Translation of 'it'

[Sigma]

If 'it' is being used to refer to a specific noun, should it agree with the gender of that noun, or should 'it' always be translated using the neuter pronoun? For example, which pronoun is correct here?

Ubi est liber? Viro eum/id dedi. - Where is the book? I gave it to the man.

My guess is that 'eum' would be correct in the above example, but I don't recall Wheelock mentioning anything about this in the section on personal pronouns.

[Sceptra Tenens]

In classical Latin, it has to agree with it's antecedent. So, it would be eum, as you suspect. Things are just a little looser from time to time in medieval Latin, from the little bit of it that I've read.

[timeodanaos]

Yes, a pronoun should agree with the (implied) noun - be it there or not. One of the best examples is a quote of Caesar's, when he saw the daggers in the hands of the other senators: Haec est vis! (I don't know where the quote is from, but it exemplifies the phenomenon well).

[Grochojad]

Pronoun's gender has to agree with the gender of the noun. Try to understand Latin per se and not through English.

[jaihare]

If 'it' is being used to refer to a specific noun, should it agree with the gender of that noun, or should 'it' always be translated using the neuter pronoun? For example, which pronoun is correct here?

Ubi est liber? Viro eum/id dedi. - Where is the book? I gave it to the man.

My guess is that 'eum' would be correct in the above example, but I don't recall Wheelock mentioning anything about this in the section on personal pronouns.

You should definitely go with eum.

In Greek, the word for book is ἡ βίβλος (feminine) or τὸ βιβλίον (neuter). I could say this two ways:

ποῦ ἐστὶν ἡ βίβλος [τὸ βιβλίον]; τῷ ἀνθρώπῳ αὐτὴν [αὐτὸ] δέδωκα.

You have to match the gender and number to the noun. In this case, liber (librī) is masculine.

I'm just reasoning this out. I haven't found a point about it in Wheelock either.

[timeodanaos]

I just looked through a few of my grammars (and realized at the same time that I own exactly none in English. how come?) and couldn't find this (very particular point - what I wrote above is included at least in Rubenbauer-Hofmann) as a rule either. Not even in Kühner-Stegmann. But trust us! It's the same in Germanic languages such as Scandinavian, English, esp. German.

[Sigma]

Excellent, just as I thought. This is what happens in Russian (Где книга? Я дал ее мужчине.), which is why I suspected the same would happen in Latin. Thankfully, it does!

[metrodorus]

Of course, remember, that in idiomatic Latin a Roman would not be bound to use 'it' in the way we use it in English. We cannot always translate English directly into Latin using the English idiom. You would not idiomatically reply " eum dedi", (although it is grammatical) normally, in the case where the pronoun stands in the same case as the noun - more often than not, it is simply omitted, unless there is some compelling reason to point out the object with the pronoun, for example as a matter of contrast to another object. So, simply, "dedi", or more elegantly, for emphasis you would repeat the noun, as Caesar so often does. This is more or less unacceptable in English, but regarded as elegant in Latin.
see Adler pg 14 for examples
http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=GJgAAAAAYAAJ

[adrianus]

Note, Sigma, that what Metrodorus draws attention to does not apply to your question. In "Ubi est liber? Viro eum dedi. // Where is the book? I gave it to the man." the pronoun (eum accusative) is not in the same case as the noun (liber nominative) so Adler wouldn't say it's elegant to omit it in "Viro eum dedi".

Ita, autem, nota, Sigma. Non dicat Alder "eum" in "viro eum dedi" omittendum esse quod altero casu (scilicet accusativo) est pronomen quàm est libris nomen (nominativo).

This is more or less unacceptable [omitting the noun/pronoun if it can be clearly assumed] in English, but regarded as elegant in Latin.

This is also fine in English in this regard: to the question "Did you give it?", the answer "I did" omits the object while echoing the verb. And to "Is it a book?", the answer "It is" is always fine without the predicate noun. To the question "Did you give X?", the answer "subject + verb + adverb/adverbial phrase ["already", "grudgingly", "without asking any questions"] is good without an object, although strictly this is answering another question.
Quibusdem locibus per verbum respondere objecto omisso bonum anglicum est. Praeter anglicè "is it a book" quaestionem, licet anglicè per verbum solum respondere sine nomine praenomineve praedicativo. Etiam subjecto et verbo cum adverbio vel dicto adverbiale saepè bonum anglicè est responsum sine objecto. Strictim autem eo casu responsum aliam quaestionem spectat.

[Sigma]

Interesting, thank you! So in that case, the following would be considered elegant and OK?

Ubi est liber? Viro (a me) datus est.

[MatthaeusLatinus]

Yes.