Les déclinaisons du latin dans les langues romanes

Gleisson   Sat Nov 19, 2005 6:35 pm GMT
In Brazilian Portuguese, we use Ô for vocative

Ô mamãe! [hey mom]
Ô papai! [hey dad]
Ô Léo! [hey Leo]

Do not confuse this with Ó which means look!(short for OLHE!)

Ela tá aí, ó = Look, she's there
Ó! = Look!
Gjones2   Sat Nov 19, 2005 9:05 pm GMT
Some persons speak of 'o' in front of a word as being an English vocative marker too. For instance, "...O my love! my wife! / Death, that hath suck'd the honey of thy breath...." Shakespeare [Romeo and Juliet]

The same word is used as an exclamation in other contexts too, though, so it's hard to be sure that that its purpose is to indicate the vocative.
Easterner   Sun Nov 27, 2005 11:24 am GMT
Stephaniel P. Spaniel: "I recently heard a Romanian friend of mine call out to his son Dan : "Dane!" It reminded me of the the vocative endings in Polish e.g. "Szef" (boss) and the vocative "Szefie!" Is this Romanian example a survival of a Latinate vocative form or a later Slavic influence?"

On the surface, it could be modelled on both the Latin vocative suffix "dominus" -> "domine" or "vir" -> "vire", characteristic to masculine nouns of the I and the III declination, and the Slavic vocative suffix "-e". However, I tend to think it is more of a latter type, since the Latin form had a rather restricted application, and as far as I know, it wasn't used with proper names at all. However, the use of the vocative is much more comprehensive in Slavic languages like Serbian and its sister languages, Croatian and Bosnian. It has a separate form for masculine and feminine nouns and proper names (Zoran -> ZoranE, also Milica -> MilicE, but Mila - > MilO, also: šef -> šefE, "boss", and žena -> ženO, "woman"). The use in Romanian is not so comprehensive (as I know, feminine names don't have separate vocative forms), but given the substantial Slavic influence, principally on spoken Romanian, I wouldn't hesitate to put it into the Slavic box.

It is also interesting to note that this vocative "-e" seems to have been rather universal in ancient times. Ancient Greek also has this same suffix used with masculine nouns, as in the well-known liturgical phrase "Kyrie eleison": "Kyrie" is the vocative form of "Kyrios" ("lord"), and in "Christos" -> "Christe". The feminine forms, as I know, merged with the nominative.
Easterner   Sun Nov 27, 2005 3:09 pm GMT
Me: "It is also interesting to note that this vocative "-e" seems to have been rather universal in ancient times."

Correction: not specifically in ancient times, but in several Indo-European languages, with the possible exception of Germanic ones, which seem to have been the first to lose the vocative case.
pipi   Sun Dec 11, 2005 6:48 pm GMT
je coné pa mé declinaison
brice   Mon Dec 19, 2005 5:22 pm GMT
the 'e' o the romanian vocative comes frome the 'e' of the latin vocative
leïla   Mon Dec 26, 2005 8:01 pm GMT
comment décliner un substantif en ancien français? Si l'on a "arc", comment savoir qu'il se décline sur la déclianaison des substantifs de type 1 masculin (alors que le mot ne comprend pas de finale en "s")?
greg   Tue Dec 27, 2005 1:37 am GMT
Excellente question leïla !

CSS : cas sujet singulier — CSP : cas sujet pluriel — CRS : cas régime singulier — CRP : cas régime pluriel.

CSS : li ars
CSP : li arc
CRS : le-lo arc
CRP : les-los ars

Le <c> du radical s'efface devant le <s> de flexion.

De la même manière :

CSS : li cers
CSP : li cerf
CRS : le-lo cerf
CRP : les-los cers
(effacement de <f> devant <s>)

CSS : li dras
CSP : li drap
CRS : le-lo drap
CRP : les-los dras
(effacement de <p> devant <s>)

Les substantifs masculins du type <ars — arc>, <cers — cerf>, <dras — drap>, mais aussi <dus — duc>, <cous — coup>, <clers — clerc>, <chans — champ> sont de la première déclinaison (<s> au CSS, pas d'alternance du radical) mais présentent ce qu'on appelle un accident de flexion : la désinence en <s> altère le dernier phonème du radical.

Substantifs réguliers de la première déclinaison (sans altération du phonème final du radical due à la désinence <s>) :

CSS : li murs
CSP : li mur
CRS : le-lo mur
CRP : les-los murs
(pas d'effacement de <r> devant <s>)

CSS : li roys
CSP : li roy
CRS : le-lo roy
CRP : les-los roys
(pas d'effacement de <y> devant <s>)
Leïla   Sun Jan 01, 2006 7:50 pm GMT
Merci beaucoup de vos précisions. Cela m'a été très utile.
carole   Thu Jan 26, 2006 6:29 pm GMT
Coucou Jordan,je te répond à ta question;ACC=ACCUSATIF (CD).


Mes saluations , carole
Guest   Fri Mar 09, 2007 4:47 pm GMT
Wow!
antimoon   Fri Mar 09, 2007 6:01 pm GMT
Quit speaking French - this is an English language website!!!
augustin717   Mon Mar 12, 2007 4:08 am GMT
The Vocative case has fared in Romanian pretty well; part of that is undoubtedely due to the influence of the surrounding slavic languages.
Besides the "-e" ending of the masculine nouns (N Ioan>V Ioane), Romanian also has the "-o" ending (of Slavic origin) for the feminine nouns (N Ioana>V Ioano;Ana>Ano; fata>fato);
In the plural, the Vocative form of both the masculine, feminine or neutral nouns is the same as the D-G plural form of the same nouns: fratilor, fetelor, dealurilor etc.
the Nominative case can also take the functions of the Vocative, as in "oameni buni" etc.
leila   Sun May 06, 2007 9:36 pm GMT
Quelqu'un saurait-il m'aider à traduire ce passage du Dit de la Rose de Christine Pizan?

Quel long procès, quel difficile chose,
Et sciences et clercs et obscures
Y met-il là et de grans aventures !
Et que de gent soupploiez et rovez
Et de peines et de baraz trouvez
Pour decepvoir sans plus une pucelle
(C’en est la fin) par fraude et par cautelle !

Voici la traduction quej'en ai donné mais il me manque des mots pour la compléter:
« quel long procès, quelle difficile chose, / Et quelles sciences à la fois savantes et obscures/ Y met-il là, en même temps que de grandes aventures ! / Et que d’aimables ....... et d’efforts et d’obstacles trouver pour tromper rien qu’une jeune fille par fraude et par malice ! »

Vous paraît-elle juste?

Je vous remercie par avance de votre aide.
Leïla
Guest   Sun May 06, 2007 10:15 pm GMT
My father often calls me by my first name with an -o suffix, therefore this does not mean that it is necessarily vocative: he refers to me this way in all other cases as well.

-y/-ie suffix I believe is diminutive; -o is a variant (cf. weirdie > weirdo)