(no subject)
As some of you might know, I've started learning a little Latin on the side. I think that this is primarily because I'm a glutton for punishment, but I suppose that my fondness for structured communication and Ars Magica have their part to play. I've been working my way through a few beginners guides in parallel, though the one I've found most useful so far is the Cambridge Latin Course. I wish to hell the structure of my French and Spanish classes had been like this - The introduction to the third person singular first and then slowly adding in the other persons and plurals makes so much sense as you plow through it.
Nevertheless, I have some confusion. Help me Obi Wan LJFlist, you're my only hope.
Pretty much the first two sentences you encounter are "Caecillius est in horto" and "Caecillius est dominus". Firstly, by my understanding, horto is in either the dative or ablative case. Dative makes no sense and my understanding of the ablative of place doesn't make that seem right either. What's going on?
Secondly, both Caecillius and Dominus are apparently in the nominative. When we learn that Grumio is a cook, we are told, "Grumio est coquus", and the same applies there. Whilst it's true that the meaning is largely retained by swapping the order of the nouns, that seems an odd distinction to make. Is that it?
Nevertheless, I have some confusion. Help me Obi Wan LJFlist, you're my only hope.
Pretty much the first two sentences you encounter are "Caecillius est in horto" and "Caecillius est dominus". Firstly, by my understanding, horto is in either the dative or ablative case. Dative makes no sense and my understanding of the ablative of place doesn't make that seem right either. What's going on?
Secondly, both Caecillius and Dominus are apparently in the nominative. When we learn that Grumio is a cook, we are told, "Grumio est coquus", and the same applies there. Whilst it's true that the meaning is largely retained by swapping the order of the nouns, that seems an odd distinction to make. Is that it?