Textkit Logo

CR's attempts at LPC

This board is a composition workshop, like a writers' workshop: post your work with questions about style or vocabulary, comment on other people's work, post composition challenges on some topic or form, or just dazzle us with your inventive use of galliambics.

CR's attempts at LPC

Postby Carolus Raeticus » Sat Sep 02, 2017 10:06 am

This is my first stab at Latin prose composition. Please do not shoot me. I would, however, appreciate constructive criticism.

-------------------------------------------------------------

LAVANTULA

Heri pelliculam nomine ''Lavantula'' spectavi. Re verâ fuit pellicula generis "B", sed satis delectabilis. Argumentum pelliculae? Angelopoli, urbe maximâ in Civitatibus Americae Unitis sitâ et hodiernis temporibus nomine "Los Angeles" (= ''Angeli'') notâ, statim eruptio novi vulcani fit. Vulcanus ille non solum lavam maximâ vi eructat sed etiam "lavantulas" sive "lavaraneas". Hae "lavantulae" sunt (in pelliculâ illâ) araneae multô maiores solitô et lavam velut missile eructare possunt. Mox multos homines his missilibus igniferis interfecti sunt.

Prima persona huius pelliculae periculosis casibus plenae est actor olim notus nunc autem paene oblitus. Hic actor autocinetô domum vehitur cum vulcanus erumpit et lavantulae in propinquitate in terram decidunt. Se e periculô eripere potest. Domi eius est uxor quae etiam in lavantulam incidit. Statim aranea maxima eam aggreditur. Mulieri autem se defendere et monstrum interficere contingit. Actor domum regressus sclopetum sumit. Mulieri imperat ut ex urbe effugat. Ipse in mediam urbem regressurus est, quod filium servare vult.

Filius cum tres amicis (duobus viris, unâ feminâ) gaudii causâ birotâ vehitur. Repente lavantulae impetum in illos faciunt. Aranea ignivoma unum ex amicis missili igniferô interficit. Alii tres in aliquod aedificium confugiunt. Lavantulae eos sequuntur, lavâ ex ore evomitâ per ianuam penetrantes. Mox ambo amici sunt mortui. Filius salutem in fugâ petens in summum aedificium ascendit. Lavantula eum sequitur. Eam autem ille instrumentô exstinctoriô, quod nitrogenium liquidum continet, occidit.

Intereâ pater eius, actor, filium petens autovehiculô urbem versus vectatur. Statim ei subsistendum est quod foramen in viâ est. Redire non potest quod cummeae autocineti rotae ob aestum liquefiunt. Proptereâ actor pedibus iter pergit. Paulô post in laophorum incidit. Ductor laophori non credit verum esse fabulam, quam actor de lavantulis narrat. Ob eam rem actor, qui quam citissimê filium invenire vult, laophorum cum omnibus hominibus in eô furatur. Iter urbem versus pergit (et in viâ aliquot lavantulas interficit).

Uxor actoris cum militibus in autocinetô onerariô ex urbe fugere conatur. Frustrâ autem. Lavantulae eos aggrediuntur. Omnes milites interficiuntur, mulieri autem contingit autocinetô e periculô effugere. Ad filium et coniugem quaerendos in mediam urbem regreditur.

Filius de summô aedificiô descendit, sed etiam hîc lavantulae impetum in eum faciunt. Instrumentum exstinctorium in lavantulam dirigit et eam interficere conatur. Non autem superest nitrogenium. Moriturus est. Repente monstrum glande ictum atque interfectum est. Pater in summô discrimine adventus est. Non autem tuti sunt, quod plures lavantulae adsunt. Denique uxor actoris advenit. Unâ effugiunt. Non autem ex urbe exire conantur sed ad locum eunt ubi actor hôc ipsô die pelliculam cinematographicam paravit. Nam filius patri de nitrogeniô et effectû in lavantulas narravit. Actor autem meminit in locô impressionis pelliculae plus nitrogenii esse.

In locô impressionis cinematographicae in operis socios incidit, qui effugere non ausi sunt. Unâ cum eis lavantulas destruere vult. Nam antequam actor filium invenit, lavantulas fugiens in museum ingressus est et in quemdam virum scientificum incidit. Ille vir ei narravit araneas "Reginam" habere. Eâ interfectâ alias araneas non iam periculum esse. Consilium actoris est hoc: in foraminibus aliquot, per quae lavantulae ex inferis ad superficiem ascendunt, pyrobolis nitrogeniô repletis deponere et posteâ omnes unô tempore displodere vult. Sic Reginam lavantularum in superficiem allicietur.

Socii adsentiunt. Pyroboli deponuntur. Displosio facta est. "Regina", lavantula ingenti magnitudine, in superficiem ascendit. Sclopetis monstrum tam ingens aggredi inutile est. Ob eam causam pyrobolum magnum fecerunt. Quô autem pactô Reginae satis appropinquandum? Consilium actoris est hoc: multis annis ante actor primas partes in pelliculâ cinematographicâ nomine ''Red Rocket'' (= ''Missile Rubrum'') egit. Quâ in pelliculâ veste rubrô indutus est. Vestis illa apparatu instructa est quô actor volare potest. Actor vestem induit, pyrobulum in manus sumit et per aerem volitans impetum in Reginam facit. Post aliquot conatus et pericula pyrobolum in os Reginae inicit. Pyrobulus disploditur: lavantula gigantea mortua, homines tuti, actor heros.

-------------------------------------------------------------

Valete,

Carolus Raeticus
Sperate miseri, cavete felices.
Carolus Raeticus
Textkit Enthusiast
 
Posts: 508
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2010 11:46 am

Re: CR's attempts at LPC

Postby Timothée » Sat Sep 02, 2017 5:57 pm

What of course is the most difficult in composing in Latin (or most any language) is to be highly idiomatic. A few points that caught my eye (I do not claim to be exhaustive):

in urbe maxima
Mox multos homines his missilibus igniferis interfecti sunt.
prima persona > prōtagōnista
Filius cum tres amicis — —
cummeae > gummeae (granted, there seems to be c/g variation in this word [and there is in the stem])
ductor > maybe auriga
verum esse fabulam; possibly, however, otherwise, e.g. auriga actorem mendacem habet
instrumentum exstinctorium > maybe simply extinctorium (‘[fire] extinguisher’)
in loco impressionis cinematographicae > maybe add here pelliculae

All in all, there would seem to be no major issues in your composition. Perge, quo coepisti.
Timothée
Textkit Enthusiast
 
Posts: 564
Joined: Fri Oct 09, 2015 4:34 pm

Re: CR's attempts at LPC

Postby Carolus Raeticus » Sun Sep 03, 2017 2:34 pm

Thank you for your correction. As for the modern expressions: I took these from various dictionaries of Neolatin without any further considerations. Writing in Latin is difficult enough as it is. For the time being my major concern is writing with as few errors (both grammar and spelling) as possible. Getting rid of syntactical structures from my mother tongue (and to a certain degree from English) is also important (although more difficult).

By the way, as for "in urbe maxima", A&G seem to think (or have thought) that one can add the preposition in or leave it (§ 282 d).

Vale,

Carolus Raeticus
Sperate miseri, cavete felices.
Carolus Raeticus
Textkit Enthusiast
 
Posts: 508
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2010 11:46 am

Re: CR's attempts at LPC

Postby Timothée » Sun Sep 03, 2017 9:07 pm

Carolus Raeticus wrote:By the way, as for "in urbe maxima", A&G seem to think (or have thought) that one can add the preposition in or leave it (§ 282 d).

There are a few examples of that in Classical Latin, but I think they are quite rare (I know only two, Arch. 4 and rep. 1,1). More common is Neapoli, in celeberrimo oppido (Rab. Post. 26), Leontinis, misera in ciuitate (Verr. II, 2, 160).

I, too, use a few Neo-Latin dictionaries, so we’re in the same boat there. My reasoning was that “film” is pellicula cinematographica, which often shortens to pellicula¹ as the attribute isn’t mentioned every time, which is exactly what you have somewhere in the text. That is why I suggested that the attribute cinematographica isn’t used alone in the sense film. If used as an attribute to impressio, then it may be okay. Also protagonista simply sounds better to my ear, even though I know it’s not the only possible choice.

¹In Spanish we have of course the same word película in the same meaning.
Timothée
Textkit Enthusiast
 
Posts: 564
Joined: Fri Oct 09, 2015 4:34 pm


Return to Composition Board

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 21 guests