1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Latin
  4. >
  5. "I want to approach Minerva."

"I want to approach Minerva."

Translation:Ego ad Minervam appropinquare volo.

October 21, 2019



(Ego) Minervae appropinquare volo.


I have the same question "Minervae appropinquare volo". Why is "ad" required to get this right?


The translation (you and) I gave is 100% correct. Centuries later, the dative was gradually replaced by constructions with prepositions. Frankly, this course is a mess. It mixes classical themes and grammar with more modern grammar and vocabulary. For example, cantare didn’t mean ‘to sing’ (canere), it meant ‘to keep on singing’. The same is true for vomitare (vomere), natare (nare),...


This is new to me. I thought this was strictly classical Latin, from the time of the Caesars. Thanks for the info!


It can't be because of words like "universitas" for instance, taken with the meaning of "university", when the classical Latin meaning is "community", or "entirety of something".

First universities in Europe came in the Middle age, so it can't be classical Latin. Many other examples like this one.

I'm in favour of learning modern life vocabulary, but it can't be done with a strictly classical course.


Can you recommend any resource that can help me be more aware of this issue? I do like this course, but it is my first exposure of Latin, so I'm easily blind to the errors.


Well, this course can best be used as an introduction to Latin. I’m glad to hear you’re enjoying it! If I were you, I wouldn’t buy a fancy detailed Oxford Latin course (too detailed and frankly, intimidating for no good reason), just buy a method for high school students or look for information online. In my opinion, it’s worth a small investment, because high school courses will also teach you some cultural background and provide you with easy versions of real Latin texts, which is very motivating. I learnt Latin in school and I’d like to refresh it soon, but I still have my old books ;) If you have any other questions, you can find me on Instagram: @roman_courier I created this account October 19th to help more people and share Roman facts and archaeological updates. Feel free to hit me up! It would be my pleasure.


Buy the "Lingua latina per se" method!


For "cantare", they say:

1rst c. BC, Cicero:
To sing. (chanter, exécuter un morceau de musique vocale)

1rst c. AC Ovidius Naso:
To bewitch.
(surely because of the proximity between a spell and a song, like we saw with "carmen")

Source (very reliable):

So "cantare" is okay in Classical Latin it seems.
Gaffiot ("chanter") and Lewis (To produce melodious sounds (by the voice or an instrument), to sound, sing, play) = give the same. They don't mention the "to go on singing" meaning. (I think it would be rather "to sing often).

Canere is just considered a synonym for "cantare", at least in those dictionaries. And natare a synonym for nare (with additional connotations for both).

But for "vomitare", they say it means "to vomit often", when "vomere" is "to vomit".

The "-tare" suffix is called a "frequentative". It rises the frequency.


Yes: with appropinquare, both the ad + accusative construction and the dative case are appropriate; both are correct, neither is wrong. (This is kind of frustrating!)


Thanks for clarifying. I hope they will fix this soon :)

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