I found it in the entry to quisquam in Lewis & Short. I’m guessing it’s Plautus. Anyone know what play it is? Anyway, here’s original passage.
Plaut. Aul. 4, 2, 2: “aut enim nemo, aut, si quisquam, ille sapiens fuit,”
And here’s my translation:
Either no one, or, if anyone at all, he was wise.
That translation sounds too literal to me though. Perhaps this would be more idiomatic to English:
Either no one was wise, or if anyone at all, it was him.
So how did I do? Which of the two is better? And another thing: I am aware I left out enim from my translation, but I’ve seen that it often is in some translations, and in particular in Old Latin writers (such as Plautus) and in Medieval sources. Am I wrong in having left it out? And if not, why is it often left out?
Gratis vobis ago.
I’m editing this after having posted it. I’m just realizing ille translates to he and illum would translate to him, so maybe my second translation isn’t correct because of that? Or am I being too rigid? What do you veteran Latinists think?
The reference to Plautus is from the Aulularia (Pot of Gold)Act 4, Scene 2, line 2, which starts: non metuo ne quisquam inveniat.
P.S. If you read the preceding line, you’ll see that you do need to express the enim:
"tu autem, Fanni, quod mihi tantum tribui dicis, quantum ego nec agnosco nec postulo, facis amice, sed, ut mihi videris, non recte iudicas de Catone." . L&S doesn’t give enough context to determine that though, due to obvious space limitations.