Latinised Name for Unknown Grammatical Case:

[Äverjeŋkyli.]

Hello, does someone know which latinised name would receive a case used to indicate the attribute of a copulative verb in a sentence?
Thanks.

[linguoboy]

"Predicative case" (which is actually found in some natlangs, e.g. Tabarasan).

[Äverjeŋkyli.]

And is there a latinised name for a "case" (which I'm not sure if it would be a case at all) that would be used in sentences with no verb of any kind (e.g. the title of a book; "The Black Cat")?
Thanks for your first answer

[linguoboy]

And is there a latinised name for a "case" (which I'm not sure if it would be a case at all) that would be used in sentences with no verb of any kind (e.g. the title of a book; "The Black Cat")?
Thanks for your first answer

1. If there's no verb, it isn't a "sentence", it's just a noun phrase.
2. Why would you need a distinct case for that?

[md0]

Alternatively, you can call it the nominative case

[linguoboy]

Alternatively, you can call it the nominative case

I mean, it would depend, wouldn't it? Whether used as a title or for some other purposes, a noun phrase could have any conceivable case depending on its role in an understood complete clause. If "The Black Cat" is the name of an establishment, for instance, the natural case to use would be dative or locative since the understood frame is "This is the establishment at the [sign of the] Black Cat". (Viz. Zur schwarzen Katze, u černé kočky, etc.)

[Äverjeŋkyli.]

And is there a latinised name for a "case" (which I'm not sure if it would be a case at all) that would be used in sentences with no verb of any kind (e.g. the title of a book; "The Black Cat")?
Thanks for your first answer

1. If there's no verb, it isn't a "sentence", it's just a noun phrase.
2. Why would you need a distinct case for that?

1. Sorry for my mistake, I was thinking on writing that but I didn't know if "sentence" and "phrase" have the same meaning difference in English as in my native language.
2. I am writing the grammar for my last conlang, Äverjeŋkyli, a language mainly based in Finnish (at least if you focus on general characteristics). It has got 9 cases, which are: Nominative, Accusative, Dative, Genitive, Relative, Partitive, Postpositional, Vocative and Absolutive/Predicative/ X (the Latinised name I need). This last case may be used as the subject of intransitive and copulative verbs, as attribute of a copulative verb and as a complement in a noun phrase (and it's the only case with no real declension at all, the noun is left with only it's noun group declension, e.g. "Kysöj" (Cats), "Kyliŋkvarda" (Vocabulary) instead of "Kysöjt" (of the cats (partitive)) or "Kyliŋkvardan" (of the Vocabulary/Vocabulary's (genitive))).
In answer to your idea that, e.g. "The Black Cat" (name of a place), I would use the postpositional case and suffix the postposition to the noun, or the relative case maybe.
Finally I would be very pleased if you give me some feedback about this characteristic of Averian: no passive sentences nor passive voice on verbs. Why not?, you may be asking yourselves. Recently, while learning German, I heard my teacher talking about the 4 pillars (most important rules) of German, and I decided to set that kind of teaching expression on my conlang while teaching it (which I'm not succesing in but...). So the three pillars of Averian are:
1. All nouns in first capital letter (from German ).
2. Every noun must be declined with a declension or another depending on it's function into the sentence.
(Here comes the one I'm referring to).
3. The conjugation of a verb is never referred to the one who suffers the action; it's always pointing to the one who does it.
So if the conjugation cannot be referred to a pacientive or an accusative, there can't be any passive sentences. What do you think of this characteristic of Averian?
Thanks.

[linguoboy]

1. Sorry for my mistake, I was thinking on writing that but I didn't know if "sentence" and "phrase" have the same meaning difference in English as in my native language.

If you're not familiar with common grammatical terminology in English, it might be helpful to read an introductory guide (like this one: https://www.zompist.com/kit.html) to learn the most basic terms and get an idea of how they might map to the vocabulary of your native language.

2. I am writing the grammar for my latest conlang, Äverjeŋkyli, a language mainly based in Finnish (at least if you focus on general characteristics). It has got 9 cases, which are: Nominative, Accusative, Dative, Genitive, Relative, Partitive, Postpositional, Vocative and Absolutive/Predicative/ X (the Latinised name I need).

You don't need a separate name for every function a case performs. Just explain in your grammar that "absolutive" is used for predicate nouns and other roles where none of the other cases would be appropriate.

Finally I would be very pleased if you give me some feedback about this characteristic of Averian: no passive sentences nor passive voice on verbs. Why not?, you may be asking yourselves. Recently, while learning German, I heard my teacher talking about the 4 pillars (most important rules) of German, and I decided to set that kind of teaching expression on my conlang while teaching it (which I'm not succesing in but...). So the three pillars of Averian are:
1. All nouns in firstbegin with a capital letter (from German ).
2. Every noun must be declined with a declension or another depending onaccording to its function into the sentence.
(Here comes the one I'm referring to).
3. The conjugation of a verb is never referred toaffected by the one who suffers the action; it's always pointing to the one who does it.
So if the conjugation cannot be referred to a patientive or an accusative, there can't be any passive sentences. What do you think of this characteristic of Averian?

It can be interesting to set yourself artificial limitations when creating a conlang to see how that guides your choices. Just be sure to think through the consequences. Passives have a wide range of functions in various languages and you want to make sure your conlang still has a way to express those functions.

If you haven't already, you'll want to have a look at how various languages handle agency and themantic relations in general, since it's not as straightforward as it might seem at first. For instance, what about involuntary actions like sneezing or breaking a bone? In many languages, these are considered things that happen to a person, not something they do. If that's the case with Averian, then who or what is the agent of such clauses? That's just one of many questions you need to consider when adopting such a "pillar".

[Linguaphile]

Alternatively, you can call it the nominative case

I mean, it would depend, wouldn't it? Whether used as a title or for some other purposes, a noun phrase could have any conceivable case depending on its role in an understood complete clause. If "The Black Cat" is the name of an establishment, for instance, the natural case to use would be dative or locative since the understood frame is "This is the establishment at the [sign of the] Black Cat". (Viz. Zur schwarzen Katze, u černé kočky, etc.)

In answer to your idea that, e.g. "The Black Cat" (name of a place), I would use the postpositional case and suffix the postposition to the noun, or the relative case maybe.

I agree that the nominative case works well for a book title or for the name of a place or establishment. I think that Finnish normally uses nominative for the names of establishments; at least, I know that Estonian does, and I think that Finnish is the same. It is the name of a book or of a establishment, after all, and nominative is the case used for naming things. (There is even a restaurant in Tallinn called Must Kass - The Black Cat, just like your example. Also Hell Hunt - The Gentle Wolf; Kolmas Draakon - The Third Dragon; etc. - all names of establishments and all nominative case.) As you said, Äverjeŋkyli, if you wanted the name of the establishment to be "At [the sign of] the Black Cat" or something similar, then you already have the postpositional case that you can use for that. Or if you are going to or from the place, instead of just naming the place, then you can change it to the appropriate case for that too.
But, it sounds to me as though your conlang already has a nominative case that is different from the one you want to use for book titles and such - did I understand that correctly? If so, then simply using nominative here may not work for you conlang, at least not without making some changes. Or you may want to expand the use of the nominative to include book titles and the names of establishments.

1. If there's no verb, it isn't a "sentence", it's just a noun phrase.

Well, for English, yes... but not in every language, and this is a conlang after all. I agree that "The Black Cat" is a phrase because of how it was used here, but I wouldn't go as far as saying "if there's no verb, it isn't a sentence." Languages like Russian, Hungarian, and Arabic routinely have zero-copula nominal sentences with no verb expressed.
In Russian "The Black Cat" is Черная Кошка, and "the cat is black" is Кошка черная. Same words, and no verb in either one.
English's "every sentence must have a verb" rule (which I just broke at the end of the last paragraph, by the way) doesn't apply to every language, so there's no reason it must apply to a conlang. (I do realize the example was given in English, but come on, you were replying to Äverjeŋkyli's second-ever post on this forum, and we all understood what was meant - why nitpick about how it would apply to English when the question was about a conlang? It's not the best way to welcome a new member to this forum.)

there can't be any passive sentences. What do you think of this characteristic of Averian?

I think you can make this work. In the case of something like breaking a bone or sneezing, you can use something like "My bone broke" or "I sneezed" or even "My nose/mouth sneezed" or whatever you decide. If your conlang has transitive verbs, you'll have even more options for how to construct those. You could also create an impersonal form that could cover some of the functions that passive takes in other languages (Finnish does that, although not quite in the way you described, so since you said your conlang is mainly based on Finnish you may have already had something like that in mind).

[Äverjeŋkyli.]

1. All nouns in firstbegin with capital letter (from German).
2. Every noun must be declined with a declension or another depending onaccording to its function into the sentence.
(Here comes the one I'm referring to).
3. The conjugation of a verb is never referred toaffected by the one who suffers the action; it's always pointing to the one who does it.

I know, I'm clearly losing English level. Thank you for correcting my reply.

...there can't be any passive sentences. What do you think of this characteristic of Averian?

I think you can make this work. In the case of something like breaking a bone or sneezing, you can use something like "My bone broke" or "I sneezed" or even "My nose/mouth sneezed" or whatever you decide. If your conlang has transitive verbs, you'll have even more options for how to construct those. You could also create an impersonal form that could cover some of the functions that passive takes in other languages (Finnish does that, although not quite in the way you described, so since you said your conlang is mainly based on Finnish you may have already had something like that in mind).

That all is true for my conlang. To say, for example, "My bone is broken" you would use the impersonal conjugation of the verb "vrähtä" (to break), so it would be "Vrähtolä min Kudeć" (notice that Kudeć (bone) is in accusative). In the case of "I sneezed", it gets a bit more complex because you have to use the auxiliary verb "kanä" (aproximately translated in English as "to make someone (verb)"), so it would be "Ähtuśkäć kanolä minć" (notice that ähtuśkäć ("to sneeze") is a verb in accusative, another strange characteristic of Averian, so minć ("to me") is in dative).
Another fact in Averian took from Finnish is Article Sintactic Indication. Depending on the place you set a word on a sentence it can be translated as "a ..." or "the ...". For example, "A man went there" would be translated as "Mynsek vönodä vatrelseśk eśköv", where Mynsek is translated as "A Man" because it comes before the main verb. To say "The man went there", we set Mynsek after the main verb, like "Vönodä Mynsek vatrelseśk eśköv".
Thanks.