How might this be stated in Latin, as in the English sentence "I do not appreciate a football game in it's own right, but rather for the time with friends that it affords me"?
Perhaps in a phrase, like ipso facto? But, being bare ablative, that seems to imply the wrong preposition... ab rather than in.use a form of ipse.
Ah, I see! So, if one wanted to refer to "(something/anything) in it's own right", might one sat aliquis ipse?No, I mean in agreement with whatever it is that you don't appreciate (or whatever) in its own right. E.g. ipse ludus me non delectat, sed... = "the game itself (= in its own right) doesn't delight me, but..."
Yes, thank you. With that in mind, then, could one make a construction like: Ludus football ut aliquid ipse me non delectat...?"Something/anything" is aliquid.
That's another way to put it. You can even combine the two: ipse per se.This wouldn't be per se?
You want to try and untether yourself from mental translation from English. When Pacifica said "you can simply use a form of ipse" instead of "you can use ut aliquid ipse" she literally meant simply using a form of ipse without any further complications: Lūdus pedifolī (or fūtubollī (just not fŭtubollī)) ipse mē nōn perinde dēlectat. However, per sē is what I'd go for instead. But if extended via a comparative clause also in the nominative (ac cum amīcīs congressus), use ipse, serving as a contrastive topic marker.Yes, thank you. With that in mind, then, could one make a construction like: Ludus football ut aliquid ipse me non delectat...?
What would the precise meaning of this be? It seems somewhat redundant. Does ipse add something here that se does not?You can even combine the two: ipse per se.
Don't I know it! This seems the hardest bit...You want to try and untether yourself from mental translation from English.
I suppose it is slightly redundant, but using two words or phrases of similar meaning together for emphasis isn't a rare phenomenon in language. This particular combination is in use in Latin. Cicero, for instance, talked at some point about goods that are laudabilia ipsa per se ("[themselves] laudable in themselves/in their own right").What would the precise meaning of this be? It seems somewhat redundant. Does ipse add something here that se does not?
I gather that a per sē used on its own in most instances will be interpreted as part of the comment, and will receive stress and a restrictive interpretation: "X is laudable only on its own, only when taken apart". Notice that this restrictive meaning works well in your phrase, hence I suggested using per sē there.What would the precise meaning of this be? It seems somewhat redundant. Does ipse add something here that se does not?
Yes, I know...this is the struggle! I wish the psychologists would identify the mechanism by which this is achieved, so that we might develop a shortcut.You want to try and untether yourself from mental translation from English.
There is no shortcut; it comes to you like insight comes to a Zen monk as your ability in the target language increases. For example, when you read a Latin sentence and understand it without having to translate it into English.Yes, I know...this is the struggle! I wish the psychologists would identify the mechanism by which this is achieved, so that we might develop a shortcut.
In truth the shortcut is to stop looking for shortcuts. Perhaps you aren't already familiar with this article by J. Slocum-Bailey, and this great read by A.Z. Foreman, and this compendium of conclusions that Second Language Acquisition research has currently reached. If so, you will certainly also benefit from reading through this collection of discussions related to learning methodology over at reddit. There's a concerted effort underway to bring Latin learning methodology up to date and to rescue learners from the effects of mental translation, something that most existing programs subject them to.Yes, I know...this is the struggle! I wish the psychologists would identify the mechanism by which this is achieved, so that we might develop a shortcut.