Translation & Gramma

[Asterix]

I've got the following sentence that is not clear to me:

Id est senatores.

It's out from a story about Romulus choosing people for the senate.

Is it : there is senators or there are sentors.

and what's about the converguence of nomen and verb. Why isn't the sentence so: iis sunt senatores ???

Thanx

[benissimus]

I don't think that this is correct, unless they are using the phrase id est like we use the phrase i.e.. I searched the internet and there is no example for "id est senatores". Maybe if you provide a larger context it will make more sense.

[whiteoctave]

Benissimus must surely be correct, and the latin you quote is merely an explanatory parenthesis of the preceding words, i.e. illos amemus, id est senatores.

~D

[Asterix]

I post the whole article out of the Book "Orbis romanus".

In civitate Romana duo genera civium fuerunt. Patricii civitati praeerant. Ex numero patriciorum non solum duo consules, sed etiam patres (id est senatores) creabantur. Plebeii non eadem iura erant quae patriciis: plebeii ab omnibus honoribus arcebantur. Leges plebeios filias patriciorum in matrimonio habere vetabant.

Well, maybe this helps you to understand the context.

Thank you

[whiteoctave]

right, it's an explanatory parenthesis (that is, a clause bracketed from the sentence, gramatically and/or literally), here qualifying patres. patres (short for patres conscripti) is a common term for the senators.

~D

[Asterix]

Okay I thought it would be something like this.

I know such a sytax ony from Arabic so I was wondering where in the grammar the rule is.

I haven't found it yet.

But thanx and bye till next time & translation.