It is surely, as you say (A&G §535e) = "since". // Ut dicis. = "since" anglicé.modus.irrealis wrote:But about "quem", I think this is an example where it's equivalent to "cum eum", where you then get the subjunctive
ptolemyauletes wrote:The tam does not really need to be translated into the English, or it could be translated as very or exceedingly or something like that.
ptolemyauletes wrote:I don't agree that such words necessarily have to be translated. I believe the English can be rendered as effectively without any idea of the qualifying tam.
ptolemyauletes wrote:Again, I am not one who advocates that every single word need be brought into the English. Sometimes the Latin just does not fit into English neatly.
ptolemyauletes wrote:To quote Horace: nec verbum verbo curabis reddere fidus interpres.
Cicero, De optimo genere oratorum, 5.14-15 wrote:In quibus non verbum pro verbo necesse habui reddere, sed genus omne verborum vimque servavi.
Abba Lhomond, Charles François, 1727-1794, est auctor qui verba aliorum paraphrasi illustrat. // ...paraphrasing others' writings.ptolemyauletes wrote:The author used the word tam because he is a Roman
We don't need to infer it; the writer says it. // Conjectemus non necesse est; palàm scribitur.ptolemyauletes wrote:If left out, would we be unable to appreciate that this was an unusually merciful act
Indeed it isn't. In everyday speech and elsewhere it occurs emphatically. // Non quidem. Et in sermone quotidiano et alibi dicitur emphaticé.ptolemyauletes wrote:quidem...Its equivalents in English are only used in very formal prose