# For the rose is a flower ....



## Casquilho

Another doubt, same song:

[Pois*] rosa est florem
Rosa est colorem
Rosa est nomen mulieris
Rosa est florem sympathiae

For the rose is a flower
The rose is a colour
Rose is a female name (literally, a woman's name)
Rose is the flower of sympathy


* For, because, explanative particle - how is it in Latin? In Portuguese, it is "pois", methinks in French it is "car", but in Latin?


----------



## italo_da_b

quia in latin, perchè in italian


----------



## Stoicorum_simia

The fact that no one has yet commented makes me wonder if I am missing something, but I can't at all see why you have _florem, colorem_ in the accusative. Surely 'rosa est flos' etc.


----------



## Casquilho

Well Stoicorum, I thought it should be accusative, since these words are direct objetcs to the verb _est. _Am I wrong?
By the way, that line in the Song of Solomon, _Ego flos campi_, puzzles me. I know the ellision of the verb sum is somewhat common, but it should not be _Ego [sum] florem campi_?

*Quia rosa est florem*... - correct?


----------



## CapnPrep

Casquilho said:


> Well Stoicorum, I thought it should be accusative, since these words are direct objetcs to the verb _est. _Am I wrong?


Yes . _Esse_ does not take a direct object, but a predicate complement whose case matches that of the subject (which is _sometimes_ in the accusative, but in this case is in the nominative).


----------



## Stoicorum_simia

No, they're not objects - they are predicates, therefore in the same case as the subject. The verb 'to be' is intransitive and can't take an object (in any language I can think of) - an accusative must have something done to it. Grammar buffs could probably explain this more clearly than I can, but for the same reason _ego flos campi_ is correct.


----------



## Casquilho

Thank you!


----------



## CapnPrep

Casquilho said:


> * For, because, explanative particle - how is it in Latin?


_Nam _(_namque_) or _enim_.


----------



## Casquilho

Whats the diference between _nam_ and _quia_? I can't get it very well.


----------



## Starfrown

Rosa enim flos est
Rosa color [est]
Rosa nomen femininum [est]
Rosa flos sympathiae [est]

----


Casquilho said:


> * For, because, explanative particle - how is it in Latin? In Portuguese, it is "pois", methinks I think in French it is "car", but in Latin?


"Methinks" is not quite interchangeable with "I think."  Methinks many people make this mistake.

The "me" in "methinks" is actually dative, and the verb, though it appears identical to the common "thinks," is a separate word meaning "seems."

"methinks" = "it seems to me"

Obviously, in many contexts, "I think" and "it seems to me" are pretty much interchangeable--thus the confusion.


----------

