Translation:Drunk parrots are the worst animals.
There's a bird in New Zealand called the kererū (commonly "wood pigeon" among older Pākehā/European generations who struggle with Māori words) that likes to binge on certain berries in summer, when they're overripe and starting to ferment. Basically, kererū are fat, clumsy birds that get very drunk and fall out of trees
Parrots are very smart. They, like many other animals, like all kind of stuff that is not healthy to them, but tastes good. They can indeed get drunk, and they will also drink coffee; you name it, they can do it. The situation with pet parrots is sad, because they really need a large flock or, for some species, simply a partner in a small flock. Humans are not good partners. But the parrots will take what is there; and of course they will want to eat and drink what you eat and drink. In nature, animals do get drunk, from pigs to parrots, mostly from ripe fruits. I personally like the parrots as a teaching tool. I do agree with another poster that we could learn more about animals that Romans sacrificed. Life was bloody and not very "civilized" as we understand it now in ancient times. But Romans should have had parrots, at least as very exotic pets.
I did see a pet shop owner who used to give a big, beautiful macaw a little thimble of rum every once in awhile. It was so cute to see him take it and drink it. I don't think they gave him so much to get him drunk though. At least I never saw him fall off his perch or anything!
This is true. Alcohol is nothing more than a transformed sugar (if you had chemistry course at school)
To make wine, it simply takes a glass of grape juice, forgotten on a table, a hot summer afternoon. The alcoholization of the sugar begins, promoted by the yeast present in the grape skin.
A certain amount of alcohol is naturally present in very ripe fruit (fruit rich in sugar). The parrots being small animals, and if they eat only very ripe fruit, in the summer, they can become alcoholized.
Some thing happens with the drosophile flies, it's a fact very well known of biologists.
In most courses you there is a button (microphone icon) on the discussion page that allows you to listen to the recording again. I have asked them to place these links in the Latin course as well. (Sometimes I go on with the lesson before reading the SD's and so in those cases I no longer have access to the recordings). In general, it would be convenient.
In his Natural history I guess.
"The parrot, which comes from India, is a green bird with a red circlet around its neck. It can be taught to speak; it greets its master and repeats words said to it. Its head and beak are very hard.
I'm not sure he was right in saying that parrots all come from India.
He talked about a particular kind of parrots, green parrots. I think it was Indian rose-ringed parakeet (Psittacula krameri) not a real parrot, but a psittacula, as we classify it now.
Seeing this one about how terrible they are really brought the "drunk parrots" thing home for me. I mean, it's a hillarious trend to have throughout this enlightening course! If anyone is so interested, there is a book, "Langua Latina" I'd highly recommend, anyone who's made it this far in the duolingo course should be able to easily understand the fist couple of chapters... (I would also suggest downloading a Latin-English translating app on your phone because you will end up bumping into unknown words) https://www.academia.edu/21452941/Lingua-Latina-Oerberg-Familia-Romana-LibroCompleto.pdf
An alternative translation which really should be accepted is: "Drunk parrots are very bad animals.” Hurled drunk parrots are the worst.
Normally, it's not "very bad", as it's a superlative here.
"Very" in "very bad" is not a superlative, it's only an adverb of intensity.
But: the use of superlative seems to be flexible in Latin, so for instance, we saw:
Plurima = The greatest amount, most of (superlative)
But also = a very large quantity (the famous "very many") =just an "intensified" quantity, in comparison with simply "a large quantity".
The Latin word is a superlative, and in English there are several ways to translate it. To say that “very” is not a superlative is correct, but “very bad” is considered one of the several legitimate ways the Latin superlative pessimus may be translated. Consider it a superlative phrase, if you will. The point is that it does translate the Latin superlative in instances where “worst” would not do.
The superlative "-st" always require the article "the".
- The most beautiful lady on earth. (superlative)
The worst student in the school. (it's a short adjective)
When you use the comparative, you don't use "the":
- Jane is more beautiful than Janice. (comparative)
Jane is worse than Janice at maths. (it's a short adjective)
When you say "Parrots are the worst animals", the meaning is completely different from "The parrots are the worst animals".
When you don't use the "the" (the first "the" here) before a plural name, it means "in general". So the sentence means: All the parrots (on earth).
If you use the definite article "the parrots", it means that you talk about a defined group of parrots, (not every parrots in the world).
Usually With the definite article, but you can say “Jane is most beautiful”, “That would be best”, etc.
Jane is more beautiful (than....) = comparative.
Or Jane is the most beautiful. = superlative.
"That would be best (for you..)" is different.
"best for you" is a kind of expression I believe, implying "the best solution for you", or something like that.
Incorrect, eh? You are saying that I and my fellow native English speakers have no idea how to speak English because for centuries we have been ignoring Stackexchange. This is our worst nightmare (sorry - our the worst nightmare). We keep forgetting to use the definite article with the superlative which, so it appears, is most necessary (oh - the most necessary).
Sorry, I didn't want to sound too affirmative, I only rely on grammar books. I trust natives, but I trust grammar books too. So, if I'm wrong, and I'm wrong often, just give me a link. I've only seen grammar books with this rule so far, but I'm ready and open to learn more, with references.
Omg. Look what's coming, if we really want to learn Latin.
I thought "animalia" was an odd sort of plural, but didn't find any comments on this page. So I looked it up in wicktionary.
Noun: animalia (animal)
(indefinite, singular, plural)
absolutive: animalia, animalia , animaliak
ergative: animaliak, animaliak, animaliek
dative: animaliari, animaliari, animaliei genitive: animaliaren, animaliaren, animalien
comitative: animaliarekin, animaliarekin, animaliekin
causative: animaliarengatik, animaliarengatik, animaliengatik
benefactive: animaliarentzat, animaliarentzat, animalientzat
instrumental: animaliaz animaliaz, animaliez
inessive: animaliarenga,n, animaliarengan, animaliengan
allative: animaliarengana, animaliarengana, animaliengana
terminative: animaliarenganaino, animaliarenganaino, animalienganaino
directive: animaliarenganantz, animaliarenganantz, animalienganantz
destinative: animaliarenganako, animaliarenganako, animalienganako
ablative: animaliarengandik, animaliarengandik, animaliengandik
partitive: animaliarik - - prolative animaliatzat - -
"very bad" should not only be accepted as a translation of "pessima" but it should be preferred to "worst." the superlative typically is used with a partitive genitive when it is used to express the idea of "most." Thus, the usual way to express "drunk parrots are the worst animals" would be "Psittaci ebrii sunt animalium (omnium) pessima."
93% of the time I just use this for spell check
Thet should fix that.
It nice they let u slide if u get a letter wrong, but ablot of the time they dont tell you. Reaffirming the missed spelling. Which when learning a new language, can really throw you off.
They should always add the perfect correct answer to the correct or wrong banner that pops up after your attempt.