Mixing
Can enclitics be chained?
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
up vote
4
down vote
favorite
I am active in a small Latin Discord group; a member brought up a question concerning the validity of the following phrase with chained enclitics:
Valēsneque?
(with the enclitics distinguished) Valēs-ne-que?
I assume that their intent was to convey something that fell around the following sentiments; it was not difficult for me to clearly interpret what he was trying to say:
And how are you?
And are you [doing] well?
etc.
However, I asserted that it was not valid, and offered a potentially suitable alternative like "et ut valēs?"; another member offered the equally suitable "atque ut valēs?".
I assumed that valēsneque was invalid largely based on two reasons: one, the fact that, other than words with unremovable enclitics that have taken on a separate meaning (see: quīcumque, quaecumque, quodcumque and others like it), I have never encountered any instance of chained enclitics anywhere; and secondly, the fact that Latin is classified as a fusional language, and that if valēsneque was indeed valid, it would potentially be an interesting, but unlikely, case of agglutination in a fusional language.
This leads me to my primary question: is the chaining of enclitics -que, -ve, -ne in sequences like valēsneque valid or not?
morphologia enclitic
asked 2 hours ago
Ethan Bierlein
1,146219
add a comment |Â
up vote
4
down vote
favorite
I am active in a small Latin Discord group; a member brought up a question concerning the validity of the following phrase with chained enclitics:
Valēsneque?
(with the enclitics distinguished) Valēs-ne-que?
I assume that their intent was to convey something that fell around the following sentiments; it was not difficult for me to clearly interpret what he was trying to say:
And how are you?
And are you [doing] well?
etc.
However, I asserted that it was not valid, and offered a potentially suitable alternative like "et ut valēs?"; another member offered the equally suitable "atque ut valēs?".
I assumed that valēsneque was invalid largely based on two reasons: one, the fact that, other than words with unremovable enclitics that have taken on a separate meaning (see: quīcumque, quaecumque, quodcumque and others like it), I have never encountered any instance of chained enclitics anywhere; and secondly, the fact that Latin is classified as a fusional language, and that if valēsneque was indeed valid, it would potentially be an interesting, but unlikely, case of agglutination in a fusional language.
This leads me to my primary question: is the chaining of enclitics -que, -ve, -ne in sequences like valēsneque valid or not?
morphologia enclitic
asked 2 hours ago
Ethan Bierlein
1,146219
add a comment |Â
up vote
4
down vote
favorite
up vote
4
down vote
favorite
I am active in a small Latin Discord group; a member brought up a question concerning the validity of the following phrase with chained enclitics:
Valēsneque?
(with the enclitics distinguished) Valēs-ne-que?
I assume that their intent was to convey something that fell around the following sentiments; it was not difficult for me to clearly interpret what he was trying to say:
And how are you?
And are you [doing] well?
etc.
However, I asserted that it was not valid, and offered a potentially suitable alternative like "et ut valēs?"; another member offered the equally suitable "atque ut valēs?".
I assumed that valēsneque was invalid largely based on two reasons: one, the fact that, other than words with unremovable enclitics that have taken on a separate meaning (see: quīcumque, quaecumque, quodcumque and others like it), I have never encountered any instance of chained enclitics anywhere; and secondly, the fact that Latin is classified as a fusional language, and that if valēsneque was indeed valid, it would potentially be an interesting, but unlikely, case of agglutination in a fusional language.
This leads me to my primary question: is the chaining of enclitics -que, -ve, -ne in sequences like valēsneque valid or not?
morphologia enclitic
asked 2 hours ago
Ethan Bierlein
1,146219
I am active in a small Latin Discord group; a member brought up a question concerning the validity of the following phrase with chained enclitics:
Valēsneque?
(with the enclitics distinguished) Valēs-ne-que?
I assume that their intent was to convey something that fell around the following sentiments; it was not difficult for me to clearly interpret what he was trying to say:
And how are you?
And are you [doing] well?
etc.
However, I asserted that it was not valid, and offered a potentially suitable alternative like "et ut valēs?"; another member offered the equally suitable "atque ut valēs?".
I assumed that valēsneque was invalid largely based on two reasons: one, the fact that, other than words with unremovable enclitics that have taken on a separate meaning (see: quīcumque, quaecumque, quodcumque and others like it), I have never encountered any instance of chained enclitics anywhere; and secondly, the fact that Latin is classified as a fusional language, and that if valēsneque was indeed valid, it would potentially be an interesting, but unlikely, case of agglutination in a fusional language.
This leads me to my primary question: is the chaining of enclitics -que, -ve, -ne in sequences like valēsneque valid or not?
morphologia enclitic
morphologia enclitic
asked 2 hours ago
Ethan Bierlein
1,146219
asked 2 hours ago
Ethan Bierlein
1,146219
asked 2 hours ago
Ethan Bierlein
1,146219
asked 2 hours ago
Ethan Bierlein
1,146219
asked 2 hours ago
Ethan Bierlein
1,146219
1,146219
add a comment |Â
add a comment |Â
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
up vote
3
down vote
Playing with a corpus search tool brought up no examples of -quene or -neque in the intended sense.
If chaining was admissible, I would expect to see attestations with -que and -ne, the most common enclitics.
Therefore I would argue that chaining of enclitics is not good classical Latin, but it is readily understandable in modern use.
answered 26 mins ago
Joonas Ilmavirta♦
42.9k1055248
add a comment |Â
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
3
down vote
Playing with a corpus search tool brought up no examples of -quene or -neque in the intended sense.
If chaining was admissible, I would expect to see attestations with -que and -ne, the most common enclitics.
Therefore I would argue that chaining of enclitics is not good classical Latin, but it is readily understandable in modern use.
answered 26 mins ago
Joonas Ilmavirta♦
42.9k1055248
add a comment |Â
up vote
3
down vote
Playing with a corpus search tool brought up no examples of -quene or -neque in the intended sense.
If chaining was admissible, I would expect to see attestations with -que and -ne, the most common enclitics.
Therefore I would argue that chaining of enclitics is not good classical Latin, but it is readily understandable in modern use.
answered 26 mins ago
Joonas Ilmavirta♦
42.9k1055248
add a comment |Â
up vote
3
down vote
up vote
3
down vote
Playing with a corpus search tool brought up no examples of -quene or -neque in the intended sense.
If chaining was admissible, I would expect to see attestations with -que and -ne, the most common enclitics.
Therefore I would argue that chaining of enclitics is not good classical Latin, but it is readily understandable in modern use.
answered 26 mins ago
Joonas Ilmavirta♦
42.9k1055248
Playing with a corpus search tool brought up no examples of -quene or -neque in the intended sense.
If chaining was admissible, I would expect to see attestations with -que and -ne, the most common enclitics.
Therefore I would argue that chaining of enclitics is not good classical Latin, but it is readily understandable in modern use.
answered 26 mins ago
Joonas Ilmavirta♦
42.9k1055248
edited 10 mins ago
answered 26 mins ago
Joonas Ilmavirta♦
42.9k1055248
answered 26 mins ago
Joonas Ilmavirta♦
42.9k1055248
answered 26 mins ago
Joonas Ilmavirta♦
42.9k1055248
42.9k1055248
add a comment |Â
add a comment |Â
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2flatin.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f7252%2fcan-enclitics-be-chained%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password