1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Latin
  4. >
  5. "Plurima ossa habemus."

"Plurima ossa habemus."

Translation:We have very many bones.

September 29, 2019



Just one question, WHO'S??

[deactivated user]

    Why not "a lot of bones"?


    Multa would be a lot. Plurima is the superlative of multa, so for plurima you say "the most " or "very many".


    how about plenty? is it different from "very many?"


    Plenty would indicate sufficient bones.

    Very many would indicate probably more bones than one would need.


    I really dislike the "very many" translation of plurima if the sentence doesn't contain a negative. I suspect "very many" is a negative polarity item in English (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polarity_item).

    I suggested the very basic superlative translation "the most," which is not currently accepted. I'm also wondering: would it work to say "we have many many bones"? It's very conversational and wouldn't be taught in a grammar, but I don't see why not.

    • 2562

    "A great many" seems to be accepted everywhere for "plurimi", so that's what I have been using.


    Many many would not be a good translation, as it's more like something a child would say.

    The most wouldn't be accurate, as it would indicate that one could have no more of the specific object.

    Very many means more than just many, but not the most. If we look at quantifiers comparatively, it would be many, then very many, then most.

    Note that "very few" is used more often than "very many", but both are entirely acceptable as colloquial English.


    CCVI ossa habemus.


    Ducenta sex? Nōnne nōbīs ducenta octō erant?


    Why is "Plurima ossa habemus" and not "Plurimas ossa habemus."?


    Adjectives must agree in gender (as well as number and case). Plurimas is accusative feminine plural while ossa here is a neuter noun so we need to use plurima which can be accusative neuter plural.


    I chickened out of actually submitting it, but I wonder if it'd take "We have a whole lot of bones." Anything to avoid the painfully non-English "very many"...


    I had a typo of "Plurima oss habemus", but it was accepted. Is that correct?


    It so happens that Duo will accept a word if it is within one character of an acceptable word it knows; often it will tell you you have a typo and move on, but sometimes it will silently ignore it. This latter behaviour is a bit unfortunate, but I cannot tell you when the typos are likely to be ignored.

    In the present case, the word is not actually correct; in writing you must have the final a. In speech, as far as I have been able to gather from teachers such as Molendinarius or ScorpioMartianus on Youtube, when two vowels meet across a word boundary one of them tends to be elided (particularly the e in est) so you might hear a Roman say something like /ˈplʊ.ɾɪ.ˈmɔs.sa.ˈbeː.mʊs/ for plurima ossa habemus.


    The listening exercise is impossible. The speaker reduces the vowels as you normally would in English and adds American diphthongs where there shouldn't be. "Bay" instead of a clear monophthong "be".


    Plurima is not very clear. I heard 10 times, and I type turima


    Weird flex, but ok

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