Hello all.
“Aemilia, quae tabellam Marci esse credit…”
If I want to take it out of context and include the fact that it’s Sextus’s slate, could I put Sextus in genitive between tabellam and Marci?
Paul.
I dont think that would work as you would have two genitives and one thing possessed. Perhaps you could start another relative clause °quae vero sexti est°
Aemilia, quae tabellam, quae vero sexti est, Marci esse credit…
A bit clunky and I have followed Ørberg’s use of the feminine relative pronoun which we discussed elsewhere.
Grateful for corrections or other ideas.
Here is John 6:1, where this happens in Greek:
Μετὰ ταῦτα ἀπῆλθεν ὁ Ἰησοῦς πέραν τῆς θαλάσσης τῆς Γαλιλαίας τῆς Τιβεριάδος.
“…the sea of Galilee (the sea of Tiberias)”
But the Vulgate fixes up these successive genitives with a relative:
“post haec abiit Iesus trans mare Galilaeae quod est Tiberiadis”
On the other hand, Augustine quotes it as just “mare Galilaeae Tiberiadis”, like the Greek. But it’s probably just as rough in Latin as it is in Greek.
Circling around to this, as it seems mistaken. Orberg’s use of the feminine relative pronoun was not what was discussed in the other thread(s) What was discussed was quae as a feminine interrogative. Quae as a relative pronoun, as here, is normal Latin. And if there’s a choice of gender/number (this doesn’t apply here), it will usually agree with what it’s referring to in its own clause, rather than the antecedent.
Thanks for correcting this. I should have actually looked at the other thread to remind myself what it was actually about.