# Translation and Errors in D'Ooge's Lesson LXII

**URL:** <https://www.textkit.com/t/translation-and-errors-in-dooges-lesson-lxii/17646>\
**Category:** Latin For Beginners by D'Ooge\
**Created:** [June 9, 2020, 5:24am UTC](https://www.textkit.com/t/translation-and-errors-in-dooges-lesson-lxii/17646 "2020-06-09T05:24:36Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 5\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Propertius](https://www.textkit.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/p/c37758/32.png) [@Propertius](https://www.textkit.com/u/Propertius)\
**Post date:** [June 9, 2020, 5:24am UTC](https://www.textkit.com/t/translation-and-errors-in-dooges-lesson-lxii/17646/1 "2020-06-09T05:24:36Z")

</div>

Exercise on pg. [152](https://archive.org/details/latinforbeginner00doogrich/page/152/mode/2up) of workbook; answers on pg. 28 of answer key.

353.I.

1. They come to [lead, send, see, hear, be led, be sent, be seen, be heard.]
2. We flee lest [we be captured, we be handed over, we see, we be killed, we be seized, we resist.]
3. He sends messengers who are to [speak, listen, come, recount, be heard, sit in the meeting.]
4. They fortify the camp by which to [defend themselves, hold back the attack, defeat the enemy, seek safety] more easily.

II.  
2. Prima luce proficiscuntur ut ante noctem iter longius faciant.  
3. Mulieres in silvam abdent ne capiantur.

For number three of part two, the workbook asks for _in the forest_ to be translated as _in_ with the accusative, so such is what I did. But why is that? Wouldn’t that translate to **into the forest**?

Gratias tibi ago.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![bedwere](https://www.textkit.com/user_avatar/www.textkit.com/bedwere/32/35_2.png) [@bedwere](https://www.textkit.com/u/bedwere)\
**Post date:** [June 9, 2020, 4:57pm UTC](https://www.textkit.com/t/translation-and-errors-in-dooges-lesson-lxii/17646/2 "2020-06-09T16:57:49Z")

</div>

> [@](#):
>
> 353.I.
> 
> 1. They come to [lead, send, see, hear, be led, be sent, be seen, be heard.]
> 2. We flee lest [we be captured, we be handed over, we see, we be killed, we be seized, we resist.]
> 3. He sends messengers who are to [speak, listen, come, recount, be heard, sit in the meeting.]
> 4. They fortify the camp **that they may** [defend themselves, hold back the attack, defeat the enemy, seek safety] more easily.
> 
> II.
> 
> 1. Helvētiī lēgātōs mittunt ut pācem petant.
> 2. Prīmā lūce proficīscuntur ut ante noctem iter longius faciant.
> 3. Mulierēs in silvam abdent nē capiantur.
> 4. Gallī bella multa gerunt ut patriam suam [ā] servitūte libērent.
> 5. Rōmānīs fortiter resistent nē dēleantur.

For I.4, I think it’s better for the student if we present the same translation as 351.3. The literal translation is there only to help understand the logic behind, but it should not be used.  
For II.3, I think D’Ooge wants to follow [Caesar’s usage](http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus:text:1999.02.0002:book=5:chapter=3&highlight=arduennam%2Csilvam) for [abdō](https://logeion.uchicago.edu/abdo). In English you can use in, as far as I can tell (it’s my second language, as you know), but not into. In Latin you can use both in+abl. and in+acc. .

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Anto](https://www.textkit.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/a/59ef9b/32.png) [@Anto](https://www.textkit.com/u/Anto)\
**Post date:** [January 13, 2023, 9:06am UTC](https://www.textkit.com/t/translation-and-errors-in-dooges-lesson-lxii/17646/3 "2023-01-13T09:06:52Z")

</div>

I have a couple of questions regarding the same exercise: 353. II.  
Instead of “ut” I have put “quī” in number one, and “quō” in number two. So, I put:

1. 
  1. Helvētiī lēgātōs mittunt **quī** pācem petant.

2. Prīmā lūce proficīscuntur **quō** ante noctem iter longius faciant.

Is it wrong? Or is it another option?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![bedwere](https://www.textkit.com/user_avatar/www.textkit.com/bedwere/32/35_2.png) [@bedwere](https://www.textkit.com/u/bedwere)\
**Post date:** [January 13, 2023, 11:44pm UTC](https://www.textkit.com/t/translation-and-errors-in-dooges-lesson-lxii/17646/4 "2023-01-13T23:44:58Z")

</div>

They are both correct. See [PURPOSE CLAUSES](https://dcc.dickinson.edu/grammar/latin/purpose-clauses)

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Anto](https://www.textkit.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/a/59ef9b/32.png) [@Anto](https://www.textkit.com/u/Anto)\
**Post date:** [January 16, 2023, 8:17am UTC](https://www.textkit.com/t/translation-and-errors-in-dooges-lesson-lxii/17646/5 "2023-01-16T08:17:05Z")

</div>

> [@](#):
>
> They are both correct. See [PURPOSE CLAUSES](https://dcc.dickinson.edu/grammar/latin/purpose-clauses)

Thank you. I appreciate it.