# cacchinat, et supra solum volvit



## surikata

In a sentence i have  `cacchinet, et supra solum volvit`
From this, could i have a translation please.
Thank you.


----------



## judkinsc

The meaning isn't precise while it's a fragment, but it means "he laughs, and rolled over/beyond the man/thing alone."

Cachinet = 3rd person singular present active subjunctive, "he might laugh, he would laugh, let him laugh..." [Needs context]

et = and, even

supra = over, above

solum = singular masculine accusative or singular neuter nominative or accusative "him, it" or "it rolled"

volvit = 3rd person singular perfect active indicative, "he rolled." There's also the possibility that your transcription is using a "v" for a "u," which dates to Classical Latin, and in this case it would be "voluit" or "he desired/wished." If this is the case, then the line would translate as "he might laugh, and desired [to be] above the man/thing alone."

Translation of fragments is ever vague. Do you have any context?


----------



## Cagey

I agree with judkinsc that we need more than this fragment, especially to explain the subjunctive *cachinet*.  Or it might be a typo.  Was it by any chance *cachinat*?  That would be easier to understand. 



> judkinsc said:
> 
> 
> 
> solum = singular masculine accusative or singular neuter nominative or accusative "him, it" or "it rolled"
Click to expand...


However, I suggest solum is from solum, -i, n. = ground.  
So: "he rolls over the ground". 

*volvit* could be either past or present. Since *cachinnet* appers to be present, I take *volvit* to be the same.


----------



## clara mente

I believe the key to this phrase lies in the translation of "solum". So far it has been taken to be an accusative of "solus-a-um", however, it probably has to do with "solum-i, n." which would translate as bottom or more likely, ground. Thus, if we insert "qui" Let him laugh out loud ,who rolls over the ground." Perhaps a jester?


----------



## surikata

For Cagey...I am deeply embarrassed, you are correct. The correct spelling should indeed be `cacchinat`....this was most careless of me.
Thank you to all who posted for me in reply.
ian- surikata.


----------



## Cagey

surikata said:


> For Cagey...I am deeply embarrassed, you are correct. The correct spelling should indeed be `cacchinat`....this was most careless of me.
> Thank you to all who posted for me in reply.
> ian- surikata.



Don't worry about it.  I, too, have made spelling errors in postings.  My own embarrass me, but other people's mistakes don' t bother me at all.

My suggestion for "*cachinnat, et supra solum volvit*" is:

He (She/ It) laughs, and rolls on the ground.


----------



## Flaminius

Indeed it sounds like a Latin translation of the Internet slang "ROTFL (roll(ing) on the floor laughing)."


----------



## Cagey

Flaminius said:


> Indeed it sounds like a Latin translation of the Internet slang "ROTFL (roll(ing) on the floor laughing)."



Thanks, Flaminius.  I thought I recognized it from a blog I read, but was shy to ask, since I am far from internet savvy.  I didn't realize that it had coalesced into a fixed saying with its own abbreviation.


----------



## cuibono

Just a quick note on the use of volvere: the verb is usually transitive (exceptions being made for inanimate, abstract objects in mostly participial phrases -_annis volventibus_ comes to mind).  So, _volvitur_ would be more correct or even _se volvit _(more vulgar, what with the reflexive and all). 
 
Might I suggest Vergil, Aeneid. 11·640 "_*volvitur* excussus ille *humi*_,"  as an example. The passage actually refers to a horse on it's back after being struck with a spear.
 
With that information you may want to try something like:
_cacchinans volvitur humi _
he rolls on the floor laughing. Literally: laughing he rolls (intr.) on the ground/soil.


----------

