Disputatio:Dominus Anulorum/1.3.5
Partem novam addereHuc illa sententia est-
Lingua anglica: They possessed from the first the art of disappearing swiftly and silently, when large folk whom they do not wish to meet come blundering by; and this art they have developed until to Men it may seem magical.
Lingua latina: Ab initio artem evanescentis cursim silentioseque possidebant, cum magnus homines qui convenire non volunt praetereunt; haec ars confirmavisse persecutus sunt, ad Hominibus magica videat.
Gratias.
the art of disappearing -> ars ex oculis abiendi.
The first problem is that in the art of X, we need X to be a noun, and evanescens (the present active participle) is a (verbal) adjective. What we want is the gerund, which is a (verbal) noun. So, for example, the art of teaching is ars docendi, not ars docenti, which would mean something like "the art of a man who is teaching, the art of a docent".
The second problem is that the gerund is the future passive participle, and evanesco has no passive. Instead, we consult Traupman's, which has to disappear from sight as oculis subduci (from Cicero, to take something away with respect to the eyes), abire ex oculis (from Livy, to leave away from the eyes). Either of these have the passive, so we could have either oculis subducendum or abiendum ex oculis. I think that subduco would have to take an accusative to indicate what is being taken away, while abeo already implies that the subject is the thing leaving, so I'll just use that.
silently -> tacite. It's shorter.
to not want -> nolle.
when (they) came blundering by -> cum... praeterierunt. This is a "whenever" clause modifying the primary clause (disappearing) -- see Bradley's Arnold section 432. The tense of the whenever clause depends on the tends of the primary clause: it is one step in the perfect. So if the primary is present, then the whenever is perfect, and if the primary is past, then the whenever is pluperfect.
this art they have developed -> watch your cases! hanc artem confirmaverunt.
until -> result clause, ut + subjunctive. Since we have the subjunctive, we have to follow the sequence of tenses. The primary verb is confirmaverunt, perfect (with have), which means this clause must have the perfect subjunctive.
seem -> passive of see, videri. Perfect passive subjunctive = perfect passive indicative + sit = visus/a/um sit. The art seems, so visa sit.
Also, in general, watch your cases and numbers.
So we have: Ab initio artem ex oculis cursim taciteque abiendi possidebant, cum magni quos convenire nolunt homines praeterierunt; hanc artem confirmaverunt, ut Hominibus magica visa sit.
Note that I used magni... homines in bracketing the relative phrase so we don't get the verb pileup at the end. --Robert.Baruch (disputatio) 21:51, 1 Decembris 2013 (UTC)
Yes, I have to watch my cases. I have to remember that the object-nouns must be in the accusative; I guess that the subjects being incorporated into the verbs throws me off a bit. I have a question- when a verb is in the passive, must the noun be in the accusative? For example, in I eat, I should be nominative, but in I was eaten, in English it still would be nominative, though the verb is passive; how does this work in Latin? | IACOBVS.CELSVS (disputatio) 17:40, 10 Decembris 2013 (UTC)