In Orberg LLPSI he has: Fortuna adversa amicis fidendum non est.
I can't figure out the syntax and grammar - or meaning. Fidendum is gerundive right?
So it's something like : adverse fortune has no friends??
Fortuna adversa amicis fidendum non est.
-
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 1341
- Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 5:15 am
-
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 3270
- Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 9:45 pm
Re: Fortuna adversa amicis fidendum non set.
Fortunâ adversâ = in [times of]/with adverse fortune
fidendum non est = [impersonally/impersonaliter] there should not be placed trust in/one should not trust in... [this verb takes a dative and the gerundive can keep this case for its object // hoc verbum dativo casui servit quo in casu gerundivum objectum tenere potest].
fidendum non est = [impersonally/impersonaliter] there should not be placed trust in/one should not trust in... [this verb takes a dative and the gerundive can keep this case for its object // hoc verbum dativo casui servit quo in casu gerundivum objectum tenere potest].
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 Zealot
- Posts: 1341
- Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 5:15 am
Re: Fortuna adversa amicis fidendum non set.
Adrianus
Gratias tibi ago.
Paul
Gratias tibi ago.
Paul
-
- Textkit Neophyte
- Posts: 79
- Joined: Wed Aug 24, 2011 12:08 am
Re: Fortuna adversa amicis fidendum non set.
Shouldn't that be fidenda, to agree with fortuna?
-
- Textkit Fan
- Posts: 226
- Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2010 6:50 pm
Re: Fortuna adversa amicis fidendum non set.
Fortuna is ablative, not the subject. The subject is impersonal.
-
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 1341
- Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 5:15 am
Re: Fortuna adversa amicis fidendum non est.
Adrianus, isn't an alternative explanation that 'fidendum' doesn't take dative but that 'amicis' is dative as it is an agent (is this the same thing?). So that it means: in times of adverse fortune friends are not trustworthy. 'amicis' - dative - agent.?
Orberg explains this in notes to the previous chapter: 'With the gerundive, which is a passive form, the dative (not ab + abl) is used to denote the agent, i.e. the person by whom the action is to be performed: Quidquid dominus imperavit servo faciendum est.
Or is this (agent) only referring to cases where someone asks or orders someone else to do something...?
Orberg explains this in notes to the previous chapter: 'With the gerundive, which is a passive form, the dative (not ab + abl) is used to denote the agent, i.e. the person by whom the action is to be performed: Quidquid dominus imperavit servo faciendum est.
Or is this (agent) only referring to cases where someone asks or orders someone else to do something...?
-
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 3270
- Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 9:45 pm
Re: Fortuna adversa amicis fidendum non est.
The verb "fideo" DOES take the dative but, COINCIDENTALLY, that's the way gerundives work impersonally.
"Fido" verbum quidem dativo casui servit quod, casu, gerundivum impersonaliter facit.
"There/it should be [done] to a thing" = "A thing should be [done]"
Here the [indirect] object is the agent.
Hîc objectum [indirectum] est quod agit.
"Fido" verbum quidem dativo casui servit quod, casu, gerundivum impersonaliter facit.
"There/it should be [done] to a thing" = "A thing should be [done]"
Here the [indirect] object is the agent.
Hîc objectum [indirectum] est quod agit.
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 Zealot
- Posts: 1341
- Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 5:15 am
Re: Fortuna adversa amicis fidendum non est.
Adrianus,
Quando dixisti: 'fidendum non est = [impersonally/impersonaliter] ' Nonne ita neutrum 'fidendum' explicatur.
Paulus
Quando dixisti: 'fidendum non est = [impersonally/impersonaliter] ' Nonne ita neutrum 'fidendum' explicatur.
Paulus
-
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 3270
- Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 9:45 pm
Re: Fortuna adversa amicis fidendum non est.
It's neuter because it's impersonal, or vice versa, if you prefer.
Neutrius generis quod impersonale; vel vice versâ, si velis.
Neutrius generis quod impersonale; vel vice versâ, si velis.
A&G, §500.3, wrote:The neuter gerundive of both transitive and intransitive verbs may be used impersonally in the second periphrastic conjugation.
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.