A friend of mine wanted me to translate a simple passage she found in a book she was reading. Although I’m not sure the context of this, or even the orgin, its kinda hard to come up with a good interpretation.. but, here it.. also with my own ‘attempt’ to translate’.
‘Non fumum ex fulgore, sed ex fumo dare lucem cogitat, et speciosa dehinc miracula promat.’
‘Not the smoke from the flame, but imagine out of the smoke to produce light, and then brought forth a beautiful wonder.’
now I know part of that doesnt even make sense, but i couldnt figure it out. could be because its 2am, could be because its not looking for ‘literal translations’. anywho, any insight would be great.
Salve Brent2009.
“Non fumum ex fulgore, sed ex fumo dare lucem
Cogitat, ut speciosa dehinc miracula promat.”
(Horace, Ars Poetica, V. 143)
I suggest/Sic suadeo:
“Not (so much) on the smoke from the flame does he dwell but on the light from the smoke, that marvellous wonders should it hence evoke.”
You know, I think it fine also here to read “lucem ex fumo” as “the appearance of the smoke” (by my reading in Lewis & Short’s dictionary on “lux”).
[More literally, possibly, in stilted English: “Not on the smoke from the flame does he dwell but on (the phenomenon) that light from the smoke should make it or allow (Latin ‘dare’) that hence it should evoke or bring out marvellous wonders”, --or “that hence marvellous wonders should be evoked or brought out”]
I don’t know if this will interest you or not, Brent2009 probe, but I found two other translations of your lines from Horace online.
“He does not lavish at a blaze his fire,
Sudden to glare, and in a smoke expire;
But rises from a cloud of smoke to light,
And pours his specious miracles to sight” —Philip Francis. (18th-century Anglo-Irish chaplain)
“One with a flash begins, and ends in smoke;
Another out of smoke brings glorious light,
And (without raising expectations high)
Surprises us with dazzling miracles.” (Wentworth Dillon, Earl of Roscommon, 17th-century Anglo-Irish poet)
Double post. Sorry.
Having posted accidentally, I may as well add that I don’t think the later poetic translations are a patch on the original for the power of the original’s more compelling and grounded visual imagery. I’ve only read a few lines of Horace, but what I’ve read just blows me away.
Quod iam collocavi etsi casu, nihilo plùs agam quà m si addam me ratione depingendi scripturam authenticam aestimare valentiores concretioresque quam versiones recentiores. Disticha tantùm ex operibus Horatii legebam, sed talia plerúmque fuerunt quae me maximè defixerunt.
I really apperciate all your help with this, I just started Latin II withint school, I really enjoy it. Thank you for all the insight you brought to me with the translations and the origin. =]
Thanks, Brent2009. Me too, I loved Latin at school but we only did it for three years, however. Taking it up again after many years I find loads of fun, even though I often make mistakes. I wish you the best of luck. Bye.
Gratias tibi ago. Ego quoque, cum discipulus eram, lingua latina me delectabat. Tres autem annos tantummodo animum ad eius studium applicabamus. Linguam adscire multos annos post mihi valdè placet, etiam si continuò erro. Optimam fortunam, Brent2009. Vale.
How is cogitat and dare used in this sentence?
Only meaning that I know for cogito is “to think, consider, reflect, ect” and it seems like there is another meaning that fits into the context.
Salve, Yee0890. I think both “cogitat” and “promat” can be interpreted two ways in this sentence. Verb “Cogitat” can mean “he thinks” or “cogitates” (I like “dwell upon” here, for “think about”) but it can be used impersonally passively (when in the third person, which it is here). Looking at the immediate context would suggest which might be nicer. I think that passive sort of interpretation works better with the second part of the sentence with the verb “promat” (present active subjunctive) for “should or may be brought out” (I say “evoke”).
I’m interpreting “dare” in this clause construction (accusative + infinitive): “lucem ex fumo dare” = “that the light from the smoke should allow”. What should it allow or permit or grant or give? That it should allow the whole final “ut” + subjunctive clause as the object: “that it should allow or permit that marvellous wonders hence be brought out” (“hence” being used spatially here to mean “from this here --the smoke”, rather than causatively where it may mean “as a result”). I think this fits also with the models where “cogito” takes “ut” + subjunctive to mean “intend” or “design” and also takes the infinitive to mean the same. I just think the other deconstruction works as well to get to sentence meaning. What do you say? In poetry (or more creative and “elegant” speech) the standard word order may be juggled to fit the meter (or just to sound more pleasant or for special emphasis) but, as in English, the ear of the fluent speaker/listener easily handles this so it’s not really a jumble. Not a fluent speaker or listener, I have to work hard to figure things out, so maybe I’m not correct. I hope someone corrects me if I’m making an error.
What’s your interpretation, Yee0890?
Actually, when I look in Lewis and Short online, I see for Cogito what you may be suggesting “II. In respect to a work to be undertaken or a conclusion to be made, to have something in mind, to intend, meditate, design, plan, purpose, etc.” and “cogito” + the example “ex fumo dare lucem” with “lucem” as the accusative of the infinitive “dare”, to read “with the purpose of giving light”. That puts a different slant on things. I suppose the translation that way goes “Not smoke from flame but light from smoke do I intend to produce, that wondrous marvels hence may be revealed.” Thanks, Yee0890. That’s a lot tidier and, when you see it, more obvious, even though it didn’t occur to me!