Under Constantine, rumblings of division within the Roman empire shifted attention away from the eastern provinces. This left Armenia with little hope of assistance against the onslaughts of the new Sasanid king, Shapur II (309 - 379 A.D.). It was amidst his attacks on Armenia and Syria, and in response to the Zoroastrian proselytizing, that Trdat the Great had chosen to make Armenia a Christian state.
Just who ruled Armenia after Trdat the Great remains veiled in obscurity. The next ruler to emerge, about whom some certain information is known, was Arshak II. It is not clear, however, if his reign began in 338 or 350 A.D. Under his rule, Armenia entered a period of restructuring, which began with the Church. A descendant of Gregory, Nerses I, became the catholicos and forbade the practice of any non-Christian religions. Permitting married men to join the clergy, he established church hierarchy wherein non-celibate clergy were subordinate to the celibate clerics. Arshak, however, was a proponent of the Arian doctrine, and when Nerses would not fall in line with this view, Arshak had him replaced. Such leniency was not granted to other nobles, whom Arshak had killed if they voiced any opposition.
Arshak's position of relative security faltered when Shapur II defeated the emperor Julian and forced his successor Jovian to cede Armenia to Persia in 364 A.D. Arshak and his general Vasak Mamikonian were taken to Persia and blinded, and Arshak's wife was likewise killed. Only his son Pap escaped to Pontus. Armenia was thus subject to Persian domination, and Zoroastrianism was imposed as the state religion.
Rome finally took initiative in 367 A.D., supplying troops to Arshak's son Pap and an Armenian general Mushegh Mamikonian, who managed to re-take Armenia from the Persians. Pap invited Nerses to return as catholicos; but Pap's pro-Arian views, in line with those of the emperor Valens, led to dissent within the Church. Nerses was eventually killed and Mushegh Mamikonian, together with several nobles, turned against Pap. The nobles split the region of Dsopk into five districts, independent and under the protection of Rome. Pap was murdered in 374 A.D., and the nephew who succeeded him was soon replaced by a Mamikonian. The death of Shapur in 379 A.D. and the partition of the Roman empire into the Western and Eastern empires changed the political climate, and the Mamikonians eventually restored Pap's two sons to the throne, marrying them to Mamikonian women.
Pap's younger son, Arshak III, was forced to flee to the western regions in 385 A.D., and the Arshakuni prince Khosrov IV was elevated to king by the pro-Persian nobles. In 387 A.D., the emperor Theodosius and Shapur III decided to partition Armenia, and Arshak III was given reign over the Byzantine-controlled western region. Khosrov IV continued to rule over Greater Armenia subject to Sasanid domination. When Arshak died, no new Armenian king was appointed, and the Arshakuni line came to an end in Byzantine Armenia. In the east, Khosrov was followed by Vramshapuh (389 - 417 A.D.). Under Vramshapuh, Sahak was named catholicos, the last one of the line of Gregory the Illuminator.
The partition of Armenia into west and east divisions subject to the dominion of different empires was a force threatening to dissolve the sense of a national Armenian identity. A similar problem plagued the Armenian Church: in much of Armenia the Syrian liturgy was used and threatened the authority of the Armenian Church; Byzantium was rapidly becoming the dominant regional power in church matters; paganism and Zoroastrianism still had a foothold in Armenian territory. This was the situation which faced Vramshapuh and the catholicos Sahak. Their solution was to codify the identity of the Armenian people through their language. For this an alphabet was needed, one distinct from those of the neighboring regions. This was the task which they charged to Mesrop Mashtots, a cleric born in the province of Taron, and who had studied Greek and Syriac.
Sometime between 400 and 407 A.D., having studied other alphabets and having consulted different calligraphers, Mesrop created the Armenian alphabet. The Sasanid rulers of the time were tolerant, and Mesrop's students were able to open schools for teaching the alphabet. The Byzantine emperor Theodosius II allowed them to do the same in Byzantine Armenia. The Armenians then entered into a period of translating works from other languages, beginning with the Bible and other liturgical material. Translations of classical works of philosophy, rhetoric, and grammar soon followed, with manuscripts of Aristotle's works becoming particularly prevalent. Voluminous translation continued from the fifth to seventh centuries, when Arab invasion curbed their efforts. Original works began to be composed after the end of the Arshakuni line, signalled by the death of Vramshapuh's son Artashes IV in 428 A.D.
Yeznik Kolbatsi, that is, Yeznik of Kolb, was probably born in A.D. 400, but the date of his death is not known. The purpose of his writing was to maintain orthodoxy and to repel heresies and other religious systems that opposed Christianity. His work Against the Sects is in four books: (1) Against the Heresy of Sects; (2) Against the Religion of the Persians; (3) Against the Religion of the Greek Philosopher; (4) Against the Marcion Heresy. This passage is from Book 1, Chapter 12.
Ard ew zayn ews harts'anen. et'é ch'ar inch' ch'kayr arraji, usti? ôdzn` zor satanay koch'ék'` imats'aw zhangamans ch'arin :
Asemk', et'é satanay ch'ar zstunganeln mardoyn Astutsoy imats'aw, vasn oroy zmardn yayn yôzharets'oyts' :
Orpés yorzham its'é ok' uruk' t'shnami, ew t'aguts'eal zt'shnamut'iwnn` gal't kamits'i vnasel, ew ch'gitits'é zhangamans vnasakarut'eann, ew shurj ekeal yatsits'i hnars xndrel.
apa gteal zhamanak` yorzham ok' i bzhshkats' t'shnamwoyn nora patuér tayts'é yays inch' ch'hpel, ew yays nish kerakrots' ch'chashakel, orov arrol'jut'eann karits'é hasanel, ew nora lueal` val'val'aki i kel'tsis barekamut'ean kel'tsaworeal` zbzhishkn parsawits'é, ew zôgtakarsn nma vnasakars t'eladreal kartsets'uts'anits'é, ew hakarrak patuérs hramanats' bzhshkin tayts'é, ew aynu arrnits'é nma vnas.
or och' et'é yarrajagoyn gitér zhangamans vnasakarut'eann, ayl i patuireloy bzhshkin gteal hnars` el'ew vnasakar :
Noynpés kartsi ew zsatanayé` naxandzeln nma e'nd naxastel'ts mardoy, ew ch'gitel zhangamans, vnasakarut'eann.
k'anzi och' et'é ch'ar inch' arraji kayr` usti zhangamansn mart' ér arrnul.
useal yAstutsoy patuiranén` or mardoyn tuaw argelul zna i chashakeloy i tnkoy imek'é i mahaberé, zayn yarrajadreats' mardoyn. or och' et'é anpitan inch' i kerakurs mardoy ér, ew och' bnut'eamb tunkn mahaber, ew vasn aynorik inch' argelaw mardn i chashakeloy i nmané, ayl ansastut'iwnn el'ew patcharr mahuan mardoyn, ibrew yants'awori` or ants'anits'é zhramanaw hramanatui` or nma kargeal its'é :
Ard ew zayn ews harts'anen. et'é ch'ar inch' ch'kayr arraji, usti? ôdzn` zor satanay koch'ék'` imats'aw zhangamans ch'arin : Asemk', et'é satanay ch'ar zstunganeln mardoyn Astutsoy imats'aw, vasn oroy zmardn yayn yôzharets'oyts' : Orpés yorzham its'é ok' uruk' t'shnami, ew t'aguts'eal zt'shnamut'iwnn` gal't kamits'i vnasel, ew ch'gitits'é zhangamans vnasakarut'eann, ew shurj ekeal yatsits'i hnars xndrel. apa gteal zhamanak` yorzham ok' i bzhshkats' t'shnamwoyn nora patuér tayts'é yays inch' ch'hpel, ew yays nish kerakrots' ch'chashakel, orov arrol'jut'eann karits'é hasanel, ew nora lueal` val'val'aki i kel'tsis barekamut'ean kel'tsaworeal` zbzhishkn parsawits'é, ew zôgtakarsn nma vnasakars t'eladreal kartsets'uts'anits'é, ew hakarrak patuérs hramanats' bzhshkin tayts'é, ew aynu arrnits'é nma vnas. or och' et'é yarrajagoyn gitér zhangamans vnasakarut'eann, ayl i patuireloy bzhshkin gteal hnars` el'ew vnasakar : Noynpés kartsi ew zsatanayé` naxandzeln nma e'nd naxastel'ts mardoy, ew ch'gitel zhangamans, vnasakarut'eann. k'anzi och' et'é ch'ar inch' arraji kayr` usti zhangamansn mart' ér arrnul. useal yAstutsoy patuiranén` or mardoyn tuaw argelul zna i chashakeloy i tnkoy imek'é i mahaberé, zayn yarrajadreats' mardoyn. or och' et'é anpitan inch' i kerakurs mardoy ér, ew och' bnut'eamb tunkn mahaber, ew vasn aynorik inch' argelaw mardn i chashakeloy i nmané, ayl ansastut'iwnn el'ew patcharr mahuan mardoyn, ibrew yants'awori` or ants'anits'é zhramanaw hramanatui` or nma kargeal its'é :
But accordingly they also ask this: "If nothing evil existed before, whence did the serpent, which you call Satan, learn the characteristics of Evil?" We say that Satan understood as evil man's disobedience to God, on account of which he induced man to this. It is like when one would be another's enemy, and having concealed his enmity, he would secretly wish to harm him; yet he would not know the nature of the harm, and having come he would wander around in search of means; then, having found the time when someone among the physicians would give an order to his adversary not to touch this thing, and not to taste such a type of food, by which he could arrive to health; and having heard of it, soon pretending under the guise of friendship, he would blame the healer; and, labelling the useful things as harmful to him, he would persuade him, and he would give directions contrary to the orders of the physician, and by this do him harm; and, if he did not recognize beforehand the nature of the harm, rather having found the cure in the physician's order, it was harmful. Thus it is thought also of Satan, his envying of the first-created man, and his not knowing the nature of the evil-doing; because, though there was no evil before, from which it was possible to recognize its nature, nevertheless having learned from God's commandment -- which was given to man to keep him from partaking of some deadly part of the plant -- he offered to man that which, though it was not a useless bit of food for man, and not by nature a deadly plant, nevertheless on this very count man was prohibited from partaking of this -- rather disobedience was the basis of death for man, as for a criminal who would disobey the dictum of an authority that would restrain him.
The interrogative adjective o?r 'which?' is declined as follows.
The form o?r of the singular is often used in place of the N Ac plural forms o?rk' and o?rs. Less frequently, the L singular oru?m replaces the L plural o?rs. The interrogative adjective does not distinguish between animate or inanimate referents. For example, o?r t'agawor tayts'é paterazm 'which king will wage war?'; oro?v zawrut'eamb kam oro?v anuamb ararék' duk' zays 'by what power or by what name did you do this?'; yoru?m zhamanaki 'at what time?'
Other interrogative adjectives are o?rpisi, G o?rpiseats' 'what sort of?' and k'ani? 'how many?'
The interrogative pronoun is formed from two stems, o- for persons and i- for things. The i-forms exhibit no plural. The declensions are as follows.
|N Sg.||o?v, o?||zi?, zi?nch'|
|Ac||o?v, o?||zi?, zi?nch'|
The instrumental forms oro?v and oro?vk' are borrowed from the interrogative adjective. The forms zi? and zi?nch' display the accusative marker z-, which has spread analogically to the nominative. zinch' may also be used as an interrogative adjective for things, e.g. zi?nch' gorts gortseal é k'o 'what deed have you done?'
The forms zi? and hi?m may mean 'why?', as well as the form zmé built from the ablative with z-. e'nd and vasn may be used with the genitive in the same role: e'ndé?r, vasn é?r 'why?'
There are several interrogative adverbs, referring to
The relative pronoun has no distinct forms; rather the forms of the interrogatives are used in this role. Understanding of their usage, however, requires distinguishing between two types of relative clause: the attributive relative clause and the substantive relative clause. An attributive relative clause is one which serves to describe its antecedent noun, much as an attributive adjective does. Some English examples would be 'the person who is writing the Armenian lessons has brown hair', or 'send all email enquiries to the person by whom the Armenian lessons were written.' In both examples the relative clauses serve an adjectival, or attributive, role modifying 'the person'. By contrast a substantive relative clause is a relative clause which, as a whole, fills the place of a noun. Again, this parallels the substantive use of an adjective. Some English examples would be 'who stole the last cookie is no friend of mine', which in slightly smoother English becomes 'whoever stole the last cookie is no friend of mine'; or 'do what I say.' In the first example, the relative clause in its entirety functions as the subject of the verb 'is'; in the second example, the whole relative clause is the object of the verb 'do'. In either situation the relative clause could be replaced by a single noun, e.g. 'Cicero is no friend of mine' or 'do something.'
Once the distinction is made between types of relative clause, relative pronoun usage becomes straightforward. Namely, in
The forms are the same as those listed for the interrogative adjective and pronoun, without the question mark ?.
Examples of attributive relative clauses are vasn banits'n zor p'awsets'an hoviwk'n 'on account of the words which the shepherds had said'; ewt'n l'ambark'... or en ewt'n hogik'n Astutsoy 'seven torches... which are the seven spirits of God'; e'ntreats' erkotasans, zors ew arrak'eals anuaneats' 'he chose twelve, whom he also called Apostles'; vets' awr é, yors arzhan é gortsel 'there are six days in which working is permitted'. Note in this last example that yors < i + ors is locative.
Examples of substantive relative clauses are or hawatay yordi, e'nduni zkeansn yawitenakans 'who(ever) believes in the Son obtains eternal life'; or zinch' asits'é dzez, arasjik' 'do what he tells you'.
As with the interrogative pronouns, the indefinite pronouns exibit a base o- for persons and a base i- for things. Two series of pronouns are formed from these, one with an indefinitizing suffix -mn, the other with -k'. Both series may be used in either adjectival or pronominal roles. The declensions are as follows.
|N Sg.||omn||imn||ok'||*ik', inch'|
The form *ik' is not found alone, but only in combination with the negative ch'- in the form ch'ik' 'there is not, there does not exist', e.g ts'ik' dzez keank' 'there is no life for you', ch'ik' ok' ayl Astuats 'there is no other God'. In place of *ik' the noun inch', G e'n/i 'thing' is used. This word is also found with a prefixed negative, och'inch', G och'e'nch'i 'nothing', e.g. yoch'e'ch'én arar znosa 'He created them from nothing.' As adjective, inch' remains in the singular even with plural substantive: awurs inch' (Ac Pl.) 'for some days'.
The instrumental singular form omamb from omn fills in for the missing instrumental singular of ok'.
The indefinite pronouns are often used to strengthen the interrogatives, e.g. o?v ok' 'who indeed?, who in the world?'; orpisi ok' kin 'what a woman!' The ok' and *ik' series of indefinites, however, are not used in general declarative statements; they only occur in negative, interrogative, conditional, and relative clauses, and with the pronoun iwrak'anch'iwr 'each', adverb haziw 'hardly' and particle t'erews 'perhaps'. This does not hold true for the forms inch'. For example, ér omn hiwand 'someone was ill', but och' ok' é 'it is no one'.
The indefinite adverb of time has two forms parallel to the pronouns: erbemn and erbek' 'sometime'. The same restrictions of usage apply as to ok', e.g. och' erbrk' 'never'.
Word formation typically treats the formation of new lexical items from old. In rare instances, such new items may be derived from complete phrases, e.g. erkrpagu 'worshipper' from erkir paganem 'I kiss the earth, I worship'; zgetnem 'I throw down' from z-getni 'to the ground'. Alternately, two lexical items may be compounded to create a new word. When this occurs, the two words are typically connected by the vowel -a-, unless the second member begins with a vowel: ch'ar-a-xaws 'slanderer' < ch'ar 'malicious' + xawsim 'I speak'; lerrn-a-kol'mn 'hill country' < learrn 'mountain' + kol'mn 'side, country'; barekam 'benevolent, friend' < *bari-a-kam < bari 'good' + kamim 'I will, wish'; tsov-ezr 'sea-side'; dzkn-ors 'fisher' < dzukn 'fish' + ors 'hunter'.
Generally speaking, new lexical items derived from old may be split into two categories: derivatives from verbs and derivatives from nouns. More precisely, words are derived from noun or verb stems. Typically the noun stem is the same as the nominative-accusative form; the verb stem is either the root aorist stem or the -ts' aorist stem. In both noun and verb derivation, the stem vowels may be subject to vocalic alternation.
The most common derivatives from verbal stems are listed below.
Causative Verbs: These are usually derived from intransitive verbs, though some transitive verbs are also subject to causative derivation, e.g. bnakem 'I dwell' yields bnakets'u'anem 'I make to dwell, I establish'. Causatives are built from the aorist stem by addition of the suffix -oyts'- / -uts'-. The form -uts'- occurs word-internally, -oyts'- appearing otherwise. The -e- found in -eay aorists drops before the causative suffix is added. Examples are listed below.
|bnakem 'I dwell'||bnakets'i||bnakets'oyts'-|
|molorim 'I err'||molorets'ay||molorets'oyts'-|
|kam 'I stand'||kats'i||kats'oyts'-|
|usanim 'I study'||usay||usoyts'-|
|darrnam 'I turn'||dardzay||dardzoyts'-|
|p'axch'im 'I flee'||p'axeay||p'axoyts'-|
|yarrnem 'I rise'||yareay||yaroyts'-|
The present stem of causative verbs has the extension -an-. The aorist stem is the same as the base. Thus there are the following examples.
|Causative Present||Causative Aorist||Caus. Aor. 3 Sg.|
|molorets'uts'anem 'I lead astray'||molorets'uts'i||molorets'oyts'|
|kats'uts'anem 'I set up, place'||kats'uts'i||kats'oyts'|
|usuts'anem 'I teach'||usuts'i||usoyts'|
|p'atsuts'anem 'I chase'||p'axuts'i||p'axoyts'|
The 2 Sg. Imperative of causative verbs shows -oyts' > -o, e.g. bnakets'o 'establish!', uso 'teach!'.
Action Nouns: These are dervied by means of several suffixes. The more frequent suffixes are listed below.
Agent Nouns: There are a few suffixes denoting agent nouns which are worthy of mention.
Adjectives: The suffix -un is commonly used to derive adjectives from verbs. It follows the o-declension. Examples are sharzhun 'movable, moving' from sharzhim 'I move'; zelun 'running over' from zelum 'I pour, overflow'; p'aylun 'bright' from p'aylem 'I shine'.
The most common derivatives from nominal stems are listed below.
Denominative Verbs: Nominal stems may form the base for verbs in -em and -im, more rarely -am. Examples are vkayem 'I testify' from vkay 'witness'; bzhshkem 'I cure' from bzhishk 'physician'; anuanem 'I name' from anun 'name' (note the stem for the oblique cases is anuan-); nawem 'I sail' from naw 'ship'; srbem 'I clean' from surb 'clean, pure'; yusam 'I hope' from yoys 'hope'.
Inchoative Verbs: The suffix -anam is typically appended to adjectives to derive inchoative verbs. These fall into category (D) in the classification of verbs. Examples are ôjanam 'I recover' from ol'j 'healthy'; ch'oranam 'I become dry' from ch'or 'dry'. In certain instances such verbs are derived from nouns: k'ahanayanam 'I become a priest' from kahanay 'priest'; veranam 'I am extolled', cf. i ver 'upwards'.
Nouns of State or Quality: The suffix -ut'iwn may also be used to derive nouns denoting quiality. Examples are bazmut'iwn 'multitude' from bazum 'many'; chshmartut'iwn 'truth' from chshmarit 'true'; k'ahanayut'iwn 'priesthood' from k'ahanay 'priest'.
Collective Nouns: Collective nouns may be derived by means of the suffixes -ik (serund-decl.), -ti (tel'i-decl.), -ean. Examples are mardik 'men, people' from mard 'man'; mankti 'children' from manuk 'child'; xozean 'pigs' from xoz 'pig'. Such nouns are declined in the singular only.
Diminutive Nouns: The suffixes -ak (a-decl.) and -ik (serund-decl.) serve to derive diminutive nouns. Examples are tsovak 'lake' from tsov 'sea'; eramak 'small herd' from eram 'herd'; ordeak 'son' from ordi 'son'; mankik 'little child' from manuk 'child'; p'ok'rik 'little' from p'ok'r 'little'.
Nouns of Place or Containment: Nouns denoting placement are derived by means of the suffixes -(an)ots', -astan, -aran (a-decl.). Examples are zhol'urdanots' 'place of assembly' from zhol'owurd 'meeting'; gandzaran 'treasure-house' from gandz 'treasure'; Hayastan 'Armenia' from Hay 'Armenian'; vardastan 'rose-garden' from vard 'rose'; dprots' 'school' from dpir 'teacher'; amaranots' 'summer quarters' from amarrn 'summer'.
Possessives and Relationals: There are several formations which yield adjectives and nouns denoting possession or relation.
General: The following derivatives do not fit into the other categories listed above.
Iteration is a process which may be used to derive new words from old. It applies equally to verbs, nouns, and adjectives. For example one finds the verbs hot-ot-im 'I smell' from hot 'scent' and kaz-kaz-em 'I run back and forth'. There are substantives xor-xor-at 'pit' from xor 'deep', lerrn-lerrn-ayn 'hill country' from learrn 'hill', hel'-el' 'current' from hel'anim 'I flow'. There are adjectives mets-a-mets 'very big', jerm-a-jerm 'very warm', arag-arag 'very quick'. In most instances the reduplication serves as intensification, as many of the above examples illustrate. The same effect may be achieved merely by doubling a word in context, without deriving a new combined word. For example one finds lurr lurr 'totally quiet' and tsanr tsanr 'very tough'.
In contrast to the notion of intensification, although in some sense allied to it, is the use of iteration in a distributive function. Examples are gund-a-gund 'in swarms' (also gund gund); goyn-a-goyn 'multicolored'; ami ami 'throughout the year'; awur awur 'day by day' (also awr awur).
At times the doubling occurs with m- preceding the second member, as in al'x-a-mal'x 'goods' from al'x 'equipment', and in sut mut 'completely wrong' from *sut sut.
The most common uses of the nominal cases are outlined below. For the use of cases with simple or compound prepositions, see Section 5 of Lesson 1.
The nominative case is the case of the grammatical subject, e.g. koyrk' tesanen 'the blind regain their sight', astel'k' ankts'in yerknits' 'stars will fall from heaven'. When the verb is a copula, the nominative is also the case of the predicate: ein ardark' erkok'in 'they were both just'. The nominative, with or without ov, may be used in forms of address: patani du, ari 'get up, young man!' The nominative is also used when quoting a person's name, even if the noun representing the person so named is in another case: arr komsi umemn Likianés anun koch'ets'eloy 'with an earl, called Likianos by name'. Here komsi is in the locative case, modified by koch'ets'eloy, but the name quoted, Likianés, remains in the nominative form.
The nominativus pendens is a usage whereby a word, which in its own clause should grammatically be in another case, is placed at the head of the statement in the nominative, and then taken up again by a pronoun in the correct oblique case. For example, tsarray or e'nd unkn och' lsé, e'nd mkanuns tan lsel nma 'the servant, who does not listen with the ear, they make him listen with the back.' Here tsarray is in the nominative, marked in the main clause by the pronoun nma.
The accusative case is the case of the direct object, e.g. or och' beré ptul' 'which does not bear fruit'. Rarely a verb may take an internal object: erkean erkiwl' mets 'they had a great fear', lit. 'they feared a great fear.' Some verbs take a double accusative, such as harts'anem 'I ask': harts'its' inch' zk'ez 'I ask you (something)'. The accusative may be predicate: Stoyikeank'n... zamenayn inch' marmin kartsets'in 'the Stoics held everything (to be) body.' The accusative may denote an extent of space or time. From this use come such adverbs as aynawr '(during) this day', hence 'today'. An accusative of respect is found in the use of zayn awrinak 'by this means, thus', and in the use of anun in the accusative to mean 'by name, in respect of name': arr komsi umemn Likianés anun koch'ets'eloy 'with an earl, called Likianos by name'. The accusative form of adjectives may be used adverbially: barwok' margaréats'aw 'they prophesied well'.
The accusative is often marked with the preposition z-. This is generally used with demonstrative pronouns, relatives, personal pronouns, proper names, and nouns with a demonstrative suffix. Examples are zna 'this', zor 'which', zis 'me', zhayrn 'the father', zAbraham 'Abraham'. The marker z- is not an inherent feature of the accusative case. It is often employed simply to distinguish the accusative form from the nominative or locative forms, e.g. yorzham dustr zmayr antrgits'é, ew nu zkesur iwr, ew kin zayr, ew tsarray ztér, ew el'bayr zel'bayr 'as the daughter reviled her mother, and the daughter-in-law her mother-in-law, and the wife her husband, and the servant his master, and the brother his brother.' The particles k'an 'than', ibrew 'like, as', and orpés 'like, as' are often followed by z- plus the accusative of the point of comparison, e.g. och' Sol'omovn... zgets'aw ibrew zmi i nots'ané 'Solomon... did not dress as one of them.'
The genitive case is the possessive case. More generally, it is a relational case, covering a wide range of nuanced meaning, usually delimiting or specifying the sphere of validity of its referent. In Classical Armenian, the genitive case is distinguished morphologically from the dative only by personal pronouns and demonstratives. The genitive may qualify a substantive, e.g. anun nora 'her name' or awur mioy chanaparh 'a day's journey'. The genitive may be used as a predicate: erku partapank' ein urumn p'oxatui 'two debtors were of a certain lender', i.e. 'there were two debtors of a certain lender', 'a certain lender had two debtors.' A genitive modifying an infinitive used as a substantive may indicate the logical subject of the action: diwrin its'é erknits' ew erkri ants'anel, k'an yawrinats'n mioy nshanaxets'i ankanel 'it is easier for heaven and earth to perish than for one stroke of the law to fall away.' The partitive genitive is more often expressed by the preposition i with the ablative, in the sense 'from among'.
Perhaps the most idiosyncratic use of the genitive in Classical Armenian is with the participle in -eal. When the subject of a clause is modified by the past participle, this subject may be in either the nominative or the genitive case, e.g. nora arreal zna taraw 'he, having seized (him), led him'; matuts'eal ashakertats'n nora asen ts'na 'his disciples, having come, say to him...'. This usage is extended to impersonal constructions involving the participle, where the genitive denotes the logical subject: zpayn isk im ach'awk' teseal é 'I have seen the fairy with my own eyes'; arr ekel'ets'eawn, zor shineal ér arrajnoyn metsin Grigori 'at the church which the first great Grigor had built.'
The dative case is the case of the indirect object, or, more generally, the case of the party interested in, but not directly affected by, the actions of the statement. The dative is used frequently with verbs. Examples are ts'uts'ék' indz zdahekan 'show me the money'; kin k'o tsnch'i k'ez ordi 'your woman bore you a son.' Several verbs take their object in the dative, such as tirem 'I rule', ishxem 'I have power', arrajnordem 'I lead', sastem 'I command', t'agaworem 'I rule as king', yal't'em 'I overwhelm'; hnazandim 'I comply', tsarrayem 'I serve', ansam 'I conform'; hawatam 'I believe', ol'ormim 'I have compassion', spasem 'I tend', nerem 'I forgive'; karawtim and karawtanam 'I use'; ts'ankanam 'I wish'; vnasem 'I harm', barkanam 'I become angry', sparrnam 'I threaten'; tel'ekanam 'I learn of'. Examples are apa t'e och' tirests'en indz 'if they not have power over me'; indz spasets'in mel'awork' 'sinners served me'; tel'ekats'aw hayreni gortsots'n 'he learned of his father's deeds.' The dative may serve as a predicate when the verb is a copula, e.g. el'ew nma ch'ar ew och' inch' 'no evil befell him.'
The dative is also used with adjectives. These may denote similarity, e.g. nman 'similar, like', hasarak 'common, public', hamemat 'proportional, commensurate'; or they may denote knowledge, e.g. gitak 'knowing', tel'eak 'well-informed, instructed, skilled-in', hmut 'knowledgeable, skilled, learned', xelamut 'taught, informed, learned'; or usefulness, e.g. pitani, pitoy 'helpful', anpitan 'useless', hachoy 'pleasing', vnasakar 'harmful', patrast 'prepared', partakan 'guilty'. Examples are erkrordn nman smin 'the second similar to this one'; merrealk' och' en gitak ew och' imik' 'the dead know nothing'; ch'é aynm partakan Astuats 'God is not to blame for this.'
In clauses with the infinitive, the dative may often be considered to be related to one word in particular, usually the infinitive itself. In these situations the dative often supplies the subject of the action denoted by the infinitive, e.g. el'ew shabat'u... anch'anel nma e'nd artoraysn 'it happened on the sabbath... that he went through the fields'; part é indz awetaranel 'it is necessary for me to preach.' Such constructions occur where Latin and Greek might employ an accusative and infinitive.
The locative case denotes static position in space or time, generally equivalent to the English 'in', 'on', or 'at'. In Classical Armenian the locative is only found with prepositions. By far the most common preposition is i, e.g. yaynm kl'zwoj och' gtanér och' jur... ew och'... 'on this island was found neither water nor...'. It is also used with arr 'beside', e.g. nstér arr durs 'he sat by the door'; with e'nd 'with', e.g. xawsel e'nd nosa 'to speak with them'; seldom with z-, e.g. zgetni harkanel 'to cast on the ground'; with e'st 'after', e.g. hatuts'anes iwrak'anch'iwr e'st gortss iwr 'you shall repay each according to his deeds.'
The ablative case denotes the source or origin, and separation therefrom. The ablative is used without a preposition only in certain fixed situations, generally in conjunction with a monosyllabic substantive in the accusative, often marked by i. Examples are z'amé i zham 'from time to time'; am yamé 'each year'; tané i tun 'from house to house'; azgé yazg 'from people to people'; minch'ew i nawasardé nawasard 'from new year to new year', that is, 'till the new year'; i k'al'ak'é i k'al'ak' 'from city to city'. The ablative forms of personal pronoun, such as indzén and k'eze'n, may be used without propositions, typically with the meaning 'self': es indzén as/awk' tesi 'I have seen it with my own eyes.'
The instrumental case denotes the means or instrument of an action, whether physical or other. It roughly takes the place of the English preposition 'with'. Examples are och' ok' gay arr hayr, et'e och' imew 'no one approaches the father, except though me'; eleal... i gerezmané anti ahiw ew xndut'eamb bazmaw 'having gone... from the grave with awe and great joy'; li xnkov 'filled with incense'. The instrumental may be used predicatively: orearn ayn xal'al'ut'eamb en e'nd mez 'these men are peaceful with us'; mer keank's ch'en yusahatut'eamb 'our life is not (fallen) into despair.' The instrumental is used in the sense of accompaniment, usually in conjunction with following handerdz 'with, together with': and nstér ashakertawk'n handerdz 'he sat there with his disciples'; Yisus ashakertawk'n iwrovk' gnats' 'Jesus withdrew with his disciples.'
Classical Armenian lacks a morphologically distinct future tense. Inasmuch as the subjunctive expresses purpose, wish, demand, or prospect, its sense is linked to the expression of future events. It is therefore common to find the Greek future translated by the aorist subjunctive. Within native treatments of Armenian grammar it has thus been common to find the aorist subjunctive called the future tense. Since there is also a present subjunctive, some treatments refer to two future tenses. The subjunctive is not, however, the only means of relating future time in Classical Armenian. When particular emphasis or clarity is required, the present tense may express future action, e.g. och' hawatam 'I will not believe'. When there is an attendant sense of necessity, the verbal adjective in -lots' is often employed in periphrastic constructions: du es or galots'n es 'Art thou He who is to come?'.
The term adverbial clauses is here used as a catch-all term for several types of clauses which modify a statement as a whole. This is in contrast to, say, relative clauses, which usually modify a substantive within a given statement. Typically in such clauses the subjunctive and indicative moods of the verb stand in free contrast. That is to say, the indicative is generally used for actual action, otherwise the subjunctive. Some of the more important types of clauses are listed below with general comments on construction.
Final Clauses: The verb of final clauses is always subjunctive. The beginning of such clauses is typically signalled by zi, less often by t'e, et'e, or orpés zi. Examples are ayl ays amenayn el'ew, zi lts'ts'i or asats'awn i tearrné 'this all happened so that what the Lord had said be fulfilled'; ...et'e gawravarin hachoy linits'i '... so that he be pleasing to the one enlisting'; orpés zi tests'en zgortss dzer baris 'so that they may know your good deeds'. If the subject or object is the same as in the main clause, the final clause is typically expressed by an infinitive: taran zna i xach' hanel 'they led him out to crucify (him)'. A final clause with a subject different from that of the main clause may be expressed with a dative plus infinitive construction: xnayets'i es i k'ez, ch'mel'anchel k'ez yis 'I look after you that you not sin against me.'
Consecutive Clauses: Also termed resultative clauses, these are introduced by orpés zi, ibrew zi 'so that'; or simply zi 'that' or zi ew (when the preceding clause contains a word meaning 'so' or 'in such a way'). Less frequently et'e or minch'ew introduce these clauses. Examples are ch'arach'ark' yoyzh, orpés zi ch'er hnar ants'anel umek' e'nd ayn chanaparh 'exceedingly harsh, so that it was not possible for any one to proceed by that path'; aynch'ap' emk' ol'ormeli ibrew zi arrants' dzordzoy mi awr ch'karemk' hamberel 'we are so dejected that we cannot go one day without a coat'; Astuats aynpés patuel zmardn kamets'aw, zi gandznich'xanut'iwnn pargeweats' nma 'God wanted to so honor man that He granted him free will.' An extended example of the use of et'e is the following: k'anzi och' et'e anmit inch' ok' el'ew na dzAstutsoy, et'e ch'gitér, et'e or inch' e'st Astutsoy kamats'n lini, bari é 'since there was none created by God so ignorant that he knew not that whatever happened by the will of God is good.'
Temporal Clauses: These have been treated separately in Lesson 4, Section 20.
Causal Clauses: These are usually introduced by zi, k'anzi, vasn zi, t'e or et'e, orovhetew 'since, because'; manawand zi 'especially since'. If the causal clause treats a factual occurrence, the verb is conjugated in the indicative; if the clause treats an assumed occurrence or one which is denied or refuted, the verb may be either indicative or subjunctive. Examples are zia?rd linits'i indz ayd, k'anzi zayr och' gitem 'how will this be, since I do not know a man'; e'ndé?r zxawss im och' giték' duk', vasn zi och' karék' lsel zbann im 'on what account do you not know my speech? since you are not able to hear my word'; manawand zi gtanemk' 'especially since we find'. zi may be strengthened by the demonstrative ays or its instrumental form aynu, e.g. aynu zi e'st ch'areats' gortsoch'n vrézhs pahanjits'é, yayt é et'e... 'since he imposes penalties according to the wicked deeds, so it is clear that...'.
Concessive Clauses: These are introduced by t'épét, t'epét 'though, although', usually followed by ew; t'e ew 'even though'; t'epét... t'epét 'be it that... be it that'; et'e... (ew) et'e 'either... or'. Examples are t'épét ew ordi é, usaw zhnazandut'iwn 'though being the son, he learned obedience'; ew ch'em t'epét arzhani 'though I am not worthy'; t'e ew trtmets'uts'i zdzez t'l't'ovn och' zl'janam 'even if I pained you in the letter, I am not sorry'; ard, e'te utits'ék', et'e e'mpits'ék' 'therefore, either eat or drink!'
Local Clauses: These are introduced either by relative adverbs dzo 'to where, whither', ur 'where, to where', usti 'from where, whence' or by prepositional constructions involving relative adverbs. Examples are ur gandzk' dzer en and ew sirtk' dzer el'its'in 'where your treasures are, there too will be your heart'; yor tun mtanits'ék', andén awt'ewans kaljik' 'in whichever house you enter, take accomodations there.'
Comparative Clauses: These have been treated in Lesson 4, Section 19.
Exceptional Clauses: Under this heading are grouped clauses often beginning in English with 'unless, except that..., save that..., save to...'. In some instances Classical Armenian uses a construction with infinitive and preposition, or with a negative participle: och'inch' gortseal... matnets'ay 'but had I done something,... I was betrayed'. Elsewhere clauses with finite verb forms are employed. bayts' et'e often serves as English 'unless', usually followed by the subjunctive: o?v é skizbn aynpisi anpatehits', bayts' et'e its'é inch' ch'ar zawrut'iwn 'who is the origin of such inconsistencies, unless it is an evil force.' p'oxanak zi, and sometimes k'an, renders English 'rather than that': p'oxanak zi part er dzez linel vardapets, pitoy é dzez usanel 'rather than that you should become teacher, it is proper that you learn.'
Conditional Clauses: The subordinate clause (protasis) is introduced by the conjunction et'e, less often t'e, and only rarely with zi. Use of zi in particular gives the sense 'when, in the case that': zi arrants' kamats'n Astutsoy gortsin irk' inch', linin ch'ar 'in the case that things are done contrary to the will of God, they are bad.' The conjunction need not be the first word of the clause. och' is always used for negation. The main clause (apodosis) is signalled by apa, ew, or apa ew when it follows the protasis. There are three basic constructions: