By meisenimverbis, in 'Latin Grammar Questions', Sep 21, 2019.
Should I treat it as Satyricum, -i?
Satyricon in the title is the Greek genitive plural (Satyricon Libri, like Metamorphoseon Libri for Ovid's Metamorphoses). So the title should be second declension plural (Satyrica, Satyricon, Satyricis, etc.)
sătĭrĭcus (on account of the confusion of the Roman Satira with the Greek Satyros, often erroneously written Sătўrĭcus; hence in the neutr. even with a Greek ending, Sătўrĭcon; cf. satirographus), a, um, adj. [satira], of or belonging to (Roman) satire, satiric, satirical: satirici carminis scriptor, Lact. 2, 4, 3; so, materia, Sid. Ep. 8, 11; Schol. Juv. 1, 168.—Substt.: 1. sătĭrĭcus, i, m., a writer of satires, a satirist, Sid. Ep. 1, 11; 4, 1.—2. Sătĭrĭcon, i, n., the title of a work of Petronius.
Lewis, C. T., & Short, C. (1891). Harpers’ Latin Dictionary (p. 1633). New York; Oxford: Harper & Brothers; Clarendon Press.
Interesting. Conte's Latin Literature: A History was my source for Satyricon being genitive plural (as well as the fact that Wikipedia gives The Satyrica as another title). Another source is the Latin Library which calls it Satyricon Liber – that makes much more sense as a genitive plural. Your source seems to contradict that. But I think I trust Conte more.
Up until the time I checked L&S, I have always thought that it was genitive plural. I still do, but thought I would present the "alternative viewpoint" for full consideration.
I would have taken it to be a genitive plural as well (especially in 'satyricon liber'), but if you look at some older book titles, you can indeed find examples where people seem to have taken it as a neuter singular:
Whereas this one treats it like a genitive:
In Latin-Latin it'd thus be Satyricorum Libri then... But it was kept in Greek declension for (the typical Roman) literary style. Okay, I get it.
Our Latin forum is a community for discussion of all topics relating to Latin language, ancient and medieval world.
Separate names with a comma.