Can 'non' with gerundive mean both lack of obligation and negative obligation? Planned...

Will I be more secure with my own router behind my ISP's router?

Can the van der Waals coefficients be negative in the van der Waals equation for real gases?

Does the Pact of the Blade warlock feature allow me to customize the properties of the pact weapon I create?

Recursive calls to a function - why is the address of the parameter passed to it lowering with each call?

“Since the train was delayed for more than an hour, passengers were given a full refund.” – Why is there no article before “passengers”?

Why do people think Winterfell crypts is the safest place for women, children & old people?

Why did Europeans not widely domesticate foxes?

Does GDPR cover the collection of data by websites that crawl the web and resell user data

What helicopter has the most rotor blades?

Does traveling In The United States require a passport or can I use my green card if not a US citizen?

/bin/ls sorts differently than just ls

Who's this lady in the war room?

How is an IPA symbol that lacks a name (e.g. ɲ) called?

Why doesn't the university give past final exams' answers?

When speaking, how do you change your mind mid-sentence?

Compiling and throwing simple dynamic exceptions at runtime for JVM

Protagonist's race is hidden - should I reveal it?

Can 'non' with gerundive mean both lack of obligation and negative obligation?

"Destructive force" carried by a B-52?

Has a Nobel Peace laureate ever been accused of war crimes?

Assertions In A Mock Callout Test

2 sample t test for sample sizes - 30,000 and 150,000

How to ask rejected full-time candidates to apply to teach individual courses?

Can a Knight grant Knighthood to another?



Can 'non' with gerundive mean both lack of obligation and negative obligation?



Planned maintenance scheduled April 23, 2019 at 23:30 UTC (7:30pm US/Eastern)
Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara
Unicorn Meta Zoo #1: Why another podcast?How do I say “this must not happen”?Can *ne* in *ne … quidem* mean *ne* instead of *non*?Comparing ius sacrum and fasCan the gerundive be used like an adjective?-NL- and -LL- in Classical LatinPassive periphrastic with two dativesCan I use abesse with hinc, inde, and others?“There is” in LatinHow can you tell whether prefixed ‘in-’ is the preposition ‘in’ or Indo-European ‘in-’?What would this pun mean?Gerundive Confusion












5















If a gerundive is used with non, can it mean both lack of obligation and negative obligation?
For example, can non loquendum est mean both "it is not necessary to speak" and "it is necessary not to speak"?
Does the word order have a role here?



If you want to argue that a gerundive with non can have a certain meaning, can you please provide a classical quotation where the meaning is clearly only one of the two possibilities?
In the cases I have seen, I find it hard to decide whether a lack of obligation or a negative obligation was meant.



To me the literal reading of such a phrase is lack of obligation, but negative obligation is possible too.
This was discussed in connection to the earlier question concerning negative obligations, but I wanted to ask this separate focused question to settle this matter.










share|improve this question



























    5















    If a gerundive is used with non, can it mean both lack of obligation and negative obligation?
    For example, can non loquendum est mean both "it is not necessary to speak" and "it is necessary not to speak"?
    Does the word order have a role here?



    If you want to argue that a gerundive with non can have a certain meaning, can you please provide a classical quotation where the meaning is clearly only one of the two possibilities?
    In the cases I have seen, I find it hard to decide whether a lack of obligation or a negative obligation was meant.



    To me the literal reading of such a phrase is lack of obligation, but negative obligation is possible too.
    This was discussed in connection to the earlier question concerning negative obligations, but I wanted to ask this separate focused question to settle this matter.










    share|improve this question

























      5












      5








      5


      1






      If a gerundive is used with non, can it mean both lack of obligation and negative obligation?
      For example, can non loquendum est mean both "it is not necessary to speak" and "it is necessary not to speak"?
      Does the word order have a role here?



      If you want to argue that a gerundive with non can have a certain meaning, can you please provide a classical quotation where the meaning is clearly only one of the two possibilities?
      In the cases I have seen, I find it hard to decide whether a lack of obligation or a negative obligation was meant.



      To me the literal reading of such a phrase is lack of obligation, but negative obligation is possible too.
      This was discussed in connection to the earlier question concerning negative obligations, but I wanted to ask this separate focused question to settle this matter.










      share|improve this question














      If a gerundive is used with non, can it mean both lack of obligation and negative obligation?
      For example, can non loquendum est mean both "it is not necessary to speak" and "it is necessary not to speak"?
      Does the word order have a role here?



      If you want to argue that a gerundive with non can have a certain meaning, can you please provide a classical quotation where the meaning is clearly only one of the two possibilities?
      In the cases I have seen, I find it hard to decide whether a lack of obligation or a negative obligation was meant.



      To me the literal reading of such a phrase is lack of obligation, but negative obligation is possible too.
      This was discussed in connection to the earlier question concerning negative obligations, but I wanted to ask this separate focused question to settle this matter.







      classical-latin example-request gerundivum negation






      share|improve this question













      share|improve this question











      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question










      asked 9 hours ago









      Joonas IlmavirtaJoonas Ilmavirta

      49.4k1271288




      49.4k1271288






















          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          4














          The following examples are of the negated gerundive clearly equivalent to a prohibition.



          The pair faciendum / non faciendum is used to indicate positive and negative obligation, as evidenced by the parallelism with sequi / fugere.




          Videsne ut quibus summa est in voluptate perspicuum sit quid iis faciendum sit aut non faciendum? ut nemo dubitet eorum omnia officia quo spectare, quid sequi, quid fugere debeant? (Cic. De Fin. 4.17.46)




          The grammarians consistently use dicendum and non dicendum to mean "an obligatory expression" and "a prohibited expression."




          Mi Paula et mi Aemilia non dicendum, quia mi masculini est generis

          pronomen, non feminini, et ortum est a prima positione meus; sed dicen-

          dum
          mea Paula et mea Aemilia, o meum caput, o meumque brachium. (Flavius Caper, De Orthographia, 102)




          Legal Latin frequently uses the negated gerundive to signify prohibition. (The Digests itself is post-classical but consists largely of extracts of earlier Latin.)




          Proculus ait ... [in a case where one crime/tort could be prosecuted under two different legal statutes] si uno iudicio res esset iudicata, altero amplius non agendum. (Digesta, 9.2.27.11.3)




          A slightly post-classical example clearly signifying prohibition:




          quod in facto reicitur, etiam in dicto non est recipiendum. (Tertullian, De Spectaculis, 17)







          share|improve this answer


























            Your Answer








            StackExchange.ready(function() {
            var channelOptions = {
            tags: "".split(" "),
            id: "644"
            };
            initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

            StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
            // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
            if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
            StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
            createEditor();
            });
            }
            else {
            createEditor();
            }
            });

            function createEditor() {
            StackExchange.prepareEditor({
            heartbeatType: 'answer',
            autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
            convertImagesToLinks: false,
            noModals: true,
            showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
            reputationToPostImages: null,
            bindNavPrevention: true,
            postfix: "",
            imageUploader: {
            brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
            contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
            allowUrls: true
            },
            noCode: true, onDemand: true,
            discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
            ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
            });


            }
            });














            draft saved

            draft discarded


















            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2flatin.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f9537%2fcan-non-with-gerundive-mean-both-lack-of-obligation-and-negative-obligation%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown

























            1 Answer
            1






            active

            oldest

            votes








            1 Answer
            1






            active

            oldest

            votes









            active

            oldest

            votes






            active

            oldest

            votes









            4














            The following examples are of the negated gerundive clearly equivalent to a prohibition.



            The pair faciendum / non faciendum is used to indicate positive and negative obligation, as evidenced by the parallelism with sequi / fugere.




            Videsne ut quibus summa est in voluptate perspicuum sit quid iis faciendum sit aut non faciendum? ut nemo dubitet eorum omnia officia quo spectare, quid sequi, quid fugere debeant? (Cic. De Fin. 4.17.46)




            The grammarians consistently use dicendum and non dicendum to mean "an obligatory expression" and "a prohibited expression."




            Mi Paula et mi Aemilia non dicendum, quia mi masculini est generis

            pronomen, non feminini, et ortum est a prima positione meus; sed dicen-

            dum
            mea Paula et mea Aemilia, o meum caput, o meumque brachium. (Flavius Caper, De Orthographia, 102)




            Legal Latin frequently uses the negated gerundive to signify prohibition. (The Digests itself is post-classical but consists largely of extracts of earlier Latin.)




            Proculus ait ... [in a case where one crime/tort could be prosecuted under two different legal statutes] si uno iudicio res esset iudicata, altero amplius non agendum. (Digesta, 9.2.27.11.3)




            A slightly post-classical example clearly signifying prohibition:




            quod in facto reicitur, etiam in dicto non est recipiendum. (Tertullian, De Spectaculis, 17)







            share|improve this answer






























              4














              The following examples are of the negated gerundive clearly equivalent to a prohibition.



              The pair faciendum / non faciendum is used to indicate positive and negative obligation, as evidenced by the parallelism with sequi / fugere.




              Videsne ut quibus summa est in voluptate perspicuum sit quid iis faciendum sit aut non faciendum? ut nemo dubitet eorum omnia officia quo spectare, quid sequi, quid fugere debeant? (Cic. De Fin. 4.17.46)




              The grammarians consistently use dicendum and non dicendum to mean "an obligatory expression" and "a prohibited expression."




              Mi Paula et mi Aemilia non dicendum, quia mi masculini est generis

              pronomen, non feminini, et ortum est a prima positione meus; sed dicen-

              dum
              mea Paula et mea Aemilia, o meum caput, o meumque brachium. (Flavius Caper, De Orthographia, 102)




              Legal Latin frequently uses the negated gerundive to signify prohibition. (The Digests itself is post-classical but consists largely of extracts of earlier Latin.)




              Proculus ait ... [in a case where one crime/tort could be prosecuted under two different legal statutes] si uno iudicio res esset iudicata, altero amplius non agendum. (Digesta, 9.2.27.11.3)




              A slightly post-classical example clearly signifying prohibition:




              quod in facto reicitur, etiam in dicto non est recipiendum. (Tertullian, De Spectaculis, 17)







              share|improve this answer




























                4












                4








                4







                The following examples are of the negated gerundive clearly equivalent to a prohibition.



                The pair faciendum / non faciendum is used to indicate positive and negative obligation, as evidenced by the parallelism with sequi / fugere.




                Videsne ut quibus summa est in voluptate perspicuum sit quid iis faciendum sit aut non faciendum? ut nemo dubitet eorum omnia officia quo spectare, quid sequi, quid fugere debeant? (Cic. De Fin. 4.17.46)




                The grammarians consistently use dicendum and non dicendum to mean "an obligatory expression" and "a prohibited expression."




                Mi Paula et mi Aemilia non dicendum, quia mi masculini est generis

                pronomen, non feminini, et ortum est a prima positione meus; sed dicen-

                dum
                mea Paula et mea Aemilia, o meum caput, o meumque brachium. (Flavius Caper, De Orthographia, 102)




                Legal Latin frequently uses the negated gerundive to signify prohibition. (The Digests itself is post-classical but consists largely of extracts of earlier Latin.)




                Proculus ait ... [in a case where one crime/tort could be prosecuted under two different legal statutes] si uno iudicio res esset iudicata, altero amplius non agendum. (Digesta, 9.2.27.11.3)




                A slightly post-classical example clearly signifying prohibition:




                quod in facto reicitur, etiam in dicto non est recipiendum. (Tertullian, De Spectaculis, 17)







                share|improve this answer















                The following examples are of the negated gerundive clearly equivalent to a prohibition.



                The pair faciendum / non faciendum is used to indicate positive and negative obligation, as evidenced by the parallelism with sequi / fugere.




                Videsne ut quibus summa est in voluptate perspicuum sit quid iis faciendum sit aut non faciendum? ut nemo dubitet eorum omnia officia quo spectare, quid sequi, quid fugere debeant? (Cic. De Fin. 4.17.46)




                The grammarians consistently use dicendum and non dicendum to mean "an obligatory expression" and "a prohibited expression."




                Mi Paula et mi Aemilia non dicendum, quia mi masculini est generis

                pronomen, non feminini, et ortum est a prima positione meus; sed dicen-

                dum
                mea Paula et mea Aemilia, o meum caput, o meumque brachium. (Flavius Caper, De Orthographia, 102)




                Legal Latin frequently uses the negated gerundive to signify prohibition. (The Digests itself is post-classical but consists largely of extracts of earlier Latin.)




                Proculus ait ... [in a case where one crime/tort could be prosecuted under two different legal statutes] si uno iudicio res esset iudicata, altero amplius non agendum. (Digesta, 9.2.27.11.3)




                A slightly post-classical example clearly signifying prohibition:




                quod in facto reicitur, etiam in dicto non est recipiendum. (Tertullian, De Spectaculis, 17)








                share|improve this answer














                share|improve this answer



                share|improve this answer








                edited 7 hours ago

























                answered 8 hours ago









                KingshorseyKingshorsey

                93939




                93939






























                    draft saved

                    draft discarded




















































                    Thanks for contributing an answer to Latin Language Stack Exchange!


                    • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                    But avoid



                    • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                    • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                    To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                    draft saved


                    draft discarded














                    StackExchange.ready(
                    function () {
                    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2flatin.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f9537%2fcan-non-with-gerundive-mean-both-lack-of-obligation-and-negative-obligation%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                    }
                    );

                    Post as a guest















                    Required, but never shown





















































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown

































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown







                    Popular posts from this blog

                    Why do type traits not work with types in namespace scope?What are POD types in C++?Why can templates only be...

                    Will tsunami waves travel forever if there was no land?Why do tsunami waves begin with the water flowing away...

                    Should I use Docker or LXD?How to cache (more) data on SSD/RAM to avoid spin up?Unable to get Windows File...