Tantum molis erat, urbs condita
- Thread starter betterbr
- Start date
Re: Question
Hm, one could try to shoehorn a meaning into that phrase, but it isn't worth it. The original phrase was tantae molis erat romanam condere gentem, from Vergil's Aeneid, which means (to quote an existing translation) "so great a task it was to found the Roman people".
Hm, one could try to shoehorn a meaning into that phrase, but it isn't worth it. The original phrase was tantae molis erat romanam condere gentem, from Vergil's Aeneid, which means (to quote an existing translation) "so great a task it was to found the Roman people".
Re: Question
Whatever misgivings one may have about its provenance, or indeed its elegance, the given phrase does at least make some kind of sense, doesn't it? I mean, it's not completely ungrammatical: the founding of the city was so much of a burden.
Whatever misgivings one may have about its provenance, or indeed its elegance, the given phrase does at least make some kind of sense, doesn't it? I mean, it's not completely ungrammatical: the founding of the city was so much of a burden.
Question
That would make sense as urbem condere, but it really seems a stretch for urbs condita, to me at least. I do admit that a meaning could be given to it which would account for the grammar, but it seems odd to have to make up a meaning which wasn't the original intention of the phrase.
That would make sense as urbem condere, but it really seems a stretch for urbs condita, to me at least. I do admit that a meaning could be given to it which would account for the grammar, but it seems odd to have to make up a meaning which wasn't the original intention of the phrase.
B
Bitmap
Guest
Re: Question
Socratidion is right, actually. urbs condita is fine for "the founding of the city". I just wonder why somebody put a comma in thereNikolaos dixit:
Re: Question
Anyway, I believe you. So, I ask this not out of doubt, but out of the urge to learn the construction thoroughly - can anyone offer an explanation of this sort of thing from a good grammar?
Really? It sounded odd to me, and I thought that AVC was just some sort of idiomatic oddity.Bitmap dixit:
Anyway, I believe you. So, I ask this not out of doubt, but out of the urge to learn the construction thoroughly - can anyone offer an explanation of this sort of thing from a good grammar?
If you have the wonderful Woodcock, he talks about it in section 95 of the New Latin Syntax. Don't know if this will work, but
http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=WmT6 ... &q&f=false
might get you there.
http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=WmT6 ... &q&f=false
might get you there.