Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

FFL Lesson 31 Quiz

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Bonnie
    replied
    Yes, good for her for seeing that the nominative and accusative neuter forms are identical. That is an excellent point to remember for the long run! And good for her for focusing on the possibilities and having fun with the sentence. Since she has not learned about the transitive-intransitive distinction yet, I agree that she deserved credit for the answer. Burn is one of those verbs that could be used transitively or intransitively in English. Pugno is another one to watch; fight can be used transitively or intransitively in English, but pugno is intransitive.

    Bonnie

    Leave a comment:


  • CarrieAnne
    replied
    Originally posted by jen1134 View Post

    We're not at this point yet in FFL, but how will we know if a verb is transitive or intransitive?
    Just saw this today. I ended up not marking my daughter’s answer wrong, but I told her not to use ardeo as a transitive verb again. Of course as a 4th grader she only barely gets what a transitive verb is… and she was so highly amused that she found a way to take advantage of nominative and accusative case endings being the same that she didn’t much care for the correction. I didn’t push the issue this time. I’m so happy that we got through FFL this year!

    Leave a comment:


  • Bonnie
    replied
    I don't know when that distinction is introduced in the Forms. To generalize, a transitive verb, like laudo or paro, will usually have an accusative direct object in the sentence, and an intransitive verb, like pugno or venio, will not have an accusative object. With a transitive verb, action goes across to an accusative direct object. For an intransitive verb, action does not go across to a direct object. I would look to see that illustrated in example sentences in the lessons until it is further explained.

    It is a concept that students pick up to some extent by osmosis because we have the same idea in English. (Although a few verbs, e.g., burn, could be confusing as they can be used transitively or intransitively in English.) The transitive-intransitive distinction becomes more important in later study, e.g., in using passive verbs.

    Bonnie

    Leave a comment:


  • jen1134
    replied
    Originally posted by Bonnie View Post
    Good question. This Latin sentence could not be, He was burning, etc. The verb ardeo is intransitive here; i.e., it does not take a direct object. This means that templum is not accusative in context and, therefore, must be nominative and the subject. The new temple was on fire, or The new temple was burning. (There are other Latin verbs meaning to burn that are transitive and will take a direct object.)

    Does that help?

    Bonnie
    We're not at this point yet in FFL, but how will we know if a verb is transitive or intransitive?

    Leave a comment:


  • Bonnie
    replied
    You could express ardebam as, I was on fire, or I was burning. The imperfect need not always be expressed with a verb ending in -ing, especially when it would make for awkward English. The -ing ending is just a good shorthand way to remember the idea that the Latin imperfect may express ongoing or continual action, as distinct from the completed action of the perfect tense.

    This is probably more than FF requires you to know, but ardeo may be used literally or in a figurative way for burn, blaze, glow. Often other words accompany it to flesh out the sense, e.g., I was burning with anger. Caesar uses ardeo, for example, to express the idea that soldiers were burning for revenge. He uses other verbs to speak of burning things literally.

    Bonnie

    Leave a comment:


  • enbateau
    replied
    Can I ask a follow-up to that? Is the imperfect tense translation of ardebam then I was on fire or I was being on fire? The translation I was burning (as in being burned) sounds normal to my ear, but the former doesn't.

    Leave a comment:


  • Bonnie
    replied
    Good question. This Latin sentence could not be, He was burning, etc. The verb ardeo is intransitive here; i.e., it does not take a direct object. This means that templum is not accusative in context and, therefore, must be nominative and the subject. The new temple was on fire, or The new temple was burning. (There are other Latin verbs meaning to burn that are transitive and will take a direct object.)

    Does that help?

    Bonnie

    Leave a comment:


  • CarrieAnne
    started a topic FFL Lesson 31 Quiz

    FFL Lesson 31 Quiz

    In translations for the First Form Latin lesson 31 quiz, my student translated “Heri templum novum ardebat” as “He was burning the new temple yesterday” instead of “The new temple was on fire yesterday.” She used “templum” as a direct object instead of the subject. Is this a technically correct translation, since templum is the declension in nominative and accusative cases?
Working...
X