3

What's the difference? Web translators in both cases come back with "where are you going to". Both vadere and ire are "to go". There has to be some, possible subtle difference. Can someone explain it, quaeso?

cmw
  • 54,480
  • 4
  • 120
  • 225
Grzegorz
  • 133
  • 3

2 Answers2

3

A primary difference, as I've already written in a comment, is that itis and vadis are not the same form: itis is the 2nd person plural, and vadis is the 2nd person singular. The form of vadere corresponding to itis would be vaditis, and the form of ire corresponding to vadis would be is.

A little excursus: Quo vadis? is a famous quote from the Bible; in particular, from the Gospel according to John, 13:36, where Simon Peter addresses Jesus so:

Dicit ei Simon Petrus: Domine, quo vadis? Respondit Jesus: Quo ego vado non potes me modo sequi: sequeris autem postea.
Simon Peter said unto him, Lord, whither goest thou? Jesus answered him, Whither I go, thou canst not follow me now; but thou shalt follow me afterwards.

So obviously this is in the singular, and if Peter would have wanted to use ire, it would have been quo is? (Jesus and his disciples did of course not speak Latin, but you get the idea.)

The meaning of the verbs ire and vadere is indeed similar, and they differ only in nuance. While ire is a very general (and very frequently used) term for all kinds of personal movement, vadere somewhat characterizes the manner of going; in particular, it indicates a certain speed or sense of urgency.

Lewis & Short note for vado:

to go, walk; esp. to go hastily or rapidly, to rush (syn. incedo).

Döderlein's Handbook of Latin Synonyms makes the following distinction:

Ire and meare denote to go, in the most general sense, as motion from one place to another; [⋯] whereas gradiri and ingredi, incedere and vadere, with particular accessory notions in regard to the manner of going; [⋯] vadere (ἐλθεῖν?) with alacrity and a quick step, as in travelling, and in attacking the enemy, in opp. to repere? like χωρεῖν; [⋯]

Georges characterizes vadere as follows (translation by me):

to travel, to go, to stride, to go forth, to stride forth, in particular quickly, in good spirits, with determination.

Sebastian Koppehel
  • 34,011
  • 2
  • 58
  • 110
-1

vado does not literally mean to go somewhere, it means to move the body forwards, meaning the physical act of walking or marching or running or otherwise moving physically. The emphasis is on bodily movement. For example:

laevo cum omni levi armatura in hostem vadit ("on the left he advanced into the enemy with all his light infantry") --Livy

Gelidus per artus vadit exsangues tremor. ("A cold shudder runs through (my) shocked body.")

dum quaerunt lumen, dum concursant familia,...ad lectum vadit. ("While the servants were running around looking for light...he took himself to bed.") --Phaedrus

scissa gaudens vadit Discordia palla ("Discord struts in her tattered robe") --Virgil

The two words are similar to each other, but vado emphasizes physical movement, whereas eo only implies going somewhere. It emphasizes the result of the movement, not the movement itself. For example, in the example from Virgil, the translator renders it as "struts". In other words, she is not going anywhere, the focus is on the motion itself. If Virgil had written it instead of vadit, then it would be a less meaningful expression.

Tyler Durden
  • 6,790
  • 11
  • 31
  • I'm not sure why this answer is getting a lot of hate: it certainly seems true that vado has a connotation of "rushing." Perhaps you should add some sources. – brianpck Oct 26 '23 at 20:38
  • 2
    @brianpck It is true that vado often has a connotation of rushing, but that's not what this answer says? – Cairnarvon Oct 26 '23 at 22:14
  • @Cairnarvon That's how I took "emphasizes physical movement" and "struts" and "advanced" in the examples, but perhaps that was too charitable an interpretation. – brianpck Oct 26 '23 at 22:26
  • @brianpck It's a complex issue. Unfortunately a lot of voters don't like subjective opinions or going outside of what is in a common grammar book. Defective verbs are sometimes thought to be that way because they express so-called "instantaneous actions" and vado is in that class. However, I thought my way of explaining was clearer than what I have read elsewhere. Unfortunately, the whole subject is a little abstract which makes it unappealing for a lot of people probably. – Tyler Durden Oct 27 '23 at 00:42
  • 1
    Wow. Such a rich answer! Thank you for the effort! I will wait for more answers - is they come. I know a priest who speaks Latin so I will ask him, too – Grzegorz Oct 27 '23 at 02:35
  • @Grzegorz: Why not invite the priest to join the site? – tony Oct 27 '23 at 08:23
  • 1
    @Tyler Durden: What about "quo vadis, Domine?" Isn't this also in the Bible? The Catholic Church has a long pedigree with the Latin language--I'd hesitate to challenge them. – tony Oct 27 '23 at 08:36
  • 1
    @tony In the medieval period people began using vado as a synonym for eo, but you have to remember these are people for whom Latin was a second language. – Tyler Durden Oct 27 '23 at 12:20
  • 2
    @TylerDurden It's not a matter of abstraction but of accuracy. I assume many checked the entry in L&S or some such dictionary and found that they don't say vado emphasizes bodily motion. If you found a dictionary that says so, a reference would be useful. What I checked disagrees with your answer, but I didn't check everything, and I'd be happy learn of a source that explains this verb better. – Joonas Ilmavirta Oct 27 '23 at 15:25
  • 1
    @JoonasIlmavirta Dictionaries don't go into metaphysical descriptions of words. If you just look at how the Romans used the word, you can clearly see usage is different than eo in that it emphasizes movement, not the getting from one place to another. In fact, in many instances, no destination is mentioned at all, like in the example from Virgil or Cicero's "cras mane vadit" (He is taking off tomorrow"). Also, one can compare pereo which means to go until nothing is left, to perish or go to waste (over time), whereas pervado means to intrude, a much more instantaneous and physical idea. – Tyler Durden Oct 27 '23 at 17:19
  • 2
    Aside from the absent source, I feel that the citations (which I haven't checked) don't really support the position well. E.g. a tremor is not really 'moving the body forwards'? My gut feeling would be that eo is more likely to be used in abstract senses than vado, although the reverse also occurs; and that vado can be more forceful. But I'd love to see some source or strong parallel citations to support that, also because these things are often less clear than our instincts would tell us. – Cerberus Oct 27 '23 at 22:18
  • @cerebus In the quote from the play, the sense is that the tremor is moving physically through the body. – Tyler Durden Oct 27 '23 at 23:20