- Email: [email protected]
Dictionnaire étymologique de la langue grecque, étudiée dans ses rapports avec les autres langues indo-européennes,
220
kanaka- p. 196, now see" M. Mayrhofer, Kurzgef. etymol. W6rterb. d. Altind., Lief. 3, Heidelberg 1954, p. 151; the second explication of ~d.hya-, p. 181) could better have been suppressed. For Rudva- (p. 299) now compare also Mayrhofer, Zs. Deutsch. Morg. Ges. 1953; for rajas(p. 296) T. Burrow, Bull. School Or. Afr. Lang. 12 (1948), p. 645 if.), for dbharan,a- Gonda, New Ind. Ant. 2 (1939), p. 69 ff. On p. 49, n. 4 (Nala 2, 1)" "she was not in her natural state, sound (in body and mind) on account of Nala"; for Ana~ga-, (p. 53, 2) see also S. Konow, Festschrift-Wackernagel, p. 1 ft. It can be readily understood that in preparing this volume not every text edition and other relevant publication was available. Incidentally a lacuna of thi:~; sort is indicated by the author himself tn t a2. Sl,k¢h~ntrar'~ Mah~bh~rata). It is however much to be regretted that Hill's, Edgerton's, and Radhakrishnan's Bhagavadgit~ translations are not so much as mentioned (p. 145), thai Garbe's and especially Otto's very questionable theories about that famous text are presented as final (p. 69, n. 1), that Tawney-Penzer's Kath~saritsigara ('Ocean of Story') has not been utilized. However, these imperfections do not detract from the merits of this book. U~techt
J. GOUDA
E. BOISACQ~f, Diction~,aire dtymologique de la langue grecque, dtudige dans ses rapports avec les autres langues indo-europdennes, 4e ~dition, augment~e d'un index par Helmut R i x Heidelberg 1950, Carl Winter, X X X I I , 1256 pp. Boisacq's renowned magnum opus was written in the first years ot this. century and published in the years 1907--1916. It is still hard to imagine that such a work should have been composed in the few spare hours, which an arduous universitary task as a professor in classical philology and archaeology left to the author. The work soon won a high praise of solid scholarship, and it has since long become a vade-mecum for all Greek scholars, as well as for students of comparative linguistics. Among its special merits, which justly eclipsed the more speculative work of PreUwitz, we may mention the judicious references to earlier publications and, above all, the author's sound and balanced judgment. While making full use of the publications of the German neogrammarians, he did not shut his eyes to the cultural
221 aspect of the foreign influences on the Greek language. It must be attributed to the h'gh qualities of Boisacq's book that, in spite of the progress made in thxs field since 1916, for a long time no need of a new work was felt. The new edition is, like the third of 1938, a mere reprint of the original work, but its usefulness is increased by the addition of an index of words of the cognate languages, comprising 131 pages, which has been compiled by H. Rix. The fact that the book, after nearly half a century, still continues to serve its purposes, is perhaps the highest praise for Boisacq's life-work. It may be anticipated that for many years to come it will remain an indispensable work of reference, beside Hofmann's small book, which is composed according to a different plan. It is unnecessary here to point out, in what respects it must now be considered nbsolete, as Hjalmar Frisk's "Griechisches etymologisches WiSrterbuch", which is going to be published by the same publisher, and which, is estimated at about the same size (circa 1250 pages) is to replace it in the course of time. Since, however, it will take many years before the new work is completed, we nust be glad that "Boisacq" is again available. Leiden
F.B.J.
KUIPER
M. MAYRHOFER,Sanskrit-Grammatik (Sammlung GSschen, Bd. 1158). Berlin 1953, Walter de Gruyter & ~'" ]p 89 S. This little book contains on 60 pages of small size the whole grammar of the classical language in Roman script, with a brief introductory remarks on the language and the literature. There are brief references to Latin and Greek, wherever such remarks may be helpful for the European student to get a better insight into the language. The work has been excellently done and the remarks are clear and to the point. Unfortunately the printer's errors are far too numerous and there are a few inaccuracies, both ill the grammatical part and in the texts (and glossary), which ougbt not to have escaped Mayrhofer's attention. In spite of this, it is warmly recommended to all those, who wish to have : some knowledge of Sanskrit for comparative purposes. Even for i students of Sanskrit philology it may prove a u~eful introduction into g i:i< the study of the language. ~ Leiden
F.B.J.
KUIPER
kanaka- p. 196, now see" M. Mayrhofer, Kurzgef. etymol. W6rterb. d. Altind., Lief. 3, Heidelberg 1954, p. 151; the second explication of ~d.hya-, p. 181) could better have been suppressed. For Rudva- (p. 299) now compare also Mayrhofer, Zs. Deutsch. Morg. Ges. 1953; for rajas(p. 296) T. Burrow, Bull. School Or. Afr. Lang. 12 (1948), p. 645 if.), for dbharan,a- Gonda, New Ind. Ant. 2 (1939), p. 69 ff. On p. 49, n. 4 (Nala 2, 1)" "she was not in her natural state, sound (in body and mind) on account of Nala"; for Ana~ga-, (p. 53, 2) see also S. Konow, Festschrift-Wackernagel, p. 1 ft. It can be readily understood that in preparing this volume not every text edition and other relevant publication was available. Incidentally a lacuna of thi:~; sort is indicated by the author himself tn t a2. Sl,k¢h~ntrar'~ Mah~bh~rata). It is however much to be regretted that Hill's, Edgerton's, and Radhakrishnan's Bhagavadgit~ translations are not so much as mentioned (p. 145), thai Garbe's and especially Otto's very questionable theories about that famous text are presented as final (p. 69, n. 1), that Tawney-Penzer's Kath~saritsigara ('Ocean of Story') has not been utilized. However, these imperfections do not detract from the merits of this book. U~techt
J. GOUDA
E. BOISACQ~f, Diction~,aire dtymologique de la langue grecque, dtudige dans ses rapports avec les autres langues indo-europdennes, 4e ~dition, augment~e d'un index par Helmut R i x Heidelberg 1950, Carl Winter, X X X I I , 1256 pp. Boisacq's renowned magnum opus was written in the first years ot this. century and published in the years 1907--1916. It is still hard to imagine that such a work should have been composed in the few spare hours, which an arduous universitary task as a professor in classical philology and archaeology left to the author. The work soon won a high praise of solid scholarship, and it has since long become a vade-mecum for all Greek scholars, as well as for students of comparative linguistics. Among its special merits, which justly eclipsed the more speculative work of PreUwitz, we may mention the judicious references to earlier publications and, above all, the author's sound and balanced judgment. While making full use of the publications of the German neogrammarians, he did not shut his eyes to the cultural
221 aspect of the foreign influences on the Greek language. It must be attributed to the h'gh qualities of Boisacq's book that, in spite of the progress made in thxs field since 1916, for a long time no need of a new work was felt. The new edition is, like the third of 1938, a mere reprint of the original work, but its usefulness is increased by the addition of an index of words of the cognate languages, comprising 131 pages, which has been compiled by H. Rix. The fact that the book, after nearly half a century, still continues to serve its purposes, is perhaps the highest praise for Boisacq's life-work. It may be anticipated that for many years to come it will remain an indispensable work of reference, beside Hofmann's small book, which is composed according to a different plan. It is unnecessary here to point out, in what respects it must now be considered nbsolete, as Hjalmar Frisk's "Griechisches etymologisches WiSrterbuch", which is going to be published by the same publisher, and which, is estimated at about the same size (circa 1250 pages) is to replace it in the course of time. Since, however, it will take many years before the new work is completed, we nust be glad that "Boisacq" is again available. Leiden
F.B.J.
KUIPER
M. MAYRHOFER,Sanskrit-Grammatik (Sammlung GSschen, Bd. 1158). Berlin 1953, Walter de Gruyter & ~'" ]p 89 S. This little book contains on 60 pages of small size the whole grammar of the classical language in Roman script, with a brief introductory remarks on the language and the literature. There are brief references to Latin and Greek, wherever such remarks may be helpful for the European student to get a better insight into the language. The work has been excellently done and the remarks are clear and to the point. Unfortunately the printer's errors are far too numerous and there are a few inaccuracies, both ill the grammatical part and in the texts (and glossary), which ougbt not to have escaped Mayrhofer's attention. In spite of this, it is warmly recommended to all those, who wish to have : some knowledge of Sanskrit for comparative purposes. Even for i students of Sanskrit philology it may prove a u~eful introduction into g i:i< the study of the language. ~ Leiden
F.B.J.
KUIPER