7

Nowadays (I guess) every language has both vulgar and non-vulgar ways to express anger, frustration and/or exasperation , in response to some nuisance. Looking e.g. at Catullus, it seems unlikely that this wasn't the case for Latin.

Do we know any examples of this? Would we hear Pro Iove! in the streets of Rome?

| improve this question | |
  • Related: latin.stackexchange.com/questions/2183/… – Rafael Nov 13 '18 at 12:45
  • There's edepol, which more literally means "by Pollux" but is often used in the sense "truly" or "indeed". I guess that wouldn't count as angry, so it doesn't answer your question? This particular word is widely used. – Joonas Ilmavirta♦ Nov 13 '18 at 14:14
  • @JoonasIlmavirta: Yes, I am actually looking for a different kind of interjection, but edepol is interesting. According to Wiktionary, it expresses surprise, annoyance or enthusiasm - not quite what I want, but not so far off, thank you. I see that women specifically, also used ēcastor, "by Castor", in the same way. – Vincenzo Oliva Nov 13 '18 at 15:25
4

Yes. From Plautus' Menaechmi 2.3.389.390:

Erotium: Certo, tibi et parasito tuo.

Sosicles: Quoi, malum, parasito? Certo haec mulier non sana est satis.

which Wiktionary translates as

Certainly you did, for yourself and your parasite."

"For whom? Fuck, parasite? Surely this woman isn't quite right in her senses.

Notable mentions, thanks to Joonas: edepol ( or just pol) and ecastor (only used by females) express "surprise, annoyance or enthusiasm".

| improve this answer | |

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.