In this line "ne ego homo infelix fui, qui non alas intervelli" what did he mean by "intervelli"? I understand that he's saying he's unlucky because he didn't cut his wings. I believe that should be because he DID cut them and couldn't fly away like a bird.
4
-
A reference to Amphitryon Act I 325.– FigulusCommented Jul 5 at 0:06
-
1This is a very interesting question. I'm not sure what's going on here either. alas intervelli looks like an accusative+infinitive phrase, "wings to be clipped", but I'm not seeing a verb to govern ithe phrase. Is the verb inferred?– FigulusCommented Jul 6 at 16:41
-
1@Figulus To clarify, now that the other comments are gone: intervelli is a 1sg active perfect indicative of intervello, not an infinitive, and alas is the direct object. Strictly speaking you'd expect intervellit in the subordinate clause, since the subject is qui, but the referent is the speaker and it's conjugated ad sensu.– CairnarvonCommented Jul 12 at 22:27
-
@Cairnarvon Interesting. That works really well, but I would have expected intervulsi for the perfect. And qui can, of course, be first or second person as well as third.– FigulusCommented Jul 14 at 14:39
Add a comment
|
1 Answer
The way language works is that things have meaning based on the context in which they appear. Your quote is from Amphitruo, and the surrounding lines are as follows (lines 325-326):
Me. Vox mi ad aures advolavit. So. Ne ego homo infelix fui
qui non alas intervelli: volucrem vocem gestito.
Me. is the god Mercury, So. is Sosia, the clever slave stock character, and this passage occurs immediately after Sosia has made a somewhat insolent remark. Translated:
Me. A voice has flown into my ears. So. Truly, I've been an unlucky man
not to have clipped its wings: I tend to have a winged voice.
The context makes it clear that the wings are not the speaker's own, but his voice's.
-
i downvoted this completely misleading answer from 3 to 2. The votes were corrected 6 hours ago. This fact shows that the this group is manipulated by non-philologists.– Roland FCommented Jul 6 at 6:49
-
1@RolandF Your downvote is still there, but in the meantime, someone else upvoted it. It's no conspiracy, it's just the way voting works.– cmw ♦Commented Jul 6 at 11:35
-
4@RolandF If you have a problem with the answer or translation, you should be specific.– cmw ♦Commented Jul 6 at 11:39
-
2@RolandF Do you mean that the verb refers to feathers being plucked out of a wing rather than wings being plucked out of a bird? Those seem to be the two available interpretations, given the context. Please elaborate; it seems others here just can't tell what you mean. Writing a separate answer on your interpretation of the verb is a good way to explain your view.– Joonas Ilmavirta ♦Commented Jul 6 at 21:00