What is the origin of Latin -ies and the fifth declension? Lysdexia 08:02, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
- Maybe -ia is from demonstrative ea. Then -ies is feminine of -ius and -ium; but -ies may be descendant another line, from a -iès if there's such a Hellènic word. Is there? Could -iès be diminutive -ès? as -ion is diminutive -on—as in the Scottish -ie/-ey. But -ium is not diminutive but rather augmentative, and -ius often comparative. I think therefore -ius, -ies/-ia, and -ium are collective—as in English -hood, -head, the former which would'v been -hoad. Sometimes -ius is genitive—I like to thruwend medium as "midst" anyway as they're both genitive mutands, medii and middes, medius and midd[hoad]. Lysdexia 14:04, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
- According to Sihler, Latin 5th declension is of unknown origin, citing:
In reality, the 'fifth declension' is a historical accident—a collection of nouns of heterogeneous ancestry which converged (in a none too orderly fashion) on a type. This explains the difficulty of finding analogues in other languages, including most particularly, the other Italic languages; and also the variability in morphological detail from noun to noun and from period to period.
- The abstracts in -iēs thus came only later once the whole paradigm became productive, probably because originally some important nouns denoting abstract concepts belonged to this paradigm. --Ivan Štambuk 14:27, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
- Sorry, -ius/-ium/-ia are lenite -icus/-icum/-ica, cognate with -igaz/-iga/-igo. Is -ies cognate with -hood or -udo? Lysdexia (talk) 13:15, 1 April 2012 (UTC)