I’m using Henle (a very old fashioned course from the forties) to revive what’s left of the Latin I learned at school. In Henle’s second year Latin is the following English to Latin translation exercise:
Caesar often burned the towns which he had taken
My translation: Caesar oppida quae capiebat (alternatively occupabat) saepe incendebat.
The answer key gives: Caesar oppida quae ceperat saepe incendit.
And
The mountains across which Caesar often led his forces separate Italy from Gaul
My translation: Montes trans quos Caesar copias suas saepe ducebat Italiam a Gallia dividunt.
Answer key: Montes trans quos Caesar copias saepe duxit Italiam a Galia dividunt.
I used the imperfect in both sentences since they involve a repeated action. But the (official) answer key uses the perfect/ plusquamperfect in both sentences. Can someone tell me why?
If you search for saepe on the Perseus website, you’ll see that the perfect is frequently used with saepe when each of the repeated actions is seen as a single, completed event rather than as continuing or unfolding.
One other point–and this is very subjective on my part. Someone who knows Latin better than I should confirm or refute this. I’m not absolutely sure of this, but I believe that the imperfect would connote that the action was habitual, as opposed to occurring on specific occasions.
Caesar oppida quae ceperat saepe incendebat. “Caesar often would burn/used to burn/was in the habit of burning the towns he captured.”
Caesar oppida quae ceperat saepe incendit. “On many occasions Caesar burned the towns he captured.”
So your translation would not necessarily be incorrect (except that unlike English in Latin you would have to use the pluperfect[ i]ceperat[/i] to indicate that the capture occurred before the burning, unless he was burning the towns as he was capturing them). Your translation would have a slightly different meaning.
Indeed, my Latin Grammar (in Dutch) also stresses the fact that one of the uses of the imperfect is to indicate that an action is habitual. So it’s not that simple as my rule of thumb so far: repeated action in the past equals the imperfect.
Is there anything comparable to Smyth for Latin? In German or French is fine too.