A simple question, need your help.
-
- Textkit Neophyte
- Posts: 6
- Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2008 3:45 pm
A simple question, need your help.
I began studying Latin a few days ago. I saw one sentence in Latin like this: "scripta imago animi." Is it right or not? if not, how can I correct?
thank you first.
thank you first.
-
- Textkit Member
- Posts: 126
- Joined: Mon Jun 23, 2008 12:30 am
- Location: Head: in the clouds
-
- Textkit Member
- Posts: 126
- Joined: Mon Jun 23, 2008 12:30 am
- Location: Head: in the clouds
No, it's fine as it is ... unless you or your friend are trying to say something different. Imago is singular feminine nominative, and so is the form scripta, which means they correctly agree. Imaginis is the genitive singular of imago. (If you've only been studying Latin a few days, I don't know how much explanation will be helpful ...)tom654321 wrote:but, a friend told me imago is single and scripta is plural? He said imago should be imaginis?
Is there something concerned with gender?
-
- Textkit Neophyte
- Posts: 6
- Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2008 3:45 pm
Thank you!Twpsyn wrote:No, it's fine as it is ... unless you or your friend are trying to say something different. Imago is singular feminine nominative, and so is the form scripta, which means they correctly agree. Imaginis is the genitive singular of imago. (If you've only been studying Latin a few days, I don't know how much explanation will be helpful ...)tom654321 wrote:but, a friend told me imago is single and scripta is plural? He said imago should be imaginis?
Is there something concerned with gender?
by the way, may i ask what's different between:
1. Scripta imago animi.
2.Scripta, imagines animi (SUNT).
If both are right, the comma in the second sentence is necessary? and why?
-
- Textkit Neophyte
- Posts: 6
- Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2008 3:45 pm
-
- Textkit Neophyte
- Posts: 3
- Joined: Fri Jul 11, 2008 1:33 pm
Apparently, tom654321 has left out the necessary context
The Latin clip came toward the end of page 205 (the link is for page 204):
http://books.google.com/books?id=zdI2BA ... &ct=result
where the discussion of Chinese writings (ideograms) was brought up. The author quoted from a Chinese text original which says:
(With regard to the Chinese writings,) every character laid down is a picture of the mind.
The author then attempted to added a Latin equivalent to the above and made an error by using the singular form of imago instead of the plural to match against scripta, or things written.
http://books.google.com/books?id=zdI2BA ... &ct=result
where the discussion of Chinese writings (ideograms) was brought up. The author quoted from a Chinese text original which says:
(With regard to the Chinese writings,) every character laid down is a picture of the mind.
The author then attempted to added a Latin equivalent to the above and made an error by using the singular form of imago instead of the plural to match against scripta, or things written.
Last edited by textkat on Fri Jul 11, 2008 2:38 pm, edited 3 times in total.
-
- Textkit Neophyte
- Posts: 6
- Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2008 3:45 pm
Re: Apparently, tom654321 has left out the necessary context
how can textkat be so stupid? no matter what the context is, my question above has been solved by some kind friends here!!!!!!!!!!textkat wrote:The Latin clip came toward the end of page 205 (the link is for page 204):
http://books.google.com/books?id=zdI2BA ... &ct=result
where the discussion of Chinese writings (ideograms) was brought up. The author quoted from a Chinese text original which says:
(With regard to the Chinese writings,) every character laid down is a picture of the mind.
The author then attempted to added a Latin equivalent to the above and made an error by using the singular form of imago instead of the plural to match against scripta, or things written.
A very clear answer here is : "scripta imago animi". ok!
-
- Textkit Neophyte
- Posts: 3
- Joined: Fri Jul 11, 2008 1:33 pm
Re: Apparently, tom654321 has left out the necessary context
tom654321 wrote: how can textkat be so stupid? no matter what the context is, my question above has been solved by some kind friends here!!!!!!!!!!
A very clear answer here is : "scripta imago animi". ok!
That's very interesting, there is no such thing as completely correct interpretation of Latin WITHOUT FULL CONTEXT, especially for something as short as this one. "scripta imago animi" is a phrase only, but "scripta, imagines animi" is a complete SENTENCE by itself, just like the Chinese ORIGINAL.
Hum, start to wonder what are you trying to hide from people who are doing their best to help you out?
-
- Textkit Member
- Posts: 126
- Joined: Mon Jun 23, 2008 12:30 am
- Location: Head: in the clouds
Re: Apparently, tom654321 has left out the necessary context
Um... okay, clearly there's some battle going on here. However, with regard to the Latin, each of those ... shall we call them 'sequences of three words'? ... can be interpreted as a full sentence or a phrase, depending on the context. You could translate the former as 'the written image of the mind' or 'the image of the mind has been written', and the latter as 'things written, the images of the mind' or (without the comma) 'things written are images of the mind'. Furthermore, 'scripta imago animi' is also a correct full sentence in either interpretation, since it can mean 'things written are the image of the mind' as well as 'the image of the mind has been written.' I hope that clears things up ...textkat wrote:That's very interesting, there is no such thing as completely correct interpretation of Latin WITHOUT FULL CONTEXT, especially for something as short as this one. "scripta imago animi" is a phrase only, but "scripta, imagines animi" is a complete SENTENCE by itself, just like the Chinese ORIGINAL.
-
- Textkit Neophyte
- Posts: 3
- Joined: Fri Jul 11, 2008 1:33 pm
Re: Apparently, tom654321 has left out the necessary context
Twpsyn wrote:Um... okay, clearly there's some battle going on here. However, with regard to the Latin, each of those ... shall we call them 'sequences of three words'? ... can be interpreted as a full sentence or a phrase, depending on the context. You could translate the former as 'the written image of the mind' or 'the image of the mind has been written', and the latter as 'things written, the images of the mind' or (without the comma) 'things written are images of the mind'. Furthermore, 'scripta imago animi' is also a correct full sentence in either interpretation, since it can mean 'things written are the image of the mind' as well as 'the image of the mind has been written.' I hope that clears things up ...
Thanks! However, the image of the mind has been written is not what the author for that Chinese Text intended to say, for just prior to this sentence, the author wrote: Spoken words, (are) the voices/vocalizations of the heart; (and) things written, pictures/visualizations of the soul. (i.e., different handwritings reveal much of different personalities). Hence, apposition of two nouns were suggested as a natural easy way to render it in Latin. (Of course, Chinese lacks inflections, so all interpretations are more or less strictly context-driven or context-unique.)
RE: 'scripta imago animi' is also a correct full sentence in either interpretation, since it can mean 'things written are the image of the mind' -- can we at least say that's not GOOD Latin then, because each character is a different picture/image and this interpretation would also betray the intend and mind of the author of original Chinese text.
The guy who wrote "scripta imago animi" in his essay happened to have been deified in China, hence a lot of unwillingness in admitting that he, too, like any other mortal, dozes off once in a while.
Last edited by textkat on Fri Jul 11, 2008 6:56 pm, edited 3 times in total.