Hi all!
I’m taking my course in Latin and I came across a Latin sentence that I’m not quite sure how to translate:
“Mea puellae formam portis dat”
I translated the sentence as “My girl gives form/shape/beauty to the gates,” but that sounds funny to me? Is this translation correct? I believe “portis” is the plural dative? “Formam” is the singular accusative?
Thanks for your guys help!
The correct sentence would be, “Mea puella formam portis dat,” which would translate as you suggest. Puella must be put in the nominative singular form (to be the subject, and to agree in case with “mea”). Formam is the singular accusative. Portis is dative plural.
For what it’s worth, I believe it CAN mean also “My girl takes herself to the gates.” (“gives her outline to”).
Et hoc significari potest, ut credo (quod forsit non tanti est): “Puella mea ad portas recedit.”
Oh you’re right, I added an extra “e” to the end of puella.. >< Thanks! The TA told us the translation was “My girlfriend gives beauty to the gates.” So, that was pretty close. I didn’t know “puella” could also mean girlfriend though.
Thanks for the help!
Very strange sentence, I think. I don’t think it does much good to translate such things unless either it appears in a text you’re reading or there is some cultural context that it can shed light upon.
Yeah, that is exactly why our entire class was so confused on the translation! My TA explained that since our vocabulary is very limited right now (this being the first week of class), some of the translations may not make much sense, but that he wanted us to be able to tell the different parts of the sentences and the cases. As our vocabulary expands, the sentences will begin to make more sense. We’re currently working on the third chapter of Wheelock’s and also reading from a companion book called 38 Latin Stories by Anne Groton and James May.
I’ve done all forty chapters of Wheelock and all thirty-five chapters of Lingua Latina Vol. I and it still doesn’t make much sense to me.
Hi,
If I want to use the adjective “antīqua” to describe a nominative, singluar, masculine noun (i.e. populus), is it declined as “antīquus” or “antīqus”?
Also, I was practicing the translation exercises in Chapter 3 of Wheelock’s (page 21) and had a question for the translation of #10. The English sentence is “We see great fortune in your daugthers’ lives, my friend.” The translation that I worked out is as follows: “Hodiē fortunam magnam in vītīs fīlīae tuae vidēmus, amīcus meus.” I got a bit confused on which case to use for some of the nouns. I’m pretty sure “great fortune” is the accusative because its the direct object. “In your daughters’ lives” can be rewritten as “in the lives of your daughters” in which case “daughters” would be genitive and “lives” would be in the ablative?
Oh, and for #11 of the same page, The English sentence is “He always gives my daughters and sons roses.” My question is do we translate my daughters and sons using a single phrase? So the translation would be “Filiīs meīs rosās semper dat?” Is there a need to distinguish daughters from sons? In this case, the declension would be the same for both, but theoretically, if the declensions were different, do we need to translate both separately? Or is it like Spanish, where the masculine term would also translate as both male and female together?
Thanks! 
Antīquus. “Antīqus” wouldn’t be possible because the “u” after a “q” acts like a “w” and therefore must always precede a vowel.
Also, I was practicing the translation exercises in Chapter 3 of Wheelock’s (page 21) and had a question for the translation of #10. The English sentence is “We see great fortune in your daugthers’ lives, my friend.” The translation that I worked out is as follows: “Hodiē fortunam magnam in vītīs fīlīae tuae vidēmus, amīcus meus.”
Hodiē magnam fortūnam in vītārum fīliārum tuārum vidēmus, amīce mī.
Also note that only the first “i” in “fīlia” is long, and fortūnam has a long “u”. Remember too that both “amīcus” and “meus” have special vocative forms (“amīcus → amīce” since it’s masculine second declension; “meus → mī” because it’s irregular).
I got a bit confused on which case to use for some of the nouns. I’m pretty sure “great fortune” is the accusative because its the direct object. “In your daughters’ lives” can be rewritten as “in the lives of your daughters” in which case “daughters” would be genitive and “lives” would be in the ablative?
Correct.
Oh, and for #11 of the same page, The English sentence is “He always gives my daughters and sons roses.” My question is do we translate my daughters and sons using a single phrase? So the translation would be “Filiīs meīs rosās semper dat?” Is there a need to distinguish daughters from sons? In this case, the declension would be the same for both, but theoretically, if the declensions were different, do we need to translate both separately? Or is it like Spanish, where the masculine term would also translate as both male and female together?
“Fīlia” has an irregular dative and ablative form in the plural: fīliābus. The text mentions this somewhere. I think “fīliīs” may nonetheless be sufficient to cover both (although the book probably wants you to use “fīliābus” just to show that you know it).
magnam, mī amīce, fortūnam in vītīs fīliārum tuārum vidēmus.
Oops, yeah, there shouldn’t be a “hodiē” in that translation. I guess I copied that from the original attempt. ^^;
And I see I got the case agreement wrong too. facepalm Craig’s got it right.
Thanks guys! That helped out a lot!
I’m working on a translation and I need some clarification on word order. I know there isn’t a definitive word order for Latin, but I was wondering if my translation would be ok. The English is “The rumors ought to warn the farmers in my fatherland”
I translated it as: “Famae agricolās in patriā meā monēre debent.” It bothers me a bit that word order can be a bit arbitrary (but that could be because im just a bit OCD lol). I also wasn’t sure if the ablative case is correct for “patriā meā.”
Thanks for the help!
Perfect.
It’s correct, because the farmers are in the fatherland, not moving into it as an accusative would suggest.
Word order in Latin isn’t arbitrary; it’s super expressive and artful! Alternatively, OK,—you can think of it like that.
Non arbitrarius ostentui latinè ordo vocabulorum, sed valdè significans et artifex. Aliter, licet,—non falsum quod dicis.
And that’s the problem, adrianus – knowing when to vary word order, and knowing what a particular word order signifies when you come across it. I’m OCD about that sort of thing too. Thankfully, by simply observing the way Latin sentences are written over and over, I think I’ve gotten the general hang of it.
For what it’s worth, the “standard” word order for Latin sentences is: Subject, indirect object, direct object, adverbial words or phrases, verb. There will, of course, be numerous exceptions in any real Latin prose, though. (And in poetry, you’re better off just assuming anything is possible and there is no standard order…)
Another rule that’s good to know is that adjectives generally come after the noun (much as in Spanish, etc.), except for adjectives of size, beauty, quantity, and a few other things, which typically precede. Likewise, genitives almost always come after the noun they modify… but only “almost”.
I believe Latin composition is also an important part of the process of understanding word order, because, by trying to express yourself not just grammatically but also clearly, you begin empathetically to recognize and understand the skills and choices of Latin authors in writing as they do,—since writing is (or should be) about communication.
Latinè scribere etiam valdè adjuvat ut ordo vocabulorum meliùs à te intellegatur. Per processum et clariùs non modò grammaticè scribendi, quasi è nebulâ videre cogitareque instituis mutuò affectu artem consiliaque auctorum latinorum atque cur sic scribant,—ars scribendi posthaec, nonnè est communicationis ars (vel debet esse)?
Thanks guys! Really helpful for a Latin newbie! =)
This is a really useful tip! Thanks!
I’m working on a few translations and came across a few questions:
English: “The danger to the good son is small.”
My Latin Translation: “Perīculum ad fīlium bonum est parvum”
I wasn’t exactly sure if I should use the accusative or the ablative case here. So far, we’ve mostly used the ablative with prepositional phrases, but Wheelock says that the accusative is often used with preposition “to.” I’m also not sure if “ab” is the correct word to use in this sentence as well.
English: “The evil war terrifies many people.”
My Latin Translation: “Bellum malum multum populum terret.”
Since Latin word order is slightly arbitrary, does one just look at context in a case like this where you can take the sentence different ways? I know in this case it wouldn’t make sense to switch which noun is the nominative and which is the accusative, but theoretically speaking.
English: “The greedy men ought to love leisure.”
My Latin Translation: “Virī avāvī ōtium amāre debent.”
For this one, I just had a question on word order. Is the infinitive verb generally right before the active verb?
Thanks in advance! =)
My guess is that it would actually be dative with no preposition: “Perīculum fīliō bonō est parvum.” And yes, “ad” always (not just “often”) takes the accusative.
You’re letting your English interfere with your Latin here. Remember that “people” in this sentence is just the plural of “person”; “populum” is “the people” in a broad sense, more like “population”. I would just say “Bellum multōs terret”, but if you really need to translate the “people” part, I would say “multōs hominēs”.
In your sentence there was only one way it could be taken, since “populum” is masculine (and therefore its nominative does not end in -um). But yes, context can help a lot, as can word order – the subject usually comes before the object, especially when there is potential for confusion (but note that what confuses us didn’t necessarily confuse the Romans).
“Avārī”, not “avārī”. It’s quite common to put the infinitive first, yes, but it’s also quite common to do it the other way around.
Ok thanks Kef! I did mean to put avārī NOT avāvī. Stupid typo… haha
We are going to be going into the future and imperfect tenses this week in class (chapters 5-6 of Wheelocks). I’m making a sentence using the imperfect and I want to know if my translation of my own sentence makes sense:
English: “I used to always eat with my good friends”
Latin: Cum amīcīs meīs bonīs semper cēnābam.
Does that look right to you guys? I think the tenses and cases I used should be correct, it’s just a matter of if there is a more usual or better word order for the adjectives. Thanks! 