PDA

View Full Version : Latin help



TheMartyr451
16-11-2007, 07:53
Not sure if this should go here...if it's not, I apologize to the moderators.

Now, I am starting a solo ambient project, and came up with the name "Hail the Emperor", but I want it to be in latin. I am pretty sure it is "Ave Imperator", but I don't speak Latin so I could be wrong. Any help is greatly appreciated.

alexh
16-11-2007, 09:07
The translation is simply "Hail Imperator". The word "Ave" was used more as a greeting.

Gaebriel
16-11-2007, 09:56
Salve Imperator - though that's more literally 'be greeted, emperor'

Agrip. Varenus Denter
16-11-2007, 13:19
Ave Imperator is a grammatically correct bastardization... and could be used (it means hello and goodbye); however, Hail is not. Hail comes from Middle English and is not Latin.

You could use Avére (avere) Imperator - which is the formal version and would be correct if you were using it in the context of wishing the Emperor good health and fortune.

Emperor's Grace
16-11-2007, 15:42
Ave .. <edit>.. (it means hello and goodbye); however, Hail is not. Hail comes from Middle English and is not Latin.

So ... Ave Maria is actually "Hello Mary" then? :eyebrows:

Agrip. Varenus Denter
17-11-2007, 09:01
So ... Ave Maria is actually "Hello Mary" then? :eyebrows:

Pretty much. You have to remember that this particular song was written long after the days of standard Latin were gone - and little by little words with roots in other languages were drifting in and becoming standard use. In the context of the song it's asking for divine intervention.

Just so you don't think I'm taking out my **** here... I've got a BA in Latin - and I remember specifically when we came to talking about that "Hail Caesar" film and how incorrect the title was, which led into a very similar discussion about "Ave" and whatnot.

Pious Hearts
17-11-2007, 14:06
You have a blood angels in latin?!
Only joking- I know what you mean. Well done- I am struggling to pass latin exams at uni.

dr.oetk3r
19-11-2007, 03:29
Agrip. Vareus Denter, you are wise. I wish i had Latin skills :(

Emperor's Grace
19-11-2007, 15:13
Pretty much. You have to remember that this particular song was written long after the days of standard Latin were gone - and little by little words with roots in other languages were drifting in and becoming standard use. In the context of the song it's asking for divine intervention..

Actually, "this particular song" was originally written with very different lyrics and had a very old prayer (c. 1050, greeting part to 6th century) fitted to it as new lyrics. The prayer was written and maintained by folks that were very versed in Latin and Greek (being the languages of the church).

http://www.carols.org.uk/ave-maria.htm

I understand that "Hail" is English based and I would not argue that the translation is direct. But translations (especially multiple serial) are often imperfect. As with all translations, people pick the closest word that they can in their language (based on both meaning and connotations) to fit the word that they are translating.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hail_Mary


The opening word of greeting, χαῖρε (chaire), here translated "Hail", literally has the meaning "Rejoice", "Be happy". This was the normal greeting in the language in which Saint Luke's Gospel is written and continues to be used in modern Greek. Accordingly, both "Hail" and "Rejoice" are possible English translations of the word.

As above, I would argue that the intent of the greeting is the same and that the indirect/contextual translation stands.

When we "hail" a cab/person, yell hello, or wave vigorously, we are trying to get the attention of someone.

Would the context be any different if we used "Greetings, Caesar!"?



Just so you don't think I'm taking out my **** here... I've got a BA in Latin - and I remember specifically when we came to talking about that "Hail Caesar" film and how incorrect the title was, which led into a very similar discussion about "Ave" and whatnot.

So you were taught Latin by some one that learned Latin as a dead language "long after the days of standard Latin were gone" and get authenticity, but the song's "author" gets dinged for the same?

I don't wish to cause you any grief but ... professors can be wrong too.

This all reminds me of a discussion of the revitalization of Gaelic in National Geographic. It said that modern Gaelic as it's taught contains a few pronunciation errors when matched against the few left that learned the living language. It's said that this is because the fellows that wanted to bring the language back from the brink had taught themselves the language largely from books and not immersion due to the lack of native speakers. Certain assumptions got made on how some things worked and/or should be pronounced that not 100% accurate.

In sum, I don't think we can call it incorrect to say "hail" for Ave unless there is a specific idiomatic or connotative issue with Ave being used that way.

In certain latinate languages, for example, different pronouns are used for different levels of familiarity in address. It would be impolite to address Caesar in a familiar sense (unless you were actually in his inner circle).

NB - My BA is in Biochemistry/Immunology. I can still say stuff that comes out my **** :D

MrP
19-11-2007, 15:41
So you were taught Latin by some one that learned Latin as a dead language "long after the days of standard Latin were gone" and get authenticity, but the song's "author" gets dinged for the same?

I don't wish to cause you any grief but ... professors can be wrong too.

I feel the need to interject here. First, we can deduce the meanings of most Latin words from their context. Second, Church Latin is not Golden (e.g. Ovid) or Silver (e.g. Tacitus) Age Latin, it's got several noteworthy differences, such as the fact that it indicates purpose clauses with the infinitive rather than ut + subjunctive. I'm no scholar of Church Latin - but Mum reads a fair bit of it, so I pick up bits and pieces!

Anyway, my reading of this page is that Agrip. Varenus Denter was correcting the mistaken assumption that Hail is a Latin word. As for whether ave is or is not a suitable form to use, I can't say. I never got into an in-depth discussion when I was doing my BA in Classics* about the correct way to address the ol' princeps. However, one can certainly get away with it, since it's an attested phrase in Suetonius. Wiki link (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ave_Caesar_morituri_te_salutant). Suetonius text link (http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/L/Roman/Texts/Suetonius/12Caesars/Claudius*.html).


Edidit et in Martio campo expugnationem direptionemque oppidi ad imaginem bellicam et deditionem Britanniae regum praeseditque paludatus. Quin et emissurus Fucinum lacum naumachiam ante commisit. Sed cum proclamantibus naumachiariis: "Have imperator, morituri te salutant!" respondisset: "Aut non,"

To be honest, I've always been more of a Greek man - it's so much more expressive a language than Latin. :) Though, er, pretty useless for Warhammer and 40k!

*Er, that's real Classics - Greek and Latin, not Class Civ or Class Studies.

MrP
19-11-2007, 15:54
In sum, I don't think we can call it incorrect to say "hail" for Ave unless there is a specific idiomatic or connotative issue with Ave being used that way.

Actually, it depends on what translation you prefer. The current tendency is for fluid contemporary sounding translations, whereas during the Victorian period and early this century (when all the early Loebs were coming out) a certain archaicising of the language is very apparent. Would one find hail in widespread use in modern English? That's the big question. No is the certain answer.

When translating between languages, it's important to give a feel for the original - it's practically impossible to be completely literally exact when translating. Little connotations slip in or out. For example, inshallah is a word that gets translated in varying ways. The following I've nabbed from a friend on another board (http://alternatehistory.com/discussion/showthread.php?p=1300447&highlight=inshallah#post1300447), it's not my own work, since my knowledge of such languages is quite minimal!


Inshallah literally means "if it is God's will", and Mashallah "God has willed it". Using them does not mean that Muslims believe that that they should sit around see if God will make it happen, any more than saying "God bless you" after a sneeze means you hope God will save them from dropping dead of plague, the original context.

Inshallah simply means "hopefully", and Mashallah means "Yay!" ("I got promoted!" "Mashallah!") - you use it as a gesture of respectful congratulation.

My point is that words have different meanings adifferent times. Hail once would have been a good translation of ave, but nowadays, who says hail? This makes it rather an archaic translation that sits ill with modern ears. I've only run across hail in Shakespeare, to be honest. Though I'm sure someone who enjoys Austen can find something more recent. :D

In short - there is a "specific idiomatic or connotative issue with Ave being used that way."

Agrip. Varenus Denter
19-11-2007, 17:05
Now we're just a bunch of language nerds on top of the Warhammer stuff. Lord help us. ;)

Meriwether
19-11-2007, 17:56
First off, I'd like to mention that my favorite musical is 'Ave Dolly'.

No, um, uh... What I meant was, that, uh, I just thought I'd throw in that 'Ave Imperator' is used by the Sisters of Battle in a 'God is Good' or 'Git r done' sort of way in the book 'Faith and Flame'. (Err... I think that's the title. It's something like that, from the Black Library.)

Cheers,

Meri

Emperor's Grace
19-11-2007, 19:39
My point is that words have different meanings adifferent times. Hail once would have been a good translation of ave, but nowadays, who says hail?

Weathermen. Ba-dum, ching!


Seriously, hail means the same thing now as then.

According to Webster (as a verb), hail means:
1 a: salute, greet b: to greet with enthusiastic approval : acclaim
2: to greet or summon by calling

See also: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/hail

Commonly, one "hails a cab". I "hail from" NY. "Hail, Hail, the gang's all here" is sung and said. "Hail to the Chief" is a fixture of town bands. Hail Mary is said by millions worldwide. etc...

Words don't become useless by falling out of common use. They just are understood by fewer of your companions. Sometimes we even choose archaic sounding words because it fits a certain flavor when speaking.

This reminds me of a conversation where someone remarked that my friend was "too milquetoast". Milquetoast is way out of common usage but somehow (high school english classes) we all knew what it meant. Not that he couldn't have said "wishy-washy" or something else close, he choose milquetoast because it fits both in definition and sound.



This makes it rather an archaic translation that sits ill with modern ears.

Archaic translations can still be acceptable. Do you think they should now translate "Ave Caesar" as "Yo, Julius!" ? :p


In short - there is a "specific idiomatic or connotative issue with Ave being used that way."

I meant in terms of the Romans having an issue with it being used in that context (address of an important figure) which, by your previous post, they did not.


First off, I'd like to mention that my favorite musical is 'Ave Dolly'.

:D I prefer "My Carnival Lady" - as long as we're subbing dubious translations :D


Inshallah literally means "if it is God's will", and Mashallah "God has willed it". Using them does not mean that Muslims believe that that they should sit around see if God will make it happen, any more than saying "God bless you" after a sneeze means you hope God will save them from dropping dead of plague, the original context.

Inshallah simply means "hopefully", and Mashallah means "Yay!" ("I got promoted!" "Mashallah!") - you use it as a gesture of respectful congratulation.

Actually, isn't this an example of an idiomatic usage of a phrase rather than a change in meaning?

Or maybe rather a change in connotation without a change in denotation?

MrP
19-11-2007, 22:59
Weathermen. Ba-dum, ching!

I like! :D


Seriously, hail means the same thing now as then.

According to Webster (as a verb), hail means:
1 a: salute, greet b: to greet with enthusiastic approval : acclaim
2: to greet or summon by calling

See also: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/hail

Commonly, one "hails a cab". I "hail from" NY. "Hail, Hail, the gang's all here" is sung and said. "Hail to the Chief" is a fixture of town bands. Hail Mary is said by millions worldwide. etc...

Words don't become useless by falling out of common use. They just are understood by fewer of your companions. Sometimes we even choose archaic sounding words because it fits a certain flavor when speaking.

This reminds me of a conversation where someone remarked that my friend was "too milquetoast". Milquetoast is way out of common usage but somehow (high school english classes) we all knew what it meant. Not that he couldn't have said "wishy-washy" or something else close, he choose milquetoast because it fits both in definition and sound.

I don't believe words become useless by falling out of common use. Why just this Saturday I was complimented by a charming young lady on my educated vocabulary. ;) However, this doesn't mean that they're good translations. I've never known anyone hail a cab, very few people use hail when saying where they're from (I'm from x is the formula I know), Hail to the Chief is definitely an American thingy, old boy, not something we Brits are too up on. Hail Mary has religious connotations. Well, it does when I pray to Mary, anyway! Hell, look at the above - I've used "old boy" - unselfconsciously, I might add, because it's a normal part of my vocabulary. But I'd not use it in a translation unless I wanted to indicate that the speaker was using archaicisms. It just doesn't fit. Words are loaded with significance, and a good translation will take into account this factor.


Archaic translations can still be acceptable. Do you think they should now translate "Ave Caesar" as "Yo, Julius!" ? :p

Ah, you've misunderstood me as opposed to old stuff and in favour of dumping things in favour of'em. Nought could be further from the truth, I assure you. For a modern translation of ave, I'd go for the closest possible modern parallels - polite words used to address monarchs, presidents and so forth. And they need to be something Anglophone for a translation, so I'm after a word used either to denote respect for the President of the USA or one of the Prime Ministers of Britian and the Commonwealth or for H.M. QE II. I'm not sure what I would use, but hail just isn't sufficiently contemporary.


I meant in terms of the Romans having an issue with it being used in that context (address of an important figure) which, by your previous post, they did not.

Ah, I didn't feel the need to quote all your post as it seemed, er, unnecessary. Here we go.


In sum, I don't think we can call it incorrect to say "hail" for Ave unless there is a specific idiomatic or connotative issue with Ave being used that way.

What I meant was that there is "a specific idiomatic or connotative issue with" hail being used as a translation for ave.



Actually, isn't this an example of an idiomatic usage of a phrase rather than a change in meaning?

Or maybe rather a change in connotation without a change in denotation?

No, the meaning has changed. Because the idiom is the commonly accepted usage. Like, erm, to decimate - ah, a good word for a Latin discussion. It originally meant to destroy one tenth part of, but is now so commonly used to mean to devastate that I've even seen it so listed in some online American dictionaries. Common use has stripped it of the original meaning and furnished it with a new one.

The original meaning is still there, of course, but it's buried under the dust of ages. Likewise, to make a descent on a place in the Napoleonic era meant to launch an amphibious assault. It means nothing of the sort nowadays. It's quite fascinating how language changes, and it's one of the reasons why new translations keep popping up. One generation might prefer a verse translation of verse (Dryden's translation of Virgil, say) while others might be happier with prose translations of verse to catch more of the nuances of the language at the expense of the fluidity of the poetry.

GAWD
20-11-2007, 17:49
Latin underwent rather big changes during the middle ages, especially lexically.

Nevertheless ... the translation you really probably want is better rendered by the Latin word for "praise" not "hail"

Hence, instead of "ave" or the like ... you'd be better off, from a purely semantic perspective (i.e.: not to send mixed signals to your Emperor) with ...

Laudo Imperator (I praise the Emporer) for a 1st person declaration. Laudate Imperator (Praise the Emporer) for a 2nd person plural exclamation.

You can also go w/a 'god save the queen' sort of saying too:

Conservate Imperator (Save the Emporer!) for a 2nd person plural exclamation ... 1st person wouldn't work as well for obvious reasons.

That said, I'm fairly certain that all three were used as salutories for the Emporer, with more mention of God later on.

Also, keep in mind that Latin is still the written language of the Vatican and spoken there as well. It is also still used at mass. Further, many languages are essentially mutated Latins (French, Spanish, Italian, Portugese) that are pretty much intelligible to each other across those language groups (i.e.: most who speak Spanish can kinda understand enough of the other languages to 'get by' in those languages). In short, Latin is not a dead language ... just on the decline. Dead languages are those languages that can trace no lineage of speakers to the modern day, like some central american native languages.