Editing Vulgar Latin (section)

== Grammar ==
{{More citations needed section|date=March 2023}}
=== Romance articles ===
It is difficult to place the point in which the [[definite article]], absent in Latin but present in all Romance languages, arose, largely because the highly colloquial speech in which it arose was seldom written down until the daughter languages had strongly diverged; most surviving texts in early Romance show the articles fully developed.

Definite articles evolved from demonstrative [[Pronoun|pronouns]] or [[Adjective|adjectives]] (an analogous development is found in many Indo-European languages, including [[Ancient Greek|Greek]], [[Celtic languages|Celtic]] and [[Germanic languages|Germanic]]); compare the fate of the Latin [[demonstrative adjective]] {{wikt-lang|la|ille}}, {{wikt-lang|la|illa}}, {{wikt-lang|la|illud}} "that", in the [[Romance languages]], becoming French {{wikt-lang|fr|le}} and {{wikt-lang|fr|la}} (Old French ''li'', ''lo'', ''la''), Catalan and Spanish {{wikt-lang|es|el}}, {{wikt-lang|es|la}} and {{wikt-lang|es|lo}}, Occitan {{wikt-lang|oc|lo}} and {{wikt-lang|oc|la}}, Portuguese and Galician {{wikt-lang|pt|o}} and {{wikt-lang|pt|a}} (elision of -l- is a common feature of Galician-Portuguese) and Italian {{wikt-lang|it|il}}, {{wikt-lang|it|lo}} and {{wikt-lang|it|la}}. [[Sardinian language|Sardinian]] went its own way here also, forming its article from {{wikt-lang|la|ipse}}, {{wikt-lang|la|ipsa}} an intensive adjective (''su, sa''); some Catalan and Occitan dialects have articles from the same source. While most of the Romance languages put the article before the noun, Romanian has its own way, by putting the article after the noun, e.g. ''lupul'' ("the wolf" – from *''lupum illum'') and ''omul'' ("the man" – ''*homo illum''),<ref name="Vincent2">Vincent (1990).</ref> possibly a result of being within the [[Balkan sprachbund]].

The term {{Lang|la|ille}} may have evolved from its initial demonstrative function, broadening to convey [[Semantics|semantic]] prominence by directing the attention of the audience towards particular referents which the speaker intended to highlight. This usage of the term is found in the {{Lang|la|[[Itinerarium Egeriae]]}}, which recounts the travels of the [[Christian pilgrimage|Christian pilgrim]]—and the author—[[Egeria (pilgrim)|Egeria]]: the author utilizes the demonstrative to mark words that are crucial to the meaning of the text. For instance, when noting the location of a cave by a church, Egeria clarifies that she is referring to "{{Lang|la|ipsa ecclesia}}" ("that church"). The usage of {{Lang|la|ille}} typically occurs alongside nouns that have previously been identified with the text: Egeria, when describing a church near [[Mount of Olives|Mount Olivet]], initially describes it merely as an "{{Lang|la|ecclesia}}," but later refers to it as "{{Lang|la|ipsa ecclesia}}." The usage of the demonstratives to denote prominent parts of discourse may have predicated the eventual transformation of the term into a definite article. Once speakers began prefacing sentences with the term, they began utilizing it in a manner similar to an article; therefore, the article-like features of the word eventually become normalized and then incorporated into the standard grammar of the language.{{Sfn|Faingold|2003|pp=49-50}}  

In Late Latin writings, {{Lang|la|ille}} was often used by writers in [[Relative clause|relative clauses]] to establish the identity of subjects not previously mentioned in the text.{{Sfn|Carlier|Mulder|2010|p=249}} The 7th-century ''[[Chronicle of Fredegar]]'' clarifies that it is discussing "{{Lang|la|homines illos}}" ("those men") before introducing a relative clause in which they are the subject.{{Sfn|Carlier|Mulder|2010|p=249}} During this time period, the term also developed [[Anaphora (linguistics)|anaphoric]] functions as an extension of the original demonstrative usage: Late Latin authors would substitute more basic mentions of a referent with {{Lang|la|ille}} and added more descriptive information.{{Sfn|Carlier|Mulder|2010|p=259}} For instance, the ''Chronicle of Fredegar'' refers to a "{{Lang|la|regina}}" ("queen") as "{{Lang|la|illam parentem Francorum}}," meaning "that relative of the [[Franks]]. From this usage of the {{Lang|la|ille}}, in which it functioned help identify a specific referent, the term may have generalized to adopt more features associated with definite articles. One example of such a development appears in the writings of the 6th-century [[Gallo-Roman culture|Gallo-Roman]] historian [[Gregory of Tours]], who wrote "{{Lang|la|Ductus itaque sanctus Eugenius ad regem, cum illo Arrianorum episcopo pro fide catholica decertavit}}," meaning "The holy [[Eugenius of Carthage|Eugenius]] was led to the king, and debated with that Arrian [[bishop]] in defense of the [[Catholic Church|Catholic faith]]."<ref>[[Gregory of Tours]]. [[iarchive:sanctigeorgiiflo01greg|Sancti Georgii Florentii Gregorii, espiscopi turonensis, Historiæ ecclesiasticæ Francorum libri decem]]. [[iarchive:sanctigeorgiiflo01greg/page/58|2.3.2]].</ref> Within this passage, the [[Ablative case|ablative]] form of the pronoun, {{Lang|la|illo}}, is utilized to denote the Arrian bishop, however it appears to function for more like the English article "the" rather than the original Classical Latin {{Lang|la|ille}}: the sentence could be understood equally as well if rendered as "The holy Eugenius was led to the king, and debated with the Arrian [[bishop]] in defense of the [[Catholic Church|Catholic faith]]."{{Sfn|Carlier|Mulder|2010|pp=251-252}} Another indication of the weakening of the demonstratives can be inferred from the fact that at this time, legal and similar texts begin to swarm with {{wikt-lang|la|praedictus}}, {{wikt-lang|la|supradictus}}, and so forth (all meaning, essentially, "aforesaid"), which seem to mean little more than "this" or "that". Gregory of Tours writes, ''Erat autem... beatissimus Anianus in supradicta civitate episcopus'' ("Blessed Anianus was bishop in that city.") The original Latin demonstrative adjectives were no longer felt to be strong or specific enough.<ref name="Harrington2">Harrington et al. (1997).</ref>

The Latin pronoun {{Lang|la|ipse}}, which was initially used to emphasize specific referents, also developed functions similar to a definite article. However, it retained some of its original emphatic properties: it was also used anaphorically to highlight prominent referents. In one 9th-10th century text from the [[Roman Catholic Diocese of Urgell|Diocese of Urgell]] they utilize the phrase {{Lang|la|ipsa ecclesia}} to identify the church the entire paragraph referred to while identifying a unique river, not mentioned previously in the text, as "{{Lang|la|illo ribo}}" ("that river").{{Sfn|Bernstein|Ordóñez|Urgell|2021|p=13}} Alongside its emphatic usage, the original Classical Latin {{Lang|la|ipse}} was also used to clarify referents if the text risked introducing ambiguity regarding the subjects and objects involved.{{Sfn|Carlier|Mulder|2010|p=14}} However, in Late Latin literature {{Lang|la|ipse}} appears in scenarios in which its presence was not necessary: In the ''Chronicle of Fredegar'', a character is introduced as "{{Lang|la|Waiofarium}}" ("[[Waiofar]]) before—in the next sentence—being described as "{{Lang|la|ipsum Waiofarium}}" ("the very same Waiofar").{{Sfn|Carlier|Mulder|2010|pp=17-18}} Other documents suggest that {{Lang|la|ipse}} and {{Lang|la|ille}} may have eventually assumed practically identical meanings: the 11th-12th century text, the {{Lang|la|Cartulario de Sant Cugat del Vallés}} utilizes both terms like definite articles, mentioning "{{Lang|la|ipsum mansum}}" and "{{Lang|la|illum mansum}}," both meaning "the authority."{{Sfn|Bernstein|Ordóñez|Urgell|2021|p=13}}

In the less formal speech, reconstructed forms suggest that the inherited Latin demonstratives were made more forceful by being compounded with {{wikt-lang|la|ecce}} (originally an [[interjection]]: "behold!"), which also spawned Italian {{wikt-lang|it|ecco}} through {{wikt-lang|la|eccum}}, a contracted form of ''ecce eum''. This is the origin of Old French {{wikt-lang|fro|cil}} (*''ecce ille''), {{wikt-lang|fro|cist}} (*''ecce iste'') and {{wikt-lang|fro|ici}} (*''ecce hic''); Italian {{wikt-lang|it|questo}} (*''eccum istum''), {{wikt-lang|it|quello}} (*''eccum illum'') and (now mainly Tuscan) {{wikt-lang|it|codesto}} (*''eccum tibi istum''), as well as {{wikt-lang|it|qui}} (*''eccu hic''), {{wikt-lang|it|qua}} (*''eccum hac''); Spanish and Occitan {{wikt-lang|es|aquel}} and Portuguese {{wikt-lang|pt|aquele}} (*''eccum ille''); Spanish {{wikt-lang|es|acá}} and Portuguese {{wikt-lang|pt|cá}} (*''eccum hac''); Spanish {{wikt-lang|es|aquí}} and Portuguese {{wikt-lang|pt|aqui}} (*''eccum hic''); Portuguese {{wikt-lang|pt|acolá}} (*''eccum illac'') and {{wikt-lang|pt|aquém}} (*''eccum inde''); Romanian {{wikt-lang|ro|acest}} (*''ecce iste'') and {{wikt-lang|ro|acela}} (*''ecce ille''), and many other forms.

On the other hand, even in the [[Oaths of Strasbourg]], dictated in Old French in AD 842, no demonstrative appears even in places where one would clearly be called for in all the later languages (''pro christian poblo'' – "for the Christian people"). Using the demonstratives as articles may have still been considered overly informal for a royal oath in the 9th century. Considerable variation exists in all of the Romance vernaculars as to their actual use:{{Citation needed|date=March 2024}} in Romanian, the articles are suffixed to the noun (or an adjective preceding it), as in other languages of the [[Balkan sprachbund]] and the [[North Germanic languages]].

The numeral {{wikt-lang|la|unus}}, {{wikt-lang|la|una}} (one) supplies the [[indefinite article]] in all cases (again, this is a common semantic development across Europe). This is anticipated in Classical Latin; [[Cicero]] writes ''cum uno gladiatore nequissimo''<ref>{{cite book |author=Marcus Tullius Cicero |url=https://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.02.0011%3Atext%3DPhil.%3Aspeech%3D2%3Achapter%3D3 |title=Philippics |at=Speech 2, chapter 3 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20221121150242/https://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus:text:1999.02.0011:text%3DPhil.:speech%3D2:chapter%3D3 |archive-date=2022-11-21 |url-status=live}}</ref> ("with a most immoral gladiator"). This suggests that ''{{lang|la|unus}}'' was beginning to supplant {{wikt-lang|la|quidam}} in the meaning of "a certain" or "some" by the 1st century BC.{{Dubious|date=May 2009|reason=Still dubious in 2024.}}

=== Loss of neuter gender ===<!-- This section is linked from [[Grammatical gender]] -->
{| class="wikitable" align="right"
|+ 1st and 2nd adjectival declension paradigm in Classical Latin:<br>e.g. ''altus'' ("tall")<br>Excludes vocative.
|-
! rowspan="2" | !! colspan="3" | singular !! colspan="3" | plural
|-
! masculine !! neuter !! feminine !! masculine !! neuter !! feminine
|- align="center"
! nominative
| {{wikt-lang|la|altus|i=no}} || altum || alta || altī || rowspan="2" | alta || altae
|- align="center"
! accusative
| colspan="2" | altum || altam || altōs || altās
|- align="center"
! dative
| colspan="2" rowspan="2" | altō || altae || colspan="3" rowspan="2" | altīs
|- align="center"
! ablative
| altā 
|- align="center"
! genitive
| colspan="2" | altī || altae || colspan="2" | altōrum || altārum
|}
The three [[grammatical genders]] of Classical Latin were replaced by a two-gender system in most Romance languages.

The neuter gender of classical Latin was in most cases identical with the masculine both syntactically and morphologically. The confusion had already started in [[Pompeii|Pompeian]] graffiti, e.g. ''cadaver mortuus'' for ''cadaver mortuum'' ("dead body"), and ''hoc locum'' for ''hunc locum'' ("this place"). The morphological confusion shows primarily in the adoption of the nominative ending ''-us'' (''-Ø'' after ''-r'') in the ''o''-declension.

In [[Petronius]]'s work, one can find ''balneus'' for {{wikt-lang|la|balneum}} ("bath"), ''fatus'' for {{wikt-lang|la|fatum}} ("fate"), ''caelus'' for {{wikt-lang|la|caelum}} ("heaven"), ''amphitheater'' for {{wikt-lang|la|amphitheatrum}} ("amphitheatre"), ''vinus'' for {{wikt-lang|la|vinum}} ("wine"), and conversely, ''thesaurum'' for {{wikt-lang|la|thesaurus}} ("treasure"). Most of these forms occur in the speech of one man: Trimalchion, an uneducated Greek (i.e. foreign) [[freedman]].

In modern Romance languages, the nominative ''s''-ending has been largely abandoned, and all substantives of the ''o''-declension have an ending derived from ''-um'': ''-u'', ''-o'', or ''-Ø''. E.g., masculine {{wikt-lang|la|murus}} ("wall"), and neuter {{wikt-lang|la|caelum}} ("sky") have evolved to: Italian {{wikt-lang|it|muro}}, {{wikt-lang|it|cielo}}; Portuguese {{wikt-lang|pt|muro}}, {{wikt-lang|pt|céu}}; Spanish {{wikt-lang|es|muro}}, {{wikt-lang|es|cielo}}, Catalan {{wikt-lang|ca|mur}}, {{wikt-lang|ca|cel}}; Romanian {{wikt-lang|ro|mur}}, ''cieru>''{{wikt-lang|ro|cer}}; French {{wikt-lang|fr|mur}}, {{wikt-lang|fr|ciel}}. However, Old French still had ''-s'' in the nominative and ''-Ø'' in the accusative in both words: ''murs'', ''ciels'' [nominative] – ''mur'', ''ciel'' [oblique].{{efn|In a few isolated masculine nouns, the ''s'' has been either preserved or reinstated in the modern languages, for example FILIUS ("son") > French {{wikt-lang|fr|fils}}, [[deus|DEUS]] ("god") > Spanish {{wikt-lang|es|dios}} and Portuguese {{wikt-lang|pt|deus}}, and particularly in proper names: Spanish ''Carlos'', ''Marcos'', in the conservative orthography of French ''Jacques'', ''Charles'', ''Jules'', etc.<ref>Menéndez Pidal 1968, p.&nbsp;208; [http://monsu.desiderio.free.fr/curiosites/cassujet.html Survivances du cas sujet].</ref>}}

For some neuter nouns of the third declension, the oblique stem was productive; for others, the nominative/accusative form, (the two were identical in Classical Latin). Evidence suggests that the neuter gender was under pressure well back into the imperial period. French ''(le)'' {{wikt-lang|fr|lait}}, Catalan ''(la)'' {{wikt-lang|ca|llet}}, Occitan ''(lo)'' {{wikt-lang|oc|lach}}, Spanish ''(la)'' {{wikt-lang|es|leche}}, Portuguese ''(o)'' {{wikt-lang|pt|leite}}, Italian language ''(il)'' {{wikt-lang|it|latte}}, [[Leonese language|Leonese]] ''(el) lleche'' and Romanian {{wikt-lang|ro|lapte}}''(le)'' ("milk"), all derive from the non-standard but attested Latin nominative/accusative neuter {{wikt-lang|la|lacte}} or accusative masculine {{wikt-lang|la|lactem}}. In Spanish the word became feminine, while in French, Portuguese and Italian it became masculine (in Romanian it remained neuter, {{wikt-lang|ro|lapte}}/{{wikt-lang|ro|lăpturi}}). Other neuter forms, however, were preserved in Romance; Catalan and French {{wikt-lang|fr|nom}}, Leonese, Portuguese and Italian {{wikt-lang|it|nome}}, Romanian {{wikt-lang|ro|nume}} ("name") all preserve the Latin nominative/accusative ''nomen'', rather than the oblique stem form *''nomin-'' (which nevertheless produced Spanish {{wikt-lang|es|nombre}}).<ref name="Vincent">Vincent (1990).</ref>
{{clear right}}
{| class="wikitable" align="right" style="margin: 10px;"
|+ Typical Italian endings
|-
! !! colspan="2" | Nouns
! colspan="2" | Adjectives and determiners
|-align="center"
! !! singular !! plural !! singular !! plural
|-align="center"
! masculine
| {{wikt-lang|it|giardino|giardin<u>o</u>}} || ''giardin<u>i</u>'' || {{wikt-lang|it|buono|buon<u>o</u>}} || ''buon<u>i</u>''
|-align="center"
! feminine
| {{wikt-lang|it|donna|donn<u>a</u>}} || ''donn<u>e</u>'' || {{wikt-lang|it|buona|buon<u>a</u>}} || ''buon<u>e</u>''
|-align="center"
! neuter
| {{wikt-lang|it|uovo|uov<u>o</u>}} || ''uov<u>a</u>'' || {{wikt-lang|it|buono|buon<u>o</u>}} || ''buon<u>e</u>''
|}

Most neuter nouns had plural forms ending in <small>-A</small> or <small>-IA</small>; some of these were reanalysed as feminine singulars, such as {{wikt-lang|la|gaudium}} ("joy"), plural ''gaudia''; the plural form lies at the root of the French feminine singular ''(la)'' {{wikt-lang|fr|joie}}, as well as of Catalan and Occitan ''(la)'' {{wikt-lang|oc|joia}} (Italian ''la'' {{wikt-lang|it|gioia}} is a borrowing from French); the same for {{wikt-lang|la|lignum}} ("wood stick"), plural ''ligna'', that originated the Catalan feminine singular noun ''(la)'' {{wikt-lang|ca|llenya}}, Portuguese ''(a)'' {{wikt-lang|pt|lenha}}, Spanish ''(la)'' {{wikt-lang|es|leña}} and Italian ''(la)'' {{wikt-lang|it|legna}}. Some Romance languages still have a special form derived from the ancient neuter plural which is treated grammatically as feminine: e.g., <small>{{wikt-lang|la|bracchium|BRACCHIUM|i=no}} : BRACCHIA</small> "arm(s)" → Italian ''(il)'' {{wikt-lang|it|braccio}} : ''(le) braccia'', Romanian {{wikt-lang|ro|braț|braț(ul)}} : ''brațe(le)''. Cf. also [[Merovingian]] Latin ''ipsa animalia aliquas mortas fuerant''.

Alternations in Italian [[heteroclitic]] nouns such as ''l'uovo fresco'' ("the fresh egg") / ''le uova fresche'' ("the fresh eggs") are usually analysed as masculine in the singular and feminine in the plural, with an irregular plural in ''-a''. However, it is also consistent with their historical development to say that {{wikt-lang|it|uovo}} is simply a regular neuter noun ({{wikt-lang|la|ovum}}, plural ''ova'') and that the characteristic ending for words agreeing with these nouns is ''-o'' in the singular and ''-e'' in the plural. The same alternation in gender exists in certain Romanian nouns, but is considered regular as it is more common than in Italian. Thus, a relict neuter gender can arguably be said to persist in Italian and Romanian.

In Portuguese, traces of the neuter plural can be found in collective formations and words meant to inform a bigger size or sturdiness. Thus, one can use {{wikt-lang|pt|ovo}}''(s)'' ("egg(s)") and {{wikt-lang|pt|ova}}''(s)'' ("roe", "collection(s) of eggs"), {{wikt-lang|pt|bordo}}''(s)'' ("section(s) of an edge") and {{wikt-lang|pt|borda}}''(s'') ("edge(s)"), {{wikt-lang|pt|saco}}''(s)'' ("bag(s)") and {{wikt-lang|pt|saca}}''(s'') ("sack(s)"), {{wikt-lang|pt|manto}}''(s)'' ("cloak(s)") and {{wikt-lang|pt|manta}}''(s)'' ("blanket(s)"). Other times, it resulted in words whose gender may be changed more or less arbitrarily, like {{wikt-lang|pt|fruto}} / {{wikt-lang|pt|fruta}} ("fruit"), {{wikt-lang|pt|caldo}} / {{wikt-lang|pt|calda}} ("broth"), etc.

These formations were especially common when they could be used to avoid irregular forms.  In Latin, the names of trees were usually feminine, but many were declined in the second declension paradigm, which was dominated by masculine or neuter nouns. Latin {{wikt-lang|la|pirus}} ("[[pear]] tree"), a feminine noun with a masculine-looking ending, became masculine in Italian ''(il)'' {{wikt-lang|it|pero}} and Romanian {{wikt-lang|ro|păr|păr(ul)}}; in French and Spanish it was replaced by the masculine derivations ''(le)'' {{wikt-lang|fr|poirier}}, ''(el)'' {{wikt-lang|es|peral}}; and in Portuguese and Catalan by the feminine derivations ''(a)'' {{wikt-lang|pt|pereira}}, ''(la)'' {{wikt-lang|ca|perera}}.

As usual, irregularities persisted longest in frequently used forms. From the fourth declension noun ''manus'' ("hand"), another feminine noun with the ending ''-us'', Italian and Spanish derived ''(la)'' {{wikt-lang|es|mano}}, Romanian ''mânu>''{{wikt-lang|ro|mână}}, pl. {{wikt-lang|ro|mâini}} / (reg.) ''mâni'', Catalan ''(la)'' {{wikt-lang|ca|mà}}, and Portuguese ''(a)'' {{wikt-lang|pt|mão}}, which preserve the feminine gender along with the masculine appearance.

Except for the Italian and Romanian heteroclitic nouns, other major Romance languages have no trace of neuter nouns, but still have neuter pronouns. French {{wikt-lang|fr|celui-ci}} / {{wikt-lang|fr|celle-ci}} / {{wikt-lang|fr|ceci}} ("this"), Spanish {{wikt-lang|es|éste}} / {{wikt-lang|es|ésta}} / {{wikt-lang|es|esto}} ("this"), Italian: {{wikt-lang|it|gli}} / {{wikt-lang|it|le}} / {{wikt-lang|it|ci}} ("to him" /"to her" / "to it"), Catalan: {{wikt-lang|ca|ho}}, {{wikt-lang|ca|açò}}, {{wikt-lang|ca|això}}, {{wikt-lang|ca|allò}} ("it" / ''this'' / ''this-that'' / ''that over there''); Portuguese: {{wikt-lang|pt|todo}} / {{wikt-lang|pt|toda}} / {{wikt-lang|pt|tudo}} ("all of him" / "all of her" / "all of it").

In Spanish, a three-way contrast is also made with the definite articles {{wikt-lang|es|el}}, {{wikt-lang|es|la}}, and {{wikt-lang|es|lo}}. The last is used with nouns denoting abstract categories: ''lo bueno'', literally "that which is good", from {{wikt-lang|es|bueno}}: good.

{{notelist}}

=== Loss of oblique cases ===
The Vulgar Latin vowel shifts caused the merger of several case endings in the nominal and adjectival declensions.{{sfn|Herman|2000|p=52}} Some of the causes include: the loss of final ''m'', the merger of ''ă'' with ''ā'', and the merger of ''ŭ'' with ''ō'' (see tables).{{sfn|Herman|2000|p=52}} Thus, by the 5th century, the number of case contrasts had been drastically reduced.{{sfn|Herman|2000|p=52}}
{| class="wikitable" align="center" style="display: inline-table;"
|+Evolution of a 1st declension noun:<br />''caepa/cēpa'' ("onion") (feminine singular)
|-
!
! Classical <br />(c. 1st century)
! Vulgar{{sfn|Herman|2000|p=52}}<br />(c. 5th cent.)
! Modern<br />Romanian
|-align="center"
! nominative
| ''caepa, cēpa''
| rowspan="3" | ''*cépa''
| rowspan="3" | ''ceapă''
|- align="center"
! accusative
| ''caepam, cēpam''
|-align="center"
! ablative
| ''caepā, cēpā''
|-align="center"
! dative
| rowspan="2" | ''caepae, cēpae''
| rowspan="2" | ''*cépe''
| rowspan="2" | ''cepe''
|-align="center"
! genitive
|}

{| class="wikitable" align="center" style="display: inline-table;"
|+Evolution of a 2nd declension noun:<br />''mūrus'' ("wall") (masculine singular)
|-
!
! Classical <br />(c. 1st cent.)
! Vulgar{{sfn|Herman|2000|p=52}}<br />(c. 5th cent.)
! Old French <br />(c. 11th cent.)
|-align="center"
!nominative
| ''mūrus''
| ''*múros''
| ''murs''
|-align="center"
! accusative
| ''mūrum''
| ''*múru''
| rowspan="4" | ''mur''
|-align="center"
! ablative
| rowspan="2" | ''mūrō''
| rowspan="2" | ''*múro''
|-align="center"
! dative
|-align="center"
! genitive
| ''mūrī''
| ''*múri''
|}

There also seems to be a marked tendency to confuse different forms even when they had not become homophonous (like the generally more distinct plurals), which indicates that nominal declension was shaped not only by phonetic mergers, but also by structural factors.{{sfn|Herman|2000|p=52}} As a result of the untenability of the noun case system after these phonetic changes, Vulgar Latin shifted from a markedly [[synthetic language]] to a more [[analytic language|analytic one]].

<!--I don't have the whole explanation of the disapparition of every case-->
The '''[[genitive case]]''' died out around the 3rd century AD, according to [[Wilhelm Meyer-Lübke|Meyer-Lübke]]{{obsolete source|date=January 2024}}<!--We need to know what the view of modern-day researchers is, not the opinion of someone who died in the 1930s. The article itself shows that his views have been superseded in some respects.-->, and began to be replaced by "de"  + noun (which originally meant "about/concerning", weakened to "of") as early as the 2nd century BC.{{Citation needed|date=December 2016}} Exceptions of remaining genitive forms are some pronouns, certain fossilized expressions and some proper names. For example, French {{wikt-lang|fr|jeudi}} ("Thursday") < Old French ''juesdi'' < Vulgar Latin "{{wikt-lang|la|diēs Iovis|jovis diēs|i=no}}"; Spanish ''es'' {{wikt-lang|es|menester}} ("it is necessary") < "est {{wikt-lang|la|ministeri|i=no}}"; and Italian {{wikt-lang|it|terremoto}} ("earthquake") < "{{wikt-lang|la|terraemotus|terrae motu|i=no}}" as well as names like ''Paoli'', ''Pieri''.{{sfn|Grandgent|1907|p=43-44}}

The '''[[dative case]]''' lasted longer than the genitive, even though [[Plautus]], in the 2nd century BC, already shows some instances of substitution by the construction "ad" + accusative. For example, "ad carnuficem dabo".{{sfn|Grandgent|1907|p=44}}<ref>[[Captivi]], 1019.</ref>

The '''[[accusative case]]''' developed as a prepositional case, displacing many instances of the [[ablative case|ablative]].{{sfn|Grandgent|1907|p=46-47}} Towards the end of the imperial period, the accusative came to be used more and more as a general oblique case.{{sfn|Herman|2000|p=53}}

Despite increasing case mergers, nominative and accusative forms seem to have remained distinct for much longer, since they are rarely confused in inscriptions.{{sfn|Herman|2000|p=53}} Even though Gaulish texts from the 7th century rarely confuse both forms, it is believed that both cases began to merge in Africa by the end of the empire, and a bit later in parts of Italy and Iberia.{{sfn|Herman|2000|p=53}} Nowadays, [[Romanian language|Romanian]] maintains a two-case system, while [[Old French]] and [[Old Occitan]] had a two-case subject-oblique system.

This Old French system was based largely on whether or not the Latin case ending contained an "s" or not, with the "s" being retained but all vowels in the ending being lost (as with ''veisin'' below). But since this meant that it was easy to confuse the singular nominative with the plural oblique, and the plural nominative with the singular oblique, this case system ultimately collapsed as well, and Middle French adopted one case (usually the oblique) for all purposes. 

Today, Romanian is generally considered the only Romance language with a surviving case system. However, some dialects of [[Romansh language|Romansh]] retain a special predicative form of the masculine singular identical to the plural: ''il bien vin'' ("the good wine") vs. ''il vin ei buns'' ("the wine is good"). This "predicative case" (as it is sometimes called) is a remnant of the Latin nominative in ''-us''.
{| class="wikitable" align="center"
|+ Evolution of a masculine noun<br />in Old French: ''veisin'' ("neighbor").<br /> (definite article in parentheses).
|-
! colspan="2" | !! Classical Latin<br />(1st cent.) !! Old French<br />(11th cent.)
|-align="center"
! rowspan="5" | singular
! nominative
| "<u>vīcīnus</u>" || (li) <u>veisins</u>
|-align="center"
! accusative
| "<u>vīcīnum</u>" || rowspan="4" | (le) <u>veisin</u>
|-align="center"	
! genitive
| "vīcīnī"
|-align="center"	
! dative
| rowspan="2" | "vīcīnō"  	
|-align="center"	
! ablative
|-align="center"
! rowspan="5" | plural
! nominative
| "<u>vīcīnī</u>" || (li) <u>veisin</u>
|-align="center"
! accusative
| "<u>vīcīnōs</u>" || rowspan="4" | (les) <u>veisins</u>
|-align="center"
! genitive
| "vīcīnōrum"
|-align="center"
! dative
| rowspan="2" | "vīcīnīs"
|-align="center"
! ablative
|}

=== Wider use of prepositions ===
The loss of a productive noun case system meant that the [[syntax|syntactic]] purposes it formerly served now had to be performed by [[preposition]]s and other paraphrases. These particles increased in number, and many new ones were formed by compounding old ones. The descendant Romance languages are full of grammatical particles such as Spanish {{wikt-lang|es|donde}}, "where", from Latin {{wikt-lang|la|de}} + {{wikt-lang|la|unde}} (which in Romanian literally means "from where"/"where from"), or French {{wikt-lang|fr|dès}}, "since", from {{wikt-lang|la|de}} + {{wikt-lang|la|ex}}, while the equivalent Spanish and Portuguese {{wikt-lang|pt|desde}} is ''de'' + ''ex'' + ''de''. Spanish {{wikt-lang|es|después}} and Portuguese {{wikt-lang|pt|depois}}, "after", represent ''de'' + ''ex'' + {{wikt-lang|la|post}}.

Some of these new compounds appear in literary texts during the late empire; French {{wikt-lang|fr|dehors}}, Spanish ''de'' {{wikt-lang|es|fuera}} and Portuguese ''de'' {{wikt-lang|pt|fora}} ("outside") all represent ''de'' + {{wikt-lang|la|foris}} (Romanian {{wikt-lang|ro|afară}} – ''ad'' + ''foris''), and we find [[Jerome]] writing ''stulti, nonne qui fecit, quod de foris est, etiam id, quod de intus est fecit?'' (Luke 11.40: "ye fools, did not he, that made which is without, make that which is within also?"). In some cases, compounds were created by combining a large number of particles, such as the Romanian {{wikt-lang|ro|adineauri}} ("just recently") from ''ad'' + ''de'' + ''in'' + ''illa'' + ''hora''.<ref>Romanian Explanatory Dictionary ([http://dexonline.ro/definitie/adineauri DEXOnline.ro])</ref>

'''Classical Latin:'''
:''Marcus patrī librum dat.'' "Marcus is giving [his] father [a/the] book."

'''Vulgar Latin:'''
:''*Marcos da libru a patre.'' "Marcus is giving [a/the] book to [his] father."{{Citation needed|date=March 2024}}

Just as in the disappearing dative case, colloquial Latin sometimes replaced the disappearing genitive case with the preposition ''de'' followed by the ablative, then eventually the accusative (oblique).

'''Classical Latin:'''
:''Marcus mihi librum patris dat.'' "Marcus is giving me [his] father's book.

'''Vulgar Latin:'''
:''*Marcos mi da libru de patre.'' "Marcus is giving me [the] book of [his] father."{{Citation needed|date=March 2024}}

=== Pronouns ===
Unlike in the nominal and adjectival inflections, pronouns kept a great part of the case distinctions. However, many changes happened. For example, the {{IPA|/ɡ/}} of ''ego'' was lost by the end of the empire, and ''eo'' appears in manuscripts from the 6th century.{{Which|date=April 2017}}{{sfn|Grandgent|1907|p=161}}
{| class="wikitable"
|+Reconstructed pronominal system of Vulgar Latin{{sfn|Grandgent|1907|p=162}} <!--The book doesn't say which case is each row, also, it's a bad scan, so I couldn't distinguish long and short vowels (little marks below the vowel)-->
|-align="center"
! !! colspan="2"| 1st person !! colspan="2"| 2nd person !! rowspan="2" | 3rd person
|-align="center"
! !! singular !! plural !! singular !! plural 
|-align="center"
! Nominative
| *éo || *nọs || *tu || *vọs ||  
|-align="center"
! Dative
| *mi || *nọ́be(s) || *ti, *tẹ́be || *vọ́be(s) || *si, *sẹ́be 
|-align="center"
! Accusative
| *mẹ || *nọs || *tẹ || *vọs || *sẹ 
|}

=== Adverbs ===
Classical Latin had a number of different suffixes that made [[adverb]]s from [[adjective]]s: {{wikt-lang|la|cārus}}, "dear", formed {{wikt-lang|la|cārē}}, "dearly"; {{wikt-lang|la|ācriter}}, "fiercely", from {{wikt-lang|la|ācer}}; {{wikt-lang|la|crēbrō}}, "often", from {{wikt-lang|la|crēber}}. All of these derivational suffixes were lost in Vulgar Latin.

An alternative formation with a feminine [[ablative case|ablative]] form modifying {{wikt-lang|la|mente}} (originally the ablative of ''mēns'', and so meaning "with a ... mind") gave rise to a widespread rule for forming adverbs in many Romance languages: adding the suffix -''ment(e)'' to the feminine form of the adjective. So {{wikt-lang|la|vēlōx}} ("quick") instead of {{wikt-lang|la|vēlōciter}} ("quickly") gave ''veloci mente'' (originally "with a quick mind", "quick-mindedly"), and ''-mente'' became a productive suffix for forming adverbs in Romance such as Italian {{wikt-lang|it|chiaramente}}, Spanish {{wikt-lang|es|claramente}} 'clearly'. The development of an originally autonomous form (the noun ''mente'', meaning 'mind') into a suffix (although remaining in free lexical use in other contexts e.g. Italian ''venire in mente'' 'come to mind') is a textbook case of [[grammaticalization]]. 

=== Verbs ===
[[File:Page of Lay of the Cid.jpg|right|thumb|upright=0.9|The ''[[Cantar de mio Cid|Cantar de Mio Cid]]'' (''Song of my [[El Cid|Cid]]'') is the earliest Spanish text]]
{{Main article|Romance verbs}}
{{See also|Romance languages#Verbal morphology}}

In general, the verbal system in the Romance languages changed less from Classical Latin than did the nominal system.

The four conjugational classes generally survived. The second and third conjugations already had identical imperfect tense forms in Latin, and also shared a common present participle. Because of the merging of short ''i'' with long ''ē'' in most of Vulgar Latin, these two conjugations grew even closer together. Several of the most frequently-used forms became indistinguishable, while others became distinguished only by stress placement:
{| class="wikitable"
!rowspan="2"|
! rowspan="2"|Infinitive
! 1st
! 2nd
! 3rd
! 1st
! 2nd
! 3rd
! rowspan="2"|Imperative<br>singular
|-
! colspan="3"|singular
! colspan="3"|plural
|-
! Second conjugation (Classical)
| -ēre
| -eō
| -ēs
| -et
| -ēmus
| -ētis
| -ent
| -ē
|-
! Second conjugation (Vulgar)
| *-ẹ́re
| *-(j)o
| *-es
| *-e(t)
| *-ẹ́mos
| *-ẹ́tes
| *-en(t)
| *-e
|-
! Third conjugation (Classical)
| -ere
| -ō
| -is
| -it
| -imus
| -itis
| -unt
| -e
|-
! Third conjugation (Vulgar)
| *-ere
| *-o
|*-es
|*-e(t)
| *-emos
| *-etes
| *-on(t)
|*-e
|}

These two conjugations came to be conflated in many of the Romance languages, often by merging them into a single class while taking endings from each of the original two conjugations. Which endings survived was different for each language, although most tended to favour second conjugation endings over the third conjugation. Spanish, for example, mostly eliminated the third conjugation forms in favour of the second conjugation forms.

French and Catalan did the same, but tended to generalise the third conjugation infinitive instead. Catalan in particular almost eliminated the second conjugation ending over time, reducing it to a small relic class. In Italian, the two infinitive endings remained separate (but spelled identically), while the conjugations merged in most other respects much as in the other languages. However, the third-conjugation third-person plural present ending survived in favour of the second conjugation version, and was even extended to the fourth conjugation. Romanian also maintained the distinction between the second and third conjugation endings.

In the [[perfect (grammar)|perfect]], many languages generalized the ''-aui'' ending most frequently found in the first conjugation. This led to an unusual development; phonetically, the ending was treated as the diphthong {{IPA|/au/}} rather than containing a semivowel {{IPA|/awi/}}, and in other cases the {{IPA|/w/}} sound was simply dropped. We know this because it did not participate in the sound shift from {{IPA|/w/}} to {{IPA|/β̞/}}.  Thus Latin ''amaui'', ''amauit'' ("I loved; he/she loved") in many areas became proto-Romance *''amai'' and *''amaut'', yielding for example Portuguese ''amei'', ''amou''. This suggests that in the spoken language, these changes in conjugation preceded the loss of {{IPA|/w/}}.<ref name="Vincent" />

Another major systemic change was to the [[future tense]], remodelled in Vulgar Latin with [[auxiliary verbs]]. A new future was originally formed with the auxiliary verb {{wikt-lang|la|habere}}, *''amare habeo'', literally "to love I have" (cf. English "I have to love", which has shades of a future meaning). This was contracted into a new future suffix in Western Romance forms, which can be seen in the following modern examples of "I will love":
* {{langx|fr|j'aimerai}} (''je'' + ''aimer'' + ''ai'') ← ''aimer'' ["to love"] + ''ai'' ["I have"].
* [[Portuguese language|Portuguese]] and {{langx|gl|amarei}} (''amar'' + [''h'']''ei'') ← ''amar'' ["to love"] + ''hei'' ["I have"]
* [[Spanish language|Spanish]] and {{langx|ca|amaré}} (''amar'' + [''h'']''e'') ← ''amar'' ["to love"] + ''he'' ["I have"].
* {{langx|it|amerò}} (''amar'' + [''h'']''o'') ← ''amare'' ["to love"] + ''ho'' ["I have"].

The first historical attestation of this new future can be found in a 7th-century Latin text, the ''[[Chronicle of Fredegar]]''<ref>Peter Nahon (2017).[https://www.academia.edu/36225613/Peter_Nahon_Pal%C3%A9oroman_Daras_Pseudo_Fr%C3%A9d%C3%A9gaire_VIIe_si%C3%A8cle_de_la_bonne_interpr%C3%A9tation_d_un_jalon_de_la_romanistique_Bulletin_de_la_Soci%C3%A9t%C3%A9_de_Linguistique_de_Paris_112_1_2017_p_123_130 Paléoroman ''Daras'' (Pseudo-Frédégaire, VIIe siècle) : de la bonne interprétation d’un jalon de la romanistique]. ''Bulletin de la Société de Linguistique de Paris'', 112/1, p. 123-130.</ref>

A [[periphrasis|periphrastic construction]] of the form 'to have to' (late Latin ''habere ad'') used as future is characteristic of [[Sardinian language|Sardinian]]: 
* ''Ap'a istàre'' < ''apo a istàre'' 'I will stay'
* ''Ap'a nàrrere'' < ''apo a nàrrer'' 'I will say'

An innovative [[conditional mood|conditional]] (distinct from the [[subjunctive mood|subjunctive]]) also developed in the same way (infinitive + conjugated form of ''habere''). The fact that the future and conditional endings were originally independent words is still evident in literary Portuguese, which in these tenses allows [[clitic]] object pronouns to be incorporated between the root of the verb and its ending: "I will love" (''eu'') ''amarei'', but "I will love you" ''amar-te-ei'', from ''amar'' + ''te'' ["you"] + (''eu'') ''hei'' = ''amar'' + ''te'' + [''h'']''ei'' = ''amar-te-ei''.

In Spanish, Italian, Romanian and Portuguese, personal pronouns can still be omitted from verb phrases as in Latin, as the endings are still distinct enough to convey that information: ''venio'' > Sp ''vengo'' ("I come"). In French, however, all the endings are typically homophonous except the first and second person (and occasionally also third person) plural, so the pronouns are always used (''je viens'') except in the [[imperative mood|imperative]].

Contrary to the millennia-long continuity of much of the active verb system, which has now survived 6000 years of known evolution,{{Citation needed|date=March 2024|reason=?}} the synthetic [[passive voice]] was utterly lost in Romance, being replaced with [[periphrastic]] verb forms—composed of the verb "to be" plus a passive participle—or impersonal [[reflexive verb|reflexive]] forms—composed of a verb and a passivizing pronoun.

Apart from the grammatical and phonetic developments there were many cases of verbs merging as complex subtleties{{Clarification needed|date=March 2024}} in Latin were reduced to simplified verbs in Romance. A classic example of this are the verbs expressing the concept "to go". Consider three particular verbs in Classical Latin expressing concepts of "going": {{wikt-lang|la|ire}}, {{wikt-lang|la|vadere}}, and *''ambitare''.{{Citation needed|date=March 2024|reason=A verb that isn't even attested in Classical Latin is not the most convincing evidence of the latter's supposed sublime mystique.}} In Spanish and Portuguese ''ire'' and ''vadere'' merged into the verb ''ir'', which derives some conjugated forms from ''ire'' and some from ''vadere''. ''andar'' was maintained as a separate verb derived from ''ambitare''.

Italian instead merged ''vadere'' and ''ambitare'' into the verb {{wikt-lang|it|andare}}. At the extreme French merged three Latin verbs with, for example, the present tense deriving from ''vadere'' and another verb ''ambulare'' (or something like it) and the future tense deriving from ''ire''. 
Similarly the Romance distinction between the Romance verbs for "to be", {{wikt-lang|la|essere}} and {{wikt-lang|la|stare}}, was lost in French as these merged into the verb {{wikt-lang|fr|être}}. In Italian, the verb {{wikt-lang|it|essere}} inherited both Romance meanings of "being essentially" and "being temporarily of the quality of", while {{wikt-lang|it|stare}} specialized into a verb denoting location or dwelling, or state of health.

==== Copula ====
{{Main article|Romance copula}}

The [[copula (linguistics)|copula]] (that is, the verb signifying "to be") of Classical Latin was {{wikt-lang|la|esse}}. This evolved to *''essere'' in Vulgar Latin by attaching the common infinitive suffix ''-re'' to the classical infinitive; this produced Italian {{wikt-lang|it|essere}} and French {{wikt-lang|fr|être}} through Proto-Gallo-Romance *''essre'' and Old French {{wikt-lang|fro|estre}} as well as Spanish and Portuguese {{wikt-lang|pt|ser}} (Romanian ''a'' {{wikt-lang|ro|fi}} derives from ''fieri'', which means "to become").

In Vulgar Latin a second copula developed utilizing the verb {{wikt-lang|la|stare}}, which originally meant (and is cognate with) "to stand", to denote a more temporary meaning. That is, *''essere'' signified the ''esse''nce, while ''stare'' signified the ''state.'' ''Stare'' evolved to Spanish and Portuguese {{wikt-lang|pt|estar}} and Old French {{wikt-lang|fro|ester}} (both through *''estare''), Romanian "a sta" ("to stand"), using the original form for the noun ("stare"="state"/"starea"="the state"), while Italian retained the original form.

The semantic shift that underlies this evolution is more or less as follows: A speaker of Classical Latin might have said: ''vir est in foro'', meaning "the man is in/at the marketplace". The same sentence in Vulgar Latin could have been *''(h)omo stat in foro'',{{Citation needed|date=March 2024}} "the man stands in/at the marketplace", replacing the ''est'' (from ''esse'') with ''stat'' (from ''stare''), because "standing" was what was perceived as what the man was actually doing.

The use of ''stare'' in this case was still semantically transparent assuming that it meant "to stand", but soon the shift from ''esse'' to ''stare'' became more widespread. In the Iberian peninsula ''esse'' ended up only denoting natural qualities that would not change, while ''stare'' was applied to transient qualities and location. In Italian, ''stare'' is used mainly for location, transitory state of health (''sta male'' 's/he is ill' but ''è gracile'' 's/he is puny') and, as in Spanish, for the eminently transient quality implied in a verb's progressive form, such as ''sto scrivendo'' to express 'I am writing'.

The historical development of the ''stare'' + ablative gerund progressive tense in those Romance languages that have it seems to have been a passage from a usage such as ''sto pensando'' 'I stand/stay (here) in thinking',{{Citation needed|date=March 2024}} in which the ''stare'' form carries the full semantic load of 'stand, stay' to [[grammaticalization]] of the construction as expression of progressive [[Grammatical aspect|aspect]] (Similar in concept to the Early Modern English construction of "I am a-thinking"). The process of reanalysis that took place over time [[semantic bleaching|bleached]] the semantics of ''stare'' so that when used in combination with the gerund the form became solely a grammatical marker of subject and tense (e.g. ''sto'' = subject first person singular, present; ''stavo'' = subject first person singular, past), no longer a [[lexical verb]] with the semantics of 'stand' (not unlike the auxiliary in compound tenses that once meant 'have, possess', but is now semantically empty: ''j''''ai''' écrit'', '''''ho''' scritto'', '''''he''' escrito'', etc.). Whereas ''sto scappando'' would once have been semantically strange at best (?'I stay escaping'), once grammaticalization was achieved, collocation with a verb of inherent mobility was no longer contradictory, and ''sto scappando'' could and did become the normal way to express 'I am escaping'. (Although it might be objected that in sentences like Spanish ''la catedral está en la ciudad'', "the cathedral is in the city" this is also unlikely to change, but all locations are expressed through ''estar'' in Spanish, as this usage originally conveyed the sense of "the cathedral ''stands'' in the city").

=== Word order typology ===
Classical Latin in most cases adopted an [[Subject–object–verb|SOV]] word order in ordinary prose, although other word orders were employed, such as in poetry, euphony, focus, or emphasis, enabled by [[inflection]]al marking of the grammatical function of words. However, word order in most of the modern Romance languages generally adopted a standard SVO word order. Relics of SOV word order still survive in the placement of [[clitic]] object pronouns (e.g. Spanish {{lang|es|yo te amo}} 'I love you').