Grata mihi tua corrigenda, Godmy. Saepè erro et latinè meliùs scribere velim. De habilitate meâ, decipere nolo; dein, nihil hîc scribo sine et latiné,—porrò, placet et adjuvit mihi sic facere. Saepè incongruo modo scribo, scio; nonnunquam posteà errata animadverto, tunc corrigo.
Thanks, Godmy. I appreciate that. I’m often making mistakes, I’m not always consistent; sometimes I see my own mistakes afterwards and correct them. Certainly, I would like to improve. I don’t wish to mislead people about my level so I lay out my wares for all to see,—plus, I like it and it helps me.
Alia corrigenda Sine fontibus aptis legis, rem habuisti incredibile → Fontibus aptis non a te lectis, rem habuisti incredibilem
alii qui non legi → alii quos non legi
Post Scriptum
A tiny point, Godmy, on omne, omni. I admit I was forgetting my declensions. You say omni is always used classically. A&G says ablative in “-i” is rare in prose for such adjectives classically, not impossible. Omni is certainly better.
Omni—per i ablativo casu singulariter,—dicis “semper”, at non semper sed plerumque dicit A&G, §116, http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.04.0001%3Asmythp%3D116. Erravi autem, fateor, quod inflectionis oblitus sum.
ille,a,ud + substantīvum (velut in “dē illā grammaticā…” etc.) = “the famous/well-known or ‘The’ x”, is common to Latin and Gaelic and English, meaning “The [famous] Grammar” or “The [famous] O’Neill” or “The Stig” or “Winnie The Pu”. It’s actually more like a title. Bonus, nisi fallor, hic usus et latinè et anglicè et goidelicé, qui epitheton vel titulus rem vel creaturam hominemve notum significat, ut “Winnie ille Pu” (non “Winnie is Pu”, non “Winnie Pu”).
It’s true I did say “de illo vocabulo” instead of “de eo vocabulo” or “de isto vocabulo”, which is more accurate, indeed; but “de illâ grammaticâ de A&G” = “Concerning A&G’s well-known grammar book”; Verum est, de usu is ea id pronominis cum nomine substantivove, falsè interdum scripsi.
Gaudeō, sī aliquid tibi hoc iuvit… forsan commodius mihi esset, sī tacuissem, quī nihil ad rem, dē quā tractābātis, habērem - at putābam melius esse amīcē hominem monēre, dē quā rē monendum esse arbitrābar, quam omnia praeterīre… quō animus malus in diēs etiam fierī posset.
Sī aliquīd in futūrō vīderō, quod iuvāre possit, scrībam (et ego nōnnumquam aliquid pravioris scrīpsī et tum, nūntiō missō, multa (retrōrsum) ēmendō…)
Rēctē monēs nōn esse etiam in aetāte classicā impossibile “-e” ablātīvum in adiectīvīs (et forsan prōnōminibus) vidēre, nam poësis semper adest…
At, ut tū et A&G dīcit dē prōsā - esse rārum: Ego modo (paulō ante) omnia exempla Cicerōnis Caesarisque, ubi “omne” scrībunt, perspexī et numquam vīdī fuisse ablātīvum. Neque dīcō tē umquam praedicāsse “omne” esse melius in ablātīvō (cōnsēnsus inter nōs est), sed modo sciendī cupiditāte causā hanc inquisitiōnem fēci (=habeō factam; quamobrem consecūtiō temporum haec), ut etiam melius videāmus QUAM rārum sit
Bene dīcis in eō contextū, cuius exemplum dedī, esse ūsum tuum iustiōrem… Ego enim plūra huius reī exempla ā tē scrīpta lēgeram, cum hoc scrīberem, et modo cāsū(=forte) hoc ūnum exemplum ēlēgī… Aliud eligendum plānē erat
Obiter: Nesciō an felix titulus sit “Winnie ille Pu”… mihi anglicismus maximus vidētur articulum dēfīnītum convertere (transferre), cum in linguīs aliīs modernīs IndoEuropeīs, sīcut in linguā meā māternā, bohemicā, quae et dēclīnat et coniugat, conversio (=trānslātiō) hōrum librōrum semper sine articulō dēfīnītō trānslātō sit (neque aliter fieri posset… stultum cum prōnōmine dēmōnstrātīvō esset).
Mihi aliquantulum “barbaricum” hīc vidētur, et in titulō “Hobbitus Ille” iam barbarismus maximus est (ipse liber terrībiliter conversus est, ut calamitātem linguae tuae patiāris, sī eum forte legās… )
Cōnsentiō autem in eō exemplō, quem ēlēgeram, fuisse ūsum tuum iustiōrem.
Sum et barbarus et felix, et anglicismus modernus non est sed antiquus et goidelicismus antiquior pro regis titulo. Classicum scribendi modum admiror, unâ cum aliis, praesertim modum Erasmi et serioris aetatis. De hoc, iterum tecum concurro: ineptum “Hobitus Ille” et inepta ista versio in quâ paucas paginas legi, reliquas neglexi.
Well, I’m a barbarian and proud of it and I’d say it’s not a modern Anglicism but a very old one [‘He’s Winnie-ther-Pooh. Don’t you know what “ther” means?’ ‘Ah, yes, now I do,’ I said quickly; and I hope you do too, because it is all the explanation you are going to get.] and a more ancient celticism for the title of king or head of all clans. I like classical latin but love also Erasmian and modern Latin. I do agree about the silliness of “Hobbitus Ille” as a title (it’s not strictly right) and elsewhere in the translation (judging from what little I read of it before disgarding it).
… tamen cēnseō “Winnie Ille Pu” nōn esse titulum ex tōtō optimum, sed licet. Titulus Bohēmicus (dē quā linguā modo breviter disseruī) est “Medvídek Pú (=Ursulus Pū)” (Dē Hobbitō iam plūra nōn dīcēmus… titulus Bohēmicus eius simpliciter est “Hobit” → “bb” nōn habēmus, neque dēmōnstratīvīs ita abūtī nōbīs licet, tamquam linguae Latīnae…)
)