Translation:The young man is in the forum with an angry parrot.
I actually looked this up and found that it is not on their motto, nor their state seal. It is, in fact, on their coat of arms. Their seal states their two state mottos-"Excelsior!" (Ever upward!) and "E Pluribus Unem" (Out of many, one).
Super cool that Novi Eboraci has actually been in use since at least 1625, I also had assumed it was a type of new latin used by hobbyists!
(Ē plūribus ūnum , which is the motto of the US.)
If you look here, you'll see the seal of New York City, which includes the Latin name (Novī Eborācī) in the genitive case, because it says "seal of the city of New York":
The pronunciation kind of sucks. When writing this as dictation, I always start out writing "iuvenes"—because THAT'S WHAT SHE SAYS. Then at the end of the sentence, when I hear the singular verb "est", I realize that she was supposed to have said "iuvenis", and I have to go back and correct it.
Yeah, it seems that way to me as well. I got it wrong though. Also, she seems to be saying psettaco instead of psittaco. And her pronunciation of in sounds like a middle American pronunciation of the English word "in". The i in irato is the only i in the sentence that is pronounced the way I anticipate the Latin i to be pronounced. But heck, they all have odd ways of pronouncing Latin at times. Although to my ear my Latin sounds perfect, I'm glad I'm not being recorded.
A few people here have pushed back against the usual claim that in Latin, word order doesn't matter. They counter that word order can matter, especially for emphasis; or so I understood. Well, this is certainly the case in English, as with this very sentence.
This is a subtle thing, but: I think there is a difference -- in English -- between, "The young man with an angry parrot is in the forum," and "The young man is in the forum with an angry parrot." In the first sentence, "with an angry parrot" identifies which young man we are talking about; the second is ambiguous; it could mean that, or it could mean, the forum he is in, is the forum that has an angry parrot.
So here's my question: is it really true, with this sentence, that the word order is immaterial? So, could this sentence have been, "Iuvenis est in foro cum psittaco irato," yielding the same options for translation?
Or am I just off base here?
You're on to something really important here.
In fact, the sentence can only mean (in Latin) " ... is in the forum with the angry parrot."
We're told that Latin doesn't have "the man in the picture" sentences: i.e., for a prep. phrase to be adnominal (describing the noun), we need a relative clause structure: Iuvenis qui cum psittaco est (or, qui psittacum portat, "who carries the parrot", or the like).
In the absence of the rel. clause structure, we 'have' to take cum psittaco with the verb, est (in foro).
Since I am a musician (classical guitarist), I have a fairly good recording system with state-of-the-art neuman mikes. I am able to record anything, and then slow it down while maintaining the pitch. I wondered whether or not I am losing my ability to hear since some of the words sound slurred. So I recorded this sentence and I slowed it down. I realized that the words "Psittaco irato" are slurred together which is easily proven if you have the equipment that I have. Since we are beginning Latin students, I would suggest that the man recording this Latin stop from slurring words. I have read that slurring words is common in Latin poetry. But does it have a place here? I was going to have my hearing checked out but now I realize it's not necessary. I note another person left the same comment below. Thank you for allowing me to gripe about this excellent website except for a few improvements that can be made. Please accept my comments as constructive criticism. Thanks!
Which report button should I press for pronunciation problems? So far I’ve been choosing the audio problem, but it occurs to me that that may be simply for technical quality of the audio. On the other hand, there is no error in the sentence per se. Anyway, the parrot should be pronounced “psit-taco”, and not “psi-taco” - the “tt” may blend into one t, but a long one.
It’s the indefinite and definite articles, auxiliary verbs, and other such helpful words which make English lose the word count. Latin loses in rare sentences (depending, of course, how we translate).
My students do so all the time, though "irritated" actually comes from a different Latin word (inrītātus, a, um or irrītātus, a, um , the participle of irrītāre , "to provoke, vex").
I like to connect them with the word "irate," which is the English derivative of īrātus, a, um , an adjective apparently formed from the noun īra, -ae , f., "anger" (but viewed in antiquity as the perfect participle of deponent īrascī , "to become angry; to fly into a rage").
But, as you can see, the emotion is (fairly) similar in both.
Usually between 20 and 40. Older than adolescentes and younger than seniores. The iuvenes are also known as the iuniores.
I see what you mean, because of our use of juvenile. The sequence is roughly infans 0-?, puer ?-14 (the Stoic view), adulescens 14 -21, iuvenis/iunior 21-40, senior 40-60, senex 60-120 (usually somewhat less).
I'm not an expert on Latin, and probably not an expert on anything. However... in another, similarly-structured sentence, it was thoroughly discussed as to whether, "the boy with the girl goes to the city" or, "the boy goes to the city with the girl".
The 'correct' answer, in both cases, seems to follow some pattern of treating the 'with the parrot' and 'with the girl', as prepositional and/or at the very least, positioned the way they are in the sentence to 'mean something'.
As a native English speaker, and as someone who would probably be a director's nightmare (or a sitcom sketch inspiration?) when it comes to how to interpret or read a line, I cannot say I find the two options, "the young man with an angry parrot is ... bla bla bla ", and "the young man is ... bla bla bla ... with an angry parrot" to be equivalent.
Consider a situation in which you are tasked with monitoring a subreddit and also a liquor store at the same time. Consider the liquor store is frequented by a young man who owns an angry parrot, and he told you today that he just signed up for reddit. Consider the subreddit you monitor is /r/youngmenandangryparrots. Consider what you are going to tell your boss; who only speaks Latin; moments after you see /u/flexinkaratsvexinparrots log in and start a flame-war with an angry, computer-savvy parrot; when he asks you, "where is the young man with the angry parrot"?
Consider how to say 'the young man with the angry parrot is in the forum with an angry parrot but not his angry parrot'.
No. The subject of the verb est is iuvenis ("the young man"), not psittacus ("a parrot"). The parrot is mentioned as psittaco irato ("angry parrot"). This is the ablative case, used with cum ("with"). So it's cum psittaco irato ("with an angry parrot"). So it's the young man being in the forum "with the angry parrot", not the parrot being in the forum "with the young man".
To say what you wrote, "An angry parrot is in the forum with the young man", you would need to say something like, Psittacus iratus cum iuvene in foro est.