Textkit Logo

De Cap XXXV Familia Romana (Orberg) VI

Here's where you can discuss all things Latin. Use this board to ask questions about grammar, discuss learning strategies, get translation help and more!

Moderator: thesaurus

De Cap XXXV Familia Romana (Orberg) VI

Postby pmda » Sun Feb 26, 2012 1:29 pm

[M] Significatio interiectionis in quo est?

[D] Aut laetitiam significamus, ut 'euax!' aut dolorem, ut 'heu!' aut admirationem, ut 'papae!' aut metum, ut 'attat!' et si qua sunt similia.

Orberg 'et si qua sunt' explicat..: si (ali)qua (n. pl) sunt

In 'Whittaker's Words' hoc modo 'aliqua' explicatur:

aliqu.a PRON 1 0 NOM S F
aliqu.a PRON 1 0 ABL S F
[XXXCO]
anyone/anybody/anything; someone; some/few; some (particular) thing;
some; any; a few; a particular/certain ~; some other; about/like (NUM);

aliqua ADV POS
aliqua ADV [XXXCO]
somehow, in some way or another, by some means or other; to some extent;

Orberg dicit ut 'aliqua' neutrum plurale sit? Etsi declinatio 'aliquis' (cuis 'aliqua' forma est.) est:

M.........F.........N;
n. aliquis, aliquis, aliquid;
v. aliquis, aliquis, aliquid;
a. aliquem, aliquam, aliquid;
g. alicuius, alicuius, alicuius;
d. alicui, alicui, alicui;
a. aliquō, aliquā, aliquō;


M.........F.........N
n. aliquī,aliquae, aliquae
v. aliquī, aliquae, aliquae
a. valiquōs, aliquās, aliquae
g. aliquōrum, aliquārum, aliquōrum
d. aliquibus, aliquibus, aliquibus
a. aliquibus, aliquibus, aliquibus

Ubi est 'aliqua'? Num 'aliqua' et 'aliquae' idem sint?
pmda
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 1040
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 5:15 am

Re: De Cap XXXV Familia Romana (Orberg) VI

Postby adrianus » Mon Feb 27, 2012 12:05 am

pmda wrote:Etsi declinatio 'aliquis' (cuis 'aliqua' forma est.) est:

M.........F.........N;
n. aliquis, aliquis, aliquid;
v. aliquis, aliquis, aliquid;
a. aliquem, aliquam, aliquid;
g. alicuius, alicuius, alicuius;
d. alicui, alicui, alicui;
a. aliquō, aliquā, aliquō;


M.........F.........N
n. aliquī,aliquae, aliquae
v. aliquī, aliquae, aliquae
a. valiquōs, aliquās, aliquae

Sic pluraliter generis neutius non est. Falsum dicis.
It isn't. You're making a mistake.

Vide A&G §151.e http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus:text:1999.04.0001:part=1:section=21&highlight=aliquis
I'm writing in Latin hoping for correction, and not because I'm confident in how I express myself. Latinè scribo ut ab omnibus corrigar, non quod confidenter me exprimam.
adrianus
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 3270
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 9:45 pm

Re: De Cap XXXV Familia Romana (Orberg) VI

Postby pmda » Mon Feb 27, 2012 6:41 pm

Adrianus

I'm not sure that I understand your answer...

In:

'...[D] Aut laetitiam significamus, ut 'euax!' aut dolorem, ut 'heu!' aut admirationem, ut 'papae!' aut metum, ut 'attat!' et si qua sunt similia.'

Orberg explains 'et si qua sunt' with a margin note that says:

'si (ali)qua (n. pl) sunt'

i.e. he's explaining this word 'qua' (with no macron) by saying it's a form of 'aliquis' and that it is a neuter plural form (n. pl.).

This is his observation - not mine.

My question is whether it's another form of the nominative plural (Orberg doesn't indicate the case) 'aliquae'.
pmda
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 1040
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 5:15 am

Re: De Cap XXXV Familia Romana (Orberg) VI

Postby nachtebuch » Mon Feb 27, 2012 9:21 pm

We happened to cover this in class today. According to my tutor, aliquis, aliquid does not share the quae found in the declination of quis, quid; the standard nominative neuter plural form for aliquis, aliquid is, in fact, aliqua.

It also happens to be the case that by convention, aliquis, aliquid loses the ali- after si, nisi, num, and ne, which would also explain Orberg's bracketing of the ali-.
nachtebuch
Textkit Neophyte
 
Posts: 7
Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2011 10:33 pm

Re: De Cap XXXV Familia Romana (Orberg) VI

Postby pmda » Tue Feb 28, 2012 6:26 am

nachtebuch wrote:We happened to cover this in class today. According to my tutor, aliquis, aliquid does not share the quae found in the declination of quis, quid; the standard nominative neuter plural form for aliquis, aliquid is, in fact, aliqua.

It also happens to be the case that by convention, aliquis, aliquid loses the ali- after si, nisi, num, and ne, which would also explain Orberg's bracketing of the ali-.


Nachtebuch, thanks for this.

In fact I think the mistake maybe that I had forgotten (despite studying the paradigms a la the Dowling method) that 'qua' is an alternative form for 'quae' in:

1) the feminine nominative singular of indefinite pronouns and adjectives and

2) the neuter nominative plural of indefinite pronouns and adjectives.

See Gavin Betts Teach Yourself Latin (p.69)

I think that the inflections that I pasted above from http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/aliquis are wrong in any case. The feminine singular of aliquis is given also as 'aliquis'. Surely it's 'aliqua' or 'aliquae'.

In any case it would seem from Gavin Betts that 'aliqua' may be an alternative for neuter plural 'aliquae' in the indefinite pronoun and adjective and (on the following page (70) ) the only correct form of feminine singular of 'aliquis'.

However this is not given from the wiktionary link posted above and nor is it allowed on Whitaker's Words - definition also posted above. I'm inclined to accept Betts - that it is as Orberg also attests: a form of neuter plural of 'aliquis'.

Betts is silent on the neuter plural of aliquis but then 'qua' is allowed in the indefinite pronoun and adjective.

BUT HOLD FAST. See this: http://books.google.ie/books?id=CvYtq-J ... is&f=false

which is quite emphatic on the matter. However in his declension of the indefinite pronoun and adjective Betts allows for 'qua' as alternative forms of Fem. Nom. Sing. and Nom. / Acc. Neut. Pl.

So your tutor is correct with the addition that the feminine nominative singular is also aliqua but the feminine nominative plural is aliquae.
pmda
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 1040
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 5:15 am

Re: De Cap XXXV Familia Romana (Orberg) VI

Postby nachtebuch » Tue Feb 28, 2012 9:07 pm

I think that the inflections that I pasted above from http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/aliquis are wrong in any case. The feminine singular of aliquis is given also as 'aliquis'. Surely it's 'aliqua' or 'aliquae'.


It's come to my attention that this actually depends on whether you're referring to the adjective or the pronoun, both of which serve different purposes. As an adjective, there are certainly distinct forms across all three genders, but if you're talking about aliquis, aliquid, which is the pronoun, then there is no distintion between masculine and feminine because it is based on the interrogatives quis, quid rather than qui, quae, quod.

In terms of meaning, the pronoun specifically refers to 'something' or 'someone' while the adjective is, as that term suggests, attached to a noun to mean 'some ______'. To illustrate, I offer Moreland & Fleischer's examples:

Aliquis ad mé heri vénit - Someone came to me yesterday. (pronominal usage)
Nón sine aliquó metú cum incolís púgnávimus. - We fought with the inhabitants not without some fear. (adjectival usage)
nachtebuch
Textkit Neophyte
 
Posts: 7
Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2011 10:33 pm

Re: De Cap XXXV Familia Romana (Orberg) VI

Postby adrianus » Tue Feb 28, 2012 9:45 pm

nachtebuch wrote: but if you're talking about aliquis, aliquid, which is the pronoun, then there is no distintion between masculine and feminine because it is based on the interrogatives quis, quid rather than qui, quae, quod.

Non est. Immò ita.
masculini generis singularis numeri: aliquis (substantivum) vel aliqui (adjectivum)
feminini generis singularis numeri: aliqua (substantivum vel adjectivum)
I'm writing in Latin hoping for correction, and not because I'm confident in how I express myself. Latinè scribo ut ab omnibus corrigar, non quod confidenter me exprimam.
adrianus
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 3270
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 9:45 pm


Return to Learning Latin

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Barry Hofstetter, ed-lanty, Google [Bot] and 68 guests