[問題] 請問saltem的運用規則？
Nec hoc probatum esse videtur, quod sint de sua betitudine certe et secure,
saltem, licet nos certissimi simus.
三個英譯如下（第三個是估狗翻譯）：
1.
Again, it seems unproved
that they,
or at least that all of them,
are certain or assured of
their own blessedness,
though we
may be quite certain of it.
2.
Nor does it seem proved
that souls in purgatory,
at least not all of them,
are certain and assured of
their own salvation,
even if we ourselves
may be entirely certain of it.
3.
Nor does this appear to be proved,
that they
are certain and assured of
their own salvation,
or at least,
though we
may be quite certain of it.
-------------------------
按文意來說，應該是第2.的翻譯比較符合，
就是「不是」所有在煉獄中的靈魂，都確定他們的救恩；
但拉丁文直譯的3.，似乎沒有否定詞，而只有saltem，
所以1.的直譯也可以說是直翻，但文意上變成「至少全部」，
就是"全部在煉獄中的靈魂，都確定他們的救恩"；
不過「至少-全部」這個組合就怪怪的，
是不是saltem/at least，本就有「不是全部」的意思呢？
--
你們中間有人對他們說：「平平安安地去吧！願你們穿得暖，吃得飽」，
卻不給他們身體所需用的，這有甚麼益處呢？（雅2：16）
--
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc), 來自: 112.105.154.122
※ 文章網址: https://www.ptt.cc/bbs/Latina/M.1535419075.A.C20.html
推
09/01 00:53,
5年前
, 1F
09/01 00:53, 1F
感謝回應，不過多了omnes意思會不同嗎？
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/omnis#Latin
主要就是saltem會有否定義嗎？
我是想到像英文的seldom就自帶否定義...
或者說，saltem
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/saltem
"Adverb
saltem (not comparable)
1.saved, reserved
2.at least
3.anyhow"
會有類似英文的seldom、a few的意思嗎？
※ 編輯: theologe (112.105.154.122), 09/01/2018 10:29:38
推
09/01 15:47,
5年前
, 2F
09/01 15:47, 2F
感謝提供工具網站，我再研究一下...
※ 編輯: theologe (112.105.154.122), 09/02/2018 18:32:33
"It serves to point out that which still remains or holds good, in spite of or
by way of exception to something opposed to it; and accordingly is used (like
certe, II.) as a restrictive particle, at least, at the least, at all events,
anyhow."
Nec hoc probatum esse videtur, quod sint de sua betitudine certe et secure,
saltem, licet nos certissimi simus.
Nor does this appear to be proved,
that they
are certain and assured of
their own salvation,
or at least,
though we
may be quite certain of it.
所以應該是符合
"I. Affirmatively (class.).
A. With a statement of the opposite"
例句第一句：
"si illud non licet, Saltem hoc licebit,"
估狗翻譯為（加","跟不加翻出來有差別耶，不過不加的翻譯比較看得懂）
"if that is not permitted to, at least this will be allowed"
這樣Saltem是在修飾後面的對比子句(的動詞?)。
回到
"Nec hoc probatum esse videtur, quod sint de sua betitudine certe et secure,
saltem, licet nos certissimi simus."
因為之前的兩個英譯有點導向"at least"是對"they"的修飾，所以才搞不清；
若"at least"也是對後面對比子句"licet nos certissimi simus."(其動詞)的修飾，
文意就比較清楚：
他們救恩的確定性並沒有被證明，
但「至少」我們是確定的（對他們的救恩？還是對我們的救恩？）。
請問這樣理解正確嗎？
主要問題是：
saltem是修飾哪個子句（的動詞?）？
是"quod sint de sua betitudine certe et secure"，
還是"licet nos certissimi simus."？
※ 編輯: theologe (112.105.154.122), 09/03/2018 13:55:29
※ 編輯: theologe (112.105.154.122), 09/09/2018 10:23:21
有朋友提供一些說明，摘要我(Q)與他(A)的對答如下：
A：
我看不出saltem為什麼有否定義，perseus上的古典作品裡也沒有.
https://goo.gl/chjrB7
https://goo.gl/fiCvdD
saltem有沒有都沒有什麼區別吧？
Nec hoc probatum esse videtur, quod sint de sua be(a)titudine
certe et secure, licet nos certissimi simus.
意思沒差吧。。
si illud non licet, hoc licebit 意思其實也沒差... 只是一個語氣的
強調而已；
「那個不行，這個可以」跟「那個不行，至少這個可以」；
表達的是同一件事，語氣不同而已。
我還是傾向拿掉saltem，看看意思是什麼，再擺會去，看怎樣不改變意思；
沒有saltem那句話意思很清楚；
Q：
saltem/at least/wenigstens，在德譯、英譯都是修飾前一句--
[三種英譯]
Nor does it seem proved that souls in purgatory, at least not all of them,
are certain and assured of their own salvation, even if we ourselves may be
entirely certain of it.
我的中譯：
「若非可證明他們至少並非全體對於救恩有確信，即便我們是完全確信的。」
Again, it seems unproved that they, or at least that all of them, are
certain or assured of their own blessedness, though we may be quite
certain of it.
我的中譯：
「至少他們（煉獄中靈魂）全體對於救恩的確信，是未證明的；但我們卻是確信。」
This, too, seems not to be proved, that they are all sure and confident of
their salvation, though we may be quite sure of it.
英譯的第三種是比較口語化的，就把at least拿掉了:p
[德譯]
Offenbar ist auch dieses nicht erwiesen, daß sie - wenigstens nicht
alle - ihrer Seligkeit sicher und gewiß sind, wenngleich wir ihrer
völlig sicher sind.
---------------------------------------------------
而若「至少」是修飾後一個子句，反而比較簡單理解：
「他們對於救恩的確信是沒有證明的，但至少我們是確信的。」
所以我本來想說是不是也是修飾後一個...，因為中文比較沒有那麼拗口；
不過德譯、英譯都是修飾前一句就是了；
所以不知道saltem的具體規則究竟是？
A：
你如果想歸結語法規則，還是建議參照Perseus上的例句一個一個比對。
※ 編輯: theologe (112.105.154.122), 09/11/2018 15:58:50