Tattoo I know that one day it will be a delight to remember all of these things.

[valmeringue]

While reading the Aeneid in college, my professor took the time to point out the line FORSAN ET HAEC OLIM MEMINISSE IUVABIT, as it’s a fairly famous line and translates (as our Latin experts surely know) to “perhaps one day it will be a delight to remember even these things” or something like that, depending on how poetic you want to get. I, like many other Latin students, enjoyed the sentiment but thought my feelings were more certain than those being expressed. I didn't want the line to give the idea of maybe; I wanted the line to show confidence. I also didn't want it to apply to a select group of occurrences, but to all things that we experience in life. As such, I altered this line a little bit to create a motto for myself, but even I, as a student of Latin, want to make ABSOLUTELY SURE that I’ve got my translation down and that it makes sense because I'd like to get a tattoo and we all know how tricky Latin can be.

What I want to say is: “I know that one day it will be a delight to remember all of these things.”

What I have come up with is: SCIO OMNIA HAEC OLIM MEMINISSE IUTURUM ESSE

Is this an accurate translation of the English?

 

[Bitmap]

The future participle of iuvare is iuvaturus.

 

[valmeringue]

The future participle of iuvare is iuvaturus.

As an indirect statement, governed by SCIO, wouldn't the future active infinitive, not the future participle, be correct?

 

[Bitmap]

As an indirect statement, governed by SCIO, wouldn't the future active infinitive, not the future participle, be correct?

Yes. What I'm saying is that it should be iuvaturum esse.

 

[valmeringue]

Yes. What I'm saying is that it should be iuvaturum esse.

Ah, I understand. So it should read SCIO OMNIA HAEC OLIM MEMINISSE IUVATURUM ESSE?

 

[Bitmap]

Yupp ... seems right to me
Let's invoke @Pacifica just to make sure.

 

[Pacifica]

The future participle of iuvare is iuvaturus.

Iuturus also exists.

As an indirect statement, governed by SCIO, wouldn't the future active infinitive, not the future participle, be correct?

The future active infinitive includes a future participle, so...

Yupp ... seems right to me
Let's invoke @Pacifica just to make sure.

It's not wrong, but maybe a little awkward? I would prefer scio fore ut olim haec omnia meminisse iuvet.

 

[Bitmap]

Iuturus also exists.

Ah ... but less common? Worse authors? (LS gave Sallust and Plinius fpr iuvaturus)

 

[valmeringue]

It's not wrong, but maybe a little awkward? I would prefer scio fore ut olim haec omnia meminisse iuvet.

Ah, yes awkward is exactly what I was afraid of. Would you be so kind as to explain the translation you gave? Is that fore in an indirect statement governed by scio and then an ut clause within the indirect statement in which iuvet is the subjunctive verb?

 

[Bitmap]

Fore ut (= futurum esse, ut) is a certain kind of circumscription that can be used to avoid awkward or too convoluted constructions.

 

[Pacifica]

Ah ... but less common? Worse authors? (LS gave Sallust and Plinius fpr iuvaturus)

The OLD mentions only one instance in Columella. Neither iuturus nor iuvaturus seems very common, but the compound adiuturus isn't that rare.

 

[Pacifica]

Is that fore in an indirect statement governed by scio and then an ut clause within the indirect statement in which iuvet is the subjunctive verb?

Yes. Literally: "I know (it) to be going to be (the case) that one day it be a delight to remember all these things".

 

[Bitmap]

The OLD mentions only one instance in Columella. Neither iuturus nor iuvaturus seems very common, but the compound adiuturus isn't that rare.

Well, that's a different word.

 

[Pacifica]

Well, that's a different word.

Yes, but it's a compound of the same verb.

 

[valmeringue]

Yes. Literally: "I know (it) to be going to be (the case) that one day it be a delight to remember all these things".

That's wonderful! Gratias tibi maximas ago!

 

[Pacifica]

You're welcome.

 

[Bitmap]

Yes, but it's a compound of the same verb.

I get that, but it wouldn't be the only compound that behaves differently from the simplex.

 

[Pacifica]

I get that, but it wouldn't be the only compound that behaves differently from the simplex.

I guess, but let's say there's a good chance the simple form will behave similarly, even though it isn't certain.

The thing is there isn't much evidence to go on regarding the simple verb. I've found two instances of iuturus and three of iuvaturus on PHI. So you see, 2 vs. 3... Even though that makes iuvaturus technically more frequent in the surviving literature, the data is too scarce for the result to be really meaningful.

In the compound, I've found one instance of adiuvaturus and 21 of adiuturus.

 

[Pacifica]

I guess my personal conclusion would be this: I'll accept both iuvaturus and iuturus, but try not to use them too often.