The More, The More

The two phrases quō..eō (hōc), tantō…quantō (hōc) can be broadly translated as ‘the more…the more.’ They are ablatives of degree of difference used to correlate to comparatives.

  • quō minus cpiditātis, eō plus auctōritātis, the less greed, the more authority
  • quantō erat gravior oppūgnātiō, tantō crēbriōrēs litterae mittēbantur, the severe the siege was, the more frequently letters were sent

The third variation is simply emphatic.

  • quantō plus crustulōs murī dabis, tantō hōc plus crustulīs eget: the mouse’s desire for cookies will increase in exact proportion to the number of cookies that you give him.

A&G note that this correlative construction later mutated to describe Cause instead of Degree of Difference.

  • eō mē minus paenitet, for that reason I regress less.

(Severe addicts should check out A&G’s note on this section 414an1, which details how the English ‘the…the’ is actually a direct descendent of these expressions, emerging from the instrumental case of a pronoun in Angle-Saxon, thȳ.)

The Essential AG: 414a, 414an

There Was a Time When…

Quite closely relate to expression of existence / non-existence are expressions of past time, which make use of the phrase est cum and fuit cum, which may be translated as ‘there was a time when…’ Like the phrases that describe existence, these make use of a relative clause of characteristic (w/ subjunctive!) to describe an indefinite period of present/past time.

  • est cum …. present subjunctive
  • fuit cum …. imperfect subjunctive
  • est cum in omnis virī aevō domum parentis linquat: there comes a time in every man’s life when he must leave the home of his father
  • est cum omnibus deceat: there is a season for all things
  • fuit cum mihi quoque initium requiēscendī fore iūstum arbitrārer: there was a time when I thought a beginning of rest would be justifiable on my part
  • fuit cum nōn altior meīs genibus essēs: there was a time when you were no taller than my knees

The Essential AG: 535an3

Expressions of Existence

In Latin, expression of existence and non-existence are handled by a Relative Clause of Characteristic (subjunctive!).

Expressions of Existence

  • sunt quī discessum animī ā corpore putent esse mortem: there are some (there exist some) who think that the departure of the soul from the body constitutes death
  • erant quī hōc cēnsērent, there were some of this opinion
  • quis est quī id nōn maximīs efferat laudibus: who is there that does not extol it with the highest praise?
  • sunt quī orbem arsum modō videre velint: some men just want to watch the world burn.

Expressions of Non-Existence

  • nihil videō quod timeam: I see nothing to fear.
  • nihil est quod adventum nostrum extimēscās: there is no reason to fear our arrival.
  • nēmō est qui SuīLocō tamen ūtātur: no one uses MySpace anymore.

A&G add that with these phrases the indicative is possible but less common, and point out that certain grammar books reference these phrases as ‘Relative Clauses with an Indefinite Antecedent.’

The Essential AG: 535a, 525an1, 535an2

Alternative and Archaic Quī and Quis

The relative and interrogative pronouns (quī, quae, quod) and (quis? quod?) are originally of the same root, so their older forms overlap in many places. The majority of this post will cover features of Latin you might only live to see once, or never.

  • The archaic genitive singular of this root is quōius, and the archaic dative singular, quoi.
  • The form quī is alternative of the ablative in all genders, though most often appears as an adverb (quī, how, in what way, inanway–using the same semantic field as the Greek ὅπῃ), or as quīcum, with whom? However, there are more general instances, even in classical Latin, for instance:

Which chest did the spears pierce: quī pectōre tela / transmittant (Lucan, Bellum Civile 7)

  • The archaic nominative plural, quēs, is only found in early Latin, though the archaic dative/ablative plural quīs is found in classical poetry.

The Essential AG: 150

Declension of Relative Pronouns

The relative pronoun is used within a complex sentence to refer to some antecedent in an earlier clause. In Latin, the relative pronoun is decline, and should fit syntactically with its own clause, rather than the case of its antecedent. For instance:

  • These are not the Droids you’re looking for: haec Droidēs nōn sunt quae quaesis.

The antecedent (nominative) does not align with the relative pronoun (accusative). Also, note how easily Latin shifts and embeds a relative clause:

  • These are not the Droids you’re looking for: quae quaesis haec Droidēs nōn sunt.
  • These are not the Droids you’re looking for: haec Droidēs quae quaesis nōn sunt.

These are both acceptable (albeit irregular/poetic) alternatives to the sentence above.

The relatives are declined as follows–

Picture 1

The Essential AG: 147

Expressions of Similarity

With Adjectives and Adverbs

The basic formula here is (adj/adv) + atque/ac


He has sense equal to his beauty: parem sapientiam habet atque formam.

He has sense equal to his beauty: pariter sapientiam habet atque formam.

She loves and hates in the same way: aequē amat ac odit.

(likewise with similiter)

With Ipse

Here, the formula is more subtle: use ipse, ipsa, ipsum with a relative clause or ac/atque.

I suspect you are disturbed by the same things which I am: tē suspicor eīsdem rēbus quibus mē ipsum commovērī.

I pray to the same gods as you: prēcor deīs atque te ipse.


The Essential AG: 384 n2

Relative Clauses as Alternatives to Nouns

In Latin, a relative clause can function as an alternative to (a) a participle, (b) an appositive or (c) a noun of agency.

This should be incredibly familiar: English relative clauses may perform all the same roles.

As participles:

  • lēgēs nunc stantēs : lēgēs quī nunc stant (the existing laws)
  • uxor librum dans : uxor quae librum dat (the wife giving the book)

As appositives:

  • iūsta glōria, frūctus virtūtis, ērepta est : iūsta glōria quae est frūctus virtūtus, ērepta est.
  • (true glory, the fruit of virtue, has been snatched away)
  • Iuppiter caelestī potestātis solium : Iuppiter, quī est caelestī potestātis solium
  • (Jupiter, the seat of heavenly power)

As nouns of agency:

  • Caesar victor Galliae : Caesar quī Galliam vincit (Caesar, conqueror of Gaul)
  • Seneca omnilector : Seneca quī omnēs legit (Secena, reader of everything)

Essential AG: 308c.

Demonstrative Pronouns (Hīc et Ille)

There’s a self-effacing story behind every post I offer–some mistake I made in class that demonstrated (pun intended) my need to review a specific topic. This one started with the ‘cell tag’ that ends the messages I send from my smart phone, which began as:

-haec litteras mittae ex mobile

I sent a message to a professor and she politely suggested I fixed it. The disconjunction here was brutal. I have no idea what I was thinking when I designed the damn thing. It now reads:

-hae litterae missae ex mobile

Review carefully and avoid my mistake–

Summary of Use

“Demonstrative pronouns are use either adjectively or substantively” (AG, 296)

As pronominal adjectives, the agree with their corresponding noun

  • With this battle fought, he went out: hōc proeliō factō, proficīscēbātur
  • They died in the same battle: eōdem proeliō periērunt.

In moments of apposition, the pronoun agrees with the appositive, not the antecedent

  • This was the head of things, this the source: rērum caput hōc erat, hīc fōns

As substantives, they are personal pronouns, frequently in the  oblique cases

  • Hostages ought to be given by them: Obsidēs ab eīs dandī sunt.
  • Let the songs be sung by them: carmina ab eīs ca canātur.
  • His army went out: exercitus eius prōfectus est.
  • Those men are the first across the Rhone: hī sunt extrā prōvinciam trāns Rhodanum prīmī 

Hīc, Haec, Hōc

Hīc, Haec, Hōc is referred to as the ‘demonstrative of first person,’ and implies something near the speaker

  • It should be translated this or these
  • These are cats she was seeking: hīs sunt gattī, quōs petēbat.
  • This standard is our own: hōc signum nostrum est.

Hīc, Haec, Hōc originally developed from the stem ho- and the enclitic -ce, hence the ‘c’ in many forms of its declension

Hīc, Haec, Hōc may refer to the speaker himself

  • I, this man, am unwilling: hīc nolō.

Hīc, Haec, Hōc generally refers to ‘the former,’ when two things are apposite in a piece of writing, since ‘the former’ denotes what is “nearer the speaker in time, place or thought; often it refers to that which has just been mentioned” (AG, 297a)

  • You did the former and set the latter aside: hōc fēcistī, illud reservāvistī

Hīc may also scan short (hic) in poetry

Hīc, ‘this one,’ should be carefully distinguished from the adverb hīc, ‘here’

  • These words have the same etymology, but different syntax
  • Adverbs don’t decline, and vary more widely in word order

Ille, Illa, Illud

Ille is attached to objects remote from the speaker, and is referred to as the ‘demonstrative of third person’

  • It should be translated that or those
  • That man is guilty: ille obnōxius est.
  • Those women were washing at the spring: illae in fontem sē lavābant.

Ille often appears as that famous or that well-known

  • That famous archer appeared: ille Architenens adfuit.

Ille generally refers to ‘the latter,’ paired with hīc, haec, hōc, as above

  • You did the former and set the latter aside: hōc fēcistī, illud reservāvistī

The neuter illud may mean ‘the following’

  • I told him the following thing: eī narrābō illud.

A redundant ille may be attached to relative pronouns in colloquial language

  • He who carefully guards, may long enjoy what he has well obtained: ille quī cōnsultē cavet, diūtinē ūtī licet partum bene. 

The Essential AG: 146, 296, 297a-b

Famous Phrase: in hōc sensū / in sensū hōc / s.h. (in this sense)

[an emerging academic notation]

demonstratives_p1

 

The Latin, or There and Back Again

I thought I should share two resources dear to my study of Latin. These are twin tools I use when searching for English words with Latin roots, or Latin words with English derivatives.

Certainly, I profit immensely from becoming tongue-tied between the two languages—if that makes sense.

There’s some danger here. Certain common Latin words, like prōspiciō, have comparatively rare English derivatives like prospicient. Naturally, after a few weeks of reading Cicero, prospicient feels like an ordinary word because you encounter its root relative so often in the text. It’s not, and I get looks for letting it loose in casual conversation. Beware.

For finding English derivatives, I use this Wikipedia page.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Latin_words_with_English_derivatives

Now, with a simple [ command/control+f ], it’s easy to search for either Latin roots or English derivatives.

However, for finding Latin roots of English words, I prefer this handy etymology dictionary, which reveals the precise history of many English words.

http://www.etymonline.com/

Neither of these tools is nearly comprehensive—so if there’s a particular world you’re interested in, a simple Google search might work. That said, if the words you’re after aren’t on either of these sites, (in my experience) they probably aren’t on Google, either.

If readers have any additional sites to suggest, I’m all ears!

Happy Hunting!