Cucumis - 무료 온라인 번역 서비스
. .



번역 - 라틴어-영어 - Si enim dicamus praecedentes legales , hos...

현재 상황번역
이 본문은 다음 언어들로 가능합니다: 라틴어영어

제목
Si enim dicamus praecedentes legales , hos...
본문
jairhaas에 의해서 게시됨
원문 언어: 라틴어

Si enim dicamus praecedentes legales , hos prophetales esse, obijciet quis libros quinque Moysi prophetales esse, quia eos prophetarum praecipuus scriptitaverit.

제목
If indeed we consider
번역
영어

tarinoidenkertoja에 의해서 번역되어짐
번역될 언어: 영어

If we said that the previous law books were the prophetical ones, somebody could claim that the Five Books of Moses were the prophetical ones, because they were written by the greatest prophet.
이 번역물에 관한 주의사항
"legales " is referred to those books who regard the law , as the Torah.
I needed to change the sentence structure in order to make it understandable in english.It isn´t an easy translation
lilian canale에 의해서 마지막으로 검증 또는 수정되었습니다 - 2009년 11월 28일 21:36





마지막 글

글쓴이
올리기

2009년 11월 24일 14:01

Aneta B.
게시물 갯수: 4487
"As if we said that the previous legislation books were the/these prophetic ones..."

hos --> the/these

2009년 11월 24일 17:11

tarinoidenkertoja
게시물 갯수: 113
I remain by the idea that "praecedentes " isn t related to that "hos", but it s related with obiciet. The true problem with latin is that there aren t native speakers to call in aid.

2009년 11월 24일 18:17

Aneta B.
게시물 갯수: 4487
Tarinoidenkertoja, I can see you doubt in my Latin skills.
Well, I claim what I do and I can't change my mind, because I know Latin rules. Accusativus cum infinitivo syntax doesn't work back! So, "hos" can't be connected with "obiciet"(We have comma before "obiciet" and this should tell us that we can't connect the verb with a pronoun from the previous clause).I'm very sorry.

2009년 11월 24일 18:50

lilian canale
게시물 갯수: 14972
Oops! I think we'd better ask for some help here

@ Efylove, could you take some time and read the previous posts so that you can help us solve the issue? Otherwise this evaluation will take ages to be completed
Thanks in advance

CC: Efylove

2009년 11월 26일 06:12

jairhaas
게시물 갯수: 261
I think some background might be helpful here. The author discusses the criteria according to which the books of the canon should be divided, subject matter or status of author. even without being a latin expert, the following translation (approximately, of course) seems sensible to me:

"If we consider the previous books, the ones pertaining to law, and also those that are prophetical, then it might be objected that also the books of Moses are prophetical, since they were written by the greates of prophets (that is, we might argue that the Torah as well as the ones called "prophets" should all be considered prophetical, from the p[oint of view of their authors)".

The continuation goes like this: "Si autem dixerimus praecedentes legales, & hos historicos esse, obijcietur etiam praecedentes magnam temporum historiam continere" - to say, that if, on the other hand, we divide acc. to subject matter, then the Torah might be placed in the section of the historical books, since it contains many historical descriptions (besides law).

2009년 11월 26일 10:58

Aneta B.
게시물 갯수: 4487
Thank you, jairhas, for your effort, but I don't agree with your version, even if we know the background. It's quite out of Latin gramma.

I don't claim we have to translate anything in a literal way, but I only showed up the literal version to understand the text corectly.
First we have to know the literal version and then we can start making beautiful literary version.

I am not a person who translates the text, but only the person who shows the literal meaning and grammatical issues.

So, I repeat once again:
We have here 'modus potentialis' in conditional clauses (in English - second conditional)- typical hypothesis and it should be concerned here.

This is my (literal)bridge once again:

As if we said that the previous legislation books (=Law) were the prophetic ones, one could claim that the Five Books of Moses (or Pentateuch) were the prophetic books , because the greatest prophet had composed them.

It doesn't deny at all your thesis that Pentateuch could be concidered as propetical books.

2009년 11월 26일 11:10

jairhaas
게시물 갯수: 261
There is a "&" sign before the word "hos"

2009년 11월 26일 11:15

Aneta B.
게시물 갯수: 4487
Where? I can't see it in the source.

2009년 11월 26일 11:21

jairhaas
게시물 갯수: 261
someone must have omiited it, do you remember that Francky thought it to be a mistake, but when he checked the internet, he found that this sign was in use in Latin already in the first century ?

2009년 11월 26일 11:30

Aneta B.
게시물 갯수: 4487
So, you, as the requester, should correct the text...

2009년 11월 26일 12:16

Aneta B.
게시물 갯수: 4487
Now we have "Accusativus duplex syntax" in "Accusativus cum infinitivus syntax" (one syntax in another syntax ), but if we put "&" instaed of comma, it would completely change the meaning and the "accusativus duplex syntax" would disappear!

Look, please:
'Si enim dicamus praecedentes legales & hos prophetales esse,..."

"As if we said that the previous ones were legislative (=Law) and the prophetic books,..." (but still second hypothetical coditional)

2009년 11월 27일 22:43

Efylove
게시물 갯수: 1015
In fact, if we say that the previous ones are the books of the law (and) that these ones are the prophetical books, someone could object that the prophetical books are the five books of Moyses, because they were composed by the greatest prophet.

This is my opinion... hope it could help!

2009년 11월 27일 23:09

Aneta B.
게시물 갯수: 4487
Efee, as it is modus potentialis I insisted on 2nd conditional in English, so:

if we say --> if we said

the previous ones are --> the previous ones were
and so on...

2009년 11월 28일 16:23

Efylove
게시물 갯수: 1015
Yes, modus potentialis of course!

2009년 11월 28일 21:31

Aneta B.
게시물 갯수: 4487
It is almost fine.

One thing:
"praecedentes legales , hos prophetales esse"
- "the previous law book was the prophetical one"

but it should be in plural, so:

"the previous law books were the prophetical ones"

2009년 11월 28일 21:33

lilian canale
게시물 갯수: 14972
Done! Is that fine now?

2009년 11월 28일 21:34

Aneta B.
게시물 갯수: 4487
Just great! At last!

2009년 11월 28일 21:36

lilian canale
게시물 갯수: 14972
Ufff!

2009년 11월 28일 21:38

Aneta B.
게시물 갯수: 4487
Yeaaah! Ufff! Thank you, Lilly.

2009년 11월 29일 05:52

jairhaas
게시물 갯수: 261
Thank you everyone!
더보기