# Wheelock Workbook,  the adj. "victorious."

**URL:** <https://www.textkit.com/t/wheelock-workbook-the-adj-victorious/4288>\
**Category:** Wheelock's Latin\
**Created:** [September 23, 2005, 6:22pm UTC](https://www.textkit.com/t/wheelock-workbook-the-adj-victorious/4288 "2005-09-23T18:22:53Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 2\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![christophershelt](https://www.textkit.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/c/73ab20/32.png) [@christophershelt](https://www.textkit.com/u/christophershelt)\
**Post date:** [September 23, 2005, 6:22pm UTC](https://www.textkit.com/t/wheelock-workbook-the-adj-victorious/4288/1 "2005-09-23T18:22:53Z")

</div>

To One and All (Uno Omnibusque)–  
In the Wheelock Workbook (3rd edit. rev.), Chapter 8, p. 65, Vis Verborum, A1. The question asks:

“Victorious” derives from the Latin adjective\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_, which is formed from the noun “victoria.”

There is no such adjective listed in Wheelock’s Latin, 6th edition; however, The New College Latin & English Dictionary does have the adjective, “victrix, -icis, (fem. & neut. only).” So, I ask, how do we decline this adjective? And, if it is only used with feminine and neuter nouns, what would we do if we needed to qualify a masculine noun? How would I say, “victorious king,” or, “victorious man?”

“rex \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_,” and, “vir \_\_\_\_\_\_\_.”

Any insight will be appreciated. Thank you.

Chris

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![benissimus](https://www.textkit.com/user_avatar/www.textkit.com/benissimus/32/7_2.png) [@benissimus](https://www.textkit.com/u/benissimus)\
**Post date:** [September 23, 2005, 6:43pm UTC](https://www.textkit.com/t/wheelock-workbook-the-adj-victorious/4288/2 "2005-09-23T18:43:04Z")

</div>

> [@christophershelt](#):
>
> To One and All (Uno Omnibusque)–  
> In the Wheelock Workbook (3rd edit. rev.), Chapter 8, p. 65, Vis Verborum, A1. The question asks:
> 
> “Victorious” derives from the Latin adjective\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_, which is formed from the noun “victoria.”

The only adjective that fits that description is _victoriosus, -a, -um_, but it is not common at all. I can only imagine that there was some discussion on word formation in this section and you were to form it based on your knowledge.

> There is no such adjective listed in Wheelock’s Latin, 6th edition; however, The New College Latin & English Dictionary does have the adjective, “victrix, -icis, (fem. & neut. only).” So, I ask, how do we decline this adjective? And, if it is only used with feminine and neuter nouns, what would we do if we needed to qualify a masculine noun? How would I say, “victorious king,” or, “victorious man?”
> 
> “rex \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_,” and, “vir \_\_\_\_\_\_\_.”

The ending -(t)rix (e.g. victrix, ultrix, terminatrix, dominatrix, tonstrix) added to the 4th principal part of the verb is the feminine agent suffix, i.e. the feminine version of -or (e.g. victor, ultor, terminator, dominator, tonsor). Victrix is considered a full adjective but victor is a noun that is used like an adjective. Unless you have skipped ahead, you probably don’t know how to use third declension adjectives, but “victorious king and victorious man” = rex victor et victor vir.