# I am become death



## poetryadik

Hi, what's the Latin of: I am become death

Thanks.


----------



## J.F. de TROYES

poetryadik said:


> Hi, what's the Latin of: I am become death
> 
> Thanks.


 
Sorry, but I don't understand what you mean : I died or I fell dead ?  Could you be a little clearer ?


----------



## Joca

J.F. de TROYES said:


> Sorry, but I don't understand what you mean : I died or I fell dead ? Could you be a little clearer ?


 
Like J. F. de Troyes, I am not quite sure about what you really mean (I have become death?), but I think it could read as:

Mors sum factus.


----------



## Twinmeister

"I am become death" isn't a valid English sentence, however "I am" was used in English at one time as the auxilliary to create the perfect with intransitive verbs (like to become). In this case, "I am become death" could be a now-archaic rendition of what would now in English be "I have become death", referring to the personification of death.

In this instance, "I am become death" would translate into Latin as "Factus sum mors", meaning "I have been made death".

If you don't mean that, I have no idea what you mean, lol.


----------



## Kevin Beach

I think the words are from the Hindu scripture, the Bhagavad-Gita. The god Vishnu is trying to persuade a Prince that he should do his duty and to impress him takes on his multi-armed form and says _'Now, I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds'._

It is a way of saying "I have become death....".

In Latin, it could be *Mors factus sum*, meaning "I have become death", or *Mors fio*, meaning "I become death" (present tense)_._

The whole clause could be *Mors terrarum exstinctor [fio]/[factus sum]
*_____________________________________________________________________

The literal translation of *Mors / terrarum exstinctor / [fio]/[factus sum]*

is "Death / of the worlds the destroyer / I [become]/[have become]".


----------



## poetryadik

My apologies for not giving the context and  I haven't logged in for several days...

The context would be something like it's a statement wherein someone would say this because he/she is intoxicated with a busy schedule.

Thanks...


----------



## Kevin Beach

poetryadik said:


> My apologies for not giving the context and  I haven't logged in for several days...
> 
> The context would be something like it's a statement wherein someone would say this because he/she is intoxicated with a busy schedule.
> 
> Thanks...


Oh dear - how tame compared with the cosmic origin of the phrase! 

If you mean the work is killing you, then *mortuus sum* (I have died) would fit.


----------



## poetryadik

My apologies. Thanks anyway since I learned about the cosmic origin of the statement.

Thank you


----------



## Cagey

poetryadik said:


> [....]
> The context would be something like it's a statement wherein someone would say this because he/she is intoxicated with a busy schedule.
> 
> Thanks...



And if it happens that _she_ is speaking, she should say, "_mortua sum_."

(_mortuus_ is masculine.)


----------



## Kevin Beach

Cagey said:


> And if it happens that _she_ is speaking, she should say, "_mortua sum_."
> 
> (_mortuus_ is masculine.)


Vere.


----------



## Stoicorum_simia

It might be interesting to note that the second translation of the Bhagavad-gita into a European language was into Latin, by Wilhelm von Schlegel in 1825 (the first was by Charles Wilkins, into English in 1785). But I don't have a copy...it would take me a bit longer to find out this original Latin for the phrase. I guess something like Kevin Beach said.


----------



## Hamlet2508

Kevin Beach said:


> Oh dear - how tame compared with the cosmic origin of the phrase!
> 
> If you mean the work is killing you, then *mortuus sum* (I have died) would fit.



In order to stay true to the Roman concept of work, I'd even consider
" <officiis> *confectus sum/consumptus sum/contritus sum" 
*


----------



## Cagey

Hamlet2508 said:


> In order to stay true to the Roman concept of work, I'd even consider
> " <officiis> *confectus sum/consumptus sum/contritus sum"
> *



This might be translated as "I am exhausted/ used up/ worn out <by my duties>".  (The three Latin words are nearly synonyms.)

(It seems good to include translations with suggestions.)


----------



## Twinmeister

They might be more accurate, but I have the feeling that poetryadik was looking for something a little more... dramatic, lol.


----------



## poetryadik

Twinmeister said:


> They might be more accurate, but I have the feeling that poetryadik was looking for something a little more... dramatic, lol.


You got it right


----------



## TheSteelGeneral

Twinmeister said:


> "I am become death" isn't a valid English sentence, however "I am" was used in English at one time as the auxilliary to create the perfect with intransitive verbs (like to become). In this case, "I am become death" could be a now-archaic rendition of what would now in English be "I have become death", referring to the personification of death.
> 
> In this instance, "I am become death" would translate into Latin as "Factus sum mors", meaning "I have been made death".
> 
> If you don't mean that, I have no idea what you mean, lol.





poetryadik said:


> My apologies for not giving the context and  I haven't logged in for several days...



<< --- >>
[T]he context of the very well known quote "I am become Death" needs to be explained.

And no doubt Oppenheimers somewhat poor English grammar skills are to blame. He was in all likelihood translating 'directly' *Ich bin Tod geworden* into *I am become Death *instead of into *I have **become Death**. *In German, the phrase is not *Ich habe**Tod geworden**, *but *Ich bin Tod geworden*.
This is not about any archaic rendition whatsoever. Given the dramatic moment, the explosion of the first atom bomb, his lesser grammatic skills are not odd.


----------



## Cagey

TheSteelGeneral said:


> < --- > the context of the very well known quote "I am become Death" needs to be explained.



On the other hand, we were answering a request for a translation of the English sentence "I am become death" in a very different context, and with quite a different meaning. See Post #6. 

The information you include is interesting, however.


----------



## TheSteelGeneral

Cagey said:


> On the other hand, we were answering a request for a translation of the English sentence "I am become death" in a very different context, and with quite a different meaning. See Post #6.
> 
> The information you include is interesting, however.


you might be right, however, there's only one context to that mistranslation, unless one is rather unsophisticated, and a forum of Latinistas didn't strike me as such. I was just surprised about that.


As you were.


----------



## Cagey

TheSteelGeneral said:


> you might be right, however, there's only one context to that mistranslation, unless one is rather unsophisticated, and a forum of Latinistas didn't strike me as such. I was just surprised about that.
> 
> 
> As you were.



Actually, Oppenheimer is widely said to have been quoting the _Bhagavad Gita_,  which Kevin Beach gives as the source in post #5.  In that case, there was no mistranslation involved.  

I offer the quote from the Wiki article on J. Robert Oppneheimer, because it is convenient, and because it reports his quoting another line from the same work.  Other sources say the same. In reference to the Trinity test in New Mexico, where his Los Alamos team first tested the bomb, Oppenheimer famously recalled the Bhagavad Gita: "If the radiance of a thousand suns were to burst at once into the sky, that would be like the splendor of the mighty one." and "Now I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds."​


----------



## Stoicorum_simia

Exactly. Although the quotation occurred at a momentous point in 20th c history, it was just that - a quotation - and _sub specie aeternitatis _Krishna might be considered the more significant speaker.


----------



## TheSteelGeneral

Cagey said:


> Actually, Oppenheimer is widely said to have been quoting the _Bhagavad Gita_,  which Kevin Beach gives as the source in post #5.  In that case, there was no mistranslation involved.



<< --- >>

My apologies, however. I thought Oppenheimer was a native German speaker, and thought that that was the origin of the mistranslation. His native English speakership (?) makes his grammatical error even odder.

I don't think there's any doubt that "I am become Death" is grammatically incorrect, and that it should be "I _have _become Death". My interpretation of the quote is that Oppenheimer feels that he has become an evil Deity. 
My subsequent and ultimate curiosity is how thát sentiment should *correctly *be expressed in Latin.
Since I doubt that "I am exhausted/ used up/ worn out " is what went through Oppenheimers mind. 
Also *mortuus sum* (I have died) and *factus sum mors *(I have been made death) seem completely off. Vishnu is saying that he has died or that he has been _passively _made into anything, he's saying that his role is actually quite the active one.

So, which one is it? 

The Steel Nitpicker 


==========================
_"I have been known to be wrong"_


----------



## Flaminius

Hi,

The use of conjugations of _be_ to cast intransitive verbs into the perfect tense is a pseudoarchaism.  It was a syntactic feature of English until a few centuries ago and occasionally turns up in modern English to solemnify D) the sentence.  I don't find reasons to assume any mistakes by Oppenheimer or the translator of _Gita_.


----------



## Stoicorum_simia

Flaminius said:


> Hi,
> 
> The use of conjugations of _be_ to cast intransitive verbs into the perfect tense is a pseudoarchaism. It was a syntactic feature of English until a few centuries ago and occasionally turns up in modern English to solemnify D) the sentence. I don't find reasons to assume any mistakes by Oppenheimer or the translator of _Gita_.


 
I agree, it's certainly not a mistake. Oppenheimer (or whichever translator he was quoting) was probably led by the solemn and religious nature of the text to recall the style of the King James Bible, which has for instance 'I am become like a bottle in the smoke' (Ps 119:83) and 'the man is become as one of us' (Gen 3:22).


----------



## Starfrown

I will echo the above two posters in asserting that the use of "I am become death" is 100% grammatically correct--simply archaic. Here's a similar example from Shakespeare:

"O cousin, thou *art* *come* to set mine eye..."


----------



## Stoicorum_simia

TheSteelGeneral said:


> Also *mortuus sum* (I have died) and *factus sum mors *(I have been made death) seem completely off.


 
_Factus sum_ doesn't have to be 'I have been made'. Although passive in form, it supplies the perfect tense of _fio_ and can mean simply 'I have become' (or indeed, 'I am become').
Looking at the original to which Oppenheimer was referring, though _(Gita_ 11.32)_,_ it actually says 'I am' (_asmi - _not usually equivalent to become, as far as I remember, although all you Sanskritists out there might want to correct me)_. _And here's another problem - the word Krishna uses is not unequivocally 'death', it's _kala_ (there should be a macron on the first a but I don't know how to do that) of which the primary meaning is actually 'time'. The meaning death is possible, but not obvious - although the context, the vision of the Lord consuming the worlds, certainly indicates death. The line continues _lokakshayakrt _(destroyer of the world) _pravrddho_, the last word perhaps indicating time 'matured', i.e. at the end of each cycle of ages the worlds are destroyed. If so that might be another difference from the Oppenheimer application.
I looked at Schlegel's version (Bhagavad-gita, id est [in Greek] _thespesion melos_, sive almi Krishnae et Arjunae colloquium de rebus divinis, Bonn 1823) and he has 'Dies sum, mundi eversor, adultus, mortales exstinctus huc profectus'. _Dies_ is perhaps not altogether clear in context, but I suppose he has in mind usages to indicate a period of time, or perhaps the sense of final day, day of destruction. So that is no help in translating Oppenheimer's version. 
Most English versions of the Gita seem to prefer 'time' over 'death'.


----------



## ciroman

Hello everyone!

I would firstly like to say that this will be a long reply and that I know this thread is old but there are a few things I would like to shine light on.
This is my first post and probably the last one on this forum. I must say that I am not able to speak Latin therefore I cannot argue or argument about your wonderful suggestions about the solution to the original poster's problem.


<< -- response to deleted comments -- >>

This is from Wikipedia(en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._Robert_Oppenheimer):


> In 1933, he learned Sanskrit and met the Indologist Arthur W. Ryder at Berkeley. He read the Bhagavad Gita in the original language and later he cited it as one of the most influential books that shaped his philosophy of life.[45] His close confidant and colleague, Nobel Prize winner Isidor Rabi, later gave his own interpretation:
> Oppenheimer was overeducated in those fields, which lie outside the scientific tradition, such as his interest in religion, in the Hindu religion in particular, which resulted in a feeling of mystery of the universe that surrounded him like a fog. He saw physics clearly, looking toward what had already been done, but at the border he tended to feel there was much more of the mysterious and novel than there actually was...[he turned] away from the hard, crude methods of theoretical physics into a mystical realm of broad intuition.[46]


The article CLEARLY states that Oppenheimer knew Sanskrit(the language that Bhagavad Gita was written in) and the Hindu religion particularly therefore you can be sure that his quote was NOT a mistake(what you claimed). He obviously knew what he was saying and your statement that 





TheSteelGeneral said:


> I don't think there's any doubt that "I am become Death" is grammatically incorrect


can be discarded as incorrect.

<< ---- >>


----------

