[quote="Qimmik"]1. This is correct. An article on Roman timekeeping: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_timekeeping
The fifth hour of the night would probably be around 11 pm in winter, but Roman hours varied with the seasons.Thank you!
2. Correct. Probably "at" is better in English.Agreed.
is not merely unnecessary, it's wrong. Expectabat
encodes all the necessary information as to voice, tense, number and person. It's not a periphrastic form.Thank you; I have struggled a bit with 'esse' and its use; I have finally made the distinction between its use, and, importantly, to not use it as an auxiliary verb.
, not salutit
. The two sentences with et
are ok here, although Latin would probably use a participle for the first verb without et
, e.g., Quintus eum salutans 'tres horas' inquit 'te exspectavi.Thanks for picking up 'salutit' - had I looked more carefully, I'd have seen it looked wrong! Salutans: I hadn't considered!
5. Gaius respondit: 'in via amicUm vidi qui
[nominative because subject of relative clause] mihi
[dative, indirect object of ostendit
, not accusative] suum
[must be accusative in agreement with canem
] canem ostendit
.It's feedback like this that cements my learning.
6. Noli requires an infinitive: Noli irasci
is a 3rd conjugation deponent, i.e., it's active in meaning but is conjugated with passive endings. Irasci
is the present infinitive. (The perfect participle, iratus
, happens to look like a 1st conjugation verb, but don't let that confuse you.)Thank you - this all (unsurprisingly) makes great sense! Your feedback is extremely helpful.
Many thanks again - I wish I could comment further, but I'm still only just
comprehending this, and I don't yet have the ability to have an in-depth discussion about the grammar. Hopefully one day I will.