the only bad thing about this is you go nom genitive instead of nom acc like in australia when i learnt makes more sense to go subject object genitive dative ablative
It depends on the language, in Dutch in sentences without pronouns or adverbs/prepositions, the indirect object usually comes before the direct object: "De mannen geven de kinderen cadeaus." "The men give presents to the children." I would say that the best order would be the one in which most of the same forms appear next to each other.
There are a couple of locatives that are fairly common which you might want to add: bellum → bellī, mīlitia → mīlitiae, focus → focī, dies → diē, humus → humī
I love how you express out loud all the feelings that Latin students have when learning the language Beginning: okay so we have cases to work with, that’s okay. Later: WHAT THE. Another case, okay, fine, 6 cases, I wish they had told me that sooner but we can work with it. Later still: 🤦🏻♂️ sigh, another one, UGH
The locative can be found in Polish and many other Slavic languages. Actually in Polish there are all the Latin cases and additionally the locative. The exception is a lack of ablative, but with instrumental instead, however these two have mostly the same function, just the name of the case is different. But, Polish locative is always used with a preposition word. Roma (Rome) is Rzym, and Romae (in Rome) would be "w Rzymie".
I can't thank you enough for your videos! I'm lerning latin in high school in Switzerland and I never understood latin the way you explain it, connecting it to greek... Thank you so much! (will you do a video about prepositions?)
Not an error. Domus has second and fourth declension forms, and the genitive is attested with both domūs and domī. Domūs tends to be late 1st century BC and later, while domī is earlier, which explains the use of domī for the locative (an earlier form that stuck). The ablative is almost exclusively domō (2nd), while the dative is usually domuī (4th), but domō (2nd) is attested for the dative also. The accusative plural is almost always domōs (2nd), while the nominative plural is always domūs (4th). This truly is an interesting word!
Could you please help me? I see "humi сecedit" in Latin Cambridge Course 3. is this a correct use of locative? He fell TO the ground, so we should have use Accusative... Or not? Thanks!
Oh, I know this story, and I hate this part! humi can be used for "to the ground", as in "iecerunt arma humi", they threw their weapons to the ground. So I don't see anything wrong with this, apart from poor Dumnorix.
Hello, I've got a question: can locative nouns use an adjective, or should I use the preposition "ïn" in such cases, e.g. "Romae antiquae" or "in Roma antiqua"?
@@latintutorial Wait a minute, couldn't you decline a noun for the genitive with a locative noun in the 1st/2nd declension singular and the dat/abl in the plural, and dat/abl in all other declensions?
Well, I'm leaving in a Greek town named Νέα Μηχανιώνα (Néa Michanióna), but its original name was Νέα Μηχανιών (Néa Mēchanión), and I suppose that it would become Nea/Nova Mēchaniō in Latin, which means that the adjective is in the 1st declension and the noun in the 3rd. How would its locative be formed? *Neae/Novae Mēchaniōnis, *Neā/Novā Mēchaniōne or *Neae/Novae Mēchaniōne?
I know you were speaking lingua in bucca (tongue-in-cheek), but the proper Latin translation of that is "Tortam Cibum: Vespertilio ex Inferno." "Meatus" (pronounced "me-AH-tus") IS an actual word in Latin, but it means "route."
I have a question that has never been answered satisfactorally, and that is why in the world did the Indo-Europeans have different verb conjugations?? I can understand case endings, although they are completely superfluous when you have prepositions to convey meanings using word order, but why -are, ire and two versions of -ere?! Help!
+Jack Wright I don't have my reference books here, but I'm pretty sure this is the right answer: Proto-IE verbs stem from two different groups, those whose stem ends in an e, and those in an o. The difference between these two stem-vowel-endings is the consonant that comes immediately before it. So, in essence, the consonant and how PIE speakers spoke affected the vowel that came after with only two options. But when you have one distinction, others result very easily, and after thousands of years, the original distinction sometimes becomes lost in the mix (so Latin would have a very complex system of classifying the reasons for the different verb conjugations, because the evolution of the language from PIE introduced a whole lot of complications). Essentially, it's all about sound (in this case, vowels) and how the PIE speaker's mouth grew up pronouncing that vowel sound in relation to other sounds (consonants and vowels).
latintutorial Thanks very much for that - it's more than anyone else has said about it. Regarding Esperanto, it was a great effort but its offspring Ido actually improved on it in several ways, one being changing the infinitive -i ending (for all verbs of course) to either -ar, -or, -ir for present, future and past infinitives. I like syncretism in declensions, too. Since the 19th century the UK has used nom-acc-gen-dat-abl for its case order, which puts similar endings next to each other and eases the pain of memorizing all those arbitrary inflections. Don't get me started on gender!
I'll try to summarise this as much as I can. PIE had a complex system of derivation, and verbs weren't an exception. While there were verbs with always an -e-/-o- between the stem and the ending (Survived as -ere) verbs in Latin, there were athematic verbs (without that vowel between the stem and ending). As such, the stem stood alone. So if the stem ended in, say, *-eh², it would remain that way and become -ā in Latin, giving rise to the -āre class. Over time many of the less prominent classes were lost and verbs were regularised into the 4 main patterns which remained productive in Latin.
I'm trying to learn Ukrainian and Russian and it makes me so mad becuase almost every case has a preposition with it yet they decided to still have all the cases. In my opinion Latin is easier when it comes to declensions, declining small words like this or that in Latin are harder
Identical endings don't mean the case doesn't exist. The locative ending in classical Latin became identical with the genitive in the 1st and 2nd declension, but with the dative/ablative in the 3rd. And that doesn't even look at plural forms.
I can't believe I forgot about this for like 3 years ahahahhaha So the reason we're right is simple - just look at the patterns formed. A. Ae A. Ae Am. As Ae. Arum ae. Is A. Is It's just so neat. I do admit, that's the genitive 2nd approach is good for the sake of remembering principal parts. But it gets so odd for the whole pattern. I'll pray for yous'uns 🙏
I DIDN'T EXPECT A MONTY PYTHON JOKE!
+Ruben No one expects a Monty Python joke!
+Ruben Ahahah, when you used the example of "domi" I knew you were going to quote The Life of Brian!
ROMANES EVNT DOMVS
I only just noticed that hahahahaha!!!!!!
what buggers me is when you don't know the map and you think a locative town or island is a noun and are bewildered.
I'm a Latin student in college, and I really appreciate your videos!
When you gotta use Latin videos to understand your Sanskrit course..
That’s a new one!
It is being actually very useful for me to understand some grammar construction in arabic! Specially with their wide use of active participles.
the only bad thing about this is you go nom genitive instead of nom acc like in australia when i learnt
makes more sense to go subject object genitive dative ablative
Exactly what I'm doing! 😅
It depends on the language, in Dutch in sentences without pronouns or adverbs/prepositions, the indirect object usually comes before the direct object: "De mannen geven de kinderen cadeaus." "The men give presents to the children."
I would say that the best order would be the one in which most of the same forms appear next to each other.
There are a couple of locatives that are fairly common which you might want to add: bellum → bellī, mīlitia → mīlitiae, focus → focī, dies → diē, humus → humī
He mentioned humī; bellī, mīlitiae, focī are identical to the genitive; diē is identical to the ablative.
I love how you express out loud all the feelings that Latin students have when learning the language
Beginning: okay so we have cases to work with, that’s okay.
Later: WHAT THE. Another case, okay, fine, 6 cases, I wish they had told me that sooner but we can work with it.
Later still: 🤦🏻♂️ sigh, another one, UGH
The locative can be found in Polish and many other Slavic languages. Actually in Polish there are all the Latin cases and additionally the locative. The exception is a lack of ablative, but with instrumental instead, however these two have mostly the same function, just the name of the case is different. But, Polish locative is always used with a preposition word. Roma (Rome) is Rzym, and Romae (in Rome) would be "w Rzymie".
I can't thank you enough for your videos! I'm lerning latin in high school in Switzerland and I never understood latin the way you explain it, connecting it to greek... Thank you so much! (will you do a video about prepositions?)
Lovin' the flying circus reference!
Thank you. That clears up a bit of confusion I experience some times when I encounter 'domi'.
hello! I learnt that to indicate the locative case we add "e" to a-ending noun. So why doesn't it work in:
"Habitas Califōrniae"
Excellent explanation. Thank you very much.
Casum Locativum amo. Valde rarus est.
I read somewhere that latin words may never take the locative if they're next to an adjective. Is this correct?
I can't recall an instance where the noun in the locative has an adjective. So without doing extensive research, likely yes.
Great video!
these vídeos are really good. do you know any editor that publish books in latin?
Small error, domus is 4th declension and the genitive is domus. But yes the locative is domi, which seems to be for convenience
Not an error. Domus has second and fourth declension forms, and the genitive is attested with both domūs and domī. Domūs tends to be late 1st century BC and later, while domī is earlier, which explains the use of domī for the locative (an earlier form that stuck). The ablative is almost exclusively domō (2nd), while the dative is usually domuī (4th), but domō (2nd) is attested for the dative also. The accusative plural is almost always domōs (2nd), while the nominative plural is always domūs (4th). This truly is an interesting word!
Could you please help me? I see "humi сecedit" in Latin Cambridge Course 3. is this a correct use of locative? He fell TO the ground, so we should have use Accusative... Or not?
Thanks!
Oh, I know this story, and I hate this part! humi can be used for "to the ground", as in "iecerunt arma humi", they threw their weapons to the ground. So I don't see anything wrong with this, apart from poor Dumnorix.
@@latintutorial Thank you for your answer! So, it is not a locative form, but an adverb?
+Matthieu Lambert I have a video on prepositions at ua-cam.com/video/BB7kgyUR6u4/v-deo.html
Hello, I've got a question: can locative nouns use an adjective, or should I use the preposition "ïn" in such cases, e.g. "Romae antiquae" or "in Roma antiqua"?
Adjectives don't have a locative form, which goes a long way towards explaining why nouns in the locative don't have adjectives modifying them.
@@latintutorial Wait a minute, couldn't you decline a noun for the genitive with a locative noun in the 1st/2nd declension singular and the dat/abl in the plural, and dat/abl in all other declensions?
Well, I'm leaving in a Greek town named Νέα Μηχανιώνα (Néa Michanióna), but its original name was Νέα Μηχανιών (Néa Mēchanión), and I suppose that it would become Nea/Nova Mēchaniō in Latin, which means that the adjective is in the 1st declension and the noun in the 3rd. How would its locative be formed?
*Neae/Novae Mēchaniōnis,
*Neā/Novā Mēchaniōne or
*Neae/Novae Mēchaniōne?
what's the diference between the preposition "ab" versus "ex" ?
"Ab" means "from." "Ex" means "out of."
Meatus Lofius: Batus ex Helliae
I know you were speaking lingua in bucca (tongue-in-cheek), but the proper Latin translation of that is "Tortam Cibum: Vespertilio ex Inferno." "Meatus" (pronounced "me-AH-tus") IS an actual word in Latin, but it means "route."
Did Latin, maybe really early, also have the instrumental case? Great Video!
+ML Productions The instrumental case blended in with the ablative (of course), but it's still visible in some adverbs.
Ah, Okey. Thanks!
I have a question that has never been answered satisfactorally, and that is why in the world did the Indo-Europeans have different verb conjugations??
I can understand case endings, although they are completely superfluous when you have prepositions to convey meanings using word order, but why -are, ire and two versions of -ere?! Help!
+Jack Wright I don't have my reference books here, but I'm pretty sure this is the right answer: Proto-IE verbs stem from two different groups, those whose stem ends in an e, and those in an o. The difference between these two stem-vowel-endings is the consonant that comes immediately before it. So, in essence, the consonant and how PIE speakers spoke affected the vowel that came after with only two options. But when you have one distinction, others result very easily, and after thousands of years, the original distinction sometimes becomes lost in the mix (so Latin would have a very complex system of classifying the reasons for the different verb conjugations, because the evolution of the language from PIE introduced a whole lot of complications). Essentially, it's all about sound (in this case, vowels) and how the PIE speaker's mouth grew up pronouncing that vowel sound in relation to other sounds (consonants and vowels).
latintutorial Thanks very much for that - it's more than anyone else has said about it.
Regarding Esperanto, it was a great effort but its offspring Ido actually improved on it in several ways, one being changing the infinitive -i ending (for all verbs of course) to either -ar, -or, -ir for present, future and past infinitives.
I like syncretism in declensions, too. Since the 19th century the UK has used nom-acc-gen-dat-abl for its case order, which puts similar endings next to each other and eases the pain of memorizing all those arbitrary inflections.
Don't get me started on gender!
I'll try to summarise this as much as I can.
PIE had a complex system of derivation, and verbs weren't an exception. While there were verbs with always an -e-/-o- between the stem and the ending (Survived as -ere) verbs in Latin, there were athematic verbs (without that vowel between the stem and ending). As such, the stem stood alone. So if the stem ended in, say, *-eh², it would remain that way and become -ā in Latin, giving rise to the -āre class. Over time many of the less prominent classes were lost and verbs were regularised into the 4 main patterns which remained productive in Latin.
Londinio Romam venio,
sed
a Britannia ad Italiam venio.
Recte?
*What do you animate with? EDIT: I WAS ONCE AN IDIOT 2 YEARS AGO. FIXED
Motion.
Typical.
So this is what the locative is! That explains why Rome never had a preposition!
belli, in war?
I'm trying to learn Ukrainian and Russian and it makes me so mad becuase almost every case has a preposition with it yet they decided to still have all the cases. In my opinion Latin is easier when it comes to declensions, declining small words like this or that in Latin are harder
Greyson Perkins I think Finish fufills your requirements, too.
In Slavic languages, all cases except locative/prepositional have specific uses without a preposition.
can you give a shout out to Ms. Miller?
Salve Ms. Miller!
Actually, there is no such a thng as Locative case in latin. It's a substituted Genitive case.
Identical endings don't mean the case doesn't exist. The locative ending in classical Latin became identical with the genitive in the 1st and 2nd declension, but with the dative/ablative in the 3rd. And that doesn't even look at plural forms.
Help
mala malus mala mala dot
Romae, sunt chaus et invidia. Barbarianī domī non manent!
"Wots this then?... ROMANES EUNT DOMUS; people called Romanes they go to the 'ouse?!"
Reading secret history and trying to understand the hell tgey are talking about
"
ja: it is "impossibile" to get rid of the accent...
Nom
Voc
Acc
Gen
Dat
Abl
Loc
Only way to do it, american one is so silly.
That's cute.
Nom
Gen
Dat
Abl
Acc
Voc
Loc
That makes sense
Nom Voc Acc Gen Dat Abl Loc also lines up with the case hiearchy,so it makes more sense.
I can't believe I forgot about this for like 3 years ahahahhaha
So the reason we're right is simple - just look at the patterns formed.
A. Ae
A. Ae
Am. As
Ae. Arum
ae. Is
A. Is
It's just so neat.
I do admit, that's the genitive 2nd approach is good for the sake of remembering principal parts. But it gets so odd for the whole pattern.
I'll pray for yous'uns 🙏
@@Magwamagwa yours is silly plus us americans are used to our way and u r u used to ur way