I have another entry for this exhibit that answers your question with a resounding yes.
Enter Plautus, in the Menaechmi, with three verbs derived from proper names in his prologue:
Atque hoc poetae faciunt in comoediis:
omnis res gestas esse Athenis autumant,
quo illud vobis graecum videatur magis;
ego nusquam dicam nisi ubi factum dicitur.
You could use retexo, literally "unweave, unravel", but also used to mean the below:
B. Trop., to break up, cancel, annul, reverse
It depends a little bit on the context, though, what the best translation would be. Other candidates are restituo, resolvo, abrogo, rescindo, induco, evacuo, exinanio, eludo, libero...
Adjectives with a similar meaning ...
This is a contracted perfect form, which is fairly common in poetry, particularly in the first conjugation.
Basically, whenever you have a second person perfect active ending in -āvisti (like amāvisti "you loved"), it can be contracted to -āsti without changing the meaning (e.g. amāsti "you loved").
It's somewhat like how English uses "don't" instead of "...
Yes, a deponent verb can have an accusative object just like non-deponent verbs do.
If I threaten someone with something in Latin, then alicui aliquid minor.
The person (or other entity) being threatened is in dative, but the threat (death, punishment, fine, ...) is in accusative.
Since minari is a deponent verb, the seemingly passive form can be used as if ...
The thesauri and dictionaries offer marvelous help with some of these.
Adapted from Döderlein's Hand-book of Latin Synonymes:
Interficere and perimere are the most general expressions for putting to death, in whatever manner, and from whatever motive, but interficere as a usual, perimere as an old, forcible, poetical expression.
Interimere involves ...
In Latin, the infinitive is not used to introduce a reason, or "purpose clause" as a Latin grammar would put it. Here are some other options, which I will gear toward the (very broad) use case of English translations using the infinitive with a sense of purpose.
Ut + Subjunctive
ut means "that, in order that" and introduces a subordinate purpose clause. ...
There are at least some cases in which this can be done, with different shades of meaning.
graecisso (-izo), āre, v. n., = Γραικίζω, to imitate the Greeks, to adopt a Grecian manner or tone: atque adeo hoc argumentum graecissat; tamen Non atticissat; verum sicelissat, Plaut. Men. prol. 7; v. Ritschl ad h. l.: graecizat, Consent. 1063 P.
First person singular (laudo) appears to be most common
Marcus Terentius Varro (116-27 BC) wrote De Lingua Latina, which survives in partial, corrupted form, but which provides valuable testimony on this matter.
In Book 6, chapter 5, he speaks of "derived words" and uses the first-person present active indicative form as the "basic form":
Both are conjugated in the present tense, passive voice, and indicative mood, from the same verb: muto. The difference is that mutamur is conjugated in the 1st person (plural) (“we change”), while mutantur is conjugated in the 3rd person (plural) (“times change”).
Owen is quoting a well-known Latin adage meaning, “Times change, and we change with them.”
A look at Lewis & Short suggests that perhaps bíbó is what you want:
to arrive at the region of the river
the inhabitants of the country through which the river passes
to be drowned
to founder, to be wrecked
to draw blood, to kill
So the definition doesn't mention alcohol. The notes do suggest, though, that a connotation of ...
Futurum est is a future active periphrastic form. It is built from futurum, the future active participle of sum (here in the neuter), which by itself means "going to be, about to be". With the addition of est, it means "It is going to be", or in the translation you quote, "It will come to pass".
Cato Maior devotes a large subsection of De Agri Cultura to wine. You can read the entire text here, and as can be expected, he sticks to very simple verbs:
making: vinum Graecum sic facito
actual wine making:
plucking grapes: Hoc vinum [= has uvas] seorsum legito
trampling grapes: In orculam calcato
pressing grapes: Manu conprimito acina
There certainly is a future imperative of esse in Latin: see Allen and Greenough's New Latin Grammar:
PRESENT SING. 2. ĕs, be thou PLUR. 2. este, be ye
FUTURE 2. estō, thou shalt be 2. estōte, ye shall be
3. estō, he shall be 3. suntō, they shall be
I have never met sunto in casual reading, though ...
It's not just Latin. As far as I'm aware, the only language that has a future subjunctive is Spanish, and it's disappearing there as well. (I don't speak Spanish, so I can't say from personal experience.)
William Harris, in Orbis Latinus, writes that the subjunctive calls forth
all the associations that go with unreality, possibility, potentiality, in ...
In the Perseus Project, I see many occurrences of estote; a disproportionate number of them appear to be in St. Jerome's Latin Vulgate. Here are two examples:
1 Maccabees 2:50, Latin Vulgate
nunc ergo o filii aemulatores estote legis et date animas vestras pro testamento patrum
Now therefore, O (my) sons, be zealots of the law...
1 Corinthians 4:16
The trick here is to broaden your translation not of obtinuere but of regnum.
Lewis Elementary gives the following definition:
kingly government, royal authority, kingship, royalty
dominion, sovereignty, rule, authority, supreme power
despotism, tyranny, personal sovereignty, arbitrary rule
a kingdom, state governed by a king
I'd say you want the present tense. A&G 466, "Present with iam diu etc.":
The Present with expressions of duration of time (especially iam diu, iam dudum) denotes an action continuing in the present, but begun in the past... In this use the present is commonly to be rendered by the perfect in English
They give examples such as annum iam audis ...
You are correct to say that this is not a 'literal' translation. Turba is a feminine singular noun, and exultet is rightly singular. I'm not sure coro is the right word, though. Interestingly, turba made it into Spanish, but apparently with a decidedly negative connotation. In Classical Latin, turba also meant "mob", but could be used more neutrally, such as ...
Whether or not this is how the forms really developed, this is how I organize it in my head.
And it has proven quite efficient, so I consider it a good description of what classical Latin conjugation is even if it fails to describe where it comes from.
First, the theme vowels in conjugations 1, 2, and 4 are long: ā, ē, ī.
The vowel i in ...
The story, as often, has to do with Proto-Indo-European laryngeals. Both these verbs had a laryngeal as the last consonant of the root: *deh₃-, *steh₂-. All the forms in Latin are based on the zero grade of these roots (i.e. the form without a vowel): *dh₃-, *sth₂-. Now, when a PIE laryngeal found itself between two consonants, in Latin the result was the ...
Plural place names should have plural verbs. A very simple case of this is Athenae, -arum (Athens). Here's an illuminating example from Cicero:
in quam cum intueor, maxime mihi occurrunt, Attice, et quasi lucent Athenae tuae, qua in urbe primum se orator extulit primumque etiam monumentis et litteris oratio est coepta mandari. (Cicero, Brutus 7)
Officially, imprimo means I mark/stamp (hence English impression), where premo just means I press.
The nuances of Latin prefixes have long fascinated me, and it took me forever to realize that they’re basically equivalent to English verbs that contain prepositions. So here it‘s a case of to press vs. to press in. Other examples are:
rideo = I laugh; ...
Actually, Latin dictionaries tend to list four forms of a Latin verb. These forms are known as "principal parts." So the "official" listing for your example consists of four principal parts:
sedeō, sedēre, sēdī, sessum [or "sessus," depending on which tradition you follow].
The first word means "I sit," the second one "to sit," the third "I sat," and the ...
The answer above is pretty comprehensive! I don't yet have the reputation points to make this into a comment, rather than a full answer, but there are a few things worth adding.
First, In the case of Aliquid boni edendum volo — I think the most literal translation would be: "I desire something of good having-to-be-eaten." boni is then a partitive genitive. ...
Pinkster 2015 mentions the following observable trends regarding the omission of esse.
it is more frequent with the 3rd person than in the 1st or 2nd;
it is more frequent with present indicative forms;
it is more frequent in simple nominal sentences etc. (see pp. 201-204 for more details).
Stolz and Schmalz add that the omission of esse is regular in ...
The verb est is omitted but implied. The motto is taken from the start of Psalm 27 (or 26):
Dominus illuminatio mea et salus mea; quem timebo?
Dominus protector vitae meae; a quo trepidabo?
The Lord is my source of light and my salvation; whom shall I fear?
The Lord is the protector of my life; by whom shall I be made to tremble?
Putting in the ...
It's actually not indicative, but subjunctive. I know Perseus' morph tool parses it as both indicative and subjunctive, but both Gildersleeve and the OLD say it's subjunctive and do not mention anything about it being indicative:
faxo, faxim (where later writers use fecero, fecerim)
The normal perfect indicative of facio was feci, fecisti, fecit (etc.).
The plural would be aleae iactae sunt.
Alea / aleae is nominative, because it's the subject of a passive verb-form.
Note that, if you used the accusative case for alea, the verb would have to be in the active and its subject would be implicit, or else would have to be a noun or pronoun. So,
aleam / aleas iecit means 'he (she, it) threw the di(c)e'. ...
Indeed, historically deponents are descended from a middle/reflexive voice. In historical usage, though, deponents lost this, and can take a direct object. See e.g.:
With plenty other examples, and even verbs like uti can take an accusative in some situations.
One could argue that the forms themselves make the ...
Joonas's answer is entirely correct, but just to add onto it a bit:
The way I learned it, prōd is an archaic form of prō. You'll also sometimes see pōr as in pōrrigō, pōlluō, etc: these three all came from different forms of the same PIE root.
In the end, prō was the one that won out, and so that's the only one you'll see used as a preposition. But all ...