Silly Latin question

  • Thread starter Thread starter latingirl
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
L

latingirl

Guest
First, I apologize if I posted this in the improper place. I figured that the Traditional Catholic crowd would be more knowledgeable with Latin.

I am working on an art project and I want to put these words into Latin:

“All draws life from me.”

My own latin is limited and I don’t know how credible online translators are, so I would appreciate any help with this. 🙂

Pax vobiscum,
Puella Latina.
 
latingirl said:
First, I apologize if I posted this in the improper place. I figured that the Traditional Catholic crowd would be more knowledgeable with Latin.

I am working on an art project and I want to put these words into Latin:

“All draws life from me.”

My own latin is limited and I don’t know how credible online translators are, so I would appreciate any help with this. 🙂

Pax vobiscum,
Puella Latina.
Click to expand...
Having dated a few classicists, the big question would be whether you are looking for Church Latin or Latin Latin.
 
My suggestion would probably be:
A me accipit vitalitas omne.
 
DElias said:
Having dated a few classicists, the big question would be whether you are looking for Church Latin or Latin Latin.
Click to expand...
There is no difference. Or, rather, it’s somewhere in between “the difference between British English and American English” and “the difference between literary English and technical English.” In other words, a sort of minor dialectical difference, largely indistinguishable except that they are generally used to talk about different subject matters.
 
There is not written difference between Classical and Church Latin but if we were speaking them, there’d be a big difference in pronuniation.

Thanks you guys, gratias. If you have any more suggestions, please pass them on. 🙂
 
latingirl said:
There is not written difference between Classical and Church Latin but if we were speaking them, there’d be a big difference in pronuniation.
Click to expand...
Not to keep this going any longer than necessary, but I was drug to a few classicist parties where this was a discussion. Apparently, church’s had issues with a number things outside of pronunciation. This was coming from grad students and professors.
 
latingirl said:
There is not written difference between Classical and Church Latin but if we were speaking them, there’d be a big difference in pronuniation.

Thanks you guys, gratias. If you have any more suggestions, please pass them on. 🙂
Click to expand...
There are small differences and you picked a good word as an example. The singular form of gratias (thanks), becomes “grace (of God)” (Ave Maria, gratia plena) in Christianized Latin. Another example is oratio, a Roman word for “speech” but Christianized to mean “prayer.”

A good book to read is “A Natural History of Latin/The story of the world’s most successful language” by Tore Janson, now available on Kindle as well.
 
DElias said:
Not to keep this going any longer than necessary, but I was drug to a few classicist parties where this was a discussion. Apparently, church’s had issues with a number things outside of pronunciation. This was coming from grad students and professors.
Click to expand...
The problem with some classicists is that they see the Church’s Latin as “wrong”. But that’s silly. Latin, like any other language, changes over time. Latin was a truly living and changing language up until the neo-classicists tried to turn back the clock.
 
ProVobis said:
That would defeat its purpose. Could you illustrate some examples?
Click to expand...
The language is not ‘made for purpose.’ The one for purpose is Esperanto, not language.

In the regular Latin of the middle eves the grammar is simplified: straight word order (subject, predicament, object, and the rest), simple sentences, a limited set of the cases. That was different either before that (in the classical ages) and after that. Compare the clementine hymns with the previous verison.

As for the tanslation the sentence “All draws life from me.” has double aspects.

Either All are drawing their life from the speaker, or the speaker’s life is emptied by things or persons

Omnes trahunt vitam eorum ex me or Omnia trahunt vitam meam ex me.

I am the opposite of the expert either for the English or for the Latin

For the Original poster: for similar questions try

groups.yahoo.com/group/ctnlatin/

the answer is usually slow by there are some experts there
 
antonivs said:
Shouldn’t it be “All draw life from me”?
Click to expand...
That’s a different sentence; it would mean “All people draw life from me.” With the singular verb, then “all” = “everything”, and it is not so much a statement about all people but about everything in the universe. That’s why I selected the neuter singular “omne.”
 
In the regular Latin of the middle eves the grammar is simplified: straight word order (subject, predicament, object, and the rest), simple sentences, a limited set of the cases. That was different either before that (in the classical ages) and after that. Compare the clementine hymns with the previous verison.
Click to expand...
But you’re just giving an illustration of styles, not any change in Latin itself. Roman writers each had a different style of writing (compare Cicero and Tacitus, for example) as does Christianized Latin which took the language of the cross to a more divine level. That was its purpose as I see it. The word order and the simple sentences of scripture and the liturgy, I suppose, were intended for easier comprehension and thought flow. (Pax domini sit semper vobiscum could very well have been written SEMPERVOBISCVMPAXDOMINISIT by a Roman writer and it would have had different (set of) connotations.)

Now when you’re comparing Old English to Middle English to Modern English, now THAT is a change.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top