Estne tibi pileus/Habsne tuum pileum: Is there a difference?

[timus]

Hi guys!
I'm currently using Adlers text with the Podcast, and was wondering if there is a difference when translating into English these two sentences:

Estne tibi pileus? (Is to you a hat)
Habsne tuum pileum? (You have your hat)

It would seem to me that the first sentence is more like 'Is it your hat?,' while the second would be 'Do you have your hat'

Thanks for clearing this up for me!

Tim.

[timeodanaos]

1) do you have a hat?

2) do you have your hat? (i.e. are you currently in possesion of your hat so that you may put it on in case your ears are cold)

How I see it, at least.

[timus]

Takk for replying!

[Lucus Eques]

If you got rid of the "tuum," there would be no real difference in meaning:

Habesne pileum?
=
Estne tibi pileus?

Altho', the "tibi" does imply a partial possession, like "tuum." Confer with "mihi lavo manus."

[timeodanaos]

Isn't lavo used as a deponent when conveying a medial voice?

[benissimus]

Isn't lavo used as a deponent when conveying a medial voice?

mihi lavo manus has the distinct flavor of late Latin or a Romancism.

[Lucus Eques]

Isn't lavo used as a deponent when conveying a medial voice?

Lavare "used as a deponent" doesn't quite make sense. Perhaps you mean, in passive voice, lavari that is, which does, as you say, convey a "medial voice" similar to the Greek vox media. So you could say "lavor," sure.

[timeodanaos]

Isn't lavo used as a deponent when conveying a medial voice?

Lavare "used as a deponent" doesn't quite make sense. Perhaps you mean, in passive voice, lavari that is, which does, as you say, convey a "medial voice" similar to the Greek vox media. So you could say "lavor," sure.

Since the conjugation is passive though the meaning isn't, I thought it more proper to call it a deponent paradigm - in this specific case at least. I'm sorry I wasn't making myself clear, I hate to sound like someone who doesn't know what he's saying - especially when I, in fact, do.

I meant to merely enquire about the specific case of lavo/lavor, where I know of the use with passive voice denoting medial action, but not of dir. object + indirect object.