Some New Theories of the Greek Ka-Perfect. 
149 
The demonstration of this relationship depends upon the principles of 
the nasalis sonans theory, which was alluded to above in connection with 
Ikv6a for * sXv6m\ and eSaoxa for * e'Saoxm. We there saw that this 
sonant nasal developed in Greek, when unaccented, into a; just as in 
many dialects in Germany the ending -n (i. e. - en ) when unaccented be¬ 
comes a short e- vowel, through the medium of the sonant nasal. 
The full or strong form of the particle kev is hey. When unaccented 
it sinks to x + the sonant nasal or *xn. This sonant nasal then regularly 
develops to a giving us xa\ just as we have raro 5 , verbal from reive*) 
(root rev-), for *rn-ro 5 . 
The Sanskrit, it maybe mentioned, develops the sonant nasal in the same 
way; thus we have ta-tds for tn-tas, corresponding to Greek ra-ro$; and 
ta-no-mi in the 5th Sanskrit class (acc. to Bopp) for tn-nd-mi. 
Nor is kev the only illustration, among particles, of this variation of 
weak and strong form, this Stammabstufung. 
We have another striking illustration in the case of the particle ocv, 
which has for its weak or unaccented form -v. This unaccented form is 
seen in 7 tdv-v ( cf . rear) and further probably in ovros, ro-v-rov, etc. It 
is doubtless the same as the Sanskrit particle -u and the Gothic -u, seen in 
the passive forms of the optative and imperative, as nimada-u and 
nimainda-u. 
The same Abstufung holds similarly for many other particles, to which 
Osthoff has devoted some exhaustive consideration in the fourth volume 
of Morpliologische Untersuchungen , pp. 222-277, in his consideration of 
what he calls the “ Tiefstufe im Indog ermanischen Vocalismus .” It is un¬ 
necessary to consider this matter further here. 
We may now return to kev. We have seen that we have to deal with 
two forms, kev and xa. There are to be sure two other forms of our 
particle viz. ke and xa, but as they do not concern our present purpose, 
we omit any consideration of the question of their special origin, inter¬ 
esting as that might be. The form xa is confined pretty nearly to the 
Doric and Lesbic-Aeolic dialects in the historical period; yet this does not 
constitute any objection against its antiquity, or against its having at some 
time been in frequent use in all dialects. 
So much for the morphological side of the particle. Let us now look at 
its probable signification. 
The tradititional etymology of kev has connected the word with the 
Skrt. Mm, which means 4 well, indeed, to be sure’; and even the latest 
scholars have signified their acceptance of this view, including among the 
latter Delbrtick in his Syntaktische Forschungen, vols. I., and IY.; Ascoli, 
Studj Critici II., 231 ff; and Gustav Meyer in his Greek Grammar. Osthoff 
is the first to raise objections to this etymology; not, as he admits, 
because it is phonetically inadmissible, though he mentions one or two 
weak spots (which we shall have to omit here), but because he thinks he 
has a better etymology to propose. He thinks kev identical with Skrt, 
