# Declension/inflection



## Ali.h

Is there a difference between the terms declension and inflection or are they one and the same?


----------



## clevermizo

Ali.h said:


> Is there a difference between the terms declension and inflection or are they one and the same?



Declension of nouns and adjectives is a kind of inflection. Inflection refers to all and any morphological changes to words to suit a grammatical purpose. "Declension" is usually used in reference to nouns and how they "change" to fit the syntax of a sentence. But "declension" can be used in other ways. You can speak of the "declension" of the preposition to include pronouns: معي، معك، معه، معها etc. can be considered "declension." Declension is not usually used with reference to verbs, where the term is usually called "conjugation" or something else depending on the sort of change it is.

However, these terms get used (and abused) a lot so they may differ in application with regards to specific languages.

Now, these are English (and by extension European) grammatical terms. I think the Arabic term صرف covers both ideas.


----------



## Meyer Wolfsheim

Ali.h said:


> Is there a difference between the terms declension and inflection or are they one and the same?


 
In English and most Indo-European languages I suspect, the difference between "declension" and "inflection" is a categorical one.  

Imagine comparing the terms Christian and Catholic.  The two are not the same.  A Catholic is a Christian but not every Christian is a Catholic.  

The same is true for inflection and declension; declension is a form of inflection, almost always referring to making nouns, adjectives, particles, etc. agree with their proper syntatical role in a sentence (case 'declensions' or case 'inflections').  

Declension is a form of inflection, but not all inflection is (noun) declension.  Conjugating verbs is a form of inflection (verb conjugation), making plural is also, etc.  

Hope to have explained this.


----------



## trance0

In addition to the mentioned types of inflection, there are some other types of it, like adjective comparison(big, bigger, the biggest), forming adverbs from adjectives(logical, logically), using different forms for definite/indefinite adjectives(majhen/mali in Slovene), forming imperfective verbs from perfective verbs in Slavic languages(kupiti/kupovati) and some other depending on the language in question.


----------



## berndf

trance0 said:


> In addition to the mentioned types of inflection, there are some other types of it, like adjective *comparison(big, bigger, the biggest)*, forming adverbs from adjectives(logical, logically), using different forms for *definite/indefinite* adjectives(majhen/mali in Slovene), forming imperfective verbs from perfective verbs in Slavic languages(kupiti/kupovati) and some other depending on the language in question.


The two in bold are usually also considered declensions. E.g. you can say that German adjectives are declined by gender, number, case, *degree* and *definiteness*  as you can see in this declension matrix for the German adjective _lang_.

The two most important types of _inflections_ are:
- _declensions_ for nouns and adjectives,
- _conjugations_ for verbs.


----------



## Hulalessar

_Inflection_ occurs when you modify a word to express things like number, case etc. 

_Declension_ means three separate things:

1. The inflection of nouns, adjectives and pronouns considered generally.

2. All the inflected forms of a given noun etc, usually arranged in table form in an order fixed by convention according to language. The declension of Latin _mensa _is as follows:

_mensa
mensa
mensam
mensae
mensae
mensa

mensae
mensae
mensas
mensarum
mensis
mensis
_

3. A class of nouns etc inflected in the same way; all Latin nouns that decline like _mensa_ belong to the first declension.

So while _declension_ can mean _inflection,_ it cannot mean a particular instance of inflection.


----------



## berndf

This is getting hairy now. I would argue that "_mensam_ is the accusative singular declension of _mensa_" contains a valid use of the term _declension_.


----------



## trance0

Like I said, the definition of what is declension and what is considered seperate inflection that is not covered or treated as part of declension is not the same in every language. In Slovene grammar definitness of adjectives may still be considered part of adjective declension paradigm, but adjective comparison is usually not. The comparison of adjectives in Slovene has never been called declining per se, instead it has always been called 'comparison'. It is however part of the process 'pregibanje besed = Beugung/Wortbeugung/Flexion = inflecting/declining', but the term 'declension/Deklination/sklanjatev' is usually reserved for exactly preset patterns of forms. But if we merge all forms of 'inflecting' into only two groups we have, as berndf correctly pointed out, only declension and conjugation.


----------



## Hulalessar

Whilst it is dangerous to call on a word's etymology to assist in deciding what it means, I think it is worth pointing out that both the word "case" and "declension" are connected with the idea of a falling away or going down a slope. The word "case" is (or was originally) employed in respect of nouns as, in the order vocative, accusative, genitive, dative and ablative, each case was felt to be a falling away from the nominative. So each instance is a "case" but the whole process of falling is the "declension".

Verbs are not "declined"  because no form was considered to be a falling away from any other; instead the forms are "yoked together" in a "conjugation".

Just as we do not say that "_amas _is the second person singular active indicative conjugation of _amo_", so I do not think we should say "_mensam_ is the accusative singular declension of _mensa_".

Whilst we can use the word "declension" generally in phrases such as "The declension of nouns in Lithuanian", it is best reserved for describing the paradigms and classes of nouns, pronouns and adjectives.


----------



## berndf

Hulalessar said:


> Whilst we can use the word "declension" generally in phrases such as "The declension of nouns in Lithuanian", it is best reserved for describing the paradigms and classes of nouns, pronouns and adjectives.


I am afraid you are trying to be more catholic than the pope here. There are loads of respectable references of expressions like "accusative singular declension".


----------



## Hulalessar

berndf said:


> I am afraid you are trying to be more catholic than the pope here. There are loads of respectable references of expressions like "accusative singular declension".



I have to say that today is the first time I have ever heard it suggested that _case _and _declension _can be synonyms. Whilst accepting that words change their meanings and when it comes to the revolution you will find me on the barricades with the descriptivists, I feel I must characterise this use of _declension _as a solecism. Apart from anything else, it leaves us with the same word for the paradigm and its constituent parts.


----------



## berndf

Hulalessar said:


> I have to say that today is the first time I have ever heard it suggested that _case _and _declension _can be synonyms.


I didn't say that. My example was "accusative, singular". In Latin, nouns are declined by _case_ and _number_. I said the term declension could also be used for an instance not only for the scheme as a whole.


----------



## Hulalessar

berndf said:


> I didn't say that. My example was "accusative, singular". In Latin, nouns are declined by _case_ and _number_. I said the term declension could also be used for an instance not only for the scheme as a whole.



Noted. In practice though does anyone ever talk about nouns declining for number without regard to case? Would you say _cats_ is the plural declension of _cat_?


----------



## berndf

Hulalessar said:


> Noted. In practice though does anyone ever talk about nouns declining for number without regard to case? Would you say _cats_ is the plural declension of _cat_?


No. To be honest, I don't remember having heard the term declension in connection with Modern English at all.


----------



## Erick404

Hulalessar said:


> Would you say _cats_ is the plural declension of _cat_?



Strictly speaking, this is right.


----------



## Hulalessar

I think I have found a good definition of declension to cover my definition 1 in post 6:

"declension is the _occurrence _of inflection"


----------



## berndf

From Wikipedia, right? I think we need to extend the quote a bit further: "declension is the occurrence of inflection in nouns, pronouns and adjectives".


----------



## Hulalessar

berndf said:


> From Wikipedia, right? I think we need to extend the quote a bit further: "declension is the occurrence of inflection in nouns, pronouns and adjectives".



It was from somewhere else that I cannot now find. Mind you I expect it is on Wikipedia as their texts crop up everywhere. I omitted the reference to pronouns and adjectives as repetition can become a little tedious.


----------



## berndf

Hulalessar said:


> I omitted the reference to pronouns and adjectives as repetition can become a little tedious.


You also omitted the reference to nouns. But that one is essential.


----------



## Hulalessar

berndf said:


> You also omitted the reference to nouns.



So I did!


----------



## Ali.h

Meyer Wolfsheim said:


> Declension is a form of inflection, but not all inflection is (noun) declension.


 
Can you please give an example for what you have stated above?


----------



## trance0

Verb conjugation.


----------



## Ali.h

trance0 said:


> Verb conjugation.


 
And why is declension not considered verb conjugation? I mean if one is allowed to say verb conjugation is a form of inflection, why can't one say verb conjugation is a form of declension? Don’t declension and inflection linguistically mean the same thing!?


----------



## Meyer Wolfsheim

Ali.h said:


> And why is declension not considered verb conjugation? I mean if one is allowed to say verb conjugation is a form of inflection, why can't one say verb conjugation is a form of declension? Don’t declension and inflection linguistically mean the same thing!?


 
No, not in the English language nor in the grammatical jargon of English grammarians either.  

Verb conjugation is not declension.  Declension refers exclusively to the various agreements of nouns, adjectives, pronouns, etc. in respect to syntatical role in a sentence.  

Verb conjugation refers to adding a suffix/prefix/infix to a verb or modifying it in some way to agree with the agent of the verb (and some cases the syntatical role of its target).  The verb will also accord with tense, mood, and aspect, along with person.  

Can you conjugate a noun?  Certainly not, unless you make the noun modify itself somehow with respect to the same categories that a verb does.  

Can you decline a verb?  Certainly not, in no cases.  And even when a verb maybe acting as a noun, it is actually a noun (a gerundive) and no longer a verb.  

I made this mistake once when I told my German professor "I know how to conjugate the definite article for all cases."  She instantly corrected me, saying you "decline and not conjugate articles."  A category mistake.  

If you have a language where there is no clear distinction between nouns and verbs, etc.  then it might be possible to use either or in that case simply use "agree" or "inflect."  But as of now , due to the distinctions in English and most Indo-European languages, declension and conjugation are different instances of inflection.


----------



## Hulalessar

Ali.h said:


> And why is declension not considered verb conjugation? I mean if one is allowed to say verb conjugation is a form of inflection, why can't one say verb conjugation is a form of declension? Don’t declension and inflection linguistically mean the same thing!?



It is simply a mater of definition. Just as "pride" is assigned to "lions" and "pack" to wolves, so "declension" is assigned to nouns, pronouns, adjectives and articles, and "conjugation" is assigned to verbs.

If one means "all the inflected forms of" the word "paradigm" can be used. However, if you mean "give all the inflected forms of" there is not, so far as a I know, a single word that covers both "decline" and "conjugate".

The reason for the distinction is because in Indo-European languages where they are inflected nouns, pronouns, adjectives and articles all behave in the same way and quite differently from verbs. The distinction does not hold good for all languages. In Japanese adjectives contain a verbal idea. In some languages the verb may need to be modified to indicate not only that it has a subject, but also an object. Indeed, some incorporating languages can be analysed as composed only of verbs with no noun capable of existing as an independent word.


----------



## Wilma_Sweden

Hulalessar said:


> If one means "all the inflected forms of" the word "paradigm" can be used. However, if you mean "give all the inflected forms of" there is not, so far as a I know, a single word that covers both "decline" and "conjugate".


I'm not entirely convinced. The verb inflect does refer to any word class, but usually (according to dictionaries) it's intransitive, e.g.. these nouns inflect for plural. However, I've seen many samples of words being inflected, i.e. passive use, from linguistics literature, which makes me wonder if you couldn't inflect any word class, i.e. give all the inflected forms of.

The nouns are less complicated: inflection is a general term (hypernym), it can relate to any word class. Conjugation and declension have more specific meaning, one relates to verbs and the other to nouns. They are hyponyms of inflection. They relate to inflection in the same way that tennis ball and ping-pong ball relate to ball - they are different sub-types, not synonyms.


----------



## koniecswiata

In the case of some languages, such as English, using the term "declension" can actually be counter-productive--at least for learners of the language.  It's not really a relevant piece of terminology you need to know to learn the language well, and would probably cause more discomfort and confusion in learners--interfering with the learning of the language itself.  The same could be said for Spanish (another language "poor" in declension), though technically when you need to say "me" instead of "yo" (I vs. me) that is a case of declension.


----------



## Meyer Wolfsheim

Yes, English grammar really lost any sense of real declension a long time ago. The term is only present probably due to the studies of languages with productive declensions, most namely Latin. There really are no actual declensions in English except in the personal interrogative pronoun which preserves the four case description and as pointed out in personal pronouns which all have irregular declensions anyways. 

If there is a language where there is no distinction between things which are declined (nouns primarily) and things which are conjugated (verbs), then perhaps neither term would be used but rather "inflected." However, if a verb simply codes for those things, then I would still call it conjugation. 

example: The apple reddens (itself) <-- Inflection for adjective, person, number, and agent. Same thing as "The red apple" or "The apple is red."


----------

