Cuius isn't an interrogative pronoun here, but an interrogative adjective (Allen & Greenough §148.b) modifying magnitudinis. The genitive is a genitive of description (or what A&G §345 calls 'genitive of quality'): 'You need a cake of what size?' (Likewise for cuius coloris capilli tui sunt: 'Your hair is of what color?')
You won't find a special ...
One way of expressing surprise is to add the word nam to a question, which seems to add a sense of "... and I really have no idea what the answer is". Lewis and Short (section III of the entry) describe this use of nam as "expressing wonder or emotion in the questioner". Nam often follows the interrogative pronoun quis and is written together as one word, ...
Latin allows the use of "Quid?" in a similar way.
See, for instance, Cicero in the First Cataline Oration:
Quid? cum te Praeneste Kalendis ipsis Novembribus occupaturum nocturno impetu esse confideres, sensistine illam coloniam meo iussu meis praesidiis, custodiis, vigiliis esse munitam?
Translation by Yonge:
What? when you made sure that you would ...
It's often difficult to match idioms exactly between languages, but in at least one case you mention Latin has an almost exact equivalent: Ubi terrarum...?
non edepol nunc ubi terrarum sim scio (Plautus, Amphitruo 336)
Now I don't have a clue where on earth I am.
Quid istúc est? aut ubi istúc est terrarum loci? (Plautus, Asinaria 32)
What is this?...
I found an article that gives some excellent examples of this usage as well as practical tips for how to recognize it: Thomas Nelson, "The Third Qui, and Six Ways to Recognize It, or 'Who Happens, Maecenas?'"
Nelson begins by noting that there are three kinds of qui. The first two are ubiquitous, and found in the L&S entry for the first meaning of qui:
In Plautus (num)quid causae is found three times (Pseudolus 533, Rudens 758, Trinummus 1188), every time with est.
There may be earlier attestations, but Plautus is pretty old and thus the construction is not a late invention.
I would rather analyze the idiom as quid causae est, including the verb.
Leaving est out is a common feature and ...
The first thing to note is that the cu- and quo- spellings are equivalent: quoius is an earlier form of cuius, in both the functions you describe. I think your question is really about the relationship between:
the gen. sg. of the relative pronoun, written quoius in Old Latin but cuius in Classical Latin; and
the possessive adjective meaning 'whose', ...
Your idea is correct.
Lewis-Short is not terribly clear:
added in a direct question, as an interrogation mark, to the first or principal word of the clause
but, if you know German, Georges is much clearer: ‑n(e) is attached to the focus of the question, therefore mostly at the beginning of the sentence.
To answer your question completely, a ...
I read the second half of the passage like so:
utrum omnes quasi occiderint teneantur videamus
videamus, utrum omnes teneantur quasi [servum] occiderint
"let us see, whether everyone should be held as if they killed the slave"
"we will consider whether everyone is liable for killing him"
This is somewhere between the two translations ...
Quis is used both as the gender-neutral animate question word (i.e. when used on its own: quis est? "who is that person?"), and as the masculine determiner (i.e. modifying a masculine noun: quis homo, senātor? "what man, senator?"). Quae is used both as the feminine question word ('who? which one?'), as the feminine determiner ('which'), ...
'For how long' can be rendered quamdiu (or quam diu). In this case, because an ongoing state is described, I'd use a present tense verb. For the answer, the accusative of duration does indeed exist in Latin and will work just fine here:
quam diu canis es? quartum quintumve* iam annum canis sum.
* According to Gildersleeve and Lodge (§336), 'In giving ...
To understand the grammar of the Latin question, you may first need to understand the grammar of the English question so you can leave it behind. The noun "size" has peculiar grammar here, roughly only about 100 years old, briefly explained in an English Language Learners answer here. Non-native speakers are often baffled by the lack of a ...
I would try to find something that a Roman might have used, and think you would get a more satisfying translation by re-phrasing the English to suggest what words I should use.
Vox for 'word' is legitimate, but a little too fancy for my taste in this situation; and isn't hortor, meaning 'urge strongly', a pretty strong word for 'suggest'? There are ...
I think your last sentence is grammatically correct. The general question is whether it's possible to raise an interrogative out of an ut clause, and there are examples of this:
Quid vis ut curem? (Plautus)
Quid vis ut faciam? (Vulgate)
Quid iubes ut faciam, domina? (Patrologia Latina)
Probably more classical examples could be found, but this is a ...
As I understand the first sentence, its subject is qui (together with the phrase after et), which is plural, referring to fines; constituendi is an adjective agreeing with that. Cutting out most of the sentence leaves:
Constituendi sunt fines.
In English, putting the subject first, we might say:
What in friendship are the limits, are to be established, ...
If the thing being bought is just some thing, then the correct gender is neuter.
It is used for things of unspecific gender, whereas masculine would be used for people of unspecific gender.
If you use quem, you are asking whom Julius is buying.
Unless he is shopping for slaves, go with quid to ask what he is buying.
If it could be slaves or something else, ...
To answer your second question (since brianpck has already given an excellent answer to the first), quī is etymologically an ablative. The paradigm of the interrogatives quī, quis is a bit odd in that it combines third-declension forms (quis, quem) and first-/second-declension ones (quā, quō). This quī is originally a third-declension ablative form ("by ...
I would say that illud might be translated as that, referring to the subordinate clause introduced by quod, which might also be translated as that:
Quid illud quod mori non timuit?
What [is] that that he didn't fear dying?
This use of illud is described by Allen and Greenough:
e. The pronouns hīc, ille, and is are used to point in either
direction, back ...
I've had a hard time finding examples of a sentence of this form from a Latin corpus. However, my guess would be that when quid is used as a substantive/pronoun with the sense of what, it does not change its form according to the gender of other nouns in the sentence. The same for quis used as a pronoun in the sense of who. (Although depending on the era, I ...
Your main words that roughly correspond to the English "which" are:
the relative pronoun qui
the adjective interrogative qui (identical to the relative pronoun in every way)
the substantive interrogatives quis and quid
You use the relative pronoun when you are making a relative clause, e.g. Speculator, qui me amavit. You can also use it ...
To state a question (direct or indirect) in Classical and Medieval Latin, you always need a question marker. These can be either:
interrogative pronouns or adjectives (e.g. Quis venit?, In quae via ambulat?, Per quod medium probas?, etc.),
interrogative adverbs (e.g. Ubi estis?, Quousque tandem abutere?, Num venit?, Quaesivi ne indices, Quaesitum utrum ...
If you want a noun for this purpose, I suggest sententia.
It means things like thought, judgement, opinion, decision, and wish.
You could just ask "sententiae?" or maybe add a verb and go "habe(ti)sne sententias?" to stay close to the English original.
Whether you should use the nominative sententiae or the accusative sententias in the standalone option ...
I suggest that you take a look at this old question about similar structures.
The conclusion was that present tense is the way to go.
Latin has an adverb diu, meaning roughly "for a long time".
I would ask "how long?" as quam diu? instead of using the word tempus.
If you do use tempus, remember that it's a neuter (not quantus tempus).
Lengths of time are ...
Wait for someone expert to give you an expert answer, but as someone whose Latin dates from the last millennium I’d say that both utrum and the subjunctive would push me towards an interrogative interpretation. There certainly ought to be a sense of “whether” in there somewhere. Not necessarily going as far as Hulot and putting an explicit question mark.
Jeanne Marie Neumann, in Lingua Latina: A College Companion, suggests
You will sometimes find quis (i.e. the form of the interrogative pronoun) used instead of quī (the form of the interrogative adjective) before a noun in questions of identity: Quis servus? Medus. [emphasis mine]
In a previous answer, @fvogel offered these examples, all of which meet ...
The simplest way is to modify the adjective with quam, "to what degree?". Formally, this is an interrogative adverb, that asks a question about how the adjective should be modified.
I couldn't find a direct question in my quick search (annoyingly, the PHI corpus doesn't let me search for question marks) but here's an indirect one from Cicero's ...
As an addition to the answers already given, tandem after interrogative might be added for the sake of emphasis, like nam (in TKR's answer), but might be even stronger.
According to Lewis and Short (I.B) it has the flavor of adverbial pray in English, so it not necessarily expresses "total surprise or perplexity" so-strong as in the sense of "what the heck?"...
There certainly is overlap in meaning between uti and quare, but there are some uses for uti which quare cannot be used for. Uti (or more usual, just ut) can be used as a relative adverb with a correlative like sic or tam or adeo.
Sic celer cucurrit ut Lucia, "he ran as fast as Lucy". Here sic and ut are used much like tam and quam. Quare, on the ...
The same word being a singular & a plural is not unusual. Consider "haec" = this: it can be feminine singular and neuter plural. Also, "ipsa" = "self": it can be feminine singular and neuter plural. These are just aspects of linguistic evolution. If yourself is receiving conflicting instructions from your teachers, you need a text book, its corresponding ...