Rise and rise again until lambs become lions

[ascaron4o]

and one last what about:

rise and rise again until lambs become lions

 

[Bitmap]

hello,

is "rise" meant to be an infinitive or an imperative?

 

[Tacitus Arctous]

If it is imperative:

"Iterum iterumque exsurge (exsurgite), dum oves leones fiunt"

Maybe subjunctive would be good here also, if one wants to put emphasis on waiting or purpose.

 

[Bitmap]

I would use a subjunctive for the reason you mentioned. With the indicative, the dum clause would have to be future II.

 

[Tacitus Arctous]

"Iterum iterumque exsurge, dum oves leones facti erunt"? (I am not sure whether it should be facti or factae)

I am not sure it has to be the future, unless the main clause shows meaning of future.

For example:

"ego in Arcadio opperior, dum ista cognosco"

"Tityre, dum redeo, pasce capellas"

"retine, dum ego huc servos evoco"

Is this clause a future in meaning? To me "exsurge" here is just a present command to rise up.
Correct me if I am wrong.

 

[Imber Ranae]

I am not sure it has to be the future, unless the main clause shows meaning of future.

For example:

"ego in Arcadio opperior, dum ista cognosco"

"Tityre, dum redeo, pasce capellas"

"retine, dum ego huc servos evoco"

True enough, but in each of your examples the direct, literal meaning of dum may still be construed as "while", although the end of the duration is clearly the point of emphasis. (Indeed, from these one can easily see how dum came to mean both "while" and "until".) Yet this is only possible in these sentences because the verbs within the dum clauses are all imperfective in aspect, that is to say continuative or durative, and thus each is conceived as occurring concomitantly with its main verb: when the one is fulfilled and ceases, so too the other must cease.

To illustrate, in the first sentence cognosco has the imperfective meaning "I'm inquiring about" or "seeking to learn" rather than perfective "I know" or "have learned", which would on the contrary have to be expressed with the perfect tense. Hence altogether it literally means: "I'm waiting in Arcanum [not "Arcadum"] while [i.e. only so long as] I inquire about these matters (of yours)". Implication: once he's found all the answers he was looking for he'll leave.

So also with the second sentence: "Tityrus, while I'm returning [i.e. have not yet returned home], feed the she-goats." The act of returning is conceived as a process rather than a single action.

And the third: "Hold him while I call the slaves hither." Here the English is expressed no differently than the Latin. The clear implication is that it's not until the slaves arrive that he may let go.

Is this clause a future in meaning? To me "exsurge" here is just a present command to rise up.
Correct me if I am wrong.

The future idea is contained in the "until" clause, not the imperative. Though I'm not sure I've quite grasped the full import of the request, I tend to agree with Bitmaps that there seems to be an idea of purpose in it, in which case the present subjunctive is called for. So maybe something like: Exsurge identidem usque eo quoad oves in leones abeant.

 

[Bitmap]

future idea is contained in the "until" clause, not the imperative.

As far as I know, the imperative contains the idea of a future, too, which can be seen by the fact that it commonly takes a future II to express what (will have) happened before the relevant command. e.g. "Respond when I ask you something" would be translated as responde si quid te rogavero

 

[Imber Ranae]

All right, yes, I know there's an inherent future implication with all imperatives, much as there is with jussive noun clauses and final clauses. I was trying more to convey the notion that an "until" clause in English must necessarily refer to a future event if it does not refer to a past event. It can't be present. The use of dum with a present tense verb to express "until" in Latin is a special case where the English distinction between "while" and "until" does not fully apply.

 

[Tacitus Arctous]

Yes that is true, like "si quid mihi acciderit, noli sequi" etc.

Thank you for your response. All of those examples I put can be translated with "until" in Finnish so I need to focus on English more.
So I am right that those examples with the meaning of "while" can only be in the present tense (praesens historicum in the past tense)?

 

[Bitmap]

So I am right that those examples with the meaning of "while" can only be in the present tense (praesens historicum in the past tense)?

Yes, although I wouldn't call it historical present... at least over here it is usually refered to as an "absolute tempus" that applies regardless of the tense in the main clause. Another example of an absolute tempus is plusquam, which may take the perfect indicative, regardless of the tense in the main clause or dum in the meaning of "until" that always takes the perfect tense when the sentence refers to a past event.

 

[Tacitus Arctous]

"Exspectavit Caesar, dum omnes naves convenirent"

Would you not translate this as "until"?

 

[Bitmap]

Yes, but Caesar uses a subjunctive here to show that the dum-clause is supposed to be the purpose and eventual aim of his action. The examples that were refered to above only apply to the indicative of course, which is used when you merely want to describe the temporal relation.

 

[Tacitus Arctous]

This is interesting. No doubt you are correct, our examples in our Finnish Latin grammar may lead astray. I shall consult more of this.