Since Marcus has left with his friends, Cornelia visits her rich friend Atia, who proudly shows her her numerous slaves:
A:
Ecce lectīcāriī meī! Firmī sunt, nam eōs servōs imprīmīs cūrō. Interdum eīs
etiam vīnum dō! Ibi Diodotus stat, magister līberōrum meōrum. Is eōs
linguam Graecam bene docet, quamquam Syrus est. Puerī autem clāmant eum
sevērum esse. Itaque eum nōn amant semperque mala dē eō nārrant.
Servās multās habeō eāsque laudō, sī bene labōrāvērunt. Neque tamen
industria eārum magna est frūstrāque eās moneō. Ecce Dēlia! Serva
nova est et semper maesta. Eam servam numquam laetam vidēbis.
C:
Lacrimās in oculīs eius esse appāret. Fortasse dolet sē ā patriā suā
abesse, sibi in terrā aliēnā amīcās nōn esse?
A:
Ego eam superbam esse crēdō: Dīcit sē ingenuam esse! Ego
autem superbiam eius brevī frangam! Modo eam verberāvī!
C:
Id nōn laudō…
A:
Quid eī nocēbit? Serva est!
C:
Immō vērō fēmina est ut tū!
Notes
[i]
All of the following are indirect statements i.e. the equivalent of, for
example, “He said that he was rich”, “I don’t think that you’re
telling the truth”; the English construction with the conjunction ‘that’ is not
used in Classical Latin. The first example, however, does show a “match” in
English:
[1]
Ego ¦ (1) eam [accusative] superbam (2) esse [infinitive] ¦ crēdō
(1)
The subject of the indirect statement is in the accusative case; in grammar
this is known as the accusative subject
(2)
The verb of the indirect statement is the infinitive.
=
Literally: I believe ¦ (1) her (2) to be arrogant
=
I believe that she is arrogant.
That
“match”, however, is limited in English whereas, in Latin, it is used all the
time:
[2]
Puerī autem clāmant ¦ (1) eum sevērum (2) esse.
Literally:
But the boys shout (1) him (2) to be harsh
=
But the boys shout that he is harsh
[3]
Dīcit ¦ (1) sē ingenuam (2) esse
Literally:
She says (1) herself (2) to be noble
=
She says that she is noble
Compare
[1] and [2] with [3]: When the speaker is talking about somebody else then the
personal pronouns are used:
[1]
Ego eam superbam esse crēdō │ I believe that she is arrogant
[2]
Puerī autem clāmant eum sevērum esse│ But the
boys shout that he is harsh
But:
[3]
Dīcit sē ingenuam esse │ She says that she [i.e. herself,
not somebody else] is noble
[4]
In the next example the indirect statements again refer to the subject:
Fortasse
dolet [A] ¦ (1) sē ā patriā suā (2) abesse, ¦ [B] sibi
in terrā aliēnā (1) amīcās (2) nōn esse?
Perhaps
she is sad that she is away from her
(own) country [and] that she does not have friends in
a foreign country.
Let’s
take it apart:
Two
indirect statements, [A] and [B], are made in the same sentence. Look at the very
literal translations and then the actual translations:
[A]
Fortasse dolet ¦ (1) sē ā patriā suā (2) abesse, …
Literally:
Perhaps she is sad (1) her(self) [accusative subject] (2) to be away [infinitive] from her
own country [suus, -a, -um is used to refer back to the subject]
=
Perhaps she is sad that she is away from her (own) country
…
[B]
sibi [dative: used to express possession] in terrā aliēnā (1) amīcās [accusative
subject] (2) nōn esse? [infinitive]
Literally:
to herself (1) friends (2)
not to be in a foreign country?
=
and that she does not have friends in a foreign country?
[5]
Indirect statements may not involve a pronoun, but a noun
(1)
Lacrimās [accusative] in oculīs eius (2) esse [infinitive] ¦ appāret
It
is evident (1) tears (2) to be in her eyes = It is evident that tears
are in her eyes
The
literal translations of course mostly sound very clumsy and unacceptable.
However, it is better first to analyse the structure in that way to become
familiar with it, and then render it into fluent English.
Three
examples from earlier readings:
From
[21](a) Marcus tells Cornelia a story
[i]
Certē nōn ignōrās ¦ (1) mē [accusative] doctum (2) esse
[infinitive]
Literally:
… you’re not unaware ¦ me [accusative] to be [infinitive]
educated = Of course you’re not unaware that I am educated
From
[21](b) Mucius Scaevola, a hero I / II
[ii]
appāretque ¦ (1) eum [accusative] (2) nōn dolēre
[infinitive]
And
it is evident (1) him (2) not to be in pain = And it is evident
that he is not in pain
[iii]
videt sibi (1) magnum periculum [accusative] (2) imminēre
[infinitive]
He
sees (1) a great danger (2) to be threatening himself = He
sees a great danger threatening him / he sees that a great
danger is threatening him
This
is an extensive topic to be covered in depth at Level 3.
[ii]
is, ea and id (and their plural forms) can be translated
in different ways:
[a]
They can stand alone as the equivalent of English he, him, her, they etc.
[b]
With nouns they act as demonstrative adjectives i.e. this, these, that, those.
However, they are sometimes known as ‘weak’ in that, unlike other words such as
hic (this) and ille (that), they are not used to point out
something / someone but to refer to something / someone mentioned previously.
Therefore, in some translations, you will come across ‘the’ i.e. the
equivalent of the English definite article, but don’t be misled into thinking
that’s what they are, for example:
A:
Librum heri ēmī.│ I bought a book yesterday.
B:
Ubi eum librum ēmistī? │ Where did you buy the book? [There
is no suggestion that they’re looking at the book, or it’s being pointed out.]
Ecce
lectīcāriī meī! │ Look at my litter-bearers!
Eōs servōs … cūrō │ [i] I look after these / those slaves, or [ii] I look after the slaves. The speaker has already referred to them.
No comments:
Post a Comment