Hi,
I started to learn Latin and trying to translate some easy passages. I want to ask an easy sentence to translate:
'Damocles, amicus Dionysii, divitias tyranni semper laudabat et dicebat Dionysium fortunae filium esse.'
I translated this sentence like that: Damocles, the friend of Dionysius, praised the riches of the tyrants and always said that the fortune of Dionysius is his son.
Is that correct? I believe it's not ... please help..
easy traslation
-
- Textkit Neophyte
- Posts: 4
- Joined: Thu Aug 26, 2004 7:01 pm
- Location: istanbul
- Contact:
-
- Textkit Enthusiast
- Posts: 394
- Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2002 6:29 pm
- Location: The Netherlands
Re: easy traslation
tyranni is gen.sing: so the riches of the tyrant. (it could also be nom.plu, but not here, beacuse there is a subject in the sentence already)cicada wrote:Hi,
I started to learn Latin and trying to translate some easy passages. I want to ask an easy sentence to translate:
'Damocles, amicus Dionysii, divitias tyranni semper laudabat et dicebat Dionysium fortunae filium esse.'
I translated this sentence like that: Damocles, the friend of Dionysius, praised the riches of the tyrants and always said that the fortune of Dionysius is his son.
Is that correct? I believe it's not ... please help..
Dionysium and filium are in the same case, acc.sing, so Dionysius is the son. Fortunae is gen.sing: so Dionysius is the son of fortune.
semper modifies laudabat: he always praised. He might have said what he said just once:).
So: Damocles, the friend of Dionysius, always praised the riches of the tyrant and said that Dionysius was the son of fortune.
Hope this helps,
Ingrid
-
- Textkit Fan
- Posts: 229
- Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2004 1:58 am
- Location: Montana
- Contact:
-
- Textkit Enthusiast
- Posts: 603
- Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2003 11:42 pm
- Location: Cambridge
-
- Textkit Enthusiast
- Posts: 400
- Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2004 12:27 am
- Location: Anc, AK, USA
-
- Textkit Fan
- Posts: 229
- Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2004 1:58 am
- Location: Montana
- Contact:
Well for someone just starting out, it's good to know the difference between perfect and imperfect tenses, is it not? if the author wanted a beginner to translate it "he praised" he would have put "laudavit" instead of "laudabat" and so on. Unless, of course, this was written by a native speaker, then forget what I just said.it should not be forgotten, however, A., that the imperfect can be rendered in about seven different ways, and here perhaps the past habitual 'he used to praise' etc. would be more appropriate than a single continual event in the past?
Once one gets more in depth one can start to explore the other ways the imperfect tense can be expressed. At least, that is just my opinion.
Aurelia
- benissimus
- Global Moderator
- Posts: 2733
- Joined: Mon May 12, 2003 4:32 am
- Location: Berkeley, California
- Contact:
I am not sure what book you are using, but there should be a thorough discussion of indirect statements. Classical Latin would never say "he said Dionysius was the son of fortune", it would say "he said Dionysius to be the son of fortune". This can be translated literally, but it becomes awkward most of the time to translate the infinitive. Thus, most of the time you should translate sentences like this as "he said that Dionysius was the son of fortune". This usually occurs with 'verbs of the head', that is verbs expressing feelings, thoughts, and sensations.classicalclarinet wrote:esse?
Shouldn't it be 'erat' if he 'was'?
I agree that it is a helpful distinction for beginners. However, I do not think it should be considered an error on the translator's behalf if he chooses to translate it differently. If someone becomes too attached to this method, he will undoubtedly learn the meaning of these sentences only after he has translated them and not be able to understand them in their true form.Aurelia wrote:Well for someone just starting out, it's good to know the difference between perfect and imperfect tenses, is it not? if the author wanted a beginner to translate it "he praised" he would have put "laudavit" instead of "laudabat" and so on. Unless, of course, this was written by a native speaker, then forget what I just said.
Once one gets more in depth one can start to explore the other ways the imperfect tense can be expressed. At least, that is just my opinion.
flebile nescio quid queritur lyra, flebile lingua murmurat exanimis, respondent flebile ripae
-
- Textkit Neophyte
- Posts: 4
- Joined: Thu Aug 26, 2004 7:01 pm
- Location: istanbul
- Contact: