Part 8

n + n ＞ n + r, r + n; ? d + n: _canŏnĭcum_ ＞ canónegue canorgue, _venēnum_ ＞ verin; _nec ūnum_ ＞ negün degün? (cf. Andalusian and Asturian _dengun_, Catalan _dingu_, apparently from _nec ūnum_ + _nĭngŭlum_).

r + r ＞ r + --, -- + r, l + r: ✱_Bernhardum_ ＞ Bernart Bernat, _marmor_ ＞ marbre marme, _prŏprium_ ＞ prǫpri prǫpi; _dīe Mércūrī_ (influenced by _dīe Vénĕris_) ＞ dimęrcres dimęcres, _grandem_ _rem_ ＞ granrẹ ganrẹ, _pr(eh)ĕndĕre_ ＞ prenre penre, _prĕsby̆ter_ ＞ pręstre pęstre; _arbĭtrium_ ＞ albire, ✱_Arvĕrnium_ ＞ Alvęrnhe, _peregrīnus_ ＞ _pele(g)rīnus_ ＞ peleris, _pŭrpŭra_ ＞ pọlpra.

s + s ＞ -- + s: ✱_spasmāre_ ＞ (espasme) pasmar (cf. French _pâmer_), perhaps through confusion of the initial es- with the prefix ex-.

t + t? ＞ -- + t: _statiōnem_? ＞ sazọ (cf. French _saison_, Spanish _sazon_).

y + y ＞ y + --: ✱_disjejūnāre_ ＞ ✱_disjeunāre_ ＞ ✱_disy’nāre_ ＞ dis´nar disnar.

III. MORPHOLOGY.

88. The most important morphological developments are common to all, or nearly all, the Romance languages. They may therefore be ascribed, in their early stages, to Vulgar Latin, although direct evidence of their beginnings is scanty.

1. DECLENSION.

NOUNS.

89. (1) During the late Vulgar Latin and early Romance period neuter nouns gradually became masculine; this change was doubtless due in part to phonetic developments which obliterated distinctive endings: _dōnum_ ＞ dọn, m.; _nōmen_ ＞ nọm, m. _Mare_, however, became almost always feminine in Gaul: la mar. Some neuter plurals in _-a_, used mainly in a collective sense, were preserved and eventually became feminine singulars: _fŏlium_ _fŏlia_ ＞ fǫlha, f. sg.; _lĭgnum_ _lĭgna_ ＞ lẹnha, f. sg.; so luǫgua, pọma, prada, beside lǫc, pọm, prat (and, by analogy, grasa, beside gras ＜ _gradus_); similarly _labia_ ＞ lavias, f. pl.

(2) Masculine and feminine nouns usually kept their original gender. Abstract nouns in _-or_, however, regularly became feminine in Gaul, other abstract nouns being mostly feminine in Latin: _honōrem_ ＞ onọr, f.; _sapōrem_ ＞ sabọr, f. With the exception of _manus_, which generally retained its gender, feminine nouns of the second and fourth declensions, unless they passed into the first declension (_pĭrus_ ＞ pẹra), became masculine, to conform to the usual _-us_ type: _fraxĭnus_ ＞ fraisnes, m.; _pīnus_ ＞ pins, m. Attracted by such words as these, _arbor_ became masculine. There were some other less important shifts.

1. _Juventus_, passing into the second declension, became masculine (_ioven_); but we find also _ioventut_, f. _Laus_ became masculine in Provençal; _fin_, on the other hand, is always feminine. _Mĕrŭla_ ＞ _merle_, m. _Correitz_, _linh_, both m., occur beside _correia_ ＜ _corrĭgia_, _linha_ ＜ _līnea_. Other similar changes might be noted. Pr. _dia_ (also _di_), like Latin _dīes_, is usually masculine.

90. Some nouns passed from the fourth to the second declension in the classic Latin period (_dŏmus_, _fīcus_); the rest doubtless followed in Vulgar Latin (_frūctus_,[82] _gradus_, _manus_). Fifth declension nouns in _-ies_ went over, for the most part, to the first declension:[83] _dīes_ ＞ dia, _facies_ ＞ fassa, _glacies_ ＞ glassa, _rabies_ ＞ rabia; but we find also di, fatz, glatz (ratge is probably French), following the third declension type. Fifth declension nouns which did not shift to the first came to be declined after the model of the third (_fides_, _res_, _spes_). The five declensions were therefore reduced to three, presumably in Vulgar Latin times. Among these there were some exchanges: polvera, vergena; cf. § 89, (1), (2), 1.

91. The use of cases became more and more restricted in Vulgar Latin, prepositional constructions taking the place of pure case distinction. At the beginning of the Romance period, nouns probably had, in unstudied speech, only two cases in constant use: a nominative and an accusative or accusative-ablative. These two cases were generally retained in Provençal, for the second and third declensions, until the literary period: we may call them _nominative_ and _objective_.

(1) The locative, which had almost vanished in classic Latin, lingered in Vulgar Latin only in names of places. It has left no sure traces in Provençal.

(2) The vocative, in classic Latin, was like the nominative for most words; in Vulgar Latin it probably disappeared, except in Church phrases, such as _mī dŏmĭne_. In Provençal we find the nominative regularly used in address (chanzọs, companh, emperaire, ioglars, Papiols), although the objective occasionally occurs in its stead (barọns pl., ioglar malastrüc, trachọr).

(3) The genitive, in the popular language, was little by little replaced by other constructions--commonly by the ablative with _de_ or by the dative; the beginnings of this substitution may be observed as early as Plautus. Among Provençal nouns--aside from such learned forms as ancianọr, christianọr, companhọr, paianọr, parentọr--we find remnants of the genitive only in a few compound words, as diiǫus ＜ _dīe Jŏvis_, and in the standing phrase ẹs mestięr ＜ _est ministĕrii_.

(4) The dative, which in most words had the same ending as the ablative, came to be replaced, in the greater part of the Empire, by the accusative with _ad_; this construction, too, goes back as far as Plautus. Provençal nouns retain no traces of the dative.

(5) The ablative, after the fall of final m (§ 55, M) and the loss of quantitive distinctions in unstressed syllables (§ 21), differed little or not at all from the accusative in the singular of nearly all nouns: _causăm_ _causā_, _dōnŭm_ _dōnō_, _patrĕm_ _patrĕ_, _frūctŭm_ _frūctū_, _dīĕm_ _dīē_. Furthermore, some prepositions (especially _in_) were used both with the accusative and with the ablative. It was inevitable, then, that the two cases should be confounded in the singular, and we have evidence of such confusion as early as the first century of our era; this led gradually to a substitution of the accusative for the ablative in the plural, the accusative plural being somewhat commoner and frequently simpler than the ablative. We may, therefore, take the accusative as the basis of the Provençal objective, remembering, however, that this accusative has been more or less blended with the ablative.

(6) The two-case declension remained theoretically in use in Provençal literature through the 14th century; but in texts later than the 12th, cases are often confused. From the spoken language the declension disappeared, in the west (as in Catalan), before the literary period; in the centre and east, probably in the 12th century; in the north, in the 13th. The case preserved was usually the objective, but sometimes the nominative. Some nouns in _-aire_ _-adọr_ kept both forms, with a differentiation of meaning.

92. In the discussion of declensions some phonetic peculiarities must not be overlooked:--

(1) In the nom. pl. of the 2d declension, a stressed ẹ, followed in the next syllable by final -ị, would regularly give ị (cf. § 27, 1); but the ẹ is preserved by the analogy of the nom. and obj. sg. and the obj. pl.: _capĭllī_ ＞ cabẹl, _mĭssī_ ＞ mẹs, _quētī_ ＞ quẹt, _sērī_ ＞ sẹr. We do, however, find cabil, and (perhaps by analogy) auzil ＜ _aucĕllī_.

(2) In the nom. pl. of the 2d declension, a c or g before the final -ị would regularly be palatalized (cf. § 55, C, G); but it is preserved from palatalization by the analogy of the other three forms: _amīcī_ ＞ amic, _lŏngī_ ＞ lonc.

(3) For the development of a t between a palatal or an n and a final s, see § 82, S: _annos_ ＞ anz, _fīlios_ ＞ filz.

(4) For the simplification of final scs, sts to cs, ts, see § 78, 2: ✱_bŭscus?_ ＞ bǫcs, _trīstes_ ＞ tritz.

(5) For the history of _-arius_ and _-tōrius_, see § 23, 1 and § 73, Ry, 1.

93. (1) Nouns whose objective singular ended in s were invariable in the earlier part of the literary period; _bracchium_ ＞ bratz, _cŏrpus_ ＞ cǫrs, _imperatrīcem_ ＞ emperairitz, _fascem_ ＞ fais, _latus_ ＞ latz, _lūcem_ ＞ lütz, _mĭssum_ ＞ mẹs, _nasum_ ＞ nas, _ŏpus_ ＞ ǫps, _ŭrsum_ ＞ ọrs, _pĭscem_ ＞ pẹis, _pĕctus_ ＞ pęitz, _prĕtium_ ＞ prętz, _tĕmpus_ ＞ tems, _vĕrsum_ ＞ vęrs, _vīsum_ ＞ vis, _vōcem_ ＞ vọtz. Later, however, a plural (originally obj. pl.) was made for such words by adding -es, generally at a time when final ts had been reduced to s (§ 64): brasses, cǫrses, mẹsses, pẹisses, vęrses; examples occur as early as the end of the 12th century.

(2) Other invariable nouns are midons, sidons, and often laus and rẹs; the last two sometimes have an objective lau, rẹ. Midons comes from the Church Latin _mī dŏmĭne_, which was popularized by the substitution of the Provençal don for _dŏmĭne_ and the addition of the nom. -s; the term was transferred from religious to feudal, and thence to amatory use, and came to mean ‘my lady.’ _Mi domina_ was common in Church Latin. Sidons is formed on the model of midons.

(3) For nouns in tš, see § 63, (1): ✱_disdūctum_ ＞ desdüg, _frūctum_ ＞ früch, _gaudium_ ＞ gaug, _nŏctem_ ＞ nuech. Such words were very often written in the plural with _-gz_, which was pronounced either ts or tš. The pronunciation ts is attested by such rhymes as _malfagz_: _alumenatz_.

94. Infinitives used substantively conformed to the 2d declension type: lauzars lauzar (like fǫcs fǫc), rire-s rire (like fabre-s fabre): see § 96. The same thing is true of masculine post-verbal nouns: (getar) gętz gęt, (guidar) guitz guit, (lansar) lans (invariable).

FIRST DECLENSION.

95. This declension came to include a part of the fifth and also some neuter plurals of the second and third. With the exception of dia (nearly always masculine) and of a few learned words, it contained only feminine nouns. As the nominative, accusative, and ablative singular early became identical, leaving only one form in the singular, the plural forms were reduced to one, the accusative crowding out the nominative; this substitution, which must have been begun before the Provençal period, was doubtless helped by the identity of nominative and accusative plural in feminine nouns of the third declension. _Causa_ will serve as a model:--

_causa_ ＞ causa _causam_ ＞ causa _causæ_ ✱_causas_ ＞ causas _causas_ ＞ causas

1. _Dia_ sometimes has a nom. sg. _dias_, following the example of other masculine nouns.

2. Many feminine proper names, in Gaul and elsewhere, developed a Low Latin declension _-a_ _-āne(m)_ or _-a_ _-ēne(m)_, as _Anna_ _Annāne_. Provençal has few traces of this inflection. The word _putana_ ＜?_pūtĭda_ + _ānem_ + _a_ may be a remnant of it. Cf. Meyer-Lübke, _Gram._, II, p. 27; E. Philipon, _Les accusatifs en_ -on _et en_ -ain, _Rom._, XXXI, 201.

SECOND DECLENSION.

96. This declension came to include the fourth. With the exception of mas, ‘hand’ (generally feminine), it contained only masculine nouns. The different types may be illustrated by _fŏcus_, _dōnum_, _faber_:--

_fŏcus_ ＞ fǫcs _dōnum_ ✱_dōnus_ ＞ dọns _faber_ ＞ faure fabre fabres

_fŏcum_ ＞ fǫc _dōnum_ ＞ dọn _fabrum_ ＞ fabre

_fŏcī_ ＞ fǫc _dōna_ ✱_dōnī_ ＞ dọn _fabrī_ ＞ fabre

_fŏcos_ ＞ fǫcs _dōna_ ✱_dōnos_ ＞ dọns _fabros_ ＞ fabres

For the c of _fŏcī_, see § 92, (2). For ✱_dŏnus_, etc., see § 89 (1). Nom. fabre is due to the analogy of the other three cases; the s of fabres is borrowed from the prevailing fǫcs type.

1. Neuters which long preserved their gender often have no _-s_ in the nom. sg.: _segle_ or _segles_. Nouns in _-age_ from _-aticum_ commonly have no _-s_: _corage_, _damnage_, _message_, _senhorage_; but forms with _-s_ occur also. Learned nouns in _-i_ from _-ium_ regularly have no _-s_: _breviari_, _emperi_, _iuzizi_, _testimoni_. Post-verbal nouns, on the other hand, usually take the nom. -s: _albires_, _blasme-s_, _consires_, _desires_ (cf. § 94). By the analogy of the _fabre-s_, _segle-s_, _blasme-s_ types, many masculines in _-e_ sometimes drop the _-s_: _clergue-s_, _diable-s_, _morgue-s_, _oncle-s_, _poble-s_. _Maestre_, _prestre_ regularly have no _-s_.

2. Most proper names are declined like common nouns: _Arnautz_ _Arnaut_, _Boecis_ _Boeci_, _Enrics_ _Enric_, _Lozoics_ _Lozoic_, _Peire-s_ _Peire_. Many proper names, however, developed in Gaul and elsewhere, from the 9th century on, a Low Latin declension _-us_ _-ōne(m)_, as _Petrus_ _Petrōnis_ (cf. § 95, 2): hence _Carle-s_ _Carló_, _Peire-s_ _Peiró_, etc.; so _Bergonhs_ _Bergonhó_, etc.

3. _Mas_, being usually feminine, has a nom. pl. _mas_.

4. For _pagadi_, _salvi_, _soli_, etc., and _beill_, _peccah_, _efanh_, etc., see § 51, 1.

THIRD DECLENSION.

97. This declension absorbed a part of the fifth: cf. § 90.

98. Nouns whose stem was different in the nominative and the accusative singular, reconstructed the nominative to correspond to the accusative, the new form being similar to the original genitive: _papĭlio_ _papiliōnem_ ＞ _papiliōnis_ _papiliōnem_, _pēs_ _pĕdem_ ＞ _pĕdis_ _pĕdem_. The change began in the Vulgar Latin period. Exceptions to the rule are names of persons, unless they ended in _-ans_ or _-ens_: _nĕpos_ _nepōtem_ ＞ nęps nebọt; but _amans_ _amantem_ ＞ ✱_amantis_ _amantem_ ＞ amáns amán.

1. _Carnis_ for _caro_ is used by classic writers. _Grūis_ for _grūs_ occurs in the _Appendix Probi_ III, belonging perhaps to the 3d century. _Papiliōnis_, _pĕdis_, _travis_ = _trabs_, and some others are found in the 8th century _Glossary of Reichenau_.

99. Masculine nouns of the third declension, early in the Provençal period, made their nominative plural conform to the second declension type, thus distinguishing it from the objective plural: _pater_ _patrem_ _patres_ _patres_ ＞ paire paire paire paires (cf. Old French and Italian). Feminines, on the other hand, kept the nominative plural in -s: _mater_ _matrem_ _matres_ _matres_ ＞ maire maire maires maires.

100. A few neuter nouns, becoming masculine in Vulgar Latin, developed distinctively masculine forms in the singular: _gĕnus_ _gĕnus_ ＞ ✱_gĕneris_ ✱_gĕnĕrem_ ＞ genres genre; so _fŭlgur_ (＞ _fŭlger_) ＞ ✱_fŭlgĕrem_ ＞ fọuzer. Most neuters, however, kept in the singular their original stem: _sēmen_ ＞ sẹm, _tĕmpus_ ＞ tems. But those in _-men_ regularly, and those in _-r_ sometimes, took an -s in the nominative singular: _flūmen_ _flūmen_ ＞ flüms flüm, _marmor_ _marmor_ ＞ marme-s marme; cǫr, in the literary language, usually has no nominative -s. In the plural most neuters brought their forms into harmony with the masculine type, but those in _-us_ kept the -s throughout: (_caput_ >) _capus_ ✱_capum_ _capĭta_ _capĭta_ ＞ caps cap cap caps, _cŏr_ _cŏr_ _cŏrda_ _cŏrda_ ＞ cǫr cǫr cǫr cǫrs, _nōmen_ _nōmen_ _nōmĭna_ _nōmĭna_ ＞ nọms nọm nọm nọms; but _cŏrpus_ _cŏrpus_ _cŏrpŏra_ _cŏrpŏra_ ＞ cǫrs cǫrs cǫrs cǫrs. _Mare_, becoming feminine, was declined thus: mars mar mars mars.

1. _Gĕnus_ also became _ges_, which was used as an adverb.

101. The third declension comprises three principal types: (1) nouns which in Latin had no difference of stem or of accent between the nominative and the accusative singular; (2) those which had a difference of stem but not of accent; (3) those which had a difference of accent.

(1) Nouns with no difference of stem or of accent:--

MASCULINE

_canis_ ＞ cas _pater_ ＞ paire-s _sōl_ ＞ sọ-s _canem_ ＞ ca _patrem_ ＞ paire _sōlem_ ＞ sọ _canes_ ＞ ca _patres_ ＞ paire _sōles_ ＞ sọl _canes_ ＞ cas _patres_ ＞ paires _sōles_ ＞ sọls

FEMININE

_fīnis_[84] ＞ fis _mater_ ＞ maire _fĭdes_ ＞ fẹs _fīnem_ ＞ fi _matrem_ ＞ maire _fĭdem_ ＞ fẹ _fīnes_ ＞ fis _matres_ ＞ maires _fĭdes_ ＞ fẹs _fīnes_ ＞ fis _matres_ ＞ maires _fĭdes_ ＞ fẹs

1. Masculine nouns of this type which etymologically had no -s in the nom. sg., often took one, even in the earliest times.

2. _Laus_ and _res_ were often invariable, but were sometimes declined like _sols_ and _fes_.

(2) Nouns with a difference of stem but not of accent:--

MASCULINE FEMININE NEUTER

_pōns_ ✱_pŏntis_ ＞ ponz _pars_ ✱_partis_ ＞ partz _lūmen_ ＞ lüm-s _pŏntem_ ＞ pon _partem_ ＞ part _lūmen_ ＞ lüm _pŏntes_ ＞ pon _partes_ ＞ partz _lūmĭna_ ＞ lüm _pŏntes_ ＞ ponz _partes_ ＞ partz _lūmĭna_ ＞ lüms

NAMES OF PERSONS

_cŏmes_ ＞ coms _hŏmo_ ＞ om _cŏmĭtem_ ＞ comte _hŏmĭnem_ ＞ ome omne[85] _cŏmĭtes_ ＞ comte _hŏmĭnes_ ＞ ome omne _cŏmĭtes_ ＞ comtes _hŏmĭnes_ ＞ omes omnes

1. For other neuter types, see § 100.

2. _Om_ later developed an inflection _oms_ _om_ _om_ _oms_.

3. _Lex_, _rex_ became _leis_ _lei_ _leis_ _leis_, _reis_ _rei_ _rei_ _reis_.

(3) Nouns with a difference of accent:--

MASCULINE FEMININE

_sĕrmo_ ✱_sermōnis_ ＞ sermọs _ratio_ ✱_ratiōnis_ ＞ razǫs _sermōnem_ ＞ sermọ _ratiōnem_ ＞ razọ _sermōnes_ ＞ sermọ _ratiōnes_ ＞ razọs _sermōnes_ ＞ sermọs _ratiōnes_ ＞ razọs

NAMES OF PERSONS IN -ANS, -ENS

_amans_ ✱_amantis_ ＞ amáns _parens_ ✱_parĕntis_ ＞ paréns _amantem_ ＞ amán _parĕntem_ ＞ parén _amantes_ ＞ amán (f. amáns) _parĕntes_ ＞ parén (f. paréns) _amantes_ ＞ amáns _parĕntes_ ＞ paréns

NAMES OF PERSONS NOT IN -ANS, -ENS

_amātor_ ＞ amaire _sĕnior_ ＞ sęnher _mŭlier_ ＞ mọler _amatōrem_ ＞ amadọr _seniōrem_ ＞ senhọr _muliĕ́rem_[86]＞ molhęr _amatōres_ ＞ amadọr _seniōres_ ＞ senhọr _muliĕ́res_ ＞ molhęrs _amatōres_ ＞ amadọrs _seniōres_ ＞ senhọrs _muliĕ́res_ ＞ molhęrs

_servītor_ ＞ servire _baro_ ＞ bar _sŏror_ ＞ sǫrre sǫr[87] _servitōrem_ ＞ servidọr _barōnem_ ＞ barọ _sorōrem_ ＞ sorọr _servitōres_ ＞ servidọr _barōnes_ ＞ barọ _sorōres_ ＞ sorọrs _servitōres_ ＞ servidọrs _barōnes_ ＞ barọs _sorōres_ ＞ sorọrs

1. After the same pattern as _senher_, we have pastor _pastōrem_ ＞ _pastre_ _pastór_, etc.; after the _bar_ pattern, ✱_companio_ (_Einf._, § 43) ✱_companiōnem_ ＞ _companh_ _companhó_, ✱_fĭllo_ (Körting) ✱_fillōnem_? ＞ _fel_ _feló_, _glŭtto_ (= _glūto_) _gluttōnem_ ＞ _glot_ _glotó_, _latro_ _latrōnem_ ＞ _laire_ _lairó_, _lĕo_ (treated like the name of a person) _leōnem_ ＞ _leu_ _leó_, etc. On the model of _amaire_, _servire_, we find _trobaire_ _trobadór_, etc., _iauzire_ _iauzidór_, etc.; and, for the second and third conjugations, _teneire_ _tenedór_, etc., _beveire_ _bevedór_, etc. The inflection of such words became much confused, and some of them eventually developed double declensions: _bars_ _bar_ _bar_ _bars_, _barós_ _baró_ _baró_ _barós_; _emperaires_ _emperaire_ _emperaire_ _emperaires_, _emperadórs_ _emperadór_ _emperadór_ _emperadórs_. Some proper names follow the _bar_ model: _Bret_ _Bretó_, _Folc-s_ (_Folques_) _Folcó_ (later _Folcós_ _Folcó_), _Gasc_ _Gascó_, _Uc_ _Ugó_, (later _Ucs_ _Uc_); cf. § 96, 2.

ADJECTIVES.

102. What has been said concerning the inflection of nouns applies also to adjectives: see §§ 91-101. For pronominal adjectives see §§ 114 ff.

1. The operation of phonetic laws sometimes results in a difference in stem between the m. and the f.: _bos_ _bona_, _larcs_ _larga_, _nutz_ _nuda_, _preon_ _preonda_; _mut_ _muda_, _prezat_ _prezada_. For _pauc_ _pauca_, _rauc_ _rauca_, see § 65, C, 1. For _-arius_ _-aria_, _-tōrius_ _-tōria_, see § 23, 1; § 73, Ry, 1.

2. Adjectives in -s or -š are undeclinable in the m. sg.: _glorios_, _perfieg_. Those in -s originally had no inflectional ending in the m. pl., but later they sometimes added -es: _divers_ _diverses_, _frances_ _franceses_. For the pl. of those in š, see § 93, (3).

103. We must recognize two classes of adjectives: (1) those which in Latin distinguish the feminine from the masculine; (2) those which do not.

1. Adjectives like _acer_, which, though inflected after the 3d declension type, could distinguish the m. from the f. in the nom. sg., fell into one or the other--usually the first--of the following classes (_agre_ _agra_, _alegre_ _alegra_; _terrestre_ _terrestre_).

(1) Masculine and feminine different:--

MASCULINE FEMININE _bĕllus_ ＞ bęls _bĕlla_ ＞ bęlla _bĕllum_ ＞ bęl _bĕllam_ ＞ bęla _bĕlli_ ＞ bęl _bĕllæ_ ✱_beĕllas_ ＞ bęlas _bĕllos_ ＞ bęls _bĕllas_ ＞ bęlas

_pauper_ ＞ paubre-s _paupĕra_ ＞ paubra _paupĕrum_ ＞ paubre _paupĕram_ ＞ paubra _paupĕi_ ＞ paubre _paupĕræas_ ＞ paubras _paupĕros_ ＞ paubres _paupĕras_ ＞ paubras

(2) Masculine and feminine alike:--

MASCULINE FEMININE _gentīlis_ ＞ gentils _gentīlis_ ＞ gentils _gentīlem_ ＞ gentil _gentīlem_ ＞ gentil _gentīles_ ＞ gentil _gentīles_ ＞ gentils _gentīles_ ＞ gentils _gentīles_ ＞ gentils

1. Some adjectives of the second class were attracted into the first either in Vulgar Latin or in Provençal; this happened to all adjectives in _-és_, _-able_, _-ible_, and also to _comun_, _dous_, _fol_, _freble_, _graile_, _len_, _mol_, _noble_, _paubre_ (early), _rude_, _trist_: _cortes_ _cortesa_, _durable_ _durabla_; _comuna_, _doussa_, etc. Some kept both inflections: _dolens_, _dolens_ or _dolenta_; _grans_, _grans_ or _granda_, etc.

104. In impersonal constructions we frequently find a nominative singular without -s, which is apparently a survival of the Latin neuter: _m’es bel_ (_greu_, _parven_, _semblan_, etc.) _que_.… But the form with -s sometimes occurs in the same constructions: _m’es greus que_.…

1. For _es mestier_, see § 91, (3).

105. Most adverbs of manner were formed by adding -men (-ment, -mens, or -menz) to the feminine singular of the adjective: belamen. These adverbs were originally ablative phrases: _serēna mĕnte_, etc. In Provençal the specific meaning of the -men was forgotten, but the two parts might still be separated by an intervening word: ẹpsa… ment. When two adverbs in -men were used together, the ending was generally affixed to only one, oftener the first. Bona and mala could be used as adverbs without the suffix.

1. For the adverbial ending -s, see § 82, S, 3.

COMPARISON.

106. Adjectives and adverbs regularly formed their comparative by prefixing plüs to the positive, and their superlative by prefixing the definite article to the comparative: cara, plüs cara, la plüs cara. This method of comparison goes back to Vulgar Latin times.

1. ‘Than’ is expressed by _que_ and _de_.

107. Some adjectives preserved their old comparative in _-ior_. These comparatives had an inflection similar to that of sęnher: cf. § 101, (3) and § 101, (3), 1.

POSITIVE COMPARATIVE