I believe there are no exceptions to this rule. That's what I have always read, and I have never encountered any, neither in Greek nor in Latin, nor even in German.
There is an hypothesis about the cause of this phenomenon. Neuter words were historically limited to inanimate objects or things that cannot act. In a basic sentence, it was rarely or never the ...
Can they not be worked out from each other?
That's the whole point for learning all of them.
Why are each of these forms necessary for memorisation?
That is the minimal amount of information to deduce how to use the noun.
To be able to use a noun, you need to know all its forms and its gender.
You cannot reliably deduce the gender from the forms, ...
(This answer is based on Weiss's Historical and Comparative Grammar of Latin and Clackson and Horrocks's Blackwell History of the Latin Language.)
The first thing to know about these two ablative endings, -e and -ī, is that neither of them is descended from the Proto-Indo-European (PIE) ablative ending.
-e comes most probably from the PIE locative ending, *...
The second form is the genitive singular.
The above answers address the substance of your question, but I wanted to add as a supplementary answer something that doesn't appear to be explicitly stated elsewhere: The genitive singular is the only form that is unique and uniform for each declension.
Unique: No other declension has the same genitive singular ...
First, Galilaee sounds right.
See this question about the vocative of Gnaeus for details.
There are situations where one finds -ee- in Latin without the first e belonging to ae.
What I found is not word-final, but I assume that is not important for your question.
There are forms of deesse and deerrare, and if the diphthong ae is included, also forms of ...
Joonas's answer is spot-on, but to give some more illustrations:
Quite a lot of Latin nouns end in -us; it's one of the best-known features of the language. But they don't all decline the same!
Servus "slave", genitive servī
Tempus "time", genitive temporis
Scelus "crime", genitive sceleris
Manus "hand", genitive manūs
You need the genitive to know which ...
It's the singular genitive-case form. The use is that if you know the nominative singular form, genitive singular form, and the gender of a regularly inflected Latin noun, you can predict all of its other forms. These are the "principal parts" of a regular Latin noun. (Some nouns have irregularities in their inflection that require more description, like the ...
'Why' isn't usually a good question for these types of things, because the answer is often "just because." The Greek isn't typical, but it does have a parallel with o-contracted words like νοῦς, περίπλους, or (neuter) κανοῦν.
Nominative Ἰησοῦς νοῦς
Genitive Ἰησοῦ νοῦ
Dative Ἰησοῖ/Ἰησοῦ νῷ
Accusative Ἰησοῦν νοῦν
To answer your second question, this rule is completely exceptionless, not only in Latin but in all Indo-European languages (that is, those that have a neuter gender at all).
neuter gender always had identical nominative, accusative and vocative forms in all three numbers
Archaic Syntax in Indo-European
Secundus is regular, eqvus isn't
There's a sound change called the "Boukólos Rule", which started back in Proto-Indo-European. When labiovelar consonants (like /kʷ/ and /gʷ/) appeared next to /w/ or /u/, they dissimilated and lost their labialization, becoming /k/ and /g/. The rule is named after one of the first known examples, Greek βουκόλος &...
You're absolutely right that PIE *a gives Old Latin /a/. But somewhere between Old Latin and Classical Latin, vowel reduction happened.
Basically, Old Latin stress was always on the first syllable. So short vowels in other (non-stressed) syllables tended to get reduced, sort of like how English keeps the i in "combine" but reduces it in "combination".
If you're asking how the third conjugation historically came to use the vowels i/u, it has to do with regular sound changes that affected the original Proto-Indo-European (PIE) endings.
The present indicative active paradigm for this verb in PIE, with its descendant paradigm in Latin, would look something like this:
1sg. *h₂eǵ-ō > agō
2sg. *h₂eǵ-e-si > ...
In a couple of letters where he describes villas (esp. 2.17 and 5.6), Pliny the Younger uses cryptoporticus (Greek κρυπτός + Latin porticus) to describe a colonnade with wall and windows – a covered gallery. Commentators (e.g., A. N. Sherwin-White, The letters of Pliny: a historical and social commentary ad II.17.16) seem to agree that he coined this term.
The Vulgata is full with proper nouns having double -ee, specially as endings (e.g. Bersabee, Phacee, Osee). I imagine you are not particularly interested in these. Below are all the other words I could find:
deest, deerunt, deessent, deerit, deerant, etc. E.g.
Nm 21:5 locutusque contra Deum et Moysen, ait : Cur eduxisti nos de Ægypto, ut moreremur in ...
According to this study, the distribution is as follows:
1st declension 21.6%
2nd declension 23.7%
3rd declension 52.6%
4th declension 1.4%
5th declension 0.7%
("Development of Gender Classifications: Modeling the Historical Change from Latin to French," by Maria Polinsky and Ezra Van Everbroeck Language Vol. 79, No. 2, Jun., 2003, Table 2, pg. 362)
I suspect that your friend misremembered the phrase.
Concerning the actual phrase that Julius Caesar said, the biographers offer conflicting evidence. Suetonius tells us that Caesar died in silence, though he admits the tradition that Caesar said in Greek: "καὶ σὺ τέκνον;" Cassius Dio echoes Suetonius, claiming that the "truest account" ...
Since you’re asking about reduplicated perfect (and not reduplicated present, as in bibo < *pi-ph3-e or sero < si-sh1-e, Weiss 2009: 405), I will try to address perfect formation only.
One of the problems is that synchronically we may not see all cases of reduplicated perfect in Classical Latin. However, by drawing on data from Old Latin and other ...
Tuomo Pekkanen's Ars Grammatica (a Latin grammar in Finnish) says that the second declension has three neuters ending in -us: vīrus, vulgus and pelagus.
They are only used in the singular, and accusative is exactly like the nominative (not -um).
I have no clue about the origin of these words.
I'm not sure if these words even have a similar history.
I get zero results for the locative Lesbi in the HP corpus (the results appear to be all genitives), but I find a handful of in Lesbo.
The same applies to a locative Euboeae, in favour of in Euboea.
The locative Rhodi, on the other hand, is common, commoner than in Rhodo, which seems to be limited to Plinius.
Rhodus did contain several major settlements in ...
The story, as often, has to do with Proto-Indo-European laryngeals. Both these verbs had a laryngeal as the last consonant of the root: *deh₃-, *steh₂-. All the forms in Latin are based on the zero grade of these roots (i.e. the form without a vowel): *dh₃-, *sth₂-. Now, when a PIE laryngeal found itself between two consonants, in Latin the result was the ...
The first form, e.g., cena, is the lemma or lexical form. This is the form you use when looking up words in a dictionary or lexicon.
The second form is the lemma declined in the genitive case, singular number. In this instance, it is cenae.
Robert J. Henle wrote,1
All Latin nouns are divided into five main groups called declensions, and in these groups we ...
It is generally believed is that
"The Italic "1st declension" continues PIE feminine formations ("ā-stems") built with an invariable suffix *-eh2(-)" (Vine 2017: 755)
cf. Beekes 2011 proposal of an ablauting suffix *eh2(-) ~ *-h2(-)).
Weiss notes that
"Masculine nouns of the first declension that we find in Latin are largely personalizations of ...
Acc. pl. pelagē occurs in Lucretius, De Rerum Natura 6.619:
at pelage multa et late substrata videmus
This is simply the Greek plural: the word is a loan of Greek πέλαγος, whose nom./acc. pl. is πελάγη.
A Packard search finds no results for vira, virora, vulga, vulgora.
(This answer is based on Weiss's Historical and Comparative Grammar of Latin, which is usually the place to go for this kind of thing.)
The most common Indo-European 3pl active ending is -nt(i), which is part of the familiar set -m(i), -s(i), -t(i), ..., -nt(i). (The 1pl and 2pl are a bit harder to reconstruct because they vary more in the individual ...
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.
If the word for "day" had developed perfectly regularly, we'd actually expect to see it in the fourth declension, as it comes from a PIE u-stem! A few traces of this hypothetical fourth-declension are attested, such as the locative diū (which survives Classically in diū "all day") and the nominative dius (which survives Classically in nunc dius > nūdius "it ...
There are agent nouns for all genders.
For example, saltare gives rise to saltator, saltatrix, and saltatrum.
For more details, see this question.
The stem is revealed by the genitive form.
For my three examples they are saltator- (third conjugation), saltatric- (third), and saltatr- (second).
(The stem of rex is reg-, so it has a g instead of a c.)
If you ...