Översättning - Engelska-Latin - Brother, not a Lover

Female gender with "dignus" ("digna", maybe (cf the remark left by the requester )

Already posted above (As I was asked by the server to develop my argumentation after having clicked on "the translation is right but might be improved"

You are right, Francky! Thank you! I forgot the requester was female...

Hi dear!

Now that you did the edit, my vote at the poll is "green", and not "blue" anymore!

Are you waiting for Efy's vote before validating?

I think that "anima" is better than "animus"; "animus" is more like "spirit". Moreover, "my Brother etc." require the vocative: "mi frater, Tartare, dilecte" (and "dilectus" provides the text a nice "variatio" in reference to the verb "amare"

Dear Francky,
Yes, I'm waiting for Efee's opinion as usual when it concerns longer and more complicated texts.

---

Dear Efee,
Could you help me with an evaluation here? It's really difficult to deal with my own translations without your help...

---

Dear amaltoninn,
Thank you for your input.
Yes I agree that 'anima' would fit even better than 'animus' in this context.

But, it's not so obvious that the words in a second line are in the Vocative. They can be also in the Nonimative, don't you think?
I have connected them with the first line where we have "tu es" (you are).
tu es --> anima pulchra
tu es-->frater meus
tu es--> Tartarus meus
tu es--> amatus/dilectus meus

Of course your interpretation is also possible.
That's why I will ask the requester to clarify a meaning of the line.

---
Dear edz21,
Could you please tell us whether the words in a second line are in the Nominative and represent or describe the subject or they are in the Vocative case (=case of address), i.e. they "call" the subject.
Thank you.

My best regards

Aneta B.

Ooops! Serena?

CC: Efylove

Hi Aneta!
Sorry for the delay, I'm being very busy, but I'll tell you everything later.

Green light for your translation! Just a doubt abut "odio me habeas": why did you choose the subjunctive and not an imperative (as you did for "reprehende"?

However, as amaltoninn suggested, I will wait for edz21's answer about the second line, because it seems quite ambiguous (I also though they were vocative!).

Ha! Yes, first I had imperatives in both the verbs then I decided to change into subjunctive, but I have done it only with the one... Have no idea why... Thank you!

All right. Let's wait for the requester's explanations.

redz21?
You logged in tonight, but didn't answer our question...

Since the requester has not replied (I understand he doesn't care anymore), I'm gonna accept the translation as it is. I'll make only the few changes that we agreed to.
Thanks to all of you for your help!