I am currently trying to wrap my head around expressions dealing with spatial relation (relationships? What’s the proper English expression?) Among these are expressions for in front/behind. The one’s I am interested in having your help with are those using a(d)versus:
aliquem adversum aggredi: to attack s.o. from the front
aliquem a fronte aggredi: to attack s.o. from the front
aliquem aversum aggredi: to attack s.o. from behind
aliquem a tergô aggredi: to attack s.o. from behind
These are the normal versions, but logically it should be possible to use a dative for the enemy, shouldn’t it?
alicui adverso colaphum incutere: to give s.o. from the front a blow with the fist on the ear
alicui averso colaphum incutere: to give s.o. from behind a blow with the fist on the ear
In addition, it should be possible to express a different spatial relation from the standard one (i. e. turned towards/away from the subject):
aliquem (1) alicui (2) adversum aggredi: to attack s.o. (1) who is turned to s.o. (2)
aliquem (1) ab aliquô (2) aversum aggredi: to attack s.o. (1) who is turned away from s.o. (2)
alicui (1) alicui (2) adverso colaphum incutere: to give s.o. (1), who is turned to s.o. (2), a blow with the fist on the ear
alicui (1) ab aliquô (2) averso colaphum incutere: to give s.o.(1), who is turned away from s.o. (2), a blow with the fist on the ear
Do you think that these phrases, which depart from the standard model, are correct?
I’ve been thinking about this since you posted it. Have you been able to find any parallels in actual Latin literature for what you want to express? My sense would be that if you can’t, it’s probably not saying what you want.
Finding the standard acc. + a(d)versum phrases is pretty easy. I use regular expressions to search a downloaded copy of the entire Latin Library. But for these expanded cases (dative; accusative + dative; accusative + ablative) searching gets tricky. Looking for “averso/aversae” (with “u” interpreted here as “v”) I find 1814 occurrences. No way I can sift through that. A search for “aversum” yields 1594 instances. Not much better.
Anyway, even if there were no instances of such extended a(d)versus-phrases, that would not render these “illegal”. They are not phrases that would crop up just in any text. And if one sticks only to the exact phrases one finds in the Latin classics, one might just as well treat Latin as “dead and gone”. Many people do, but I do not want to do that.
Well, not dead and gone, but the closest thins we have to living speakers of the language. I was intrigued by your suggestions because they seem plausible, the kind of thing one ought to be able to say in the language. Finding some parallels would prove that living speakers of the language used it that way. I have the entire Perseus collection in Logos and the ability to do “syntax” searches, which should enable me to narrow the search parameters quite a bit, so I’ll see what I can turn up (though it might be a few days, I also have some finals to write).
It’s essentially a complete sort of bible software platform. I got it not because of that but because they included the entire Perseus collection for free.
In eadem naui esse would appear to be a pretty good way of saying ‘to be in the same boat’. Cicero has it in epistulae ad familiares 2,5,1, and it appears later in Ammianus Marcellinus (30,10,2), and Augustine has some kind of variation of it in in psalmos enarrationes 106,7, according to the ThlL.
