I-Stems with Ablative -i

Here’s the other half of that list that I started in (this post). These are the class of consonantal adjectives that tend not to operate as quasi-nouns, and therefore tend to take -i in the ablative, rather than -e.

  • āmēns, āmentis, frantic, crazed
  • anceps, ancipis, double, doubtful
  • concors, concordis, agreed, joint
  • dēgener, dēgeneris, low-born, weak
  • hebes, hebetis, dull, blunt
  • ingēns, ingentis, huge, vast
  • inops, inopis, needy, helpless
  • memor, memoris, mindful of
  • pār, paris, alike, equal to
  • perpes, perpetis, lasting
  • praeceps, praecipitis, headlong
  • praepes, praepitis, nimble, winged
  • teres, teretis, smooth

Sorry for the relative obscurity of these last two posts. The thing is, they cover a few footnotes in Allen and Greenough that I feel should be out there on the Internet, preferably with a basic entry format and definition.

The Essential AG: 121a3

Advertisement

I-Stems with Ablative -e

Consider section 121a4, which lists a variety of consonant stem adjectives that do not take -i in the ablative singular. They are completely regular, and the entry is really there only to keep you from having second guesses.

I’ll list them here so they get some web mileage, despite not being especially interesting, however rare:

  • caelescaelitis relating to the heavens or their Gods
  • compos, compotis possessing control of
  • dēses, dēsidis lazy
  • dīves, dīvitis wealthy
  • hospes, hospitis amicable, relating to guest-friendship
  • particeps, participis participating in
  • praepes, praepitis nimble, winged
  • pauper, pauperis poor, destitute
  • prīnceps, prīncipis princely, noble
  • sōspes, sospitis safe and sound
  • superstes, superstitis surviving

As someone pointed out in a comment, the general but non-binding idea is that those adjectives which most often operate as nouns (like these) take the ablative in -e, whereas those that are properly adjectival take the ablative in -i. You find hints of this throughout the consonantal and i-stem entries in Allen and Greenough (see 121a1-2), but they make no effort to propagate it as a formal rule.

The Essential AG: 121a1-2, a4

I-Stems: Neuter Exceptions [4/8]

So, unfortunately, I stated earlier that the neuter i-stem class is entirely regular. In fact, a footnote in A&G reveals about ten exceptions.

These nouns are almost regular, except that with consonantal stems –al and –ar they also add the ending -e to the nominative and accusative singular. Note that because of this ending, the -ā- is long in all cases.

Where the singular is uncommon or does not exist, I have used the plural.

  • alveāre, alveāris, beehive
  • augurāle, augurālis, augur’s staff
  • capillāre, capillāris, pomade
  • cochlearē, cochleāris, spoon
  • collāre, collāris, collar
  • dentālia, dentālium, sharebeam of a plow (What?)
  • fōcāle, fōcālis, cravat (What?)
  • nāvāle, nāvālis, dock
  • penetrāle, penetrālis, inner shrine
  • rāmālia, rāmālium, twigs
  • scūtāle, scūtālis, thong of a sling
  • tibiālia, tibiālia, shin-length stockings

The Essential AG: 68n2

The Vocative Case: Declension

A&G define the vocative as “the case of Direct Address.” (35f)

Generally speaking, the vocative and the nominative are the same.

However, in certain nouns of the second declension (those with nominative -us or -ius) have two exceptional variations. All nouns in -us feature an -e in the vocative (mūrus…mūre). Those ending in -ius (Vergilius, fīlius, genius, etc.) take a vocative  (Vergilī, filī, genī).

  • [Highly attentive readers should note that this vocative does not shift its accent, rendering Vergílī, and not *Vérgilī, as one might expect.]

That’s how it stands for nouns. There’s a slight variation in policy for adjectives, though luckily the same general rule (same as the nominative) holds true for all but the second declension (bonus…bone). However, the one catch is that adjectives ending in -ius change to -ie and not . Therefore, when calling to a Spartan son, we might say O fīlī Lacedaemonie! (not *Lacedaemonī).

If anyone has a better understanding of vocative plurals, which I assume are all identical to their nominative forms, feel free to say more in the comments below. A&G are totally silent on this issue, which I assume signals that listing the vocatives would be redundant (with respect to the nominatives).

The Essential AG: 38a