Attingit

[john abshire]

...... attingit etiam ab sequanis et helvetiis flumen rhenum,.........
.......It borders too on the side of the sequani and the helvetii, upon the river Rhine.....
——I don’t get “on the side of”, or “upon”.

My translation (after much time)
.... it also borders the river Rhine, from/at the sequani and the helvetii,.....
Is this wrong?

 

[Bitmap]

My translation (after much time)
.... it also borders the river Rhine, from/at the sequani and the helvetii,.....
Is this wrong?

Does that sound like a proper English sentence to you?

 

[john abshire]

Does that sound like a proper English sentence to you?

......It also borders the river Rhine, from the sequani and the helvetii.....

this translation is the best I can do. I could not get the book’s translation, and I could not figure out where the book got “on the side of” or “upon”. That is what I need help with.

 

[Gryllus Minor]

What you are learning is that prepositions don't always actually work like the initial glosses we learn. I love this note from one of the student commentaries I use when teaching this:

"ā flumine, at the river. There are many phrases in which we feel at or on to be the appropriate preposition, but in which the Romans thought of a starting point and consequently used ab or ex, which literally means from."

 

[john abshire]

What you are learning is that prepositions don't always actually work like the initial glosses we learn.

apparently so. However, it seems to me that when translating the sentence, it is more clear with the direct object following the verb, so that the direct object is not confused as an object of prepostion, e.g.
...... attingit etiam ab sequanis et helvetiis flumen rhenum,.........
.......It borders too on the side of the sequani and the helvetii, upon the river Rhine.... [author's translation]
.... it also borders the river Rhine, from/at the sequani and the helvetii,..... [my translation]

then it is a matter of wrestling with how to fit in the objects of preposition, i.e. what does ab mean in this case?
The author apparently thought ab should mean "on the side of", or better said, he thought he could best express the meaning of the sentence in this way.

I love this note from one of the student commentaries I use when teaching this:
"ā flumine, at the river. There are many phrases in which we feel at or on to be the appropriate preposition, but in which the Romans thought of a starting point and consequently used ab or ex, which literally means from."

I'm not sure what you mean, but let me guess;
are you saying that if you were writing a phrase in latin for your students, and wanted to say
"on the side of the sequani and the helvetii", you would write
secundum sequanum et helvetium
however; Caesar and his Latin speaking readers were so accustomed to Latin they kinda knew what each other meant , and they could use ab when secundum (or a more desciptive preposition meaning "on the side of") was really what they meant.
??

 

[Pacifica]

No, it's more that the use of prepositions (like other things) doesn't always match 100% literally between different languages. So, for example, you can find a Latin preposition meaning literally "from" in a context where English would use something different.

 

[Gryllus Minor]

From the OLD:

a (with nouns of direction) In the direction of, on, in.

ab laeua rite probatum Enn. Ann. 613; nequis aut hinc aut ab laeua aut a dextera ‥ adsit Pl. Mil. 607; ab dextra parte Cato orat. 39; sinistra (pars) ab oriente, dextra ab occasu Var. L. 7.7; Vincla uidebis ‥ caudarum a parte locata Cic. Arat. 395(151); ab alia porta ‥ Sabinus ager Agr. 2.66; si est calor a sole se opponant N.D. 2.129; uirum ‥ saecla ‥ quae cum quattuor ‥ uidemus quattuor a uentis et caeli partibus esse Lucr. 6.1111; attingit etiam ab Sequanis et Heluetiis flumen Rhenum Caes. Gal. 1.1.5; unus (exercitus) ab urbe, alter a Gallia obstant Sal. Cat. 58.6; hos tota armenta sequuntur a tergo Verg. A. 1.185; munimentum a planioribus aditu locis Liv. 1.33.7; et a fronte et ab tergo urgerent 4.33.10; Romani a maritima arce (oppugnabant) 31.46.9; Sardoa ‥ regna sinistris respicit a remis Ov. Fast. 4.290; ab occasu refulgens nuncupatur uesper Plin. Nat. 2.36; dulcis ‥ respicitur tellus comitesque a puppe relicti Stat. Theb. 7.144; tempestatem ab Ostia atrocem Tac. Ann. 11.31; Andromachen a fronte uidebis Juv. 6.503; —(with adverb) ne qvis ‥ ab ante aliam ponat CIL 11.147.

b (with other words) in a line or direction extending from, by, near; off (a coast).

collis ‥ infimus apertus, ab superiore parte siluestris Caes. Gal. 2.18.2; uox ab imis morata Vitr. 5.2.2; castra ab regione urbis ‥ posita Liv. 26.42.6; abietis quae pars a terra fuit Plin. Nat. 16.196; ut ab omni parte saturentur Larg. 227; oppositis Semelen a uentre lacertis Stat. Theb. 4.564; qui ab utraque parte fluminis ‥ praedia possident Gaius Inst. 2.72; —(in fig. phrase) ipsa ‥ natura eius affectionis ‥ quietissima ab parte explicanda Cic. Inv. 2.25; nihil est ab omni parte beatum Hor. Carm. 2.16.27; —a Germania immensas insulas non pridem conpertas cognitum habeo Plin. Nat. 2.246; (Sardinia) habet ‥ a Gorditano promunturio duas insulas 3.83.


Glare, P. G. W. (Ed.). (2012). Oxford Latin Dictionary (Second Edition, Vol. I & II). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

 

[john abshire]

No, it's more that the use of prepositions (like other things) doesn't always match 100% literally between different languages. So, for example, you can find a Latin preposition meaning literally "from" in a context where English would use something different.

I think I follow you, at least in cases where it is difficult to express what you mean in the second language, then you substitute something close. However, in this case, if the goal was to say “on the side of the sequani”, “in ripa sequani” would be closer than “a sequano”.
Is “a sequano” translated “from the side of the sequani” vs “from the sequani” because of (also) context? Or just because you think that is what he meant?

 

[Gryllus Minor]

Another example, the one usually used to illustrate this, is ā dextrō cornū, "on the right wing" of an army. John, not sure what to say at this point. It's simply a matter of seeing the preposition in enough contexts to get used to how it is actually used. Again, think of ā/ab as expressing a starting point, and then from context the best way to express that location in English. Did you read through the OLD entry that I supplied?

 

[john abshire]

Another example, the one usually used to illustrate this, is ā dextrō cornū, "on the right wing" of an army. John, not sure what to say at this point. It's simply a matter of seeing the preposition in enough contexts to get used to how it is actually used. Again, think of ā/ab as expressing a starting point, and then from context the best way to express that location in English. Did you read through the OLD entry that I supplied?

I tried. It is beyond my ability.

 

[Gryllus Minor]

I tried. It is beyond my ability.

Then you'll have to take it on faith, and continue working on your Latin. It will not remain beyond your ability. Think of it right now as an idiomatic usage.

 

[David Fields]

Let's see I if I understand some of what was the response to Mr. Abshire's query: How Caesar, and his contemporary users of Latin, used the Latin language is--by definition-- Classical Latin. The fact that some of how they used it is difficult to put in another language (such as English), or that using different words would have made "translation" more sensible, would have been irrelevant to them.

Then, how do you know what the original Latin user originally meant? In short, is the answer, "we don't always"? But by looking at similar uses, as you showed in OLD, one can get an approximation. (or, in the certain absence of absolute knowledge, an agreement among the knowledgeable. ) For those experts on this board there is a.....Latiny....Latinish....sense, from so much exposure to the raw, actual, writings of the time.

I am also reading Julius Caesar, to try to "get in his head". I am starting to realize there are layers to this "translation" thing. "Equus" is "horse"--but it is certainly not American Thoroughbred which is in my head--I should learn more about horses in Roman times. I was jolted when I ran into the fact that the Romans in Italy put their grape vines around trees, or laced them from tree to tree (as the central Italians did until 100 years ago)--that makes a very different mental image for "vinyard" than what had been in my head.

It helps with book 1 that I have lived in Geneva. I know the lake, and the Jura, and the Rhone--though since the area straddles Switzerland and France, it is hard for me to find appropriate typology maps which straddle the entire area [to estimate where the wall JC built was, likely. Though I am sure there are a bazillion sources which I will eventually stumble on where learned speculation has already been applied]. Eventually....and I guess this may be a goal of anyone learning a new language, which perforce means a new culture, is to not directly "translate" into English, but to understand while staying in classical Latin. An "acies" is an acies. ["Piste" always means piste to me. My early skiing was in the Vallee--to "translate" the word into its northeast American version was to lose all relevant meaning]

 

[Westcott]

Talking about Roman horses, I've just backed a horse called Claudius Secundus in the 2.20 at Lingfield. Guess where it came? That's right, second.

 

[Etaoin Shrdlu]

Why are you betting on the all-weather when Cheltenham's on?