What is Latin for 'Boys will be boys'?

March 25, 2006 6:31 AM

Latin speakers: What is Latin for the expression 'Boys will be boys'?

Yep, there are online translation devices around, but I want to be sure I get it right.

posted by BorgLove to writing & language (10 comments total)

literally, something like

pueri pueri erunt

I think.

Although it's been a long time.

I think the 'erunt' ('they will be') is probably droppable.
posted by unSane at 6:53 AM on March 25, 2006

1900 Latin Phrases & Sayings - Very useful generally - perhaps your answer lies there?
posted by DrtyBlvd at 7:07 AM on March 25, 2006

The original is:

Sunt pueri pueri, pueri puerilia tractant.

Boys are boys, and boys do boyish things (or something like that).
posted by defreckled at 7:50 AM on March 25, 2006

your question is rather puerile
posted by MonkeySaltedNuts at 9:24 AM on March 25, 2006

Googling "boys will be boys" latin pueri seems to support defreckled's answer. But for a refresher on Latin grammar in general, ask a Centurion.
posted by Oddly at 10:35 AM on March 25, 2006

I'm confused by the answers above. Shouldn't it be Pueri erunt pueros?

Pueri = nominative plural
erunt = 3rd person plural
pueros = accusative plural

Puer is a second declension masculine noun.

(Oddly enough, I'm working on a translation of Catullus's poem 64 for class. Perhaps my brain is fried.)
posted by thebabelfish at 3:18 PM on March 25, 2006

No, babelfish; state of being verbs take predicate nominatives, not accusative direct objects.
posted by ikkyu2 at 6:39 PM on March 25, 2006

state of being verbs take predicate nominatives, not accusative direct objects

The rule is more general than that, surely? "To be" always connects grammatical equivalents.
posted by IndigoJones at 11:08 AM on March 26, 2006

I read "pueri pueros erunt" as "boys will be (some other) boys," which doesn't really make much sense, and what little sense it makes kind of contradicts what you're trying to say.

I'm with the others saying "pueri pueri erunt," or maybe just "pueri erunt," if you think that people won't take that as a science fiction-type suggestion like, "at some point in the future on this spot, boys will be." I generally like to shorten things as much as possible, and Latin's pretty good at that when you're going for sententiousness, so I say, "pueri erunt."
posted by MarkAnd at 8:43 AM on March 27, 2006

"To be" always connects grammatical equivalents.

Except when it's connecting a noun with an adjective, or a noun with a gerund, or a noun with an infinitive, or et c.

Of course, if you're defining grammatical equivalents as things that it's grammatically correct to connect with state-of-being verbs, then why sure, you're right.
posted by ikkyu2 at 4:24 PM on March 29, 2006