The queen loves the great forest et cetera

KarlaUK

Active Member
1. (A friend goes to get Sextus) Hasn't Mark invited you to our dinner?
Nōnne Mārcus nōn tē cenae nōstrae invītavit?
There's a non missing.
invitare is constructed aliquem ad aliquid invitare.

Nōnne Mārcus nōn tē cenae nōstrae invītavit?
@Bitmap Can you explain the missing nōn, please?
I need to think about Invirāre some more.
4. (Ans,) I have not come having been warned about the forest this morning by a certain farmer.
Ab quādam agricolā dē silvā hodiē māne monitus nōn vēnī.
agricola is masculine.
Ab quōdam agricolā dē silvā hodiē māne monitus nōn vēnī.
6. (Sextus) "These boys are rash," said he. "The forest is dangerous."
"Hiī puerī temerāriī sunt", inquit. " Silva perīculōsa est."
Typo: hii

Sadly, not a typo.
"Hī puerī temerāriī sunt", inquit. " Silva perīculōsa est.
7.(First speaker) Are these his words? (Sextus) These are his very words.
Haec euis verba sunt? Haec euis ipsa verba sunt.
It's spelt eius.
Haec eius verba sunt? Haec eius ipsa verba sunt.
8. (First speaker) Have you yourself ever seen anything (of) dangerous in this forest? I have seen nothing.
Ipse tū quidquam perīculōsī in silvā umquam vīdistī. Ego nūllam vīdī.
nullam is wrong ... although I suppose you could say nullam rem. But there is a better word for "nothing".
Ipse tū quidquam perīculōsī in silvā umquam vīdistī. Ego nihil vīdī.
10. Come now to our supper.
Nunc ēnae nōstrae vēnī.
You probably mean cena?! I would construct venire as venire ad aliquid ... the dative may be found in poetry, but it's nothing regular.
In the imperative of venire, the e is short.
Nunc cenae nōstrae venī. Work in progress -I need to think about Invirāre some more.
 

Pacifica

grammaticissima
Staff member
I need to think about Invirāre some more.
*invitare

What Bitmap is saying is that you need ad + accusative (ad cenam) instead of the dative (cenae). That's because the dinner is a destination of sorts, rather than an indirect object.
Haec eius verba sunt? Haec eius ipsa verba sunt.
Ipse tū quidquam perīculōsī in silvā umquam vīdistī. Ego nihil vīdī.
You often write questions without any interrogative particles. While that is sometimes done, it isn't the most usual way to go, either, and in these sentences at least I would have used particles, e.g. Eiusne haec verba sunt? Num ipse tu quidquam periculosi in silva umquam vidisti? For the latter, enumquam would work nicely, too, but I don't suppose that's been introduced in your textbook yet.
 

Bitmap

Civis Illustris
@Bitmap Can you explain the missing nōn, please?
You had a double negation in there ... a triple negation would have made it ok again :D

For the latter, enumquam would work nicely, too, but I don't suppose that's been introduced in your textbook yet.
Not even I have seen that word before. But I take it it's 2 words.
 

KarlaUK

Active Member
*invitare

What Bitmap is saying is that you need ad + accusative (ad cenam) instead of the dative (cenae). That's because the dinner is a destination of sorts, rather than an indirect object.


You often write questions without any interrogative particles. While that is sometimes done, it isn't the most usual way to go, either, and in these sentences at least I would have used particles, e.g. Eiusne haec verba sunt? Num ipse tu quidquam periculosi in silva umquam vidisti? For the latter, enumquam would work nicely, too, but I don't suppose that's been introduced in your textbook yet.
Thank you for the information on ad and invītāre. I had been looking (because I do try to find the answers, myself)
Noted on the questions. I didn't want to put it on haec(ne) but moving eius and putting it on that end makes sense.
The Ipse one, I forgot it was a question by the time I crafted most of the rest of the sentence.
Not found enumquam at all yet.
 

Pacifica

grammaticissima
Staff member

KarlaUK

Active Member
1. (A friend goes to get Sextus) Hasn't Mark invited you to our dinner?
Nōnne Mārcus nōn tē cenae nōstrae invītavit?
There's a non missing.
invitare is constructed aliquem ad aliquid invitare.
I guess it is literal movement to dinner rather than figurative.
Nōnne Mārcus tē ad cenam nōstram invītavit?

Haec eius verba sunt? Haec eius ipsa verba sunt.​
Ipse tū quidquam perīculōsī in silvā umquam vīdistī. Ego nihil vīdī.​
You often write questions without any interrogative particles. While that is sometimes done, it isn't the most usual way to go, either, and in these sentences at least I would have used particles, e.g. Eiusne haec verba sunt? Num ipse tu quidquam periculosi in silva umquam vidisti? For the latter, enumquam would work nicely, too, but I don't suppose that's been introduced in your textbook yet.​

No it hasn't in fact I can't find it in there anywhere.
Thanks, both.

 

Pacifica

grammaticissima
Staff member
I guess it is literal movement to dinner rather than figurative.
Even figurative movement can be expressed by ad (or in) + acc., for instance a purpose, translated as "for" or a figurative "toward" (e.g. pisces ad cenam emi, "I bought fish for dinner"). You'll learn about this later, but I'm saying it now just so a false notion doesn't take root in your mind.
Doesn't matter.
I saw this after I wrote the above. So I'm confirming what Bitmap said and just elaborating on it a little.
 

Pacifica

grammaticissima
Staff member
:rolleyes1:
 

Pacifica

grammaticissima
Staff member
Both are good. I was rolling my eyes at the statement itself, not its grammar.
 

KarlaUK

Active Member
Please will anyone help check my translations in to basic Latin to assist my self-learning.
Exercises are from W Gardner Hale's First Latin Book. I have underlined those words where I am unsure on the appropriate word order. A comment on these whether wrong or right would be much appreciated as would highlighting any macron errors.
I missed these, earlier.

Section 238 (2nd Ed.)

1. The little boys, having been prompted (use moneō) by Mark, are ready now to defend themselves.
Puerī parvī, ā Mārcō monitī, nunc sē dēfendere parant.

2. The big boys, blamed by everybody (say all) will desist.
Puerī magnī, ā cūnctīs culpantur, dēsistent.

3. If they do not do this, we shall stop (prohibeō) them.
Sed hoc nōn facient, eōs prohibēbimus.

4. They will not wish to fight with so many.
nōn cum tam multīs pugnāre cupient.

5. Thus, the prohibited game will not be begun again.
Ita, lūdus prohibitus nōn interum incipit.

6. We have saved the good reputation of our school.
Fāmam bonam scholae nostrae servāvimus.
 

Bitmap

Civis Illustris
1. The little boys, having been prompted (use moneō) by Mark, are ready now to defend themselves.
Puerī parvī, ā Mārcō monitī, nunc sē dēfendere parant.
This technically means "they are getting ready to defend themselves".

I suppose the book wants you to use the PPP of parare + infinitive construction.

2. The big boys, blamed by everybody (say all) will desist.
Puerī magnī, ā cūnctīs culpantur, dēsistent.
Use the PPP.

3. If they do not do this, we shall stop (prohibeō) them.
Sed hoc nōn facient, eōs prohibēbimus.
if = si

4. They will not wish to fight with so many.
nōn cum tam multīs pugnāre cupient.
Very good.

5. Thus, the prohibited game will not be begun again.
Ita, lūdus prohibitus nōn interum incipit.
iterum
voice + tense.

6. We have saved the good reputation of our school.
Fāmam bonam scholae nostrae servāvimus.
That's correct. Well done!
 

KarlaUK

Active Member
Thanks @Bitmap
1. The little boys, having been prompted (use moneō) by Mark, are ready now to defend themselves.
Puerī parvī, ā Mārcō monitī, nunc sē dēfendere parant.
This technically means "they are getting ready to defend themselves".

I suppose the book wants you to use the PPP of parare + infinitive construction.
I had to interrupt my studies for a lot of work and forgot the latest chapter. I knew what I was writing was not a literal translation but, best I get something down on 'paper' from what is hiding in my brain :)


2. The big boys, blamed by everybody (say all) will desist.
Puerī magnī, ā cūnctīs culpantur, dēsistent.
Use the PPP.
3. If they do not do this, we shall stop (prohibeō) them.
Sed hoc nōn facient, eōs prohibēbimus.
if = si

Oops.
Sī hoc nōn facient, eōs prohibēbimus.

5. Thus, the prohibited game will not be begun again.
Ita, lūdus prohibitus nōn interum incipit.
iterum
voice + tense.
Damn that little word; I keep misspelling it. I guess it ought to be in the passive. I was wandering about the be begun and the passive is not my strongest voice when it comes to identification and I spotted the will and then still mis-constructed the verb.
Ita, lūdus prohibitus nōn iterum incipiētur.
 

Bitmap

Civis Illustris
Sentence 5 is right, now. You still need to correct 1+2.
 
Top