Why is it that dictionaries don't have entries

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.
Post Reply
User avatar
swtwentyman
Textkit Enthusiast
Posts: 463
Joined: Fri Sep 19, 2014 12:28 am

Why is it that dictionaries don't have entries

Post by swtwentyman » Thu Nov 27, 2014 2:22 pm

for the third principal part? If I were confronted with "peperi" it would never occur to me to even look anywhere near "pario", and several verbs have non-guessable perfect forms, yet my dictionary, as I believe is common, only has entries for the first and fourth parts (which is odd since the supine can nearly always be inferred). I have no idea how irregular perfect forms were looked up before Google!

Patruus
Textkit Neophyte
Posts: 39
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2007 9:31 pm

Re: Why is it that dictionaries don't have entries

Post by Patruus » Thu Nov 27, 2014 8:34 pm

Just input "peperi" (or any other Latin word) into Whitaker to get the full picture -
http://lysy2.archives.nd.edu/cgi-bin/words.exe

Victor
Textkit Fan
Posts: 253
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2013 1:19 am

Re: Why is it that dictionaries don't have entries

Post by Victor » Sun Nov 30, 2014 6:40 pm

swtwentyman wrote:I have no idea how irregular perfect forms were looked up before Google!
You either made an educated guess, or consulted an alphabetical list of irregular verbs (showing their principal parts), or made sure you were reasonably well acquainted with that list to begin with - in ascending order of desirability.

horus92
Textkit Neophyte
Posts: 38
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 12:42 am

Re: Why is it that dictionaries don't have entries

Post by horus92 » Tue Dec 02, 2014 1:36 pm

There are some patterns if you think about it. With practice you recognize something like, say, "spopondisse" as a reduplicated verb even if you don't know the verb and you'd know to look for something like "spondo". Most perfects besides totally irregular ones like ferro/tuli/latus are formed by adding -v to the present stem, by dropping the stem-vowel for -u- (mereo/merui), reduplication, adding -s to the stem, or lengthening the root vowel. A handful are form perfects in an irregular way but still close to the stem (peto, petere, petivi).

hlawson38
Textkit Enthusiast
Posts: 637
Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2010 12:38 am

Re: Why is it that dictionaries don't have entries

Post by hlawson38 » Tue Dec 02, 2014 2:49 pm

FWIW, John Traupman's _New College Latin and English Dictionary_ (Bantam) prints many of the hard-to-guess perfect forms. For example, I see on p. 305:
pependi
peperci
and peperi

Most of the time Traupman tells me what I need. Traupman also has tables of conjugations and declensions in the front pages. Moreover, he translates the examples into English. This is very helpful when the idiomatic meanings are non-obvious.

Another poster mentioned Whitaker. Besides the online Whitaker cited, there is also a free downloadable Whitaker, that lets you look up the words when offline. I use Whitaker very often.

Since I can read French fairly well, I also use the student Gaffiott, which I find helpful for its examples. They seem exceptionally well chosen, and in the student version of Gaffiott the examples are translated (into French of course).

Download Whitaker here:
http://archives.nd.edu/whitaker/words.htm

The Barnes & Noble here in Greensboro, North Carolina, keeps Traupman in stock. Copies also turn up in used bookstores.

I forget where I got my Gaffiott, but ISTR Amazon.

Post Reply