if you wanted some random latin...

[mousapelli]

Just my typed Latin Prose Comp connected passage. I didn't feel there was a need to lock this.



Cum Galli Brenno duce Clusium, urbs Etruscorum, oppugnarent, Romani legatos ad barbarios quaerendo cur bellum cum urbe finitima gererent miserunt. Brennus urbane eos recepit sed eos quaerentes derisit et "Arbitramur" inquit "Clusinos nobis inuriam inferre quod multos agros, quos paucos colere possunt, habeant, tamen nihil nobis qui multi et pauperes simus cedunt. In pristinum vos Romani cum eis qui agros cum vobis non communicabant bellum gerebatis. Modo similis vobis moribus veteris obtemperamus quae declarent infirmi potentioribus obsequi. Desinite itaque Clusinorum vos misere." Legati qui Gallos operam ad vicendum daturi esse intellegerent, Clusium intraverunt et incolis persuasit ut eos qui oppugnabant adorirentur. Tum Brennus cum hominem Romanum trucidatum inter mortuos cognovisset tam iratus erat quia nuper homo legato adveniens in se armatus sit ut Clusio militibus remotis etiam Romam signa protulit.

unrelatedly, the reviews for the KKM dvd are starting to trickle out *SQUEE*

Comments

[thieving-gypsy.livejournal.com]

Unrelated, but when you have a spare minute there's something on auburn_crimson for you. :D

HAPPY BIRTHDAY! *hugs*

[gmth.livejournal.com]

Just wanted to wish you a happy birthday! Hope it's a fabulous one. :-)

[mousapelli.livejournal.com]

*squee* thanks so much! we're doing what we can (it's such a swinging party at the library, you know...)

[toft-froggy.livejournal.com]

quod multos agros, quos paucos colere possunt, habeant

Simply because I'm confused and think I'm being stupid, is that 'because they have many fields which few are able to cultivate', or 'because they have many fields, few of which they are able to cultivate'? Because if the first, shouldn't it be 'quod multos agros, quos pauci colere possunt, habeant' and if second, 'quorum paucos colere possunt'? And why is habeant subjunctive and not cedunt?

[mousapelli.livejournal.com]

no, it's the second one. they have lots of land but not so many people to till them, and Brennus is complaining that they won't give up any of the land they aren't using.

because habeant is a subordinating clause to an indirect statement (Clusinos inferre), and the cedunt sentence isn't subordinate to anything. If i didn't have the 'we think' in there and it just said "Clusini inferunt inuriam nobis quod..." then it would be indicative, but the indirect discourse screws everything up.

It kind of makes my head hurt a little, but my professor insists it is so.

[mousapelli.livejournal.com]

and perhaps i should answer the other question:

I think, as far as 'quorum' is concerned, you can make a case either way. to be honest, i'm having trouble digging up an example of 'pauci' being used in a relative clause, and the only one i've got here has it in apposition.

I suspect that you are more right, however, and I think i will change it. the real problem here is that in true roman style, i think the 'orum' ending is ugly (which is why a lot of common gen. pls. get shortened to 'um').