04.03.2013 Views

The Latin Neuter Plurals in Romance - Page ON

The Latin Neuter Plurals in Romance - Page ON

The Latin Neuter Plurals in Romance - Page ON

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

115<br />

115<br />

from a late Greek form kólphos, masc. or neut. PUTE-US/-UM, VAD-US/-UM, and<br />

the 4th-decl. mascs. ARCUS, FETUS, FRUCTUS, GRADUS, all with early<br />

2nd-declension forms. If we add the further words I quoted <strong>in</strong> §4e as hav<strong>in</strong>g<br />

parallel forms <strong>in</strong> Rumanian and Lombard <strong>Lat<strong>in</strong></strong>, we have 2nd-decl. mascs.<br />

CAMPUS, LOCUS (which also had a neut. pl. LOCA), RAMUS (with late pl. RAMA),<br />

VENTUS, 2nd-decl. neut. PAVIMENTUM, and 4th-decl. mascs. CURSUS, LACUS.<br />

What are we to make of this? For a start, there is one group which I alluded to<br />

earlier <strong>in</strong> §3. This consists of the 4th-declension mascul<strong>in</strong>e deverbal nouns <strong>in</strong><br />

-TUS, -SUS, such as ACTUS, VISUS, which came to be paralleled by forms derived<br />

from the nom<strong>in</strong>al use of the neuter of the past participle, as ACTUM, VISUM; this<br />

also led to other new formations such as FRUCTUM, GUSTUM, PASSUM (cf.<br />

“passa” for ‘fords’ quoted by Du Cange, s.v. passum), and to the appearance of<br />

forms like PRATUS, FURTUS, FATUS, no doubt <strong>in</strong>tended to be corrections of<br />

supposedly mistaken neuter forms (note the parallel with LECTUS (2 and 4) and<br />

late LECTUM). We thus have a situation where there was widespread fluctuation<br />

between mascul<strong>in</strong>e 4th-declension forms and neuter 2nd-declension forms, and<br />

later evidence shows that this development affected all the 4th-declension<br />

mascul<strong>in</strong>es (<strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g those that showed 4th-declension forms at one stage or<br />

another), giv<strong>in</strong>g forms like the ARCORA, CIBORA, GRADORA, LACORA quoted<br />

before, and Lomb. Lat. lectora, portora, pratora, Rum. gusturi, porturi, sânuri,<br />

visuri, also geruri, cornuri (beside coarne) from the neuters GELU, CORNU;<br />

further, as a later development perhaps, Istro-Rum. acur (Schicks., p. 53), It.<br />

dial. acora/agora (beside which Rohlfs, §370, quotes a <strong>Lat<strong>in</strong></strong> ACURA), ficora<br />

from the fem<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>es ACUS, FICUS (which also were used as mascul<strong>in</strong>es, with a<br />

neuter FICUM also appear<strong>in</strong>g; cf. also the development of PECUS), and even dial.<br />

(Salent.) manure from MANUS, which has no history of mascul<strong>in</strong>ity.<br />

g) Hav<strong>in</strong>g established the po<strong>in</strong>t that these nouns became neuters, the<br />

next question we face is why they should have adopted the -ORA rather than the

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!