Textkit Logo

Is this sentence correct?

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

Is this sentence correct?

Postby Quis ut Deus » Fri Mar 19, 2010 9:50 pm

I was reading this in an article on Nuntii Latini, "De flumine Gange purgando."

The sentence is:

Ganges, flumen Indiae nobilissimum, venenis industrialibus male infectus est."

If "flumen" is neuter, wouldn't it be "infectum est?"
Quis ut Deus
Textkit Member
 
Posts: 166
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 8:46 pm

Re: Is this sentence correct?

Postby Quis ut Deus » Fri Mar 19, 2010 10:24 pm

Or, if rivers are masculine, could they have used "fluvius" instead of "flumen?"

I guess my question is, does the word in apposition with the subject have to match in gender?
Quis ut Deus
Textkit Member
 
Posts: 166
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 8:46 pm

Re: Is this sentence correct?

Postby adrianus » Fri Mar 19, 2010 10:38 pm

The name Ganges -is, the river in India, is masculine in Latin.
Nomen Gangis, fluvii Indiae, latinè masculini generis est.

I guess my question is, does the word in apposition with the subject have to match in gender?

Not at all // Minimè.
Last edited by adrianus on Fri Mar 19, 2010 10:42 pm, edited 2 times in total.
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: 3252
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 9:45 pm

Re: Is this sentence correct?

Postby Quis ut Deus » Fri Mar 19, 2010 10:40 pm

Ok, that clears it up!

Vale, Adriane!
Quis ut Deus
Textkit Member
 
Posts: 166
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 8:46 pm

Re: Is this sentence correct?

Postby Imber Ranae » Fri Mar 19, 2010 10:55 pm

Quis ut Deus wrote:I was reading this in an article on Nuntii Latini, "De flumine Gange purgando."

The sentence is:

Ganges, flumen Indiae nobilissimum, venenis industrialibus male infectus est."

If "flumen" is neuter, wouldn't it be "infectum est?"


It agrees with Ganges, which is masculine like most names of rivers.

Quis ut Deus wrote:Or, if rivers are masculine, could they have used "fluvius" instead of "flumen?"


Yes, and likewise amnis, but both those words are much less common than flumen in classical prose.

Quis ut Deus wrote:I guess my question is, does the word in apposition with the subject have to match in gender?


No. It often will when possible, as with e.g. victrices Athenae "victorious Athens" and currus victor "the victory chariot". But there's no reason to go out of the way to make the word for "river" match gender with each river's name.
Last edited by Imber Ranae on Sat Mar 20, 2010 1:19 am, edited 1 time in total.
Ex mala malo
bono malo uesci
quam ex bona malo
malo malo malo.
Imber Ranae
Textkit Member
 
Posts: 190
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2009 5:06 am

Re: Is this sentence correct?

Postby adrianus » Fri Mar 19, 2010 11:20 pm

Here's another one. // Ecce aliud problema.

Nutkin is a squirrel and he's male (in imagined real life!) but Nutkin = Little Nut = Nucula in Latin (as I believe) which is feminine as a common noun. Is "he" now "she" in Latin for agreement purposes of adjectives and pronouns with his name as a proper noun? Or do we call him Nuculus (an invented name) or even "Nucula Bonus" (Nutkin, the Good (male squirrel))?

Nucula est sciurus et masculini generis (in vitâ verâ ut imaginata!) at nomen proprium anglicè Nutkin latinè nucula vertitur (nisi fallor), quod nomen commune feminini generis est. Estne nunc feminini generis in quo attinet ad concordiam adjectivorum pronominumque cum nomine proprio ei? Vel vocamusne eum Nunculum (nomen proprium fictum) vel Nuculam Bonum quidem?
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: 3252
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 9:45 pm

Re: Is this sentence correct?

Postby Imber Ranae » Sat Mar 20, 2010 1:30 am

adrianus wrote:Here's another one. // Ecce aliud problema.

Nutkin is a squirrel and he's male (in imagined real life!) but Nutkin = Little Nut = Nucula in Latin (as I believe) which is feminine as a common noun. Is "he" now "she" in Latin for agreement purposes of adjectives and pronouns with his name as a proper noun? Or do we call him Nuculus (an invented name) or even "Nucula Bonus" (Nutkin, the Good (male squirrel))?

Nucula est sciurus et masculini generis (in vitâ verâ ut imaginata!) at nomen proprium anglicè Nutkin latinè nucula vertitur (nisi fallor), quod nomen commune feminini generis est. Estne nunc feminini generis in quo attinet ad concordiam adjectivorum pronominumque cum nomine proprio ei? Vel vocamusne eum Nunculum (nomen proprium fictum) vel Nuculam Bonum quidem?


Going by the example of Scaevola "Little Lefty", I'd say to keep with Nucula but have any adjective agree with the natural gender of whichever Nutkin you happen to be talking about (Nucula bonus in this case).
Ex mala malo
bono malo uesci
quam ex bona malo
malo malo malo.
Imber Ranae
Textkit Member
 
Posts: 190
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2009 5:06 am

Re: Is this sentence correct?

Postby adrianus » Sat Mar 20, 2010 2:44 am

Scaevola is masculine. Scaevola and nucula are both first declension. What's the relevance to the problem, Imber Ranae? I don't get it.

Scaevola nomen masculini generis est. Et scaevola et nucula primae declinationis sunt. Quomodo, Imber Ranae, id ad rem pertinet? Id non intellego.
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: 3252
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 9:45 pm

Re: Is this sentence correct?

Postby Imber Ranae » Sat Mar 20, 2010 3:20 am

Unless I'm mistaken, the origin of the name Scaevola is scaevola manus (similar to dextra often standing for dextra manus), meaning it was originally a feminine adjective. It only got its masculine designation when it became the nickname of a man, and then eventually the cognomen of his descendants. So Nucula could work on the same basis, no?

ETA: Vide footnote in § 42 of Allen & Greenough.
Ex mala malo
bono malo uesci
quam ex bona malo
malo malo malo.
Imber Ranae
Textkit Member
 
Posts: 190
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2009 5:06 am

Re: Is this sentence correct?

Postby adrianus » Sat Mar 20, 2010 3:52 am

Maybe this is a better way of asking the question: in Latin can we freely convert common nouns into proper nouns and, if so, can gender become epicene?
Fortassè quaestio ità meliùs ponatur: licetne vertere libenter latinè nomina communia in propria? Quinimmò si licet, potestne genus epicoenum fieri?

That's a neat way of thinking about it, Imber Ranae. You reckon you can, on the basis of that example.
Nec quicquam magis elegans tuum responsum, Imber Ranae. Fieri potest, ut putas, secundum exemplum datum.
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: 3252
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 9:45 pm

Re: Is this sentence correct?

Postby Imber Ranae » Sat Mar 20, 2010 4:02 am

Apparently Nucula is already a Roman name.

Is this merely a felicitous coincidence, Adrianus, or did you know all along? :wink:
Ex mala malo
bono malo uesci
quam ex bona malo
malo malo malo.
Imber Ranae
Textkit Member
 
Posts: 190
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2009 5:06 am

Re: Is this sentence correct?

Postby adrianus » Sat Mar 20, 2010 4:11 am

A felicitous coincidence. And an embarrassment, that I didn't see it in L&S!
Concursus felix est. Simul impedimentum, me id apud L&S non animadvertisse!
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: 3252
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 9:45 pm


Return to Learning Latin

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google Adsense [Bot] and 56 guests