All that we are is the result of what we have thought

[jokerjay12345]

So far from a few translations I've found I've come across these two. I need help translating it correctly and I need to double check these two answers.
"Omne quod sumus eventus illius quod putavimus."
"Omne quod sumus eventus illius quod cogitavimus."

 

[Iohannes Aurum]

They both look good, but please wait for others to reply first

 

[jokerjay12345]

Ok, which do you personally think would be best?

 

[Adamas]

Cogitare is thinking in general; putare specifically refers to thinking as in 'deeming, regarding, supposing, pondering, considering, judging.' If you could clarify what you mean by 'think' there may be some other, better term; otherwise I'd go with cogitare. Perhaps: omnia quae sumus fluunt e cogitatis

 

[jokerjay12345]

So hmm... "Omne quod sumus eventus illius quod cogitavimus." Is not as good as the one you posted? What is the direct translation of the one you sugested? "Omnia quae sumus fluunt e cogitatis." ?

 

[Adamas]

Yours works fine too; I was just providing another option. Literally:

Omne quod sumus eventus illius quod cogitavimus = "Each thing that we are is the result of that thing that we have thought"

Omnia quae sumus fluunt e cogitatis = "Everything that we are flows from things that were thought"

 

[Bitmap]

Omnia quae sumus fluunt e cogitatis = "Everything that we are flows from things that were thought"

I think this is a better version as a phrase like "the result of something" requires a less nominal and more verbal translation in my opinion. I don't think an expression like "omne quod" is actually in line with the Latin language. For "all that we are", you can also use the indefinite "quidquid sumus".
Not sure if the plural ablative would immediately be tracked back to the neuter plural (usual masc/fem is assumed first) ... it might be more common to find rebus attached to such an expression. The relative clause was not a bad option either, though ... (something like "fiunt ex eis quae cogitavimus [or cogitarimus]" would be fine)

 

[jokerjay12345]

Is there anyway for it to be "That we have thought?" Instead of "That were thought."?

 

[scrabulista]

Omnia quae sumus fluunt e cogitatis is more literally "All that we are flows from things thought." cogito is the verb as in cogito, ergo sum. Its past participle is cogitatus, which is cogitatis in the ablative plural.

You could possibly put a nostris "our" with the cogitatis.

I am reluctant to suggest ex rebus quos cogitavimus . There's probably a better choice than rebus.
In philosophy, res cogitans "a thinking thing" goes along with cogito ergo sum.

How about cogitavimus, ergo sumus? "We have thought, therefore we are."

 

[Adamas]

Not sure if the plural ablative would immediately be tracked back to the neuter plural (usual masc/fem is assumed first)

I thought it was safe enough on the assumption that 'thinking something' is more expected (at least in English) than 'thinking someone.' The fact that cogitatum is an established word meaning 'a thought' also makes it pretty safe to assume that it would be read as 'things thought' or just 'thoughts.' I'd be a tad worried that rebus cogitatis might be understood as 'from issues we have thought about' (or the like) rather than as 'from whatever stuff we have thought.'

For cogitatis on its own, I'd be more worried that someone might read the meaning as 'all we are is a result of what people have thought' as opposed to 'all we are is a result of what we ourselves have thought.' For that reason, I'd support changing it to omnia quae sumus fluunt e cogitatis nostris per scrabulista. (Or one would say e cogitatis a nobis? This seems a little awkward.)

Is there anyway for it to be "That we have thought?" Instead of "That were thought."?

Yes. (Though I do think a Roman would be slightly more likely to say 'that were thought by us' in this context, if only because they have some sort of fetish for participles. ) If you prefer the active voice, go with what Bitmap said: fiunt ex eis quae cogitavimus. This literally means "(events) happen out of those things which we have thought." Or, again going with Bitmap's suggestion, you could preserve the original wording more closely with quicquid sumus est ex eis quae cogitavimus ("whatever we are is from the things which we have thought").

Yet another option: Quaecumque facta sumus quibuscumque cogitatis sumus - Literally "We are whatsoever (things) we have become by means of whatsoever (things) have been thought (by us)", but equally translatable as your request or as "We are whatever we've become by virtue of whatever we've thought" (if the sentence makes sense).

ex rebus quos cogitavimus

e rebus quas cogitavimus

 

[Bitmap]

Not sure if the plural ablative would immediately be tracked back to the neuter plural (usual masc/fem is assumed first)

I thought it was safe enough on the assumption that 'thinking something' is more expected (at least in English) than 'thinking someone.' The fact that cogitatum is an established word meaning 'a thought' also makes it pretty safe to assume that it would be read as 'things thought' or just 'thoughts.' I'd be a tad worried that rebus cogitatis might be understood as 'from issues we have thought about' (or the like) rather than as 'from whatever stuff we have thought.'

You're probably right there

For cogitatis on its own, I'd be more worried that someone might read the meaning as 'all we are is a result of what people have thought' as opposed to 'all we are is a result of what we ourselves have thought.' For that reason, I'd support changing it to omnia quae sumus fluunt e cogitatis nostris per scrabulista. (Or one would say e cogitatis a nobis? This seems a little awkward.)

nobis? as an auctorial dative? I wouldn't do that, sounds awkward as you say

 

[jokerjay12345]

So would "omnia quae sumus fluunt e cogitatis nostris" come closest to being the final answer and the closest to being the direct translation of "All that we are is the result of what we have thought?" By Buddha.

 

[scrabulista]

Very good Adamas -- I should have remembered that res was feminine. I suppose if re takes e, so does rebus.

From Lewis & Short:

ex or ē (ex always before vowels, and elsewh. more freq. than e; e. g. in Cic. Rep. I. e occurs 19 times, but ex 61 times, before consonants—but no rule can be given for the usage; cf., e. g., ex and e together: “qui ex corporum vinculis tamquam e carcere evolaverunt,” Cic. Rep. 6, 14. But certain expressions have almost constantly the same form, as ex parte, ex sententia, ex senatus consulto, ex lege, ex tempore, etc.; but e regione, e re nata, e vestigio, e medio, and e republica used adverbially...

 

[jokerjay12345]

Ok so I'm going to go with, "Omnia quae sumus fluunt e cogitatis nostris." What are the correct letters used. I know they have different lettering for example the letter " ñ " in the Spanish language.

 

[Nikolaos]

There are no different letters in Latin, except for optional diacritical marks.

If you want, you can replace all Us with Vs, since they are the same letter in Latin.


Sent via Tapatalk

 

[jokerjay12345]

Yeah sorry that's what I meant. The diacritical marks. I didn't know what they were called and apparently failed to improvise haha. Yes I need those please.

 

[Matthaeus]

Omnia quae sumus fluunt [e-long:1tna8fsu][/e-long:1tna8fsu] c[o-long:1tna8fsu][/o-long:1tna8fsu]git[a-long:1tna8fsu][/a-long:1tna8fsu]t[i-long:1tna8fsu][/i-long:1tna8fsu]s nostr[i-long:1tna8fsu][/i-long:1tna8fsu]s

 

[jokerjay12345]

Ok thanks everyone so much. I need to go research a font to get it Tattoed. Thanks again!

 

[Matthaeus]

omg don't tell me you're actually going to tattoo the macrons

 

[jokerjay12345]

What's a macron?