# Gibbā (ablative)



## flljob

Spectat in occasum gibbā dum crescit
Why not accusative or nominative?

Muchas gracias


----------



## exgerman

Where did you find this? What's the context?


----------



## flljob

flljob said:


> The whole text is:
> Spectat in occasum gibbā dum crescit
> Ortum cum spectat luna perit.



If it were gibba and not gibbā, I think the meaning would be:
La luna está en cuarto creciente cuando la convexidad está hacia el ocaso/occidente. (I can't translate it into English), but in the text it is used gibbā, ablative.

Saludos

It is an exercise of a latin grammar book in Italian.


----------



## Scholiast

salvete omnes!

I think it is possible, indeed necessary, to make sense of _gibbā_, ablative, here.

L&S offer (s.v. _gibbus_):

*II.* Subst.
*A.* *gibbus* , i, m., _a hunch_, _hump_, *Juv. 10, 294*; *309*; *6, 109*.—
*B.* *gibba* , ae, f., the same, *Suet. Dom. 23*. —
*2.* *Transf.*, _a hump-like swelling_, _protuberance_, _Amm. 23, 4_.​
This means _gibba _(though of course rare) is here a noun rather than an adjective, and the sense is "The moon faces westward _with its convex side_ while it waxes, and eastward when it wanes".

In English, moreover, a moon is "gibbous", whether waxing or waning, between its half-phases and the full. See (e.g.) this illustration: http://astronomologer.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/8_MoonPhasesw.jpg

Incidentally, the two lines quoted by flljob (_Spectat in occasum gibbā dum crescit / Ortum cum spectat luna perit_) are metrically an incomplete elegiac couplet, requiring for completion a trisyllable (of the pattern ˇ ¯ ˇ or ˇ ¯ ¯ after _crescit_) and another, dactylic, before _luna_.

Σ


----------



## flljob

I still don't understand why in the first sentence the "subject" is in ablative, but in the second sentence "luna", which is the subject, is in nominative, with the same verb "spectat".
(Corrijo: 'luna' no es sujeto de 'spectat', sino de 'crescit' y 'perit', una disculpa)

¿No será un error tipográfico "gibba" con la marca de "a" larga?

Muchas gracias


----------



## Scholiast

saludos a todos!



flljob said:


> I still don't understand why in the first sentence the "subject" is in ablative, but in the second sentence "luna", whichs is the subject, is in nominative, with the same verb "spectat".


The subject of the entire couplet is _luna_: these are not two separate sentences with each one a separate grammatical structure. I could enlarge, to complete the couplet

_spectat in occasum gibba dum crescit alumna;
ortum cum spectat perdita luna perit_​
"The moon, as a nursling, grows facing west with her swell;
When facing the west, she, doomed to fade, disappears".

This is only guesswork on my part, as far as the reconstruction of the original couplet is concerned. But the main point remains: in Latin verse, contortions of word-order are frequently permitted _metri gratia_, especially within couplets, and the postponement, or rather, late arrival, of the unambiguous subject, _luna_, is not at all odd. Though it might be argued that this is a bit tricky for inclusion in a basic manual of Latin grammar.

Σ


----------



## flljob

Spectat in occasum gibbā dum crescit
Ortum cum spectat luna perit.

I found in an Italian dictionary:

gobba a levante luna calante,
gobba a ponente luna crescente

This dictionary defines gobba as the convex side of the moon.

If I translate the latin sentence as two:
Si la la convexidad/joroba de la luna está hacia el poniente [la luna está] en cuarto creciente,
cuando está hacia el oriente [la convexidad/la joroba], la luna está en menguante/está desapareciendo/está muriendo.

So, I think these are two different sentences, one refers to 'gibba'(subject of spectat), and the second to 'luna' (subject of crescit and perit).

Saludos, muchas gracias por responder.


----------



## Quiviscumque

Estimado fljob, el orden es

Luna Spectat in occasum gibbā dum [illa] crescit, 
[luna] spectat in Ortum [gibbā] cum [illa] perit.

En español:

La luna mira a poniente con la joroba mientras crece,
mira a levante con la joroba cuando ella perece.

I debo confesar que me ha costado mucho entenderlo.


----------



## flljob

Estimado Quiviscumque, lo que he encontrado (soy un pobre autodidacta) es que el verbo "specto", seguido de "inter" o "in" indica ubicación. Si el sujeto de specto fuera luna, la traducción sería "la luna está en el ocaso cuando crece" y "gibba" no tendría ninguna función. Perdón por mi terquedad, pero su valiosísima ayuda es la única manera que tengo de aprender y confirmar mis aciertos y errores.

Saludos y gracias


----------



## Quiviscumque

flljob said:


> [...] el verbo "specto", seguido de "inter" o "in" indica ubicación [...]



Mi viejo diccionario latín-español  (de cuando yo tenía 12 años) dice:

*specto* contemplar, mirar (_ad_ o in _aliquem_, mirar hacia uno) || ... || estar orientado (_in septentrionem_, hacia el norte).

_specto_ puede ser _estar orientado hacia_, pero nunca _estar en._

Los versillos son retorcidos en cuanto al orden de las palabras, pero no en cuanto a su significado: la luna mira, apunta, está orientada hacia el este/oeste. Pero eso no tendría sentido completo, pues la luna no tiene ojos ni manecilla que señale... por eso hay que decir que mira  o está orientada con su joroba.


----------



## flljob

Bien. Sería entonces que "gibba" es un circunstancial instrumental.

Gracias


----------



## Scholiast

salvete de novo


flljob said:


> I still don't understand why in the first sentence the "subject" is in ablative, but in the second sentence "luna", which is the subject, is in nominative, with the same verb "spectat".


I'm sorry if I was not clear in post # 6. My point was that these two phrases are not two separate sentences. The subject of both is "luna", which is what I think Quiviscumque was trying to say. There is a single sentence with one subject, but with the verb ("spectat") repeated in both, though in the second line it is subordinate (with _cum_), while "perit" is grammatically the main verb. In the first line "crescit" is in the subordinate _dum_-clause.
_spectare_ in the sense of "facing" in a geographical direction (east/west &c) is well known to classical Latin, notably in Caesar.
Please look again at what I originally wrote.
Σ

Edit: Also, I see I made a silly error in # 6: in the second line, the moon is of course facing *east *(_ortum_).


----------



## flljob

Estimado Scholiast:
Revisto y releído, gratias ago.
Saludos


----------

