"I go from home."
Translation:Ego domo eo.
No, simply because domus is one of a few nouns (plus the names of cities, towns, small islands) that doesn't use prepositions for "motion FROM" and "motion TOWARDS." We would say "ab urbe eo" (I go away from the city) and "a villa eo" (I go away from the villa), but with the noun domus, it's the ablative alone that carries the "motion away from" function.
If they are not used with prepositions in extant Latin literature, doesn't that suggest that they couldn't be used with them? (Sorry to be obtuse.)
I do know that, for example, "Rōmam veniunt" and "Ad Rōmam veniunt" have distinct meanings: the first being "They come to Rome" and the second (using prep. ad) meaning "They come to the area near Rome / the vicinity of Rome ."
They can be used with other prepositions (dē Rōmā, "about Rome"); it's just that the basic directions (TO and FROM) and the basic location (IN/AT) don't require the normal prepositions that you'd use with, say, the noun "urbs" (city).
UPDATE: I've added this on another thread, I think; but I recently read and noticed a passage in Cicero, where the word domus does indeed have a preposition governing it:
apparently, because the word is qualified by a possessive genitive--it's not the usual domus that means "my home" (or "your home" or "the relevant person's home"):
Cicero is pointing out to Catiline that he knows all about the latter's conspiracy to overthrow the government; he proves it by telling him what he (Catiline) did last night:
_Dīcō tē priōre nocte vēnisse inter falcāriōs--nōn agam obscūrē--in M. Laecae domum; ... _
"I say that you went, last night, among the Scythe-makers; let me not speak in riddles: that you went into the house of Marcus Laeca; ..."
Notice preposition in governing domum , said to be because domum has the genitive ("of Marcus Laeca").
I guess it's the difference between "I'm going HOME," (meaning, to MY house) = Domum eō ; and "I'm going TO Joe's house" = In Marcī domum eō .
(The quotation is from Cicero, In Catilinam I. 4.)
Ablative, singular; 2nd declension.
The funny thing is that the noun (domus) varies between the 2nd and the 4th declensions; this is rather unusual. (The "adverbial" forms belong to the 2nd declension: domō from home, domum (to) home, homeward, domī at home.)
Normally, you learn the declension by seeing how the noun is listed, in an "official" dictionary listing:
such a listing gives the nominative singular form first, then the genitive singular.
the genitive singular, listed second, indicates the declension, as follows:
-ae = 1st; -ī = 2nd; -is = 3rd; -ūs = 4th; -eī (or -ēī) = 5th.
So, for example:
father = pater, patris, m. From the -is ending on the 2nd form listed, patris, we know this noun belongs to the 3rd declension.
field, territory = ager, agrī, m. From the -ī of the gen sing, we know it's 2nd decl.
home, house = domus, domūs, f. From the -ūs genitive sing., we see it's a 4th decl noun.
Another way to approach the topic of "declensions" is to learn what each of the 5 declensions does, in the ablative singular form:
1st: -ā. 2nd: -ō. 3rd: -e (or -ī). 4th: -ū. 5th: -ē
(Notice that it's always a vowel, for the abl sing; "the" vowel of each declension. There are 2 listed, for 3rd declension; adjectives, and some nouns, use the ending -ī.)
Indeed; if I were the Tyrant of Latin Education, I would have declensions be marked by the genitive_plural, which also marks which 3rd-declension nouns are i-stems (-ium) and which are consonant-stems (-um)._ But I am not, so we use the genitive singular and have to use heuristics like imparisyllabicity to separate the two groups in the third declension.
I guess the ablative singular would do the same job as the genitive plural; but have you ever actually seen the dative instead of the genitive given in a textbook?
I've never seen the dative (or ablative!) listed, in preference to the genitive;
I really only mentioned the singular ablatives, in my comment above, because I figured that that was one case that was getting a fair amount of "play," on Duolingo.
I really don't like the system that gives nominative followed by accusative: I guess it highlights the very important neuter "rule," that nominative = accusative; but it otherwise allows one to confound the 2nd and 4th declensions for 'too long' (since both will have -us and -um) and, to some extent, 3rd and 5th declensions as well (-ēs can be a 3rd decl. nomin. sing, and both of them use -em).
The usage depends on where the speaker and listener are located relative to the destination.
'To come' would normally have either the speaker or the listener at the destination.
'To go' would normally have neither the speaker or the listener at the destination.
"Come here" (telling someone to come towards you) vs "Go there" (telling someone to go to a spot away from you).
"I am coming home." (Likely would say to family or someone at home) vs "I am going home." (Maybe said to a co-worker as you leave work or to a friend from their place)
I run into you at the taberna, and I comment "Domo venio," which would suggest to you that I was just at my house before coming and meeting you.
I am about to leave my house, and I comment to my familiares, "Nunc domo eo," "Now I'm going away from home" (to my appointment at the taberna with you!).
(Would you use venir for the first and aller for the second, in French?)
Not really, in French, rather:
Domo venio: je viens de chez moi.
Domo eo: je pars de chez moi (leave)
(the preposition is always "de" (from)
But "partir" is taken as a replacement for "aller" here, exactly the same way English would use "to leave" (the house) as a replacement for "to go" in this context (go from the house).
I have no idea why there are such "replacements", when venir/aller are opposite direction verbs (Je vais et je viens)
And why it occurs in French and English, when there are no link here between the grammar structure and the vocabulary of the 2 languages.
I should ask a linguist some day.
What's the difference between ablative domo vs domu alternatives? Can one choose what they want, or is there some rule to choosing one over another?
On the wiktionary page, they state:
At least in later Latin, the most common declension is as follows: domus, domus, domui, domum, domo — domus, domorum, domibus, domos, domibus.
So it's a matter of a time period, where the domu declension is an archaic form and no longer used?
Allen & Greenough show that it's a noun with 2 stems (the 4th decl. pattern and the 2nd decl. one); they comment that many of the 4th-decl. plant names also come in 2nd-decl. varieties, so it looks like the "confusion" was very old.
I've been taught to think of the "adverbial" forms (domi, at home; domo, from home; domum, [to] home, homewards) as coming from the 2nd decl. 'side', whereas the word house, domus, belongs to the 4th decl.
The Oxford Latin Dictionary shows that the 2nd decl. set of forms (acc. pl. domos, for example) is old; I'd think of that as the archaic set, and that they're "fossilized" in the directional / locational forms (all of which have 2nd decl. endings; of course, the accus. -um ending is common to both 4th and 2nd).
Dicolatin gives a very good answer.
DOMO 1rst century BC, CICERO (when it's the alternative for Domui, sing dat.)
DOMU 1rst century BC, CICERO , (alternative for Domo, sing. abl.)
DOMUI 1rst century BC, CICERO (alternative for the loc. Domi)
DOMUIS 1rst century BC, VARRO, (alternative for sing. gen. Domus)
http://www.dicolatin.com/FR/LAK/0/DOMO/index.htm (in French)
Words that have the locative like domus will drop the proposition in place from which (what is used here) and place to which (one of which is ad + accusative) constructions.
Location domi sum -> I am at home. in foro sum -> I am in the forum.
Place From Which domo venio -> I am coming from home. a foro venio -> I am coming from the forum.
Place To Which domum eo -> I am going home ad forum eo -> I am going to the forum.