Latin: plural of exodus?
LaLassa
or exodi? And would the respective Latin plural form be appropriate in an
English text at all?
Thank you in advance,
Ines
Alan Crozier
>Can anyone tell me what the plural of the Latin word exodus is? Is it
exodus
>or exodi? And would the respective Latin plural form be appropriate in an
>English text at all?
>
The Latin plural is exodi, but the English word would look very strange in
any plural form.
Alan
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Alan Crozier
Lund, Sweden
e-mail alan.c...@telia.com
Roger Whitehead
> The Latin plural is exodi, but the English word would look very strange in
> any plural form.
According to the OED, in the 1416th c. the book in the Bible was sometimes
called the ‘Book of Exodi’.
Regards,
Roger
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Roger Whitehead,
Oxted, Surrey, England
John Woodgate
klu.ac.at> inimitably wrote:
>Can anyone tell me what the plural of the Latin word exodus is? Is it exodus
>or exodi? And would the respective Latin plural form be appropriate in an
>English text at all?
>
*might* be 'exodoi', but I don't know enough Greek to be sure.
--
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. Phone +44 (0)1268 747839
Fax +44 (0)1268 777124. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk
Defnyddiwch y cod post.
***PLEASE DO NOT E-MAIL COPIES OF NEWSGROUP POSTS TO ME***
Alan Crozier
><NP6%3.9839$Up1.5...@news.chello.at>, LaLassa <ilas...@edu.uni-
>klu.ac.at> inimitably wrote:
>>Can anyone tell me what the plural of the Latin word exodus is? Is it
exodus
>>or exodi? And would the respective Latin plural form be appropriate in an
>>English text at all?
>>
>It's not a Latin word, but a Greek word 'exodos', latinised. The plural
>*might* be 'exodoi', but I don't know enough Greek to be sure.
>--
I took the form exodi from my Latin dictionary.
Benoit Evans
<4O8%3.6$62i.17...@newsb.telia.net>...
> LaLassa wrote in message ...
> exodus
> >or exodi? And would the respective Latin plural form be appropriate in
an
> >English text at all?
> >
>
>
in
> any plural form.
According to the _Longman Dictionary of Contemporay English_, 1990,
"exodus" has no plural form in English. Perhaps you could simply use the
singular form, as in "the exodus of the Jews from Egypt long ago and of the
Palestinians from modern Israel...". That is a rather common construction
in English that allows a singular noun to be used in a context of
plurality.
--
Regards,
K.-Benoit Evans
Traducteur agréé / Certified Translator (OTIAQ)
Régie des rentes du Québec
Québec, Canada
Ceci n'est pas un texte officiel | This is not an official text
du Gouvernement du Québec, ses | of the Gouvernement du Québec,
organismes ou mandataires. | its institutions or mandataries.
Alan Crozier <alan.c...@telia.com> a écrit dans l'article
<4O8%3.6$62i.17...@newsb.telia.net>...
> LaLassa wrote in message ...
> >Can anyone tell me what the plural of the Latin word exodus is? Is it
> exodus
> >or exodi? And would the respective Latin plural form be appropriate in
an
> >English text at all?
> >
>
>
> The Latin plural is exodi, but the English word would look very strange
in
> any plural form.
>
Matthew Montchalin
| <NP6%3.9839$Up1.5...@news.chello.at>, LaLassa <ilas...@edu.uni-
| klu.ac.at> inimitably wrote:
| >Can anyone tell me what the plural of the Latin word exodus is? Is it exodus
| >or exodi? And would the respective Latin plural form be appropriate in an
| >English text at all?
| >
| It's not a Latin word, but a Greek word 'exodos', latinised. The plural
| *might* be 'exodoi', but I don't know enough Greek to be sure.
The Oxford Glossary of Late Latin to 600 A.D. indicates that the neuter
exodum is yet another variation to exodus. Lewis & Short's Latin
Dictionary indicates that "exodus, i" is a second declension feminine noun
derived from the Greek exodos, an exit or going out. It was probably
considered feminine because of the implied 'historia' or maybe 'res
gesta.' The Latin version of exodos is "exitus, us" -- a masculine 4th
declension noun.
The translator was seeking the plural of exodus. Depending on the nature
of the sentence, it is possible that no plural is to be used, nor should
be desirable. Can somebody post the sentence that is to be translated?
For instance, the following singular/plural formations are possible:
Singular Plural
exodus exodi (feminine)
exodum exoda (neuter)
exitus exitUs (masculine)
Matthew Montchalin
| Can anyone tell me what the plural of the Latin word exodus is? Is
| it exodus or exodi? And would the respective Latin plural form be
| appropriate in an English text at all?
What is the singular of spaghetti, and is it appropriate in an English
text at all?
Matthew Montchalin
| According to the _Longman Dictionary of Contemporay English_, 1990,
| "exodus" has no plural form in English. Perhaps you could simply use
| the singular form, as in "the exodus of the Jews from Egypt long ago
| and of the Palestinians from modern Israel...". That is a rather common
| construction in English that allows a singular noun to be used in a
| context of plurality.
Yes, that would be a good way of solving this problem.
Which is not to say that a plural of exodus is impossible, just unusual:
"The Jewish people departed from Egypt so many times in a thousand
years that exoduses were rather frequent occurrences, just as
commonplace as opening and shutting doors."
If a plural must be used, just regularize it as an ordinary English word
so that your readers don't stumble over it. Use an -es.
Matthew Montchalin
| The translator was seeking the plural of exodus. Depending on the nature
| of the sentence, it is possible that no plural is to be used, nor should
| be desirable. Can somebody post the sentence that is to be translated?
|
| For instance, the following singular/plural formations are possible:
|
| Singular Plural
| exodus exodi (feminine)
| exodum exoda (neuter)
| exitus exitUs (masculine)
For what it's worth, the Dictionary of Ecclesiastical Latin by Leo Stelten
(Hendrickson Publishers, 2nd Printing, 1995) indicates yet a fourth
version of exodus:
Singular Plural
exodus exodUs (4th declension masculine noun)
Roger Whitehead
<Pine.SUN.3.96.991125...@compass.OregonVOS.net>,
> Singular Plural
> exodus exodUs (4th declension masculine noun)
All this declining for a word that John W reckons isn't Latin. 8-)
John Woodgate
appropriate.
Philip 'Yes, that's my address' Newton
wrote:
>It's not a Latin word, but a Greek word 'exodos', latinised. The plural
>*might* be 'exodoi', but I don't know enough Greek to be sure.
That's the Greek plural, yes. It's feminine, by the way (hę exodos, hai
exodoi).
Cheers,
Philip
--
Philip Newton <nospam...@gmx.li>
Philip 'Yes, that's my address' Newton
<mmon...@OregonVOS.net> wrote:
> Lewis & Short's Latin
>Dictionary indicates that "exodus, i" is a second declension feminine noun
>derived from the Greek exodos, an exit or going out. It was probably
>considered feminine because of the implied 'historia' or maybe 'res
>gesta.'
Or because it derives from Greek "exodos", which is feminine in Greek?
(Just guessing, don't know whether gender assignments on loan words work
that way in Latin.)
mb
Matthew Montchalin wrote in message ...
>On Thu, 25 Nov 1999, John Woodgate wrote:
>
>| <NP6%3.9839$Up1.5...@news.chello.at>, LaLassa <ilas...@edu.uni-
>| >Can anyone tell me what the plural of the Latin word exodus is? Is it
exodus
>| >or exodi? And would the respective Latin plural form be appropriate in
an
>| >English text at all?
>| >
>| *might* be 'exodoi', but I don't know enough Greek to be sure.
>
>Dictionary indicates that "exodus, i" is a second declension feminine noun
>derived from the Greek exodos, an exit or going out. It was probably
>considered feminine because of the implied 'historia' or maybe 'res
>declension noun.
>
>of the sentence, it is possible that no plural is to be used, nor should
>be desirable. Can somebody post the sentence that is to be translated?
>
>For instance, the following singular/plural formations are possible:
>
> Singular Plural
> exodus exodi (feminine)
> exodum exoda (neuter)
> exitus exitUs (masculine)
We might have a problem with the meaning differentiation here. Exodos - doi
can indicate either an exit or a travel, while exodon - da regularly refers
to "outlay" - expenses, payments... One would clearly need to review the
exact texts for the use of the neuter noun in Latin; it is hard to imagine
that those who introduced its use would be ignorant of its Greek meaning and
use it indiscriminately.
Matthew Montchalin
| On Thu, 25 Nov 1999 08:42:17 -0800, Matthew Montchalin
| <mmon...@OregonVOS.net> wrote:
|
| > Lewis & Short's Latin
| >Dictionary indicates that "exodus, i" is a second declension feminine noun
| >derived from the Greek exodos, an exit or going out. It was probably
| >considered feminine because of the implied 'historia' or maybe 'res
| >gesta.'
|
| Or because it derives from Greek "exodos", which is feminine in Greek?
Does Greek have a verb comparable to the Latin exeo? At least exitus
comes from exeo. As for exodos, I'm not sure what it comes from. My
advice is to just use exitus and exitium and then avoid exodos altogether
as an undesirable Greek import.
Matthew Montchalin
| Matthew Montchalin <mmon...@OregonVOS.net> inimitably wrote:
| >On Thu, 25 Nov 1999, LaLassa wrote:
| >
| >| Can anyone tell me what the plural of the Latin word exodus is? Is
| >| it exodus or exodi? And would the respective Latin plural form be
| >| appropriate in an English text at all?
| >
| >text at all?
| >
| We had a very long thread about that about two years ago. No, it is not
| appropriate.
Well, it *could* be worse. We *could *be delving into the possibilities
of a plural form for 'Jesus' or 'Christus.' It is my understanding that
these are still declined in German. (E.g., Jesus Christi, Jesum Christum,
but possibly wanting a plural, and the vocative of Jesus is not Jese but
Jesus because it is a 4th declension noun in Latin, but heaven knows how
it declines in Greek.) It would be best to just keep it in the singular.
Kim Bastin
>
[snip]
>
> The Oxford Glossary of Late Latin to 600 A.D. indicates that the neuter
> Dictionary indicates that "exodus, i" is a second declension feminine noun
> derived from the Greek exodos, an exit or going out. It was probably
> considered feminine because of the implied 'historia' or maybe 'res
> gesta.'
Very bad guess. It is feminine because the Greek word _hodos_ was feminine
- one of the numerous second declension feminine nouns in that language.
_exodos_ < _ex_ 'out' + _hodos_ 'way, road'.
John Woodgate
What about 'Pie Jesu', then? And 'Jesu, Joy of Man's Desiring'? And.....
The vocative in -u is uncommon because 4th declension proper nouns are
relatively rare.
LaLassa
etymological characteristics of "exodus" and the various way of declining
it! My request seems to have sparked something of a discussion on linguistic
principles, which I find quite interesting I must say (especially the plural
form of Jesus Christus, and yes, in German Jesus Christus ist still
declined!).
My request is not really about a text to be translated, I was only wondering
whether there can be any plural form at all, because in a denotative meaning
it would be perfectly logical, as I see it.
I'm writing a literary analysis of a novel where the protagonist TWICE sets
up remote communities, which due to external threats have to be left behind,
and the community - this is done with many biblical references - leaves and
looks for new places to set up their envisioned utopian "project". So they
are expelled twice, which led me to believe that I could use a plural form
of exodus to describe this.
I guess I'm going to stick with the singular after all, which is probably
most appropriate.
Cheers,
Ines
Matthew Montchalin
| It is feminine because the Greek word _hodos_ was feminine - one
| of the numerous second declension feminine nouns in that language.
| _exodos_ < _ex_ 'out' + _hodos_ 'way, road'.
Okay.
Matthew Montchalin
| What about 'Pie Jesu', then? And 'Jesu, Joy of Man's Desiring'? And.....
Might those be Normanisms of some kind?
| The vocative in -u is uncommon because 4th declension proper nouns are
| relatively rare.
Lewis & Stoddard's Latin Grammar gives the following forms as acceptable
singular vocatives for 4th declension nouns:
Nominative fructus domus anus cornu
Vocative fructus domus anus cornu
If Jesus has a vocative Jesu, it must be a mediaevalism of some kind.
Tim Kynerd
Matthew Montchalin wrote:
>On Thu, 25 Nov 1999, John Woodgate wrote:
>| Matthew Montchalin <mmon...@OregonVOS.net> inimitably wrote:
>| >On Thu, 25 Nov 1999, LaLassa wrote:
>| >
>| >| Can anyone tell me what the plural of the Latin word exodus is? Is
>| >| it exodus or exodi? And would the respective Latin plural form be
>| >| appropriate in an English text at all?
>| >
>| >What is the singular of spaghetti, and is it appropriate in an English
>| >text at all?
>| >
>| We had a very long thread about that about two years ago. No, it is not
>| appropriate.
>
>Well, it *could* be worse. We *could *be delving into the possibilities
>of a plural form for 'Jesus' or 'Christus.' It is my understanding that
>these are still declined in German. (E.g., Jesus Christi, Jesum Christum,
>but possibly wanting a plural, and the vocative of Jesus is not Jese but
>Jesus because it is a 4th declension noun in Latin, but heaven knows how
>it declines in Greek.) It would be best to just keep it in the singular.
To a limited extent, you find this in Swedish as well, with forms like "Jesu
död" for "Jesus' death" and "Kristi kropp" for "the body of Christ." The
uninflected form is "Jesus Kristus." AFAIK no attempt is made to put them
in the plural (could there be more than one Jesus?).
--
Tim Kynerd Sundbyberg (småstan i storstan), Sweden tky...@my-deja.com
"If I had my way, I would move to another lifetime.
I'd quit my job, ride the train through the misty nighttime...." --
Steely Dan, "Any World (That I'm Welcome To)"
John Woodgate
Matthew Montchalin <mmon...@OregonVOS.net> inimitably wrote:
Certainly 'Church Latin' has differed from other 'Latins' for a very
long time, often having been exposed to different 'authorities'.
Consider the pronunciation of 'In excelsis Deo' ('exchelsis'), 'coelo'
(as 'chello' with a longer 'e') and 'Mariae' ('ae' rendered as English
'hay', unaspirated), for example.
Pierre Renault
> To a limited extent, you find this in Swedish as well, with forms like "Jesu
> död" for "Jesus' death" and "Kristi kropp" for "the body of Christ." The
> uninflected form is "Jesus Kristus." AFAIK no attempt is made to put them
> in the plural (could there be more than one Jesus?).
Sure. About half the pitching squad for the Cuban National baseball
team.
Pierre
John Woodgate
Matthew Montchalin
Matthew Montchalin wrote:
| >Well, it *could* be worse. We *could *be delving into the
| >possibilities of a plural form for 'Jesus' or 'Christus.' It is
| >my understanding that these are still declined in German. (E.g.,
| >Jesus Christi, Jesum Christum, but possibly wanting a plural, and
| >the vocative of Jesus is not Jese but Jesus because it is a 4th
| >declension noun in Latin, but heaven knows how it declines in Greek.)
| >It would be best to just keep it in the singular.
Tim Kynerd wrote:
| To a limited extent, you find this in Swedish as well, with forms like
| "Jesu död" for "Jesus' death" and "Kristi kropp" for "the body of
| Christ."
Interesting!
| The uninflected form is "Jesus Kristus." AFAIK no attempt is made to
| put them in the plural (could there be more than one Jesus?).
Sure, but what I wonder about, is why the Greeks used 'christos' for
annointed instead of some kind of construction using 'baptistos' or
whatever they wanted to use. I thought christos meant 'annointed' --
pretty much the same thing as baptized? (Pardon my deplorable ignorance.)
Maybe someone can explain to me the difference between being annointed
and being baptized?
What is Jesus in Hebrew? Does Hebrew decline its nouns, or does it
use stuff like prepositions or postpositions or word order to keep
grammatical relationships straight? Is the Greek 'christos' participial
in some way or other, and does that correspond to something similar in
Hebrew?
In any case, in Latin, the 4th declension plurals for all those Jesuses,
the annointed ones, the whole lot of them, whether taken jointly or
severally, would be:
__Plural__Forms____
Nominative JesUs ChristI
Vocative JesUs ChristI
Genitive JesUum ChristOrum
Locative JesUum ChristOrum
Dative Jesubus ChristIs
Accusative JesUs ChristOs
Ablative Jesubus ChristIs
with capitalized vowels signifying Long vowels (just in case one of you
wants to write poetry)...
Philip 'Yes, that's my address' Newton
<mmon...@OregonVOS.net> wrote:
>Does Greek have a verb comparable to the Latin exeo?
No, not one that's formed the same way.
> At least exitus
>comes from exeo. As for exodos, I'm not sure what it comes from.
ek-, ex- (prefix: out) + hodos (noun feminine: way, road).
There are a bunch of words based on he hodos, e.g. methodos (> method),
kathodos (descent > cathode), anodos (ascent > anode), synodos (>
synode), etc.
> My
>advice is to just use exitus and exitium and then avoid exodos altogether
>as an undesirable Greek import.
Cheers,
Philip 'Yes, that's my address' Newton
<mmon...@OregonVOS.net> wrote:
>Well, it *could* be worse. We *could *be delving into the possibilities
>of a plural form for 'Jesus' or 'Christus.' It is my understanding that
>these are still declined in German. (E.g., Jesus Christi, Jesum Christum,
It is sometimes. nom. Jesus Christus, gen. Jesu Christi, dat. Jesum
Christum, acc. Jesu Christo IIRC. Genitive used more frequently than
dative or accusative, e.g. in prayers "im Namen Jesu Christi".
>but possibly wanting a plural, and the vocative of Jesus is not Jese but
>Jesus because it is a 4th declension noun in Latin, but heaven knows how
>it declines in Greek.) It would be best to just keep it in the singular.
It's a declension of its own, since it's a borrowing from Hebrew. I
can't find my ancient Greek grammar, but it had it listed near the end
of the noun section, together with about a half-dozen other given names
which have special declensions.
I believe it went something like nom. Iêsous, gen. Iêsou, acc. Iêsoun,
voc. Iêsou. Don't remember the dative. And Christos, of course, declines
just like a normal second declension male adjective (christos, christou
christôi, christon, christe), with a plural if you so desire (christoi,
christôn, christois, christous, christoi).
Philip 'Yes, that's my address' Newton
<mmon...@OregonVOS.net> wrote:
>Sure, but what I wonder about, is why the Greeks used 'christos' for
>annointed instead of some kind of construction using 'baptistos' or
>whatever they wanted to use. I thought christos meant 'annointed' --
>pretty much the same thing as baptized? (Pardon my deplorable ignorance.)
>Maybe someone can explain to me the difference between being annointed
>and being baptized?
I believe anointed refers to the anointing with oil (poured on the head)
as part of the coronation of a King. Baptising (IIRC, from Greek baptô,
to dip) means immersion in water, though baptising is nowadays done by
sprinkling in some churches.
I believe "christos" is a translation of the Hebrew word "Messiah"
(Meshiakh?) which also means "anointed" and which was in use as a term
for the promised, well, Messiah long before Greek-speaking, New
Testament times.
>What is Jesus in Hebrew?
Yeshu`ah, I believe (` = ayin). I believe the meaning is "YHWH is
salvation".
>Is the Greek 'christos' participial in some way or other, and does that
>correspond to something similar in Hebrew?
"christos" is an adjective formed from the verb "chrizo". It acts kind
of like a perfect participle in that it means, roughly, "having been
anointed". Like the adjective "closed" (The door is closed) is similar
to the past participle of the verb close. The perfect participle of
"chrizo" would be "kechrismenos".
>In any case, in Latin, the 4th declension plurals for all those Jesuses,
>the annointed ones, the whole lot of them, whether taken jointly or
>severally, would be:
[snip]
Thanks!
Matthew Montchalin
| In any case, in Latin, the 4th declension plurals for all those Jesuses,
| the annointed ones, the whole lot of them, whether taken jointly or
| severally, would be:
|
| __Plural__Forms____
| Nominative JesUs ChristI
| Vocative JesUs ChristI
| Genitive JesUum ChristOrum
| Locative JesUum ChristOrum
Whoooops! The Genitive and Locative forms of Jesus's name have short u's.
| Dative Jesubus ChristIs
| Accusative JesUs ChristOs
| Ablative Jesubus ChristIs
|
| with capitalized vowels signifying Long vowels (just in case one of you
| wants to write poetry)...
The locative plural of Jesus ought to look like the genitive plural.
Absurd construction, you say? Well, if a sea captain were navigating
about the world, and discovered an entire archipelago, and wanted to name
them "The Jesuses," well, there you go: an opportunity for a locative
construction in the plural.
John Woodgate
Montchalin <mmon...@OregonVOS.net> inimitably wrote:
>What is Jesus in Hebrew?
AIUI, the language spoken in Palestine at that time was Aramaic. So,
there is another step in the chain of translations, Aramaic > Hebrew >
Greek > Latin > Everything Else.
>
>In any case, in Latin, the 4th declension plurals for all those Jesuses,
>the annointed ones, the whole lot of them, whether taken jointly or
>severally, would be:
>
> __Plural__Forms____
>Nominative JesUs ChristI
>Vocative JesUs ChristI
>Genitive JesUum ChristOrum
>Locative JesUum ChristOrum
>Dative Jesubus ChristIs
>Accusative JesUs ChristOs
>Ablative Jesubus ChristIs
>
>with capitalized vowels signifying Long vowels (just in case one of you
>wants to write poetry)...
The forms are correct (although I can't confirm the Locatives in -uum
and -orum, because that case was obsolete by the time of the other JC -
Julius Caesar). BUT 'Christus' is Second Declension, not Fourth.
Matthew Montchalin
| > __Plural__Forms____
| >Nominative JesUs ChristI
| >Vocative JesUs ChristI
| >Genitive JesUum ChristOrum
| >Locative JesUum ChristOrum
| >Dative Jesubus ChristIs
| >Accusative JesUs ChristOs
| >Ablative Jesubus ChristIs
| >
| >with capitalized vowels signifying Long vowels (just in case one of you
| >wants to write poetry)...
|
| The forms are correct (although I can't confirm the Locatives in -uum
| and -orum, because that case was obsolete by the time of the other JC -
| Julius Caesar).
Barely in use, that is true, but still useful for poetic effect.
| BUT 'Christus' is Second Declension, not Fourth.
Yes, that is why Christus was declined as such.
Benoit Evans
> | The uninflected form is "Jesus Kristus." AFAIK no attempt is made to
> | put them in the plural (could there be more than one Jesus?).
Indeed, there could be and there were several.
In addition to Jesus Son of Mary (peace be upon him) there are several
other Ieshua'hs in the Bible:
The Jesus who authored the Aprocryphal Book of Ecclesiasticus (as it is
called in the Western Church), which in the Septuagint, is called the Book
of Jesus the Son of Sirach.
There is the Jesus nicknamed Justus who was Paul's co-worker (see
Collossians 4.11)
And, if the translators had been consistent, all the Ieshu'ahs of the Old
Testament, especially Ieshu'ah the son of Nun, whose story is told in the
Book of Joshua. He was the one who, after the death of Moses (peace be
upon him), brought the Israelites through the divided waters of the Jordan
River and into the Promised Land. It could be said that he completed the
salvation of God's people under the Old Covenant, and that the Ieshu'ah
that came after him completed the salvation of God's people under the New
Covenant. Because of the inconsistency of early translators that has been
perpetuated by modern translators, Christians have a Messiah in the Old
Testament and a Christ in the New Testament. They have Josuahs in the Old
but Jesuses in the New.
If they had been more rigorous, there would be less confusion over the
meaning of the word Lord. In the Old Testament, respecting the reluctance
of the Jews to pronounce the Divine Name (IHVH), they instead adopted an
equivalent for Adonai, which the Jews substituted for the Divine Name.
That equivalent was Dominus or, in English, Lord (in a few places the
translators use Jehovah). In the New Testament the Greek title of address
and respect, Kyrios (Sir, Mr., Monsieur, Senor) was also translated as
Lord. It is difficult to measure the effect of that confusion on the
deliberations and decisions of the Councils of Nicea and Chalcedon on the
nature of Jesus.
I have gotten somewhat off the original subject, but the tangent has
allowed me to bring the subject back to translation and gives me the
opportunity to close with an old Arabic adage that those of us who
sometimes take our profession too lightly might find edifying.
"Every writer will die but the words of his hand will remain. Strive
therefore to write nothing that you would not want to see on the Day of
Resurrection."
Regards,
Benoit Evans
Certified Translator (OTIAQ)
Quebec, Canada
John Woodgate
Matthew Montchalin <mmon...@OregonVOS.net> inimitably wrote:
You snipped the bit that I was responding to!
This bit:
>In any case, in Latin, the 4th declension plurals for all those Jesuses,
>the annointed ones, the whole lot of them, whether taken jointly or
>severally, would be:
which seems to me to imply that 'Christus' was 4th declension.
Roger Whitehead
<kevans-2711...@modemcable200.15-200-24.que.mc.videotron.net>,
Benoit Evans wrote:
> Jesus Son of Mary (peace be upon him) . . . Moses (peace be upon
> him)
Benoit,
Thank you for that summary. Why is it that these two people get a
benediction but none of the other people you mention?
John Woodgate
Newton <nospam...@gmx.li> inimitably wrote:
>It's a declension of its own, since it's a borrowing from Hebrew. I
>can't find my ancient Greek grammar, but it had it listed near the end
>of the noun section, together with about a half-dozen other given names
>which have special declensions.
>
>I believe it went something like nom. Iêsous, gen. Iêsou, acc. Iêsoun,
>voc. Iêsou.
Aha! That explains 'Pie Jesu', etc.
Matthew Montchalin
| >| BUT 'Christus' is Second Declension, not Fourth.
| >
| >Yes, that is why Christus was declined as such.
| >
|
| You snipped the bit that I was responding to!
|
| This bit:
|
| >In any case, in Latin, the 4th declension plurals for all those Jesuses,
| >the annointed ones, the whole lot of them, whether taken jointly or
| >severally, would be:
|
| which seems to me to imply that 'Christus' was 4th declension.
Thank goodness you pointed it out, then. The rest of us ought to have
automatically recognized Christus for being in the 2nd declension...
Sorry I didn't point it out a little more carefully. I keep forgetting
there are people around here that haven't even taken 1 term in Latin...
Matthew Montchalin
| > At least exitus comes from exeo. As for exodos, I'm not sure what it
| > comes from.
|
| ek-, ex- (prefix: out) + hodos (noun feminine: way, road).
Is the Greek noun hodos connected with the Latin verb eo? What about
the neuter noun iter, itineris? The Italic precursor to iter was probably
itus, back when the letter 'r' sounded a lot more sibilant? It doesn't
take that much more work to change itus to hodos...
And, btw, there *is* a 4th declension masculine noun itus, itus clearly
produced from the 4th principal part of eo.
Matthew Montchalin
| Matthew Montchalin wrote:
| >
| > Is the Greek noun hodos connected with the Latin verb eo? What about
| > the neuter noun iter, itineris? The Italic precursor to iter was probably
| > itus, back when the letter 'r' sounded a lot more sibilant? It doesn't
| > take that much more work to change itus to hodos...
| >
|
| There is a Greek word called "hodeuein"...to walk, to hike, to travel,
| but obviously, it is derived from "hodos", not the other way round.
Well, heavens, that's what the Latin uadere means. Maybe uado is
connected with hodos?
Christof Kuhn
>
> Is the Greek noun hodos connected with the Latin verb eo? What about
> the neuter noun iter, itineris? The Italic precursor to iter was probably
> itus, back when the letter 'r' sounded a lot more sibilant? It doesn't
> take that much more work to change itus to hodos...
>
There is a Greek word called "hodeuein"...to walk, to hike, to travel,
but obviously, it is derived from "hodos", not the other way round.
By the way, it used to be something like "odFos" (the "F" is an obsolete
letter which used to be spoken as a "v"), derived from the hypothetical
stem "sed" (to walk, to step).
Lat. "ire" is related to Gr. "ienai" , 1.P.Sg. "eimi" (pronounced on the
first syllable, in contrast to "eimi" - last syllable ... "I am")
Cheers, Christof
---
Christof Kuhn
Inst. f. Angewandte Geologie,
Univ. f. BoKu Wien, Austria
h944...@edv1.boku.ac.at
http://homepage.boku.ac.at/h9440283/index.htm
James Lee
that the anointing with chrism takes place immediately after the baptism. It
forms part of the same ceremony, but is not the same thing.
P.S. 'Jesus' (without going in to Aramaic, Hebraic Greek or Latin
orthography) was not an uncommon name in biblical times. Perhaps the
best-known namesake is Jesus (Yeshua) ben Eleazer ben Sirach, the writer of
the deuterocanonical book Ecclesiasticus.
James Lee
Alan Crozier
>On Mon, 29 Nov 1999, Christof Kuhn wrote:
>
>| >
>| > Is the Greek noun hodos connected with the Latin verb eo? What about
>| > the neuter noun iter, itineris? The Italic precursor to iter was
probably
>| > itus, back when the letter 'r' sounded a lot more sibilant? It doesn't
>| > take that much more work to change itus to hodos...
>| >
>|
>| There is a Greek word called "hodeuein"...to walk, to hike, to travel,
>| but obviously, it is derived from "hodos", not the other way round.
>
>connected with hodos?
>
But Greek hodos must surely go back to a root begnning with s (cf. hex and
sex). Pokorny has a root *sed- meaning "to go", with reflexes in Sanskrit
and Avestan as well . It's not clear from his dictionary how he would relate
that root to *sed- meaning "sit".
Alan
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Alan Crozier
Lund, Sweden
e-mail alan.c...@telia.com
Heidrun Aschacher
<mmon...@OregonVOS.net> wrote:
>| which seems to me to imply that 'Christus' was 4th declension.
>
>Thank goodness you pointed it out, then. The rest of us ought to have
>automatically recognized Christus for being in the 2nd declension...
>Sorry I didn't point it out a little more carefully. I keep forgetting
>there are people around here that haven't even taken 1 term in Latin...
Christus belongs to the second declension; in fact the genitive is
'Christi' as you can read in any Latin dictionary. BTW, the German
language uses the Latin declension for Christus in the genitive case
(Christi Geburt).
Heidi
Dan Hanqvist
> On Thu, 25 Nov 1999, John Woodgate wrote:
> | <NP6%3.9839$Up1.5...@news.chello.at>, LaLassa <ilas...@edu.uni-
> | >Can anyone tell me what the plural of the Latin word exodus is? Is it exodus
> | >or exodi? And would the respective Latin plural form be appropriate in an
> | >English text at all?
> | >
> | *might* be 'exodoi', but I don't know enough Greek to be sure.
> The Oxford Glossary of Late Latin to 600 A.D. indicates that the neuter
> exodum is yet another variation to exodus. Lewis & Short's Latin
> Dictionary indicates that "exodus, i" is a second declension feminine noun
> derived from the Greek exodos, an exit or going out. It was probably
> considered feminine because of the implied 'historia' or maybe 'res
> gesta.' The Latin version of exodos is "exitus, us" -- a masculine 4th
> declension noun.
> The translator was seeking the plural of exodus. Depending on the nature
> of the sentence, it is possible that no plural is to be used, nor should
> be desirable. Can somebody post the sentence that is to be translated?
> For instance, the following singular/plural formations are possible:
> Singular Plural
> exodus exodi (feminine)
> exodum exoda (neuter)
> exitus exitUs (masculine)
I think "exodus" is a second declension masculine noun. Which gives the long -i plural form.