Cic. Tusc. Disp. 2.1.

Pacifica

grammaticissima
Staff member
I just can't find the main clause/verb of the second sentence:

Quamquam non sumus ignari multos studiose contra esse dicturos; quod vitare nullo modo potuimus, nisi nihil omnino scriberemus. Etenim si orationes, quas nos multitudinis iudicio probari volebamus (popularis est enim illa facultas, et effectus eloquentiae est audientium adprobatio) sed si reperiebantur non nulli qui nihil laudarent, nisi quod se imitari posse confiderent, quemque sperandi sibi, eumdem bene dicendi finem proponerent, et cum obruerentur copia sententiarum atque verborum, ieiunitatem et famem se malle quam ubertatem et copiam dicerent, unde erat exortum genus Atticorum eis ipsis qui id sequi se profitebantur ignotum, qui iam conticuerunt paene ab ipso foro inrisi - 4 quid futurum putamus, cum adiutore populo quo utebamur antea, nunc minime nos uti posse videamus?

Si orationes what? Maybe I must understand scriberemus or in another mood scribebamus from the preceding sentence?

So si orationes scriberemus/scribebamus (?), sed si reperiebantur... - and then you have the long relative and cum clauses etc - but where is the apodosis of the condition?

I would think he got lost in his thought and changed his sentence in the middle, without continuing it strictly, but I'm probably missing some simple thing.
 

LCF

a.k.a. Lucifer
He did not get lost. But he is talking about the same style he is writing in that specific sentence. Here is the jist of it, I do not want to do a word by word translation.

And if speeches, that are overflown with sentences and words (cum obruerentur) which the folks cannot understand and cannot praise, because they themselves cannot attain such style, should we not use (write in) such speeches?

Etenim si orationes .... one big adjective showing of superbia of Cicero.... + nunc minime nos uti posse videamus?
 

Matthaeus

Vemortuicida strenuus
Hmm I think the apodosis begins with quid futurum.
 

Pacifica

grammaticissima
Staff member
He did not get lost. But he is talking about the same style he is writing in that specific sentence. Here is the jist of it, I do not want to do a word by word translation.

And if speeches, that are overflown with sentences and words (cum obruerentur) which the folks cannot understand and cannot praise, because they themselves cannot attain such style, should we not use (write in) such speeches?

Etenim si orationes .... one big adjective showing of superbia of Cicero.... + nunc minime nos uti posse videamus?
No, uti isn't referring to orations:

quid futurum putamus, cum adiutore populo quo utebamur antea, nunc minime nos uti posse videamus? = what do we think will happen, as we see that we can no longer at all use the people as a helper as we did before?
Hmm I think the apodosis begins with quid futurum.
Perhaps but then I still don't get the logic.
 

LCF

a.k.a. Lucifer
No, uti isn't referring to orations:
.

The whole thing refers the orationes. Masqueraded as a joke/sarcasm. What we cannot use the same forum/help then? Meaning, should we then write in a simpler manner?
 
Top