Textkit Logo

Please advise if you see a mistake.

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

Re: Please advise if you see a mistake.

Postby Interaxus » Sat Jan 17, 2009 1:54 am

Adrianus:

As tyro and humble beneficiary, I'd like to say how grateful I am for this thread - also for the English-Latin parallel texts scattered throughout theTextkit cloud written by yourself, thesaurus et al.

Can you please say a lttle more about this project? Where do your English texts come from? Van Nostrand? Your own head? Apart from practising/honing your own Latin, what is the ultimate aim of the project? Will there be an end-product? A New Comenius?

Cheers,
Int
Interaxus
Textkit Enthusiast
 
Posts: 520
Joined: Tue Sep 28, 2004 1:04 am
Location: Stockholm, Sweden

Re: Please advise if you see a mistake.

Postby adrianus » Sat Jan 17, 2009 4:16 am

Thanks a lot, Interaxe. Very kind of you. And please forgive me the mistakes which are everywhere! I'm a novice in the same boat.

They're all extracts from a program I'm writing, called Mundus (copyright Adrian Mallon), which is similar to Comenius's Orbis Sensualium Pictus, but updated and interactive. Who knows when it will be finished, because it's part of a larger suite of computer programs eLingua Latina, comprising Verba, Dictio, Quaestiones and Fabula (a videogame set in a 3D immersive environment).

Multas gratias, Interaxe, tibi ago de verbis tuis benignissimis. Et ignoscas, amabò te, vitia quae ubiquè feci! Tirones conjuncti sumus.

Omnia sunt excerpta è programmate quod scribo, Mundus nomine (et jus proprium scriptoris, Adrian Mallon), quod simile est Orbis Sensualium Pictus operis Comenii, sed dierum nostrorum et vi mutuâ. Quis scit quando id perfecturum sit, quià majoris operis programmatum ordinatralium pars est, videlicet eLingua Latina, quod continet quoquè has alias partes: Verba, Dictio, Quaestiones, Fabula (videoludum in circumjecto absorbente trium dimensionum situm).


(Vide Mallon, Adrian, "eLingua Latina: Designing a Classical-language E-learning Resource," Computer Assisted Language Learning, Vol. 19, Nos. 4 & 5, October 2006: 373-388. et "eLingua Latina and immersive CALL tool design", Computer Assisted Language Learning, Volume 20, Issue 4 October 2007: 345-363.)
I'm writing in Latin hoping for correction, and not because I'm confident in how I express myself. Latinè scribo ut ab omnibus corrigar, non quod confidenter me exprimam.
adrianus
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 3270
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 9:45 pm

Re: Please advise if you see a mistake.

Postby Swth\r » Sat Jan 17, 2009 5:17 pm

Very nice work!!! And the final project seems very interesting!
Dives qui sapiens est...
Swth\r
Textkit Fan
 
Posts: 270
Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2008 6:51 pm
Location: Greece

Re: Please advise if you see a mistake.

Postby adrianus » Sat Jan 17, 2009 8:20 pm

Thanks, Salvator. Just please correct any mistakes you see, if you wouldn't mind. Corrigas autem quaecumque vitia videas, quaeso, si tibi non molestum sit.

Number 21. Numerum viginti unum.
Adverbs and adjectives have three degrees of comparison: positive, comparative, superlative. We compare the characteristics of two or more objects. For example, of solid objects or liquids and gases in containers (or otherwise in one place) we may compare weights, dimensions (such as length, breadth, height, volume or surface area) or any adjective that may apply (relating to colour, smell, taste or anything of that kind),—even very subjectively, by saying this thing is nicer or better or worse that that. An abstract noun, like "life", can't be compared to a concrete noun, like "book", unless to explain how similar or dissimilar they are to each other poetically.

In latin, adjectives are used in the comparative degree in two main ways: (1) with "quàm" after the adjective and before the second noun in the same case as the first; (2) without "quàm" and with the second noun in the ablative (of comparison). A superlative adjective, like any adjective, agrees with its noun in gender, number and case. We usually say, then, "homo est animal doctissimum" or "doctissimus animalium" rather than "doctissimum animalium", unless "doctissimum" here we consider a substantive, "the smartest one".


Gradus comparationis adjectivis adverbiisque sunt tres: positivus, comparativus, superlativus. Propria duarum vel ampliùs rerum comparamus. Exempli gratiâ, rerum solidarum vel liquorum gasorumque in vasculis (vel secùs in uno loco) comparemus pondos, dimensiones (ut longitudinem, latitudinem, altitudinem, conceptum vel superficiei spatium), vel quodcunque adjectivum aptum sit (ad colorem, odorem, saporem vel ullum alium genus pertinentem),—subjectivissimum proprium quidem, in dicendo hoc gratius vel melius vel peius illi esse. Abstractum nomen, ut "vita", concreto, ut "liber", compari non potest, nisi in explicando quàm similes dissimilesve sunt illi suorum sensu poetico.

Adjectivi latinè cum grado comparativo duobus modis principalibus utuntur: (primum) per "quàm" post adjectivum positum et ante secundum nomen quod eodem casu est ut est primum; (secundum) sinè "quàm" et per alterum nomen ablativo casu (comparationis). Adjectivum superlativi gradûs, sicut omnia adjectiva, cum nomine ad quod adicitur per genum numerumque atque casum convenit. Dicamus ideò "homo est animal doctissimum" vel "doctissimus animalium" sed non "doctissimum animalium", nisi "doctissimum" hîc substantivi modo habeamus.
I'm writing in Latin hoping for correction, and not because I'm confident in how I express myself. Latinè scribo ut ab omnibus corrigar, non quod confidenter me exprimam.
adrianus
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 3270
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 9:45 pm

Re: Please advise if you see a mistake.

Postby Swth\r » Sat Jan 17, 2009 9:03 pm

I don't mind at all. Time is my major problem, after all... :(

You are much more skillful than me in Latin. But 8) I think weight is "pondus-ponderis" , not "pondus-i".

Labor mihi non est. Inopiae temporis me valde miseret; quam ob rem tristiculum me arbitror.

Sed conloquamini de sermonibus tuis. Peritiorem sane ad loquendum Latine te esse puto quam me ipsum. Censeo tamen "pondera" figuram rectam esse pro "pondos". :wink:

Etiam te corrigere volo ad haec:

genus pertinentem => genus pertinens ?
subjectivissimum proprium=> subjectivissime (adverb) ?
in dicendo => dicendo ?
maius, peius illi => illo (ablat.) ?
similes dissimilesve ... illi => similia dissimiliave ... illa (nomina) ?
utuntur = "they use", not "they are used" (verbum deponens!). Nescio tamen quid pro eo verbo proponam...
per "quam" => cum "quam" ?
per alterum nomen => cum altero nomine ?
convenio + dativus ??? fortasse rectius quam "cum+abl." ???

Utinam utilis sim...
Dives qui sapiens est...
Swth\r
Textkit Fan
 
Posts: 270
Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2008 6:51 pm
Location: Greece

Re: Please advise if you see a mistake.

Postby adrianus » Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:27 pm

"Pondus -eris", "illo", et "utuntur"!! Rectè dicis. Gratias, Salvator.

"subjectivissimum proprium quidem" = "even the most subjective quality"
"in dicendo" minùs ambiguum est quàm "dicendo" (both are said but to use "in" removes any ambiguities)
"cum" or "per", but "per" = "using" "by means on" "with" often used by the grammarians/saepè apud grammaticos
"convenio" + acc + dative + "cum" + "ad" + "in" (vide OLD & L&S.
I'm writing in Latin hoping for correction, and not because I'm confident in how I express myself. Latinè scribo ut ab omnibus corrigar, non quod confidenter me exprimam.
adrianus
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 3270
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 9:45 pm

Re: Please advise if you see a mistake.

Postby adrianus » Sun Jan 18, 2009 5:29 pm

Number 22. Numerum viginiti duo.
Before satellites were used to indicate position, sailors navigated by the sun, stars, moon and planets, magnetic compass, dead-reckoning and sea-charts. The sun rises in the east and sets in the west. At noon, it reaches its highest point in the sky which, while overhead at the equator, points north in the southern hemisphere and south in the northern. The Pole Star points to the North Pole. A compass's needle points to magnetic north near the Arctic pole, and its rose indicates south, east and west. Dead reckoning involves plotting a course from a vessel's speed, direction, drift in current or tide, and time travelling from landmarks.


Ante satellitium usum ad designandum situum, nautae sole, stellis, lunâ planetisque, indice magnetico, numeratione sitûs cum circino, chartis marinis navigabant. Sol in orientale exoritur, in occidente occidit. Meridie, locum editissimum sui est in caelo pertingit, quod in circulo aequinoctialis est adeò suprá, in hemisphaerio septentrionali ad austres dirigit, in australi ad septentriones. Polaris Stella ad Polum Articum dirigit. Index nauticus ad polum magneticum propè Arcticum dirigit, et indicat rosa pyxidis ad austres et orientem occidentemque. Numeratio sitûs cum circino involvat cursum navis delineare è navis velocitate, directione, natando in aquis profluentibus aestuve, atque duratione ab locis in lingulâ vectandi.
I'm writing in Latin hoping for correction, and not because I'm confident in how I express myself. Latinè scribo ut ab omnibus corrigar, non quod confidenter me exprimam.
adrianus
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 3270
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 9:45 pm

Re: Please advise if you see a mistake.

Postby Swth\r » Mon Jan 19, 2009 10:50 am

adrianus wrote:"Pondus -eris", "illo", et "utuntur"!! Rectè dicis. Gratias, Salvator.

"subjectivissimum proprium quidem" = "even the most subjective quality"
"in dicendo" minùs ambiguum est quàm "dicendo" (both are said but to use "in" removes any ambiguities)
"cum" or "per", but "per" = "using" "by means on" "with" often used by the grammarians/saepè apud grammaticos
"convenio" + acc + dative + "cum" + "ad" + "in" (vide OLD & L&S.


Yes, you are right about all. I answered by memory only (not so strong though... as it seems)
Again, not sure 100%, but I thought "per"+acc. is used with persons only... (Another answer made out of my memory :roll: )

What about "genus pertinens"? Isn't it the correct one?

I will try to read and check your new post at evening (after 22.00 greece time).
Dives qui sapiens est...
Swth\r
Textkit Fan
 
Posts: 270
Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2008 6:51 pm
Location: Greece

Re: Please advise if you see a mistake.

Postby adrianus » Mon Jan 19, 2009 12:44 pm

Swth\r wrote:
adrianus wrote:Again, not sure 100%, but I thought "per"+acc. is used with persons only... (Another answer made out of my memory :roll: )

What about "genus pertinens"? Isn't it the correct one?

Crede mihi, "per" sic adhibitum esse, ut "aqua per q", vidi (me paenitet, locos memoriâ non teneo)
Et etiam verùm dicis: "pertinens" nec "pertinentem" quià verbum cui adicitur casu accusativo quidem sed neutrius autem generis est.
I'm writing in Latin hoping for correction, and not because I'm confident in how I express myself. Latinè scribo ut ab omnibus corrigar, non quod confidenter me exprimam.
adrianus
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 3270
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 9:45 pm

Re: Please advise if you see a mistake.

Postby adrianus » Mon Jan 19, 2009 2:05 pm

Number 23. Numerum viginti tres.
The ancient Romans counted years from the founding of the city of Rome (in 753 BC). March was the first month in their calendar. Dates in the Julian calendar were reckoned backwards from these three points in the month: the Calendae (the first day), the Nonae (the seventh of March, May, July and October, but the fifth of other months), and the Idus or Ides (the fifteenth of March, May, July and October but the thirteenth of other months). Note that when the Romans counted backwards, they included the number they counted from. We say six is two numbers before eight, but the Romans say that it is three numbers before eight because they include the eight.

With our calendar, we say "Today is the eighteenth of January, AD two thousand and nine (or 'of the Common Era')."
By the Roman calendar, we say "Today is the fifteenth day before the Kalends of March in the two thousand seven hundred and sixty second year from, or of, the founding of the city."

Romani antiqui annos ab urbe Româ conditâ (anno septingentensimo quinquagensimo tertio ante aevum communem) numerabant. Martius primus mensis in calendario eis erat. Dies mensis Juliano calendario sciantur in dinumerando contrariè ab his tribus diebus: calendis (die primo), nonis (septimo martii, maii, julii octobrisque sed quinto aliorum), et idibus (quinto decimo martii, maii, julii octobrisque sed tertio decimo aliorum mensuum). Nota, Romani, dinumerando ante vel post aliquod numerum, initium annumerabant. Dicimus sex numerum secundum antè octo sed dicebant Romani tertium, quià numerum octo annumerabant.

Calendario nostro, dicimus "hodie est duodevicensimus dies mensis Januarii anno Aevi Communis (vel Anno Domini) bis millesimo nono."
Calendario Romanorum, dicimus "hodie est dies quintus decimus ante Kalendas Februarias anno bis millesimo septingentensimo sexagensimo secundo ab urbe conditâ, vel anno urbis conditae."
I'm writing in Latin hoping for correction, and not because I'm confident in how I express myself. Latinè scribo ut ab omnibus corrigar, non quod confidenter me exprimam.
adrianus
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 3270
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 9:45 pm

Re: Please advise if you see a mistake.

Postby Didymus » Mon Jan 19, 2009 4:25 pm

adrianus wrote:Thanks a lot, Interaxe. Very kind of you. And please forgive me the mistakes which are everywhere! I'm a novice in the same boat.

They're all extracts from a program I'm writing, called Mundus (copyright Adrian Mallon), which is similar to Comenius's Orbis Sensualium Pictus, but updated and interactive. Who knows when it will be finished, because it's part of a larger suite of computer programs eLingua Latina, comprising Verba, Dictio, Quaestiones and Fabula (a videogame set in a 3D immersive environment).

...

(Vide Mallon, Adrian, "eLingua Latina: Designing a Classical-language E-learning Resource," Computer Assisted Language Learning, Vol. 19, Nos. 4 & 5, October 2006: 373-388. et "eLingua Latina and immersive CALL tool design", Computer Assisted Language Learning, Volume 20, Issue 4 October 2007: 345-363.)


Adrian, I have a question that I hope will not be found too amiss, because I think your effort is a worthwhile one. (Note: I skimmed the second cited article, but was for some curious reason unable to access the first one -- perhaps this line of thought is addressed therein.)

I read many of your posts, but I very rarely make corrections to your Latin, chiefly because my time is limited. Furthermore, as I said, I admire the effort, and making correction after correction comes off as invidious. Nevertheless, as I've mentally agreed with you in the past when you've criticized others' efforts at professing to be Latin teachers when they are in fact rank amateurs (as specimen examples of their Latinity prove), I will ask you the same sort of question: since you are a novice, how do you propose to teach others? A game that is intended for beginners, no less than a textbook, must be as error-free as humanly possible.

In recent posts of yours any number of errors, large and small, can be cited: quo in the thread in question has nothing to do with what you've provided, faci is not the passive of facere (cf. too your post here); indeed, in your very signature ostendo should be subjunctive (exprimere and non instead of nec would be more idiomatic). This list can be expanded ad libitum, but the point is sufficiently made. It is inevitable that similar errors will creep into the game that you're designing, which would fundamentally vitiate its very praiseworthy purpose. How do you plan to deal with this issue? (Forgive me if this is discussed in your first paper; as I said, I could not access it.)

I leave aside much else about the Latin itself, but it should perhaps be considered that much of the Latin you write, even when not "wrong," is of such strange Latinity that no Roman would ever have written it. Since students by and large learn Latin to read what the Romans wrote, there is the strongest argument for basing what we teach on that model. Re-reading, this all seems a bit harsh, but I can assure you that it is not my intention to be overly critical.
Didymus
Textkit Fan
 
Posts: 218
Joined: Sun Sep 24, 2006 2:46 pm

Re: Please advise if you see a mistake.

Postby adrianus » Mon Jan 19, 2009 4:30 pm

Number 24. Numerum viginti quattuor.
To weigh something, put it onto the dish of a scales. If it's a liquid, put it first in a container and afterwards subtract the container's weight from the total weight. Units for measuring weight are kilograms and pounds. There are one thousand grams in a kilogram, and a thousand kilograms in a tonne. There are sixteen ounces in a pound and, today, two thousand two hundred and forty pounds in a ton. A ton of feathers has the same weight as a ton of bricks. If dropped, they should fall at the same rate. If the box with the feathers bursts when falling, however, air resistance on the feathers would slow down their rate of fall.


Ad pensandum alicuius, id in lancem librae pone. Si liquor est, eum pone priùs in vasculum, et posteà vasculi ponderem ab summâ ponderis subtrahe. Unitas ponderum mensurandorum est chilogramma et libra. Sunt mille grammata in chilogrammate. Sunt mille chilogrammata in tonnâ. Sunt mille miligrammata in chilogrammate. Sunt sedecim unciae in librâ. Sunt hodie duae milia ducentae quadraginta librae in tonnâ. Pennarum tonna idem ponderem atquè laterum tonna habet. Si arca autem pennas continens in cadendo disrumpatur, obstantiâ aeris contrà pennas, velocitas earum descendentium diminuatur.
I'm writing in Latin hoping for correction, and not because I'm confident in how I express myself. Latinè scribo ut ab omnibus corrigar, non quod confidenter me exprimam.
adrianus
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 3270
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 9:45 pm

Re: Please advise if you see a mistake.

Postby adrianus » Mon Jan 19, 2009 10:14 pm

Hi Didymus

I'm very glad that you asked me that. What you say is eminently fair and reasonable. It is not at all over critical.

Note that I have only ever been harsh in this forum with one person; with others it has generally been a matter of exercises in debate.

I am an expert in educational software design in English, but I am NOT an expert in Latin, although I am now more expert than many other developers and that was my goal. I chose to tackle Latin because it throws up some very interesting issues, I believe. Some of those issues concern the gaps in understanding that arise when content experts communicate with software developers. Most products are compromises, but ineffective products can also arise. Etc., etc.

In itself, this TextKit forum is a window onto an experiment in self-learning. One can ask, how do learners learn from each other, and other questions. My self-learning here is transparent, as is my progress or lack of it. I'm not trying to teach but to learn, by expressing what I think and listening to responses.

I can't publish work as commercial products until they go through "real" content experts. But I can't afford to pay real content experts. And in the writing and design stages, real content experts I've spoken to are very impressed by the software, but lack an understanding of the languages of design and development processes so they have limited creative input. What I can do, though, is to examine and describe the problem. And this, I think, is useful research. My software, then, is a testbed for issues involved in the design of computer-based language-learning in certain areas. In becoming a learner myself, it forces me to rethink how I design in English, even. [By the way, my first paper and other talks at conferences did appeal for help from content experts. I still appeal,—but my pockets are empty.]

I love your last point
I leave aside much else about the Latin itself, but it should perhaps be considered that much of the Latin you write, even when not "wrong," is of such strange Latinity that no Roman would ever have written it. Since students by and large learn Latin to read what the Romans wrote, there is the strongest argument for basing what we teach on that model.
I use resources from many periods, especially many schoolbooks from the 15th to 17th centuries students. I'm not making excuses. Of course, I crave an understanding of departures from classical forms, where I use a form from another period, and where I talk unintelligible rubbish. Even content experts can't always say about everything, though, until they go back and consult sources. I showed a computer card game in Latin at a conference and no one could commit to saying whether or not the vocabulary was accurate without a period of study in the library,—the Romans, after all, didn't play cards. By the way, they all liked the game and wanted it.

Anyway, you can see how silly I am. Writing software that I can't publish for an audience that doesn't exist, because it's not about the Romans. Only a fool would do what I'm doing for the sake of an experiment.

P.S. Please, tell Junya the answer to his question about "quo".

Salve Didyme

Quod tu id me rogas felicissimum esse me facit. Rectissimum aequissimum quod dicis, et minimè modo intemperato mordente.

Cum uno solùm in foro nimis criticus eram; quae res cum aliis accederunt, exercitiones plerumquè controversiarum erant.

Designationis evolutionisque programmatum eruditionum in linguam anglicam gnarus sum; non sum latiné, etsi nunc peritior quàm multi alii designatores. Et sic erat consilium meam. Latinum discere optavi, quià multa et tenentia sunt eventus quae oriuntur, credo. Nonnullos illorum ad interstitia communicandi inter scriptores eorum quae continentur et desigatores. Pars major commodorum causâ compromittendi adveniunt. Adveniunt etiam commoda quae inutilia sunt. Et caetera, et caetera.

In ipso, hoc TextKit forum fenestra est quae tentamentum in discendo proprio aperit. Potes rogare quomodò hîc tyrones inter se discant, et alias quaestiones ponare. Scientias mea hîc clarè videtur; etiam utrum progrediar an caespitem. Non hîc doceo sed discere quaeso, qui quod puto dicam et responsa audiam.

Non possum commoda emittere antequàm à gnaris veris corriguntur. At res mihi non suppetit ad mercedes eorum. Et illi gnari quibus per gradus evolutionis locutus sum benè amant quod facio, sed processus designationis evolutionisque ignorant et contribuere plus effectivè in fingendo non possunt. Ecce autem quod facere possum, difficultatem describere et inquirere. Haec investigatio utilis est, ut credo. Programmata mea, ergo, habeo ut viae etiam rerum scrutandarum et approbandarum ad designationem instrumentorum pro linguarum discendo. Ego tyronem quidem in fiendo, id me nunc cogitare facit quomodò anglicè designem. [Primo capitulo meo et in aliis colloquiis, auxilium gnatorum quaesivi. Continuò quaero,—sinè crumenis, addo.]

Proxima rem quod scribis me valdè tenet. Fontibus ex multis aevis utor, praesertim grammatistas saeculorum ab quinto decimo ad septimum decimum. Vitia mea non excuso. Intellegere aveo ubi ab viâ classicâ deviem, ubi formâ aevi serioris utar, ubi nugas dicam. Et gnarus non semper responsum habet, nisi diu in libris venetur. Ludum chartularum computatralem in colloquio monstravi, ubi nemo dicere potuerunt utrum vocabularium bonum fuerit an non, sinè spatio studii in bibliothecâ. Romani, re verâ, chartulis non ludebant. Ludum amavere, obiter, et eum voluere.

Utiquè, quàm stultus sum, vides. Programmata scribo quae divulgare non possum, lectoribus qui carent quià quod scribo ad Romanos non pertinet. Solùm asinus faciat quod facio causâ tentamenti.

Post scriptum.
Das responsum ad quaestionem de "quo" quam posuit Junya
Last edited by adrianus on Tue Jan 20, 2009 2:24 am, edited 1 time in total.
I'm writing in Latin hoping for correction, and not because I'm confident in how I express myself. Latinè scribo ut ab omnibus corrigar, non quod confidenter me exprimam.
adrianus
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 3270
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 9:45 pm

Re: Please advise if you see a mistake.

Postby Swth\r » Mon Jan 19, 2009 10:42 pm

adrianus wrote:Number 24. Numerum viginti quattuor.
To weigh something, put it onto the dish of a scales. If it's a liquid, put it first in a container and afterwards subtract the container's weight from the total weight. Units for measuring weight are kilograms and pounds. There are one thousand grams in a kilogram, and a thousand kilograms in a tonne. There are sixteen ounces in a pound and, today, two thousand two hundred and forty pounds in a ton. A ton of feathers has the same weight as a ton of bricks. If dropped, they should fall at the same rate. If the box with the feathers bursts when falling, however, air resistance on the feathers would slow down their rate of fall.


Ad pensandum alicuius, id in lancem librae pone. Si liquor est, eum pone priùs in vasculum, et posteà vasculi ponderem ab summâ ponderis subtrahe. Unitas ponderum mensurandorum est chilogramma et libra. Sunt mille grammata in chilogrammate. Sunt mille chilogrammata in tonnâ. Sunt mille miligrammata in chilogrammate. Sunt sedecim unciae in librâ. Sunt hodie duae milia ducentae quadraginta librae in tonnâ. Pennarum tonna idem ponderem atquè laterum tonna habet. Si arca autem pennas continens in cadendo disrumpatur, obstantiâ aeris contrà pennas, velocitas earum descendentium diminuatur.


Ad aliquid pensandum, id in lance librae pone (accusative with gerundivum is needed)
better "in+abl."=> in lance, in vasculo
eum pone => fortasse rectius "id pone", quia "is" pronomen "aliquid" plus refert quam "liquor" ?
ponderem=>pondus, twice (again :D )
fortasse melius "ratiocinor" pro "mensuro" ?
Si disrumpatur...diminuatur => melius fortasse "si disrumperetur...diminueretur"

Unitas...est => ? Non recte dictum esse id mihi videtur. Sed haud scio an quod alliud rectius sit.
Dives qui sapiens est...
Swth\r
Textkit Fan
 
Posts: 270
Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2008 6:51 pm
Location: Greece

Re: Please advise if you see a mistake.

Postby adrianus » Tue Jan 20, 2009 1:12 am

Mille gratias tibi ago, Salvator
Ad aliquid pensandum, id in lance librae pone (accusative with gerundivum is needed)
Hoc est gerundium (non adjectivum gerundivum) cum 'ad' (cum genitivo, et numquam accusativo) quod etiam designationem exprimit. Nonnè licet?
better "in+abl."=> in lance, in vasculo /// eum pone => fortasse rectius "id pone", quia "is" pronomen "aliquid" plus refert quam "liquor" ? ///ponderem=>pondus, twice (again )/// fortasse melius "ratiocinor" pro "mensuro" ?
quater rectè dicis, ut opinor!
Si disrumpatur...diminuatur => melius fortasse "si disrumperetur...diminueretur"
Nonnè hoc ad futurum pertinet, et sensu vivido? Nonnè meliùs sit futurum tempus activum modum habere? :D
Unitas...est => ? Non recte dictum esse id mihi videtur. Sed haud scio an quod alliud rectius sit.
Dicit Ainsworth (1808) "An unit, or unity [in arithmetick] * Unitas"
Last edited by adrianus on Tue Jan 20, 2009 1:59 am, edited 1 time in total.
I'm writing in Latin hoping for correction, and not because I'm confident in how I express myself. Latinè scribo ut ab omnibus corrigar, non quod confidenter me exprimam.
adrianus
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 3270
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 9:45 pm

Re: Please advise if you see a mistake.

Postby adrianus » Tue Jan 20, 2009 1:49 am

Didymus wrote:
adrianus wrote:indeed, in your very signature ostendo should be subjunctive (exprimere and non instead of nec would be more idiomatic).
I'm sure "se ostendere" is classical and not obscure, Didyme, because I've read it so and see it explained so in L&S. Indeed, "et non" is nicer than "nec" there. But not the subjunctive, I don't think. Subjunctive in a causal clause when the reason is given on the authority of another, but indicative with "quod" when on the authority of the speaker, which makes good sense to me. I know you're right about other mistakes. Maybe I misunderstand A&G on this.
Latinè scribo ut ab omnibus corrigar, et non quod confidenter me ostendo.

Anglicè verbatim "I'm writing in Latin so that I may be corrected and not because I express myself confidently [in Latin]"
Esne certus, Didyme, de usu verbi modo subjunctivo? Aliter dicunt Allen & Greenough §540, sed fortassè locum malè intellego.
I'm writing in Latin hoping for correction, and not because I'm confident in how I express myself. Latinè scribo ut ab omnibus corrigar, non quod confidenter me exprimam.
adrianus
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 3270
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 9:45 pm

Re: Please advise if you see a mistake.

Postby Didymus » Tue Jan 20, 2009 1:14 pm

For my brevity I apologize: after yesterday's holiday it's back to the real world today. A selective reply (omissions imply neither agreement nor disagreement), hysteron proteron, more Homerico:

(1) Subjunctive: cf. AG 540 n. 3, non quod etc. when introducing a denied reason take the subjunctive.
(2) ostendere: what you have is not incomprehensible, especially knowing in advance what it's supposed to be, but me exprimere is the better idiom. I don't think I see what you see in the dictionaries, and I can't think of an exact parallel to your usage. Since you like later Latin, for my usage cf. Politian's famous quote: "'non exprimis,' inquit aliquis, 'Ciceronem.' quid tum? non enim sum Cicero; me tamen, ut opinor, exprimo." Other Renaissance writers on style, like Muret and Lipsius, will turn up similar examples.
(3) "Content experts" for Latin must be hard to find. There are only a very limited number of people with the language skills to edit this sort of thing, and I'd imagine they are often more concerned with other pursuits. I suppose sufficient money could prove a workable inducement though.
(4) I'm not sure that you're silly. Crazy, yes, but in a most eminently admirable way, and certainly no crazier than I who spend hours writing Greek and Latin verse. You surely would have a larger audience if your game were modeled closely on the Roman world in language and theme, because I imagine such a thing, if done well, would prove enormously popular at the middle school/high school level.
(5) It seems a shame that there is no way to yoke the research and experimental aspects of the work with expert language review. In the best case scenario there will be a great duplication of effort as revisions start being made.
(6) I think the whole thing is a wonderful pursuit. We're all perhaps crazy for devoting so much time and energy to dead languages, but that's part of the unique charm and attraction of it all. I wish you the very best of luck.
Didymus
Textkit Fan
 
Posts: 218
Joined: Sun Sep 24, 2006 2:46 pm

Re: Please advise if you see a mistake.

Postby adrianus » Tue Jan 20, 2009 3:54 pm

Thanks for the help and kind words, Didymus
De verbis benignis auxilioque gratias tibi ago, Didyme.
Didymus wrote:(1) Subjunctive: cf. AG 540 n. 3, non quod etc. when introducing a denied reason take the subjunctive.

I understand now. Nunc intellego.
Didymus wrote:(2) ostendere: what you have is not incomprehensible, especially knowing in advance what it's supposed to be, but me exprimere is the better idiom. I don't think I see what you see in the dictionaries,

L&S on 'ostendo' wrote:B. In partic.
1. To show, express, indicate by speech or signs; to give to understand, to declare, say, tell, make known, etc. (syn.: indico, declaro, significo).--With acc.: illud ostendit, Cic. Att. 1, 1, 4 .--With obj.- or rel.-clause: ostendit se cum rege colloqui velle, Nep. Con. 3, 2 : quid sui consilii sit, ostendit, Caes. B. G. 1, 21 ; cf. id. ib. 5, 2, 3.--Absol.: ut ostendimus supra, as we showed above, Nep. Ages. 1, 5 : sed aliter, atque ostenderam, facio, Cic. Fam. 2, 3, 2 : signum est per quod ostenditur idonea perficiendi facultas esse quaesita, Auct. Her. 2, 4, 6 : primum ostendendum est, id. ib. 2, 16, 23 .--


OLD on 'ostendo' wrote:7. To make clear (a state of mind, body, etc.) by one's actions, appearance, or sim. show, evince. b (refl.) to reveal one's qualities; (w.pred) to show oneself to be...9 (of words or their users) To express, signify, denote...

Doesn't that apply to what we're talking about? [I don't deny "exprimere", of course!Nonné ad quod investigamus id pertinet? "Exprimere" non nego, certé!
I'm writing in Latin hoping for correction, and not because I'm confident in how I express myself. Latinè scribo ut ab omnibus corrigar, non quod confidenter me exprimam.
adrianus
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 3270
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 9:45 pm

Re: Please advise if you see a mistake.

Postby adrianus » Tue Jan 20, 2009 5:20 pm

Number 25. Numerum vinginti quinque.
Dice is a game of chance.
Usually, a die is a cube. It has six faces numbered from one to six. The numbers are shown by spots.
With dice, the numbers are called a one-spot, two-spot, three-spot, four-spot, five-spot and six-spot.
The dice-player puts a die in the dice-cup. He shakes the cup and turns it upside down. A bigger number on the die beats a smaller number.

Aleâ ludere ludus fortis est.
Solet ut alea cubus est. Sex facies habet quae de uno à sex numeratae sunt. Numeri notis demonstrantur. Cum aleâ, numeri his nominibus appellantur: monas, dyas, ternio, quaternio, pentas, senio.
Aleator aleam in fritillum ponit. Fritillum jacit et invertit. Numerus aliae superior inferiorem vincit.
I'm writing in Latin hoping for correction, and not because I'm confident in how I express myself. Latinè scribo ut ab omnibus corrigar, non quod confidenter me exprimam.
adrianus
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 3270
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 9:45 pm

Re: Please advise if you see a mistake.

Postby adrianus » Tue Jan 20, 2009 5:52 pm

Number 26. Numerum viginti sex.
The game 'heads or tails' is a game of chance played with a coin. It is also called 'even or odd' ('even' referring to the side of the coin with the head).
To play the game, one person tosses a coin and another guesses what face will land uppermost.

Ludus 'caput aut navis' ludus fortis est, nummo lusus. Etiam 'par vel impar' appellatur ('par' faciem capite significans).
Qui ludum ludant [?...vel Ad ludendum ludum], alter nummum jacit et alter faciem quae summa cadet conjecit.
I'm writing in Latin hoping for correction, and not because I'm confident in how I express myself. Latinè scribo ut ab omnibus corrigar, non quod confidenter me exprimam.
adrianus
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 3270
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 9:45 pm

Re: Please advise if you see a mistake.

Postby adrianus » Tue Jan 20, 2009 6:28 pm

Number 27. Numerum viginti septem.
There are fifty four cards in a pack in four suits, of hearts, diamonds, clubs and spades. Each suit has thirteen cards: the ace, deuce, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine and ten and three court cards, the knave, queen and king.
In this game, the ace is the lowest card.

Sunt quinquaginta quattuor chartae in fasciculo, in quattuor familias divisae, corde ac rhombo trifolioque atque maculâ nigrâ. Omnis familia tredecim chartas habet: monadem, dyadem, ternionem, quaternionem, pentadem, senionem, septionem, ogdoadem, enneadem, decadem, et tres chartas imaginem humanam gerentes, milem, reginam regemque.
In hoc ludo, monas charta minima est.


Corrigenda: ogdoadem (non oggeadem) = ogdoas -adis
heptas -adis (non septio -onem)
"in quattuor familias divisae, cordis ac rhombis trifoliique atque maculae nigrae.
Last edited by adrianus on Sat Jan 31, 2009 1:21 am, edited 3 times in total.
I'm writing in Latin hoping for correction, and not because I'm confident in how I express myself. Latinè scribo ut ab omnibus corrigar, non quod confidenter me exprimam.
adrianus
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 3270
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 9:45 pm

Re: Please advise if you see a mistake.

Postby Didymus » Tue Jan 20, 2009 7:49 pm

adrianus wrote:
Didymus wrote:(2) ostendere: what you have is not incomprehensible, especially knowing in advance what it's supposed to be, but me exprimere is the better idiom. I don't think I see what you see in the dictionaries,

L&S on 'ostendo' wrote:B. In partic.
1. To show, express, indicate by speech or signs; to give to understand, to declare, say, tell, make known, etc. (syn.: indico, declaro, significo).--With acc.: illud ostendit, Cic. Att. 1, 1, 4 .--With obj.- or rel.-clause: ostendit se cum rege colloqui velle, Nep. Con. 3, 2 : quid sui consilii sit, ostendit, Caes. B. G. 1, 21 ; cf. id. ib. 5, 2, 3.--Absol.: ut ostendimus supra, as we showed above, Nep. Ages. 1, 5 : sed aliter, atque ostenderam, facio, Cic. Fam. 2, 3, 2 : signum est per quod ostenditur idonea perficiendi facultas esse quaesita, Auct. Her. 2, 4, 6 : primum ostendendum est, id. ib. 2, 16, 23 .--


OLD on 'ostendo' wrote:7. To make clear (a state of mind, body, etc.) by one's actions, appearance, or sim. show, evince. b (refl.) to reveal one's qualities; (w.pred) to show oneself to be...9 (of words or their users) To express, signify, denote...

Doesn't that apply to what we're talking about? [I don't deny "exprimere", of course!Nonné ad quod investigamus id pertinet? "Exprimere" non nego, certé!


The OLD is referring to "words or their users" as subjects: e.g., "such and such a word means this." This is not the usage you are looking for. What you want is to be found in exprimere at TLL s.u. 1790 coll. 62-73 (i.e., s.u. exprimere ad II.A.2.a.β). Since you are not likely to have the TLL to hand, it quotes among others the following examples: Cic. de orat. 2.90, Att. 8.11.1; Sen. epist. 6.6, 95.69; Tac. dial. 21.7; Plin. epist. 4.7.5, 9.22.1; Sidon. 1.1.2; etc. The meaning you want for ostendo would be found (but is not, so far as I can see) at TLL s.u. 1129 col. 32-1130 col. 42 (pars prior II.B.3). ostendere with a reflexive pronoun is indeed quite common, but in very different senses, which all the more militate against it being used in an unusual way here. Until I see a parallel, I would be very chary about your proposed usage.

There is also no need for et before quod in your signature.
Didymus
Textkit Fan
 
Posts: 218
Joined: Sun Sep 24, 2006 2:46 pm

Re: Please advise if you see a mistake.

Postby adrianus » Tue Jan 20, 2009 8:02 pm

Thanks very much, Didymus. I confess I'm convinced. Also, if it's not too much trouble, what would you say are the worst instances of, or most illustrative of, strange latinity rather than ungrammatical latin, from the above passages? I know it would help me (perhaps others, too?).

Multas gratias, Didyme. Me convictus esse fateor. Etiam, si tibi non nimìs molestum sit, Didyme, quae exemplaria latinitatis meae in locis suprá, quamvìs grammaticè bona, ratione scribendi pessima sint, dicas? Id me adjuvet, scio (fortassè alios, quoqué?).
I'm writing in Latin hoping for correction, and not because I'm confident in how I express myself. Latinè scribo ut ab omnibus corrigar, non quod confidenter me exprimam.
adrianus
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 3270
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 9:45 pm

Re: Please advise if you see a mistake.

Postby Swth\r » Tue Jan 20, 2009 9:51 pm

adrianus wrote:Mille gratias tibi ago, Salvator
Ad aliquid pensandum, id in lance librae pone (accusative with gerundivum is needed)
Hoc est gerundium (non adjectivum gerundivum) cum 'ad' (cum genitivo, et numquam accusativo) quod etiam designationem exprimit. Nonnè licet?
better "in+abl."=> in lance, in vasculo /// eum pone => fortasse rectius "id pone", quia "is" pronomen "aliquid" plus refert quam "liquor" ? ///ponderem=>pondus, twice (again )/// fortasse melius "ratiocinor" pro "mensuro" ?
quater rectè dicis, ut opinor!
Si disrumpatur...diminuatur => melius fortasse "si disrumperetur...diminueretur"
Nonnè hoc ad futurum pertinet, et sensu vivido? Nonnè meliùs sit futurum tempus activum modum habere? :D
Unitas...est => ? Non recte dictum esse id mihi videtur. Sed haud scio an quod alliud rectius sit.
Dicit Ainsworth (1808) "An unit, or unity [in arithmetick] * Unitas"


"Penso" cum accusativo, numquam cum genitivo; "ad" cum accusativo, numquam cum genitivo. Ad + gerundium + object ---> ad+gerundivum+subject (necessarily). Gerund is noun, but it takes an object, not supplement in genitive. In the case that prepositional gerund is used, the transition to prepositional gerundive is necessary

The conditional sentence that you used is of course correct. I just thought that the meaning is like in english: if I were a doctor, I would save a lot of lives. So, in our case: If that falled, it would ... (But it is not going to...)
Your condition describes something that is propable to hapen in future; mine something that could happen in present, but it does not happen.
Dives qui sapiens est...
Swth\r
Textkit Fan
 
Posts: 270
Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2008 6:51 pm
Location: Greece

Re: Please advise if you see a mistake.

Postby adrianus » Tue Jan 20, 2009 10:33 pm

Swth\r wrote:"Penso" cum accusativo, numquam cum genitivo; "ad" cum accusativo, numquam cum genitivo. Ad + gerundium + object ---> ad+gerundivum+subject (necessarily). Gerund is noun, but it takes an object, not supplement in genitive. In the case that prepositional gerund is used, the transition to prepositional gerundive is necessary

Well, what I was trying to say was that, when you have "ad" + gerund, the gerund in the accusative never itself takes an accusative (a direct object), following A&G§506,n.2, and A&G give the example "ad parendum senatui". I thought I could use a qualifying genitive, but what you say about that I understand: "Don't do it, but use the gerundive instead." Understood, and thanks, Salvator.

Dicere 'ad cum genetivo' non volui. Me malè expressi, sine dubitó. Quod licet ut verbum adjectum casu genetivo ad gerundium adiciatur putavi. Sed quod tu dicis intellego: "Noli id facere, magis gerundivo utere." Intellego et gratias tibi ago, Salvator.
I'm writing in Latin hoping for correction, and not because I'm confident in how I express myself. Latinè scribo ut ab omnibus corrigar, non quod confidenter me exprimam.
adrianus
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 3270
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 9:45 pm

Re: Please advise if you see a mistake.

Postby Swth\r » Tue Jan 20, 2009 10:49 pm

adrianus wrote:Number 27. Numerum viginti septem.
There are fifty four cards in a pack in four suits, of hearts, diamonds, clubs and spades. Each suit has thirteen cards: the ace, deuce, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine and ten and three court cards, the knave, queen and king.
In this game, the ace is the lowest card.

Sunt quinquaginta quattuor chartae in fasciculo, in quattuor familias divisae, corde ac rhombo trifolioque atque maculâ nigrâ. Omnis familia tredecim chartas habet: monadem, dyadem, ternionem, quaternionem, pentadem, senionem, septionem, oggeadem, enneadem, decadem, et tres chartas imaginem humanam gerentes, milem, reginam regemque.
In hoc ludo, monas charta minima est.


milem => militem ? What does "knave" or "jack" mean in english? Wouldn't it be ok to use "centurio" or "tribunus", or perhaps "princeps" for "knave"?
WHy ablative for "corde ac rhombo trifolioque atque maculâ nigrâ"?
And why not "clava" for "club"?
Dives qui sapiens est...
Swth\r
Textkit Fan
 
Posts: 270
Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2008 6:51 pm
Location: Greece

Re: Please advise if you see a mistake.

Postby Swth\r » Tue Jan 20, 2009 11:03 pm

adrianus wrote:Well, what I was trying to say was that, when you have "ad" + gerund, the gerund in the accusative never itself takes an accusative (a direct object), following A&G§506,n.2, and A&G give the example "ad parendum senatui". I thought I could use a qualifying genitive, but what you say about that I understand: "Don't do it, but use the gerundive instead." Understood, and thanks, Salvator.

Dicere 'ad cum genetivo' non volui. Me malè expressi, sine dubitó. Quod licet ut verbum adjectum casu genetivo ad gerundium adiciatur putavi. Sed quod tu dicis intellego: "Noli id facere, magis gerundivo utere." Intellego et gratias tibi ago, Salvator.


"Pareo" + dativus (obey to, comply to...). Dative is the object. Prepositional gerunds become gerundives only if they have an object in accusative, and in this case the conversion is obligatory.

ad interficiendum uxorem ---> ad uxorem interficiendam
uxorem interficiendi causa ---> uxoris inteficiendae causa
liber de inteficiendo uxorem ---> liber de uxore inteficienda

If the object is in another case, the conversion never takes place. The same if you have no object, or if the object is something else, e.g. an infinitive.

in parendum senatui ---> XXXX
dictum de subveniendum reipublicae ---> XXXX
ad cupiendum interficere uxorem ---> XXXX

"Pareo" cum dativo... :wink:
Semper gerundium cum prepositione et accusativo in gerundivum converte. :wink:

ad interficiendum uxorem ---> ad uxorem interficiendam
uxorem interficiendi causa ---> uxoris inteficiendae causa
liber de inteficiendo uxorem ---> liber de uxore inteficienda

Si gerundio cum quo alio casu uti velis vel cum nullo casu (e.g. cum infinitivo), numquam gerundium in gerundivum converteris.

in parendum senatui ---> XXXX
dictum de subveniendum reipublicae ---> XXXX
ad cupiendum interficere uxorem ---> XXXX


Vale!
Dives qui sapiens est...
Swth\r
Textkit Fan
 
Posts: 270
Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2008 6:51 pm
Location: Greece

Re: Please advise if you see a mistake.

Postby adrianus » Tue Jan 20, 2009 11:45 pm

Swth\r wrote:milem => militem ? What does "knave" or "jack" mean in english? Wouldn't it be ok to use "centurio" or "tribunus", or perhaps "princeps" for "knave"?
WHy ablative for "corde ac rhombo trifolioque atque maculâ nigrâ"?
And why not "clava" for "club"?

miles = knight. Ità est. Malè scripsi. "Militem" est.
clava for club or pila for spade from Italian spado in cards??
Implicitly, I'm not translating English words but trying to give the Latin terms that are authentic,—that were used historically.
Implicitè, anglicos sermones in latinos convertere non volo, sed me authentica verba latina dare conor,—verba quae historicè adhibitebantur.

Oh. Idiomatically, ablative here for "the suit in diamonds" "familia rhombo", to suggest how to say "ace of diamonds" = "monas rhombo". Maybe genitive could be used, but I haven't seen it. I have seen ablative. Usum genetivi non adhùc vidi. Ablativum vidi *** Equally, I could just be making a big mistake here!!! Aequè, fortè hîc admodùm erro, ut aliàs!!!
Last edited by adrianus on Wed Jan 21, 2009 2:18 am, edited 3 times in total.
I'm writing in Latin hoping for correction, and not because I'm confident in how I express myself. Latinè scribo ut ab omnibus corrigar, non quod confidenter me exprimam.
adrianus
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 3270
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 9:45 pm

Re: Please advise if you see a mistake.

Postby Didymus » Wed Jan 21, 2009 1:24 am

adrianus wrote:Also, if it's not too much trouble, what would you say are the worst instances of, or most illustrative of, strange latinity rather than ungrammatical latin, from the above passages? I know it would help me (perhaps others, too?).


I am afraid that this will have to wait for another day. In any event, neither you nor anyone else should be too fastidious about writing Latin -- otherwise nothing would ever be written.
Didymus
Textkit Fan
 
Posts: 218
Joined: Sun Sep 24, 2006 2:46 pm

Re: Please advise if you see a mistake.

Postby adrianus » Wed Jan 21, 2009 1:49 am

No problem. I look forward to whatever you might say, however brief.
Libenter. Quodcunque dicas, quamvìs breve, expecto.
I'm writing in Latin hoping for correction, and not because I'm confident in how I express myself. Latinè scribo ut ab omnibus corrigar, non quod confidenter me exprimam.
adrianus
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 3270
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 9:45 pm

Re: Please advise if you see a mistake.

Postby Swth\r » Wed Jan 21, 2009 10:15 am

adrianus wrote:Implicitly, I'm not translating English words but trying to give the Latin terms that are authentic,—that were used historically.


Do they exist? Have you found terminology in Latin about card playing ? :shock:
Dives qui sapiens est...
Swth\r
Textkit Fan
 
Posts: 270
Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2008 6:51 pm
Location: Greece

Re: Please advise if you see a mistake.

Postby adrianus » Wed Jan 21, 2009 4:37 pm

I reply in another thread, Salvator. Responsum alio filo do.
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=9049
I checked Pexenfelder again and he uses the genitive for such as "genus cordis", and I can't put my finger on the early 17th-century passage I thought used the ablative, so I will definitely change to genitive.
Locum in quo casu ablativo familae chartularum ostenduntur invenire non possum. Fortassè id malè memoriâ teneo, quià verò Pexenfelderus casu genitivo scribit, et perperàm aliter credi.
I'm writing in Latin hoping for correction, and not because I'm confident in how I express myself. Latinè scribo ut ab omnibus corrigar, non quod confidenter me exprimam.
adrianus
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 3270
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 9:45 pm

Re: Please advise if you see a mistake.

Postby adrianus » Wed Jan 21, 2009 9:50 pm

Number 28. Numerus viginti octo.
Chess (so called after the Persian word for a king) is a board game for two. The board has sixty-four squares with eight in each side. Squares are alternatively white and black. One player has sixteen black pieces, the other sixteen white pieces. Each player has a king, a queen, a couple of rooks, a pair of bishops, a couple of knights and eight pawns.

A king can move one square in any direction; a queen, any number of squares in any cardinal direction; a rook, north, south, east and west; a bishop, diagonally; a knight, two squares north, south, east or west and one square to the side. When any pawn is first moved, it can travel one or two squares forward; thereafter, it moves only one square forward. However, when capturing another piece, the pawn always moves one square diagonally.

The object of the game is to capture the opponent's king.

Ludus latrunculorum (vulgò schachus de verbo persico pro rege) est tabulae ludus duobus. Tabula sexaginta quattuor tessellas habet, cuius in utro latere octo. Tessellae nigrae cum albis alternant. Habet alter lusor sedecim calculos nigros, alter sedecim albos. Utrimquè sunt rex, regina, bini duces, par episcoporum, bini milites atque octo pedites.

Rex una tessella in aliqua directione movere potest; regina, aliquo numero in aliquâ directione principi; dux, in aliquâ directione rectâ; episcopus in directione diagonale; miles, duobus tessellis in aliquâ directione rectâ et unâ à latere. Cum quisdam pedes primò movet, unâ vel duobus tessellis porrò ire potest; exinde, porrò unâ solùm tessellâ movet. Semper autem calculo capiendo, pedes unâ tessellâ diagonale movet.

Regem adversarii capere est ludi finis.
I'm writing in Latin hoping for correction, and not because I'm confident in how I express myself. Latinè scribo ut ab omnibus corrigar, non quod confidenter me exprimam.
adrianus
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 3270
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 9:45 pm

Re: Please advise if you see a mistake.

Postby Alatius » Wed Jan 21, 2009 10:27 pm

adrianus wrote:Number 28. Numerus viginti octo.
... Utrimquè sunt rex, regina, bini duces, par episcoporum, bini milites atque octo pedites. ...

I'm pretty sure that should be octoni pedites, because they have eight peasants each.
Alatius
Textkit Fan
 
Posts: 268
Joined: Mon May 14, 2007 11:21 am
Location: Upsalia, Suecia

Re: Please advise if you see a mistake.

Postby adrianus » Wed Jan 21, 2009 11:47 pm

Good point, Alatius. Bonum argumentum, Alati.
[Hîc obiter, pedes (pawn)= foot-soldier, aut rusticus aut urbanus aut mercennarius alienus.]
I'm writing in Latin hoping for correction, and not because I'm confident in how I express myself. Latinè scribo ut ab omnibus corrigar, non quod confidenter me exprimam.
adrianus
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 3270
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 9:45 pm

Re: Please advise if you see a mistake.

Postby adrianus » Fri Jan 30, 2009 3:22 pm

Number 29. Numerus undetriginta (viginti novem).

Bathroom and Toilet

In the bathroom, you have a bath in the bath or a shower in the shower, wash your hands and face with soap in the washhand basin and shave with a razor and shaving-brush (or a can of shaving foam). In a modern house, the hot-water tank is immediately above the bathroom. It supplies hot water to the hot-water tap. In former times, water was brought in a basin.

You go to the toilet to defecate or urinate. To defecate, you lower the toilet seat and sit on it. Men often raise the toilet seat to stand while urinating. You wipe your bottom with toilet paper or use a bidet to wash yourself. After having gone to the toilet, you pull the toilet chain or turn the handle to flush it. A toilet brush is used to wipe the toilet bowl (which is normally porcelain). Then you wash your hands and dry them with a towel.


Balneolum et Latrina

In balneolo, in labro balneo lavas vel balneolo pluvio uteris, faciem sapone in labello lavas, novaculâ scopulâque tonsoriâ (vel vasculo pastae tonsoriae) abradis. Domo moderno, cisterna aquae calidae rectâ suprâ balneum est. Ea aquam calidam ad epitonium aquae calidae suppeditat. Olim, aqua in aquaemanali afferebatur.

In latrinam is ut defaeces vel mingas. Ut defaeces, jugum sellae deprimis et in eam sedes. Viri saepè jugum levant ut stent dum mingunt. Podicem chartis hygienicis tergis, vel scaphium adhibes ut te laves. Ventre vesicâve exoneratâ, vinculum cisternae tractas vel manubrium torques, ut sellam purges. Adhibetur scopula latrinae ad vas sellae tergendum (quod vas murrhinâ vulgò est). Tunc manus lavas et eas manteli siccas.
I'm writing in Latin hoping for correction, and not because I'm confident in how I express myself. Latinè scribo ut ab omnibus corrigar, non quod confidenter me exprimam.
adrianus
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 3270
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 9:45 pm

Re: Please advise if you see a mistake.

Postby adrianus » Mon Feb 02, 2009 12:52 pm

Number 30. Numerus triginta.
Astrology is an occult science based on the belief that our lives are influenced by the movements of the sun, moon, stars and planets through the narrow band in the sky called the zodiac across twelve particular constellations. There are four types of astrology, all involving calculations of the positions of the heavenly bodies, and respectively seeking to know: (1) when will be a favourable time to do something; (2) the answer to a specific problem using current positions; (3) an individual's personality and fate from positions when he or she was born; (4) the fates of peoples, nations and the world as a whole.

Astrologia est scientia occulta et in hâc fide condita, quod finguntur vitae nostrae motibus solis ac lunae stellarumque atque planetarum per zonam angustam in caelis, zodiacum nomine et eius quasdam duodecim constellationes. Sunt quattuor genus astrologiae, quorum omnis requirit ut positiones corporum caelestum calculentur. Rogat primum quandò propitium ad agendum sit ; secundum positionibus currentibus responsum ad quandam quaestionem; tertium natûs positionibus temporis ad personam sortemque cuiusdam sciendam; quaternum ad fatos sciendos gentium nationumque atque in toto mundi.
I'm writing in Latin hoping for correction, and not because I'm confident in how I express myself. Latinè scribo ut ab omnibus corrigar, non quod confidenter me exprimam.
adrianus
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 3270
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 9:45 pm

Re: Please advise if you see a mistake.

Postby adrianus » Mon Feb 02, 2009 1:21 pm

Number 31. Numerus triginta unus.
Alchemy is the art and science of transforming substances. A forerunner of modern chemistry, Alchemy pictures all substances as composed of only a few elements, usually four: Earth, Air, Fire and Water, with different qualities. Changes in the qualities of a substance, such as colour, was a sign that the material had been changed into another. Many believed that it was theoretically possible for any material to be converted into gold. In fact, modern science confirms this, but it also confirms that the energy required to do so would be far too costly.


Alchemia est ars scientiaque materias mutandi. Praecursor chimiae modernae, pingit alchimia omnes substantias ut solùm quattuor elementis compositas, vel terrâ vel aëre vel igne vel aquâ, et qualitates varias habentibus. Sit signum mutandi ex materiâ quâdam in aliam qualitates ut colorem mutatas esse. Multes erant qui quamque materiam in aurum mutari quire credebant. Verùm, scientia moderna id non negat, sed energiam quae sic in faciendo requisita sit immodicissimi constaturam fore monstrat.
I'm writing in Latin hoping for correction, and not because I'm confident in how I express myself. Latinè scribo ut ab omnibus corrigar, non quod confidenter me exprimam.
adrianus
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 3270
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 9:45 pm

Re: Please advise if you see a mistake.

Postby adrianus » Thu Feb 05, 2009 1:28 pm

Number 32. Numerus triginta duo.
A recitation is a song or poem given by a singer or reciter. A hexameter is a type of poem each of whose lines is divided into six feet. A foot is a measure of time. We say that the hexameter has a meter of six feet. The rhythm of the hexameter is that of a waltz, in which the initial beat corresponds to a long syllable followed immediately by either a couple of short syllables or a single long syllable. The last foot of a line may be a exception; if the writer prefers, he can instead put a single short syllable after the ictus there.

A syllable is either short or long,—and long either by nature or by position. When calculating the quantities of syllables, make sure to ignore the spaces between words on the same line. By a process called elision, syllables are collapsed together when one ending in a vowel is preceded by another on the same line starting with a vowel or the letter "h".


Cantus est carmen vel poema quam cantator canit. Hexameter est genus cantûs cuius omnis linea in sex pedes divisa est. Pes mensura temporis est. Dicimus hexametrum metrum sex pedum habere. Rhythmus hexametri est ille tripudi [vel saltationis in gyrum vel choreae Vindoborensis?] in quo ad syllabam longam competit ictus princeps qui dein duplicibus syllabis brevibus vel simplice longâ secutus est. Exceptio sit pes qui lineam terminat; si praeferat compositor cantûs, ibi simplicem syllabam brevem post ictum ponat.

Syllaba aut brevis aut longa est,—et longa naturâ vel positione. Quantitates syllabarum in calculando, cave negligas spatios inter vocales intrà eandem lineam ignorare. Processu elisione nomine, generaliter syllabae in eâdem lineâ quarum prima in vocali terminans secundam in vocali vel "h" litterâ incipientem praecedit in unam syllabam coalescunt.
I'm writing in Latin hoping for correction, and not because I'm confident in how I express myself. Latinè scribo ut ab omnibus corrigar, non quod confidenter me exprimam.
adrianus
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 3270
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 9:45 pm

Re: Please advise if you see a mistake.

Postby adrianus » Thu Feb 05, 2009 4:56 pm

Number 33. Numerus triginta tres.
Open-air Games

Open-air games are played outside. Tag is a child's game in which everyone runs, one chases and whoever is caught in turn has to do the chasing. Another is "King of the Castle" where you climb up and shout or chant until knocked down, whereupon roles are swopped. In English, this couplet is chanted, "I'm the King of the Castle, You're a Dirty Rascal." Football and handball are games for both adults and children. Track-and-field sports are, of course, generally individual, competitive open-air games. They include the long-jump, high-jump, and running and throwing events. The relay race is the only team track-and-field event. Most game-players are amateurs; the rest are professional.


Aperti Ludi

Ludi aperti foris luduntur. Ludus puerilis est diffugium, quô omnes fugiunt, unus captitat et quicunque captus est vice fit eum qui captitare debet. Alius est "Rex Castelli" quô ascendis et clamas vel canis, usque dum deturbaris, dehinc partes permutabuntur. Olim latinè recitabatur hoc distichon: "Rex erit qui rectè faciet; Qui non faciet, non erit." Et adultibus et liberis est pedifolle et manufolle ludere. Athletica campestris curriculique certè ludi ferè singulibus agonistis aperti sunt. Hîc includuntur certaminia saltûs in longum et in altum, cursûsque ac jactûs. Solum turmae certamen in campo curriculove est cursus antecessorum. Magna pars lusorum est cultorum voluptariorum; reliqua quaestum sic facit.
Last edited by adrianus on Fri Feb 06, 2009 2:26 am, edited 1 time in total.
I'm writing in Latin hoping for correction, and not because I'm confident in how I express myself. Latinè scribo ut ab omnibus corrigar, non quod confidenter me exprimam.
adrianus
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 3270
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 9:45 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Learning Latin

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], SlavikN and 43 guests