Page 1 of 1

question about chapter 22.

Posted: Tue Mar 13, 2007 2:34 am
by Turendil
I was informed by my latin prof that the following sentence on chapter 22 of was all Fubared and I was wondering exactly what I did that was so horrible.

The english sentence was "With great hope the tyrant ordered those ships to be destroyed.

My sentence ran as follows: Cum magna spe Illae navis ab isto tyranno Iubebantur esse delendam.

(this was all alfter class so it doesn't quite count yet.)

WHat's wrong with this sentence and why?

Re: question about chapter 22.

Posted: Tue Mar 13, 2007 2:44 pm
by cdm2003
Turendil wrote: The english sentence was "With great hope the tyrant ordered those ships to be destroyed.

My sentence ran as follows: Cum magna spe Illae navis ab isto tyranno Iubebantur esse delendam.
Hi Turendil...

Your prof may have taken issue with the fact that you took and active sentence and made is passive. Now, I don't know if that was an option to you or not, but even as a passive statement it's a little off, especially the verb:

Magna cum spe - you don't even need the cum but it isn't incorrect to use it. If you do, the adjective in a cum + abl construction regularly moves outside, e.g., magna cum spe, magna cum laude, summa cum laude, etc.

illae naves - naves, plural, not navis, singular.

a tyranno - no need for iste, which would suggest that very tyrannt, or that tyrannt which is a real pain in all our tails. :)

delere iussae sunt - I would use the perfect tense (perfect, passive, 3rd. pers. plural) of iubeo here and just the plain ol' infinitive of deleo.

Grand total: Magna cum spe illae naves a tyranno delere iussae sunt. Beware, however, that the sentence in English is an active one, so unless your prof told you to change it into the passive it is fubared upwards and sideways. :) So, for active: Magna cum spe tyrannus illas naves delere iussit. Nice and neat.

Best,
Chris

Posted: Tue Mar 13, 2007 5:32 pm
by Turendil
Gratias ago.

I appreciate it. I think that the active/passive end of things was primaril the issue. However he didn't put it that way so I was left to wonder that on my own. many thanks.

Sorn

Posted: Tue Mar 13, 2007 11:03 pm
by Chris Weimer
Actually, with commands (and ordering is a command), you would normally use ut + subjunctive.

Turendil - you used "delendam" for "to be destroyed". While in English it may be hard to distinguish the two, delendam (which actually should be delendae, since it, as an adjective, ought to have agreed with illae naves), denotes an action to be undertaken in the future. You missed out on the sequence of tenses here, since a future can't be a secondary tense when the main verb is perfect. Instead, you use the imperfect.

Also, I wonder why king isn't used here? I think I'd prefer rex, unless there's some sort of context indicating tyrannus.

Tyrannus (vel rex) iussit ut illae naves delerentur.

Posted: Wed Mar 14, 2007 7:21 pm
by cdm2003
Chris Weimer wrote:Actually, with commands (and ordering is a command), you would normally use ut + subjunctive.
The above--less common though nevertheless acceptable--construction (iubeo + indic.) is what Wheelock's expects at the moment. The subjunctive mood and jussive clauses aren't introduced to the student until chapter 28.
Chris Weimer wrote:Also, I wonder why king isn't used here? I think I'd prefer rex, unless there's some sort of context indicating tyrannus.
I'm not sure why you think rex is a better translation for "tyrant" than tyrannus. To me, at least, there is a clear difference between a king and a tyrant, a distinction which would not have been lost on the Classical world. I don't recall (and I could be wrong) Numa Pompilius ever regarded by Classical authors as a tyrannus, yet he was well understood to be a rex.

Chris

Posted: Thu Mar 15, 2007 3:51 am
by Chris Weimer


Re: question about chapter 22.

Posted: Thu Mar 15, 2007 6:20 am
by Iulianus
Turendil wrote:"With great hope the tyrant ordered those ships to be destroyed.
cdm2003 wrote:Magna cum spe tyrannus illas naves delere iussit.
Salvete omnes!

Shouldn't this be "deleri"? "To be destroyed" sounds like a passive infinitive to me.

Valete sodales,

Iulianus

Posted: Thu Mar 15, 2007 2:42 pm
by cdm2003


Posted: Thu Mar 15, 2007 5:50 pm
by Turendil
I knew what you meant anyway. When I reconstructed I used deleri. I apreciate it. Thanks much.

Sorn

Posted: Sat Dec 29, 2007 3:20 pm
by elduce
How about this:

Magna spe tyrannus iussit ut naves eas/illas delerentur.

Since I haven't practice Latin much in the last year, I'm not as strong as I used to be.