Latin/grammar

Advertisement


Question
Dear Maria,
Could you please help me with the last a few questions in De Ira II:

1. Quibusdam, ut ait Sextius, iratis profuit aspexisse speculum. (De Ira, 2.36.1)
Is the following understanding correct?
“speculum” is the obj. of “aspexisse”.
Is “aspexisse” the subj. of the verb “profuit”?

2. velut in rem praesentem adducti non agnoverunt se: (De Ira, 2.36.1)
I am a bit confused about the grammar of “non agnoverunt se””?

3. Animus si ostendi et si in ulla materia perlucere posset, intuentis nos confunderet ater maculosusque et aestuans et distortus et tumidus. (De Ira, 2.36.2)
My question is about the 2nd part of the sentence: “intuentis nos confunderet ater maculosusque et aestuans et distortus et tumidus.”
(a) From the verb “confunderet” it seems “nos” is the obj. of that verb. But then why is “intuentis”, a present participle. modifying “nos”, not accu. to match “nos”?
(b) There is a string of adj. Do they all modify “animus”?

4. et luminum suffudit aciem in oculos uehementius umor egestus (De Ira, 2.36.4)
Could you give a literal translation?

Thank you.
Robert

Answer
Dear Robert,

1.In “Quibusdam, ut ait Sextius, iratis profuit aspexisse speculum”(Seneca, De Ira, 2.36.1) “speculum” is just  the direct object  of the past active infinitive “aspexisse” which is the subject of the verb “profuit” (See the literal translation:” to have seen (aspexisse) [their] image (speculum) [as in a mirror] was useful (profuit) to some (quibusdam) angry [men] (iratis), as Sextius says (ut ait Sextius )”.


2.In “… velut in rem praesentem adducti non agnoverunt se”  (De Ira, 2.36.1) “non agnoverunt se” means “they did not recognize (non agnoverunt, perfect tense from “agnosco”) themselves (“se”, direct object)” in the literal translation “…like as (velut) brought (adducti”, past participle used as a predicate participle of the subject) to the reality (in rem praesentem) they did not recognize (non agnoverunt, from “agnosco”) themselves (“se”, direct object)”, i.e. “…brought, as it were face to face with the reality they did not recognize themselves” just to point out how men  change their appearance because of anger.


3.In “ Animus si ostendi et si in ulla materia perlucere posset, intuentis nos confunderet ater maculosusque et aestuans et distortus et tumidus” (De Ira, 2.36.2) the 2nd part of the sentence, i.e. the apodosis of the Conditional Sentence ( Conditions  contrary to fact. See AG 514)  “intuentis nos confunderet ater maculosusque et aestuans et distortus et tumidus” literally means:”…the black (ater) and mottled (maculosusque) and inflamed (et aestuans) and distorted (et distortus) and swollen (tumidus) [ soul/animus] would confound (confunderet) us (nos) who are looking upon it (intuentis/intuentes, plural accusative, present participle )”.
In short, if the  soul could be shown, its black and mottled, inflamed, distorted and swollen appearance due to anger would confound us who are looking upon it.

Please note that:

(a) “nos” is the object of the verb “confunderet”. Similarly “intuentis”, a present participle which modifies “nos”, is a plural accusative because  “intuentis” stands for “intuentes”( part pl pres masc acc).

(b) the string of adjectives  modify “animus”.


4. Here’s the literal translation for “….et luminum suffudit aciem in oculos uehementius umor egestus” (De Ira, 2.36.4):”…and the  fluid (umor)  which has been carried (egestus, past participle of “egero”. This participle in the nominative masculine singular agrees with “umor”) too violently (vehementius, comparative of the adverb “vehementer”) to the eyes (in oculos) has blurred (suffudit) the sharpness (aciem) of eyes/vision(luminum)”, just to emphasize that an immoderate flow of liquid to the eyes has blurred the sharpness of vision.


Best regards,
Maria

Latin

All Answers


Answers by Expert:


Ask Experts

Volunteer


Maria

Expertise

I am an expert in Latin Language and Literature and I'll be glad to answer any questions concerning this matter.

Experience

Over 25 years teaching experience.

Education/Credentials
I received my Ph.D. in Classics (summa cum laude) from Genova University (Italy).

This expert accepts donations:

©2016 About.com. All rights reserved.