Hampie wrote:Sī tē jam, Catilīna, comprehendī, sī interficī jusserō, crēdō, erit verendum mihi, nē nōn potius hoc omnēs bonī sērius ā mē quam quisquam crūdēlius factum esse dīcat.
The first part I think I've figured out. I struggled with erit verendum mihi, but I finally understood it as something like "it will be scary for me". The rest just... Puzzles me. Ne non I understand is some rhetoric trick with a double negation and has just a normal negative meaning, I believe. Maybe I'm tired but this sentence just don't make sense to me... I have the Swedish translation, a Swedish commentary that deals with it just by offering a translation of the passage, and I found a great English word list here.
erit verendum mihi ne omnes boni non potius (dicant) hoc serius factum esse a me quam quisquam dicat [hoc a me] crudelius factum esse.
If I will have ordered you now, Catiline, to be seized and killed, I believe I will have to fear lest all good people say that this was done more slowly by me, than that anyone would say it was done more cruelly.
If I were to order you now to be seized and killed, Catiline, I would fear that good people would rather say that my order was too slow than too cruel.
ptran wrote:I think thesaurus got it and is right that it is a very hard passage. I've always suspected that we're all missing the sarcasm that Cicero says the "credo." Imagine the following sentence uttered sincerely and sarcastically: "I suppose I'll have to do worse." The sarcastic version seems to be saying the opposite, and I think that Cicero is saying that as well.
'if it's got a negative, there ain't one, if it ain't got a negative, there is one'.
ptolemyauletes wrote:Vereor ut veniat (I fear that he will not come)
Dubito num venturus sit (I doubt whther he will come)
In the first instance, one is afraid, and hoping 'let him not come.'
The rule I use to teach fear clauses is 'if it's got a negative, there ain't one, if it ain't got a negative, there is one'.
Or that fear clauses are the opposite of what they seem.
Interaxus wrote:Swth/r:
Probably because you missed what Ptolemyauletes wrote some days back:The rule I use to teach fear clauses is 'if it's got a negative, there ain't one, if it ain't got a negative, there is one'.
Or that fear clauses are the opposite of what they seem.
Or you need to check out what your Grammar Book says about VERBS OF FEARING (UT, NE, UT...NON)
Cheers,
Int
"If I were to order you seized and killed right now, Catilina, I'd be less worried that all decent people would say I didn't do it soon enough but that not a single one would say it was too harsh of me."
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 103 guests