# Homer: "...aien aristeuein..."?



## Michael Zwingli

At the outset, let me apologize for having to use Roman script to render the Greek words in this post; I have no available Greek keyboard at present. I am hopeful that my question will come across clearly.

This question pertains to ancient/archaic Greek, as found in Homer, and so, I suppose, "Epic" Greek. Particularly, my question has to do with a verb used by Homer within the speech of Glaucus to Diomedes in Book 6 of the Iliad. Therein, Glaucus famously says: "Hippolochus begat me...and instructed me...ever to be brave and to be preeminent among men.. ". In this passage, the wording rendered into English as "...ever...to be preeminent..." are Homer's "..._aien_..._aristeuein_..."; my first question is about the verb _aristeuein_, as I have been unable to find this verb online. _Aristeuein _appears to be the infinitive form of a stative verb derived from _aristos_/"best", which, as I am sure you must know, was used in Ancient Greek as the superlative form of _agathos_/"good". The verb in question, if I am right about that, seems to be: _aristeo_/"I am preeminent (I am best)". Am I correct in so surmising? If my reasoning about that is right, why have I been unable to discover such a verb on the internet? Is that a recognized verb of Ancient Greek? Might such a verb be a creation of Homer himself; did Homer create words as circumstance required as, for instance, was occasionally done by Shakespeare in his English plays, and has otherwise been done by superlative writers throughout history?

In searching online for the verb used by Homer in the instant passage from the Iliad, I encountered the fact that the phrase _aien aristeuein_, apparently having been inspired by the instant passage from Homer, is used as a motto of several educational institutions (e.g. St. Andrews University in Scotland and Boston College in the U.S.), and is, in these cases, usually translated as: "ever to excel". Is "to excel", as opposed to "to be best"/"to be preeminent", a valid translation of _aristeuein_? I only ask this because it seems to me that there is some semantic distance between these translations.

My second major question assumes that the verb in this case is, indeed, _aristeo. _I find myself questioning the form of the infinitive used by Homer in this case: _aristeuein_, which confuses me a bit. Homer clearly uses the thematic infinitive suffix here: _-ein. _l believe that in both Attic and Ionic (Homer's native dialect, no?), when the infinitive suffix_ -ein_ was used with a stative verb, the omega of the verbal "-eo" suffix was dropped while the epsilon was retained. This can be seen, for example, in the stative verb _phileo_: with respect to which the infinitive _phileein_/"to love" corresponds to _phileo_/"I love", as opposed to an infinitive with the form _phileuein_/"to love" corresponding to _phileo_/"I love". Even so, Homer seems to retain both the epsilon and the omega of the stative verbal suffix within the infinitive form (after suffixation with _-ein_). Why does Homer, within his text, seem to have retained the omega of the suffix of a hypothetical thematic verb_ aristeo_ in the thematic infinitive _aristeuein_, especially seeing as Ionic was Homer's native dialect? Why did Homer use the form _aristeuein_ as opposed to _aristeein_ for the infinitive of my presumed verb_ aristeo_? Was retention of the omega within the thematic infinitive common in Epic Greek, or was this a case of usage of the suffix _-ein_ peculiar to Homer himself?

I was unsure whether to post these questions here, or in the etymology forum, but ultimately decided to try here. If this thread should be moved to linguistics/etymology, then I shall appreciate for  a moderator to do so. Thanks in advance for any help that I may receive regarding these questions.

- Mike


----------



## Perseas

Hello

The verb is ἀριστεύω (present inf. ἀριστεύειν).


----------



## Michael Zwingli

Ah, you have explained everything in a word! Thank you, man. Now it makes perfect sense to me. That's what I get for making unwarranted assumptions.😁


----------



## Αγγελος

It might interest you to know that the verb αριστεύω is still used in modern Greek, mostly to mean 'to get full marks/a straight A', and the derived noun αριστεία is the standard translation of 'excellence'.


----------



## ioanell

In addition to the help you have received so far regarding your questions , here’s my own contribution.



Michael Zwingli said:


> Was retention of the omega within the thematic infinitive common in Epic Greek, or was this a case of usage of the suffix _-ein_ peculiar to Homer himself?



Please, note that all verbs in the active voice (except some four cases) end either in -ω or, if contracted, in -ῶ. Τhe non-contracted verbs have present tense infinitives ending in -ειν, and all verbs either contracted or non-contracted have their future tense infinitives ending in -ειν as well.



Michael Zwingli said:


> especially seeing as Ionic was Homer's native dialect?



Homer may have lived in Ionia, but his epics were composed in an artificial literary language, never spoken, but comprehensible by the whole Greek-speaking world. Homeric language is fundamentally based on the Ionic dialect, but it shows features of multiple regional Greek dialects and periods, especially lots of Aeolian elements and even some older, Mycaenean forms.



Michael Zwingli said:


> Is "to excel", as opposed to "to be best"/"to be preeminent", a valid translation of _aristeuein_?



Here *ἀριστεύω* is the verb in question. As can be seen in the Homeric text, the phrase “αἰὲν ἀριστεύειν” and the following phrase "ὑπείροχον ἔμμεναι ἄλλων" are the infinitive objects of the verb “ἐπέτελλεν” [=instructed, enjoined], whereas the phrase “αἰὲν ἀριστεύειν”, when isolated and used separately as a motto, looks like imperative giving a mild paternal instruction. This phrase alone means “always be best/[here, bravest in the battle], whereas the following (after the connective καὶ) phrase "ὑπείροχον ἔμμεναι ἄλλων" means “be pre-eminent above all [others]”. Apart from the very famous phrase “*αἰὲν ἀριστεύειν*”, the longer phrase “αἰὲν ἀριστεύειν καὶ ὑπείροχον ἔμμεναι ἄλλων” also seems to be a longer motto. As for the etymology of the words: infinitive ἀριστεύειν<verb ἀριστεύω <adj. ἄριστ[ος]+verbal suffix -εύω or noun ἀριστεύ[ς]+verbal suffix -jω / infinitive ἔμμεναι <Aeol. ἔμμι [εἰμί]=to be, and its predicate ὑπείροχον  [=pre-eminent].


----------



## Michael Zwingli

Hi, Ioanell. I just checked back here after a while. You have provided a lot of useful background information. Thank you.


ioanell said:


> Homer may have lived in Ionia, but his epics were composed in an artificial literary language, never spoken, but comprehensible by the whole Greek-speaking world. Homeric language is fundamentally based on the Ionic dialect, but it shows features of multiple regional Greek dialects and periods, especially lots of Aeolian elements and even some older, Mycaenean forms.


Ah, and that "artificial language" is what we know as "Epic Greek"?


ioanell said:


> Here *ἀριστεύω* is the verb in question. As can be seen in the Homeric text, the phrase “αἰὲν ἀριστεύειν”...This phrase alone means “always be best/[here, bravest in the battle]...


I find it somewhat odd that only the superlative form of the old IE adjective _*heristos_ (="most fitting", "most suitable", itself the superlative of _*heryos =_ "fitting", "suitable", which would have appeared in Greek as something like _arios, _I think) descended into Greek, as the superlative of an entirely different adjective with a different, but semantically related meaning (namely, _agathos =_"good"). Language is fickle in it's evolution, is it not?


----------



## Perseas

Michael Zwingli said:


> I find it somewhat odd that only the superlative form of the old IE adjective _*heristos_ (="most fitting", "most suitable", itself the superlative of _*heryos =_ "fitting", "suitable",


Yes, I found this analysis in Wiktionary:
From Proto-Indo-European *h₂éristos (“fittest, most fitting, most suitable”), the superlative of *h₂er- (“to fit, be suitable”).

According to Babiniotis dictionary, άριστος comes from the augmentative prefix (αυξητικό πρόθεμα) αρι-, which is attested in ancient compounds (e.g. αρί-ζηλος, αρί-γνωτος, αρι-ήκοος) and denotes that something is obvious, apparent. The same dictionary does't rule out that άριστος might be related (at least semantically) to the word family of αραρίσκω (αρετή, αριθμός, αρμός e.t.c.).


----------



## apmoy70

Perseas said:


> Yes, I found this analysis in Wiktionary:
> From Proto-Indo-European *h₂éristos (“fittest, most fitting, most suitable”), the superlative of *h₂er- (“to fit, be suitable”).
> 
> According to Babiniotis dictionary, άριστος comes from the augmentative prefix (αυξητικό πρόθεμα) αρι-, which is attested in ancient compounds (e.g. αρί-ζηλος, αρί-γνωτος, αρι-ήκοος) and denotes that something is obvious, apparent. The same dictionary does't rule out that άριστος might be related (at least semantically) to the word family of αραρίσκω (αρετή, αριθμός, αρμός e.t.c.).


For Beekes, Babiniotis' analysis is considered improbable. For Beekes the superlative ἄριστος to the comparative *«ἀρείων» ăreí̯ōn* --> _better, stronger, nobler_, is probably from *«ἄρος» ắrŏs* (neut.) --> _advantage_, related to the deponent verb *«ἄρνυμαι» ắrnumai̯* --> _to win, gain, acquire_ with cognate in other IE languages the Armenian առնել (ar̄nel), _to take, purchase_.



Αγγελος said:


> It might interest you to know that the verb αριστεύω is still used in modern Greek, mostly to mean 'to get full marks/a straight A', and the derived noun αριστεία is the standard translation of 'excellence'.


And the motto of the Greek National Defence General Staff (Joint Chiefs of Staff)


----------



## Michael Zwingli

Again, please forgive my lack of a Greek language keyboard (I usually am typing on my telephone with in my replies here).



Perseas said:


> ...Babiniotis dictionary...does't rule out that άριστος might be related (at least semantically) to the word family of αραρίσκω (αρετή, αριθμός, αρμός e.t.c.).


Yes, I think it is generally accepted that all these lemmas: the Greek inchoative verb _ararisko_, and _arete, arithmos, _and_ armos,_ and _arthros_ (joint) as well, all ultimately derive from the IE root _*her-_, which is a verbal root carrying the meaning "to fit together".


apmoy70 said:


> For Beekes, Babiniotis' analysis is considered improbable. For Beekes the superlative ἄριστος to the comparative *«ἀρείων» ăreí̯ōn* --> _better, stronger, nobler_, is probably from *«ἄρος» ắrŏs* (neut.) --> _advantage..._


This is probably a highly presumptuous statement, but I might tend to hesitate about Beekes analysis, unless said Greek _aros_ is a corruption of an earlier hypothetical _arios,_ meaning either "fitting"/"suitable", or perhaps "good". This would, of course, have come into Greek from IE _*heryos_, which is the positive form of superlative _*heristos_ and has the meaning "fitting", "suitable", of course from the same verbal root _*her- _"to fit together". My question of above is why a positive adjectival form like _arios_ never made it's way into Greek, as it did into Sanscrit, where _arya_ took up the meaning "noble" from the original "fitting"/"suitable" of IE _*heryos_. Perhaps because it would have had to displace an already established _agathos_ to enter into Greek? Or, perhaps the form was not liked by Greek because _-ios_ was not suffixed to verbal stems to create abjectives? In any case, the adjective _*heryos_ seems to me to have been lost to Greek during the time that the Proto-Greeks were making their way from the Pontic-Caspian Steppe to the South of the Balkan Peninsula.​Now, I am simply musing...​


----------



## apmoy70

Michael Zwingli said:


> Again, please forgive my lack of a Greek language keyboard (I usually am typing on my telephone with in my replies here).
> 
> 
> Yes, I think it is generally accepted that all these lemmas: the Greek inchoative verb _ararisko_, and _arete, arithmos, _and_ armos,_ and _arthros_ (joint) as well, all ultimately derive from the IE root _*her-_, which is a verbal root carrying the meaning "to fit together".
> 
> This is probably a highly presumptuous statement, but I might tend to hesitate about Beekes analysis, unless said Greek _aros_ is a corruption of an earlier hypothetical _arios,_ meaning either "fitting"/"suitable", or perhaps "good". This would, of course, have come into Greek from IE _*heryos_, which is the positive form of superlative _*heristos_ and has the meaning "fitting", "suitable", of course from the same verbal root _*her- _"to fit together". My question of above is why a positive adjectival form like _arios_ never made it's way into Greek, as it did into Sanscrit, where _arya_ took up the meaning "noble" from the original "fitting"/"suitable" of IE _*heryos_. Perhaps because it would have had to displace an already established _agathos_ to enter into Greek? Or, perhaps the form was not liked by Greek because _-ios_ was not suffixed to verbal stems to create abjectives? In any case, the adjective _*heryos_ seems to me to have been lost to Greek during the time that the Proto-Greeks were making their way from the Pontic-Caspian Steppe to the South of the Balkan Peninsula.​Now, I am simply musing...​


But it did make it, the first element *«ἀρι-» ari-* in inseparable compounds (meaning, the word is never found alone), derives from the said PIE root *h₂er- and in verbal governing compounds conveys the meaning of _goodness, excessiveness_ or _excellence_ e.g *«ἀρίδηλος» ărídēlŏs* --> _very famous_, *«ἀρίγνως» ărígnōs* --> _easy to recognise_, *«ἀρίδακρυς» ărídakrus* --> _(person) shedding tears excessively_, *«ἀριδείκετος» ărĭdeí̯kĕtŏs* --> _very famous (lit. very easy to point at)_ etc


----------



## Michael Zwingli

apmoy70 said:


> But it did make it, the first element *«ἀρι-» ari-* in inseparable compounds (meaning, the word is never found alone), derives from the said PIE root *h₂er-...


Thanks, I was not aware of that, but it makes a certain sense. I still wonder why the positive form of the adjective never made it in, though.


----------



## Helleno File

Michael Zwingli said:


> Again, please forgive my lack of a Greek language keyboard (I usually am typing on my telephone with in my replies here.


I have just added an item about  Modern Greek keyboards for users of mobile devices to the Greek Resources Suggestions thread here.


----------



## Michael Zwingli

Helleno File said:


> I have just added an item about  Modern Greek keyboards for users of mobile devices to the Greek Resources Suggestions thread here.


Haha, now if you can find me a keyboard that will type the macrons for Latin text, I will be complete! ( I haven't tried really hard to find these things, and so have been remiss myself).


----------



## Scholiast

Ὦριστοι

Followers of this thread and other enthusiasts may care to know that ΑΙΕΝ ΑΡΙΣΤΕΥΕΙΝ is the motto of Kelvinside Academy in the West End of Glasgow (Scotland), and together with the school's heraldic crest is emblazoned on the blazers of the pupils there.

Σ


----------



## Michael Zwingli

Scholiast said:


> Ὦριστοι
> 
> Followers of this thread and other enthusiasts may care to know that ΑΙΕΝ ΑΡΙΣΤΕΥΕΙΝ is the motto of Kelvinside Academy in the West End of Glasgow (Scotland), and together with the school's heraldic crest is emblazoned on the blazers of the pupils there.
> 
> Σ


Hello, Scholiast. Nice to "see" you outside of the confines of the Latin Forum! Yes, that phrase is an obvious choice for a motto, and graces the arms of St. Andrews University (Scotland), and Boston College in the U.S., and I am sure of more than a handful  of other institutions as well.
If you would not mind, I began a thread in the Etymologies Forum regarding the etymology of Latin _heredito, _and would like to have your opinion on my position therein expressed.😊


----------



## ioanell

In reference with other postings above:

_From Proto-Indo-European *h₂éristos (“fittest, most fitting, most suitable”), the superlative of *h₂er- (“to fit, be suitable”)._

In my opinion, the wording of this Wiktionary’s analysis looks (maybe inevitably) somehow odd. When writing “the superlative of”, one would expect a [reconstructed P.I.E.] adjective to follow, instead of only the verbal root *h₂er- (with its verbal meaning “to fit, be suitable”). Perhaps "...the superlative of a [non-yet constructed, but implied] positive deriving from the verbal root *h₂er-". As it is, it’s like saying φίλτατος, the superlative of (the verb) φιλέω.

*ἄριστος and ἀρι*-

It’s odd, in my opinion, that Beekes, whereas doesn’t give the derivation for these two but a question mark (?), in the section ETYM. of *ἄριστος* says “A primary superlative to the comparative *ἀρείων*. It is sometimes considered to contain the prefix *ἀρι*-, but this seems improbable to me…”, and on the other hand, in the section ETYM. of *ἀρι*-, without presenting any other reliable derivation/etymology suggestion, he says that linguist “Willi …maintains the widely accepted connection with *ἄριστος*”, a view which can be easily supposed and interpreted as being accepted by him as well. Somehow contradictory, in my opinion.



Michael Zwingli said:


> Language is fickle in it's evolution



I think most of our co-posters would agree with this statement, adding “in many cases”.



Michael Zwingli said:


> unless said Greek _aros_ is a corruption of an earlier hypothetical _arios_



I don’t think there’s any indication whatsoever for such a corruption of ἄρος and I can’t say whether a word _arios_ [<IE *_heryos_] has ever existed in Greek, except for Ἄριος=Median [<Medes]



Michael Zwingli said:


> I find it somewhat odd that only the superlative form of the old IE adjective _*heristos_ (="most fitting", "most suitable", itself the superlative of _*heryos =_ "fitting", "suitable", which would have appeared in Greek as something like _arios, _I think) descended into Greek, as the superlative of an entirely different adjective with a different, but semantically related meaning (namely, _agathos =_"good").





Michael Zwingli said:


> My question of above is why a positive adjectival form like _arios_ never made it's way into Greek, as it did into Sanscrit, where _arya_ took up the meaning "noble" from the original "fitting"/"suitable" of IE _*heryos_.



All asterisk-marked forms are reconstructed items of a proto-stage; so, the case of IE *_heryos_ making its way into Sanskrit as _arya_ may be just an isolated example with no outer-Sanskrit counterpart, a similar linguistic phenomenon which must have happened in many other circumstances with other IE languages. BTW, apart from the quoted superlative *_heristos_ and the positive adjectival form *_heryos_, there seems that a comparative degree of this IE adjective couldn’t be reconstructed. I don’t know if *_heristos_ has been the proto-form of any word in another IE (and specifically European) language.



Michael Zwingli said:


> the superlative of an entirely different adjective with a different, but semantically related meaning (namely, _agathos =_"good").



I guess you know that ἀγαθός, besides ἄριστος, has another three superlative forms, βέλτιστος, κράτιστος and λῷστος, with their corresponding comparatives.


----------



## Michael Zwingli

Thank you, Ioanell, for taking time to address many of my thoughts on this. I value the opinions of others in such matters.


ioanell said:


> All asterisk-marked forms are reconstructed items of a proto-stage; so, the case of IE *_heryos_ making its way into Sanskrit as _arya_ may be just an isolated example with no outer-Sanskrit counterpart, a similar linguistic phenomenon which must have happened in many other circumstances with other IE languages. BTW, apart from the quoted superlative *_heristos_ and the positive adjectival form *_heryos_, there seems that a comparative degree of this IE adjective couldn’t be reconstructed. I don’t know if *_heristos_ has been the proto-form of any word in another IE (and specifically European) language.


If memory serves me, said _*heryos_ was most fully expressed in Proto-Indo-Iranian and it's descendants; elsewhere, as with the instant Greek terms, the expression was fragmentary. In PII, _*aryas_ apparently became an ethnic autonym for a particular south-central Asian population, probably from a sense meaning "allied" or "joined". In addition to becoming _arya_/"noble" in Sanscrit (through so-called "Proto-Indo-Aryan"), this developed through Proto-Iranian and into Old Iranian as something like _*ariya(h)_/", where it remained an autonym having a sense like "compatriot". Actually, the name of the country _Iran_ is generally taken to be a derivative of said _*ariya_, so having a meaning like "land of the compatriots". Fascinating enough to be worthy of mention...


ioanell said:


> l can’t say whether a word _arios_ [<IE *_heryos_] has ever existed in Greek, except for Ἄριος=Median [<Medes...


Ah, yes! Given the great (and often intense) historical contact between the Hellenic and Iranic peoples, this Greek term seems surely to have come into Greek from the Old Iranian autonym, rather than as a direct descendent of _*heryos_, wouldn't you think? I wonder: was this term only applied to Medes, or to Iranic peoples in general?


ioanell said:


> I guess you know that ἀγαθός, besides ἄριστος, has another three superlative forms, βέλτιστος, κράτιστος and λῷστος, with their corresponding comparatives.


Yes sir, I am aware of that. I think it illustrates the organic, uncontrived nature of the evolution of most of our languages.

While perusing the various Fora, I just came upon a thread in the Etymology Forum which might interest. It is entitled: "Greek: Ariobarzanes and it's Iranic antecedents."


----------



## ioanell

Hi,



Michael Zwingli said:


> this Greek term seems surely to have come into Greek from the Old Iranian autonym



When in #16 above I said that the word *ἄρος *is not a corruption of an earlier hypothetical _arios_, this had to do with your question why IE **heryos* entered Sanskrit and not Greek and with the contestation/exclusion that a word (adjective) *ἄριος* ever existed in Greek with the meaning of "fitting"/"suitable". But, of course, I will easily agree with you that *Ἄριος*=Median [<Medes] seems surely to have come into Greek from the Old Iranian autonym _*ariya_.



Michael Zwingli said:


> I wonder: was this term only applied to Medes, or to Iranic peoples in general?



The Greeks, having probably heard this word from the locals, gave the name *Ἄριοι* only to the Medes, although the term _*ariya_ was used throughout the empire of Cyrus II, who conquered their territory in 550 BC. Making use of the Iranian toponym *Fars* (see Farsi) or *Pars *[> Gr. Περσίς], especially after their contact with the Iranians since about the middle of the 6th century BC, the Greeks named the whole country of Cyrus as *Περσία *and the Iranic peoples in it as *Πέρσαι*, terms which also passed into the Western World. Anyway, the word Ἄριος in Greek just denotes an ethnonym and bears neither the meaning of "fitting"/"suitable" /"noble" nor the meaning of "compatriot". All these, of course, refer to the antiquity and the meaning that the word "άριος" took mainly in beginning of the last century, in Modern Greek as well, is another story.


----------



## bearded

Michael Zwingli said:


> a thread in the Etymology Forum


Cf. also this thread:  Latin: Alani, Greek: Alanoi


----------



## Michael Zwingli

bearded said:


> Cf. also this thread:  Latin: Alani, Greek: Alanoi


Molto grazie, barbate!


----------



## Michael Zwingli

ioanell said:


> As can be seen in the Homeric text, the phrase “αἰὲν ἀριστεύειν” and the following phrase "ὑπείροχον ἔμμεναι ἄλλων" are the infinitive objects of the verb “ἐπέτελλεν” [=instructed, enjoined]


Hi, Ioanell! I have one question regarding this. Why is the third person imperfect form, *ἐπέτελλε*_*ν*_, used here instead of the first person, _*ἐπέτελλον*_ ? Is it because the Homeric text is here saying "*He *(Glaucus' father) sent and *enjoined* me to always be best (bravest in the battle), and to be pre-eminent above all others"?


----------



## Αγγελος

Precisely. You yourself quoted the passage as meaning "Hippolochus ... instructed me ... ever to be brave and to be preeminent among men". How could anything but the third person singular have been used here?


----------



## Michael Zwingli

Αγγελος said:


> Precisely. You yourself quoted the passage as meaning "Hippolochus ... instructed me ... ever to be brave and to be preeminent among men". How could anything but the third person singular have been used here?


Yes, thank you @Αγγελος. I managed to confuse myself in reading through this, but I took a coffee break, and I'm better now.


----------



## fdb

If I may cast a bit of cold water on the issue: the etymology, and even the semantics of Sanskrit ārya- and Avestan airiia- remain controversial. It is widely accepted that ārya- is a vriddhi formation from the Vedic adjective ari-, but the meaning of ari- is not known for certain. Some specialists believe that it means “foreigner, guest”, as famously argued in a monograph by the German indologist Paul Thieme, “Der Fremdling im Ṛgveda: eine Studie über die Bedeutung der Worte ari, arya, aryaman und ārya”, Leipzig, 1938, a view that did not go down well with many of Thieme’s compatriots. More recently the Hungarian scholar Oswald Szemerényi ruffled even more feathers by arguing that the A- word was a borrowing from Semitic. In any case, the link with the Greek aristos is highly uncertain. This is indeed one of those places where fools rush in but angels fear to tread.


----------



## ahvalj

There are also the Old Irish _aire_ (and perhaps Gaulish names in _Ario-_), whose connection with the above word according to _Matasović R · 2009 · Etymological dictionary of Proto-Celtic: _43 "still offers the most plausible etymology" (_*ari̯os_), and the Norwegian early runic _arbijarjostez_ _arbijano_ "inheritance-foremost of heirs" (_Antonsen EH · 2002 · Runes and Germanic linguistics: _127–130) of the same alleged provenance (_Orel VE · 2003 · A handbook of Germanic etymology: _23; _*arjaz_).


----------



## Michael Zwingli

fdb said:


> Some specialists believe that it means “foreigner, guest”, as famously argued in a monograph by the German indologist Paul Thieme, “Der Fremdling im Ṛgveda: eine Studie über die Bedeutung der Worte ari, arya, aryaman und ārya”, Leipzig, 1938, a view that did not go down well with many of Thieme’s compatriots. More recently the Hungarian scholar Oswald Szemerényi ruffled even more feathers by arguing that the A- word was a borrowing from Semitic


@fdb, are you aware of these essays existing in English translation? If so, where may they be found?


----------



## Αγγελος

Michael Zwingli said:


> Haha, now if you can find me a keyboard that will type the macrons for Latin text, I will be complete! ( I haven't tried really hard to find these things, and so have been remiss myself).


If you are using Windows, try the Canadian Multilingual Standard keyboard driver, included in Windows for quite a few years now. It allows you to type just about all accented Latin letters in actual use, including the ŷ and ŵ of Welsh and the ĉĝĥĵŝ of Esperanto -- and of course the macron and breve of Latin!


----------



## Michael Zwingli

I have an additional question pertaining to the phrase _αἰὲν ἀριστεύειν._ Since *ᾱ̓εί/αἰεί/αἰὲν* can mean either "always"/"ever" (at all times during a given interval), or "forever" (for all time in the future), if the verb were to be changed from the _*present*_ _infinitive_ to the _*future*_ _infinitive_, would it change the meaning of the phrase as follows:

_αἰὲν ἀριστεύειν _= "always to be the best", "ever to excel" (to be the best at all times during an interval)

_αἰὲν ἀριστεύσειν _= "to be the best forever" (to be the best for all time in the future)

?


----------



## Scholiast

Hello again Michael.

I don't think so. To me the future infinitive would imply 'always to be _on the point of_' excelling', in other words describing someone promising, destined never to reach the top.

Σ


----------



## Michael Zwingli

Scholiast said:


> Hello again Michael.
> 
> I don't think so. To me the future infinitive would imply 'always to be _on the point of_' excelling', in other words describing someone promising, destined never to reach the top.


Hi, Scholiast. I understand you. I was of the mind that, because of the dual meaning of _αἰὲν_, that _αἰὲν ἀριστεύσειν _could mean either "to excel at all times, but in the future" (a somewhat distressing thought for never reaching attainment, similar to that engendered by the "free beer tomorrow" sign in the pub), or "to excel for all (future) time (that is, 'for ever')". Sometimes the interplay of semantics and syntax can lead to such apparent ambiguity.


----------



## ioanell

Michael Zwingli said:


> "always"/"ever" (at all times during a given interval)


I really don’t understand what you mean by “_a given interval_”.
In order that we don't get lost in translation, the AG adverb ἀεί, and epic forms αἰεί, αἰέν, means ‘always, ever’ [see LSJ]. In our case, the case of Glaucus, αἰὲν means "always [at all times and on all occasions, now and in the future] until the end of his life".



Michael Zwingli said:


> αἰὲν ἀριστεύειν


In AG the infinitive -apart from its other usages within the sentence- was also used independently (of a verb, this usage being almost exclusively poetic) in place of the imperative, so as to give an order, an exhortation, an instruction, e.g. Pallas Athene’s exhortation to Diomedes: θαρσῶν, νῦν, Διόμηδες, ἐπί Τρώεσσι μάχεσθαι. [=“Be of good courage now, Diomedes, to fight against the Trojans”](Il. book 5 [rhaps. E], 124).

In #5 above, you must have already seen that in there I noted that this phrase is the object of the verb “*ἐπέτελλεν*” [=instructed, enjoined, ordered] in a full sentence (Iliad, book 6 [rhaps. Z], 207-208), whereas the famous phrase “*αἰὲν ἀριστεύειν*”, isolated from its initial place and used separately (as a motto), becomes an imperative giving a mild paternal instruction/exhortation. Logically, Hippolochus must have exactly said to his son: “αἰὲν ἀριστεύειν καὶ ὑπείροχον ἔμμεναι ἄλλων…”. Moreover, the same exhortation -although found later in Iliad - has chronologically preceded Hippolochus’s speech within the story, when Peleus in Phthia, sending his son Achilles to join the Danaans' (=Greeks') army, enjoined him with the same words [book 11 [rhaps. Λ], 783-784].



Michael Zwingli said:


> if the verb were to be changed from the _*present*_ _infinitive_ to the _*future*_ _infinitive_


The infinitive *ἀριστεύειν* within the full sentence is an _infinitive of purpose_ and as such it could never be found in the future tense [_ἀριστεύσειν_]. Besides, the verb ἀριστεύω is mainly found in the Present and Aorist tenses.


----------



## Michael Zwingli

Thank you, Ioanell!


ioanell said:


> The infinitive *ἀριστεύειν* within the full sentence is an _infinitive of purpose_ and as such it could never be found in the future tense


Ah, I see. I will have to research infinitives of purpose in one of the grammars.


ioanell said:


> I really don’t understand what you mean by “_a given interval_”.


Well, English "always" has a broader semantic field than "ever" and "forever", covering the meanings of both of them. The adverbs "always" and "ever" can mean "at all times", which seems to suggest a time interval during which the verbal action described by these adverbs will apply, as opposed to "for all time"/"for time everlasting", which meaning is covered by the adverbs "always" and "forever"...


ioanell said:


> In order that we don't get lost in translation, the AG adverb ἀεί, and epic forms αἰεί, αἰέν, means ‘always, ever’ [see LSJ].


...and I thought that ἀεί and it's variants all included the sense "forever" as well. Are not both these senses of αἰεὶ/ἀεί given in Herodotus?:  _ὁ αἰεὶ βασιλεύων..._ "_ever_ reigning as king (for the time being)", and  _τοῖσι τούτων αἰεὶ ἐκγόνοισι _ "to their descendants _forever_" (meaning, I think, "from the present time to eternity"). Since "ever" and "forever" have differing meanings, both covered by "always", I was have been of the opinion that the full definition of _ἀεί_ should be: (sense 1, "at all times during a given period") "always", "ever"; (sense 2, "for time eternal") "always", "forever". Am I wrong about this?


----------



## ioanell

Michael, I wish we didn’t get finally lost in translation.


Michael Zwingli said:


> "always",... "ever" and "forever"


Although I already had the relevant knowledge regarding these English adverbs, I rigorously looked them up again in the British Lexico, where I saw the following:

always=*1* at all times; on all occasions. *1.2* forever; for all future time. Synonyms: _until the end of time_, _eternally_, etc ALWAYS | Meaning & Definition for UK English | Lexico.com 

ever= *2* always; at all times. Synonyms: _forever_, _eternally_, _until the end of time _EVER | Meaning & Definition for UK English | Lexico.com

and, taking into account your good point above, I have these questions: While _until the end of time_ and _eternally_ are logical synonyms of _forever_ as in your proposed _sense 2 _above, how come and the dictionary gives _forever_, _eternally_ and _until the end of time_ as synonyms of the No 2 meaning of ever, that is _always; at all times_, which is your proposed _sense 1_? Could they be synonyms to both “at all times” and “for time eternal”, whereas they seem to only fit the latter?



Michael Zwingli said:


> ...and I thought that ἀεί and it's variants all included the sense "forever" as well.


And you are right, because the meanings of *ἀεὶ* (from the Greek version of LSJ) are _πάντοτε_ [=always, ever], _αιωνίως_ [=eternally], _διαπαντός_ [=forever], according to the context. See also the expression N.B. _ὁ ἀεὶ χρόνος_ [=αιωνιότητα=eternity] in Htd., _οἱ ἀεὶ ὄντες_ [=οι αθάνατοι=the immortals], in Xen., etc or a more precise rendition of “forever” with a relevant variant of ἀεὶ, the compound adverb *εἰσαεὶ* [<prep. εἰς + ἀεὶ]. In *αἰὲν ἀριστεύειν* the meaning is “be best/bravest at all times, especially, when the circumstances call for it; and let this be until the end of your life”; eternity, of course, for somebody couldn’t be there beyond the end of their lives.



Michael Zwingli said:


> Are not both these senses of αἰεὶ/ἀεί given in Herodotus?: _ὁ αἰεὶ βασιλεύων..._ "_ever_ reigning as king (for the time being)", and _τοῖσι τούτων αἰεὶ ἐκγόνοισι _ "to their descendants _forever_" (meaning, I think, "from the present time to eternity").


Have in mind, however, that there are some circumstances where the adverb ἀεὶ takes on some special meanings (see LSJ ἀεὶ, at _—but_ etc., Greek version at _αλλά:_ etc.), as when Herodotus writes _ὁ αἰεὶ βασιλεύων..._ where _αἰεὶ_ means *ἑκάστοτε, *that is_ “ὁ _*ἑκάστοτε*_ βασιλεύων...”_, viz. “the man (king) who reigns *each time*_”*, *_“the king of *a certain time period*” or when, narraring the ailment sent by the goddess to the Skythians and their descendants, he writes _τοῖσι τούτων αἰεὶ ἐκγόνοισι,_ that is “to their offspring *from then on*, *ever after*, *from generation to generation*”.


----------



## Michael Zwingli

ioanell said:


> I have these questions: While _until the end of time_ and _eternally_ are logical synonyms of _forever_ as in your proposed _sense 2 _above, how come and the dictionary gives _forever_, _eternally_ and _until the end of time_ as synonyms of the No 2 meaning of ever, that is _always; at all times_, which is your proposed _sense 1_?


I think not. The adverbials "eternally", "until the end of time", and "for time eternal" all specifically indicate that a verbal action shall occur over an _infinite_ amount of time in the future, while the adverbial phrase "at all times" does not.

Unfortunately, Ioanell, I think the inconsistency you note in the Lexico entries simply indicates a case of sloppy, unrigorous lexicography, as would seem to be evidenced by the obvious internal conflict. English _forever_ is obviously a prefixtual derivative of _ever_ ("at all points in time"), and was hypothetically so derived in order to produce, before Latin had a chance to influence English (with _eternally_) through Norman French (pursuant to Duke William's invasion and subjugation of Anglo-Saxon England), a word having the semantic value of "at all points in time _for_ all future time". Because of this, _ever_ and _forever_ should not be viewed as having any semantic overlap. 

_Always_ originally had the same semantic value as _ever_, but it's semantic field was broadened over the centuries to include the meaning of _forever_ as a result of common usage, since people used _always_ to express both of the aforementioned meanings...both the meaning of _ever_ and that of _forever_ (whether this 'semantic broadening' occurred before or after the derivation of _forever_, I do not know, but my gut tells me before). The unfortunate fact is that the English speaking world is filled with lazy and sloppy lexicography. The most rigorous, though yet imperfect, source for word meaning remains the OED and it's adjuncts. Merriam-Webster is very good, as well, as a second-tier resource. Online, Wiktionary is not bad because of the intensity of the administrative editing, but there, poor contributions often take some time to be corrected as a result of the discussion process preceding administrative edits/reversions. All in all, I would prefer Wiktionary to Lexico.

A curious note: you may or may not be aware that the AG adverb _ᾱ̓εί/αἰεί/αἰὲν_ (<Proto-Hellenic *aiweí) and Latin adverb _aeternaliter_ (<Proto-Italic *aiwom) are connate, both deriving from the IE root _*h₂eyu/*h₂óyu n_, referring originally to "a lifetime", later to "a long period of time". Pretty cool, eh?


ioanell said:


> Have in mind, however, that there are some circumstances where the adverb ἀεὶ takes on some special meanings (see LSJ ἀεὶ, at _—but_ etc., Greek version at _αλλά:_ etc.), as when Herodotus writes _ὁ αἰεὶ βασιλεύων..._ where _αἰεὶ_ means *ἑκάστοτε, *that is_ “ὁ _*ἑκάστοτε*_ βασιλεύων...”_, viz. “the man (king) who reigns *each time*_”*, *_“the king of *a certain time period*” or when, narraring the ailment sent by the goddess to the Skythians and their descendants, he writes _τοῖσι τούτων αἰεὶ ἐκγόνοισι,_ that is “to their offspring *from then on*, *ever after*, *from generation to generation*”.


Thank you for these more precise renditions into English!


----------



## Michael Zwingli

ioanell said:


> ...the meanings of *ἀεὶ* (from the Greek version of LSJ) are _πάντοτε_ [=always, ever], _αιωνίως_ [=eternally], _διαπαντός_ [=forever], according to the context.


It appears abundantly clear that within the context of Glaucus' speech in the Iliad...that is, within the context of the particular injunction to Glaucus' by his father, _αἰὲν ἀριστεύειν_ means "to excel (in valor) at all times", either "for the duration of the war" or "for the duration of your entire life", and so _αἰὲν_ must have the rather _finite_ sense of "ever". The context provided by Homer makes this clear, as you have noted, and you have also noted how that same context demands an "infinitive of purpose":


ioanell said:


> The infinitive *ἀριστεύειν* within the full sentence is an _infinitive of purpose_ and as such it could never be found in the future tense [_ἀριστεύσειν_]. Besides, the verb ἀριστεύω is mainly found in the Present and Aorist tenses.


However, what about cases within which there is no context provided, such as in the motto of Boston College, which is simply _αἰὲν ἀριστεύειν_, or perhaps as in such an uncontextualized statement as _οἴομαι αἰὲν ἀριστεύειν_? In the absence of additional textual information (context), cannot  _αἰὲν_ be viewed to have either the semantic value of _ever_ or that of _forever_, or perhaps both? That is to say, cannot _αἰὲν ἀριστεύειν_ in such cases mean both "ever to excel"/"to excel at all points in time (for an undisclosed period of time)", and/or "to excel forever"/"to excel continuously for all future time"? If so, how might the desired meaning of _αἰὲν_, between "ever" and "forever", be indicated in such cases? This apparent conundrum is why I thought of using the future infinitive to suggest the meaning "forever" for _αἰὲν_, but you seem to indicate the unacceptibility of that. My question, then, is: if in uncontextualized situations, one would want to refrain from using the future infinitive _ἀριστεύσειν_ in order to show the intention that the use of _αἰὲν_ is intended to mean _"forever"_ as opposed to _"ever"_, then how might one show in which of the two senses he is using the word?


----------



## ioanell

Michael Zwingli said:


> Even so, cannot _αἰὲν ἀριστεύειν_ as a stand-alone phrase within which _αἰὲν_ remains uncontextualized, such as in the motto of Boston College, can mean both "ever to excel"/"to excel at all points in time (for an undisclosed period of time)", and "to excel forever"/"to excel continuously for all future time"?


To be frank, it seems that I am unable to understand the difference, maybe due to the way/wording it is put. {_at all points in time (for an undisclosed period of time) vs continuously for all future time_} But, doesn’t a continuous line [the whole future time] consist of a series of dots/points [moments of time] tightly united one to another? Anyway -leaving my above question for a philosophical discussion outside this forum-, in your question above, I ‘d say “can mean both” and I presume that when the authorities of the Boston College chose this phrase as a motto they wouldn’t want their students to excel just for the time of their studies within their institution, but they would want them to excel for the rest of their lives as well. The same did Hippolochus mean, I guess, when he enjoined his son by these words, as the (Ancient) Greek aristocrats did not only try to excel in the war by their *ἀριστεία*, but also in other activities such as hunting, sports and delivering speeches in public. Anyway, we Modern Greeks, when stating this motto, translate just “always” and not “forever”.



Michael Zwingli said:


> within such a(n) ... uncontextualized statement _οἴομαι αἰὲν ἀριστεύειν_ would one still want to refrain from using the future infinitive _ἀριστεύσειν (?)_


the infinitive *ἀριστεύειν* is not attested in the future tense within the AG literature, we don’t know whether such an infinitive was ever used in Ancient Greek and I don’t think that one would dare in our days to create and use such a supposedly AG structure, which, of course, would be unjustifiable; just as the hypothetical statement _οἴομαι _[ἐγὼ]_ αἰὲν ἀριστεύειν_ [ἐγὼ], which - as it stands- translates into English as “I think that I will always be best”.



Michael Zwingli said:


> A curious note: you may or may not be aware that the AG adverb _ᾱ̓εί/αἰεί/αἰὲν_ (<Proto-Hellenic *aiweí) and Latin adverb _aeternaliter_ (<Proto-Italic *aiwom) are connate, both deriving from the IE root _*h₂eyu/*h₂óyu n_, referring originally to "a lifetime", later to "a long period of time". Pretty cool, eh?


Oh, yes, I’m aware of this common IE root, from which, via Proto-Hellenic and Proto-Italic respectively, derive two nouns with striking outer resemblance and semantic content, that is to say Gr. *αἰών* (-ος, gen.), from *αἰFών* [, “(life)time, life, generation, long period of time, epoch, eternity” and Lat. *aevum *(-i, gen.) from *aevom*, with the same as the Greek meanings. N.B. 1. The adverb _αἰέν _came from the old locative case of αἰFών N.B. 2 MG word _αιώνας _means “century-a period of one hundred years”.


----------

