en+vidéo

or -AT or -T, a negative suffix to verbs, peculiar to Iceland and a part, at least, of Norway. Occurs frequently in old Icelandic poetry and laws, so as almost to form a complete negative voice. In the 1st pers. a personal pronoun k (g) = ek is inserted before the negative suffix, in the 2nd pers. a t or tt. As a rule the pron. as thus repeated; má-k-at-ek, non possum; sé-k-at-ek, non video; hef-k-at-ek, non habeo; skal-k-at-ek; vil-k-at-ek, nolo; mon-k-at-ek, non ero, etc.: 2nd pers. skal-t-at-tu; mon-t-at-tu; gaf-t-at-tu, non dabas: and after a long vowel a tt, mátt-at-tu, sátt-at-tu; so almost invariably in all monosyllabic verbal forms; but not so in bisyllabic ones, máttir-a-þú, non poteras: yet in some instances in the 1st pers. a pronominal g is inserted, e. g. bjargi-g-a-k, verbally servem ego non ego; höggvi-g-a-k, non cædam; stöðvi-g-a-k, quin sistam; vildi-g-a-k, nolui; hafði-g-a-k, non babui; mátti-g-a-k, non potui; görði-g-a-k, non feci: if the verb has gg as final radical consonants, they change into kk, e. g. þikk-at-ek = þigg-k-at-ek, nolo accipere. In the 3rd pers. a and at or t are used indifferently, t being particularly suffixed to bisyllabic verbal flexions ending in a vowel, in order to avoid an hiatus,—skal-at or skal-a, non erit; but skolo-t, non sunto: forms with an hiatus, however, occur,—bíti-a, non mordat; renni-a, ne currat; skríði-a, id.; leti-a, ne retardet; væri-a, ne esset; urðu-a, non erant; but bíti-t, renni-t, skríði-t, urðu-t are more current forms: v. Lex. Poët. The negative suffix is almost peculiar to indic., conj., and imperat. moods; the neg. infin. hardly occurs. Nothing analogous to this form is to be found in any South-Teutonic idiom; neither do there remain any traces of its having been used in Sweden or Denmark. A single exception is the Runic verse on a stone monument in Öland, an old Danish province, now Swedish, where however the inscriptions may proceed from a Norse or Icel. hand. The Runic inscriptions run thus, sa’r aigi flo, who did not fly, old Icel. ‘flo-at,’ Baut. 1169. Neither does it occur in any Norse prose monuments (laws): but its use may yet be inferred from its occurrence in Norse poets of the 10th century, e. g. the poets Eyvind and Thiodolf; some of which instances, however, may be due to their being transmitted through Icel. oral tradition. In Bragi Gamli (9th century) it occurs twice or thrice; in the Haustlöng four times, in Ynglingatal four times, in Hákonarmál once (all Norse poems of the 10th century). In Icel. the suffixed negation was in full force through the whole of the 10th century. A slight difference in idioms, however, may be observed: Völuspá, e. g., prefers the negation by né (using vas-at only once, verse 3). In the old Hávamal the suffix abounds (being used thirty-five times), see the verses 6, 10, 11, 18, 26, 29, 30, 34, 37–39, 49, 51, 52, 68, 74, 88, 113–115, 126–128, 130, 134, 136, 147, 149, 151, 153, 159. In Skírnismál, Harbarðsljóð, Lokasenna—all these poems probably composed by the same author, and not before the 10th century—about thirty times, viz. Hbl. 3, 4, 8, 14, 26, 35, 56; Skm. 5, 18, 22; Ls. 15, 16, 18, 25, 28, 30, 36, 42, 47, 49, 56, 60, 62. Egil (born circa 900, died circa 990) abounds in the use of the suffixed neg. (he most commonly avails himself of -at, -gi, or né): so, too, does Hallfred (born circa 968, died 1008), Einar Skálaglam in Vellekla (circa 940–995), and Thorarin in the Máhlíðingavísur (composed in the year 981); and in the few epigrams relating to the introduction of Christianity in Icel. (995–1000) there occur mon-k-að-ek, tek-k-at-ek, vil-k-at-ek, hlífði-t, mon-a, es-a; cp. the Kristni S. and Njala. From this time, however, its use becomes more rare. Sighvat (born circa 995, died 1040) still makes a frequent but not exclusive use of it. Subsequent poets use it now and then as an epic form, until it disappeared almost entirely in poetry at the middle or end of the 13th century. In the Sólarljóð there is not a single instance. The verses of some of our Sagas are probably later than the Sagas themselves; the greatest part of the Völsungakviður are scarcely older than the 11th century. In all these -at and conj. eigi are used indifferently. In prose the laws continued to employ the old forms long after they were abolished in common prose. The suffixed verbal negation was used,

α. in the delivering of the oath in the Icel. Courts, esp. the Fifth Court, instituted about the year 1004; and it seems to have been used through the whole of the Icel. Commonwealth (till the year 1272). The oath of the Fifth (High) Court, as preserved in the Grágás, runs in the 1st pers., hefka ek fé borit í dóm þenna til liðs mér um sök þessa, ok ek monka bjóða, hefka ek fundit, ok monka ek finna, hvárki til laga né ólaga, p. 79; and again p. 81, only different as to ek hefka, ek monka (new Ed.): 3rd pers., hefirat hann fé; borit í dóm þenna ok monat hann bjóða, ok hefirat hann fundit, ok monat hann tinna, 80, 81; cp. also 82, and Nj. l. c. ch. 145, where it is interesting to observe that the author confounds the ist and 3rd persons, a sign of decay in grammatical form.

β. the Speaker (lögsögumaðr), in publicly reciting and explaining the law, and speaking in the name of the law, from the Hill of Laws (lögberg), frequently employed the old form, esp. in the legal words of command es and skal (yet seldom in plur.): erat in the dictatorial phrases, erat skyldr (skylt), non esto obligatus; erat landeigandi skyldr, Grág. (Kb.) i. 17; erat hinn skyldr, 21; yngri maðr era skyldr at fasta, 35; enda erat honum þá skylt at …, 48; erat þat sakar spell, 127; era hinn þá skyldr at lýsa, 154; erat hann framar skyldr sakráða, 216; ok erat hann skyldr at ábyrgjask þat fé, 238; ok erat hann skyldr, id.; ok erat sakar aðili ella skyldr, ii. 74; erat hinn skyldr við at taka, 142; erat manni skylt at taka búfé, 143; enda erat heimting til fjár þess, 169; era hann þá skyldr at taka við í öðru fé nema hann vili, 209; ok erat þeim skylt at tíunda fé sitt, 211; ok erat hann skyldr at gjalda tíund af því, 212; erat kirkjudrottinn þá skyldr, 228; ef hann erat landeigandi, i. 136. Skalat: skalat maðr eiga fó óborit, i. 23; skalat homum þat verða optar en um siun, 55; skalat maðr ryðja við sjálfan sik, 62; skalat hann þat svá dvelja, 68; skalat hann til véfangs ganga, 71; skalat aðilja í stefnuvætti hafa, 127; ok skala hann gjalda fyrir þat, 135; ok skalat hann með sök fara, 171; enda skalat hann fleirum baugum bœta, 199; skalat hann skilja félagit, 240; skalat hann meiri skuld eiga en, ii. 4; skalat þeim meðan á brott skipta, 5; skalat hann lögvillr verða, svá, 34; skalat hon at heldr varðveita þat fé, 59; í skalat enn sami maðr þar lengr vera, 71; ok skala honum bæta þat, 79; skalat fyl telja, 89; skalat hann banna fiskför, 123; skalat hann lóga fé því á engi veg, 158; skalat drepa þá menn, 167; skalat svá skipta manneldi, 173; skalat maðr reiðast við fjórðungi vísu, 183. Plur.: skolut menn andvitni bera ok hér á þingi, i. 68; skolut mál hans standast, 71; skolut þeir færi til vefangs ganga en, 75, etc. etc. Other instances are rare: tekrat þar fé er eigi er til (a proverb), i. 9; ok um telrat þat til sakbóta, ok of telrat þá til sakbóta ( it does not count), 178; ef hann villat ( will not) lýsa sár sitt, 51; ok ræðrat hann öðrum mönnum á hendr þann úmaga, 248; ræðrat sá sínum ómögum á hendr, ii. 18; verðrat honum at sakarspelli and verðrat honum þat at s., i. 63; verðrat honum þat at sakarvörn, 149; kömrat hann öðru við, ii. 141; þarfat hann bíða til þess, i. 70; ok skilrat hann frá aðra aura, ii. 141, i. 136. Reflexive form: kömskat hann til heimtingar um þat fé, he loses the claim to the money, ii. 180, etc. All these instances are taken from the Kb. (Ed. 1853). Remarkable is also the ambiguity in the oath of Glum (see Sir Edm. Head, Viga-Glum, pp. 102, 103, note, I. c.), who, instead of the plain common formal oath—vask-at-ek þar, vák-at-ek þar, rauðk-at-ek þar odd ok egg—said, vask at þar, vák at þar, rauðk at þar. He inverted the sense by dropping the intermediate pronominal ek between the verb and þar, and pronouncing ‒ ‒́ instead of ‒́ ⏑. It further occurs in some few proverbs: varat af vöru, sleikði um þvöru, Fs. 159; veldrat sá er varir, Nj. 61 (now commonly ekki veldr sá er v., so in Grett.); erat héra at borgnara þótt hœna beri skjöld, Fms. vii. 116; era hlums vant kvað refr, dró hörpu á ísi, 19: also in some phrases, referred to as verba ipsissima from the heathen age—erat vinum líft Ingimundar, Fs. 39; erat sjá draumr minni, Ld. 128. Thorodd employs it twice or thrice: því at ek sékk-a þess meiri þörf, because í do not see any more reason for this, Skálda 167; kannka ek til þess meiri ráð en lítil, I do not know, id.; mona ( will not) mín móna ( my mammy) við mik göra verst hjóna, 163. In sacred translations of the 12th century it occurs now and then. In the Homilies and Dialogues of Gregory the Great: monatþu í því flóði verða, thou shalt not; esa þat undarligt þótt, it is not to be wondered at; hann máttia sofna, he could not sleep; moncaþ ek banna, I shall not mind, Greg. 51, 53; vasal kall heyrt á strætum, was not, Post. 645. 84; nú mona fríðir menn hér koma, Niðrst. 623. 7. In later writers as an archaism; a few times in the Al. (MS. A. M. 519), 3, 5, 6, 44, 108; and about as many times in the MS. Eirspennill (A. M. 47, fol.) [Etymon uncertain; that at is the right form may be inferred from the assimilation in at-tu, and the anastrophe in t, though the reason for the frequent dropping of the t is still unexplained. The coincidence with the Scottish dinna, canna is quite accidental.]

I) pers. pron. I;

in poetry and old prose a pronominal k is suffixed to the verb, emk = em ek, vask = vas ek; sák = sá ek; mundak = munda ek; even if preceded by ek: ek sék, ek sitk; a preceding g becomes by assimilation k, hykk = hygg ek; the pronominal k is inserted between the suffixed negative, -a or -at, and the verb, sáka = sá ek-a, I saw not; veitka = veit ek-a, I know not.

II) from aka.

* * *

pers. pron., mod. eg, proncd. ég or jeg; eg occurs as early as in MSS. of the 15th century, Arna-Magn. 556 A; jak, Fms. x. 287, cp. the mod. Swed. form and the mod. Icel. jeg; old poets make it rhyme with ek, as, Halldórr ok ek | höfum engi þrek, Korm. 154 (in a verse), cp. Ld. 108: [Ulf. ïk, but ek on the Golden horn and on the stone in Tune; A. S. ic; Engl. I; Germ. ich; old Swed. jak, mod. jag; Dan. jeg; cp. Lat. ego, Gr. ἐγώ]:—I, Nj. 10, 30, 132, etc.

2. in poetry and old prose a pronominal ‘k or ‘g is suffixed to the verb; em’k búinn annan í at nefna, Grág. i. 103; ek em’k, 623. 56, Blas. 41, Mork. 89, 94, 99, 104, Vþm. 8, Ls. 14, Ad. 1, Post. 645. 33; jók’k, ‘I eked’ ( added), Íb. (pref.); vas’k þar fjórtán vetr, ch. 9; þá er ek var’k á bænum, Blas. 40, Hm. 12; ek bað’k, Post. 645. 54; ek kom’k, Skm. 18; ek sit’k, Mork. 168; ek finn’k, 141; ek nam’k, 73; sá’k, 75; ek sé’k ( video), 103, 168, Fms. xi. 110; mun’k-at ek, Mork. 50; svá ek vind’k, Hm. 156; ok rít’k á þessa lund, Skálda (Thorodd) 166; sjá’k ( sim), Mork. 183: g before k becomes by assimilation k, e. g. hyk’k = hygg’k, Skm. 5: the pronominal k is inserted between the suffixed negative and the verb, ek skal’k-a, hef’k-a, mon’k-a, sa’k-a, ma’k-a, veit’k-a, or skal’k-a ek, hef’k-a ek, etc.: even a double k after a diphthong, siá’kk ( sim), Mork. 89, 134, but chiefly in poetry with the suffixed negative, e. g. ek sé’kk-a: this form is obsolete, whereas the suffixed g (or k) in bisyllables or after a vowel is more freq.; svá at ek fæ’k eigi leyzt mik, Edda 20; er ek vilda’g helzt, Fms. xi. 146; eigi munda’k trúa, Edda 32; ef ek lifi ok mega’k ráða, 34; þá hafða’k bundit með gresjarni, id.; sem önga frægð muna’k af hljóta, 20; sýnda’k bæði þeim ok Sæmundi, Íb. (pref.); þá er ek var heima heyrða’k sagt, Edda 81; er ek aeva kenni’g, Hm. 164; draums ætli’g þér, Hdl. 7; þorða’g, Ad. 1; ræka’g, mætta’g, Stor. 8; sky’t ek ok ræ’k (ræ’g, v. l.), Fms. vi. 170 (in a verse); líkara at ek vitja’g hingat þessa heita, Eg. 319; næða’k (or næða’g), if I could reach, Eb. 70 (in a verse); at ek nemni þá menn alla ok beiði’g, Grág. ii. 317; vilja’k, I will, Ht. 1; þvíat ek ætla’g, Ó. H. 59; ok náða’k svá öllu ríki þeirra, 74; þvíat ek trúi’k yðr bezt, 88; ek setta’k, Mork. 62; flytta’k, 94; geri’k, heyrða’k, 36; mæli’g, 39; ek vetti’g, 175; tefli’g, 186; setta’g, lagða’g, id.; vilda’g, 193; vide Lex. Poët. and the word ‘-at’ [p. 2]: sometimes a double pronoun occurs, g and k, mátti’g-a’k, Og. 32; bjargi’g-a’k, Hm. 153; stöðvi’g-a’k, 151; hversu ek má’k, Fms. vi. 102; vide Lex. Poët. and Frump. 228 sqq.

B. DAT. AND ACC. are from a different root:—dat. mér, [Ulf. mis; Germ. mir; lost in Dan.], Nj. 10, etc. etc.; acc. mik, mod. mig, which form occurs even in MSS. at the beginning of the 14th century, e. g. Hauks-bók: mek occurs now and then in MSS., e. g. O. H. L., N. G. L., Sks. B, else it is rare and obsolete, Al. 42, Ó. H. 107, [Ulf. mik; A. S. mec; Engl. me; Germ. mich; Dan. mig.] As the word is so common, we shall only mention the use of mik which is special to the Scandinavian tongue, viz. its use as a verbal suffix. The ancients had a double form for the reflexive; for 1st pers. -mk, i. e. mik suffixed to the plur. of the verb; for the 3rd pers. -sk, i. e. sik suffixed to sing. and plur. alike; thus, ek (vér) þykkjumk, I (we) seem to myself ( ourselves); but hann þykkisk, he seems to himself; þeir þykkjask, they seem to themselves: the -mk was later changed into -mz, or - mst of editions and mod. use; but this is a grammatical decay, as if both - mst and -st (þykjumst and þykist) arose from the same reflex. sik.

1. the subject may be another person or thing (plur. or sing.) and the personal pronoun mik suffixed as object to the verb, a kind of middle voice found in very old poems, and where it occurs freq. it is a test of antiquity; in prose it is quite obsolete: jötna vegir stóðum’k yfir ok undir, the ways of giants (i. e. precipices) stood above and beneath me, Hm. 106; er lögðum’k arm yfir, the lass who laid her arms round me, 108; mögr hétum’k fögru, my son promised me fair, Egil; hilmir buðum’k löð (acc.), the king gave me leave, i. e. bade me, sing, Höfuðl. 2; úlfs bagi gáfum’k íþrótt, the wolf’s foe ( Odin) gave me the art ( poetry), Stor. 23; Ragnarr gáfum’k reiðar mána, R. gave me the shield, Bragi; þat erum’k sýnt, it is shewn to me, id.; stöndum’k ilmr fyrir yndi, the lass blights my joy, Kormak; hugr tjáðum’k, courage helped me, Egil; snertum’k harmr við hjarta, grief touches me to the heart, Landn.; stöndum’k til hjarta hjörr, the sword pierces me to the heart, Fm. i; feldr brennum’k, my cloak catches fire, Gm. 1; draum dreymðum’k, I dreamed a dream; grimt várum’k hlið, the gap ( breach) was terrible to me, Stor. 6; hálf ván féllum’k, half my hope failed me, Gráfeldar-drápa; heiðnir rekkar hnekðum’k, the heathen men turned me out, Sighvat; dísir hvöttum’k at, the ‘dísir’ hooted us, Hðm. 29; gumi görðum’k at vigi, the man made us fight, id.; lyst várum’k, it list me, Am. 74: very common is erum’k, ‘tis to me (us); erum’k van, I (we) have to expect; mjök erum’k tregt tungu at hræra, ‘tis hard for me to move the tongue, i. e. the tongue cleaves to my mouth, Stor. 1, 17, Ad. 16.

2. sometimes oneself is the subject, freq. in prose and poetry, either in deponent verbs or as reflex. or recipr.; at vit skilim’k sáttir, Ó. H. 119; at vér komim’k, that we shall come, 85; finnum’k hér þá, 108; ef vér finnum’k, 111; ek skildum’k við Ólaf konung, 126; ef ek komum’k í braut, 140; sigrom’k, if I gain the victory, 206; æðrom’k, 214; ef ek öndum’k, if I die, Eg. 127; ek berum’k, I bear myself, Grág. ii. 57, Mork. passim; ek þykkjum’k, þóttum’k, ráðum’k, látum’k, setjum’k, bjóðum’k, skildum’k, kveljum’k, etc., = ek þykisk, þóttisk, ræðsk, lætsk, setsk, býðsk, skildisk, kvelsk, etc.: even at the present day the forms eg þykjumst, þóttumst are often used in writing; in other words the suffix - mst (-mk) is almost obsolete.

β. the obsolete interjection er mik = I am; vel er mik, well is me (= ‘bless me!’), O. H. L. 71; æ er mik, ah me! 64; kendr er mik, I am known, 66: with a reflex. notion, hvat er mik at því, what is that to me? Skv. 1. 28; er mik þat undir frétt þeirri, that is my reason for asking, Grág. i. 19:—this ‘er mik’ is clearly the remains of the old erum’k.

C. DUAL AND PLUR. also from a different root:

1. dual vit, mod. við, a Norse form mit also occurs, Al. 170, 171, [cp. mi, Ivar Aasen]:—we two; gen. and dat. from a different root, okkar and okkr, [cp. Goth. ïggqis; A. S. inc and incer; O. H. G. inch and inchar; Ivar Aasen dikke and dykk]:—our.

2. plur.:

α. nom. vér and vær, the last form now obsolete, [Goth. veis; A. S. and Engl. we; Germ. wir; Dan. vi]:—we.

β. gen. vár, mod. vor, Eg. 524, Fms. viii. 213, 398, etc.

γ. dat. and acc. oss, [Goth. uns (acc.), unsis (dat.); A. S. us; Germ. uns; Swed. oss; Dan. os]:—us: it need only be noticed that in mod. familiar usage the dual—við, okkr, okkar—has taken the place of the plural, vér, oss; but that in written books the forms vér, oss are still in freq. use, except in light or familiar style; old writers, on the other hand, made a clear distinction both in speech and writing.