Just a little phrase, if you can spare the time:
Callide quod ut celer ira.
Thanks in advance,
eX
What phrase are you translating, eX? (Otherwise, can’t check your latin)
Quid vertis, eX? (Aliter, quod latinè habes verificari/comperi non potest)
The one in italics.
Callide quod ut celer ira.
Unless you want the English…
“Subtle and quick to anger.”
Thank you for your response, BTW.
Salve eX
You want to translate, “Subtle and quick to anger”, right? It would help to know from what period this comes, because the English is ambiguous. “Subtle” in English can mean “subtle” in a modern sense or “cunning” or “thin, or piercing” in an older sense, while “to anger” may mean “to make angry” or “to become angry”. If you can’t say, no problem. “Callide quod ut celer ira” isn’t right, BTW, I would say, unless you mean “Something cunning/clever that I would be hidden from by anger”.
Sententiam anglicam vertere vis, nonné? Meliùs si scis quo saecullo venit hoc dictum, quià ambiguum anglicè est. Si dicere non potes, minimè grave.
I assumed from its context that subtle should mean clever, cunning and/or experienced.
And I figure, that “quick to anger” implies a short temper. So maybe iracundus would have been more appropriate?
As a translation perhaps, “subtilis/acutus et paratè/citò iratus” for “sly/cunning and readily/soon/quickly angered/angry” for a person. “Iracundus” is nice, indeed.
Salvete exitao adrianumque,
Assuming the ommitted subject is in the third person and the default masculine gender, you could write something like this:
Sua ira celeris levisque est.
His anger is quick and capricious.
Isn’t the word “Iracundus” uncommon and medieval in origin?
Nonne verbum “Iracundus” in origine serius multo et inusitatum est.
Thank you for your time Adrianus. So, you like iracundus, but for a person feel that citò iratus is better for a person?
Perhaps to make it more clear, it is a justification for a warning, “for they are subtle and quick to anger.” In this case I would like it to be singular, instead of plural.
What about callide as regards cunning, crafty, shrewd? I see it as a warning that this is a dangerous person because of experience, cleverness and easily angered.
Vastor:
I don’t know if it’s appropriate in this case, but I quite like the turn of Sua ira celeris levisque est. That reminds me of a time before ADHD meds. LOL
Not at all. It’s a classical word.
Minimè, vastor. Classicum.
Adjectives have adverbival force in circumstances other than this, I think. Best, I think, to say (if you want to use facilis and brevis (though) “subtle” is omitted + “facere est” is odd) “Facilè et breviter iratus fit”
Aliis contextibus non hoc, credo, adjectivi vim adverbiorum habere possunt. Meliùs est ità scribere (si “facilis” et “brevis” dictionibus utaris et “subtle” vel “cunning” anglicè negligas, et vitium est obiter “facere” sic scribere): “Facilè et breviter iratus fit.”
No. Either is good, I say: “citò iracundus” or “citò iratus”
Minimè. Utrum bonum est, dico.
So, acutus et iracundus (est)?
Could callidus et iracundus (est) work as well?
And do we need a verb?
Complimentary Infinitive.
Verbum infinitum complementariumque.
Without a verb, how would you identify the subject? To me, it would be vague and nonsensical without a verb or a pronoun representing the subject.
Salve eX
callidus = acutus = subtilis, indeed.
A verb? With “est” you can give it or not (leaving it understood).
But “quick to anger” is not “iracundus”. You need the adverb with “iracundus”.
You can also have for iracundus or iratus the following: irritatus, exscerbatus, exasperatus, incensus.
Scripsisti:
Facilis et brevis/celer iratus facere est.
He is easy and quick to make angry.
Not with “est”, nor even if you wrote “faci [sic*]”.
Cum “est” verbo non licet, nec si quidem “faci [sic*]” scribas.
*Corrigendum. “fieri”, non “faci”! Gratias, Didyme.
Verum dixisti. de verbo “possum” cogitabam.
Gratiae.
The adjective you’re looking for, eX, is “irascibilis -e” = “irascible” or “choleric” or “quick to become angry”, even though post-classical. Otherwise, use “angry” with an adverb.
Adjectivum quod quaeris (etsi post-classicum) est “irascibilis -e”. Aliter, utere adverbio cum “iracundus” adjectivo.
Salve Adrianus,
So then, callidus et citò iracundus est, should work, yes?
Now, when using irascibilis, this is the equivalent of the English irascible, as an adjective, it can stand alone as et irascibilis? What about citò irascus? I like it because it can convey the meaning of wrathfulness.
Again, thank you gentlemen for your time and patience.
eX
- yes. Ità
- yes. Certé.
- No. Minimè. “irascus” doesn’t exist/ non exstat.