She never told him whether she wished to go or not
Numquam dixit eum utrum voluisset ire necne non
Eum is the wrong case.
Necne by itself is ‘or not’ (only in indirect questions; in direct it is ‘annon’); there is no need to add a ‘non’.
We hoped to find the very stone with which the general was killed
Speramus repperi lapidem cum quem ducem interficeretur
WHoa there. Verbs of hoping usually take the future participle (to be most elegant, don’t include the esse) and the subject in the accusative case. You forgot to translate ‘the VERY stone’ and your cases for the rest of the nouns are hopeless. There are simpler and more correct ways to express ‘means by which’.
He asked us where the sword had been put
Rogavit nos ubi gladium passuessit erat
passuessit?? You mean pono in the pluperfect subjunctive. Get rid of erat, you already have a conjugated verb.
I am trying to learn which hill they will fortify
sum conarens cognoscere quem collem muniantur
sum conarens is English idiom, not Latin. Use the plain present, and remember the verb is deponent. The present subjunctive will not express futurity except in a few unambiguous circumstances. You need a future participle and a form of esse in the subjunctive.
She never told him whether she wished to go or not
Numquam dixit eum utrum voluisset ire necne non
“told him” = “told to him” … translate it this way.
As dictated by adz, you double negified yourself with necne non (and not not / nor not), lose the non.
We hoped to find the very stone with which the general was killed
Speramus repperi lapidem cum quem ducem interficeretur
“hoped” is past tense, speramus is present?
this should say something like sperabamus (nos) reperturos (esse) lapidem….
cum always takes the ablative, but that is besides the point. “with which” does not mean you are ACCOMPANIED BY “which” (cum quo), it means BY MEANS OF “which” (quo).
He asked us where the sword had been put
Rogavit nos ubi gladium passuessit erat
I’m not sure how you got ‘passuessit’, but you need the pluperfect passive subjunctive of pono (“had been put”). All passive perfect tenses (perfect, pluperfect, future perfect) are formed from the supine stem pono, ponere, posui, positum “to put”
I am trying to learn which hill they will fortify
sum conarens cognoscere quem collem muniantur
“I am trying” is present tense, present progressive to be exact. All present tenses, including present progressive, are translated as simple present in Latin. You are just making things more complicated
munio, munire, munivi, munitum “to fortify”; why have you put it in the passive?
Caesar was our general when the Gauls were defeated.
Caesar erat dux nostrum cum Gallias vinceretur
Since he has defeated many tribes, he will be called imperator.
Cum vicisser multae ex gentibus, vocabitur imperator
When we were leaving the big city, we caught sight of that famous ship, the Queen Mary, approaching the shore.
Cum relinqueremus magnae urbem, conspeximus navem illam, rigna maria, appropinquabatlitorem
But when I ask you to bring back the money, what will you do?
Sed cum rogat te ut reducas pecuniam, quod faces?
By advancing quickly to the river our legion alarmed the enemy.
Procedendo celeriter ad fluminem nostrum legio permoverunt hostem
He wrote a book about sailing.
Scripsit libum de navigando
This place is not suitable for finding animals
Hic locus non idoneus reperiendis animalibus
Mother was desirous of saving herself
Mater erat cupida servandi sui
dux nostrum literally means “the general/leader of us” (using the genitive nostrum of nos); if you wanted to use the adjective noster, -stra, -strum you would say dux noster, though your translation is another way which works.
Gallia, -ae “(the country of) Gaul”; Galli, -orum “the Gauls, the people of Gaul”
If you choose to use a passive verb (vinceretur) you cannot have a direct object (Gallias); make it the subject instead.
Since he has defeated many tribes, he will be called imperator.
Cum vicisser multae ex gentibus, vocabitur imperator
I assume vicisser is a typo for vicisset; this would mean “since he had defeated…” which is not what was asked. It seems they want you to use the perfect subjunctive.
vocabitur works, but other verbs are more commonly used when naming someone (e.g. appello, nomino, dico).
When we were leaving the big city, we caught sight of that famous ship, the Queen Mary, approaching the shore.
Cum relinqueremus magnae urbem, conspeximus navem illam, rigna maria, appropinquabatlitorem
magnae and urbem must agree in case and gender.
rigna… you mean regina. It and Maria must be in the accusative case since they are in apposition with navem illam.
“(that famous ship) approaching (the shore)” is a present participle. This also refers to navem illam, as shown by my example.
litus, litoris is neuter, accusative is the same as nominative.
But when I ask you to bring back the money, what will you do?
Sed cum rogat te ut reducas pecuniam, quod faces?
rogat “he asks”, you were asked for “I ask” (which is actually future because this is a conditional).
“What will you do?” is a question, so you must use the interrogative quis/quid instead of qui/quae/quod.
the future of -io verbs of the 3rd conjugation (e.g. facio) retains the ‘I’ throughout.
By advancing quickly to the river our legion alarmed the enemy.
Procedendo celeriter ad fluminem nostrum legio permoverunt hostem
flumen, -inis is neuter, accusative is the same as nominative.
nostrum does not agree with legio as it must (if you are using the genitive of nos, that is not advisable here).
“the enemy (as a body of people)” should be translated in the plural: hostes, -ium.
He wrote a book about sailing.
Scripsit libum de navigando
make sure you get that R in librum.
Mother was desirous of saving herself
Mater erat cupida servandi sui
Men who lack money should not be despised.
Viri qui carent pecunia non despiciendi sunt
We must not complain. (I changed it to “it must not be complained by us”)
Nobis non querorendum est
The tenth legion must be praised.
Decima legio laudanda est
They will have to cross without boats. (I changed it to “it must be crossed by them without boats”
Transiendum est eis… (I had no idea how to do “without” and I wasn’t sure of the case of boats)
Men who lack money should not be despised.
Viri qui carent pecunia non despiciendi sunt
That pecunia is in the ablative case of course. Just so you know.
We must not complain. (I changed it to “it must not be complained by us”)
Nobis non querorendum est
Queror, queri, questus is a third declension noun declined like rego. So I’d say querendum is the word to use here, on analogy with regendum.
The tenth legion must be praised.
Decima legio laudanda est
They will have to cross without boats. (I changed it to “it must be crossed by them without boats”
Transiendum est eis… (I had no idea how to do “without” and I wasn’t sure of the case of boats)
is good
without = sine + ablative.
For boat I would use linter, lintris (f). Navis, -is is more shippy, and the other words in my dictionary appear to be of Greek origin. Best steer clear of those. Also I have seen linter used on occasion in my reading for the small raft-like boats used to cross a river.
What would ou say if he should try to find you, liutenant?
Quod dicas si conaret reperire te, legatum?
If you look at the sun with your eyes open, you will be able to see nothing afterward.
Si auspicies solemcum tuis oculis apertis poteris videre nihil postea.
Were Caesar alive today, he would be suprised at many things.
Si Caesar viveret hodie, miraretur multis reis.
They would not have found the places if they had not descended from the hills.
Non repperissent locos si non descendissent de collibus.
These sentences are rather interesting (and number 2 is quite informative!).
Try to remember the corrections from past exercises. I told you in one of the recent ones that in questions quid/quis is used rather than qui/quae/quod.
“he should try…” should be present subjunctive. I recommend a review of the tenses for conditionals.
the formation with the accusative (legatum) is not unheard of, but you should really use the vocative.
If you look at the sun with your eyes open, you will be able to see nothing afterward.
Si auspicies solemcum tuis oculis apertis poteris videre nihil postea.
auspicies is not a word, perhaps you mean aspicies.
cum does NOT mean “by means of”, you are using the wrong word. As I said in one of the last exercises, cum means ACCOMPANYING and ablative means BY MEANS OF, this should help you distinguish between the two meanings of the word “when”, but you must pay careful attention to detail in prose composition. This particular case should be ablative without a prepositon, it could be argued to be either ablative of means or ablative absolute, but it will look the same either way.
Your Latin sentences are mirroring the order of the English sentences, at least put the verb at the end every once in a while and don’t put adverbs after their verbs! Sentences usually do not begin and rarely end with a vocative (as in your sentence 1). Pay attention to the order of the Latin sentences which you translate into English and try to imitate the order and style.
Were Caesar alive today, he would be suprised at many things.
Si Caesar viveret hodie, miraretur multis reis.
miror takes the accusative, not the ablative or dative as you have.
If you were to use the ablative or dative of res, (which you won’t) it would be rebus.
They would not have found the places if they had not descended from the hills.
Non repperissent locos si non descendissent de collibus.
