Ask through where? "per quem locum?"

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
Jim Bryan
Textkit Neophyte
Posts: 35
Joined: Mon Dec 20, 2010 7:29 am
Location: Australia

Ask through where? "per quem locum?"

Post by Jim Bryan » Wed Nov 28, 2018 6:44 am

How do you ask "through where?"
e. g. Rufus per forum cucurrit.
Per quem locum Rufus cucurrit? Is this the best way to ask "through where?"

per quem in Ecclesiastical Latin means "by whom" "through whom". Is that also classical?

per quid?
per quod?

Thank you
Jim (Jacobulus)

Nesrad
Textkit Fan
Posts: 315
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 1:10 pm

Re: Ask through where? "per quem locum?"

Post by Nesrad » Wed Nov 28, 2018 2:15 pm

Qua cuccurit?

anphph
Textkit Enthusiast
Posts: 577
Joined: Fri Nov 09, 2007 1:35 am

Re: Ask through where? "per quem locum?"

Post by anphph » Wed Nov 28, 2018 4:22 pm

Qua being an adverbial survival standing for Qua via? In the ablative.

anphph
Textkit Enthusiast
Posts: 577
Joined: Fri Nov 09, 2007 1:35 am

Re: Ask through where? "per quem locum?"

Post by anphph » Wed Nov 28, 2018 4:23 pm

Qua being an adverbial survival standing for Qua via? In the ablative.

The other adverbs are also exstant:

Hac,
Istac,
Illac

User avatar
Barry Hofstetter
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 1043
Joined: Thu Aug 15, 2013 12:22 pm

Re: Ask through where? "per quem locum?"

Post by Barry Hofstetter » Wed Nov 28, 2018 7:34 pm

anphph wrote:
Wed Nov 28, 2018 4:23 pm
Qua being an adverbial survival standing for Qua via? In the ablative.

The other adverbs are also exstant:
It's generally only people who know some Latin who make this particular spelling error... I was once grading a paper for a theology class in which the student consistently spelled "expect" "exspect." When I asked her if she had ever studied Latin, she said "4 years in high school. How did you know?" :shock: :D
N.E. Barry Hofstetter
The Jack M. Barrack Hebrew Academy
καὶ σὺ τὸ σὸν ποιήσεις κἀγὼ τὸ ἐμόν. ἆρον τὸ σὸν καὶ ὕπαγε.

anphph
Textkit Enthusiast
Posts: 577
Joined: Fri Nov 09, 2007 1:35 am

Re: Ask through where? "per quem locum?"

Post by anphph » Wed Nov 28, 2018 7:57 pm

Barry Hofstetter wrote:
Wed Nov 28, 2018 7:34 pm
anphph wrote:
Wed Nov 28, 2018 4:23 pm
Qua being an adverbial survival standing for Qua via? In the ablative.

The other adverbs are also exstant:
It's generally only people who know some Latin who make this particular spelling error... I was once grading a paper for a theology class in which the student consistently spelled "expect" "exspect." When I asked her if she had ever studied Latin, she said "4 years in high school. How did you know?" :shock: :D
Hah, my muscle memory was apparently wiser than I was. I typed extant, looked back at it, and fixed it into a mistake. Thanks. Concerning the possible harmful consequences that knowing Latin can have on English, Francis Bacon comes to mind, "obiter libatum a Deo abducit, penitus exaustum reducit ad eundem."

Still on that subject, though, one of Coluccius Salutati's "ideas" for classicizing Latin -- especially as of against Petrarch -- was to recover those long-gone consonants, replacing expecto and existo etc with exspecto and exsisto, which, to be frank, and pace mea, do seem a bit pedantic now that I think of it.
Last edited by anphph on Wed Nov 28, 2018 10:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.

mwh
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 3253
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 2:34 am

Re: Ask through where? "per quem locum?"

Post by mwh » Wed Nov 28, 2018 10:32 pm

Worse than pedantic, phonologically false. But I hope you’ll share more of your humanistic knowledge.

anphph
Textkit Enthusiast
Posts: 577
Joined: Fri Nov 09, 2007 1:35 am

Re: Ask through where? "per quem locum?"

Post by anphph » Thu Nov 29, 2018 1:51 am

mwh wrote:
Wed Nov 28, 2018 10:32 pm
phonologically false

Right, but etymologically correct, which is often a concern for people interested in confirming the pedigree of the language they are using. Portuguese is at the moment suffering the aftershock of an orthographic agreement that got rid of a significant number of "etymological consonants" (such as the p in baptisma) as we call them, and a large chunk of the cultural elite is very much against it for historical reasons, though they have long ceased to be phonologically relevant. Unlike in English or French, the rest of the language is (excluding these) is quite close to being read phonetically, which pressured countries to just go with "full phonetical". We'll see how it turns out.

Concerning Humanist spelling, and just to give a few examples which you likely already know but maybe others don't, you do often see "false etymologies", such as fēmina being written fœmina (the ē being falsely traced back to fœtus), or, a particularly nice one, lylium for lilium, since a flower of that kind had to have a Greek pedigree, and what is there Greeker than the letter y? (the word does come from Greek, but the spelling is λείριον)

mwh
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 3253
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 2:34 am

Re: Ask through where? "per quem locum?"

Post by mwh » Thu Nov 29, 2018 3:21 am

Interesting, Miguel, thanks. I like the way Italian does it myself—none of this “etymological” nonsense, just spell it as it sounds and say it as it’s spelled. Impossible in English of course, and would be barbaric in French (thanks to the Académie francaise?) though I gather there have been a few (very few) changes in that direction. The Romans themselves quite often got their own etymologies wrong and spelled accordingly. Exsul, anyone? And now exscuse me while I exspectorate.

Post Reply