Of closed positions and prepositional phrases

Nikolaos · Feb 12, 2011

In response to this:

Bitmap dixit:
Nikolaos dixit:

So, prepositional phrases can't normally be used adjectivally in Latin?

Click to expand...

prepositions were originally adverbs that merely used to intensify case functions - that's why they either attach themselves to particular cases or (in their function as adverbs) to verbs (in the form of prefixes) ... uhm ... long story - I'm sure you can read up on it somewhere.... to keep it simple: if you think of prepositions as adverbs, you can understand that it only makes limited sense to link them to nouns (just like you wouldn't say "the highly house").

There are tons of exceptions, though... like nouns derived from verbs ("amor erga aliquem"), especially nouns derived from verbs of movement ("accessus ad aliquid" / "exitus ex aliqua re") or when the expression expresses some kind of affiliation ... or its opposite, like "exercitus cum/sine duce" / "homo de plebe" / "unus ex servis")
another exception is the closed position, which is often achieved by adding a PPP, in which case the adverbial construction would be linked to a verbal expression again (e.g. "pugna in saltu Teutoburgiensi facta") ... this somehow applies to all closed positions, though, even if no verbal link is apparent [e.g. Cic. de re p. V: "hinc enim illa et apud Graecos exempla (blabla)"]

I think that's part of any good style guide and/or grammar.

What is the Latin equivalent of such phrases then? How would one say, "The key on the table is green" as opposed to "The green key is on the table"?

Click to expand...

"The key (which is) placed on the table is green" (that's essentially what "the key on the table" implies anyway):
clavis in tabula posita viridis est
clavis quae in tabula (posita) est viridis est

Nikolaos dixit:

To ArmyAviator - "Mortis in caelo oculi" - "Eyes of Death in the sky"... although I am not sure whether it is the "eyes" specifically in the sky or "Death".

Click to expand...

with the explanation above it should be clear

Even though I quoted the whole thing above, I will still quote the parts that I am replying to below.

prepositions were originally adverbs that merely used to intensify case functions - that's why they either attach themselves to particular cases or (in their function as adverbs) to verbs (in the form of prefixes) ... uhm ... long story - I'm sure you can read up on it somewhere.... to keep it simple: if you think of prepositions as adverbs, you can understand that it only makes limited sense to link them to nouns (just like you wouldn't say "the highly house").

Interesting. I actually had been wondering how prepositions had developed.

another exception is the closed position, which is often achieved by adding a PPP, in which case the adverbial construction would be linked to a verbal expression again (e.g. "pugna in saltu Teutoburgiensi facta") ... this somehow applies to all closed positions, though, even if no verbal link is apparent [e.g. Cic. de re p. V: "hinc enim illa et apud Graecos exempla (blabla)"]

Now, by closed positions, do you mean positions enclosed by a substantive and it's adjectives/genitives?

I think that's part of any good style guide and/or grammar.

I can't find it in A&G or Adler, and Google isn't helping. Apparently either English writers don't seem to care much about this rule, or I am looking in all of the wrong places. I'm not saying that I doubt you at all, though - I'm just saying that I can't find anything to read for a more in-depth explanation... or any explanation at all.

"The key (which is) placed on the table is green" (that's essentially what "the key on the table" implies anyway):
clavis in tabula posita viridis est
clavis quae in tabula (posita) est viridis est

Ah, yes, of course. Thank you.

with the explanation above it should be clear

If a genitive noun is considered an adjective of the substantive it modifies, then it is clear. "Death's eyes in the sky", or literally, "Death's in-the-sky eyes".

Bitmap · Feb 13, 2011

I wrote that previous post in a bit of a hurry

Nikolaos dixit:
prepositions were originally adverbs that merely used to intensify case functions - that's why they either attach themselves to particular cases or (in their function as adverbs) to verbs (in the form of prefixes) ... uhm ... long story - I'm sure you can read up on it somewhere.... to keep it simple: if you think of prepositions as adverbs, you can understand that it only makes limited sense to link them to nouns (just like you wouldn't say "the highly house").

Click to expand...

Interesting. I actually had been wondering how prepositions had developed.

Originally (in Indo-European languages), it seems like there was no real need for prepositions as case functions covered the meaning sufficiently well. You have remainders of that in constructions like "domum/foras/Romam ire" (where the bare accusative is used to express motion towards) or "Rom[a-long:3u509a4p][/a-long:3u509a4p]/rure cedere" (where the bare ablative is used to show motion away from something).*
Later, adverbs were added to intensify (or make clear) what is meant, which were so frequently used with particular case constructions that they formed a close symbiosis with either the case they accompanied or the corresponding verb. E.g. for motion away, the fore-runner of "ab" was used which now either occurs with the ablative "ab urbe ire" or as a prefix "urbe abire". I suppose the frequent use of some adverbs with a particular case is what eventually made them "prepositions" as they didn't occur in any other constructions anymore.** This developement is the reason why prepositions always occur with one particular case (or with different cases in different meanings) and why they never occur with the nominative.

* forms like domum/rus/foras (and town names) that are frequently used often resist changes a bit more tenaciously - this is also why in most languages, forms of "to be" are still very diverse, even though most other verbs may have lost most of their endings.
** sometimes you find remainders of their adverbial nature in fixed collocations. In German, the preposition "durch" ("through" or in Latin "per") can be used as an adverb in the idiom "jemanden durch und durch lieben" ("to love somebody through and through" = to love someone a lot). An even better example is probably Latin itself, which has words like contra, ultra, circa, citra etc. that can either be used as adverbs or as prepositions.

another exception is the closed position, which is often achieved by adding a PPP, in which case the adverbial construction would be linked to a verbal expression again (e.g. "pugna in saltu Teutoburgiensi facta") ... this somehow applies to all closed positions, though, even if no verbal link is apparent [e.g. Cic. de re p. V: "hinc enim illa et apud Graecos exempla (blabla)"]

Click to expand...

Now, by closed positions, do you mean positions enclosed by a substantive and it's adjectives/genitives?

Yes. This construction is quite common in Latin (which has a general tendency to use hyperbata). cf. ablativi absoluti like "after a bridge had been built across Rhine", which would be translated as "ponte in Rhenum facto" or "facto in Rhenum ponte" with the additional information enclosed between the PPP and the corresponding noun rather than put somewhere else.
Now, in this example the prepositional phrase "in Rhenum" is dependent on a PPP "factum" and therefore linked to a verb. If a preposition can depend on something verbal*, you're entirely fine (which in most cases you are). In a sentence like "milites pontem in Rhenum fecerunt" (the soldiers built a bridge across Rhine), the prepositional phrase "in Rhenum" is not linked to "pontem" but to "fecerunt", so it's perfectly fine.
For some reason, possibly in analogy to the very common closed position with the PPP, the closed position also works when no verbal connection is apparent. I mentioned Cicero's "illa apud Graecos exempla" ... similar possible examples (made up by me on the spot) would be "omnes trans Hiberum regiones" (all regions on the other side of the Hiberus river) or "Marcelli ad Nolam proelium"

* "Something verbal" can also mean a noun whose verbal roots are still apparent; like "amor", which is derived from "amare" [in many cases the verb existed before its corresponding noun]. Therefore, I think you find expressions like "amor erga/in aliquem" - when an attribute occurs, you would of course use a closed position again, e.g. "tuus erga me amor".

I think that's part of any good style guide and/or grammar.

Click to expand...

I can't find it in A&G or Adler, and Google isn't helping. Apparently either English writers don't seem to care much about this rule, or I am looking in all of the wrong places. I'm not saying that I doubt you at all, though - I'm just saying that I can't find anything to read for a more in-depth explanation... or any explanation at all.

granted, it's more of a stilistical than a grammatical question.

If a genitive noun is considered an adjective of the substantive it modifies, then it is clear.

I would call it an "attribute". Since a genetive noun is not really an adjective.

Nikolaos · Feb 13, 2011

Thank you for the detailed answer. I have always thought that Latin was a beautiful language but never had time to learn it

Sorry, something came over me. Thank you, I have locked this information in my storehouse. If I ever make a mistake concerning this, I have probably lost my storehouse key and have far worse things to worry about.

"Attribute", that's the word I was looking for but couldn't think of.

cinefactus · Feb 13, 2011

Thanks for this very informative post Bitmap. Can you give some more examples in English of sentences which should be translated by closed and open positions so I can be sure that I have it right?

Bitmap dixit:
"after a bridge had been built across Rhine", which would be translated as "ponte in Rhenum facto" or "facto in Rhenum ponte" with the additional information enclosed between the PPP and the corresponding noun rather than put somewhere else.

I note that you are using in here. Would trans be wrong?

Bitmap · Feb 13, 2011

Nikolaos dixit:
I have always thought that Latin was a beautiful language but never had time to learn it

neither have I!

Cinefactus dixit:
Thanks for this very informative post Bitmap. Can you give some more examples in English of sentences which should be translated by closed and open positions so I can be sure that I have it right?

I'm not sure what you mean. As a general rule, I would choose a closed position whenever possible, even though you may also be able to use a different word order. e.g. "I'm the biggest mouse of all" can be done like in English "sum summus mus omnium" (perfectly fine), but a closed position might be nicer, e,g, "summus omnium mus sum". It's only really important with prepositions, I think. If someone wants a tattoo like "house in garden", don't just go "domus in horto", but try to establish a closed position by adding a PPP or an adjective like "domus in horto sita".

I recently had a translation excercise with a sentence like (simplified) "the Romans fortified the town so no space to invade would be left" and my teacher proposed "Romani urbem muniverunt, ne locus invadendi relinqueretur". Someone asked if you could also go "ad invadendum", but that's not possible per se since the perpositional phrase wouldn't really depend on any verb. You could mend it by going "ne locus ad invadendum aptus relinqueretur". I proposed "ne quis ad invadendum locus blabla" ... uhm, whatever. stupid story

Cinefactus dixit:
I note that you are using in here. Would trans be wrong?

No, but "pontem facere in (name of the rive in accusative" is the classical expression that Caesar uses, I think. In later stages, you also find "pontem aedificare" and I'm pretty sure you also find different prepositions. I just try to use classical expressions when I give examples because ... well, I might as well.

After all, the restrictions regarding preposition which I'm talking about may not really be valid anymore in post-classical literature

cinefactus · Feb 14, 2011

Bitmap dixit:
I just try to use classical expressions when I give examples because ... well, I might as well.

After all, the restrictions regarding preposition which I'm talking about may not really be valid anymore in post-classical literature

I appreciate the use of the classical examples. I always learn something... and even if my historical interests lie in Mediaeval Latin, I want to be excellent at Classical!

Imber Ranae · Mar 8, 2011

Cinefactus dixit:
I appreciate the use of the classical examples. I always learn something... and even if my historical interests lie in Mediaeval Latin, I want to be excellent at Classical!

Examples of the "closed position" tendency, you mean? Examples are literally everywhere.

A few I've picked out at a glance from in Catilinam I:

Nihilne te nocturnum praesidium Palati, nihil urbis vigiliae, nihil timor populi, nihil concursus bonorum omnium, nihil hic munitissimus habendi senatus locus, nihil horum ora voltusque moverunt?

Catilinam orbem terrae caede atque incendiis vastare cupientem nos consules perferemus?

Nam illa nimis antiqua praetereo, quod C. Servilius Ahala Sp. Maelium novis rebus studentem manu sua occidit.

Cupio, patres conscripti, me esse clementem, cupio in tantis rei publicae periculis me non dissolutum videri, sed iam me ipse inertiae nequitiaeque condemno.

cinefactus · Mar 8, 2011

Thanks IR. It was more English examples that I was thinking of, to try to help me identify the pattern. I think I have got the idea, but more examples are always better!

Imber Ranae · Mar 8, 2011

Nikolaos dixit:
I can't find it in A&G or Adler, and Google isn't helping. Apparently either English writers don't seem to care much about this rule, or I am looking in all of the wrong places.

Hmm, A&G seems to mention it only very briefly and not very comprehensively in §344 remark (g) [p. 391], though I haven't checked the whole book so I might have missed something.

This old book (§425 remark 3) is the only source I kind find on short notice that seems to cover this subject.

cinefactus · Mar 9, 2011

Thanks again. Unfortunately none of these books are accessible from outside the US, but if I search I should be able to find something...

Imber Ranae · Mar 14, 2011

Cinefactus dixit:
Thanks again. Unfortunately none of these books are accessible from outside the US, but if I search I should be able to find something...

Really? That's annoying. Both should be long out of copyright. I knew that for currently copyrighted books the content of the previews sometimes varies by country, but how does this work?

I'll just retype it here, then:

Rem. 3. The Latin language does not use Preopositional Attributes as frequently and freely as the English language, and English Prepositional Attributes genreally are expressed either by LATIN GENITIVES, or by the insertion of PARTICIPLES, as: Bellum Helvetiorum, a war with the Helviations; Studium modestiae, a zeal for modesty; Desiderium tui, a longing for thee; Victoriae belli civilis, a victory in a civil war; Consuetudo hominum, the intercourse with men; Gloria belli the renown in war; Bellum cum Carthaginiensibus gestum, the war with the Carthaginians; Mons prope urbem situs, a mountain near the city; Libri de philosophia scripti, books on philosophy.

Only some relations are expressed by Latin Prepositional Attributes, and these must be chiefly learned by the usage of the Latin authors, as: Aditus ad castra, the access to the camp; Iter ad Helvetios, the road (journey) to the country of the Helvetians; Insula in lacu Prelio, an island in the Prelian lake; Homo de plebe (not plebis) a man of the plebs; Poculum ex auro, a gold goblet; Tua in me amicitia, thy friendship for me.

Rem. 4. Prepositional OBJECTS, like the Case-objects, generally stand before their governing verbs. In the compound objective phrase they generally follow the case-object, except for reasons of emphasis. Prepositional ATTRIBUTES generally follow their governing nouns. In the compound attributive phrase they stand after the adjective or attributive genitive, and before the governing noun, as: Ciceronis de philosophia libri, Cicero's books on philosophy; Magna in castris trepidatio, a great excitement in the camp; Optima tua de me opinio, thy highly favorable opinion about me.

Also, for Nikolaos (and whoever else can find it): see §298 in this grammar.

cinefactus · Mar 14, 2011

Wow. Thanks for doing all of that IR. It makes things a lot clearer!

Nikolaos · Mar 21, 2011

Yes, thank you!

Quasus · Apr 22, 2011

There are quite a few editions of Madvig’s grammar at archive.org, here is one of them:
http://www.archive.org/details/alatingr ... 00thacgoog
Direct link to the PDF file
There is also its German original there as well as a Danish translation.

Of closed positions and prepositional phrases

Nikolaos

schmikolaos

Bitmap

Guest

Nikolaos

schmikolaos

cinefactus

Censor

Bitmap

Guest

cinefactus

Censor

Imber Ranae

Ranunculus Iracundus

cinefactus

Censor

Imber Ranae

Ranunculus Iracundus

cinefactus

Censor

Imber Ranae

Ranunculus Iracundus

cinefactus

Censor

Nikolaos

schmikolaos

Quasus

Civis Illustris