(2) The W. spv. ‑haf (= Ir. ‑em, ‑am) is from Kelt. *‑isamos, *‑isamā < Italo-Kelt. *‑isₑm-os, ‑ā, cf. Lat. plūrimus < *plōisₑmos. This is formed by adding the ordinal ending *‑ₑmos (: Lat. sept-imus) to the suffix of comparison ‑is‑, just as the other ordinal ending ‑tos (: Lat. sex-tus) added to ‑is- forms the other spv. ending ‑istos familiar in Gk. and Germanic. [The ‑ss- of Lat. ‑issimus is due to some re-formation, probably ‑is- + ‑simus newly compounded, the latter element containing ‑(i)s- already.]
(3) The W. cpv. ‑ach (Bret. ‑oc’h) seems to come from Brit. *‑aks- for unaccented *‑āks- § 74; probably in full *‑āk’son < *‑āk-isōn (final *‑on for *‑ōn § 59 v) the cpv. in *‑is-ōn (: Gk. ‑ιων, Goth, ‑iza) of a derivative in *‑āk-os of the adj. § 153 (5). The general substitution of the cpv. of a derivative for the ordinary cpv. in *‑i̯ōs is doubtless due to the fact that, after the loss of endings, the cpv. in ‑i̯ōs did not differ from the pos. pl. (*katarn-i̯ōs would give *cedeirn),[1] or in some cases from the pos. sg. (*meliss-i̯ōs would give *melys). The suffix ‑āk- itself prob. had a heightening force, as it has in Lith. when added to an adj.; in Lettish ‑āks is the ordinary cpv. ending. The suffix *‑isōn is formed by adding *‑ōn to the suffix of comparison *‑is‑. It occurs with loss of ‑i- in W. nes, haws, etc. § 148 i, q.v.; the final *‑ōn is the L°-grade of a suffix ‑en‑, which is perhaps to be seen in amgen § 148 ii and haeachen g. 234, apparently an obl. case of haeach § 220 iii (6). The final ‑n of the nom. sg. ‑son is prob. the initial of no ‘than’ § 113 i (1).
(4) The W. eqtv. ‑het (= Bret. exclamative ‑het) seems to be from Brit. *‑is-eto‑s, formed by adding the Kelt. ordinal suffix *‑eto‑s § 154 ii (2) to the suffix of comparison *‑is‑. It contains the same elements as the spv. suffix *‑istos, but is a new and independent formation, in which each element preserves some measure of its significance: ‑is- ‘superior’, ‑eto- ‘in order’. It is equative in meaning only when cyn is prefixed; thus cyn deced â ‘as beautiful as’, lit. ‘equally excelling-in-beauty with’. Without cyn it is an exclamative, as uchet y kwynaf r.p. 1417 ‘how loudly I lament!’; so Ml. Bret. kazret den ‘what a fine man!’ (in the dial. of Leon the spv. is substituted for it, as brasa den ‘what a big man!’). In W. it is largely used substantially as the obj. of a vb. or prep., meaning not the quality denoted by the adj. but the degree of it: er i theced ‘in spite of her superior beauty’.
Zimmer, KZ. xxxiv 161–223, held that the eqtv. was a noun like colled, etc., which became an adj. by being compounded with cyn, which he regarded as *kom‑; cf. lliw ‘colour’, cyfliw ‘of a like colour’. His explanation did not account for the ‑h- in the suffix; hence Stern, ZfCP. iii 164, suggests that the eqtv. is a compound, the second element being allied to Ir. sāith, Lat. satis, but this the vowel does not admit of.—The fact that teced is a noun in er i theced no more proves it to be a noun originally than the use of gwaethaf
- ↑ Both survived for hēn ‘old’, but the pl. only as a noun; thus hŷn ‘older’ < *seni̯ōs, hŷn ‘ancestors’ < *senī.
r 2
