Exercises from Sinkovich Textbook

[EPSQ]

Hello everyone,
I'm a college freshman and I've been teaching myself using the textbook Introductory College Latin by Kathryn A. Sinkovich. I'm almost finished with the book but a few exercises have been giving me trouble here and there so here I am asking for help. On a side note, would you all recommend taking Latin in college or just continue by myself? Would I get a lot more out of it?

1. Miserunt legatos ad Caesarem qui [ab eo ne eos ipsos?] duceret in numero hostium peterent.
two verbs in one clause?
They sent envoys to Caesar who

2. Homo narravit ea quae scivit quoniam senatus ei fidem publicam dedisset.

The man told [her?] who knew since the senate had given him public trust.

3. Cum Catilina sapientiam sceleri idoneam habuit, nostra tamen virtus eius imporbitati aequa erat.
Although Catiline had wisdom fit for a crime, our virtue was even [to his wickedness?].


4. Coniugium erat decori viro cum postea multis divitiis potiretur.
The marriage was (a source of glory?) to the man since afterwards he was gaining possession of many riches.
is decori dative of possession?

[Qimmik]

1. Is ab eo ne eos ipsos in the text, or did you supply it? Without it the sentence doesn't make sense. With it: "They sent envoys to Caesar to requested him [qui ab eo peterent is a relative clause of purpose, with the verb in the subjunctive] not to consider them [ne ducerent] as enemies [in the number of enemies].

2. ea quae is neuter accusative plural, not feminine singular; "he told the things that he knew", "he told what he knew."

3. "Although Catiline had knowledge that was suitable for the crime, nevertheless our courage was a match for [aequa] his wickedness."

4. decori is a "dative of purpose." With viro, this is the notorious "double dative" construction, which is very confusing and seems to account a lot of the questions in this forum! See Allen & Greenough sec. 382, and, in particular para. 5, Note 1:

http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.04.0001%3Asmythp%3D382

The sentence itself is a little strange out of context, but I think the cum clause is probably to be understood as temporal, not causal. "The marriage was a source of distinction to the man, as he subsequently was acquiring many riches."

[Iacobus de Indianius]

2. Homo narravit ea quae scivit quoniam senatus ei fidem publicam dedisset.

The man reported the things which he knew since the senate had given him (i.e. to him) the public trust.

^^sorry, I didn't see the responses above my post.

[Qimmik]

As for your more general question, I think the answer would depend on what you want to do with Latin, whether it would fit in with your academic program, and whether your school offers more advanced courses in the language. If you're interested in studying Latin literature, college-level courses would be helpful provided you can fit them in whatever program you're planning on pursuing.

If you're interested in pursuing an academic career in classical Latin, you would need to master Greek, too, and sooner rather than later, and in any case you would need to hunker down and put in a lot of effort during your remaining undergraduate years. And you should talk to someone about the job situation.

In any case, good luck with your studies!

[EPSQ]

Thanks you for the help!

Quick question: You translated 'in numero hostium' as 'as enemies' is that an expression or more of a freer translation?

I'm not sure I want to be a Latin professor but I know I would definitely enjoy a Latin course. I plan on checking out what my university has to offer. And wow having to master Greek as well seems like a whole lot more work. But since I dig Latin so much, I think sometime I might try and get a taste of Greek see what it's like. It's not too far of a leap from Latin right?

[Qimmik]

ne duceret in numero hostium could be translated 'to consider in the number [or 'category'] of enemies'.

See II under numerus in Lewis and Short : http://perseus.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/philologic/getobject.pl?c.12:1097.lewisandshort .

It's not too far of a leap from Latin right?

When you have mastered the grammar of a language like Latin (and unlike English) that is highly inflected, you should have a head start on Greek. But Greek has many more verb forms and many more irregularities than Latin. There are very few completely regular verbs in Greek. (The verb pauo, "to stop", is typically used as a paradigm because it is completely regular.) Also, Classical Latin is relatively standardized, whereas in Greek there is a sometimes bewildering proliferation of dialect forms and even of alternative forms in the same dialect, and there are at least three dialects that have to be mastered to read Greek poetry. Many students find Greek syntax more complicated than Latin (although in some ways Greek seems to me at least less artificial than Latin). However, what seems like the most daunting aspect of Greek to those who haven't studied it--namely, the alphabet--can be assimilated in just a few weeks (although the accentuation is complicated).