Implicaturum: Grice fought with this. It’s a term of
art, and he mainly wants to avoid, fastidiously, equivocation. “I say
fastidiously because at Oxford, few – Hare is one of them – followed suit --.
Most stuck with ‘implicatio.’ “So, if we
stick with Roman, we have ‘implicatio.’ This gives English ‘implication,’
because the Anglo-Norman nominative proceeded via the Roman accusative, i. e.
‘implicationem.’ The use of –ure is also Anglo-Norman, for Roman ‘-ura.’ So we
have ‘implicatura,’ and in Anglo-Norman, ‘implicature.’ ‘Implicatio’ is a
feminine noun, and so is ‘implicatura.’ ‘Implicatio’ is a ‘active voice’ noun;
so is ‘implicatura.’ The Roman allows for a correlative neuter to the past
participle, ‘implicatum,’ or ‘implicitum’ (there are vowel alternation here).
So, the two neuter correlative active forms for the two neuter passive perfect
forms, ‘implicatum’ and ‘implicitum’ are ‘implicaturum’ and ‘impliciturum.’
Kneale has expanded on the use of ‘implicans.’ If ‘implicans’ is the active PRESENT
participle for ‘implicare,’ ‘implicaturum’ is the active FUTURE participle.
There is no need to specify the vehicle, as per Kneale, ‘propositio implicans,’
‘propositio implicata’ – Since ‘implicatura’ is definitely constructed out of
the active-voice future participle, we should have in fact a trio, where the
two second items get two variants, each: the implicans, the implicaturum/impliciturum,
and the implicatum/implicitum. Note that in the present participle, the vowel
alternation does not apply: there’s ‘implicans’ (masculine, feminine, and
neuter) only, which then yields, in the neuter forms, the future, ‘implicaturum’/’impliciturum,’
and the perfect, ‘implicatum’/’implicitum.’ The same for ‘explicare’: explicatio,
explicatura, -- explicans, yielding explicaturum/expliciturm, explicatum/explciitum.
Note that when I speak of what is seen, ‘see’ being diaphanous, I refer to ‘visum,’
what is seen. – There is no need, and in fact it is best not to, spceficy the
vehicle. The Romans used the neuter, singular, for each case --.” “If I were serious about ‘implicature’ being
feminine, I would speak of the ‘implicata’ as a singular form, but I do not. I
use ‘implicatum,’ what is implied – and use ‘implicata’ as plural neuter. Since
an implicatum is usually indeterminate, it’s best to refer to the plural, ‘implicata’
– Ditto for the ‘implicaturum,’ which becomes, in the plural, ‘implicatura.’ –
the vehicles are various in that stress, emphasis, context, all change the
vehicle, somehow --. Implicatio then is like ‘conceptio,’ it is an abstract
form (strictly feminine) that has a process-producti ambiguity that the neuter
family: implicans, implicaturum/impliciturm, implicatum/implicitum avoids. Note
that while –ure form in Anglo-Norman does not derive from the accusative, as ‘implication,’
does hence no accusative nasal ‘n’ (of ‘implicatioN,’ but not ‘implicatio’) in ‘implicature.’
The fact that the Anglo-Normans confused it all by turning this into ‘employ,’
and ‘imply’ should not deter the Oxonian for his delightful coinages!” Active Nominal Forms Infinitive: implicā́re Present
participle: implicāns; implicántis Future participle: implicītúrus;
implicātúrus Gerund: implicándum Gerundive: implicándus Passive Nominal
Forms Infinitive: implicā́re Perfect participle: implicī́tum; implicā́tum. implicitura
(Latin Dictionary) lemma part voice mood
tense gender number case implicare verb active participle future feminine singularnominative
ablative vocative lemma part voice mood tense gender number case implicare verb
active participle future neuter plural nominative accusative vocative
INFLECTION Temporal inflection present – masculine implicans future – masculine
impliciturus / implicaturus present – feminine implicans future – feminine implicitura
/ implicatura present – neuter implicans future – neuter impliciturum /
implicaturum.
Wednesday, June 24, 2020
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment