David wrote" : >For me, nullum (in this case nulla) has more the sense of nothing or >none, as in >nullum quod tetigit non ornavit.
OK, I'm no Latin scholar but isn't nulla in some senses used for no, as in nullatenus, in no wise? >"no" in this sense seems more like sine than nullum. > >As in >Sine sole sileo But how about sine qua non, without which, nothing? It seems to me that, vis a vis Latin, the translation is often going to be approximate rather than literal. >and a periphrastic would add something >But perhaps the sense of the thread is >Nullum est iam dictum quod non dictum sit prius >- Nothing is said that hasn't been said before. > >It's got a prius in it anyway. And in this case I prefer Honda to Toyota. :) Regards, Craig _________________________________________________________________ Need personalized email and website? Look no further. It's easy with Doteasy $0 Web Hosting! Learn more at www.doteasy.com To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
