There's no "O" in this sentence, so this might not be the best place to have this particular discussion, but Latin is certainly not strictly SVO. It is only around half of Latin sentences that end with the verb. It's perfectly common for the verb to be the first word on the sentence, or the object, or for the subject to come at the end.
In subordinate clauses the word order is more predictable, and there is a stronger tendency for the verb to be placed at the end.
Usually, but he word order can be changed for emphasis. Livia non in urbe studet emphasizes the city - she studies, but not in the city. Livia non studet in urbe emphasizes the study - she is in the city, but doesn't study. Both is translated Livia doesn't study in the city.
Is Latin like Arabic and Turkish in that the word the closest to the verb is stressed? So this sentence means he is stressing that it is not in the city that she's studying (rather she might be studying at her home on the countryside) . If I would say "Livia non studet in urbe" would it be an acceptable sentence meaning that studying is not something she's doing in the city (but maybe just enoying life).?
I think typically the adverb "non" modifies the verb. Here the distinction is not as clear. If the distinction was necessary for meaning, I think the sentence would use a negative adjective like "in nulla urbe" (in no city) to avoid ambiguity. In general adverbs associate with their nearest word or phrase, but this is definitely not always true especially in poetry and real Latin
I will play my grammar nazi, but are you sure "non" is an adverb in Latin? It works like an adverb, but I'm not quite sure, as I didn't find sources.
"Non, none" can be an adverb in English. But in Latin, it's a "negative particle".
Please, if I'm wrong, I'd like the link to learn something new. I'm specially interested if a grammarian or a linguist replies.
I'm saying it smoothly. Smoothly is an adverb, because it modifies the way I "say" it.
I'm not saying it. Is not an adverb, as it doesn't modify, modulate the way.
Not entirely accurate. The "ne" functions the same way as in Latin (in the context of negating verbs), but the "pas", "jamais", "rien", "personne", "nulle part", etc. are all considered « adverbes de négation ». The "ne" is dropped a lot anyway since it's a bit redundant at times.
Sorry about that Korean only comment, This is for Korean users who learn Latin
틀림없이 저처럼 호기심으로 또는 영어 공부 더 파 보실려고 하시는 분 계실거라 생각 해서 정보 공유합니다.
- Livia non in urbe studet
- 주어 + 부정어 + 부사 + 동사
- Latin word order가 SOV인건 알겠는데 부정어를 쓰는 방법이 Korean word order와 다른 것 같습니다.
- 한국어 어순으로 굳이 직역 하자면
- "리비아가 아냐 도시에 공부하는거" 정도로 해석이 되는데
- "리비아가 도시에서 공부하지 않아" 라고 동사와 붙여서 쓰는 것은 아직 발견 하지 못했습니다 (2020-04-27)
- 추후 새로운 지식이 쌓이면 수정 하겠습니다.
L - clear L like in Spanish "luz" or French "lumière" (note that it can be a dark L /ɫ/ in a lot of other phonetic contexts)
Ī - /iː/ like in "feet"
V - /w/ like in "woman"
I - /ɪ/ as in "fit", can even approach /i/ in this case (which would be like in "feet" but said shorter)
A - /a/, front like in Spanish "carro" or French "ballon"
Three syllables: "LEE-wih-ah"
In English, "Livia does not study in the city" is ambiguous. It could mean "Livia does not STUDY in the city" or it could mean "Livia does not study IN THE CITY".
In Latin, the "non" goes before what it negates, although "non in urbe studet" is just as ambiguous as the English. If it were "in urbe non studet" that would force the "does not STUDY" meaning. Both ways ought to be accepted.
yes, here's a snippet- "Most verbs do not show grammatical gender: the same ending is used whether the subject is "he", "she", or "it". However, when a verb is made periphrastically out of a participle and part of the verb sum "I am", the participle shows gender, for example:
missus est "he was sent" missa est "she was sent" Impersonal verbs, such as nūntiātum est "it was reported", are neuter singular."
I'm not the best at the English language; this is the case, no?
We would have to know the exact sentence and your exact translation.
I placed "non" before the verb. System did not accept it.
Again, that does not provide any context. That is a vague description of what you did. That is not an exact sentence with your exact translation. That is not enough to go on. You're making me guess.
If the "non" was meant to negate something other than the verb and you put it after that, that's why. As I said, in a sentence like this, the "non" could be negating "in urbe" and not "studet".
In Latin many verbs take the dative instead of the accusative. This is very common for compound verbs which have preposition prefixes. In the case of studet, it is because it has the primary idea of "be eager for"
The verb credo, credere - to trust also takes the dative because it has the idea of "give trust to"
I don't see where they mean it's always transitive.
I make a search, to see if *studere could be listed as a transitive or intransitive verb. I found an old Latin grammar book in French:
"Quelques verbes sont transitifs en français et intransitifs en latin, et réciproquement. Ainsi étudier est transitif, studere est intransitif; sciscitari est transitif"
Source here: https://books.google.fr/books?id=f24ZAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA229&lpg=PA229&dq=studere+transitive&source=bl&ots=wILCEs0elg&sig=ACfU3U2T1_JBzz9Va38oPcY-Hlt3KMrY1w&hl=fr&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiTrpSG7tfkAhUKXRoKHZkWCPMQ6AEwAXoECCgQAQ#v=onepage&q=studere%20transitive&f=false
Roughly translated by:
Some verbs are transitive in French and intransitive in Latin, and vice versa. Thus to study (étudier) in French is transitive, studere is intransitive ; sciscitari is transitive "
Note that this grammar really consider that studere = étudier = to study.
On the wiktionary:
studeō, infinitif : studēre, parfait : studuī (pas de supin) intransitif. Note : suivi du datif.
Studere is intransitive, so it's the opposite, you can't use it in proper Latin if there's an object to study.
According to this grammar, you can say "I study Latin" in English, as the verb can be used both transitively or intransitively, but you can't say "studere Latin" in Latin.
The capital letters, the comas, and the dots, in short, punctuation, are not counted in Duolingo. In other course, it's just ignored by the software, so here, it must be the same.
You probably mistyped something, "Livia does not study in the city" is the correction given by Duolingo to me.
Latin has no articles, definite or indefinite.
English has articles, but those don't go before prepositional phrases. It's "in the city", not "the in city". And the official translation is "Livia does not study in the city".
Also, this is a forum for learners to help each other understand the lessons. The volunteer course contributors do not (and can not) monitor these threads for feedback. If you ever feel a correct answer was marked wrong, you need to hit the little flag icon before continuing to the next prompt and report "My answer should be accepted."