Apuleius: Amor & Psyche

[Katarina]

Hi!

I am trying to puzzle out this sentence:

Sic immensum procedit in dies opinio, sic insulas iam proxumas et terrae plusculum prouinciasque plurimas fama porrecta peruagatur. (ut ...)

I don't know what to do with et terrae plusculum. I would gues that terrae is partitative genitive that goes with plusculum.
What I know I would translate as:
So much this opinion went forth in days endlessly, so the spread out fame went through the closest islands end through a bit more of the land and through multiple provinces.

But then plusculum is used as a substantive in accusative form?

Thanks for your help!

 

[Pacifica]

Yes, plusculum is a substantive in the accusative, with terrae as a partitive genitive. I don't think it has a truly comparative sense here; it's probably just like "a fair bit".

In dies means "by the day", "daily" or the like.

 

[Katarina]

Iam multi mortalium longis itineribus atque altissimis maris meatibus ad saeculi specimen gloriosum confluebant.

How about this? I guess this is the ablativus loci? So that would mean they would be comming there on long roads of the sea?

 

[Pacifica]

More like "by long roads..." It's just some kind of instrumental ablative. Maybe you can call it "ablative of the way".

 

[Pacifica]

"Long" (longis) goes with itineribus, though, not maris meatibus.

 

[Katarina]

Yes, but I found also altus could mean long ... what would that mean then?

 

[Pacifica]

Yes, but I found also altus could mean long ...

Where did you find that? I've never seen it in that sense and I can't find it now.

... what would that mean then?

Basically it means "deepest". It seems kind of a transferred epithet. The paths of the see are deep because the sea is. That's how it looks to me at first sight anyway.

 

[Pacifica]

Or possibly it could mean that the paths are (coming from) far away, which I guess isn't very different from saying that they're long...

 

[Pacifica]

But in connection with the sea the idea of depth comes to mind first.

 

[Katarina]

Where did you find that? I've never seen it in that sense and I can't find it now.

I think I had some problems with understanding english. I understood it better when I looked it up in my language.

 

[Katarina]

Could you help me with this sentence:

Nimirum communi numinis piamento vicariae venerationis incertum sustinebo.

I am confused what goes together. But especially I don't know what to do with incertum. It can't be the subject of the sentence and as an adjective three is no noun in the same case. And I can't see anything that would call for an accusative.

 

[Pacifica]

But especially I don't know what to do with incertum. It can't be the subject of the sentence and as an adjective three is no noun in the same case.

It's being used substantively (as a noun) here. It's the direct object of sustinebo.

 

[Katarina]

Right. So the translations goes:

It seems I will bear the incertenty of vicarious veneration of deity while it is going to be expiated commonly = for both at the same time?

 

[Katarina]

Another question.

Virgo ista amore flagrantissimo teneatur hominis extremi, quem et dignitatis et patrimonii simul ei incolumitatis ipsius Fortuna damnavit, tamque infimi ut per totum orbem non inveniat miseriae suae comparem.

I have no clue why all these genetives. And I don't know what to do with ei. Could I get any help with this, please?

 

[Pacifica]

Right. So the translations goes:

It seems I will bear the incertenty of vicarious veneration of deity while it is going to be expiated commonly = for both at the same time?

Yes, that's the idea.

Another question.

Virgo ista amore flagrantissimo teneatur hominis extremi, quem et dignitatis et patrimonii simul ei incolumitatis ipsius Fortuna damnavit, tamque infimi ut per totum orbem non inveniat miseriae suae comparem.

I have no clue why all these genetives. And I don't know what to do with ei. Could I get any help with this, please?

Ei is a mistake for et (see here).

Hominis extremi tamque infimi modifies amore: "the love of...".

Dignitatis et patrimonii et incolumitatis ipsius goes with damnavit: "whom fortune condemned 'of' (i.e. condemned by depriving him of) ...."

 

[Katarina]

Is it possibile that ipsum quod incipit velle is a kind of phrase - like does it often stands like this together and have a special meaning?

The context is:
Sic effata et osculis hiantibus filium diu ac pressule sauiata proximas oras reflui litoris petit, plantisque roseis uibrantium fluctuum summo rore calcato ecce iam profundi maris sudo resedit uertice, et ipsum quod incipit uelle, set statim, quasi pridem praeceperit, non moratur marinum obsequium: adsunt Nerei filiae chorum canentes ...

 

[Pacifica]

does it often stands like this together

No. I have never seen it elsewhere as far as I can recall. Apuleius sometimes uses weird constructions. The sense seems to be that as soon as she began to wish for it, it happened: the very "sea service" that she began to want did not delay... it came as soon as she conceived the wish for it.

 

[Katarina]

It is strange construction indeed.
This came to my minds: the very thing (ipsum) that started (quod incipit) she wants. I only wonder what to do with this infinitive here ...

 

[Pacifica]

The infinitive depends on incipit ("she begins to want"). Quod is the object of velle.

The very "sea service" (ipsum marinum obsequium) that (quod) she begins (incipit) to want (velle)...

 

[Pacifica]

Or it could also be: the "sea service" (marinum obsequium) does not delay (non moratur) the very thing (ipsum) which (quod) she begins (incipit) to want (velle). It's ambiguous to me.