# Simple Latin translation **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [September 1, 2013, 4:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/simple-latin-translation/667738 "2013-09-01T16:59:01Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 10\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Amateur\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/59ef9b/32.png) [@Amateur\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Amateur_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2013, 4:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/simple-latin-translation/667738/1 "2013-09-01T16:59:01Z")
In Latin, “vacuam” means “empty.” What would be the correct form if the word were turned into a personal noun, i.e., “one who is empty”? “Vacuor”? ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2013, 6:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/simple-latin-translation/667738/2 "2013-09-01T18:11:11Z")
In Latin, for “one who is \”, you just use the adjective itself as a noun. Do note that you need to decline the adjective or noun according to the role it’s playing in the sentence. ---
**Author:** ![Amateur\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/59ef9b/32.png) [@Amateur\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Amateur_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2013, 6:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/simple-latin-translation/667738/3 "2013-09-01T18:14:59Z")
The phrase I am looking for is parallel to “caveat emptor”: “Let [he who is empty] beware.” So is “caveat vacuam” correct? ---
**Author:** ![Dr.Drake](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/ad7895/32.png) [@Dr.Drake](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dr.Drake)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2013, 6:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/simple-latin-translation/667738/4 "2013-09-01T18:41:44Z")
_Caveat vacuus_. “He who is vacuous” needs to be in the nominative case. ---
**Author:** ![Amateur\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/59ef9b/32.png) [@Amateur\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Amateur_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2013, 6:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/simple-latin-translation/667738/5 "2013-09-01T18:44:36Z")
> [@Dr.Drake](#): > > _Caveat vacuus_. “He who is vacuous” needs to be in the nominative case. Thanks. Does this convey the gist of “an empty person” (in the spiritual/ethical/compassionate sense) more than the current meaning of “vacuous” (a shallow, empty-headed person)? ---
**Author:** ![Dr.Drake](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/ad7895/32.png) [@Dr.Drake](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dr.Drake)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2013, 6:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/simple-latin-translation/667738/6 "2013-09-01T18:57:03Z")
I don’t think so. It seems to be mostly neutral (“empty, vacant”) with a shade of the modern sense (“vacuous”). I think you’d be hard pressed to find a concise Classical Latin equivalent for what you want, because it’s not really an ancient Roman concept. If you _did_ explain that concept to an Ancient Roman, though, he would probably go “oh, that kind of _vacuus_”. You could possibly say _Caveat animus vacuus_, “Let the empty soul beware.” (I’m not entirely sure you wouldn’t want _Caveat animi vacui_ or _Caveat vir animi vacui_, with the descriptive genitive.) ---
**Author:** ![Quartz](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quartz/32/267_2.png) [@Quartz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Quartz)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2013, 7:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/simple-latin-translation/667738/7 "2013-09-01T19:46:58Z")
I wonder if you’re going about it the wrong way? How about negating the noun?, so you might say _Caveat inanimus_ - ‘Let the one with no spirit beware.’ Actually, there may be a better word for empty - _inanis_ - so your phrase becomes _Caveat inanis_. ---
**Author:** ![Dr.Drake](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/ad7895/32.png) [@Dr.Drake](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dr.Drake)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2013, 7:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/simple-latin-translation/667738/8 "2013-09-01T19:59:54Z")
For what it’s worth, one of the Latin synonym dictionaries says that _inanis_ is “the emptiness of that which has been full, but is now without its contents,” while _vacuus_ is “the emptiness of that which may be filled.” If that’s so (sometimes these older reference works reach a bit, I think), then _vacuus_ suits the OP’s meaning better. ---
**Author:** ![Amateur\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/59ef9b/32.png) [@Amateur\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Amateur_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2013, 8:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/simple-latin-translation/667738/9 "2013-09-01T20:41:50Z")
From my little Latin and less Greek I think _Caveat vacuus_ says exactly what I want… and if the shade of Cicero wants stalk me, so be it. Thanks. ---
**Author:** ![Kizarvexius](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/da6949/32.png) [@Kizarvexius](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kizarvexius)\ **Post date:** [September 3, 2013, 2:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/simple-latin-translation/667738/10 "2013-09-03T14:32:46Z")
> [@Amateur\_Barbarian](#): > > From my little Latin and less Greek I think _Caveat vacuus_ says exactly what I want… and if the shade of Cicero wants stalk me, so be it. > > Thanks. Personally, I wouldn’t wish that on my worst enemy. The guy _never_ shut up.