# Amor vincit omnia vs. omnia vincit amor



## maria anne

I've heard/seen it both ways.
Half of those I've asked have claimed it's the former, the other half the latter.
Most frustrating, ha. Any help would be appreciated.


----------



## Outsider

They are both correct.


----------



## remosfan

Both are acceptable and mean the same thing, although there could be a slight difference in emphasis. Acutally you can put the three words in any of the 6 possible orders and it would still be alright. So on that level, you can pick which one you like.

If this though is a reference to Virgil, he used "omnia vincit Amor."


----------



## el flaco

heh, I was kinda on the same quest..
I didn't want to start a new thread and just brought this old back up. (this one is 2 years old  )

But I did some thinking and researching.. tell me what you guys think.

*Omnia vincit Amor*, originally appeared in _Eclogue X_ of the Eclogues, a series of poems by _Virgil_ (70 BC - 19 BC).

*Amor Vincit Omnia*, a painting by the Baroque artist _Michelangelo Merisi da Caravaggio_.
This should be where the _Amor_ Vincit Omnia version was 'first' used..

To me, _Amor_ Vincit Omnia looks like the correct version.. because of the direct translation match: Love Conquers All

Well.. not, I've put that aside thinking about Spanish vs. English. These are often translated reversed e.g..
Dishwasher/Lavaplatos ..Large Coffee/Café Grande.

So I'm pretty much comfortable with the *Omnia vincit Amor* version as being the correct/original.

Ok, so my knowledge on the latin language is bad.
I came across spellings like *Omnía* vincit Amor.
Yea, spelled with an accent on the I, my question is: should it be spelled with accents on the I in Latin?

I mean when spelling música in Spanish we just say muscia without the ´ on the U.
So it might have been lazy typing.

Last but not not least, what is up with the inconsistent use of low and high case letters?
Omnia vincit Amor... Omnia and Amor both spelled with a capital letter?
Should Amor be spelled with a capital A in Latin?

Let me know what you guys think, thanks.


----------



## alexacohen

Hello:
I never saw omnia written with any accent anywhere.
A title can be spelled with capital letters, as in the painting by Caravaggio.
Amor, when it is a personalization, can be spelled with capital letters too.
Love is always the conqueror.


----------



## el flaco

Thanks for your reply.

hmm I think I misinterpreted the accent over the I.. the font used in the picture just made it look like an accent..

So but just to get this strait *Omnia vincit Amor* is written with inconsistence use of capital letters on purpose?

Just because Omnia is the beginning of the sentence and Amor because it is a personalization (the conqueror)?


----------



## alexacohen

If the poet had written Eros instead of Amor you wouldn't be wondering...


----------



## el flaco

Why would that be, please note that my knowledge on the Latin language is bad to none.
I'm trying to educate myself some on this.
So did I understand it correct? In Latin, words can transform into personalization and should be written with a capital letter?

Your help is appreciated.


----------



## alexacohen

Oof. I'll try to explain. In Roman mythology, Cupid is the god of love and lust. One of his Latin names is Eros (which was his original name in Greek), but he is sometimes also called Amor. So when Amor is used as the name of the god of lust and love, it has to be written with capital letters.


----------



## ayupshiplad

alexacohen said:


> Oof. I'll try to explain. In Roman mythology, Cupid is the god of love and lust. One of his Latin names is Eros (which was his original name in Greek), but he is sometimes also called Amor. So when Amor is used as the name of the god of lust and love, it has to be written with capital letters.


 
But Latin never had capitalisation or punctuation . You only see it nowadays in 'original' texts to aid comprehension for the reader/translator. This is certainly what I've been taught from my very knowledgeable Latin teacher!


----------



## alexacohen

ayupshiplad said:


> But Latin never had capitalisation or punctuation . You only see it nowadays in 'original' texts to aid comprehension for the reader/translator. This is certainly what I've been taught from my very knowledgeable Latin teacher!


El flaco has said himself that he doesn't know much Latin. So I have tried to explain his question as best as I could, just referring to what he wrote. And in a "modernised" Latin text, there is capitalisation. And punctuation.  

I didn't want to confuse him even more.


----------



## ayupshiplad

alexacohen said:


> El flaco has said himself that he doesn't know much Latin. So I have tried to explain his question as best as I could, just referring to what he wrote. And in a "modernised" Latin text, there is capitalisation. And punctuation.
> 
> I didn't want to confuse him even more.


 
Ah ok, that makes more sense, I understand your not wanting to confuse him even more. However, it is actually incorrect and as el flaco was asking "Should amor be spelt with a capital letter in Latin?" I thought I would contribute!


----------



## alexacohen

ayupshiplad said:


> Ah ok, that makes more sense, I understand your not wanting to confuse him even more. However, it is actually incorrect and as el flaco was asking "Should amor be spelt with a capital letter in Latin?" I thought I would contribute!


 
But how could I have answered him "the whole thing is incorrect"? 
He was obviously asking about a "modernised" version. No beginner can read a Latin original!


----------



## Flaminius

el flaco said:
			
		

> Should Amor be spelled with a capital A in Latin?


Many people who are around in the 21st century and study Latin appreciate a capitalised general noun as a personification or deification.  In contrast, non-capitalised words are less likely to be understood as either.


xxx


----------



## el flaco

Thanks, all.


----------



## Chopin

_post scriptum_:
Virgil elsewhere said: "labor omnia vicit improbus" (persistent work conquered all), which is sometimes varied to:
"labor omnia vincit"


----------



## jeffreyadixon

Please remember to refer to Chaucer, The Canterbury Tales, Prologue, line 160. It is through study of Chaucer that I decided to tatoo "amor vincit omnia" on my back.


----------



## Sietesoles

Although, given the great Sintactic Flexibility of Latin, all six possible orders for the phrase would be correct (that is: "amor vincit omnia", "vincit omnia amor", "omnia amor vincit", etc...) and its meaning would be the same (because of the cases which make it very clear what part is the subject and which is the Direct complement), it would be much more common in Latin to find the verb at the end of the phrase and the subject of gratest emphasis in the first position.

"amor omnia vincit"


Good nigth everybody!
Sietesoles  
_______
_______


----------



## Aithria

Hi all.
Maybe my reply’s quite tardy… at any rate ....
 
“Grammatically” speaking  …. by reason of  its highly structured morphology,  Latin language was subject, especially in writing,  to no fixed construction of sentences (…. as Remosfan wrote ).
Chaucer’s quotation of Virgil is plain, but not so faithful and/or correct, as usual in Middle Ages (sometimes because people used to quote “from heart”, very often for their way to conceive of “copyright” was far from ours - some scholars call this “intertextuality”… if you rather like…-). So … let’s say  “Omnia vincit Amor” is a Virgil’s line of verse and “Amor vincit omnia” a Chaucer’s  …. . However.... Jeffreyadixon, what a poetical back !
To my personal point of view, if a line of verse or a passage from a book happens to turn into proverb or motto, well…let’s quote it right as the author wrote! 
Why Virgil wrote “Omnia vincit amor ….” in Eclogue X  and  “….labor omnia vicit // improbus…” in Georgica I ? Because quantities in hexameters are to be observed (blank verses were unknown to Latin metrics) and … which is more important … for “his creativity and inspiration told him so” !
 
P.S. please, forgive my bad command of English. Thank you!


----------



## joey123joy

el flaco said:


> heh, I was kinda on the same quest..
> I didn't want to start a new thread and just brought this old back up. (this one is 2 years old  )
> 
> But I did some thinking and researching.. tell me what you guys think.
> 
> *Omnia vincit Amor*, originally appeared in _Eclogue X_ of the Eclogues, a series of poems by _Virgil_ (70 BC - 19 BC).
> 
> *Amor Vincit Omnia*, a painting by the Baroque artist _Michelangelo Merisi da Caravaggio_.
> This should be where the _Amor_ Vincit Omnia version was 'first' used..
> 
> To me, _Amor_ Vincit Omnia looks like the correct version.. because of the direct translation match: Love Conquers All
> 
> Well.. not, I've put that aside thinking about Spanish vs. English. These are often translated reversed e.g..
> Dishwasher/Lavaplatos ..Large Coffee/Café Grande.
> 
> So I'm pretty much comfortable with the *Omnia vincit Amor* version as being the correct/original.
> 
> Ok, so my knowledge on the latin language is bad.
> I came across spellings like *Omnía* vincit Amor.
> Yea, spelled with an accent on the I, my question is: should it be spelled with accents on the I in Latin?
> 
> I mean when spelling música in Spanish we just say muscia without the ´ on the U.
> So it might have been lazy typing.
> 
> Last but not not least, what is up with the inconsistent use of low and high case letters?
> Omnia vincit Amor... Omnia and Amor both spelled with a capital letter?
> Should Amor be spelled with a capital A in Latin?
> 
> Let me know what you guys think, thanks.


 
Latin grammar allows the word order to be "not strict", so the noun can be in the beginning, middle or end. It is not a question of right or wrong but of the author's preference. The phrase could be correctly written also: Vincit omnia amor, or even Vincit amor omnia, or omnia amor vincit. Latin is totally flexible on word order, once the declensions will let you know which part of the speech each word belongs to, what is impossible in the English language. Regarding the use of upper case and lower case.... Well, in the ancient times there was no lower case letters. so originally it was written. AMOR VINCIT OMNIA, and so on. The translation of Amor with A in upper case is from the 15th century when all the germanic and anglo -saxonic languages used Capital letters for every and any noun on a phrase. German still is that way. If you said that phrase in German today you would do this way: 
ich weiß, dass Liebe alle erobert, where "Liebe" means love and as a noun must always begin in upper case. American newspapers and documents untill the end of the 18th century was the same, capital initials for every noun. It was not so back in the old Latin days, where on the other hand, all that they knew were capital letters.


----------



## litelchau

Aithria said:


> Hi all.
> Maybe my reply’s quite tardy… at any rate ....
> 
> “Grammatically” speaking …. by reason of its highly structured morphology, Latin language was subject, especially in writing, to no fixed construction of sentences (…. as Remosfan wrote ).
> Chaucer’s quotation of Virgil is plain, but not so faithful and/or correct, as usual in Middle Ages (sometimes because people used to quote “from heart”, very often for their way to conceive of “copyright” was far from ours - some scholars call this “intertextuality”… if you rather like…-). So … let’s say “Omnia vincit Amor” is a Virgil’s line of verse and “Amor vincit omnia” a Chaucer’s …. . However.... Jeffreyadixon, what a poetical back !
> To my personal point of view, if a line of verse or a passage from a book happens to turn into proverb or motto, well…let’s quote it right as the author wrote!
> Why Virgil wrote “Omnia vincit amor ….” in Eclogue X and “….labor omnia vicit // improbus…” in Georgica I ? Because quantities in hexameters are to be observed (blank verses were unknown to Latin metrics) and … which is more important … for “his creativity and inspiration told him so” !
> 
> P.S. please, forgive my bad command of English. Thank you!


 Aquí está la clave.

La estructura del hexámentro es una combinación de sílabas largas y breves, por lo que Virgilio no puede en ese lugar del verso escribir "amor omnia vincit", o cualquiera de las demás combinaciones.

Como se ha dicho, todas son correctas y todas pueden aparecer en un texto en prosa ( aunque el latín también tiene sus preferencias en el orden de palabras), pero en verso manda la métrica ( y también, por supuesto, las preferencias del autor).


----------



## XiaoRoel

> La estructura del hexámetro es una combinación de sílabas largas y breves, por lo que Virgilio no puede en ese lugar del verso escribir "amor omnia vincit", o cualquiera de las demás combinaciones.


Exacto.


> Como se ha dicho, todas son correctas y todas pueden aparecer en un texto en prosa ( aunque el latín también tiene sus preferencias en el orden de palabras), pero en verso manda la métrica ( y también, por supuesto, las preferencias del autor).


El latín tiene un orden estricto de palabras (es una lengua SOV) que sólo razones estilísticas o métricas puede variar (como en todas las lenguas) siempre con la limitación de que el texto resultante sea comprensible. El natural orden de la oración propuesta es _amor omnia uincit_ (SUJ/OD/V) que, por razones métricas o estilísticas, podría variarse (tanto más cuanto que la frase sólo tiene los tres elementos claves de la oración transitiva activa sin posibilidad de confusión de casos). El mito del "desorden" de los elementos de la frase latina es sólo eso, un mito como se puede comprobar con un estudio de frecuencias. Si el tal desorden es inmotivado no sirve a lo _aptum_ sino que es un _uitium_ que produce _obscuritas_ gratuita y desmerece el texto.


----------



## gimbur

XiaoRoel said:


> El latín tiene un orden estricto de palabras





joey123joy said:


> Latin grammar allows the word order to be "not strict"



Seeing as the two statements clearly contradict each other I have to ask: Which one is correct? I want to engrave this phrase on a wedding present and it needs to be right, since the bride is likely to know the difference.


----------



## Cagey

The first statement is not in absolute contradiction of the first, as XiaoRoel goes on to say that the order might be changed for stylistic reasons.  You have a choice of which to use according to the association of each, which has been discussed in post 4.

You could use _omnia vincit amor_, because it is well-known quote from Virgil's Eclogue X, or _amor omnia uincit_ because it is the traditional order of classical Latin.  _Amor Vincit Omnia_, is a painting by Caravaggio. If she is likely more likely to know the last, you could use that.


----------



## Aserolf

I always thought it was *amor omnia vincit*, as this is the correct order of Latin. That's what I've been told.


----------



## Cagey

Aserolf said:


> I always thought it was *amor omnia vincit*, as this is the correct order of Latin. That's what I've been told.


Yes, it is the traditionally correct order, but this is not what Virgil wrote, if you are quoting him.


----------



## XiaoRoel

> but this is not what Virgil wrote


Recuerda la explicación métrica de Litelchau:


> La estructura del hexámetro es una combinación de sílabas largas y breves, por lo que Virgilio no puede en ese lugar del verso escribir "amor omnia vincit", o cualquiera de las demás combinaciones.


----------



## Cagey

Yes, I meant only that when you quote the poet, you use his word order.  

I didn't mean that Virgil would not have written it differently in a different context.


----------



## gimbur

Cagey said:


> You could use _omnia vincit amor_, because it is well-known quote from Virgil's Eclogue X, or _amor omnia uincit_ because it is the traditional order of classical Latin.  _Amor Vincit Omnia_, is a painting by Caravaggio. If she is likely more likely to know the last, you could use that.



The bride is a linguist, so I'll go with the classical order. I also think that makes the most sense when taken out of context. If, as Litelchau says, the order Virgil used is a direct result of the rhythm of the verse, when taken out of context it will lose some of its meaning.


----------



## XiaoRoel

_El latín no funciona como el inglés por su sistema casual_. En una frase como ésta no se pierde significado: hay un verbo transitivo con un acusativo (OD) y un nominativo (SUJ), por tanto _no hay riesgo de anfibología aunque no se siga el orden natural_.


----------



## sunnythevoyager

Hi Everyone,
i m a new user over here
i just want know something about this phrase- labor omnia vincit
i want to that what is the meanings each of these words - omnia and vincit ..... which of them means conquer and which mean all things
Can anyone help me in this
regards 
manni


----------



## litelchau

labor = work
omnia = all things
vincit = conquer


----------



## djmc

If it is a disguised quote from Virgil, I would keep his order even though it is not totally normal. After all if I intended a reference to Shakespeare's "to be or not to be" I would not have "either I should be or not be".


----------

