# all Slavic: adjective suffix -k?



## Gavril

Hello,

Quite a few basic adjectives in Slovene end in *-k*:

_visok_ "high"
_širok_ "wide"
_ozek_ "narrow"
_grenek_ "bitter"
_mehek_ "soft"
_gledek_ "smooth"
_globok_ "deep"
etc.

Is this pattern of *k*-final adjectives found in all Slavic languages, or is it restricted to South (or South-west) Slavic?

Also, does anyone happen to know the origin of this -_k_ suffix? Is it related to, e.g., the (originally Greek) suffix -*ic* seen in words like_ elast*ic*_, _stat*ic*,_ etc.?

Thanks for any info,
Gavril


----------



## Eunos

This suffix is found in Bulgarian too:
висок "high"
дълбок "deep"
нисък "short"
тънък "thin"
etc. 
In Russian this types of adjectives have "ий" after the "k"
высокий "high"
глубокий "deep"
низкий "short"
тонкий "thin"


----------



## Azori

Gavril said:


> Quite a few basic adjectives in Slovene end in *-k*:
> 
> _visok_ "high"
> _širok_ "wide"
> _ozek_ "narrow"
> _grenek_ "bitter"
> _mehek_ "soft"
> _gledek_ "smooth"
> _globok_ "deep"
> etc.


In Slovak these adjectives always end in a vowel in the nominative case (the ending depends on the gender and the number of the noun). Thus:

_vysoký / vysoká / vysoké / vysokí_ (high)
_široký / široká / široké / širokí_ (wide)
_úzky / úzka / úzke / úzki_ (narrow)
... etc.

Most adjectives of this kind end in a vowel in Slovak. They have only the so-called "long form". There are very few adjectives with both a long and a short form, as far as I know, there are only three of them:

_dlžen_ (as in _"byť dlžen"_ = to owe somebody something), with the long form _dlžný_
_hoden / hodný_ (worthy, deserving)
_vinen / vinný_ (guilty)

There is no difference in meaning but the short forms are somewhat literary.


----------



## Duya

Well yes, but that -k- is still not part of the root: _vys-, šir-, uz-_ etc, which can be seen from the comparative forms. Gavril asks where does that -k stem from. I wouldn't know the answer, but it apparently comes from Common Slavic, since that same paradigm is present in all languages we surveyed so far. It would be interesting to hear from Baltic language speakers.


----------



## FairOaks

Eunos said:


> This suffix is found in Bulgarian too:
> висок "high"
> дълбок "deep"
> нисък "short"
> тънък "thin"
> etc.
> In Russian this types of adjectives have "ий" after the "k"
> высокий "high"
> глубокий "deep"
> низкий "short"
> тонкий "thin"



I think that, for facility's sake, you must consider the short forms of Russian adjectives, for example: _высок_, _глубок_, _низок_, _тонок_.
But to answer the main question—no, I don't think the suffix has been borrowed from Ancient Greek, although they might share a common PIE root. Also, note that there are apparently at least two different suffixes per language (with certain exceptions, I suppose):
широк / širok (–ок/–ok)
гладък / gledek (–ък/–ek)
And that's not a recent development, because it's found in Old Church Slavonic (широкъ, гладъкъ, etc.).


----------



## Gavril

FairOaks said:


> But to answer the main question—no, I don't think the suffix has been borrowed from Ancient Greek, although they might share a common PIE root.


 
I wasn't suggesting that it was borrowed from Greek, but that (as you say) it might be from the same PIE root. And, if Wiktionary is trustworthy (I just checked it), that does indeed seem to be the case: OCS -_ъкъ_ (-_ŭkŭ)_ is apparently cognate with Greek -_kos_ (> English -ic, etc.), Germanic *-_gaz _(English -*y*, German -*ig* etc.), and so on.


----------



## iobyo

Duya said:


> It would be interesting to hear from Baltic language speakers.



That was my first thought too, and it would seem it's a Slavic innovation (examples from Derksen's dictionary):

*gladъkъ  < BSl.  *glaʔdus (Lith. glodus); 
*kortъkъ < BSl. *kortus (supposedly a cognate of Lith. kartus 'bitter');
*ǫzъkъ < BSl. *anź-(u)- (Lith. ankštas);
*soldъkъ < BSl. *solʔdus (Lith. saldus, Latv. salds);
*tьnъkъ < BSl. *tinʔ-u-/*tenʔ-u- (Lith. tęvas, Latv. tievs).​


----------



## ahvalj

There are actually two suffixes, -uko- (OCS -ъкъ) and -oko- (OCS -окъ). The first one, as iobyo has shown, replaces the old u-adjectives, still alive in Lithuanian and often denoting active or passive ability. The second, -oko- occurs in a limited number of Slavic adjectives and looks like a simple morphological extension of the root. Both suffixes are inherited from the Indo-European and occur in other IE languages as well. As to the Greek -iko-, it is the same suffix as the OCS -ьць (Russian -ец, SC -ac etc.). Its older form is preserved in Lithuanian: vainikas=вѣньць (IE *woynikos), vainukas=вѣнъкъ (IE *woynukos).


----------



## bragpipes

ahvalj said:


> There are actually two suffixes, -uko- (OCS -ъкъ) and -oko- (OCS -окъ). The first one, as iobyo has shown, replaces the old u-adjectives, still alive in Lithuanian and often denoting active or passive ability. The second, -oko- occurs in a limited number of Slavic adjectives and looks like a simple morphological extension of the root. Both suffixes are inherited from the Indo-European and occur in other IE languages as well. As to the Greek -iko-, it is the same suffix as the OCS -ьць (Russian -ец, SC -ac etc.). Its older form is preserved in Lithuanian: vainikas=вѣньць (IE *woynikos), vainukas=вѣнъкъ (IE *woynukos).



@ahvalj When you say "still alive" in Lithuanian, I'm guessing that you mean that it was once alive and kicking in Slavic too?  Could you please explain the way it works in Lithuanian?  

I'm not sure how active/passive have anything to do with something like sladak (sweet), or is that the second suffix (-oko)?


----------



## ahvalj

bragpipes said:


> @ahvalj When you say "still alive" in Lithuanian, I'm guessing that you mean that it was once alive and kicking in Slavic too?  Could you please explain the way it works in Lithuanian?
> 
> I'm not sure how active/passive have anything to do with something like sladak (sweet), or is that the second suffix (-oko)?


If you look at the Lithuanian adjectives, you'll find that very many of them belong to the type -_us_ (Nom. Sg. masc.) / -_i_ (Nom. Sg. fem.), including recent loanwords, like _intensyvus,_ _intuityvus, konservatyvus, konspektyvus, konspiratyvus, konstruktyvus etc. _which means that new adjectives keep forming in this type. In the attested Slavic languages, the _u_-type has disappeared in the adjectives, but several dozens of the Slavic _ъkъ_-adjectives correspond to the Lithuanian _us_-ones (see #7 and also §10 in PIE /a/;/o/ merger in protogermanic, a trace of distinction?), which suggests that the original _u_-stems were extended with the *_ka_-suffix, like e. g. in "sweet": Lithuanian _saldus_ — OCS _sladъkъ,_ OES _solodъkъ;_ this is also supported by the fact that this _k_ is not present in the Comparative degree, which formed before that extension took place: OCS _sladъkъ → slažde_ <*_saldı̯es _(also modern Russian _слаще < слаждьше_ from the neuter form extended with _-ьш-_ from cases other than Nom./Acc. Sg.: e.g. the Nom./Acc. Pl. _слаждьша<_*_saldı̯iṣā: ı̯ _from the Nom./Acc. full grade *_-ı̯es_ had penetrated to the other case forms).


----------



## Karton Realista

I'm pretty sure they're relics of short form of adjectives.
Just like pewien in Polish (regular: pewny).
None end on -k in Polish, as far as I'm aware.


----------



## ahvalj

Karton Realista said:


> I'm pretty sure they're relics of short form of adjectives.
> Just like pewien in Polish (regular: pewny).
> None end on -k in Polish, as far as I'm aware.


_Saldus — słodki
glodus — gładki
lipus — lepki_

Otkupschikov (_Откупщиков ЮВ · 1983/2001 · Балтийские и славянские прилагательные с -u-основой_) mentions 98 etymologically related Slavic/Lithuanian pairs of this type, e. g.:

_варкий — varus
гладкий — glodus
гливкой — gleivus
глудкий — glaudus
громкий — grumus
грудкий — graudus
грузкий — gramžus
грязкий — grimzlus
гудкий — gaudus
едкий — ėdus
ёмкий — jamus
зудкий — žaudus
крохкий — krušus
крушкий —  kraušus
крупкой — kraupus
лайкий — lojus
липкий — lipus
лепкий — laipus
ловкий — lavus
меткий — metus
ноский — našus
резкий — raižus
сладкий — saldus
торопкий —  tarpus

бойкий — bajus
бродкий — bradus
валкий —  ap-valus
вёрткий —  virtus
вадкий, водкий — vadus, pa-vadus
видкий — pa-vydus
гадкий — godus
гаркий, горкий — gorus
гидкий — gūdus
гонкий — ganus
гуский — ganstus
дерзкий — diržus
жалкий — gėlus
жоркий — gėrus
колкий — kalus
коский — kasus
краткий, короткий — kartus
ломкий — ap-lamus
рубкий — rambus
споркий, споркой — sparus
терпкий — tirpus
тяжкий — tingus_

etc.


----------



## Sobakus

Karton Realista said:


> I'm pretty sure they're relics of short form of adjectives.
> Just like pewien in Polish (regular: pewny).
> None end on -k in Polish, as far as I'm aware.


_Visok_ and _visoki_ are two forms of the same adjective which can end in 11 different syllables in Polish just for the base form, but the short form used as the dictionary form in Slovene just so happens to have fallen out of use in modern Polish. What the OP was asking about is adjectives whose stem ends in -k.


----------



## Karton Realista

Sobakus said:


> _Visok_ and _visoki_ are two forms of the same adjective which can end in 11 different syllables in Polish just for the base form, but the short form used as the dictionary form in Slovene just so happens to have fallen out of use in modern Polish. What the OP was asking about is adjectives whose stem ends in -k.


Oj, that's the deal. Sorry for that interjection


----------

