Textkit Logo

IPSI vs SIBI

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

IPSI vs SIBI

Postby blutoonwithcarrotandnail » Sun Feb 24, 2008 9:56 pm

Look at the following two sentences:

AGRICOLA IPSI AGRUM ARAVIT - The farmer himself plowed the field
AGRICOLA SIBI AGRUM ARAVIT - The farmer by himself plowed the field

Essentially they are both pronouns (IPSI and SIBI) although the
meaning is different.

Is knowing when to use them simply based upon knowing how the
meaning differs?

It is as simple as saying 'he plowed it for himself so that he could
take the profit' versus 'he did it alone without somebody else helping
him'?

Is it just simply contextual? Who is helping you versus what you did
with it?

Somebody someplace else was saying that IPSI implies

'opposition between two people'

What does this mean?

Thanks.
377 gram sent 729 vocab german 850 dutch 83 italian cold 214 spanish 450 roman
17 demo 43 icelandic
User avatar
blutoonwithcarrotandnail
Textkit Fan
 
Posts: 263
Joined: Sat Jan 21, 2006 2:49 pm

Postby MiguelM » Sun Feb 24, 2008 10:25 pm

If you want to say "The farmer himself plowed the field", you mustn't use the Dative case of the pronoun (IPSI) which you used. Ipse instead should be used. Thus AGRICOLA IPSE AGRUM ARAVIT means The farmer himself plowed the field. With AGRICOLA IPSI AGRUM ARAVIT you have the dative function of "giving", as in roughly "The farmer plowed (to) he-himself the field."

SIBI is the reflex pronoun in the dative case (reflex, as the noun indicates, means that the action is carried back to the subject of the verb). For what concerns translation into English, it is equivalent to "IPSI" ie "He plowed the field [reflex] to himself [being it reflective of the "He"].

'opposition between two people'

[EGO] IPSE AGRUM ARAVI.

I [and not someone else] was the one who farmed the field.



The issue you're raising between it being about whether he farmed it for himself, or he farmed it by himself alone seems to me to be more an issue of case (dative/nominative) than actually of the pronoun used. In any case, I hope I could explain well enough.
User avatar
MiguelM
Textkit Fan
 
Posts: 204
Joined: Fri Nov 09, 2007 1:35 am
Location: Portugal

Postby blutoonwithcarrotandnail » Mon Feb 25, 2008 1:37 am

I don't see the difference between IPSE and SIBI unless SIBI
is used with 'for' all the time and IPSE is not. I am sure that
that is not the case.

They look like the same word 'self' and they are both pronouns.

So when would know when to use one and not the other if there
both pronouns?

They say there a difference of meaing. What is it?

Thanks.
377 gram sent 729 vocab german 850 dutch 83 italian cold 214 spanish 450 roman
17 demo 43 icelandic
User avatar
blutoonwithcarrotandnail
Textkit Fan
 
Posts: 263
Joined: Sat Jan 21, 2006 2:49 pm

Postby Kasper » Mon Feb 25, 2008 2:41 am

blutoonwithcarrotandnail wrote:I don't see the difference between IPSE and SIBI unless SIBI
is used with 'for' all the time and IPSE is not.


That is exactly the point. 'sibi' is always, without exception, dative. that is, it is the indirect object. However it is also reflexive, and therefore translated as 'for/to himself/herself'.

'ipse' is always, without exception, nominative. That is, the subject of the main verb and can be translated as 'he', or, but not necessarily, as the strong 'he himself'.

"Ipse agrum sibi aravit" would translate as "He (himself) plows the field for him(self)", i.e. for his own benefit.

hope this helps.
“Cum ego verbo utar,” Humpty Dumpty dixit voce contempta, “indicat illud quod optem – nec plus nec minus.”
“Est tamen rogatio” dixit Alice, “an efficere verba tot res indicare possis.”
“Rogatio est, “Humpty Dumpty responsit, “quae fiat magister – id cunctum est.”
Kasper
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 799
Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2003 3:01 am
Location: Melbourne

Postby blutoonwithcarrotandnail » Mon Feb 25, 2008 3:15 am

If that is the only difference between them then what is
the difference between

IPSI (dative)

and

SIBI (dative)

Thanks.
377 gram sent 729 vocab german 850 dutch 83 italian cold 214 spanish 450 roman
17 demo 43 icelandic
User avatar
blutoonwithcarrotandnail
Textkit Fan
 
Posts: 263
Joined: Sat Jan 21, 2006 2:49 pm

Postby Kasper » Mon Feb 25, 2008 3:43 am

i think this will require the assistance of one of the superior latinists on this forum.

In my view, which may be wrong, forms of 'ipse' (including ipsi) strengthen or emphasise the person or object that they refer to.

In this it is different from sibi (or other reflexive forms for that matter).

"ille vir donum sibi dedit." (that man gave himself a present)
"sibi ipsi?!" (to himself?!)
“Cum ego verbo utar,” Humpty Dumpty dixit voce contempta, “indicat illud quod optem – nec plus nec minus.”
“Est tamen rogatio” dixit Alice, “an efficere verba tot res indicare possis.”
“Rogatio est, “Humpty Dumpty responsit, “quae fiat magister – id cunctum est.”
Kasper
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 799
Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2003 3:01 am
Location: Melbourne

Postby MiguelM » Mon Feb 25, 2008 2:38 pm

The suffix -pse is originally an emphatic particle meaning -self. So you have is,ea,id +pse (ipse, ipsa, ipsum) meaning almost literally "himself,herself,itself). As in English, you could just use "he plows the field", but if you want emphasis on the fact that HE is the one that plows the field, you may want "He himself plows the field", thus "[is>]ipse agrum arat".

Τhe 'se' reflex pronoun means that the action reflects back. In many cases it may have an identical meaning, but I am sure others more knowledgeable will come up with examples where there is a defined difference.
User avatar
MiguelM
Textkit Fan
 
Posts: 204
Joined: Fri Nov 09, 2007 1:35 am
Location: Portugal

Postby blutoonwithcarrotandnail » Mon Feb 25, 2008 3:38 pm

Do you mean like

'He did this himself' (he performed the action)
vs
'He hit himself' (he performed the action on himself)

That actually makes sense. However, this does not map onto the
book example

'The farmer himself plowed the field'
and
'The farmer plowed the field for himself'

If it did map perfectly onto it it would have said:

'The farmer himself plowed the field'
and
'The farmer plowed himself'


Again

'The farmer plowed himself' does not map onto 'The farmer plowed the field for himself'


Thanks.
377 gram sent 729 vocab german 850 dutch 83 italian cold 214 spanish 450 roman
17 demo 43 icelandic
User avatar
blutoonwithcarrotandnail
Textkit Fan
 
Posts: 263
Joined: Sat Jan 21, 2006 2:49 pm

Postby timeodanaos » Mon Feb 25, 2008 4:19 pm

blutoonwithcarrotandnail wrote:Do you mean like

'He did this himself' (he performed the action)
vs
'He hit himself' (he performed the action on himself)

That actually makes sense. However, this does not map onto the
book example

'The farmer himself plowed the field'
and
'The farmer plowed the field for himself'

If it did map perfectly onto it it would have said:

'The farmer himself plowed the field'
and
'The farmer plowed himself'


Again

'The farmer plowed himself' does not map onto 'The farmer plowed the field for himself'


Thanks.


The difference in these sentences as translated into Latin is the case:

Agricola ipse agrum arauit = The farmer plowed the field himself (=he did it, noone else did it)

Agricola ipsi agrum arauit = The farmer plowed the field for himself (=implicating that he did not do it for the sake of someone else, i.e. he will eat his crops himself)

The last one could also be written with sibi, agricola sibi agrum arauit, and the difference in meaning would be marginal, if any.


The problem is that English does not have an actual reflexive pronoun, as for example se in Latin and sich in German, and as a result, other means are taken to use to reflect the meaning of the reflexive pronoun, nowadays 'himself/herself/itself'.
Reading Thomas Malory's Le Morte d'Arthur (from the latter part of the fifteenth century, I think), I noticed that he, where I would expect 'himself' in a reflexive sense, always uses 'he' alone.
At least that's what I think.
timeodanaos
Textkit Fan
 
Posts: 280
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 10:36 pm
Location: Hafnia, Denmark

Postby MiguelM » Mon Feb 25, 2008 4:20 pm

'He did this himself' (he performed the action)
vs
'He hit himself' (he performed the action on himself)

Yes, that is really it.

Ipse hoc fecit
vs
Se pulsauit



I am not sure what your question is. The farmer himself plowed is Agricola ipse arat. The farmer plowed the field for himself is Agricola agrum arat sibi.

If you wanted to say "The farmer plowed himself"(as if the farmer were a field!), then yes, "Agricola se arat" would be it.
User avatar
MiguelM
Textkit Fan
 
Posts: 204
Joined: Fri Nov 09, 2007 1:35 am
Location: Portugal

Postby bellumbellum » Mon Feb 25, 2008 9:22 pm

blutoonwithcarrotandnail wrote:Do you mean like

'He did this himself' (he performed the action)
vs
'He hit himself' (he performed the action on himself)

That actually makes sense. However, this does not map onto the
book example

'The farmer himself plowed the field'
and
'The farmer plowed the field for himself'

If it did map perfectly onto it it would have said:

'The farmer himself plowed the field'
and
'The farmer plowed himself'


Again

'The farmer plowed himself' does not map onto 'The farmer plowed the field for himself'


Thanks.





Here is the best way that I can describe this.

IPSE

Is an Intensive Pronoun, it is used to give emphasis to a noun or
pronoun in either the subject or the predicate of a sentence.
Aside from being translated as myself/ourselves, yourself/yourselves,
and himself/herself/itself/themselves, it can also mean the very or
the actual. The best way to think of the use of Ipse is to see it in light
of the importance of the noun it is pertaining to.
i.e. Cicero himself told it to me. (Cicero Ipse id mihi dixit.)
Cicero told it to me, myself. (Cicero id mihi ipsi dixit.)
We ourselves will sail across the sea.([Nos] Ipsi trans mare navigabimus.)
We will sail across the see itself. (trans mare ipsum navigabimus.)
They themselves will fight to the death. ([Ea] Ipsa ad morti pugnabunt.)
They will fight to death itself. (Ad morti ipsi pugnabunt.)
You (sg.) yourself hold wisdom. ([Tu] ipse sapientiam tenes.)
You (sg) hold wisdom itself. (Sapientiam ipsam tenes.)
You (pl) yourselves conquered Rome. ([Vos] ipsi Romam vicisti.)
You (pl) conquered Rome itself. (Romam ipsam vicisti.)

As you see from the examples any noun that was modified by IPSE held
a certain emphasis as to it's importance in the sentence. I hope
that helps.

Now as for the reflexive pronoun sibi and it's uses.

As someone else has already stated a reflexive pronoun reflects back
on to only the subject of a sentence. For this reason there is
no Nominative for this pronoun. To give a more full illustration I will
have to incorporate the reflexive pronouns of myself and yourself as
well. I apologize in advance for all of the examples.

I denied myself ([Ego] negavi me.)
I give peace to myself. ([Ego] pacem do mihi.)
We sing for ourselves. ([Nos] cantamus nobis.)
We love ourselves. ([Nos] amamus nos.)
You (sg.) frighten yourself. ([Tu] terres te.)
You (pl.) give strength to yourself. ([Vos] Vires datis vobis.)
He doesn't understand himself. (Is non intellegit se.)

These next two examples show an important difference between
the use of (de) as in regarding something and the use of the genitive
as possessing something.


Marcus speaks of himself. (Marcus dicit de se.)
She gives of herself. (Ea dat sui.)

It remains to itself. (Id remanet sibi.)
They come for themselves. (Ea veniunt sibi.)
They dine with/by themselves. (Ea canant se.)

I hope these examples and explanations could help. The only other
advise I could give in understanding the differences is to look at this
way; when using a reflexive pronoun (mihi, tibi, sibi, etc.) it acts as
it's own noun, so in English as we say, He gives to himself, the
subject, He, is performing the verb, gives, to the predicate noun,
himself. Just as if I were to say, He gives to the people, "He gives," is
the subject and his action, and "to the people," is the subject
noun receiving the action. So, the reflexive pronoun is it's own noun.

When using the Intensive pronoun it is to show the emphasis of a
noun, and would be right even to group it as an adjective, for even
though it doesn't modify the noun with a complementary word such
as: great, weak, happy, sad, etc., by showing the "emphasis" as
HE/THAT is THE person/thing which is performing the verb, it modifies
the significance of the noun.

If this is all to confusing let me know and I will try to make it more simple.
bellumbellum
Textkit Neophyte
 
Posts: 6
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2008 5:18 pm

Postby adrianus » Tue Feb 26, 2008 1:11 pm

A saying/dictum

"Homines plerique ipsi sibi mala parant"
= "So many people (people and many) themselves are the cause of (prepare or furnish) bad things for themselves"
= "So many people are their own worst enemies"
adrianus
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 3270
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 9:45 pm

Postby blutoonwithcarrotandnail » Tue Feb 26, 2008 4:59 pm

timeodanaos wrote:
Agricola ipse agrum arauit = The farmer plowed the field himself (=he did it, noone else did it)

Agricola ipsi agrum arauit = The farmer plowed the field for himself (=implicating that he did not do it for the sake of someone else, i.e. he will eat his crops himself)

The last one could also be written with sibi, agricola sibi agrum arauit, and the difference in meaning would be marginal, if any.



Is there a rule for when IPSE can be used as SUI or conversely
when SUI can be used as IPSE?

You said they do not map onto the english language perfectly.

If this is true can SUI be used half the time for IPSE?

Can IPSE be used half the time for SUI?

Is there some rule?

Thanks.
377 gram sent 729 vocab german 850 dutch 83 italian cold 214 spanish 450 roman
17 demo 43 icelandic
User avatar
blutoonwithcarrotandnail
Textkit Fan
 
Posts: 263
Joined: Sat Jan 21, 2006 2:49 pm

Postby timeodanaos » Tue Feb 26, 2008 5:17 pm

The main difference is that the reflexive pronoun se always corresponds to the subject of the sentence, thus ipse could be used as in: 'arauit agrum ipsum', he plowed the selfsame field (the field that I mentioned earlier and that you now are assumed to know about).

'se' will always correspond to the subject, as well as the possesive suua/sua/suum.

'ipse' can moreover also be used in conjunction with 'se': ager se ipsum arauit', the field plowed itself (now with extra emphasis on itself: can you believe it? The field is plowing itself nowadays!!! oh yeah, and I AM aware that this last example is a bit far out.


Also: Heluetii bellum gerunt cum suis hostibus = the Helvetians are making war with their (own) enemies

Heluetii bellum gerunt cum ipsis hostibus = the Helvetians are making war with the self same enemies (these enemies could for example be the same enemies that Caesar had battled just the other day, but not necessarily the old household enemies of the Helvetians)


And finally, ipse is sometimes used (perhaps only in later Latin?) as just a demonstrative pronoun, at least it's used that way all the time in the Pervigilium Veneris, which I've been reading.

Please someone more knowledgeable correct me if I am wrong in this matter.
timeodanaos
Textkit Fan
 
Posts: 280
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 10:36 pm
Location: Hafnia, Denmark

Postby blutoonwithcarrotandnail » Tue Feb 26, 2008 8:22 pm

timeodanaos wrote:The main difference is that the reflexive pronoun se always corresponds to the subject of the sentence, thus ipse could be used as in: 'arauit agrum ipsum', he plowed the selfsame field (the field that I mentioned earlier and that you now are assumed to know about).

'se' will always correspond to the subject, as well as the possesive suua/sua/suum.



So this would mean that

ARAVIT AGRUM IPSUM = ARAVIT AGRUM SE

or am I missing the point?

Thanks.
377 gram sent 729 vocab german 850 dutch 83 italian cold 214 spanish 450 roman
17 demo 43 icelandic
User avatar
blutoonwithcarrotandnail
Textkit Fan
 
Posts: 263
Joined: Sat Jan 21, 2006 2:49 pm

Postby MiguelM » Tue Feb 26, 2008 10:43 pm

You are. The reflexive pronoun always ... reflects back to the doer. Does

ARAVIT AGRUM IPSUM
He plows the field itself.

ARAVIT AGRUM SE
He plows the field (and) himself.

Because the SE goes back to the doer, which is the agricola.
User avatar
MiguelM
Textkit Fan
 
Posts: 204
Joined: Fri Nov 09, 2007 1:35 am
Location: Portugal

Postby Kasper » Tue Feb 26, 2008 11:01 pm

ipsum (and its other forms) as has now been variously stated, emphasises the noun it connects with. Translations may be 'the very ...', 'the actual ...', 'the selfsame ...'.

So in your first sentence, "aravit agrum ipsum", the subject (the person plowing) is implied, and ipsum merely emphasises which field is being plowed.

In both sentences, agrum is accusative, not nominative, and therefore se cannot refer to it. In your sentence "aravit agrum se", the subject to which 'se' refers is implied, i.e. he/she/it plowed the field himself/herself/itself.
“Cum ego verbo utar,” Humpty Dumpty dixit voce contempta, “indicat illud quod optem – nec plus nec minus.”
“Est tamen rogatio” dixit Alice, “an efficere verba tot res indicare possis.”
“Rogatio est, “Humpty Dumpty responsit, “quae fiat magister – id cunctum est.”
Kasper
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 799
Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2003 3:01 am
Location: Melbourne

Postby blutoonwithcarrotandnail » Wed Feb 27, 2008 3:09 am

timeodanaos wrote:The main difference is that the reflexive pronoun se always corresponds to the subject of the sentence, thus ipse could be used as in: 'arauit agrum ipsum', he plowed the selfsame field (the field that I mentioned earlier and that you now are assumed to know about).

'se' will always correspond to the subject, as well as the possesive suua/sua/suum.



I think i misinterpreted this explanation. I think what it is saying is that
unconditionally 'SE goes with the subject' and that IPSE refers to the
fact that he plowed the field but the action was NOT done to him himself
(reflexive)

SE should therefore always correspond to the subject - and no form of
IPSE in the declension (IPSE IPSIUS IPSI IPSUM IPSO) can substitute
at any time for any form of SUI (SUI SIBI SE SE)

Thanks.
377 gram sent 729 vocab german 850 dutch 83 italian cold 214 spanish 450 roman
17 demo 43 icelandic
User avatar
blutoonwithcarrotandnail
Textkit Fan
 
Posts: 263
Joined: Sat Jan 21, 2006 2:49 pm

Postby blutoonwithcarrotandnail » Wed Feb 27, 2008 3:56 pm

Here if I am correct all of the following are not equivalents:

(agricola sui agrum aravit) is not the same as (agricola ipsi agrum aravit)
(agricola sibi agrum aravit) is not the same as (agricola ipsi agrum aravit)
(agricola se agrum aravit) is not the same as (agricola ipsi agrum aravit)

none of these combinations are the same

For 'AGRICOLA IPSI AGRUM ARAVIT' even if I change IPSI (to IPSE,
IPSIUS, IPSUM, IPSO) it will never make the above sentences equal.


Thanks.
377 gram sent 729 vocab german 850 dutch 83 italian cold 214 spanish 450 roman
17 demo 43 icelandic
User avatar
blutoonwithcarrotandnail
Textkit Fan
 
Posts: 263
Joined: Sat Jan 21, 2006 2:49 pm

Postby timeodanaos » Wed Feb 27, 2008 5:03 pm

blutoonwithcarrotandnail wrote:(agricola sui agrum aravit) is not the same as (agricola ipsi agrum aravit)
(agricola sibi agrum aravit) is not the same as (agricola ipsi agrum aravit)
(agricola se agrum aravit) is not the same as (agricola ipsi agrum aravit)

For 'AGRICOLA IPSI AGRUM ARAVIT' even if I change IPSI (to IPSE,
IPSIUS, IPSUM, IPSO) it will never make the above sentences equal.


The three sentences you've just written mean very different things, the first one doesn't even mean anything in my ears, and that's because of the different cases, and thus, they could never all just be replaced with the dative of ipse.


The pronouns in Latin all have slightly different meanings:

is, ea, id = he, she, it
ipse, ipsa, ipsum = the same
hic, haec, hoc = that one (who is here by me) (closer to the speaker)
iste, ista, istud = that one (who is over there by you) (closer to the reciever)
ille, illa, illud = that one (over there by the other ones) (closer to someone else)

...and then 'se', which always corresponds to the subject of the sentence.


These subtle differences are only strictly followed in classical times and are not obeyed later on, but they do exist, and that is why the sentences mean different things.


This means that you are right in your final statement, although I had a hard time comprehending that last sentence.
timeodanaos
Textkit Fan
 
Posts: 280
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 10:36 pm
Location: Hafnia, Denmark

Postby blutoonwithcarrotandnail » Wed Feb 27, 2008 5:51 pm

If IPSE is a pronoun and SUI is a pronoun, then in English what
is 'self' considered? Is it an adjective or a pronoun or a
possesive adjective (himself)?

There is only one in english correct? There is just the word
'self' and it always falls under the same part of speech.

'Myself' or 'I did it to myself' is the same part of speech in
English correct? What part of speech is this, adj or pron or
a possesive adj?

Thanks.
377 gram sent 729 vocab german 850 dutch 83 italian cold 214 spanish 450 roman
17 demo 43 icelandic
User avatar
blutoonwithcarrotandnail
Textkit Fan
 
Posts: 263
Joined: Sat Jan 21, 2006 2:49 pm

Postby timeodanaos » Wed Feb 27, 2008 6:58 pm

I'm in no way a prodigy in the ways of English philology, and the particular word self is an example of one word apparently fitting into four parts of speech, cf. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/self.

You cannot lure me into writing anything about possesives in English, and especially not compared to Latin, because the ways in which they are realised are so different, and I can't formulate myself well enough for that purpose.

Myself is a pronoun. It functions as a reflexive, that is, as 'se' in Latin. The difference is that it is modified in English according to person, gender and number, yourself, themselves, herself etc. - the -self in this pronoun looks like a grammaticalisation of the noun 'self', i.e. 'I did it to my self = to my own person = to me'.
timeodanaos
Textkit Fan
 
Posts: 280
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 10:36 pm
Location: Hafnia, Denmark

Postby blutoonwithcarrotandnail » Wed Feb 27, 2008 11:11 pm

timeodanaos wrote:Reading Thomas Malory's Le Morte d'Arthur (from the latter part of the fifteenth century, I think), I noticed that he, where I would expect 'himself' in a reflexive sense, always uses 'he' alone.
At least that's what I think.


IPSE seems to always correspond to 'himself' in 5 cases and SUI to
'himself' in 4 cases based upon the manipulation of 'of, to, for, by,
from.'

There seems to be a pefectly preserved relation for when to use each.
There seems to be no flowchart with an 'if/then' decision for when
to violate this pattern. The only one i can find possible of doing this
to use something else would be the use of 'he' in an english translation
instead of 'himself'. This should make no difference and it should have
been 'himself'. The backward translation means nothing. Correct?

Thanks.
377 gram sent 729 vocab german 850 dutch 83 italian cold 214 spanish 450 roman
17 demo 43 icelandic
User avatar
blutoonwithcarrotandnail
Textkit Fan
 
Posts: 263
Joined: Sat Jan 21, 2006 2:49 pm

Postby bellumbellum » Thu Feb 28, 2008 9:29 am

I'm not sure if this is your current question but,

All 5 cases are used with IPSE because it will agree with the noun it modifies:
[all examples in the singular.
Nominative: Is IPSE id puellae dabit. (He, himself, will give it to the girl)
Genitive: Vita viri IPSIUS sine amoribus valere poterit.
(The life of man, himself, will not be able to be strong
without love.)
Dative: Ea hanc mihi IPSI faciebat. (She made this for me, myself)
Accusative: Hunc liberum IPSUM scripsisti. (You wrote this very book.-this
book itself)
Ablative: Ego illa puella IPSA fugavi. (I fled from that very girl.-that
girl herself.)

The reason for there only being 4 cases for se is in the fact that as it is a
reflexive pronoun, it ALWAYS refers to the SUBJECT, and therefore can
never stand as the subject. It is used as any other noun of the predicate
would be:

Genitive: (I can't think of a good example of how to use sui here, either
its proper use is something I haven't learned yet or I missed
something.)
Dative: Ea] rosam SIBI miserat. (She had sent roses to herself.)
Accusative: Ea] SE ei miserat. (She had sent herself to him.)
Ablative: Ea] eum a SE miserat. (She had sent him from her(self).)

In the Examples for SE I only use EA to show who the pronoun reflects
back to.
bellumbellum
Textkit Neophyte
 
Posts: 6
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2008 5:18 pm

Postby ingrid70 » Thu Feb 28, 2008 11:10 am

bellumbellum wrote:Genitive: (I can't think of a good example of how to use sui here, either
its proper use is something I haven't learned yet or I missed
something.)


sui, like the genitives mei, tui, nostri and vestri, is mainly (or only?) used as genitive of the object: amor sui: love for himself.

Ingrid
ingrid70
Textkit Enthusiast
 
Posts: 394
Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2002 6:29 pm
Location: The Netherlands

Postby bellumbellum » Thu Feb 28, 2008 5:29 pm

ingrid70 wrote:
bellumbellum wrote:Genitive: (I can't think of a good example of how to use sui here, either
its proper use is something I haven't learned yet or I missed
something.)


sui, like the genitives mei, tui, nostri and vestri, is mainly (or only?) used as genitive of the object: amor sui: love for himself.

Ingrid



Gratias ago!
bellumbellum
Textkit Neophyte
 
Posts: 6
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2008 5:18 pm

Postby blutoonwithcarrotandnail » Thu Feb 28, 2008 8:30 pm

Slightly off the subject but heres a question:

In the reflexive sentence 'He hates himself'

Does the subject noun stand alone, or is it really
considered a part of the greater label 'the predicate'

Also, in the use of the reflexive (SUI) can you expect to
find 2 verbs where as in the non-reflexive (IPSE) you should
only find one verb in the sentence:

Reflexive: I hate myself (1 verb)
Non-Reflexive: We ourselves will sail across the sea (2 verbs)

Thanks.
377 gram sent 729 vocab german 850 dutch 83 italian cold 214 spanish 450 roman
17 demo 43 icelandic
User avatar
blutoonwithcarrotandnail
Textkit Fan
 
Posts: 263
Joined: Sat Jan 21, 2006 2:49 pm

Postby timeodanaos » Sat Mar 01, 2008 11:06 am

blutoonwithcarrotandnail wrote:Also, in the use of the reflexive (SUI) can you expect to
find 2 verbs where as in the non-reflexive (IPSE) you should
only find one verb in the sentence:

Reflexive: I hate myself (1 verb)
Non-Reflexive: We ourselves will sail across the sea (2 verbs)
There is but one verb in both sentences. 'will sail' is considered as one, since one is finite (will) and one is infinitive (sail), together they form one meaning, that 'we' do not sail as of now, but that we either want to go sailing, or we are definitely going to go sailing.

And the difference has nothing to do with the pronoun, as it is perfectly possible to say 'I will hate myself' or 'we ourselves sail across the sea', where the 'myself-pronoun' in the first is still reflexive, and in the second, it is still demonstrative.
timeodanaos
Textkit Fan
 
Posts: 280
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 10:36 pm
Location: Hafnia, Denmark

Postby blutoonwithcarrotandnail » Sun Mar 02, 2008 5:24 am

This may sound stupid but I guess that the giveaway for the
SUI vs IPSE is that the comparitive structure of the two sentences
if its confusing you is:

IPSE - We ourselves will sail across the sea
SUI - We ourselves will sail across ourselves (literally
our own bodies)

Although the second sentence makes absolutely no sense, if
it did it would be reflexive which makes the difference between
the two clearer.

Correct?

Thanks.
377 gram sent 729 vocab german 850 dutch 83 italian cold 214 spanish 450 roman
17 demo 43 icelandic
User avatar
blutoonwithcarrotandnail
Textkit Fan
 
Posts: 263
Joined: Sat Jan 21, 2006 2:49 pm

Postby timeodanaos » Sun Mar 02, 2008 9:13 am

Yes, if we were to sail across ourselves, that would translate into a sentence with se, where 'se' would be the object (or determinant for the preposition anyway) and would correspond to the subject, 'we/nos'. The first 'ourselves', then, would still be rendered as ipsi (assuming that 'we' includes men, in nominativus pluralis masculinum).

In short, you are right, you have understood the difference, I shall cease to confuse you. :)



(americans and other nationalities always start the paradigms nominative, genitive, whereas I and everyone else in my country start nominative, accusative, that's why I always write 'se' as a starting point)
timeodanaos
Textkit Fan
 
Posts: 280
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 10:36 pm
Location: Hafnia, Denmark


Return to Learning Latin

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google Adsense [Bot], sarit888 and 64 guests