# Who(ever) doesn't speak a foreign language, doesn't know his mother tongue.



## GoKyu

Hi all, I'm learning German (3 years so far), and I've taken a particular quote (Zitat) sort of as my mantra - I'd be interested to see how it would be worded in Latin.

"Wer keine fremde Sprache spricht, kennt seine Muttersprache nicht." --Goethe

Who(ever) doesn't speak a foreign language, doesn't know his mother tongue.

Thanks!

         -Bryan


----------



## Whodunit

GoKyu said:


> "Wer keine fremde Sprache spricht, kennt seine Muttersprache nicht." --Goethe


 
Let me try it:

_Qui linguam barbaram non loquitur, sermonem patrium nescit._

"Barbarus" mans "not Roman." If you need to say "foreign," you could also use "peregrinus" (declined: peregrinam).


----------



## Joca

Whodunit said:


> Let me try it:
> 
> _Qui linguam barbaram non loquitur, sermonem patrium nescit._
> 
> "Barbarus" mans "not Roman." If you need to say "foreign," you could also use "peregrinus" (declined: peregrinam).


 
Whodunit, do you mind my trying again?

"*Qui nullam linguam externam loquitur, patriam nesciet.*"
He who...

or

"*Quicumque nullam linguam externam loquitur, patriam nesciet."*
Whoever...

"Nesciet" is a future form.

_He who doesn't speak a foreign language, will not know the language of his fatherland (or his own)._

JC


----------



## Whodunit

Joca said:


> Whodunit, do you mind my trying again?


 
Although your translation makes sense in Latin, it doesn't correspond to the original sentence. 

In my opinion, "nullus" is not necessary, it gives too much emphasis on the "keine" in German. We would use "gar keine" in such a context. As I said before, "barbarus" is what the Romans would have used. There are many possibilities to express "foreign." I don't like "patria" without mentioning the word for "language" again; it should be there, otherwise it has another meaning.

What I might agree upon is the future tense. It could be better in Latin.


----------



## Joca

Whodunit said:


> Although your translation makes sense in Latin, it doesn't correspond to the original sentence.
> 
> In my opinion, "nullus" is not necessary, it gives too much emphasis on the "keine" in German. We would use "gar keine" in such a context. As I said before, "barbarus" is what the Romans would have used. There are many possibilities to express "foreign." I don't like "patria" without mentioning the word for "language" again; it should be there, otherwise it has another meaning.
> 
> What I might agree upon is the future tense. It could be better in Latin.


 
Thanks Whodunit.

Your translation: _Qui linguam barbaram non loquitur, sermonem patrium nescit._

He who doesn't speak a foreign (barbarian) language, doesn't know the native talk. 

I think that your translation also makes sense in Latin, but:

a) does it correspond to the original sentence? Probably not. Maybe we don't need to very strict in this respect; I presume that a certain liberty can be taken.

b) "barbarus" makes sense in a Roman/Greek/Latin context, but not in a sentence by Goethe, I am afraid. "Barbarus" also stands for "savage, rude", in rather a pejorative sense. I don't think Goethe had this in mind. 

In any case, let's wait for someone else to untie the knot. Do you agree?

Cheers,

JC


----------



## GoKyu

Thanks for the replies so far, this is very interesting! 

Gibt's andere Deutschen, die auch Lateinisch können? 

         -Bryan


----------



## jazyk

No no no. All suggestions are bad.  Here's the best one:

Qui linguis exter(n)is non loquitur, suam linguam non cognoscet.

Jazyk


----------

