# Always be yourself. Unless you can be a unicorn .....



## salix27

Salve ^^

I'm trying to translate the following quote into Latin: Always be yourself. Unless you can be a unicorn,  then always be a unicorn.
With the help of a dictionary I came up with the following translation: Semper tutemet es. Nisi unicornis esse potes, tunc semper unicornis es.
Honestly I have no idea if that'd be an accurate translation, and if it's grammatically sound at all, so I'd love to receive some feedback.


----------



## Pugnator

I would translate it into: 
Semper es te ipsum. Dum possit unicornem esse inde semper unicornem (esse). 
But I'm not totally sure, expecially about the last part.


----------



## Pugnator

I forgot the negation after dum.
So:
Semper es te ipsum. Dum ne possit unicornem esse inde semper unicornem


----------



## Copperknickers

Pugnator said:


> I forgot the negation after dum.
> So:
> Semper es te ipsum. Dum ne possit unicornem esse inde semper unicornem



That would translate as 'Always be yourself. While one cannot be a unicorn, then always be a unicorn.'

I would say a couple of things: the full stop needs to be (re)moved, and it looks rather strange to mix the imperative with the third person subjunctive, and I may be wrong, but maybe 'to be able to be smth' should perhaps a copulative sentence because the Latin word 'possum' is a form of 'sum', in which case it should take the nominative:

semper es te ipsum, dum ne possis unicornis esse, inde semper unicornis.

Still, that was just correcting a couple of things in your sentence, it's not my suggestion for what the ideal Latin translation of this phrase would be (I'm not the best at Latin composition).


----------



## Pugnator

Copperknickers said:


> I would say a couple of things: the full stop needs to be (re)moved, and it looks rather strange to mix the imperative with the third person subjunctive, and I may be wrong, but maybe 'to be able to be smth' should perhaps a copulative sentence because the Latin word 'possum' is a form of 'sum', in which case it should take the nominative:


I used the accusative because there is an infinitive sentence but I'm not totally sure about it. But regarding possit I did it because I wanted to make the "possum" impersonal, something in english like "Unless it is possible". Dum  ne + subjunctive mean "Unless" not "Cannot".  Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.


----------



## salix27

Thank you very much @Pugnator and @Copperknickers! Your input was very helpful, and thanks to your explanations I now understand things much better (like how 'dum ne' in combination with the subjunctive translates as 'unless'). I also assumed that 'to be able to be' / 'possum esse' was a copulative sentence, so I guess I'll keep unicornis in the nominative case. 

Semper es te ipsum, dum ne possis unicornis esse, inde semper unicornis


----------



## Scholiast

salvete omnes!

I have tried to abstain from this, but...,


Pugnator said:


> Semper es te ipsum. (esse).


The nominative subject in the implied _es_ is _tu_. The complement must also be nominative (_tu ipse_).



Pugnator said:


> Semper es te ipsum



This is meaningless, as _es_ assumes a 2nd person sing. verb, and _te ipsum_ addresses the person.



Copperknickers said:


> semper es te ipsum, dum ne possis unicornis esse, inde semper unicornis.



Coppernickers, I thought you were better than that. _dum ne possis cornis esse _is meaningless - unless possibly in Maryhill?


----------



## Pugnator

Scholiast said:


> The nominative subject is the implied _tu_ in _es_. The complement must also be nominative (_tu ipse_).


te should be accusative because is de facto an accusative of an imperative.
Similiar example are the famouses
"Medico, Cura te ipsum"
and 
"Nosce te ipsum".
So I'm competly sure this is correct 


Scholiast said:


> This is meaningless, as _es_ assumes a 2nd person sing. verb, and _te ipsum_ addresses the person.


Read above.


----------



## salix27

Pugnator said:


> te should be accusative because is de facto an accusative of an imperative


 sounds logical indeed.




Scholiast said:


> _dum ne possis cornis esse _is meaningless


 could you explain what is wrong with this part, or how it could be improved?


----------



## Scholiast

Greetings once more



Pugnator said:


> te should be accusative because is de facto an accusative of an imperative.
> Similiar example are the famouses
> "Medico, *Cura* te ipsum"
> and
> "*Nosce* te ipsum".
> So I'm competly sure this is correct



[my emphasis] Sorry, Pugnator, but _curare_ and _noscere_ are transitive verbs which take a direct object in, of course, the accusative. _esse_ (along with other verbs of being or becoming such as _fieri_ and _creari_) is intransitive, so cannot have an object. The complement remains in the nominative, as in "Pugnator callid*us* est" (not _callid_*um*).



salix27 said:


> could you explain what is wrong with this part, or how it could be improved?



_dum_ is a conjunction, meaning "while" or "so long as" or "until". With a subjunctive verb such as _possis_ it anticipates an indefinite future event - e.g. "Wait here until I come back [however long that may be]". So _dum possis cornis esse_ should mean "...until [such time as] you are able to be...".

_ne_ when used with a subjunctive verb is also a conjunction, but with an entirely different function, that is, to introduce a negative purpose clause: "...in order not to be able to...".

The combination is, as I said, meaningless.

For the original thought, I would suggest _es tu is qui ipse es_: "Always be that which you yourself are" (on this rare occasion, Latin is wordier than English).

The rest of the aphorism (the unicorns bit) defeats me entirely (which is one reason I did not pitch in at the outset of this Thread), as I don't understand the logic of what it is trying to say in English.

Σ


----------



## salix27

Scholiast said:


> _esse_ (along with other verbs of being or becoming such as _fieri_ and _creari_) is intransitive, so cannot have an object. The complement remains in the nominative



Thank you for the clarification, Scoliast,



Scholiast said:


> _es tu is qui ipse es_: "Always be that which you yourself are"



and for this suggestion as well. Sounds much better!



Scholiast said:


> The rest of the aphorism (the unicorns bit) defeats me entirely (which is one reason I did not pitch in at the outset of this Thread), as I don't understand the logic of what it is trying to say in English.



I hope rephrasing the aphorism helps:
Always be yourself. However, IF it were possible to be a unicorn instead of being yourself (which would be much more wonderful), then be a unicorn.

Perhaps this discussion could be of help as well:
forum.wordreference.com/threads/always-be-yourself-unless-you-can-be-a-unicorn-then-always-be-a-unicorn.3075518/


----------



## Scholiast

Greetings again


salix27 said:


> Always be yourself. However, IF it were possible to be a unicorn instead of being yourself (which would be much more wonderful), then be a unicorn.


Ah. I see.
Then _sis semper is qui ipse es, nisi unicornis esse possis._
"Be yourself, unless you can (remotely) be a unicorn".
Σ


----------



## Pugnator

Scholiast said:


> _dum_ is a conjunction, meaning "while" or "so long as" or "until". With a subjunctive verb such as _possis_ it anticipates an indefinite future event - e.g. "Wait here until I come back [however long that may be]". So _dum possis cornis esse_ should mean "...until [such time as] you are able to be...".
> 
> _ne_ when used with a subjunctive verb is also a conjunction, but with an entirely different function, that is, to introduce a negative purpose clause: "...in order not to be able to...". The combination is, as I said, meaningless.


try to search dum ne or directly dum into the dictionary. On mine say that "Dum ne + subjunctive" mean Unless (My dictionary is Latin-italian and Italian-Latin so the translation of dum ne is "A meno che non" which mean Unless).


----------



## Pugnator

Anyway see also on Romans2.19 :


> confidis te ipsum ducem esse caecorum lumen eorum qui in tenebris sun


It use an accusative (ducem) with the infinite esse.


----------



## Scholiast

salve tu quoque, Pugnator - nomine verbis aequipotens

_dum _+ _ne_: L&S: *(β). * In restrictive clauses: “sint sane liberales ex sociorum fortunis, sint misericordes in furibus aerarii, ne illi sanguinem nostrum largiantur, etc.,” _only let them not; if they only will not_, *Sall. C. 52, 12*. So, dum ne, dummodo ne, modo ne, and dum quidem ne; v. dum and modo: me vero nihil istorum ne juvenem quidem movit umquam: ne nunc senem, _much less now I am old_ = nedum, *Cic. Fam. 9, 26, 2*



Pugnator said:


> Anyway see also on Romans2.19 :
> 
> It use an accusative (ducem) with the infinite esse.



This is irrelevant as it is an indirect statement in which the accusative is used both for subject and complement.

Σ

Edit: sorry, I did not mean to sound unfriendly!


----------

