How did the Romans say the preposition off?
Gratias Ago,
El
Generally, Latin doesn’t make the same distinction between on/in that English does. Though of course super can sometimes mean “on,” in my experience “in” is used more commonly for both meanings. Thus, “in mensa” means “on the table,” not, as English speakers might guess with some perplexity, “in the table.” Or “in cathedra sedens,” “sitting on the throne” (but compare English “sitting in the chair.”
The opposites of on/in are off/out. So it seems likely to me that Latin probably uses ex/e (=out, out of) not only for “out” but also in many cases where English speakers would prefer “off.” Thus librum e mensa cepit might mean “he took the book off the table” (and not just “he took the book from the table,” which has a slightly different meaning).
So, according to this argument on/in = in, out/off = ex.
This is a bit of a guess, though.
Here’s what Cassell’s dictionary says in its English to Latin section (which partially confirms my theory):
off, prep. (1) = detached from, not on, extra (with acc.; = outside, away from), e or ex (= out of); — duty, otiosus (2) = detached from, but near to, perhaps contra (=opposite): an island lying — Alexandria, insula obiecta Alexandreae (dat.: Caes.).
[Edited once to fix an error]
Bellum paxque,
Gratias ago pro verbis tuis. I had a feeling ex/e was the word but needed a little more certainty. Prepositions leave lots of room for interpretation.
EL
Indeed, a wise man once told me that one of the hardest parts of learning any language is fully understanding its prepositions.
What about the other two candidates?
AB or A = away or away from
DE = down or away from
EX or E = out of or from
Traupman in his New College Latin/English Dictionary only gives:
off prep de (w. abl.)
Cheers,
Int
Obligatory Jozsef Herman reference: JH maintains that it was the ambiguity of the oblique cases that impelled the spoken language towards a greater use of the prepositions as clarifying additions, contributing to the gradual decline of inflectional morphology. Note that he didn’t consider this impulsion a “late Latin” development but one that was always present in the spoken language.
It’s a good thing to occasionally recall that classical Latin was a highly artificial use of the language with very little relation to its common (vulgar) usage.