Terence, Adelfoi 290

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
Constantinus Philo
Textkit Fan
Posts: 237
Joined: Tue Mar 05, 2019 1:04 pm

Terence, Adelfoi 290

Post by Constantinus Philo » Sat Mar 09, 2019 12:05 pm

Here is an interesting place from Terence's Adelfoi 270 act2 scene4
Oh mi germane ah vereor coram in os te laudari amplius ne id adsentandi magis quam quo habeam gratum facere existimes
My question is: what is this quo?
Also, is it common for accusativus cum infinitivo to omit its acc., as is the case here.

hlawson38
Textkit Enthusiast
Posts: 603
Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2010 12:38 am

Re: Terence, Adelfoi 290

Post by hlawson38 » Mon Mar 11, 2019 2:06 pm

Constantinus Philo wrote:
Sat Mar 09, 2019 12:05 pm
Here is an interesting place from Terence's Adelfoi 270 act2 scene4
Oh mi germane ah vereor coram in os te laudari amplius ne id adsentandi magis quam quo habeam gratum facere existimes
My question is: what is this quo?
Also, is it common for accusativus cum infinitivo to omit its acc., as is the case here.
I usually ask questions, but I'll hazard an answer, and appeal to abler Latinists to supply needed correction.

I believe quo here is an adverb, meaning something like "whereby". It is, as I read the line, in a contrast with adsentandi causa, where the word causa is supplied by the reader.

FWIW LatinLibrary online text gives laudare, the active infinitive, rather than laudari.

I'm unsure what the active infinitive facere does in the sentence. My guess is that its subject is id and that it means "it functions [id ... facere ] for the sake of flattery rather than whereby I might have your thanks".

But I'm in the dark about the contrast implied in my reading between adsentandi causa and quo habeam gratum. The Latin word gratus is one I don't understand well. Does Terence means a real, meaningful contrast? In English there certainly is a contrast between flattery and praise.
Last edited by hlawson38 on Mon Mar 11, 2019 7:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Barry Hofstetter
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 838
Joined: Thu Aug 15, 2013 12:22 pm

Re: Terence, Adelfoi 290

Post by Barry Hofstetter » Mon Mar 11, 2019 3:57 pm

Constantinus Philo wrote:
Sat Mar 09, 2019 12:05 pm
Here is an interesting place from Terence's Adelfoi 270 act2 scene4
Oh mi germane ah vereor coram in os te laudari amplius ne id adsentandi magis quam quo habeam gratum facere existimes
My question is: what is this quo?
Also, is it common for accusativus cum infinitivo to omit its acc., as is the case here.
quo I think in this sense:
For the reason that, because: non edepol quo te impudicam crederem, Plaut. Am. 3, 2, 32: quod scribis, non quo ipse audieris, sed te ipsum putare, me, Cic. Att. 10, 1, 3: non quo libenter male audiam, sed quia, etc., id. de Or. 2, 75, 305: non eo dico, quo mihi veniat in dubium, id. Quint. 2, 5: neque eo nunc dico, quo quidquam illum senserim, Ter. Heaut. 3, 2, 43: non pol, quo quemquam plus amem, Eo feci, sed, id. Eun. 1, 2, 16.
Lewis, C. T., & Short, C. (1891). Harpers’ Latin Dictionary (p. 1518). New York; Oxford: Harper & Brothers; Clarendon Press.

The Perseus text (which I have through Logos) has laudare:

O mi germane; ah, vereor coram in os te laudare amplius,
Ne id assentandi magis quam quo habeam gratum facere existimes.

I would supply mē as the subject of facere, and no, Latin normally expresses the subject of the infinitive, but occasionally omits it. From A&G:
The Subject Accusative of the Infinitive is regularly expressed in Indirect Discourse, even if it is wanting in the direct:

ōrātor sum, I am an orator; dīcit sē esse ōrātōrem, he says he is an orator.

Note 1— But the subject is often omitted if easily understood:—

īgnōscere imprūdentiae dīxit (B. G. 4.27), he said he pardoned their rashness.

eadem ab aliīs quaerit: reperit esse vēra (id. 1.18), he inquires about these same things from others; he finds that they are true.

Note 2— After a relative, or quam (than), if the verb would be the same as that of the main clause, it is usually omitted, and its subject is attracted into the accusative:—

tē suspicor eīsdem rēbus quibus mē ipsum commovērī (Cat. M. 1), I suspect that you are disturbed by the same things as I.

cōnfīdō tamen haec quoque tibi nōn minus grāta quam ipsōs librōs futūra (Plin. Ep. 3.5.20), I trust that these facts too will be no less pleasing to you than the books themselves.


Not sure what to call the gerund here (supplying causā is one solution, as mentioned by hlawson38), but the meaning is clear.
N.E. Barry Hofstetter
The Jack M. Barrack Hebrew Academy
καὶ σὺ τὸ σὸν ποιήσεις κἀγὼ τὸ ἐμόν. ἆρον τὸ σὸν καὶ ὕπαγε.

Constantinus Philo
Textkit Fan
Posts: 237
Joined: Tue Mar 05, 2019 1:04 pm

Re: Terence, Adelfoi 290

Post by Constantinus Philo » Mon Mar 11, 2019 5:52 pm

You are the best. I double checked ur suggestions, all's correct,as for the gerund adsentandi it is emploi autonome du génétif du gérondif Ernout Thomas p. 267

Post Reply