AN ANSWER KEY TO
A Primer of Ecclesiastical Latin
AN ANSWER KEY TO
A Primer of Ecclesiastical Latin A Supplement to the Text by John F. Collins Prepared by
John R. Dunlap
e Catholic University of America Press Washington, D.C.
Copyright © 2006 e Catholic University of America Press All rights reserved e paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of American National Standards for Information Science—Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials, .-. ∞ - - Dunlap, John, R., –
An answer key to A primer of ecclesiastical Latin : a supplement to the text by John F. Collins / prepared by John R. Dunlap. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. -: ---- (pbk. : alk. paper) -: --- (pbk. : alk. paper) . Collins, John F., –. Primer of ecclesiastical Latin. . Latin language— Church Latin—Grammar. . Liturgical language—Latin. . Latin language, Medieval and modern—Grammar. . Latin language, Postclassical—Grammar. . Bible—Language, style. . Catholic Church—Liturgy. I. Title. . Suppl. —dc
Contents
Preface vii
Unit 18
Unit 1
Unit 19
Unit 2
Unit 20
Unit 3
Unit 21
Unit 4
Unit 22
Unit 5
Unit 23
Unit 6
Unit 24
Unit 7
Unit 25
Unit 8
Unit 26
Unit 9
Unit 27
Unit 10
Unit 28
Unit 11
Unit 29
Unit 12
Unit 30
Unit 13
Unit 31
Unit 14
Unit 32
Unit 15
Unit 33
Unit 16
Unit 34
Unit 17
Unit 35
Preface
is answer key comes in response to numerous requests over the years
since the publication of John F. Collins’s Primer of Ecclesiastical Latin in . Collins himself—who died in before the issue of an answer key to his text had been resolved—envisioned his text for self-teaching as well as con ventional classroom use. In addition to greater exibility for teachers, then, the key is intended also to make the popular text more accessible to autodidacts, homeschooling families, parish seminars, and the like. e answer key covers the regular drills, exercises, and, eventually, short readings that occur in each of the units of the text. e translations of exercise sentences, especially as they become more complex, are intended to be serviceable rather than exhaustive. Intermittently, however, alternative translations are provided, in most cases for obvious reasons. e most common reason is to give a more idiomatic English rendering of a Latin expression the sense of which may not be clear with a literal translation. Such alternatives are indicated with a slash mark (/) followed by the more idiomatic English expression. In the course of preparing this key, two issues emerged of su cient importance to warrant some preliminary attention in the key. e rst is the issue of vocabulary glosses, ve of which are not expansive enough in the text’s vocabulary lists to handle particular sentences in which the Latin words occur. e second is the issue of simple printing errors, which were discovered in a few units of the text. ese two issues are outlined below for convenient reference.
vii
viii
Preface
A. Addenda
. Unit , p. : solvo needs “abolish” to accommodate Exercise ,
p. . . Unit , p. : subdo needs “add,” “supply” to accommodate Exercise , p. . . Unit , p. : homo needs “man” to accommodate the normal translation of such scriptural terms as Filius hominis, “Son of Man.” . Unit , p. : peto needs “seek” to reveal the logic behind the idiom peto a [noun] ut. . Unit , pp. –: confero needs “ponder” to accommodate Exercise , p. . B. Errata
. Unit , p. : “diaconem” should be diaconum. . Unit , p. , Reading , ll –: awed punctuation; change to fac-
tum est nihil, quod factum est; in ipso . . . (comma aer nihil; semicolon between est and in) . Unit , p. , Exercise I, : the reference should be to Psalm li, (not ). . Unit , p. , Exercise I, : praeterquam is incorrectly glossed for the context; should be “contrary to” (cf. general vocabulary, p. ). . Unit , p. , Exercise I, : nos should be vos, according to the Nova Vulgata; but the sentence is translated as-is in the key. . Unit , p. : the reference should be to Psalm li, , (not , ).
Apart from the addenda and errata outlined above, a few issues of translation are noted and explained as they emerge in the key. ese include a consistent translation of the ablative absolute when the form occurs without a larger context, the idiomatic translation of future perfects in conditional clauses, and the normal translation of the historical present. I am greatly obliged to several people for their encouragement and help. Particular thanks are owed to the fathers and brothers of the Carmelite Monastery in San Jose, California—students of mine who rst suggested to me the need for a study aid to accompany our Collins text; to my depart-
Preface
ix
ment chairman, Bill Greenwalt, who lobbied for my sabbatical time; and especially to David J. McGonagle, director of the CUA Press, whose patience and guidance were, with respect to the whole project, sine qua non.
. Department of Classics Santa Clara University December
