1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Latin
  4. >
  5. "I should not fight."

"I should not fight."

Translation:Ego pugnare non debeo.

September 15, 2019



I had suspected I needed "pugnare" instead of "pugno", but the blasted pop up tip said "pugno" >.>


I would say that "Ego pugnare non debeo" is "I do not have to fight". "I should not fight" - maybe "Ego non pugnare debeo"? Please correct me if I am wrong :)


I don't think so. The question of knowing if debeo could be "should" and/or "have to" hasn't been cleared yet in the comments of this forum (I wish it will), but for the other part:

The "non" has to be before the active verb. At least, it's the way I understand the grammar books recommendations: "put the negative particle right before the part it negates".

I think it's always "non debeo pugnare", with non-debeo.
Probably someone will correct me with example of non used before an infinitive, if it's common.


The problem is not about that. When you say "I should not fight", it doesn't simply mean "it's not true that I should" (you may fight, but not obliged), but that I should avoid fighting. I think that in Latin it doesn't work like in English: if I say "pugnare non debeo" it will simply mean that I am not obliged to fight, but not exactly that I "shouldn't"


I thought of it more, "I ought not to fight"; "Non pugnare debeo".



Ego = I

Pugnare = to fight

Non = not

Debeo = have to (as in an obligation)

This sentence is interesting and I see why some people are confused. This sentence literally means: I should not have to be obligated to fight. This seems to be more idiomatic than literally however, meaning that the person thinking this believes that they, in general, ought not to be obligated to engage in the act of physically fighting, without necessarily already having that obligation.

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