βλώσκω

[helios523]

Hello,

Can anyone point me to a resource that explains linguistically why βλώσκω has such a strange form in the future, aorist and perfect?

Thank you!

[jeidsath]

Well, to start out with, here is Smyth:

βλώ-σκω for μ(β)λω-σκω from μολ-, μλω- (130 D.) go: fut. μολοῦμαι (806), 2 aor. ἔμολον, perf. μέμβλωκα. Poetic. (V.)

And then in 130:

130. Development.—δ is developed between ν and ρ, as in ἀνδρός of a man for ἀνρος from ἀνήρ (cp. cinder with Lat. cineris); β is developed between μ and ρ (or λ), as in μεσημβρία_ midday, south from μεσ-ημρια_ for μεσ-ημερια_ from μέσος middle and ἡμέρα_ day (cp. chamber with Lat. camera).

130 D. So in Hom. μέ-μβλω-κα have gone from μλω from μολ- in ἔ-μολ-ο-ν (128 a). At the beginning of words this μ is dropped; thus, βλώσκω go, βροτός mortal for μβρο-τος (root μρο-, μορ-, as in mor-tuus). In composition μ remains, as in ἄ-μβροτος immortal; but ἄ-βροτος immortal is formed from βροτός.

[Hylander]

The present and the perfect are the strange forms, not the aorist or future.

The root is μ_λ-, which shows up clearly in 2d aorist ε-μολ-ον, with the internal vowel -ο-.

Τhe present is formed from the zero-grade μλ- (i.e., no internal vowel) plus the suffix -σκω, like γι-γνω-σκω (which, however, unlike βλωσκω has a reduplicated present). The present would be *μλωσκω, without an internal vowel, but classical ancient Greek generally doesn't allow the consonant cluster μλ- at the beginning of a word, so the μ- of the present tense has become β-.

The perfect μέμβλωκα has developed an epenthetic -β- between μ and λ, which smoothes out the un-Greek consonant cluster -μλ-.

[Markos]

βλώσκων λάμβανε.