I just wanted to check whether my translation of this is correct. We’ve just learned that adjectives agree with their noun, and we’ve learne about apposition.
#9 : Mali servi equum bonum Marci domini necant.
I originally translated :
The bad servants of Marcus, the Lord, kill the good horse.
But I’m not sure whether the translation might be :
The bad servants kill the good horse of Marcus, the Lord.
mali servi = bad servants, NOM
equum bonum = the good horse, ACC S
necant = to kill, VERB PL
Marci = Marcus, GEN S of the bad servants because the ending -i matches the ending in “mali servi”?
If it were “the horse of Marcus”, would it be “equum bonum Marcum” ?
I think it would be ‘bonum marci equum’
but I am badly unsure about that ;D
The bad servants of Marcus, the Lord, kill the good horse
=you went for the much less obvious one there, I’m not sure it’s right though! I’ve heard of adjectives being seperated from noun for emphasis but … I don’t know.
The bad servants kill the good horse of Marcus, the Lord.
=how I read it ;D
Mali servi equum bonum Marci domini necant.
Could this also be, “The bad servant’s good horse do Marcuses, the Lords, kill”?
Prefer the second one, as the genitive is placed closer to the noun which it describes (generally).
I guess I was trying to make it the sentence more difficult than it really was. And I was thrown off by seeing so many words with the same -i ending (viz. mali, servi, et Marci).
I’ll have to work on differentiating the Genitive from an Adjective.
Back to the question of using -que as “and”. Can you still use it for linking three words together like this :
English : A, B and C.
Latin : A, B C-que.
Hmm, now that you mention it, I think -que specifically joins no more than two words. You can, however, use it in a list if it is only joining two of the items:
i.e. Puellae et pueri familiaque.
As you can see, it breaks up redundancy where in English it would seem rather bland if you kept saying the same word “and”.
Mali servi equum bonum Marci domini necant.
Could this also be, “The bad servant’s good horse do Marcuses, the Lords, kill”?
Does this work!!?
[quote author=Episcopus link=board=3;threadid=268;start=0#1612 date=1058616421]
Mali servi equum bonum Marci domini necant.
Could this also be, “The bad servant’s good horse do Marcuses, the Lords, kill”?
Does this work!!?
[/quote]
I assume you use Marci as the subject of the sentence? It’s grammatically possible, but I don’t think the Romans would use it. It’s too far-fetched, and they did write to be understood.
Ingrid
yay thanks Ingrid 
I am proud of that!
I’d question the ‘Romans wrote to be understood’ theory!!
Hmm, it might seem they didn’t want to be understood if you make your first attempt at reading them. Bit like James Joyce,
“I’ve put in so many enigmas and puzzles [in Ulysses] that it will keep the professors busy for centuries arguing over what I meant, and that’s the only way of insuring one’s immortality.”
I just don’t think literary criticism was as well established in Roman times (but I stand to be corrected on this).
Maybe I was thinking of a 19th century Dutch writer (pseudonym: multatuli, to stay on the topic of Latin), who said: I want to be read.
Ingrid
[quote author=Episcopus link=board=3;threadid=268;start=0#1612 date=1058616421]
Mali servi equum bonum Marci domini necant.
Could this also be, “The bad servant’s good horse do Marcuses, the Lords, kill”?
Does this work!!? [/quote]
Hey, that’s an interesting slant I never thought of. So you’re assuming that there are two or more Lords who are all named Marcus.
It’s possible, but how often do you use names in the plural?
anna-kournikõvae