blutoonwithcarrotandnail wrote:[Noun stem]... and what are its use besides classification?
blutoonwithcarrotandnail wrote:what is ARCA used for? i do not see any tenses being formed from it
such as present or perfect past participle.
blutoonwithcarrotandnail wrote:or is the word ARCA just a theory of how the word is formed. i dont see
the book saying 'take ARCA and add the letters +M' or anythign to indicate
adrianus wrote:Yes, it is a theory of word formation, and sometimes confusing, I think. Yes, in language learning to know the word root serves principally (exclusively?) in word classification, as you say.
Benedarius wrote: Arca has the stem "arc", but yes, arc means nothing in Latin. The only reason you ever think about arc is so that you can add a, ae etc. to it to form all of its different forms.
there is a difference in stem between ARCA- and ARC-
ARX [ARC-] and ARCA form their dative and accusative by receiving -I and -M at the end of the stem, so the result is ARCI /ARCAI [--> ARCAE] and ARCEM / ARCAM respectively.
<TR><TD>GENDER</TD><TD>Decl. 1</TD><TD>p/12</TD><TD>Decl. 2</TD><TD>p/12</TD><TD>Decl. 3i</TD><TD>p/12</TD><TD>Decl. 3c</TD><TD>p/12</TD><TD>Decl. 4</TD><TD>p/12</TD><TD>Decl. 5</TD><TD>p/12</TD></TR>
NuclearWarhead wrote:Unfortunately, statistics aren't much worth without interpretation.
The way I did the sums does take that into account, NuclearWarhead, because that I class as an ambiguous case, "-um/-om", "-us/-os", "-em/-im", and the program includes it and other exotic and pre-classical instances. (Not that those are just pre-classical because -os/-us, om/um, "-em/-im" survive into classical Latin, too.) No one would normally talk in statistics but they are useful here in questioning generalizations. That's the only reason I'm offering them, and I don't say they're 100% accurate either, just suggestive and quickly done.NuclearWarhead wrote:For instance, it is purely convention that we spell it "dominus" and not "dominos" in the nom.sg., and the statistics don't take that into account.
Essorant wrote:Are there any recorded examples in Latin where the plural ending -i is -oi as in Greek?
acanos acanthos actinophoros adadunephros adipsatheos aegolios aegophthalmos aelinos alphos ampelodesmos amphicomos amphimacros amphitapos amphithalamos anapauomenos Androgeos anthericos anthropographos anthropophagos apophlegmatismos apoxyomenos aracos arrhetos asbestos aspalathos aspendios asteismos atheos aulopoios aulos autopyros avos beloacos belotocos beryllos bios botanismos branchos brenthos bromos bulbos bulimos buphthalmos cactos caestos cammaros caros cataclysmos cenchros Cerberos cervos cestos cestros chalceos characterismos chersydros chirodytos choeros chorios chrysocephalos chrysos cinaedologos cinnamolgos circos cisthos claros cliticos clivos clymenos cobios cochlos cocos Colossos coquos corchoros corytos cosmicos cosmos crataegos cremnos crobylos crocodillos crocodilos crotaphos cyamos Cypros cysthos Damascos deuteros elelisphacos enharmonicos enharmonios epitritos Euhios gorytos haliaeetos hippodromos hyacinthos Hymenaeos hypaethros lagynos leucacanthos lichanos logos lychanos monocerotos peristereos phloginos pissoceros proslambanomenos pygarg rhythmos sarcasmos schematismos scirros scolymos scorpios smaragdos sphacos sycaminos sycomoros syllogismos systylos tenesmos tetrardos tonos tragelaphos tropos trychnos tyrotarichos zmaragdos pharos Pharos Acanthon Aegaleos Egaleos Aegos barbos bendidios burgos tetraedros achilleos acinos acopos acoros aculos acylos adipsos aegonychos agnos alopecuros ampelos amphiprostylos anagtros anhydros anonymos antidotos apios aposplenos apostrophos apsyctos Arctos argyros aros asplenos astolos astrobolos atomos auginos buglossos callithrichos capnios capnos caragogos cemos cestros chalcophonos chalcophthongos chamaecissos chamaecyparissos chamaemelygos chamedyosmos chersos chryselectros chrysocanthos chrysoprasos chrysoprassos cissanthemos cissaros cissos clonos cnecus comaros Corinthos costos crataegonos crethmos crustallos crystallos cyanos cyclaminos cynoglossos cynosbatos cynospastos cyparissos cypros daucos dialectos diametros diphthongos Eosos Ephesos gnecos hyperbolaeos lageos lecythos melilotos nyctegretos opisthotonos perimetros terebenthos terebinthos topazos Tyros Abatos Abydos Acytos Adramittios Aegialos Aegilos Aegospotamos polygrammos polygonos Samos barbitos bolos chironomos chrysolithos cyperos cypiros lotos octaedros
modus.irrealis wrote:Old Latin also had -oi for the nominative plural which changed to -i. See the preview at http://books.google.ca/books?id=O7z4Sl- ... #PPA243,M1 for example.
No problem. Willingly. But who knows, I might be totally wrong, for I'm a pretty unreliable witness. I just read bits and pieces and, doing that, one misses many things and sometimes you miss the big picture.modus.irrealis wrote:Interesting, thanks. I had always just assumed that it was found in the remains of Old Latin.
Users browsing this forum: Alexa [Bot], Google Adsense [Bot], Jandar, Yahoo [Bot] and 71 guests