FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > IIDB ARCHIVE: 200X-2003, PD 2007 > IIDB Philosophical Forums (PRIOR TO JUN-2003)
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Today at 05:55 AM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 01-30-2003, 11:22 AM   #11
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: NCSU
Posts: 5,853
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Principia
Actually, the etymology of species is from the rare 5th declension (species, speciei/specie). But the form for the nominative is the same for both the plural and the singular cases. So while "specie" is a word, it's well, syntactically incorrect. http://www.math.ohio-state.edu/~econrad/lang/ln5.html

Heh, more than you need to know.
Dang it. I knew i needed to check to make sure it isn't 5th declension. Anyways here is the declension, since someone had already asked about the ablative 'specie.'

Singular
N species
G speciei/specie (early)
D speciei
Ac speciem
Ab specie

Plural
N species
G specierum
D speciebus
Ac species
Ab speciebus

The nominative is used when a noun is the subject.
The genitive is used when a noun modifies another noun, i.e. posessive.
The dative is used with some prepositions and when the noun is the indirect object.
The accusitive is used with some prepositions and when the noun is a direct object.
The ablative is used with some prepositions.

The interesting think is that "species" is related to "specere" which means "to look at." "Appearance" is probably its most literal meaning in Latin. I guess that means that the morphological species concept is redundant.

What annoys me is people who think that there exists a species called Homo sapien. This includes the US Congress.
RufusAtticus is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 02:46 PM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.