My translation of this sentence is muddled:
Sententias de anima mutare inceperamus sed sententias non mutaveratis.
We had begun to change thoughts about the soul but thoughts had not changed.
The verbs, I think, are both pluperfect indicative. So it is had begun, and had changed. Perhaps I am thinking too much about the meaning which in these exercises don’t sometimes make a lot of sense.
Hallo! It actually looks mostly right, but mutaveratis is indicative pluperfect 2nd person plural, so it would turn out to you (plu.) had not changed the thoughts.
so:
We had begun to change [our] thoughts about the soul, but you had not changed [your] thoughts.
Or atleast I think.
Thanks - I missed the person of mutaveratis but looks like I got the translation ok. It’ll be nice when I learn ‘our’ and ‘your’ - it’ll make the sentences more readable.
It’ll be nice when I learn ‘our’ and ‘your’ - it’ll make the sentences more readable.
vester, -ra, -um - your (pl)
noster, -ra, -um - our
But be aware that Latin is notorious for not using possessive pronouns when context makes the connection clear. In your sentence, for instance, there is little doubt that sententiae can only be changed by the person having them. Thus to say vestras sententias non mutaveratis is, at least for the Romans, redundant.
David
PS - Anyway, I’m always on the lookout for chances to say “Latin is notorious.”