Svetla Chorbadzhieva (asker) Jan 7, 2009:

more context And this excess of chimerical feet is perhaps the very least of the scholastic supererogations. Ex uno disce omnia. The fact is that quantity is a point in whose investigation the lumber of mere learning may be dispensed with, if ever in any.

Stephen C. Farrand Jan 7, 2009:

Omnes vs. Omnia Ms. Ellen Kraus's calling for an emendation above (from omnes to omnia) is quite unnecessary. A check of the phrase via Google and Google Scholar produces about a dozen examples of it from 19th century publications. Moreover, I am convinced that the complaint about the quality of the Latin concerns the deviation from the underlying original in the Aeneid, not that the Latin itself is unintelligible.

The original question was to explain the Latin quote (i.e. to translate it). It clearly made sense to a variety of people in the 19th century, most of whom (but not all) were native speakers of English. And in all cases it refers to things or events, not people.

Ellen Kraus Jan 6, 2009:

triumphantly in a Latin, even worse than his logic. > This means that Mr. Ch used the ancient Latin phrase whose translation is < from one learn (about them) all>, wrongly.

Ellen Kraus Jan 6, 2009:

I venture to argue that the term should read ex uno disce omnes. Nur diesen Ausspruch fand ich unter Latin Phrases, compiled by Answers Corp. belegt. As to the phrase <ex uno disce omnia>, I found it under "ex uno disce omnia, adds Mr. Ch., triumphantly

Stephen C. Farrand Jan 6, 2009:

Ambiguous Gender in Latin I am a little surprised by the number of posters who are ignoring the gender of omnia in the original post. The original in Virgil (accipe nunc Danaum insidias et crimine ab uno / disce omnis) has clear antecedents for uno and omnis (= omnes) both. But our quote does not; both uno and omnia must be NEUTER, referring to things, not to people. Ex + uno masculine is a very odd concept.

I would compare the motto of the United States (also Virgilian in origin) e pluribus unum. No one ever translates that as "from many people, one".

I put it to you that 1) the phrase as posted makes perfect sense (although I am not certain that ex, instead of ab, is classical idiom); 2) Joseph's is the only translation that conveys the original's meaning clearly.