Well, I think, in antiquity people translated,
and even very complicated philosophy, correctly,
between Greek and Latin for example. thus if we
have an adverb in Latin, there is an adverb in
Greek too (teh Greek original is not known).
The "bonum" is a miscitation (cf. the not
trustworthy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_mortuis_nil_nisi_bonum)
or deliberate alteration of
"de mortuis nil nisi bene".
Deliberate?: yes, because it changes the
imperative from "being just and fair" in "to be a
panegyric" (perhaps more fashionable and accepted
in our times).
msk
>On Oct 6, 2011, at 9:28 AM, Manfred Kropp wrote:
>>
>> Just a very pedestrian correction of the Latin
>>citation (probaby of Chilon of
>>Sparta;http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chilon_von_Sparta):
>> de mortuis nil nisi bene (not: bonum)
>>
>
>And even more pedantically. If Chilon of Sparta
>said it, and Diogenes Laėrtius who quoted it,
>it certainly wasn't in Latin.
>However the Latin was then and is now "de
>mortuis nil nisi bonum dicendum est" where bonum
>is an adjective acting as a noun and NOT an
>adverb which is what bene is. Bene would be
>correct only if the phrase was something like
>"speak only well of the dead", which is
>certainly the intent of the phrase
>
>My Latin is I fear rather rusty as it is now 60
>years ago I first started learning Latin in the
>class of Father John Flynn SJ, of whom we
>freshman were rightly terrified. Still, there
>are somethings which stick even now.
>
>Still, if we wish to have a good Latin phrase to
>honor Steve, the lines on the tomb of
>Christopher Wren come to mind. "Si momentum
>requires, circumspice" (If you require a
>monument, look around."
>
>rich
>--
>Rich Hansen
>[log in to unmask] // [log in to unmask]
|
