4 ms·

One thing that fascinates me are latin 1st declension masculine occupational nouns: pirata, nauta, poeta... Both pirata and poeta at least, take "il" in italian

One thing that fascinates me are latin 1st declension masculine occupational nouns: pirata, nauta, poeta... Both pirata and poeta at least, take "il" in italian. Nauta it seems, did not survive.

trylfthsk 6y ago
Is there a good explanation for how these came to develop? I've heard it explained by saying that "they're typically men's spheres" as rationale from my brief exposure to the language, but this seems deeply unsatisfying for a variety of reasons - id est, in comparison to something along the lines of loanword/archaism/evolution of root/evolution of grammatic gender.
- dnautics 6y ago
  I was hoping someone here would be able to explain it to me!
  - dhosek 6y ago
    No explanation, but Spanish has some similar things with the -ista suffix (e.g., jornalista = journalist, Zapatista = follower of Zapata, etc.). In Latin, those nouns are grammatically feminine and would be referred to with feminine pronouns and modified with feminine adjectives. There are a handful of first-declension names that take masculine pronouns and adjectives, none of which spring to mind at the moment.
    - stevula 6y ago
      As with nauta, pirata, and poeta, the suffix -ista is also borrowed from Greek which is a source of many masculine 1st declension loanwords in Latin.
    - tomcooks 6y ago
      (Jornalista is Portuguese, you're looking for periodista)
    - thaumasiotes 6y ago
      > In Latin, those nouns are grammatically feminine and would be referred to with feminine pronouns and modified with feminine adjectives. This is not correct; dnautics mentioned a set of nouns which are common and always masculine. Textbooks generally cover this set specifically. Wheelock provides a list and the acronymic mnemonic UNUS NAUTA, which -- it points out -- doubles as a way to emphasize that nauta is masculine, not feminine.
- stevula 6y ago
  There is no rule in Latin that 1st declension nouns (i.e most nouns ending in -a) like nauta, pirata, pirata, etc must be feminine —- morphology and gender are independent. There was merely a strong tendency for them to be feminine, but as you can see there are exceptions. In short, -a does not mean feminine. Another factor is that all three of those nouns are loanwords from Ancient Greek, which had quite a few 1st declension nouns that are masculine. Agricola (“farmer”) is an example of a native Latin masculine noun ending in -a. You are right that occupational words that were typically associated with men tend to be masculine. Generally, nouns that describe people do match the gender of the person, though there are some exceptions. Note: you’ll also find some -o nouns in Italian and Spanish that are feminine (e.g. la mano “the hand”).
  - thaumasiotes 6y ago
    > In short, -a does not mean feminine. Weeeellll... Latin doesn't distinguish nounal case endings from adjectival case endings. (I believe Russian does, which makes resolving certain grammatical questions much easier.) But the gender of a noun is defined by the gender of an adjective that agrees with the noun. So quercus alta, a tall oak tree, is unambiguously feminine, despite ending in -us, because we can see that the adjective agreeing with it is feminine. How do we know the adjective is feminine? That's easy, it ends in -a, and -a means feminine. This tends not to support the theory that "-a does not mean feminine". :-/
  - samatman 6y ago
    The reverse as well, the most common being el día, "the day"
  - oytis 6y ago
    Greek, for one, also has 2nd declension feminine nouns, e.g. παρθένος.
- coliveira 6y ago
  These masculine words of 1st declension are typically of greek origin. They follow the 1st dec. pattern, despite being of the masculine genre.
thaumasiotes 6y ago
I'm even more interested in the fact that Latin tree names are second declension feminine. Pinus, quercus, etc. How did that work out?
- arnsholt 6y ago
  Pinus and quercus are both fourth declination, not second, but there seem to be some elements of the second declination that have been included at some point (pini/pinorum/pinis and querci/quercorum) which muddy the waters a bit.
  - thaumasiotes 6y ago
    Huh. The Lewis and Short entry just makes me feel like I'm missing something - http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/morph?l=pinus&la=la#lexicon http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/morph?l=pinus&la=la#lexi... "abl. sing. only pinu; gen. and abl. plur. pinorum and pinis)", but then it goes on to cite the accusative plural pinos in Virgil. And that note implies a strict distinction between dative plural pinibus and ablative pinis, which seems weird. Not that the rest of it isn't weird, I guess. (As an aside, the note for quercus that "dat. and abl. plural do not occur"... I can believe that a lack of genitive and dative forms for vis is a fact about the language. Dative and ablative plural forms existing for pine trees, but not oak trees, feels more like a coincidence of the historical record than a fact about the language.)
- dnautics 6y ago
  I always ascribed that to be because the romans thought that nymphs inhabited trees. But are you sure those are second declension and not fourth declension?
  - thaumasiotes 6y ago
    > But are you sure those are second declension and not fourth declension? No, I'm not sure. See the sibling subthread. They're not less weird in the fourth declension, which is itself overwhelmingly masculine or neuter. That said, second declension forms do seem to be attested for nearly every case of pinus.

One thing that fascinates me are latin 1st declension masculine occupational nouns: pirata, nauta, poeta... Both pirata and poeta at least, take "il" in italian. Nauta it seems, did not survive.

trylfthsk 6y ago

Is there a good explanation for how these came to develop? I've heard it explained by saying that "they're typically men's spheres" as rationale from my brief exposure to the language, but this seems deeply unsatisfying for a variety of reasons - id est, in comparison to something along the lines of loanword/archaism/evolution of root/evolution of grammatic gender.

dnautics 6y ago
I was hoping someone here would be able to explain it to me!
- dhosek 6y ago
  No explanation, but Spanish has some similar things with the -ista suffix (e.g., jornalista = journalist, Zapatista = follower of Zapata, etc.). In Latin, those nouns are grammatically feminine and would be referred to with feminine pronouns and modified with feminine adjectives. There are a handful of first-declension names that take masculine pronouns and adjectives, none of which spring to mind at the moment.
  - stevula 6y ago
    As with nauta, pirata, and poeta, the suffix -ista is also borrowed from Greek which is a source of many masculine 1st declension loanwords in Latin.
  - tomcooks 6y ago
    (Jornalista is Portuguese, you're looking for periodista)
  - thaumasiotes 6y ago
    > In Latin, those nouns are grammatically feminine and would be referred to with feminine pronouns and modified with feminine adjectives. This is not correct; dnautics mentioned a set of nouns which are common and always masculine. Textbooks generally cover this set specifically. Wheelock provides a list and the acronymic mnemonic UNUS NAUTA, which -- it points out -- doubles as a way to emphasize that nauta is masculine, not feminine.
stevula 6y ago
There is no rule in Latin that 1st declension nouns (i.e most nouns ending in -a) like nauta, pirata, pirata, etc must be feminine —- morphology and gender are independent. There was merely a strong tendency for them to be feminine, but as you can see there are exceptions. In short, -a does not mean feminine. Another factor is that all three of those nouns are loanwords from Ancient Greek, which had quite a few 1st declension nouns that are masculine. Agricola (“farmer”) is an example of a native Latin masculine noun ending in -a. You are right that occupational words that were typically associated with men tend to be masculine. Generally, nouns that describe people do match the gender of the person, though there are some exceptions. Note: you’ll also find some -o nouns in Italian and Spanish that are feminine (e.g. la mano “the hand”).
- thaumasiotes 6y ago
  > In short, -a does not mean feminine. Weeeellll... Latin doesn't distinguish nounal case endings from adjectival case endings. (I believe Russian does, which makes resolving certain grammatical questions much easier.) But the gender of a noun is defined by the gender of an adjective that agrees with the noun. So quercus alta, a tall oak tree, is unambiguously feminine, despite ending in -us, because we can see that the adjective agreeing with it is feminine. How do we know the adjective is feminine? That's easy, it ends in -a, and -a means feminine. This tends not to support the theory that "-a does not mean feminine". :-/
- samatman 6y ago
  The reverse as well, the most common being el día, "the day"
- oytis 6y ago
  Greek, for one, also has 2nd declension feminine nouns, e.g. παρθένος.
coliveira 6y ago
These masculine words of 1st declension are typically of greek origin. They follow the 1st dec. pattern, despite being of the masculine genre.

thaumasiotes 6y ago

I'm even more interested in the fact that Latin tree names are second declension feminine. Pinus, quercus, etc. How did that work out?

arnsholt 6y ago
Pinus and quercus are both fourth declination, not second, but there seem to be some elements of the second declination that have been included at some point (pini/pinorum/pinis and querci/quercorum) which muddy the waters a bit.
- thaumasiotes 6y ago
  Huh. The Lewis and Short entry just makes me feel like I'm missing something - http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/morph?l=pinus&la=la#lexicon http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/morph?l=pinus&la=la#lexi... "abl. sing. only pinu; gen. and abl. plur. pinorum and pinis)", but then it goes on to cite the accusative plural pinos in Virgil. And that note implies a strict distinction between dative plural pinibus and ablative pinis, which seems weird. Not that the rest of it isn't weird, I guess. (As an aside, the note for quercus that "dat. and abl. plural do not occur"... I can believe that a lack of genitive and dative forms for vis is a fact about the language. Dative and ablative plural forms existing for pine trees, but not oak trees, feels more like a coincidence of the historical record than a fact about the language.)
dnautics 6y ago
I always ascribed that to be because the romans thought that nymphs inhabited trees. But are you sure those are second declension and not fourth declension?
- thaumasiotes 6y ago
  > But are you sure those are second declension and not fourth declension? No, I'm not sure. See the sibling subthread. They're not less weird in the fourth declension, which is itself overwhelmingly masculine or neuter. That said, second declension forms do seem to be attested for nearly every case of pinus.