Latin Translation Question

[Reefgazer]

For those of you who know Latin, I am stumped by this translation that DD and I are working on:  "Our king was praying before the arrival of the army" is translated into Latin by Memoria Press as "Rex noster ante exercitus adventum orabit".  Do any of you know why adventum is placed after exercitus?  I would have put adventum before exercitus. 

[KrissiK]

Hmmm! I'll work on that. I love translations!

[Critterfixer]

That one bothered me too. I think what I finally decided was that the "of the army" being a genitive is best placed before the OP it modifies to prevent confusion.

 

Translation checklist says, "In Latin the genitive usually precedes the noun, but it isn't incorrect if it follows."

Edited February 1, 2016 by Critterfixer

[Reefgazer]

Oh, I bet this is it! Thanks!

That one bothered me too. I think what I finally decided was that the "of the army" being a genitive is best placed before the OP it modifies to prevent confusion.

 

Translation checklist says, "In Latin the genitive usually precedes the noun, but it isn't incorrect if it follows."

 

[KrissiK]

I'll go with Critter's explanation, too!

[KrissiK]

Ok, I translated that just for fun. I would have put "adventum" immediately after "ante" as well, as the object of the preposition (we just finished the two lessons on prepositions in SFL). Glad to know, though, that doing it that way isn't incorrect. It seems like just when I feel like I'm getting the hang of this... someone throws a monkey wrench into things.

 

Critter, you mentioned "translation checklist"..... Please elaborate. :)

Edited February 1, 2016 by KrissiK

[Critterfixer]

The Translation Checklist is pg 4 in the  SFL Workbook and Test Key. 

[KrissiK]

The Translation Checklist is pg 4 in the SFL Workbook and Test Key.

Aha! Found it! Thank you!

[Critterfixer]

You are welcome. Imagine my grouchiness when I read that I'm supposed to have been going over this with my students...oh, well. I've only got two; I have time to discuss the ins and outs of translation stuff as it comes up, right?

[KrissiK]

You are welcome. Imagine my grouchiness when I read that I'm supposed to have been going over this with my students...oh, well. I've only got two; I have time to discuss the ins and outs of translation stuff as it comes up, right?

Yeah,do it as you go. I finally decided to actually do every exercise now. I'd been teaching this stuff just with the answer key and the videos, but now that we're about a third of the way through Second Form with DS#2, I figured it's time to really get a grasp on it. Especially if he's going to go on to Third Form eventually. I'm loving it. It really is fun.

[Critterfixer]

 

Yeah,do it as you go. I finally decided to actually do every exercise now. I'd been teaching this stuff just with the answer key and the videos, but now that we're about a third of the way through Second Form with DS#2, I figured it's time to really get a grasp on it. Especially if he's going to go on to Third Form eventually. I'm loving it. It really is fun. 

 

 

Yeah, I do the same thing. Just do the lesson along with the boys.

[Reefgazer]

I should read the dang book more closely.  :laugh:

The Translation Checklist is pg 4 in the  SFL Workbook and Test Key. 

 

[Critterfixer]

 

I should read the dang book more closely.   :laugh:

 

Story of my life. :lol:

[Reefgazer]

I bought myself a workbook for FFL and SFL and work the entire lessons with DD.  but it's because I wanted to learn Latin with her anyway.

Yeah,do it as you go. I finally decided to actually do every exercise now. I'd been teaching this stuff just with the answer key and the videos, but now that we're about a third of the way through Second Form with DS#2, I figured it's time to really get a grasp on it. Especially if he's going to go on to Third Form eventually. I'm loving it. It really is fun.

 

[Omma]

For those of you who know Latin, I am stumped by this translation that DD and I are working on:  "Our king was praying before the arrival of the army" is translated into Latin by Memoria Press as "Rex noster ante exercitus adventum orabit".  Do any of you know why adventum is placed after exercitus?  I would have put adventum before exercitus.

 

 

What about orabat (he was praying) vs. orabit (he will pray)?  With your English translation, I would have thought the verb would have been 'orabat' in Latin.

 

Brenda

[Critterfixer]

It is orabat if it is the sentence I'm thinking of. Lesson 11, Worksheet 5, #1.

[Critterfixer]

But if we are discussing weirdness in translation, maybe somebody can help me out on this one. Let's say you want to say "the citizens of Rome" or "the citizens of Spain." Why would the adjective default to feminine? Thus,  Romanae cives or Hispaniae cives.  (The questions for inquiry is MP SFL, Lesson 13, Worksheet 6, sentence 5) Is it because not knowing if the citizens are masculine or feminine, then you go with what you do know--that Rome and Spain would be feminine nouns, so their genitive form should be feminine unless specifically altered by the gender of the modified noun?

That's what I'm assuming, but I don't know for sure.

[KrissiK]

I bought myself a workbook for FFL and SFL and work the entire lessons with DD. but it's because I wanted to learn Latin with her anyway.

I'm just making copies. Shhh, don't tell MP. But I am planning on buying the workbook for Third Form for next year for myself.

[Critterfixer]

I painstakingly write down every exercise by hand in my own notebook. :D This is because I'm one of those crazy people who don't know it until they write it down, sad to say.  :001_smile:

[Reefgazer]

You're right.  We had it right on the worksheet, but I typed it wrong here.

What about orabat (he was praying) vs. orabit (he will pray)?  With your English translation, I would have thought the verb would have been 'orabat' in Latin.

 

Brenda

 

[Reefgazer]

I'm pretty sure it's because Roma and Hispania are feminine.

But if we are discussing weirdness in translation, maybe somebody can help me out on this one. Let's say you want to say "the citizens of Rome" or "the citizens of Spain." Why would the adjective default to feminine? Thus,  Romanae cives or Hispaniae cives.  (The questions for inquiry is MP SFL, Lesson 13, Worksheet 6, sentence 5) Is it because not knowing if the citizens are masculine or feminine, then you go with what you do know--that Rome and Spain would be feminine nouns, so their genitive form should be feminine unless specifically altered by the gender of the modified noun?

That's what I'm assuming, but I don't know for sure.

 

[Reefgazer]

Yeah, that's the sentence and the lesson; I just typed it wrong here.

It is orabat if it is the sentence I'm thinking of. Lesson 11, Worksheet 5, #1.

 

[Critterfixer]

 

I'm pretty sure it's because Roma and Hispania are feminine.

 

I think I'm just going to put the mystery in the category of things I haven't learned yet. It's a long list. :laugh:

 

[KrissiK]

I'm pretty sure it's because Roma and Hispania are feminine.

I would agree!

[Critterfixer]

I think that sometimes my desire to treat genitives as possessive adjectives overrules my Latin sense.  :svengo:

[KrissiK]

I think that sometimes my desire to treat genitives as possessive adjectives overrules my Latin sense. :svengo:

One thing that is slowly happening to me is that I am starting to give up my desire to translate word for word according to my English sensibilities and work at getting the meaning working within the Latin framework. This is hard for me. I always felt I was bad at languages. I taught in a missionary school in Brazil for two years and dropped out of Portuguese class because I just didn't get it. But now, learning Latin in a very slow, gentle, thorough way... I'm getting this language thing. I am very very excited.

[Reefgazer]

Same here.  I never thought I was good at languages, and maybe not.  But at least learning with MP helps me understand as I struggle along. 

 

 

One thing that is slowly happening to me is that I am starting to give up my desire to translate word for word according to my English sensibilities and work at getting the meaning working within the Latin framework. This is hard for me. I always felt I was bad at languages. I taught in a missionary school in Brazil for two years and dropped out of Portuguese class because I just didn't get it. But now, learning Latin in a very slow, gentle, thorough way... I'm getting this language thing. I am very very excited.

 

[Reefgazer]

So....we are still struggling along with the translations in Week 11, worksheet 5, and I stumbled on another one I think is similar to the original question I posted.  I made the same durned mistake, too, I think.  Take a gander at this and tell me what you think:

 

The sentence to translate into Latin is "Your dog was sitting behind father's feet."  I translated it as "Canis tuus post pedes fratres sedebat."  Well, the actual translation, according to MP, is "Canis tuus post patris pedes sedebat."  What's up wit dat?  Did I made the same mistake-that-is-not-really-a mistake?

[Critterfixer]

I do believe so. 

 

The sentence to translate into Latin is "Your dog was sitting behind father's feet."  I translated it as "Canis tuus post pedes fratres sedebat."  Well, the actual translation, according to MP, is "Canis tuus post patris pedes sedebat."  What's up wit dat?  Did I made the same mistake-that-is-not-really-a mistake?

 

 

[Omma]

So....we are still struggling along with the translations in Week 11, worksheet 5, and I stumbled on another one I think is similar to the original question I posted.  I made the same durned mistake, too, I think.  Take a gander at this and tell me what you think:

 

The sentence to translate into Latin is "Your dog was sitting behind father's feet."  I translated it as "Canis tuus post pedes fratres sedebat."  Well, the actual translation, according to MP, is "Canis tuus post patris pedes sedebat."  What's up wit dat?  Did I made the same mistake-that-is-not-really-a mistake?

That's interesting.  Yes, we do have to break out of our English grid to learn a new way to combine words when we study other languages.  I guess we could think of it as, 'The dog of you, behind the 'of father feet', was sitting.'  

 

I think why this is especially challenging for us is that 'post' is a prep. that takes the accusative case and the acc. case shows up here two words after the word 'post' instead of directly after it.  And the word in between is a genitive, of all things!!

 

I love discussing Latin, though.  It's my new favorite thing, much to my son's chagrin!

 

Brenda

[KrissiK]

"Frater" is brother and "pater" is father. But as far as word order goes... On pg. 70 of SFL workbook we have "vaccae nostrae" translated as "our cows" and in the next sentence we have "agricolae vaccae" translated as "the farmer's cows". As I'm looking through the exercise, it looks like the pronoun adjectives follow the noun and the regular adjectives precede. Not sure if that's a rule, but it does look like a pattern.

[Critterfixer]

 

But as far as word order goes... On pg. 70 of SFL workbook we have "vaccae nostrae" translated as "our cows" and in the next sentence we have "agricolae vaccae" translated as "the farmer's cows". As I'm looking through the exercise, it looks like the pronoun adjectives follow the noun and the regular adjectives precede. Not sure if that's a rule, but it does look like a pattern. 

 

 

You are going to go make me drag out my workbook again, aren't you? :laugh:

Vaccae nostrae has a true possessive pronoun adjective with it. Adjectives seem to be pretty flexible (well, Latin is flexible) but I like having possessive adjectives in front of the nouns they modify. I see several examples on the same page where they put the possessive pronoun adjective after the noun. So I think it must not be much of a thing. 

The other, agricolae vaccae could just as easily translate as the cows of the farmer. So another genitive, and should be in front of the noun that it "goes with". I've gotten to where I won't call those things adjectives anymore. Not even in English. 

[Omma]

"Frater" is brother and "pater" is father. But as far as word order goes... On pg. 70 of SFL workbook we have "vaccae nostrae" translated as "our cows" and in the next sentence we have "agricolae vaccae" translated as "the farmer's cows". As I'm looking through the exercise, it looks like the pronoun adjectives follow the noun and the regular adjectives precede. Not sure if that's a rule, but it does look like a pattern.

Well, I do know from Henle that quantity adjectives go before the noun and adjectives that show quality go after the noun, as a general rule.  But that still does not explain the genitive case word order.

[Critterfixer]

I think it is simply that genitives are their own animal. We call them possessive adjectives, but they are really nouns that flexed their case. The thing to remember is that you are not wrong to put the genitive behind the noun it accompanies if you would like to do so. It isn't wrong to do that.

[KrissiK]

Word order seems flexible. It's the case that really determines meaning.

[Critterfixer]

If you want a good example of why a genitive should precede the noun it goes with, take a look at sentence 15 on page 70. In that case, the placement of Galliae prior to viri et feminae makes it very clear that Galliae goes with the compound subject and not just one part of the subject. You could not place that word behind feminae or viri and have the same clear meaning that you do by putting it before the compound subject. 

That sentence does give a clear indication of why genitives should precede the noun (s) at least in some circumstances.

[KrissiK]

I agree with you. Coincidentally, I just finished working on that sentence and I got it wrong because I placed Galliae after feminae. I also put sunt at the end and it needs to come before the predicate adjective. I've gotten so used to the verb being at the end that I just assumed...

[Critterfixer]

Head's up! Lesson 14, WB page 6 is waiting to beat you up with genitives! You will encounter "genitive of the whole" without warning!

Omnium Italiae provinciarum nomina nescio. Trick below:

G (plur) G(sing) G (plur)       DO(plur) SV

of all      of Italy   of provinces  the names   I don't know

 

To arrange:

I don't know the names of all of the provinces of Italy.

 

A tip: Underline every ending you find in the sentences. Label each word as the case it belongs to rather than the English term (so say Acc. instead of DO). It helps.

 

Sentences 1 and 5 show genitive of the whole.

 

[Omma]

Head's up! Lesson 14, WB page 6 is waiting to beat you up with genitives! You will encounter "genitive of the whole" without warning!

Omnium Italiae provinciarum nomina nescio. Trick below:

G (plur) G(sing) G (plur)       DO(plur) SV

of all      of Italy   of provinces  the names   I don't know

 

To arrange:

I don't know the names of all of the provinces of Italy.

 

A tip: Underline every ending you find in the sentences. Label each word as the case it belongs to rather than the English term (so say Acc. instead of DO). It helps.

 

Sentences 1 and 5 show genitive of the whole.

Thanks for sharing this example.

 

One thing to note is that the first genitive mentioned is actually a 'quantity' adjective (omnium) so it is listed before the noun it modifies (provinciarum), but with an embedded 'of Italy'  genitive 'noun' that is acting more like an adj., stuck in between).  At least that is the way I am trying to process this, thus: 

 

I don't know the names of all the 'of Italy' provinces.

 

What do you think?

 

Fun discussion, though!

[Critterfixer]

The trick is making sure the student notices that omnium has a genitive case ending, putting it unequivocally with the rest of the genitive group. Moreover, there is the additional understanding that because the ending is a plural genitive it simply must modify the plural provinciarum and not Italiae. I suspect that no one would quibble over a translation that puts Italian first (I don't know the names of all of the Italian provinces) but by seeing that omnium and provinciarum are plural, the translation flows naturally to the construct (I don't know the names of all of the provinces of Italy -which is then made simpler by saying I don't know the names of all the provinces of Italy.)

 

As the sentences get more complicated, I am finding that making sure the boys follow a routine of first examining endings for case before they try to label the parts of the sentence is helpful.

[Critterfixer]

I'm beginning to think (as I look ahead to Third Form Latin) that it may be time for me to...get Henle Latin. :leaving:

And a magnifying glass, because my eyesight won't be getting any better. :lol: My understanding is that it comes with a guide to syntax.

[Omma]

I just wanted to thank you for posting this thread.  In doing Henle Reading No. 23 today, I suddenly understand a translation better because of this discussion here on the WTM forum!

 

Cupidi victoriae et belli gloriae...

Eager for victory and the glory of war...

 

I remembered that you could have what I like to think of as an 'embedded genitive' placed in front of another genitive, since we would not say, 'Eager for victory and the of war of glory'  or 'Eager for victory and (the) war of glory' like I used to try to translate the above.  (Note:  cupidi requires the genitive case).

 

So, thanks guys...you helped me today!  :hurray:

 

Brenda

[KrissiK]

This is a great website if you want more practice for translations.https://sites.google.com/site/ewlatin/Home/first-form-latin-page

It says it's for First Form, but we're in the middle of Second Form and some of the sentences I have trouble with. And I can't find an answer key, so you are kind of on your own as far as that goes.

Edited February 9, 2016 by KrissiK

[KrissiK]

And while we're talking about genitives, here's a sentence from this website I was struggling with last night.

 

Multa dona sororibus reginae dederamus.

 

This is what I got... Dederamus - we were giving

Multa dona - many gifts

Reginae - the queen (dative case or genitive)

Sororibus - the sisters (dative or ablative case, plural)

 

This is how I translated it...

We were giving many gifts to the Queen's sisters.

 

The dative case and the ablative... I guess I struggle with the whole thing that prepositional phrases can function as possessive or indirect objects.

 

And you can't necessarily translate word for word. You translate and then kind of feel around for the meaning until you get it.

 

I love Latin!

Edited February 9, 2016 by KrissiK

[Omma]

And while we're talking about genitives, here's a sentence from this website I was struggling with last night.

 

Multa dona sororibus reginae dederamus.

 

This is what I got... Dederamus - we were giving

Multa dona - many gifts

Reginae - the queen (dative case or genitive)

Sororibus - the sisters (dative or ablative case, plural)

 

This is how I translated it...

We were giving many gifts to the Queen's sisters.

 

The dative case and the ablative... I guess I struggle with the whole thing that prepositional phrases can function as possessive or indirect objects.

 

And you can't necessarily translate word for word. You translate and then kind of feel around for the meaning until you get it.

 

I love Latin!

Looks good.  I would just say that, technically, if you want to say 'we were giving' then you would use the imperfect which is on the present stem, so translate as: 'dabamus'  we were giving

 

dederamus = 'we had given' since it is off the 3rd principal part and using the perfect stem, but with 'era' in the ending, which is my big clue for pluperfect.  I think of it this way...a bygone 'era' since pluperfect is the past before the past, in a way.

 

And I must agree, I love Latin, too!  :lurk5:

 

Brenda

[KrissiK]

You're right, Brenda. I still don't truly understand the pluperfect. Gaaaa!

[Omma]

You're right, Brenda. I still don't truly understand the pluperfect. Gaaaa!

Think of this memory device:

 

Helping verb 'had' in English = use of 'era' in Latin verb tense ending, off of the perfect stem

 

Here's a formula for the formation of a Latin Pluperfect verb:  

Perfect stem +era +active PE

           orav-  +era  +t   =       oraverat   'he had prayed'

 

 Also remember that pluperfect is completed action in the past whereas imperfect is continuous action.  Think of the present stem more along the lines of continuous action, while the perfect stem is used for tenses with completed action (rather than present stem for present happenings, and perfect stem for past happenings).

 

Hope this helps.

 

Brenda

[KrissiK]

Think of this memory device:

 

Helping verb 'had' in English = use of 'era' in Latin verb tense ending, off of the perfect stem

 

Here's a formula for the formation of a Latin Pluperfect verb:  

Perfect stem +era +active PE

           orav-  +era  +t   =       oraverat   'he had prayed'

 

 Also remember that pluperfect is completed action in the past whereas imperfect is continuous action.  Think of the present stem more along the lines of continuous action, while the perfect stem is used for tenses with completed action (rather than present stem for present happenings, and perfect stem for past happenings).

 

Hope this helps.

 

Brenda

OK, but see, to me this is splitting hairs. Because isn't the perfect tense  an action completed in the past? I'm looking at the book and I see "have", "have" and "did" for all these perfect tenses to me and it just makes no sense. In the sentence example I gave previously, "had given" in the pluperfect. Why not just use "gave" which in the perfect tense? What difference does it make? Unless you were going to add another phrase to the sentence. "We had given the Queen's sister a gift, but then we realized that someone gave them the same thing last week." I understand that that is what pluperfect is all about. A past action completed prior to another past action. But the sentence in the example only has the first part. Maybe the sentence is meant to be merely academic. But even so, it is not correct usage. (At least the way I understand pluperfect)  So, it wouldn't be so much the helping verb, but what you're trying to communicate.

Edited February 9, 2016 by KrissiK

[Omma]

Well, the imperfect sense of "We were giving many gifts to the Queen's sisters" also doesn't tell you the rest of the story, so that is no different to me than using a pluperfect example.  For instance, what happened while you were in the process of giving many gifts to the sisters?  Were you interrupted by a loud bang?  Did one of the gifts shatter to the floor? 

 

For now, just remember that you use 'was/were verbing with imperfect and 'had verbed' with pluperfect.

 

Does that help?

 

 

[KrissiK]

Well, the imperfect sense of "We were giving many gifts to the Queen's sisters" also doesn't tell you the rest of the story, so that is no different to me than using a pluperfect example. For instance, what happened while you were in the process of giving many gifts to the sisters? Were you interrupted by a loud bang? Did one of the gifts shatter to the floor?

 

For now, just remember that you use 'was/were verbing with imperfect and 'had verbed' with pluperfect.

 

Does that help?

Yes, it does. You're right, either way it doesn't make sense because you don't have the rest of the thought. And, as I read my next example, it wasn't truly pluperfect because it didn't happen prior to the other past action. The writers of these exercises are probably focusing on teaching correct grammar forms using tenses and vocabulary we know and not so much focusing on making sense.