I do not understand the following sentence taken from a manual about writing fiction:
A writer could not handle any of the special devices mentioned in this chapter if she did not first clearly understand what structural norm it was that she was departing from.
It would be much easier for me to grasp the meaning if someone translated it into Cicero’s Latin, please.
Edit: Sorry Laurentius posted at the same time, who has already answered the question. For what it’s worth (not much…), I had understood the sentence in Latin as something like scriptor, nisi prius eam normam scribendi intellexerit a qua discessurus sit, nullo praecepto in hoc libro tractato recte uti sciet. Cheers, Chad
ok, now i get it thanx a lot. Can We understand it, however, as: scriptor, nisi prius eam normam scribendi intellexerit/intellexisset a qua discessurus sit/fuerit/esset, nullo praecepto in hoc libro tractato recte uti sciet/sciret/sciat. anyways, the mood used in the original sentence is subjunctive, not indicative, right?
The grammar of the original English seems unnatural to me. After glancing at the original context on Google Books, I offer the following (still clunky) version:
No writer will be able to handle any of the special devices mentioned in this chapter unless he or she has first clearly understood the structural norm which is violated by the device in question.
There are no subjunctive forms in the original English, and trying to analyze English grammar in terms of the moods that would be required if an English utterance were to be translated into Latin is usually not very helpful as a means of understanding the English on its own terms.