![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
ricardienneI didn't do much at all today, but I did make it to the library to check last night's translation. It was instructive. Instructive as to how little a grasp I have of Latin idiom at all. But now I can produce a slightly better version:
C. PLINIUS TACITO SUO S.
1 Librum tuum legi et, quam diligentissime potui, adnotavi quae commutanda, quae eximenda arbitrarer. Nam et ego verum dicere assuevi, et tu libenter audire. Neque enim ulli patientius reprehenduntur, quam qui maxime laudari merentur. 2 Nunc a te librum meum cum adnotationibus tuis exspecto. O iucundas, o pulchras vices! Quam me delectat quod, si qua posteris cura nostri, usquequaque narrabitur, qua concordia simplicitate fide vixerimus! 3 Erit rarum et insigne, duos homines aetate dignitate propemodum aequales, non nullius in litteris nominis — cogor enim de te quoque parcius dicere, quia de me simul dico -, alterum alterius studia fovisse. 4 Equidem adulescentulus, cum iam tu fama gloriaque floreres, te sequi, tibi 'longo sed proximus intervallo' et esse et haberi concupiscebam. Et erant multa clarissima ingenia; sed tu mihi — ita similitudo naturae ferebat — maxime imitabilis, maxime imitandus videbaris. 5 Quo magis gaudeo, quod si quis de studiis sermo, una nominamur, quod de te loquentibus statim occurro. Nec desunt qui utrique nostrum praeferantur. 6 Sed nos, nihil interest mea quo loco, iungimur; nam mihi primus, qui a te proximus. Quin etiam in testamentis debes adnotasse: nisi quis forte alterutri nostrum amicissimus, eadem legata et quidem pariter accipimus. 7 Quae omnia huc spectant, ut invicem ardentius diligamus, cum tot vinculis nos studia mores fama, suprema denique hominum iudicia constringant. Vale.
C. Plinius to his friend Tacitus:
1. I have read your book, and, as diligently as I could, I have noted what things I judged should be changed and which ones removed. For I am accustomed to speak truly and you to hear freely. For none are reproved more patiently than those who deserve most to be be praised. 2. Now I expect my book from you with your notes. O happy, O beautiful exchanges. How it delights me that, if our descendents have any concern for us, in whatever what it will be narrated, by what harmonious simplicity we will have lived faithfully! 3. It will be a rare and notable thing, two men about eaqual in age and rank, not a little renowned in letters -- for I am driven to speak more sparingly about you also, because I speak of myself at the same time -- each tending to the studies of the other. 4. For my part, as a young man, when you were already flourishing in report and glory, I desired to follow you, to be "next to, but at a great distance" to you and to be held so. And there were many most renowned talents, but you seemed to me -- thus the image bore to nature -- the most imitable and the most to be imitated. 5. By which I rejoice the more, that if there is any speech had about learning, we are named as one, that I am thought of at once by those speaking of you. They are not absent of whom one or the other of us is preferred. 7. But we, we are joined, it does matter to me in what order; for he is first to me, who comes nearest to you. And truly, in wills, you ought to have noted it: unless someone is by chance the particular friend to one of us, the same things are bequeathed, and, indeed we receive equally. 7. All of which things tend to this: that we cherish each other all the more ardently, as studies, habits, report, and finally the highest judgements of men bind us with so many chains. Farewell.
NOTES:
librum
The Loeb translation consistendly translated this as "oration" and studium as "oratory." It makes a lot of sense, given the context, but I'm sticking with basic vocabularly meanings because I don't really know how to use the more specific ones yet.
Neque enim ulli patientius reprehenduntur, quam qui maxime laudari merentur
This was the really embarrassing mistake. Two comparative adverbs, "quam," and it didn't make sense the way I had it, and I still didn't notice that it was a comparison. Eek. Actually, I think I must have skipped over the "quam." I shall blame this on not having eaten dinner yesterday.
tibi 'longo sed proximus intervallo' et esse et haberi
I originally took tibi as a dative of agent with haberi and read it as "to be next but at a long interval ["to you" understood] and be held by you to be next etc." which is a little weird. O Greek, how you have corrupted me! We pretty much only use datives of agent with gerundives in Latin.
ita similitudo naturae ferebat
I translated as "thus was the semblance [of you being most to be imitated] bearing to [your] nature [because now that I know you better, I can tell that you truly are to be imitated." Loeb translated it as something like "thus there was a semblance of our natures." Literallness aside (which is only going to get me into trouble, I know, as Latin is most emphatically not a literal language), I think my reading makes just as much sense grammatically, although I don't know whether it makes sense idiomatically. I don't see why it wouldn't, though.
quod si quis de studiis sermo, una nominamur, quod…
I was rather stupid here and took quis as abl. plural (that would be quibus) and sermo as a first person singular verb (it isn't). I actually did know that it can be a noun, but I assumed it could be verb, too. (The one time I don't look something up to check, it gets me!) I also took the second quod to be causal, but it makes more sense as "the fact that" like the first one.
Nec desunt qui utrique nostrum praeferantur.
I still don't quite get this sentence. Loeb translated something like "some prefer one of us, some the other" which is quite free, but definitely makes sense. I just can't figure out how to make the grammar work. "Qui" seems like it should be nom. pl. to go with its antecedent of "desunt." But utrique HAS to be nom. pl. Could they go together? But that doens't make sense with the passive verb. Whereas "utrique nostrum praeferantur" does make sense: "each one of us is preferred" (pl. verb to go with pl. subject, but the meaning is separate and so singular). Then what to do about "qui?" The only thing I could think of was to take "qui" as gen. sing. (genitive of respect?) doing the same kind of thing, to indicate the "each of these people prefers one of us" idea. But I don't like that, and usually when I find it awkward, I turn out to have been wrong. Maybe -- no. "Utrique" has to go with "nostrum" as partitive genitive, because it is a dual, and there are more than two implied by "nec desunt." I give up.
Sed nos, nihil interest mea quo loco, iungimur; nam mihi primus, qui a te proximus.
Do to not at all getting the previous sentence, this one came out a little oddly last time. Pliny is still talking about which one of them is more renowned; I took the second part more generally than probably is best. I was definitely focusing on the friendship aspect of this letter last night, and so on the similarities Pliny is pointing out between the two of them rather than the comparisons. That I wasn't doing well with comparisons is sort of obvious. In fact, I seem to have screwed up every sentence implying a comparison! Or almost every.
Huh. Seven sections; seven major mistakes (six really, because I contest one of them). I need to work on this.
C. PLINIUS TACITO SUO S.
1 Librum tuum legi et, quam diligentissime potui, adnotavi quae commutanda, quae eximenda arbitrarer. Nam et ego verum dicere assuevi, et tu libenter audire. Neque enim ulli patientius reprehenduntur, quam qui maxime laudari merentur. 2 Nunc a te librum meum cum adnotationibus tuis exspecto. O iucundas, o pulchras vices! Quam me delectat quod, si qua posteris cura nostri, usquequaque narrabitur, qua concordia simplicitate fide vixerimus! 3 Erit rarum et insigne, duos homines aetate dignitate propemodum aequales, non nullius in litteris nominis — cogor enim de te quoque parcius dicere, quia de me simul dico -, alterum alterius studia fovisse. 4 Equidem adulescentulus, cum iam tu fama gloriaque floreres, te sequi, tibi 'longo sed proximus intervallo' et esse et haberi concupiscebam. Et erant multa clarissima ingenia; sed tu mihi — ita similitudo naturae ferebat — maxime imitabilis, maxime imitandus videbaris. 5 Quo magis gaudeo, quod si quis de studiis sermo, una nominamur, quod de te loquentibus statim occurro. Nec desunt qui utrique nostrum praeferantur. 6 Sed nos, nihil interest mea quo loco, iungimur; nam mihi primus, qui a te proximus. Quin etiam in testamentis debes adnotasse: nisi quis forte alterutri nostrum amicissimus, eadem legata et quidem pariter accipimus. 7 Quae omnia huc spectant, ut invicem ardentius diligamus, cum tot vinculis nos studia mores fama, suprema denique hominum iudicia constringant. Vale.
C. Plinius to his friend Tacitus:
1. I have read your book, and, as diligently as I could, I have noted what things I judged should be changed and which ones removed. For I am accustomed to speak truly and you to hear freely. For none are reproved more patiently than those who deserve most to be be praised. 2. Now I expect my book from you with your notes. O happy, O beautiful exchanges. How it delights me that, if our descendents have any concern for us, in whatever what it will be narrated, by what harmonious simplicity we will have lived faithfully! 3. It will be a rare and notable thing, two men about eaqual in age and rank, not a little renowned in letters -- for I am driven to speak more sparingly about you also, because I speak of myself at the same time -- each tending to the studies of the other. 4. For my part, as a young man, when you were already flourishing in report and glory, I desired to follow you, to be "next to, but at a great distance" to you and to be held so. And there were many most renowned talents, but you seemed to me -- thus the image bore to nature -- the most imitable and the most to be imitated. 5. By which I rejoice the more, that if there is any speech had about learning, we are named as one, that I am thought of at once by those speaking of you. They are not absent of whom one or the other of us is preferred. 7. But we, we are joined, it does matter to me in what order; for he is first to me, who comes nearest to you. And truly, in wills, you ought to have noted it: unless someone is by chance the particular friend to one of us, the same things are bequeathed, and, indeed we receive equally. 7. All of which things tend to this: that we cherish each other all the more ardently, as studies, habits, report, and finally the highest judgements of men bind us with so many chains. Farewell.
NOTES:
librum
The Loeb translation consistendly translated this as "oration" and studium as "oratory." It makes a lot of sense, given the context, but I'm sticking with basic vocabularly meanings because I don't really know how to use the more specific ones yet.
Neque enim ulli patientius reprehenduntur, quam qui maxime laudari merentur
This was the really embarrassing mistake. Two comparative adverbs, "quam," and it didn't make sense the way I had it, and I still didn't notice that it was a comparison. Eek. Actually, I think I must have skipped over the "quam." I shall blame this on not having eaten dinner yesterday.
tibi 'longo sed proximus intervallo' et esse et haberi
I originally took tibi as a dative of agent with haberi and read it as "to be next but at a long interval ["to you" understood] and be held by you to be next etc." which is a little weird. O Greek, how you have corrupted me! We pretty much only use datives of agent with gerundives in Latin.
ita similitudo naturae ferebat
I translated as "thus was the semblance [of you being most to be imitated] bearing to [your] nature [because now that I know you better, I can tell that you truly are to be imitated." Loeb translated it as something like "thus there was a semblance of our natures." Literallness aside (which is only going to get me into trouble, I know, as Latin is most emphatically not a literal language), I think my reading makes just as much sense grammatically, although I don't know whether it makes sense idiomatically. I don't see why it wouldn't, though.
quod si quis de studiis sermo, una nominamur, quod…
I was rather stupid here and took quis as abl. plural (that would be quibus) and sermo as a first person singular verb (it isn't). I actually did know that it can be a noun, but I assumed it could be verb, too. (The one time I don't look something up to check, it gets me!) I also took the second quod to be causal, but it makes more sense as "the fact that" like the first one.
Nec desunt qui utrique nostrum praeferantur.
I still don't quite get this sentence. Loeb translated something like "some prefer one of us, some the other" which is quite free, but definitely makes sense. I just can't figure out how to make the grammar work. "Qui" seems like it should be nom. pl. to go with its antecedent of "desunt." But utrique HAS to be nom. pl. Could they go together? But that doens't make sense with the passive verb. Whereas "utrique nostrum praeferantur" does make sense: "each one of us is preferred" (pl. verb to go with pl. subject, but the meaning is separate and so singular). Then what to do about "qui?" The only thing I could think of was to take "qui" as gen. sing. (genitive of respect?) doing the same kind of thing, to indicate the "each of these people prefers one of us" idea. But I don't like that, and usually when I find it awkward, I turn out to have been wrong. Maybe -- no. "Utrique" has to go with "nostrum" as partitive genitive, because it is a dual, and there are more than two implied by "nec desunt." I give up.
Sed nos, nihil interest mea quo loco, iungimur; nam mihi primus, qui a te proximus.
Do to not at all getting the previous sentence, this one came out a little oddly last time. Pliny is still talking about which one of them is more renowned; I took the second part more generally than probably is best. I was definitely focusing on the friendship aspect of this letter last night, and so on the similarities Pliny is pointing out between the two of them rather than the comparisons. That I wasn't doing well with comparisons is sort of obvious. In fact, I seem to have screwed up every sentence implying a comparison! Or almost every.
Huh. Seven sections; seven major mistakes (six really, because I contest one of them). I need to work on this.
