Quatermass wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Quatermass wrote:
How do you say in Latin "Quatermass has kicked the derrieres of aliens more times than you have read Proust's In Search of Lost Time"?
Quatermassus daemones vincuerat multot pluris quam legueras Proustis
In Search of Lost TimeWould this be correct?
Buggered if I know, I asked you because you seemed more adept at actual Latin translation.
According to this standard of measure:
Quote:
I. Depth and range of scholarship: comparative philological knowledge of how the language came to be what it is and comparative literary knowledge of the culture to which it has given expression. 1) Foundational. 2) General knowledge of family/cultural circle. 3) In specific detail.
II. Ability to read texts of great books: 1) Slowly deciphering with the aid of a dictionary, or annotated texts, or simpler works. 2) Smoothly and freely, but sometimes getting the gist more than specific details, and certainly profiting from dictionary use. 3) With ease, pleasure, speed, and depth of understanding comparable to that with which I can read English.
III. Ability to produce a scholarly translation of the texts of great books: 1) Slowly and steadily with constant recourse to dictionaries and reference grammars. 2) By means of systematic dictionary work. 3) Spontaneously, with recourse to dictionaries for accuracy.
IV. Conversational ability to engage in a discussion about the kinds of ideas and themes found in great books: 1) Within a limited range and/or with the indulgence and assistance of my conversation partners. 2) Within a full range, but sometimes paraphrasing or searching philological reservoirs for expressions. 3) Freely and without constraint.
http://www.foreignlanguageexpertise.com/about.html#ml
I'd rate myself as:
I(1), II(1.5 to 2~), III(1.66 to 2.3~), IV(1)