# Looking to verify a couple of Latin phrases



## Poni Travieso

Good day everyone. I was hoping I could get some help from people who understand the nuances of Latin better than I do. I'm having a friend make me a custom coin on his 3D printer and I wanted Latin phrases similar to the famous _E pluribus unum_ (as well as the Latin mottos many US States have) but I'm not particularly well-versed in the many different verb conjugations and noun declensions that occurred in Latin.

The phrases I'm looking to verify are:

*E*(x?)* tribius unum* (One from three)

*Omni nubi partiverit fiducia* (Confidence will part any cloud)

I did my best to reason the syntax out; _pluribus_ from _E pluribus unum_ seems to be the ablative plural of _plus_, so I used the ablative plural _tribius_ form of _tribus_. And if I'm not mistaken (which I probably am ), _nubes _should be in the accusative (and _omnis_ as well since it's modifying _nubes_?), _fiducia_ remains nominative and _partio_ should use the 3rd person singular perfect future conjugation. Additionally from what little I understand, word order is relatively free in Latin owing to both the verb conjugations and noun declensions, so I picked the order that seemed most pleasing to me, but I understand that even in "free word order" languages, word order can still have an effect on connotation.

If there's anything I got wrong, please let me know as soon as you can. Thanks!


----------



## Scholiast

Greetings, all and especially Poni

The grammatical reasoning was mostly sound, but there are a couple of corrections:

(a) _E tribus unum_ (spello or typo in 'trib_*i*_us');

(b) _quamcumque* nubem _(or _omnes nubes_, plural) _partiet fiducia _(_omni nubi _is mysteriously dative, but the accusative is called for in a direct object; and _partiet_ is future simple—I cannot see a good reason for the future perfect _partiverit_ here).

I trust this is helpful.

Σ

*I.e. 'any...whatever'.


----------



## Poni Travieso

Scholiast said:


> (a) _E tribus unum_ (spello or typo in 'tribius');



Sorry, I meant to write "tribibus" before, not "tribius". Would _E tribibus unum _work, or would there be a reason to use _E tribus unum_ instead even though that wouldn't be ablative (as far as the declension charts I'm looking at say)?

Also, I originally went with the future perfect because the explanation I read online said that it was for events with a definite end, but if the simple future would be the more common/streamlined way of writing it then I'll go with that instead.


----------



## Scholiast

Hello again.


Poni Travieso said:


> Would _E tribibus unum _work?


No, the dative and ablative of _tres_ is _tribus_ in all three genders.
Σ


----------



## Poni Travieso

Oh, I see now where I went wrong. I was looking at the chart for _tribus_ (noun) instead of _tres _(numeral)_._ Thanks!


----------



## Scholiast

Greetings once more


Poni Travieso said:


> I originally went with the future perfect because the explanation I read online said that it was for events with a definite end, but if the simple future would be the more common/streamlined way of writing


It is precisely for this reason that you need the future simple, as 'any [conceivable, potential, future] cloud' is an indefinite concept. In fact, Latin could cheerfully put this in the 'eternal' present tense as well (_partit_), as being virtually a proverb, just as we could say in English 'Confidence parts any cloud'. Incidentally, you might consider using a verb such as _dispellere_ or _dispergere_ instead ('dispel' or 'disperse').
Σ


----------



## Poni Travieso

I like the sound of _dispellere. _The full phrase in that case would be _Quamcumque nubem/Omnes nubes dispellit fiducia, _correct?


----------



## Scholiast

Hello again, Poni


Poni Travieso said:


> The full phrase in that case would be _Quamcumque nubem/Omnes nubes dispellit fiducia, _correct?


From a grammatical/syntactical point of view, you've got it. You will obviously have to consider issues such as capitalisation, and font. If memory serves me, _e pluribus unum_ on American banknotes is all printed in upper case; also, Latin easily 'deifies' abstract concepts such as 'Fiducia', which you could therefore have rendered on your medallion as FIDVCIA.
Σ


----------



## Poni Travieso

Scholiast said:


> Hello again, Poni
> 
> From a grammatical/syntactical point of view, you've got it. You will obviously have to consider issues such as capitalisation, and font. If memory serves me, _e pluribus unum_ on American banknotes is all upper case; also, Latin easily 'deifies' abstract concepts such as 'Fiducia', which you could therefore have rendered on your medallion as FIDVCIA.
> Σ



That's right, I forgot that U originally evolved from V. I think I do want to put it in all uppercase, so in theory it should read OMNES NVBES DISPELLIT FIDVCIA, yes?


----------



## Scholiast

Dear Mr Poni


Poni Travieso said:


> it should read OMNES NVBES DISPELLIT FIDVCIA, yes?


That is correct Latin—but now I have a minor misgiving, for to 'part [the] clouds', an ancient and dismally dim memory nags at me, is a Biblical expression. But for the life of me I cannot immediately remember wherefrom.

This is now beddy-byes time in the UK, especially for 60+ retired schoolmasters, while you in CA are just waking up. Bear with me until tomorrow to track it down...

Σ


----------



## Poni Travieso

Alright, have a good night and thanks for all the help so far. I'll leave my further thoughts below for your consideration tomorrow:



Scholiast said:


> for to 'part [the] clouds', an ancient and dismally dim memory nags at me, is a Biblical expression.



That could be; upon googling "nubes dispellit" I found a couple results (in addition to this very WR thread ) which seem to mention Virgin Mary and scripture. It wasn't quite my intent to reference the Bible, rather I was thinking of "parting the clouds" in a poetic sense of overcoming defeatism/hopelessness/etc. Perhaps using _nimbus_ instead of _nubes–_OMNES NIMBOS DISPELLIT FIDVCIA (?)–would work better since the former more often refers to storm clouds specifically?


----------



## Scholiast

@poni, good day Sir

Right, got there. It's not biblical (though there is something similar in Job 37), but the precise phrase _dispellere nubes_, metaphorically meaning 'to drive out fear/ignorance/misunderstanding/weakness/doubts' was used in about 1760 by an Austrian Jesuit by the name of Benedict Stay in a 10-book long work in Latin hexameter verse about 'modern' philosophy, addressed to a certain Cardinal Rezzoni. There is also somewhere in Virgil the related phrase _umbram dispellere_ ('get rid of the shadows'), so I am inclined to think this is virtually proverbial.

I also now think that _omnes_ or _quamcumque_ is redundant. NVBES DISPELLIT FIDVCIA has an epigrammatic and punchy ring and feel to it ('Confidence dispels clouds').

How's that for you?

Σ

Edit: in the literal sense, the phrase is also used by Lucan on the morning of the battle of Pharsalus ('the sun's warmth disperses the morning mists'), but I have no text to hand to locate the precise reference.


----------



## bearded

Salve Scholiast
Could you please consider whether the verb _dissipare w_ould also fit instead of _dispellere.. _I'm not sure, but I found some entries with _dissipare nubem/nubes..
Opera Omnia_
...and in Italian _dissipare le nubi_ is of course very common.


----------



## Scholiast

Well spotted, bearded!

I hadn't thought of the Fathers, but this reference to John Chrysostom ('Golden-mouth') reinforces my thinking that the idea/phrase is proverbial. And in fact it is already there at Aristophanes, _Clouds_ 378.

Σ


----------



## Scholiast

Hello again everyone



bearded said:


> ...and in Italian _dissipare le nubi_ is of course very common.



[bearded edited his post after I had replied in # 14.]

This, I submit, further buttresses my notion that the idiomatic concept, even if not the precise wording, is proverbial. The reason for _dispellere_ (rather than _dissipare_) in Lucan and Benedict Stay is obvious: _dissipare_ is very difficult to fit into an hexameter line of poetry, though _dissipat_, 3rd pers. sing. pres. indic. act., could work (it would scan as a dactyl, provided that the next word begins with a vowel or 'h').

Σ


----------



## Poni Travieso

Would it make any sense to put the verb at the end (_Nubes fiducia dissipat_)? That would give it a similar ring to _Fortis fortuna adiuvat, _but I don't know whether that particular word order would mess up the emphasis as I've read that the first and last words in a phrase are usually the most important.


----------



## Scholiast

Once more, then...


Poni Travieso said:


> I've read that the first and last words in a phrase are usually the most important.


That is in general right. For the flavour, however, I would stick with leaving FIDVCIA to the end. In English the conceptual emphasis is at the start of a sentence, in Latin it is at the end. Witness _e pluribus_ (_tribus_) _*unum*_.

Σ


----------



## Poni Travieso

In that case I'm perfectly happy with NVBES DISSIPAT FIDVCIA as it would certainly save quite a bit more precious space on the coin. 

Thanks for all your help! I had a fair inkling about how much discussion there is to be had over Latin translations, so I'm glad I sought to consult someone rather than wing it.


----------



## Scholiast

Good!


Poni Travieso said:


> so I'm glad I sought to consult someone rather than wing it.


I shudder to think of the number of 'Google [Mis-]Translate' tattoos and other 'Latin' mementoes are circulating the planet...
Glad to have been of service, of course.
Σ


----------

