sheri, I showed this to the DH who, although he hasn't done Latin since his school days more than 40 years ago, was fascinated by it.
Like you, he has been unable to find an obvious translation and thinks there is a possible printing error in 'expectivi'.
It could be expectavi which might give the meaning as I have waited (for) this. An eg he found was from Psalm 40 which begins 'I have waited patiently for the Lord . . .'
On the other hand if the word was expedivi the meaning could be I have set this free (as in 'disentangled') from me.

Would you believe that John has taken over an hour to come up with the above, and says it is still only guesswork.
Hope this helps!

This is an excellent example of why I have such an instinctive negative reaction to Latin quotes in books. It's feels like it's flaunting intellectualism, with the hidden implication that anyone who doesn't understand it is someone we don't really want reading this book anyway.

It's like the similar (possibly apocryphal) stories where solicitors write letters to each other which includea chapter and verse reference in the Bible; only when you look it up do you understand the point. It's just being clever for the sake of it.

And in this instance, if it really is a misprint which could be read in two ways, it rather seems to have backfired, doesn't it!

Thank you, Vee and Martin, for your help. I agree, this is being clever for clever's sake, though the book was published in 1914 and the author (Richardson Little Wright) was pretty fresh out of an ivy league college, so Latin might have been the expected thing back then. He was taken to task by some newspaper reviewers for using Latin when English would do nicely. And if it is a typo, or even an error on his part that slipped by his editor, it's lasted nearly a century to annoy me *G*.

Vee, I think your husband's first translation would be closest, I have waited for this referring to the author's upcoming marriage. Please thank John for his help!

If anyone has any other thoughts on this one, I'd appreciate them.

I agree that using Latin or other foreign languages can smack of false-intellectualism, but shouldn't dedications be given a bit more leeway? After all, they aren't important to the story (unlike epigraphs, for example) and are usually personal in nature anyway.

Russ - you can do what you like in a dedication, of course. It may even be a private message from the author to his fiancee, deliberately misspelt, after some private joke that no-one will now ever know.

Don't mind me - it's one of my many hobby-horses, and I'm a lot more relaxed about it now. These days, I can go to google, type in the Latin and voilà !

(Hmmmm - is that being clever-clever??)

I can see using the original language for quotations, but I'm annoyed when a translation is not provided in a footnote or in parenthesis. I also don't object to stock phrases that can be found in an ordinary reference or that the writer could expect the reader to know, eg. folie a deux, per se, Weltschmertz, etc.

Up until about 50 years ago, nearly all high school graduates studied Latin. It wasn't pretentious then. Anyone who would read a literary novel would get it.

Widespread Latin instruction started to drop away after WWII, though anyone planning a career in law, medicine, nursing, or biological sciences would still study it. Popularity of the language fell off even further when the Catholic Church adopted the vernacular mass instead of the Latin mass.

Now only a few universities offer Latin, and high schools which teach Latin are extremely rare.

I never studied Latin myself, though as an ardent gardener I regret this. I can actually see how it would be useful in my daily life.

Rosefolly

In high school I got tired of having to share my notes with everyone (couldn't say "No") so I started taking them in Latin. They all just thought my handwriting had become illegible. Latin is good to know. Also helpful in figuring out what unfamiliar words mean. Though I can't make any better suggestions than John as to the inscription.

Rosefolly, have you seen the book Botanical Latin by William T. Stearn? I bought it when I went back to college to take horticulture classes and never really read much of it, but it could be very useful in learning some Latin from a botanical point of view. It is very comprehensive, including history, grammar, an extensive vocabulary (English to Latin and Latin to English), and descriptions written in Latin followed by the English translation. I have other books on botanical nomenclature but this is the one that could assist most in gaining some knowledge of Latin.

Now that I will be starting Master Gardener classes in a couple of weeks, maybe my interest will again be great enough to make use of this book. I know the Master Gardener training won't require that depth of knowledge but I would love to know it for myself.

Frances, I did buy a copy of it but have never really used it. Lazy, I guess.

One thing I'm curious about is pronunciation. There are two ways to pronounce Latin. The later way is Latin vulgate, used by the Catholic Church. The earlier way was Classical Latin pronunciation. Take for example the botanical Latin word 'acer' meaning 'maple'. Under the Latin vulgate this would be prnounced 'ay-ser'. Under classical Latin it would be prnouncecd 'ay-ker', like the English word 'acre'. I have no idea which tradition I should follow for botanical Latin.

Does anyone know which is considered correct?

Rosefolly

Rosefolly, in my plant materials classes we learned quite a bit about pronunciation of the plant names. "Acer" is pronounced "ay-ser". Since I don't know anything about Latin, I didn't realize there were two possibilities for pronunciation and don't know if the Latin vulgate would apply to every botanical name.

The link below is for the Fine Gardening Guide to Pronouncing Botanical Latin. It is very useful.

Here is a link that might be useful: Fine Gardening Pronunciation Guide

Frances - I have never take latin either but have bought several "acers" over the years and the garden nurseries have always pronounced them as ay-sers. FWIW, Paula.

I'm laughing because I can just imagine the look on the faces of some of my favourite garden centre workers as I ask, "Excuse me, but do you use latin vulgate or classical?"

Rosefolly and all--The pronunciation of botanical Latin often has little to do with Latin as pronounced in the classical manner or in the Catholic church. Very few people in nurseries know Latin names anyway, and those who do often have their own quirky way of pronouncing it. And experts can disagree on correct pronunciation. The point is, look confident and pronounce it in whatever way seems logical--unless you are addressing an audience of serious horticulturists or botanists. Then Stearns is the authority.

I was never very good at Latin but I cling on to my dictionaries. I can't find the variations suggested by Vee's husband, but both my books give me expetivi, first person singular past tense of 'strive for, desire, demand, require'.

I googled the phrase with that variation, i.e. hanc mihi expetivi, and got the phrase in a context: ­Adjuro nunquam eam me deserturum, Non, si capiundos mihi sciam esse inimicos omneis homines. Hanc mihi expetivi, contigit: conveniunt mores: valeant Qui inter nos dissidium volunt: hanc, nisi mors, Mi adimet nemo.Â

I also found the phrase 'hanc mihi expetivi, contigit' online in a dictionary of old German by the Brothers Grimm! Contigit means 'it happens, it befalls'.

It seems that the phrase and the text above are from the play 'Andria' by Terence, Act 4 Scene 2. See below for even more Latin! The translation by Henry Thomas Rhiley renders the phrase as 'Her have I chosen for mine; she has fallen to my lot'

*******************************

Botanical Latin is supposed to be an international language, similar to medical Latin, but the extreme variation in pronunciation is quite an impediment. I have a tendency to revert to German pronunciation for anything that is 'foreign' in English, which creates even more obstacles. Add to all of that the fact that many parts of botanical names are of other origins, e.g. the Fuchsia was named after a certain Mr Fuchs (and I therefore want to call it a 'fooxia' not a 'fyoosha'). And who came up with Cotoneaster? That's just deliberately confusing.

Here is a link that might be useful: Andria text

I have to laugh about cotoneaster. Even though I now know they are cuh-TONE-ee-as-ters, having had my pronunciation gently corrected, I still privately think of them as Cotton Easters.

Rosefolly

Anyanka, that is wonderful, thank you so much! Her I have chosen for mine, she has fallen to my lot sounds perfectly appropriate, and a play by Terence would probably be something he'd be familiar with and would choose (esp. in 1914). He was a bit of a romantic, and adored his wife.

Thank you again!

You're welcome - I love doing research... Do you happen to know what his wife's name was? I noticed that the first initial is 'A' and was just wondering if she was an Andrea or Andria by chance.

Anyanka, her name was Agnes Foster Wright, and she was an interior designer, an author, the owner of a chain of design stores in the 1920's, and Editor of "Bride's Magazine" for a number of years. Quite an accomplished lady.

Perhaps there was something in the context of the play that spoke to him of her?