Ttdfjt

Conditions for Roots of a quadratic equation at infinity

No Torah = Revert to Nothingness?

Reference request: quantifier elimination test

What's it called when the bad guy gets eaten?

Can Jimmy hang on his rope?

Found and corrected a mistake on someone's else paper -- praxis?

Why different specifications for telescopes and binoculars?

Is it better in terms of durability to remove card+battery or to connect to charger/computer via USB-C?

What is a writing material that persists forever or for a long time?

Is it okay to use open source code to do an interview task?

How do you move up one folder in Finder?

What happens to unproductive professors?

Strong Password Detection in Python

How to evaluate the performance of open source solver?

What does the multimeter dial do internally?

Are there red cards that offer protection against mass token destruction?

Publishing papers seem natural to many, while I find it really hard to think novel stuff to pursue till publication. How to cope up with this?

What is the problem here?(all integers are irrational proof...i think so)

What minifigure is this?

Hail hit my roof. Do I need to replace it?

Why is a mixture of two normally distributed variables only bimodal if their means differ by at least two times the common standard deviation?

Why did Old English lose both thorn and eth?

When an electron changes its spin, or any other intrinsic property, is it still the same electron?

Did right-wing politician Franz Josef Strauss ever explain why he gave a 3 billion loan to East Germany in 1983?

Sentences with no verb, but an ablative

Example sentences where different cases mean different thingsVerb forms after “tamquam si”“Hunt deer with bows, with snares: rabbits,” or referencing a verb from a previous clauseHaving problem translating these two sentencesUnnecessary genitive being used with 'suum'“Nothing but seventh place is good enough”Can the absolute ablative be used with a prepositional phrase?Ne … quidem with prepositionI'm really having trouble with “but” (as in “except”) in this phraseAblative considered as an accusative

.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;

5

Sometimes I will run across sentences that have no verb, but there is an ablative and I am not sure about the right approach to assuming a verb. For example, in this 16th century sentence:

Erat inter eos & Reginaldinos vetus odium, saepe multis utriusque
partis cladibus nobilitatum;

This sentence begins "There was among those and the Reginalds an old hatred, often the nobility of many parts of both ...". Then there is just the word cladibus "in/at the breaking" which I guess could be ablative or dative. Is the reader supposed to assume a missing erant. So, it would be "were at the breaking (point)" as though it said "in cladibus erant" or something like that? How do you handle sentences like this?

sentence-translation syntax omitted-words

share|improve this question

edited Jun 30 at 12:33

Joonas Ilmavirta♦

50.7k1212 gold badges7373 silver badges304304 bronze badges

asked Jun 30 at 7:55

Tyler DurdenTyler Durden

27511 silver badge55 bronze badges

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Take as one group saepe multis cladibus 'often with many injuries,'
  
  – Hugh
  Jun 30 at 14:29
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

5

Sometimes I will run across sentences that have no verb, but there is an ablative and I am not sure about the right approach to assuming a verb. For example, in this 16th century sentence:

Erat inter eos & Reginaldinos vetus odium, saepe multis utriusque
partis cladibus nobilitatum;

This sentence begins "There was among those and the Reginalds an old hatred, often the nobility of many parts of both ...". Then there is just the word cladibus "in/at the breaking" which I guess could be ablative or dative. Is the reader supposed to assume a missing erant. So, it would be "were at the breaking (point)" as though it said "in cladibus erant" or something like that? How do you handle sentences like this?

sentence-translation syntax omitted-words

share|improve this question

edited Jun 30 at 12:33

Joonas Ilmavirta♦

50.7k1212 gold badges7373 silver badges304304 bronze badges

asked Jun 30 at 7:55

Tyler DurdenTyler Durden

27511 silver badge55 bronze badges

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Take as one group saepe multis cladibus 'often with many injuries,'
  
  – Hugh
  Jun 30 at 14:29
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

Sometimes I will run across sentences that have no verb, but there is an ablative and I am not sure about the right approach to assuming a verb. For example, in this 16th century sentence:

Erat inter eos & Reginaldinos vetus odium, saepe multis utriusque
partis cladibus nobilitatum;

This sentence begins "There was among those and the Reginalds an old hatred, often the nobility of many parts of both ...". Then there is just the word cladibus "in/at the breaking" which I guess could be ablative or dative. Is the reader supposed to assume a missing erant. So, it would be "were at the breaking (point)" as though it said "in cladibus erant" or something like that? How do you handle sentences like this?

sentence-translation syntax omitted-words

share|improve this question

edited Jun 30 at 12:33

Joonas Ilmavirta♦

50.7k1212 gold badges7373 silver badges304304 bronze badges

asked Jun 30 at 7:55

Tyler DurdenTyler Durden

27511 silver badge55 bronze badges

share|improve this question

edited Jun 30 at 12:33

Joonas Ilmavirta♦

50.7k1212 gold badges7373 silver badges304304 bronze badges

asked Jun 30 at 7:55

Tyler DurdenTyler Durden

27511 silver badge55 bronze badges

share|improve this question

edited Jun 30 at 12:33

Joonas Ilmavirta♦

50.7k1212 gold badges7373 silver badges304304 bronze badges

asked Jun 30 at 7:55

Tyler DurdenTyler Durden

27511 silver badge55 bronze badges

edited Jun 30 at 12:33

Joonas Ilmavirta♦

50.7k1212 gold badges7373 silver badges304304 bronze badges

edited Jun 30 at 12:33

Joonas Ilmavirta♦

50.7k1212 gold badges7373 silver badges304304 bronze badges

asked Jun 30 at 7:55

Tyler DurdenTyler Durden

27511 silver badge55 bronze badges

asked Jun 30 at 7:55

Tyler DurdenTyler Durden

27511 silver badge55 bronze badges

2 Answers
2

active

oldest

votes

4

The main clause, with a verb is

Erat vetus odium,

This ancient hatred is described by an adjective phrase, which tells you the participants,

inter eos & Reginaldinos

and another longer phrase explaining to some extent how (adverb) it was an ancient hatred; i.e. 'often with many clashes'

saepe multis cladibus

these 'clashes' (within the compound adverb phrase) more precisely described (with an adjective phrase) as being clashes 'of the nobility of each side.'

share|improve this answer

edited Jun 30 at 14:24

answered Jun 30 at 14:03

HughHugh

6,54822 gold badges99 silver badges1919 bronze badges

add a comment | 

3

Saepe multis utriusque partis cladibus nobilitatum can be interpreted as an Ablative Absolute construction whose predicate is the adjectival phrase saepe multis and its subject is the nominal phrase utriusque partis cladibus nobilitatum. The head of the former is multis, whereas the head of the latter is cladibus. Lit. 'with the injuries of both parts of their nobilities often being many'. I don't know about the context. So I hope you'll be able to provide a better translation.
I agree with you that this construction can be given a sentential interpretation (in this reading, the Ablative Absolute construction is possible; no verb is needed) but, this said, notice that it can also be interpreted as merely involving a so-called Ablative of attendant circumstances (i.e., lit. 'often with many injuries of both parts of their nobilities'). In fact, this second interpretation seems quite natural here.

share|improve this answer

edited Jun 30 at 13:19

answered Jun 30 at 12:11

MitominoMitomino

86122 silver badges1010 bronze badges

• 
  
  
  

  
  4
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  The “mere” ablative of circumstances feels right to this (inexpert) ear. Simpler too!
  
  – Martin Kochanski
  Jun 30 at 13:28
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Yes, I agree with you. Not only simpler but probably more appropriate too. Cf. also the typical example senatu frequente, where two readings are in principle possible: cf. the Ablative absolute, whereby frequente is predicative, and the Ablative of attendant circumstances, whereby this adjective is not predicative but attributive.
  
  – Mitomino
  Jun 30 at 14:06
  
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  It is worth pointing out that in this English edition of the text (philological.bham.ac.uk/scothist/15lat.html // 22. Erat inter eos et Reginaldinos vetus odium saepe multis utrisque partis cladibus nobilitatum <acceptis>) , a participle acceptis is added to highlight the propositional nature of the Ablative constituent. As noted above, this is not necessary provided that the adjective can acquire a predicative nature. Cf. also Frequenti senatu and Frequenti senatu coacto NB: only in the former example frequenti can have a predicative reading.
  
  – Mitomino
  Jun 30 at 17:59
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  I think the presence of saepe makes an ablative of circumstance seem odd—perhaps also because I wouldn't expect the latter inside an existential erat sentence. On the other hand, multis...cladibus makes for an odd ablative absolute, because I somehow don't like the feeling of praedicative multis as in "clashes were many". I think I would expect an adjective with a more 'propositional' meaning in an ablative absolute. So I'm inclined to say the sentence is odd either way. Should this be considered proper Latin? In classical Latin, I would perhaps expect a genitive.
  
  – Cerberus♦
  Jul 1 at 12:11
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Precisely the combination of the meaning of saepe with multis made me think of the typical syntactically ambiguous example frequenti senatu/frequentissimo senatu. I agree with you that the semantics of multis is not enough to obtain a predicative status but perhaps combined with saepe in this non-Classical text such a reading is possible.
  
  – Mitomino
  Jul 2 at 18:12
  
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

Your Answer

StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "644"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);

else
createEditor();

);

function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);



);

draft saved

draft discarded

Sign up or log in

StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);

Sign up using Google

Sign up using Facebook

Sign up using Email and Password

Post as a guest

Name

Email

Required, but never shown

StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2flatin.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f11037%2fsentences-with-no-verb-but-an-ablative%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest

Name

Email

Required, but never shown

4

The main clause, with a verb is

Erat vetus odium,

This ancient hatred is described by an adjective phrase, which tells you the participants,

inter eos & Reginaldinos

and another longer phrase explaining to some extent how (adverb) it was an ancient hatred; i.e. 'often with many clashes'

saepe multis cladibus

these 'clashes' (within the compound adverb phrase) more precisely described (with an adjective phrase) as being clashes 'of the nobility of each side.'

share|improve this answer

edited Jun 30 at 14:24

answered Jun 30 at 14:03

HughHugh

6,54822 gold badges99 silver badges1919 bronze badges

add a comment | 

4

The main clause, with a verb is

Erat vetus odium,

This ancient hatred is described by an adjective phrase, which tells you the participants,

inter eos & Reginaldinos

and another longer phrase explaining to some extent how (adverb) it was an ancient hatred; i.e. 'often with many clashes'

saepe multis cladibus

these 'clashes' (within the compound adverb phrase) more precisely described (with an adjective phrase) as being clashes 'of the nobility of each side.'

share|improve this answer

edited Jun 30 at 14:24

answered Jun 30 at 14:03

HughHugh

6,54822 gold badges99 silver badges1919 bronze badges

add a comment | 

The main clause, with a verb is

Erat vetus odium,

This ancient hatred is described by an adjective phrase, which tells you the participants,

inter eos & Reginaldinos

and another longer phrase explaining to some extent how (adverb) it was an ancient hatred; i.e. 'often with many clashes'

saepe multis cladibus

these 'clashes' (within the compound adverb phrase) more precisely described (with an adjective phrase) as being clashes 'of the nobility of each side.'

share|improve this answer

edited Jun 30 at 14:24

answered Jun 30 at 14:03

HughHugh

6,54822 gold badges99 silver badges1919 bronze badges

share|improve this answer

edited Jun 30 at 14:24

answered Jun 30 at 14:03

HughHugh

6,54822 gold badges99 silver badges1919 bronze badges

answered Jun 30 at 14:03

HughHugh

6,54822 gold badges99 silver badges1919 bronze badges

answered Jun 30 at 14:03

HughHugh

6,54822 gold badges99 silver badges1919 bronze badges

3

Saepe multis utriusque partis cladibus nobilitatum can be interpreted as an Ablative Absolute construction whose predicate is the adjectival phrase saepe multis and its subject is the nominal phrase utriusque partis cladibus nobilitatum. The head of the former is multis, whereas the head of the latter is cladibus. Lit. 'with the injuries of both parts of their nobilities often being many'. I don't know about the context. So I hope you'll be able to provide a better translation.
I agree with you that this construction can be given a sentential interpretation (in this reading, the Ablative Absolute construction is possible; no verb is needed) but, this said, notice that it can also be interpreted as merely involving a so-called Ablative of attendant circumstances (i.e., lit. 'often with many injuries of both parts of their nobilities'). In fact, this second interpretation seems quite natural here.

share|improve this answer

edited Jun 30 at 13:19

answered Jun 30 at 12:11

MitominoMitomino

86122 silver badges1010 bronze badges

• 
  
  
  

  
  4
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  The “mere” ablative of circumstances feels right to this (inexpert) ear. Simpler too!
  
  – Martin Kochanski
  Jun 30 at 13:28
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Yes, I agree with you. Not only simpler but probably more appropriate too. Cf. also the typical example senatu frequente, where two readings are in principle possible: cf. the Ablative absolute, whereby frequente is predicative, and the Ablative of attendant circumstances, whereby this adjective is not predicative but attributive.
  
  – Mitomino
  Jun 30 at 14:06
  
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  It is worth pointing out that in this English edition of the text (philological.bham.ac.uk/scothist/15lat.html // 22. Erat inter eos et Reginaldinos vetus odium saepe multis utrisque partis cladibus nobilitatum <acceptis>) , a participle acceptis is added to highlight the propositional nature of the Ablative constituent. As noted above, this is not necessary provided that the adjective can acquire a predicative nature. Cf. also Frequenti senatu and Frequenti senatu coacto NB: only in the former example frequenti can have a predicative reading.
  
  – Mitomino
  Jun 30 at 17:59
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  I think the presence of saepe makes an ablative of circumstance seem odd—perhaps also because I wouldn't expect the latter inside an existential erat sentence. On the other hand, multis...cladibus makes for an odd ablative absolute, because I somehow don't like the feeling of praedicative multis as in "clashes were many". I think I would expect an adjective with a more 'propositional' meaning in an ablative absolute. So I'm inclined to say the sentence is odd either way. Should this be considered proper Latin? In classical Latin, I would perhaps expect a genitive.
  
  – Cerberus♦
  Jul 1 at 12:11
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Precisely the combination of the meaning of saepe with multis made me think of the typical syntactically ambiguous example frequenti senatu/frequentissimo senatu. I agree with you that the semantics of multis is not enough to obtain a predicative status but perhaps combined with saepe in this non-Classical text such a reading is possible.
  
  – Mitomino
  Jul 2 at 18:12
  
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

3

Saepe multis utriusque partis cladibus nobilitatum can be interpreted as an Ablative Absolute construction whose predicate is the adjectival phrase saepe multis and its subject is the nominal phrase utriusque partis cladibus nobilitatum. The head of the former is multis, whereas the head of the latter is cladibus. Lit. 'with the injuries of both parts of their nobilities often being many'. I don't know about the context. So I hope you'll be able to provide a better translation.
I agree with you that this construction can be given a sentential interpretation (in this reading, the Ablative Absolute construction is possible; no verb is needed) but, this said, notice that it can also be interpreted as merely involving a so-called Ablative of attendant circumstances (i.e., lit. 'often with many injuries of both parts of their nobilities'). In fact, this second interpretation seems quite natural here.

share|improve this answer

edited Jun 30 at 13:19

answered Jun 30 at 12:11

MitominoMitomino

86122 silver badges1010 bronze badges

• 
  
  
  

  
  4
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  The “mere” ablative of circumstances feels right to this (inexpert) ear. Simpler too!
  
  – Martin Kochanski
  Jun 30 at 13:28
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Yes, I agree with you. Not only simpler but probably more appropriate too. Cf. also the typical example senatu frequente, where two readings are in principle possible: cf. the Ablative absolute, whereby frequente is predicative, and the Ablative of attendant circumstances, whereby this adjective is not predicative but attributive.
  
  – Mitomino
  Jun 30 at 14:06
  
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  It is worth pointing out that in this English edition of the text (philological.bham.ac.uk/scothist/15lat.html // 22. Erat inter eos et Reginaldinos vetus odium saepe multis utrisque partis cladibus nobilitatum <acceptis>) , a participle acceptis is added to highlight the propositional nature of the Ablative constituent. As noted above, this is not necessary provided that the adjective can acquire a predicative nature. Cf. also Frequenti senatu and Frequenti senatu coacto NB: only in the former example frequenti can have a predicative reading.
  
  – Mitomino
  Jun 30 at 17:59
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  I think the presence of saepe makes an ablative of circumstance seem odd—perhaps also because I wouldn't expect the latter inside an existential erat sentence. On the other hand, multis...cladibus makes for an odd ablative absolute, because I somehow don't like the feeling of praedicative multis as in "clashes were many". I think I would expect an adjective with a more 'propositional' meaning in an ablative absolute. So I'm inclined to say the sentence is odd either way. Should this be considered proper Latin? In classical Latin, I would perhaps expect a genitive.
  
  – Cerberus♦
  Jul 1 at 12:11
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Precisely the combination of the meaning of saepe with multis made me think of the typical syntactically ambiguous example frequenti senatu/frequentissimo senatu. I agree with you that the semantics of multis is not enough to obtain a predicative status but perhaps combined with saepe in this non-Classical text such a reading is possible.
  
  – Mitomino
  Jul 2 at 18:12
  
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

Saepe multis utriusque partis cladibus nobilitatum can be interpreted as an Ablative Absolute construction whose predicate is the adjectival phrase saepe multis and its subject is the nominal phrase utriusque partis cladibus nobilitatum. The head of the former is multis, whereas the head of the latter is cladibus. Lit. 'with the injuries of both parts of their nobilities often being many'. I don't know about the context. So I hope you'll be able to provide a better translation.
I agree with you that this construction can be given a sentential interpretation (in this reading, the Ablative Absolute construction is possible; no verb is needed) but, this said, notice that it can also be interpreted as merely involving a so-called Ablative of attendant circumstances (i.e., lit. 'often with many injuries of both parts of their nobilities'). In fact, this second interpretation seems quite natural here.

share|improve this answer

edited Jun 30 at 13:19

answered Jun 30 at 12:11

MitominoMitomino

86122 silver badges1010 bronze badges

share|improve this answer

edited Jun 30 at 13:19

answered Jun 30 at 12:11

MitominoMitomino

86122 silver badges1010 bronze badges

answered Jun 30 at 12:11

MitominoMitomino

86122 silver badges1010 bronze badges

answered Jun 30 at 12:11

MitominoMitomino

86122 silver badges1010 bronze badges