Latina Est Gaudium: Take II

[akujunkan]

I just bookmooched a B&W (pirated?) copy of the Oxford Latin Course: Part I, which was the textbook we used in my Latin classes at IASMH. What better way to celebrate than by asking a bunch of random questions from Jenny's First Year Latin?

1) Jenney states in the preposition unit that both a/ab and e/ex mean "from," but gives no other information. Are the two interchangeable, or are there situations where one is more appropriate than the other?

2) And now on to verb conjugations. One E->L exercise sentence is "Lucius had walked with his friends for a long time." Should I translate the verb as ambulaverat or ambulaverant? In other words, do verbs give preference to their subject or to the entire group of people performing the action, regardless of their locations in the sentence?

3) A similar question on noun declensions: an E->L exercise sentence reads "Horses are good and friendly animals." Should this be translated "Equi sunt animales boni et amici" or "Equi sunt animales bona et amica?" In other words, should I decline the adjectives as the 1st D equus or 3rd N animal?

4) Last but not least: et versus -que. Are there situations where one is more appropriate than the other? I see -que used to link two nouns, but can it also be used for adjectives and so forth?

Like I said, completely random, but stuff that isn't explained anywhere in the text.

That will be all.

Comments

[sara-tanaquil.livejournal.com]

1) Mmm, a/ab and e/ex aren't exactly interchangeable, though there are some areas where they overlap. a/ab has more of a sense of "moving away from", while e/ex has the sense of "coming out of."

2) I would definite translate that as ambulaverat, since for "with his friends" I think they're looking for cum amicis. Latin tends to go strictly by grammatical subject, not sense, when deciding singular/plural. In fact, even when there are clearly two grammatical subjects (Lucius et amicus, eg.) the verb might sometimes be singular to agree with the nearest one, sometimes plural to agree with both.

should I decline the adjectives as the 1st D equus or 3rd N animal?

3) Strictly speaking, neither. Adjectives have to agree with nouns in case, number and gender, but the actual form of their declension is determined by the adjective's own declension. bonus and amicus are both -us, -a, -um type adjectives, so it would be "boni et amici."

4) I had to consult Allen & Greenough for this one. Apparently, -que is classed with other conjunctions which "connect similar constructions" -- i.e. usually noun and noun, adjective and adjective, clause and clause. It also says that "Et simply connects words or clauses; -que combines more closely into one connected whole." But in the majority of cases, I'd expect to see it joining nouns. In the example above, boni amicique feels wrong somehow.

Tough questions!

[akujunkan.livejournal.com]

a/ab has more of a sense of "moving away from", while e/ex has the sense of "coming out of."

Ah, I figured there was a distinction like that. What remains to be seen is whether Latin has the same senses of "moving away" versus "moving out" that English does;)

As for #3, I don't think I phrased my question precisely. My issue here is that there are two nouns--equus and animal--of two different declensions, and I'm not sure to which of those two I should apply "good" and "friendly." Should I decline the adjectives as -us adjectives (after equus) or -um adjectives (after animal)? I'm guessing the former from your answer, but does that rule apply in similar situations with a noun in the subject and a predicate noun?

Anyway, thank you for taking the time to answer this stuff, let alone looking things up! I really appreciate it:-)

[sara-tanaquil.livejournal.com]

Oh, I get your question now! Because you wrote animales, I forgot that animal is a neuter noun. The plural of animal is animalia. (See how bad my prose comp skills are?) The declension still doesn't make any difference, but the gender does.

You're right, the adjectives should agree with the predicate, not the subject.

Bonus and amicus are 1/2 declension -us, -a, -um adjectives no matter what, but if they agree with nom. neut. pl. animalia, they should be given the nominative neuter plural ending of an -us, -a, -um adjective: bona et amica.

Is that clearer now? Sorry for the confusion. I was making the adjectives agree with "animales," but I was thinking of "animales" as a masculine plural noun.

And can I just say, your question was highly intelligent, but that sentence is idiotic. No Roman in his right mind would ever refer to a horse as a "friendly animal." Viz. the charming Varro, who wrote in his agricultural treatise that there are three types of farm tools: inanimate tools (plows), tools that are animate but mute (horses), and tools that are animate and can talk (slaves).

[akujunkan.livejournal.com]

Thanks again for the help & clarification! And I don't think the confusion had so much to do with your prose skills as my wanton interchanging of 'declension' and 'gender.' If nothing else, I knew what I meant;-)

Varro sounds charming indeed. (>.<) Every time I read something along those lines I'm reminded that as bad as things still are, humanity has come a long way. Good lord.