Re: Non vitae sed scholae discimus
| From: | J. 'Mach' Wust <j_mach_wust@...> |
|---|
| Date: | Friday, September 17, 2004, 19:27 |
|---|
On Fri, 17 Sep 2004 12:51:02 +0200, Andreas Johansson <andjo@...> wrote:
>I don't know if my previous mail on this topic went thru, but I went home and
>checked Tore Jansson's _Latin_, and it agrees with what I thought I recalled;
>what Seneca actually wrote was _Non vitae sed scholae discimus_ "Not for life
>but for school do we learn". It's noted its often quoted in opposite form,
>and yet attributed to Seneca (which strikes me as highly discourteous, no
>matter how dead the old man might be).
It's not that bad since he meant it should be the other way round. By
inversing Seneca's word, we get it the way he'd have wanted it. It's not a
proper quote, but an allusion, and a quite litteral one.
gry@s:
j. 'mach' wust
Reply