1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Latin
  4. >
  5. "Plurima sepulchra Romae sunt…

"Plurima sepulchra Romae sunt."

Translation:There are very many graves in Rome.

September 2, 2019

This discussion is locked.


The ancient Romans forbade burials in the city, except for deified emperors; most of the graves were in cemeteries outside the walls.


Why? I think there's a link with the souls of the dead as ghosts, is it true?

They say " The Appian Way, the oldest highway, is lined with tombs of the most aristocratic families."



The Via Appia is outside of the city walls.


Why is this in the Food section?


Because lessons are linked are grouped by grammar, to make them progressive. The topic is the general trend.


Ghoul can learn something from Duo too.


Yeah, that's my question too.


Maybe you could eat the graves if you have really strong teeth.


There are many graves in Rome is wrong?


They are looking for "very many graves"--the course is still new.


"There are many graves in Rome" → Multa sepulchra Romæ sunt.


"There are many..." is wrong"

Because they didn't use "multa" here (many, a lot), But "plurima", meaning it's a superlative for multa.

plurima > multa.

Plurima is even more multa than multa, so even more "many" than "many".

It's a very large quantity (plurima), not only a large quantity (multa).


Is it truly superlative, as in the most? Does "Plurima sepulchra Romae sunt" mean "Rome has the most graves", or "Most graves are in Rome", or does it just mean "There are very many graves in Rome".

I find it strange that the course requires the use of 'very', given that it has more or less no lexical meaning. Mark Twain once wrote that you should replace every instance of very in your writing with damn, and if it doesn't seem right then it should be removed. Does "Plurima sepulchra Romae sunt" mean, "There are damned many graves in Rome"?


It has 2 uses: a true superlative ("the most"), plus a very high degree of ("quite a few," "very many").


I wrote the same, does "very many" makes sense in English for native speakers?


"Quite a few" or "A whole lot of" sounds better to me, than the phrase "very many" (which I tend to use in negative contexts, like: "There are not very many ways to achieve this"), speaking for myself.


There are no graves in Rome. Burial within the city was not allowed.


Rome has been continuously inhabited for centuries. The culture has changed somewhat. The city has probably also expanded to the point that graves which previously were outside the city walls, are now well within the city.


Within the Pomerium, the official border of Rome. When we see ancient graves/tombs in what is considered Rome today, most of them weren't within the official borders before.


Nothing in this sentence implies that it is talking about ancient Rome. There ARE graves in Rome nowadays: I've seen quite a few! If we assume that all the sentences are about the ancient days, what do we do with Novum Eboracum?


Except for some Emperors.


They were buried on the Campus Martius, which is now part of Rome, but then, was outside the pomerium, so not officially part of the city.

This is also why legions were permitted to camp on that ground - legions were not supposed to be inside the city of Rome when under arms.


And there were very many emperors I guess…


The Pomerium stopped representing the de facto borders of the city early in the history of Rome.


Lots of, a vast amount of, numerous, uncountable amount of, plenty of, a great many


It reminds me my visit of the acatholic cemetery of Rome, very beautiful <3


Oh, really beautiful. I loved it too.


That, too, is outside of the walls.


How about a plethora of graves, like "a plethora of piñatas"?


It's not good, because you would need a word to say "less than a plethora". Plethora is a lot, but a superlative for nothing.

Here, you need a word and its superlative, the same way faster is the superlative for fast.

Here, plurima, is even more "multa" than "multa is"
Like faster is even more fast than fast.

It is why they used "very" with many, to mean "even more many than many".
But every expressions that would oppose a word, and a word even greater, will do.


"Faster" isn't the superlative for "fast", it's the comparative. "Fastest" is the superlative.



You keep using that word; I do not think it means what you think it means


If we're looking for a superlative, "very many" doesn't work in English, although I've heard it used to mean "a great number of." You can easily have more than "very many," as in this sentence: "Very many people died of the plague in this village, but even more died in that village."


You're right. "The greatest number" is a possible translation for the superlative plurimus.

(It's relevant that Latin superlatives translated both "the absolutely highest/greatest" meaning, and "very high, to a considerable extent," which is rather different.

In other words, the superlative celerrimus meant either "fastest" or "very fast, extremely fast, quite fast." )


I did four years of latin at school and never had problems translating this, now this app makes it suddenly strange with the 'very many' problem...


How would you translate plurimus?


Plentiful? I think the issue with most of the students is not that they hate using multus but simply "very many" sounds unnatural.


Try 'a great many' then


"'very many' sounds unnatural"

How so? "A great many / a good many / very many" are all phrases meaning "a very large number (of)" -- and none of them sounds unnatural to me.

Most of the young men went off to the war, and a great many never came back. Although it all happened a good many years ago, very many people still remember that fact.


Plentiful seems by far the best English translation, as it is commonly used to mean 'a great number of' but more literally means 'more than necessary', retaining the superlative implications of the Latin.


I don't see any connection whatsoever this has with food, which is the skill I was practicing when this came along.


(Maybe just a reminder that the locative case exists?)


This discussion casts light on the US motto e pluribus unmuzzled, usually translated “out of many, one”


Pluribus comes from plus pluris meaning many plurimus is the superlative, meaning a great many, very many, the most


Plūs, plūris, a neuter substantive meaning "more" (functioning as a comparative degree to multus, a, um, "much").

So, ē plūribus literally means "from MORE" (not "from many," which would be ē multīs ).


LOL Don't you mean "E pluribus unum"?


In Latin-Spanish Dictionary Plurimus is translated to "muchos" = many. I've never heard very many in English. Does not sound usual


Plurimi does not mean muchos in Spanish, but muchísimos, muy muchos.


Every one of my answers keeps getting marked as wrong because of the faulty algorithm.


Isn't the "very" an excess of literal translation? Nobody would say "very many" in English. If this is necessary, for instance, to try to teach a "more than many" world, is still not OK to force it this way. If the literal translation is weird, a good translation would rather try to mean the same in a normal way, instead of to making fit one language by disrupting the other language's nature.


A great many is also accepted. I do say very many, but still, (so not nobody). It is necessary to distinguish it from multus -a -um. If the words meant the same thing, then we wouldn't have included them just to confuse you.

Multus -a -um: Many

Plurimus -a -um: Very many, a great many, the greatest number


Nobody would say "very many" in English. < I disagee. Very many people WOULD say it -- myself (an English speaker of very many years' standing) included!


However, why do you insist with the "very many"? is it a kind "more than many" but still not a superlative? can you supply more info on this kind of words like "plurima"? Maybe provide a link for further reading! Thanks!


Yes, it's a superlative. It's the superlative for "many", so it's even more "many" than "many".

Any expression in English meaning "more than many" should work.


It's not a superlative. According to your definition, "four" would be a superlative to "three" and "five" would be a superlative to "four." "Many" doesn't have a superlative because it isn't a comparative. There can be only one superlative matching a comparative. Examples include more/most, greater/greatest, dumber/dumbest, etc. "Many" is neither a comparative nor a superlative, nor is "very." "Very many" is a very poor way to translate anything into English. I'm tempted to call it the poorest. But that would be hyperbole - also an actual superlative. Please, ditch "very many." You're reinforcing awful "English" to people who are probably trying to improve it by learning Latin


So, "many" is a positive-degree adjective; "more/rather a lot/too many" is the comparative degree; and "most/quite a few" is the superlative.

I don't like "very many" either, as a translation of plurimus .


More than many is rarely used. Very many is one of the comparative degrees of superlatives.


It is funny when comments on Duolingo say, " Nobody would says such and such in English" when that is precisely what I do say.


Why not "sepulchrae"?


No, because sepulchra is a neuter plural 2nd declension noun (a singular tomb is a sepulchrum ). For this noun, the -a ending is plural (nominative/accusative case). It's not the type of noun (like vīlla or puella) that uses -a for singular nominative and -ae for plural nominative (1st decl. noun).


"Very many" is this American English? British English says "great many"


The whole course is in American English, but very many is also used in British English.

You can report "a great many". You need the a for it to be right.


There are many many graves.


why is it "very many" instead of a lot of, or something? the translation is just wrong


'Very many' is not only correct English, but also the best translation for 'plūrima'.


How about "the most graves are in Rome"?


wouldn't "most" be a superlative form rather than a "very many" or more-than-many amount as it is pretended for us to translate?

Because If it is not superlative, it could be better translated as "really many graves" or "a lot of graves" or "lots of grave" or such phrases.

I guess "plurima" is like a higher degree of many, but not a superlative or majority, like "most" or "the most".


Superlative is in the idea, here it's an absolute superlative (the most..of all), and it's the idiomatic way Romans used to say "very very very large quantity". So, even if the "very very" is not technically a superlative, it has this meaning.


There are several graves in Rome.


"There are several graves in Rome" → Aliquot/complura sepulchra in Romæ sunt.


Several is a few, which is usually not many. Quite the opposite to 'very many'

  • 2451

Sorry, I don't think this is English. 'There are a lot of graves in Rome' should be accepted.


Sorry, but it is English. If we wanted to say many, we'd say multa sepulchra. Plurima means very many or a great many.

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