Domus apud Angulum Puensem Sita

Parthenophilus · Post by **Parthenophilus** » Fri Apr 22, 2005 12:31 am

I picked up a second-hand copy of Domus Anguli Puensis (The House at Pooh Corner) recently. I was interested by the syntax (or is it grammar?) of this part:

[Original text: Looking very calm, very dignified, with his legs in the
air, came Eeyore from beneath the bridge.]

I interpret this as treating "infra ponte" as the ablative of a hypothetical "infra pons," which, although made up of two words, acts like a single word meaning "the space beneath the bridge." I suppose "infra" is the adverb and not the preposition.

This is new to me. Is it standard Latin? Presumably the translator could point to a precedent. Could anyone here?

benissimus · Post by **benissimus** » Fri Apr 22, 2005 1:05 am

it looks weird to me for an adverb to intervene between a preposition and its object.

adz000 · Post by **adz000** » Fri Apr 22, 2005 2:32 am

Isn't it the adjective inferus -a -um?

Parthenophilus · Post by **Parthenophilus** » Fri Apr 22, 2005 3:23 am

That would be infera.

adz000 · Post by **adz000** » Fri Apr 22, 2005 1:24 pm

My mistake! I was thinking that since the adverb infra is a shortened form of infera agreeing with parte then this could be some kind of back formation. I overlooked the important fact that pons is masculine.

When I've seen ex infra before, it's usually been in the phrase ex infra scriptis or something like that, where the adverb is clearly modifying a participle. My suspicion is that it's an error here.

Ioannes · Post by **Ioannes** » Fri Apr 22, 2005 3:22 pm

Well, "infra" takes accusative. So, the ablative form of "pons", "ponte", is from "ex", and "infra" is used an adverb, unless the ablative form of "pons" overrides the accusative form of "pons", making it "ponte", not "pontem"?

Is it only me, or is this just a messy sentence? :S

Deses · Post by **Deses** » Fri Apr 22, 2005 4:15 pm

Ioannes wrote:Well, "infra" takes accusative. So, the ablative form of "pons", "ponte", is from "ex", and "infra" is used an adverb, unless the ablative form of "pons" overrides the accusative form of "pons", making it "ponte", not "pontem"?

Is it only me, or is this just a messy sentence? :S

Well, one could somehow take infra adverbially... Still, very odd. Perhaps one could see it this way: ex infraponte, from underthebridgness.

Parthenophilus · Post by **Parthenophilus** » Fri Apr 22, 2005 6:18 pm

I would be interested to know how the learned Latinists here would translate phrases like "from beneath the bridge", if not in the way demonstrated above.

Episcopus · Post by **Episcopus** » Fri Apr 22, 2005 7:52 pm

Given the choice I would have been inclined actually to write ex infra pontem, with [infra pontem] prepositional phrase as object in turn of the preposition ex, then [ex infra pontem] of course adverbial phrase. However I should think ex infra ponte to be fine, "from the bridge, below" so infra is indeed the adverb. The positioning of infra im Mittel is better than say ex ponte infra which is nasty, it just lets you know quickly. Actually ex infra ponte I quite like it now I don't care what you lads think! In fact using an adverb to avoid the clumsy preposition-governing-prepositional phrase could prove quite useful. I haven't seen many instances of this at all, whiteoctave surely can help us all.

benissimus · Post by **benissimus** » Fri Apr 22, 2005 9:26 pm

evenit Ior ex ponte ab infero - the closest I can think of, though ab infero signifies "from the bottom" and not so much "from underneath", but with ex it is more obvious that he was under (in) it. I will try to find a more adequate word unless someone more literate in Latin can shed some light on this. It shouldn't be difficult if only I could find a word to describe a space beneath something.

surely infra ex ponte would be better than ex infra ponte, which is probably just an overly literal translation of the English phrasing.

whiteoctave · Post by **whiteoctave** » Fri Apr 22, 2005 10:55 pm

i don't find the situation problematic. although Latin lacks a word as appropriate as, say, Grk. ἔνερθε(ν), the substantival imum (or infimum) from imus (or infimus) is often used in such a sense. thus 'a pontis imo' with a compound verb of motion in ex- or ab- would suffice here. a phrase with Ciceronian backing would be 'parte (pontis) ab infera'.
it is perhaps worth noting a sentence from Festus:
sublucare arbores est ramos earum, et ueluti subtus lucem mittere.

~D

Episcopus · Post by **Episcopus** » Sat Apr 23, 2005 1:04 pm

aha, I felt like I should have known that you could use a pontis imo, instead I used some silly word like umbris as I did not know that infimus could be used substantively. Nice post d