Mediaeval "Pro se"?

Callaina

Feles Curiosissima
A friend asked me about the translation of this short prayer. I'm assuming that pro se must refer (unclassically, of course) to the familia tua; I can't really see any other way of taking it. Does anyone else?

concede huic familiae tuae pro se hunc intercessorem quem dedisti pontificem = "Grant to this your family, for its benefit, that man as intercessor whom you gave as bishop."
 

Bitmap

Civis Illustris
I would have understood it that way, too.

I don't think the reference is unclassical here ... at least I wouldn't know how else to put it.
 

Callaina

Feles Curiosissima
Isn't se usually supposed to refer to the subject of the sentence, where is God here? Why not pro ea?
 

Bitmap

Civis Illustris
Isn't se usually supposed to refer to the subject of the sentence, where is God here? Why not pro ea?
Yes, reflexive pronouns usually refer to the subject of the sentence or of a superordinate clause (if the subordinate clause is dependent), but there are exceptions ... for example, when it is logically clear that the reflexive pronoun does not refer to the subject ... or when it technically can't refer to the subject, like in this sentence: The verb is in second person singular, so a reference to the subject would have to be pro te.

Pacifica wrote about that to some extent in one of her excellent articles:

Reflexives are also used when the person to whom an utterance/thought/intention, etc. is ascribed isn't the grammatical subject of the introducing verb, but it is logical that the reflexive be used because it refers to the one speaking/thinking/intending, etc. E.g. A Lucio accepi litteras, adventare suum fratrem = "I received a letter from Lucius, (saying) that his (Lucius's) brother was arriving". Even if it isn't said literally, it is Lucius who says that his brother is arriving.
Now, granted, this happens a lot more often with possessive reflexive pronouns, but you also find such examples. I would say you could get away with it in that sentence ... pro se would be more misleading if the sentence started with Deus concedat, in which case I would probably also prefer pro ea (ipsa) there.
 

Callaina

Feles Curiosissima
Yes, in the Lucius sentence it is quite clear, because there's an indirect discourse clause with Lucius as the implied speaker. But there isn't any such clause in the example I gave. I'm not saying that pro se is impossible there; it just feels clunky, and rather unjustified given the context.
 

Bitmap

Civis Illustris
Yes, in the Lucius sentence it is quite clear, because there's an indirect discourse clause with Lucius as the implied speaker.
There are more examples of reflexives refering to something other than the subject.

I'm not saying that pro se is impossible there; it just feels clunky, and rather unjustified given the context.
It does feel clunky, mainly because that piece of information is rather redundant anyway. I doesn't feel completely unjustified to me as a construction in that particular sentence, though.
 

syntaxianus

Civis Illustris
concede huic familiae tuae pro se hunc intercessorem quem dedisti pontificem = "Grant to this your family, for its benefit, that man as intercessor whom you gave as bishop."
I take it this way:

Grant this family as an intercessor for itself [or on its own behalf]
the one whom you have given [it] as [its] pope [or bishop].
 

Callaina

Feles Curiosissima
Hmm, ok, I suppose with hunc intercessorem the pro se feels a bit less odd.
 
Top