# Vita bonum est et vita malum, mors neutrum habet ho[ru]m:



## relativamente

This a Roman Epitaph
You cn find it here
http://www.thelatinlibrary.com/epitaphs.html

Vita bonum est et vita malum, mors neutrum habet ho[ru]m:

perspice si sapias, [q]uid magis expedia[t.

set quia sunt Man, sit tibi terra lev[is. 

Can anybody explain the use of neuter bonum neutrum with feminine nouns like vita and mors?


----------



## wandle

relativamente said:


> Can anybody explain the use of neuter bonum neutrum with feminine nouns like vita and mors?



Latin adjectives can and regularly do function as nouns. 
Thus *bonus* as an adjective simply means 'good': as a noun, *bonus*, on its own, means 'a good man'.

In the present case, *neutrum* ('neither') functions as a noun (its gender is neuter) and it is the object of the verb *habet*.

In the phrase *vita bonum est*, *bonum* also acts as a neuter noun and it is the complement of the verb *est*. 
This phrase means: 'Life is a good thing'.

*Vita malum [est]* means 'Life is a bad thing'.


----------



## bibax

In Spanish: La vida es lo bueno, lo malo... La muerte tiene lo neutro de ellos...


----------



## Dib

Could "vita" here be an ablative with a locative sense? I am saying this, because in my opinion that would gel better with "mors neutrum habet horum"; while vita in nominative would presumably have better synergy with "mors neutrum est horum". What do you think?

In fact if "vita" is taken to mean a lifetime, then it is probably not that wierd either, being an ablative of time expression. Or is my logic rather faulty somewhere?


----------



## relativamente

I observe some contradiction.For the one hand saying that there's no good nor bad after death and on the other accepting the existence of the Manes http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manes
Besides this Latin includes set instead of sed 
I think that vita maybe is in ablative without preposition.I am not sure though.


----------



## wandle

Dib said:


> Could "vita" here be an ablative with a locative sense?


No: if the meaning were 'In life, there is good', this would be *in vita, bonum est*; or it could be *vita habet bonum*.


> in my opinion that would gel better with "mors neutrum habet horum"


Why does the construction change from *vita est bonum* to *mors habet neutrum*?
That is (a) for variety and (b) for the sake of the metre. This is an hexameter line and the words *neutrum habet horum* are in the correct metrical form for the last two feet of the line (dactyl followed by spondee).

*bibax'* translation gives the correct construction of the line.


----------



## wandle

relativamente said:


> I observe some contradiction.For the one hand saying that there's no good nor bad after death and on the other accepting the existence of the Manes http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manes


The Latin says 'death has neither of these things': this may mean simply that the event of death is neither good nor bad in itself. This need not conflict with the idea that (good or bad) spirits of the dead exist.


> Besides this Latin includes set instead of sed


This is a straightforward alternative form, probably used here just for euphony with the following *quia*.


----------



## CapnPrep

relativamente said:


> I think that vita maybe is in ablative without preposition.I am not sure though.


You can be sure it is not, because the meter requires a short _ă_.


----------



## Dib

wandle said:


> No: if the meaning were 'In life, there is good', this would be *in vita, bonum est*; or it could be *vita habet bonum*.
> 
> Why does the construction change from *vita est bonum* to *mors habet neutrum*?
> That is (a) for variety and (b) for the sake of the metre. This is an hexameter line and the words *neutrum habet horum* are in the correct metrical form for the last two feet of the line (dactyl followed by spondee).




Ah, ok, thanks for pointing out. I hadn't realized that it was a hexameter line.


----------

