How do I say “this must not happen”? 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?Are there examples of passive imperative forms of non-deponent verbs in ancient literature?When can the gerund take an object?How to emphasize adjectives?Is the complement of esse in nominative or accusative when esse is a subject?Should the phrase “I often saw” use the imperfect or the aorist in Greek?Passives Without AccusativesJenney's Second Year Latin, Lesson 12, exercise E: Ut clauses and how to translate English infinitivesMisquoting Linnaeus or correcting him?Passive periphrastic with two dativesExpressing English modalities of advice in LatinHow can you tell whether prefixed ‘in-’ is the preposition ‘in’ or Indo-European ‘in-’?

Any stored/leased 737s that could substitute for grounded MAXs?

Weaponising the Grasp-at-a-Distance spell

Understanding piped commands in GNU/Linux

Why not use the yoke to control yaw, as well as pitch and roll?

When does a function NOT have an antiderivative?

Was the pager message from Nick Fury to Captain Marvel unnecessary?

Short story about astronauts fertilizing soil with their own bodies

What does 丫 mean? 丫是什么意思?

My mentor says to set image to Fine instead of RAW — how is this different from JPG?

Adapting the Chinese Remainder Theorem (CRT) for integers to polynomials

Is it OK to use the testing sample to compare algorithms?

How to achieve cat-like agility?

Why are current probes so expensive?

Sally's older brother

Did any compiler fully use 80-bit floating point?

In musical terms, what properties are varied by the human voice to produce different words / syllables?

How to name indistinguishable henchmen in a screenplay?

Why is there so little support for joining EFTA in the British parliament?

Keep at all times, the minus sign above aligned with minus sign below

Why does BitLocker not use RSA?

Why complex landing gears are used instead of simple, reliable and light weight muscle wire or shape memory alloys?

Vertical ranges of Column Plots in 12

How to make an animal which can only breed for a certain number of generations?

Fit odd number of triplets in a measure?



How do I say “this must not happen”?



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?Are there examples of passive imperative forms of non-deponent verbs in ancient literature?When can the gerund take an object?How to emphasize adjectives?Is the complement of esse in nominative or accusative when esse is a subject?Should the phrase “I often saw” use the imperfect or the aorist in Greek?Passives Without AccusativesJenney's Second Year Latin, Lesson 12, exercise E: Ut clauses and how to translate English infinitivesMisquoting Linnaeus or correcting him?Passive periphrastic with two dativesExpressing English modalities of advice in LatinHow can you tell whether prefixed ‘in-’ is the preposition ‘in’ or Indo-European ‘in-’?










3















I'm used to translating English auxiliary "must" with a Latin gerundive: hic necandus est "this man must be killed".



But what if I want to say "this man must not be killed"? I would read non necandus est as "it's not necessary to kill him", which is a somewhat different meaning (it's ambivalent about whether he should be killed or not).










share|improve this question




























    3















    I'm used to translating English auxiliary "must" with a Latin gerundive: hic necandus est "this man must be killed".



    But what if I want to say "this man must not be killed"? I would read non necandus est as "it's not necessary to kill him", which is a somewhat different meaning (it's ambivalent about whether he should be killed or not).










    share|improve this question


























      3












      3








      3








      I'm used to translating English auxiliary "must" with a Latin gerundive: hic necandus est "this man must be killed".



      But what if I want to say "this man must not be killed"? I would read non necandus est as "it's not necessary to kill him", which is a somewhat different meaning (it's ambivalent about whether he should be killed or not).










      share|improve this question
















      I'm used to translating English auxiliary "must" with a Latin gerundive: hic necandus est "this man must be killed".



      But what if I want to say "this man must not be killed"? I would read non necandus est as "it's not necessary to kill him", which is a somewhat different meaning (it's ambivalent about whether he should be killed or not).







      grammar-choice gerundivum negation






      share|improve this question















      share|improve this question













      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question








      edited 4 hours ago







      Draconis

















      asked 6 hours ago









      DraconisDraconis

      18.9k22676




      18.9k22676




















          2 Answers
          2






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          2














          In my experience many languages confuse lack of desire and desire of the contrary.
          For example, I would like to be able to say "I don't want coffee" as the negation of "I want coffee", meaning that I don't have a desire to have coffee.
          To say that I am actively against drinking coffee, I would prefer to say "I want not to have coffee".
          But, unfortunately, English doesn't work this way, and "I don't want coffee" is construed as "I want not to have coffee" instead of the more ambivalent reading.



          Similarly, the Latin non necandus est is more literally "it is not necessary to kill him" but could also be read as "it is necessary not to kill him".
          I found examples of similar constructions, but it is not easy to decide which meaning is intended in each case.
          I would consider both readings valid in general.



          I see a couple of ways to express "it is necessary to not kill him" without ambiguity:



          1. Take a new verb with the opposite meaning: servandus est

          2. Explain in more words: necesse est eum non necare

          3. Work it into the structure of a sentence: curandum est ne necetur

          4. In some cases you might be able to use a negative order: noli(te) eum necare

            (There are also passive imperatives.)





          share|improve this answer
































            1














            There are three or four impersonal verbs to express what is appropriate, or legal, or obligatory.



            1 děcet, it is appropriate
            2 dēděcet, it is inapproptiate, unseemly.




            Ut nobis decet; As seems right to us.
            Oratorem irasci minime decet, simulare non dēděcet. It is not professional for an orator to get angry, it is not unprofessional to pretend (to get angry). Cicero Tusc., 4,25




            Non nos decet necare; ‘It is not right for us to kill.’
            Dedecet necare; ‘It is unseemly (uncouth? it is not very nice?) to kill.’



            3 Lĭcet, it is lawful

            (cf. illĭcĭtē, adv. illegally; illĭcĭtus adj., illegal)




            Lĭcet nemini peccare, Cicero Tusc., 5,19 'Nobody is permitted to do evil.'




            So, Licet nemini eum necare. 'It is not lawful to kill him.'



            4 Oportet, it is a duty, one ought.




            Est aliquid, quod non oporteat, etiam si licet; quicquid vero non licet, certe non oportet.

            'There is something which one ought not to do, even if it is legal; but anything illegal, certainly ought not to be done.' Cicero.




            Certe oportet non eum necare, 'Undoubtedly, one ought not to kill him.'






            share|improve this answer























            • I really like using dedecet and illicitum est for this. (+1!) The others suffer from the ambiguity described in the question: one could read non oportet as "it is not a duty to" instead of "it is a duty not to".

              – Joonas Ilmavirta
              7 mins ago











            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%2f9526%2fhow-do-i-say-this-must-not-happen%23new-answer', 'question_page');

            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown

























            2 Answers
            2






            active

            oldest

            votes








            2 Answers
            2






            active

            oldest

            votes









            active

            oldest

            votes






            active

            oldest

            votes









            2














            In my experience many languages confuse lack of desire and desire of the contrary.
            For example, I would like to be able to say "I don't want coffee" as the negation of "I want coffee", meaning that I don't have a desire to have coffee.
            To say that I am actively against drinking coffee, I would prefer to say "I want not to have coffee".
            But, unfortunately, English doesn't work this way, and "I don't want coffee" is construed as "I want not to have coffee" instead of the more ambivalent reading.



            Similarly, the Latin non necandus est is more literally "it is not necessary to kill him" but could also be read as "it is necessary not to kill him".
            I found examples of similar constructions, but it is not easy to decide which meaning is intended in each case.
            I would consider both readings valid in general.



            I see a couple of ways to express "it is necessary to not kill him" without ambiguity:



            1. Take a new verb with the opposite meaning: servandus est

            2. Explain in more words: necesse est eum non necare

            3. Work it into the structure of a sentence: curandum est ne necetur

            4. In some cases you might be able to use a negative order: noli(te) eum necare

              (There are also passive imperatives.)





            share|improve this answer





























              2














              In my experience many languages confuse lack of desire and desire of the contrary.
              For example, I would like to be able to say "I don't want coffee" as the negation of "I want coffee", meaning that I don't have a desire to have coffee.
              To say that I am actively against drinking coffee, I would prefer to say "I want not to have coffee".
              But, unfortunately, English doesn't work this way, and "I don't want coffee" is construed as "I want not to have coffee" instead of the more ambivalent reading.



              Similarly, the Latin non necandus est is more literally "it is not necessary to kill him" but could also be read as "it is necessary not to kill him".
              I found examples of similar constructions, but it is not easy to decide which meaning is intended in each case.
              I would consider both readings valid in general.



              I see a couple of ways to express "it is necessary to not kill him" without ambiguity:



              1. Take a new verb with the opposite meaning: servandus est

              2. Explain in more words: necesse est eum non necare

              3. Work it into the structure of a sentence: curandum est ne necetur

              4. In some cases you might be able to use a negative order: noli(te) eum necare

                (There are also passive imperatives.)





              share|improve this answer



























                2












                2








                2







                In my experience many languages confuse lack of desire and desire of the contrary.
                For example, I would like to be able to say "I don't want coffee" as the negation of "I want coffee", meaning that I don't have a desire to have coffee.
                To say that I am actively against drinking coffee, I would prefer to say "I want not to have coffee".
                But, unfortunately, English doesn't work this way, and "I don't want coffee" is construed as "I want not to have coffee" instead of the more ambivalent reading.



                Similarly, the Latin non necandus est is more literally "it is not necessary to kill him" but could also be read as "it is necessary not to kill him".
                I found examples of similar constructions, but it is not easy to decide which meaning is intended in each case.
                I would consider both readings valid in general.



                I see a couple of ways to express "it is necessary to not kill him" without ambiguity:



                1. Take a new verb with the opposite meaning: servandus est

                2. Explain in more words: necesse est eum non necare

                3. Work it into the structure of a sentence: curandum est ne necetur

                4. In some cases you might be able to use a negative order: noli(te) eum necare

                  (There are also passive imperatives.)





                share|improve this answer















                In my experience many languages confuse lack of desire and desire of the contrary.
                For example, I would like to be able to say "I don't want coffee" as the negation of "I want coffee", meaning that I don't have a desire to have coffee.
                To say that I am actively against drinking coffee, I would prefer to say "I want not to have coffee".
                But, unfortunately, English doesn't work this way, and "I don't want coffee" is construed as "I want not to have coffee" instead of the more ambivalent reading.



                Similarly, the Latin non necandus est is more literally "it is not necessary to kill him" but could also be read as "it is necessary not to kill him".
                I found examples of similar constructions, but it is not easy to decide which meaning is intended in each case.
                I would consider both readings valid in general.



                I see a couple of ways to express "it is necessary to not kill him" without ambiguity:



                1. Take a new verb with the opposite meaning: servandus est

                2. Explain in more words: necesse est eum non necare

                3. Work it into the structure of a sentence: curandum est ne necetur

                4. In some cases you might be able to use a negative order: noli(te) eum necare

                  (There are also passive imperatives.)






                share|improve this answer














                share|improve this answer



                share|improve this answer








                edited 2 hours ago

























                answered 4 hours ago









                Joonas IlmavirtaJoonas Ilmavirta

                49.3k1271288




                49.3k1271288





















                    1














                    There are three or four impersonal verbs to express what is appropriate, or legal, or obligatory.



                    1 děcet, it is appropriate
                    2 dēděcet, it is inapproptiate, unseemly.




                    Ut nobis decet; As seems right to us.
                    Oratorem irasci minime decet, simulare non dēděcet. It is not professional for an orator to get angry, it is not unprofessional to pretend (to get angry). Cicero Tusc., 4,25




                    Non nos decet necare; ‘It is not right for us to kill.’
                    Dedecet necare; ‘It is unseemly (uncouth? it is not very nice?) to kill.’



                    3 Lĭcet, it is lawful

                    (cf. illĭcĭtē, adv. illegally; illĭcĭtus adj., illegal)




                    Lĭcet nemini peccare, Cicero Tusc., 5,19 'Nobody is permitted to do evil.'




                    So, Licet nemini eum necare. 'It is not lawful to kill him.'



                    4 Oportet, it is a duty, one ought.




                    Est aliquid, quod non oporteat, etiam si licet; quicquid vero non licet, certe non oportet.

                    'There is something which one ought not to do, even if it is legal; but anything illegal, certainly ought not to be done.' Cicero.




                    Certe oportet non eum necare, 'Undoubtedly, one ought not to kill him.'






                    share|improve this answer























                    • I really like using dedecet and illicitum est for this. (+1!) The others suffer from the ambiguity described in the question: one could read non oportet as "it is not a duty to" instead of "it is a duty not to".

                      – Joonas Ilmavirta
                      7 mins ago















                    1














                    There are three or four impersonal verbs to express what is appropriate, or legal, or obligatory.



                    1 děcet, it is appropriate
                    2 dēděcet, it is inapproptiate, unseemly.




                    Ut nobis decet; As seems right to us.
                    Oratorem irasci minime decet, simulare non dēděcet. It is not professional for an orator to get angry, it is not unprofessional to pretend (to get angry). Cicero Tusc., 4,25




                    Non nos decet necare; ‘It is not right for us to kill.’
                    Dedecet necare; ‘It is unseemly (uncouth? it is not very nice?) to kill.’



                    3 Lĭcet, it is lawful

                    (cf. illĭcĭtē, adv. illegally; illĭcĭtus adj., illegal)




                    Lĭcet nemini peccare, Cicero Tusc., 5,19 'Nobody is permitted to do evil.'




                    So, Licet nemini eum necare. 'It is not lawful to kill him.'



                    4 Oportet, it is a duty, one ought.




                    Est aliquid, quod non oporteat, etiam si licet; quicquid vero non licet, certe non oportet.

                    'There is something which one ought not to do, even if it is legal; but anything illegal, certainly ought not to be done.' Cicero.




                    Certe oportet non eum necare, 'Undoubtedly, one ought not to kill him.'






                    share|improve this answer























                    • I really like using dedecet and illicitum est for this. (+1!) The others suffer from the ambiguity described in the question: one could read non oportet as "it is not a duty to" instead of "it is a duty not to".

                      – Joonas Ilmavirta
                      7 mins ago













                    1












                    1








                    1







                    There are three or four impersonal verbs to express what is appropriate, or legal, or obligatory.



                    1 děcet, it is appropriate
                    2 dēděcet, it is inapproptiate, unseemly.




                    Ut nobis decet; As seems right to us.
                    Oratorem irasci minime decet, simulare non dēděcet. It is not professional for an orator to get angry, it is not unprofessional to pretend (to get angry). Cicero Tusc., 4,25




                    Non nos decet necare; ‘It is not right for us to kill.’
                    Dedecet necare; ‘It is unseemly (uncouth? it is not very nice?) to kill.’



                    3 Lĭcet, it is lawful

                    (cf. illĭcĭtē, adv. illegally; illĭcĭtus adj., illegal)




                    Lĭcet nemini peccare, Cicero Tusc., 5,19 'Nobody is permitted to do evil.'




                    So, Licet nemini eum necare. 'It is not lawful to kill him.'



                    4 Oportet, it is a duty, one ought.




                    Est aliquid, quod non oporteat, etiam si licet; quicquid vero non licet, certe non oportet.

                    'There is something which one ought not to do, even if it is legal; but anything illegal, certainly ought not to be done.' Cicero.




                    Certe oportet non eum necare, 'Undoubtedly, one ought not to kill him.'






                    share|improve this answer













                    There are three or four impersonal verbs to express what is appropriate, or legal, or obligatory.



                    1 děcet, it is appropriate
                    2 dēděcet, it is inapproptiate, unseemly.




                    Ut nobis decet; As seems right to us.
                    Oratorem irasci minime decet, simulare non dēděcet. It is not professional for an orator to get angry, it is not unprofessional to pretend (to get angry). Cicero Tusc., 4,25




                    Non nos decet necare; ‘It is not right for us to kill.’
                    Dedecet necare; ‘It is unseemly (uncouth? it is not very nice?) to kill.’



                    3 Lĭcet, it is lawful

                    (cf. illĭcĭtē, adv. illegally; illĭcĭtus adj., illegal)




                    Lĭcet nemini peccare, Cicero Tusc., 5,19 'Nobody is permitted to do evil.'




                    So, Licet nemini eum necare. 'It is not lawful to kill him.'



                    4 Oportet, it is a duty, one ought.




                    Est aliquid, quod non oporteat, etiam si licet; quicquid vero non licet, certe non oportet.

                    'There is something which one ought not to do, even if it is legal; but anything illegal, certainly ought not to be done.' Cicero.




                    Certe oportet non eum necare, 'Undoubtedly, one ought not to kill him.'







                    share|improve this answer












                    share|improve this answer



                    share|improve this answer










                    answered 20 mins ago









                    HughHugh

                    5,6802616




                    5,6802616












                    • I really like using dedecet and illicitum est for this. (+1!) The others suffer from the ambiguity described in the question: one could read non oportet as "it is not a duty to" instead of "it is a duty not to".

                      – Joonas Ilmavirta
                      7 mins ago

















                    • I really like using dedecet and illicitum est for this. (+1!) The others suffer from the ambiguity described in the question: one could read non oportet as "it is not a duty to" instead of "it is a duty not to".

                      – Joonas Ilmavirta
                      7 mins ago
















                    I really like using dedecet and illicitum est for this. (+1!) The others suffer from the ambiguity described in the question: one could read non oportet as "it is not a duty to" instead of "it is a duty not to".

                    – Joonas Ilmavirta
                    7 mins ago





                    I really like using dedecet and illicitum est for this. (+1!) The others suffer from the ambiguity described in the question: one could read non oportet as "it is not a duty to" instead of "it is a duty not to".

                    – Joonas Ilmavirta
                    7 mins ago

















                    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%2f9526%2fhow-do-i-say-this-must-not-happen%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

                    How to create a command for the “strange m” symbol in latex? Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara Planned maintenance scheduled April 23, 2019 at 23:30 UTC (7:30pm US/Eastern)How do you make your own symbol when Detexify fails?Writing bold small caps with mathpazo packageplus-minus symbol with parenthesis around the minus signGreek character in Beamer document titleHow to create dashed right arrow over symbol?Currency symbol: Turkish LiraDouble prec as a single symbol?Plus Sign Too Big; How to Call adfbullet?Is there a TeX macro for three-legged pi?How do I get my integral-like symbol to align like the integral?How to selectively substitute a letter with another symbol representing the same letterHow do I generate a less than symbol and vertical bar that are the same height?

                    Българска екзархия Съдържание История | Български екзарси | Вижте също | Външни препратки | Литература | Бележки | НавигацияУстав за управлението на българската екзархия. Цариград, 1870Слово на Ловешкия митрополит Иларион при откриването на Българския народен събор в Цариград на 23. II. 1870 г.Българската правда и гръцката кривда. От С. М. (= Софийски Мелетий). Цариград, 1872Предстоятели на Българската екзархияПодмененият ВеликденИнформационна агенция „Фокус“Димитър Ризов. Българите в техните исторически, етнографически и политически граници (Атлас съдържащ 40 карти). Berlin, Königliche Hoflithographie, Hof-Buch- und -Steindruckerei Wilhelm Greve, 1917Report of the International Commission to Inquire into the Causes and Conduct of the Balkan Wars

                    Category:Tremithousa Media in category "Tremithousa"Navigation menuUpload media34° 49′ 02.7″ N, 32° 26′ 37.32″ EOpenStreetMapGoogle EarthProximityramaReasonatorScholiaStatisticsWikiShootMe