Textkit Logo

Istud quae non est...

Here's where you can discuss all things Latin. Use this board to ask questions about grammar, discuss learning strategies, get translation help and more!

Moderator: thesaurus

Istud quae non est...

Postby pmda » Mon Jan 09, 2012 7:53 pm

Below is a line from Martial and I offer two alternative translations.

Could anyone guide me as to which is closest - mine is the first one?

Istud quae nōn est, dīcere, Bassa, solet!

1. That which is said, Bassa, is usually not true!

2. Those that are not, Bassa, usually say it!

I'm following the grammar closely 'Istud' is Neuter nominative so it should refer to a thing but, of course, this is poetry so there's a wider range of possible translations.....
pmda
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 1089
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 5:15 am

Re: Istud quae non est...

Postby flamendialis » Mon Jan 09, 2012 9:23 pm

dicis formosam,dicis te, Bassa, puellam
Istud , quae nōn est, dīcere, Bassa, solet!

you say you are beautiful girl , you call you so Bassa
this (that she is beautiful) used to say Bassa, is not true


this is my try
flamendialis
Textkit Neophyte
 
Posts: 6
Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2011 6:07 pm

Re: Istud quae non est...

Postby adrianus » Mon Jan 09, 2012 9:28 pm

"You say you're a beautiful girl, Bassa, you say you are.
She [/one] who isn't typically says that, Bassa"
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.
adrianus
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 3270
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 9:45 pm

Re: Istud quae non est...

Postby pmda » Tue Jan 10, 2012 11:47 am

Thanks to you both... I think what threw me was 'istud' neuter...but of course impersonal 'one' would be neuter wouldn't it?
pmda
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 1089
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 5:15 am

Re: Istud quae non est...

Postby Alatius » Tue Jan 10, 2012 12:53 pm

pmda wrote:but of course impersonal 'one' would be neuter wouldn't it?

No, never; humans are never neuter in Latin, as far as I know. The "she/one who" of Adriani translation is contained in "quae". If you want, you can think of it as an "ea" which is understood:
[Ea], quae non est [formosa], solet istud dicere.
"Istud" refers to the previous utterance ("Formosa sum").
Alatius
Textkit Fan
 
Posts: 268
Joined: Mon May 14, 2007 11:21 am
Location: Upsalia, Suecia

Re: Istud quae non est...

Postby pmda » Tue Jan 10, 2012 1:25 pm

Alatius...thanks...now it makes sense.
pmda
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 1089
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 5:15 am

Re: Istud quae non est...

Postby Sceptra Tenens » Tue Jan 10, 2012 5:06 pm

Alatius wrote:
pmda wrote:No, never; humans are never neuter in Latin, as far as I know.


There is mancipium for "slave" (or more directly, something which is purchased, and "slave" by extension), but that's the only exception that I know of.
mihi iussa capessere fas est
Sceptra Tenens
Textkit Member
 
Posts: 148
Joined: Fri Dec 30, 2011 12:46 am
Location: Loca feta furentibus austris

Re: Istud quae non est...

Postby adrianus » Tue Jan 10, 2012 7:07 pm

Metonymically, "chattle", "partner/spouse", "Mellissa Tarentina, a very lovely bit of fruit", "partner", "guest", "sweetheart", "object of desire", "hunting party", "darling", "convicts", "house servants", "casualties", "bodyguard", "sweetheart", "prostitute", "slaves", "sweetheart". [I only looked at the second declension.]

Third declination: "head/leader", "sweetheart"

Per metonumiam, ut "mancipium", ut "conjugium / conubium", ut "noveratis Melissam Tarentinam, pulcherrimum bacciballum" (Satyricon Petroni), ut "consortium", ut "convivium", ut "corculum", ut "cupitum", ut "cynegiolum", ut "deliciolum seu delicium", "ergastula", "famulitium", "fortuita", "satellitium", "savium", "scortum", "servitium", "suavium" [Solam secundam declinationem examinavi.]

Tertia declinatio: "caput", "mel"
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.
adrianus
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 3270
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 9:45 pm

Re: Istud quae non est...

Postby Alatius » Tue Jan 10, 2012 8:47 pm

Hah, I knew I was going to regret that. :) What if I said that people are never refered to with a neuter pronoun (which was what I had in mind)? Sure, you can probably dig out an example of that as well, but not unless the person is deliberately dehumanized, I would think.
Alatius
Textkit Fan
 
Posts: 268
Joined: Mon May 14, 2007 11:21 am
Location: Upsalia, Suecia

Re: Istud quae non est...

Postby adrianus » Tue Jan 10, 2012 9:40 pm


Et "eam" et "quod"
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.
adrianus
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 3270
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 9:45 pm


Return to Learning Latin

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Calgacus, Google Adsense [Bot] and 19 guests