Why is τηλικοῦτος (< τηλικ + οὗτος) not spelled τηλιχοῦτος? Cf. e. g. ἀφορισμός.


Beekes writes that houtos is from *so-h²u-to-, “a univerbation of the *so/to- pronoun with the stem that also figures in autos”. In this case τηλικοῦτος is not tēlik + houto-, but tēliko + uto (without the pronoun *so).

  • And besides, τηλικ has the same pronoun (notice how the interrogative (with pi) and correlative alter the initial letter), so there may have been some sense of redundancy in the οὗ. – Hugh Nov 6 '18 at 12:36
  • αὐτός seems pretty transparently to come from αὖ το- "that one again" > "that (same) one", so probably there wasn't really a morpheme uto, but rather τηλικοῦτος is an analogical formation based on οὗτος (which maybe is what you're saying). – TKR Nov 6 '18 at 22:40
  • Would this also apply to τοιοῦτος, τοσοῦτος, τοιόσδε, τοσόσδε, such that they are not to be pronounced with an aspiration? – Toothrot Nov 12 '18 at 11:09

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.