Re: Examples wanted: How do you say this?

On Monday, April 18, 2005, at 01:30 , caeruleancentaur wrote:

> --- In conlang@yahoogroups.com, Ray Brown <ray.brown@F...> wrote:
>
>> Example:
>> eo     imperium  tenente,               euentum timeo
>> he-ABL power-ACC hold-PRES.PART-ABL
>> With him holding power, I fear the outcome
>
>> There was, however, no present participle for "to be" in Classical
>> Latin, so the two nouns were just put in the ablative, for example:
>>  Caesare   duce,    nihil timebimus.
>> Caesar-ABL leader-ABL
>> With Caesar being leader, we shall fear nothing.
>
> I notice that, in the two examples you give, the topic of the
> absolute construction is not the same as the subject of the main
> clause.  Is it correct to say that this is the rule with absolute
> constructions?
Yes, it is. The 'topic' or 'subject' of the absolute clause must not be
the same as any of the arguments of the main verb, whether subject, object,
  indirect object or, indeed, the object of a preposition.

> Thus, one couldn't say: With me holding power, I fear
> the outcome, or With Caesar being leader, he shall fear nothing.
Correct - the first sentence would be:
(ego) imperium tenens nihil timeo  (where 'temens' is nominative singular)

..and the second would be:
Caesar dux nihil timebit

If one wanted to be more explicit, then a clause could be used, for
example:
cum imperium teneam, nihil timeo/  Caesar, cum dux sit, nihil timebit

> Have I understood this correctly?
Yes.

> P.S. I hope I used the word "topic" correctly.
Possibly not - but I understood what you meant   :)

Trask defines 'topic' as:
"That element of a sentence which is presented as already existing in the
discourse and which the rest of the sentence (the _comment_) is in some
sense 'about'......"

In the two sentences I gave with ablative absolute, I would understand the
ablative absolute phrases themselves to be the topic with 'euentum
timeo' & 'nihil timebimus' as comments. But we would, I guess, need a
context in order to be certain.
===============================================

On Monday, April 18, 2005, at 03:49 , Ph. D. wrote:
[snip]
> This is certainly true for Classical Latin. The topic of the absolute
> cannot refer to the subject or object of the main clause.
>
> Eum imperium tenentem timeo.
> he-ACC power-ACC hold-PRES.PART-ACC fear-PRES-1SG
> With him holding power, I fear him.
>
> No ablative absolute because "him" is the object of "timeo."
Precisely - these phrases are labeled 'absolute' because, as Trask says:
"A constituent linked semantically and intonationally to the rest of the
sentence, but lacking any expression of a syntactic linkage: _[The day
being cloudy,] we decided to stay at home_; _The two women, [their
business completed,] retired to the bar._"

If a participial phrase can be syntactically linked to the rest of the
sentence in Latin, then it must be so linked. The 'ablative absolute' may
be used only when no overt syntactic linkage is possible.

Ray
===============================================
http://home.freeuk.com/ray.brown
ray.brown@freeuk.com
===============================================
Anything is possible in the fabulous Celtic twilight,
which is not so much a twilight of the gods
as of the reason."      [JRRT, "English and Welsh" ]