Participles + Esse translation

MichaelJYoo

Member

I was hoping for some tips as to how to manage a form of a participle + esse. Such as:

Quibus alia addi necesse est, quae similiter passim de eo scripta legere est: (How would you translate this?) Quod sit Pater Jesu Christi, quod Jesum Filium suum miserit, Spiritu Sancto suo unxerit, voluntatem suam ei totam patefecerit. Quae omnia talia sunt, ut credi omnino debeat, attributa etiam ista, quae ad fidem Jesu Christo habendam necessaria sunt, Jesu Christo competere, & in libris his sacris plene descripta esse: ac proinde etiam credendum esse Jesus Christum esse.

I have:

To which things it is necessary to add, things everywhere written concerning him to read there is: That He is the Father of Jesus Christ, that He has sent His Son Jesus, has anointed Him with His Holy Spirit, has revealed His whole will to Him. All these excellent things are those attributes which are necessary to having faith in Jesus Christ, that must be entirely believed to coincide with Jesus Christ and have been clearly described in these sacred books to be:
 

Pacifica

grammaticissima

  • Aedilis

Location:
Belgium
Infinitive (legere is an infinitive, not a participle) + est = "it is possible to...", "one can..."

Quae omnia talia sunt, ut credi omnino debeat, attributa etiam ista, quae ad fidem Jesu Christo habendam necessaria sunt, Jesu Christo competere = "Which/these [facts] are all such that it should entirely be believed (or, less literally, maybe "all these facts make it an absolute necessity to believe") that those attributes which are necessary for having faith in Jesus Christ also pertain to Jesus Christ"

"Have been described" is a correct translation for descripta esse, but you should do away with "to be" (using it is like translating esse twice, once as "have been" and once as "to be").

Credendum esse = that it is to be believed/that it must be believed/that one should believe...

Jesus doesn't make sense grammatically; doesn't it rather say Jesum?
 
Last edited:

MichaelJYoo

Member

Infinitive (legere is an infinitive, not a participle) + est = "it is possible to...", "one can..."

Quae omnia talia sunt, ut credi omnino debeat, attributa etiam ista, quae ad fidem Jesu Christo habendam necessaria sunt, Jesu Christo competere = "Which/these [facts] are all such that it should entirely be believed (or, less literally, maybe "all these facts make it an absolute necessity to believe") that those attributes which are necessary for having faith in Jesus Christ also pertain to Jesus Christ"

"Have been described" is a correct translation for descripta esse, but you should do away with "to be" (using it is like translating esse twice, once as "have been" and once as "to be").

Credendum esse = that it is to be believed/that it must be believed/that one should believe...

Jesus doesn't make sense grammatically; doesn't it rather say Jesum?
Thank you I really appreciate it. So a form of the participle + esse is a periphrastic it seems like? But why use the infinitive "esse" and not a conjugated form of it? And yes, it should be Jesum.
 
B

Bitmap

Guest

Thank you I really appreciate it. So a form of the participle + esse is a periphrastic it seems like? But why use the infinitive "esse" and not a conjugated form of it? And yes, it should be Jesum.
It is an AcI dependent on ut credi debeat.
credi debet Iesum credendum esse
= "It has to be believed that you have to believe in Jesus"

Thank you I really appreciate it. So a form of the participle + esse is a periphrastic it seems like?
Yes. (That's essentially the definition of periphrastic)
 

MichaelJYoo

Member

Infinitive (legere is an infinitive, not a participle) + est = "it is possible to...", "one can..."

Quae omnia talia sunt, ut credi omnino debeat, attributa etiam ista, quae ad fidem Jesu Christo habendam necessaria sunt, Jesu Christo competere = "Which/these [facts] are all such that it should entirely be believed (or, less literally, maybe "all these facts make it an absolute necessity to believe") that those attributes which are necessary for having faith in Jesus Christ also pertain to Jesus Christ"

"Have been described" is a correct translation for descripta esse, but you should do away with "to be" (using it is like translating esse twice, once as "have been" and once as "to be").

Credendum esse = that it is to be believed/that it must be believed/that one should believe...

Jesus doesn't make sense grammatically; doesn't it rather say Jesum?
I was also wondering how an infinitive + est = "it is possible to," "one can," etc.

Certainly it makes sense within the context of the passage, but I was just wondering more about "est" can translate as "possible to/can"
 

Pacifica

grammaticissima

  • Aedilis

Location:
Belgium
See L&S:

Est, sit, etc., with infin. in Gr. constr., it is possible, is allowed, permitted, one may, etc. (mostly poet. and post-class.): “est quādam prodire tenus, si non datur ultra,” Hor. Ep. 1, 1, 32: “Cato, R. R. prooem. § 1: scire est liberum Ingenium atque animum,” Ter. Ad. 5, 3, 42: “nec non et Tityon terrae omniparentis alumnum Cernere erat,” Verg. A. 6, 596; 8, 676; Sil. 2, 413: “neque est te fallere quicquam,” Verg. G. 4, 447: “unde Plus haurire est,” Hor. S. 1, 2, 79: “est Gaudia prodentem vultum celare,” id. ib. 2, 5, 103: “quod versu dicere non est,” id. ib. 1, 5, 87: “quod tangere non est,” Ov. M. 3, 478: “quae verbo objecta, verbo negare sit,” Liv. 42, 41, 2 Weissenb. ad loc.: “ut conjectare erat intentione vultus,” Tac. A. 16, 34: “est videre argentea vasa,” id. G. 5; Val. Max. 2, 6, 8; v. Zumpt, Gram. § 227.— With dat.: “ne tibi sit frigida saxa adire,” Prop. 1, 20, 13; Tib. 1, 6, 24 (32): “tu procul a patriā (nec sit mihi credere tantum!) Alpinas nives Me sine vides,” Verg. E. 10, 46: “fuerit mihi eguisse aliquando amicitiae tuae,” Sall. J. 110, 3; Dig. 46, 3, 72, § 4.—


I suppose that very literally you can look at it this way: legere est = "reading is", "reading exists" = "it is possible to read". There is actually kind of a similar use of "is" in English, but only in negative contexts, e.g. "There's no avoiding it" = "It's impossible to avoid it".
 

MichaelJYoo

Member

See L&S:

Est, sit, etc., with infin. in Gr. constr., it is possible, is allowed, permitted, one may, etc. (mostly poet. and post-class.): “est quādam prodire tenus, si non datur ultra,” Hor. Ep. 1, 1, 32: “Cato, R. R. prooem. § 1: scire est liberum Ingenium atque animum,” Ter. Ad. 5, 3, 42: “nec non et Tityon terrae omniparentis alumnum Cernere erat,” Verg. A. 6, 596; 8, 676; Sil. 2, 413: “neque est te fallere quicquam,” Verg. G. 4, 447: “unde Plus haurire est,” Hor. S. 1, 2, 79: “est Gaudia prodentem vultum celare,” id. ib. 2, 5, 103: “quod versu dicere non est,” id. ib. 1, 5, 87: “quod tangere non est,” Ov. M. 3, 478: “quae verbo objecta, verbo negare sit,” Liv. 42, 41, 2 Weissenb. ad loc.: “ut conjectare erat intentione vultus,” Tac. A. 16, 34: “est videre argentea vasa,” id. G. 5; Val. Max. 2, 6, 8; v. Zumpt, Gram. § 227.— With dat.: “ne tibi sit frigida saxa adire,” Prop. 1, 20, 13; Tib. 1, 6, 24 (32): “tu procul a patriā (nec sit mihi credere tantum!) Alpinas nives Me sine vides,” Verg. E. 10, 46: “fuerit mihi eguisse aliquando amicitiae tuae,” Sall. J. 110, 3; Dig. 46, 3, 72, § 4.—


I suppose that very literally you can look at it this way: legere est = "reading is", "reading exists" = "it is possible to read". There is actually kind of a similar use of "is" in English, but only in negative contexts, e.g. "There's no avoiding it" = "It's impossible to avoid it".
Thanks so much! This was so helpful.
 
Top