"Livia does not study in the city."
Translation:Livia non in urbe studet.
21 Comments
It should be accepted now, but unfortunately it takes some time for the changes we make in the Incubator to be active for users (sometimes as long as two weeks).
Still, please report (with the button in the lesson, not in the discussion) if it's not accepted, it's still possible something got missed!
Latin does not have arigid laguage structure. Does not matter where the words are located. It is the same to say: Livia non studet in urbe. Livia in urbe non studet. In urbe Livia non studet or any other combination.
word order in latin is arbitrary please don't flag a different word order as a mistake if the grammar is fine
They should all be accepted now, but unfortunately it takes some time for the changes we make in the Incubator to be active for users (sometimes as long as two weeks).
Still, please report (with the button in the lesson, not in the discussion) if it's not accepted, it's still possible something got missed!
It's not arbitrary, but it is a great deal more flexible than English.
I agree Liva non studet in urbe is equally valid to Liva in urbe non studet
It should be accepted now, but unfortunately it takes some time for the changes we make in the Incubator to be active for users (sometimes as long as two weeks).
Still, please report (with the button in the lesson, not in the discussion) if it's not accepted, it's still possible something got missed!
No, no, no, no. This translation implies that she actually studies. She studies in the fields (or wherever) and NOT IN THE CITY. "Livia in urbe non studet" should be equally correct as we dont know whether she studies or not. And to be honest, I dont fancy the verb "to study" in classical Latin "studeo". It has a rather medieval/late Latin feel to it.
1043
I agree - Livia non in urbe studet implies 'she is studying, but not in the city' whereas Livia in urbe non studet implies 'she's in the city, but not for studying' (negations are one of the points where word order matters a great deal in Latin).
I also agree that studere as 'to study' is odd in Classical Latin as studere means something along the lines of 'to apply oneself diligently', and as far as I know it's rarely used without an object or an adverb to begin with.
- 74
I wonder: would you ever say this in (classical) Latin? The literal meaning of "studeo" is "to be zealous/to eagerly apply oneself to something" or something like that. Which can mean "study", as in "I'm studying the Latin authors" (i.e. I read them seriously and intensively) – but using the verb without a (dative) object is rare, and the idea of "studying (in general) at a specific place" to me sounds modern and hardly classical.
Hi, Why is "Livia in urbe non discit" incorrect? AFAIU 'studeo' is not translated as 'to study'. (Also, I'm used to translating in french, maybe in english latin-learning ressource 'studeo' is translated into 'to study')
Also, thanks for the course I'm so glad there's finally a latin one :)
That would be "learn", which isn't the same thing (one can do a lot of studying without learning anything, and one can learn without studying).
- 74
In many languages you do use the same words for "learn" and "study", however. And if you check "disco" and "studeo" in the dictionary (especially the parts headlined "Absol") neither corresponds very well to the modern idea of studying, but both seems to be (at least sometimes) possible. But as I say in another comment below, "studet" in this particular sentence does seem a bit strange.
http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=disco&fromdoc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.04.0059 http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=studeo&fromdoc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.04.0059
"Urbs" doesn't use Locative. "Domus" is one of very few common nouns that do.
