Saluete amici! Benissimus and I were discussing diminutive and augmentative suffixes, and I’ve actually been hard pressed to find a counterpart to the Latin diminutive “-ulus,” and its variants. Italian has “-one” to augment the root word, as in “Lucone,” “big Luke,” or “librone,” “a great big book.” I have been wondering if Latin had an equivalent, but it occurred to me that it has quite the same, doesn’t it? “Patronus” is from “pater,” “matrona,” from “mater.” Was the usage of “-onus” to augment the root noun uncommon?
Are there any other varieties that A&G don’t talk about?
If I’m not mistaken, it is from the uncommon suffix -o, -onis, added to a certain few Latin nouns. Examples are bucco “idiot” (literally “big cheek[s]”), and the names Fronto ("Big-Head) and Naso (“Big-Nose”). I could easily be mistaken, since the main use of this suffix is not to show largeness, and even when it is, it always seems to describe a person rather than a thing as in Italian.
I doubt that matrona and patronus share the suffix which you are seeking, doesn’t the -e ending in Italian/Spanish usually signify 3rd declension origin? They seem to be formed on analogy with second declension stems (*matro-, *patro-) with the common -nus/-na noun suffix. OLD says they may be similar in formation to colonus.
Though the masculine suffix in Italian I mentioned is -one, the feminine version is -ona; and the Italian for patronus is padrone, demonstrating the clear derivation of It. -one from L. -onus (and Italians cite “padrone” in their grammar books as an example of an -one suffix, despite the fact that it is directly derived from “patronus,” indicating that these two indications are not mututally exclusive) — and moreover, “matrona” and “patronus” respectively do in a very literal sense mean “big mother” and “big father.” Not that there necessarily has to be rhyme or reason to it, but it seems like going from matr- then adding -o- to matrona is far more of a stretch than simply matr- to matrona, no? And coupled with the -one usage in Italian, it seems like this could have been a vulgate thing that existed in some of the Italic languages, that Latin at the least didn’t pick up on.
I’m still baffled by the lack of an augmentative suffix in Latin.
there are few universals when citing methods of derivation, I was unaware but not much surprised that -us may come into Italian as -e.
— and moreover, “matrona” and “patronus” respectively do in a very literal sense mean “big mother” and “big father.”
since your matron or patron is not a person who created you or is necessarily even related to you, you must mean “big mother/father” in a figurative sense, not a literal one. There is nothing about these words that requires there to be some idea of large size or mass, they could just as easily be seen as “mother/father-like (person)” which is a frequent significance given to the -n- suffix. I can see how the -one suffix on padrone could develop the augmentative significance, by alluding to the original word, meaning “boss”, and then eventually achieving its own independence.
Not that there necessarily has to be rhyme or reason to it, but it seems like going from > matr- > then adding > -o- > to > matrona > is far more of a stretch than simply > matr- > to > matrona> , no?
Maybe it is a more roundabout explanation, but similar formations are not at all uncommon throughout Latin. The only mystery with the stem+o+nus idea, and I do not claim my explanation to be the only possible one (or even a particularly likely one), is that there isn’t much reason for the 2nd declension stem vowel to be there, and there is a lack of words for analogy to be drawn from. The fact that this -onus suffix is not used freely and only occurs in a few words, most of which need not be conceived as carrying an idea of “largeness”, leads me to believe that it was not an augmentative suffix during its usage in Latin, but that it is certainly possible that it could have developed that sense at a later period. It seems like Italian sources would be more informed about this than Latin ones.
And coupled with the > -one > usage in Italian, it seems like this could have been a vulgate thing that existed in some of the Italic languages, that Latin at the least didn’t pick up on.
What do you base this on?
I’m still baffled by the lack of an augmentative suffix in Latin.
since your matron or patron is not a person who created you or is necessarily even related to you, you must mean “big mother/father” in a figurative sense, not a literal one. There is nothing about these words that requires there to be some idea of large size or mass, they could just as easily be seen as “mother/father-like (person)” which is a frequent significance given to the -n- suffix. I can see how the -one suffix on padrone could develop the augmentative significance, by alluding to the original word, meaning “boss”, and then eventually achieving its own independence.
Indeed, that seems to be exactly the case.
Maybe it is a more roundabout explanation, but similar formations are not at all uncommon throughout Latin. The only mystery with the stem+o+nus idea, and I do not claim my explanation to be the only possible one (or even a particularly likely one), is that there isn’t much reason for the 2nd declension stem vowel to be there, and there is a lack of words for analogy to be drawn from. The fact that this -onus suffix is not used freely and only occurs in a few words, most of which need not be conceived as carrying an idea of “largeness”, leads me to believe that it was not an augmentative suffix during its usage in Latin, but that it is certainly possible that it could have developed that sense at a later period. It seems like Italian sources would be more informed about this than Latin ones.
Yes, it would seem so.
I’m still baffled by the lack of an augmentative suffix in Latin.
Well, it does sound nice. Does English have one?
Touché, monsieur Benissime. Hehe, other than the internet-slang -h00r ?
Hehe, other than the internet-slang -h00r ? 