Accusative in genitive relative clause with verb finiebat











up vote
5
down vote

favorite
1












I am working on Satyricon, currently chapter 30, and have stumbled upon a passage with a grammar that baffles me:




Et quod praecipuē mīrātus sum, in postibus triclīniī fascēs erant cum secūribus fīxī, quōrum ūnam partem quăsĭ embŏlum nāvis aēneum fīniēbat, in quō erat scrīptum:




My current translation is such:




And that which particularly baffled me / had me wondering, was that fasces were attached to the doorway with [their] axes, which [had] one part finished like the blazened beak of a ship, on which were written:




The relative clause, ‘quōrum … fīniēbat’, is where the problem is. The relative pronoun quōrum is such because it possessive; it is the fasces’ axes that are being described. Then follows ‘ūnam partem’, which is in the accusative. For the life of me, I cannot figure out what the cause of this accusative is. It is as far as I can tell, not the object of the verb, but rather the subject!



This same conundrum applies to ‘embŏlum nāvis aēneum’. I interpret this to be a direct object, but find ‘quăsĭ’ to make this harder. With regards to ‘nāvis’, it is genitive, and again I believe this to be a possessive genitive.



My suspicion is that there is something either with the verb ‘fīniēbat’ or the conjunction ‘quăsĭ’ that causes these strange things, but I suppose I am completely wrong about this as well. My grammar led me to comparative conditional clauses with regards to ‘quăsĭ’, but then ended up even more confused, because I after reading about that, expected ‘quăsĭ’ to call a subjunctive verb.



I hope I have explained the problem well enough. In summary:




  • Why is ‘ūnam partem’ accusative?

  • Am I correct in assuming that ‘embŏlum nāvis aēneum’ is a direct object?

  • Why doesn’t ‘quăsĭ’ cause ‘fīniēbat’ to be ‘fīnīret’?

  • And finally, do ‘fīniēbat’ and ‘quăsĭ’ have some special properties to them calling specific cases?










share|improve this question


























    up vote
    5
    down vote

    favorite
    1












    I am working on Satyricon, currently chapter 30, and have stumbled upon a passage with a grammar that baffles me:




    Et quod praecipuē mīrātus sum, in postibus triclīniī fascēs erant cum secūribus fīxī, quōrum ūnam partem quăsĭ embŏlum nāvis aēneum fīniēbat, in quō erat scrīptum:




    My current translation is such:




    And that which particularly baffled me / had me wondering, was that fasces were attached to the doorway with [their] axes, which [had] one part finished like the blazened beak of a ship, on which were written:




    The relative clause, ‘quōrum … fīniēbat’, is where the problem is. The relative pronoun quōrum is such because it possessive; it is the fasces’ axes that are being described. Then follows ‘ūnam partem’, which is in the accusative. For the life of me, I cannot figure out what the cause of this accusative is. It is as far as I can tell, not the object of the verb, but rather the subject!



    This same conundrum applies to ‘embŏlum nāvis aēneum’. I interpret this to be a direct object, but find ‘quăsĭ’ to make this harder. With regards to ‘nāvis’, it is genitive, and again I believe this to be a possessive genitive.



    My suspicion is that there is something either with the verb ‘fīniēbat’ or the conjunction ‘quăsĭ’ that causes these strange things, but I suppose I am completely wrong about this as well. My grammar led me to comparative conditional clauses with regards to ‘quăsĭ’, but then ended up even more confused, because I after reading about that, expected ‘quăsĭ’ to call a subjunctive verb.



    I hope I have explained the problem well enough. In summary:




    • Why is ‘ūnam partem’ accusative?

    • Am I correct in assuming that ‘embŏlum nāvis aēneum’ is a direct object?

    • Why doesn’t ‘quăsĭ’ cause ‘fīniēbat’ to be ‘fīnīret’?

    • And finally, do ‘fīniēbat’ and ‘quăsĭ’ have some special properties to them calling specific cases?










    share|improve this question
























      up vote
      5
      down vote

      favorite
      1









      up vote
      5
      down vote

      favorite
      1






      1





      I am working on Satyricon, currently chapter 30, and have stumbled upon a passage with a grammar that baffles me:




      Et quod praecipuē mīrātus sum, in postibus triclīniī fascēs erant cum secūribus fīxī, quōrum ūnam partem quăsĭ embŏlum nāvis aēneum fīniēbat, in quō erat scrīptum:




      My current translation is such:




      And that which particularly baffled me / had me wondering, was that fasces were attached to the doorway with [their] axes, which [had] one part finished like the blazened beak of a ship, on which were written:




      The relative clause, ‘quōrum … fīniēbat’, is where the problem is. The relative pronoun quōrum is such because it possessive; it is the fasces’ axes that are being described. Then follows ‘ūnam partem’, which is in the accusative. For the life of me, I cannot figure out what the cause of this accusative is. It is as far as I can tell, not the object of the verb, but rather the subject!



      This same conundrum applies to ‘embŏlum nāvis aēneum’. I interpret this to be a direct object, but find ‘quăsĭ’ to make this harder. With regards to ‘nāvis’, it is genitive, and again I believe this to be a possessive genitive.



      My suspicion is that there is something either with the verb ‘fīniēbat’ or the conjunction ‘quăsĭ’ that causes these strange things, but I suppose I am completely wrong about this as well. My grammar led me to comparative conditional clauses with regards to ‘quăsĭ’, but then ended up even more confused, because I after reading about that, expected ‘quăsĭ’ to call a subjunctive verb.



      I hope I have explained the problem well enough. In summary:




      • Why is ‘ūnam partem’ accusative?

      • Am I correct in assuming that ‘embŏlum nāvis aēneum’ is a direct object?

      • Why doesn’t ‘quăsĭ’ cause ‘fīniēbat’ to be ‘fīnīret’?

      • And finally, do ‘fīniēbat’ and ‘quăsĭ’ have some special properties to them calling specific cases?










      share|improve this question













      I am working on Satyricon, currently chapter 30, and have stumbled upon a passage with a grammar that baffles me:




      Et quod praecipuē mīrātus sum, in postibus triclīniī fascēs erant cum secūribus fīxī, quōrum ūnam partem quăsĭ embŏlum nāvis aēneum fīniēbat, in quō erat scrīptum:




      My current translation is such:




      And that which particularly baffled me / had me wondering, was that fasces were attached to the doorway with [their] axes, which [had] one part finished like the blazened beak of a ship, on which were written:




      The relative clause, ‘quōrum … fīniēbat’, is where the problem is. The relative pronoun quōrum is such because it possessive; it is the fasces’ axes that are being described. Then follows ‘ūnam partem’, which is in the accusative. For the life of me, I cannot figure out what the cause of this accusative is. It is as far as I can tell, not the object of the verb, but rather the subject!



      This same conundrum applies to ‘embŏlum nāvis aēneum’. I interpret this to be a direct object, but find ‘quăsĭ’ to make this harder. With regards to ‘nāvis’, it is genitive, and again I believe this to be a possessive genitive.



      My suspicion is that there is something either with the verb ‘fīniēbat’ or the conjunction ‘quăsĭ’ that causes these strange things, but I suppose I am completely wrong about this as well. My grammar led me to comparative conditional clauses with regards to ‘quăsĭ’, but then ended up even more confused, because I after reading about that, expected ‘quăsĭ’ to call a subjunctive verb.



      I hope I have explained the problem well enough. In summary:




      • Why is ‘ūnam partem’ accusative?

      • Am I correct in assuming that ‘embŏlum nāvis aēneum’ is a direct object?

      • Why doesn’t ‘quăsĭ’ cause ‘fīniēbat’ to be ‘fīnīret’?

      • And finally, do ‘fīniēbat’ and ‘quăsĭ’ have some special properties to them calling specific cases?







      coniunctivus accusativus relative-clause object






      share|improve this question













      share|improve this question











      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question










      asked Nov 23 at 21:27









      Canned Man

      260112




      260112






















          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes

















          up vote
          7
          down vote



          accepted










          There aren't any special uses involved here; your incorrect assumption is that embolum (navis) aeneum is accusative -- in fact it's the nominative subject of finiebat. Literally, "one part of which a sort of (quasi) bronze beak of a ship completed". The Latin idiom is different here from how we'd say it in English, which is what makes this clause confusing, but the idea being expressed is the same as in your translation.



          As for quasi, the reason it's not followed by subjunctive here is that it isn't really modifying the verb, but just the noun phrase embolum navis aeneum. In addition to being a conjunction, quasi can be a kind of adverb meaning something like "nearly, sort of" (see section II of the L&S entry).






          share|improve this answer























          • I am assuming this means that my final question is a ‘No, there aren’t any special properties to them’, correct?
            – Canned Man
            Nov 27 at 14:40










          • @CannedMan That's right, no special properties (unless you count the adverbial use of quasi).
            – TKR
            Nov 28 at 5:27










          • I would include that comment in the answer, to have it all in one collected answer. Thank you!
            – Canned Man
            2 days ago










          • @CannedMan Done.
            – TKR
            6 hours ago











          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',
          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
          });


          }
          });














          draft saved

          draft discarded


















          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2flatin.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f7581%2faccusative-in-genitive-relative-clause-with-verb-finiebat%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown

























          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes








          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes








          up vote
          7
          down vote



          accepted










          There aren't any special uses involved here; your incorrect assumption is that embolum (navis) aeneum is accusative -- in fact it's the nominative subject of finiebat. Literally, "one part of which a sort of (quasi) bronze beak of a ship completed". The Latin idiom is different here from how we'd say it in English, which is what makes this clause confusing, but the idea being expressed is the same as in your translation.



          As for quasi, the reason it's not followed by subjunctive here is that it isn't really modifying the verb, but just the noun phrase embolum navis aeneum. In addition to being a conjunction, quasi can be a kind of adverb meaning something like "nearly, sort of" (see section II of the L&S entry).






          share|improve this answer























          • I am assuming this means that my final question is a ‘No, there aren’t any special properties to them’, correct?
            – Canned Man
            Nov 27 at 14:40










          • @CannedMan That's right, no special properties (unless you count the adverbial use of quasi).
            – TKR
            Nov 28 at 5:27










          • I would include that comment in the answer, to have it all in one collected answer. Thank you!
            – Canned Man
            2 days ago










          • @CannedMan Done.
            – TKR
            6 hours ago















          up vote
          7
          down vote



          accepted










          There aren't any special uses involved here; your incorrect assumption is that embolum (navis) aeneum is accusative -- in fact it's the nominative subject of finiebat. Literally, "one part of which a sort of (quasi) bronze beak of a ship completed". The Latin idiom is different here from how we'd say it in English, which is what makes this clause confusing, but the idea being expressed is the same as in your translation.



          As for quasi, the reason it's not followed by subjunctive here is that it isn't really modifying the verb, but just the noun phrase embolum navis aeneum. In addition to being a conjunction, quasi can be a kind of adverb meaning something like "nearly, sort of" (see section II of the L&S entry).






          share|improve this answer























          • I am assuming this means that my final question is a ‘No, there aren’t any special properties to them’, correct?
            – Canned Man
            Nov 27 at 14:40










          • @CannedMan That's right, no special properties (unless you count the adverbial use of quasi).
            – TKR
            Nov 28 at 5:27










          • I would include that comment in the answer, to have it all in one collected answer. Thank you!
            – Canned Man
            2 days ago










          • @CannedMan Done.
            – TKR
            6 hours ago













          up vote
          7
          down vote



          accepted







          up vote
          7
          down vote



          accepted






          There aren't any special uses involved here; your incorrect assumption is that embolum (navis) aeneum is accusative -- in fact it's the nominative subject of finiebat. Literally, "one part of which a sort of (quasi) bronze beak of a ship completed". The Latin idiom is different here from how we'd say it in English, which is what makes this clause confusing, but the idea being expressed is the same as in your translation.



          As for quasi, the reason it's not followed by subjunctive here is that it isn't really modifying the verb, but just the noun phrase embolum navis aeneum. In addition to being a conjunction, quasi can be a kind of adverb meaning something like "nearly, sort of" (see section II of the L&S entry).






          share|improve this answer














          There aren't any special uses involved here; your incorrect assumption is that embolum (navis) aeneum is accusative -- in fact it's the nominative subject of finiebat. Literally, "one part of which a sort of (quasi) bronze beak of a ship completed". The Latin idiom is different here from how we'd say it in English, which is what makes this clause confusing, but the idea being expressed is the same as in your translation.



          As for quasi, the reason it's not followed by subjunctive here is that it isn't really modifying the verb, but just the noun phrase embolum navis aeneum. In addition to being a conjunction, quasi can be a kind of adverb meaning something like "nearly, sort of" (see section II of the L&S entry).







          share|improve this answer














          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer








          edited 6 hours ago

























          answered Nov 23 at 21:59









          TKR

          13k2755




          13k2755












          • I am assuming this means that my final question is a ‘No, there aren’t any special properties to them’, correct?
            – Canned Man
            Nov 27 at 14:40










          • @CannedMan That's right, no special properties (unless you count the adverbial use of quasi).
            – TKR
            Nov 28 at 5:27










          • I would include that comment in the answer, to have it all in one collected answer. Thank you!
            – Canned Man
            2 days ago










          • @CannedMan Done.
            – TKR
            6 hours ago


















          • I am assuming this means that my final question is a ‘No, there aren’t any special properties to them’, correct?
            – Canned Man
            Nov 27 at 14:40










          • @CannedMan That's right, no special properties (unless you count the adverbial use of quasi).
            – TKR
            Nov 28 at 5:27










          • I would include that comment in the answer, to have it all in one collected answer. Thank you!
            – Canned Man
            2 days ago










          • @CannedMan Done.
            – TKR
            6 hours ago
















          I am assuming this means that my final question is a ‘No, there aren’t any special properties to them’, correct?
          – Canned Man
          Nov 27 at 14:40




          I am assuming this means that my final question is a ‘No, there aren’t any special properties to them’, correct?
          – Canned Man
          Nov 27 at 14:40












          @CannedMan That's right, no special properties (unless you count the adverbial use of quasi).
          – TKR
          Nov 28 at 5:27




          @CannedMan That's right, no special properties (unless you count the adverbial use of quasi).
          – TKR
          Nov 28 at 5:27












          I would include that comment in the answer, to have it all in one collected answer. Thank you!
          – Canned Man
          2 days ago




          I would include that comment in the answer, to have it all in one collected answer. Thank you!
          – Canned Man
          2 days ago












          @CannedMan Done.
          – TKR
          6 hours ago




          @CannedMan Done.
          – TKR
          6 hours ago


















          draft saved

          draft discarded




















































          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.





          Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


          Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


          • 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.




          draft saved


          draft discarded














          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2flatin.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f7581%2faccusative-in-genitive-relative-clause-with-verb-finiebat%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          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







          Popular posts from this blog

          Probability when a professor distributes a quiz and homework assignment to a class of n students.

          Aardman Animations

          Are they similar matrix