Cola is a Latinized form of kola, taken from some Niger-Congo language (it's not clear which) and applied to a genus of plants. It isn't a native Latin word and would have been unfamiliar to the Romans (except as the plural of the Greek borrowing colon, used as a technical term in rhetoric—completely unrelated).
So by these standards, I'd agree with K-HB ...
These are the exact same word, and yes both mean "world" but no you cannot substitute them for each other. Latin is a fully inflexional language, which means that the words have endings which change depending on their grammatical use. You can compare mundum and mundi to whom and whose. You wouldn't say, "This is me ball" (well, not in Standard English, at ...
The similarity is a coincidence; these words are unrelated. Etymological dictionaries such as De Vaan's give the following account of the two words:
The earlier form of the conjunction cum is quom; this is attested in early Latin, and also in the word quoniam (< quom iam). It is descended from Proto-Indo-European *kʷom "when" and has cognates in other IE ...
My impression is that "Latin name" here means "scientific name (of a species)".
Many people seem to conflate scientific names and Latin names, although the two are different concepts.
The way I see it, the claim is that cola is the best-known scientific name of a species in taxonomy.
This claim is not unreasonable, but I will not comment on whether it is ...
These words are unrelated: they developed independently from different Proto-Indo-European roots, according to Michiel de Vaan's Etymological Dictionary (337–38).
First, liber or librī, meaning "book," is thought to come from a PIE word meaning "leaf, rind": *lubʰ-ro-. De Vaan cites several Indo-European languages that have attested cognates and summarizes:...
The thesauri and dictionaries offer marvelous help with some of these.
Adapted from Döderlein's Hand-book of Latin Synonymes:
Interficere and perimere are the most general expressions for putting to death, in whatever manner, and from whatever motive, but interficere as a usual, perimere as an old, forcible, poetical expression.
Interimere involves ...
For my answer, I will use material from a 1931 article written to address this very issue: "The Use of Forem and Essem" by Winnie D. Lawrence, available on JSTOR.
While essem was always a good literary word, forem, after Plautus, gave evidence of decline in this respect. In later writers, especially in Sallust and Tacitus, it was an affected ...
The gist of Au101's answer is confirmed by de Vaan's Etymological Dictionary. First, regarding sex, in Proto-Italic and Proto-Indo-European, he gives:
PIt. *seks 'six', *seks-to- 'sixth'
PIE *(s)ueks 'six', *uks-ó- 'sixth'.
The PIt. form *seks has analogically dropped *-w- from *sweks by analogy with *septm 'seven'.
Regarding sexus, there is ...
Laetitia is a state of being, from laetus happy. Someone who is laetus has gaudium, in the sense that someone who is rich has money. It more generally should be translated as happiness instead of joy.
It should be noted that the two words became synonymous in poetry and in later Latin prose.
See the Lewis and Short entries under gaudium and laetitia.
The Latin word used for "world" here is mundus.
This word has several forms (singular/plural):
The five grammatical cases are used in different contexts and they are rarely interchangeable.
"Of the world" requires ...
None, and here's why.
If you look at -que cognates (Hittite -kku 'now, even, and'; Sanskrit -ca 'and'; Greek Gr. -τε 'and' etc.), you will see that the meaning is virtually the same (and). There is no evidence to suggest that -que was an enclitic in five. What would it mean, "five.and", anyway??? And there are no other numerals of the type "X.and."...
All forms of se, including suus, normally refer to the subject of the main clause of the sentence. Eius, however, normally does not refer to this subject, but to someone else. So the two words have different meanings.
Sextus Tarquinius crudelis est. Lucretia praevidet mortem suam.
"S.T. is cruel. Lucretia foresees her own death."
Sextus Tarquinius ...
According to the Guide Romain Antique, by Jean Dautry, Georges Hacquard and Olivier Maisani, from the second century BC the Romans had 3 meals a day only one of which was plentiful : the cena.
The jentaculum was the breakfast: some bread and cheese after waking up;
The prandium was a simple collation (merenda), eaten on the ...
Liber is that Latin word for book, and my first inclination is to go there. However, further context is needed to make an actual decision. Other options include libellum and codex.
Monumentum is most wrong. A book can be a monument, but not all monuments are books, and so likewise not all monumenta are libri. If you're refering to the Horace quote monumenta ...
In general, the -osus ending indicates plenty. Lacrimosa isn't just "teary-eyed," but weepy. Same with nivosa. Niveus is often used with mountains to describe the snow-topped peaks, and from the quality of snow (i.e. whiteness), it is used to describe things in English we'd describe as "snow-white" - teeth, milk, togas, fleece (as in the old nursery rhyme). ...
Certainly there are differences between the three, which I hope the following will demonstrate with sufficient clarity.
The roots of universus indicate 'turned into one', which describes a group formed from [objects] for a single purpose; homines universi in servitium ducti sunt, 'the whole population was led into slavery'.
Derived from coniunctus,cunctus ...
Divus is a term used to refer to Roman deities or highly esteemed individuals (e.g. emperors). L&S give some classic Latin quotes, and you can also see books about Divus Augustus, Divus Titus, Divus Claudius, and etc.
Now, as many things in Christianity inherited from Roman customs and language, it seems divos was also used for saints....
Well, this may obviously be outdated, but G.M. Messing banged out a 3-page treatment of "The Etymology of Lat. Mentula" for the Oct. 1956 Classical Philology (Vol. 51, No. 4, pp. 247–249).
His review of the scholarship to that point was
Lat. mentula 'membrum virile' has never been satisfactorily etymologized. Of the various suggestions made in the ...
A word for “house” is probably the easy part:
aedes, -ium, f. literally means “rooms.” Only fits if your dwelling has more than one room, although, if it has only one, you could call it aedis.
domicilium and habitatium are pretty generic terms
However, I am partial to tectum (roof) in the metonymical sense, which I think emphasises the function of a living ...
No, I don't think so, and for this I can actually rely on etymonline which is a fine resource, even if linguistics students are discouraged from using it for their homework.
The entry for the English word 'six' is complete enough:
Old English siex, six, sex, from Proto-Germanic *sekhs (source also of Old Saxon and Danish seks, Old Norse, Swedish, and Old ...
forte (from fors, fortis, chance, luck etc.) simply means 'by chance'.
fortasse (sometimes fortassis) is a contraction from forte an sit, 'as it might chance to be', usually translated as 'perhaps', 'as it may be' etc.
Also found are fors sit an (often as one word) and its contraction forsan; and occasionally forsit (from fors sit).
Larger Latin-English ...
Another partial answer.
Tl;dr: kissing had a social role in Judaism that was inherited into Christianity (as osculum in the Vulgate), where it even had/acquired a ceremonial role (not sure if this one existed among Jews). Maybe—and this is pure speculation—this ceremonial role was what later made the word osculum a matter of respect and created ...
I cannot provide a complete answer either, but perhaps a few points one the subject of kissing, and the semantics of the words for it. I cannot, unfortunately, provide immediate literature references for these,
The elder word for the kiss is osculum, attested in the earliest writing, and with a very transparent meaning (“little mouth”). Romans had a ...
Yes, there is a technical difference, though the meanings tend to shade one into the other.
Roughly, pluvia is the wet stuff itself, the falling water that comprises the shower, imber.
More or less as you would in English, it's quite legitimate to use either, as you wish, to describe the actual weather. Imber, however, does tend to mean heavy or cold rain, ...
I believe the cursory etymology you stated is inaccurate. Here is what my research shows:
Medieval Latin meaning of trivium / trivialis
In the Middle Ages, the liberal arts were divided into the trivium (grammar, logic, and rhetoric) and the quadrivium (music, arithmetic, geometry and astronomy), but this was hardly a relationship of easy and difficult.
According to Lewis & Short, cunctus "all" is a contraction of coniunctus "bound together", from con- "together" and iungo "to bind". Iungo is from Proto-Indo-European *(H)iug- "yoke". But De Vaan does not mention this etymology; he only says cunctus may be a contraction of concitus, from con- and cieo "to move, incite". He adds that Ernout ...
Let me mention some things to complement your and TKR's lists.
First, the adjectives iuvenis and senex have the irregular comparatives iunior and senior.
These comparatives are rarely (if ever) used in neuter.
Neither adjective has a superlative.
For senex, the superlative can be replaced by that of vetustus (vetustissimus).
For vetus, comparatives and ...
Ignore the prefixes here. Semantically here they're exactly the same. They both mean "to pour out", and although profundere is more likely than effundere to mean "to cause to pour out", as a passive participle that distinction is not felt. Moreover, any distinction is all but lost in post-Classical Latin. By 1957, they were completely synonymous, and word ...
No, they're two different roots. Ascendere is made up of the prefix ad- + scandere (first: scando), which means "to climb."
On the other hand, accendere is related to candere (first: candeo), which means "to shine" or "to glow" (like a fire).
Here's a summary of the article "Meals" written by Professor Gutsfeld (Université de Lorraine) for Der Neue Pauly - if you're serious about Latin or classical studies, you should already know what it is. Unfortunately, it is behind a paywall, so many of us mostly likely will never access this fantastic multivolume reference.