I suppose that I'm not entirely sure what "minimal pair" means, in any precise way. As Iason indicated, I was following the example given by Philip initially. How about hōc the adverb and ablative masculine/neuter singular of hic, vs. hoc nominative and accusative neuter singular of hic?That's not a minimal pair.
They differ in only one phoneme, ō vs. o. Thus they constitute a minimal pair.Ah, I see... How does the hōc/hoc example work?
I don't quite understand. Why wouldn't they?It all depends whether inflections of the same word count as minimal pairs. Do they? Technically yes, I guess...?
And I think hīc ‘here’ versus hic ‘this’, unless they’re the same word or one is a form of the other?
They're not the same word. The former is an adverb while the latter is the nominative masculine singular form of the demonstrative pronoun.
Rather "at this time of night", I believe.tonight
It's more of a warning for people who might see Lewis and Short's misleading macrons in "hīc haec hōc". Not the only misleading macrons they have either... cf. "cūjus" and "ŭter, ū̆tra, ū̆trum", where the macron stands for a heavy syllable.As for the two hics being the same word or different ones, I guess it depends what you mean by that. They usually have separate dictionary entries, but the adverb must be an old locative form or the like of the pronoun.
Afraid Iáson beat you to it, he and his Argonautici (although he didn't list perfect, I think).A pretty obscure one:
sedēre, 'to sit down', infinitive of sedeō
sēdēre, variant of sēdērunt, 'they sat down'
sēdēre, variant of sēdēris, 'that you (may) be calmed down / appeased', subjunctive of sēdō sēdāre