I have found very diverse translations online:

My guess

First, the Latin name Luke seems to be Lucas.

Second, I would say the vocative need to be used here. In this case, it is Luca. The vocative of Pater is also pater.

Finally, ego sum tuum seems to be "I am your". Ego, however, seems to be used only for emphasis, and it is not necessary. Provided the context of this phrase however (dramatic scene in Star Wars), I would say that the correct translation is:

Luca, pater ego sum tuum

I am not sure about the order though. Would the above be correct?

2 Answers 2


Give the context of the (mis)quote, I'd offer:

Luca, ego pater tuus sum.

In Latin, "your" is most often the adjective tuus, and thus declines with the noun it modifies. Because pater is masculine, so too would be tuus. If it were 'mother', then you'd have mater tua.

The order pater tuus is assured, though tuus pater isn't impossible. There's no reason to separate it, though, like you did. You'd only really see that in poetry, and then it's done for some purpose (either meaning or, more likely, meter).

The emphasis can change depending on what you include. I think having ego is appropriate, but different speakers will use different things and they're not necessarily wrong.

Finally, for the actual quote, this would be a great example of using immo. Note that Darth Vader actually says, "No, I am your father." In Latin, this could be rendered:

Immo ego pater tuus sum.

The immo here counters what was previously said ("He told me you killed him") and points to a correction of it.

The sum is optional, since ego is already spelled out, though I'm torn as to whether Vader would drop it. There's something to be said about the rhythms of a snappy sentence (without the sum) v. the fuller, more formal sentence (with it).

  • No comma after immo?
    – luchonacho
    Commented May 6, 2017 at 16:31
  • @luchonacho Commas are modern, so I don't really pay attention to them. Some editors would put a comma there, some might not.
    – cmw
    Commented May 6, 2017 at 16:56
  • 2
    Wouldn't the Latin form of Luke be Lucius?
    – TheHonRose
    Commented May 6, 2017 at 17:47
  • 1
    @TheHonRose It's been established since at least the Vulgate that Lucas is the translation of Λουκας, from which we get the name Luke.
    – cmw
    Commented May 6, 2017 at 19:21
  • 2
    @JoonasIlmavirta Etymonline derives it otherwise: Luke, from Latin Lucas (Greek Loukas), contraction of Lucanus literally "of Lucania."
    – cmw
    Commented May 6, 2017 at 19:21

Here's a quick transcript of the preceding lines:

Luke: I'll never join you.
Vader: If you only knew the power of the dark side. Obi Wan never told you what happened to your father.
L: He told me enough. He told me you killed him
V: No, I am your father

I like C.M. Weimer's suggestion: here is a slight modification that does not require any vocal inflection to understand exactly what the immo is referring to. I will use Plautus as my pattern:

Bal. Quid est ei homini nomen?
Sim. Leno Ballio.
Bal. Scivin ego? Ipse ego is sum, adulescens, quem tu quaeris. (Plautus, Pseudolus 975-77)

Here is the dialogue in context:

Lucas: Numquam tecum consociabo.
Vader: Si modo vim cognosceres partis obscurae. Obi Wan numquam tibi dixit quid patri tuo evenisset.
L: Sat mihi dixit. Mihi dixit te eum occidisse.
V: Immo, ipse ego pater tuus sum.
L: Eheu! Eheu! Eheu!

  • 7
    Love the eheus!
    – cmw
    Commented May 6, 2017 at 19:31
  • 1
    Both answers were great, but I feel oblige to accept the first one. It would be great to be able to accept two answers!
    – luchonacho
    Commented May 7, 2017 at 7:28

Your Answer

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

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.