I have written here that
TOM!
can be
MI!
as a special case in the vocative. is this because in the vocative
MEUS can also be MI in special cases? this is assuming these are
possessive adjectives and not personal pronouns
also if Peulla is 'PEULLA!' then why does 'Tom' become 'MI!'
instead of just remaining 'TOM!'
thanks
TOM! MI!
-
- Textkit Fan
- Posts: 263
- Joined: Sat Jan 21, 2006 2:49 pm
- Location: Bergenfield, NJ
TOM! MI!
cuts like ice cream fast like a razor blade
-
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 3270
- Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 9:45 pm
Re: TOM! MI!
It isn't clear what you are talking about.blutoonwithcarrotandnail wrote:I have written here that
TOM!
can be
MI!
as a special case in the vocative.
De quo dicis, non clarum est.
Do you mean "Oh, my Tom"?
Visne dicere hoc: "O mi Thomas"?
I'm writing in Latin hoping for correction, and not because I'm confident in how I express myself. Latinè scribo ut ab omnibus corrigar, non quod confidenter me exprimam.
-
- Textkit Fan
- Posts: 263
- Joined: Sat Jan 21, 2006 2:49 pm
- Location: Bergenfield, NJ
Re: TOM! MI!
I am talking about direct address of a person in the vocative itself
PEULLE!
SERVE!
TULLI!
for some reason in my notes i seem to have that
TOM!
can also be 'MI!'
or likewise that VIRGILLI! can be MI!
is this correct?
thanks
PEULLE!
SERVE!
TULLI!
for some reason in my notes i seem to have that
TOM!
can also be 'MI!'
or likewise that VIRGILLI! can be MI!
is this correct?
thanks
cuts like ice cream fast like a razor blade
-
- Textkit Enthusiast
- Posts: 425
- Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2005 3:15 am
- Location: Munich
- Contact:
Re: TOM! MI!
Meus and mi are adjectives. They can't replace a noun, but they can be used in addition to one. I think you must have gotten something confused in your notes.
IPHIGENIE: Kann uns zum Vaterland die Fremde werden?
ARKAS: Und dir ist fremd das Vaterland geworden.
IPHIGENIE: Das ist's, warum mein blutend Herz nicht heilt.
(Goethe, Iphigenie auf Tauris)
ARKAS: Und dir ist fremd das Vaterland geworden.
IPHIGENIE: Das ist's, warum mein blutend Herz nicht heilt.
(Goethe, Iphigenie auf Tauris)
- ptolemyauletes
- Textkit Fan
- Posts: 202
- Joined: Mon Mar 16, 2009 9:26 am
Re: TOM! MI!
No. 'Mi!' Is meaningless on its own. It is like someone standing on the street corner and shouting 'My!' 'My what?' is the confused reply.
I think what your instructor meant was not that Mi! can replace Tom!, but that it can complement it.
I can address Tom in Latin with a simple vocative, 'Tom! Or I can address him with his name AND 'mi.
mi Tom! = 'My Tom', an oddity in English perhaps, but perfectly normal in Latin.
I think what your instructor meant was not that Mi! can replace Tom!, but that it can complement it.
I can address Tom in Latin with a simple vocative, 'Tom! Or I can address him with his name AND 'mi.
mi Tom! = 'My Tom', an oddity in English perhaps, but perfectly normal in Latin.
The only thing we can guarantee when communicating via the internet is that we will be almost completely misunderstood, and likely cause great offence in doing so. Throw in an attempt at humour and you insure a lifelong enemy will be made.
-
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 3270
- Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 9:45 pm
Re: TOM! MI!
Not meaningless, ptolemyauletes/spiphany. "O, mi!" means "O my dear/beloved (masculine)",—that, as a substantive, could be what blutoonwithcarrotandnail has a reference to.
Non sine significatione, ptolemyauletes spiphanyque; "O mi amor/amice care" significare potest quod in aliquo loco inveni canorcaeruluscarotaclavoque ut nomen substantivum.
Otherwise, as you say // Aliter, ut dicitis: "O Virgili! mi!" = "O Virgili mi!" = "Oh, Virgil! My beloved!" = "Oh, my [dear/beloved] Virgil" or "Oh, my Tom" = "O, my dear Tom"
Dictum anglicum non novum in illâ regione ubi habito, dico, unâ cum "Thomas noster!"; similiter alibi quoàd "Mi/mea vir/puer/puella/mulier/care", nonné?
Non sine significatione, ptolemyauletes spiphanyque; "O mi amor/amice care" significare potest quod in aliquo loco inveni canorcaeruluscarotaclavoque ut nomen substantivum.
Otherwise, as you say // Aliter, ut dicitis: "O Virgili! mi!" = "O Virgili mi!" = "Oh, Virgil! My beloved!" = "Oh, my [dear/beloved] Virgil" or "Oh, my Tom" = "O, my dear Tom"
Not such an oddity in English where I come from, I must say, alongside "Our Tom!" (voc.), and "My man/woman/boy/girl/dear!" isn't so strange elsewhere, is it?mi Tom! = 'My Tom', an oddity in English perhaps, but perfectly normal in Latin.
Dictum anglicum non novum in illâ regione ubi habito, dico, unâ cum "Thomas noster!"; similiter alibi quoàd "Mi/mea vir/puer/puella/mulier/care", nonné?
I'm writing in Latin hoping for correction, and not because I'm confident in how I express myself. Latinè scribo ut ab omnibus corrigar, non quod confidenter me exprimam.
-
- Textkit Fan
- Posts: 263
- Joined: Sat Jan 21, 2006 2:49 pm
- Location: Bergenfield, NJ
Re: TOM! MI!
granted then the only way to use TOM! in the vocative in Roman is TOM!spiphany wrote:Meus and mi are adjectives. They can't replace a noun, but they can be used in addition to one. I think you must have gotten something confused in your notes.
just like VIRGILLI! is VIRGILLI!
there is no possesive adjective (MEUS, MEI..) or personal pronoun (EGO, MEI..)
which can replace TOM! in any case?
thanks
cuts like ice cream fast like a razor blade