Will you take the time to check this little story I wrote?
-
- Textkit Member
- Posts: 166
- Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 8:46 pm
Will you take the time to check this little story I wrote?
Salvete, docti amici! (Hope I said that right!)
I was wondering if any of you could help correct a little story I wrote.
It's not very good or imaginative (in fact, it's downright lame!), but I'm trying to see if my understanding of certain Latin grammatical constructs are OK.
This story should include:
1) The ablative of comparison.
2) Gerund of purpose
3) Ablative absolute
4) Present Participle
P.S., this is not a homework assignment. I'm working out of Wheelock and D'Ooge on my own.
So, without further ado...
DIES QUAM LAETISSIMUS
Olim Romani cum Graecis bellum gererunt. Proelia multa fuerunt. Denique prolieum ultimum in agro ad Romam sub sole pugnatum est.
Ab initio, exercitum Graecum exercitum Romanum oppugnavit. Copiae Graecae interfecerunt multos milites Romanos. Dux Graecus praestat. Dux Graecus clarior Duce Romano fuit [1].
Autem aliqud factum est. Di Romani venerunt ad proelium de sole ad Graecos necandum[2]. Totum exercitum Graecum deletum est a deis Romanis.
Exercito Graeco victo[3], dux Romanus laetissimus fortunatissimusque fuit, et, lacrimans[4], sacram de bove aureo deis suis fecit.
Well, thanks to all who help me out.
Gratis vobis ago et valete!
I was wondering if any of you could help correct a little story I wrote.
It's not very good or imaginative (in fact, it's downright lame!), but I'm trying to see if my understanding of certain Latin grammatical constructs are OK.
This story should include:
1) The ablative of comparison.
2) Gerund of purpose
3) Ablative absolute
4) Present Participle
P.S., this is not a homework assignment. I'm working out of Wheelock and D'Ooge on my own.
So, without further ado...
DIES QUAM LAETISSIMUS
Olim Romani cum Graecis bellum gererunt. Proelia multa fuerunt. Denique prolieum ultimum in agro ad Romam sub sole pugnatum est.
Ab initio, exercitum Graecum exercitum Romanum oppugnavit. Copiae Graecae interfecerunt multos milites Romanos. Dux Graecus praestat. Dux Graecus clarior Duce Romano fuit [1].
Autem aliqud factum est. Di Romani venerunt ad proelium de sole ad Graecos necandum[2]. Totum exercitum Graecum deletum est a deis Romanis.
Exercito Graeco victo[3], dux Romanus laetissimus fortunatissimusque fuit, et, lacrimans[4], sacram de bove aureo deis suis fecit.
Well, thanks to all who help me out.
Gratis vobis ago et valete!
-
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 3270
- Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 9:45 pm
Re: Will you take the time to check this little story I wrote?
Salve Quis ut Deus
gesserunt
Romae (non "ad Romam")—sorry, you mean "near Rome" and what you have is fine. Me excusas. Licet quod scripsisti.
praestit
"Aliquid autem", non "autem aliquid"
Dux Graecorum
Duce Romanorum
Di romanorum vel di romani
ad graecos necandos
sacrificium vel sacrum vel hostiam bovis aurei
Fortassè alii aliter vel plus dicant.
gesserunt
Romae (non "ad Romam")—sorry, you mean "near Rome" and what you have is fine. Me excusas. Licet quod scripsisti.
praestit
"Aliquid autem", non "autem aliquid"
Dux Graecorum
Duce Romanorum
Di romanorum vel di romani
ad graecos necandos
sacrificium vel sacrum vel hostiam bovis aurei
Fortassè alii aliter vel plus dicant.
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.
- benissimus
- Global Moderator
- Posts: 2733
- Joined: Mon May 12, 2003 4:32 am
- Location: Berkeley, California
- Contact:
Re: Will you take the time to check this little story I wrote?
I think an imperfect or historic present would be more appropriate here, but if you choose to use the perfect then adrianus gives the correct form.Quis ut Deus wrote:Olim Romani cum Graecis bellum gererunt.
differo abs te, adriane, nam ager non romae esse debet, nisi fallor, sed esse prope romam puto.Proelia multa fuerunt. Denique prolieum ultimum in agro ad Romam sub sole pugnatum est.
That is to say, I think "ad romam" is correct, because I assume you are not talking about a field in the city of Rome (which would call for the locative), but rather a field near or "at the foot of" Rome, in which case it is ok to use ad+accusative if the noun has a locative.
You should put either the Greek army or the Roman army into the nominative for the story to make sense. Remember exercitus is a masculine noun.Ab initio, exercitum Graecum exercitum Romanum oppugnavit.
praestat is not wrong as a historic present. However, if you want to use the perfect it would be praestitit, not praestit (perhaps a typo by adrianus)Copiae Graecae interfecerunt multos milites Romanos. Dux Graecus praestat.
This strikes me as a very unusual thing to say (besides the position of autem). It might sound more Latin to say something like "aliud factum est" (=a different thing occurred =something else happened) or "res aliter euenit"Autem aliqud factum est.
exercitus is, again, a masculine noun.Totum exercitum Graecum deletum est a deis Romanis.
flebile nescio quid queritur lyra, flebile lingua murmurat exanimis, respondent flebile ripae
-
- Textkit Member
- Posts: 166
- Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 8:46 pm
Redux
Salvete Adriane et Benissime!
Thanks for the help! Gratias vobis auxilium.
Well, here is revised story:
I've incorporated the changes of both Benissimus and Adrianus and Thesaurus.
CHANGES/NEW WORDS IN GREEN
DIES QUAM LAETISSIMUS
Olim Romani cum Graecis bellum gerebant. Proelia multa fuerunt. Denique proelium ultimum in agro ad Romam sub sole pugnatum est.
Ab initio, exercitum Graecorum exercitus Romanorum oppugnavit. Copiae Graecorum interfecerunt multos hostes. Dux Graecorum praestitit. Dux Graecorum clarior Duce Romanorum fuit [1].
Aliud factum est. Di Romanorum venerunt ad proelium de sole ad Graecos necandos[2]. Totus exercitus Graecorum deletus est in pauco temporis.
Exercito Graeco victo[3], dux Romanorum laetissimus fortunatissimusque fuit, et, lacrimans[4], sacrificium de sanguine feminae captae bibit..
Thanks again, Adrianus and Benissimus for helping me out, and to anybody else who might have something to add. I really appreciate it.
Gratias vobis ago, Adriane et Benissimus et Thesaure!
Valete!
Thanks for the help! Gratias vobis auxilium.
Well, here is revised story:
I've incorporated the changes of both Benissimus and Adrianus and Thesaurus.
CHANGES/NEW WORDS IN GREEN
DIES QUAM LAETISSIMUS
Olim Romani cum Graecis bellum gerebant. Proelia multa fuerunt. Denique proelium ultimum in agro ad Romam sub sole pugnatum est.
Ab initio, exercitum Graecorum exercitus Romanorum oppugnavit. Copiae Graecorum interfecerunt multos hostes. Dux Graecorum praestitit. Dux Graecorum clarior Duce Romanorum fuit [1].
Aliud factum est. Di Romanorum venerunt ad proelium de sole ad Graecos necandos[2]. Totus exercitus Graecorum deletus est in pauco temporis.
Exercito Graeco victo[3], dux Romanorum laetissimus fortunatissimusque fuit, et, lacrimans[4], sacrificium de sanguine feminae captae bibit..
Thanks again, Adrianus and Benissimus for helping me out, and to anybody else who might have something to add. I really appreciate it.
Gratias vobis ago, Adriane et Benissimus et Thesaure!
Valete!
Last edited by Quis ut Deus on Tue Dec 15, 2009 3:08 pm, edited 3 times in total.
- thesaurus
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 1012
- Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2006 9:44 pm
Re: Redux
It's better, but errors have crept in./Melior est, sed etiam nunc menda hic et illic serpunt.Quis ut Deus wrote: DIES QUAM LAETISSIMUS
Olim Romani cum Graecis bellum gesserunt. Proelia multa fuerunt. Denique prolieum ultimum in agro ad Romam sub sole pugnatum est.
Ab initio, exercitum Graecorum exercitus Romanorum oppugnavit. Copiae Graecorum interfecerunt multos hostes. Dux Graecorum praestiti. Dux Graecorum clarior Duce Romanorum fuit [1].
Aliud factum est. Di Romanorum venerunt ad proelium de sole ad Graecos necandum[2]. Totus exercitus Graecorum deletus est in pauco tempore.
Exercito Graeco victo[3], dux Romanorum laetissimus fortunatissimusque fuit, et, lacrimans[4], sacrificium de sanguine feminae captae bibit..
prolieum = proelium
praestiti = praestitit
ad Graecos necandum = ad Graecos necandos (noted earlier/prius notatum)
in pauco tempore = in pauco temporis (lit. "in a little of time")
Finis nova acrior est, sed in has res explicandas idonea.
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
-
- Textkit Member
- Posts: 166
- Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 8:46 pm
Confused about
"necandos" vs. "necandum"
I thought the gerund could be used to express purpose.
For example, in Wheelock Chapter 39:
Athenas iit ad vivendum bene. | He went to Athens to live well.
In D'Ooge, Lesson LXXI, Section 405:
Misit equites ad insequendum. | He sent horsemen to pursue (He sent horsemen in pursuit).
In D'Ooge, Lesson LXXI, Section 407:
Ad audiendum venerunt. | They came to hear.
So, I'm confused as to why I can't say, "Venerunt ad Graecos necandum." " | "They came to kill the Greeks"
Or should I use a subjunctive clause instead? "Venerunt ut Graecos necarent"
Thanks again, guys, for your patience.
Patientes sunt!
I thought the gerund could be used to express purpose.
For example, in Wheelock Chapter 39:
Athenas iit ad vivendum bene. | He went to Athens to live well.
In D'Ooge, Lesson LXXI, Section 405:
Misit equites ad insequendum. | He sent horsemen to pursue (He sent horsemen in pursuit).
In D'Ooge, Lesson LXXI, Section 407:
Ad audiendum venerunt. | They came to hear.
So, I'm confused as to why I can't say, "Venerunt ad Graecos necandum." " | "They came to kill the Greeks"
Or should I use a subjunctive clause instead? "Venerunt ut Graecos necarent"
Thanks again, guys, for your patience.
Patientes sunt!
-
- Textkit Member
- Posts: 166
- Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 8:46 pm
Did some research...
Ok, according to this website, the GERUNDIVE + direct object is preferred to a gerund + direct object.
http://www.class.uidaho.edu/luschnig/La ... mar/10.htm
Ex: ad urbem capiendam "for capturing the city / to capture the city"
Which is why you guys prefer "ad Graecos necandos." The gerundive has to match in number and gender, while the gerund is used only for neuter pronouns and adjectives.
Man, this is a tough language! But I'm having a good time.
Thanks to all for your patience.
Gratis vobis ago!
http://www.class.uidaho.edu/luschnig/La ... mar/10.htm
Ex: ad urbem capiendam "for capturing the city / to capture the city"
Which is why you guys prefer "ad Graecos necandos." The gerundive has to match in number and gender, while the gerund is used only for neuter pronouns and adjectives.
Man, this is a tough language! But I'm having a good time.
Thanks to all for your patience.
Gratis vobis ago!
- thesaurus
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 1012
- Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2006 9:44 pm
Re: Did some research...
Yes, precisely. You've figured it out. In a nutshell, you can use the gerund to express purpose by itself, but if you want to include a direct object you need the gerundive. Don't let these grammatical terms confuse you: in practice, it just means making sure that the case of the verb form agrees with that of the object. "ad necandum" for the purpose of killing (gerund), "ad graecos necandos" for the purpose of killing Greeks (gerundive). // Ita sic. Bene inventus. Ut pauca dicam, gerundium aliquid propositum designat, sed si obiectum adhibere velis, necesse est gerundivo uti. Noli sollicitari ob labyrinthum nominum grammaticorum: significat solum casus verborum congruere debere.Quis ut Deus wrote: Which is why you guys prefer "ad Graecos necandos." The gerundive has to match in number and gender, while the gerund is used only for neuter pronouns and adjectives.
Man, this is a tough language! But I'm having a good time.
It is a tough language, but it seems like you have surmounted the most difficult parts. Now you are just learning more vocabulary and ironing out the wrinkles.
// Scilicet difficilis est lingua latina, sed culmina scandisti: nunc verba discenda et nugae grammaticae sunt poliendae.
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
- Einhard
- Textkit Member
- Posts: 147
- Joined: Wed Apr 22, 2009 4:05 pm
- Location: Hibernia
Re: Will you take the time to check this little story I wrote?
Salve Quis et Quid,
I think it's an excellent idea to compose your own stories, or even single sentences, to test your grasp of grammar and the like. In relation to your story, I'd follow Benissimus in suggesting that you change the perfect gesserunt in Olim Romani cum Graecis bellum gesserunt to the imperfect "gerebant". The latter indicates an event or events which took place over an extended period of time, whereas the perfect deals with more circumscribed actions. Thus the war itself could be rendered in the imperfect as it took place over weeks or months, while a single battle could be placed in the perfect.
I think it's an excellent idea to compose your own stories, or even single sentences, to test your grasp of grammar and the like. In relation to your story, I'd follow Benissimus in suggesting that you change the perfect gesserunt in Olim Romani cum Graecis bellum gesserunt to the imperfect "gerebant". The latter indicates an event or events which took place over an extended period of time, whereas the perfect deals with more circumscribed actions. Thus the war itself could be rendered in the imperfect as it took place over weeks or months, while a single battle could be placed in the perfect.
-
- Textkit Member
- Posts: 166
- Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 8:46 pm
Thanks to all of you!
Salvete Adriane, Thesaure, Einhard, et Benissime!
Gratias vobis ago!
It is truly an honor to have you guys helping me.
Let me give you all some background on my desire to learn Latin.
Ten years when i was in college, I wanted to study Latin.I studied History (secondary focus on Ancient Rome) and I wanted to be able to study the primary sources in Latin. I studied a year of Spanish and half a year of German, but I never got around to being able to study Latin because of financial consraints. In other words, I had to graduate and get a job!
But, about a year and a half ago, I decided to give it a shot. I picked up Wheelock and I haven't stopped since. I've downloaded most of the materials from this site as well.
And having you all as a resource to fall back on as I grow in the langauge is a blessing indeed. I really feel that in four years I'll be able to read whatever I want in Latin.
Valete omnes!
Gratias vobis ago!
It is truly an honor to have you guys helping me.
Let me give you all some background on my desire to learn Latin.
Ten years when i was in college, I wanted to study Latin.I studied History (secondary focus on Ancient Rome) and I wanted to be able to study the primary sources in Latin. I studied a year of Spanish and half a year of German, but I never got around to being able to study Latin because of financial consraints. In other words, I had to graduate and get a job!
But, about a year and a half ago, I decided to give it a shot. I picked up Wheelock and I haven't stopped since. I've downloaded most of the materials from this site as well.
And having you all as a resource to fall back on as I grow in the langauge is a blessing indeed. I really feel that in four years I'll be able to read whatever I want in Latin.
Valete omnes!
-
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 3270
- Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 9:45 pm
Re: Will you take the time to check this little story I wrote?
I thought I had said that earlier. // Nonnè similiter iam dixi?benissimus wrote:differo abs te, adriane, nam ager non romae esse debet, nisi fallor, sed esse prope romam puto.
That is to say, I think "ad romam" is correct, because I assume you are not talking about a field in the city of Rome (which would call for the locative), but rather a field near or "at the foot of" Rome, in which case it is ok to use ad+accusative if the noun has a locative.
There's nothing wrong with "bellum gesserunt". Would you really say "Olim Romani bellum gerebant in quo multa proelia fuerunt cuius ultimum ad Romam pugnatum est" before "Olim Romani bellum gesserunt in quo multa proelia fuerunt cuius ultimum ad Romam pugnatum est"?
Quid est cum "bellum gesserunt"? Benè licet. Dicasne verùm hoc: "Olim Romani bellum gerebant in quo multa proelia fuerunt cuius ultimum ad Romam pugnatum est"; et hoc mittas: "Olim Romani bellum gesserunt in quo multa proelia fuerunt cuius ultimum ad Romam pugnatum est"?
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.
-
- Textkit Neophyte
- Posts: 9
- Joined: Sat Aug 30, 2008 12:30 am
- Location: Australia
Re: Will you take the time to check this little story I wrote?
Hey Quis ut Deus, exercitus is a 4th declension noun and so I believe "exercito Graeco victo" should read "exercitu Graeco victo".
-
- Textkit Neophyte
- Posts: 43
- Joined: Wed Feb 27, 2008 4:07 am
- Location: Canada
Re: Will you take the time to check this little story I wrote?
I'd prefer quorum over cuius. Although yours is also correct, it just seems like making the relative pronoun stand for the battles gives the sentence a better progression than again referencing the war. I also think it relates better to the ultimum ... pugnatum.adrianus wrote:Olim Romani bellum gerebant in quo multa proelia fuerunt cuius ultimum ad Romam pugnatum est
Once upon a time the Romans were waging a war, in which there were many battles, of which [battles] the greatest/last was fought near Rome.
-
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 3270
- Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 9:45 pm
Re: Will you take the time to check this little story I wrote?
Thanks, Bretonus. I now also prefer your "quorum" version.
Gratias, Bretone, tibi ago. Et ego cogitans id quod per "quorum" scripsisti praefero.
Gratias, Bretone, tibi ago. Et ego cogitans id quod per "quorum" scripsisti praefero.
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.