Correcting Adler's Key to his "Practical Gramma

[Carolus Raeticus]

Salvete!

I have transcribed the entire 172 "Exercises" from Adler's A Practical Grammar of the Latin Language (1858, scanned version to be found at this Archive.org-page) together with the Key to the Exercises contained in Adler's Practical Grammar of the Latin Language (henceforth called KEY; 1858, scanned version to be found at this Archive.org-page). The end result will be a side-by-side (English-Latin) PDF-version and a raw text file (both free of course).

I proofread it (quite diligently, I hope, but from experience I can tell that there are always a few blunders missed) and also tried to find errors in the KEY itself and suggest corrections. A few translations were missing, as well.

Now I need your help. Before creating the final digital version of the English-Latin version of Adler's "Exercises", the errors have to be amended. For that purpose I have created a list of all the mistakes, missing translations, etc., that I noticed. I probably missed a few but should have found most of the more obvious ones. Of course, suggestions for correction are welcome once the final version is put online.

I shall present the list of errors for comment in several installments. I would like you to look at each of them closely and tell whether the changes suggested by me are correct. I had to add a few translations, as well, for those missing in the KEY. Of course, there are many ways to translate an English sentence into Latin, as Adler himself points out in the Preface to the KEY prepared by himself. However, I tried to stick as closely to Adler's examples as possible. The task at hand is NOT to improve upon Adler's work but instead to correct and amend it in as close to his style as possible.

So, let's get rolling. Let's have a look at the format used. The exercises are mostly Question/Answer-pairs. Often you need to know both the question and the answer to know what gender or number to use. So in most cases I included both question and answer (Q&A). First comes the English Q&A, followed by the Latin one. My comments are attached in bold and red. Any page numbers given refer to the textbook, not the KEY.

So, let's get rolling.

Carolus Raeticus

[Carolus Raeticus]

Instalment 1:

Let's go slowly for the first installment: only three errors/questions to cover.

Exercise 2:

English Q&A:

• Which fine ribbon have you?
• I have your fine ribbon.

Latin Q&A (KEY):

• Quam taeniam pulchram habes (Quae taenia pulchra tibi est)?
• MISSING IN KEY. Suggested: Tuam taeniam pulchram habeo (Taenia tua pulchra mihi est). Reasoning: following the example immediately preceding this Q&A-pair.

Exercise 3:

English Q&A:

• Which table have you?
• I have the stone table.

Latin Q&A (KEY):

• Quam mensam habes (Quae tibi mensa est)?
• Mensam ligneam habeo (Mensa mihi est lignea). Wrong translation. Suggested: Mensam lapideam habeo (Mensa mihi est lapidea). Reasoning: although Adler introduces both lapideus and saxeus as translations for of stone, he only ever uses lapideus in the entire KEY.

Exercise 7:

English Q&A:

• What have you?
• I have something beautiful.

Latin Q&A (KEY):

• Quid habes (Quid tibi est)
• Aliquid pulchri habeo (Est mihi quiddam pulchri). Shouldn't this be quidquam pulchri (cp. top of page 22)?

Valete,

Carolus Raeticus

[adrianus]

[*] Aliquid pulchri habeo (Est mihi quiddam pulchri). Shouldn't this be quidquam pulchri (cp. top of page 22)?[/list]

Non sit. Rectè scribitur, Carole, ut opinor.
quiddam = a certain, something (specific); quidquam = any(thing), something (vague);

[Carolus Raeticus]

Salve Adriane!

Non sit. Rectè scribitur, Carole, ut opinor.
quiddam = a certain, something (specific); quidquam = any(thing), something (vague);

Hm, I guess you are right. Cassell's dictionary actually gives these examples:

• quiddam divinum, something divine
• with partitive genitive, quiddam mali

Also quidquam seems to be more or less confined to negatives. Still I'm surprised at its use because Adler does not formally introduce quidam, quaedam, quoddam/quiddam until Lesson 16 (= Exercise 18). But so it goes, I guess.

So, as far as Installment 1 goes:

• Exercise 2: Missing translation for "I have your fine ribbon." = "Tuam taeniam pulchram habeo (Taenia tua pulchra mihi est)."
• Exercise 3: "Mensam ligneam habeo (Mensa mihi est lignea)." - Change to: "Mensam lapideam habeo (Mensa mihi est lapidea)."
• Exercise 7: I'm leaving "Aliquid pulchri habeo (Est mihi quiddam pulchri)." as it is.

Thank you for the hint.

Carolus Raeticus

[Carolus Raeticus]

Installment 2:

Exercise 8:

English Q&A:

• Has he my umbrella or my stick
• He has neither your umbrella nor your stick.

Latin Q&A (KEY):

• Utrum ei est umbraculum tuum an baculum tuum? Obvious error. Suggested: Utrum ei est umbraculum meum an baculum meum?
• Non est ei neque umbraculum tuum nec baculum tuum?

Exercise 12:

English Q&A:

• Who has my a** Read a.s.s without dots (changed by Textkit's overly politically correct software into a**). Wiping out an entire animal species in one fell stroke, now that's what I call zealous.
• The peasant has it.

Latin Q&A (KEY):

• Quis asinum habet? English my not translated. Suggested: Quis asinum meum habet. Reasoning: similar sentence Quis ovem meam habet in Exercise 8.
• Rusticus eum habet

Exercise 14:

English Q&A

• Has your tailor my good buttons?
• My tailor has your good gold buttons.

Latin Q&A (KEY):

• Tenetne sartor tuus orbiculos fibulatorios meos? good not translated in KEY. Suggested: Tenetne sartor tuus orbiculos fibulatorios meos BONOS.
• Sartor meus orbiculos fibulatorios tuos aureos tenet. good not translated in KEY. Suggested: Sartor meus orbiculos fibulatorios tuos aureos BONOS tenet. Please advise concerning the "correct" position of bonos.

Valete,

Carolus Raeticus

[A.A.I]

(I don't want to interrupt the thread but I want to say that I appreciate this effort. Really good work, guys. Can't wait to see more of it!)

[adrianus]

Bona, Carole, corrigenda tua, nisi fallor.
Your corrections look good, I think, Carolus.

[Carolus Raeticus]

Thank you, Adrianus.

Changes settled on for Installment 2:

• Exercise 8: "Utrum ei est umbraculum tuum an baculum tuum?" -- Change to: "Utrum ei est umbraculum meum an baculum meum?"
• Exercise 12: "Quis asinum habet?" -- Change to: "Quis asinum meum habet."
• Exercise 14: "Tenetne sartor tuus orbiculos fibulatorios meos?" -- Change to: "Tenetne sartor tuus orbiculos fibulatorios meos bonos."
• Exercise 14: "Sartor meus orbiculos fibulatorios tuos aureos tenet." -- Change to: "Sartor meus orbiculos fibulatorios tuos aureos bonos tenet."

INSTALLMENT 3:

Exercise 15:

English Q&A

• Has your friend my large letters or those of the Germans?
• He has neither the one nor the other (neque has neque illas, or, neque illas neque alteras).

Latin Q&A (KEY):

• Utrum amicus tuus epistolas meas longas habet an illas Germanorum?
• Non habet neque unas neque alteras. neque unas neque alteras is not one of the suggested translations given in the KEY (neque has neque illas, or, neque illas neque alteras). Suggested (to avoid confusion): Non habet neque has neque illas (neque illas neque alteras).

Exercise 17:

English Q&A

• Have your brothers my knives or theirs?
• My brothers have neither your knives nor theirs.

Latin Q&A (KEY):

• Utrum fratres mei cultros habent meos an suos? your brothers wrongly translated as my brothers. Suggested: Utrum fratres TUI cultros habent meos an suos?
• Fratres mei nec tuos nec suos cultros habent.

Exercise 17:

English Q&A

• Have I your chickens or those of your cooks?
• You have neither mine nor those of my cooks.

Latin Q&A (KEY):

• Utrum mihi sunt gallinae tuae an (illae) coqui tui? Plural cooks in ORIGINAL wrongly translated as singular. Suggested: Utrum mihi sunt gallinae tuae an (illae) coquorum tuorum?
• Neque meae neque illae coqui tui tibi sunt. Plural cooks in KEY wrongly translated as singular. Suggested: Neque meae neque illae coquorum tuorum tibi sunt.

Exercise 18:

English Q&A

• Who has some good ships?
• Those Englishmen have some.

Latin Q&A (KEY):

• Quis naves aliquas bonas habet?
• Angli habent aliquos. aliquos has wrong gender (refers to feminine naves). Suggested: Angli habent ALIQUAS.

Vale,

Carolus Raeticus

[rendorf]

Are you transcribing Adler? If so, I've already done it. I put the whole book into an Anki deck. I used cards with 3 fields, the first contains the Latin sentences or vocab the entire book: exercises and lessons, the second has English translations, and the third the connected grammatical information. It took me the last 3 and a half years to input this, and is around 13k cards, but the whole book and answer key is in it. If you're interested in it you can email me and I'll give you a link to the Googledoc containing my Anki file. If you want to take it out of Anki format you could just cut and paste from the cards into another file. Hope this can be helpful for you. Robert

[rendorf]

Users of Adler,

I had difficulty posting this, so sorry if this is duplicative. I wanted to let you know that I've transcribed all of Adler into an Anki deck. It has three fields for each card:
1-the Latin sentence--from the sentences in the lessons and exercises, and the sentences given in the grammar lessons in small print, including the footnotes
2-the English translation, either from the main book or the key
3-the attached grammatical explanations from the lessons

The whole book and key are thus spread across about 13k cards. It took me about 3 and a half years to input and learn all these cards, but it really improved my facility with Latin. I'd be happy to share it with anyone interested. Just email me and I can send you a link to the Googledrive folder I've got it in. Robert

[Carolus Raeticus]

Salvete!

Changes settled on for Installment 3:

None. The questions concerning Exercises 15, 17 (two questions), 18 have not been answered, so I shall ask them again later on.

INSTALLMENT 4:

Exercise 20:

English Q&A

• Have you a good letter?
• I have a good letter and a good book.

Latin Q&A (KEY):

• Habesne unam epistolam? a good letter in ORIGINAL translated as a letter. Suggested: Habesnam unam epistolam BONAM?
• Unam epistolam et unum librum habeo. good (letter/book) in KEY not translated. Suggested: Unam epistolam BONAM et unum librum BONUM habeo.

Exercise 20:

English Q&A

• Has your friend any houses?
• He has some.
• He has ten houses (aedes) and five gardens.

Latin Q&A (KEY):

• Suntne amico tuo aliquae aedes.
• MISSING IN KEY. Suggested: Sunt ei aliquae.
• Sunt ei denae aedes et quinque hortuli.

Exercise 21:

English Q&A

• Has your neighbor our good bread?
• He has not ours, but that of his brother.

Latin Q&A (KEY):

• Num vicinus noster panem nostrum bonum habet? your neighbor in ORIGINAL wrongly translated as our neighbor. Suggested: Num vicinus TUUS panem nostrum bonum habet?
• Non nostrum, verum fratris sui habet.

Exercise 21:

English Q&A

• How many coats has the young man of our neighbors?
• The young man of our neighbors has only one good coat, but that of your friend has three of them.

Latin Q&A (KEY):

• Quot togas habet juvenis vicinorum nostrorum.
• Vicinorum nostrorum juvenis non habet nisi unam togam, sed ille amici tui tres habet. one good coat in ORIGINAL translated as if one coat. Suggested: Vicinorum nostrorum juvenis non habet nisi unam togam bonam, sed ille amici tui tres habet.

Valete,

Carolus Raeticus

[pmda]

Does anyone know why the Google pdf of this book lacks a table of contents at the front...it's 700 pages long and this must surely be a problem..?

[Carolus Raeticus]

Salve pmda!

I do not know the rationale behind the lack of a TOC. Personally, I findd the Index (p. 691-706) quite sufficient. I do not think that there ever was a TOC as such. Or do you know of a version of Adler's Practical Grammar with an original table of content?

What are you missing exactly? Personally, I would like to have an index of the vocabulary focal points of the various lessons. Adler does not introduce the vocabulary (at least not all of it) haphazardly, but seems to cover certain concepts or word fields. At least that is my impression (I am not using the text book itself, only the exercises).

Vale,

Carolus Raeticus

[pmda]

Thanks. I'm not familiar with 19th Century publishing conventions or, perhaps more relevantly, the conventions of publishing a Latin grammar / text book. But it seems very strange that he didn't do a TOC. I can't recall ever seeing a text book of any kind not having a TOC. He has divided his course into sections.. I assumed that it had been missed from the scan.

[adrianus]

Exercise 21:

English Q&A

• Has your neighbor our good bread?
• He has not ours, but that of his brother.

Latin Q&A (KEY):

• Num vicinus noster panem nostrum bonum habet? your neighbor in ORIGINAL wrongly translated as our neighbor. Suggested: Num vicinus TUUS panem nostrum bonum habet?
• Non nostrum, verum fratris sui habet.

Forsit "vicinus vester" non "vicinus tuus" quod pluraliter per nostris pronomen est responsum.
Corrigendum
Stat "vicinus tuus", quod potest "nostrum" in "nostrum panem" indicare et primi locutoris panem et secundi soli locutoris.
"Vicinus tuus" can be OK since the first speaker might be including the second in the singular as owners of the bread when he says "nostrum panem".

[adrianus]

Exercise 18
Those Englishmen = Angli illi

[Carolus Raeticus]

Salve Adriane!

Concerning Exercise 21:

I prefer the singular "tuus" because the singular seems to be the number expected in most Q&A except where otherwise clearly indicated. But to make it more clear I will adapt the English question from the text book:

English Q&A

• Has your neighbor our good bread? Change to "Has your (sg.) neighbor our good bread?" to make the number of "your" evident.
• He has not ours, but that of his brother.

Latin Q&A (KEY):

• Num vicinus noster panem nostrum bonum habet? "your neighbor" in ORIGINAL wrongly translated as our neighbor. Change to "Num vicinus TUUS panem nostrum bonum habet?"
• Non nostrum, verum fratris sui habet.

As for Exercise 18:

Exercise 18
Those Englishmen = Angli illi

So, you think that the sentence should read as follows, aren't you: "Angli ILLI habent ALIQUAS."?

Thank you for your kind assistance,

Carolus Raeticus

[adrianus]

So, you think that the sentence should read as follows, aren't you: "Angli ILLI habent ALIQUAS."?

Ita sentio // yes, I do.

[Carolus Raeticus]

Thank you, Adrianus.

Changes settled on for Installment 3:

• Exercise 15: "Non habet neque unas neque alteras." -- Change to: "Non habet neque has neque illas (neque illas neque alteras)."
• Exercise 17: "Utrum fratres mei cultros habent meos an suos?" -- Change to: "Utrum fratres tui cultros habent meos an suos?"
• Exercise 17: "Utrum mihi sunt gallinae tuae an (illae) coqui tui?" -- Change to: "Utrum mihi sunt gallinae tuae an (illae) coquorum tuorum?"
• Exercise 17: "Neque meae neque illae coqui tui tibi sunt." -- Change to: "Neque meae neque illae coquorum tuorum tibi sunt."
• Exercise 18: "Angli habent aliquos" -- Change to: "Angli illi habent aliquas."

Changes settled on for Installment 4:

• Exercise 20: "Habesne unam epistolam?" -- Change to: " Habesnam unam epistolam bonam?"
• Exercise 20: "Unam epistolam et unum librum habeo." -- Change to: "Unam epistolam bonam et unum librum bonum habeo."
• Exercise 20: Missing Latin translation of "He has some [houses]" -- Add missing translation: "Sunt ei aliquae."
• Exercise 21: "Num vicinus noster panem nostrum bonum habet?" -- Change to: "Num vicinus tuus panem nostrum bonum habet?" Also change "Has your neighbor our good bread?" to "Has your (sg.) neighbor our good bread?" to clarify the number-issue of "your".
• Exercise 21: "Vicinorum nostrorum juvenis non habet nisi unam togam, sed ille amici tui tres habet." -- Change to: "Vicinorum nostrorum juvenis non habet nisi unam togam bonam, sed ille amici tui tres habet."

I am closing this thread. I will post the following installments as seperate threads (Correcting Adler: Inst. 5 etc.) as things would get complicated pretty fast, otherwise.

Vale,

Carolus Raeticus

PS: I REALLY appreciate your help.