cipośis: Difference between revisions
From Lexicon Leponticum
Jump to navigationJump to search
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{word | {{word | ||
|status=unlikely | |||
|type_word=proper noun | |type_word=proper noun | ||
|stem_class=i | |stem_class=i | ||
| Line 5: | Line 6: | ||
|case=gen. | |case=gen. | ||
|gender=masc. | |gender=masc. | ||
|language= | |language=unknown | ||
|language_adaptation=Latin | |language_adaptation=Latin | ||
|analysis_morphemic={{m| | |analysis_morphemic=cipoś{{m|-is (Lat.)|-is}} | ||
|analysis_phonemic= | |analysis_phonemic=unknown | ||
|meaning= | |meaning='of Cipoś' | ||
|field_semantic=personal name | |field_semantic=personal name | ||
|checklevel= | |checklevel=0 | ||
}} | }} | ||
== Commentary == | == Commentary == | ||
The form | See the inscription page on the uncertain reading. | ||
< | |||
The form, being a patronymic genitive followed by ''f.'' in an alphabetically Latin inscription, could only be a consonant stem ''cipośs'', i.e. ''cipods'' (hardly with san for a tau gallicum cluster). The convenient comparandum ''cipodi'' cited by {{bib|Rhŷs 1913}}: 56 and repeated by {{bib|Tibiletti Bruno 1981}}: 173 is, however, a chimera: line 2 of {{bib|CIL}} V 8934 (Suno) reads {{tr|lat|secuddi}} (recte ''secundi''). We are left with a linguistically highly implausible form (cf. {{bib|Stifter 2024b}}: 137). | |||
</ | <p style="text-align:right;>[[User:Corinna Salomon|Corinna Salomon]]</p> | ||
{{bibliography}} | {{bibliography}} | ||
Revision as of 17:30, 11 November 2024
| Attestation: | VB·30 (surica/ciponis/f) (1) |
|---|---|
| Status: | unlikely |
| Language: | unknown |
| adapted to: | Latin |
| Word Type: | proper noun |
| Semantic Field: | personal name |
|
| |
| Grammatical Categories: | gen. sg. masc. |
| Stem Class: | i |
|
| |
| Morphemic Analysis: | cipoś-is |
| Phonemic Analysis: | unknown |
| Meaning: | 'of Cipoś' |
Commentary
See the inscription page on the uncertain reading.
The form, being a patronymic genitive followed by f. in an alphabetically Latin inscription, could only be a consonant stem cipośs, i.e. cipods (hardly with san for a tau gallicum cluster). The convenient comparandum cipodi cited by Rhŷs 1913: 56 and repeated by Tibiletti Bruno 1981: 173 is, however, a chimera: line 2 of CIL V 8934 (Suno) reads secuddi (recte secundi). We are left with a linguistically highly implausible form (cf. Stifter 2024b: 137).
Bibliography
| CIL | Berlin-Brandenburg Academy of Sciences and Humanities, Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum. (17 volumes, various supplements) |
|---|
