Oscarino da Silva Ivo

Elementos de morfologia histórica do nome em latim

Introduction

Elementos de morfologia histórica do nome em latim. Estudo da morfologia histórica do nome em latim. Analisa como desinências casuais indicam função sintática e número, mas nem sempre o gênero de substantivos.

Abstract

As desinências casuais latinas indicam, ao mesmo tempo, a função sintática e o número gramatical das palavras. Não se pode dizer o mesmo com relação ao gênero, pelo menos do substantivo. Nenhum morfema distingue o substantivo masculino nauta do substantivo feminino ianua, ou dominus, masculino, de fagus, feminino. Pode-se afirmar que o nominativo masculino dominus é diferente, na sua desinência, do neutro templum, mas não cabe a mesma afirmação para as formas dominum e templum, de acusativo singular.

Review

The article, "Elementos de morfologia histórica do nome em latim," presents a focused and pertinent investigation into a specific aspect of Latin nominal morphology. The abstract clearly outlines the central premise: while Latin case endings consistently encode syntactic function and grammatical number, their role in marking grammatical gender, particularly for nouns, is considerably less direct and often absent. This observation addresses a fundamental characteristic of Latin grammar and sets the stage for what promises to be a nuanced discussion within historical linguistics, offering insights into the structure and evolution of the Latin nominal system. The abstract effectively communicates its core argument through well-chosen examples. The comparison between nouns like *nauta* (masculine) and *ianua* (feminine), or *dominus* (masculine) and *fagus* (feminine), immediately highlights the lack of consistent gender-specific desinences across paradigms. Furthermore, the abstract's precision in distinguishing how gender might be discernible in some nominative singular forms (e.g., *dominus* vs. *templum*) but not in others (e.g., accusative singular *dominum* vs. *templum*) demonstrates an attentive and detailed approach to the subject matter. This initial exposition suggests a robust analysis that delves into the intricacies of Latin declension patterns. While the abstract provides a strong descriptive foundation, the inclusion of "histórica" in the title suggests an expectation of deeper diachronic analysis. It would be valuable for the full paper to explore the historical trajectory of these morphological patterns: how did this inconsistency in gender marking evolve within Latin, and what might be its origins or consequences in the broader Indo-European context? A discussion of the functional implications of this lack of explicit gender marking by desinences, such as how meaning or reference is disambiguated, would also enrich the analysis. Overall, the abstract presents a highly promising contribution to the study of Latin historical morphology, and I anticipate a comprehensive and insightful full paper building upon these compelling initial observations.

Full Text

Comments

You need to be logged in to post a comment.