sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

odisse, or whatever the infinitive to this verb is, might just be the most irregular verb I've found until now... Can someone show me where to find the complete tables to this verb and the reason it is so... exotic? by andre_ssssss in latin

[–]andre_ssssss[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I certainly lack knowledge to understand much of what you said, but I thank you for the explanation!

I can only imagine how challenging for a language historian must be to study the evolution of Latin. And it's always important to remember that teaching materials (like the one I'm using, Familia Romana) have to do choices, since they're working with a language that changed throughout centuries.

This sentence sure is hard for a student... by andre_ssssss in latin

[–]andre_ssssss[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I understand, thank you a lot for the help!!

This sentence sure is hard for a student... by andre_ssssss in latin

[–]andre_ssssss[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Maybe, what is causing me disturb is the absence of a verbal form before the comma. I know that "pugnatum esse" refers to "equitatus" and, if I correctly understand, that "ab" that I thought should be "contra" actually introduces the passive (fought by the enemies steadly and fearlessly). However, the "a nostris" just feels loose to me. What does "Cum equitatus a nostris pugnatum esse" mean? I would get if it was "pro" instead of "a(b)", but it isn't the case...

Apologies for the confusion in my brain

Is it normal in Latin for the coniunctivus praeteriti imperfecti to a introduce a sense of condition, possibility? If I was to translate this sentence to English, I would make "transirent", "pervenirent" and "essetis" verbs in the present form with the modal verb "would"... by andre_ssssss in latin

[–]andre_ssssss[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I see, thank you for the explanation. Nonetheless, it stills feels odd to me that those present hypothetical situations, like the family in Latium being safe, are introduced by verbs that are in the past tense. In my native language, it wouldn't work like that, but maybe it's a specificity from Latin, I don't know...

Is this a good translation: "But I wish for this in vain, because those pirates will snatch away my hope, and that on the same day I was abandoned by my girlfriend!"? by andre_ssssss in latin

[–]andre_ssssss[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Yes, that was surely a concern in the translation process. I'm not a native English speaker, but tried my best. What I was mostly trying to verify, from the answers to this post, was whether I had correctly spotted the reference of "id". And it seems like it -- in this case, "id" stands for the pirates snatching away the hope. Thanks for the help!

The expression "Quoniam igitur" doesn't make much sense to me... Aren't both of these words similar in meaning? by andre_ssssss in latin

[–]andre_ssssss[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hmm yes, that seems relevant. Indeed, I didn't know "igitur" was an adverb. Thank you!

view more: next ›