LV

john abshire

Well-Known Member
Pugionem quem absterserat intuitus est. Pugio in sole lucebat. Sed restabant parvae maculae obscurae et lineae, quas Clodius diu intuitus, “at quid,” inquit, “hoc rei est?! Viarum hercle, speciem hae maculae et lineae praebent!”

he looked at the dagger which he had wiped off. The dagger was shining in the sun. But small dark stains and lines remained, which Clodius having looked at for a long time said “but what is this to ________?! Of the roads, hercle, to which provided the appearance of stain and line.!”

pls review
Especially the last sentences
Thank you
 

Pacifica

grammaticissima
Staff member
Quid hoc rei est? = literally "What of a thing is this?" i.e. "What kind of thing is this?", "What is this?"

Hercle is an interjection that emphasizes one's certitude (it's basically an oath by Hercules). Shakespeare might have said "by heaven" or "by my troth" there... For something more modern I guess you could say "really", "definitely" or so.

Hae maculae et lineae is the subject of praebent, which is present tense. Hae isn't a relative.
 

Pacifica

grammaticissima
Staff member
Hercle is an interjection that emphasizes one's certitude (it's basically an oath by Hercules). Shakespeare might have said "by heaven" or "by my troth" there... For something more modern I guess you could say "really", "definitely" or so.
But since we're in a Roman context anyway, it's just fine to translate it simply as "by Hercules".
 
Top