Re: Origin of "igitur"

On Wednesday, September 29, 2004, at 12:34 , Mark J. Reed wrote:

> This came up on my Latin study list - what is the origin of the Latin
> word "igitur"?
According to the Lewis & Short dictionary, it derives from three earlier
morphemes:
i- the pronominal stem of i-s, i-d etc
-gi- the suffix which appears in Sanskrit as -ha and ancient Greek as -tha
(a locative suffix)
-tur the same suffix as the -tus in adverbs like _penitus_ (inwardly,
internally), _antiquitus_ (in former times)

But L & S's etymologies are not always sound, and this looks to me little
better than guesswork. In particular it is difficult enough to see how
sanskrit -ha and Greek -tha ( <-- *dha) can be related, but to associate
-gi- with these seems  a desperate attempt. How can the phonological
changes be plausibly accounted for?

Also, the change of -tus to -tur is arbitrary. We know intervocalic /s/ in
proto-Latin became /r/ (presumably becoming [z] along the way; similar
things happened in Germanic, cf. was ~ were), but final /s/ maintained
itself into early Classical Latin. Subsequent changes of final -s to -r in
the Classical period were only the result of analogy, e.g. _honos_ (gen.
honoris) and _robus_ (gen. roburis) _honor_ and _robur_ respectively.

I think we can safely dismiss this etymology. None of the other reference
books I have to hand suggest an etymology.

> Does it actually come from the passive of ago, or is
> the similarity a coincidence?
Now that is a most interesting suggestion. We know that in proto-Latin
there was initial word stress which caused weaking of following short
vowels*, so where we have the verb _agere_ (to drive, do, act), when it is
compounded it reduces to -igere, e.g.
abigere - to drive away
adigere - to drive; urge; bring [person] to a situation/state of mind
[against their will]
exigere - to drive off, expel; to require, demand
redigere - to drive back, bring back; to call in, collect, receive [money
etc]; to render, reduce [to a condition]
etc - not an exhaustive list.

In normal Classical prose _igitur_ is normally placed after the first word
of its clause, i.e. *in an unstressed position*. So could it be the
passive of _agere_ used parenthetically after the initial word?

The question is whether the meaning "therefore, accordingly, in these
circumstances" could reasonably derive from the present passive indicative
_agitur_ (it is [being] done) used parenthetically. I would be happier
with a subjunctive _aga:tur_, but long vowels were not subject to
weakening and we must, therefore, rule it out of consideration.

Quite simply: I do not know the origin of _igitur_ and I can find no
credible explanation in any of the references I have at hand. The
suggestion that _igitur_ is derived from a unstressed _agitur_ used
parenthetically is attractive, but do the meanings of _igitur_ and
_agitur_ make this plausible?

*also the diphthongs |ae| /aj/ and |au| /aw/ weakened to simple long
vowels /i:/ and /u:/ respectively.
Ray
===============================================
http://home.freeuk.com/ray.brown
ray.brown@freeuk.com
===============================================
Anything is possible in the fabulous Celtic twilight,
which is not so much a twilight of the gods
as of the reason."      [JRRT, "English and Welsh" ]

Reply