#latin grammar

interretialia:

  • Simple Conditions

    ▪ Past Particular:
        If Philip said this, he was lying.
        εἰ ὁ Φίλιππος τοῦτο εἶπεν, ἐψεύδετο.
        Sī Philippus hoc dīxit, mentiēbātur.

    ▪ Past General:
        If Philip (ever) said this, he was (always) lying.
        εἰ ὁ Φίλιππος τοῦτο λέγοι, ἐψεύδετο.
        Sī Philippus hoc (aliquandō) dīxit, (semper) mentiēbātur.

    ▪ Present Particular:
        If you believe Philip, you are foolish.
        εἰ τῷ Φιλίππῳ πιστεύεις, μῶρος εἶ.
        Sī Philippō crēdis, stultus es.

    ▪ Present General:
        If you (ever) believe Philip, you are (always) foolish.
        ἐὰν τῷ Φιλίππῳ πιστεύῃς, μῶρος εἶ.
        Sī Philippō (aliquandō) crēdis, stultus (semper) es.

    ▪ Future Minatory:
        If you do this, you will die.
        εἰ τοῦτο ποιήσεις, ἀποθανεῖ.
        Sī hoc faciēs, moriēris.

    ▪ Future More Vivid Particular:
        If the doctor does this, he will receive his pay.
        ἐὰν ὁ ἰατρὸς τοῦτο ποιήσῃ, τὸν μισθὸν δέξεται.
        Sī medicus hoc faciat, mercēdem accipiet.

    ▪ Future More Vivid General:
        If the doctor (ever) does this, he will (always) receive his pay.
        ἐὰν ὁ ἰατρὸς τοῦτο ποιήσῃ, τὸν μισθὸν δέξεται.
        Sī medicus hoc (aliquandō) faciat, mercēdem (semper) accipiet.

  • Contrary to Fact and Remove Conditions

    ▪ Past Contrary to Fact:
        If the doctor had done this, he would have received his pay.
        εἰ ὁ ἰατρὸς τοῦτο ἐποίησεν, ἐδέξατο ἂν τὸν μισθόν.
        Sī medicus hoc fēcisset, mercēdem accēpisset.

    ▪ Present Contrary to Fact:
        If our father were living, he would be coming to our aid.
        εἰ ἔζη ὁ πατήρ, ἡμῖν ἂν ἐβοήθει.
        Sī pater vīveret, nōbīs subvenīret.

    ▪ Future Remote or Future Less Vivid:
        If the doctor should do this, he would not receive his pay.
        εἰ ὁ ἰατρὸς τοῦτο ποιήσειεν, οὐκ ἂν δέξαιτο τὸν μισθόν.
        Sī medicus hoc faciat, mercēdem non accipiat.

The Greek and English examples came from Athenaze, Book II, Second Edition. The Latin examples are my own translations of the Greek and English examples.

Yo yo

So for Christmas, I got Wheelock’s Latin 7th edition and the accompanying workbook and I’ve been trying to get myself to work in it. Since I like to try and put out content that I’ve typed up for my own learning, here are my notes for the first chapter of the textbook, the blank workbook questions, as well as the answers that I came up with. I’m pretty sure they’re right answers, but if they aren’t please correct me lol. (Follow hyperlinks for access). 

There are many features of Latin grammar and idiom which can be difficult for the modern learner to understand fully because such features have no exact counterparts in English and the Romance languages. Elementary courses on Latin tend to spend little to no time reviewing these seemingly unusual aspects of the Latin language. Fortunately, the student can get some help by consulting the “Preliminary Hints” section of Bradley’s Arnold Latin Prose Composition, and the “Notes on Grammar” and “Various Hints” sections of W. R. Hardie’s Latin Prose Composition. There are several seemingly unusual yet vitally important aspects of the Latin language, though, that these sources do not deal with sufficiently or at all.

In this essay I present some hints that pertain to twelve points wherein the grammar or idiom of those modern languages is misleading or intractable to modern-language speakers who are busy learning Latin composition.

Contents

1. Latin Does Not Have a “Predicate” Case
2. Postpositive Particles and Enclitics Have Special Positions
3. Latin’s Way of Writing “…and I”
4. Nouns Cannot Be Non-Appositive Modifiers in Latin
5. Fused Relatives/Correlatives Do Not Exist in Latin
6. Latin Does Not Use a “Polite Plural” as in Modern Languages
7. Latin Adverbs and Adverbial Phrases as Attributives
8. Gender Neutrality (or the Lack of It) in Latin
9. Word Formation: Nominal Composition and Denominative Verbs
10. The Difference between Se/SuusandEius
11. The Subjunctive by Attraction Is Not Really a Thing in Latin
12. Adjectives and Adverbs in English, Adverbs and Adjectives in Latin
13. Sources

1. Latin Does Not Have a “Predicate” Case

In colloquial English we often say, “It’s me” and “That’s him,” where we use the object pronoun forms meandhim as subject complements in the predicate of a sentence instead of the subjectformsIandhe. According to non-colloquial forms of English, we are to say, “It is I” and “That is he.”

Latin, however, does not do this at all, even in its colloquial forms. It has no “predicate” case that differs from the nominative case, and it always uses the same case as the subject for the subject complement. When the verb of the sentence is a linking verb like esse, the case of the subject complement is usually nominative, but in certain situations other cases are involved.

Examples:

• Ego sum. (not “Me sum” or “Mihi sum.”)
  It’s me.
   
• Ille est. (not “Illum est.”)
  That’s him.
   
• Quae sunt illa? (not “Quae sunt illos?” or “Quae sunt illas?”)
  What are those?
   
• Esse mihi laeto licet. (not “Esse mihi laetus licet.”)
  I am allowed to be happy.
   
• Scio me esse hominem bonum. (not “Scio me esse homo bonus.”)
  I know I am a good person.
   
• Deus fio. (not “Deum fio.”)
  I am becoming a god.

There are instances in Latin literature, mostly in the plays of Plautus and Terence, where a pronoun in the accusative case follows, or merges with, the interjection ecce even when that pronoun is referring to an individual who serves as the subject of the sentence (e.g., Ecce me, “Here I am”; Eccos exeunt, “Look, here they are coming out”). Someone might suppose that this “ecce + [accusative]” construction is Latin’s own version of the “object me as subject” construction in English, but the truth is that the Latin construction is parenthetic to the rest of its own sentence, and the accusative case is due to its being the object of some form of an implied transitive verb like videre, so: Ecce me=Eccevideme;Eccos exeunt=Eccosvide, exeunt). The nominative case can also follow the ecce. This construction is also parenthetic to the rest of its own sentence, but it has no implication of the existence of some implied verb like videre(e.g.,Ecce ego, “Here I am”).

English speakers who are learning Latin very often make the mistake of writing sentences like “Cornelia est puellam,” instead of the correctCornelia est puella (“Cornelia is a girl”), partly because of the “object me as subject” construction of colloquial English, and partly because these students are used to seeing the accusative forms of words together with transitive verbs (e.g., Corneliam amo, “I love Cornelia”; eum video, “I see him”).

Memes such as “Me and the Boys” and “Me, Also Me” use the “object me as subject” construction, and so that means that when we translate the English words into Latin, we must use the nominative forms of the Latin pronoun and not some other form like the accusative or ablative me.

We write these meme phrases as:

• Ego Puerique/Ego et Pueri
  Me and the Boys
   
• Ego, Ego Quoque:
  Me, Also Me:

The same goes for the other pronoun forms:

• Tu:/Vos:
  You:
   
• Is:
  Him:
   
• Ea:
  Her:
   
• Nos:
  Us:

2.Postpositive Particles and Enclitics Have Special Positions

Latin word order is for the most part syntactically freer than that of English, but certain Latin words take specific positions to perform their particular functions. The words of that type which concern us here are postpositive particles and enclitics. A postpositive particle is a word that does not come first in a clause or phrase, and sometimes needs to be translated in English one word earlier than where it appears in the Latin. An enclitic is a word which does not stand by itself, but is added at the end of another word, and therefore all enclitics are by their very nature postpositive particles.

The particles autem (a mark of discourse transition), enim (“for,” introducing a reason), vero (introducing something in opposition to what precedes), quoque (“also,” “too”), quidem (“indeed,” “surely,” giving emphasis, and often has a concessive meaning), and the conjunctive enclitic -que (“and”) and the interrogative enclitic -ne (almost always appearing on the end of the first word of the sentence) are always postpositive, while igitur (“and then,” “then”) and tamen (“nevertheless,” “yet”) generallyare.

Ne … quidem means “not even…” or “not … either.” The emphatic word or words (represented by the “…”) must stand betweenthene and the quidem.

Examples:

• Omnes viri mortales sunt. Socrates autem vir est. Ergo Socrates mortalis est.
  All men are mortal. Socrates is a man. Therefore, Socrates is mortal.
   
• Pueriautemvenerunt.
  The boys, however, came./However, the boys came.
   
• Puerienimvenerunt.
  For the boys came.
   
• Neutrumvero. Praefero vinum.
  Actually, neither. I prefer wine.
   
• Veniantigitur, dum ne nos interpellent.
  Let them come then, provided they don’t interrupt us.
   
• Res sane difficilis, sed tamen investiganda est.
  Though a difficult question, yet still one that demands investigation.
   
• Senatus Populusque Romanus (not “Senatusque Populus Romanus”)
  The Senate and the Roman People
   
• Pueri puellaeque(not “Puerique puellae”)
  Boys and girls
   
• Ego Puerique
  Me and the Boys
   
• Quodam die chartam piceam habemus quoque.
  One day we have tar paper also. (i.e., we, too, will have…)
   
• TuQuoque(not “Quoque tu”)
  You too
   
• Hocquidem videre licet.
  This surely one may see.
   
• Videtene id? (not “Ne videte id?”)
  Do you see it?
   
• Mene amas? An eum?
  Do you love me? Or him?
   
• Sedne Iugurtha quidem quietus erat. (not “Sed ne quidem Iugurtha quietus erat.”)
  But not even Jugurtha was quiet.
   
• Ingrata patria, ne ossa quidemhabebis.
  Ungrateful fatherland, you will not even have my bones.

Pay special attention to the positions of these words.

If you want to translate “Also, I did this” in English, resist the urge to write something like “Quoque, hoc feci.” Quoqueisnever a sentence-modifying adverb like the “Also” in the aforementioned English sentence, and it is so consistently used as a postpositive particle that the “Quoque” in “Quoque, hoc feci” would reasonably be mistaken for either the quoque form of the pronoun quisque or the word quo with the enclitic -que. “Also, I did this” must be translated as Praeterea hoc feci or even Ceterum hoc feci.

3.Latin’s Way of Writing “…and I”

In English we say, “My brother and I” and “the King and I,” with the third person first and the first person last. We seem to do this out of politeness.

Latin, though, does not use that order, and the order which it does use has nothing to do with the expression of politeness. When we talk about the “first person” and the “second person” and the “third person” while discussing Latin sentences, we are using terms which correspond to the order in which we would mention these individuals in a Latin sentence with a finite verb, and that means first person first, second person second, and third person third. We use the same order in mere Latin phrases as well. This means that “You and I” in Latin is Ego et tu. The order then keeps going down the line.

Examples:

• Tu et Cicero
  You and Cicero
   
• Ego et tu et Cicero
  You, Cicero, and I
   
• Ego et Lancelot et Galahad
  Lancelot, Galahad, and I
   
• Ego et frater meus
  My brother and I
   
• Ego et Rex
  The King and I

Note that Latin uses the same order as the colloquial Me and you.

4.Nouns Cannot Be Non-Appositive Modifiers in Latin

While English does distinguish between nouns and adjectives, there is not a hard and fast line between the two categories, and English nouns can act as adjectives even when these words are not the same as the nouns they modify. We can refer to these adjective-like nouns as “non-appositive modifiers.” In the phrases horse feathersandhouse mother, the two nouns horseandhouse are not the feathers and the mother, but they modify those nouns, and so are non-appositive modifiers: horse feathers = feathers of the horse variety or equine feathers or feathers on a horse; house mother = mother of the house variety or a mother living in a house or a mother of the house.

Latincannot do this. There is a hard and fast line between nouns and adjectives in Latin (viz., nouns have a gender, while adjectives assume, or “agree with,” the gender of the noun they are in construction with), and a Latin noun cannot become a non-appositive modifier like its English equivalent can. If we want to use a non-appositive modifier in Latin, we must either use a corresponding adjective or put the word in the genitive:

• pennae equinae/pennae equi
  horse feathers
   
• mater domestica/mater domūs
  house mother

But note what happens if we use the nominative forms of the nouns:

• equus pennae
  horseandfeathers
   
• domus mater
  houseandmother

When we put the nominative forms of the nouns together next to one another like what we see in each of these two phrases, we end up with an asyndetic phase. (These phrases could also be read as appositives, so that “equus pennae” means “horse, the feathers,” where the horse is the feathers, but since we have established that the corresponding words in the English phrases are not supposed to be appositives, and because these Latin words are imitating a noun phrase rather than being just two linked words, my statement about how each of these is an asyndetic phase still stands.)

Sometimes Latin uses adjectival nouns which are really nouns in apposition, that is, the two nouns refer to the same individual. We can call these words “appositive modifiers.” So, for example, victrices Athenae means “victorious Athens,” and while victrix would normally be a noun meaning “victress” or “the victorious one,” here it is an adjective or an appositive modifier. One could even translate the phrase as “Athens the victress.” Similarly, milites tirones means either “novice soldiers” or “soldiers who are novices.”

Latin’s sharp distinction between nouns and adjectives also applies when words come together to form compound words. The morphological and syntactic features of a word are not nullified simply because it appears within a word, or if it is linked to another word with a hyphen. So, for example, the two words in the compound respublica, “republic,” still have their individual morphological and syntactic features even though they form one word, and therefore since the adjective is agreeing with the noun, each word is declined separately even within that single word: nominative singular respublica, genitive singular reipublicae, accusative singular rempublicam, etc. Another example is modus operandi, “mode of operating,” but this time only the modus is declined while the genitive operandi keeps its form to retain its genitive meaning: nominative singular modusoperandi, genitive singular modioperandi, accusative singular modumoperandi, etc. All of that means that equus pennaestill cannot mean “horse feathers” even if we write it as equuspennae (with no spaces) or equus-pennae (with a hyphen).

Here I point to, and comment on, four specific places which make the mistake of using Latin nouns as non-appositive modifiers.

1. The“Coronavirus” entry at Latin Wikipedia has an invented “Coronavirus, Coronaeviri” declension (where each of the words coronaandvirus is declined separately), and this declension is completely wrong because the noun corona cannot be a non-appositive modifier in Latin, and so the compound which uses that declension at best means “coronaandvirus,” not something like “virus of the corona type.” This “Coronavirus, Coronaeviri” declension therefore behaves like the declension of ususfructus,usūsfructūs, which means “use and enjoyment,” and each of the two words is declined separately. A compound word of coronaandvirus created through nominal composition would actuallybe*Coronivirus in Latin. It seems that whoever came up with the name Coronaviruseitherdid not knowordid not care that the regular Connecting Vowel in Latin is i for nominal compounds. As it stands, Coronavirus looks like it is a univerbation of the phrase [solari] coronā virus, “virus with a [solar] corona,” which comprises an abbreviated ablative of description and a nominative.
   
   
2. Mark Walker, who translated The Hobbit into Latin (i.e., Hobbitus Ille), rendered the adjective “pitch-black” in Latin as tenebrosa-pix, where he erroneously treated the noun pix as a non-appositive modifier and connected that noun to an adjective with a hyphen. But hyphens do not nullify the morphological and syntactic features of a word, and that means the phrase tenebrosa-pix is exactly the same as the plain, old tenebrosa pix, which really means “dark pitch.” And so, the sentence from Walker’s translation tum tenebrosa-pix eratactually means “then it was dark pitch.” “Pitch-black,” though, can be in Latin piceus, an adjective from pix, or some comparative phrase like tam niger quam pix, “as black as pitch,” or perhaps even piciniger, a neologism that is a nominal compound of pixandniger.
   
   
3. Vox Machina means “Voice and Machine” and not “Voice Machine.” It is a phrase like pactum conventum, which means “bargain andcovenant.”Vox is a noun in Latin, and the “voice” in the English phrase “Voice Machine” is not just a noun but also a non-appositive modifier modifying the “Machine,” and so, in order to render “Voice Machine” in Latin, we need to write either Machina VocalisorMachina Vocis.
   
   
4. This well-known image, which shows stylized depictions of Darth Vader and Luke Skywalker, appears to render “He holds a lightsaber” into Latin as Luxgladium tenet.Luxgladium tenet, however, is just the phrase Lux gladium tenet, which actually means “The light holds the sword”! It looks like whoever wrote the text was trying to create a compound of luxandgladius, but ended up just writing a sentence that is nonsense. (The Latin on this image is pretty awful in general.) I suppose the nominative form of the compound is supposed to be luxgladius, but luxgladius, of course, would mean “light and sword.” The “light” in the word “lightsaber” is a noun and a non-appositive modifier modifying the “sword,” so if we wish to render “lightsaber” in Latin, we need to write ensis luminosus(whereensis is a poetic word for “sword,” and reflects the poetic or fanciful use of “saber”) or ensis luminaris(althoughluminaris is not a common word in Latin) or, if we wish to use a compound word from luxandgladius,lucigladius.

5.Fused Relatives/Correlatives Do Not Exist in Latin

In English a relative clause and its antecedant can combine into a noun phrase which is called a free relative or a fused relative construction. The resulting what of this fused relative construction is a fusion of both the relative pronoun and its antecedant: what = “that which,” “the thing that.”

Example:

The cats ate what I gave them.

which can be rewritten as:

The cats ate that which I gave them.

Latindoes not do this. A Latin relative pronoun, like quod, cannot introduce a noun phrase like the what does in the English sentence above. Nor can it fuse together with its antecedant, since the two words are syntactically discrete. Not only are we unable to pull a “id quod” (“that which”) from this relative pronoun quod in Latin, we are unable to know whether the antecedant should even beid by looking at the relative pronoun!

Latin relative clauses are adjective clauses, and it is important not to treat such clauses as Latin noun clauses for two reasons. First, the noun phrases of that type do not exist in Latin, and second, the language makes a clear distinction between relative clauses and subordinate interrogative clauses, which are noun clauses and are typically called “indirect questions.”

Look at this sentence:

The cats know what I gave them.

Youcannot pull a “that which” out of this what because it is interrogative: it represents a variable which the cats could fill in by providing relevant information, and does not represent a combination of an antecedant and a variable which is bound by that antecedant. Latin must express this what by an interrogative which introduces a subordinate interrogative clause.

The two English sentences are therefore translated like this:

• Felesidederuntquodeisdedi. (Relative clause.)
  The cats ate what I gave them.
   
• Feles sciunt quideisdederim. (Interrogative clause.)
  The cats know what I gave them.

Memes of the “What She Says, What She Means” format contain phrases which are subordinate interrogative clauses, not relative pronouns, for two reasons. First, the English phrases are noun constructions, and therefore require us to use noun constructions in Latin when we translate the English phrases into Latin. Second, the what represents variables which are subsequently filled in with relevant information, and that relevant information comes after the colons in each of the two phrases.

We translate the two phrases this way:

• Quideadicat: …
  What she says: …
   
• Quideavelit: …
  What she means: …

Writing “Quod ea dicit:” and “Quod ea vult:” (i.e., relative clauses) would be very wrong because Latin cannot fuse those relatives, and the variable indicated by the English what is filled in with the relevant information after the colons, not some nonexistent antecedant of the relative.

English can also combine correlative words as seen in memes of the “When X / X When” format, which indicate how an individual reacts under a specified circumstance. In such memes, the whenlooks like it introduces a clause indicating some specified circumstance, but it actually combines that clause with correlative words referring to the individual doing the reacting. Subsequently, the when represents a fusion of itself and some correlative word or phrase like then,at that time,me, or my face when.

Latindoes not fuse correlatives like this, either. The phrases tum cum,ego cum,facies mea cum, etc., cannot fuse into a single cum. A Latin word and its Latin correlative are also syntactically discrete, and all of the relevant words must be written out to convey what the English means.

Examples:

• Tum cum mater tua cibum tuum favorabilissimum coquit
  When your mom cooks your favorite food
   
• Tum cum canis tuus dormiens caudam suam movet
  When your dog wags his tail while sleeping
   
• Zeuscum quamlibet feminam videt
  Zeus when he sees anything female
   
• Pellicularii Youtube situs cum in duodetricesima secunda pelliculae sunt
  Youtubers when they’re 28 seconds into the video
   
• Ego octo annos natus cum minister deversorii me “bonum virum” vocat
  8 year old me when the hotel waiter calls me Sir

6.Latin Does Not Use a “Polite Plural” as in Modern Languages

TheT–V distinction (or “polite plural”) is the contextual use of different pronouns that exists in some languages and serves to convey formality or familiarity. While modern English does not observe such a distinction, modern Romance languages such as French and Spanishdo.

Latin itself, however, does not observe such a distinction. This is true especially for the use of imperatives. If you use a plural form of a Latin imperative, you are specifically addressing more than one person, and that is true if you are making either a general or a specific command for more than one person. Latin does not “default” to the plural when the speaker or writer is uncertain of how many individuals will end up being the recipients of the command. The singular form of a Latin imperative, however, can be used for general commands, which are addressed to no one in particular, and specific commands, which are addressed to a particular person.

Examples:

• CaveCanem
  Beware the Dog
   
• SapereAude
  Dare to be Wise
   
• RespiceFinem
  Look Back at the End

The plural forms of imperatives sometimes appear in quoted texts.

Examples:

• Et nunc reges intelligiteerudimini qui iudicatis terram.
  And now, O ye kings, understand: receive instruction, you that judge the earth.
   
• Manibusdate lilia plenis.
  Give lilies with full hands.

On a related note, nosandnoster sometimes appear instead of egoandmeus in Roman letters and familiar speech. In general, the plural forms in such cases have an air of dignity, complacency, and importance. They indicate that the speaker thinks of themself as a “personage.” Cicero frequently uses these plural forms. The regal use of “we,” however, is not known to Latin.

7.Latin Adverbs and Adverbial Phrases as Attributives

English freely uses adverbs and adverbial phrases as attributive modifiers. The phrase man in the moon, for example, comprises a noun, man, and the prepositional phrase in the moon, which modifies that noun like an adjective: man in the moon = a man who is in, or lives on, the moon.

But Latin does not so freely use such words and phrases in that way. When a real adverb or adverbial phrase is used as such in Latin, it is introduced by, or bound to, a verb form, and this means that we often use a relative clauseora participle in Latin where we would use an attributive modifier in English. Thus, we would normally render the phrase “man in the moon” in Latin as vir qui in luna est,vir qui in luna habitat, or vir in luna habitans.

Here are some Latin translations of other English phrases of that type:

• Puella Quae Inaurem Margaritiferam Habet/Puella Inaurem Margaritiferam Habens
  Girl with a Pearl Earring
   
• Vir Qui Causiam Flavam Gerit/Vir Causiam Flavam Gerens
  Man with the Yellow Hat
   
• Fortissimi Qui in Testa Dimidiata Sunt/Fortissimi in Testa Dimidiata Appositi
  Heroes in a Half Shell
   
• Rotae Quae in Laophorio Sunt/Rotae ad Laophorium Affixae
  The Wheels on the Bus
   
• Simius Qui in Medio Est/Simius in Medio Stans
  Monkey in the Middle
   
• Cor Quod Nomine Tuo Inscriptum Est/Cor Nomine Tuo Inscriptum
  A Heart with Your Name on It
   
• Pellicula Quae de 10 Numero Est/Pellicula de 10 Numero Tractans
  A Video about the Number 10
   
• liber qui e bibliotheca sumptus est/liber e bibliotheca sumptus
  the book from the library

At this point we should note that attributive modifiers which resemble adverbs and adverbial phrases sometimes appear in Latin of all periods.

Examples:

• At pater infelix, nec iampater
  But the unhappy father, no longer a father
   
• bonos et utilis et e re publicacivis
  citizens good, useful, and advantageous to the Republic
   
• albo et sine sanguinevultu
  with a face white and bloodless
   
• senectutemsine querela
  old age without complaint
   
• Ciceronisde philosophialiber
  Cicero’s book on philosophy
   
• voluntaserga aliquem
  desireto do good to someone
   
• unuse militibus
  oneof the soldiers
   
• TriumviratumRei Publicae Constituendae
  Commission of Three for the Restoration of the State

Various scholars have hunted down, and commented on, examples of such phrases from Latin literature, especially of so-called “Adnominal Prepositional Phrases” (i.e., prepositional phrases which appear to be used as attributive modifiers which are in construction with nouns). One may inquire why these attributive modifiers have the appearances of adverbial constructions. Perhaps the most obvious way to answer our question is to suggest that these phrases are parts of participial phrases like the vir in luna habitans mentioned above, but the participle in question is typically or usually *sens, the unused present participle of esse, “to be.” According to this suggestion, the phrase At pater infelix, nec iam pater, for example, stands for At pater infelix, nec iam *senspater, and the phrase bonos et utilis et e re publica civis stands for bonos et utilis et e re *sentes publica civis.

One may object by saying that it is much more parsimonious to suppose that a verbal form like a participle is not implied with these adverbial constructions, but parsimony is irrelevant when we consider that adverbs and prepositional phrases are constructions most typically tied to a verb rather than to a noun, nor would we expect a participle form of esse to show up overly even when we can be sure that its force is felt (as it is in ablative absolute constructions like L. Domitio Ap. Claudio consulibus). If you reject my suggestion, you will get stuck trying to explain why these verb-bound constructions became ostensibly attributive in the first place, and why they are not used ostensibly attributively as often as other, real attributives.

In any event, the fact that many of the Roman authors have used these verb-bound constructions as ostensibly attributive modifiers means that we would be not entirely wrong to imitate that usage: e.g., virinluna;Puellacum Inaure Margaritifera. Since, however, that usage is not as common as the usage of real attributive modifiers for nouns, and since there is always the potential of construing any of those verb-bound constructions with an actual verb instead of the intended noun, we would be safer to use Latin constructions which contain a relative clause or a participle. An exception to that principle, though, is the use of such verb-bound constructions in well-known Latin phrases and in titles of books and other such media: e.g., ArgumentumadHominem, “Argument to the Person”; M. Tullii Ciceronis Orationes inCatilinam, “Marcus Tullius Cicero’s Orations against Catiline.”

8.Gender Neutrality (or the Lack of It) in Latin

Modern English has a system whereby natural gender has been assigned to particular nouns and pronouns: masculine words denote male people or animals, feminine words mostly denote female people or animals, and neuter words denote sexless objects. Throughout the years, users of English have invented various gender-neutral pronouns for the language (e.g., thon,xe,ze). In recent times, however, many have taken the generalizing third-person English pronoun they and prescribed it to be used specifically as a gender-neutral or genderless, singular pronoun consciously chosen either for someone whom the user of the word knows or by someone who is rejecting the traditional gender binary. This novel use of they has very much caught on in English-speaking areas, and we see “they/them” prominently displayed in social-media bios, email signatures, and conference name tags.

Gender in Latin is completely different. Latin has at its core a syntactic system of nominal morphology and concord. That is how agreement is possible among nouns, pronouns, and adjectives in the language. Without this system, Latin nominal syntax is altogether incoherent. By convention we refer to this system as “gender.” The hard and fast line between nouns and adjectives in Latin centers around whether a nominal word has a gender (making it a noun or substantive pronoun) or assumes a gender (making it an adjective or adjectival pronoun). Words denoting male people and animals may be masculine, and words denoting female people and animals may be feminine, but Latin’s masculine and feminine gender categories are not based on some sort of essential “male-ness” or “female-ness.” Syntax,not biological reality, ultimately serves as the basis of Latin’s gender system.

Moreover, Latin lacks a gender-neutral or genderless form which is comparable in function to English’s they.All nominal Latin words have a gender, and none can begenderless. A Latin word may not overtly specify a gender, but it always presupposes at least one. The lack of specificity of a gender does not imply the lack of a gender. Third-declension endings like -isand-esand-ex, genitive pronominal forms like eiusandhuius, and plural pronominal forms like eiandeae, do not behave like they because they are never genderless, and when they refer to people, they are always binary: either masculine or feminine. Latin’s neuter gender is not gender-neutral, and as a matter of fact the only neuter words in Latin which refer to people are words meant to dehumanizeordisparage them (e.g., mancipium, “slave”; scortumandprostibulum, “prostitute”). Using neuter-gender pronouns for people in Latin is like using it to refer to a person in English.

Attempts to create gender-neutral language in Latin can very easily fail because they are liable to ignore these basic features of Latin’s gender system and treat the language’s gender system like English’s system of natural gender or the gender systems of the modern Romance languages, which are quite unlike Latin’s system since they lack the neuter gender and cases.

The closest that Latin has to gender-neutral terms are—ironically enough—genderedanimalwordslikepasser(“sparrow”),aquila (“eagle”), and vulpes (“fox”). The feminine word aquila, for instance, is always feminine no matter what the reproductive features or individual identity of the particular eagle in question is, so we can write: aquila mas,aquila femina, and aquila nonbinaria. And so, there are indeed “gender-neutral gendered words” in Latin. To our English-speaking ears, “gender-neutral gendered words” may sound absurd, but we should realize that the genders of such nouns exist to satisfy the demands of Latin’s system of morphology and concord.

9.Word Formation: Nominal Composition and Denominative Verbs

English can create compound words from nouns and adjectives simply by joining the words together without changes to those words.

Examples:

• egg + head = egghead
   
• cat + girl = catgirl
   
• black + bird = blackbird

Such a process is called nominal composition.

English also can create verbs directly from nouns and adjectives.

Examples:

• cash → to cash
   
• weird → to weird
   
• gaslight → to gaslight

These words are called denominative verbs.

Latin can create verbs and compound words from nouns and adjectives as well, but one cannot simply join together words in the same way that we do in English, nor do Latin compound words and verbs come about through random or haphazard development. There are real, coherent processes through which new words arise, and although these processes can be complicated, there are nevertheless some basic ideas to keep in mind.

All nominal composition and denominative-verb formation in Latin involves the concatenation of stems of words. Exactly how those stems of words concatenate is not always obvious because the final sound of one stem must interact with the initial sound of the next stem in accordance with the morphophonological rules of the language. Since Latin is not anyone’s native language today, we do not come to the study of the language with an instinct of how these sounds interact with one another to form new words. For this reason, we require an empirical investigation of these morphophonological rules of Latin. Fortunately, such investigations have been carried out, and from them we can follow the basic, simplified rules which appear below.

The most basic rules for nominal composition in Latin are as follows:

1. A compound word created through nominal composition can have any number of parts, but for the sake of simplicity, I will be describing the creation of these compound words in terms of a first partanda second part. The first and second parts of such compound words are noun stems, adjective stems, and nominalized verb stems.
   
   
2. The first part of the compound word is a combining form which is created by taking the case ending of the genitive singular form (-ae,-i,-ius,-is,-us,-ei) or genitive plural form (-arum,-orum,-umor-ium,-uum,-erum) of a noun or adjective from any declension and replacing that case ending with the Connecting Vowel i(e.g.,magnus,magni, “great,” becomes the combining form magni-). If a combining form happens to end in -ii (two “i”s) after the case ending of the genitive singular or plural has been changed to the Connecting Vowel i (e.g., combining form medii-frommedius,medii, “middle”), this -ii shortens to the Connecting Vowel -i(e.g.,medii-becomesmedi-).
   
   
3. If the second part of the compound word begins with a
   
   
1. consonant, the combining form which serves as the first part of the compound word remains unchanged;
   
   
2. vowel, the Connecting Vowel i of the combining form which serves as the first part of the compound
   
   
1. remainsif that combining form is monosyllabic (e.g., combining form tri-, from tres, “three,” retains its Connecting Vowel -i) or if that Connecting Vowel -i is the shortened version of -ii (e.g., combining form medi- standing for medii-, from medius, “middle,” retains that single Connecting Vowel -i);
   
   
2. otherwisedisappears, and so, for example, the combining form magni-, when it appears before -animus, loses its Connecting Vowel i and becomes magn-.
   
4. The last part of the compound word either stands unaltered or is given an appropriate suffix or ending, depending on the intended meaning.
   
   
5. Certain nouns and adjectives, especially undeclinable words (including numerals), have special combining forms which are to be used as the first parts of compounds, e.g., quadri-orquadru- for the adjective quattuor, “four.” Similarly, certain words have special forms which appear only as the second parts of compounds, e.g., -cida, “-killer” (which is a nominalization of the stem of the verb caedere, “to kill”).

Below are examples of compound words created through nominal composition. Compounds indicated by † below already existed. Compounds indicated by ‡ below are those that I created for the sake of demonstration. Each Latin word in the list below appears in its nominative singular or plural form and, if applicable, in its genitive singular or plural form.

• ala, alae (wing) + -cornis, -cornis (-horned) → ali-corni- → ‡alicornis, alicornis (with wings and a horn; alicorn)
   
• aqua, aquae (water) + -ducus, -duci (-leading) → aqui-duco- → †aquiducus, aquiduci (drawing off water)
   
• corona, coronae (crown) + virus, viri (virus) → Coroni-viro- → ‡Coronivirus, Coroniviri (Coronivirus/Coronavirus)
   
• flamma, flammae (flame) + -comus, -comi (-haired) → flammi-como- → †flammicomus, flammicomi (flame-haired)
   
• gloria, gloriae (glory) + -iugis, -iugis (-yoked) → glorii-iugi- → ‡gloriiugis, gloriiugis (yoked to glory)
   

• sapientia, sapientiae (wisdom) + potens, potentis (mighty) → sapientii-potent- → †sapientipotens, sapientipotentis (mighty in wisdom)
   

• via, viae (road) + vis, vis (violence) → vii-vi- → ‡vivis, vivis (road rage)
   
• ager, agri (field) + -cola, -colae (-cultivator) → agri-cola- → †agricola, agricolae (field-cultivator, farmer)
   
• caper, capri (goat) + -cornus, -corni (-horned) → Capri-corno- → †Capricornus, Capricorni (goat-horned; Capricorn)
   
• caseus, casei (cheese) + -ceps, -cipitis (-headed) → casei-cipit- → ‡caseiceps, caseicipitis (cheesehead)
   
• equus, equi (horse) + pennae, pennarum (feathers) → equi-penna- → ‡equipennae, equipennarum (horsefeathers)
   
• gallus, galli (cock) + cauda, caudae (tail) → galli-cauda- → †gallicauda, gallicaudae (cocktail)
   
• gladius, gladii (sword) + -fex, -ficis (-maker) → gladii-fic- → †gladifex, gladificis (swordmaker)
   
• liber, libri (book) + vox, vocis (voice) → Libri-voc- → ‡Librivox, Librivocis (LibriVox)
   
• patruus, patrui (uncle) + -produs, -prodi (-betraying) → patrui-prodo- → ‡patruiprodus, patruiprodi (uncle-betraying)
   
• tyrannus, tyranni (tyrant) + -cida, -cidae (-killer) → tyranni-cida- → †tyrannicida, tyrannicidae (tyrant-killer)
   
• vir, viri (man) + -cidium, -cidii (-cide) → viri-cidio- → †viricidium, viricidii (killing of men)
   
• gasum, gasi (gas) + lumen, luminis (light) → gasi-lumin- → ‡gasilumen, gasiluminis (gaslight)
   
• negotium, negotii (business) + homo, hominis (person) → negotii-homin- → ‡negotihomo, negotihominis (businessperson)
   
• ovum, ovi (egg) + -ceps, -cipitis (-headed) → ovi-cipit- → ‡oviceps, ovicipitis (egghead)
   
• ovum, ovi (egg) + ovis, ovis (sheep) → ovi-ovi- → ‡ovovis, ovovis (egg sheep)
   
• sandalium, sandalii (sandal) + gerula, gerulae (bearer) → sandalii-gerula- → †sandaligerulae, sandaligerularum (sandal-bearers)
   
• virus, viri (virus) + -cidium, -cidii (-cide) → viri-cidio- → ‡viricidium, viricidii (viricide)
   
• vulgus, vulgi (crowd) + -vagus, -vagi (-wandering) → vulgi-vago- → †vulgivagus, vulgivagi (wandering everywhere)
   
• bonus, boni (good) + -moris, -moris (-mannered) → boni-mori- → †bonimoris, bonimoris (good-mannered)
   
• doctus, docti (learned) + -ficus, -fici (-making) → docti-fico- → †doctificus, doctifici (making learned)
   
• magnus, magni (great) + -animus, -animi (-souled) → magni-animo- → †magnanimus, magnanimi (magnanimous)
   
• medius, medii (middle) + -amna, -amnae (-rivered) → Medii-amna- → †Mediamna, Mediamnae (Mesopotamia)
   
• medius, medii (middle) + terra, terrae (earth) → medii-terra- → †mediterraneus, mediterranei (mediterranean)
   
• multus, multi (much) + amor, amoris (love) → multi-amor- → ‡multamorium, multamorii (multamory/multiamory)
   
• multus, multi (much) + -bibus, -bibi (-drinking) → multi-bibo- → †multibibus, multibibi (much-drinking)
   
• niger, nigri (black) + avis, avis (bird) → nigri-avi- → ‡nigravis, nigravis (blackbird)
   
• unus, unius (one) + -cornis, -cornis (-horned) → uni-corni- → †unicornis, unicornis (with one horn; unicorn)
   
• homo, hominis (human) + -formis, -formis (-shaped) → homini-formi- → †hominiformis, hominiformis (human-shaped)
   
• draco, draconis (dragon) + equus, equi (horse) → Draconi-equo- → †Draconequus, Draconequi (Draconequus)
   
• flos, floris (flower) + -legus, -legi (-culling) → flori-lego- → †florilegus, florilegi (flower-culling)
   
• imago, imaginis (image) + -fer, -feri (-carrier) → imagini-fero- → †imaginifer, imaginiferi (image-carrier, standard-bearer)
   
• lac, lactis (milk) + -color, -coloris (-colored) → lacti-color- → †lacticolor, lacticoloris (milk-colored)
   
• lex, legis (law) + -fer, -feri (-bringing) → legi-fero- → †legifer, legiferi (lawgiving)
   
• lux, lucis (light) + -fer, -feri (-bringing, -bringer) → luci-fero- → †lucifer, luciferi (light-bringer; Lucifer)
   
• lux, lucis (light) + gladius, gladii (sword) → luci-gladio- → ‡lucigladius, lucigladii (lightsaber)
   
• mel, mellis (honey) + -fluus, -flui (-flowing) → melli-fluo- → †mellifluus, melliflui (flowing with honey)
   
• pix, picis (pitch) + niger, nigri (black) → pici-nigro- → ‡piciniger, picinigri (pitch-black)
   
• vox, vocis (voice) + machina, machinae (machine) → Voci-machina- → ‡Vocimachina, Vocimachinae (Voice Machine)
   
• rete, retis (net) + -fex, -ficis (-maker) → reti-fic- → †retifex, retificis (netmaker)
   
• os, oris (mouth) + -ficium, -ficii (-making) → ori-ficio- → †orificium, orificii (orifice)
   
• pater, patris (father) + -cida, -cidae (-killer) → patri-cida- → †patricida, patricidae (father-killer)
   
• ignis, ignis (fire) + -vomus, -vomi (vomiting x) → igni-vomo- → †ignivomus, ignivomi (vomiting fire)
   
• ovis, ovis (sheep) + auritus, auriti (having large ears) → ovi-aurito- → ‡ovauritus, ovauriti (sheep-eared)
   
• animal, animalis (animal) + amans, amantis (loving) → animali-amant- → ‡animalamans, animalamantis (animal-loving)
   
• pellis, pellis (fur) + globulus, globuli (ball) → pelli-globulo- → ‡pelliglobulus, pelliglobuli (furball)
   
• feles, felis (cat) + puella, puellae (girl) → feli-puella- → ‡felipuella, felipuellae (catgirl)
   
• nox, noctis (night) + -vidus, -vidi (-seeing) → nocti-vido- → †noctividus, noctividi (night-seeing)
   
• nubes, nubis (cloud) + -gena, -genae (-born) → nubi-gena- → †nubigena, nubigenae (cloud-born)
   
• urbs, urbis (city) + -cremus, -cremi (-burning) → urbi-cremo- → †urbicremus, urbicremi (city-burning)
   
• bos, bovis (ox) + -formis, -formis (-shaped) → bovi-formi- → †boviformis, boviformis (ox-shaped)
   
• senex, senis (old man) + -cidium, -cidii (-cide) → seni-cidio- → ‡senicidium, senicidii (senicide)
   
• caro, carnis (flesh) + -vorus, -vori (feeding on x) → carni-voro- → †carnivorus, carnivori (carnivorous, feeding on flesh)
   
• os, ossis (bone) + -fragus, -fragi (-breaking) → ossi-frago- → †ossifragus, ossifragi (bone-breaking)
   
• vis, vis (force) + ager, agri (field) → vi-agro- → ‡viager, viagri (force field)
   
• sus, suis (swine) + -formis, -formis (-shaped) → sui-formi- → †suiformis, suiformis (swine-shaped)
   
• Iuppiter, Iovis (Jupiter) + barba, barbae (beard) → Iovi-barba- → †Iovibarba, Iovibarbae (Jupiter’s Beard)
   
• nix, nivis (snow) + -fer, -feri (-bringing) → nivi-fero- → †nivifer, niviferi (snow-giving)
   
• iter, itineris (journey) + vir, viri (man) → itineri-viro- → ‡itinerivir, itineriviri (journeyman)
   
• celer (swift) + -pes, -pedis (-footed) → celeri-ped- → †celeripes, celeripedis (swift of foot)
   
• omnis, omnis (all) + -genus, -geni (of x kind) → omni-geno- → †omnigenus, omnigeni (of all kinds)
   
• tres, trium (three) + -iugis, -iugis (-yoked) → tri-iugi- → †triiugis, triiugis (triple-yoked)
   
• tres, trium (three) + -linguis, -linguis (-tongued) → tri-lingui- → †trilinguis, trilinguis (with three tongues)
   
• tres, trium (three) + vires, virium (strength, force) → Tri-viri- → †Trivires, Trivirium (Triforce)
   

• confidens, confidentis (confident) + -loquus, -loqui (-speaking) → confidenti-loquo- → †confidentiloquus, confidentiloqui (speaking confidently)
   

• par, paris (pair) + copula, copulae (bond) → pari-copula- → ‡paricopula, paricopulae (pair bond)
   

• senior, senioris (senior) + momentum, momenti (moment) → seniori-momento- → ‡seniorimomentum, seniorimomenti (senior moment)
   

• velox, velocis (swift) + raptor, raptoris (plunderer) → Veloci-raptor- → †Velociraptor, Velociraptoris (Velociraptor)
   
• domus, domus (house) + mater, matris (mother) → domi-matr- → ‡domimater, domimatris (house mother)
   
• domus, domus (house) + -porta, -portae (-carrier) → domi-porta- → †domiporta, domiportae (snail)
   
• cornu, cornus (horn) + -cen, -cinis (-player) → corni-cin- → †cornicen, cornicinis (hornblower)
   
• facies, faciei (face) + -tergium, -tergii (-cloth) → facii-tergio- → †facitergium, facitergii (facecloth)
   
• res, rei (thing) + -metrum, -metri (-meter) → ri-metro- → ‡Rimetrum, Rimetri (Thing-O-Meter)
   
• spes, spei (hope) + -fer, -feri (-bringing) → spi-fero- → ‡spifer, spiferi (bringing hope)
   
• duo, duorum (two) + -ceps, -cipitis (-headed) → bi-cipit- → †biceps, bicipitis (with two heads)
   
• duo, duorum (two) + -ennium, -ennii (-years) → bi-ennio- → †biennium, biennii (period of two years)
   
• quattuor (four) + -fidus, -fidi (-split) → quadri-fido- → †quadrifidus, quadrifidi (split into four parts)
   
• quattuor (four) + -pes, -pedis (-footed) → quadru-ped- → †quadrupes, quadrupedis (with four feet)
   
• quinque (five) + -angulus, -anguli (-cornered) → quinqui-angulo- → †quinquangulus, quinquanguli (five-cornered)
   
• quinque (five) + -fidus, -fidi (-split) → quinqui-fido- → †quinquifidus, quinquifidi (split into five parts)
   
• quinque (five) + -remis, -remis (-oared) → quinque-remi- → †quinqueremis, quinqueremis (with five banks of oars)
   
• sex (six) + -ennium, -ennii (-years) → sex-ennio- → †sexennium, sexennii (period of six years)
   
• sex (six) + -fidus, -fidi (-split) → sex-fido- → †sexfidus, sexfidi (split into six parts)
   
• #latin grammar #latin prose #tagamemnon #latin fandom #latin language #latin translation #lingua latina #writing latin #latin declension #latin word formation #formation of latin words #latin vocabulary #latin prose composition #writing the latin language #latin hints #word formation #paradigm #paradigms #latin paradigm #latin paradigms #declension #declensions #latin declensions