An important word is missing in the Latin course!
The Latin course mentions gems, but it does not mention lingots. This means that I can't describe my possessions on Duolingo, which is unfortunate.
To solve this severe issue, I've invented the Latin term for Lingot: Lingotus.
It follows the -o declension, i.e.:
(Sing. Nominative:) lingotus
(Sing. Genitive:) lingoti
(Sing. Dative:) lingoto
(Sing. Accusative:) lingotum
(Sing. Ablative:) lingoto
(Sing. Vocative:) lingote
(Pl. Nominative:) lingoti
(Pl. Genitive:) lingotorum
(Pl. Dative:) lingotis
(Pl. Accusative:) lingotos
(Pl. Ablative:) lingotis
(Pl. Vocative:) lingoti
So, if I want to talk to my lingots, I'll shout: "Lingoti!" ("Oh, Lingots!") :D And if I want to talk to just one of them, I'll say: "Lingote!"
Just a little weekend fun, with a huge thanks to all the contributors and to those who answer questions, particularly in the sentence discussions. Gratias vobis ago! :-)
Happy learning, everyone! :-)
Improved version, provided by ARCANA-MYSA in a post below (thanks!):
Lingot, lingotis (3rd declension, masculine for consistency) works well enough.
V. cool! Please accept a few of the little beauties.
In French "lingot" means what we call an Ingot in English. In Latin an ingot is later, lateris (m.), a brick, and a golden one is "later aureus," lit., a gold brick! :) , at least acc. to Pliny the Elder:
C. Caesar primo introitu urbis civili bello suo ex aerario protulit laterum aureorum XV, argenteorum XXX, et in numerato |CCC|. . . .
(Gaius [Julius] Caesar, on his first entry of the city during his Civil War drew out from the treasury 15 [thousand pounds` weight] ingots of gold, thirty of silver, and in coin 300 [thousand]. . . .
But two words are not as convenient as your one.
FWIW, I found this using this extremely useful English-Latin dictionary, which is coupled with Lewis and Short's Latin-English dictionary, although I should note that the link to Pliny does not end us up at the right passage (paragraph 56).
Lingotus? Why change the word? Lingot, lingotis (3rd declension, masculine for consistency) works well enough.
Your version works, but in my experience it's far easier to put foreign words into third declension. :) To each their own!
Volgav vitsenanieff nivya kevach varatsach.
Here is a version with long vowels marked so you can see how it changes the pronunciation:
You can see that it sounds quite different with a long 'o' - which would be standard in a word like this. How do I know that this happens? It's not a technical learning, but it is what I have heard or seen in lots of third declension nouns. (It may not always happen but it seems normal.) See for instance:
bellātor (warriror) https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/bellator#Latin
Words in Latin sound very different when you add the long vowels in. Think bellatores versus bellātōrēs. The latter is rather threatening, the former sounds a bit like ballet dancers.
This sounds great! Thanks for the improvement to my invention. :-)
I didn't know how to perform the declension of words ending in anything different from -us, -um, -a in the nominative.
I support your variant, and I'll add it to my OP so that we all talk about our lingotes harmoniously. ;-)
Edit: I just added the vocative because I want to address my Lingots correctly. ;-)
Maybe you've come across this, maybe not, it's Winston Churchill relating his first Latin experiences:
Behold me then on a gloomy evening, with an aching heart, seated in front of the First Declension.
Mensa - a table
Mensa - O table
Mensam - a table
Mensae - of a table
Mensae - to or for a table
Mensa - by, with or from a table
What on earth did it mean? Where was the sense in it? It seemed absolute rigmarole to me. However, there was one thing I could always do: I could learn by heart. And I thereupon proceeded, as far as my private sorrows would allow, to memorize the acrostic-looking task which had been set me.
In due course the Master returned.
"Have you learnt it?" he asked.
"I think I can say it, sir," I replied; and I gabbled it off.
He seemed so satisfied with this that I was emboldened to ask a question.
"What does it mean, sir?"
"It means what it says. Mensa, a table. Mensa is a noun of the First Declension. There are five declensions. You have learnt the singular of the First Declension."
"But," I repeated," what does it mean?"
"Mensa means a table," he answered.
"Then why does mensa also mean O table," I enquired, "and what does O table mean?"
"Mensa, O table, is the vocative case," he replied.
"But why O table?" I persisted in genuine curiosity.
"O table – you would use that in addressing a table, in invoking a table." And then seeing he was not carrying me with him, "You would use it in speaking to a table."
"But I never do," I blurted out in honest amazement.
"If you are impertinent, you will be punished, and punished, let me tell you, very severely," was his conclusive rejoinder.
Such was my first introduction to the classics from which, I have been told, many of our cleverest men have derived so much solace and profit.
salvete the order of declension in latin - singular and plural - is : nominative, vocative, accusative, genitive, dative and ablative for a better memory for it. en français : l'ordre de la déclinaison en latin - singulier et pluriel - est : nominatif, vocatif, accusatif, génitif, datif et ablatif pour une meilleure mémorisation de celle-ci.
There are two competing systems for declension unfortunately. The 'ancient' way, or 'natural' way according to the Romans is Nominative, Genitive, Dative, Accusative, Ablative, Vocative, as has been given here, or as you will find on Wiktionary for example. It is more common in the USA as well. See: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/villa#Latin
The order you suggest is as I understand it was an innovation of Victorian British Latinists, who wanted to show the similarities between certain forms more clearly.