Différences

Cette page vous donne les différences entre la révision choisie et la version actuelle de la page.

dictionnaire:the_morphology_of_classical_latin6 [2015/10/31 13:51]
ollivier
dictionnaire:the_morphology_of_classical_latin6 [2016/01/27 18:03] (Version actuelle)
ollivier
Ligne 356: Ligne 356:
 ^DAT. | //ist-ī// | //ist-ī//| //ist-ī// | | //ist-īs// | //ist-īs// | //ist-īs// | ^DAT. | //ist-ī// | //ist-ī//| //ist-ī// | | //ist-īs// | //ist-īs// | //ist-īs// |
 ^ABL. | //ist-ō// | //ist-ā// | //ist-ō// | | //ist-īs// | //ist-īs// | //ist-īs// | ^ABL. | //ist-ō// | //ist-ā// | //ist-ō// | | //ist-īs// | //ist-īs// | //ist-īs// |
-^ACC. | //ist-um// | //ist-am// | //ist-ud// | | //ist-ōs// | //ist-ās// | //ist-a// |+^ACC. | //ist-um// | //ist-am// | //ist-ud// | | //ist-ōs// | //ist-ās// |//ist-a// |
  
  
Ligne 476: Ligne 476:
  
     * Liv. 1,2,2 : //neutra acies laeta ex ei certamine abiit// \\  "not one of both parties came out of this meeting to advantage".     * Liv. 1,2,2 : //neutra acies laeta ex ei certamine abiit// \\  "not one of both parties came out of this meeting to advantage".
-Null-us, -a, -um “not any, no” is above all an indefinite determiner + 
 + 
 +//Null-us, -a, -um// “not any, no” is above all an indefinite determiner 
   
  
-nullo modo, nullo pacto “in no way” (Cic., Verr. 2,40 +    * Cic., //Verr.// 2,40: // nullo modo, nullo pacto// \\ “in no way” 
-adolescens nullius consilli (Cic., Q. fr. 1,2,15“a young man of no importance”;+  
 +   
 +    * Cic., //Q. fr.// 1,2,15: //adolescens nullius consilli// \\ “a young man of no importance”; 
 + 
 but it can function also as a NP: but it can function also as a NP:
-ut nullo egeat (Cic., Lael. 30 “he doesn’t need anybody”;  + 
-quod ante id tempus accidit nulli (Caes., Gall. 2,35,3“which was not happened to anybody until then”; + 
-In that position, Latin will prefer to use the variants nēmō “nobody, no one”, and nihil “not anything, nothing”, the declension of which shows clearly the relationship with the determiners: +    * Cic., //Lael.// 30: //ut nullo egeat// \\  “he doesn’t need anybody”; 
-NOM. nēmō nihil +    
-GEN. null-īus null-īus re-ī +  
-DAT. nēmin-ī null-ī re-ī +    * Caes., //Gall.// 2,35,3: //quod ante id tempus accidit nulli// \\  “which was not happened to anybody until then”; 
-ABL. null-ō null-ā rē + 
-ACC. nēmin-em nihil + 
- Declension of nēmō and nihil +In that position, Latin will prefer to use the variants //nēmō// “nobody, no one”, and //nihil// “not anything, nothing”, the declension of which shows clearly the relationship with the determiners: 
-Incidentally, nēmō is often used as a simple determiner by Plautus:  + 
-Nemo homo umquam ita arbitratust (Plaut.Persa 211) “nobody ever thought  so”. + 
-Belong also to the class of determiners, tot-us, -a, -um “the whole of, all”, sol-us, -a, -um “alone, only one”, and unu-us, -a, -um “one, a single”, which have a Genitive in -īus, and a dative in -ī: +Declension of //nēmō// and //nihil//: 
-Hinc totum odium, hinc omnis offensio (Cic.Flach. 54) “hence all her antipathy , hence all her grudge” + 
- uniuersum totius urbis incendium (Cic., Syll. 19“the general fire of all the city".  + 
-In conclusion, we can add to the morphological specific feature of the declension which we call the pronominal declension, namely the genitive in -īus and the dative in -ī, the syntactical feature of concerning only some constituents which are some members of the determiners’ class, i. e. some immediate constituents of an exocentric NP.+^ ^ ^ |  
 +^NOM. | //nēmō// | //nihil// | 
 +^GEN. | //null-īus// | //null-īus re-ī// | 
 +^DAT. | //nēmin-ī// | //null-ī re-ī// | 
 +^ABL. | //null-ō// | //null-ā rē// | 
 +^ACC. | //nēmin-em// | //nihil// | 
 +  
 +Incidentally, //nēmō// is often used as a simple determiner by Plautus:  
 + 
 + 
 +    * Plaut., //Persa// 211: //Nemo homo umquam ita arbitratust//\\  “nobody ever thought  so”. 
 + 
 + 
 +Belong also to the class of determiners, //tot-us, -a, -um// “the whole of, all”, //sol-us, -a, -um// “alone, only one”, and //unu-us, -a, -um// “one, a single”, which have a Genitive in //-īus//, and a dative in ////
 + 
 + 
 +    * Cic., //Flach.// 54: //Hinc totum odium, hinc omnis offensio//\\  “hence all her antipathy , hence all her grudge” 
 + 
 + 
 +    * Cic., //Syll.// 19: //uniuersum totius urbis incendium//, \\  “the general fire of all the city".  
 + 
 + 
 +In conclusion, we can add to the morphological specific feature of the declension which we call the pronominal declension, namely the genitive in //-īus// and the dative in //-ī,// the syntactical feature of concerning only some constituents which are some members of the determiners’ class, //i. e.// some immediate constituents of an exocentric NP. 
 + 
 + 
 + 
 +\\  
 +\\  
 +\\  
 +  
 + 
 +\\ 
 +[[:encyclopédie_linguistique:notions_linguistiques:morphologie:The morphology_of_classical Latin|Retour au plan]] ou  
 +[[:dictionnaire: The morphology of classical latin7|Aller au § 7.]]