*-āną
Runic: ᚨᚾᚨ Pronunciation: /ɑː.nɑ̃/suffix · forms verbs · Weak class 3
Function
- forms chiefly stative or fientive verbs meaning ‘to be’ or ‘to become’ what is denoted by an adjective or noun
- forms factitive verbs meaning ‘to make, treat, or regard as’ what is denoted by an adjective or noun
Etymology
The present paradigm for Weak class 3 verbs shows an alternation *-ai- ~ *-ā-. This inflectional form was likely originally used in factitive verbs (especially deadjectival and denominal), and it has been generally argued to be derived from Proto-Indo-European thematic factitives in *-o-yé/ó-, with the *-ai- appearing before inherited endings that begin with *e or *i, and the *-ā- appearing elsewhere. There is ongoing debate about how to explain the exact phonological and analogical developments that led to the Germanic alternation; however, there is no straightforward way to derive the complete paradigm from pre-Germanic *-ajaną through regular loss of intervocalic *-j- (Fulk 2018: 308–13; Jasanoff 1973: 850–70; Ringe 2017: 203–206, 262, 286–89; Tanaka 2011: 254–60, 268–69).
In addition to absorbing older stative verbs, Weak Class 3 also included some stative verbs that appear to have continued a separate formation with Proto-Germanic *-ai- ~ *-ja-, possibly derived from an Indo-European stative or essive formation in *-eh₁-yé/ó- or its zero-grade counterpart. Thus, Weak class 3 as reconstructed for Proto-Germanic appears to have been morphologically diverse. While its factitives and many of its statives shared the *-ai- ~ -*ā- paradigm, they did not necessarily all come from the same Proto-Indo-European source. Examples of similar stative formations include Latin rubēre and Old Church Slavonic ръдѣти (rъděti). Similarly, Ancient Greek factitives in -όω (-óō) may represent a related Indo-European denominative-factitive pattern (Fulk 2018: 308–13; Ringe 2017: 203–206; Tanaka 2011: 254–60; Tucker 1981: 15–34).
The early runic forms wiju and wija appear to be first-person singular forms corresponding to Gothic 𐍅𐌴𐌹𐌷𐌰𐌽 (weihan), and indicate that there was a Northwest Germanic ending **-jǣ and that a *j-bearing formation existed in at least one factitive verb. Mees (2023: 347–64) argues that the early epigraphic evidence cannot easily be reconciled with the recent reconstructions that derive the factitive paradigm directly from *-o-yé/ó- as Proto-Germanic *-ai- ~ *-ā-. The forms do not demonstrate that intervocalic *-j- was regularly retained throughout Weak class 3; however, they do provide further evidence that this verb class has more than one morphological history.
Paradigm
Present active
| Person | Indicative | Subjunctive | Imperative |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1st singular | -ō | – | – |
| 2nd singular | -aisi | – | -ai |
| 3rd singular | -aiþi | – | -āþau |
| 1st dual | -ōs | – | – |
| 2nd dual | -āþiz | – | -āþiz |
| 1st plural | -āmaz | – | – |
| 2nd plural | -aiþ | – | -aiþ |
| 3rd plural | -ānþi | – | -ānþau |
Present passive
| Person | Indicative | Subjunctive |
|---|---|---|
| 1st singular | – | – |
| 2nd singular | -āsai | – |
| 3rd singular | -āþai | – |
| 1st dual | – | – |
| 2nd dual | – | – |
| 1st plural | -ānþai | – |
| 2nd plural | -ānþai | – |
| 3rd plural | -ānþai | – |
Past
| Person | Indicative | Subjunctive |
|---|---|---|
| 1st singular | -adǭ | -adēdį̄ |
| 2nd singular | -adēz | -adēdīz |
| 3rd singular | -adē | -adēdī |
| 1st dual | -adēdū | -adēdīw |
| 2nd dual | -adēdudiz | -adēdīdiz |
| 1st plural | -adēdum | -adēdīm |
| 2nd plural | -adēdud | -adēdīd |
| 3rd plural | -adēdun | -adēdīn |
Non-finite Forms
| Infinitive | Present Participle | Past Participle |
|---|---|---|
| -āną | -āndz | -adaz |
Descendants
-
*-ēn (Proto-West Germanic)
-
-ēn (Old High German)
-
-en (Middle High German)
- -en (German)
-
-en (Middle High German)
-
-ēn (Old High German)
- -𐌰𐌽 (-ān) (Gothic)