17.02.26: Level 3; indirect statement; the accusative-infinitive [24]: use of quod

[i] In the first post on the topic of indirect statement, it was mentioned that quod as an equivalent of the English conjuction ‘that’ is a feature of Late Latin rather than Classical:

Level 3: indirect statement; the accusative-infinitive [1] (note [4])

https://adckl2.blogspot.com/2025/06/level-3-indirect-statement-accusative.html

et vīdit Deus ¦ quod esset bonum (Vulgate) │ and God saw that it was good

lēgātī renūntiāvērunt ¦ quod Pompeium in potestāte habērent │ the ambassadors reported that they had Pompey in their power

This type of clause with quod gradually took over from the accusative and infinitive construction and became the usual way of expressing indirect speech in the Romance languages:

French / Spanish / Portuguese: que; Italian: che; Romanian: că

This parallels with, for example, Old English: þæt; Mediaeval German: daȥ; Modern Russian: chto (что)

However, in Classical Latin quod / quia introduces a causal / explanatory clause rather than an indirect statement:

[ii] quod: “(the fact) that”

quod rediit ¦ nōbīs mīrābile vidētur (Cicero) │ (the fact) that he returned ¦ seems marvellous to us

praetereō ¦ quod eam sibī domum dēlēgit (Cicero) │  I pass over ¦ the fact that he chose that house for himself

i.e. these two do not ‘report’ an event, but express a reaction to something already known

[iii] verbs of emotion / feeling are followed by either quod or quia; a way of differentiating the use of quod (or quia) in this context is mostly to interpret the meaning as ‘because’ rather than ‘that’.

Quod scrībis . . . gaudeō. │ I am glad ¦ that you write.

Gaudēmus quod ad tempus adestis │ We rejoice ¦ that you are here on time

Faciō libenter quod eam nōn possum praeterīre. │ I am glad ¦ that I cannot pass it by.

Gaudet quod vivit │ He rejoices ¦ that he is alive.

Opportūnissima rēs accidit quod Germānī vēnērunt. │ A very fortunate thing happened, ¦ (namely) that the Germans came.

Optimum, quod sustulistī. │ It is a very good thing ¦ that you have removed [him].

dolet mihi quod tū nunc stomachāris (Cicero) │ I'm sorry ¦ that you're angry now

quī ¦ quia nōn habuit ā mē turmās equitum ¦ fortasse suscēnset │ who perhaps feels angry ¦ that he did not receive squadrons of cavalry from me

https://dcc.dickinson.edu/grammar/latin/indicative-quod

[iv] The question is how the term Classical Latin is defined as opposed to, for example, Ecclesiastical or, in this case, “vernacular”. The use of quod to introduce an indirect statement is not considered a feature of Classical Latin i.e. the formal writing of Cicero, Livy etc. There may be occasional examples of quod introducing indirect statement. From Plautus:

Equidem sciō iam fīlius quod amet meus istanc meretrīcem ē proxumō Philaenium. │ I already know that my son is in love with that prostitute from next door, Philaenium.

Nunc sciō ego quod tē amāvī et miser sum factus. │ Now I know that I loved you and have been made wretched.

These would imply that quod was used in the vernacular, which would not be surprising given the common developments in the Romance languages that reflect that use, as well as equivalents in, for example, the Germanic and Slavonic languages, all of which would suggest it is a very early feature. While that is interesting to note, it is the literary language of the Classical period that is the predominant concern, and none of the major writers on Latin grammar refer to it, nor is it standard literary practice.

17.02.26: Level 3; the Pater Noster of Juvencus [5]; notes on Latin poetry [4] video

[5] video: Vincent’s complete recitation with lines scanned and key points noted.

Take away:

dactyl(ic)

spondee

anceps

hexameter

/i/ + V: either ⁱa / ⁱo or i-a / i-o

diphthong

long by nature i.e. always long in any form of written or spoken Latin

long by position: [i] VCC; [ii] V+X[ks] i.e. becomes long in verse

elision: -(V) ͜ V- / -(V) + (h)V

17.02.26: Level 3; Celestial Sphere: from the authors [3] Poeticon Astronomicon; Hyginus

[1] In fīnītiōne mundī circulī sunt parallēlī quīnque, in quibus tōta ratiō sphaerae cōnsistit, praeter eum quī zōdiacus appellātur; │ At the boundary of the world there are five parallel circles, in which the entire system of the sphere is contained, except for that one which is called the zodiac;

[2] quī, quod nōn ut cēterī circulī certā dīmēnsiōne fīnītur et inclīnātior aliīs vidētur, λοξός [loksos] ā Graecīs est dictus. │ and this (circle), because it is not bounded by a fixed dimension like the others and appears more inclined than the rest, is called loxos by the Greeks.

[3] Quīnque autem quōs suprā dīximus sīc in sphaerā mētiuntur: │ The five (circles), which we have mentioned above, measure out / divide the sphere in this manner:

[4] initiō sūmptō ā polō quī boreus appellātur, ad eum quī notius et antarcticus vocātur, in trīgintā partēs ūnumquodque hēmisphaerium dīviditur, ita utī dīmēnsiō significārī videātur in tōtā sphaerā sexāgintā partēs factās. │ Beginning from the pole called Boreas (the northern pole) to that which is called Notus or Antarctic, each hemisphere is divided into thirty parts, so that the entire sphere is seen to be marked out into sixty parts in all.

• boreās, -ae [1/m]: north; north wind
• boreus, -a, -um; boreālis, -e: northern; Aurōra Boreālis: Northern Lights
• Notus, -ī [2/m]: god of the Southern Wind
• hēmisphaerium, -ī  [2/n]: hemisphere
• ūnum¦quodque: each

05.12.25: Level 3; indefinites [16] -que

https://adckl.blogspot.com/2025/09/051225-level-3-indefinites-16-que.html

Image: woodcut from the 1482 edition

Note further features of abbreviation

[i] the letter /q/ with a stroke through it (ꝗ); again, depending on the writer, it could equal an entire word e.g. quam, but here it indicates the omission of letters:

Eꝗnoctialis = equinoctialis

28.11.25: the Domesday Book; reading the manuscript [v] types of abbreviation [iv]; mind your p’s and q’s

https://adckl.blogspot.com/2025/08/281125-domesday-book-reading-manuscript_35.html

[ii] (Difficult to make out in the image): zodiacʔ (the sign usually marking the omission of -us or -rum) = zodiacus

16.02.26: Level 2; Vincent (Latin Reader); XL / XLI; [1] A Sudden Attack by the British; [2] British Methods of Fighting (ii) grammar review

[1] A Sudden Attack by the British

Equitēs Britannōrum et essedāriī cum equitibus Rōmānīs in itinere ācriter proeliō cōnflīxērunt. Rōmānī omnibus in partibus erant superiōrēs atque hostēs in silvās et collēs compulērunt. Dum Rōmānī sunt incautī atque castra mūniunt, subitō hostēs ex omnibus partibus contrā mīlitēs, quī prō castrīs erant in statiōne, impetum fēcērunt. Caesar duās cohortēs et partem legiōnis mīsit. Rōmānī hostēs fugāvērunt atque numerum magnum necāvērunt.

[2] British Methods of Fighting

Hōc in genere pugnae nostrī propter arma gravia nec hostibus īnstāre poterant nec ab signīs discēdere audēbant. Nostrī equitēs magnō cum perīculō pugnābant, quod hostēs cōnsultō saepe cēdēbant atque, ubi nostrōs ā legiōnibus remōverant, ex essedīs dēsiliēbant et pedibus contendēbant. Hostēs rārī semper pugnābant et statiōnēs intervāllīs magnīs habēbant atque integrī fessīs succēdēbant. Hīs causīs mīlitēs  Rōmānī magnā cum difficultāte contendēbant.

The questions refer to either of the two texts

[i] Give the nominative singular of the following nouns

cohortēs

difficultāte

equitēs

genere

itinere

pedibus

[ii] Identify the case of the two words in bold and explain why that case is being used:

nec hostibus īnstāre poterant

integrī fessīs succēdēbant

[iii] Translate the following phrases all of which use the ablative case

(1)

prō castrīs

(2)

in itinere

in statiōne

hōc in genere pugnae

omnibus in partibus

(3)

ex essedīs

ex omnibus partibus

(4)

nec ab signīs discēdere audēbant

nostrōs ā legiōnibus remōverant

(5)

cum equitibus Rōmānīs

magnā cum difficultāte

magnō cum perīculō

(6)

hīs causīs

intervāllīs magnīs

pedibus contendēbant

____________________

[i]

cohortēs < cohors

difficultāte < difficultās

equitēs < eques

genere < genus

itinere < iter

pedibus < pēs

[ii] Both are compound verbs followed by the dative case

īnstō, -āre [1]: press on

succēdō, -ere (sub + cēdō) [3]: relieve

https://adckl.blogspot.com/2025/02/130425-level-3-verbs-with-dative-case-1.html

[iii]

(1)

prō castrīs │ in front of / before the camp

(2)

in itinere │ on the journey (march)

in statiōne │ at (one’s) post / on guard

hōc in genere pugnae │ in this type (of battle)

omnibus in partibus │ (here) in all respects / every respect

(3)

ex essedīs │ out of the chariots (here: the idea of ‘down from’)

ex omnibus partibus │ from every direction

(4)

nec ab signīs discēdere audēbant │ and they did not dare to go away from / leave their standards

nostrōs ā legiōnibus remōverant │ they had drawn our mean away from the legions

(5)

cum equitibus Rōmānīs │ with the Roman cavalry

magnā cum difficultāte  │ with great difficulty

magnō cum perīculō │ with great danger

(6)

hīs causīs │ for these reasons

intervāllīs magnīs │ lit: at large intervals = with great spaces (between them)

pedibus contendēbant │ they fought on foot

15.02.26: Level 1; Carolus et Maria [24][ix]: the comparative and superlative; reference tables

15.02.26: Level 1; Carolus et Maria [24][viii]: the comparative and superlative; Latin tutorial; irregular forms

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=quUOppMKxTo

[1]

Haec avis est alta. │ This bird is high.

Illa avis quoque est alta. │ This bird is also high.

Illa / illa avis est altior  … │ That one / that bird is higher …

… quam haec / haec avis, │ …than this one / this bird,

sed haec avis est altissima. │ but this bird is the highest.

[2]

In itinere sunt tria flūmina lāta. │ On the journey / way there are three wide rivers.

Flūmen prīmum est lātum, │ The first river is wide,

sed flūmen secundum est lātius ¦ quam prīmum │ but the second river is wider ¦ than the first (one)

et flūmen tertium est lātissimum. │ and the third river is the widest.

[3]

Cicerō est ¦ optimus patrōnus ¦ omnium. │ Cicero is ¦ the best patron / protector ¦ of all.

Hortensius est ¦ patrōnus māior ¦ quam aliī patrōnī,  │ Hortensius is ¦ a greater patron ¦ than other patrons.

sed est patrōnus pēior quam Cicerō. │ but he is ¦ a worse patron ¦ than Cicero.

[4]

Rōmānī Mārtem ¦ deum potentem ¦ colunt. │ The Romans worship Mars, ¦ a powerful god.

Rōmānī quoque colunt Iōvem, ¦ patrem maximum ¦ deōrum. │ The Romans also worship Jupiter, ¦ the greatest father ¦ of the gods.

Iuppiter est potentior ¦ quam Mārs, │ Jupiter is more powerful ¦ than Mars,

Habet ¦ vim maiōrem ¦ quam Mārs. │ he has ¦ greater power ¦ than Mars. 

Iūppiter est potentissimus ¦ deōrum. │ Jupiter is the most powerful ¦ of the gods.

Est deus maximē potēns.  │ He is an especially powerful god.

[5] Match the answers with the questions:

[i] Minimē, illud est lātius quam hoc.

[ii] Cicerō est māior patrōnus quam Hortensius.

[iii] Cicerō est optimus patrōnus omnium.

[iv] Iūppiter māiōrem vim habet.

[v] Haec avis est altior.

Quis est optimus patrōnus omnium?

Quae est altior avis? Haec aut illa?

Est Cicerō māior aut pēior patrōnus quam Hortensius?

Estne hoc flūmen lātius quam illud flūmen?

Quis habet māiōrem vim? Mārs aut Iūppiter?

14.02.26: Level 3; indirect statement; the accusative-infinitive [23]: negative statements; denial

[a] negō, -āre, -āvī, -ātus [1] [i] deny; [ii] refuse

This verb is also used to create a negative statement [literally: say … not] for example:

He does not understand. │ Nōn intellegit.

> He says ¦ that he does not understand. │ Negat ¦ sē intellegere.

i.e. the concept of ‘not’ in the indirect statement is already contained in the verb negat; nōn is not required

Examples; sometimes ‘deny’ is an alternative translation:

Haec negat sē tuam esse mātrem. (Plautus)│ She denies that she is your mother = She says that she is not your mother.

Negāvī mē scīre (Cicero) │ I said that I did not know.

Hostēs negāvērunt sē arma dissimilia habēre. │The enemies denied that they had different weapons = the enemies said that they did not have different weapons.

Magister negāvit sē discipulum verberāvisse. │ The teacher denied that he had beaten the pupil = the teacher said that he had not beaten the pupil.

Negāvit sē mihi pecūniam dedisse. │ He denied that he had given me the money = he said that he had not given me the money.

Nōn it, negat sē itūram [esse]* (Plautus) │ She’s not going, she says that she will not go.

*Note the omission of esse; this is a feature to look out for in original literature.

Marītus negāvit sē Rōmae mānsūrum esse. │ The husband said that he would not stay at Rome.

[b]

Look at the following English example and the different ways in which the same idea can be expressed:

[i] He said that he hadn’t ever [not + ever] seen a more faithful servant than her.

[ii] He said that he had never seen a more faithful servant than her.

Latin conveys the idea using the equivalent of [i] above:

quicquam / quidquam: anything

quisquam: anybody

ūllus, -a, -um: any

umquam: ever

usquam: anywhere

By using negō, -āre, which already contains the idea of ‘not’, those pronouns and adverbs become negative i.e. in translation they change to nothing, nobody, no (not any), never, nowhere.

Examples:

Negat ¦ sē umquam in Ītaliā fuisse │ He denies that he has ever been in Italy = He says that he has not ever been in Italy = he says that he has never been in Italy.

Negāvit sē umquam vīdisse servam fidēliōrem quam hanc. │ He denied that he had ever seen = He said that he had not ever seen = he said that he had never seen ¦ a more faithful servant than her.

Negāvit umquam sē bibisse iūcundius. (Cicero) │ He said that he had not ever drunk = he said that he had never drunk ¦ (anything) more pleasant.

Negāvit quemquam esse in cīvitāte praeter sē quī id efficere posset (Cicero) │ He said that there was not anybody = he said that there was nobody ¦ in the city apart from himself who could carry it out.

Negat quicquam esse … efficācius (Seneca) │ He says that there is not anything more effective = he says that there is nothing more effective.

Negat ūllum esse tempus … (Cicero) │ He says that there is not any time = he says that there is no time …

Negō usquam umquam fuisse maiōrēs (Cicero) │ I say that there never was a time or place where they had more = Literally: I say that there was not ever (and) not anywhere, where they had more.

Exercise: complete the Latin with the words listed below.

[1] He says that he did not do this. │ Hoc sē __________ negat.

[2] [i] I say that [ii] he has not done this. │ [i] __________ [ii] __________ hoc fēcisse.

[3] He says that [i] he (referring to himself) is not [ii] ready. │ [i] __________ [ii] __________ esse negat.

[4] He says he has done nothing. │ Negat sē __________ fēcisse.

[5] He said that he would [i] never [ii] do this. │ Sē hoc [i] __________ [ii] __________ negāvit.

[6] He says that it was not by this man that your brother [i] was [ii] killed. │ Ab hōc homine [ii] __________ [i] __________ frātrem tuum negat.

[7] [i] He denies that Caesar [ii] has been in Gaul. │[i] __________ Caesarem in Galliā [ii] __________.

[8] He said that Caesar had not been in Gaul. │ __________ Caesarem in Galliā fuisse.

[9] [i] We deny that [ii] we [iii] have received a benefit. │ [i] __________ [ii] __________ beneficium [iii] __________ (Seneca)

[10] He denies that he has [i] ever [iii] seen such wonders [ii] anywhere. │ Negat sē [i] __________ [ii] __________ tanta mīra [iii] __________. (Plautus: adapted)

[11] The Carthaginians [i] said that they would not [ii] accept unfair terms of peace. │ Carthāginiēnsēs [i] __________ sē inīquās condiciōnēs pācis [ii] __________ esse.

[12] They denied that they had heard about the arrival of the king. │ Negāvērunt sē dē rēgis adventū __________.

[13] [i] Surely you don’t [ii] deny that [iii] you [iv] did not know these things? │ [i] __________ [ii] __________ [iii] __________ haec [iv] __________?

negāmus; negās; negat; negāvērunt; negāvit; negō

eum; nōs; sē; tē

accēpisse; acceptūrōs; audīvisse; esse; factūrum; fēcisse; fuisse; interfectum; parātum; scīvisse; vīdisse

num; quidquam; umquam; umquam; usquam

____________________

[1] Hoc sē fēcisse negat.

[2] [i] Negō [ii] eum hoc fēcisse.

[3] [i] Sē [ii] parātum esse negat.

[4] Negat sē quidquam fēcisse.

[5] Sē hoc [i] umquam [ii] factūrum negāvit.

[6] Ab hōc homine [ii] interfectum [i] esse frātrem tuum negat.

[7] [i] Negat Caesarem in Galliā [ii] fuisse.

[8] Negāvit Caesarem in Galliā fuisse.

[9] [i] Negāmus [ii] nōs beneficium [iii] accēpisse (Seneca)

[10] Negat sē [i] umquam [ii] usquam tanta mīra [iii] vīdisse.

[11] Carthāginiēnsēs [i] negāvērunt sē inīquās condiciōnēs pācis [ii] acceptūrōs esse.

[12] Negāvērunt sē dē rēgis adventū audīvisse.

[13] [i] Num [ii] negās [iii] tē haec [iv] scīvisse?

14.02.26: Level 3; the Pater Noster of Juvencus [4]; notes on Latin poetry [3] elision; reciting the verse

[3] Elision

[l.5] Īn cāe-¦ l(o) ͜ ūt tēr- ¦ rīs fī- ¦ āt tŭ-ă ¦ clā-ră vŏ- ¦ lūn-tās [īn cāe-l^oūt]

[i] -V ͜ V- i.e. a vowel at the end of a word and a vowel at the beginning of the next word are usually elided; the term is elision, and you can see that the end vowel is not scanned as it is either generally omitted when speaking or spoken rapidly together with the next vowel so that it forms one syllable:

[l.8]  Īn-nŭ-mĕ- ¦ r(a) ͜ īn-dūl- ¦ gēns ēr- ¦ rō- rīs ¦ dē-bĭ-tă ¦ prā-vī [-mĕ-¦ r’īn-dūl-]

[ii] Elision also occurs when the following letter is /h/ [V + hV]; /h/ is considered silent

[l.6] Vī-tā- ¦ līsqu(e) ͜ (h)ŏ- dĭ- ¦ ē sānc- ¦ tī sūb- ¦ stān-tĭ-ă ¦ pā-nĭs [līs qu’ŏ-dĭ-]

[4] Reciting the verse

It’s all very well talking about long and short syllables – but how are they actually said? Any poem in whatever language is open to interpretation, including the mood in which it is spoken, its pace and what the speaker wishes to emphasise. But you need to start somewhere to get the basic rhythms. The opening lyrics of “Paperback Writer” by the Beatles is comprised almost completely of crotchets (a single beat) and quavers (half a beat). Imagine you’re back in Primary Music class! Clap your hands, kids …

one q ¦ and a n ¦ two q ¦ and a n ¦ three q ¦ and a n ¦ four q

Omit the first and last words:

(Dear) ¦ Sir q or q Ma-dame n  will-you n read q my q book-it n took-me n years q to q write q, will-you n take-a n (look)?

Image #2: The notation is from the sheet music; the Beatles ‘play around’ a little with some of the rhythms when they sing it, but you can hear the long and short beats in the same way that you can hear the long and short syllables of the Latin work. Don’t sing it – say it, while tapping a pencil on the table. Then keep tapping that pencil and say the Latin line, and you’ll be getting pretty close to a Roman.

26.11.25: The roles of Winnie the Pooh – and squirrels – in language learning …

A nice memory: battling my way home along the Strand in London during a wintry, rainy rush hour, I suddenly heard “Vinni-Pukh igrayet v futbol!” I looked round and there was one of my former students grinning at me. Now an international lawyer, he had studied Law and Modern Languages at university, one of those languages being Russian, which I had taught him from Beginner to A Level. Of all the things he could have said in Russian, he chose to say what had stuck in his mind: “Winnie the Pooh is playing football”, and he knew it would have stuck in my mind too, because Winnie the Pooh had been used to illustrate a lot of verbs when this now successful lawyer was about 13.

Magister Andrews’ reference to a squirrel in his recent video has a similar effect. We tend to remember ‘oddities’, something that seems out of context, unexpected in a language where we talk far more about soldiers and questionable politicians than we do about squirrels. While squirrel is not exactly the most essential word to know, what a squirrel does – walks, climbs, runs, jumps, eats - is a key concept. And, along the way, there are other features of the language that crop up.

I've put together a short video showing these points. Below is the transcript with some key information highlighted together with a translation. Let’s hope you remember the “squirrel” video in the same way that an international lawyer remembered Winnie the Pooh playing football!

[1]

Ecce! In pictūrā est sciūrus. │ Look! In the picture (there) is a squirrel.

[2]

Ubi est sciūrus? In viā est. │ Where is the squirrel? It’s on the path / in the street.

[3]

Ubi est sciūrus? Sciūrus in silvā est. │ Where is the squirrel? The squirrel is in the forest.

[4]

Quō colōre est hic sciūrus? │ What colour is this squirrel?

Rūfus est. │ It’s red.

[5]

Quō colōre est ille sciūrus? │ What colour is that squirrel?

Cinerēus est. │ It’s grey.

[6] Salvē, sciūre! / Salvē, ō sciūre! │ Hello, squirrel!

[7] Sciūrus ambulat. │ The squirrel is walking.

[8] Sciūrus in arbore sedet. │ The squirrel is sitting in a tree.

[9] Sciūrus in arborem ascendit. │ The squirrel is climbing (into) the tree.

[10] Sciūrus currit. │ The squirrel is running.

[11] Sciūrus salit. │ The squirrel is jumping.

[12] Sciūrus fugit. │ The squirrel is running away.

[13]

Quid est? │ What is it?

Est nux. │ It’s a nut.

[14] Sciūrus nucem edit. │ The squirrel is eating a nut.

[15] Ecce! Duo sciūrī nucēs edunt. │ Look! Two squirrels are eating nuts.

You can ‘take away’ as much or as little as you want, but here are a few that I think really matter at the early stages:

(1)

[i] hic (masculine) / haec (feminine) / hoc (neuter): this; hic sciūrus │ this squirrel

[ii] ille (masculine) / illa (feminine) / illud (neuter): that; ille sciūrus │ that squirrel

These words can have different functions depending upon context but here they act as demonstratives i.e. pointing to someone / something.

(2)

[i] When a verb ends in -t, it indicates ‘(s)/he, it does / is doing something’; sciūrus currit │ the squirrel is running

[ii] When a verb ends in -nt, it indicates ‘they (are) do(ing) something’; duo sciūrī edunt │ two squirrels are eating

(3)

Nouns change their endings depending on what function they perform in a sentence

via: path > in viā: on a path

silva: forest > in silvā: in a forest

arbor: tree > in arbore: in a tree

sciūrus in arborem ascendit > the squirrel is climbing up (literally: into) a tree

nux: nut

> sciūrus nucem edit │ the squirrel is eating a nut

> duo sciūrī nucēs edunt │ two squirrels are eating nuts

Getting to grips with noun endings won’t happen overnight; it takes considerable time, but the endings that nouns take are not random, and posts in the group deal extensively with all the forms that a noun can have and the way in which nouns are grouped.

(4) adjectives; two were used to refer to colour

cinerēus: ash-coloured; grey

rūfus: red; also used to refer to people with red hair

All files in the group that discuss colour:

[i] 07.03.24: colour adjectives

https://www.facebook.com/groups/latinforstarters/permalink/479628014648472

[ii] 07.03.24: Quō colōre est?

https://www.facebook.com/groups/latinforstarters/permalink/479627847981822/

[iii] 07.03.24: describing colours

https://www.facebook.com/groups/latinforstarters/permalink/479627894648484

[iv] 07.03.24: describing eye colour

https://www.facebook.com/groups/latinforstarters/permalink/479628104648463

[v] 07.03.24: describing hair [1]

https://www.facebook.com/groups/latinforstarters/permalink/479628251315115/

[vi] 07.03.24: describing hair [2]

https://www.facebook.com/groups/latinforstarters/permalink/479628311315109

25.11.26: follow-up on the previous post; How to say hello to squirrels …

Referring to:

https://www.facebook.com/groups/latinforstarters/posts/839862315291705/

When starting out in Latin, it’s very important to note that, even at the most basic levels, different features of the language can be “thrown” at you; that cannot be avoided since, in any everyday statement, a range of language has to be used.

It’s equally important not to be dragged down by that and not to try to understand every point that occurs; it is enough to be aware of them. However, I’ve added some information in case you want to explore any of the points further. The group has posts on all of these.

[1] Magister Andrews appellor: I am called …

appellō: I call / address (somebody) = active verb

appellor: I am called = passive verb

He could equally have said: Nōmen mihi est Magister Andrews │ My name is … [literally: to me there is the name ..]

[2] Ecce via │This is a road / street / path [or: Look, (it's) a road]

Ecce via pulchra │ This is a beautiful path

[3] Ecce sciūrus │ Look, a squirrel

If you say hello, or good-bye, to a squirrel - or to anyone or anything that ends in -us – you change the ending to -e

Salvē sciūre! │ Hello, squirrel.

Valē, sciūre! │ Good-bye, squirrel.

Mārcus > Salvē, Mārce!

Quīntus > Valē, Quīnte!

There are a couple of variations:

[i] meus > mī

Sextus est amīcus meus │ Sextus is my friend

> Salvē, amīce mī! │ Hello, my friend.

[ii] If a person’s name ends in -ius > -ī

Iūlius > Salvē, Iūlī!

The exclamation mark is commonly found in textbooks / grammar books as a marker when addressing people or giving commands; it doesn’t mean, however, that you’re shouting at the squirrel!

Magister Andrews’ video takes us right back to the start of this group:

19.02.24: Addressing people directly

https://www.facebook.com/groups/latinforstarters/posts/394066236537984/

[4] Sciūrus fūgit │ The squirrel is running away

fūgiō: I (am) run(ning) away

fūgit: (s)he / it is running away

tempus fūgit: time flies

18.03.24: 3rd-iō conjugation

https://www.facebook.com/groups/latinforstarters/posts/409226905021917/

[5] His video introduction:

[i] Nēmō nisi ego, ¦ per silvam ambulāns, pelliculamque faciēns dōnec …

Nobody apart from / except me ¦ [who is] walking through the forest and making a film until …

Note: unless you’re speaking Latin in the 15th century, those endings in –(ā/ē)ns cannot be used to express I am doing something i.e. ambulō = I walk or I am walking

[ii] ex(s)pectā paulum: wait a little; a command form, i.e. telling you to do something

The verb is either ‘expectō’ or ‘exspectō’: I (am) wait(ing) [for …]

25.02.24: verbs; first conjugation present tense

https://www.facebook.com/groups/latinforstarters/posts/397175869560354/

That post explains the key principles of how verbs are formed in Latin.

22.11.25: Level 1; review presentations (1):

https://www.facebook.com/groups/latinforstarters/posts/838353188775951/

 22.11.25: Level 1; I'm just experimenting a bit with producing some simple presentation videos.

Key information:

1. 1st person singular present tense of ambulō (I walk / am walking), currō (I run), stō (I stand)
2. ego: I
3. when ego is not needed because the verb ending tells you who is performing the action: ambulō
4. negative of verbs: nōn ambulō (I don't walk / I am not walking)
5. via: street > in viā: in the street

 

21.11.25: Group Resources [4] follow-up on the previous post

Referring to:

https://www.facebook.com/groups/latinforstarters/posts/836908405587096/

The theme of these ‘group resources’ posts is not only to list what is on file here in the group and links, but to give some guidance to the question Magister Andrews originally posed: there are truckloads of Latin resources online, but how do you find “the diamond in the rough” because, frankly, there are also truckloads of garbage, all of which – and I know from my own experience – will simply be a waste of time and could mislead you to believe that Latin, while no doubt challenging (there’s no getting around that), is simply too high a hill to climb. But it can be climbed; you just need to find your way. However, if you’re a beginner, how do you know what is useful and what is not? Well, that can be a personal decision; what I’ve listed in these recent posts is what I thought would be appropriate for the different levels in this group but I would never say that there is some sort of definitive list.

Videos and listening resources can be a nightmare. I’ve spent more time selecting them – and many of them still had to be edited – than on any other resource. Magister Andrews has done a few of these little videos already, and I hope he does more. Why do I like them?

[1] It isn’t ‘fancy’ – it isn’t full of zappy video effects and “Gladiator” soundtracks which may suggest that a presenter is concentrating more on the look than the content, and there’s ample evidence of that online.

[2] It is short and focussed, it deals with a limited range of vocabulary, and the intentions are clear. He titles his videos ‘Latin from Zero’ i.e. he knows exactly who his ‘target audience’ is and so he doesn’t give you some rambling introduction – in Latin – which, if you’re only starting, will be confusing, nor does he give ‘examples’ using more advanced levels or go off at a tangent talking about something that has nothing to do with the topic in hand.

He does add a ‘side note’ – calceōs foedōs ignosce │ forgive (my) filthy shoes – but that isn’t a key piece of information; he’s already told us what matters in this video.

[3] He never speaks in English, but simply gives you the phrases with a translation as an additional reference. He illustrates the vocabulary by his own physical movements, visual references, and the pace of his voice.

[4] He doesn’t pretend to be a Roman. I have no issues with people who like to think they are, or eat dormice or invade Gaul, but when they talk at full speed using every grammatical structure Latin has on offer, and you’re just starting out, then it can be very intimidating. I really stress the word intimidating; there can be a lot of that online.

[5] He doesn’t make mistakes, nor does his pronunciation sound as if somebody is scraping their nails on a blackboard. He uses standard Classical Latin pronunciation and correct vowel lengths. Occasionally I have worked with videos where there has been some minor error – nobody’s perfect – but it doesn’t detract from the quality of what has been done, and if I can’t edit it, I always note it.

[6] He has a consistent style. We like consistency, and we become comfortable with the style and voice of a presenter. One of the problems in Youtube is that you may come across a video relating to, for example, a particular book, but the presenters don’t follow through and produce videos on all the chapters. My posts on Sonnenschein’s Ora Maritima were a rare find since there are listening resources for the entire book.

Thanks, Magister Andrews – and your filthy shoes are forgiven  – just don’t dress up as a gladiator.

14.02.26: Level 3; Celestial Sphere: from the authors [2] A sky painted with stars …

Manilius: Astronomica

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astronomica_(Manilius)

Meter: hexameter [ - - / - uu (x6)]

04.09.25: The best place to start Latin poetry is … in a cave! [2]; some basics concerning Classical Latin poetry

https://adckl.blogspot.com/2025/09/040925-best-place-to-start-latin-poetry_3.html

[1] Hīs inter sōlisque viās Arctōsque latentīs,

[Hīs īn- ¦ tēr sō- ¦ līs-quĕ vĭ- ¦ ās ārc- ¦ tōs-quĕ lă- ¦ tēn-tīs]

Between these and the paths of the Sun and the hidden Bears,

[2] Axem quae mundī strīdentem pondere torquent,

[Āx-ēm ¦ quāe mūn- ¦ dī strī- ¦ dēn-tēm ¦ pōn-dĕ-rĕ ¦ tōr-quē̆nt]

which turn the axis of the world, creaking under its weight,

[3] Orbe peregrīnō caelum dēpingitur astrīs,

[Ōr-bĕ pĕ- ¦ rē-grī- ¦ nō cāe- ¦ lūm dē- ¦ pīn-gĭ-tŭr ¦ ās-trīs]

in a foreign orbit the sky is painted with stars,

[4] Quae notia antīquī dīxērunt sīdera vātēs.

[Quāe nŏ-tĭ-(a) ¦ ān-tī- ¦ quī dī-¦ xē-rūnt ¦ sī-dĕ-ră ¦ vā-tēs]

which the ancient poets called the southern constellations

notius, -a, -um: southern

Arctos, -ī [2/f]: the Great Bear (Ursa Major); (here) in the plural, referring to Ursa Major and Ursa Minor

vātēs, -is [3 m/f]: various meanings including [i] prophet(ess); [ii] soothsayer; [iii] poet(ess)

13.02.26: Level 2; Vincent (Latin Reader); XL / XLI; [1] A Sudden Attack by the British; [2] British Methods of Fighting (i) comprehension

[1] A Sudden Attack by the British

Equitēs Britannōrum et essedāriī cum equitibus Rōmānīs in itinere ācriter proeliō cōnflīxērunt. Rōmānī omnibus in partibus erant superiōrēs atque hostēs in silvās et collēs compulērunt. Dum Rōmānī sunt incautī atque castra mūniunt, subitō hostēs ex omnibus partibus contrā mīlitēs, quī prō castrīs erant in statiōne, impetum fēcērunt. Caesar duās cohortēs et partem legiōnis mīsit. Rōmānī hostēs fugāvērunt atque numerum magnum necāvērunt.

cōnflīgō, cōnflīgere, cōnflīxī,  cōnflīctus [3]: struggle; engage (in battle)

Note the difference between the Latin tense usage and the English translation:

[(i) temporal clause; clause of time] Dum Rōmānī sunt incautī atque castra mūniunt, ¦ [(ii) main clause] subitō hostēs … impetum fēcērunt. │ (i) While the Romans were careless and (were) fortifying the camp, (ii) suddenly the enemy made an attack.

The present tense is used with dum in the temporal clause (i) even though the action described in the main clause (ii) took place in the past; this conveys that both actions were happening at the same time

Dum Rōmānī sunt [present tense ≠ Engl.] incautī atque castra mūniunt [present tense ≠ Engl.], │ Literally: While the Romans are carless and (are) fortifying the camp,  [ = While the Romans were careless and (were) fortifying the camp,]

subitō hostēs … impetum fēcērunt [perfect tense = Engl.] │ suddenly the enemy made an attack

[1] Comprehension

The following statements are untrue; correct them:

[i] the Romans had charioteers

[ii] the Romans fought in higher locations

[iii] the Britons fought in the forests and hills

[iv] the Romans were always careful

[v] the Britons did not attack

[vi] the Roman soldiers were on guard inside the camp

[vii] Caesar sent three legions and part of a cohort

[viii] a large number of Romans were killed

[2] British Methods of Fighting

Hōc in genere pugnae nostrī propter arma gravia nec hostibus īnstāre poterant nec ab signīs discēdere audēbant. Nostrī equitēs magnō cum perīculō pugnābant, quod hostēs cōnsultō saepe cēdēbant atque, ubi nostrōs ā legiōnibus remōverant, ex essedīs dēsiliēbant et pedibus  contendēbant. Hostēs rārī semper pugnābant et statiōnēs intervāllīs magnīs habēbant atque integrī fessīs succēdēbant. Hīs causīs mīlitēs  Rōmānī magnā cum difficultāte contendēbant.

cōnsultō: deliberately

rārus, -a, -um: scattered

succēdō, -ere, successī, successus [3]: relieve

[2] Comprehension

What reason(s) are given for the statements in bold?

[i] nostrī propter arma gravia nec hostibus īnstāre poterant (1)

[ii] Nostrī equitēs magnō cum perīculō pugnābant, quod hostēs cōnsultō saepe cēdēbant atque, ubi nostrōs ā legiōnibus remōverant, ex essedīs dēsiliēbant et pedibus contendēbant (4)

[iii] Hostēs rārī semper pugnābant et statiōnēs intervāllīs magnīs habēbant atque integrī fessīs succēdēbant. Hīs causīs mīlitēs Rōmānī magnā cum difficultāte contendēbant (3)

____________________

[1]

[i] the Britons │ Equitēs Britannōrum et essedāriī

[ii] superior / stronger (than the Britons) │ Rōmānī … erant superiōrēs

[iii] pushed together into the forests and hills │ Rōmānī … hostēs in silvās et collēs compulērunt

[iv] careless ¦ when fortifying the camp │ Dum Rōmānī sunt incautī atque castra mūniunt

[v] made a sudden attack │ subitō hostēs … impetum fēcērunt

[vi] outside the camp / in front of the camp │ prō castrīs erant in statiōne

[vii] Caesar sent two cohorts and part of a legion │ Caesar duās cohortēs et partem legiōnis mīsit

[viii] a large number of the enemy │ Rōmānī hostēs fugāvērunt atque numerum magnum necāvērunt.

[2]

[i] heavy weapons

[ii] (1) enemy often retreated deliberately (2) drew the Romans away from the legions (3) leapt down from chariots (4) fought on foot

[iii] (1) enemy always fought in scattered order; (2) posts at wide intervals; (3) fresh soldiers relieved tired ones

12.02.26: Level 1; Carolus et Maria [24][vii]: object of comparison; relative superlative

[1] object of comparison

Urbs antīqua etiam (1) pulchrior erat (2) quam haec. │ The ancient city was even (1) more beautiful (2) than this one.

When, for example, you say that the temple is older than the museum, the noun (or pronoun) after than is known as the object of comparison. In Latin, the object of comparison can be formed in two ways:

The man is stronger ¦ than the boy.

[i] Vir [nominative] fortior est ¦ quam puer [nominative].

[ii] Vir [nominative] fortior est ¦ puerō [ablative].

They are not always interchangeable, but – at this stage – it is enough to recognise both possibilities.

Links

Object of comparison with:

[i] quam

https://youtu.be/Fm1EIvgFTvI

[ii] the ablative case

https://youtu.be/wTyQM41nfUk

[2] relative superlative

“Mirror, mirror on the wall, who is the fairest of them all?”

[1] The superlative can stand alone:

Fortissimus est. │ He is the bravest.

[2] The relative superlative refers to when the superlative is used in relation to something else e.g. the bravest of (all) the soldiers. Latin expresses this idea in two ways:

[i] With the genitive, and usually genitive plural since the superlative tends to be highlighting the best, worst etc. of a group, more than one person or thing:

eloquentissimus ¦ Rōmānōrum │ the most eloquent ¦ of the Romans

doctissimus ¦ magistrōrum │ the most educated ¦ of the teachers

pulcherrima omnium fēminārum │ the most beautiful ¦ of all the women

altissima ¦ arborum │ the tallest ¦ of the trees

[ii] With ē / ex + ablative plural

altissima ex arboribus │ the tallest of the trees

doctissimus ē magistrīs │ the most educated of the teachers

That is similar to English “He’s the best pupil out of that whole class.

https://adckl.blogspot.com/2024/10/051224-level-2-degrees-of-comparison-17.htm