Contoh preposition dative

Is there a way a way to express causation without a preposition?

2024.05.14 11:23 AdDelicious15 Is there a way a way to express causation without a preposition?

I have been learning Russian for a while now, and I want to expand my grammar, but since I no longer have a teacher I decided to ask here
Typically when I want to express causation I use из-за +род. but I want to improve on my speech. In ancient greek causation can be shown with dative but not with any prepositions, I figured russian might have smth similar as well, maybe with the instrumental case, but I'm not sure. If any natives or more famiar speakers can shed some light it'd be much appreciated

submitted by AdDelicious15 to russian [link] [comments]

2024.05.13 08:12 Imuybemovoko An Overview of Verbs in Câynqasang

Alright. I last discussed Câynqasang here, where I covered noun case and quirky subject. Also, here's the first overview post. This time, I'm going to give an overview of verbs in the language. I'll touch on the major points, but there might be a good deal of detail that ends up being beyond the scope of this. I intend to cover the auxiliary verbs, other methods of tense marking, and, by nature of the basic tenses, person marking. Also, I've already discussed the verb classes in a previous post because they're linked to some functions of the case system, but I'll cover that briefly again here. Participles and other features derived from them, however, are mostly beyond the scope of this post, though some will appear in example sentences because both can appear in constructions involving auxiliary verbs.

Verb Classes

Câynqasang verbs belong to four classes, largely (though not exclusively!) determined by their meaning. As I detailed in my most recent post, they trigger a good deal of quirky subject, which I will briefly touch on again here. All may take subjects in the vocative case for imperative constructions, and I will briefly detail other options below.
Action verbs include most verbs in the language. These typically deal in concrete actions and in senses which don't fit in one of the other three categories. The subject of a sentence containing them may take case marking for reflexive constructions or volition marking. Examples:

nyu [ŋo] "to have" (This is the alienable form. The inalienable "have", ê [eː], is a stative verb.)
gno [ɣno] "to drink"
sman [smɐn] "to dig"
cûl [t͡ʃɪːl] "to bite"

Motion verbs typically deal with motion, though this operates in some broad senses, as we'll see. The subject of a sentence containing them takes prepositional cases to indicate the direction of the motion. Examples:

lan [lɐn] "to sit"
ngûyinytinyu [ˈŋɪːjiŋtiŋu] "to inject"
hînû [ˈxɪːniː] "to fight"
lâmvu [ˈlɐːmu] "to cross, traverse"

Stative verbs most often deal with states of being, though some irregularity can occur within this class as well. The subject of a sentence containing them takes case marking to indicate volition. Examples:

gla [ɣla] "to sleep"
kalîng [kaˈlɪːŋ] "to hydrate" (This has an additional sense as a noun, "waterfall")
îny [ɪːŋ] "to pray" (one of the wilder examples)
calom [t͡saˈlɔm] "to rain" (also the noun "rain"; yes, weather is often handled with stative verbs)

Perception verbs typically deal with the senses, though especially this class has some unexpected things and fun exceptions. The subject of a sentence containing them is actually unable to take the nominative case, mandating other marking to indicate reflexives or volition. Examples:

tiptâ [tiptaː] "to learn"
sunyu [suŋo] "to love" (considered an act of perception rather than a state! Many emotional states are handled this way)
tkâranco [tkɐːrant͡su] "to sabotage" (one of the wilder ones, this one explained by semantic drift from "to deceive")
mngôny [mŋɔːŋ] "to know"

Agreement and the Basic Tenses

Verbs mark for singular, paucal, and plural number and first, second, and third person. Here is a table of the basic endings:
https://preview.redd.it/ndrsdre6l40d1.png?width=800&format=png&auto=webp&s=0164ebde6d9c6657589ea6422de9ae1a512d6ce2
The basic past and future tenses are marked with suffixes -tûl- and -nqi- respectively, attaching before the person agreement (and in some cases here, though not many in this case, sound changes have eroded the original form). The basic stem of verbs is considered to be perfective. The imperfective is marked with what once was a simple reduplication of the onset and nucleus of the first syllable, though that relationship has been heavily obscured by sound changes in many verbs. I'll give a few examples of reduplicated stems from the verbs I listed above, as well as one more:

memngôny- [memˈŋɔːŋ] IPFV-know
kakllîng- [kakˈlɪːŋ] IPFV-hydrate
hîyînû- [ˈxɪːjiːniː] IPFV-fight

These are relatively straightforward reduplicated stems, though that last does retain a /j/ lost in the original stem and each example here has a vowel that's unpredictable from the remaining stem. However, a lot worse is possible. For example:

ti [ti] "to dream" > koti- [kuti] IPFV-dream

Câynqasang's sound changes make things weird sometimes.
I'll give a couple quick example sentences to show how this all works in context:
Mka mngônytûlvu nê cêh. [mka ˈmŋɔːŋtiːlvu neː t͡ʃɛːx] 1S.DAT know-PST-1S DEF.SPEC.P 3P "I always knew these things against my will". (Dative case here means unwilling.)
Vo amdî titkârancomdû i êlak. [vo amˈdiː titˈkɐːrant͡sumdiː i ˈɛːlak] INDEF.NSPEC 3S.INS IPFV-sabotage-3S DEF.SPEC airlock "Someone is sabotaging the airlock." (Here, the indefinite nonspecific article means this is an unknown party; if it was one of a known group of people doing this, definite nonspecific ve would take its place.)
Moving on.

Auxiliary Verbs, Tense, and Other Stuff

Câynqasang has an extensive set of auxiliary verbs that handle more complex tense, aspect, and mood in addition to negation and the passive voice. These are one of the areas where the differences between the formal and informal registers are most visible. I'll give the formal and then the informal forms:
Formal:
Main Auxiliary
https://preview.redd.it/8mivjgfpp40d1.png?width=1221&format=png&auto=webp&s=c7782643b3a8aa68519a94eda8ff3601295d910e
Negative Auxiliary
https://preview.redd.it/1hzmiy7tp40d1.png?width=1228&format=png&auto=webp&s=c74a5edcb34618b5c3da140763f07a72acd557e6
Passive Auxiliary
https://preview.redd.it/0atqspxwp40d1.png?width=1228&format=png&auto=webp&s=a8b8696f3d3996766dd49ef7c5f563907b9ae6bd
Main auxiliary (informal)
https://preview.redd.it/xmuvwfe0q40d1.png?width=1236&format=png&auto=webp&s=a705b0c340c5acfe2fd4d1d43daade0e75379348
Negative auxiliary (informal)
https://preview.redd.it/oglmiic2q40d1.png?width=1222&format=png&auto=webp&s=b6675c0f29082e79d2559c84bdd50e2803bede1b
Passive auxiliary (informal)
https://preview.redd.it/ssxjxya4q40d1.png?width=1211&format=png&auto=webp&s=651ad5fa11c313b54bc485c6b5a0a73ac6341044
Note the additional degree of fusion in the informal register, and the reduction of some syllables such that none of the informal register forms are more than disyllabic.
In constructions, these precede the lexical verb, and the lexical verb takes a participle or a converb. Again, couple of example sentences:
No ôngsa sîtêla no, nang ôngsa vînray kîvrongtadêv nê cêh. [no ˈɔːŋsa ˈʃɪːteːla no, nɐŋ ˈɔːŋsa ˈvɪːnraj ˈkɪːvruŋtadeːv neː t͡ʃɛːx] 2P.DAT NEG.2P see-CONV.GEN 2P.DAT 2P.INS NEG.2P HORT confirm-PTCP DEF.SPEC.P 3P "Not having seen these things for yourselves, you ought not to confirm them."
This example has one clause that uses a converb with the negative auxiliary and one that uses the present participle with the hortative form of the negative auxiliary, in the formal register this two-part ôngsa vînray situation. Another example:
Ye i côl sanqe kamesîtêl, yâkînghê ola lamnyunqicêh, [je i t͡sɔːl saˈɴe kameˈʃɪːteːl ˈjɐːkiːŋxeː uˈla lamŋuɴiˈt͡ʃɛːx] And DEF.SPEC 3P.GEN PERF.3P happen-CONV.GEN soul-P 1P.GEN peaceful-FUT.3P "And having felt all of these things come to pass, our souls will know peace,"
The broader work I pulled this from uses the informal register just about exclusively despite some of its other formatting. This example here includes a converb clause with an auxiliary.
So, that's a quick and dirty overview of verbs in Câynqasang, Sometime in the future I'll dive into converbs, relativization, derivational morphology, or some other feature of the language, or maybe I'll get more specific about the lexicon or about some of the uses of a feature I've already covered. Thanks for reading!

submitted by Imuybemovoko to conlangs [link] [comments]

2024.05.09 14:13 Blakut About the dative /accusative of locations

When I learned German, we were taught that direction, movement, uses accusative, and location, static, uses dative. Wohin? Accusative, Wo? Dative.
I also know that some prepositions demand accusative or dative.
Now let's consider the following:
Ich gehe zum Fenster.
Ich bin am Fenster.
Both are dative, because the first one even tho conveys a direction of movement, has zu, a dative preposition.
Why zu? Why not Ich gehe an den Fenster?
In any case the logical flow I see is you get a preposition which conveys direction or position, and decide the case based on that. The preposition is determined by the verb and the noun. Where does the first rule I was taught come in?

submitted by Blakut to German [link] [comments]

2024.05.07 16:24 Impressive_Cut_3656 changing stress in the word поезд

Hi everyone!
Could someone help me by marking the stressed syllable in the different forms of the word "train" in russian?
Singular: nominative поезд; genitive поезда; dative поезду; accusative поезд; instrumental поездом; prepositional поезде.
Plural: Nominative поездa; genitive поездов; dative поездам; accusative поездa; instrumental поездами; prepositional поездах
Thanks in advance!

submitted by Impressive_Cut_3656 to russian [link] [comments]

2024.05.07 02:55 Lysimachiakis Biweekly Telephone Game v3 (588)

This is a game of borrowing and loaning words! To give our conlangs a more naturalistic flair, this game can help us get realistic loans into our language by giving us an artificial-ish "world" to pull words from!
The Telephone Game will be posted every Monday and Friday, hopefully.

Rules

1) Post a word in your language, with IPA and a definition.
Note: try to show your word inflected, as it would appear in a typical sentence. This can be the source of many interesting borrowings in natlangs (like how so many Arabic words were borrowed with the definite article fossilized onto it! algebra, alcohol, etc.)
2) Respond to a post by adapting the word to your language's phonology, and consider shifting the meaning of the word a bit!
3) Sometimes, you may see an interesting phrase or construction in a language. Instead of adopting the word as a loan word, you are welcome to calque the phrase -- for example, taking skyscraper by using your language's native words for sky and scraper. If you do this, please label the post at the start as Calque so people don't get confused about your path of adopting/loaning.
Last Time...

Tundrayan by SapphoenixFireBird

skrîǰo / скрыџо [skrɪˈd͡ʒo] n. inan. neut. ʏᴏ-root

wing, arm

ʏᴏ-root	Singular	Dual	Plural
Nominative	skrîǰo	skrîǰä	skrîǰa
Accusative	skrîǰo	skrîǰä	skrîǰa
Genitive	skrîǰa	skrîǰu	skrîǰ
Dative	skrîǰu	skrîǰoma	skrîǰôm
Instrumental	skrîǰômi̥	skrîǰoma	skrîǰî
Locative	skrîǰä	skrîǰu	skrîǰäx
Vocative	skrîǰo	skrîǰä	skrîǰa
Prepositional	skrîǰě	skrîǰǐx	skrîǰǎx

Welcome to another instance of the Irregularly-Posted Game of Borrowings (IPGOB)!
Peace, Love, & Conlanging ❤️

submitted by Lysimachiakis to conlangs [link] [comments]

2024.05.05 21:57 Prestigious_Aside140 Dative case

So I understand that the dative cases requires an indirect object/ verb/ or preposition but why does the sentence "Sie können tickets am dem ticketshalter kaufen?" Is it because it's saying you can buy the tickets for yourself?

submitted by Prestigious_Aside140 to German [link] [comments]

2024.05.04 22:35 Klonoa517 Need a little help with understanding the accusative in this sentence.

I'm currently studying prepositions in one of my German workbooks, and I'm a little confused on one of the examples.
In one of the sentences "He pushes a file between the door and the frame", the book translate it as "Er steckt eine Feile zwischen die Tür und den Rahmen", with "die Tür" and "den Rahmen" being accusative following the preposition "zwischen".
Why is it not in the dative "zwischen der Tür und dem Rahmen"?
Is it because someone is putting the file in a place (between the door and the frame) [change of state of the object], rather than the file already existing in that place?

submitted by Klonoa517 to German [link] [comments]

2024.05.02 04:04 giftedburnoutasian The tendency to replace "whose" with "for whom" in relative clauses

I've noticed it a lot in my own speech/writing and that of other native speakers, but I'm surprised at the lack of discussion/linguistic study about this, especially given that it may serve as contrary evidence to the popular belief that "whom" is dying out. For me, using "whose" rather than defaulting to the clunkier "for whom" in sentence structures like the ones below takes conscious effort (I have to rememberemind myself to use it.)
Examples below:

In particular, foreigners for whom English is their second language and who are only accustomed to BBC English. (from Why would someone use their native regional accent instead of BBC English at an international conference?)
Americans for whom English isn't your first language, would you ever use this phrase: "it would've had to have been"? (from https://www.reddit.com/AskAnAmerican/comments/t8nduq/americans\_for\_whom\_english\_isnt\_your\_first/)
people for whom academic interests are relegated solely to the classroom, they draw a strong distinction between academic life as 'work' and everything else as 'fun.' (my own quote from: https://www.reddit.com/college/comments/16vyx5m/how\_would\_you\_describe\_your\_relationship\_to\_you)

All of these can be reworded with no loss of clarity as:

In particular, foreigners whose second language is English and who are only accustomed to BBC English.
Americans whose first language isn't English, would you ever use this phrase: "it would've had to have been"?
people whose academic interests are relegated solely to the classroom, they draw a strong distinction between academic life as 'work' and everything else as 'fun.' (ignoring all other grammatically questionable things about this sentence.)

I should also note that the preposition-stranded versions of the original sentences make no sense grammatically:

In particular, foreigners who English is their second language for and who are only accustomed to BBC English.
Americans who English isn't your first language for, would you ever use this phrase: "it would've had to have been"?
people who academic interests are relegated solely to the classroom for, they draw a strong distinction between academic life as 'work' and everything else as 'fun.'

I have a few questions about this:

When did people start doing this/how did it catch on?
In which dialects of English is it most common?
Is this mostly colloquial or is it also accepted use in formal settings?
Are there any other demographic correlations associated with this tendency (age/generation, region, ethnicity, education level, social class, gender?)
Are there any academic articles, blogs, or writing at all about this topic? I could not find anything from a google search.
Does this trend challenge the generally accepted idea that "whom" is disappearing from the English language?

An interesting aside: I think this parallels the German tendency to replace the genitive with the dative in informal settings, though I had this in my dialect/idiolect before ever learning German.

submitted by giftedburnoutasian to grammar [link] [comments]

2024.04.30 22:46 JoTBa Idiomatic Syntax Structures

Edit: I originally thought I was being clever when I did this, but I see that Latin does almost this exact same thing 😂
Do y'all have any idiomatic phrases that make use of an archaic meaning or grammatical structure in your clongs?
My recent project is an IE lang in which the PIE subjunctive forms changed to have a future meaning and the PIE optative changed to have a subjunctive meaning. This use of this contemporary subjunctive is seen when someone is expressing desire or a wish for an action. They would not use a verb "to want," but rather they would put the verb in the subjunctive with use of <ȝefi> /jefi/ "if" + a dative agent (person who is desiring). Here, the conjunction <ȝefi> does not strictly mean "if" and is not what is triggering the subjunctive, but draws on a proto-form prepositional meaning of "according to" or "by." For example:

Mos uþþēr ȝefi ējo fiþaoȝþo.
I hope the rain stops soon.
soon rain-nom if me-sing.dat stop-middlevoice.3S.subj
/mos úθθeːr jefi éːʝo fíθaojθo/

This cannot be used with just a noun as the object, where a verb specifically meaning "wish fohope" must be used which puts the object in the accusative: ie:

Weȝxoh wiṭȝɔ̄.
I hope for victory.
victory-sing.acc wish-1S.pres
/wéjxoh wítʰjɑː/

submitted by JoTBa to conlangs [link] [comments]

2024.04.29 11:30 polymathicus Why is it "teuren" instead of "teurem"?

Zum Beispiel:
"Sven arbeitet als Kellner in einem teuren Restaurant."
My work so far:

in einem teuren Restaurant is an adverbial phrase answering the question "wo...?"
Therefore, the two-case preposition in is in the Dative case.
Dative form of the indefinite article einem for a neuter noun (das Restaurant) agrees.
So the adjective "teuer" in the dative adverbial phrase should take on a dative ending i.e "teurem"

Where did I go wrong?
UPDATE: Wow, thank you all for the really helpful and detailed responses + references! I am learning about adjectival declensions from Nicos Weg A1, and the notes I compiled from the exercises are:

After an indefinite article (e.g ein, eine, einen), adjectives in the nominative and accusative cases take the same ending as the definite article (e.g der, die, das, den).
After an indefinite masculine article, the nominative adjectival ending is "-er", like "der", and the accusative ending is "-en", like "den".
After an indefinite feminine article, the adjectival ending in the nominative and accusative is "-e", like "die".
After an indefinite neuter article, the adjectival ending in the nominative and accusative is "-s", like "das" e.g Nicos trägt ein rotes T-shirt.
Before plural nouns, the adjectival ending is always "-e", like "die".

I realize that my mistake is extrapolating this "rule" to the dative case as well, in addition to this not being the most complete or formal way to talk about adjectival declensions. The more axiomatic way would be to speak of weak, strong, and mixed declensions. I will reconstruct my notes about this topic!

submitted by polymathicus to German [link] [comments]

2024.04.29 05:42 beeeiiia What determines case?

Hallo, ive been struggling a lot with this lately. We just learned about der Dativ in my class and how case relates to prepositions, but Im very confused. We learned that cases can be determined by the verb (like essen or kaufen being akkusativ), but so do prepositions and the sentence structure relates too. I dont know what determines the case of a sentence. If you have a verb of one case and a preposition of another, how does that work? Also, how does sentence structure play into it? Can word order determine cases too?

submitted by beeeiiia to German [link] [comments]

2024.04.26 17:37 Suendensprung SSSSS #2 Last Week's Results and "And then there were verbs"

Last Week's Results

Welcome back to Sündensprung's Shitlang Scrubbing #2! If you don't now what this is, look at the first iteration.

So, last time, we looked at the noun system of Proto-Nasiwa. To keep it short, there were "case prefixes" and plural by reduplication of the last syllable. And there was the case prefix fai which was the nominative marker and the definite article (or something like that).

Case
The revised case system looks like this:

Case	Prefix	Case	Prepostion
Nominative	fai-	Nominative/Absolutive	∅
Genitive	ana-	Ergative	fai
Instrumental	hji-	Allative	ana
Locative	tjes-	Ablative	hji
		Adessive	tjes

The prefixes were changed to prepositional case particles. And the genitive, instrumental and locative were reworked into a mixture of locational and syntactical cases. These have multiple functions and the naming conventions are out of convenience.

Allative: The allative is used for direction towards something, the accusative, the dative and for possession
Ablativ: The ablative is used for direction away from something, the instrumental, the partitive and material
Adessive: The adessive is used for position at something (locative)

Definiteness ergativity:
To remain true to the article role of fai, it has become an ergative marker with the ergativity split by definiteness though the role of fai is reversed as ergativity is used when a noun is indefinite

Split-Ergativity	Definite	Indefinite
Actor (A)	∅	fai
Patient (P)	ana	∅
Subject (S)	∅	fai

From a diachronic perspective, this system probably developed from a former animacy based split-ergativity.

Plurality
The plurality marking has been expanded on based on the type of noun.

Plurality	Transnumeral	Paucal	Superplural
Animate	unmarked	final syl. redup.	full redup.
damsa - bird	damsa - bird(s)	damsasa - a few birds	damsa damsa - many birds

Inanimate	Unmarked Number
gwabu - egg	gwabu - egg(s)

Collective	Unmarked	Singulative
ogwa - seed	ogwa - seed	sawu ana ogwa - a seedkorn	"one of seed"

Some example sentences
Fandai daidam ana heidai sesja hji fwamtu tjes kokwa.
∅ fandai ∅ daidam ana heidai sesja hji fwamtu tjes kokwa
NOM woman ABS meat ALL man eat ABL hand ADE tree
The Woman eats meat from the man by the tree by hand.

Fai fandai ana sawu ana daidam ana heidai sesja hji fwamtu tjes kokwa.
fai fandai ana sawu daidam ana heidai sesja hji fwamtu tjes kokwa
ERG woman ALL one ALL meat ALL man eat ABL hand ADE tree
A woman eats the piece of meat from the man by the tree by hand

So what do you think? Are there other ideas or improvements you have? Let me know!

"And then there were verb"

This week, we will look at the verb system of Proto Nasiwa.

The verbs were marked for tense (present, past, future) and for valency (active, passive and causative) by using auxilliary verbs

Active	Passive	Causative
∅	hami + verb	jenmi + verb

The lexical sources for hami is "have" and for jenmi it's "make"

Present	Past	Future
∅	verb + elai	verb + njita

There are no lexical sources for these, they're just marked as the past and future form of sjen "be"

There isn't a explanation for the different positions of the auxilliary verbs for the different position in the verb complex.

So what could we do to improve, revise and spice up this system? For this one I don't really know, what to do, so it's all up for grabs. However, I recently learned about the evidentiality and volitional system of the Tibetic languages and have been really intrigued by that. So that could be some inspiration.

I'd love to hear your guys thoughts and until next time, have a beautiful day :)

submitted by Suendensprung to conlangs [link] [comments]

2024.04.26 03:09 Salpingia Why is the Balkansprachbund defined so vaguely by literature

Most of the time the Balkansprachbund is considered when discussing Balkan slavic languages divergence from other slavic language development. But when considering the Balkansprachbund as a whole (Greek, Albanian, Romanian, Balkan Slavic, Balkan Romani) I notice the following problems with this classification. The structural convergence seems to happen as a whole in three main time stages.
-Balkan Case system + prepositional system. This is clearly the result of an internal development in both Latin and Greek, and in Albanian was due to contact with Latin. This is an ancient syntactic development arising in the 1st Century BC in Latin (prepositional system tends to the accusative, and spreading to Greek and Albanian in the 1st to 3rd century AD when the system crystallised in all languages (Which at the time was Albanian, Latin, and spoken Koine Greek) It was at this time that the Balkan case system (prepositional Accusative with location + direction merger, Genitive/Dative merger) This balkan case system and location/direction merging was once present in all romance languages, before the western romance languages innovated away from this system. In the case of romanian, this sprachbund feature is an archaism rather than an innovation.
Another piece of evidence backing my assertion, is that armenian has a balkan case system, probably due to Greco-Latin influence in antiquity.
Many centuries later, other syntactic patterns emerged.
-particle subjunctives, want futures, and Infinitive Loss. All of these changes most likely precede the Slavic migrations, and probably emerged in either Greek or Albanian depending on the feature. These are not clearly Latin innovations as the Balkan case system is. This is the first instance of a balkan areal convergence zone.
-have perfects, conditionals, and clitic order.
These probably arose after the slavic migrations but are not present in their balkan form in any other slavic language. I should first state that Proto-Slavic innovated this system first due to contact with germanic which in turn got it from latin. But in non-slavic balkan languages, their patterns mimic that of the western romance languages. It is more likely that balkan slavic kept their aorist forms due to contact with a Latin and Greek substratum rather than being the direct cause of the convergence, otherwise one would expect Greek and Albanian to have typical slavic-like verbal systems, which they don't. So I must conclude that this feature emerged due to western romance contact from the sea, rather than a particular balkan language area. The balkan slavic conditionals and clitic order also follow typical romance patterns, rather than the native slavic patterns. Some of these features are clearly the result of romance adstratum influence. And the will + infinitive loss is so pervasive in Greek deep into the past, and moving in a direction from Greece into the balkans, that I cannot conclude this as an example of a balkan convergence zone.
-suffix definite articles and evidentiality
I shouldn't lump these together because they arose centuries apart these are are what separates Greek, (some of, depending on which feature) Romanian, and the peripheral Balkan Slavic varieties from the core balkan languages. The suffixed article arose during the middle Bulgarian period, with Albania and southern Romania as its nexus and the evidential system arose as a convergence zone with Macedonia as its nexus. This situation is far more indicative of a sprachbund than the other two periods I described.
There are some phonological zones that happened at the tail end of the common slavic period which affect the balkans with Macedonia, Tosk Albania, and Romania as its nexus, which spill over into northern Greek and Southern Shtokavian. Which also are indications of a Balkan convergence zone.
Many of the features described by traditional balkan literature are things in which balkan languages are more conservative than their nonbalkan neighbours. (The clearest example is Latin)
So my question is, why does literature on this subject lump 3 events, which are centuries apart, some the result of sprachbund convergence zones, some the result of direct substratum influence or western (nonbalkan) adstratum influence, and from an ancient Greco-Latin convergence zone which took place in antiquity, as the Balkansprachbund?
Experts please correct any mistakes, Thank you!

submitted by Salpingia to asklinguistics [link] [comments]

2024.04.18 12:08 No-Nerve-9406 I found a mistake

It's from the grammar explanations about two-way prepositions. The sentence I marked is supposed to be "ich gehe in den Supermarkt" (Akkusativ, not Nominativ). Watch out if you rely on those explanations. Do you know how I can report this?

submitted by No-Nerve-9406 to DuolingoGerman [link] [comments]

2024.04.16 03:51 Ready0208 How do I tell direct objects from indirect ones?

The title sums it up, but I'll explain further.
In languages with prepositions, such as English, Portuguese and French, telling whether an object is direct or indirect is really straightforward: just remember whether it's followed by a preposition or not.
Here is a practical example of what I mean: Is the object of the verb "to give" direct or indirect? Well, if you give something, you give it TO someone. "To" here is a preposition, thus "to give" has indirect objects. However "to crush" has direct objects, as "he who crushes is crushing something" — no preposition needed.
However… Latin is not English, and Latin uses its prepositions quite sparingly, it seems. Everyone tells me Latin has two cases for objects, one for direct ones (accusative) and the other for indirect ones (dative). But if Latin rarely uses its prepositions, how am I supposed to know which is which? I can't use the rhetorical device I used on "to give" and "to crush" because English is not Latin and Latin is not English: I can't just assume a direct object in English remains a direct object in Latin.
So here is my question: how do I tell whether a verb in Latin (or any other language that lacks, or rarely uses, prepositions) has direct or indirect objects? There has to be a logic to it, just like there is in English, so how do I do it? Because, if indirect objects exist in Latin (I don't know how they sem to be so frequent with so sparingly used prepositions, but fine) and their presence determines the case I'm using, knowing how to tell whether an object is direct or not is actually pretty important. So, again, how do I tell which objects are direct and which are indirect?
Thank you in advance.
Note: From what little I saw, the so-called indirect objects appear liable to be more accurately called "patients", as in they passively recieve the action to which they refer. When a man kisses his wife, she is not the one acting, she is receiving the action, thus in a sentence like "the husband gave a kiss to the wife" (direct order makes my point clearer). The wife is a patient, she is receiving the action "kiss", thus we'd use the dative on the word wife, were English still a declining language. Not because she's an object, but because she is the receiver of an action.
I don't know if this framework is correct (probably not, or else you'd see it more often), but I can't find an explanation that breaks my logic of "Indirect objects are preceeded of a preposition; Latin barely uses prepositions; therefore Latin barely has indirect objects".

submitted by Ready0208 to latin [link] [comments]

2024.04.14 14:19 DavidinFez VIRGIL’S Aeneid 1, 8-22: Musa, mihi causas memora

Notes:
Mūsa: Muse; there were nine Muses; here it’s Calliope, the patron goddess of heroic poetry
Compare the beginning of the Odyssey and the Iliad:
“Tell me, O Muse, of the man of many devices, who wandered full many ways after he had sacked the sacred citadel of Troy.”
“Sing the wrath, Goddess, of Peleus' son, Achilles, that destructive wrath which brought countless woes upon the Achaeans.”
memorā: remind, recount, relate, tell
mihī: to me
causās: the causes, the reasons
quō: what
nūmine: divine will, command; divinity, deity, god
laesō: having been offended, violated, wounded; “because of what aspect of her divinity having been offended”
-ve: or
dolēns: being displeased, angry, feeling indignation
quid: at what rēgīna: the queen, Juno
deum = deorum; of the gods; This gen. pl ending is very common in poetry.
impulerit: forced, compelled, drove, pushed; perfect subjunctive, indirect question.
virum: a man
īnsīgnem: renowned, distinguished, remarkable
pietāte: for his loyalty and devotion to his family, the gods, and country
volvere: to live through, experience, endure, suffer
tot: so many
cāsūs: hardships, misfortunes, dangers, perils
adīre: to encounter, undergo
tot: so many
labōrēs: hardships, difficulties, dangers, misfortunes
-ne: introduces a question
(sunt): are, are there; understood
tantae: such great, so great
īrae: feelings of anger, wrath, rage, hatred, resentment
animīs: in the minds; dative of possession
caelestibus: celestial, heavenly, divine, of the gods
fuit: there was, it was
antīqua: (an) ancient; Carthage was actually founded by the Phoenicians in the 9th century BC, about 300 years after the Trojan war!
urbs: city
Tyriī: Tyrian, Phoenician, of Tyre; Tyre is a city in Lebanon.
colōnī: settlers, colonists
tenuēre = tenuerunt; held, inhabited, ruled
Karthāgō: Carthage
contrā: in front of, across from, opposite; in opposition to
Ītaliam: Italy. Note the juxtaposition of Karthago and Italiam.
-que: and
ōstia: the shores; acc. after “contra”.
Tiberīna: of the Tiber
longē: at a distance, far, far off; an adverb. Note how “ostia” being on the next line and the lack of “elision” (longe…ostia) emphasizes the distance.
dīves: rich
opum: in resources, power, lit. “of resources”
-que: and
asperrima: very (most) fierce, cruel, formidable
studiīs: in its pursuits, zeal, desires, endeavors
bellī: of war
quam: which
ūnam: alone
magis: more
omnibus: than all; ablative of comparison
terrīs: lands, countries
Iūnō: Juno
fertur: is said, is reported
coluisse: to have cared for, cherished, loved
Samō: Samos, an island near Ephesus in Asia Minor, a center of the worship of Juno, her birthplace and site of a very famous temple. Ablative absolute.
posthabitā: having been placed after, having been esteemed less; “Even Samos having been put in second place”
hīc: here; probably Carthage
(sunt/fuerunt): are/were
illius: “Iunonis”, her, Juno’s
arma: armor, weapons
hīc: here
fuit: was
currus: (her) chariot; refers to relics preserved in her temple
hoc: fothat this (city, refering to Carthage); acc subject of infinitive; neuter because of proximity to “regnum”. Note repetition of hic, hic, hoc.
esse: to be, be; infinitive with tendit and fovet
rēgnum: the ruling power, the royal authority
gentibus; over nations
sī: if
quā (viā): in any way
Fāta: the fates, the godesses that determine the will of the gods. Note that the Fates are more powerful than Juno.
sinant: would allow it; subjunctive.
iam: already
tum: then
dea: the goddess
tendit: endeavors, designs, intends; present used instead of the past, for vividness.
-que….. que: and; the repetition is a feature of epic poetry.
fovet: cherishes, hopes, longs for, desires; present referring to the past sed enim: but indeed
audierat = audiverat: she had heard
prōgeniem: (that) a race, lineage; acc subject of infinitive in indirect statement.
dūcī: was being derived, was springing from, was descended; passive infinitive.
ā: from
Trōiānō: Trojan
sanguine: blood
quae: which, ref. to progeniem
olim: one day
verteret: would overturn; imperfect subjunctive.
Tyriās: the Tyrian (Carthaginian)
arcēs: citadels, strongholds, fortresses, palaces
hinc: (that) from here (the race from Trojan blood)
populum: a people; acc subject of infinitive
rēgem: ruling, the noun being used as a participle, regentem
lātē: widely, far and wide
-que: and
superbum: proud, arrogant, fierce, mighty
bellō: in war ventūrum (esse): was going to come; future infinitive
excidiō: for the destruction, ruin, overthrow; dative of purpose
Libyae: foof Libya, (especially Carthage); dative object of excidio.
sīc: thus
Parcās: the Parcae, the Fates
volvere: were ordaining, decreeing
Notes for end of video:
Thanks for listening!
Click on “CC” on the upper right-hand corner of the video to turn the subtitles on or off. I encourage you first to listen to the Latin once or twice without the subtitles :)
To see my notes on vocabulary & grammar, please click on “….more” under the description.
Artwork:
Virgil Mosaic, 1st known portrait of the poet, 1st-3rd Century AD, Bardo National Museum, Tunis; on the scroll in Virgil’s hand is " MVSA MIHI CAVSAS MEMORA QVO NVMINE LAESO QVIDVE… "; public domain.
Translation: David Amster, Fez, April 13, 2024
Notes for video
Virgil’s Aeneid Book 1, 8-22 continues the introduction to his epic masterpiece about the hero Aeneas and the founding of Rome.
Vocabulary notes:
“Mūsa, mihī causās memorā”
Mūsa: Muse; there were nine Muses; here it’s Calliope, the patron goddess of heroic poetry; vocative.
Compare the beginning of the Odyssey and the Iliad:
“Tell me, O Muse, of the man of many devices, who wandered full many ways after he had sacked the sacred citadel of Troy.”
“Sing the wrath, Goddess, of Peleus' son, Achilles, that destructive wrath which brought countless woes upon the Achaeans.”
memorā: remind, recount, relate, tell
mihī: to me
causās: the causes, the reasons
“quō nūmine laesō”
quō: what
nūmine: divine will, command; divinity, deity, god; ablative absolute
laesō: having been offended, violated, wounded; ablative absolute; “ what divine command/deity having been offended”, “because of what aspect of her divinity having been offended”.
“quidve dolēns”
-ve: or
dolēns: being displeased, angry, feeling indignation
quid: at what
“rēgīna deum impulerit virum īnsīgnem pietāte volvere tot cāsūs, adīre tot labōrēs” rēgīna: the queen, Juno
deum = deorum; of the gods; This gen. pl ending is very common in poetry.
impulerit: forced, compelled, drove, pushed; perfect subjunctive, indirect question.
virum: a man
īnsīgnem: renowned, distinguished, remarkable
pietāte: for his loyalty and devotion to his family, the gods, and country
volvere: to live through, experience, endure, suffer
tot: so many
cāsūs: hardships, misfortunes, dangers, perils
adīre: to encounter, undergo
tot: so many
labōrēs: hardships, difficulties, dangers, misfortunes “Tantaene īrae (sunt) animīs caelestibus?”
-ne: introduces a question
(sunt): are, are there; understood
tantae: such great, so great
īrae: feelings of anger, wrath, rage, hatred, resentment
animīs: in the minds; dative of possession
caelestibus: celestial, heavenly, divine, of the gods
“Urbs antīqua fuit, Tyriī tenuēre colōnī, Karthāgō”
fuit: there was, it was
antīqua: (an) ancient; Carthage was actually founded by the Phoenicians in the 9th century BC, about 300 years after the Trojan war!
urbs: city
Tyriī: Tyrian, Phoenician, of Tyre; Tyre is a city in Lebanon.
colōnī: settlers, colonists
tenuēre = tenuerunt; held, inhabited, ruled
Karthāgō: Carthage
“Ītaliam contrā Tiberīnaque longē…ōstia”
contrā: in front of, across from, opposite; in opposition to; note how the preposition is after the noun. “Contra” seems to imply it was physically across from, but also the enemy of Rome and Italy.
Ītaliam: Italy. Note the juxtaposition of Karthago and Italiam.
-que: and
ōstia: the shores; acc. after “contra”.
Tiberīna: of the Tiber
longē: at a distance, far, far off; an adverb. Note how “ostia” being on the next line and the lack of “elision” (longe…ostia) emphasizes the distance.
“dīves opum studiīsque asperrima bellī”
dīves: rich
opum: in resources, power, lit. “of resources”
-que: and
asperrima: very (most) fierce, cruel, formidable
studiīs: in its pursuits, zeal, desires, endeavors
bellī: of war
“quam ūnam magis omnibus terrīs Iūnō fertur coluisse Samō posthabitā”
quam: which
ūnam: alone
magis: more
omnibus: than all; ablative of comparison
terrīs: lands, countries
Iūnō: Juno
fertur: is said, is reported
coluisse: to have cared for, cherished, loved
Samō: Samos, an island near Ephesus in Asia Minor, a center of the worship of Juno, her birthplace and site of a very famous temple. Ablative absolute.
posthabitā: having been placed after, having been esteemed less; “Even Samos having been put in second place”
“hīc illius arma, hīc currus fuit”
hīc: here; probably Carthage
(sunt/fuerunt): are/were
illius: “Iunonis”, her, Juno’s
arma: armor, weapons
hīc: here
fuit: was
currus: (her) chariot; refers to relics preserved in her temple.
“hoc esse rēgnum gentibus, sī quā Fāta sinant, iam tum dea tenditque fovetque”
hoc: fothat this (city, refering to Carthage); acc subject of infinitive; neuter because of proximity to “regnum”. Note repetition of hic, hic, hoc.
esse: to be, be; infinitive with tendit and fovet
rēgnum: the ruling power, the royal authority
gentibus; over nations
sī: if
quā (viā): in any way
Fāta: the fates, the godesses that determine the will of the gods. Note that the Fates are more powerful than Juno.
sinant: would allow it; subjunctive.
iam: already
tum: then
dea: the goddess
tendit: endeavors, designs, intends; present used instead of the past, for vividness.
-que….. que: and; the repetition is a feature of epic poetry.
fovet: cherishes, hopes, longs for, desires; present referring to the past
“sed enim audierat prōgeniem dūcī ā Trōiānō sanguine” sed enim: but indeed
audierat = audiverat: she had heard
prōgeniem: (that) a race, lineage; acc subject of infinitive in indirect statement.
dūcī: was being derived, was springing from, was descended; passive infinitive.
ā: from
Trōiānō: Trojan
sanguine: blood “quae olim verteret Tyriās arcēs”
quae: which, ref. to progeniem
olim: one day
verteret: would overturn; imperfect subjunctive.
Tyriās: the Tyrian (Carthaginian)
arcēs: citadels, strongholds, fortresses, palaces “(audierat) hinc populum lātē rēgem bellōque superbumventūrum (esse) excidiō Libyae”
hinc: (that) from here (the race from Trojan blood)
populum: a people; acc subject of infinitive
rēgem: ruling, the noun being used as a participle, regentem
lātē: widely, far and wide
-que: and
superbum: proud, arrogant, fierce, mighty
bellō: in war ventūrum (esse): was going to come; future infinitive
excidiō: for the destruction, ruin, overthrow; dative of purpose
Libyae: foof Libya, (especially Carthage); dative object of excidio.
“sīc volvere Parcās”
sīc: thus
Parcās: the Parcae, the Fates; acc. subject of infinitive in ind statement w/ audierat understood.
volvere: were ordaining, decreeing, fixing a series of revolving events; infinitive in indirect statement; note the repetition of the word from line 9.

submitted by DavidinFez to classics [link] [comments]

2024.04.14 14:17 DavidinFez VIRGIL’S Aeneid 1, 8-22: Musa, mihi causas memora

submitted by DavidinFez to latin [link] [comments]

2024.04.11 05:45 Shayan_Khan_Afrdi Hi, i have two questions.

Maria hat auf dich gewartet. Auf is 2 way preposition, there is no direction in this sentence so why not dative (dir)??
The second question is : ich denke jeden tag an dich. Jeden(Akkusativ), why it is Akkusativ?

submitted by Shayan_Khan_Afrdi to German [link] [comments]

2024.04.11 01:39 FloraSyme The Moglish Language (Mostly Pronouns)

Moglish is the language spoken by the Moglan race, a race that appears in my novels. Moglans are very similar to Goblins. Compared to other languages featured in my novels, Moglish has relatively simple phonics, vocabulary, and grammar.
(Note: I really hope I made the tables correctly. I'm still new to them on Reddit.)
Alphabet:

short vowels	long vowels
a (ʌ)	ai (aɪ)
e (ɛ)	ei (eɪ)
i (ɪ)	ii (iː)
o (ɒ)	ou (əʊ)
u (ʊ)	uu (uː)

unvoiced consonants	voiced consonants
p (p)	b (b)
t (t)	d (d)
f (f)	v (v)
k (k)	g (g)
s (s)	z (z)
h (h)
	y (j)
	w (w)
	l (l)
	r (r)
	n (n)
	m (m)

Personal Pronouns:

	singular	plural
1st person	mi	wi / ri
2nd person	tu	su
3rd person proximate	zo	lo
3rd person obviative	wa	ya

Reflexive, Intensive & Solitary:

	singular	plural
-self	yinda	yiingo
-self	wonda	woungo
by -self	tenda	teingo

Demonstrate Pronouns:

	singular	plural
proximal	dan	dain
medial	din	dein
distal	don	duun
interrogative	hen	ven

Indefinite Pronouns:

	-one / -body / -thing
every-	kaiki
any-	gouki
no-	neiki
some-	fuuki

Other Interrogatives:


where	won
when	wein
why	wai
how	wuu
how many / how much	wouna
how little / how few	wiima

Case Markers:


nominative	-la
accusative	-yo
dative	-ni
ablative	-ka
prepositional	-mo
genitive	-ta
proprietorship	-fo
vocative	-ro

Pronouns in Moglish do not decline to different cases. Pronouns' cases are decided in the same way nouns' cases are: via a suffix that comes straight after the word. For example, "-la" is the subject particle, so if "-la" is placed directly after a pronoun, that pronoun will be in the nominative case.
Pronouns in Moglish distinguish between singular and plural. They also make a distinction for exclusivity ("wi") and inclusivity ("ri") in the 1st person plural. Pronouns in Moglish do not differentiate for gender or animacy in any person (1st person, 2nd person, or 3rd person). Pronouns do, however, have a proximate-obviative distinction in the 3rd person. Because Moglish pronouns do not differentiate according to animacy at all, a word like "kaiki" covers "everyone", "everybody", and "everything".
Moglish demonstrative pronouns have a proximal-medial-distal-interrogative distinction. For example, "dan" means "this", "din" means "that", "don" means "that yonder", and "hen" means "who", "what", or "which", depending on context. All of these also differentiate between singular and plural.
The "self"-form of pronouns (reflexive, intensive, and solitary) are covered by singular words that can be applied to all pronouns. For example, "yinda" can mean "myself", "yourself", "himself", "herself", "itself", or "themself" (reflexive), while "youngo" can mean "ourselves", "yourselves", or "themselves" (reflexive).
Please let me know what you think. I'd love some feedback, constructive criticism, suggestions, etc. :)

submitted by FloraSyme to conlangs [link] [comments]

2024.04.10 12:00 DavidinFez VIRGIL Aeneid Book 1, 8-22 Lesson 2

A lesson on lines 8-22 from the introduction of the Aeneid. For lesson 1 (lines 1-7) I’ll put a link in the comments.
I will post my recitation and translation in a few days on my YouTube channel (David Amster).
Mūsa, mihī causās memorā, quō nūmine laesō, quidve dolēns, rēgīna deum tot volvere cāsūs īnsīgnem pietāte virum, tot adīre labōrēs impulerit. Tantaene animīs caelestibus īrae?
Urbs antīqua fuit, Tyriī tenuēre colōnī, Karthāgō, Ītaliam contrā Tiberīnaque longē ōstia, dīves opum studiīsque asperrima bellī, quam Iūnō fertur terrīs magis omnibus ūnam posthabitā coluisse Samō; hīc illius arma, hīc currus fuit; hoc rēgnum dea gentibus esse, sī quā Fāta sinant, iam tum tenditque fovetque. Prōgeniem sed enim Trōiānō ā sanguine dūcī audierat, Tyriās olim quae verteret arcēs; hinc populum lātē rēgem bellōque superbum ventūrum excidiō Libyae: sīc volvere Parcās.
VOCABULARY & GRAMMAR:
“Mūsa, mihī causās memorā”
Mūsa: Muse; there were nine Muses; here it’s Calliope, the patron goddess of heroic poetry; vocative.
Compare the beginning of the Odyssey and the Iliad:
“Tell me, O Muse, of the man of many devices, who wandered full many ways after he had sacked the sacred citadel of Troy.”
“Sing the wrath, Goddess, of Peleus' son, Achilles, that destructive wrath which brought countless woes upon the Achaeans.”
memorā: remind, recount, relate, tell; imperative.
mihī: to me; dative
causās: the causes, the reasons; accusative pl.
“quō nūmine laesō”
quō: what; ablative sing neut.
nūmine: divine will, command; divinity, deity, god; ablative
laesō: having been offended, violated, wounded; perfect passive participle in ablative absolute, “ what divine command/deity having been offended”, “because of what aspect of her divinity having been offended”.
“quidve dolēns”
-ve: or
dolēns: being displeased, angry, feeling indignation; nomin. sing present participle.
quid: at what; acc. sing neut.
“rēgīna deum impulerit virum īnsīgnem pietāte volvere tot cāsūs, adīre tot labōrēs” rēgīna: the queen, Juno; nom. sing.
deum = deorum; of the gods; gen. pl. This gen. pl ending is very common in poetry.
impulerit: forced, compelled, drove, pushed; 3rd p sing perfect subjunctive, indirect question. (impello)
virum: a man; acc. sing.
īnsīgnem: renowned, distinguished, remarkable; acc sing. (insignis)
pietāte: for his loyalty and devotion to his family, the gods, and country; ablative sing (pietas)
volvere: to live through, experience, endure, suffer; infinitive.
tot: so many
cāsūs: hardships, misfortunes, dangers, perils; accusative pl.
adīre: to encounter, undergo; infinitive (adeo)
tot: so many
labōrēs: hardships, difficulties, dangers, misfortunes; acc. pl. “Tantaene īrae (sunt) animīs caelestibus?”
-ne: introduces a question
(sunt): are, are there; understood
tantae: such great, so great; nom. pl.
īrae: feelings of anger, wrath, rage, hatred, resentment; nom pl.
animīs: in the minds; dative of possession
caelestibus: celestial, heavenly, divine, of the gods; dative pl.
“Urbs antīqua fuit, Tyriī tenuēre colōnī, Karthāgō”
fuit: there was; 3rd p sing perfect.
antīqua: (an) ancient; Carthage was actually founded by the Phoenicians in the 9th century BC, about 300 years after the Trojan war!
urbs: city; nom. sing fem.
Tyriī: Tyrian, Phoenician, of Tyre; nom pl masc. Tyre is a city in Lebanon.
colōnī: settlers, colonists; nom pl.
tenuēre = tenuerunt; held, inhabited, ruled; 3rd p pl perfect.
Karthāgō: Carthage; nom sing.
“Ītaliam contrā Tiberīnaque longē…ōstia”
contrā: in front of, across from, opposite; in opposition to; note how the preposition is after the noun. “Contra” seems to imply it was physically across from, but also the enemy of Rome and Italy.
Ītaliam: Italy; acc. sing. Note the juxtaposition of Karthago and Italiam.
-que: and
ōstia: the shores; acc pl neut after “contra”.
Tiberīna: of the Tiber; acc pl neut.
longē: at a distance, far, far off; an adverb. Note how “ostia” being on the next line and the lack of “elision” (longe…ostia) emphasizes the distance.
“dīves opum studiīsque asperrima bellī”
dīves: rich; nom. sing fem adjective w/ Karthago.
opum: in resources, power, lit. “of resources”; gen pl fem.
-que: and
asperrima: very (most) fierce, cruel, formidable; nom sing fem superlative of asper.
studiīs: in its pursuits, zeal, desires, endeavors; ablative pl neut (studium)
bellī: of war; gen sing.
“quam ūnam magis omnibus terrīs Iūnō fertur coluisse Samō posthabitā”
quam: which; acc sing fem ref. to Karthago.
ūnam: alone; acc sing fem.
magis: more; adverb
omnibus: than all; ablative of comparison, pl fem.
terrīs: lands, countries; abl of comp. pl fem.
Iūnō: Juno; nom sing.
fertur: is said, is reported; 3rd p sing passive (fero)
coluisse: to have cared for, cherished, loved; perfect infinitive (colo)
Samō: Samos, an island near Ephesus in Asia Minor, a center of the worship of Juno, her birthplace and site of a very famous temple. Ablative absolute. (Samos).
posthabitā: having been placed after, having been esteemed less; perfect passive participle, ablative absolute: “Even Samos having been put in second place”
“hīc illius arma, hīc currus fuit”
hīc: here; probably Carthage
(sunt/fuerunt): are/were
illius: “Iunonis”, her, Juno’s; gen. sing fem.
arma: armor, weapons; nom pl neut.
hīc: here
fuit: was; 3rd p sing perfect
currus: (her) chariot; nom sing masc; refers to relics preserved in her temple.
“hoc esse rēgnum gentibus, sī quā Fāta sinant, iam tum dea tenditque fovetque”
hoc: fothat this (city, refering to Carthage); acc sing neut subject of infinitive; it’s neuter because of proximity to “regnum”.
esse: to be, be; infinitive with tendit and fovet
rēgnum: the ruling power, the royal authority; acc. sing neut.
gentibus; over nations; dative pl.
sī: if
quā (viā): in any way; ablative
Fāta: the fates, the godesses that determine the will of the gods; nom neut pl. Note that the Fates are more powerful than Juno.
sinant: would allow it; 3rd p pl subjunctive.
iam: already
tum: then
dea: the goddess; nom sing.
tendit: endeavors, designs, intends; 3rd p sing. present used, instead of the past, for vividness.
-que….. que: and; the repetition is a feature of epic poetry.
fovet: cherishes, hopes, longs for, desires; 3rd p sing present.
“sed enim audierat prōgeniem dūcī ā Trōiānō sanguine” sed enim: but indeed
audierat = audiverat: she had heard; 3rd p sing pluperfect.
prōgeniem: (that) a race, lineage; acc sing fem subject of infinitive in indirect statement.
dūcī: was being derived, was springing from, was descended; present passive infinitive.
ā: from; plus ablative.
Trōiānō: Trojan; ablative sing.
sanguine: blood; ablative sing. “quae olim verteret Tyriās arcēs”
quae: which, ref. to progeniem; nom sing fem.
olim: one day
verteret: would overturn; 3rd p sing imperfect subjunctive.
Tyriās: the Tyrian (Carthaginian); acc pl fem.
arcēs: citadels, strongholds, fortresses, palaces; acc pl fem. (arx) “(audierat) hinc populum lātē rēgem bellōque superbumventūrum (esse) excidiō Libyae”
(audierat): she had heard, understood from the previous sentence.
hinc: (that) from here (the race from Trojan blood)
populum: a people; acc sing neut subject of infinitive in ind. statement.
rēgem: ruling, the noun being used as a participle, regentem; acc sing masc.
lātē: widely, far and wide
-que: and
superbum: proud, arrogant, fierce, mighty; acc sing neut. w/ populum.
bellō: in war; ablative sing neut. ventūrum (esse): was going to come; future active infinitive
excidiō: for the destruction, ruin, overthrow; dative of purpose (excidium)
Libyae: for Libya (especially Carthage); dative object of excidio.
“sīc volvere Parcās”
sīc: thus
Parcās: the Parcae, the Fates; acc. pl fem subject of infinitive in ind statement w/ audierat understood.
volvere: were ordaining, decreeing, fixing a series of revolving events; infinitive in indirect statement; note the repetition of the word from line 9.
PRONUNCIATION (I’ve marked the stress with an apostrophe before the stressed syllable):
mūsa, mihī causās ‘memorā, quō ‘nūmine laesō, quidve dolē(n)s, Rē’gīna deuN tot ‘volvere cāsūs ī(n)’sīŋgneM pie’tāte viruN, tot a’dīre la’bōrēs im’pulerit. tan’taen(e) ‘animīs cae’lestibus īrae?
uRbs an’tīqua fuit, ‘tyriī tenu’ēre co’lōnī, kaR’THāg(ō), ī’taliaNG contrā tibe’rīnaque loŋgē ‘ōstia, dīves opu(m) studi’īsqu(e) as’peRRima beLLī, qua(m) Iūnō feRtuR teRRīs magis ‘omnibus ūna(m) post’habitā colu’iSSe samō; hīc ‘iLLius aRma, hīc cuRRus fuit; hoc RēŋgnuN dea ‘gentibus eSSe, sī quā fāta sinant, iaN tuN ten’ditque fo’vetque. prō’genie(m) sed eniN tRō’iān(ō) ā ‘saŋguine dūcī au’dierat, ‘tyriās oliNG quae ‘veRteret aRcēs; hinc ‘populu(m) lātē rēgeM beL’Lōque su’peRbu(m) ven’tūr(um) ex’cidiō ‘libyae: sīc ‘volvere paRcās.

submitted by DavidinFez to latin [link] [comments]

2024.04.10 09:41 STEIN197 How do I understand this type of sentences (Zu + Partizip Präsens)?

THere is a text in Outlook - "Zu lesendes Element auswählen". What is this type of a sentence, how do I understand this? I see here "zu". If it's a preposition, then there should be Dativ after that, but there is an adjective after that. If it's not a preposition, then there should be a verb but there is no verb in the sentence. How do I understand this type of a sentence and how is it called?

submitted by STEIN197 to German [link] [comments]

2024.04.10 02:30 Moncefbe explain please :

explain please : -Gestern konnte ich nicht in die schule gehen Why did we write in this sentence (in die Schule gehen) even though there is a preposition for me, which is (in), which is followed by (dativ)? And in this second sentence: Morgen kommt ein guter Freund. Why did we write (ein guter Freund) when we have a verb (kommt) and also (der freund) and therefore it must be einen (akkusativ)?

submitted by Moncefbe to German [link] [comments]

http://swiebodzin.info