# Live and Let Live



## lajng

Hello!

I'm looking for the Latin translation of the phrase "Live and Let Live".  I've found "Dum Vivimus, Vivamus" which translates into "while we live, let us live" but its not quite right.  Any help is appreciated!


----------



## Deccius

Vive et vivas (all singular) = Live and Let live


----------



## Lorenzo Italiae

Deccius said:


> Vive et vivas (all singular) = Live and Let live


I'm sorry but I don't agree with you about that _vivas_ : which kind of indipendent subjunctive do you use it as? esortative? potential? dubitative? any of volitives? I can't understand it. Anyway I don't think that there is any of them that conveys the idea of permission (LET live).
I would translate: Vive et vivere sine.


----------



## Deccius

Lorenzo Italiae said:


> I'm sorry but I don't agree with you about that _vivas_ : which kind of indipendent subjunctive do you use it as? esortative? potential? dubitative? any of volitives? I can't understand it. Anyway I don't think that there is any of them that conveys the idea of permission (LET live).
> I would translate: Vive et vivere sine.



Um...I should have written "Vive et vivat", no?  I was thinking it might be a jussive subjunctive.  I don't really think this "let" expresses permission, do you?  That's the reason I didn't use the verb "sinere".


----------



## jazyk

I think vive et viva(n)t is a very good translation.


----------



## Lorenzo Italiae

Deccius said:


> Um...I should have written "Vive et vivat", no? I was thinking it might be a jussive subjunctive. I don't really think this "let" expresses permission, do you? That's the reason I didn't use the verb "sinere".


 well... "vive et viva(n)t" is more suitable in my opinion, though less literal. Anyway, yes, it's kinda permission, to me. Otherwise how would you consider it? Jussive-exhortative? This could work, as this is the idea conveyed [you should let people live], isn't it?
But the problem is with the latin verb: vivere means only "to live", and I don't think that it also means "to let someone live". So, tu sum up, I would agree with your using an exhortative subjunctive, which conveys the idea of a moderate order, but I believe that the meaning of the grammatical tense cannot modify the meaning of the verb "vivere". 
Infact I would translate "vivas" as "live" and not as "let live".
It's a bit confused    someone help us!!


----------



## Joca

Although my Latin is (still) very poor, I'd venture to say something.

I like it this way: Vive et vivere sine. It's more in line with the original. 

But I think you could also use the verb patior:

Vive et vivi patere. 

Will someone please check the latter for me?

Thanks.

JC


----------



## judkinsc

_Vive et alteros vivere permitte_, perhaps.

"Let" is often translated with the iussive subjunctive, but the meaning may be obscured with its usage here. _"Vive et vivant"_ seems good, though: "live and let them live."


----------



## clara mente

Why not try the passive voice hear :"Vive et vivatur."


----------



## judkinsc

The passive won't work so well here, since the verb "to live" isn't easily made passive. "He is lived?" "Vivatur" would be "he might be lived" or something similar.

The "Let" is truly a iussive/hortatory subjunctive form in English.


----------



## Lorenzo Italiae

judkinsc said:


> The "Let" is truly a iussive/hortatory subjunctive form in English.


Of course it is . Yet, in my opinion, the problem is that the _let_ is referred to a second singular person (i.e_. _you), and because of this I don't agree with the translation of "vivant" for "let live". "Let live" means that it's the person you are addressing to who has to let other people live, so I think we have to underline this idea of telling someone what he should do, which is conveyed, as said, by the _let_.
I'm also referring to the Italian sentence "vivi e lascia vivere" (=vive et sine vivere) which perfectly translates the English one.
Don't you agree?
Lorenzo


----------



## clara mente

In response to the usage of the passive, I should have made it more clear that I meant the impersonal usage e.g. " Let it go!" (be gone) Exitum sit! Just another way of looking at this phaseology, but the jussive would also do just fine.


----------



## judkinsc

clara mente said:


> "Let it go!" (be gone) Exitum sit!



Passive subjunctive there, though. The subjunctive mood holds the sense of the "let," instead of the passive voice.


----------



## judkinsc

Lorenzo Italiae said:


> Yet, in my opinion, the problem is that the _let_ is referred to a second singular person (i.e_. _you), and because of this I don't agree with the translation of "vivant" for "let live".



It's truly better to use a different syntactical form than the subjunctive to translate the second verb, "let live," in this context. Latin does not easily accept the idea of "to permit" into the iussive subjunctive, while the English "let" does.

The phrase you gave in Italian works similarly to the phrase I gave in Latin earlier, allowing a "helping" verb to modify the second use of "vivere" (if I follow the Italian correctly).


----------



## Lorenzo Italiae

Infact I agree with that sentence (_Vive et [alteros] vivere permitte_)  
And you have correctly understood the Italian sentence (_vivi e lascia vivere_), which is very close to Latin one (_vive et vivere permitte/sine_), and, in my opinion, also to the English one we have begun with (_Live and let live_).
I may be misunderstanding the English meaning: both _live_ and_  let live_ are imperative mood, aren't they? If I'm right, then it's obvious to translate with _Vive et [alteros] vivere permitte, _and no subjunctive mood is required.
Waiting for answers


----------



## Whodunit

I agree with judkinsc and LI. The subjunctive can't be used in this context. An example for when the Latin subjunctive is possible with "let" is:

"Exeamus igitur!" - Thusly, let us go!
"Audiatur et altera pars!" - The other party ought to be listened to, too!

Let me generalize that only if you can use "should/ought to" in English, the Latin subjunctive for the English "let" can be used. In the other case where "let" means "permit," you can use the verb "permittere" or "sinere" (maybe pati, as well).

To sum it up, I want to tell you that I agree with the translation "*Vive et/ac alteros vivere permitte*."


----------



## Outsider

I think the English speakers get a little confused because the _let_ + infinitive periphrasis can be used as a compound subjunctive (which doubles as a compound imperative). But here I would say the verb _let_ should be read literally (="permit", "allow", as Whodunit said), not as part of a periphrasis.


----------



## Lorenzo Italiae

Whodunit said:


> I agree with judkinsc and LI. The subjunctive can't be used in this context. An example for when the Latin subjunctive is possible with "let" is:
> 
> "Exeamus igitur!" - Thusly, let us go!
> "Audiatur et altera pars!" - The other party ought to be listened to, too!
> 
> Let me generalize that only if you can use "should/ought to" in English, the Latin subjunctive for the English "let" can be used. In the other case where "let" means "permit," you can use the verb "permittere" or "sinere" (maybe pati, as well).
> 
> To sum it up, I want to tell you that I agree with the translation "*Vive et/ac alteros vivere permitte*."


 


Outsider said:


> I think the English speakers get a little confused because the _let_ + infinitive periphrasis can be used as a compound subjunctive (which doubles as a compound imperative). But here I would say the verb _let_ should be read literally (="permit", "allow", as Whodunit said), not as part of a periphrasis.


I do agree with you guys  
Thanks for answering


----------



## lajng

Thank you all very much, but I'm I'm uncertain what the "Alteros" translates to?

The phrase "live and let live" to me means live your life and let others live theirs.  

I get that it starts with "vive et...." but am uncertain as to which words to translate the "let live" part?

If I say "Vive et vivere permitte" would that correctly translate?  

I should back up and explain my concern for accuracy, this is a phrase I want as a tattoo.


----------



## Whodunit

We agreed on thsi translation: *Vive et alteros vivere permitte*.

Here's the analysis:

Vive - imperative singular of "vivere" (to live)
et - conjunction (and)
alteros - accusative masculine plural of "alterus" (another)
vivere - infinitive (to live)
permitte - imperative singular of "permittere" (to permit)

= Live and permit the others to live.


----------



## lajng

I see.  If I wanted to leave the "others" out would it still be correct for me to say "Vive et vivere permitte"?  That would literally translate to "Live and let live" right?


----------



## Whodunit

lajng said:


> I see. If I wanted to leave the "others" out would it still be correct for me to say "Vive et vivere permitte"? That would literally translate to "Live and let live" right?


 
Yes, but please try to compare it to this sentence in English:

Live and permit to live.

In my opinion, there's inherently the question about "_who_ (do I permit to live)?" You should answer the question in Latin, but if you don't want to it's all up to you.


----------



## bellasys

I apologize if I missed a reference to "*Vive et Sine Vivere*" in the above threads- I tried to take them all in as a courtesy, but may have missed...

The above is from my ancestry, the Eaton family motto, dating back to ~1460 England, Eaton Castle (not Eton), England, and its presentation is effective as "natural language."


----------

