¹ Jahrbilcher filr classische Philologie, fünfzehnter Supplementband (1887), pp. 453–556.

² Palestra No. 170 (1930).—Cf. JEGP, xxxii (1933). 86–88,

³ Loc. cit., 457 ff.

⁴ Loc. cit., 478 f., 485 f.

⁵ Loc. cit., p. 43 ff.

⁶ Cf. loc. cit., pp. 126–136.

⁷ Cf. Jespersen, Language, p. 403.

⁸ Anker-Jensen, Acta Phil. Scand., x (1935), 14 f. offers acute observations on the very diverse force of positive meaning possible with the double negative in Danish and Latin

⁹ The present writer confesses to a large measure of belief in the irresistible, environmental, power of fashion habits in all domains of life, and thus also in syntactic-stylstic matters as well as in (sporadic) sound changes. If the long oo has changed to short over large areas of our country, in words like roof, hoof, hoop, wool, etc., then, in the ace of analogy, why not in words like loop, whoop, spool, fool, moon, etc.? English is averse to certain adjectives being compounded with un-, in-. Thus, wicked, terrible, wrathfd, stingy—really a very numerous class; probably because words strongly depreciatory er se do not need, or are not susceptible of, further modification. Cf. Jespersen, Negation in English, p. 144. But Old Norse does have hundreds of similar compounds with pejoratives, such as óblaupr ‘not cowardly’; óhn⊘ggr ‘not stingy’; óreipinn ‘not wrathful.‘ Cf. below, p. 23. Then, why the difference in languages so closely akin, if not through fashion?

¹⁰ Op. cit., p. liv.

¹¹ Editions: The Eddie poems are quoted after Gering's ed. 4, 1922. For the remainder of the poetic literature I have depended on Finnur Jónsson's Den Norsk-Islandske Skjaldedigtning, 2 vols. Translations into Danish therefrom are not specially marked. In the matter of the prose literature, I have keenly felt the lack, as yet, of a uniform edition; which entailed the awkwardness of having to cite, now by chapter and paragraph (as in the Sagabibliothek volumes), now by page and lines.

The project of the Fornritafjélag, recently started, will remedy this (though, at the present rate, it may take another fifteen years!). The following works were used: Gísla s., Grettis s., Eyrbyggja s., Egils s., Laxdœla s., Frioþjófs s., Cláris., Flóres s., Hungrvaka (all in the Sagabibliothek); Flóamanna s., Vatsdœla s., Hallfreoar s. in Vigfússon-Möbius Fornsögur (1860); Hrafnkels s., þórsteins s. st., þórsteins s. hv., þórsteins s. Sí., Droplaugar s. Gunnars s. þ., Vápnfiroinga s. in Austfiroingasogur, ed. Jakobsen (1902); Hœnsna þóris s., Bandamanna s. in Zwei Isländergeschichten, ed. Heusler (1913); Viga-Glúms s., Ljósvetninga s., Reykdœla s., Valla-Ljóts s., Svarfdœla s., Víga-Skúta s. in Íslenzkar Fornsogur (1880, 1881, 1833); Hrólfs s. kr., Sorla p. in Fornaldarsogur Nororlanda, ed. Valdimar smundarson, vol. i (1891); V⊘sunga s. in Norrœne Skrifter osv., ed. S. Bugge (1864); Krmáks s., ed. Möbius (1886); Haroar s. Gr., ed. þórleifr Jónsson (1891); Finnboga s., ed. Gering (1879); Gylfaginning, Skáldskaparm⊘, ed. Finnur Jónsson (1900); Fóstbrœora s., Cophagen, ed. Gíslason (1852); Sturlunga s., ed. Kålund (1906); Grœnlendinga þ. in vol. iv of Íslenzk Fornrit (1935); Heimskringla, ed. Finnur Jónsson (1911); Stjórn, ed. Unger (1862); Knytlinga s., in vol. xi of Fornmanna Sögur (1928); Alexanders s., ed. Unger (1848).—The Proverbs, after Finnur Jónsson's “Oldislandske ordsprog og talemåder,” Ark. f. n. Fil. vol. 26 (1914), 61–111; 170–217.

Abbreviations. In the matter of abbreviations I have adopted (1) for the non-Eddic poetry, those of the Lexicon Poeticum ² (the third edition not being available to me); (2) for the Edda, those of Gering's Vollständiges Wörterbuch;for the prose, those of Fritzner's Ordbog osv.

¹² Fritzner records far over a thousand ó-compounds, of which perhaps the majority are found, each more or less frequently, in litotic use. Of the ca. 200 ó-compounds listed in the Lex. Poet., a very large proportion occur only once; and none with litotic force.

¹³ As it happens, this was not found in litotic combination. As to its ‘neutral’ value, cf. note 14, below.

¹⁴ Notwithstanding the frequent use of me⨿- as litotic adverbial definition (cf. p. 9) the use with negatives shows that it is not always used in a negative sense. Cf. also meoalsnótr (Hov., 54 f.)—‘middlings wise’; me⨿lag (n), at meoallagi 'medium quality, average,' meoalmaor á voxt 'middlesized person.'

¹⁵ Fj⊘sv., 9, Ht., 91, 92 are hardly litotic.

¹⁶ Loc. cit., pp. 72–84.

¹⁷ Loc. cit., p. 79.

¹⁸ For the form, cf. Noreen, §382, 3; for the meaning cf. Alex. s., p. 71 (copia pat er gnótt).

¹⁹ But the medial form gnœgjaz does not possess litotic force.

²⁰ Except, possibly, Hov., 2: mjok es brápr es á br⊖dom skal sins of freista frama:

great haste hath he, etc.

²¹ Gup., ii, 31: pann hefk allra ælgofgastan

fylki fundit ok framast nekkvi

does not belong here.

²² To be sure, nokkut has rather negative value here; but cf. the reading suggested by E. Kock, Not. Norr., §1995: lofat nakkvat.

²³ Försök til belysning af mörkare och oförstådda ställen i den poetiska Eddan, p. 21 f.

²⁴ See the discussion in Ger. Kom., sub Hov., 33, 1.

²⁵ Ordbog, ii, 437; Lex. Poet., sub verbo.

²⁶ Tidskr.f. philol., viii, 70. Cf. also A. Kock, Arkiv, xx, 69. Thus also Kock, Not. Norr., §309, and Meissner, Wb., sub verbo (though the meaning ‘always’ does not fit in any of the passages there cited). The meaning ‘always’ is lent support by the superlative optast (below, p. 32).

²⁷ Neither word nor occurrence is booked in any of the dictionaries. Cl. V. gives only talsveror, without locus.

²⁸ There is no mention of the adverbial œrnum in Lex. Poet.

²⁹ Arkiv, xxx, 61 f., 170 f.

³⁰ Unfortunately, Kålund leaves me in the lurch with regard to the physical aspect of the locale; for neither in his description of the Fiskilœkjarhverfi nor of the Mývatnshverfi (Beskrivelse, ii, 124) does he refer to the nature of the ground. And, strangely, this topographically memorable episode is nowhere referred to by him. However, in the absence of other material, I conclude from the precise information on localities shown by the author of the saga and the well-known recent volcanic and scoriaceous nature of the surroundings of the Myvatn, that here too, he writes from a precise knowledge.

³¹ A number of synonymic phrases with -traupr, -styggr, -skjárr are collected by Ger. Kom. sub H. H., i, 36, 2.

³² Cf. also the numerous opposites with mildr, Lex. Poet. sub mildr 1.

³³ Meoal-snotr skyle manna hver (Hov., 54 ff.) is of course not litotic.

³⁴ On account of the vapidity of the text it is difficult to decide whether misjafn in Mhkv., 21 and 26 has litotic force. Finnur Jónsson apparently does not think so.

³⁵ Cf. Hübner, loc. cit., pp. 118 f., 127 f.

³⁶ Cf. Nygaard, Norrœn Syntax, §58.

³⁷ Not recorded in Lex. Poet. ²

³⁸ Not identical with the ‘elative.‘ Cf. Behaghel, Deutsche Syntax, i, 159; e.g., ein allerliebstes Kind. No mention of the litotic force in Heusler, Altisländisches Elementarbuch, §393.

³⁹ For the form with ⊘, cf. Noreen, §82 A. 3.

⁴⁰ E. Kock, Not. Norr., §55, mentions also mest among words not expressing ‘direkt jamförelse.‘ However, a scrutiny of the occurrences (Mhkv., 21, St., 12, Eyv. lv., 14, Háv., 11, E. Sk., 6, 63 p. dr., 18) shows no clear case of understatement.

⁴¹ Lil., 77, mentioned in this connection by Lex. Poet., does not belong here.

⁴² However, E. Kock, Not. Norr. §1141, §2033 translates nasta here by ‘förut, nyligen.‘

⁴³ A particularly good example of which appears in the famous line þokk mun gráta . . . þurrum torum (Gylfag., p. 60).