Latin Help

[witchofnovember]

Time: Contemporary
Setting New York City
Searches: English to Latin translator, Latin help.

I want to riff on Descartes' Cognito Ergo Sum. Is Cognito Cognito Ergo Cognito Sum, anywhere near a correct construction? I'm trying to say "I think that I think, therefor I think that I am".

Comments

[steepholm]

Shouldn't that be 'cogito'?

[ioanna_ioannina]

Yes, it should.
The construction should be like this: "Cogito me cogitare, ergo me esse cogito."

[cygna_hime]

Is the 'me' necessary if the subject is the same in the direct and indirect constructions? I feel like it's not, but I may be getting other languages mixed in.

[sorrel_forbes]

Yes, it is. The subject is required in this context (in Latin) because the infinitive verb does not give it. And Indirect constructions are just a bit peculiar in that the subject is given in the accusative case.

"Cogito me cogitare ergo me esse cogito" is correct.

"Cogito me cogitare ergo cogito me esse" would also be correct, and has the advantage of being a little bit less opaque.

Of course, if transparency is paramount, and accuracy not so much (such as in Pratchett or Rowling) then many English speakers might be more comfortable with OP's original guess (with amended spelling).

[cygna_hime]

"Cogito Cogitare Ergo Cogito Esse" is the translation you're after.

[lyndseas]

Ambrose Bierce had it as "Cogito cogito ergo cogito sum". I'm not sure of the correctness of the grammar, but if the speaker isn't translating it themselves, I'd say that they'd be most likely to use that version since the Devil's Dictionary is a common source of quotations.

[ioanna_ioannina]

This translation is wrong. Cogitare is verbum sentiendi, dicendi, and as such it requires accusativus / nominativus cum infinitivo.

[witchofnovember]

I deleted a spam bot. I hope that was okay.