Talk:Latin language: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>Stefan Olejniczak |
imported>John Stephenson (The last sentence is not really relevant, but could be made to be with examples, I suppose. (2): yes, except for 'formality') |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{subpages}} | |||
==Last paragraph== | ==Last paragraph== | ||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
2. Isn't is better to replace "concerns" with "grammatical categories" here? That seems to be the most proper term. See for example [http://www.audioenglish.net/dictionary/grammatical_category.htm] or Wikipedia: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grammatical_category]. [[User:Stefan Olejniczak|Stefan Olejniczak]] 11:58, 13 November 2010 (UTC) | 2. Isn't is better to replace "concerns" with "grammatical categories" here? That seems to be the most proper term. See for example [http://www.audioenglish.net/dictionary/grammatical_category.htm] or Wikipedia: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grammatical_category]. [[User:Stefan Olejniczak|Stefan Olejniczak]] 11:58, 13 November 2010 (UTC) | ||
:The last sentence is not really relevant, but could be made to be with examples, I suppose. (2): yes, except for 'formality'. [[User:John Stephenson|John Stephenson]] 12:31, 13 November 2010 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 06:31, 13 November 2010
Last paragraph
Latin is a highly synthetic language, using many suffixes to indicate concerns such as number, gender, formality, possession and tense. Adding these endings is called conjugating for verbs and declining for nouns and adjectives.
I have 2 remarks on this:
1. The last sentence is right as such but it applies to grammar in general, so why should it be mentioned in particular here? Just because the terms "declension" and "conjugation" are derived from Latin?
2. Isn't is better to replace "concerns" with "grammatical categories" here? That seems to be the most proper term. See for example [1] or Wikipedia: [2]. Stefan Olejniczak 11:58, 13 November 2010 (UTC)
- The last sentence is not really relevant, but could be made to be with examples, I suppose. (2): yes, except for 'formality'. John Stephenson 12:31, 13 November 2010 (UTC)