1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Latin
  4. >
  5. "The doctor heals the sick ma…

"The doctor heals the sick man."

Translation:Medica aegrum sanat.

September 5, 2019

13 Comments


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

the doctor can be medicus and medica.


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/7ga4Ktv4

i wrote medicus vir aegrum sanat is it wrong because vir shouldn't be there? or should vir be written differently? and if vir shouldn't be there, should femina also not be there if it was a woman. what would it be then? medicus aegra sanat?


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

Vir can be there but because it is the direct object it should be in the accusative: medicus virum aegrum sanat. If the sick person is a woman: medicus feminam aegram sanat.


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

Also, if you leave vir in the nominative, it will be taken as modifying the medicus: it's not necessary, but it would have a meaning: "The man who's a doctor," or "The doctor fellow", is curing the sick man (since aegrum on its own, without noun virum, can mean "the sick man").


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

Does "aegrum" necessarily imply that the person who is sick is gendered as masculine? Would not "The doctor heals the sick person." also work?

I didn't attempt it with "person;" I only got the multiple-choice version today. Gonna give it a go if I remember.


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

Yes, just as in English, "If someone is sick, the doctor heals him" means "the doctor heals that person."

The Latin adj. form aegrum has what's called the MASCULINE accus sing ending, but "masculine" is also used in the "generic" sense, in Latin.

I would say the same is true in English, with the generic use of "man" and "he" and so forth; but, though that was once true, it's been "problematized" by those folks who think that, if we just get "the right words," reality will be transformed! (or something)


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/mona208606

So does this mean that aegrum and aegram are now nouns? Or do they remain adjectives?


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

Good point. E.g., magni, 'great men,' magnae, 'great women.' Happens in English: https://www.englishgrammar.org/adjectives-nouns-2/ Spanish: https://www.fluentu.com/blog/spanish/adjectives-as-nouns-spanish/ Many languages.


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

Yes, in effect: they are "substantivized adjectives," meaning they serve as nouns.

The forms (especially the nominatives and accusatives, which have 3 gendered endings, to differentiate masc and fem and neuter: e.g., accus plur aegrōs, aegrās, aegra for "sick men/women/things," respectively; and the genitive plural feminine aegrārum "of the sick women,") reveal enough gender clues on their own as not to need a noun like "men, women, things" accompanying them.

In the dative and ablative, and genitive plural of masculine or neuter, we tend to see the noun rēs, reī , f., "thing," added, to differentiate from "people":

dē miserīs , "about the wretched people" ; dē rēbus miserīs , "about the unfortunate matters."


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

Another option for a male doctor = Medicus aegrum sanat


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/flashj007

Where is 'vir' in that sentence


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

Excellent question!

The point here is that the gendered adjective makes it unnecessary to include a form of the word vir .

Since the -um ending on the adjective aegrum indicates "masculine, singular, accusative," we know that the direct object of the verb sanat , "heals," is a man.

If the adjective were aegram , we would know that the doctor is healing a sick woman .

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