> Mikael Johansson wrote:
>
> > > Probably. But Latin has a special rule for Present participle
> declension,
> > > IIRC.
> >
> > More or less... There is one whole class of adjectives, with the same
form
> > in nominative singular for all genders, in which the present participle
is
> > included. And as a special rule, the present participle has the singular
> > ablative ending "-e" and not "-i" _when_ it functions as a verb and not
an
> > adjective (i.e. in constructions such as ablative absolute etc.)
>
> Yup. If amans (lover, loving one) is used as an adj., it bears the -i
> ablative ending. When used as a verb it bears -e ending. Now, $1000000
> question: what about if used as a nominalized adj. (the lover)? My guess
is
> that it should bear the -e ending, being now a 3rd declension masculine
> *noun* with dental pattern. But I might be wrong (really, this point is
one
> of those who have always make me wonder about Latin morphology!). What do
ya
> think?
Probably (I'll forward this to my professor and ask about his qualified
opinion :-) it wouldn't be amans at all but amator (stem+agent suffix). Btw,
amans is not lover but rather present participle -- loving. Loving one is
already the nominalization of the verbal adjective.
A quick peer into Lewis&Scott (online @
http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/lexica.html and click the link ;-) yields that
in fact amans is only operable as a present participle.
> Luca
// Mikael Johansson