Wow! I’m flattered you all took such an interest. I’ll have to return to making these news reports soon; let us pray I shall have the time!
First of all: in the interest of time, I made numerous small errors in my Latin due to carelessness in my haste to produce daily reports. They often make me shudder when I catch them. Keep this in mind, so that you don’t have to turn your brains inside out to justify my mistakes! heh. Moreover, I’m sure numerous more classical choices are available for much of my writings; and I am most open to hear your thoughts therewith!
"Novum Eboracum vectigalia plurima imponere in animo est Gubernatori Patersono nuntiat New York Daily News.”
This should have been “in animo ESSE,” or there should have been a comma before “nuntiat.” I realized the error after I had made the recording, which would have had to have been redone.
However, by leaving “Novum Eboracum” in the accusative, I intended to say, “Governer Paterson has in mind that New York [should] impose lots of taxes,” taking advantage of the historical infinitive for simplicity/journalese. I agree that the dative case makes sense for “to impose on New York.”
Bushi administratio respondebit pecunia ejusdem servationis argentariae pro Wall Street utens ad “Magnos Tres” curruum venditores adjuvandos.
What is servationis argentaria? I’m thinking reserve bank? or perhaps the treasury department? or is it a reference to TARP? "The Bush administration will respond (that) the same (TARP/treasury/reserve bank) money for Wall Street will be used to help the “big three” auto sellers.
Am I right to translate utens contemporaneously with respondebit , i.e. “will be used”? Or should it be translated in the present tense, i.e. “is being used”?
I meant “servatio argentaria” to mean “bailout.”
And in translation, I would say, “The Bush administration will respond using money of the same Wall Street bailout for helping the Big Three car companies.”
Dummodo Irania jam facultatem habuerit uranii locupletandi, fieri potest Praesidentem Iranianum Ahmadinejad minas terrae Israelianae “delendae” quas prius clamavit exsequi. Tali casu responsum nucleare ab America conjectum esset in Iraniam, ait membrum manipuli transitionis Obamae.
If Iran might now have the ability to enrich , Iranian President Ahmadinejad is able to carry out threats for Israeli land to be destroyed which he previously claimed (promised?) to accomplish. In such a case a nuclear response from America would be launched into Iran, a member of the Obama transition team said.
(Comment/question: The bolded part, although I know what it is trying to say, completely baffles me in its construction. What is the subject of potest?)
The subject of potest is merely “it,” which remains unstated. The idiom “fieri potest” means “it’s possible.”
So: “Provided that Iran already has the ability to enrich uranium, it’s possible that the Iranian President Ahmadinehad will carry out his threats that the land of Israel should be erased, which he has previously declared.”
Jeez, I sure sound more like I’m editorializing than reporting the straight news when I put it in English! Heh heh…
Unless I’m missing something, I think it should actually read “minas terram Israelianam ‘delendae,’” because it is “threats of destroying the Israelian country,” and the ‘country of Israel’ is the object of “delendae.” And it would probably be easier to just substitute “Israelem” for the noun+adjective."
That wouldn’t work, since the gerundive acts as an adjective, and has to concord with the thing “to be destroyed.”
I hope to resume recordings of the news in May, when time becomes more available. And so many interesting news stories! to the Tea Parties to Pirates, all so much more wonderful in Latin. Till then, valete!
Duh…I should have seen that. Thanks. I am working on the next one down now, regarding the then proposed bill to help the big 3 automakers: