Here are 11-20 revised in the light of comments so far received, for which again many thanks.
10. You and I will hide this from our friends.
Ego et tū hoc amīcōs cēlābimus.
He, having been made king, did not ask his people for advice.
Is, rēx crēatus, ā populō cōnsilium nōn rogāvit.
(Is, rēx crēatus, populum cōnsilium nōn rogāvit. Double accusative less idiomatic)
We were asked for the sword, which we had concealed from our father.
Gladium rogātī sumus, quem patrem nostrum cēlāverāmus.
I was asked by Caius for a sword.
Gladium ā Cāiō rogātus sum.
They were thought to be very wise.
Sapientissimī esse putābantur
I hid from Caius the sword for which you asked me.
Gladium Cāium cēlāvi, quem ā mē rogāvistī.
Were you not taught Greek by your master?
Nōnne linguam Graecam ā tuō magistrō doctus es?
They became consuls, because they were thought to be wise.
Cōnsulēs factī sunt quia sapientēs putābantur.
Why did you hide this from Caius?
Cūr hoc Cāium cēlāvistī?
You, who did this, were not elected consul by the citizens.
Tū, quī hoc fēcistī, cōnsul nōn creātus es ā cīvibus.
The man, whom you asked for advice, has taught me many things.
Vir, ā quō cōnsilium rogāvistī, multās rēs mē docuit.
( Vir, quem cōnsilium rogāvistī, multās rēs mē docuit Double accusative with rogāre less good, see also 11.)
Thanks I have made the correction. You are eagle-eyed and conscientious just what we need on this project.
Its getting late here so I will post F 1-10 tomorrow.
In case anyone wonders what’s left. F is the dative of possessor and simple uses of se suus ipse and is. G is the ablative case. H is easy prepositional phrases and K is prepositions. So only 4 more exercises to go!
Here are 1-10 of F. The rubric expects the dative of possessor, but perhaps none of the examples are particularly appropriate for this construction. My understanding is that it only used where there is a close (“inner” Gildersleeve) connection and with nōmen etc. See Gildersleeve 349.
Grateful for corrections
Exercise F.
DATIVE OF POSSESSOR; SIMPLE USES OF SE, SUUS, IPSE, IS.
He killed himself with his own sword.
Sē suō gladiō interfēcit.
He has a garden which was given him by his friend.
Hortum habet, quem eī ab amīcō eius datus est. (Hortus eī est, quem… is also possible but seems awkward.)
He bought the house for himself and his wife.
Ipse sibī uxōrīque domum ēmit. (is ipse correct here?)
I have never seen him himself, but I have seen his children.
Ego eum ipsum numquam, autem līberōs eius vīdī. (is vīdī also required in the first clause?)
His children ask him for bread, which he cannot give them.
Līberī eius pānem ab eō rogant, quem eīs dare nōn potest. (double accusative possible but less good ie Līberī eius pānem eum rogant..)
He has given his children the bread which they asked him for.
Pānem līberīs suīs dedit quem ab eō rogāvērunt. ( double accusative possible but less good “quem eum rogāvērunt”)
They have ships and sailors, but they have not many harbours.
Nāvēs nautāsque habent, sed multōs portūs nōn habent. ( Nāvēs nautaeque eīs, sed multī portūs eīs nōn sunt.) The latter because this is an exercise in the dative of possession although this does not seem to me to be appropriate here.
He wished to conceal his opinion from me, but I asked his friends.
Is sententiam suam mē cēlāre volēbat, sed amīcōs eius rogāvī.
You Gauls fear Caesar and his army.
Vōs Gallī Caesarem et exercitum eius timētis.
He led his army against the Gauls, and took their camp.
Is exercitum suum contrā Galliōs dūxit et castra eōrum cēpit.
I don’t myself see anything wrong with possessive dative here: Est ei hortus qui ab amīcō datus est. (No need for eius.)
Del. Ipse
Del. Ego
For this exercise I’d repeat vidi.
And I’d use tamen: Eum ipsum numquam vidi, liberos tamen vidi. (eius optional) Or chiasmus better, vidi tamen liberos.
Many thanks for your corrections on F 1-10 which I have incorporated here:
Exercise F.
DATIVE OF POSSESSOR; SIMPLE USES OF SE, SUUS, IPSE, IS.
1.He killed himself with his own sword.
Sē suō gladiō interfēcit.
He has a garden which was given him by his friend.
Hortum habet, quī eī ab amīcō eius datus est. (Hortus eī est, quī… is also possible)
He bought the house for himself and his wife.
Sibī uxōrīque domum ēmit. (is ipse correct here?)
I have never seen him himself, but I have seen his children.
Eum ipsum numquam vīdī, vīdī tamen līberōs (eius).
His children ask him for bread, which he cannot give them.
Līberī eius pānem ab eō rogant, quem eīs dare nōn potest. (double accusative possible but less good ie Līberī eius pānem eum rogant..)
He has given his children the bread which they asked him for.
Pānem līberīs suīs dedit quem ab eō rogāvērunt. ( double accusative possible but less good “quem eum rogāvērunt”)
They have ships and sailors, but they have not many
harbours.
Nāvēs nautāsque habent, sed multōs portūs nōn habent. ( Nāvēs nautaeque eīs, sed multī portūs eīs nōn sunt.)
He wished to conceal his opinion from me, but I asked his friends.
Sententiam suam mē cēlāre volēbat, sed amīcōs eius rogāvī.
You Gauls fear Caesar and his army.
Vōs Gallī Caesarem et exercitum eius timētis.
He led his army against the Gauls, and took their camp.
Exercitum suum contrā Gallōs dūxit et castra eōrum cēpit.
Here are my solutions to F 11-20. I would be grateful for corrections and comments.
The citizens themselves wished to make him consul.
Cīvēs ipsī eum cōnsulem creāre volēbant. (Imperfect because this is something they wished over a period of time? or perfect (voluērunt) as it happened at some time in the past?)
We have many friends, whom we do not often see.
Multi amīcī nōbīs sunt, quōs saepe nōn vidēmus.
I myself will give you his sword.
Ego ipse tibi gladium eius dabō.
We ourselves have many ships.
Nōs ipsī multās navēs habemus.
( Multae navēs nōbis ipsīs sunt.)
He himself gave me his own sword.
Is ipse gladium suum mihi dedit.
I killed him, because he wished to make himself king.
Eum interfēcī quia sē rēgem fierī volēbat.
I had many friends once, but now I have few.
Ōlim multī amīcī mihi erant, nunc autem paucī mihi sunt
I asked you for their bread.
Tē pānem eōrum rogāvī.
They gave us their sailors and ships.
Nōbis nautās nāvēsque eōrum dedērunt.
We ourselves have been taught many things by him.
Nōs ipsī multās rēs ab eō doctī sumus
Many thanks bedwere for your corrections. Somehow I forgot frētus was an adjective.
Here are 11-20 of G. I would be grateful for help in eliminating my mistakes.
A man who is contented with little is worthy of a happy life.
Vir quī contentus parvō, dignus beātā vitā est.
We shall often use the books which you have given us.
Saepe librīs ūtēmur quōs nōbīs dedistī.
You seem to me to be worthy of praise.
Mihi dignus laude esse vidēris.
We have no need of these ships.
Nōbīs hīs nāvibus nōn opus est.
They attacked the city, relying on the courage of their
soldiers.
Urbem aggressī sunt, frētī virtūte mīlitum.
I did this through the advice of Caius.
Hoc cōnsiliō Cāiī fēcit.
By this courage he took the city.
Hāc virtūte urbem cēpit.
Did you use the riches which were given you?
Nōnne dīvitiīs ūsus es quae tibi datae sunt? If we were to use ne would it be “Ūsusne es dīvitiīs quae tibi datae”? sunt?
\
Many men have died of hunger.
Multī fame mortuī sunt. (omit virī?)
You, who perform your duties well, have many friends.
Vōs quī officiīs bene fungiminī multōs amīcōs habētis.
Greek would use ὅστις ἄν and subjunctive for the indefinite relative clause, and I wonder if subjunctive would be better here—(is) qui parvo contentus sit. At all events, it should have a verb.
Many thanks for your all the comments. The end is in sight!
I was trying to avoid the subjunctive because this is supposed to be an elementary exercise. I agree that this is probably the best solution and we could include it as an alternative to bedwere’s proposed " Parvō contentus vir dignus beātā vitā est." So :
Parvō contentus vir dignus beātā vitā est. (Is quī parvō contentus sit dignus beātā vitā est.)
Will this work?
On 12 wouldn’t hīs be better than eīs although I dont see much wrong with librīs on its own. Is this a matter of style rather than grammar?
on 18 I am happy to use “esne ūsus” . (I don’t remember encountering ne attached to a perfect like this so wasn’t sure where to attach it. )
Subjunctive in the relative clause would be post-classical (Livy and later, cf. Gildersleeve 625 R4), so I retract that suggestion. But I would still use a rel.clause: Is qui parvo contentus est …
12 eis unnecessary (and not his, demonstrative). 18 is parallel, and again no pronoun needed.
16 feci not fecit!
Ususne es …
You could add homines, but not viri.
?Better Vobis … multi amici sunt.
I’m glad the end is in sight! Thanks seneca for holding it all together.
Again I haven’t bothered marking longa. (vita in 11 both vowels long.)
Gildersleeve 454 says that Ne is always appended to the emphatic word, which is usually the first word in the sentence “But exceptions are not uncommon”.
Pinkster says “The particle -ne is by far the most frequent in sentence questions in Early Latin, but it disappeared rapidly. Cicero has relatively few instances if compared with Early Latin (see Table 6.2). In Seneca’s Epistulae Morales, with many questions, there are only five instances (including one quotation). When it is used by later authors, this is a stylistic imitation of earlier times.” I found this surprising given the insistence of textbooks that ne is the “correct” form for “neutral” questions.
I dont know what mwh had in mind, but it was probably that “Ūsusne es” is acceptable rather than “esne ūsus” is wrong. The difference now I (over)think about it more is that the former places emphasis on the “use” of riches the latter places emphasis on the person using them. All probably not translatable. (Its also not clear to me whether it makes sense to break up the single syntactical unit “Ūsus es” in this way)
I am interested as to why you think eis is more idiomatic? Thinking of the focus of these exercises as pitched at intermediate students is this something you would expect them to understand?
Thanks for the references to Gildersleeve and Pinkster. I see five instances of esne in PHI, but none as part of a perfect passive. estne, unsurprisingly, is far more common (75x), but none of those instances seem to occur with a perfect passive participle either (though I might have missed one). Searching for -usne, however, yields some examples of [part.]-ne + form of sum. That’s what I get for relying on Sprachgefühl, I suppose. So ususne es seems to be the better choice.
As for adding the pronoun, no, I wouldn’t bother about it with students using NH (especially since, as I was careful to note, the English doesn’t justify it). I had in mind sentences like these, with a form of is that correlates with a following relative pronoun:
Cic. Rosc. 139
nostri isti nobiles nisi vigilantes et boni et fortes et misericordes erunt, eis hominibus in quibus haec erunt ornamenta sua concedant necesse est.
Cic. Font. 13
Huic provinciae quae ex hac generum varietate constaret M. Fonteius, ut dixi, praefuit; qui erant
hostes, subegit, qui proxime fuerant, eos ex eis agris quibus erant multati decedere coegit . . .
Cic. Mur. 1
idem ego sum precatus ut eis quoque hominibus quibus hic consulatus me rogante datus esset ea res fauste feliciter prospereque eveniret.
Cic. Arch. 4
Nam ut primum ex pueris excessit Archias atque ab eis artibus quibus aetas puerilis ad humanitatem informari solet, se ad scribendi studium contulit . . .
Cic. Cael. 66
Itaque haec causa ab argumentis, a coniectura, ab eis signis quibus veritas inlustrari solet ad testis tota traducta est.
Cic. Cael. 72
Cuius prima aetas disciplinae dedita fuit eisque artibus quibus instruimur ad hunc usum forensem, ad capessendam rem publicam, ad honorem, gloriam, dignitatem.
I could wish that NH had written the English sentence to include “those,” but as it’s written eis shouldn’t be in the answer key.
)