Page 1 of 2

Latin Composition

PostPosted: Thu Sep 01, 2005 1:00 am
by Q Valerius
Just wandering if anyone could check my Latin for errors etc...

"'Exemplar' humanus est qui omnes cum maximo honore observemus. Prope animam tres virtutes muneraque tenet. Prima simplus est qui caritates haud necessarie habet; honestus qui vera omnia semper loquitur; aequus quoque qui omnibus bona decoraque dat. Fidelitas in se, pietas in deo, ac humilitas in aliis. Sapiens de rebus iusticis omnibus caelorum mundique, et gentes a moribus eius iudicare potest. Viri paenitendi errorum speculant ac genibus cadunt. Cogitationes puri sic verba pura sic homines a doctrina stupent. Mali etiam stupent, qui non urbis perturbit, vel servantur vel verentur. Vir infinitus ne catenis victus at liber ad persequendum monasticiae, et cum mortem appropinquat, portae regiae caelarum apperiuntur ac pace in aeternitate dormit. Vero vitam hanc vicit, nam perfectus exemplum.

Sagax, prudentissimus hominum est. Oraculum, nam se scit. Miles, pugnans pace usque ad inluminationem. Ne luciferianus ne noctiferianus, at in harmonia perfecta. Via optima eius, sed maxima est amare."

PostPosted: Thu Nov 17, 2005 2:10 am
by Iacobulus
Haven't gone over all of it, but from first sentence I think your use of the relative pronoun "qui" should be in the accusative case: "quem" since it appears to be the direct object of "observemus." ("WHOM we would?should/might regard great honor.")

Also, did you intend for "observemus"? It is a first declension verb, and your form would be the present subjunctive.

PostPosted: Fri Nov 18, 2005 12:13 am
by Q Valerius
Ah, yes, of course. quem. But I did intend for the subjunctive there (hortative).

PostPosted: Fri Nov 18, 2005 7:37 pm
by Iacobulus
Hortatory is the correct term, actually. However, you don't see too much usage of the hortatory subjunctive in a relative clause. Because if you translate the hortatory as "Let us do" so and so, then it is awkward. Maybe if it were made into a deliberative (whom we should) or potential subjunctive (whom we would/could).

Sorry to pick, but I'm currently taking a Latin composition class, so this very relevant to me!.

The rest seems fine, albeit a bit elementary, very St. Jerome. Not that it's a bad thing, a certain amount of poinancy can be had from simplistic syntax, rather than being bogged down in Ciceronian rhetoric.

However, I would perhaps add a few more conjunctions to liven it up a bit and give it a better flow. Maybe some connective conjunctions (igitur, ergo, itaque, etc.) or some adversative (sed, autem, tamen). I also see the potentional for a lot more periaphrastic constructions with gerundives (must and so forth).

What is this for exactly?
[/i]

PostPosted: Fri Nov 18, 2005 11:11 pm
by Primus Aurelius Timavus
Salve Iacobule,

Sorry to pick, but it's "potential" :D

My Latin teacher used to call the horatory subjunctive the "salad subjunctive" because more often than not it was translated "Let us..". It was one of those school boy mnemonics like "dic, duc, fac and fer should have an 'e' but it isn't there" and "We beat all liars" (the endings of each conjugation in the present subjunctive). I'm curious: are those still taught today? I last studied Latin 25 years ago and these rules stuck with me.

Tergestus

PostPosted: Sat Nov 19, 2005 8:49 am
by Q Valerius
Iacobulus wrote:Hortatory is the correct term, actually. However, you don't see too much usage of the hortatory subjunctive in a relative clause. Because if you translate the hortatory as "Let us do" so and so, then it is awkward. Maybe if it were made into a deliberative (whom we should) or potential subjunctive (whom we would/could).

Hortative is incorrect, then. Subjunctive, still, though. The English which I started from.at this point is "The Exemplar is a human whom we all should respect with the greatest honor."

Sorry to pick, but I'm currently taking a Latin composition class, so this very relevant to me!.

No! I actually needed a person to talk with, for, as you can see, no one else was interested.

The rest seems fine, albeit a bit elementary, very St. Jerome. Not that it's a bad thing, a certain amount of poinancy can be had from simplistic syntax, rather than being bogged down in Ciceronian rhetoric.

Well, considering the subject matter, it probably be better simplistic. However, as much as I like simplicity (quod necesse est) I don't necessarily like naivite, which is why I posted it here.

However, I would perhaps add a few more conjunctions to liven it up a bit and give it a better flow. Maybe some connective conjunctions (igitur, ergo, itaque, etc.) or some adversative (sed, autem, tamen). I also see the potentional for a lot more periaphrastic constructions with gerundives (must and so forth).

Perhaps you can point to a couple of rough spots? And yes, this is constantly revised.

What is this for exactly?

Personal philosophy.

PostPosted: Sat Nov 19, 2005 8:50 am
by Q Valerius
Primus Aurelius Tergestus wrote:Salve Iacobule,

Sorry to pick, but it's "potential" :D

My Latin teacher used to call the horatory subjunctive the "salad subjunctive" because more often than not it was translated "Let us..". It was one of those school boy mnemonics like "dic, duc, fac and fer should have an 'e' but it isn't there" and "We beat all liars" (the endings of each conjugation in the present subjunctive). I'm curious: are those still taught today? I last studied Latin 25 years ago and these rules stuck with me.

Tergestus


I learned those as "dic, duc, fac, fer; drop the /e/ it should be there" and "We beat a liar" for those two. Wow, 25 years and it seems as nothing changed!

PostPosted: Sat Nov 19, 2005 3:31 pm
by Primus Aurelius Timavus
Also, it is "periphrastic".

PostPosted: Sun Nov 20, 2005 1:19 am
by Q Valerius
Primus Aurelius Tergestus wrote:Also, it is "periphrastic".

I'm sure it was merely a typographical error.

PostPosted: Sun Nov 20, 2005 10:23 pm
by Iacobulus
Primus Aurelius Tergestus wrote:Salve Iacobule,

Sorry to pick, but it's "potential" :D

My Latin teacher used to call the horatory subjunctive the "salad subjunctive" because more often than not it was translated "Let us..". It was one of those school boy mnemonics like "dic, duc, fac and fer should have an 'e' but it isn't there" and "We beat all liars" (the endings of each conjugation in the present subjunctive). I'm curious: are those still taught today? I last studied Latin 25 years ago and these rules stuck with me.

Tergestus


Of course. Actually, if you look at my post, I said it would be better if it were potential or deliberative, aguing against the hortatory. So actually I did realize that.

And yes, "periaphrastic" was a typo.

PostPosted: Sun Nov 20, 2005 10:27 pm
by Iacobulus
Quinte:

At my university (U of Kentucky), we are fairly well-renown for our Latin Institute, which is a four-course graduate program taught entirely in Latin.

Also, every summer the department hosts a conventiculum, in which scholars from all around come to discuss Latin in Latin.

I've only just begun learning to actually communicate in Latin, and it is quite a daunting task to carry on a conversation in Latin.

PostPosted: Mon Nov 21, 2005 8:15 am
by Q Valerius
If you ever feel the need to try it out, #latin on EFNet is my channel where we sometimes speak in Latin.

PostPosted: Mon Nov 21, 2005 8:53 pm
by Iacobulus
Quin hic Latine loquimur? Fortasse sit forum ad linguam Latinam loquendam?

Valde difficilum est loqui Latine, multo difficilius quam scribere Latine.

PostPosted: Mon Nov 21, 2005 8:56 pm
by Iacobulus
Q. Valerius Scerio wrote:If you ever feel the need to try it out, #latin on EFNet is my channel where we sometimes speak in Latin.


Thanks for the offer, I may look into, but believe me when I say that I get plenty of practice here! The second part of my Latin composition class is completely in Latin, lecture, discussion, everything. It's next semester! I hope I'm prepared, I've only been practicing conversational Latin during this semester. Bona fortuna mihi.

PostPosted: Mon Nov 21, 2005 9:56 pm
by Cleopatra Aelia
Salve Iacobule,

Iacobulus wrote:At my university (U of Kentucky), we are fairly well-renown for our Latin Institute, which is a four-course graduate program taught entirely in Latin.

Also, every summer the department hosts a conventiculum, in which scholars from all around come to discuss Latin in Latin.

I've only just begun learning to actually communicate in Latin, and it is quite a daunting task to carry on a conversation in Latin.


Maybe I would've loved my Latin classes at school much more if we practised speaking it. But all we did was translating from Latin into German and very often that was a big discussion if it was possible to translate it that way or the other way. In the end I didn't know if the translation a fellow studen suggested was correct or not.

I learned Latin for four year but couldn't have a decent conversation in that language. The only things I still remember is that what we use here to greet others etc.

PostPosted: Tue Nov 22, 2005 8:41 am
by Q Valerius
Iacobulus wrote:
Q. Valerius Scerio wrote:If you ever feel the need to try it out, #latin on EFNet is my channel where we sometimes speak in Latin.


Thanks for the offer, I may look into, but believe me when I say that I get plenty of practice here! The second part of my Latin composition class is completely in Latin, lecture, discussion, everything. It's next semester! I hope I'm prepared, I've only been practicing conversational Latin during this semester. Bona fortuna mihi.

Ita vero, multa fortunae tibi vero! Eheu, mi amice, sole in Latinam? Difficillimum etiam mihi!

PostPosted: Tue Nov 22, 2005 7:20 pm
by Iacobulus
Q. Valerius Scerio wrote:Ita vero, multa fortunae tibi vero! Eheu, mi amice, sole in Latinam? Difficillimum etiam mihi!


Sane, Quinti, sed non ita difficile facere est, ut non possit solum Latine loqui. Ab nostris est exercendum!

Aliquis optime opera auctorum Romanorum transire atque legere possit, sed ceterum idem ipse haud bene loqui Latine, velut Anglice. Noli te pudere, quod paulo male loqueris Latine.

Quis est custos fori huius? Res ad linguam Latinam loquendam est instituenda!

PostPosted: Thu Nov 24, 2005 2:06 pm
by Q Valerius
Iacobulus wrote:Quis est custos fori huius? Res ad linguam Latinam loquendam est instituenda!

Puto ut Tiberius Dionysius Draco et K. C. Duellianus sunt, sed tamen hic numquam video.

Bene esset Latine loqui

PostPosted: Thu Feb 23, 2006 4:06 am
by Valerius Claudius Iohanes
Latine loqui est quod necessito ego. Bona ratio. Scio linguam meam barbaram esse sed propter hoc ipsum volo practicare.

PostPosted: Thu Feb 23, 2006 4:16 am
by Primus Aurelius Timavus
Damn Valeri Claudi, I like your Latin. Knowing Spanish very well and Italian pretty well, I can understand it just fine without breaking out my Latin grammars and dictionaries. Maybe you've unknowingly rediscovered the spoken, vice literary, Latin that developed into the Romance languages. Congratulations!