Talk:Supine

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The accusative supine in Latin can only be used with verbs of movement. I'll change it if there are no objection. Vegfarandi 19:02, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] From dative?

Can anyone clarify what it means that the second supine is derived from the ablative "or the dative"?

Does this mean that (1) scholars are uncertain whether it came from the dative or the ablative, or (2) scholars believe it somehow came from both the ablative and the dative?

I can believe that proto-Latin really had a full fourth-declension verbal noun. (There are several fourth declension nouns that are of this form -- sensus, actus, etc.) And it makes sense that the ablative of these nouns would "become" the second supine.

But I've never heard of a variant supine mirabile dictui, and I don't see any reference to a dative supine in Bennett or any other source. So I will remove the "dative" mention unless someone can either explain it or give a source for it. — Lawrence King ^(talk) 11:14, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

This is what my Latin Grammar by Kristinn Ármannsson states. According to him the ablative and dative merged in these nouns, that is, the Romans stopped using the dative form and started to only use the ablative form. (see the note on dativus finalis and ablativus respectivus). I don't know what else to tell you. Don't diz da Kristinn. Vegfarandi 20:18, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Makes sense to me. — Lawrence King ^(talk) 11:08, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] "This also applies to Norwegian where the form supine is called perfektum"

Is this true? Isn't it the total compound form, like har spist (has eaten), that is called perfektum, while just spist is a form of the perfect participle which is called perfektum partisipp? Is there any Norwegian verb for which the form used with ha (have) is not a form of the perfect (past) participle, but a unique form? (In Swedish this is the case for strong verbs). 85.228.97.169 (talk) 08:29, 4 April 2008 (UTC)