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

Hot answers tagged

11

This can be read as a dativus auctoris. It should then be translated thus: lest he should be suspected by his mistress / be suspect to his mistress Common in gerundive constructions (hostis nobis vincendus est), the dativus auctoris is also occasionally used with other passive verbs; it is then most common with past participles (mihi cognitum est: "it is ...


10

Actually, your quote from the Vulgate isn't an example of audire + dative! Though auditis is spelled the same as the present 2nd person plural ("You [pl.] hear"), it is actually an ablative perfect participle. A clue to this is that there would be an unexplained shift from tu to vos. In your sentence, auditis sermonibus is an ablative absolute forming a ...


6

Let me make some remarks on what you say above: "Imagine you want to say something like "from us to you [plural]" (where "from" indicates ablative and "to" dative). Since the order is usually uninformative in Latin, nobis vobis is not precise enough. Would something like a nobis vobis be enough?". As pointed out by Joonas, context is important here. For ...


4

This answer only considers the nuances of habere, not a comparison between it and the possessive dative. The possessive genitive is different; it functions mostly like the English genitive and is used to express things like "my dog" rather than "I have a dog". The example of the pope actually makes a good example for habere. The canonical announcement upon ...


4

I agree with the other answers: though ambiguity sometimes is inevitable, the ablative wouldn't be used alone in this context. Here is an example from Plautus that almost exactly parallels your case (with some previous lines added for context): Gel. [...] Quid igitur me volt? Croc. Tritici modios decem rogare, opinor [te volt]. Gel. Mene, ut ab sese ...


3

Ambiguity like this is commonplace in Latin. For example, "we have to help you" can be nobis vobis auxiliandum est, where the two datives happily mix the two roles. (In this specific case one of the datives can be replaced by an agent a nobis, but sometimes ambiguity is inevitable.) Even though Latin word order is flexible, it does contain information. ...


3

Despite its name, the Latin “ablative” is not normally used on its own for motion from a place or person. (Often, as in nobis and vobis, the “ablative” is historically not an ablative at all, but an old instrumental). I would stick with “a nobis vobis”.


2

I would take cujuscunque rei causa to be a single noun phrase: "a cause for/of every individual thing". That is, assignari has a subject, but the object is left implied; if it were made explicit, it would be something like illi "…to that thing". A cause of every individual thing must be assigned [to that thing]: either a reason why it exists, or a reason ...


2

It can be useful to consult the relevant commentary made by A. J. Woodman (2018). The Annals of Tacitus (Book IV). Series: Cambridge Classical Texts and Commentaries (vol. 58). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Here is the relevant quote on page 87: "It is unclear whether paelici is dative of agent (cf. 2.50.3n) or dative of the person concerned (...


2

As for your 1st question, meo judicio is clearly ablative (cf. also meā sententiā). And, yes, you're right: this use is often referred to in Latin grammars as "Ablative of specification". As for your 2nd question, the particle quidem has recently been analyzed as a marker of emphatic affirmative polarity. This issue seems to be more complex than I expected (...


2

The literal translation is not "to my heart" but "to me to heart". This is unnatural English but natural Latin. I would say that grammatically the datives mihi and cordi are not linked (the way meo cordi would be); I would rather analyze the core of the sentence as cordi est and mihi as an added mention of the beneficiary. Someone who benefits or suffers ...


1

The difference is not great between "The cause and reason ought to be assigned to each thing why or why not..." and "The cause and reason of each thing why or why not... ought to be assigned..." Though the Genitive after causa is more literal. I think the most significant reason for choosing the Genitive rather than the dative is continuity. The formula "...


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