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 ...
The translation is indeed syntactically inexact, but in a very common and justifiable way.
The point is that Latin -- unlike e.g. Greek, from which this text is translated -- lacks a perfect active participle. This means that there's no direct way of saying "Having called his disciples together...". (The exception to this is using a deponent verb, since ...
I have found three ways of referring to the age of wine, the first of which is the most common and simplest:
An adjective such as anniculus, bimus etc.
quadrimum Sabina, o Thaliarche, merum diota
fetch the four-year old wine from the Sabine jar, o Thaliarchus
Horace, Odes, 1.9
ponite turaque bimi cum patera meri
set down incense and a ...
As brianpck mentioned, the English suffix "-able" is borrowed from Latin. The rules for applying it in Latin are more transparent than the English alteration between "-able" and "-ible". EDIT: And are actually even easier, now that I think about it.
First, choose your stem.
If the verb has a fourth principal part (supine) ending in -tus, remove the -tus ...
There is a verb fatīscō, fatīscere, —, ???, meaning to fall apart or collapse. (Sometimes it also acts like a deponent verb, fatīscor, fatīscī, with the same meaning.) But it's practically nonexistent in the past tense, and doesn't have a proper perfect system.
Fessus could be considered a perfect participle for fatīscō, with the inchoative -isc- ...
Your translation "he proved to them that completing these efforts was done very easily" is good.
To express such things in Latin the supine is a good choice.
The supine ablative (like factu) is an ablative of respect.
Hoc responsum facile est scriptu.
= This answer is easy with respect to writing.
= This answer is easy to write.
δοῦσα is a feminine nom. sg. participle, but it's more likely to be taken as the aorist participle of δίδωμι 'give' than the present participle of δέω 'bind': generally, monosyllabic stems (like δε-) don't contract. That said, there are exceptions, and it looks like δοῦσα is actually attested as an alternate of the regular form δέουσα.
μή negates a ...
Perfacile factu means "easy to do." Factu is a supine, and this construction—supines coming off of certain adjectives—is pretty much where you will always see its ablative form. Other common examples are:
Mirabile dictu, "Amazing to say";
Difficilis latu, "Difficult to bear";
Optimum factu, "Best [thing] to do;
Nefas dictu, "Unlawful to say".
With that in ...
I see now that some people call this a "future passive participle", but it is conventionally called a gerundive. So I wouldn't think of "going to be read" at all if I were to translate it.
A sense of prediction or obligation is inherent in any gerundive. The most literal translation is as follows—by most literal I mean the one that works in most situations, ...
I think that your question will become a lot clearer when you realize that the gerundive is a participle: specifically, it is the future passive participle.
This is thus not a question of choosing between a gerundive and a participle, but rather choosing which participle (tense and voice) to use. Here is a brief overview of the kinds of participles of ...
There is a direct quote for this situation in the Satyricon, where Petronius just uses annus in the genitive plural:
Statim allatae sunt amphorae vitreae diligenter gypsatae, quarum in cervicibus pittacia erant affixa cum hoc titulo: FALERNVM OPIMIANVM ANNORVM CENTVM. Dum titulos perlegimus, complosit Trimalchio manus et: "Eheu, inquit, ergo diutius vivit ...
My first instinct was that this is, at the very least, not common in classical Latin, and should only happen with participles that are basically adjectives and have lost some of their verbal semantics, like sapiens or patiens. The reason I think that, is that a present participle is perfectly capable of standing on its own in Latin, it doesn't need an actual ...
Weiss cites, besides alumnus, femina (from a root meaning 'give suck'), calumnia (derived from *kalwo-mno-, from the root of calvor 'deceive'), and possibly also columna and the divine name Vortumnus (if related to verto 'turn', though it may rather be Etruscan). These are not Greek loans but native formations; I don't know when precisely they were formed, ...
This is found even in classical Latin. The perfect passive can be formed by using either the present tense of esse or, when one wants to stress the completedness of the action, the perfect tense. Likewise, the pluperfect can use either the imperfect or pluperfect of esse, and the future perfect can use either the future or future perfect.
Here's a reference ...
There is a regular sound change by which Latin a (long or short), when stressed and in an open syllable, became [e] or [ε]. A few examples out of many:
mare > mer
amāre > aimer
nāsum > nez
The past participle suffix is simply another case of this change: -ātum > -é. (It's conventional to cite Latin nouns in the accusative when talking about Romance changes ...
190b. The perfect participle generally has an active sense, but in verbs otherwise deponent it is often passive: as, mercátus, bought; adeptus, gained (or having gained).
As I read it (with the help of some other paper grammars) this means: “Perfect participles of deponent verbs generally have an active sense. However, there are deponent verbs which follow ...
Wiktionary seems to be wrong. De Vaan derives clīvus and gnāvus from forms with the PIE suffix *-wo-, which is not the same as the pf. ppl. suffix *-wos-; he derives alvus by metathesis from an earlier aulos. Weiss lists the first two along with many others under nouns formed with the suffix -uo-.
The PIE perfect participle was athematic and had *-wōs in ...
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 [...
The English suffix "-able/-ible" comes directly from Latin -abilis/-ibilis.
A search for Latin words ending in -bilis returns 737 results, of which the first few are:
Unless there's some bizarre, ultra-special construction going on here, ambulabat can never be a present participle -- it is the 3rd person singular, imperfect active form of ambulare, and can be translated as was walking.
Since posting this question, I have found some information, although I'm not as sure of it as I would like to be. I use some hedging in this answer, but this is only meant to indicate my personal lack of certainty; I'm not saying that the matter is objectively uncertain.
Possible syntactic differences
-ns words may only take accusative direct objects when ...
The double ss is evidence for a short vowel in ussi (at least at some point)
Just a short time after posting this question, I remembered a relevant fact. Even though there wasn't (as far as I know) a regular Latin sound change that would have shortened ū to u in this context, there was a Latin sound change that would have shortened ss to s after a long ...
This is a deponent verb.
Both the normal contemplare and the deponent contemplari exist and mean roughly the same thing.
I have the impression that the deponent one is more common, but the details surely depend on the era and author.
The deponent verb has passive forms but active meaning, and therefore the passive perfect participle has active meaning too.
It seems that some people have proposed that -menos developed in a few Latin words to -mens rather than -mnus, but there is no consensus in favor of this etymology. (And it certainly doesn't seem to have been productive.) At least one current Wiktionary entry gives an etymology based on this idea: the adjective clēmens, according to Wiktionary, comes "from ...
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.
I'm not an expert in Latin of the age of the Vulgate, so somebody else may have a more enlightened view, but grammatically speaking you're exactly right; the phrase in question is an ablative absolute, meaning "his twelve disciples having been called together," and "And having called his twelve disciples together" seems to be a mistranslation, or at least a ...
Ephesians 1:16: οὐ παύομαι εὐχαριστῶν ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν μνείαν (ὑμῶν) ποιούμενος ἐπὶ τῶν προσευχῶν μου. (The second ὑμῶν is missing in the best Mss.)
The Vulgata has: non cesso gratias agens pro vobis, memoriam vestri faciens in orationibus meis.
KJV: [I] cease not to give thanks for you, making mention of you in my prayers (continuing the first-person ...
There is an editorial rule of thumb: 'The more difficult reading is to be preferred,' and in this case the author, Lundström, prefers antilucanam and antilucanis(line 4), when the other versions S A, and (line 4) S A and R are in favour of the dictionary preference antelucanus.
XI 2, 12 antilucanam: when preparing this locus for publication I
I used corpus searches to constrain the possibility of participle comparison.
Here are the observations:
Superlative of future participle:
The only words with -turissim- are forms of maturissimus.
No hits with -surissim- or -xurissim-.
Comparative of future participle:
Searching for -turior- returns a number of forms of maturior, one promunturiorum, one ...
Ens ut nomen and ens ut participium are found in medieval works, used in both metaphysical and descriptive senses: "existence or reality thought of as things" as opposed to "existence or reality thought of as action/process".
But, as an attempt at classical Latin, your version looks completely wrong to me.
In classical Latin the verb sum famously has no ...