EGO vs SUUS third person with HIC

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.
blutoonwithcarrotandnail
Textkit Fan
Posts: 263
Joined: Sat Jan 21, 2006 2:49 pm
Location: Bergenfield, NJ

EGO vs SUUS third person with HIC

Post by blutoonwithcarrotandnail » Thu May 28, 2009 3:08 am

HIC ILLE ISTE are sometimes used as third person pronouns for
he, she, it.

In the following sentence TRISTIS PATER SUM EGO

you can replace 'EGO' with HIC

however HIC is not third person. Shouldnt the correct
usage be

TRISTIS PATER SUM SUUS

that doesnt seem right

Thanks.
cuts like ice cream fast like a razor blade

spiphany
Textkit Enthusiast
Posts: 425
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2005 3:15 am
Location: Munich
Contact:

Re: EGO vs SUUS third person with HIC

Post by spiphany » Thu May 28, 2009 4:46 am

I'm afraid I don't follow you.

'Suus' is a possessive adjective and cannot be used as a pronoun.

You can use hic to replace a NOUN. You can also use it instead of is/ea/id. You can't use it as a replacement for "I", however. The sentence you gave would be like saying "That man am a father" -- doesn't make sense at all. You can say "Ille est pater", but meaning is different, the sentence no longer indicates that the SPEAKER is the father.

Okay, so why can you use hic or ille to mean "him"? Well, if you think about it, "that one" is roughly equivalent in meaning to "him". You're pointing out someone in general, but not specifying exactly who it is (you're not saying "Julius Caesar" or "the man in the tie-dyed toga," but simply "that guy over there").
IPHIGENIE: Kann uns zum Vaterland die Fremde werden?
ARKAS: Und dir ist fremd das Vaterland geworden.
IPHIGENIE: Das ist's, warum mein blutend Herz nicht heilt.
(Goethe, Iphigenie auf Tauris)

adrianus
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 3270
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 9:45 pm

Re: EGO vs SUUS third person with HIC

Post by adrianus » Thu May 28, 2009 11:46 am

spiphany wrote:You can't use it as a replacement for "I", however. The sentence you gave would be like saying "That man am a father" -- doesn't make sense at all in Latin. You can say "Ille est pater", but meaning is different, the sentence no longer indicates that the SPEAKER is the father.
I'm not so sure, spiphany, that it makes no sense at all. Id latinè nihilum significare, spiphany, minus certus sum. "Hic tristis pater sum" means to me "I am a sad father such as this [man]" and "Ille sum pater" means "I am such a father as he [that man]". Maybe I'm just mistaken. Fortassè modò erro.

Tristis pater sum ego = I [secondary emphasis] am a sad [primary emphasis] father
Tristis pater sum hic = I am a sad [emphasized] father, such as this [afterthought] but a dubious construction (because of word order), I think. At formula mala est (ob verborum ordinem), ut opinor.
Tristis pater sum suus = I am a sad father of his own(!?)—a grammatically mistaken and dubious construction, I reckon. Soloecismus est et formae dubiae, ut habeo.

Just as you say, spiphany, in these sentences, "ego", "suus" and "hic" are not substitutes for each other. They have completely different senses (some weird, if not just wrong).

Ut dicis, spiphany, his in sententiis, "ego", "suus", "hic" inter se invicem substitui non possunt, nisi sensum gravissimè mutuari efficatur (modo monstruoso aut planè erroneo).
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.

blutoonwithcarrotandnail
Textkit Fan
Posts: 263
Joined: Sat Jan 21, 2006 2:49 pm
Location: Bergenfield, NJ

Re: EGO vs SUUS third person with HIC

Post by blutoonwithcarrotandnail » Fri May 29, 2009 7:06 pm

blutoonwithcarrotandnail wrote:HIC ILLE ISTE are sometimes used as third person pronouns for
he, she, it.

In the following sentence TRISTIS PATER SUM EGO

you can replace 'EGO' with HIC

which would be TRISTIS PATER SUM HIC
Is HIC or EGO in this case considered to be 3rd person?

thanks.
cuts like ice cream fast like a razor blade

adrianus
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 3270
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 9:45 pm

Re: EGO vs SUUS third person with HIC

Post by adrianus » Fri May 29, 2009 7:58 pm

"Hic" refers to the third person (he) /tertiam personam spectat
"Ego" refers to the first person (I) /primam personam respicit
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.

blutoonwithcarrotandnail
Textkit Fan
Posts: 263
Joined: Sat Jan 21, 2006 2:49 pm
Location: Bergenfield, NJ

Re: EGO vs SUUS third person with HIC

Post by blutoonwithcarrotandnail » Sat May 30, 2009 2:20 am

blutoonwithcarrotandnail wrote:HIC ILLE ISTE are sometimes used as third person pronouns for
he, she, it.

In the following sentence TRISTIS PATER SUM EGO

you can replace 'EGO' with HIC

So if it is neccessary to use HIC or ILLE or ISTE to replace a third person pronoun
than

TRISTIS PATER SUM EGO

then changing it to

TRISTIS PATER SUM HIC

is not an example of this rule be used since EGO is first person

doesnt EGO have to be 3rd person to have HIC replace it

Thanks.
cuts like ice cream fast like a razor blade

adrianus
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 3270
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 9:45 pm

Re: EGO vs SUUS third person with HIC

Post by adrianus » Sat May 30, 2009 7:59 am

blutoonwithcarrotandnail wrote:then changing it to

TRISTIS PATER SUM HIC

is not an example of this rule be used since EGO is first person

doesnt EGO have to be 3rd person to have HIC replace it
You're right. Changing EGO to HIC isn't sensible.
Probè dicis. EGO in HIC mutare sanum non est.
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.

blutoonwithcarrotandnail
Textkit Fan
Posts: 263
Joined: Sat Jan 21, 2006 2:49 pm
Location: Bergenfield, NJ

Re: EGO vs SUUS third person with HIC

Post by blutoonwithcarrotandnail » Sat May 30, 2009 4:38 pm

adrianus wrote: You're right. Changing EGO to HIC isn't sensible.
Probè dicis. EGO in HIC mutare sanum non est.
maybe my sentence is fundamentally wrong for application of the rule.
we are supposed to be replacing a third person pronoun with HIC

can you give me an example of this with a different sentence?

thanks
cuts like ice cream fast like a razor blade

adrianus
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 3270
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 9:45 pm

Re: EGO vs SUUS third person with HIC

Post by adrianus » Sat May 30, 2009 10:59 pm

blutoonwithcarrotandnail wrote:we are supposed to be replacing a third person pronoun with HIC

can you give me an example of this with a different sentence?
Hic (with a short i) is a masculine third person pronoun in the nominative, so...
Hic (per i litteram brevem) est pronomen tertiae personae masculini generis nominativo casu, ergo...
Ille venit. >> Hic venit. or/vel
Ille vir venit >> Hic vir venit. or/vel
Is eam vidit. >> Hic eam vidit.
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.

blutoonwithcarrotandnail
Textkit Fan
Posts: 263
Joined: Sat Jan 21, 2006 2:49 pm
Location: Bergenfield, NJ

Re: EGO vs SUUS third person with HIC

Post by blutoonwithcarrotandnail » Sat May 30, 2009 11:50 pm

adrianus wrote:
Ille venit. >> Hic venit. or/vel
Ille vir venit >> Hic vir venit. or/vel
Is eam vidit. >> Hic eam vidit.
I suppose this follows the pattern and is correct:

ILLE SUM EGO

is the same as (a substitution):

ILLE SUM HIC

thanks.
cuts like ice cream fast like a razor blade

Post Reply