psilord wrote:For example, in 648: First Declension, Singular, Masculine, Nominative.
Why is there an '[face=spionic]j[/face] (none)'? What exactly does the "(none)" mean in this context? Does this mean either I'll see an [face=spionic]j[/face] or I won't?
psilord wrote:Another question is in 649.
Are ALL forms in the brackets rare and not needing to be memorized? Or just the ones with the footnote attached to it specifying that? I got confused when the First Declension, Dual, Masculine, Genitive (in 649) was [[face=spionic]h|in[/face]] and I thought it was rare, but then saw it plain as day in 659, implying that it was not rare at all since 659 are forms meant to be memorized.
psilord wrote:Another question:
In the places where "none" is written (in 648)--excepting the case where the ablaut is specified, will I just see the appropriate word stem for that case?
psilord wrote:Another question:
In 649, what is the difference between the Third Declension, Singular, Masc&Fem, Nominative and the Third Declension, Singular, Masc&Fem, Vocative? One of them is 'sigma (none)' and the other is '(sigma none)'.
psilord wrote:And one more question, suppose I have a First Declension, Singular, Feminine, Nominative noun, how can I tell it isn't a First Declension, Dual, Feminine, Nominative noun? How does one know the difference? By the number and person of the verb associated with the nominative noun?
psilord wrote:Am I correct in assuming that all declension conflicts vanish when declensions are combined with the number and person of the verbs operating on them? So far, without verbs (I'm on Lesson III/IV) it is sometimes hard to figure out the plurality of some things.
Paul wrote: Yes, the forms in square brackets are rare. I'm not sure why Pharr failed to bracket the feminine dual [face=spionic]h|in[/face] in 649.
Paul wrote: When I first encountered the table in 648 I thought, "Great, a single statement of the many case-endings. Master it and you'll be able to derive any substantive form." The reality was quite otherwise. I don't find this table especially useful. The tables provided in 649 are far more useful.
psilord wrote:Paul wrote: Yes, the forms in square brackets are rare. I'm not sure why Pharr failed to bracket the feminine dual [face=spionic]h|in[/face] in 649.
Did you mean to write that the feminine dual [face=spionic]h|in[/face] in 649 SHOULD be bracketed? Because it is. I only questioned it because
the first noun decelension we learn (plan, council) uses a declension that is considered rare.
psilord wrote:Also, I have another question. The Third Declension Neuter Nominative, Accusative, and Vocative have a long line through them in table 649. Is this the same as 'none', which is implied by table 648 of the same case endings? Or does it mean that you will never find any third declension neuter words using those cases?
psilord wrote:Yeah, I'm reorganizing those tables into some LaTeX because they appear to have an anti-memorization field about them which is upsetting me. I care much more about singularity to plural changes than masculine to feminine changes for memorization purposes.
Users browsing this forum: naturalphilosopher and 17 guests