This is from Pseudolus Noster 12 de Pseudolo et Ennio
Tum fragōre Pseudolus excitātus est, quī per fenestram magnā vōce, “Domī nōn sum,” exclāmāvit. “Abī in malam crucem!” Haec Enniī dīmittendī causā dīxit. Ennius autem nōn dīmissus est, sed “O improbissime,” inquit, “es domī. Nam raucam tuam vōcem audio. Cuius fallendī causā mentītus es?” At Pseudolus, postquam haec audīvit, caput ē fenestrā extrūsit
extrūdo, extrūdere, extrūsī, extrūsum push out
et vōce raucissimā, “Homō,” inquit, “imprudentissimus es. Ego crēdidī iānitōrī tuō, quī, ut dīxit, tē domī invenīre nōn potuit, sed tū nōn crēdis mihi ipsī.”
Possitive "you lied to fool someone.
Cuius fallendī causā mentītus es?”
I think it means.
Who are you fooling, you liar? mentitus adjective n or
You have lied to fool whom? mentitus es verb
Cuius fallendī is in the genitive case following causā. fallendī is a gerundive. mentītus es is a second person perfect from the verb mentīrī.
For the sake of deceiving whom, have you lied? (the gerundive is passive so literally “For the sake of whom to be deceived” - but this is very awkward in English).
So your “You have lied to fool whom?” is closest.
causā plus gerundive is used to express purpose.
Not so easy to come up with an elegant translation.
This is really an interesting structure.
So the expected answer would be
Enniī fallendī causā mentītus sum? I lied in order to fool Ennius. (that Ennius be fooled).
So I think grammatically you are asking for the “subjective genitive” of fallendī causā. (not sure if that is the correct term, but something like that.
So you could use this structure anytime you wanted so get someone to respond using genitive gerundive + causa statement including the “subjective genitive”..Or you (=one) could practice gerundive + causa by asking the question and answering it. Nonne? (Of course I don’t know if this structure ever shows up in Latin" through out the ages, maybe it’s just a “teacher’s type question”..) In any case if I use it a few times, it wouldn’t look so confusing.
Thanks heaps!
Would it be grammatically permissible, even if not idiomatic, to render the question “Quem fallendi causa mentitus es ?” In other words, ti use the gerund instead of the gerundive ?
Not sure what you’re after here. Since it’s just the ablative of causa, naturally it’s not always quasi-prepositional (e.g. non sine causa “not without cause”). But when it is, it can be used with a gerund (e.g. discendi causa "for the sake of learning”) or with a gerundive (e.g. belli gerendi causa “for the sake of waging war”) .
