A Morphological Element Having No Grammatical Function in Georgian. 1. Concerning the Suffix -ენ (>-ნ)

Abstract

In Old Georgian, in the system of person and number of a verb, namely, in the screeves of Series II the element -ენ (>-ნ) appears that is considered to be a plural direct object marker. 8 This element has no morphological function – It is not related to a specific person, i.e. in all those forms where it appears, all the persons have their own morphological markers, e.g. დაგვ-ზარდ-ნ-ა მან ჩუენ; და-გ-ზარდ-ნ-ა-თ მან თქუენ; და-ზარდ-ნ-ა მან იგინი; დაგუ-ზარდ-ენ შენ ჩუენ; და-გ-ზარდ-ენ-ი-თ მე თქუენ, etc.

In the first example, the element -ენ (>-ნ) is related to person I, in the second one – to person II, in the third example – to person III and so on. In all these forms we have a determinate expression with person and plural markers.

The same element appears even in a unipersonal verb, e.g. და-ვ-იზარდ-ენ-ი-თ ჩუენ; დაი-ზარდ-ენ-ი-თ თქუენ; დაი-ზარდ-ნ-ეს იგინი.

Expressing specific person and number is clearer in these forms. The element -en (>-n) is included in all the three forms.

-ენ (>-ნ) is grammatically odd though it is obviously a morphological element because it determinately appears in the paradigm following a certain rule but this rule is not grammatical as – “a person in the nominative case” regardless being a subject and an object, and a person type – is not a grammatical definition.

In old Georgian, the method of distinguishing the element -ენ (>-ნ) in a transitive or intransitive verb coincides with a principle of expressing a class-category in the languages having class conjugation (e.g. Avar). As it seems, the element -ენ (>-ნ) is a remain of class conjugation in Old Georgian; a certain reference to this topic was made by Arnold Chikobava.