# in vino/vinum veritas



## Aoyama

We all know the saying, but it seems there are two versions.
I only knew "in vino ...". Which one is correct ?


----------



## Cagey

Grammar requires "in vin*o* veritas".  

The other version is ungrammatical, by the standards of classical Latin.


----------



## Aoyama

Right, I follow you, but why is it that "in vinum ..." can also be found ?


----------



## Kevin Beach

Because people make mistakes.


----------



## Aoyama

That's for sure, _errare human*um* est _... But it seems that you can also find this version on Google ... (Which doesn't prove anything, I would agree).


----------



## Kevin Beach

You can find all the errors under the sun on Google!

*In vino* means "in wine", in the static sense, unmoving.

*In vinum* means "into wine", involving motion.


----------



## Aoyama

> *In vino* means "in wine", in the static sense, unmoving.
> 
> *In vinum* means "into wine", involving motion.


That is a good explanation, and something new under the sun, thank you.


----------



## Aoyama

Well, after giving it some thought, the answer may be a bit more subtle. _In_ is normally followed by the _accusative_ , so "in vinum" is plausible. Vino is an ablative. The ablative in Latin generally points out "the place where you come from". In vino veritas = truth comes from wine. With the preposition _in _, the ablative may also indicate the _place where you are_ ("locative "), in opposition with the accusative which indicates the _place where you are going to _. So "in vinum veritas" could be understood as "truth goes to wine", a bit different from "truth is in wine", but defendable, even if "in vino veritas" is the widely accepted sentence. "In vinum veritas" could also be translated as "the quest of truth leads you to the bottle/wine"...


----------



## Cagey

Aoyama said:


> So "in vinum veritas" could be understood as "truth goes to wine", a bit different from "truth is in wine", but defensible, even if "in vino veritas" is the widely accepted sentence. "In vinum veritas" could also be translated as "the quest of truth leads you to the bottle/wine"...



I don't think anyone would understand it this way unless you included a verb. 

_In vino veritas_ works as a sentence because the complete form is "in vino veritas _est_", with "est" (=is) omitted.  It is quite acceptable to omit a form of the verb "to be" in Latin.  The reader will supply it.  This is a special feature of "to be".

To be an intelligible stand-alone sentence, "truth into the wine" (in vinum veritas) requires the addition of a verb of motion, which cannot be omitted.


----------



## CapnPrep

Aoyama said:


> _In_ is normally followed by the _accusative_


 This is like saying that _dans_ normally means 'into' in French. Both cases are normal with _in_.


> The ablative in Latin generally points out "the place where you come from". In vino veritas = truth comes from wine.


The ablative of source only works with the prepositions _de_, _ab_, _ex_ (or more rarely, with no preposition). _In vino_ can only mean 'in the wine' (and not e.g. 'from within the wine'). 




Cagey said:


> To be an intelligible stand-alone sentence, "truth into the wine" (in vinum veritas) requires the addition of a verb of motion, which cannot be omitted.


Verbs of motion can be omitted (_Unde et quo, Catius?_) and in aphoristic style I think _In vinum veritas _would be OK, except that many people would just assume it was an error. _In vinum *veritatem*_ (with an understood transitive verb and subject) would be more clearly recognized as a deliberate variation of the original expression.


----------



## Kevin Beach

I suppose you could say that somebody must be putting _in vinum veritas_, otherwise nobody could find _in vino veritas_.


----------



## Aoyama

> Verbs of motion can be omitted and in aphoristic style I think _In vinum veritas _would be OK, except that many people would just assume it was an error. _In vinum *veritatem*_ (with an understood/understated transitive verb and subject) would be more clearly recognized as a deliberate variation of the original expression.


We agree on this one. Sic transit .


----------



## Tinu

Aoyama said:


> Well, after giving it some thought, the answer may be a bit more subtle. _In_ is normally followed by the _accusative_ , so "in vinum" is plausible. Vino is an ablative. The ablative in Latin generally points out "the place where you come from". In vino veritas = truth comes from wine. With the preposition _in _, the ablative may also indicate the _place where you are_ ("locative "), in opposition with the accusative which indicates the _place where you are going to _. So "in vinum veritas" could be understood as "truth goes to wine", a bit different from "truth is in wine", but defendable, even if "in vino veritas" is the widely accepted sentence. "In vinum veritas" could also be translated as "the quest of truth leads you to the bottle/wine"...


 
I am sory, Aoyama, but veritas like this must have been hidden in many glasses of wine! (joking!)  The truth isn´t really that complicated,the "nuda veritas" is that Latin preposition "in" simply has double rection: 1) with accusative it means "into" as pointed correctly above; 2) with ablative (which in this case has really the locative meaning) it means "in".
But you could NEVER translate "In vino veritas" as "Truth comes from wine", never! This is misunderstanding, ecause Latin ablative keeps its original ablative meaning only in several cases,and never with preposition "in"! (typical prepositions which "protect" its really ablative sense are e. g. "ex", "de", "a", meaning according to context from or by...)
But I must agree your poetical translations,though disputable, have their iner beauty


----------



## Tinu

I am sorry, I didn´t notice that CapnPrep has already said the same on Friday, my apologies!


----------

