"The temple has an altar."
Translation:Templum aram habet.
6 CommentsThis discussion is locked.
Change "Templum" to "Temple
I'm open to criticism, so if I'm wrong, take it with a grain of salt, but I've always been taught that accusative is mainly for what is being acted or related upon and pretty much always is an indicator of the sentence object. This sentence quoque could be "he has a temple Altar" since temple is also accusative, and this is how I've always seen such a translation written in Latin. I'd change "Templum" to "Temple". Or someone could also say that it's the Altar that has a temple, and that would be a valid translation as well
Not sure why you want to change templum to temple. Temple is not a form of templum in Latin, templum can be nominative, accusative, or vocative singular (since it is a neuter second declension).
I think (someone can correct me but I don't think noun adjuncts is something Latin tends to do) that to say something like "temple altar" it would be more likely to use an adjective (aram templarem -> 'an altar belonging to a temple') or a genitive (aram templi -> 'the altar of the temple'). So I suspect templarem aram habet or aram templi habet would fit better for 'He has a temple altar'.
'The altar has a temple' does not make much sense since aram is in the accusative not the nominative.
We could also say "Templo aram est" which means something like "with the temple is an altar". That's some special form of the 3rd case in Latin as far as i know. I may be wrong but i guess it's the dative (3rd case) used as "dativus possessivus" that shows something "is with" another thing. And that means, as far as I know from my books in school, it "has" (/owns)that certain thing. I'm not sure whether or not it only works with people... Have you an idea?