Talk:senex

inoperant link
 Link leads to no Spanish issue. (Or as be it in English.) And likely such word doesn't exist in Spanish.--Manfariel (talk) 12:56, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

etymo
But why senex instead of senus? What relation to Gothic seneigs?--Manfariel (talk) 20:20, 22 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Not sure about the -ex part, but the relation to Gothic sineigs lies in the fact that the sen- in Lat. senex is the same as sin- in Got. sineigs. The Got. suffix -eigs is not cognate with Lat. -ex, though, it is rather cognate with -īcus. — Mnemosientje (t · c) 12:42, 24 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Hmmmm. A contrivance sénex (sénecs) » *sénecus » *sénicus » *sénīcus, to avoid confusion with sēnus (six each)? --Manfariel (talk) 13:28, 27 June 2020 (UTC)

RFV discussion: November 2021
Is senium attested as an adjectival genitive plural of Latin senex? If it were a regular adjective, senium would be plausible, but grammars seem to only mention senum as genitive plural (which we list only in the noun's inflection table). Searching for examples of either is complicated because of the distinct noun senium, as well as the distributive numeral sēnum. I'm a bit skeptical that the noun and adjective senses of senex are really formally distinguished in the way that the entry currently indicates; I wonder whether the adjective use might really be more like an appositive or predicative use of the noun.--Urszag (talk) 06:13, 6 November 2021 (UTC)
 * I see uses of virorum senum and mulierum senum, as well as one use of virorum senium. --Lambiam 22:27, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you! Looks like both are attested.--Urszag (talk) 14:38, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

RFV discussion: June–July 2024
Latin. The Oxford Latin dictionary says "as adj[ective] not found in quot[ations]s w[ith] nom[inative] or acc[usative] neut[er] s[u]b[stantive]s." A 1653 grammar says it is "defective in the neuter".--Urszag (talk) 01:09, 1 June 2024 (UTC)


 * L&S say, more specifically, “ nom. and acc. of the neutr. plur. in the posit. and of the neutr. sing. in the comp. do not occur .” So no * and no  * – although we do give this neutr. sing. in the comp. in the declension table at, apparently making an appearance in Medieval Latin.  --Lambiam 19:43, 4 June 2024 (UTC)
 * I think it is best to just show the established, Classical masculine (and marginally feminine) forms in the table, and leave the rest to the usage notes. I've edited the entry accordingly, and so will mark this as RFV-resolved.--Urszag (talk) 13:58, 3 July 2024 (UTC)