We have followed the general practice in referring to the…
““We have followed the general practice in referring to the nominative form as a "case" among four other cases. However, some modern grammarians have developed an account which goes back to Aristotle and according to which the term "noun" ('onoma') should be reserved for the nominative form, which names ('onomazein') simply, with no indication of a relation to other elements in the sentence. From its base (or "upright" or "straight" -- 'orthe', 'eutheia') form and function, a noun may undergo a "fall" ('ptosis', Latin 'casus', whence English 'case') or "inclination" ('klisis', from 'klino') towards other elements within the sentence. The roster of such fallings off is called a 'declension'. Although it is convenient to include the nominative form among the "cases," we shall occasionally refer to the other four as the 'oblique' cases.””
About This Quote
This interpretation was drafted with AI assistance. It is one reading of the quote, not the author's own explanation.
They explain that the nominative case historically functioned as a “case” but argue that “noun” should refer solely to the nominative, tracing the terminology back to Aristotle.
In simple terms: They discuss naming conventions for noun cases and suggest a more precise definition.
Key Takeaway
Consider precise terminology in linguistic analysis.
Themes
linguistics
grammar
terminology
historical linguistics
philosophy of language
Mood
analytical
academic
Type
theoretical
explanatory
When to use this quote
- language teaching
- translation studies
- academic debate
Key Concepts
noun classification
case theory
syntactic analysis
Questions to Reflect On
- Do modern grammars adopt this distinction?
- How does terminology affect language learning?
A Different Perspective
The argument may be too technical for non‑specialists.