Uses of dative

[john abshire]

The man bought a book for his son.
Vir librum filio (dative) emit.
The man bought a book from his son.
Vir librum a filio (ablative) emit.
The man gave a book to his son.
Vir librum filio (dative) dedit.

He plowed the field for planting.
Plantando (dative) agrum arat.
He plowed the field for me.
Agrum mihi (dative) aravit.
It seems to me that the king is bad.
Mihi (dative) videtur ut rex malus est.
The field ought to be plowed by the farmer.
Agrum arandum est agricolae (dative).
??

 

[Bitmap]

The man bought a book for his son.
Vir librum filio (dative) emit.
The man bought a book from his son.
Vir librum a filio (ablative) emit.
The man gave a book to his son.
Vir librum filio (dative) dedit.

Yes.

He plowed the field for planting.
Plantando (dative) agrum arat.

The dative in the gerund is not very usual and this would probably be taken as an ablative of means ("He plowed the field by planting"?! oO).
I think you would use ad plantandum here.
Also: aravit.

He plowed the field for me.
Agrum mihi (dative) aravit.

Yes.

It seems to me that the king is bad.
Mihi (dative) videtur ut rex malus est.

videri triggers an NcI: mihi videtur rex malus esse.

The field ought to be plowed by the farmer.
Agrum arandum est agricolae (dative).

Yes, but ager is masculine. ager arandus est.

 

[Bitmap]

Also: Happy birthday belatedly!

 

[Pacifica]

The dative in the gerund is not very usual

While the dative gerund is sometimes used to express purpose, it's mostly confined to certain expressions, most often ones that denote choosing something (like a day, place...) for a certain purpose. It indeed seems unusual here.

Also mind the tense, John: "plowed" and arat don't match.

 

[john abshire]

While the dative gerund is sometimes used to express purpose, it's mostly confined to certain expressions, most often ones that denote choosing something (like a day, place...) for a certain purpose. It indeed seems unusual here.

Also mind the tense, John: "plowed" and arat don't match.

[thank you bitmap and pacifica]
Plantando agrum aravit.
He plowed the field for planting.
I’m confused, because planting is the purpose of plowing, it is why you plow.
And I did mean this as an example of dative of purpose.
Another, she prepared the food for eating. (Where eating would be a gerund in dative case)
How would you rephrase it in Latin in an usual way?
He plowed the field in order to plow? (ut arare?)

 

[Issacus Divus]

[thank you bitmap and pacifica]
Plantando agrum aravit.
He plowed the field for planting.
I’m confused, because planting is the purpose of plowing, it is why you plow.
And I did mean this as an example of dative of purpose.

But it’s still unusual.

 

[Gryllus Minor]

And just a quick note, plantō does not mean "plant." You want serō or conserō.

I agree that using the gerund with a dative of purpose here, while not impossible, is improbable. Something like Agrum aravit ut sereret would be more natural, or ad + gerundive, ad serendum agrum aravit.

 

[john abshire]

And just a quick note, plantō does not mean "plant." You want serō or conserō.

I agree that using the gerund with a dative of purpose here, while not impossible, is improbable. Something like Agrum aravit ut sereret would be more natural, or ad + gerundive, ad serendum agrum aravit.

Agrum aravit ut sereret.
He has plowed the field in order that he may plant.
Ad serendum agrum aravit.
He plowed the field for purpose of planting.
??
The easiest for me is to just accept that a gerund is not used for Dative of purpose (dativus finalis), but acceptable examples use common nouns;
“We learn for life (vitae).” “To call for help (auxilio).”

Besides dative of purpose, there is dativus commodi, dativus possessivus (possessive dative), dativus ethicus (ethic dative), dativus auctoris, dative with gerundive (gerundive of obligation) “must be done by us”.

The farmer called for help (in order) to plow the field for me.
Agricola auxilio (dativus finalis) ut mihi (dativus commodi) araret.
?
What has the farmer done for me?
Quis agricola mihi (dativus ethicus) fecit?
?

 

[Pacifica]

“To call for help (auxilio).”

You don't use a dative there but you'd rather say something like auxilium invocare/petere....

What has the farmer done for me?
Quis agricola mihi (dativus ethicus) fecit?

Quis means "who" (in the nominative, which would also be the wrong case here). "What" is quid.

Quid mihi fecit? would sooner be taken as "What has he done to me?" For "What has he done for me (for my benefit)?" you'd rather say Quid mea causa fecit? or Quid pro me fecit?

 

[john abshire]

While the dative gerund is sometimes used to express purpose, it's mostly confined to certain expressions, most often ones that denote choosing something (like a day, place...) for a certain purpose. It indeed seems unusual here.

Also mind the tense, John: "plowed" and arat don't match.

do you mean that the following sentence would be "usual"?
The farmer chose the field for planting.
agricola agrum serendo elegit. ?

 

[Pacifica]

Yes. Well, I've never seen it in the context of fields and planting, but the construction would be usual enough.

 

[john abshire]

Yes. Well, I've never seen it in the context of fields and planting, but the construction would be usual enough.

Thank you