Textkit Logo

pones nomen

Here's where you can discuss all things Latin. Use this board to ask questions about grammar, discuss learning strategies, get translation help and more!

Moderator: thesaurus

pones nomen

Postby Junya » Wed Jul 02, 2008 8:02 am

Hi. I am sorry for participating in this forum only when I have to post my own question. But I am sick and don't have enough energy to look at this site very often.

I am reading a Latin text. And there is a place I don't understand.


Tunc intellecta, vel plura ex eis, fiunt sic quod intenciones eorum intelliguntur aliis modis; verbi gracia: ubi, quod intelligitur in illis, cum tu consideraveris intencionem eius, vel non invenies in eis aliquid de intencione eius omnino, vel pones nomen nisi in eis sit quod faciet te acquirere aliam intencionem secundum alium modum.

(Then the intelligibles, namely most of them, become such that their representations are recognized in the different ways; for example, "where"(one of the category), which is recognized in them (= intelligibles), when you try to recognize the representation of it (= "where"), you either find in them (= intelligibles) no representation of it (= "where") at all, or give name if in them (= intelligibles) there is nothing that makes you get another representation, in a different way.)


+ Is my understanding of demonstratives (put in the brackets) right?
+ What is "pones nomen" indicating?
+ I am particularly vague with the meaning of "vel pones nomen nisi in eis sit quod faciet te acquirere aliam intencionem secundum alium modum."


The place before this passage I totally understand. If you need it for understanding of the context, I will post the translation of it too with the text.



The text you can see at
http://hiphi.ubbcluj.ro/fam/texte/alpha ... llecto.htm
Junya
Textkit Enthusiast
 
Posts: 453
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2007 2:26 am
Location: Japan

Re: pones nomen

Postby thesaurus » Wed Jul 02, 2008 7:09 pm

Junya wrote:Tunc intellecta, vel plura ex eis, fiunt sic quod intenciones eorum intelliguntur aliis modis; verbi gracia: ubi, quod intelligitur in illis, cum tu consideraveris intencionem eius, vel non invenies in eis aliquid de intencione eius omnino, vel pones nomen nisi in eis sit quod faciet te acquirere aliam intencionem secundum alium modum.

(Then the intelligibles, namely most of them, become such that their representations are recognized in the different ways; for example, "where"(one of the category), which is recognized in them (= intelligibles), when you try to recognize the representation of it (= "where"), you either find in them (= intelligibles) no representation of it (= "where") at all, or give name if in them (= intelligibles) there is nothing that makes you get another representation, in a different way.)


+ Is my understanding of demonstratives (put in the brackets) right?
+ What is "pones nomen" indicating?
+ I am particularly vague with the meaning of "vel pones nomen nisi in eis sit quod faciet te acquirere aliam intencionem secundum alium modum."


Salve Junya! Salvus sis!

Here is the best I can make of it:

"When you consider the meaning/referent of "where", which is understood to be one of them [the intelligibles], either you will not find any meaning at all in it, or you will give it a name, unless there is something in it which will make you take another meaning by another method."

To explain:
+I read "pones nomen" as "you will give/put a name to something."

+Your readings in the brackets are correct.

+The last sentence has this meaning: given a referent like "where" or "there" (which we would call an "indexicality" in modern linguistic terms <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indexical>), we are faced with the problem of how to interpret it ("considerare intencionem eius"). There are two options: one, either we do not know what it refers to ("non invenis in eo aliquid de intencione eius"); or, you understand what it refers to and therefore can "give a name" to the referent. For example, if you understand "here" means "in Thesaurus's house," then that is the "nomen" you've given to "here/ibi". In this case you recognize this because I say "here" while you stand in my house with me. However, assuming you aren't with me, you may figure out what "here" refers to when I use it by paying attention to the context surrounding the word. I believe this is one of the "other ways" (alium modum") which "makes you acquire its meaning."

I don't know if any of this is correct, but this is how I understand it.
Horae quidem cedunt et dies et menses et anni, nec praeteritum tempus umquam revertitur nec quid sequatur sciri potest. Quod cuique temporis ad vivendum datur, eo debet esse contentus. --Cicero, De Senectute
thesaurus
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 989
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2006 9:44 pm

Postby Junya » Wed Jul 02, 2008 9:49 pm

My problematic passage.
Tunc intellecta, vel plura ex eis, fiunt sic quod intenciones eorum intelliguntur aliis modis; verbi gracia: ubi, quod intelligitur in illis, cum tu consideraveris intencionem eius, vel non invenies in eis aliquid de intencione eius omnino, vel pones nomen nisi in eis sit quod faciet te acquirere aliam intencionem secundum alium modum.



Thank you Thesaurus for the answer and for the care for my sickness. :)
You gave me a meaning which I didn't notice.
But I am still in problem how this passage may continue to the previous passages.
I don't know the meaning of this passage, but I feel this passage's atmosphere is different than the previous passages.

Here is the passages before this place. I'm afraid this might be so long that nobody wants to read and answer.


Igitur intencio de hoc quod ipsa est intelligens in effectu et intellectus in effectu et intellectum in effectu una et eadem intencio est et ad unam et eamdem intencionem est. Intellecta enim que erant intellecta in potencia et antequam essent intellecta in effectu erant forme in materiis extra animam; cum vero fuerint intellecta in effectu, tunc esse eorum, prout sunt intellecta in effectu, non est eorum pout sunt forme in materiis.


(So the meaning of it that "it is actually thinking" and "it is the intellect in actuality" and "it is what is thought in actuality" is all the same meaning. For, <what is thought> (=intelligibles) which were <what is thought in potentiality> and were forms within the materials outside the soul before they become <what is thought in actuality>; when they (=intelligibles) become <what is thought in actuality> (=intelligibles in actuality), then their existance as <what is thought in actuality>, is not their existance as the forms in materials.)


Suum enim esse in seipsis vel in materiis non est suum esse secundum quod sunt intellecta in effectu; nam eorum esse in se ipsis comitantur cetera que adiunguntur eis, que aliquando sunt ubi, et aliquando quando, et aliquando situs, et aliquando quantum, et aliquando sunt qualia cum qualitatibus corporalibus et aliquando agunt et aliquando paciuntur.


(Their existance in themselves, namely in materials, is not their existance as <what is thought in actuality> (=intelligibles); for their existance in themselves is accompanied by other things, which are like these, "being where", "being when", "being at pause", "being how much", "being how" with corporeal qualities, "being in activity", "being in passivity".)


Cum autem fiunt intellecta in effectu, removentur ab eis multa ex iis predicamentis; esse igitur illorum fit aliud esse.


(But when they become <what is thought in actuality> (=intelligibles), many of those predicables (above mentioned categories "where", "when", etc.) are separated from these (=intelligibles); and their (=intelligibles') existance becomes a different one.


Tunc intellecta, vel plura ex eis, fiunt sic quod intenciones eorum intelliguntur aliis modis; verbi gracia: ubi, quod intelligitur in illis, cum tu consideraveris intencionem eius, vel non invenies in eis aliquid de intencione eius omnino, vel pones nomen nisi in eis sit quod faciet te acquirere aliam intencionem secundum alium modum.


(Then <what is thought> (=intelligibles), namely most of them, become such that their meanings are understood in some different ways; for example: when you consider the meaning/referent of "where", which is understood to be one of them [the intelligibles], either you will not find any meaning at all in it, or you will give it a name, unless there is something in it which will make you take another meaning by another method.)
Junya
Textkit Enthusiast
 
Posts: 453
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2007 2:26 am
Location: Japan

Postby Junya » Thu Jul 03, 2008 11:50 pm

I pondered upon the passage with thesaurus' hint, regarding also the context, and I got an idea.

here is a new translation.

Tunc intellecta, vel plura ex eis, fiunt sic quod intenciones eorum intelliguntur aliis modis; verbi gracia: ubi, quod intelligitur in illis, cum tu consideraveris intencionem eius, vel non invenies in eis aliquid de intencione eius omnino, vel pones nomen nisi in eis sit quod faciet te acquirere aliam intencionem secundum alium modum.


Then (= when the intelligibles have become the intelligibles in actuality) most of the intelligibles are recognized in a different manner (than when they were outside the soul, i.e. were in potentiality).

Taking for example (the predicable) "where", which you can recognize in the intelligibles (when they were outside the soul),
when you try to think of this,
you either can't recognize it in the intelligibles (= intelligibles in actuality, intelligibles inside the soul) at all,
or because you can't recognize it newly in some different manner (than when it was outside the soul) you just give it a (vacant) name.



How is this new interpretation?
(So "pones nomen" means "you give a vacant name".)
Junya
Textkit Enthusiast
 
Posts: 453
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2007 2:26 am
Location: Japan

Postby adrianus » Fri Jul 04, 2008 11:44 pm

Hello Junya. Good health to you.
I'm in Lithuania and just saw your post.
I have started slowly to read and translate what you've posted.

Salve, Junya, et bonam sospitatem.
Lituaniam visito et epistulam tuam modò legi.
Verto ut sequitur.

Al Farabi wrote:Igitur intencio de hoc quod ipsa est intelligens in effectu et intellectus in effectu et intellectum in effectu una et eadem intencio est et ad unam et eamdem intencionem est. Intellecta enim que erant intellecta in potencia et antequam essent intellecta in effectu erant forme in materiis extra animam; cum vero fuerint intellecta in effectu, tunc esse eorum, prout sunt intellecta in effectu, non est eorum pout sunt forme in materiis.

Therefore with regard to that which an intention is itself actually thinking, both the actual thought and the thing actually thought [about] are one and the same intention, and [move] towards one and the same intention [in the Aristotelian sense of a final cause, I think]. For thoughts which were potential thoughts, and would afterwards be actual thoughts, were material forms outside the soul. When in fact they are actualized, their essence accords to actual thoughts, not to material forms.

Al Farabi wrote:Suum enim esse in seipsis vel in materiis non est suum esse secundum quod sunt intellecta in effectu; nam eorum esse in se ipsis comitantur cetera que adiunguntur eis, que aliquando sunt ubi, et aliquando quando, et aliquando situs, et aliquando quantum, et aliquando sunt qualia cum qualitatibus corporalibus et aliquando agunt et aliquando paciuntur.

For very essence is in things themselves or materially, and not according to what [aspects] are actually intelligible. For the essence of things in themselves occurs with other things [aspects] connected to them, as at times with where, or when, or the position, or how much, or what sort of corporeal quality, or [whether] acting or being acted upon.
adrianus
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 3270
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 9:45 pm

Postby Junya » Sat Jul 05, 2008 12:57 am

Hi, Adrianus. Why are you in Lithuania? My health condition is not very good, I soon get ill when I use pc and concentrate. Too much concentration is very bad to my health, if you believe it or not. (I guess no doctor in the present day would say concentration is bad.)

Thank you. You gave me a hint on a vague part.
(una et eadem intencio est et ad unam et eamdem intencionem est.)

About one of the 10 categories "situs", it would be better "posture" or "in what posture", not "be at pause" as I put it yesterday.
Junya
Textkit Enthusiast
 
Posts: 453
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2007 2:26 am
Location: Japan

Postby adrianus » Sat Jul 05, 2008 8:48 am

Al Farabi wrote:Cum autem fiunt intellecta in effectu, removentur ab eis multa ex iis predicamentis; esse igitur illorum fit aliud esse.

Ut scripsisti, Junya. As you wrote:But when they become actual thoughts, many of those predicates (descriptive qualities) are removed; their essence therefore becomes a different one.

Al Farabi wrote:Tunc intellecta, vel plura ex eis, fiunt sic quod intenciones eorum intelliguntur aliis modis; verbi gracia: ubi, quod intelligitur in illis, cum tu consideraveris intencionem eius, vel non invenies in eis aliquid de intencione eius omnino, vel pones nomen nisi in eis sit quod faciet te acquirere aliam intencionem secundum alium modum.

Then the thoughts (intelligibles), or most of them, become such that their intentions are understood differently; as with the word where, which you may understand as one such, when you consider its intention either you find none at all, or you [should] posit a name/noun other than one it already has, to enable you to take another meaning/intention in another way

I'm in Lithuania for a serious games conference. In lithuaniâ sum ut colloquium de ludis sonticis assistam praesentationesque dem.
"Posture" poti quidem videtur at...
"Posture" sounds better, indeed, although I think "situs" as distinct from "ubi" may refer to aspects like "precise or mathematical position" or "orientation" not covered by "ubi" relating to a geographical place or something relating to other things (on the table in a room in a particular house... etcaetera). I'm not sure.
adrianus
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 3270
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 9:45 pm

Postby Junya » Sat Jul 05, 2008 10:06 pm

Thank you Adrianus. You gave me another hint (on "vel pones nomen nisi in eis sit quod faciet te acquirere aliam intencionem secundum alium modum"). But I have to think about this place more, though taking time on one place too long is not a good thing.

By the way, what is the "serious game"?
Junya
Textkit Enthusiast
 
Posts: 453
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2007 2:26 am
Location: Japan

Postby joels341 » Sun Jul 06, 2008 1:15 am

joels341
Textkit Neophyte
 
Posts: 16
Joined: Sun Feb 18, 2007 1:09 am

Postby Junya » Mon Jul 07, 2008 6:51 am

Thank you. But there is no difference between your translation and mine.
Junya
Textkit Enthusiast
 
Posts: 453
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2007 2:26 am
Location: Japan

Postby Junya » Tue Jul 08, 2008 12:27 am

Joels, you said

"Although I don't get the last part either. I think it is "have been leaned upon", but I am not sure how it fits in the rest of the sentence. "

I want to know what you exactly mean by "have been learned upon".

I am still vague with "pones nomen". So I need any hint.
Junya
Textkit Enthusiast
 
Posts: 453
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2007 2:26 am
Location: Japan

Postby Junya » Wed Jul 09, 2008 9:59 pm

Thank you Joels, Adrianus, Thesaurus.

Tunc intellecta, vel plura ex eis, fiunt sic quod intenciones eorum intelliguntur aliis modis; verbi gracia: ubi, quod intelligitur in illis, cum tu consideraveris intencionem eius, vel non invenies in eis aliquid de intencione eius omnino, vel pones nomen nisi in eis sit quod faciet te acquirere aliam intencionem secundum alium modum.



I'm still vague about "pones nomen".

Do you think this "pones nomen" has a special meaning, or just an ordinary meaning?

I feel, and apparently Joels feels, so other people would feel, that this "pones nomen" appears abrupt and strangely here.

Could you name all the meanings of "ponese nomen" you can think of?
Junya
Textkit Enthusiast
 
Posts: 453
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2007 2:26 am
Location: Japan

Postby joels341 » Sat Jul 12, 2008 4:14 pm

pones nomen


pones= verb, future active indicative, 2nd person singular, (pono, ponere)

meanings:
you will put
you will place (as in to place something somewhere)
you will set
you will erect/build
you will ordain

nomen= neuter noun, nominative singular, vocative singular, accusative singular, (nomen, nominis)

meanings:
a/the name (subject, direct object, or being spoken to)
a/the noun (subject, direct object, or being spoken to)
a/the title (subject, direct object, or being spoken to)
a/the record (as in something marked down) (subject, direct object, or being spoken to)
a/the heading (subject, direct object, or being spoken to)

pones nomen=
you will build a name
you will put a name
you will set a name
joels341
Textkit Neophyte
 
Posts: 16
Joined: Sun Feb 18, 2007 1:09 am

Postby adrianus » Mon Jul 14, 2008 8:58 pm

Salve Junya care,

I came back yesterday. I'm not sure if were asking me earlier about the nature of "serious games" in general, or about my work in particular. "Serious games" is a label coined for those designed with ulterior purposes, --purposes other than just to give pleasure,--either formal educational or training games, say. I'm especially interested in making educational and language games and will talk about one in this forum in the future.

In OLD and L&S, "pono", with regard to names, just refers to imposing or giving a name, or (indirectly, in L&S) writing down a name and the English word "posit" (which derives from "ponere") also fits, I believe.

In Hiberniam a Lituaniâ heri reveni et ad filum tuum. Quid, rogas, sonticus ludus sit? Ludus est qui finem habet ultrà voluptatem dantem, ut finem paedagogicum vel qui exercet. At fortasse rogas naturam ludorum quos facit. Paedagogicos linguisticosque fingo et hic de uno futurò ampliùs dicam.
adrianus
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 3270
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 9:45 pm

Postby Junya » Thu Jul 17, 2008 2:53 am

Thank you Joels and Adrianus.

In the end, I can't improve my translation further. This translation of mine would be, at least in the mere appearance, just ok as it is.

Thank you very much.





Quote
Igitur intencio de hoc quod ipsa est intelligens in effectu et intellectus in ef
fectu et intellectum in effectu una et eadem intencio est et ad unam et eamdem i
ntencionem est. Intellecta enim que erant intellecta in potencia et antequam ess
ent intellecta in effectu erant forme in materiis extra animam; cum vero fuerint
intellecta in effectu, tunc esse eorum, prout sunt intellecta in effectu, non e
st eorum pout sunt forme in materiis.


[ [ So the meaning of it that "it is actually thinking" and "it is the intellect in
actuality" and "it is what is thought in actuality" is all the same meaning. Fo
r, <what is thought> (=intelligibles) which were <what is thought in potentialit
y> and were forms within the materials outside the soul before they become <what
is thought in actuality>; when they (=intelligibles) become <what is thought in
actuality> (=intelligibles in actuality), then their existance as <what is thou
ght in actuality>, is not their existance as the forms in materials.] ]



Quote:
Suum enim esse in seipsis vel in materiis non est suum esse secundum quod sunt i
ntellecta in effectu; nam eorum esse in se ipsis comitantur cetera que adiungunt
ur eis, que aliquando sunt ubi, et aliquando quando, et aliquando situs, et aliq
uando quantum, et aliquando sunt qualia cum qualitatibus corporalibus et aliquan
do agunt et aliquando paciuntur.


[ [ Their existance in themselves, namely in materials, is not their existance as <
what is thought in actuality> (=intelligibles); for their existance in themselve
s is accompanied by other things, which are like these, "being where", "being wh
en", "being at pause", "being how much", "being how" with corporeal qualities, "
being in activity", "being in passivity".] ]



Quote:
Cum autem fiunt intellecta in effectu, removentur ab eis multa ex iis predicamen
tis; esse igitur illorum fit aliud esse.


[ [ But when they become <what is thought in actuality> (=intelligibles), many of t
hose predicables (above mentioned categories "where", "when", etc.) are separate
d from these (=intelligibles); and their (=intelligibles') existance becomes a d
ifferent one.] ]



Quote:
Tunc intellecta, vel plura ex eis, fiunt sic quod intenciones eorum intelliguntu
r aliis modis; verbi gracia: ubi, quod intelligitur in illis, cum tu considerave
ris intencionem eius, vel non invenies in eis aliquid de intencione eius omnino,
vel pones nomen nisi in eis sit quod faciet te acquirere aliam intencionem secu
ndum alium modum.


[ [ Then (= when the intelligibles have become the intelligibles in actuality) most
of the intelligibles are recognized in a different manner (than when they were o
utside the soul, i.e. were in potentiality).


Taking for example (the predicable) "where", which you can recognize in the int
elligibles (when they were outside the soul),
when you try to think of this,
you either can't recognize it in the intelligibles (= intelligibles in actuality
, intelligibles inside the soul) at all,
or because you can't recognize it newly in some different manner (than when it w
as outside the soul) you just give it a (vacant) name.
] ]
Junya
Textkit Enthusiast
 
Posts: 453
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2007 2:26 am
Location: Japan

Postby adrianus » Sun Jul 27, 2008 3:26 am

You have the heart of a lion, Junya.

Leonis, Junya, animum habes. :)
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.
adrianus
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 3270
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 9:45 pm


Return to Learning Latin

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot] and 60 guests