?

Log in

[icon] Why this ut? - The latin community
View:Recent Entries.
View:Archive.
View:Friends.
View:Profile.
View:Website (The Perseus Project).

Security:
Subject:Why this ut?
Time:03:12 pm
From the Apocolocyntosis of (pseudo-)Seneca:

"Nimis rustice" inquies: "cum omnes poetae, non contenti ortus et occasus describere, ut etiam medium diem inquietent, tu sic transibis horam tam bonam?"

(Loeb translation: "Clumsy creature!" you say. "The poets are not content to describe sunrise and sunset, and now they even disturb the midday siesta. Will you thus neglect so good an hour?")

What is that ut doing there? Inquietent is the main verb of the cum-clause, so isn't the ut extraneous? Is ut etiam some kind of idiom? Or am I misparsing this sentence?
comments: Leave a comment Previous Entry Share Next Entry


goliard
Link:(Link)
Time:2013-07-15 05:04 pm (UTC)
The "cum" reading is from the Loeb edition, which follows a 1904 edition by Buecheler. I don't know where the "adquiescunt" reading is from, but I suppose it's possible that a scribe miscopied the end of that word as "cum".
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)


ioanna_ioannina
Link:(Link)
Time:2013-07-15 05:38 pm (UTC)
"Inquies" in future is rare enough for me and "adquiescere" is common enough to believe your original version to be difficilior, ergo potior. The scribes usually replaced things they did not understand with things they did (and which made sense in the context - of course we are speaking about scribes who knew Latin well enough; as the illiterate ones were making completely different mistakes and much less difficult to emendate).
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

[icon] Why this ut? - The latin community
View:Recent Entries.
View:Archive.
View:Friends.
View:Profile.
View:Website (The Perseus Project).