"Surely Corinna does not live alone?"
Translation:Num Corinna sola habitat?
Whether is one of the possible translations for "num", according to the link posted on this page by Lukianos, but not here.
In direct questions (the case here!) = "surely not"
In indirect speech, reported questions = "whether". (she asked me whether...)
Quaero, num ........?
I ask whether ........?
And also as an articulation between 2 clauses:
: videamus ergo, num expositio haec longior demum esse debeat.
Therefore we see, whether this explanation should not be a little longer.
Bill, have a look at the notes for this chapter: https://www.duolingo.com/skill/la/places/tips-and-notes
Num The particle num indicates that the speaker expects a negative answer; the speaker would be surprised if someone answered yes.
I understood it this way so far:
The word "num" (surely not) relates to a tag question in which the first part must be in the negative form. See:
Num Sparta insula est? Surely Sparta isn't an island? Sparta isn't a island, is it?
Num Marcus Novi Eboraci habitat? Surely Marcus does not live in New York? Marcus doesn't live in New York, does he?
Yes, I agree. More precisely, the Latin NUM-phrase is functionally the equivalent of the English tag question, but the difference is that in Latin this part is explicit, whereas the negative part is implicit or tacit. "Surely ... isn't" is just a clunky (or stilted) way of saying "…isn't ..., is it?”, which could also be simply asked by a positive question similar to an echo question realized with an inquisitive intonation that is meant to elicit correction: “(Are you kidding me?) Corinna lives by herself? (please tell me she doesn’t OR this can’t be true, please tell me it isn’t)”
Num is just an archaic way of saying "now" and is meant to elicit correction (Nunc 'now' is a derivative of this, i.e. nunc < /num-ke/ "now-this/here; now-now"). The question could be paraphrased as "(So, my understanding is that) Corinna does NOT live alone [implied], NOW (correct me if that is not the case and) Corinna does live alone." Sometimes the answer to that would be minime (= minimally, to the smallest degree), implying that your tacit negative assumption is confirmed (= no, she doesn’t live alone, you are correct in that) and therefore need not be corrected even “minimally” (as an exclamation).
-- Num Corinna sola habitat = “(I assume she doesn’t) Now (…correct me if) Corinna (actually) does live alone.”
-- Minime = “(Oh, no, stay calm, she doesn’t -- I don’t have to correct you even) minimally!” :)
-- (Ita) vero = “(Well, actually) in fact = in truth, truthfully (that is a great question because she actually does! – I hate to bring it to you, I’m sorry but you stand corrected (literally) by truth or with truth.” :(
As this language is in Beta, I've given this one a pass, but you aren't imagining things. Some of the speakers have slightly different ways to say the words they are pronouncing, and the RR vs. r isn't the only one. IMO I'm going to give this one time to improve, while as my usual using more than one resource. HTH
Just a thought here, I've gotten used to "num" being the equal to the English phrase "surely. . . [negative]" . If you think about it, there are other ways that negatives are indicated in different languages. "Ne . . .pas" in French is the one I'm thinking about. "Num" is the way they do it in Latin. It's kind of like the upside down question mark in Spanish: it indicates that there is a question in the sentence, before you even read it. Latin's "num" is an indicator of a negative assertion. /just a thought.