The Stack Overflow podcast is back! Listen to an interview with our new CEO.
17

In this case I would read puto more as a side remark to the clause deus fio. You could emphasize this with punctuation: Puto: deus fio. I think: I'm becoming a god. The verb puto is indeed grammatically detached from the rest of the clause. It is grammatically correct, but it is not really grammatically connected to deus fio. (The semantic connection ...


8

Yes, I would by all means supply est. The phrase fas est is a fixed combination either introducing an a.c.i. or governing a complementary/supplementary infinitive plus the latter's arguments. The est can be omitted, as in similar constructions. I would analyse this fas est as having a primary dative complement nulli casto and a infinitival phrase as a ...


7

I've never seen fieri potest, quod. I find however several examples of fieri potest, ut subjunctive in the corpora; the first two are: Si hoc fieri potest ut in hac civitate quae longe iure libertatis ceteris civitatibus antecellit quisquam nullis comitiis imperium aut potestatem adsequi possit, quid attinet tertio capite legem curiatam ferre iubere, cum ...


6

In English, your consecutio temporum is usually called the ‘sequence of tenses’. There is a general rule that in the principal sentence (i) a primary tense is followed in the subordinate clause by a primary tense, and (ii) a historic tense by a historic tense. In subordinate clauses the subjunctive is usual, incomplete action being represented by the ...


5

Regarding the question in the title, Lewis and Short (seemingly this community's favorite dictionary) lists among the meanings of inde the following: from that time, thenceforward, since, after that, thereafter, thereupon, then. Just in case, there is the same entry on other dictionary. The same idea applies to unde. Relative pronouns/adverbs that mark ...


4

In addition to Cerberus' answer, I would rather make the following slicing: fas [est] nulli casto insistere limen sceleratum As far as I know, it is very common to omit esse in Latin: e.g. some lines before your quotation you can read Quæ scelerum facies? (What shapes of crime are here? v. 560).


4

This is what Adolf V. Streng (Latinan kielioppi, 5th edition, 1936) says in §161.2: Finnish: Toisen tahi kolmannen asteen konjunktiivinen sivulause mukautuu predikaattinsa tempuksen puolesta sitä lähinnä hallitsevan sivulauseen mukaan. Free translation: A conjunctive subordinate clause of second or third order adapts to the closest governing clause ...


4

The adjective contentus (satisfied, content) can be modified with ablative. For example, viro contentus means "satisfied with a/the man". In your case the attribute has two words: unus vir (uno viro in ablative). Therefore I would translate like this: Uxor, quae bona est, uno viro est contenta. A wife, who is good, is satisfied with one man. I added ...


3

What your question really seems to be about is whether inde can serve as a subordinate conjunction, like dum, cum, etc., introducing a subordinate clause, to be translated as "when" or "while". You ask this, because you feel that a conjunction is needed to link the two lines. If you look at the link to Lewis & Short above, you will see that inde (unlike ...


3

If we have a subordinate clause depending on superordinate conjunctive clause, we must consider the tense of the conjunctive: (A) present or perfect "logic" (assimilable to a present), it should be used the tenses prescripted by the consecutio temporum of the primary times, like in Sen. ep. 32,1: sic vive tamquam quid facias auditurus sim (B) ...


3

Here are some comments: 1a: The infinitive cannot express purpose in Latin like it can in English. See this earlier question, for example. 1h&i: The rules of consecutio temporum require that a conjunctive subordinate to present or future verb is present or perfect, and one subordinate to any of the past tenses is imperfect or pluperfect. Because "he has ...


3

non quidem est dubium quin ceteros duces aspernandi causa hoc dixerit... "There is indeed no doubt that he said this in order to upset the other generals." You could translate it thus, but a (somewhat less desirable) alternative is possible: "There is indeed no doubt whether he said this in order to upset the other generals." When there is no doubt ...


2

As Joonas noted, puto is parenthetical. I'll just add, by way of comparison, that Claudius's ultima vox in Seneca's Apocolocyntosis was 'vae me, puto, concacavi me.'


2

Tuomo Pekkanen's Ars Grammatica – Latinan kielioppi (§116, lisäys 3) mentions that the historical present can be treated as either a present tense or as a past tense when consecutio temporum is concerned. It gives this example without any citation or further explanation: Quod cum videret, quaerit, quae causa sit/esset. When he saw it, he ...


2

This is only a partial answer and in need of further substantiation, but I'll post it for what's it's worth. First, as to the difference between quod and quia. Though these are often treated as interchangeable, and both can take either the indicative or the subjunctive depending on whether the reason stated is the writer's or is ascribed to someone else, ...


2

The best answer that I can give is to adapt the notes I made years ago during instruction in prose composition [which I am doing by inserting comments in square brackets]. ADVERBIAL CLAUSES — CAUSAL The word cum has a whole list of meanings, as conjunction, preposition and adverb. The form quum is often found instead of cum, and these two are more or less ...


2

I suspect one of the things that's throwing you off is the word order: it would have been much easier if the sentence had been uxor quae bona est contenta est ūnō uirō. However, that order feels sort of strange. The thing to remember is that Latin word order is very flexible (though not infinitely flexible), and often words that appear right next to each ...


2

When a clause is subordinate to a nominal form of a verb (anything that does not have a grammatical person), the conjunctive predicate of the subordinate clause follows the predicate verb of its main clause, not the nominal form. For example: Me adiit mirans, cur Graeci sic loquerent. (Here loqui follows adire, not mirari.) There is, however, an exception: ...


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