I have trouble understanding the grammar of this sentence, especially re:

Absurdum est, affirmare, re credendum esse non judici.

It is absurd to affirm, that we must not give credit to a judge.

from "A Translation and Explanation of the Principal Technical Terms and Phrases…" by Halkerston.

I get that re credendum esse non judici is indirect speech but the ablative re really puzzles me.

  • 1
    I found at least one example of rei credendum esse, which makes a lot more sense to my ear.
    – brianpck
    Commented Mar 18 at 15:19
  • @brianpck: I was wondering why, for the gerundive-of-obligation, the ablative, "re" was used; yourself has corrected it to, "rei". Why is "iudici" in the genitive? Why not use a passive infinitive giving: "It is absurd that the matter should be believed and is not to be judged/ considered,"?
    – tony
    Commented Mar 20 at 9:06
  • @tony I interpret both as dative, i.e. "It is absurd to affirm that we should believe in a thing, not in a judge."
    – brianpck
    Commented Mar 20 at 12:40
  • @brianpck: I thought it was "iudicium"--"judgement"; not "iudex"--"judge". Thanks.
    – tony
    Commented Mar 21 at 8:19
  • Could re not simply mean something like, "in a case": "It is absurd, that one ought not to trust the judge in a case*?
    – Cerberus
    Commented Mar 24 at 1:59


Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.