Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ    Attic   

Re: Case

From:BP Jonsson <bpj@...>
Date:Wednesday, July 14, 1999, 22:00
At 21:47 +0100 14.7.1999, Raymond A. Brown wrote:
>At 7:24 pm +0200 14/7/99, BP Jonsson wrote: >>At 03:56 -0400 11.7.1999, John Cowan wrote:
>>BTW it occurs to me that "Iesus" is irregular in Latin itself. AFAIK the >>inflection is borrowed from greek but is irregular there too! Ray? > >It is borrowed from Greek and certainly by classical standards it is >irregular there also, being of course a borrowing from Aramaic.
Yes, Yeshua or something like that.
>But the Greek declension is not abnormal for the modern language nor IIRC >for foreign names partially assimilated into Hellnic Greek.
I would regard the non-anomaly in the modern language a coincidence, (or in case the whole language has aligned itself to the name of the Pantokratwr a coincidence in the Gandalfian sense...) Can you give other examples of partially assimilated foreign names? Beside Iesous I know only of such that got wholly assimilated, like the Persian royal names, including late forms like Valakhsh > Vologeses/Bologeses, Khosru > Chosroes, Narseh -> Narses, and even Salok > Seloes (notwithstanding its Greek origin--Seleukos!), Vahram > Bagranes* or not assimilated at all like most Hebrew names (Isaak, Iakoub) and the bulk of Persian and Aramaic names found in inscriptions. [*I have no idea why they liked to put Persians into the first declension -- onless it was the fact that most Old Persian names ended in -as, in which case Dareios instead of *Dareias is an anomaly -- but they obviously did!]
>It is given a >final -s for nom., and a final -n for the acc. and no ending for the gen. & >dative, thus:
[snip] Which looks modern Greek enough, except that acc. -n is optional now.
>But Greek commonly had the definite article before proper names, so cases >could usually be quite clearly distinguished.
>Similarly the Latin had only three forms: Iesus (nom.), Iesum (acc.) & Iesu >(gen., dat, abl. and vocative). The 'u' was long in the 1st cent. (but may >have been shortened before the acc. -m) and the word was, following the >Greek, irregularly stressed on the final. > >If German does indeed keep the Latin forms, then it should have: >Jesus Christus (nom) >Jesum Christum (acc) >Jesu Christi (gen) >Jesu Christo (dat)
Right. Swedish has lost the separate vocative (except in some hymns!:) but German retains it, AFAIK.
>Ray. > > >======================================== >A mind which thinks at its own expense >will always interfere with language. >[J.G.Hamann - 1760] >========================================
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ B.Philip Jonsson <bpj@...> <melroch@...> Solitudinem faciunt pacem appellant! (Tacitus)