We’re rewarding the question askers & reputations are being recalculated! Read more.
19

The ablative absolute does not require a participle. It can be a noun and an adjective, as you say, or two nouns (Caesare duce urbem cepimus), or even an adjective and an accusative with infinitive (most probably, see the end of this post). However, there is a "verb-like" aspect to the construction that makes you want to add "being" if there is no ...


8

You were spot on with your parsing of iussit; it is, in fact, the third person singular perfect active indicative of iubeō, iubēre, iussī, iussum. With regards to parātīs (the macrons should give a bit of a spoiler regarding what it is), you were not quite there. It is the perfect passive participle of parō, parāre, parāvī, parātum, and is being used in an ...


8

The word solus is a little ambiguous. While it has been discussed before (here and here), the topic is certainly not exhausted. I can think of several translations of sola fide: By means of the only faith Only by means of (a) faith By means of (a/the) lonely faith For comparison, observe the effect of articles in the following, all of which could ...


8

It's possible, but unlikely. First, the closeness of the words suggests a connection between them, and the commas mean the editors agreed. More importantly, though, superbus governs an ablative. See e.g. Vergil's Aeneid 5.268, where the ones who received a gift were "opibus superbi", or later in 5.478 where Entellus is "tauro superbus", or in prose with ...


7

As Sumelic says, both -i and -e can be used as the ablative ending of a participle. Even so, mixing them in the same sentence would probably be unusual. Respicienti is really a dative here; the new a.c.i. (discidisse) has a different construction from the previous one (exclamasse with an ablative absolute Caio dante). The new construction is like Chaerea [...


5

It seems most natural to me to translate that as a causal ablative. The Delian is arrogant due to the victory over the serpent. Compare this for example with dono laetus, "happy due to the gift", and notice that serpens victa does not only mean "the defeated serpent" but also "victory over the serpent". Absolute ablative is also possible, but then victa ...


5

It would be impossible for me to give as exhaustive an answer as the one @Cerberus gave, so I'll just say that I always see ablative absolutes as containing implied participles. Legione dispersa victi sumus. With the legion having been scattered, we were conquered. Caesare duce urbem cepimus. With Caesar being the general, we took the city. ...


5

Although we do not have native competence of Latin, my impression is that alleged Ablative Absolute constructions like "Caesare Romae" or "Caesare in Hispania" are NOT possible. Or at least, after many years reading Latin texts, I've been unable to find them. Again what is not found in the corpora (Latin is a textual language) does not necessarily mean that ...


5

It is quite a usual thing in Latin to use the ablative case to indicate the circumstances under which the main clause's action (sc. that of the main verb) happens. In such a case, the rule is that the noun (or pronoun) may not appear in the main sentence. You seem to be confounding the ablative absolute with this, the so-called ablative of attendant ...


3

"Victa serpente" is not to be interpreted here as "Ablative Absolute" (in the sense that it does not form an adverbial clause depending on a main sentence) but rather as a "DOMINANT participle construction". These structures are often referred to as "Ab urbe condita" (AUC) constructions, where the participle can often be translated as a nominalization. Cf. "...


2

I also lack native competence in Latin, so I offer here an unauthoritative guess, mostly for comment from more-knowledgeable users. Quid discrimen? I'm thinking that to native speakers, grammatical constructions often appear straightforwardly logical, that to non-natives seem strange and in need of explanation. For example, I'm guessing that to the Roman ...


2

If an answer based solely on your own examples would be acceptable, may I suggest the 'well-formed' examples in the second group have indeclinable substantives contributing to the Ablative Absolute. /esse/ may be needed to complete the indeclinable noun being read as Ablative. Example 1 the indeclinable noun clause is vivere Ptolomaeum which would be the ...


1

I don't think nesting is a good way of describing this phenomenon. This is simply what happens when a clause with a predicate noun or adjective is transformed into an ablative absolute. Quo mortuo nuntiato = qui mortuus nuntiatus est. Similarly, hoste iudicato Dolabella = Dolabella hostis iudicatus est and Marcello consule facto = Marcellus consul factus ...


1

Latin word order is free, and the parts of the absolute ablative can be in either order. One order might be more common than the other, but tendencies should not be taken as hard rules. To me capta urbe is as valid as urbe capta. Therefore my answer to 1 is yes. Regarding 2, I see no particular reason for the reverse order. What looks weird to me is ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible