cēnātum est?

[ASD]

I have a question about the phrase cēnātum est in the Roman Canon.

My missal translates the phrase

Símili modo postquam cenátum est

as

In like manner, after He had supped

However, NO ICEL translation has an impersonal

When supper was ended

Two things:

• I think cēnātus est gives He had supped, right?
  
• Links here and here suggesting impersonal construction is correct.
  

Can anybody explain what's going on with those translations, or which is correct and why?

TIA. ASD
----------------------
Traditional Latin Mass: Translation and Grammar

[Rosarium]

The old translation is horrible and non literal in the NO. This has been revised and is due to be implemented soon.

The new translations are literal (even "pro multis"). Here it is:

In a similar way,
taking the chalice filled with the fruit of the vine,
he gave thanks,
and gave the chalice to his disciples, saying:

The old English translations are very...weird. The entire text is like that.

The "And also with you" is being properly translated as:

And with your spirit.

as it is in the Latin as well.

EDIT: It is usually futile to try to "match up" the old translation because it is not literal at all, but it will be soon.

[ASD]

Thanks for quick reply, Rosarium.

Are you looking at new NO translation here? It uses

In a similar way, when supper was ended

.

TIA. ASD
-------------------
Traditional Latin Mass: Translation and Grammar

[Rosarium]

Thanks for quick reply, Rosarium.

Are you looking at new NO translation here? It uses

In a similar way, when supper was ended

.

Ah yes. Sorry, I had cut off part of the line when I trimmed the commentary about taking the chalice.

[MagisterMusicae]

The word "est" in Latin is tricky.

It is the present tense of two verbs:

est = "He/she/it   is, is being" -- from the verb "esse" whose present tense active indicative first person singular is "sum"

est = "He/she/it   eats, is eating, does eat" -- from the verb "edere" whose present tense active indicative first person singular is "edo"

In the phrase "Postquam cenatum est" it is the latter. Literally this is translated "After he had eaten supper".

The reason that it is a present tense, but translated into the past is that it is the "Historic or Narrative Present". In Latin you may employ the present tense in telling a story or an historical narrative. It carries the idea of the past, but is conjugated like the present. It should be translated into English in the simple past tense.

So while not literally accurate "After supper was ended" is a rough, unpoetic, but accurate translation of the sense of the phrase.

[ASD]

Thanks, MagisterMusicae.

So far, so good.

• Verb: edō, ēsse (or edere), ēdī, ēsus (with ēst instead of edit)
• Tense: Historical or narrative present.

But, what about cēnātum? Presumably it then is an accusative object of some kind?

Here's what I get from WIlliam Whitaker's WORDS.

Not sure which it is. Perfect passive participles can sometimes be used like adjectives in present tense, right?
 

=>cenatum
cenat.um    VPAR   1 1 NOM S N PERF PASSIVE PPL
cenat.um    VPAR   1 1 VOC S N PERF PASSIVE PPL
cenat.um    VPAR   1 1 ACC S M PERF PASSIVE PPL
cenat.um    VPAR   1 1 ACC S N PERF PASSIVE PPL
cenat.um    SUPINE 1 1 ACC S N                 
ceno, cenare, cenavi, cenatus  V   [XXXBO] 
dine, eat dinner/supper; have dinner with; dine on, make a meal of;
cenat.um    ADJ    1 1 NOM S N POS             
cenat.um    ADJ    1 1 VOC S N POS             
cenat.um    ADJ    1 1 ACC S M POS             
cenat.um    ADJ    1 1 ACC S N POS             
cenatus, cenata, cenatum  ADJ   [XXXCO] 
having dined/eaten; supplied with dinner;

TIA. ASD
---------------------
Traditional Latin Mass: Translation and Grammar

[MagisterMusicae]

Actually you bring up a good point.

Cenatum est could be a passive perfect construction. For this one would use the verb esse (est) with the perfect passive participle, in this case neuter (cenatum).

The problem here is that it is probably more accurate to use the masculine version of the perfect particple cenatus, not cenatum -- though the most of our prayers don't always follow the strictest classical grammatical rules.

The reason, I went with historic present was by looking at the rest of the prayer. Words like accipiens and agens are present participles and the only other proper verb is benedixit, a active indicative present tense third person singular, used as the historic present tense.

That would tend to suggest that the whole narrative is constructed similarly.

This would make cenatum a noun, and in the construction you cite, it would be accusative singular (a direct object of the verb est).

Thanks, MagisterMusicae.

So far, so good.

• Verb: edō, ēsse (or edere), ēdī, ēsus (with ēst instead of edit)
• Tense: Historical or narrative present.

But, what about cēnātum? Presumably it then is an accusative object of some kind?

Here's what I get from WIlliam Whitaker's WORDS.

Not sure which it is. Perfect passive participles can sometimes be used like adjectives in present tense, right?
 

=>cenatum
cenat.um    VPAR   1 1 NOM S N PERF PASSIVE PPL
cenat.um    VPAR   1 1 VOC S N PERF PASSIVE PPL
cenat.um    VPAR   1 1 ACC S M PERF PASSIVE PPL
cenat.um    VPAR   1 1 ACC S N PERF PASSIVE PPL
cenat.um    SUPINE 1 1 ACC S N                 
ceno, cenare, cenavi, cenatus  V   [XXXBO] 
dine, eat dinner/supper; have dinner with; dine on, make a meal of;
cenat.um    ADJ    1 1 NOM S N POS             
cenat.um    ADJ    1 1 VOC S N POS             
cenat.um    ADJ    1 1 ACC S M POS             
cenat.um    ADJ    1 1 ACC S N POS             
cenatus, cenata, cenatum  ADJ   [XXXCO] 
having dined/eaten; supplied with dinner;

TIA. ASD
---------------------
Traditional Latin Mass: Translation and Grammar

[ASD]

Hmm. I'm still a little confused.

My dictionaries, (Elementary Lewis, Cassell's, and William Whitaker's WORDS) have a noun cēna, cēnæ, f. However, I can't see that cēnātum itself is a noun.

Obviously, all these words are related. Still, it seems to me that cēnātum has to be either a perfect passive participle or an adjective.

TIA. ASD
------------------------
Traditional Latin Mass: Translation and Grammar

[MagisterMusicae]

I understand the confusion, but if we look at the meaning of what you suggest and the context, I don't think it works. But looking back at my Latin books, I think I found a solution which works.

First, if cenatum is the perfect passive participle it simply I don't think it can work with esse (because parallel structure demans that tenses stay consistent and as before benedixit is present tense).

If instead we have the verb edere, then we need an noun or pronoun as an object. Neither an adjective or participle work. Hence why I said that cenatum, then must be an accusative noun (it fits the second declension as well).

What I overlooked was a somewhat rarer, but important construction, the supine. In fact this is a verbal noun, but I'm not as familiar with its usage, so I may be wrong in suggesting it could be used here. The supine is constructed just like the perfect participle (so it might look like the construction we see here)

It is possible that your adjective theory is correct too, if the verb is esse and used an an adjective this participle actually could literally mean "After he was supplied with dinner".

This is why I only teach the Introductory Latin course, honestly my more advanced grammar is rusty at best.

Hmm. I'm still a little confused.

My dictionaries, (Elementary Lewis, Cassell's, and William Whitaker's WORDS) have a noun cēna, cēnæ, f. However, I can't see that cēnātum itself is a noun.

Obviously, all these words are related. Still, it seems to me that cēnātum has to be either a perfect passive participle or an adjective.

TIA. ASD
------------------------
Traditional Latin Mass: Translation and Grammar

[ASD]

I ruled out supine because my understanding is that the accusative supine construction uses verbs of motion like īre and venīre.