κατὰ ὦλκα Ν

ὠλκα, [full] ὦλκας, only in acc. sg. and pl.,

A = αὖλαξ, ἄλοξ, furrow, Il. 13.707, Od.18.375, Mosch.2.81, A.R.3.1054, 1333. (

κατὰ ὦλκα Il.

l. c. has perh. replaced κατ' Αϝολκα which may have been an old [dialect] Aeol. form ([etym.] a)vḷka).)

αὖλαξ, ᾰκος, ἡ (also ὁ, AP9.274 (Phil.), Aret.SD2.13), also [full] ἄλοξ, οκος (q. v.); [full] ὦλξ, found only in acc. ὦλκα, ὦλκας; [dialect] Dor. [full] ὦλαξ EM 625.38:—

A furrow made in ploughing, [ βόε] ἱεμένω κατὰ ὦλκα hastening along the furrow, Il.13.707;

κατὰ ὦλκας A.R.3.1054

;

εἰ ὦλκα διηνεκέα προταμοίμην Od.18.375

; [

βόε] ἐρίσαντε ἐν αὔλακι Hes.Op. 439

; ἰθεῖάν κ' αὔλακ' ἐλαύνοι ib. 443;

ὀρθὰς αὔλακας.. ἤλαυνε Pi.P.4.227

;

ἀρότρῳ ἀναρρηγνύντες αὖλακας Hdt.2.14

;

αἰθέρος αὔλακα τέμνων Ar.Av. 1400

(lyr.);

ἐξ ἀλόκων ἐπετειᾶν A.Ag. 1015

;

βαθεῖαν ἄλοκα διὰ φρενὸς καρπούμενος Id.Th. 593

;

ἐν ἄλοκι Ar.Av. 234

(lyr.).

b furrow's breadth, Thphr.HP8.8.7, CP4.12.1.

2 metaph., wife,

σπείρειν τέκνων ἄλοκα E.Ph.18

; αἱ πατρῷαι ἄλοκες thy father's wife, S.OT 1211.

3 metaph., furrow in the skin, gash, wound,

ὄνυχος ἄλοκι νεοτόμῳ A.Ch.25

(lyr.);

δορὸς ἄλοκα E.HF 164

; of the line drawn by the stile in writing,

ποίαν αὔλακα; Ar.Th. 782

(anap.), cf. AP 6.68 (Jul. Aegypt.).

4 swathe, Theoc.10.6.

5 αὖ. ὑδροφόρος aque-duct, IG14.453 ([place name] Catana).

b αὔλακας· κοίλους τόπους, Hsch.— Chiefly poet., never in good [dialect] Att. Prose; Hom. only in acc. ὦλκα; αὖλαξ only is used by Pi. and Hdt., ἄλοξ only by Trag.; both αὖλαξ and ἄλοξ by Ar. (Cf. Lac. εὐλάκα 'plough', Lith. velkù, Slav. vlèką 'pull'.)

Grammatical information: f.

Meaning: `furrow' (Trag., Com.).

Other forms: Also αὖλαξ (Hes.), ὦλκα, - ας acc. sg., pl. (Hom.), Dor. ὦλαξ EM 625, 37and in ὁμ-ώλακες (A. R. 2, 396). Further εὑλάκᾱ `plough' with the Lacon. fut. inf. εὑλαξεῖν (Orac. ap. Th. 5, 16); and αὑλάχα ἡ ὕννις H. and *ὄλοκες (cod. ὀλοκεύς) αὔλακες H.

Origin: PG [a word of Pre-Greek origin]

Etymology: The relation between these forms was unclear. Solmsen Unt. 258ff. explained ὦλκα from *ἄϜολκα ( κατὰ ὦλκα Ν 707 for original *κατ' ἄϜολκα); it is strange that this form did not live on. Beside *ἀ-Ϝολκ- the zero grade would give *ἀ-Ϝλακ- in αὖλαξ. The root was supposed in Lith. velkù, OCS vlěkǫ, Av. varǝk- `draw'; one could assume * h₂uelk-. This is tempting, but must not be correct. If the Balto-Slavic words are isolated (there is further only Av. vǝrǝc-), the verb may be non-IE; also it is rather * uelkʷ-, which makes the connection with Greek impossible; further there is no trace of the verb in Greek, which has ἔλκω \< *selk-. εὑλάκα can no longer be explained from different prothesis, *ἐ-Ϝλακ-. But ἄλοξ cannot be explained in this way: metathesis of *αϜολκ- would give *αυλοκ-; an after the F had disappeared, metathesis was no longer possible (only contraction to *ωλκ-). - I see no reason to reject ὀλοκ-. ὦλαξ was perhaps taken from a compound, like ὁμώλακ-, which would give *ολακ-. - Pisani JF 53, 29 derived αὖλαξ from αὑλός and separated it from ἄλοξ etc., which is improbable. - The variants are strongly reminiscent of substr. words, as Beekes Dev. 40 held (withdrawn ib. 275-7). Variation of prothetic ε\/α\/ο\/αυ\/ευ is typical of substr. words, as is κ\/χ ( αὐλάχα). So more probably we have to assume a substr. word. The start with the Homeric form was wrong: it is the only form that has no vowel between λ and κ, and is therefore suspect. If we assume labialised phonemes, like lʷ, a reconstruction * alʷak- gives all forms: αὖλαξ (by anticipation of the labial feature; which gives ὦλαξ by contraction), ἄλοξ (influence on the second vowel ; ὀλοκ- on both vowels), interchange α\/ε gave εὐλακ-; see Beekes Pre-Gr., and cf. ἀρασχάδες etc. Homer might have had *κατ' ὠλακ(α), which became unclear during the tradition.

Page in Frisk: 1,77