Ab illo Diotrepe et ab omnibus malis sit tibi pax.

Pacifica

grammaticissima
Staff member
I know what it means, like "may you not be disturbed by those people", but I'm not sure about the English translation. Can you say "peace from someone/something" in that sense? "From that Diotrephes and from all bad people, peace be to you"?
 

LVXORD

Civis Illustris
Could it be peace be with you?
 

Pacifica

grammaticissima
Staff member
Yes it could, and would probably be more usual, but the version of the Bible we use (these are glosses, comments on Bible verse, and we're making a book with English translations of those glosses alongside the Bible text), has "to you", so I use the same vocabulary to be consistent.

This is commenting on 3 John 14 "But I hope speedily to see you, and we will speak mouth to mouth. Peace be to you. Our friends salute you. Salute the friends by name."

It's the Douay-Rheims version, just with "thee" changed to "you"...
 

Imber Ranae

Ranunculus Iracundus
I know what it means, like "may you not be disturbed by those people", but I'm not sure about the English translation. Can you say "peace from someone/something" in that sense? "From that Diotrephes and from all bad people, peace be to you"?
No, it doesn't really make sense that way. Maybe something like "may you have respite from...etc." if it's something that he's already been enduring. Otherwise "may you go undisturbed by..." should work.
 

Pacifica

grammaticissima
Staff member
No, it doesn't really make sense that way. Maybe something like "may you have respite from...etc." if it's something that he's already been enduring. Otherwise "may you go undisturbed by..." should work.
The problem is that it's commenting on that verse with "peace be to you", interpreting it, using the same words in the Latin, like this:

Verse: *Pax tibi. Salutant te amici. Saluta amicos per nomen.

Gloss: *Ab illo Diotrepe et ab omnibus malis sit tibi pax.

Is there no way at all to use the same expression "peace be to you" in the English in both verse and gloss, as the same pax tibi is used in the Latin?

Maybe something like "Peace be to you in going undisturbed by...."?
 

Imber Ranae

Ranunculus Iracundus
Is there no way at all to use the same expression "peace be to you" in the English in both verse and gloss, as the same pax tibi is used in the Latin?
I really don't think so. "May you have peace from/peace be to you from..." would seem always to indicate the author of the peace, not whom or what the peace should free you from.
Maybe something like "Peace be to you in going undisturbed by...."?
Maybe just, "Peace be to you away from...[etc.]" Dunno.
 

Pacifica

grammaticissima
Staff member
Even in French I would not know how to translate it.
 

limetrees

Civis Illustris
May you have peace from that Diotrepes and from all evil men.
This works OK, meaning may you not be disturbed by...

I can't agree with Imber Ranae that "may you have peace from" always indicates the author of the peace.
It can do,
e.g.
Philippians 1.2. Grace be unto you, and peace from God our Father, and from the Lord Jesus Christ.
Gratia vobis, et pax a Deo Patre nostro, et Domino Jesu Christo.

but you can also get peace from the devil, or from a toothache, or from what ails you.

and as the Latin in Phil 1.2 shows (A deo pax), its just as ambiguous in the Latin.
 

Imber Ranae

Ranunculus Iracundus
I find it odd, nor can I find any legitimate examples of it in Google Books (not that I've done an exhaustive search, by any means, but I'd rather not waste my effort on such).
 

Pacifica

grammaticissima
Staff member
I humbly ask all native (or equivalent) English speakers who happen to read this thread to just take a few seconds to give their opinion, as now it's one against one. And if you agree with IR that it doesn't work and happen to have an idea for the translation, please suggest.
 

LVXORD

Civis Illustris
I honestly find peace be to you a rather literal translation. But I think peace be to you from... an ordinary translation. Though, I think it does tend to indicate the evil people as the author of the peace. I think may you have respite from... captures the meaning nicely.
 
Pacis Puella,

I think the reason you are getting so few responses is that it is a surprisingly hard question to answer. My first thought was that you could not say “may you have/be at peace from [your enemies],” the more I think about it, however, the more confused I am about it. It may be a case where we native speakers are going to give you the worst advice. As one person has indicated, to create a felicitious English construction you would ideally translate it without actually using the word “peace,” but since it is a gloss on the passage “pax tibi” you really have to.

In the context of 3 John, Diophenes was someone who was spreading bad blood about John in the church. If it is a gloss of John’s farewell where he is promising to come and talk about things face to face, is it possible he is simply saying “be at peace about Diophenes and all the troublemakers” until I arrive? I think “ab” could carry this sense in medieval Latin (defined as “in regards to.”) Diophenes wasn’t brandishing spears, just a wicked tongue. Then again, it could also mean “I hope they leave you alone.” “May Diophenes and all the wicked leave you in peace,” would be nice, but is perhaps stretching the Latin too much unless you have context to back it up. If you say “may you have peace from Diophenes and all the wicked” I do think the meaning will be clear since the reader will automatically presume that peace isn’t coming from the wicked people. It just sounds awkward, and possibly technically incorrect (while at the same time sounding like something someone might actually say . . . and possibly correct, heck I don’t know). I know someone who might know (for my own peace of mind now), and if I do, I’ll get back to you.

It sounds like it must be an interlinear gloss (since it is talking about Diophenes in the present tense). Are you translating both the interlinear and the Glossa Ordinaria? I’d be curious to know what books you are working on, which manuscript you are using (Rusch?), and if you are working towards publication. I’ve just been getting more familiar with the Glossa myself.

Sorry this isn't much help. I mostly wanted to give a possible explanation of why all of us "experts" in our mother tongue are not giving you much help.

Good Luck!
 

Pacifica

grammaticissima
Staff member
Thank you Carpe Piscem. :)

This is indeed an interlinear gloss. I am working for a book that will be published (by a member of the forum, COPLAND 3) containing English translations of all the Glossa Ordinaria as well as interlinear of the three epistles of John. I have done a big part of the translations, and I am now finishing proofreading everything, both my own translations and some that were made by others. I am using mainly Rusch, but also Langton, Migne and Venice (though this one less, because it has many misprints) for comparison, and now I will also compare with another old manuscript which Copland has found recently, the name of which I don't remember now.
 
Thank you Carpe Piscem. :)

This is indeed an interlinear gloss. I am working for a book that will be published (by a member of the forum, COPLAND 3) containing English translations of all the Glossa Ordinaria as well as interlinear of the three epistles of John. I have done a big part of the translations, and I am now finishing proofreading everything, both my own translations and some that were made by others. I am using mainly Rusch, but also Langton, Migne and Venice (though this one less, because it has many misprints) for comparison, and now I will also compare with another old manuscript which Copland has found recently, the name of which I don't remember now.
You have a good project. I was just at a conference on medieval studies, and it seemed like everyone was talking about the Glossa. About 10 years ago there were only a handful of people who were mentioning it, let alone doing work with it. At the book fair, the two books available in translation (Song of Songs and Romans) were big sellers. I'm happy more will soon be available.

I sent off your translation question to my English expert, but he has not replied to me yet . . .
 

Pacifica

grammaticissima
Staff member
Thanks for wishing to help.

I have found the expression in two books on Google books:

.... God gave us his Son Jesus and has given us a life of protection and peace from the devil.
http://books.google.ie/books?id=lUflppY1OjoC&pg=PA20&dq=peace from the devil&hl=en&sa=X&ei=KeOAU-LLGofG7AaQrYHwDw&ved=0CEIQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q=peace from the devil&f=false
(Some kind of attraction due to the construction used with "protection", maybe...? But not in the following example.)

This is the way the world gives peace. But this is not Christ's way. It is not peace from trouble, but peace in trouble.
http://books.google.ie/books?id=YLwPAAAAIAAJ&q=peace from trouble&dq=peace from trouble&hl=en&sa=X&ei=1uOAU97INOeO7Ab-94HwAg&ved=0CGQQ6AEwCTgK
 
The second quote works for me. The first one still sounds strange to my ear, but the meaning is very clear. Perhaps the difference is that the second one is not talking about peace "from" persons. It does seem to mean that you can probably use the phrase "may you have peace from . . ." without raising any eyebrows.

Do keep in mind that just because something shows up in print does not mean it is necessarily good English -- especially these days. If these two quotations are the only instances in all of the books in Google's cache where that phrase is used it would seem to actually be an argument against its being a very acceptable construction. Neither source is very scholarly or literary either. It is interesting that both are from Christian books, however. Were you searching specifically for religious examples? It may be a good indication that, even if not widely used, it has developed a usage in Christianity (perhaps through translations!).
 

Pacifica

grammaticissima
Staff member
Yes, I know that if I found it only in two books it certainly isn't a very usual expression. As to the fact that they are not very scholarly or literary books, I don't care that much about it actually, because scholars are not the only ones to speak a language. A bigger drawback perhaps is the rarity and the fact that it doesn't sound right to everyone here, but for now I've kept it in my translation nevertheless, because I have no clue what better I could do, and I'm thinking, well, even if some readers find it strange, as long as the meaning is understandable, so be it.

I didn't find those examples myself actually, someone indicated them to me. I was also struck by the fact that they're both religious; I don't know if it's chance or not. I also thought that it was perhaps through translation...
 
You make a good point that scholars are not the only ones who have the right to say how language should be used. I was simply thinking that you couldn't be as certain that the book was well-edited/scrutinized before publication, not that the author was less worthy of consideration. If it were all up to the scholars languages would never grow, and living languages are supposed to. I can think of several things that I' d be willing to bet good money are going to be accepted English in 100 years that make current academics howl.
 
Top