The queen loves the great forest et cetera

[Bitmap]

Those will now begin another game. Is there a reason the adverb is between the adj. and the noun? I thought they were to stick with the word they modified (although I'm VERY bad at working out the correct connection in English)

I don't see any special reason for putting the adverb there other than maybe creating some tension, but the sentence is grammatically fine. Nouns and adjectives that can be identified by their case endings to belong together do not need to be tied to each other, and in a lot of cases, they actually aren't. This is often done for emphasis or tension. The sentence would even be right if it said alios illi nunc incipient ludos, and it would even sound rather good. This stylistic device is called hyperbaton. I wrote about it in this thread under the green term "hyperbaton".

Btw. you turned alios ludos into the singular in your translation. It should be "other games".

 

[KarlaUK]

I don't see any special reason for putting the adverb there other than maybe creating some tension, but the sentence is grammatically fine. Nouns and adjectives that can be identified by their case endings to belong together do not need to be tied to each other, and in a lot of cases, they actually aren't. This is often done for emphasis or tension. The sentence would even be right if it said alios illi nunc incipient ludos, and it would even sound rather good. This stylistic device is called hyperbaton. I wrote about it in this thread under the green term "hyperbaton".

Btw. you turned alios ludos into the singular in your translation. It should be "other games".

My brain doesn't seem to connect to my fingers sometimes and my brain 'reads' what it told my fingers to type <sigh>
Those will now begin other games.
Thanks for the link.

 

[Pacifica]

But these boys really don't want to fight.

More exactly, certe = certainly.

 

[Laurentius]

Noted: Putāre has not yet been covered. Let's chalk this up to a poor example as I can't see another verb to suggest here, from what has been covered.

What do you mean with "Putāre has not yet been covered"? It's a rather normal first conjugation verb, I doubt the book has an explanation for every single verb you can find in Latin.

 

[Bitmap]

What do you mean with "Putāre has not yet been covered"? It's a rather normal first conjugation verb, I doubt the book has an explanation for every single verb you can find in Latin.

No, but textbooks usually cover about 20-30 words of vocabulary to be learnt by heart per unit and putare hadn't been among them, yet.

 

[Laurentius]

No, but textbooks usually cover about 20-30 words of vocabulary to be learnt by heart per unit and putare hadn't been among them, yet.

Sounds like a minimum requirement to be able to do the exercises rather than a suggested limit for the words you can use.

 

[Bitmap]

Sounds like a minimum requirement to be able to do the exercises rather than a suggested limit for the words you can use.

Well, obviously ... but it's not like she rejected the use of putare ... she simply excused her ignorance of that by the fact that it comes later in the book (and the author probably accidentally slipped that in from the next unit).

It's not that bad an idea to go with a limited vocabulary in the beginning. The problem with a lot of textbooks is that they overload you with new grammar on the basis of unknown, new words; and that, on the other hand, they introduce new words in the context of a lot of unknown grammar and unknown words.
And it's really hard to learn 30 new words each time until you're up there at 1200 words if you go as fast as Karla does (and for most people, even if you go a lot slowlier). So I can't really blame her.

 

[Laurentius]

Well, obviously ... but it's not like she rejected the use of putare ... she simply excused her ignorance of that by the fact that it comes later in the book (and the author probably accidentally slipped that in from the next unit).

It's not that bad an idea to go with a limited vocabulary in the beginning. The problem with a lot of textbooks is that they overload you with new grammar on the basis of unknown, new words; and that, on the other, they introduce new words in the context of a lot of unknown grammar and unknown words.
And it's really hard to learn 30 new words each time until you're up there at 1200 words if you go as fast as Karla does (and for most people, even if you go a lot slowlier). So I can't really blame her.

I thought she was saying that it'd be better not to use the words that are not given by the book, which I personally find a bit limiting idk. But yeah I understand it can be confusing to use too many words.

 

[Pacifica]

I thought she was saying that it'd be better not to use the words that are not given by the book

It makes sense for a beginner's textbook to give exercise sentences that can be translated using vocabulary that's already been covered.

 

[KarlaUK]

Hale introduces about 8-15 words per chapter. He was a firm believer in reading a sentence one word at a time and understanding what that might say, what options it open/close for the next word in the context of that sentence, what picture it paints so far as opposed to parsing and finding the verb etc. and constructing the sentence meaning. Hence, limited extra vocabulary to explain concepts was deemed sufficient.
Also, I'm too old to learn great gobs of vocab and failed in other languages trying to do that. It's suiting me so far (thanks, in great part, to Bitmap & Pacifica) Vocabulary is useless if you can't understand sentence construction and endings. Understanding the nuances of the language are important to enjoying real authors.

 

[KarlaUK]

Another exercise but this time Latin to English.
Please will anyone help check my translations from basic textbook Latin into English to assist my self-learning.Exercises are from W Gardner Hale's First Latin Book. A short comment on these whether wrong or right would be much appreciated.

Section 231 (1st Ed.)

1. (The teacher) Mārcus eiusque(??) sociī mē adiūvērunt. Iī quī Sextum lacessīvērunt, nōn temerē (sic) ?temere in prīstinō maleficiō mānsērunt, sed sēsē cōnservērunt. Ipse Sextus ab hīs diū lacessītus, tamen iīs inimīcus nōn est. Haec mihi magnopere placuērunt.

Marcus and his allies have assisted me. Those who have bullied Sextus, have not persisted thoughtlessly in (their) former wrong-doing, but have saved themselves. Sextus, (himself) having been harrassed by these (boys) for a long time, nevertheless is not an enemy to them (for them). These things have greatly pleased me.

2. (Sextus stayed away from Mark's pinic in the woods. Mark says) Sextus nōn vēnit. Viditne eum aliquis? Ā mē hodiē māne invītātus, tamen abest. (One of the boys) Ego eum vīdī. (Mark) Ubi erat? Quid faciēbat? (Ans) In villā suā manēbat. (Mark) Quid erat causae? (Ans) Ab aliquō agricolā monitus venīre timēbat. (Mark) Quid dē nostrā cēnā dicēbat agricola? (Ans) "Temerārius," inquit, "es. Silva perīculōsa est." (Mark) Nihil hīc est perīculōsī. Hic agricola Sextō verba dedit.

Sextus has not come. Has anyone seen him? Having been invited in the morning by me today, he is nevertheless absent. I have seen him. Where was he? What was he doing? He was (staying) in his villa. What (of) reason was it? (Gen. of whole.) what was the reason? He was afraid to come having been warned by some farmer. What did the farmer say about our dinner? "Thoughtless", he said "it is. The wood is full of danger." Nothing in this place is (of) danger(ous). This farmer has fooled (given words to) Sextus.

 

[Pacifica]

eiusque(??)

Eius + que. You've translated it correctly. What were you unsure of?

temerē (sic) ?temere

Dunno; the OLD says the last e is short, and so does Bitmap, and I'd tend to trust them. L&S (at least the online version) is known to contain the odd macron mistake. Now I guess it could be that the length is actually uncertain.

cōnservērunt

I guess that was actually conservarunt or conservaverunt?

What (of) reason was it? (Gen. of whole.) what was the reason?

The literal translation should be more like "what (of) reason was [there]?"

Your other translation, "what was the reason?", is fine.

"Thoughtless", he said "it is.

Take another look at the gender of temerarius and the person of es.

Nothing in this place is (of) danger(ous).

Yes, or, to reflect the construction more closely, "There is nothing (of) dangerous here."

 

[Bitmap]

Eius + que. You've translated it correctly. What were you unsure of?

I suppose she was wondering (and I think correctly so) why it says eius rather than sui.

Dunno; the OLD says the last e is short, and so does Bitmap, and I'd tend to trust them. L&S (at least the online version) is known to contain the odd macron mistake. Now I guess it could be that the length is actually uncertain.

Etymologically, it is considered to be a locative remainder of *temus, -eris, n. 'darkness'.
In verse, it always gets elided in hexameters ... which is extremely surprising given that a uu– word with the meaning of temere would be extremely convenient. That's why I presume it gets elided because the last is short and forces you to do so.
Maybe I can find an example from iambic poetry where it doesn't get elided.

 

[Pacifica]

I suppose she was wondering (and I think correctly so) why it says eius rather than sui.

I thought that might be it, but I wanted confirmation before launching into an explanation.

 

[Bitmap]

Now I guess it could be that the length is actually uncertain.

I found 2 examples from Terence, but they are written in iambic octonar and iambic septinar ... I'll put them in the spoiler to show how I think they should be scanned, but that metre is so random that they would also scan if the last e were long in temere.

Spoiler: Terence

Ter. An. 205
ne temere facias; neque tu haud dicas tibi non praedictum: cave!

octonar:
ne temere facias; // neque t'haud dicas tibi non praedictum cave!
- u u / u u u / - // u u / - - / - u u / - - / - - / u -

Ter. Hec. 705
quo magis omnis res cautius ne temere faciam adcuro.

septinar:
quo magis omnis res // cautiu' ne temere faci' adcuro
- u u / - - / - // - / u u - / u u u / u u - / - -

I fortunately found another two examples in Seneca's Phaedra, which is written in a clearer metre: iambic trimeters:
x - / u - / x - / u - / x - / u x

Sen. Phaed. 394
sic temere iactae colla perfundant comae

- u u / u - / - - / u - / - - / u -

Sen. Phaed. 1248
pondusque et artus temere congestos date.

- - / u - / - u u / u - / - - / u u

In both these lines the last e in temere falls in a place where it has to be short.

 

[Pacifica]

Thanks. L&S and Hale are probably just wrong, then.

 

[KarlaUK]

@Bitmap & @Pacifica

1. (The teacher) Mārcus eiusque(??) sociī mē adiūvērunt. Iī quī Sextum lacessīvērunt, nōn temerē (sic) ?temere in prīstinō maleficiō mānsērunt, sed sēsē cōnservērunt. Ipse Sextus ab hīs diū lacessītus, tamen iīs inimīcus nōn est. Haec mihi magnopere placuērunt.

Marcus and his allies have assisted me. Those who have bullied Sextus, have not persisted thoughtlessly in (their) former wrong-doing, but have saved themselves. Sextus, (himself) having been harrassed by these (boys) for a long time, nevertheless is not an enemy to them (for them). These things have greatly pleased me.

Eius + que. You've translated it correctly. What were you unsure of?
Dunno; the OLD says the last e is short, and so does Bitmap, and I'd tend to trust them. L&S (at least the online version) is known to contain the odd macron mistake. Now I guess it could be that the length is actually uncertain.
I guess that was actually conservarunt or conservaverunt?

I thought euis should agree with socii. I am always getting muddled here especially when it comes to the genitive.
Hale has it all through as temerē. I guess there has been additional information since his day. I will correct to and use temere going forward.
Yep. conservāvērunt.

Quid dē nostrā cēnā dicēbat agricola? (Ans) "Temerārius," inquit, "es. Silva perīculōsa est."
What did the farmer say about our dinner? "Thoughtless", he said "it is. The wood is full of danger."

Take another look at the gender of temerarius and the person of es.

"Thoughtless", he said " you are.

 

[Laurentius]

I think the last e in temere may have become longer in later centuries because it is followed by words starting with consonants in hexameters. Or maybe the spoken language was becoming less about vowel lenghts and so they made a mistake, I don't know.

 

[Pacifica]

I thought euis should agree with socii.

If it agreed with socii, giving ei/ii socii, it would mean "those allies", not "the allies of that (person)", "the allies of him", "his allies".

"Thoughtless", he said " you are.

That's right.

 

[KarlaUK]

Thanks @Bitmap for the analysis of temerē/temere.
Adding to the knowledge of Latin all round. Most dictionaries online all go with a (long) ē.
Cactus2000.de doesn't even have temere (rashly, blindly) as the adverb but temerāriē (carelessly, recklessly, imprudently) which I think is an alternative.