Roman Equivalent of "Sir, Yes, Sir!"

[Kate Gilliver]

Pliny when addressing the emperor Trajan uses the form Domine; 'sir', 'master' or 'lord' would be fine as a translation of that, so I think you're on pretty safe grounds using it. And if a senator can use it to the emperor, I don't think there's any problem with having a soldier using it to a superior officer.

[Salvianus]

Tarbicus has it: even if manners had changed by the late C4th, the tablets show usage by soldiers to their commanding officer (Cerialis) and others in the late 1st-early 2nd, both in formal requests and in more informal terms: mi domine karissime "My dearest lord" and dominefrater karissime "dearest lord/brother" (perhaps "fellow officer" or ex conturbenalis in a literal or metaphorical sense?).

I believe the normal Latin way to answer a question like "Is it raining?" was to say "It is raining." rather than an equivalent to "yes". A soldier repeating back the order to confirm their understanding as well as assent certainly has a familiar ring (to sailors, anyway!).

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

It is a way of ensureing the order was understood in noisy situations....

[Celtic505]

Would the Roman army when training new recruits endure through a process similar to modern Basic training? I know drill, fighting techniques and marching with packs twice as heavy as the normal load were employed but is there any evidence to show a process like modern basic? What would be the qualifying test to become a legionaire? I would imagine something like an ancient version of the Crucible in Marine basic.

[M. Demetrius]

I can't say that. I've just tried!

Say it oh BOY dee oh.
Looks harder than it is, I reckon.

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

I was reading a post of Jims, where it mentions the recruits were not to be given their marks, until they had shown them to be tough enough to endure the exertion required....I suppose it could have been a training period to test their mettle....a bit like basic....once you pass, you get to wear the beret...or get the tattoo.... :lol:

[petrinus]

oh boy dee oh or "oh boway dee oh" ?

[M. Demetrius]

oh boy dee oh or "oh boway dee oh" ?

Well, I was taught that the dipthong OE was pronounced like OY in English. In Englishized adopted Latin words it's usually prounounced like long E (as in subpoena= sub PEE nuh). The Romans would probably have pronounced it sub POY na, or possibly SUB poy na by that rule.

Anyone else is welcome to correct me, I'm no expert in Latin, just a couple of years of school study, much much more than a couple of years ago.

[M. Demetrius]

Hmm. Looks like I quoted myself. Oh, well, consider the source. :lol:

[Triarius]

So if you are writing (or reading) a novel in English, what would you prefer to have the soldier say:

"Yes, sir!"

"Yes, Centurio!"

"Yes, domine!"

[Neuraleanus]

So if you are writing (or reading) a novel in English, what would you prefer to have the soldier say:

"Yes, sir!"

"Yes, Centurio!"

"Yes, domine!"

I think that it is good to interject a little bit of Latin into the English. The reader will eventually figure it out from context. I like the way they did that in HBO's Rome. So I would go for:

"Yes, domine"

[Salvianus]

So if you are writing (or reading) a novel in English, what would you prefer to have the soldier say:

Of those: "Yes, sir!" which is the best English paraphrase of what we are making educated guesses about what they used as a paraphrase of "Yes sir!" hock:

Personally, I avoid mixing languages in speech, unless using a technical word for a specific reason. I think one can use the well known English versions of Latin words when one is writing in English. The use of Latin, I believe, depends on your audience: there may be a few readers who will recognise points of Latin Grammar but I suspect few of those would applaud it's application to an English sentence.

I have more thoughts on the subject, but I usually hold out for an acknowledgement :wink:

[Triarius]

I have more thoughts on the subject, but I usually hold out for an acknowledgement :wink:

Well, if any of this gets published, Jasper (and Romanarmy.com, and possibly RAT) are getting them, so why not?

I tend to agree with you, and I realize that this group may well have a different preference than the population at large.

So far, most of my prepublication readers are floored by terms most people here wouldn't blink at. (Excuse me: "at which people here wouldn't blink." Ahem. :roll: )

[Salvianus]

Oh, I doubt I can be as much help as Jasper

Broad audience is certainly a dilemma. I think solutions depend on point of view. One of the most accessible approaches I have seen in first person or limited omniscient third person is to establish place and time with authentic dialogue placed in the mouths of those identified as foreign to the 'familar' narrator/focal character. For example, the British' slave taken into the heart of Empire hears Latin without comprehension before learning to converse (and ignoring the fact that their language would be no more comprehensible to the modern English speaker). The epitome of this approach in film would be the 13th Warrior.

Alternatively on can take Tolkein's approach: overheard 'foreigners' speech is simply left untranslated in order to emphasise their difference to all, but adheres to grammatical rules in order to please the erudite (witness Star Trek Klingon for the fanboys!). 'Technical' vocab is incorporated with contextual explanation to shorthand worldbuilding detail.

A softer approach is to record the verbatim speech of characters in the distance, while chacters in focus are translated.

cheers