6. Pronouns

6.1. About the Pronouns

6.1.1. Pronouns are used as nouns or as adjectives. They are divided into the following seven classes:

1. Personal pronouns: as, eg, I.

2. Reflexive pronouns: as, se, himself.

3. Possessive pronouns: as, serós, our.

4. Demonstrative pronouns: as, so, this, that.

5. Relative pronouns: as, jos, who.

6. Interrogative pronouns: as, qis? who?

7. Indefinite pronouns: as, qis, anyone.

6.1.2. Like adjectives, pronouns are declined for case and number and – except for the personal and reflexive pronouns – for gender. Pronouns have a special declension, differing from the nominal declension in several respects.

6.2. Personal Pronouns

6.2.1. The personal pronouns of the first person are eg, I, wejes, we; of the second person, tū, thou, juwes, you. The personal pronouns of the third person - he, she, it, they - are wanting in Indo-European, an anaphoric (or even a demonstrative) being used instead.

NOTE. Late Indo-European had no personal pronouns for the third person, like most of the early dialects attested. For that purpose, a demonstrative was used instead; as, from ki, id, cf. Anatolian ki, Gmc. khi-, Lat. cis-, id, Gk. ekeinos, Lith. sis, O.C.S. si, etc.

6.2.2. Since every finite verb form automatically indicates the ‘person’ of the verb, the nominal pronoun forms are already adequately marked.  Therefore, pronouns are not generally used in verbal sentences; they might be used to mark insistence, though: esmi, I am; eg esmi, me, I am.

In comparison with the orthotonic forms, often strengthened by particles, the special enclitic forms feature the minimal word stem and may be used in multiple cases.

NOTE. Tonic forms are fully stressed (emphatic or contrastive), while enclitic are unstressed clitic object pronouns; these are clearly attested in Anatolian, Indo-Iranian, Greek, Balto-Slavic and Tocharian. They are mostly reduced versions of the full forms, and it is a common resource write them added to the preceding verb, cf. Hitt. -mu, O.Lith. -m(i).

6.2.3. The personal (non-reflexive) pronouns are declined as follows:

First Person

 

Singular eg-, me-

Plural we-, no-

 

Orthotonic

Enclitic

Orthotonic

Enclitic

NOM.

eg(h)óm, eg, I

wejes, smés, we

ACC.

mewóm, me

me

smé, nōns, us

nos

GEN.

mene, of me

mo

seróm, of us

nos

DAT.

meghei, meghjom

moi

sméi, nosbhos

nos

LOC.

mei

smí, nosi

INS.

mojo

-

nosbhis

ABL.

med

-

sméd

Second Person

 

Singular tu-, te-

Plural  ju-, we-

 

Orthotonic

Enclitic

Orthotonic

Enclitic

NOM.

tū, tu, thou

juwes, jusmés, you

ACC.

tewóm, thee

t(w)e

jusmé, wōns, you

wos

GEN.

tewe; of thee

t(w)o

wesróm, of you

wos

DAT.

tebhei, tebhjo

t(w)oi

jusméi, wosbhos

wos

LOC.

t(w)ei

jusmí, wosi

INS.

t(w)ojo

wosbhis

ABL.

t(w)ed

jusméd

NOTE. A comprehensive comparison of the reconstructed forms is at the end of this book:

1) For 1st P. Nom. eghóm (<*egh2-óm), emphatic from eg (<*eg-óh2), cf. O.Ind. ahám, Av. azəm, Hom.Gk. εγων, Ven. ehom.

2) Enclitics moi, mei, and t(w)oi, t(w)ei, are found in genitive, dative and locative, but they are deliberately specialised in this table.

3) 1st sg. dative is often found reconstructed as mebhi/mebhei, following the 2nd pl.  tebhei/tebhi.

4) -es endings in nom. pl., smés, (j)usmés (<*juswés?) attested in Att.-Ion. Greek and Gothic.

5) An older ju(s)wes is probably behind the generally reconstructed nominative *jūHs? based on Balto-Slavic (and Germanic) forms, which would therefore be a contraction of the original form (cf. Skt. yū-yám, Gk. u-meis, Lat. uōs, Cel. s-wīs, Goth. iz-wis<*uz-wes?)   

6) Zero-grade forms in jus- are also found as us- (from wes-? cf. Goth. izwis<*uswes?).

7) Possibly accusatives jusmé<*jusmēn<**jusmens, and smé<*smēn<**smens.

8) Probably acc. pl. **nos-m-snōns and **wos-m-swōns.

8) Gen. nsom, wsom, is also attested.

9) Osc.-Umb., O.Ind. variant (orthotonic) series of Acc. Sg. in -m, as mēm(e), twēm, tewem, usóm, s(w)ēm.

10) Dual forms (in *-h1) are for the 1st nom. , acc. tonic , enclitic ; for the 2nd , acc. tonic ūwé, enclitic .

For the personal pronouns of the third person singular and plural, the anaphoric i- is used. See §6.5 and §6.6 for more details on its use and inflection.

6.3. Reflexive Pronouns

6.3.1. Reflexive pronouns are used in the accusative and the oblique cases to refer to the subject of the sentence or clause in which they stand, meaning ‘(one)self’.

They do not have a nominative case, do not distinguish number, and can be used with any of the three persons.

se, -self

ACC.

se, myself, yourself, himself/herself/itself, ourselves, yourselves, themselves.

GEN.

sewe, soi, of myself, yourself, himself/herself/itself, ourselves, etc.

ABL.

swed, by/from/etc. myself, yourself, himself/herself/itself, ourselves, etc.

DAT.

sebhei, soi, to myself, yourself, himself/herself/itself, ourselves, etc.

L.-I.

sei, in/with myself, yourself, himself/herself/itself, ourselves, etc.

 

NOTE. Particular IE languages show an old swoi and swe, cf. Gk. Lesb. ϝε. According to J.T. Katz precisely this swe is regarded as ancient and se as secondary. In contrast, G.E. Dunkel connects se/soi, which he considers more ancient, with the demonstrative pronoun so.

6.3.2. The reciprocals one another, each other, were expressed like the distributives (v.s. §5.5.4), with the first member in the nominative, and the second in the accusative (or other oblique case); as, aljos aljom, onjos onjom, etc.; as,

NOTE. Cf. Hitt. 1-aš 1-an ku-w-aš-ki-it ‘one killed the other continuously’, O.Ind. anyonya-<*anyás anyám, Av. aniiō.aniia-, Chor. nywny, Gk. allālo-<*alos allon, *alloi allous ‘one another’, Lat. aliī aliōs, alterius alterum; for oinos álterom, cf. Latin unus alterum, Eng. one another, Ger. einander, etc. Reciprocity is one of the principal meanings of middle voice forms, v.i. §7.1.2.

6.4. Possessive Pronouns

6.4.1. From the bases of the personal pronouns, the oldest possessive pronouns seem to have been mos, mine, smós, ours, twos, thine, usmós, yours, swos, own.

NOTE. So e.g. in Gk. emós (<*h1mós), ammos, sós, ummos, hos, Av. ma-, θwa-, O.Ind. tva-. Variants exist in tewós (as Gk. teϝós, Lat. tuus), sewós (as Gk. heϝós, Lat. suus), explained as neologisms, but “which may well be as early as Late PIE” (Sihler 1995).

6.4.2. The common Late Indo-European possessives were formed from the same bases with suffixes -(i)jo- in the singular, -(t)ero- in the plural; as, méwijos, menjos, my,serós, our, téwijos, thy, userós, your, séwijos.

NOTE. For such common PIE forms, similar to the genitives of the personal pronouns (v.s. §6.2), cf. Gk. ēméteros (<smé-tero-), uméteros (<usmé-tero-), O.Lat. noster (<nos-tero-) uoster (<wos-tero-), Goth. unsara-, (<s-ero-), izwara- (<wesw-ero-?), etc. all used as possessive pronouns; for the singular, cf. Lat. meus, O.C.S. mojĭ, Goth meina-, etc. O.Ind. madīya-, tvadīya, etc. were formed from the ablatives mad, tvad, etc., while possessives mamaka-, asmāka-, jusmāka-, were made from the genitives. See Szemerényi (1970), Adrados–Bernabé–Mendoza (1995-1998), Meier-Brügger (2003).

6.4.3. Possessives are declined like adjectives of the first type, in -os, -ā, -om.

NOTE. PIE swos, séwijos, are only used as reflexives, referring generally to the subject of the sentence. For a possessive of the third person not referring to the subject, the genitive of the anaphoric must be used. Thus, pater séwijom chenti, (s)he/it kills his [own] father; but pater esjo chenti, (s)he/it kills his [somebody (m.) else’s] father. See below §10.1.2 for more on its use.

6.5. Anaphoric Pronouns

6.5.1. Anaphora is an instance of an expression referring to another, the weak part of the deixis. In general, an anaphoric is represented by a pro-form or some kind of deictic. They usually don’t have adjectival use, and are only used as mere abbreviating substitutes of the noun.

NOTE. Old anaphorics were usually substituted in modern IE languages by demonstratives.

They are usually integrated into the pronoun system with gender; only occasionally some of these anaphorics have been integrated into the personal pronouns system in Indo-European languages.

6.5.2. Indo-European has a general anaphoric pronoun, is, ja/ī id, an old demonstrative pronoun with basis on PIE root i- with ablaut ei-.

NOTE. PIE root i- is also the base for common relative jo-. Demonstrative is, ja/ī, id, with anaphoric value, “he/she/it”, in Italic (e.g. Lat. is,ea, id), Germanic (e.g. O.H.G. ir, er/iz, ez), Baltic (e.g. Lith. jìs/), Greek (e.g. Cypriot ín), Indo-Iranian (e.g. Skt. ay-ám, iy-ám, i-d-ám).

6.5.3. The other demonstrative pronoun, so, , tod, functions as anaphoric too, but tends to appear leading the sentence, being its origin probably the relative. They are also used for the second term in comparisons.

NOTE. Demonstrative so, , tod is also widely attested in Celtic (e.g. O.Ir. -so/-d), Italic (e.g. Lat. is-te, is-ta, is-tud), Germanic (e.g. Goth. sa, , þata, O.Eng. , sēo, þæt, O.H.G. der, die, daz), Baltic (e.g. Lith. tàs, ), Slavic (e.g. O.C.S. tŭ, ta, to), Alb. ai, ajo, Gk. ho, , , Indo-Iranian (e.g. Skt. , s, tát), Toch B se, , te, Arm. ay-d, Hitt. ta. Modern IE languages have sometimes mixed both forms to create a single system, while others maintain the old differentiation.

 

6.6. Demonstrative Pronouns

6.6.1. The function of demonstrative pronouns, deixis, includes an indication of position in relation to the person speaking. It is possible to express a maximum of four (generally three) different degrees of distance; as, I-deixis (here, near the speaker), thou-deixis (there, near the person addressed), that-deixis (there, without a particular spatial reference), yonder-deixis (yonder, over there).

6.6.2. The demonstrative pronouns so, this, that, and is, this one, that one, “the (just named)”, are used to point out or designate a person or thing for special attention, either with nouns, as adjectives, or alone, as pronouns, and are declined as follows:


 

so, , tod, this, that

 

Singular

Plural

 

masc.

neu.

fem.

masc.

neu.

fem.

NOM.

so

tod

toi

tāi

ACC.

tom

tām

tons

tāns

GEN.

tosjo

tesjās

toisom

tāsom

ABL.

tosmōd

tesjās

toibhos/toimos

tābhos/tāmos

DAT.

tosmōi

tesjāi

toibhos/toimos

tābhos/tāmos

LOC.

tosmi

tesjāi

toisu

tāsu

INS.

toi

tesjā

tōis

tābhis/tāmis

 NOTE. Variants are observed in the attested dialects: 1) Nom. so (before all consonants) is also found as sos in Old Indian, Greek and Gothic (in all other circumstances), and as se in Latin (cf. Lat. ipse). 2) Nom. is found as sja/sī in Germanic and Celtic. 3) Nom. Pl. tāi is general, while sāi is restricted to some dialects, as Attic-Ionic Greek, possibly from original fem. * and masc. *to (Meier-Brügger 2003). However, linguists like Beekes (1995) or Adrados–Bernabé–Mendoza (1995-1998) reconstruct the nominative form in s- as the original Proto-Indo-European form. 4) The instrumental singular forms are difficult to reconstruct with the available data.

is, ja, id, this one, that one

 

Singular

Plural

 

masc.

neu.

fem.

masc.

neu.

fem.

NOM.

is

id

ja/ī

ejes

ī/ja

jās

ACC.

im

jam/īm

ins

jāns

GEN.

esjo

esjās

eisom

esom

ABL.

esmōd

esjās

eibhos/eimos

DAT.

esmōi

esjāi

eibhos/eimos

LOC.

esmi

esjāi

eisu

INS.

ei

esjā

eibhis/eimis

NOTE. Some emphatic forms exist; as, ejóm for is, idóm for id; ijóm for ja.

6.6.2. Distance degrees in demonstratives might be classified as follows: kos, , kod (also ghei-ke, ghāi-ke, ghod-ke), I-deixis, ‘this here’, oisos, oisā, oisom, thou-deixis, ‘this there’, general so, tod, , that-deixis; elne, elnā, elnod, yonder-deixis.

NOTE. While there is no definite or indefinite article in PIE, and nouns might be translated as indefinite or definite depending on the context – as in Sanskrit or Latin –, when the difference is crucial demonstratives are used. See §10.4.3.

6.6.3. Deictic particles which appear frequently with demonstrative pronouns include -ke/-ko-, here; -ne-/-no-, there; -wo-, away, again.

NOTE. For PIE i-, se-, he, cf. Lat. is, O.Ind. sa, esa, Hitt. apā, Goth. is, O.Ir. (h)í; for -ke/-ko-, in (e)ke, ghei-(ke), this (here), cf. Hitt. kās, eda (def.), Lat. hic (<*ghe-i-ke), Goth. hi-, sa(h), O.Ir. sin, O.C.S. sĭ, si, se, Lith. šìs, ši; for ke-enos, cf. Gk. keĩnos (<*ke-enos), O.N. hánn, hann, ‘he’; for au-, away, again, cf. Gk. houtos, O.Ind. a-sau, u-, Av. ava-, OCS. ovĭovĭ; for se-, te-, in oi-se, is-te, ene, this (there), cf. Lat. iste, Gk. οιος (<*oihos), O.Ind. enam (clit.); for en-, cf. O.C.S. onĭ, Lith. anàs ‘that’; for -ne, -no-, that, cf. Lat. ille (<*el-ne), ollus (<*ol-nos), Gk. keĩnos (<*ke-enos), Goth. jains. Common derivatives kei, here (loc. from ke), num-ke, now (from , now), or i-dhei, there, tom-ke, then (from tom, then). Latin (c)ibī, (c)ubī are frequently found reconstructed as PIE *ibhi, *qobhi (cf. Hitt. kuwaapi(t), see Kloekhorst 2007), but it is not difficult to find a common origin in PIE i-dhei, qo-dhei for similar forms attested in different IE dialects; cf. Lat. ubī, Osc. puf, O.Ind. kuha, O.Sla. kude, etc.

6.7. Interrogative and Indefinite Pronouns

6.7.1. Introduction

1. There are two forms of the interrogative-indefinite pronoun in Proto-Indo-European, and each one corresponded to a different class: qi- (with ablaut qei-) to the substantive, and qo- to the adjective pronouns.

SUBSTANTIVE

ADJECTIVE

qis bhéreti? who carries?

qos wīrós bhéreti? what man carries?

qid widjesi? what do you see?

qom autom widjesi? which car do you see?

NOTE. In the origin, qi-/qo- was possibly a noun which meant ‘the unknown’, and its interrogative/indefinite sense depended on the individual sentences. Later both became pronouns with gender, thus functioning as (orthotonic) interrogatives or (enclitic) indefinites (Szemerényi, 1970). The form qi- is probably the original independent form (compare the degree of specialisation of qo-, further extended in IE dialects), for which qo- could have been originally the o-grade form (Beekes 1995, Adrados–Bernabé–Mendoza 1995-1998). The substantive interrogative pronoun in PIE was qi-, whereas qo- was used to fill adjectival functions (Meier-Brügger 2003, Sihler 1995). Some IE dialects have chosen the o-stem only, as Germanic, while some others have mixed them together in a single paradigm, as Indo-Iranian, Balto-Slavic or Italic. Cf. Sktr. ka, Av. ko, Gk. tis, Lat. qui, quae, quod; quis, quid, Osc. pisi, Umb. púí, svepis, O.Pers. čiy, Pers. ki, Phryg. kos, Toch. kus/kŭse, Arm. ov, inč’, Gmc. *khwo- (cf. Goth. hwas, O.N. hverr, O.S. hwe, O.E. hwā, Dan. hvo, O.Fris. hwa, O.H.G. hwër), Lith. kas, Ltv. kas, O.C.S. kuto, Rus. kto, Pol. kto, O.Ir. ce, cid, Welsh pwy, Alb. kush, Kam. kâča; in Anatolian, compare Hitt. kuiš, Luw. kui-, Lyd. qi-, Lyc. tike, and Carian kuo.

2. The substantive interrogative pronoun qis? who?, qid? what?, declined like i-:

 

Singular

Plural

 

m.

f.

n.

m.

f.

n.

NOM.

qis

qid

qejes