Disputatio:Dominus Anulorum/1.3.4
Sententia 1.3.4
recensereHuc illa sententia est-
- Lingua anglica: They are quick of hearing and sharp-eyed, and though they are inclined to be fat and do not hurry unnecessarily, they are nonetheless nimble and deft in their movements.
- Lingua latina: Velociter audiens sunt, sagaces oculos habent, quamquam ad opimis acclinis sunt et dumtaxat cum est necessarius currunt, nihilominus de momentis eorum agilis et actuarius sunt.
Gratias tibi ago. | IACOBVS.CELSVS (disputatio) 20:45, 26 Novembris 2013 (UTC)
What luck, we've encountered the genitive of quality! See Bradley's Arnold section 303.
A man of great joy would be vir magni gaudii. But sadly, the genitive of quality must come with an adjective. If it doesn't, you can't use the genitive, so a man of joy would have to be a joyful man, vir gaudens (or vir laetus).
So with that in mind:
quick of hearing -> of quick hearing -> velocis auditus (auditus, auditūs 4th decl).
sharp-eyed -> of sharp eyesight, acuta aciei.
That being said, we could also use the ablative of respect. So quick of hearing would be quick with respect to hearing, velox auditu. But the Latin love of parallel structure would demand we use one or the other for both clauses.
though -> If you have "though X is true, nevertheless Y is also true", then use quamquam... tamen... You can also use, instead of quamquam, a whole variety of other words like quamvis, etsi, tametsi, and so on. See tamen in L&S.
inclined (towards) -> propensus ad + noun
fat -> we need a noun rather than an adjective, like fatness. pinguitudo is a nice, funny word.
unnecessarily -> supervacue, adv form of supervacuus, unnecessary.
deft in their movements -> of deft movement -> habilis motus
So we have: Sunt velocis auditus acutaque aciei, et quamquam ad pinguitudinem propensi sunt nec supervacue currunt, tamen sunt agiles habilisque motus. --Robert.Baruch (disputatio) 21:52, 28 Novembris 2013 (UTC)
I would rather use the ablative of respect, if that is okay. It flows a little bit more smoother, in my opinion. Also, I have a question on the word order. Since the reader already knows we are talking about the Hobbits, would it be okay to put the sunt at the end of the sentence? If all that I say is correct, then the translation would look like this:
Velox auditu acutusque acie sunt, et quamquam ad pinguitudinem propensi sunt nec supervacue currunt, tamen agiles habilisque motus sunt.
Thank you. | IACOBVS.CELSVS (disputatio) 17:08, 10 Decembris 2013 (UTC)