“Ego”, inquit Epicharmus, “cūnctōs tyrannōs miserōs esse videō. Quis enim ignōrat tyrannīs semper īnsidiās imminēre? Itaque nē tyrannī quidem putant vītam suam beātam esse. Sī placēbit, vōbīs parvam fābulam dē Dionȳsiō nārrābō…”
Tum Mārcus: “Placet, nam cōnstat tē semper pulchrās
fābulās nārrāre.”
Et Epicharmus: “Dāmoclēs, ūnus ex amīcīs Dionȳsiī, dīvitiās
tyrannī semper laudābat, Dionȳsium
fortūnae fīlium esse praedicābat.
Aliquandō tyrannus: ‘Quid, sī dēmōnstrābō tē errāre mēque
nōn tam beātum esse, quam tū putās? Tē hodiē ad cēnam (1) invītō.’
Iam Dāmoclēs laetus trīclīnium intrat. Videt mēnsās bonīs
cibīs abundāre, gaudet servōs verbīs suīs pārēre – subitō autem
horret: Dēsuper gladius imminet, et appāret gladium saetā equīnā (2)
pendēre!
Et Dionȳsius: ‘Ecce
fortūna tyrannōrum! Num mē esse beātum adhūc putās?'”
(1) ad cenam: (invite somebody) to a meal
(2) saetā equīnā (ablative): on a horse’s hair
Indirect statement
This text contains many examples (in italics) of indirect
statement.
[1] A ‘statement’ can be [i] direct or [ii] indirect:
[i] “I’m hungry,” says John. This is a direct
statement i.e. quoting the actual words that John says, which, in English, are
usually indicated by speech marks “_____ ” (also known as quotation marks or
inverted commas).
The Latin term is orātiō recta: direct speech /
direct discourse
[ii] John says ¦ that he is hungry. This is an indirect
statement i.e. it reports what John says without using his actual
words. It is also known as reported speech. In English, and in other
languages, this often involves a change of tense: “I’m hungry,” said John >
John said ¦ that he was hungry.
The Latin term is orātiō oblīqua: indirect speech /
indirect discourse
[2] Neither the term ‘statement’ nor ‘speech’ gives you the
full picture because both imply something that is said or written. However, the
terms ‘direct’ and ‘indirect’ can also refer to, for example, what somebody thinks
or feels or sees.
[3] Latin expresses indirect statement differently from English
and in other languages. It is a lengthy topic and so, at this level, we’ll look
at one aspect of it.
Four examples to begin with:
[i]
Direct statement: The pupils are studying. │ Discipulī
student.
Indirect statement: The teacher says ¦ that the
pupils are studying.
Magister dīcit ¦ [1] discipulōs [accusative] [2] studēre
[infinitive]
[literally: The teacher says ¦ [1] the pupils [2] to
be studying]
Classical Latin does not use a conjunction i.e. any
equivalent of English ‘that’ in this construction.
[1] the subject of the indirect statement is in the accusative
case
[2] the verb of the indirect statement becomes an infinitive
That’s why the construction is referred to as an accusative-infinitive.
[ii]
The accusative-infinitive is like a ‘formula’ i.e. two consistent
changes are made to create an indirect statement from a direct one.
Direct statement: Caesar is approaching the city. │ Caesar
urbī appropinquat.
Indirect statement: The messengers shout ¦ that Caesar is
approaching the city.
Nūntiī clāmant ¦ [1] Caesarem [accusative] urbī [2] appropinquāre
[infinitive].
[literally: The messengers shout [1] Caesar [2] to
be approaching the city.]
[iii] Note the additional changes which happens in these two:
[a]
Direct statement: Julia is ¦ a good student. │
Iūlia est ¦ bona discipula [nominative].
Iūlia est bona discipula: in grammar ‘bona discipula’
is known as the predicative nominative after the verb ‘to be’; that
predicative nominative will also become accusative in the indirect statement.
Indirect statement: The teacher says ¦ that Julia is ¦ a
good student.
Magister dīcit ¦ [1] Iūliam [accusative] ¦ bonam
discipulam [accusative] ¦ [2] esse [infinitive].
[literally: The teacher says ¦ [1] Julia [2] to be
¦ a good student.]
[b]
Direct statement: My teacher is an educated man. │ Magister
meus ¦ homō doctus [nominative] ¦ est.
Indirect statement: I believe ¦ that my teacher is ¦ an
educated man.]
Crēdō ¦ [1] magistrum meum [accusative] ¦ hominem
doctum [accusative] ¦ [2] esse [infinitive].
[literally: I believe ¦ [1] my teacher [2] to be
¦ an educated man.]
Examples from the text
The first two examples are ‘taken apart’ to show the construction
with the literal and actual translation. All of the examples follow the same ‘formula’
discussed above.
[1]
Cōnstat ¦ [1] tē [accusative] semper pulchrās fābulās [2]
nārrāre [infinitive].
[literally: It is agreed ¦ [1] you [2] to tell
beautiful tales.]
> It is agreed
¦ that [1] you always [2] tell beautiful tales.
[2]
Ego … [1] cūnctōs
tyrannōs [accusative] ¦ miserōs [accusative] [2] esse [infinitive] videō.
[literally: I see ¦ [1] all tyrants [2] to be ¦ miserable.]
> I see ¦ that
[1] all tyrants [2] are ¦ miserable.
[3]
Quis enim ignōrat
¦ tyrannīs semper [1] īnsidiās [2] imminēre?
For who doesn’t
know ¦ that [1] plots [2] are always hanging over tyrants?
[4]
Nē tyrannī
quidem putant ¦ [1] vītam suam ¦ beātam [2] esse.
Not even
tyrants think ¦ that [1] their life [2] is ¦ blessed.
[5]
[1] Dionȳsium fortūnae
fīlium [2] esse praedicābat.
He warned ¦ that
[1] Dionysius [2] was ¦ the son of Fortune.
[6]
Sī dēmōnstrābō
¦ [1] tē [2] errāre ¦ [1] mēque nōn tam ¦ beātum [2] esse.
If I (shall)
show ¦ that [1] you [2] are wrong ¦ and (that) [1] I [2] am
not so ¦ blessed.
[7]
Videt ¦ [1] mēnsās
bonīs cibīs [2] abundāre.
He sees ¦ that [1] the tables [2] are overflowing
with good food.
[8]
Gaudet
¦ [1] servōs verbīs suīs [2] pārēre.
[i] He rejoices ¦ that [1] the slaves [2] are
obeying his words.
[9]
Appāret ¦ [1]
gladium saetā equīnā [2] pendēre.
[i] It is
obvious ¦ that [1] a sword [2] is hanging by a horse’s hair.
[10]
Num [1] mē [2] esse ¦ beātum adhūc putās?
[i] Surely you don’t still think ¦ that [1] I [2] am ¦ blessed?
No comments:
Post a Comment