Talk:Catullus 85
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate, you can edit the article. You can discuss the Project at its talk page. |
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary at in the comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article. |
[edit] Translation
What translation is being used here? What source, when I did this for my Latin GCSE I was told that "excrucior" translated more to "Crucified", perhaps as the word excruciating is derived from this we should alter the translation? Help plz 15:53, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
- This dictionary has it as "to torture" or "to torment." It's related to crux,crucis, but it's not actually the verb for crucify, at least by this dictionary (New college latin english dictionary). Sophy's Duckling 09:36, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] capitalization
Are either "Quare" or " Nescio" supposed to be capitalized? It looks like a mistake to me, after having a little bit of Latin and realizing that the language lacks capitalization at the beginning of sentences, but I don't know where to find a reliable original (I see it typed both ways online). thanks. Jxn 05:30, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
The word excrucior does literally mean torture, but the word comes from the Latin word crux, crucis, f: cross. In this poem I would say that crucified is a better translation. If you look at the poem itself it has a very neat chiastic structure. "Odi et amo…sentio et excrucior," I hate and I love…I feel and I am crucified; "faciam…fieri," I do it… it is done; "requiris // nescio," you ask, I don't know. The poem itself becomes the cross that Catullus is hanging from.
Concerning capitalization in Latin, the original manuscript of Catullus was written in all capitals with no spaces. It is entirely up to the editor how it is punctuated.
[edit] wikisource
The Wikisource article in direct relation to this poem (here: http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Catullus_85) has an differentiating translation. There should be some congruency between the two articles.
