Ablative case...

Beati Pauperes · Post by **Beati Pauperes** » Sun Apr 24, 2005 10:26 pm

Here is the explication the first chapter of "Beginner's Latin" gave me, but still I do not understand it...

Ablative case: 'with', 'in' used (not always) with prepositions (e.g. cum, in)

What does exactly that means? I tried to translate it to English, but it appears that English does not have such case...

Could someone explain it to me???

Thanks!!! I would really appreciate it

JLatin1 · Post by **JLatin1** » Sun Apr 24, 2005 11:17 pm

Certain Latin prepositions only take the ablative case. I think that in English it is the object of the prepositions. I posted some basic Latin stuff on my website here:
http://languagetools.tripod.com

Note: Not commercial or anything, just so that I can share what I've learned.

EDIT: Please tell me if anything on the site can be improved or needs corrections.

Beati Pauperes · Post by **Beati Pauperes** » Sun Apr 24, 2005 11:28 pm

Thanks JLatin1!!!

I can't tell any errors but I think is good. I understood the ablative chart!!!

May I print it? That way I can study without having to depend on my computer...

Thanks, I will wait for your answer to print it...

JLatin1 · Post by **JLatin1** » Sun Apr 24, 2005 11:34 pm

Beati Pauperes wrote:Thanks JLatin1!!!

I can't tell any errors but I think is good. I understood the ablative chart!!!

May I print it? That way I can study without having to depend on my computer...

Thanks, I will wait for your answer to print it...

Please print it, that's the whole purpose of the website. If you want me to email you the word document let me know. (PM)

Beati Pauperes · Post by **Beati Pauperes** » Sun Apr 24, 2005 11:48 pm

Thanks JLatin1!!!

Could you e-mail me the word document?? I would really appreciate it...

benissimus · Post by **benissimus** » Mon Apr 25, 2005 2:08 am

2nd decl acc plur neut should be "a", not "ibus". 3rd decl nom plur neut should be "a", not "as". 5th decl gen plur is "erum", not "eum". 5th decl gen and dat sing may contain a long or short e, depending on the word. you also forgot macrons in several places in the declension tables, which is not that important, but it might be misleading since you marked them in a lot of places and it draws a false distinction. I suspect most of these things are just typos

how can the ablative be an indirect object? in addition to the ablative, the accusative can also be the object of certain prepositions. there are other roles for the other cases, but you have their main functions there.

active is not a "tense" but a "mood". the ending "isti" is long on the last, not the first syllable (the same goes for "istis"). you may want to add to your english translations of the imperfect "kept playing".

the third conjugation stem vowel is really an intermediate vowel in origin and surfaces mostly as "i", not "e" (there is not a single e in the entire present tense).

JLatin1 · Post by **JLatin1** » Mon Apr 25, 2005 5:25 am

benissimus wrote:2nd decl acc plur neut should be "a", not "ibus". 3rd decl nom plur neut should be "a", not "as". 5th decl gen plur is "erum", not "eum". 5th decl gen and dat sing may contain a long or short e, depending on the word. you also forgot macrons in several places in the declension tables, which is not important that important, but it might be misleading since you marked them in a lot of places and it draws a false distinction. I suspect most of these things are just typos

how can the ablative be an indirect object? in addition to the ablative, the accusative can also be the object of certain prepositions. there are other roles for the other cases, but you have their main functions there.

active is not a "tense" but a "mood". the ending "isti" is long on the last, not the first syllable (the same goes for "istis"). you may want to add to your english translations of the imperfect "kept playing".

the third conjugation stem vowel is really an intermediate vowel in origin and surfaces mostly as "i", not "e" (there is not a single e in the entire present tense).

I should have added a note to my work that it was tentative and not error free. When I find the time, I'll add your corrections to my work. I used the macrons as delineated in my Latin book, but I'll also post a disclaimer about the macrons in my work.

Thanks, kind benissimus, sir,
-Jonathan

JLatin1 · Post by **JLatin1** » Mon Apr 25, 2005 4:18 pm

I added your corrections, but haven't yet uploaded them to my website. I'll double-check the macrons later. In my book, while most words in the third conjugation have the "i" stem, the present infinitive form has an "e".

Aurelia · Post by **Aurelia** » Tue Apr 26, 2005 3:57 am

I just remember it as "by, with, from, in, on, at"

Beati Pauperes · Post by **Beati Pauperes** » Thu Apr 28, 2005 2:41 am

I just remember it as "by, with, from, in, on, at"

Thanks Aurelia!! I think that is an easy way

JLatin1 · Post by **JLatin1** » Sat Apr 30, 2005 7:59 pm

Here's a nifty way to remember: SID SPACE: sub, in, de, sine. pro, ab/a, cum, e/ex.

Deses · Post by **Deses** » Sat Apr 30, 2005 8:23 pm

JLatin1 wrote:Here's a nifty way to remember: SID SPACE: sub, in, de, sine. pro, ab/a, cum, e/ex.

How about something like SUB IN THE SINus, PRO-ABortion CUN-Eiform?

whiteoctave · Post by **whiteoctave** » Sat Apr 30, 2005 8:52 pm

I tend to prefer the mnemonic "de, sine, pro, ab/a, cum, e/ex, tenus, prae, absque, coram and palam always, and in, sub, subter and super sometimes, take the ablative."

~D

yadfothgildloc · Post by **yadfothgildloc** » Sat Apr 30, 2005 9:56 pm

whiteoctave wrote:I tend to prefer the mnemonic "de, sine, pro, ab/a, cum, e/ex, tenus, prae, absque, coram and palam always, and in, sub, subter and super sometimes, take the ablative."

~D

Is there a melody with that? Or just the line? (It just doesn't seem very mnemonic to me...)

Deccius · Post by **Deccius** » Sat Apr 30, 2005 10:04 pm

I tend to prefer the mnemonic "de, sine, pro, ab/a, cum, e/ex, tenus, prae, absque, coram and palam always, and in, sub, subter and super sometimes, take the ablative."

~D

Do I detect sarcasm?