copiae Romanae castra Etruscorum prope flumen ingens oppugnabant. (et cetera)

Kuba26

non sum dignus
(1) copiae Romanae castra Etruscorum prope flumen ingens oppugnabant.
The Roman forces attacked the huge Etruscan camp near the huge river.

(2) Etrusci autem castra ingentia prope flumen pararverunt.
The Etruscans however prepared the a huge camp near the river.

(3) Lars Porsenna, rex Etruscorum, milites audaces ad Romanos duxit.
Lars Porsenna, king of the Etruscans, led the brave soldiers towards the Romans.

(4) Romani autem hostes audaces non timebant et in pugnam festinaverunt.
The Romans however did not fear the bold enemy and hurried into battle.

(5) Etrusci Romanos audaces viderunt nec tamen fugere cupiebant.
The bold Etruscans saw the bold Romans but did not want to flee.
 

Pacifica

grammaticissima
Staff member
(1) copiae Romanae castra Etruscorum prope flumen ingens oppugnabant.
The Roman forces attacked the huge Etruscan camp near the river.
Ingens is singular while castra is plural, so they're not agreeing together.
Maybe render oppugnabant as "were attacking".
(2) Etrusci autem castra ingentia prope flumen pararverunt.
The Etruscans however prepared the huge camp near the river.

(3) Lars Porsenna, rex Etruscorum, milites audaces ad Romanos duxit.
Lars Porsenna, king of the Etruscans, led the brave soldiers towards the Romans.
Latin has no formal difference between "the" and "a", of course, but in the context of this whole little story, "a" would be better in these sentences than "the".
(5) Etrusci Romanos audaces viderunt nec tamen fugere cupiebant.
The bold Etruscans saw the Romans but did not want to flee.
Audaces is to Romanos.
 

Kuba26

non sum dignus
Ingens is singular while castra is plural, so they're not agreeing together.
Thanks for the useful comments as usual Pacis Puella!
About ingens, I was confused as well, but it really says ingens (sing., nom./voc., m./f.) in the exercise.
 

Pacifica

grammaticissima
Staff member
Thanks for the useful comments as usual Pacis Puella!
No problem.
About ingens, I was confused as well, but it really says ingens (sing., nom./voc., m./f.) in the exercise. It happens.
I wasn't saying it should have been something else than ingens in the Latin, just that it didn't go with castra, so your translation needs changing. It goes with another word in the sentence... there's only one that it can go with. :) Ingens is also nom./voc./acc. neuter.
 

Kuba26

non sum dignus
I wasn't saying it should have been something else than ingens in the Latin, just that it didn't go with castra, so your translation needs changing. It goes with another word in the sentence... there's only one that it can go with. :)
Of course, ingens can be accusative as well! It couldn't be copiae or castra because of the plural, so it should be flumen (sing. acc. neuter). "... the huge river."
 

Pacifica

grammaticissima
Staff member
Yep!
 

Kuba26

non sum dignus
Thanks for the constructive and didactic approach!
 

Pacifica

grammaticissima
Staff member
You're welcome and thank you for qualifying my approach that way. ;)
 

Pacifica

grammaticissima
Staff member
If I were, I would be a magistra. But no, I am not, at least not professionally. I suppose we can say I'm just kind of an amateur one on this forum! You say "as well"; are you a teacher of something?
 

Kuba26

non sum dignus
Yes, Lingua Anglica.
 

Pacifica

grammaticissima
Staff member
(Linguae Anglicae) Ah! Please do correct me if you happen to see something wrong in my English!
 
Si Pacis non magiſtra ſit, ſuficat donec magiſtra adveneat.;)

What ſtrikes me here is how Latin was willing to uſe two quite opposite and conflicting meanings of the prefix 'in-' (ſtupidly conflated from roots that ſeparately became 'in-' and 'un-' in Engliſh) to form compounds with the 'gigno' root with quite oppoſite meanings. 'Ingens' could hardly be more oppoſed to 'ingenuus'.:confused:
 

Kuba26

non sum dignus
Si Pacis non magiſtra ſit, ſuficat donec magiſtra adveneat.;)
If Pacis be not a teacher, as long as she be sufficient, a teacher be (subjunctive ?) arrived.
Something along those lines I believe, but there is a lot wrong with it.
 
The colloquial Engliſh expreſſion would be: 'If Pacis isn't a teacher, ſhe'll do until one comes along'. 'If ____ isn't a ____, s/he'll do until one comes along' (or 'happens by') is pretty much a set phraſe in colloquial Engliſh. In formal Engliſh it would be: 'If Pacis be not a teacher, ſhe may ſuffice until a teacher arrive'. The meaning is 'She might not officially be a teacher, but ſhe might as well be a teacher.'
Just wait. She will have ſome comment to make on my having uſed three preſent ſubjunctives, or some other magiſterial point, and then you will totally underſtand what I meant.:D
 

Pacifica

grammaticissima
Staff member
Yes, I have some small comments. ;)

*If you intended to translate the "colloquial" version, sit should be est, since it is "if she isn't" and not "if she weren't/if she were not to be/if she be not". If you intended to translate the formal version "if she be not", well... Ok for sit I guess, though I don't really understand why to state as unreal "if I be not a teacher" while I am actually not one (maybe I'm missing here some rule/nuance of formal English, but in Latin in any case the indicative would make more sense here in my opinion).

Then only spelling matters:
*"She'll do" = future = sufficiet; "she may suffice/let her suffice" = sufficiat
*adveniat
 
IN MITIGATIONE:
Stupida anus quam tueor quam incorrigiblis fuit hodie, ut ex quarta declenſione in ſecundam tranſtulerit se. Sic fortaſſe poſſit Pacis miſereri mei.:rolleyes:
 

Pacifica

grammaticissima
Staff member
IN MITIGATIONE:
Stupida anus quam tueor quam quae incorrigiblis fuit hodie, ut ex quarta declenſione declinatione in ſecundam tranſtulerit se. Sic fortaſſe poſſit Pacis miſereri mei.:rolleyes:
Hahae, anum contumacem! Ignosco libenter...
Completely off topic, but I really like the alternative for QED: Quo errat demonstrator
Lol!
 
Top