or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › General › General Chat › Site Topics - Part II
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Site Topics - Part II - Page 791

post #11851 of 14864
Quote:
Originally Posted by E,TF View Post

Latin dictionaries often list the nominative and genitive singular forms of a noun, as opposed to nominative singular and plural forms as you would find in an English dictionary, as it allows the reader to work out how the noun declines. Fori is the genitive singular case of forum (indicating possession). Forum declines thus: forum (nom. sg); fori (gen. sg); furo (dat. sg); forum (acc. sg.); foro (alb.sg); fora (nom. pl); fororum (gen.pl); foris (dat. pl); fora (acc. pl); foris (abl. pl). The nominative plural is fora.

I knew all those years of latin at school would come in handy one day (though I had to look some of that up to remind myself).

Meh, my 2.5 years of Latin have failed me. I knew I would be a terrible priest.

My biggest compaint about the use of "fora" is that it is always misused.
post #11852 of 14864
How could you take 2.5 years of Latin and not understand basic declensions? Isn't that always done the first thing in the first year?
post #11853 of 14864
Phew, Ed had me confused there for a minute. I was certain fora was right, 2nd declension neuter, nominative plural as described by ETF. But I also had been led to believe Ed knew Latin. Oh, well.

Which brings up a question - what is the convention for how far we take a Latin word (or any other "imported" word) in terms of declining or pluralizing it in Latin, as we do with fora. Is it equally correct to say forums? After all, when we describe the forum's moderators, we don't say the fori moderators.

In fact, if we go back to the phrasing that started this whole thing:
Quote:
Piobaire has tried very hard to disparage me on this fora.

It would seem that this should have been the ablative singular case, and should have been foro.

I know why will have an answer for this.
post #11854 of 14864
STOP TROLLING ME!
post #11855 of 14864
Quote:
Originally Posted by Douglas View Post

But I also had been led to believe Ed knew Latin.

This tense is correct. I knew it. Haven't found too many Latinians to converse with lately and I've forgotten most of my Latin. shog[1].gif
post #11856 of 14864
Quote:
Originally Posted by Douglas View Post

Is it equally correct to say forums?


Forums is fine. Of course, it doesn't hurt to know that the correct Latin plural form of Forum is Fora, but when a word has been as assimilated by the English language as Forum has, it becomes natural to treat it as an English word. IMO.
post #11857 of 14864
Quote:
Originally Posted by Piobaire View Post

STOP TROLLING ME!

not everything is about you, special flower.
post #11858 of 14864
Quote:
Originally Posted by Douglas View Post

not everything is about you, special flower.

We both know that's false.
post #11859 of 14864
Quote:
Originally Posted by Douglas View Post

Phew, Ed had me confused there for a minute. I was certain fora was right, 2nd declension neuter, nominative plural as described by ETF. But I also had been led to believe Ed knew Latin. Oh, well.

Which brings up a question - what is the convention for how far we take a Latin word (or any other "imported" word) in terms of declining or pluralizing it in Latin, as we do with fora. Is it equally correct to say forums? After all, when we describe the forum's moderators, we don't say the fori moderators.

In fact, if we go back to the phrasing that started this whole thing:
It would seem that this should have been the ablative singular case, and should have been foro.

I know why will have an answer for this.

Generally's it's whatever common usage dictates at the time the word is introduced and becomes commonly used, and after that it tends to become 'frozen' in the language in that form. That's why there are conflicting and/or duplicated forms of some words such as 'concept' and 'conception' which in some contexts mean exactly the same thing ('concept' coming from the Latin 'conceptus' and 'conception' from the French) was likely introduced from a different source and at a different time than the other. The same is true of many other words in English such as 'form' and 'format' (Latin and French respectively). Expanding on this a bit, why does saying 'all the fora have changed' sound correct but saying 'all the data have changed' sounds strange? After all, 'data' is plural (and we never say 'datums' in this context).

In terms of pronunciation, this brings to mind a thread in General Chat about (or sidetracked-to) the pronunciation of 'valet'. 60-70 years ago, 'valet' had its pronunciation Anglicized was sometimes pronounced vallit along with the competing form (now used almost exclusively) of vallay. In the end, vallay seems to have won. Nowadays, words coming from French tend to have their pronunciations prix-fixed -- sous vide, auteur, mise en place, etc. Yet not too long ago -- perhaps around the time 'valet' was introduced -- foreign words tended to be Anglicized, which is why we speak of an estoppel (ess-stopple) certificate (from Old French along with 'valet'), prima facie (preema faysha) evidence, and Julius (instead of yool-yus)) Caesar. It's also the reason Lord Byron's Don Juan doesn't rhyme using the modern pronunciation of Juan (it was prononuced Joo-ahn) and why in Shakespeare's As You Like It Jaques is pronounced Jay-kwees.
Edited by why - 1/16/13 at 10:17am
post #11860 of 14864

 Not exactly vacation reading, but great in piecemeal, is Latin Alive: The Survival of Latin in English and Romance Languages

 

http://www.amazon.com/Latin-Alive-Survival-English-Languages/dp/0521734185/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1358351757&sr=8-3&keywords=Latin+Alive
 

post #11861 of 14864
Quote:
Originally Posted by why View Post

Generally's it's whatever common usage dictates at the time the word is introduced and becomes commonly used, and after that it tends to become 'frozen' in the language in that form. That's why there are conflicting and/or duplicated forms of some words such as 'concept' and 'conception' which in some contexts mean exactly the same thing ('concept' coming from the Latin 'conceptus' and 'conception' from the French) was likely introduced from a different source and at a different time than the other. The same is true of many other words in English such as 'form' and 'format' (Latin and French respectively). Expanding on this a bit, why does saying 'all the fora have changed' sound correct but saying 'all the data have changed' sounds strange? After all, 'data' is plural (and we never say 'datums' in this context).

In terms of pronunciation, this brings to mind a thread in General Chat about (or sidetracked-to) the pronunciation of 'valet'. 60-70 years ago, 'valet' had its pronunciation Anglicized was sometimes pronounced vallit along with the competing form (now used almost exclusively) of vallay. In the end, vallay seems to have won. Nowadays, words coming from French tend to have their pronunciations prix-fixed -- sous vide, auteur, mise en place, etc. Yet not too long ago -- perhaps around the time 'valet' was introduced -- foreign words tended to be Anglicized, which is why we speak of an estoppel (ess-topple) certificate (from Old French along with 'valet'), prima facie (preema faysha) evidence, and Julius (instead of yool-yus)) Caesar. It's also the reason Lord Byron's Don Juan doesn't rhyme using the modern pronunciation of Juan (it was prononuced Joo-en) and why in Shakespeare's As You Like It Jacques is pronounced Jack-wiss.

This is really interesting. (0) Can I say forums. I despise the use of fora.
post #11862 of 14864
Quote:
Originally Posted by itsstillmatt View Post

This is really interesting. (0)

+1. that might have been the most interesting 2 paragraphs on language evolution and pronunciation that i have read, perhaps ever.
post #11863 of 14864
It's funny you picked the Julius in Caesar and not the Caesar, which if I'm not mistaken would have sounded more like the German Kaiser.
post #11864 of 14864
Quote:
Originally Posted by Douglas View Post

It's funny you picked the Julius in Caesar and not the Caesar, which if I'm not mistaken would have sounded more like the German Kaiser.

Yes, because those changes occurred in vulgar Latin and probably came to English through French where the Latin c had already changed from /k/ to /s/. Obviously something else changed too, but it gets a little hairy and I'm not sure it was due to an Anglicization in the same sense.
post #11865 of 14864
Quote:
Originally Posted by why View Post

Generally's it's whatever common usage dictates at the time the word is introduced and becomes commonly used, and after that it tends to become 'frozen' in the language in that form. That's why there are conflicting and/or duplicated forms of some words such as 'concept' and 'conception' which in some contexts mean exactly the same thing ('concept' coming from the Latin 'conceptus' and 'conception' from the French) was likely introduced from a different source and at a different time than the other. The same is true of many other words in English such as 'form' and 'format' (Latin and French respectively). Expanding on this a bit, why does saying 'all the fora have changed' sound correct but saying 'all the data have changed' sounds strange? After all, 'data' is plural (and we never say 'datums' in this context).

In terms of pronunciation, this brings to mind a thread in General Chat about (or sidetracked-to) the pronunciation of 'valet'. 60-70 years ago, 'valet' had its pronunciation Anglicized was sometimes pronounced vallit along with the competing form (now used almost exclusively) of vallay. In the end, vallay seems to have won. Nowadays, words coming from French tend to have their pronunciations prix-fixed -- sous vide, auteur, mise en place, etc. Yet not too long ago -- perhaps around the time 'valet' was introduced -- foreign words tended to be Anglicized, which is why we speak of an estoppel (ess-topple) certificate (from Old French along with 'valet'), prima facie (preema faysha) evidence, and Julius (instead of yool-yus)) Caesar. It's also the reason Lord Byron's Don Juan doesn't rhyme using the modern pronunciation of Juan (it was prononuced Joo-en) and why in Shakespeare's As You Like It Jacques is pronounced Jack-wiss.

Do you have any idea when "valet" came into common use? If it was before about the 14th century then most of the English nobility would have been either Anglo Norman speakers or bilingual English/French speakers. So would there perhaps have been an upstairs downstairs division of pronunciation with the downstairs pronunciation vallit, especially in Britain, winning out until the mid/late 20th century? The re-emergence of vallay then possibly due to the ubiquity of American influence allied with the decline in the actual number of gentlemen's gentlemen?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Chat
Styleforum › Forums › General › General Chat › Site Topics - Part II