# thank you for reading



## mirla

Hi,

I'm sending out cards to readers of my blog about languages and I would like to write on some of these cards a message in Latin. Would you be so kind as to help me translate it (I have studied Latin but about 10 years ago so now I would say I only have a general idea of how Latin works) I would like to put:
Thank you for reading Multilinguablog
How should I say this?


----------



## Snodv

_Gratias tibi ago pro legendo_...(for a singular you); _gratias vobis ago pro legendo_...(for a plural you).  A grammar I have (Gildersleeve and Lodge) says that _pro_ with a gerund is rare, but not unknown.
Elliptically, you can skip _ago_ (I give) and just say _gratias_, etc.
Others may offer alternatives.


----------



## mirla

Snodv, gratias tibi ago!


----------



## Kevin Beach

Gratias tibi (vobis) legendo.


----------



## bearded

Hello
My Latin is a bit 'rusty', too, but I would suggest (for what it's worth):
_Gratias ago de legendo_
or
_Gratias ago propter lecturam.
_
To me, just 'legendo' sounds like ''I thank you while I read'', and 'pro legendo' like ''I thank you in favour of reading''(nonsense).
I hope that I'm not mistaken.


----------



## Kevin Beach

bearded said:


> Hello
> My Latin is a bit 'rusty', too, but I would suggest (for what it's worth):
> _Gratias ago de legendo_
> or
> _Gratias ago propter lecturam.
> _
> To me, just 'legendo' sounds like ''I thank you while I read'', and 'pro legendo' like ''I thank you in favour of reading''(nonsense).
> I hope that I'm not mistaken.


Wouldn't "I thank you while I read" take the nminative case - legendus? I thought that "legendo" was dative and therefore conformed to "tibi".


----------



## Flaminius

How about using a full subordinate clause of reason or a relative clause?  Perhaps _tibi quod legisti_ or _tibi qui legisti_?  Does a present participle make no sense?  _Tibi legenti_?


----------



## bearded

Kevin Beach said:


> I thought that "legendo" was dative


'Legendo' can be dative or ablative, but the problem is that the meaning is not quite the same as English 'reading'. The nominative 'legendus' would mean ''who has to be read'' and its dative 'legendo' = ''to the one that has to be read''. In the ablative case _(in) legendo _ could mean ''while/in reading''.  Besides, the English phrase ''thank you for reading'' can mean either 'for reading now' or 'for having read' - depending on whether the actions of reading and thanking are contemporary or not.  If they are contemporary, the present participle as proposed by Flaminius (gratias ago tibi legen_ti_) would make sense. Otherwise, see below:



Flaminius said:


> _tibi quod legisti_ or _tibi qui legisti_?



Or _..quia legisti.
_
My suggestions (de legendo/propter lecturam) are 'neuter', i.e. valid for both contemporary or non-contemporary actions.
However, I would be grateful to experts (e.g. Scholiast) if they let us have  their opinion and possibly better suggestions.


----------



## Snodv

I submit that _pro_ is not only "in favor of," but also quite legitimately "in exchange for" as in the popular phrase "quid pro quo."  And do we not return thanks "in exchange for" favors received?  And my dictionary quotes Cicero as saying "pro meritis gratias referre."


----------



## bearded

Snodv said:


> Cicero ... "pro meritis gratias referre.


 ''Pro meritis'' is alright, but I'm not sure that it works the same way with a gerund..


----------



## Scholiast

salvete amici!

Snodv's suggestion (# 2, reinforced in # 9) of _pro legendo_ is indeed perfectly grammatical. But somehow it does not 'feel' quite idiomatic, despite the Cicero citation: I understand _pro _here to mean 'in proportion to'.

My own suggestion would be to simplify with a participle, 'gratias legentibus [vobis] ago', or (to make it more intimate) 'gratias legenti [tibi] ago'. More epigrammatically, and in keeping with Latin's magnificent capacity for _multum in parvo_, 'gratias legentibus'.

Σ


----------



## bearded

Scholiast said:


> 'gratias legentibus'.



The most elegant solution - as usual.


----------



## mirla

And _gratias ago tibo legenti_? In the end I got a bit confused)


----------



## Flaminius

_Tibi_ pro _tibo_.  You should use _legentibus [vobis]_ for plural readers and _legenti [tibi]_ for a singular reader.  I take *Scholiast* in #11 to mean that the plural construction is more appropriate unless your text is meant to be read by just one person.


----------



## Scholiast

salvete sodales!


Flaminius said:


> I take *Scholiast* in #11 to mean that the plural construction is more appropriate unless your text is meant to be read by just one person


Not quite, o Flamini. The relationship between a writer and a reader is almost always in some sense one-to-one, so singular (in both senses). So a degree of intimacy is perhaps appropriate for this context.
Σ


----------

