Here’s a quick link to Erik Mendoza’s Interpres, which works to bridge the gap between Whitaker’s WORDS and the latest editions of Macintosh OS X.
When I finally purchased a new laptop, I discovered that Whitaker’s WORDS was no longer compatible with Macintosh Mountain Lion (OS X 10.8). William Whitaker died recently so his version of the software remains static and incompatible with the latest versions of OS X. However, Erik Mendoza has been awesome enough to produce Interpres, which is a compatible (and I would argue more user-friendly) version of the WORDS program. Hopefully, Interpres will also jive well with Apple’s up-and-coming Mavericks (OS X 10.9), due out later this year.
If anyone wants to add a footnote about the latest version of WORDS for Windows 8, I’m sure it would be well received! For those of you suffering under the heel of Windows 8, I offer my sincere condolences.
The ablative of agent is expressed with ā or ab, and denotes an agent associated with a passive verb. In basic cases, this means the [ab + ablative] unit would be the nominative subject in an active construction.
Hats are worn by these men, but scorned by those men: capellī ab hīs gestantur, sed ab illīs spernantur.
These men wear hats, but those men scorn hats: hī capellōs gestant, sed illī spernant.
He was brought to trial by his sons: ā fīliīs in iūdicium vocātus est.
His sons brought him to trial: eum fīliī in iūdicium vocāvērunt.
According to AG, this construction is developed from the ablative of source. “The agent is conceived as the source or author of the action.” -AG, 405n2
How is this not a chicken/egg scenario? They don’t work to justify their claim, but it might be that claiming a ‘source’ is a perceived ‘agent’ offers agency to all things, whereas claiming an ‘agent’ is a ‘source’ merely relates a relationship between two things.
The ablative agent may appear with active verbs, but only where they are intransitive and allude to a passive meaning.
She was killed by the elephants: periit ab elephantīs