HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: perkins@MSUPA.PA.MSU.EDU
Newsgroups: sci.classics
Subject: Re: Habemus ad dominum
Date: 21 Aug 92 05:07:29 GMT
Reply-To: perkins@MSUPA.PA.MSU.EDU
Organization: MSU Dept. of Physics & Astronomy

In article <Bt8qo2.2F1@netnews.jhuapl.edu>, avlb@aplcomm.jhuapl.edu 
(A V Louis Biggie) writes:

>In the Latin mass,
>[...]                Also, why "Agnus dei" and not "Agne Dei" - shouldn't it 
>be vocative?

Perhaps this is an example of the exceptional usage noted in Hale & Buck's
_A_Latin_Grammar_, section 401, p.210 (of the 1985 printing of the 1966 U of
Alabama Press reprint of the 1903 edition):

     401. In poetry and ceremonious prose, the Nominative is sometimes 
     used instead of the Vocative, or as an Appositive or Predicate to a
     Vocative.

     audi tu, populus Albanus, <<hear, people of Alba>>; Liv. I, 24, 7.
     nate, meae vires, mea magna potentia solus, <<O son, my strength,
          my great power, thou alone>>; Aen. I, 664.
     salve, primus omnium parens patriae appellate, <<hail thou, named
          first of all the father of thy country>>; Plin. N. H. 7, 117.

I would think that a Mass would count as ceremonious prose, if not poetry...
Invoking the old "medieval Latinists didn't know what they were doing" saw
might be a bit of overkill when Livy and Vergil did the same thing when it
suited their purposes.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
George J Perkins     perkins@msupa.pa.msu.edu    gjperkins@fnal.fnal.gov

p.s. In case you don't have Hale & Buck handy, the same basic exception is
noted in section 340.a. (with the Livy example) of Allen & Greenough's
_New_Latin_Grammar_ (1931 reprint of the 1903 revised edition) and in
section 171 (citing the Livy and the Vergil without attribution) of
Bennett's _Latin_Grammar_ (1908 revised edition). Allen & Greenough link 
this usage with Imperative verbs (still applicable in the "Agnus Dei"
case), but Bennett just says "especially in poetry and formal prose". 
Newsgroups: sci.classics
From: JAREA@UKCC.UKY.EDU
Subject: Re: : I need a word
Organization: University of Kentucky
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 01:31:32 GMT

 
Synecdoche?   Taking the part for the hole??  Sounds pretty kinky to me!!!
From: cla02@seq1.keele.ac.uk (R. Wallace)
Newsgroups: sci.classics
Subject: Re: Habemus ad dominum
Date: 21 Aug 92 09:51:38 GMT
Organization: University of Keele, England

Agnus dei as a vocative?

Classical poets quite regularly use nominatives as vocatives when it
suits them.

See, for example, Horace Sermones 1, 6, 38: tune, Syri, Damae, aut
Dionysi filius, audes.....

The trouble with the Romans was that they never had the chance to read
the Latin grammar books....

Richard Wallace
From: xzs0302@rchland.vnet.ibm.com (T.A. Gyorgak)
Newsgroups: sci.classics
Subject: Computer Program for Classics Instruction:
Keywords: Teaching Aids
Date: 19 Aug 92 21:48:03 GMT
Organization: IBM Rochester
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM


   Does anyone know of a good program for teaching Latin and Greek to
children of all ages?  
Newsgroups: sci.classics
From: wmporter@jetson.uh.edu (William M. Porter)
Subject: Re: Habemus ad dominum
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Keywords: Ecclesiastical Latin
Organization: University of Houston
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 08:02:00 GMT

Forgive me for responding thus to myself, but I want to clarify something I
said before too many people scratch their heads over it:

>                                                The inconsistency between
>"filius" and "fili" is not surprising: This is a perfect example of the
>kind of thing one encounters in a lot of medieval/ecclesiastical texts. It
>probably does reflect a degree of carelessness about grammar, but let us
>remember that there are a number of lines in the "Aeneid" in which a noun is
>used twice with (say) a long medial vowel once and a short medial vowel the
>second time. 

What I meant by that reference to a matter of quantity in the Aeneid is that
consistency is not always achieved nor even always sought after by even the
greatest Latin writers. As Richard Wallace put it earlier in this thread, very
well: "The trouble with the Romans was that they never had a chance to read the
Latin grammar books."  

William Porter  * * * Classical Languages: University of Houston
Internet: wmporter@jetson.uh.edu /or/ CompuServe: 75430,1351
From: wmporter@jetson.uh.edu (William M. Porter)
Newsgroups: sci.classics
Subject: Re: Habemus ad dominum
Keywords: Ecclesiastical Latin
Date: 22 Aug 92 10:47:00 GMT
Organization: University of Houston
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <1992Aug20.204641.9103@beaver.cs.washington.edu>,
louns@cs.washington.edu (Michael Lounsbery) writes... 

  >Undoubtedly related to all this is the phrase from the Gloria: >  

  > "Domine Fili unigenite, Iesu Christe, Domine Deus, Agnus Dei, Filius
  > Patris, qui tollis peccata mundi, miserere nobis" >  

  >Here we have a string of vocatives (starting with Domine) followed by what 
  >look like nominatives (Agnus and Filius).  Since the passage uses Fili as 
  >nominative, we can be certain that Filius is not a vocative.  The Agnus, 
  >falling uncertainly between a clear vocative and a clear nominative, could 
  >go either way. > 

Aha! This is a useful offering. I had forgotten this source. (It's been twenty
years since I listened to the Latin liturgy regularly.) I would only point out
that your attempt to explain away "filius" and "agnus" later in the series is
unnecessary: these too are clearly vocatives. The inconsistency between
"filius" and "fili" is not surprising: This is a perfect example of the
kind of thing one encounters in a lot of medieval/ecclesiastical texts. It
probably does reflect a degree of carelessness about grammar, but let us
remember that there are a number of lines in the "Aeneid" in which a noun is
used twice with (say) a long medial vowel once and a short medial vowel the
second time. 

William Porter  * * * Classical Languages: University of Houston
Internet: wmporter@jetson.uh.edu /or/ CompuServe: 75430,1351
From: sasbmt@jjoyce.unx.sas.com (Bruce Tindall)
Newsgroups: sci.classics
Subject: Re: Habemus ad dominum
Date: 20 Aug 92 19:30:45 GMT
Organization: SAS Institute Inc.
Originator: sasbmt@jjoyce.unx.sas.com


In article <aardvark-200892110652@146.154.24.90>, aardvark@ial1.jsc.nasa.gov (Michael Martin) writes:
>Angus being nominative requires it to be a subject. If we
>supply the missing verb 'to be' we arrive at;
>
>Angus Dei, qui tollis peccata mundi.....
>
>You are the Lamb of God, who takes away the sins of the world...

But I don't think this explanation works, when you consider the
two *full* sentences that begin with those words.

"Agnus Dei, qui tollis peccata mundi, miserere nobis." and
"  "    "    "     "      "      "    dona nobis pacem."

There is an explicit verb in each sentence -- the imperatives 
"miserere" and "dona" -- so there's no room for an implicit
indicative verb "es" of which "Agnus" would be the subject.

Of course you could impute different punctuation; it would
work if it were punctuated, "Agnus Dei [es], qui tollis
peccata mundi.  Miserere nobis!  Dona nobis pacem!"  But that's
not how I recall seeing it in print.
-- 
Bruce Tindall, Core Testing Manager, SAS Institute Inc., Cary NC 27513
Newsgroups: sci.classics
From: collins@netnews.jhuapl.edu (Skip Collins)
Subject: Re: Verbum Domini (was: Habemus ad dominum)
Organization: JHU/Applied Physics Laboratory
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 14:59:53 GMT

aardvark@ial1.jsc.nasa.gov (Michael Martin) writes:

>There are plenty of other
>examples of the missing 'to be' in the Liturgy. The phrase, 'Verbum
>Domini', after the readings is an example. This, until recently, was
>rendered in English as 'This is the Word of the Lord'.

This recent trend to render 'Verbum Domini' as 'The Word of the Lord'
has annoyed me from the first time I heard it. Leaving
out the verb 'to be' in this context in English seems an 
unjustified change in the ICEL translation. The remarkable speed
with which this alteration has spread leads me to suspect that some bishops'
committee made a recommendation for the change. Or some liturgist with
a bee in her bonnet proseletized like hell. I cannot even guess what ills
this is supposed to cure.
---
Skip Collins
-- 
Skip Collins
Newsgroups: sci.classics
From: wbralick@afit.af.mil (Will Bralick)
Subject: Re: Habemus ad dominum
Organization: Self-similar
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1992 17:08:44 GMT

In article <19AUG199214061798@jetson.uh.edu> wmporter@jetson.uh.edu (William M. Porter) writes:
| You raise a couple questions that I never asked in all my years of 
| going to Latin masses. "Sursum" means "upwards"; it's an adverb. 
| "Sursum corda" means "Hearts upward!", more or less literally, 
| with the imperative verb implied. The congregation then responds, 
| "habemus [corda sursum] ad Dominus," which is now generally translated 
| "We have lifted them up to the Lord" in the Catholic Mass.

Please note that ``we have lifted them up to the Lord'' is the 
translation approved by the ICEL (International Commission on 
English in the Liturgy).  This is the same commission which has
approved the translation of ``credo'' as ``_we_ believe'' --
needless to say, I view anything this commission approves with 
suspicion.  From an older translation of the Mass which I happen 
to have, ``habemus ad Dominus'' was translated as ``we have them 
lifted unto the Lord'' which seems to be a better translation.

| As for "Agnus Dei", I think the answer must be that this is
| medieval/ecclesiastical Latin and simply doesn't follow the 
| classical rule for vocatives in the second declension.

Which brings up an interesting point.  Are there any texts out 
there which deal with the differences between medieval/ecclesiastical 
and classical Latin?  


Best regards,

-- 
Will Bralick                          |  If we desire to defeat the enemy,
             wbralick@afit.af.mil     |  we must proportion our efforts to 
             bralick@cs.psu.edu       |  his powers of resistance.
with disclaimer;  use disclaimer;     |               - Carl von Clauswitz
Newsgroups: sci.classics
From: avlb@aplcomm.jhuapl.edu (A V Louis Biggie)
Subject: Re: Habemus ad dominum
Reply-To: avlb@aplcomm.jhuapl.edu (A V Louis Biggie)
Organization: JHU/Applied Physics Laboratory
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1992 16:53:55 GMT


But we still have "Domine, non .. sum dignus"
From: ingria@bbn.com (Bob Ingria)
Newsgroups: sci.classics
Subject: Re: Habemus ad dominum
Date: 20 Aug 92 19:35:32 GMT
Reply-To: ingria@BBN.COM
NNTP-Posting-Host: bbn.com
In-reply-to: avlb@aplcomm.jhuapl.edu's message of 20 Aug 92 19:15:39 GMT

In article <BtAqu3.HzG@netnews.jhuapl.edu> avlb@aplcomm.jhuapl.edu (A V Louis Biggie) writes:
   In article <aardvark-200892110652@146.154.24.90>, aardvark@ial1.jsc.nasa.gov 
   (Michael Martin) writes:
   > William M. Porter's reply (all of which I agreed with except for the
   > following);
   > 
   > > As for "Agnus Dei", I think the answer must be that this is
   > > medieval/ecclesiastical Latin and simply doesn't follow the classical 
   rule for
   > > vocatives in the second declension.
   > 
   > There are plenty examples of the usage of the vocative endings in
   > Ecclesiastical Latin, so I do not think that the above explanation is
   > tenable. For example, later on in the Liturgy we have; 'Domine, non dignus
   > sum...'.
   > 
   > Actualy, I would propose a much simpler and more 'classical' explanation.
   > The Romans, being the terse people they were, often dropped the verb from
   > their sentances. Angus being nominative requires it to be a subject. If we
   > supply the missing verb 'to be' we arrive at;
   > 
   > Angus Dei, qui tollis peccata mundi.....
   > 
   > You are the Lamb of God, who takes away the sins of the world...
   > 
   But the main verb is not missing - it's the imperative, "dona."  The full 
   sentence is "Agnus dei, qui tollis peccata mundi, dona nobis pacem."

This suggests some alternatives:

(1) it's an instance of Case attraction (into the Case of the relative
pronoun---Nominative);

(2) it's a mistake---i.e. ``Agnus'' was given the Case appropriate for
the closest verb, rather than the Case it should receive, given it's
grammatical interpretation as a vocative.

(Note that (1) and (2) are essentially the same explanation; (1)
simply means this was a general phenomenon in the Latin of the period
of composition; (2) means this was not a general construction but an
idiosyncracy.

-30-
Bob
From: wmporter@jetson.uh.edu (William M. Porter)
Newsgroups: sci.classics
Subject: Re: Habemus ad dominum
Date: 19 Aug 92 19:06:00 GMT
Article-I.D.: jetson.19AUG199214061798
Organization: University of Houston
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <Bt8qo2.2F1@netnews.jhuapl.edu>, avlb@aplcomm.jhuapl.edu (A V Louis Biggie) writes...
>In the Latin mass, "Habemus ad dominum" was translated as "We have raised 
>them up to the Lord."  Does anyone know how this translation is reached?  In 
>classical Latin, "Habere" is used to indicate possession, but is not used as 
>an auxiliary to form perfect tenses.  Also, the line "sursum corda" is not 
>easy to understand?  Also, why "Agnus dei" and not "Agne Dei" - shouldn't it 
>be vocative?

You raise a couple questions that I never asked in all my years of going to
Latin masses. "Sursum" means "upwards"; it's an adverb. "Sursum corda" means
"Hearts upward!", more or less literally, with the imperative verb implied. The
congregation then responds, "habemus [corda sursum] ad Dominus," which is now
generally translated "We have lifted them up to the Lord" in the Catholic Mass.
As for "Agnus Dei", I think the answer must be that this is
medieval/ecclesiastical Latin and simply doesn't follow the classical rule for
vocatives in the second declension.

William Porter  * * * Classical Languages: University of Houston
Internet: wmporter@jetson.uh.edu /or/ CompuServe: 75430,1351
Newsgroups: sci.classics
From: wmporter@jetson.uh.edu (William M. Porter)
Subject: Re: music
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: University of Houston
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 07:52:00 GMT

In article <1jjydsm@rpi.edu>, mccomt@aix.rpi.edu (Todd M. McComb) writes...
>What is the state of knowledge concerning music during the Roman Empire
>and earlier?  Are there any good references on the subject?

There was a good book on ancient classical music published in the last few
years. I own the book and have read parts of it, but it is (alas) at my office,
not here at home. I think the author's name was Cometti.

The simple answer to your question is that not a whole heck of a lot is known
about ancient Greek or Roman music of any period: just enough to be
tantalizing. 

William Porter  * * * Classical Languages: University of Houston
Internet: wmporter@jetson.uh.edu /or/ CompuServe: 75430,1351
From: bylander@henri.ma.utexas.edu (Mark Joseph Bylander)
Newsgroups: sci.classics
Subject: Re: Habemus ad dominum
Date: 20 Aug 92 20:52:22 GMT
Organization: University of Texas at Austin Mathematics

wmporter@jetson.uh.edu (William M. Porter) writes:

>In article <Bt8qo2.2F1@netnews.jhuapl.edu>, avlb@aplcomm.jhuapl.edu (A V Louis Biggie) writes...
>>In the Latin mass, "Habemus ad dominum" was translated as "We have raised 
>>them up to the Lord."  Does anyone know how this translation is reached?  In 
>>classical Latin, "Habere" is used to indicate possession, but is not used as 
>>an auxiliary to form perfect tenses.  Also, the line "sursum corda" is not 
>>easy to understand?  Also, why "Agnus dei" and not "Agne Dei" - shouldn't it 
>>be vocative?

>You raise a couple questions that I never asked in all my years of going to
>Latin masses. "Sursum" means "upwards"; it's an adverb. "Sursum corda" means
>"Hearts upward!", more or less literally, with the imperative verb implied. The
>congregation then responds, "habemus [corda sursum] ad Dominus," which is now
>generally translated "We have lifted them up to the Lord" in the Catholic Mass.

Actually, the common usage in all the Catholic churces I have attended is,
"We lift them up to the Lord."  I believe this is the ICEL translation.

Mark Bylander 
Newsgroups: sci.classics
From: mccomt@aix.rpi.edu (Todd M. McComb)
Subject: music
Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 20:59:32 GMT

What is the state of knowledge concerning music during the Roman Empire
and earlier?  Are there any good references on the subject?

T. M. McComb

Newsgroups: sci.classics
From: wmporter@jetson.uh.edu (William M. Porter)
Subject: Re: Habemus ad dominum
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: University of Houston
Date: Sat, 22 Aug 1992 11:05:00 GMT

George Perkins provides, finally, a good answer to the question about "agnus
Dei" to which I had offered a first and somewhat thoughtless answer:

>Perhaps this is an example of the exceptional usage noted in Hale & Buck's
>_A_Latin_Grammar_, section 401, p.210 (of the 1985 printing of the 1966 U of
>Alabama Press reprint of the 1903 edition):
> 
>     401. In poetry and ceremonious prose, the Nominative is sometimes 
>     used instead of the Vocative, or as an Appositive or Predicate to a
>     Vocative.
> 
>     audi tu, populus Albanus, <<hear, people of Alba>>; Liv. I, 24, 7.
>     nate, meae vires, mea magna potentia solus, <<O son, my strength,
>          my great power, thou alone>>; Aen. I, 664.
> 
>I would think that a Mass would count as ceremonious prose, if not poetry...
>Invoking the old "medieval Latinists didn't know what they were doing" saw
>might be a bit of overkill when Livy and Vergil did the same thing when it
>suited their purposes.

I had looked at both Bennett and Allen & Greenough very quickly before my
original posting and missed this in both sources. (I don't have Hale & Buck.) I
must have looked only in the sections on accidence.

I did not mean to say that "medieval Latinists didn't know what they were
doing" and don't think I did. It is undeniable however that medieval grammar
and orthography are, shall we say more "flexible" than classical grammar, a
good bit of the time. And the citation of a classical precedent here helps
explain "agnus Dei" at this point in the Mass, but does not resolve the clear
inconsistency between "fili" and "filius" in the Gloria, noted by Michael
Lounsbery in an early posting in this thread.

Nevertheless, these grammatical parallels are "on point" (as the lawyers say). 

William Porter  * * * Classical Languages: University of Houston
Internet: wmporter@jetson.uh.edu

Newsgroups: sci.classics
From: rcape@scott.skidmore.edu (robert cape)
Subject: Re: Catilinarians out of print?
Organization: Skidmore College, Saratoga Springs NY
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 02:15:14 GMT


It is surprising but true that the Catilinarians do not exist in a
good school/undergraduate edition.  A new commentary (and text?) is
planned for the Cambridge UP "Yellow and Green" series, to be edited
by R. Thomas of Harvard, but it will not be available for some time.
I have found that some of the best commentaries, with good grammatical
notes, are to be found in "selections" of Cicero's speeches of the
kind done in the earlier part of this century.  Such books typically
contain 5-6 speeches and often include a couple of the Catilinarians.
There is an edition of Cat. I & II, edited by H.E. Gould and J.L
Whiteley, reprinted and available from Bristol Classical Press.  It is
a mediocre work and deserves to be replaced.  Nevertheless, it seems
to be about all we have.

Valete,

Bob Cape


P.S.  I just remembered that the Bristol Classical Press and Bolchazy-
Carducci series of texts, translations and notes has a volume on the
Catilinarians listed as forthcoming or in preparation.  By the way,
the historical notes in the new Loeb (by MacDonald) are superb.
Owners of the old Loeb (by L. Lord?) will want to replace their copy
with the newer edition.






Newsgroups: sci.classics
From: wrightdb@pigsty.dental.washington.edu
Subject: creating zoological names
Organization: University of Washington
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1992 23:25:07 GMT

As a paleontologist I am faced with the task of naming some 
extinct mammals (viz. peccaries, pig-like animals of the 
New World).  Such names are, of course, customarily of Greek or 
Latin origin (or latinized "barbarisms").  I have made a few 
attempts at coining names for these animals and will be very 
grateful for any constructive criticism (apropos correctness 
of combination, etc.) of my neologisms.  Better still would be 
superior words (more creative, more euphonius) to express the 
desired meaning.

Below are the meanings I am groping for, and the current state of 
my attempts (constructed on the basis of roots and rules provided 
by Brown, W. R., 1956. _Composition_of_Scientific_Words_. 
Smithsonian Institution Press).  The name of a species is a 
binomial (e.g., *Felis catus*).  The first name, which always 
begins with a capital letter, is the genus name.  It is singular 
and in the nominative case.  The second name is the "trivial" name, 
or epithet (commonly called the "species" name).  It begins with a 
lowercase letter. It is adjectival (adjective, genitive, or noun 
used as adjective) and must agree in gender with the genus name.  

The "wings" and "helmets" below refer to lateral flanges on the 
zygomatic arch (cheekbone).  

DESIRED MEANING		|	MY ATTEMPT
--------------------------------------------------------------	
			|	
winged pig, 		|	[*-hyus* is a Greek root for
pig having wings 	|	pig that is commonly used in this
["the time has come,	|	group]
the walrus said..."]	|	*Pterygohyus* (Gr. f. pterygos, 	
			|	wing;
			|	or *Pterohyus*  (Gr. n. pteron = 
			|	feather, wing)
			|	or *Ptesimohyus* (Gr. ptesimos, 	
			|	winged)  				 
	
-----------------------------------------------------------------
helmeted pig		|
(or, as an alternative,	|	*Cassipecari* (L. cassis = helmet)
is there a special name	|
for headgear like the 	|
flying nun wore?)	|
-----------------------------------------------------------------
			|	*ignioligneus* (L. ignis, fire,
burner of wood;		|	ignio, set on fire; L. lignum, n. 
one who burns wood 	|	wood, ligneus, of wood)
[patronym for 		|	
*Woodburne*]		|	This species is a member of the 
			|	genus *Platygonus*  
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: sci.classics
From: avlb@aplcomm.jhuapl.edu (A V Louis Biggie)
Subject: Habemus ad dominum
Reply-To: avlb@aplcomm.jhuapl.edu (A V Louis Biggie)
Organization: JHU/Applied Physics Laboratory
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 17:16:50 GMT

In the Latin mass, "Habemus ad dominum" was translated as "We have raised 
them up to the Lord."  Does anyone know how this translation is reached?  In 
classical Latin, "Habere" is used to indicate possession, but is not used as 
an auxiliary to form perfect tenses.  Also, the line "sursum corda" is not 
easy to understand?  Also, why "Agnus dei" and not "Agne Dei" - shouldn't it 
be vocative?



Newsgroups: sci.classics