Would some one please verify the latin translation of the phrase “Amor vincit omnia” to be “Love conquers all”
Thank you.
Correct.
My high school latin and Wikipedia both agree with your translation.
It should be spelled vincet, but yeah, Amor vincet omnia is “Love conquers all.”
I don’t think so. Vincere is a third-conjugation verb, so vincit is the third-person singular, present tense, indicative mood, active voice, and thus translates as conquers. Vincet is the third-person singular, future tense, indicative mood, active voice, and would translate as will conquer.
Vincet is the future tense. Vincit is the present tense.
Which, on preview, is what **brianmelendez ** has just said too.
Are you sure it’s third conjugation? I thought it was second. It’s been a few years since I took college Latin but I thought all the verbs whose infinitive forms ended in -ere were second conjugation. Is vinco an irregular conjugation in some way or is there some rule that I’ve forgotten?
I appreciate this conversation, the spelling is also important. Present tense is what I am looking for.
I graduated from Cow Pie High, and latin was not offered. All learning since has been from books and learned people like yourselves.
Again, thank you.
I’m sure. An -ere ending can be second or third conjugation – usually second conjugation if the first e is long, or third conjugation if it is short (as with vincere):
Thanks, that explains it. I forgot all about that long e short e stuff.
The exact quote from Virgil has the words in a different order: Omnia vincit Amor, but the meaning is the same. Note that “all” in this context means “all things” not “all people,” as the Latinless sometimes assume. Had Virgil mean “love conquers all people” he would have said Omnes vincit Amor.
But Virgil was wrong. Alium vincit amorem, garlic conquers love.
I’m not a Latin expert, thought I did rightly guess the translation. However, isn’t it possible that the difference between “conquers” and “will conquer” possibly not very significant in this context? When spoken in the present tense, it describes an ongoing characteristic or capability of love. When spoken in the future tense, it merely draws the necessary conclusion based on that characteristic.
Given that even closely related languages, like English and German, use tenses in substantially divergent ways, is it safe to assume the same “sense” from Latin tenses as we would have in English?