4

Considering the original phrase:

The king who all citizens love is happy.

(Portuguese: Feliz é o rei a quem todos os cidadãos amam.)

Here is a proposed Latin translation:

Felix est rex is quem omnes cives amant

Is the pronoun "is" necessary?

3

Not sure where you got that is from. The original phrase, which seems to be from a 1845 book of Latin exercises, does not has it. For instance, see here.

In any case, is as pronoun means "he", or as demonstrative, "this/that", so maybe the phrase with the is could be translated as

Happy is he the king who all citizens love

or

Happy is this/that king who all citizens love

2
  • 1
    Appreciated. The translation to latin I got is from someone who translated from the portuguese version. But any way, I couldn`t found a reason as well. – ryuichi Jul 26 '18 at 7:37
  • 1
    It could easily be a happy king is he whom all citizens love with felix fronted for emphasis. – Anonym Jul 26 '18 at 19:04
1

The best of Latin: the best of English: happy is the king; he (is), whom (quem) all citizens love. To omit "is" may be acceptable; but, the assertion becomes sloppy. Guys with the erudition of Cicero would not thank you.

2
  • I don't get this argument at all. The antecedent of the relative clause is rex.. Why does it need a demonstrative in apposition? What's sloppy about omitting it? – Colin Fine Jul 29 '18 at 21:40
  • @Colin Fine: Here, "king" is being emphasised (possibly for a dramtic effect); HE, whom...Omit "si", which you may do, the emphasis is reduced; assertion is weakened. – tony Jul 31 '18 at 9:11

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.