How do I say “this must not happen”? Planned maintenance scheduled April 23, 2019 at 23:30 UTC (7:30pm US/Eastern) Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara Unicorn Meta Zoo #1: Why another podcast?Are there examples of passive imperative forms of non-deponent verbs in ancient literature?When can the gerund take an object?How to emphasize adjectives?Is the complement of esse in nominative or accusative when esse is a subject?Should the phrase “I often saw” use the imperfect or the aorist in Greek?Passives Without AccusativesJenney's Second Year Latin, Lesson 12, exercise E: Ut clauses and how to translate English infinitivesMisquoting Linnaeus or correcting him?Passive periphrastic with two dativesExpressing English modalities of advice in LatinHow can you tell whether prefixed ‘in-’ is the preposition ‘in’ or Indo-European ‘in-’?
Why not use the yoke to control yaw, as well as pitch and roll?
How to ask rejected full-time candidates to apply to teach individual courses?
Any stored/leased 737s that could substitute for grounded MAXs?
What was the last profitable war?
Did John Wesley plagiarize Matthew Henry...?
The Nth Gryphon Number
Can two people see the same photon?
New Order #6: Easter Egg
Random body shuffle every night—can we still function?
Searching extreme points of polyhedron
Does the universe have a fixed centre of mass?
Does the Rock Gnome trait Artificer's Lore apply when you aren't proficient in History?
Is the time—manner—place ordering of adverbials an oversimplification?
Besides transaction validation, are there any other uses of the Script language in Bitcoin
Getting representations of the Lie group out of representations of its Lie algebra
How can I prevent/balance waiting and turtling as a response to cooldown mechanics
Table formatting with tabularx?
How to resize main filesystem
Diophantine equation 3^a+1=3^b+5^c
Sally's older brother
Improvising over quartal voicings
Did pre-Columbian Americans know the spherical shape of the Earth?
Why is there so little support for joining EFTA in the British parliament?
Why are current probes so expensive?
How do I say “this must not happen”?
Planned maintenance scheduled April 23, 2019 at 23:30 UTC (7:30pm US/Eastern)
Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara
Unicorn Meta Zoo #1: Why another podcast?Are there examples of passive imperative forms of non-deponent verbs in ancient literature?When can the gerund take an object?How to emphasize adjectives?Is the complement of esse in nominative or accusative when esse is a subject?Should the phrase “I often saw” use the imperfect or the aorist in Greek?Passives Without AccusativesJenney's Second Year Latin, Lesson 12, exercise E: Ut clauses and how to translate English infinitivesMisquoting Linnaeus or correcting him?Passive periphrastic with two dativesExpressing English modalities of advice in LatinHow can you tell whether prefixed ‘in-’ is the preposition ‘in’ or Indo-European ‘in-’?
I'm used to translating English auxiliary "must" with a Latin gerundive: hic necandus est "this man must be killed".
But what if I want to say "this man must not be killed"? I would read non necandus est as "it's not necessary to kill him", which is a somewhat different meaning (it's ambivalent about whether he should be killed or not).
grammar-choice gerundivum negation
add a comment |
I'm used to translating English auxiliary "must" with a Latin gerundive: hic necandus est "this man must be killed".
But what if I want to say "this man must not be killed"? I would read non necandus est as "it's not necessary to kill him", which is a somewhat different meaning (it's ambivalent about whether he should be killed or not).
grammar-choice gerundivum negation
add a comment |
I'm used to translating English auxiliary "must" with a Latin gerundive: hic necandus est "this man must be killed".
But what if I want to say "this man must not be killed"? I would read non necandus est as "it's not necessary to kill him", which is a somewhat different meaning (it's ambivalent about whether he should be killed or not).
grammar-choice gerundivum negation
I'm used to translating English auxiliary "must" with a Latin gerundive: hic necandus est "this man must be killed".
But what if I want to say "this man must not be killed"? I would read non necandus est as "it's not necessary to kill him", which is a somewhat different meaning (it's ambivalent about whether he should be killed or not).
grammar-choice gerundivum negation
grammar-choice gerundivum negation
edited 5 hours ago
Draconis
asked 8 hours ago
DraconisDraconis
18.9k22676
18.9k22676
add a comment |
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
In my experience many languages confuse lack of desire and desire of the contrary.
For example, I would like to be able to say "I don't want coffee" as the negation of "I want coffee", meaning that I don't have a desire to have coffee.
To say that I am actively against drinking coffee, I would prefer to say "I want not to have coffee".
But, unfortunately, English doesn't work this way, and "I don't want coffee" is construed as "I want not to have coffee" instead of the more ambivalent reading.
Similarly, the Latin non necandus est is more literally "it is not necessary to kill him" but could also be read as "it is necessary not to kill him".
I found examples of similar constructions, but it is not easy to decide which meaning is intended in each case.
I would consider both readings valid in general.
I see a couple of ways to express "it is necessary to not kill him" without ambiguity:
- Take a new verb with the opposite meaning: servandus est
- Explain in more words: necesse est eum non necare
- Work it into the structure of a sentence: curandum est ne necetur
- In some cases you might be able to use a negative order: noli(te) eum necare
(There are also passive imperatives.)
add a comment |
There are three or four impersonal verbs to express what is appropriate, or legal, or obligatory.
1 děcet, it is appropriate
2 dēděcet, it is inapproptiate, unseemly.
Ut nobis decet; As seems right to us.
Oratorem irasci minime decet, simulare non dēděcet. It is not professional for an orator to get angry, it is not unprofessional to pretend (to get angry). Cicero Tusc., 4,25
Non nos decet necare; ‘It is not right for us to kill.’
Dedecet necare; ‘It is unseemly (uncouth? it is not very nice?) to kill.’
3 Lĭcet, it is lawful
(cf. illĭcĭtē, adv. illegally; illĭcĭtus adj., illegal)
Lĭcet nemini peccare, Cicero Tusc., 5,19 'Nobody is permitted to do evil.'
So, Licet nemini eum necare. 'It is not lawful to kill him.'
4 Oportet, it is a duty, one ought.
Est aliquid, quod non oporteat, etiam si licet; quicquid vero non licet, certe non oportet.
'There is something which one ought not to do, even if it is legal; but anything illegal, certainly ought not to be done.' Cicero.
Certe oportet non eum necare, 'Undoubtedly, one ought not to kill him.'
I really like using dedecet and illicitum est for this. (+1!) The others suffer from the ambiguity described in the question: one could read non oportet as "it is not a duty to" instead of "it is a duty not to".
– Joonas Ilmavirta♦
1 hour ago
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "644"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2flatin.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f9526%2fhow-do-i-say-this-must-not-happen%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
In my experience many languages confuse lack of desire and desire of the contrary.
For example, I would like to be able to say "I don't want coffee" as the negation of "I want coffee", meaning that I don't have a desire to have coffee.
To say that I am actively against drinking coffee, I would prefer to say "I want not to have coffee".
But, unfortunately, English doesn't work this way, and "I don't want coffee" is construed as "I want not to have coffee" instead of the more ambivalent reading.
Similarly, the Latin non necandus est is more literally "it is not necessary to kill him" but could also be read as "it is necessary not to kill him".
I found examples of similar constructions, but it is not easy to decide which meaning is intended in each case.
I would consider both readings valid in general.
I see a couple of ways to express "it is necessary to not kill him" without ambiguity:
- Take a new verb with the opposite meaning: servandus est
- Explain in more words: necesse est eum non necare
- Work it into the structure of a sentence: curandum est ne necetur
- In some cases you might be able to use a negative order: noli(te) eum necare
(There are also passive imperatives.)
add a comment |
In my experience many languages confuse lack of desire and desire of the contrary.
For example, I would like to be able to say "I don't want coffee" as the negation of "I want coffee", meaning that I don't have a desire to have coffee.
To say that I am actively against drinking coffee, I would prefer to say "I want not to have coffee".
But, unfortunately, English doesn't work this way, and "I don't want coffee" is construed as "I want not to have coffee" instead of the more ambivalent reading.
Similarly, the Latin non necandus est is more literally "it is not necessary to kill him" but could also be read as "it is necessary not to kill him".
I found examples of similar constructions, but it is not easy to decide which meaning is intended in each case.
I would consider both readings valid in general.
I see a couple of ways to express "it is necessary to not kill him" without ambiguity:
- Take a new verb with the opposite meaning: servandus est
- Explain in more words: necesse est eum non necare
- Work it into the structure of a sentence: curandum est ne necetur
- In some cases you might be able to use a negative order: noli(te) eum necare
(There are also passive imperatives.)
add a comment |
In my experience many languages confuse lack of desire and desire of the contrary.
For example, I would like to be able to say "I don't want coffee" as the negation of "I want coffee", meaning that I don't have a desire to have coffee.
To say that I am actively against drinking coffee, I would prefer to say "I want not to have coffee".
But, unfortunately, English doesn't work this way, and "I don't want coffee" is construed as "I want not to have coffee" instead of the more ambivalent reading.
Similarly, the Latin non necandus est is more literally "it is not necessary to kill him" but could also be read as "it is necessary not to kill him".
I found examples of similar constructions, but it is not easy to decide which meaning is intended in each case.
I would consider both readings valid in general.
I see a couple of ways to express "it is necessary to not kill him" without ambiguity:
- Take a new verb with the opposite meaning: servandus est
- Explain in more words: necesse est eum non necare
- Work it into the structure of a sentence: curandum est ne necetur
- In some cases you might be able to use a negative order: noli(te) eum necare
(There are also passive imperatives.)
In my experience many languages confuse lack of desire and desire of the contrary.
For example, I would like to be able to say "I don't want coffee" as the negation of "I want coffee", meaning that I don't have a desire to have coffee.
To say that I am actively against drinking coffee, I would prefer to say "I want not to have coffee".
But, unfortunately, English doesn't work this way, and "I don't want coffee" is construed as "I want not to have coffee" instead of the more ambivalent reading.
Similarly, the Latin non necandus est is more literally "it is not necessary to kill him" but could also be read as "it is necessary not to kill him".
I found examples of similar constructions, but it is not easy to decide which meaning is intended in each case.
I would consider both readings valid in general.
I see a couple of ways to express "it is necessary to not kill him" without ambiguity:
- Take a new verb with the opposite meaning: servandus est
- Explain in more words: necesse est eum non necare
- Work it into the structure of a sentence: curandum est ne necetur
- In some cases you might be able to use a negative order: noli(te) eum necare
(There are also passive imperatives.)
edited 3 hours ago
answered 6 hours ago
Joonas Ilmavirta♦Joonas Ilmavirta
49.3k1271288
49.3k1271288
add a comment |
add a comment |
There are three or four impersonal verbs to express what is appropriate, or legal, or obligatory.
1 děcet, it is appropriate
2 dēděcet, it is inapproptiate, unseemly.
Ut nobis decet; As seems right to us.
Oratorem irasci minime decet, simulare non dēděcet. It is not professional for an orator to get angry, it is not unprofessional to pretend (to get angry). Cicero Tusc., 4,25
Non nos decet necare; ‘It is not right for us to kill.’
Dedecet necare; ‘It is unseemly (uncouth? it is not very nice?) to kill.’
3 Lĭcet, it is lawful
(cf. illĭcĭtē, adv. illegally; illĭcĭtus adj., illegal)
Lĭcet nemini peccare, Cicero Tusc., 5,19 'Nobody is permitted to do evil.'
So, Licet nemini eum necare. 'It is not lawful to kill him.'
4 Oportet, it is a duty, one ought.
Est aliquid, quod non oporteat, etiam si licet; quicquid vero non licet, certe non oportet.
'There is something which one ought not to do, even if it is legal; but anything illegal, certainly ought not to be done.' Cicero.
Certe oportet non eum necare, 'Undoubtedly, one ought not to kill him.'
I really like using dedecet and illicitum est for this. (+1!) The others suffer from the ambiguity described in the question: one could read non oportet as "it is not a duty to" instead of "it is a duty not to".
– Joonas Ilmavirta♦
1 hour ago
add a comment |
There are three or four impersonal verbs to express what is appropriate, or legal, or obligatory.
1 děcet, it is appropriate
2 dēděcet, it is inapproptiate, unseemly.
Ut nobis decet; As seems right to us.
Oratorem irasci minime decet, simulare non dēděcet. It is not professional for an orator to get angry, it is not unprofessional to pretend (to get angry). Cicero Tusc., 4,25
Non nos decet necare; ‘It is not right for us to kill.’
Dedecet necare; ‘It is unseemly (uncouth? it is not very nice?) to kill.’
3 Lĭcet, it is lawful
(cf. illĭcĭtē, adv. illegally; illĭcĭtus adj., illegal)
Lĭcet nemini peccare, Cicero Tusc., 5,19 'Nobody is permitted to do evil.'
So, Licet nemini eum necare. 'It is not lawful to kill him.'
4 Oportet, it is a duty, one ought.
Est aliquid, quod non oporteat, etiam si licet; quicquid vero non licet, certe non oportet.
'There is something which one ought not to do, even if it is legal; but anything illegal, certainly ought not to be done.' Cicero.
Certe oportet non eum necare, 'Undoubtedly, one ought not to kill him.'
I really like using dedecet and illicitum est for this. (+1!) The others suffer from the ambiguity described in the question: one could read non oportet as "it is not a duty to" instead of "it is a duty not to".
– Joonas Ilmavirta♦
1 hour ago
add a comment |
There are three or four impersonal verbs to express what is appropriate, or legal, or obligatory.
1 děcet, it is appropriate
2 dēděcet, it is inapproptiate, unseemly.
Ut nobis decet; As seems right to us.
Oratorem irasci minime decet, simulare non dēděcet. It is not professional for an orator to get angry, it is not unprofessional to pretend (to get angry). Cicero Tusc., 4,25
Non nos decet necare; ‘It is not right for us to kill.’
Dedecet necare; ‘It is unseemly (uncouth? it is not very nice?) to kill.’
3 Lĭcet, it is lawful
(cf. illĭcĭtē, adv. illegally; illĭcĭtus adj., illegal)
Lĭcet nemini peccare, Cicero Tusc., 5,19 'Nobody is permitted to do evil.'
So, Licet nemini eum necare. 'It is not lawful to kill him.'
4 Oportet, it is a duty, one ought.
Est aliquid, quod non oporteat, etiam si licet; quicquid vero non licet, certe non oportet.
'There is something which one ought not to do, even if it is legal; but anything illegal, certainly ought not to be done.' Cicero.
Certe oportet non eum necare, 'Undoubtedly, one ought not to kill him.'
There are three or four impersonal verbs to express what is appropriate, or legal, or obligatory.
1 děcet, it is appropriate
2 dēděcet, it is inapproptiate, unseemly.
Ut nobis decet; As seems right to us.
Oratorem irasci minime decet, simulare non dēděcet. It is not professional for an orator to get angry, it is not unprofessional to pretend (to get angry). Cicero Tusc., 4,25
Non nos decet necare; ‘It is not right for us to kill.’
Dedecet necare; ‘It is unseemly (uncouth? it is not very nice?) to kill.’
3 Lĭcet, it is lawful
(cf. illĭcĭtē, adv. illegally; illĭcĭtus adj., illegal)
Lĭcet nemini peccare, Cicero Tusc., 5,19 'Nobody is permitted to do evil.'
So, Licet nemini eum necare. 'It is not lawful to kill him.'
4 Oportet, it is a duty, one ought.
Est aliquid, quod non oporteat, etiam si licet; quicquid vero non licet, certe non oportet.
'There is something which one ought not to do, even if it is legal; but anything illegal, certainly ought not to be done.' Cicero.
Certe oportet non eum necare, 'Undoubtedly, one ought not to kill him.'
answered 1 hour ago
HughHugh
5,6902616
5,6902616
I really like using dedecet and illicitum est for this. (+1!) The others suffer from the ambiguity described in the question: one could read non oportet as "it is not a duty to" instead of "it is a duty not to".
– Joonas Ilmavirta♦
1 hour ago
add a comment |
I really like using dedecet and illicitum est for this. (+1!) The others suffer from the ambiguity described in the question: one could read non oportet as "it is not a duty to" instead of "it is a duty not to".
– Joonas Ilmavirta♦
1 hour ago
I really like using dedecet and illicitum est for this. (+1!) The others suffer from the ambiguity described in the question: one could read non oportet as "it is not a duty to" instead of "it is a duty not to".
– Joonas Ilmavirta♦
1 hour ago
I really like using dedecet and illicitum est for this. (+1!) The others suffer from the ambiguity described in the question: one could read non oportet as "it is not a duty to" instead of "it is a duty not to".
– Joonas Ilmavirta♦
1 hour ago
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Latin Language Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2flatin.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f9526%2fhow-do-i-say-this-must-not-happen%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown