Ancient Languages/adjective context
Hello! I was trying to figure something out. When referring to a person of great victory or will power, like Spartacus or Caesar, how would you describe them as "indomitable." I'm trying to determine if "indomitus" or "indomabilis" works in a person context; I don't want to be accidentally referring to a savage animal or something purely "wild." The sentence would translate to "I am Indomitable" (ego indomitus?).
Thank you! :)
the sentence "I am Indomitable" where the adjective refers to a person of great victory or will power, like Caesar, translates as:”Invictus sum”, where the adjective INVICTUS in the nominative masculine singular means “indomitable”/” invincible”, while SUM , which is the 1st.person singular of this verb, means “I am”.
Therefore "ego indomitus" is wrong as it would mean "I indomitable" that makes no sense at all.
Note that Latin does not use the personal pronoun “Ego”as well as the other personal pronouns simply because they are implied in the verb that changes ending according to the different pronouns.
For example: SUM means "I am", ES means “you are”, EST means “he/she/it is”, SUMUS means “we are”, ESTIS means “you are” related to many persons, and SUNT means “they are”.
As for the adjectives "indomitus" and "indomabilis”, they both usually do not work in a person context as they mean “untamable”/ “ungovernable”/“wild" /”fierce” especially related to a savage animal.
Finally I have to tell you that "indomitable" translates as INVICTUS when referring to a male person which is the subject of a sentence, whereas it translates as INVICTA when referring to a female person.
Latin in fact is an inflected language where the adjectives agree with the noun they refer to, differently from English where there is no agreement of the adjectives with the nouns.
Hope this can be helpful to you.