Hi.
I don’t remember (I forgot) if quod had a use as a substitute for ut, but in this sentence quod seems to be set together with ita.
Cum vero animus se ita erigit quod requirit pupillam mali videre…tu eum citius in igne comburis cum volueris.
Is this ita… quod… meaning like ita… ut… ?
(requirit is indicative, so quod clause would be describing a result.
Forsit enuntiatio pectoris cum quod:
It’s possibly an expression of feeling with quod: See A&G, §572b: http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=AG+572&fromdoc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.04.0001
“When the heart excites itself so very much that it longs to look into the eye of the devil [/evil] and the teeth [/jaw] of wickedness [et maxillam nequitiae], you burn it in the fire pretty quickly when you want [that /shall have wished that].”
Hi. 
Cum vero animus se ita erigit
quod requirit pupillam mali videre et maxillam nequicie
tu eum citius in igne comburis
By the way, about a week or a couple of weeks ago, I asked you if a present participle can be used in vocative, and you found for me this example.
http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=gt9BAAAAcAAJ&pg=PA843&lpg=PA843&dq="o+poenitens"&source=bl&ots=O7j5W20vAy&sig=AhnrEK-OlOURYtoDvJJl64aDQok&hl=en&sa=X&ei=LklzUOuoMuWw0AWu0YAo&sqi=2&ved=0CCQQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q="o%20poenitens"&f=false
I have wondered how you did searching and wanted to ask you how you found that.
Could you tell me ?
I see people who are advanced learners are also good at searching the web.
I wonder how they become good at it.
Are they taught by others ?
I admit I think the opposite, that it’s not vague but colourful and it does express a feeling of craving to see evil and hear or speak evil (for the eye looking at a jaw).
Adversum credo, fateor. Non mihi obscurum sed poeticum et significat libidinem eius qui mala videat loquatur audiatur.
Quod in aliâ epistulae parte scribis, modo est hoc: rectae quaestiones felix quaesitum prosperant. Porrò, imaginari debes quomodo alii scribant reanturque.
As for the other thing, the trick is asking the right questions and trying to imagine how others think and write.
More precisely, I looked for word pairs beginning “o” (+ imagined present participle substantives such as “sinners”—“o penitentes” or “o poenitentes”—, “believers” —“O credentes”—and so on)
Accuratiùs dicere, collocationes per “o” vocabulum primum ut “o penitens” et alias similes quaesivi.
I looked for word pairs beginning “o” (+ imagined present participle substantives such as “sinners”—“o penitentes” or “o poenitentes”—, “believers” —“O credentes”—and so on)
You mean you tried searching by the searchwords “o poenitentes”, “o credentes”, and so on one by one ?
I do. That was all that was needed. There’s no better way, I would say.
Ita. Sat suffecit. Nec exstat satius inquirendi modus, ut opinor.
Maybe I am missing something, but is this not just a causal clause?
‘cum vero animus se ita erigit quod requirit pupillam mali videre et maxillam nequicie
tu eum citius in igne comburis’
When the heart excites itself so very much BECAUSE it longs to look into the eye of the devil [/evil] and the teeth [/jaw] of wickedness [et maxillam nequitiae], you burn it in the fire pretty quickly when you want [that /shall have wished that]."
I am a bit sleepy, so maybe I am misreading this…
But looking at a translation of this passage online I think I am correct.
‘And when the soul rises up
to look into the eye of evil
and the jaws of wickedness,
you quickly consume it
with fire as you will.’
The translator has merged the ‘quod requirit videre’ into ‘to look’. It wants to look, therefore it is rising up ‘to look’. It is not rising up with the result that it looks evil in the eye, but rather looking up because it wants to do so.
In any case, my own experience with such Christian poetry is that the normal rules of Classical Latin grammar often go out the window.
That’s better, ptolemyauletes. Just “because”.
Melius quidem, ptolemaeeaulete, ibi “quod/quia”.
Hi, Ptolemyauletes.
You two agree that quod here means because, and I see that meaning in the top article of Lewis and Short, and I see no explanation in the same dictionary that there is an expression ita…quod….
Then, finally, I ask you for an assurance.
You two are of an opinion that ita is a separate thing from quod here, and has no grammatical relation ?
(I guessed ita might be coupled with quod because of some medieval irregularity.)
Ita vero,—quae obiter collocatio satius est quam alia, “ita quod” enim, sed non necesse est eam considerari.
Yes. Why not pursue “ita vero” before “ita quod”? Not that it’s necessary or helpful.
How about this ita quod ?
Deus enim rorem in illas misit,
de quo multiplex fama crevit,
ita quod > omnes populi ex hac honorabili fama
velut cibum gustabant.
Which meaning of quod is this ?
Lewis & Short for quod:
http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.04.0059%3Aentry%3Dquod1
To me, this seems to mean so that + a result.
Well, less easily perhaps in English “because” there, I guess, but more “as to, with regard to the fact that” [ita quod = thus + to the extent that, with regard to the fact that]
Non ibi eâ ratione, magis quod = anglicè “with regard to the fact that”
“God indeed sprinkled water on them
from which sprang a multi-dimensional tradition,
[multi-dimensional so to speak] in so far as all nations
from this honoured tradition
effectively derived sustenance.”
In medieval law, “ita quod” = “thus that” but not “in order to”, more “on condition that”,“to the extent that the following is so”.
De “its quod” in jure aevi medii, “hâc lege/conditione” significatur.
I suppose it is a bit like “ita ut” = “in the same way as…”
Hi.
Deus enim rorem in illas misit,
de quo multiplex fama crevit,
ita quod omnes populi ex hac honorabili fama
velut cibum gustabant.
You wrote :
In medieval law, “ita quod” = “thus that” but not “in order to”, more “on condition that”,“to the extent that the following is so”.
De “its quod” in jure aevi medii, “hâc lege/conditione” significatur.
Then, is it meaning it was so on the condition that / in that / to the extent that all nations were tasting from this gloriously famous story something like a tasteful food ?
(ita here seems to refer to Deus enim rorem in illas misit, de quo multiplex fama crevit, not to the following sentence, whose quotation I didn’t put here.)
It seems not very awkward. It seems good.
But how about were going to taste for the imperfect gustabant ?
Imperfect can be used as a future in the past.
You wrote :
I suppose it is a bit like “ita ut” = “in the same way as…”
But in the same way as doesn’t seem to fit in this sentence very well.
If ita quod is an equivalent to ita ut (that’s what I thought) , and ita ut can mean variously like so as in English, why can’t it lead a result clause ?
I feel it would not be awkward if I take omnes populi ex hac honorabili fama
velut cibum gustabant as a result.
I would say // Sic dicam, “in that / to the extent that” but not // non “it was so on the condition that”.
I didn’t know that about the imperfect. Otherwise, I think just “used to”, since, in my opinion this whole phrase is just explaining in what sense “fama” was “multiplex”. // De imperfectum et futurum praeterito, id nescivi.
If “to the extent that” introduces a result clause, then OK. I don’t see such a clause [introduced by “in so far as/to the extent that”] so described elsewhere but I get your reasoning. It seems to me more a clause of characteristic.//Licet. Sic alibi non lego, at argumentum tuum diligo. Magis clausula ad rei descriptionem pertinens, id mihi videtur.
Deus enim rorem in illas misit,
de quo multiplex fama crevit,
ita quod omnes populi ex hac honorabili fama
velut cibum gustabant.
As to the imperfect as expressing a future in the past (e.g. was going to…),
I can’t exactly rememer where it was written, and since I’m bad at searching the net I can’t find the e-text page soon,
but I got to know the usage reading A New Latin Syntax by E.C. Woodcock.
If you don’t find it yourself, I will see the book and find a passage telling about that imperfect usage, though it will take some time.
I got it.
For example, section 200 (ii) :
The imperfect tense is often used of a movement attempted or begun, but not finished.
e.g. Cic. Lig. 24 > veniebatis in Africam… prohibiti estis in provincia pedem ponere.
you were for coming into Africa, but you were prevented from setting foot in the province.Livy, 7,17,12 > orta contentio est quod duo patricii consules creabantur.
A dispute arose because movement was afoot to elect two patrician consuls.In this conative or inceptive sense faciebam is almost equivalent to > facturus eram> , and accordingly the imperfect indicative, like -urus eram, is sometimes found in the apodosis of unreal conditions…
Thanks, Junya. I understand now how it could be construed almost futuristically.
Gratias tibi ago, Junya. Nunc intellego quomodo id cum sensu ferè futuro construas.