Textkit Logo

BLB, Collar & Daniell, § 30

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

BLB, Collar & Daniell, § 30

Postby Barrius » Mon Apr 12, 2004 8:16 pm

From "The Beginner's Latin Book" by Collar and Daniell - can someone be so kind as to check my responses. (With exercise text so no one has to look them up).

Critics welcome. Suggestions taken. Thanks in advance.

Code: Select all
Page 11, § 30.I  (Genitive And Dative)
 1. Lunae plenae.         Gen. Of the full moon / The full moon's.
                          Dat. To/for the full moon.
 2. Lunarum plenarum.     Of the full moons / The full moons'.
 3. Lunis plenis.         To/for the full moons.
 4. Horarum primarum.     Of the first hours.
 5. Horis primis.         To/for the first hours.
 6. Filia Galbae.         Galba's daughter / The daughter of Galba.
 7. Filiis Corneliae.     To/for Cornelia's daughters.
 8. Rosis albis.          To/for the white roses.
 9. Columbae parvae.      Gen. The small dove's.
                          Dat. To/for the small dove.
10. Aquilarum alarum.     The eagles' wings.   


Page 11, § 30.II   (Genitive And Dative)
 1. The queen's daughter.      Reginae filia.            
 2. The queens' daughters.     Reginarum filiae.
 3. For the girl's rose.       Puellae rosae.
 4. Of the wings of the dove.  Alarum columbae.
 5. For Cornelia's daughter.   Corneliae filiae.
 6. Of Britain.                Britanniae.
 7. For eagles.                Aquilis.
 8. Of the long streets.       Viarum longarum.
 9. For the little girls.      Puellis parvis.
10. To the small trumpet.      Tubae parvae.

Barrius
Textkit Member
 
Posts: 191
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2004 8:45 pm
Location: above ground, thank God!

Postby whiteoctave » Mon Apr 12, 2004 8:29 pm

Yeah, they are mostly right, providing of course that the only permissible answers for each phrase were those in the genitive or dative. You may want to look at number 10 of the first exercise again (if indeed the Latin is typed correctly).

~dave
User avatar
whiteoctave
Textkit Enthusiast
 
Posts: 603
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2003 11:42 pm
Location: Cambridge

Postby Saturnalicius Princeps » Mon Apr 12, 2004 9:31 pm

Perhaps #7 of the first exercise would bear another look as well...

To/for Cornelia's daughters would be Filiabus Corneliae, rather than the Filiis Corneliae that is listed. I believe you should be correct simply substituting sons for daughters.
Saturnalicius Princeps
Textkit Neophyte
 
Posts: 6
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2004 4:18 am

Postby whiteoctave » Mon Apr 12, 2004 9:38 pm

good man -well spotted.
i mentioned about this abl/dat form in some other latin forum here a few days ago, and in so doing i think i noted that it was an alternative form. As far as my knowledge extends, filiabus cam into prominence in Classical Greek (so as to avoid gender confusions in a word whose gender is naturally of great import) and remained as a useful irregular form. In earlier Latin, for instance Ennius and Plautus, however, filiis is often used. Even up to the time of Livy (v.37.fifty something), filiis can be used.
All in all, I think it should be pointed out, but cannot necessarily be classed a mistake ;)

~dave
User avatar
whiteoctave
Textkit Enthusiast
 
Posts: 603
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2003 11:42 pm
Location: Cambridge

Postby Barrius » Tue Apr 13, 2004 12:25 am

whiteoctave wrote:Yeah, they are mostly right, providing of course that the only permissible answers for each phrase were those in the genitive or dative.


Yes, dative and genitive, as the earlier exercises were nomitive and accuitive.


You may want to look at number 10 of the first exercise again (if indeed the Latin is typed correctly).


The Latin is correct, which mean's my translation is off. I guess "Of the wings of the eagles" would be better (genitive of the genitive?)
Barrius
Textkit Member
 
Posts: 191
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2004 8:45 pm
Location: above ground, thank God!

Postby Barrius » Tue Apr 13, 2004 12:31 am

Saturnalicius Princeps wrote:Perhaps #7 of the first exercise would bear another look as well...

To/for Cornelia's daughters would be Filiabus Corneliae, rather than the Filiis Corneliae that is listed. I believe you should be correct simply substituting sons for daughters.



Arrggh! You are correct! I remember reading WhiteOctive's post about filiabus/deabus (besides seeing it inthe book) and still missed it! Filiis would be masculine.

Thank you both for the corrections. This takes some getting used too.
Barrius
Textkit Member
 
Posts: 191
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2004 8:45 pm
Location: above ground, thank God!

Postby Saturnalicius Princeps » Tue Apr 13, 2004 8:16 am

I had missed the earlier reference of WhiteOctave to filiabus. After looking it up, I'm glad to say that I understand it a little better myself.
Saturnalicius Princeps
Textkit Neophyte
 
Posts: 6
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2004 4:18 am

Postby Barrius » Tue Apr 13, 2004 12:12 pm

Saturnalicius Princeps: D'Ooge notes on page 29 that "abus" is used in dative & ablative plural. "Beginner's Latin Book" by Collier and Daniell (page 9 footnote 1) states this occurs mostly in legal or religious language - I've seen another reference (possibly WhiteOctave's ? ) that stated to not decline it as such is permissible, but is bad grammar.

Maybe now it will sink in and I'll remember it. Now if I could just spell correctly!

Thanks for the help.
Barrius
Textkit Member
 
Posts: 191
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2004 8:45 pm
Location: above ground, thank God!

Postby whiteoctave » Tue Apr 13, 2004 1:57 pm

Yeah, i made the comment just above. I tried to stress, however, that it is not bad grammar and is perfectly permissible, but that it is less stylistic.

~dave

p.s. I enjoyed the ironic positioning of your split infinitive!
User avatar
whiteoctave
Textkit Enthusiast
 
Posts: 603
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2003 11:42 pm
Location: Cambridge

Postby Barrius » Tue Apr 13, 2004 2:29 pm

whiteoctave wrote:p.s. I enjoyed the ironic positioning of your split infinitive!


Arrrggh!!!! "to not decline it" - is there any way to learn Latin correctly, without me worrying about having to abide by grammatical rules of English as well? ;o)

(If you could see how many typos I have to correct in each post ....)







Actually, when all is said and done, maybe I can at least "begin" to write/speak English properly. I do favour the English spelling of some words already, if you know what I mean.
Barrius
Textkit Member
 
Posts: 191
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2004 8:45 pm
Location: above ground, thank God!


Return to Learning Latin

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google Adsense [Bot], Qimmik, Yahoo [Bot] and 49 guests