I am using Henle 1 to teach Latin. It lists pugno, pugnare as intransitive.
My Latin dictionary says it is both intransitive and transitive. In English it is common for “fight” to be transitive. “The Americans fought the Germans is WW II.” “I am fighting a cold.” Also, this verb could be passive, therefore transitive. “The disease was faught by numerous radium treatments.” Is there a reason Henle would list this verb as only intransitive?
Thanks,
dcm
Salve dcmoore6. Pugno IS an intransitive verb in Latin (despite its transitive use in English), that, if used with an object, will have a preposition “cum”, “adversum” or “in”. What dictionary are you using that gives it as transitive as well? The circumstances when it can have transitive properties are a little obscure, I think, – as in a compound word such as “oppugno”, say, but with prepositions “adversum” or “in” when they take an accusative that doesn’t make “pugno” transitive. Does your dictionary have an example of it’s transitive use?
The dictionary I am using is the “New College Latin and English”. The example from the NCLE is “clara pugna ad Perusiam pugnata est = a brilliant battle was fought at Perusia.” which I realize is passive. So my understanding is that the transitive with "fight’ is more of an English aspect than a Latin, which is what you replied.
Yes. As you know, intransitive verbs can’t have passives. However… This is impersonal (third person) use of the verb in the passive voice, which allows intransitive verbs to take on a passive sense which they can’t in other circumstances (verbs such as pugno, faveo, curro, venio, listed in one grammar, for instance).