Dear all, I was wondering is someone can help confirm whether my translation (from English into Latin) is correct here.
What I wanted to say is:
And so, the Greeks entered the Eastern City and conquered the enemy.
This is what I have come up with.
itaque, Graecī intraverunt urbem orientālem et vincevano hostem.
The obvious problem here is the fact that I think vincevano is irregular, from the 2d conj vincere. Also I was again wondering if orientalem could be written as orientalis instead. That way it would read (I think) the city of the East instead of the Eastern city.
Just so you guys know, non of this is homework or anything (I'm 22 lol) just doing it because I like Latin.
More minor Latin translation help.
-
- Textkit Neophyte
- Posts: 3
- Joined: Sat Nov 09, 2013 5:59 am
-
- Textkit Neophyte
- Posts: 57
- Joined: Fri Nov 15, 2013 8:06 am
Re: More minor Latin translation help.
"-Vno" is an Italian suffix, "vincevano" is an Italian conjugation. You meant uīcērunt / uīcēre.
Aiming to imitate 1st c. BC Latin, I'd correct your sentence to "Itaque graecī intrāuērunt urbem orientālem et uīcērunt hostēs". It's been often observed that this Latin used "hostis" in the plural when they meant "the enemy" as in an army or a city (instead of a particular person), unlike English where the singular "enemy" can be used for both. I wonder if that was actually obeyed in other times, though...
You could play a lot with the word choice and word order, of course. "Itaque orientālem graecī introiēre urbem hostēsque uīcērunt", etc.
Aiming to imitate 1st c. BC Latin, I'd correct your sentence to "Itaque graecī intrāuērunt urbem orientālem et uīcērunt hostēs". It's been often observed that this Latin used "hostis" in the plural when they meant "the enemy" as in an army or a city (instead of a particular person), unlike English where the singular "enemy" can be used for both. I wonder if that was actually obeyed in other times, though...
You could play a lot with the word choice and word order, of course. "Itaque orientālem graecī introiēre urbem hostēsque uīcērunt", etc.
-
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 2090
- Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2013 10:15 pm
Re: More minor Latin translation help.
You might also use a participle for the first verb:
Itaque Graeci urbem orientalem ingressi hostes uicerunt.
Or an absolute construction:
Itaque Graeci urbe orientali intrata hostes superarunt.
Itaque Graeci urbem orientalem ingressi hostes uicerunt.
Or an absolute construction:
Itaque Graeci urbe orientali intrata hostes superarunt.
-
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 3270
- Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 9:45 pm
Re: More minor Latin translation help.
What good suggestions. In case it's not clear (sometimes I would miss it, I admit), "superarunt" = "superaverunt" by legitimately dropping the "ve" in syncope.
Quam bonum consilium! Ut clarum sit res (et mihi ipsi qui nonnunquam id non adnotem et aliis), per syncopam (id est, per jacturam "ve" litterarum justam) "superaverunt" fit "superarunt".
Quam bonum consilium! Ut clarum sit res (et mihi ipsi qui nonnunquam id non adnotem et aliis), per syncopam (id est, per jacturam "ve" litterarum justam) "superaverunt" fit "superarunt".
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.