Why are the 2nd/3rd singular forms of present of « potere » irregular?Relationship between indicativo...
Stateful vs non-stateful app
What was the "glowing package" Pym was expecting?
Can someone publish a story that happened to you?
How to figure out whether the data is sample data or population data apart from the client's information?
Examples of non trivial equivalence relations , I mean equivalence relations without the expression " same ... as" in their definition?
Modify locally tikzset
Python "triplet" dictionary?
Pressure to defend the relevance of one's area of mathematics
Binary Numbers Magic Trick
Was there a Viking Exchange as well as a Columbian one?
Is there a way to get a compiler for the original B programming language?
What is the strongest case that can be made in favour of the UK regaining some control over fishing policy after Brexit?
What's the metal clinking sound at the end of credits in Avengers: Endgame?
Packing rectangles: Does rotation ever help?
What does "rf" mean in "rfkill"?
Can solid acids and bases have pH values? If not, how are they classified as acids or bases?
Unexpected email from Yorkshire Bank
Can my Warlock be invisible and attack with its familiar?
get exit status from system() call
Any examples of headwear for races with animal ears?
How to delegate to implementing class
Help, my Death Star suffers from Kessler syndrome!
Confusion about capacitors
Why do Ichisongas hate elephants and hippos?
Why are the 2nd/3rd singular forms of present of « potere » irregular?
Relationship between indicativo presente and congiuntivo presente of 1st person plural (noi) conjugation?Is ‘cosare’ equivalent to the generic use of ‘do’ in English?Is 'si dispiace' ever an acceptable form of the verb dispiacere?Etymology of conjugation 2-person singularWhy are these two conjugations of 'viaggiare' irregular forms?How and why did avere get the 'h' in some present tense forms?Why do the numbers change format at 17-19?What's the origin of /ʎ/ sound of “gli”?Why does “congiuntivo imperfetto” come from Latin subjunctive pluperfect instead of subjunctive imperfect?How did “sapere” lose the middle consonant P in its indicative present table?Is “Cafeé und Thée Logia” partly Italian?
The verb potere comes from Latin posse and the conjugation table follows regular Latin → Italian patterns except for puoi and può. Why is that?
Latin Italian
possum posso
potes puoi
potest può
possimus* possiamo
potestis potete
possunt possono
Why doesn't Italian speak tu *poti and lui *pote?
* Latin possimus is given as the origin of possiamo instead of possumus because all 1st-person plural indicative present forms of Italian verbs are back-ported from the subjunctive present forms.
verbs etymology
asked 3 hours ago
iBugiBug
60011
add a comment |
The verb potere comes from Latin posse and the conjugation table follows regular Latin → Italian patterns except for puoi and può. Why is that?
Latin Italian
possum posso
potes puoi
potest può
possimus* possiamo
potestis potete
possunt possono
Why doesn't Italian speak tu *poti and lui *pote?
* Latin possimus is given as the origin of possiamo instead of possumus because all 1st-person plural indicative present forms of Italian verbs are back-ported from the subjunctive present forms.
verbs etymology
asked 3 hours ago
iBugiBug
60011
Wasn't it possumus? In general, it is pot- + forms of sum verb.
– DaG
3 hours ago
@DaG Specifically regarding the fact that all Italian noi forms of indicative present are backported from subjunctive present.
– iBug
3 hours ago
Not sure I understand: you have deliberately given the subjunctive rather than the indicative form for the 4th person for that reason? If so, perhaps you could make a note about it.
– DaG
3 hours ago
@DaG That's right. I added a note about that
– iBug
3 hours ago
Perfect, thanks.
– DaG
3 hours ago
add a comment |
The verb potere comes from Latin posse and the conjugation table follows regular Latin → Italian patterns except for puoi and può. Why is that?
Latin Italian
possum posso
potes puoi
potest può
possimus* possiamo
potestis potete
possunt possono
Why doesn't Italian speak tu *poti and lui *pote?
* Latin possimus is given as the origin of possiamo instead of possumus because all 1st-person plural indicative present forms of Italian verbs are back-ported from the subjunctive present forms.
verbs etymology
asked 3 hours ago
iBugiBug
60011
The verb potere comes from Latin posse and the conjugation table follows regular Latin → Italian patterns except for puoi and può. Why is that?
Latin Italian
possum posso
potes puoi
potest può
possimus* possiamo
potestis potete
possunt possono
Why doesn't Italian speak tu *poti and lui *pote?
* Latin possimus is given as the origin of possiamo instead of possumus because all 1st-person plural indicative present forms of Italian verbs are back-ported from the subjunctive present forms.
verbs etymology
verbs etymology
asked 3 hours ago
iBugiBug
60011
asked 3 hours ago
iBugiBug
60011
edited 3 hours ago
iBug
asked 3 hours ago
iBugiBug
60011
asked 3 hours ago
iBugiBug
60011
asked 3 hours ago
iBugiBug
60011
60011
Wasn't it possumus? In general, it is pot- + forms of sum verb.
– DaG
3 hours ago
@DaG Specifically regarding the fact that all Italian noi forms of indicative present are backported from subjunctive present.
– iBug
3 hours ago
Not sure I understand: you have deliberately given the subjunctive rather than the indicative form for the 4th person for that reason? If so, perhaps you could make a note about it.
– DaG
3 hours ago
@DaG That's right. I added a note about that
– iBug
3 hours ago
Perfect, thanks.
– DaG
3 hours ago
add a comment |
Wasn't it possumus? In general, it is pot- + forms of sum verb.
– DaG
3 hours ago
@DaG Specifically regarding the fact that all Italian noi forms of indicative present are backported from subjunctive present.
– iBug
3 hours ago
Not sure I understand: you have deliberately given the subjunctive rather than the indicative form for the 4th person for that reason? If so, perhaps you could make a note about it.
– DaG
3 hours ago
@DaG That's right. I added a note about that
– iBug
3 hours ago
Perfect, thanks.
– DaG
3 hours ago
Wasn't it possumus? In general, it is pot- + forms of sum verb.
– DaG
3 hours ago
Wasn't it possumus? In general, it is pot- + forms of sum verb.
– DaG
3 hours ago
@DaG Specifically regarding the fact that all Italian noi forms of indicative present are backported from subjunctive present.
– iBug
3 hours ago
@DaG Specifically regarding the fact that all Italian noi forms of indicative present are backported from subjunctive present.
– iBug
3 hours ago
Not sure I understand: you have deliberately given the subjunctive rather than the indicative form for the 4th person for that reason? If so, perhaps you could make a note about it.
– DaG
3 hours ago
Not sure I understand: you have deliberately given the subjunctive rather than the indicative form for the 4th person for that reason? If so, perhaps you could make a note about it.
– DaG
3 hours ago
@DaG That's right. I added a note about that
– iBug
3 hours ago
@DaG That's right. I added a note about that
– iBug
3 hours ago
Perfect, thanks.
– DaG
3 hours ago
Perfect, thanks.
– DaG
3 hours ago
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
The forms puoti and puote (obtained from poti and pote by regular stressed open syllable diphtongization) are in fact attested in the early Tuscan and survived in literary Italian till quite late (in fact, arguably till today, even). See for example the famous verse, from Dante's Comedy
Vuolsi così colà dove si puote
ciò che si vuole, e più non dimandare
("So it is wanted where one is able to do what one wants, and ask no more"). And, from the 1912 edition of Il Milione, chapter XCIII
Signore re, aguale ben puoti vedere che tu non se’ da guerreggiare con meco.
The passage from puote to può is in line with the elision of many final -te and -de in Italian: from cittade to città and from virtute to virtù.
It is a bit harder to explain how to go from puoti to puoi. I was unable to find a solid indication of the reason for this change in the literature (Röhlfs simply says it is a "simplification"). The best conjecture I can make is that this is by analogy to the (regular) form vuoi of volere. This is supported by the existence of an archaic third singular form puole or pole clearly influenced from vuole that survived in various regional languages (cfr. pòle in Pisa, pöl in Turin, pòle in Treia (Marche) and pól in Venice).
It is not impossible that this passed through an uncertainly attested *puoli (by analogy with the archaic vuoli), which lost the intervocalic l as it happened for many other words. Of course analogic pressure from può cannot be discarded either.
answered 52 mins ago
Denis Nardin♦Denis Nardin
7,11421540
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "524"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fitalian.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f10457%2fwhy-are-the-2nd-3rd-singular-forms-of-present-of-potere-irregular%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
The forms puoti and puote (obtained from poti and pote by regular stressed open syllable diphtongization) are in fact attested in the early Tuscan and survived in literary Italian till quite late (in fact, arguably till today, even). See for example the famous verse, from Dante's Comedy
Vuolsi così colà dove si puote
ciò che si vuole, e più non dimandare
("So it is wanted where one is able to do what one wants, and ask no more"). And, from the 1912 edition of Il Milione, chapter XCIII
Signore re, aguale ben puoti vedere che tu non se’ da guerreggiare con meco.
The passage from puote to può is in line with the elision of many final -te and -de in Italian: from cittade to città and from virtute to virtù.
It is a bit harder to explain how to go from puoti to puoi. I was unable to find a solid indication of the reason for this change in the literature (Röhlfs simply says it is a "simplification"). The best conjecture I can make is that this is by analogy to the (regular) form vuoi of volere. This is supported by the existence of an archaic third singular form puole or pole clearly influenced from vuole that survived in various regional languages (cfr. pòle in Pisa, pöl in Turin, pòle in Treia (Marche) and pól in Venice).
It is not impossible that this passed through an uncertainly attested *puoli (by analogy with the archaic vuoli), which lost the intervocalic l as it happened for many other words. Of course analogic pressure from può cannot be discarded either.
answered 52 mins ago
Denis Nardin♦Denis Nardin
7,11421540
add a comment |
The forms puoti and puote (obtained from poti and pote by regular stressed open syllable diphtongization) are in fact attested in the early Tuscan and survived in literary Italian till quite late (in fact, arguably till today, even). See for example the famous verse, from Dante's Comedy
Vuolsi così colà dove si puote
ciò che si vuole, e più non dimandare
("So it is wanted where one is able to do what one wants, and ask no more"). And, from the 1912 edition of Il Milione, chapter XCIII
Signore re, aguale ben puoti vedere che tu non se’ da guerreggiare con meco.
The passage from puote to può is in line with the elision of many final -te and -de in Italian: from cittade to città and from virtute to virtù.
It is a bit harder to explain how to go from puoti to puoi. I was unable to find a solid indication of the reason for this change in the literature (Röhlfs simply says it is a "simplification"). The best conjecture I can make is that this is by analogy to the (regular) form vuoi of volere. This is supported by the existence of an archaic third singular form puole or pole clearly influenced from vuole that survived in various regional languages (cfr. pòle in Pisa, pöl in Turin, pòle in Treia (Marche) and pól in Venice).
It is not impossible that this passed through an uncertainly attested *puoli (by analogy with the archaic vuoli), which lost the intervocalic l as it happened for many other words. Of course analogic pressure from può cannot be discarded either.
answered 52 mins ago
Denis Nardin♦Denis Nardin
7,11421540
add a comment |
The forms puoti and puote (obtained from poti and pote by regular stressed open syllable diphtongization) are in fact attested in the early Tuscan and survived in literary Italian till quite late (in fact, arguably till today, even). See for example the famous verse, from Dante's Comedy
Vuolsi così colà dove si puote
ciò che si vuole, e più non dimandare
("So it is wanted where one is able to do what one wants, and ask no more"). And, from the 1912 edition of Il Milione, chapter XCIII
Signore re, aguale ben puoti vedere che tu non se’ da guerreggiare con meco.
The passage from puote to può is in line with the elision of many final -te and -de in Italian: from cittade to città and from virtute to virtù.
It is a bit harder to explain how to go from puoti to puoi. I was unable to find a solid indication of the reason for this change in the literature (Röhlfs simply says it is a "simplification"). The best conjecture I can make is that this is by analogy to the (regular) form vuoi of volere. This is supported by the existence of an archaic third singular form puole or pole clearly influenced from vuole that survived in various regional languages (cfr. pòle in Pisa, pöl in Turin, pòle in Treia (Marche) and pól in Venice).
It is not impossible that this passed through an uncertainly attested *puoli (by analogy with the archaic vuoli), which lost the intervocalic l as it happened for many other words. Of course analogic pressure from può cannot be discarded either.
answered 52 mins ago
Denis Nardin♦Denis Nardin
7,11421540
The forms puoti and puote (obtained from poti and pote by regular stressed open syllable diphtongization) are in fact attested in the early Tuscan and survived in literary Italian till quite late (in fact, arguably till today, even). See for example the famous verse, from Dante's Comedy
Vuolsi così colà dove si puote
ciò che si vuole, e più non dimandare
("So it is wanted where one is able to do what one wants, and ask no more"). And, from the 1912 edition of Il Milione, chapter XCIII
Signore re, aguale ben puoti vedere che tu non se’ da guerreggiare con meco.
The passage from puote to può is in line with the elision of many final -te and -de in Italian: from cittade to città and from virtute to virtù.
It is a bit harder to explain how to go from puoti to puoi. I was unable to find a solid indication of the reason for this change in the literature (Röhlfs simply says it is a "simplification"). The best conjecture I can make is that this is by analogy to the (regular) form vuoi of volere. This is supported by the existence of an archaic third singular form puole or pole clearly influenced from vuole that survived in various regional languages (cfr. pòle in Pisa, pöl in Turin, pòle in Treia (Marche) and pól in Venice).
It is not impossible that this passed through an uncertainly attested *puoli (by analogy with the archaic vuoli), which lost the intervocalic l as it happened for many other words. Of course analogic pressure from può cannot be discarded either.
answered 52 mins ago
Denis Nardin♦Denis Nardin
7,11421540
edited 18 mins ago
answered 52 mins ago
Denis Nardin♦Denis Nardin
7,11421540
answered 52 mins ago
Denis Nardin♦Denis Nardin
7,11421540
answered 52 mins ago
Denis Nardin♦Denis Nardin
7,11421540
7,11421540
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Italian Language Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fitalian.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f10457%2fwhy-are-the-2nd-3rd-singular-forms-of-present-of-potere-irregular%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Wasn't it possumus? In general, it is pot- + forms of sum verb.
– DaG
3 hours ago
@DaG Specifically regarding the fact that all Italian noi forms of indicative present are backported from subjunctive present.
– iBug
3 hours ago
Not sure I understand: you have deliberately given the subjunctive rather than the indicative form for the 4th person for that reason? If so, perhaps you could make a note about it.
– DaG
3 hours ago
@DaG That's right. I added a note about that
– iBug
3 hours ago
Perfect, thanks.
– DaG
3 hours ago