Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T19:45:42.733Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Notes

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 October 2009

Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Notes
Information
The Classical Review , Volume 4 , Issue 4 , April 1890 , pp. 182 - 184
Copyright
Copyright © The Classical Association 1890

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

page 182 note 1 Suggested by Heyne, : Kinkel, Ep. Grace. Fr. p. 17.Google Scholar

page 183 note 1 Or for then the ρ was dropped owing to ρ following close upon it in forms like , cp. for etd, Brug. Curt. Stud. ix. 272. , if it stood alone, might well come from : uen-ter, as suggested by Feist Goth. Etym p. 89.

page 183 note 1 It should not be forgotten that has been compared with Eng. ash. But the coincidence of the Avestic word has not been noticed before, and should hardly be left out of account.