Thanks to both SteveM and Ross for the translations. They are different. Now if I only knew how to evaluate them. I'd never heard of Grok 3.
Grok 3 seems to have "tarochus" as "rogue." I'm not sure about that. However, I do like "ruffiane" as "pimp." Steve has "letch" as a possibility. That is the difficulty of inferring the meaning of a word from the context of just one sentence. And even the meaning of that one sentence is in doubt. Grok 3 has:
"“Who’s the coward? Me?” “Yes, you, you pimp!”
My mother-in-law was with me, that whore,
And that rogue thought she’d be another toll to collect.
He started threatening me if I didn’t pay quick."
Steve offers a partial translation, which isn't really enough. He has
Who is the scoundrel/bastard, I you, me?..
His mother in law was with him (the narrator),
and that fool / letch (tarochus) thought she was a whore,
and there for him!
.....
Then we have Ross's old translation, also partial
...
My mother-in-law was with me, ...
and this idiot thought he could get some money out of her,
so he started threatening me.
So let's go line by line.
Quis poltronus ego? tu. mi? si. deh ruffiane
For "poltronus" Grok 3 has "coward", Steve has "scoundrel". ("Bastard" in this context is similar enough to drop.) Google Translate offered "coward." The word, or similar, occurs elsewhere in the poem, in particular, in another section I used Google Translate on.
Non invenies quisquam poltronior illo
for which Grok 3 has:
You’d find no greater coward than this one.
Steve M has
You will not find any greater scoundrel than he.
Google Translate had:
You will not find anyone more arrogant than he.
Wiktionary has, for Italian "poltrone", lazy. There is also the Lombard "polter," meaning "couch", which fits that meaning. However, the context, that of charging married people and widows, doesn't fit.
The only other occurrence of "poltrone" words is in the sentence just before the part I'm focusing on:
Quis tibi pagare negat poltrone dicebam:
Grok 3 says,
“Who’s refusing to pay, you coward?” I said.
The
Grand Dizionario della Lingua Italiana (GDLI) gives ten meanings for the word, including all of the above.
https://www.gdli.it/pdf_viewer/Scripts/ ... a=poltrone,
https://www.gdli.it/pdf_viewer/Scripts/ ... a=poltrone It seems to me that Steve's "scoundrel" fits best.
Then there is "ruffiane". Grok 3 has "pimp"; Google translate had "ruffian." The context, with "putana" in the next line, supports Grok 3. In modern Italian it is "ruffiano",
https://www.gdli.it/pdf_viewer/Scripts/ ... a=ruffiano. Then:
Erat mecum mea socrus unde putana
Grok 3 has
My mother-in-law was with me, that whore.
This seems to me not to fit the context, which is directed at the toll-taker and not others, who are his victims. Steve says that the toll-taker thought she was a whore. That fits the context.
Now the crucial line:
Quod foret una sibi pensebat ille tarochus
Grok 3 has:
And that rogue thought she’d be another toll to collect.
which is like Ross (unless one understands that tolls can come in other forms than money), except that "rogue" and "idiot" have different meanings:
And that idiot thought he could get some money out of her.
And SteveM:
that fool / letch (tarochus) thought she was a whore, and there for him!
That seems pretty good to me, as it connects with "pimp" and "whore". The only thing I'm dubious about is "letch", as it doesn't fit the later "tarocco" in Italian. Grok 3 adds words that aren't there. Ross's does, too, and doesn't fit with "pimp" and "whore".
Finally,
Et cito ni solvara mihi menazare comenzat.
Grok 3:
He started threatening me if I didn’t pay quick.
Ross:
So he started threatening me.
Ross has left out the "quick". It is either that he quickly started threatening, or what Grok has. The -a ending on "solvara" suggests "he" rather than "I", but that makes no sense. So "I pay up."
So I get:
“Who’s the scoundrel, I? "You." "Me?” “Yes, you, you pimp!”
My mother-in-law was with me, a whore,
The fool thought, and there for him.
And [if?] I don't [didn't?] pay up [,?] at once [,?] he started [starts?] to threaten me.
From Ross's translation, I had thought that what made him a tarochus was his threatening behavior, inappropriate agitation, although I suppose "extortioner" would have also been a possibility. But I wanted something that fit the concept of "fool", or "crazy person," and "extortioner" didn't do that. I did not have enough context to suppose anything else. Now it seems to me that what makes the toll-taker a tarochus is his lack of imagination, which prevents him from recognizing what is in front of him, obvious to others, in terms other than what his first impulse tells him, that the woman is a whore meant for him, as payment. It is really the same as in Alione's poem, where the taroch does not realize that priests or monks could be other than celibate.
Without a core meaning of agitation, the theory that "tarochus" comes from the Greek "tarachos" or the Latin "taraxia" seems to me weakened. That it comes from the Arabic "tarakh", deduction, is stronger, as well as the proposal that it comes from the Lombard word for a block of wood. However, "tarakh" is related to "tarare" (Italian), "tarato" (past participle), and, I think, the Provencale "taro" or "tarous".
Magic Moon: Yes, "ch" is pronounced like "k" in Italian. Since "tarochus" has a Latin ending, we should also consider what the medieval Latin pronunciation would be. It is the same, I think.
So what is behind this word "tarochus," etymologically? Since Mantovano is Mantuan and Gaspar is Milanese, it either derives from a word familiar to both of them or is itself already in common use. But where? Piedmont is merely the setting for the story. If the rest of the Italian, or Latinizations of Italian, or vice versa, used a particular dialect throughout (as opposed to just the quoted speech), then perhaps this word, too, would be in that dialect. I have no idea. Perhaps Grok 3 could tell us more: "vernacular Italian" isn't very preise. I have no idea how to use Grok 3. And even if most words are Tuscan, the literary language, that doesn't prevent an occasional word from a dialect, which here would be more likely Lombard than Piedmontese, because of who is writing (from Mantua) and who it is written to (from Milan).
Alione is definitely Piedmontese and is based in Asti. The editor says in his introduction to Mantovano that Alione wrote an pro-French macaronic poem (reproduced in the book) against a anti-French one by Mantovano:
Che questo poeta componesse ma Maccheronea prima dell'anno 1499, consta dalla Maccheronea dell' Alione diretta contro quella del Bassano, il quale era morto prima di quell ’ anno. Quella dell ’ Alione porta il titolo: Macharonea contra macharoneam Bassani. Verso la fine di essa si leggono questi due versi:
Hoc solimi mitto satis est responsa Bassani
Qui contra gallos dictavil macharoneam.
Di questa Maccheronea del Bassano non esiste più alcuno esemplare conosciuto.
(That this poet composed a Maccheronea before the year 1499 is established by Alione's Maccheronea directed against that of Bassano, who had died before that year. That of Alione bears the title:
Macharonea contra macharoneam Bassani. Towards the end of it one reads these two verses:
I am sending this alone, it is enough, the answer to Bassanio
Who speaks against the Gauls, a macharonea.
Of this Maccheronea by Bassano there is no longer any known copy.)
So there is the possibility that Alione is simply following Mantovano, whatever dialect he is using himself. Or not. I was surprised by the statement that Bassano died before 1499, as the Bassano Mantovano in treccani died much later. Perhaps it is a different one.
I do not know how close we are to solving the riddle of the origin of the words "tarocchi" and "tarot".