1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Latin
  4. >
  5. "The young man was born in Ne…

"The young man was born in New York."

Translation:Iuvenis Novi Eboraci natus est.

September 2, 2019

49 Comments


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/meteulku_

What is the difference between "iuvenis" and "iuvenes"?


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Guilherme158912

Iuvenis: young man Iuvenes: young men


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Wyattrox03

Iuvenis: of the young man


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/JefDeSmedt

I seem to remember (from 40 years ago) that iuvenes is nominative plural (the "40 years ago" is just to stress that I'm not trusting my own memory, so neither should anyone else ;-) )


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Kathryn920593

JefDeSmedt is correct. It is a difference between singular and plural respectively


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/TehBigO

What's the difference between "Novi Eboraci" and "Novum Eboracum"?


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Kathryn920593

different case: "-i" ending here is locative, meaning translated as "in New York" (can also be genitive, possessive translated as "of New York"); "-um" ending is nominative (subject), accusative (object), or vocative (speaking to New York). In Latin, there is no sentence order, but nouns are declined with different endings to distinguish the case they are in within the sentence


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/wesestmihinomen

couldnt this be much easier stated as Novum Eboracum is when NY is the subject; and Novi Eboraci is when NY is the direct or indirect object? I took latin as a kid and some of these explanations dont make sense.


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/PauloChen2

"Eborācum" is neuter, so the nominative (subject) and accusative (direct object) have the same endings. The form for an indirect object is "Eborācō".

Case Usage Form
nominative subject Eborācum
genitive possession Eborācī
dative indirect object Eborācō
accusative direct object Eborācum
ablative some prepositions Eborācō
vocative address Eborācum
locative location Eborācī

https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Urim_L

Can't it be "Iuvenis Novi Eboraci est natus"? Or "Iuvenis est natus Novi Eboraci", etc?


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/lescouleurs

I also wanna know why "Iuvenis est natus Novi Eboraci" was considered incorrect.


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/MariusBrez

Your syntax creates two clauses. In the first a young man exists, while in the second a birth takes place in New York. The birth must be specified after the subject, so we know to whom it belongs and before the verb which modifies the process into an action.


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Nicholas141873

What's the difference between nata and natus


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Kathryn920593

gender: feminine and masculine respectively


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/catherine.539406

Why is it "Novi Eboraci" but "in Germania"?

I had both within 5 questions


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/PERCE_NEIGE

Because Germania is a country, so we cannot apply the locative to countries. It's only for the cities/towns (and small Islands), a a few words, so it is for New York.


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/j11v8

Shouldn't it be natus erat for "was born" and not natus est ( which should translate as "am born")? Please correct me if I'm mistaken.


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/PERCE_NEIGE

No, it has no link with the present or the past. It's rather a state.

English language represents this state, to be born, by a past. As the action was in the past.

Most of the Romance languages (all?) represents this state by a present, as it's a state, like you are living, you are "born-ed".


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/PeterScham1

Actually, "natus" wasn't originally an adjective. It comes from the verb "nascor" meaning to be born. The verb is a passive only verb, and "natus est" is the perfect passive tense for the verb. So "was born" is the most accurate translation. "natus erat" would be pluperfect (had been born) and nascitur would be present (is born).


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/PERCE_NEIGE

Yes, but the problem is that you translate from English. English uses "was born", but try to translate from a Romance language. (The Latin descend languages)

I was born (past) = Natus sum.

I was born (past) = Je suis né (French, present) = Sono nato (italian, present) = Latin?

Even if "être né" is a form a past, it's also a state.
Same in italian "nato" is "an adjectivation of the past participle". So, there's really probably something like that in the "natus est". A possible adjectivation. Not a coincidence.


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/affeape

It’s not all romance languages, though. In Spanish one says ‘yo nací’ which is the simple past tense—translates directly to ‘I was born’.


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Martin358481

Natus, or archaically also gnatus, is literally 'born, birthed', it is and always was an adjective. Technically, the form is originally a so-called "verbal adjective", which just means that the meaning could be either passive "having been born" or active "having born". Now in Latin this verbal adjective was incorporated into the perfect system, in other words, it is understood as a perfect passive participle. It is best to think of it as an adjective depicting a state (of being born) -- as someone's here already pointed out.

If you specify it as present perfect, that means a state that is still relevant, still going on. So natus (for masc. sg.) est "was born (and is still alive)", on the other hand natus erat "was born (but died at a point)". English does not differentiate between these (thus, Shakespeare was born (= natus erat) in 1564, and Lady Gaga was born (= nata est) in 1986, even though, in Latin, the latter has to be rendered by what in English would be "is born", that is if English used the same logic as Latin, because Lady Gaga is still with us). Now, this works like this because, without any context, the assumption is that we are using HERE & NOW as the point of reference for this state. Given some other context, these would have to be relative to the point of reference given in that context, of course.


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/venustheegoddess

Would Iuvenis natus Novi Eboraci est be correct?


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/PERCE_NEIGE

I think it's better to let "natus" and "est" together, with no hyperbate (not separated by other words), I tried to find example of sentences taken from Latin corpus, with this splitted, but I didn't find any. Maybe some other user, more advanced than I am could find many examples of this?


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/dabrygo

The tips section says "The locative case is a special case which indicates a location used for cities." Does this mean "Iuvenis Novi Eboraci natus est" translates to "The young man was born in New York City" and "Iuvenis in Novum Eboracum natus est" translates to "The young man was born in (the state of) New York"?


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/HimanshuNi12

When should I use "in" before a city name


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/GScottOliver

I don't think it's ever used, as explained in this comment by Kathryn, among other places.


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/N.vkDw

Couldn't one translate iuvenis as a youngster rather than a young man?


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/PERCE_NEIGE

According to Cambridge dictionary, a youngster seems younger than a young man.

a young person, usually an older child

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/youngster


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Ryan88007

quid est sinister cum "Iuvenis est natus Novi Eboraci"?


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Al_MIC

Wouldn't normally be Eboraci Novi, or at least shouldn't that be acceptable because in Latin Adjectives often come after the nouns they modify?


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/psittacus_ebrius

The "new" in New York is not an adjective, it is the first part of a compound noun.


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/retired82844

If "Stephanus natus est in America." / "Stephanus was born in America." Why "Iuvenis natus est in Novi Eboraci ." is not correst??????


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/dora593462

America is a state, Novum Eboracum (New York) is a city; so He was born In Italia but He was born Romae


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/GScottOliver

As dora indicated but did not state, the word order should be fine, but since New York is a city, we use the locative case without the preposition in.


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/theswagdalena

Why is "in" sometimes used and sometimes not?


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/ken232607

Doesn't the latin sentence translate as, "the young man was born in New York City" since the locative form, Novi Eboravi, is used and there is no "in?"


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/6tbUAUt8

is est the proper form for the simple past of esse?


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/PedroDiaz417553

the hyperbaton allows to put another order of the words in Latin, then I should be able to say Iuvenis natus Novi Eboraci est


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/CheeLearnsSmth

why Iuvenis est natus Novi Evoraci incorrect?


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Robert485433

Several other comments in this Discussion explain that natus est is treated as a phrasal verb, and should not be separated.


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Valeria.arce

Why not "iuvenis est natus novi eboraci"?


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Candice_Mace

Is 'Iuvenis natus Novi Eboraci est' wrong?


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/marcialori

I think better: Iuvenis in Novi Eboraci natus est. "In is important "


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Elisabeth544452

If iuvenis means young man then is there a word that means young woman, or is iuvenis actually supposed to mean youth in general.


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/emma829439

word order has been unimportant and now suddenly it's important...

I put: Iuvenis natus Novi Eboraci est correct answer is : Iuvenis Novi Eboraci natus est. Why isn't mine OK? Thanks for any help.


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/GScottOliver

Several other comments in this Discussion explain that natus est is treated as a phrasal verb, and should not be separated.

Learn Latin in just 5 minutes a day. For free.