1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Latin
  4. >
  5. "We skilled people fight."

"We skilled people fight."

Translation:Periti pugnamus.

September 10, 2019

29 Comments


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

I wish they make it English by using the commas.

We, skilled people, fight.

With the commas, it's perfectly correct, and without the commas, it's bad.

The inserter commas ares used as a kind of parenthesis, to denote we are describing the "we" with non essential info.

http://users.utu.fi/micnel/comma.htm


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Rae.F
Mod
Plus
  • 2612

It's not parenthesis. It's a restrictive appositive. It is essential info. It is correct without the commas.


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

Bracketing commas would work I agree, but the tendency in English is towards minimising their use. Sentences that start "We, the underprivileged, can no longer endure this state of affairs etc" still remain a little over-engineered I think.

It's hard to think of a way round that meets all needs, but what do you think of these?

"The experts are fighting" "The craftsmen are fighting". "The specialists are fighting". "The authorities are fighting".

English uses adjectives as nouns in many fixed phrases, for example "The poor are always with us" "The rich and powerful always seem to win". But these examples are not typical. I just feel that bringing the sentence back to a noun rather than trying to use an adjective ("the skilled") makes more sense in English.


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Stephan653495

Shouldn't it read

We fight skilled people.

?


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

No, because perītī is in the nominative case. To say we fight skilled people, you can write:

Perītōs pugnāmus.


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

Is perītōs in dative, accusative or ablative case?


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

In this case the adjective "periti" is nominative (subject case), so it must be modifying the subject we. This leads to an awkward translation in english, but it is correct. The skilled people is not the object, but is the subject of the sentence


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Matt281606

Perhaps it's just bad luck, but I feel that I've only seen this word (peritus) a handful of times in this subject, and when I've got it right, it's purely an unsure guess. In my opinion, it would be better if this appeared more frequently and in a variety of ways - currently I believe I've only seen it in this sentence and in the sentence "medicum peritum non habemus". Whereas "negotiosus", "otiosus" and several others seem to appear more frequently and in a wider variety of sentences.


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Septimus734191

Would "expert" be as good a translation for peritus? "Skilled people" is a little stilted.


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

Yes, expert is given in some dictionaries, so it's a possibility.


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

I added "nos" because an earlier sentence was counted wrong for my not using "tu". Ideally, translations should be acceptable either with or without the personal pronoun.


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

Yes, with or without the pronoun-subject, it's acceptable. So, when it's not accepted, because of the lack of pronoun-subject, or because you included it, please report.

Here, you can perfectly have the pronoun, as the "We" in "We, skilled people" is emphatic. But Duo also accepts "Periti, pugnamus".


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

In most inflected languages, there are cases where the use of a subject is still recommended.


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/SH219

Please correct this. It makes no sense in English.


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Rae.F
Mod
Plus
  • 2612

There is nothing to correct. It's perfectly fine. It's called a restrictive appositive.

We three kings come bearing gifts.
You kids should stay in school.
We ladies are having a night out.
We skilled people fight.

http://www.cws.illinois.edu/workshop/writers/appositives/

https://www.englishgrammar101.com/module-9/verbals-and-phrases/lesson-9/restrictive-and-nonrestrictive-appositives

https://www.dailywritingtips.com/restrictive-appositives/


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

This sentence comes up again and again; now on LEVEL 3. The ambiguity is gone (as usual) by now and I'm grateful for Duolingo's contributors for this lesson. It's actually quite easy (although advanced?) and useful.


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/EdwardPaff1

As usual, Latin has word order rules.


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/TiagoRodri856988

It does, but in this case any permutation of periti and pugnamus should be accepted.

Perhaps periti nos pugnamus might be ambiguous for reciprocal periti inter nos pugnamus "we experts fight among ourselves" or "fight one another."


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

When we have to provide translation without prompts, I completely forget this word, confusing it with perfidus

Do we have an english association for it? Something that the word became later?


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/zU60uNOa

Nos viri perfidi pugnamus


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Martina247556

Maybe I'm stupid, but I don't understand the English sentence. Doesn't make any sense to me


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/SH219

Can you please make this sentence correct? It makes no sense in English.


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Rae.F
Mod
Plus
  • 2612

It makes perfect sense and there is nothing wrong with it.

We three kings come bearing gifts.
You kids should stay in school.
We skilled people fight.


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/IARose
  • 1952

The only way this would make the remotest kind of sense in English is to translate it as we fight with skill (or more - urgh - clumsily being skilled people, we fight)


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/Rae.F
Mod
Plus
  • 2612

It makes perfect sense as-is. Please refer to my other comments on this page.


https://www.duolingo.com/profile/IARose
  • 1952

Yes this construction can be used but it should be carefully applied, and in this instance, I believe, it doesn't really work especially when read ; which not to say you cannot glean what is meant even when not declaimed by a Shakespearan actor, who would put the emphasis in the right places.
That said, assuming I will not convince you or vice-versa; let's just, as usual, agree to differ.

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