Quomodo efficienter mactare tempum?

Pacifica

grammaticissima
Staff member
Quomodo efficienter mactare tempum? Studere linguam latinam.
By the way, I thought I might as well let you know that there are several problems in the above.

1) Tempus is third declension neuter, so the accusative is the same as the nominative, tempus.

2) Mactare isn't used in this sense; terere is a better idea.

3) I think discere would be better here than studere. The latter is only rarely transitive; it's more often used with the dative, but then the sense is a bit broader than just "study"; it's more like "devote oneself to" or the like.

3) Infinitives aren't used that way in Latin. In sentences like "how to...?" and the like, Latin uses different constructions, notably the subjunctive.

So I would suggest to fix it to:

Quomodo efficienter teras tempus? Discas linguam Latinam. Lit. "How may you kill/use up time effectively? You (would) study Latin", or "(let you) learn Latin".

Or: Quomodo efficienter teratur tempus? Discatur lingua Latina. Lit. "How may time be killed/used up effectively? Let Latin be studied (let one study Latin)."
 

Pacifica

grammaticissima
Staff member
I had not elected to write my signature in Classical Latin
Roughly, there is classical, ante-classical, post-classical, and incorrect. Your signature is incorrect. Were you intentionally going for incorrect?
 

Pacifica

grammaticissima
Staff member
Then tell me in what kind of Latin exactly it's correct, because it'll have to be a kind of Latin I've never read.
 
It was within a Medieval Latin Prose book that I had encountered it, and the author was using it as "Slaying Father time", I believe using Tempus as the god like "Chronus"; his meaning though was that in slaying him time was used.
I unfortunately am using my phone at the moment, so encountering this online will have to be for later.
 

Aurifex

Aedilis
Staff member
I don't know about killing time with Latin, Andrew; you're killing all of us with your seemingly incurable insistence on the correctness of things that are demonstrably wrong.

Having a shaky grasp of Latin is no crime, and regular members of Latin Discussion have plenty of time for people whose Latin is shaky. But do yourself a favour and all the rest of us and put an end to this ludicrous huffing and puffing whilst you vainly attempt to save face you've already lost. Nobody thinks any the worse of you for making mistakes, but people start to when you pointlessly insist you never even made them in the first place.

If you like playing around with words (I think you do) there are plenty of games fora in which you are welcome to do just that. But no more games at others' expense on the translation fora, please, or you'll rapidly exhaust people's patience.
 
I don't know about killing time with Latin, Andrew; you're killing all of us with your seemingly incurable insistence on the correctness of things that are demonstrably wrong.
My "incurable insistence on the correctness of things"? Mate, do you mean the post that I made in this thread just a couple hours ago?
I don't believe I have ever denied the help that any of you give when translating Latin, in fact I quite welcome it. Godmy and pacis puella have helped me greatly in the past with my learning, and I am extremely grateful to them for their work.

You speak as if I have come on this site, and procede to tell everyone that I am the most correct and the best. That is completely unfounded, and is merely an attack on my character.

Having a shaky grasp of Latin is no crime, and regular members of Latin Discussion have plenty of time for people whose Latin is shaky. But do yourself a favour and all the rest of us and put an end to this ludicrous huffing and puffing whilst you vainly attempt to save face you've already lost. Nobody thinks any the worse of you for making mistakes, but people start to when you pointlessly insist you never even made them in the first place.
As I have stated, I quite enjoy being corrected, as it is the only way to improve in a subject.

As for saving face? In your mind that may be a factor, but let's face it, this is the internet; this is not kindergarten. I do not care what other adults think about my learning of a language that is not native to myself, and I have too much experience learning other languages to feel that not being able to speak in the most correct manner is something worth having your pride hurt over.

In the way that you have written your discourse to me, it appears to me that you are the one huffing and puffing, as if my having an opinion is a blasphemy; a "thought-crime". But that's open to interpretation, isn't it? ;)

As for Latin is concerned, I come onto this site to translate and learn Classical Latin. Although I have learned much of it, I am by no means a master, and the path is long & complicated.
For the rest of the versions of Latin, as per epoch/region, each dialect or type is distinguished by subtle differences in vocabulary, usage, spelling, morphology, and syntax.

My signature is personal to me, and my prerogative was not for it to have been written in Classical Latin; If you wish to tell me what it is in Classical Latin, that is fine.
In fact, she helped me with the word "tempus" which I had written incorrectly as "tempum".

Now, as I have said before, I make these things a discussion. Creating an arguement of "correct and incorrect" with no substance does not advance anybody's learning. Do not become inflamed by the act of creating a discussion.

Also, if you wish to see something of where a "discussion" actually helps, click here.With my having discussed what my view on the topic was at that moment, Godmy was able to help me in my quest in better Latin Translation.

Post Scriptum: Remember: "Latin Discussion", not "Latin Arguement".
 

Callaina

Feles Curiosissima
Creating an arguement of "correct and incorrect" with no substance does not advance anybody's learning
Indeed, some substance would be nice. E.g. do you have some examples of the "Ante-Renaissance" usages you were citing earlier?

Post Scriptum: Remember: "Latin Discussion", not "Latin Arguement".
"Argument", not "Arguement". ;)
 
Here is one I found, in the book, "Quod Christus in coena sua staurōsimō agnum paschalem non comederit", written by Gottlob Friedrich Gude in 1733;

The passage I believe I was referring to was in the Oxford medieval Latin verse. Unfortunately it is not an e-book.

Also, the descendants of this phrase in other languages are "ammazzare il tempo", "matar el tiempo", and "matar o tempo" for Portuguese, Castillian(Spanish), and Tuscan(Italian). I am not to sure about French.

I have to admit I was mystified by the 'efficienter mactare tempus'. I was imagining someone traveling to Tartarus, capturing Chronus, and sacrificing him in an effective way (maybe with a bazooka?).Then I realized I was just reading English.

Hollywood should make that into a movie; Zeus and his friends become angered by the Titans, so they hunt each and every one down. With Bazookas.
 
Could you give us your translation of that passage?
Sure:
2.: Out of the prescribed laws:
a.Within the space of one day. That the Jews then in their own time - "ausu" "Paschatos" (Easter people?) - may have delayed the feast on the Sabbath, of whose change various explanations are invented, Flacius, Cbmnitius, Hunnius, Gerbardus, in Harmon.​
b.Within the space of several hours. Of course by sacrificing time & by eating the prescribed amount - it is said: "between two evenings"; this whole saying being proclaimed through "νυχθήμερον" (greek for night-day), under whose beginning -"paiter"- as well as the end being evident through feasting upon the sheep of Easter for the Israelites, therefore Christ being observed on the first night, the Jews specifically being devoted through a lamb by sacrificing & eating another, in order so that in no way the divine law may have been violated by Christ nor by the Jews.​

It's a little rough, but I think it'll do.
 

Etaoin Shrdlu

Civis Illustris
I suppose it's my fault for not specifying a translation into English. In any case I meant just the scilicet mactando et edendo praefinitum dici part, which you've got wrong; do you not see that it has a similar reference to the mactando et comedendo several lines below?
 
Scilicet tempus mactando et edendo praefinitum dici
Of course time by sacrificing & eating the prescribed amount it is said:
I do not see what time is referring to, if it is not in the accusative case.

Judaeos vero alteram agno mactando & comedendo impendisse.
"the Jews specifically being devoted through a lamb by sacrificing & eating another"

Edit:
Of course by sacrificing & eating the time is said: "between two evenings"? I thought it was referring to the saying.

Is Tempus being used as a nominative in this sentence?

Time of course by sacrificing & by eating it is said.
 

Pacifica

grammaticissima
Staff member
It is accusative, as part of an acc.-inf. clause. Mactando and edendo are dative rather than ablative.

Scilicet tempus mactando et edendo praefinitum dici: "that is, that a determined time for killing and eating [it/the lamb] is said/given/mentioned*."

*I haven't really looked at all the context, so I'm not sure which translation would fit best.
 
Oh I see, praefinitum is the adjective for tempus.
So:
Of course, the prescribed time for sacrificing & eating is to be said: " between two evenings"
 
Top