I think you’ve got the first part of the sentence wrong.
“neque” was tought in p.40 and is synonym to “nec”.
for “et o’ra’vit ne’ se’ i’nsidia’rum da’mna’ret”, check the last example on p.52 and the third on p.53.
Give it another try after that and I’m sure you’ll get it right.
That is the right meaning for neque (when there are two). nequeis actually ne + -que, but this ne has kept it original meaning as a general “not”, like non (non = ne unum “not one, not a bit”). In most other places, ne has been replaced by non.
But it’s a great book, isn’t it?
I’m loving it, I’m to finish Unit 3 today, I’ve been on a 1-unit-a-day pace since I got it and plan to keep that way, if it should not get too hard.
yes, ne is the original word meaning “not”, and is the original negative in all Indo-European languages. mortuus should be pronounced like mor-tu-us. In modern textbooks that distinguish between v and u, always pronounce u as a vowel and v as a consonant (not mor-twus). There are some times when a u is pronounced v or vice versa, but those will not appear in your textbook.
What vocabulary are you referring to? You should try to memorize it all, but you don’t have to do it all at once. You can’t read much if you don’t know the words, grammar is only one part of the language.
In modern textbooks that distinguish between v and u, always pronounce u as a vowel and v as a consonant
Except, of course, after q. I suppose it is because of English usage that modern textbooks, though subsituting v for nearly all instances of consonantal u, still keep the u when following q? The combination, of course, yields phoetic “kw.” Maybe there’s some better explanation for this inconsistency that I haven’t considered?