Unit 3 Reading
-
- Textkit Neophyte
- Posts: 73
- Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2005 10:03 pm
Unit 3 Reading
I'm not sure if I translated this sentence correctly:
Ibi re'g'inam mortuam vi'dit et o'ra'vit ne' se' i'nsidia'rum da'mna'ret, sed re'gi'na neque specta'vit neque Aene'a'n audi'vit.
There he saw and spoke to the dead queen in order that she not accuse him of treachery, but the queen neither saw nor heard Aeneas.
I'm unsure if neque means neither... nor since I can't find it in the book. I even thought it meant ne' + que but that didn't make sense ??
Ibi re'g'inam mortuam vi'dit et o'ra'vit ne' se' i'nsidia'rum da'mna'ret, sed re'gi'na neque specta'vit neque Aene'a'n audi'vit.
There he saw and spoke to the dead queen in order that she not accuse him of treachery, but the queen neither saw nor heard Aeneas.
I'm unsure if neque means neither... nor since I can't find it in the book. I even thought it meant ne' + que but that didn't make sense ??
Last edited by Mofmog on Mon Jul 11, 2005 8:34 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Textkit Member
- Posts: 192
- Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2005 3:56 am
-
- Textkit Neophyte
- Posts: 73
- Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2005 10:03 pm
Ibi re'g'inam mortuam vi'dit et o'ra'vit ne' se' i'nsidia'rum da'mna'ret, sed re'gi'na neque specta'vit neque Aene'a'n audi'vit.Cyborg wrote:I think you've got the first part of the sentence wrong.
"neque" was tought in p.40 and is synonym to "nec".
for "et o'ra'vit ne' se' i'nsidia'rum da'mna'ret", check the last example on p.52 and the third on p.53.
Give it another try after that and I'm sure you'll get it right.
There he saw the dead queen and begged so that she may not accuse him of treachery, but the queen neither saw nor heard Aeneas.
Oh I see where I went wrong. I mistook "to beg" for "to speak".
Edit: This book is so Iupiter lightning bolt it dense that it's hard to find alot of things
- benissimus
- Global Moderator
- Posts: 2733
- Joined: Mon May 12, 2003 4:32 am
- Location: Berkeley, California
- Contact:
Re: Unit 3 Reading
That is the right meaning for neque (when there are two). neque is actually ne + -que, but this ne has kept it original meaning as a general "not", like non (non = ne unum "not one, not a bit"). In most other places, ne has been replaced by non.Mofmog wrote:I'm unsure if neque means neither... nor since I can't find it in the book. I even thought it meant ne' + que but that didn't make sense ??
flebile nescio quid queritur lyra, flebile lingua murmurat exanimis, respondent flebile ripae
-
- Textkit Member
- Posts: 192
- Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2005 3:56 am
-
- Textkit Neophyte
- Posts: 73
- Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2005 10:03 pm
Re: Unit 3 Reading
So pre classical latin uses ne? I'll remeber that one. Also, how do I pronounce "mortuus" with the double u's?benissimus wrote:That is the right meaning for neque (when there are two). neque is actually ne + -que, but this ne has kept it original meaning as a general "not", like non (non = ne unum "not one, not a bit"). In most other places, ne has been replaced by non.Mofmog wrote:I'm unsure if neque means neither... nor since I can't find it in the book. I even thought it meant ne' + que but that didn't make sense ??
- benissimus
- Global Moderator
- Posts: 2733
- Joined: Mon May 12, 2003 4:32 am
- Location: Berkeley, California
- Contact:
Re: Unit 3 Reading
yes, ne is the original word meaning "not", and is the original negative in all Indo-European languages. mortuus should be pronounced like mor-tu-us. In modern textbooks that distinguish between v and u, always pronounce u as a vowel and v as a consonant (not mor-twus). There are some times when a u is pronounced v or vice versa, but those will not appear in your textbook.Mofmog wrote:So pre classical latin uses ne? I'll remeber that one. Also, how do I pronounce "mortuus" with the double u's?benissimus wrote:That is the right meaning for neque (when there are two). neque is actually ne + -que, but this ne has kept it original meaning as a general "not", like non (non = ne unum "not one, not a bit"). In most other places, ne has been replaced by non.Mofmog wrote:I'm unsure if neque means neither... nor since I can't find it in the book. I even thought it meant ne' + que but that didn't make sense ??
flebile nescio quid queritur lyra, flebile lingua murmurat exanimis, respondent flebile ripae
- benissimus
- Global Moderator
- Posts: 2733
- Joined: Mon May 12, 2003 4:32 am
- Location: Berkeley, California
- Contact:
What vocabulary are you referring to? You should try to memorize it all, but you don't have to do it all at once. You can't read much if you don't know the words, grammar is only one part of the language.Mofmog wrote:I'm having trouble remembering all this vocabulary. Is it important?
flebile nescio quid queritur lyra, flebile lingua murmurat exanimis, respondent flebile ripae
-
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 718
- Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2005 2:29 pm
- Location: nanun Hanguge issoyo (in Korea sum)
- Contact:
Benissimus said:
David
Except, of course, after q. I suppose it is because of English usage that modern textbooks, though subsituting v for nearly all instances of consonantal u, still keep the u when following q? The combination, of course, yields phoetic "kw." Maybe there's some better explanation for this inconsistency that I haven't considered?In modern textbooks that distinguish between v and u, always pronounce u as a vowel and v as a consonant
David