Confirm subjunctive sentences

Here you can discuss all things Latin. Use this board to ask questions about grammar, discuss learning strategies, get help with a difficult passage of Latin, and more.
Post Reply
caeruleus
Textkit Neophyte
Posts: 24
Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2003 1:08 am
Location: U.S.A.
Contact:

Confirm subjunctive sentences

Post by caeruleus » Tue Sep 06, 2005 4:56 am

Forum:

I'd like to have these sentences in the present subjunctive confirmed for correctness. Thanks!:

1. Fortiter pugnemus
--Let us fight bravely.

2. Ne Fugiamus
--Let us not flee.

3. Statim ad castra redeant
--Let them at once return to the camp.

4. Amemus patriam; Pareamus senatui (Here the verb takes the dative singular, 4th declension)
--Let us love our country; Let us obey the senate.

5. Pueri diligenter laborent.
--Let the children work hard.
[face=Verdana][/face]

User avatar
Episcopus
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 2563
Joined: Sat Jun 14, 2003 8:57 pm

Post by Episcopus » Tue Sep 06, 2005 11:57 am

evening, C.

note that 'pueri' is wont to mean 'boys', whilst 'liberi' might be a better choice for 'children'

you look like you are ready for more complex sentences, as yours were refreshingly 1/canine.
phpbb

User avatar
nostos
Textkit Enthusiast
Posts: 375
Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2005 12:30 am
Location: Montréal, QC

Post by nostos » Tue Sep 06, 2005 4:58 pm

At first E I was afraid of you, with your aggressive knowledge of how to speak it well and your dismissive commentary on and about everyone else, but it seems as though you really do like helping (from this response and others that you've posted recently). And after the initial terror evanesced, I was discriminating enough to know that the people whom you berate are well-known to you (and it's a loving kind of scold), be it from real life or textkit.

I'm relatively terrorised again that you'll take this the wrong way and metaphorically club me, repeatedly, and mostly in a language that I'm nowhere near understanding; in this area, I can't bludgeon back.
Last edited by nostos on Tue Sep 06, 2005 5:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
William
Textkit Fan
Posts: 285
Joined: Sat Aug 21, 2004 10:16 pm
Location: Kearny, NJ 07032 • Die vereinigten Staaten

Post by William » Tue Sep 06, 2005 5:34 pm

Nostos, just offer him some quality polyurethane bouncy balls for his collection and he'll forgive anything you say.

WB

User avatar
benissimus
Global Moderator
Posts: 2733
Joined: Mon May 12, 2003 4:32 am
Location: Berkeley, California
Contact:

Post by benissimus » Wed Sep 07, 2005 2:19 am

There is really nothing to fear of him. He is full of poffy woffies and afraid of girls! Just kidding.

Flawless subjunctives, caeruleus. Episcopus surely loves the subjunctive.
flebile nescio quid queritur lyra, flebile lingua murmurat exanimis, respondent flebile ripae

User avatar
Episcopus
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 2563
Joined: Sat Jun 14, 2003 8:57 pm

Post by Episcopus » Wed Sep 07, 2005 3:40 pm

Temet quod esm gratior irascere!

Neque vero negarem me quadam globulorum causa fortitudinis inopiae semper abstitisse, sed tantum unam vereor; reliquas enim flocci non facit Episcopus ille.
phpbb

adz000
Textkit Member
Posts: 162
Joined: Mon May 19, 2003 9:45 pm
Location: Cantabrigiae Massachusettensium
Contact:

Post by adz000 » Wed Sep 07, 2005 6:34 pm

Another reason for preferring liberi: under the Principate pueri very often refers to one's household slaves.

User avatar
Episcopus
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 2563
Joined: Sat Jun 14, 2003 8:57 pm

Post by Episcopus » Wed Sep 07, 2005 8:27 pm

adz is indeed a man with some knowledge!
phpbb

User avatar
nostos
Textkit Enthusiast
Posts: 375
Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2005 12:30 am
Location: Montréal, QC

Post by nostos » Wed Sep 07, 2005 9:10 pm

te relinquere non volo Episcope; bene quae tibi dixi lege. cur mihi floccos non facere Episcopum illum dixisti? me vulneras, E. :P

From what I half-got, that’s about all the very broken Latin with which I’m going to try to respond; hopefully the point came through.

My translation, thanks in large part to the Oxford minidictionary (I can see the grimace now, but I can’t afford the big one yet; and I have my Latin/Spanish dictionary, much bigger and more detailed, on the way):

He fears that which (because?) you are kinder to make angry (. . . ?)

Nor in truth might I deny that I always stood at a certain distance because of the want of courage of that little tightly-packed throng; . . . ? I am respected; you may disregard [me], truly that Episcopus doesn’t consider it of the least importance.

I’d much rather have the English translation from you, however. I now brace for my next batch of beating :shock:

User avatar
Episcopus
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 2563
Joined: Sat Jun 14, 2003 8:57 pm

Post by Episcopus » Wed Sep 07, 2005 9:51 pm

Episcopus wrote:Temet quod esm gratior irascere!

Neque vero negarem me quadam globulorum causa fortitudinis inopiae semper abstitisse, sed tantum unam vereor; reliquas enim flocci non facit Episcopus ille.
The present stem of sum is es-; and the personal ending 1st person singular is, as you know, -m. I was naughty. es+m esm -> sum

gratus - pleasing, acceptable, popular etc - gratior here - more popular

irascor - irascere 2nd person present, remember irasci is deponent!

ablative of comparison te
-met added on to personal pronouns intensive

Than you because I am more popular you get angry

---

And I will not deny that I, devoid of testicular fortitude, have always stood away from a certain female, but I only fear one - for the rest I care not.

---

I respect you for reading! Most think that I do not make sense! Sorry about the esm that was whiteoctaves mor!
phpbb

User avatar
nostos
Textkit Enthusiast
Posts: 375
Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2005 12:30 am
Location: Montréal, QC

Post by nostos » Wed Sep 07, 2005 10:01 pm

Thanks! :D

Post Reply