4

I'm reading Ficīnus's Latin translation of Plato's Apology and came across the following passage, two things in which baffle me. (They're unrelated, so I'm making them two separate questions.)

Socrates is talking about why he never entered politics.

Hujus autem causa est, dē quā sæpe mē passim dīcentem audīvistis, dīvīnum vidēlicet quiddam atque dæmonium in vōce quādam mihi adesse.... Sed mihi quidem ab ipsā pueritiā hoc adest—vōx scīlicet quædam—quæ quotiēs fit, mē prohibet agere, quod āctūrus eram, prōvocat vērō nunquam. Hoc, inquam, est, quod mihi repugnet quō minus mē ad publica cōnferam.

I'm trying to figure out the grammar of the bolded section. I could see something like quotiēs fit ut mē prohibeat agere or even quæ quotiēs fit ut mē prohibeat agere, with the implied word order quotiēs fit ut [quæ] mē prohibeat agere. Even repunctuating it doesn't help: Sed mihi hoc adest quæ quotiēs fit. Mē prohibet agere, quod.... Now mē prohibet agere makes sense but what comes before it is nonsense.

What's going on?

5

The relative clause is quae me prohibit agere, and the clause quoties fit is subordinate to it. If it helps, just add a comma after quae:

quae, quoties fit, me prohibet..., 'which, as often as it occurs, prohibits me....'

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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