uiro multa allocuto et ferociam uxoris recordato Alcumena tamen nil respondit.

Lysandra

Canis

  • Civis Illustris

  • Patrona

Is the Latin you've given us, Dana, the self-contained entirety of what you have to translate for this question or is there more? If this is all there is to the question, are there any questions before or after on the same topic?
Aurifex, it is in relation to Plautus' play Amphitruo. There is a grammatical question following this in relation to the dative in the sentence, but I have already figured it out.
 

Pacifica

grammaticissima

  • Aedilis

Location:
Belgium
I don't think it's a temporal clause but a participle one (which is the main point of study this week).
It's a participial clause in Latin, but which can be rendered with a temporal clause in English, as you yourself did with "after".
If 'multa' should not be translated as 'addressed many things', is it describing 'ferociam' as I originally suggested? I am still not clear on whether 'multa' is acting as a noun or an adjective.
No, multa isn't describing ferociam; it it did, it would need to agree with it and be multam. It's a neuter plural, literally "many things", but it can also be translated adverbially as "a lot" or sim. "After he spoke many things to her", "after he spoke a lot to her", or something of the kind.
 

Callaina

Feles Curiosissima

  • Civis Illustris

  • Patrona

Location:
Canada
Sorry, I misinterpreted. But perhaps the way you suggest to translate it could make it seems like she thought of it as an absolute ablative. The teacher might think of it as an error.
How do we know for sure it's not/can't be an ablative absolute? Does respondit absolutely need an indirect object (i.e. the man)?
 

Pacifica

grammaticissima

  • Aedilis

Location:
Belgium
Well, I suppose that in theory it could be an ablative absolute, but the dative seems more likely.
 

Lysandra

Canis

  • Civis Illustris

  • Patrona

Thank you again for all of your help. I still have one question about 'multa' though. I know it is neuter plural, but is it nominative and describing 'allocutus' or is it accusative and the object of 'allocutus'?
 

Ignis Umbra

Ignis Aeternus

  • Civis Illustris

  • Patronus

Location:
USA
The latter; multa is the direct object of allocuto.
 

Pacifica

grammaticissima

  • Aedilis

Location:
Belgium
Well, more like an internal object than a direct object.
 

Callaina

Feles Curiosissima

  • Civis Illustris

  • Patrona

Location:
Canada
Well, more like an internal object than a direct object.
I think I understand what you mean here by "internal object", but can you say more (i.e. what exactly is the difference?)
 

Pacifica

grammaticissima

  • Aedilis

Location:
Belgium
Hmm, how to explain that...

A direct object is an "external" object, so the thing/person directly affected/acted upon, as in e.g. Alcumenam adloquitur, "He addresses/talks to Alcumena", whereas an internal object is not something you act upon but something that is inherent in the action of the verb. It can be either what's called a cognate accusative — so a noun that is related to the verb as in, e.g. pugnam pugnare, "to fight a fight", or magnam insaniam insanire, "to be mad with a great madness" — or a neuter pronoun, as in si quicquam me amas, literally "if you love me anything", i.e. "if you love me at all", or Alcumenam multa adloquitur, more or less literally, "He addresses alcumena (with) many things/words". The same principle is at play in adverbs that are actually neuter accusatives like multum, satis, parum and such.
 

malleolus

Civis Illustris

  • Civis Illustris

  • Patronus

Which textbook has this sentence been taken from?
 

Lysandra

Canis

  • Civis Illustris

  • Patrona

Which textbook has this sentence been taken from?
The sentence is made up for the homework, but it is based off of similar ones in Peter V. Jones' Reading Latin: Grammar, Vocabulary and Exercises.

Hmm, how to explain that...

A direct object is an "external" object, so the thing/person directly afftected/acted upon, as in e.g. Alcumenam adloquitur, "He addresses/talks to Alcumena", whereas an internal object is not something you act upon but something that is inherent in the action of the verb. It can be either what's called a cognate accusative — so a noun that is related to the verb as in, e.g. pugnam pugnare, "to fight a fight", or magnam insaniam insanire, "to be mad with a great madness" — or a neuter pronoun, as in si quicquam me amas, literally "if you love me anything", i.e. "if you love me at all", or Alcumenam multa adloquitur, more or less literally, "He addresses alcumena (with) many things/words". The same principle is at play in adverbs that are actually neuter accusatives like multum, satis, parum and such.
Thank you for the explanation. It makes a lot more sense now. Actually, I submitted the assignment a few hours ago, but I am still interested in learning more.
 

Pacifica

grammaticissima

  • Aedilis

Location:
Belgium
Well, the adversative contrast betwenn the fact that he talked a lot and called to mind the fierceness of his wife and the fact that Alcumena didn't respond isn't obvious at first, though I guess it can still fit somehow...
 

malleolus

Civis Illustris

  • Civis Illustris

  • Patronus

It strikes me the word "tamen" is unwanted in this sentence.

One could work around it by translating, rather freely, I admit, "Although the man talked about many things/addressed a lot of things and remembered ETA: his wife's fierceness, Alcmene still didn't make any response.
 

Callaina

Feles Curiosissima

  • Civis Illustris

  • Patrona

Location:
Canada
Well, the adversative contrast betwenn the fact that he talked a lot and called to mind the fierceness of his wife and the fact that Alcumena didn't respond isn't obvious at first, though I guess it can still fit somehow...
It made sense to me -- like he was expecting to get a reaction (of sympathy or whatever) from Alcumena, and didn't, even after he told her at great length about what a horrible person his wife was...
 

Pacifica

grammaticissima

  • Aedilis

Location:
Belgium
It made sense to me -- like he was expecting to get a reaction (of sympathy or whatever) from Alcumena, and didn't, even after he told her at great length about what a horrible person his wife was...
Yes, it can make sense. It just isn't immediately obvious.

addressed a lot of things
Why does everyone seem to persevere in (mis)translating it like this...? :(

Btw, Lysandra, there was a forum member called Carpe Piscem who had the same avatar as you. Are you the same person or do you just happen by chance to have the same avatar?
 

malleolus

Civis Illustris

  • Civis Illustris

  • Patronus

Comment deleted.
 
Top