Carolus Dickens

Gregorius Textor

Civis Illustris
(Another writing exercise. Corrections welcome.)

Carolus Dickens scriptor praeclarus fuit.

Anno Domini MDCCCXII in Britanniā natus est, filius Ioannis Dickens.

Cum pater prodigus, multa aes alienum[1] contractus, in carcerem iactatus esset, puero opus erat in officinā laborare.

Carolus theatrum amabat. Multos cum amicos convivabatur. Saepe longissime in urbe ambulabat aut rure equitabat.

Pauperes et humiles, viduas pupillosque curabat. Suum autem uxorem odivit et repudiabat.[2]

In Britanniā Hiberniāque lustrabans fabellas suas recitabat. Bis in Americam peregrinatus est.[3]

Notes:

[1] debita

[2] disiungit. I'm trying to say that he legally separated from his wife. I can't find a term that clearly means separate, as opposed to divorce, and am not sure that classical Latin speakers even had the concept, although the Mediaevals must have.

[3]Although I've recently finished reading a biography of Dickens, I'm writing from memory, so the things I say might not be completely accurate.
 

Pacifica

grammaticissima
Staff member
multa aes alienum[1] contractus
Two problems here:

1) Multa doesn't agree with aes alienum.

2) Contraho is not a deponent verb. So its perfect participle has a passive meaning, "having been contracted", not active "having contracted". You could fix this by turning the phrase into an ablative absolute: multo aere alieno contracto.
Multos cum amicos convivabatur.
Cum takes the ablative.
Suum autem uxorem odivit
Suum is in the wrong gender.

Odivit is attested in late Latin, I think, but it isn't a correct form. The defectiveness of the verb odisse means that you can't really express a perfect-tense meaning with it (the perfect form has a present meaning) but maybe you can say odisse coepit or some other paraphrase. However, I'm not entirely sure if you did have a perfect meaning in mind or rather an imperfect one. Did you mean to refer to the moment when he started hating his wife, or to his hatred of her in general?
repudiabat
The imperfect tense sounds odd here.
I'm trying to say that he legally separated from his wife. I can't find a term that clearly means separate, as opposed to divorce, and am not sure that classical Latin speakers even had the concept, although the Mediaevals must have.
I don't know.
In Britanniā Hiberniāque lustrabans
Lustrabans isn't a word. You probably meant lustrans. If so, it would be more usual for it to have a direct object.
 

Gregorius Textor

Civis Illustris
Odivit is attested in late Latin, I think, but it isn't a correct form. The defectiveness of the verb odisse means that you can't really express a perfect-tense meaning with it (the perfect form has a present meaning) but maybe you can say odisse coepit or some other paraphrase. However, I'm not entirely sure if you did have a perfect meaning in mind or rather an imperfect one. Did you mean to refer to the moment when he started hating his wife, or to his hatred of her in general?
I had forgotten that odi means "I hate" rather than "I have hated". I meant his hatred of her in general, so I want the imperfect sense, which, according to Bennett's New Latin Grammar, #133, is given by the pluperfect form of this word. So I think I can say oderat et repudiavit.

Maybe he meant gen. plural of sus
Yeah, as in "he thought his wife was a sus"!!!
 

Pacifica

grammaticissima
Staff member

Gregorius Textor

Civis Illustris
Revised:

Carolus Dickens scriptor praeclarus fuit.

Anno Domini MDCCCXII in Britanniā natus est, filius Ioannis Dickens.

Cum pater prodigus, multo aere alieno contracto,
in carcerem iactatus esset, puero opus erat in officinā laborare.

Carolus theatrum amabat. Multis cum amicis convivabatur.
Saepe longissime in urbe ambulabat aut rure equitabat.

Pauperes et humiles, viduas pupillosque curabat.
Suam autem uxorem oderat et repudiavit.

Britanniam Hiberniamque lustrans fabellas suas recitabat.
Bis in Americam peregrinatus est.
 
Top