Page 1 of 1

Conjugation of φέρω: ἤνεγκαν, ἠνέχθη, etc?

Posted: January 30th, 2018, 9:04 am
by PhillipLebsack
Some of the forms of φέρω seem totally unrelated to φέρω in just about every visual way. Is there any way to explain why φέρω looks so different in these forms?

Re: Conjugation of φέρω: ἤνεγκαν, ἠνέχθη, etc?

Posted: January 30th, 2018, 9:36 am
by Jason Hare
PhillipLebsack wrote:
January 30th, 2018, 9:04 am
Some of the forms of φέρω seem totally unrelated to φέρω in just about every visual way. Is there any way to explain why φέρω looks so different in these forms?
They aren't related. You need to simply memorize them.

Re: Conjugation of φέρω: ἤνεγκαν, ἠνέχθη, etc?

Posted: January 30th, 2018, 10:36 am
by Barry Hofstetter
The principal parts are assembled from three distinct roots that are otherwise unrelated but came to be associated through usage. The same thing happened with the root in Latin, the principle parts being ferō, ferre, tulī, lātum (and additionally happens to be one of the few irregular verbs in Latin).

Re: Conjugation of φέρω: ἤνεγκαν, ἠνέχθη, etc?

Posted: January 30th, 2018, 11:01 am
by Jonathan Robie
There's a similar phenomenon in English for 'is', 'was', 'to be', 'have been'. I assume there is a similar history.

I'm convinced that the Indo-Europeans spent most of their time amusing themselves by plotting ways to make language confusing.

Re: Conjugation of φέρω: ἤνεγκαν, ἠνέχθη, etc?

Posted: January 30th, 2018, 5:30 pm
by Stephen Carlson
The technical term is suppletion. English has it too, not just in the verb to be (is ~ was ~ been) but also in to go (go ~ went). Generally a product of the vagaries of history, suppletion is thought to have some cognitive / processing benefits. Relatedly, it is mainly found with very common words, which affords you plenty of opportunities to recognize and instill its various forms.

Re: Conjugation of φέρω: ἤνεγκαν, ἠνέχθη, etc?

Posted: January 31st, 2018, 6:52 pm
by Shirley Rollinson
PhillipLebsack wrote:
January 30th, 2018, 9:04 am
Some of the forms of φέρω seem totally unrelated to φέρω in just about every visual way. Is there any way to explain why φέρω looks so different in these forms?
If you need some help with similar verbs, check out the chapters of the Online Textbook
http://www.drshirley.org/greek/textbook ... utures.pdf
http://www.drshirley.org/greek/textbook ... aorist.pdf
The language (they way they spoke) came before the grammar rules and books.
Life is like that
:-)
Shirley Rollinson