When searching the Internet something interesting about the argument "philology", behold I come across the following text, conclusion of an article published on the site http://www.filologia .org.br/revista/36/07.htm "The ablative absolute is of course just a thought apart, a separate survey, as if a virtual pair of parentheses. is so exceedingly condensed and encapsulated loses morphic character of person, number and gender (no gender in participles), dispensing clausal connective and juxtaposing the paragraph with only a comma. Presents the forms of present or past participle in ablative. Has the force of persuasion as much as a syllogism. And Aristotle in his Rhetoric Art, examine whether, perhaps lamented the fact that the Greek language have lost it and concentrate on this genitive grammatical role. It is the ablative case is genuinely Latin, so other languages \u200b\u200bcan imitate him, setting interfaces, but not pair it absolutely "
Emphasis added. Make two expressions that do not really understand. The first statement (that the ablative absolute morphic characters of the lost person, number and gender) is not present, for example, in the simple syntactic structure, "Cicerone cenante nuntius litteram attulit Thursday.": Will the participle "cenante" lost morphic characters in number and gender (How would lose these characters because Ablative participle must agree in gender, number and case with its subject "Cicerone"?). It is known that the ablative absolute is equivalent to a conditional proposition, whose subject is not exercising any function in the main proposition, and consists of a name (subject of the proposition) and a present participle or perfect agrees that with the subject in gender, number and case (ablative of course).
The second assertion, that is, the fact of the Greek language to have lost the ablative to the point of deserving Aristotle's lament that probably the comment in its Rhetorical Art, also goes against this fact of glotologia classic: the only remnant of that certificate would have the ablative in Greek is the suffix-φί, preserved only in the Homeric language, always with instrumental value, or to designate the company or the rental therefore unfit to fill the role of ablative absolute (cf. August Schleicher, Leo Meyer, Compendio di grammatica comparative dello antico Indian, Greek ed italico , p.323- 324). Unless you have found some papyrus, parchment or unpublished epigraph that reflect the employment ablative in Greek! From what I know, the Greek language has not lost the ablative! Its function is Indo-European grammar which was assumed by genitive!
What amazes me is that these statements from letters, and not merely students. The tempora! The mores!
AVRELIVS
AVRELIVS