1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Latin
  4. >
  5. "Marcus makes a long journey …

"Marcus makes a long journey to the city."

Translation:Marcus iter longum ad urbem facit.

October 1, 2019



‘In urbem’ would make more sense. ‘Ad urbem’ means that he won’t enter the city.


Ad urbem, movement to the city

Ab urbem, movement away from the city

The memory trick I use is

ad, like adhere (+) ab, like abnormal (-)


ab takes the ablative and it should be ab urbe


If Marcus lived close to the city, "in urbem" would make sense, but if he lives some distance away, it would not make sense. I think it is understood that once he reaches the city he will enter it, just as it is understood that if I say that I am making a journey to a particular location that I will enter it.


What about a different word order; when is it arbitrary and when is it not, are the adjectives after the nouns, what about the verbs and accusative? I did it like this: Marcus facit iter longum ad urbem.


The others word order are okay, I think as long as you keep "ad urbem" together. So, report them.


Same, I also said, "Marcus facit iter longum ad urbem." with its correction being "Marcus iter longum ad urbem facit."


I think "iter facit" order shouldn't be changed. Also, I recommend using verb as a last word in sentence as Latin mostly uses SOV (Subject-Object-Verb) order.


Why isn't "iter" accusative?


It is accusative. Iter is a neuter 3rd declension (which means the accusative is the same as the nominative for both singular and plural).


I wrote "Marcus iter facit ad urbem longum" but was marked wrong. Is that me getting it wrong or the computer?


I'm merely a beginner but doesn't the adjective (longum) have to be next to the noun (iter) thus - Marcus iter longum facit ad urbem. I'll have a go at using this next time to check.

Yes, seems to be OK that way


I am writing the correct answer and it is not accepting it


Is something wrong with this? If so, what? "Marcus longum ad urbem iter facit" (rejected)


I am wondering the same thing. I also typed this and was marked wrong and am curious as to why.


Why is city not dative case (for indirect object)?


The preposition ad takes an accusative, not a dative.


With you there! I am thinking Marcus = subject, iter=direct object, so wondering why city would not be indirect, perhaps indicating a diff preposition? Trying to square this with where dative shows up elsewhere in Latin


This link may help with understanding when the dative is appropriate (or at least hopefully be of some help): http://dcc.dickinson.edu/grammar/latin/dative


Thanks! This looks like a great resource I will have to begin using it. Doing a bit more review I think I am incorrect to consider "city" an indirect object, rather I should have called it object of a prepositional phrase--if we were to give this any case, I think it would be Instrumental, which I haven't seen as part of Latin.

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