Infern0 wrote:"Mea puellae formam portis dat"
I translated the sentence as "My girl gives form/shape/beauty to the gates," but that sounds funny to me? Is this translation correct? I believe "portis" is the plural dative? "Formam" is the singular accusative?
furrykef wrote:Very strange sentence, I think. I don't think it does much good to translate such things unless either it appears in a text you're reading or there is some cultural context that it can shed light upon.
Infern0 wrote:is it declined as "antīquus" or "antīqus"?
Also, I was practicing the translation exercises in Chapter 3 of Wheelock's (page 21) and had a question for the translation of #10. The English sentence is "We see great fortune in your daugthers' lives, my friend." The translation that I worked out is as follows: "Hodiē fortunam magnam in vītīs fīlīae tuae vidēmus, amīcus meus."
I got a bit confused on which case to use for some of the nouns. I'm pretty sure "great fortune" is the accusative because its the direct object. "In your daughters' lives" can be rewritten as "in the lives of your daughters" in which case "daughters" would be genitive and "lives" would be in the ablative?
Oh, and for #11 of the same page, The English sentence is "He always gives my daughters and sons roses." My question is do we translate my daughters and sons using a single phrase? So the translation would be "Filiīs meīs rosās semper dat?" Is there a need to distinguish daughters from sons? In this case, the declension would be the same for both, but theoretically, if the declensions were different, do we need to translate both separately? Or is it like Spanish, where the masculine term would also translate as both male and female together?
furrykef wrote:Infern0 wrote:Also, I was practicing the translation exercises in Chapter 3 of Wheelock's (page 21) and had a question for the translation of #10. The English sentence is "We see great fortune in your daugthers' lives, my friend." The translation that I worked out is as follows: "Hodiē fortunam magnam in vītīs fīlīae tuae vidēmus, amīcus meus."
Hodiē magnam fortūnam in vītārum fīliārum tuārum vidēmus, amīce mī.
Infern0 wrote:I'm working on a translation and I need some clarification on word order. I know there isn't a definitive word order for Latin, but I was wondering if my translation would be ok. The English is "The rumors ought to warn the farmers in my fatherland"
I translated it as: "Famae agricolās in patriā meā monēre debent."
Infern0 wrote:I also wasn't sure if the ablative case is correct for "patriā meā."
Infern0 wrote:It bothers me a bit that word order can be a bit arbitrary (but that could be because im just a bit OCD lol).
furrykef wrote:Another rule that's good to know is that adjectives generally come after the noun (much as in Spanish, etc.), except for adjectives of size, beauty, quantity, and a few other things, which typically precede. Likewise, genitives almost always come after the noun they modify... but only "almost".
Infern0 wrote:English: "The danger to the good son is small."
My Latin Translation: "Perīculum ad fīlium bonum est parvum"
I wasn't exactly sure if I should use the accusative or the ablative case here. So far, we've mostly used the ablative with prepositional phrases, but Wheelock says that the accusative is often used with preposition "to." I'm also not sure if "ab" is the correct word to use in this sentence as well.
Infern0 wrote:English: "The evil war terrifies many people."
My Latin Translation: "Bellum malum multum populum terret."
Infern0 wrote:Since Latin word order is slightly arbitrary, does one just look at context in a case like this where you can take the sentence different ways?
Infern0 wrote:English: "The greedy men ought to love leisure."
My Latin Translation: "Virī avāvī ōtium amāre debent."
Latin: Virī stultī culpāre nōn possumus; magnus numerus sānum erant.
I put it in the accusative because I think men would be a direct object in this situation, right?
victoriaw wrote:Do you also know which other languages besides Latin and Slovenian have cases like nominative, accusative, dative, genitive?
Users browsing this forum: Jandar and 62 guests