Textkit Logo

Adestne

Here you can discuss all things Latin. Use this board to ask questions about grammar, discuss learning strategies, get help with a difficult passage of Latin, and more.

Adestne

Postby Lucus Eques » Thu Jun 16, 2005 5:37 pm

Saluete!

I was wondering where the accent would fall on adestne; I realize -ne is enclitic, but I never actually thought about its effect on pronunciation in a combined word like that. Quid putatis?
L. Amadeus Ranierius

SCORPIO·MARTIANVS
User avatar
Lucus Eques
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 2017
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2004 12:52 pm
Location: Tucson, Arizona

Postby Lucus Eques » Thu Jun 16, 2005 6:00 pm

Come to think of it, what happens for something like rosa liliumque? Does the stress fall on the -um-?
L. Amadeus Ranierius

SCORPIO·MARTIANVS
User avatar
Lucus Eques
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 2017
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2004 12:52 pm
Location: Tucson, Arizona

Postby Cyborg » Thu Jun 16, 2005 6:58 pm

I think it's adestne and liliumque.
that's because in lilium the iu are both short, so it cannot be a
diphthong. so when -que is used, the stress falls on "um" alone (not "ium").
in "adestne" I simply cannot see why would not the stress fall on "est".

anyway, that's just what I've read so far. let us both wait for the experts. :)
User avatar
Cyborg
Textkit Member
 
Posts: 192
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2005 3:56 am

Postby Lucus Eques » Thu Jun 16, 2005 9:36 pm

Cyborg wrote:I think it's adestne and liliumque.
that's because in lilium the iu are both short, so it cannot be a
diphthong. so when -que is used, the stress falls on "um" alone (not "ium").


Okay, the relative stress was my question, not specifically regarding the "um" or "ium" — however, if the 'i' is short, it will act somewhat consonantally, more like an English 'y' than a completely distinct vowel. uide Italian pronunciation.

anyway, that's just what I've read so far. let us both wait for the experts. :)


Indeed.
L. Amadeus Ranierius

SCORPIO·MARTIANVS
User avatar
Lucus Eques
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 2017
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2004 12:52 pm
Location: Tucson, Arizona

Postby Cyborg » Thu Jun 16, 2005 11:01 pm

liliumque sounds the strangest thing.
User avatar
Cyborg
Textkit Member
 
Posts: 192
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2005 3:56 am

Postby benissimus » Fri Jun 17, 2005 7:34 am

The stress always falls before an enclitic. There is some argument as to what constitutes an enclitic for the sake of accent, but you're safe to put the stress immediately before an enclitic -que, -ue, or -ne. When you get a word like itaque or ubique, it is not as clear because the enclitic is inseparable from the word if you want to preserve its meaning.
flebile nescio quid queritur lyra, flebile lingua murmurat exanimis, respondent flebile ripae
User avatar
benissimus
Global Moderator
 
Posts: 2733
Joined: Mon May 12, 2003 4:32 am
Location: Berkeley, California

Postby Deses » Fri Jun 17, 2005 2:00 pm

Besides, in adestne and liliumque penults are long by position. Hence they should be stressed anyway.
<a href="http://www.inrebus.com"> In Rebus: Latin quotes and phrases; Latin mottos; Windows interface for Latin Words </a>
User avatar
Deses
Textkit Fan
 
Posts: 271
Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2004 5:38 pm

Postby Cyborg » Fri Jun 17, 2005 3:37 pm

benissimus wrote:The stress always falls before an enclitic. There is some argument as to what constitutes an enclitic for the sake of accent, but you're safe to put the stress immediately before an enclitic -que, -ue, or -ne. When you get a word like itaque or ubique, it is not as clear because the enclitic is inseparable from the word if you want to preserve its meaning.

You reminded me I read about this itaque case somewhere... I remembered: it was on A+G. Here it is:

A+G pp. 7 wrote:a. when an enclitic is joined to a word, the accent falls on the syllable next before the enclitic, whether long or short: as, dea'que, amare'ue, tibi'ne, ita'que (and...so), as distinguished from i'taque (therefore). So (according to some) ex'inde, ec'quando, etc.

I just cannot imagine why would anyone need to append the -que to an "ita".
User avatar
Cyborg
Textkit Member
 
Posts: 192
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2005 3:56 am

Postby mraig » Sat Jun 18, 2005 7:07 am

Cyborg wrote:I just cannot imagine why would anyone need to append the -que to an "ita".


The same reason that we might say "and so" when we could just say "so". Sometimes you just want your meaningless connective to be two syllables instead of one.
mraig
Textkit Member
 
Posts: 142
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2004 6:24 am

Postby Lucus Eques » Sat Jun 18, 2005 7:15 am

mraig wrote:The same reason that we might say "and so" when we could just say "so". Sometimes you just want your meaningless connective to be two syllables instead of one.


Mm, very well put. Locutus benissime.
L. Amadeus Ranierius

SCORPIO·MARTIANVS
User avatar
Lucus Eques
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 2017
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2004 12:52 pm
Location: Tucson, Arizona

Postby Cyborg » Sat Jun 18, 2005 2:45 pm

Oh, I did not know -que could be used with adverbs too. I thought it were only for nouns.
User avatar
Cyborg
Textkit Member
 
Posts: 192
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2005 3:56 am

Postby Magistra » Mon Jun 20, 2005 12:38 am

Benissimus quoted A & G:

ita'que (and...so), as distinguished from i'taque (therefore)


mraig wrote:

The same reason that we might say "and so" when we could just say "so".


The way I understand the A & G quote is that ita'que and i'taque have totally different meanings.

"Therefore" and "and so" are synonyms.

I understand that ita'que (and...so) is used when one wants to use the enclitic -que (and) as a conjunction and ita (so) as an adverb.

The ellipsis given in A & G between "and" and "so" indicate that in English other words intervene.

E.G. It was stormy, and it rained so heavily that flooding was likely. ("Therefore" or "(and) so" are not suitable here.)

Magistra
Magistra
Textkit Member
 
Posts: 129
Joined: Sun May 04, 2003 12:42 pm


Return to Learning Latin

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 95 guests