Talk:Monogenes

3rd declension?
, do we not think this is correct? — JohnC5 18:59, 14 December 2016 (UTC)


 * nom_sg_n could also be monogenes with a short vowel like in Greek. Dictionaries have some neuters from Greek ending in <-es> as -es and some as -ēs. But there's most likely no proof for either vowel length. Similary voc_sg_m could also be monogenes like in Greek. -Ko·mine (talk) 19:15, 14 December 2016 (UTC)


 * For context, I should explain that I created this because it is seemingly the only adjective ending in listed in L&S; I needed a basis for declining and attesting the New Latin . Unfortunately, L&S, Gaffiot, and Karl Ernst Georges’ 1918 Ausführliches lateinisch-deutsches Handwörterbuch all define it as a masculine adjective only (meaning they do not recognise feminine or neuter forms); for my purposes, it might've well have been a noun. — I.S.M.E.T.A. 08:59, 16 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Judging by what those authorities write, this word only occurs in . I've quoted all his uses in that work. What I infer from that is that this word is a proper noun, not an adjective (see the new definition I've given it), and that, since it only occurs in the nominative  and the accusative, it declines like a normal third-declension noun. I'm sorry I had to undo your work, but I believe what we now have is accurate. There may also exist an adjective of the form *, but I'd like to see evidence of it if it does, since the existence of the synonymous  would render it redundant. — I.S.M.E.T.A. 09:40, 16 January 2017 (UTC)