Part 5 — CHAPTER V.—Syntax of Verbs.

AGREEMENT.

With One Subject.

254. 1. Agreement in Number and Person. A Finite Verb agrees with its subject in Number and Person; as,—

vōs vidētis, you see;

pater fīliōs īnstituit, the father trains his sons.

2. Agreement in Gender. In the compound forms of the verb the participle regularly agrees with its subject in gender; as,—

sēditiō repressa est, the mutiny was checked.

3. But when a predicate noun is of different gender or number from its subject, the verb usually agrees with its nearest substantive; as,—

Tarquiniī māterna patria erat, Tarquinii was his native country on his mother's side;

nōn omnis error stultitia est dīcenda, not every error is to be called folly.

a. Less frequently the verb agrees with an appositive; as,—

Coriolī, oppidum Volscōrum, captum est, Corioli, a town of the Volsci, was captured.

4. Construction according to Sense. Sometimes the verb agrees with its subject according to sense instead of strict grammatical form. Thus:—

a) In Number; as,—

multitūdō hominum convēnerant, a crowd of men had gathered.

b) In Gender; as,—

duo mīlia crucibus adfīxī sunt, two thousand (men) were crucified.

With Two or More Subjects.

255. 1. Agreement in Number. With two or more subjects the verb is regularly plural; as,—

pater et fīlius mortuī sunt, the father and son died.

2. But sometimes the verb agrees with the nearest subject; viz.,—

a) When the verb precedes both subjects or stands between them; as,—

mortuus est pater et fīlius;

pater mortuus est et fīlius.

b) When the subjects are connected by aut; aut ... aut; vel ... vel; neque ... neque; as,—

neque pater neque fīlius mortuus est, neither father nor son died.

3. When the different subjects are felt together as constituting a whole, the singular is used; as,—

temeritās ignōrātiōque vitiōsa est, rashness and ignorance are bad.

a. This is regularly the case in senātus populusque Rōmānus.

4. Agreement in Person. With compound subjects of different persons the verb always takes the first person rather than the second, and the second rather than the third; as,—

sī tū et Tullia valētis, ego et Cicerō valēmus, if you and Tullia are well, Cicero and I are well.

5. Agreement in Gender. With subjects of different genders the participle in the compound tenses follows the same principles as laid down for predicate adjectives. See § 235, B, 2.

VOICES.

256. 1. The Passive Voice sometimes retains traces of its original middle or reflexive meaning; as,—

ego nōn patiar eum dēfendī, I shall not allow him to defend himself.

2. In imitation of Greek usage many perfect passive participles are used by the poets as indirect middles, i.e. the subject is viewed as acting not upon itself, but as doing something in his own interest; as,—

vēlātus tempora, having veiled his temples.

a. Occasionally finite forms of the verb are thus used; as,—

tunicā indūcitur artūs, he covers his limbs with a tunic.

3. Intransitive Verbs may be used impersonally in the passive; as,—

curritur, people run (lit. it is run);

ventum est, he (they, etc.) came (lit. it was come).

TENSES.

TENSES OF THE INDICATIVE.

257. 1. The Latin tenses express two distinct notions:—

a) The period of time to which the action belongs: Present, Past, or Future.

b) The kind of action: Undefined, Going on, or Completed.

The Latin with its six tenses is able to express each of the three kinds of action for each of the three periods of time (making practically nine tenses). It does this by employing certain tenses in more than one way, as may be seen by the following table:—

KIND OF ACTION. PERIOD OF TIME.

PRESENT. PAST. FUTURE.

UNDEFINED Present: scrībō, I write. Historical Perfect: scrīpsī, I wrote. Future: scrībam, I shall write.

GOING ON. Present: scrībō, I am writing. Imperfect: scrībēbam, I was writing. Future: scrībam, I shall be writing.

COMPLETED. Present Perfect: scrīpsī, I have written. Pluperfect: scrīpseram, I had written. Future Perfect: scrīpserō, I shall have written.

2. It will be seen that the Present may express Undefined action or action Going on; so also the Future. The Perfect likewise has a double use, according as it denotes action Completed in present time (Present Perfect) or Undefined action belonging to past time (Historical Perfect).

Principal and Historical Tenses.

258. Tenses which denote Present or Future time are called Principal (or Primary) Tenses, those which denote Past time are called Historical (or Secondary).

The Principal Tenses of the Indicative are: Present, Future, Present Perfect, Future Perfect.

The Historical Tenses are: Imperfect, Historical Perfect, Pluperfect.

Present Indicative.

259. Besides the two uses indicated in the table, the Present Indicative presents the following peculiarities:—

1. It is used to denote a general truth, i.e. something true not merely in the present but at all times ('Gnomic Present'); as,—

virtūs conciliat amīcitiās et cōnservat, virtue establishes ties of friendship and maintains them (i.e. always does so).

2. It is used of an attempted action ('Conative Present'); as,—

dum vītant vitia, in contrāria currunt, while they try to avoid (vītant) vices, they rush into opposite ones.

3. In lively narration the Present is often used of a past action ('Historical Present'); as,—

Caesar imperat magnum numerum obsidum, Caesar demanded a large number of hostages (lit. demands).

4. In combination with jam, jam diū, jam prīdem, and similar words, the Present is frequently used of an action originating in the past and continuing in the present; as,—

jam prīdem cupiō tē vīsere, I have long been desiring to visit you (i.e. I desire and have long desired).

Imperfect Indicative.

260. 1. The Imperfect primarily denotes action going on in past time; as,—

librum legēbam, I was reading a book.

a. This force makes the Imperfect especially adapted to serve as the tense of description (as opposed to mere narration).

2. From the notion of action going on, there easily develops the notion of repeated or customary action; as,—

lēgātōs interrogābat, he kept asking the envoys;

C. Duīlium vidēbam puer, as a boy I often used to see Gaius Duilius.

3. The Imperfect often denotes an attempted action ('Conative Imperfect') or an action as beginning ('Inceptive Imperfect'); as,—

hostēs nostrōs intrā mūnītiōnēs prōgredī prohibēbant, the enemy tried to prevent (prohibēbant) our men from advancing within the fortifications ('Conative');

ad proelium sē expediēbant, they were beginning to get ready for battle ('Inceptive').

4. The Imperfect, with jam, jam diū, jam dūdum, etc., is sometimes used of an action which had been continuing some time; as,—

domicilium Rōmae multōs jam annōs habēbat, he had had his residence at Rome for many years (i.e. he had it at this time and had long had it).

Future Indicative.

261. 1. The Latin is much more exact in the use of the Future than is the English. We say: 'If he comes, I shall be glad,' where we really mean: 'If he shall come,' etc. In such cases the Latin rarely admits the Present, but generally employs the Future.

2. Sometimes the Future has Imperative force; as, dīcēs, say!

Perfect Indicative.

262. A. PRESENT PERFECT. Several Present Perfects denote the state resulting from a completed act, and so seem equivalent to the Present; as,—

nōvī, cognōvī, I know (lit. I have become acquainted with);

cōnsuēvī, I am wont (lit. I have become accustomed).

B. HISTORICAL PERFECT. The Historical Perfect is the tense of narration (as opposed to the Imperfect, the tense of description); as,—

Rēgulus in senātum vēnit, mandāta exposuit, reddī captivōs negāvit esse ūtile, Regulus came into the Senate, set forth his commission, said it was useless for captives to be returned.

1. Occasionally the Historical Perfect is used of a general truth ('Gnomic Perfect').

Pluperfect Indicative.

263. The Latin Pluperfect, like the English Past Perfect, denotes an act completed in the past; as,—

Caesar Rhēnum trānsīre dēcrēverat, sed nāvēs deerant, Caesar had decided to cross the Rhine, but had no boats.

a. In those verbs whose Perfect has Present force (§ 262, A), the Pluperfect has the force of an Imperfect; as,—

nōveram, I knew.

Future Perfect Indicative.

264. The Future Perfect denotes an action completed in future time. Thus:—

scrībam epistulam, cum redieris, I will write the letter when you have returned (lit. when you shall have returned).

a. The Latin is much more exact in the use of the Future Perfect than the English, which commonly employs the Present Perfect instead of the Future Perfect.

b. In those verbs whose Perfect has Present force (§ 262, A) the Future Perfect has the force of a Future; as,—

nōverō, I shall know.

Epistolary Tenses.

265. In letters the writer often uses tenses which are not appropriate at the time of writing, but which will be so at the time when his letter is received; he thus employs the Imperfect and the Perfect for the Present, and the Pluperfect for the Present Perfect; as,—

nihil habēbam quod scrīberem, neque enim novī quidquam audieram et ad tuās omnēs epistulās jam rescrīpseram, I have nothing to write, for I have heard no news and have already answered all your letters.

TENSES OF THE SUBJUNCTIVE.

266. A. In Independent sentences. See §§ 272-280.

B. In Dependent Sentences. In dependent sentences the tenses of the subjunctive usually conform to the so-called

Sequence of Tenses.

267. 1. In the Subjunctive the Present and Perfect are Principal tenses, the Imperfect and Pluperfect, Historical.

2. By the Sequence of Tenses Principal tenses are followed by Principal, Historical by Historical. Thus:—

PRINCIPAL SEQUENCE,—

videō quid faciās, I see what you are doing.

vidēbō quid faciās, I shall see what you are doing.

vīderō quid faciās, I shall have seen what you are doing.

videō quid fēcerīs, I see what you have done.

vidēbō quid fēcerīs, I shall see what you have done.

vīderō quid fēcerīs, I shall have seen what you have done.

HISTORICAL SEQUENCE,—

vidēbam quid facerēs, I saw what you were doing.

vīdī quid facerēs, I saw what you were doing.

vīderam quid facerēs, I had seen what you were doing.

vidēbam quid fēcissēs, I saw what you had done.

vīdī quid fēcissēs, I saw what you had done.

vīderam quid fēcissēs, I had seen what you had done.

3. The Present and Imperfect Subjunctive denote incomplete action, the Perfect and Pluperfect completed action, exactly as in the Indicative.

Peculiarities of Sequence.

268. 1. The Perfect Indicative is usually an historical tense (even when translated in English as a Present Perfect), and so is followed by the Imperfect and Pluperfect Subjunctive; as,—

dēmōnstrāvī quārē ad causam accēderem, I have shown why I took the case (lit. I showed why, etc.).

2. A dependent Perfect Infinitive is treated as an historical tense wherever, if resolved into an equivalent Indicative, it would be historical; as,—

videor ostendisse quālēs deī essent, I seem to have shown of what nature the gods are (ostendisse here corresponds to an Indicative, ostendī, I showed).

3. The Historical Present is sometimes regarded as a principal tense, sometimes as historical. Thus:—

Sulla suōs hortātur ut fortī animō sint, Sulla exhorts his soldiers to be stout-hearted;

Gallōs hortātur ut arma caperent, he exhorted the Gauls to take arms.

4. Conditional sentences of the 'contrary-to-fact' type are not affected by the principles for the Sequence of Tenses; as,—

honestum tāle est ut, vel sī ignōrārent id hominēs, suā tamen pulchritūdine laudabīle esset, virtue is such a thing that even if men were ignorant of it, it would still be worthy of praise for its own loveliness.

5. In conditional sentences of the 'contrary-to-fact' type the Imperfect Subjunctive is usually treated as an Historical tense; as,—

sī sōlōs eōs dīcerēs miserōs, quibus moriendum esset, nēminem tū quidem eōrum quī vīverent exciperēs, if you called only those wretched who must die, you would except no one of those who live.

6. In clauses of Result and some others, the Perfect Subjunctive is sometimes used as an historical tense. Thus:—

rēx tantum mōtus est, ut Tissaphernem hostem jūdicārit, the king was so much moved that he adjudged Tissaphernes an enemy.

This construction is rare in Cicero, but frequent in Nepos and subsequent historians. The Perfect Subjunctive in this use represents a result simply as a fact without reference to the continuance of the act, and therefore corresponds to an Historical Perfect Indicative of direct statement. Thus, jūdicārit in the above example corresponds to adjūdicāvit, he adjudged. To denote a result as something continuous, all writers use the Imperfect Subjunctive after historical tenses.

7. Sometimes perspicuity demands that the ordinary principles of Sequence be abandoned altogether. Thus:

a) We may have the Present or Perfect Subjunctive after an historical tense; as,—

Verrēs Siciliam ita perdidit ut ea restituī nōn possit, Verres so ruined Sicily that it cannot be restored (Direct statement: nōn potest restitui);

ārdēbat Hortēnsius dīcendī cupiditāte sīc, ut in nūllō flagrantius studium vīderim, Hortensius burned so with eagerness to speak that I have seen in no one a greater desire (Direct statement: in nūllō vīdī, I have seen in no one).

NOTE.—This usage is different from that cited under 6. Here, by neglect of Sequence, the Perfect is used, though a principal tense; there the Perfect was used as an historical tense.

b) We may have a principal tense followed by the Perfect Subjunctive used historically; as,—

nesciō quid causae fuerit cūr nūllās ad mē litterās darēs, I do not know what reason there was why you did not send me a letter.

Here fuerit is historical, as is shown by the following Imperfect Subjunctive.

Method of Expressing Future Time in the Subjunctive.

269. The Future and Future Perfect, which are lacking to the Latin Subjunctive, are supplied in subordinate clauses as follows:—

1.

a) The Future is supplied by the Present after principal tenses, by the Imperfect after historical tenses.

b) The Future Perfect is supplied by the Perfect after principal tenses, by the Pluperfect after historical tenses.

This is especially frequent when the context clearly shows, by the presence of a future tense in the main clause, that the reference is to future time. Thus:—

Gallī pollicentur sē factūrōs, quae Caesar imperet, the Gauls promise they will do what Caesar shall order;

Gallī pollicēbantur sē factūrōs, quae Caesar imperāret, the Gauls promised they would do what Caesar should order;

Gallī pollicentur sē factūrōs quae Caesar imperāverit, the Gauls promise they will do what Caesar shall have ordered;

Gallī pollicēbantur sē factūrōs quae Caesar imperāvisset, the Gauls promised they would do what Caesar should have ordered.

2. Even where the context does not contain a Future tense in the main clause, Future time is often expressed in the subordinate clauses by the Present and Imperfect Subjunctive. Thus:—

timeō nē veniat, I am afraid he will come;

Caesar exspectābat quid cōnsilī hostēs caperent, Caesar was waiting to see what plan the enemy would adopt.

3. Where greater definiteness is necessary, the periphrastic forms in -ūrus sim and -ūrus essem are employed, especially in clauses of Result, Indirect Questions, and after nōn dubitō quīn; as,—

nōn dubitō quīn pater ventūrus sit, I do not doubt that my father will come;

nōn dubitābam quīn pater ventūrus esset, I did not doubt that my father would come.

4. Where the verb has no Future Active Participle, or where it stands in the passive voice, its Future character may be indicated by the use of the particles mox, brevī, statim, etc., in connection with the Present and Imperfect Subjunctive; as,—

nōn dubitō quīn tē mox hūjus reī paeniteat, I do not doubt that you will soon repent of this thing;

nōn dubitābam quīn haec rēs brevī cōnficerētur, I did not doubt that this thing would soon be fnished.

TENSES OF THE INFINITIVE.

270. 1. The tenses of the Infinitive denote time not absolutely, but with reference to the verb on which they depend. Thus:—

a) The Present Infinitive represents an act as contemporaneous with the time of the verb on which it depends; as,—

vidētur honōrēs adsequī, he seems to be gaining honors;

vidēbātur honōrēs adsequī, he seemed to be gaining honors.

b) The Perfect Infinitive represents an act as prior to the time of the verb on which it depends; as,—

vidētur honōrēs adsecūtus esse, he seems to have gained honors;

vīsus est honōrēs adsecūtus esse, he seemed to have gained honors.

c) The Future Infinitive represents an act as subsequent to that of the verb on which it depends; as,—

vidētur honōrēs adsecūtūrus esse, he seems to be about to gain honors;

vīsus est honōrēs adsecūtūrus esse, he seemed to be about to gain honors.

2. Where the English says 'ought to have done,' 'might have done,' etc., the Latin uses dēbuī, oportuit, potuī (dēbēbam, oportēbat, poteram), with the Present Infinitive; as,—

dēbuit dīcere, he ought to have said (lit. owed it to say);

opōrtuit venīre, he ought to have come;

potuit vidēre, he might have seen.

a. Oportuit, volō, nōlō (and in poetry some other verbs), may take a Perfect Infinitive instead of the Present; as,—

hōc jam prīdem factum esse oportuit, this ought long ago to have been done.

3. PERIPHRASTIC FUTURE INFINITIVE. Verbs that have no Participial Stem, express the Future Infinitive Active and Passive by fore ut or futūrum esse ut, with the Subjunctive; as,—

spērō fore ut tē paeniteat levitātis, I hope you will repent of your fickleness (lit. hope it will happen that you repent);

spērō futūrum esse ut hostēs arceantur, I hope that the enemy will be kept off.

a. The Periphrastic Future Infinitive is often used, especially in the Passive, even in case of verbs which have the Participial Stem; as,—

spērō fore ut hostēs vincantur, I hope the enemy will be conquered.

4. Passives and Deponents sometimes form a Future Perfect Infinitive with fore; as,—

spērō epistulam scrīptam fore, I hope the letter will have been written;

dīcō mē satis adeptum fore, I say that I shall have gained enough.

THE MOODS.

MOODS IN INDEPENDENT SENTENCES.

The Indicative in Independent Sentences.

271. The Indicative is used for the statement of facts, the supposition of facts, or inquiry after facts.

1. Note the following idiomatic uses:—

a) With possum; as,—

possum multa dīcere, I might say much;

poteram multa dīcere, I might have said much (§ 270, 2).

b) In such expressions as longum est, aequum est, melius est, difficile est, ūtilius est, and some others; as,—

longum est ea dīcere, it would be tedious to tell that;

difficile est omnia persequī, it would be difficult to enumerate everything.

The Subjunctive in Independent Sentences.

272. The Subjunctive is used in Independent Sentences to express something—

VOLITIVE SUBJUNCTIVE.

273. The Volitive Subjunctive represents the action as willed. It always implies authority on the part of the speaker, and has the following varieties:—

A. HORTATORY SUBJUNCTIVE.

274. The Hortatory Subjunctive expresses an exhortation. This use is confined to the first person plural of the Present. The negative is nē. Thus:—

eāmus, let us go;

amēmus patriam, let us love our country;

nē dēspērēmus, let us not despair.

B. JUSSIVE SUBJUNCTIVE.

275. The Jussive Subjunctive expresses a command. The Jussive stands regularly in the Present Tense, and is used—

1. Most frequently in the third singular and the third plural; as,—

dīcat, let him tell;

dīcant, let them tell;

quārē sēcēdant improbī, wherefore let the wicked depart!

2. Less frequently in the second person, often with indefinite force; as,—

istō bonō ūtāre, use that advantage;

modestē vīvās, live temperately.

C. PROHIBITIVE SUBJUNCTIVE.

276. The Subjunctive is used in the second and third persons singular and plural, with nē, to express a prohibition. Both Present and Perfect occur, and without appreciable difference of meaning; as,—

nē repugnētis, do not resist!

tū vērō istam nē relīquerīs, don't leave her!

impiī nē plācāre audeant deōs, let not the impious dare to appease the gods!

a. Neither of these constructions is frequent in classical prose.

b. A commoner method of expressing a prohibition in the second person is by the use of nōlī (nōlīte) with a following infinitive, or by cavē or cavē nē with the Subjunctive; as,—

nōlī hōc facere, don't do this (lit. be unwilling to do)!

nōlīte mentīrī, do not lie!

cavē ignōscās, cavē tē misereat, do not forgive, do not pity!

cavē nē haec faciās, do not do this (lit. take care lest you do)!

D. DELIBERATIVE SUBJUNCTIVE.

277. The Deliberative Subjunctive is used in questions and exclamations implying doubt, indignation, the impossibility of an act, obligation, or propriety. The Present is used referring to present time, the Imperfect referring to past. The negative is nōn. Thus:—

quid faciam, what shall I do?

ego redeam, I go back!

huic cēdāmus! hūjus condiciōnēs audiāmus! are we to bow to him! are we to listen to his terms!

quid facerem, what was I to do?

hunc ego nōn dīligam, should I not cherish this man?

a. These Deliberative Questions are usually purely Rhetorical in character, and do not expect an answer.

E. CONCESSIVE SUBJUNCTIVE.

278. The Subjunctive is used to indicate something as granted or conceded for the sake of argument. The Present is used for present time, the Perfect regularly for past. The negative is nē. Thus:—

sit hōc vērum, I grant that this is true (lit. let this be true);

nē sint in senectūte vīrēs, I grant there is not strength in old age;

fuerit malus cīvis aliīs; tibi quandō esse coepit, I grant that he was a bad citizen to others; when did he begin to be so toward you?

OPTATIVE SUBJUNCTIVE.

279. The Optative Subjunctive occurs in expressions of wishing. The negative is regularly nē.

1. The Present Tense, often accompanied by utinam, is used where the wish is conceived of as possible.

dī istaec prohibeant, may the gods prevent that!

falsus utinam vātēs sim, oh that I may be a false prophet!

nē veniant, may they not come!

2. The Imperfect expresses, in the form of a wish, the regret that something is not so now; the Pluperfect that something was not so in the past. The Imperfect and Pluperfect are regularly accompanied by utinam; as,—

utinam istud ex animō dīcerēs, would that you were saying that in earnest (i.e. I regret that you are not saying it in earnest);

Pēlīdēs utinam vītāsset Apollinis arcūs, would that Achilles had escaped the bow of Apollo;

utinam nē nātus essem, would that I had not been born.

POTENTIAL SUBJUNCTIVE.

280. The Potential Subjunctive expresses a possibility. The negative is nōn. The following uses are to be noted:—

1. The 'May' Potential.—The Potential Subjunctive may designate a mere possibility (English auxiliary may). Both Present and Perfect occur, and without appreciable difference of meaning. Thus:—

dīcat aliquis, some one may say;

dīxerit aliquis, some one may say.

a. This construction is by no means frequent, and is confined mainly to a few phrases like those given as examples.

2. 'Should'-'Would' Potential.—The Potential Subjunctive may represent something as depending upon a condition expressed or understood (English auxiliary should, would). Both Present and Perfect occur, and without appreciable difference of meaning. Thus:—

fortūnam citius reperiās quam retineās, one would more quickly find Fortune than keep it (i.e. if one should make the trial);

crēdiderim, I should believe.

a. Here belongs the use of velim, mālim, nōlim, as softened forms of statement for volō, mālō, nōlō. Thus:—

velim mihi ignōscās, I wish you would forgive me;

nōlim putēs mē jocārī, I don't want you to think I'm joking.

b. When the condition is expressed, we get one of the regular types of Conditional Sentences (see § 303); as,—

diēs dēficiat, sī cōner ēnumerāre causās, time would fail if I should attempt to enumerate the reasons.

3. 'Can'-'Could' Potential.—In the Present and Imperfect the Potential occurs in the second person singular (with indefinite force; § 356, 3) of a few verbs of perceiving, seeing, thinking, and the like; as,—

videās, cernās, one can see, one can perceive;

crēderēs, one could believe;

vidērēs, cernerēs, one could see, perceive;

putārēs, one could imagine.

4. The Imperfect and Pluperfect in the Apodosis of conditional sentences of the contrary-to-fact type (see § 304) are also Potential in character. By omission of the Protasis, such an Apodosis sometimes stands alone, particularly vellem, nōllem, māllem; as,—

vellem id quidem, I should wish that (i.e. were I bold enough).

The Imperative.

281. The Imperative is used in commands, admonitions and entreaties (negative nē), as,—

ēgredere ex urbe, depart from the city;

mihi ignōsce, pardon me;

valē, farewell.

1. The Present is the tense of the Imperative most commonly used, but the Future is employed—

a) Where there is a distinct reference to future time, especially in the apodosis of conditional sentences; as,—

rem vōbīs prōpōnam; vōs eam penditōte, I will lay the matter before you; do you (then) consider it;

sī bene disputābit, tribuitō litterīs Graecis, if he shall speak well, attribute it to Greek literature.

b) In laws, treaties, wills, maxims, etc.; as,—

cōnsulēs summum jūs habentō, the consuls shall have supreme power;

hominem mortuom in urbe nē sepelītō, no one shall bury a dead body in the city;

amīcitia rēgī Antiochō cum populō Rōmānō hīs legibus et condiciōnibus estō, let there be friendship between Antiochus and the Roman people on the following terms and conditions;

quārtae estō partis Mārcus hērēs, let Marcus be heir to a fourth (of the property);

ignōscitō saepe alterī, numquam tibi, forgive your neighbor often, yourself never.

2. Except with the Future Imperative the negative is not used in classical prose. Prohibitions are regularly expressed in other ways. See § 276, b.

3. Questions in the Indicative introduced by quīn (why not?) are often equivalent to an Imperative or to the Hortatory Subjunctive; as,—

quīn abīs, go away! (lit. why don't you go away?);

quīn vōcem continētis, keep still! (lit. why don't you stop your voices?);

quīn equōs cōnscendimus, let us mount our horses (lit. why do we not mount our horses?)

MOODS IN DEPENDENT CLAUSES.

Clauses of Purpose.

282. 1. Clauses of Purpose are introduced most commonly by ut (utī), quō (that, in order that), nē (in order that not, lest), and stand in the Subjunctive, as,—

edimus ut vīvāmus, we eat that we may live;

adjūtā mē quō hōc fīat facilius, help me, in order that this may be done more easily;

portās clausit, nē quam oppidānī injūriam acciperent, he closed the gates, lest the townspeople should receive any injury.

a. Quō, as a rule, is employed only when the purpose clause contains a comparative or a comparative idea. Occasional exceptions occur; as,—

haec faciunt quō Chremētem absterreant, they are doing this in order to frighten Chremes.

b. Ut nē is sometimes found instead of nē. Thus:—

ut nē quid neglegenter agāmus, in order that we may not do anything carelessly.

c. Ut nōn (not nē) is used where the negation belongs to some single word, instead of to the purpose clause as a whole. Thus:—

ut nōn ējectus ad aliēnōs, sed invītātus ad tuōs videāre, that you may seem not driven out among strangers, but invited to your own friends.

d. To say 'and that not' or 'or that not,' the Latin regularly uses nēve (neu); as,—

ut eārum rērum vīs minuerētur, neu pontī nocērent, that the violence of these things might be lessened, and that they might not harm the bridge;

profūgit, nē caperētur nēve interficerētur, he fled, that he might not be captured or killed.

e. But neque (for nēve) is sometimes used in a second Purpose Clause when ut stands in the first, and, after the Augustan era, even when the first clause is introduced by nē.

f. Purpose Clauses sometimes stand in apposition with a preceding noun or pronoun: as,—

hāc causā, ut pācem habērent, on this account, that they might have peace.

2. A Relative Pronoun (quī) or Adverb (ubi, unde, quō) is frequently used to introduce a Purpose Clause; as,—

Helvētiī lēgātōs mittunt, quī dīcerent, the Helvetii sent envoys to say (lit. who should say);

haec habuī, dē senectūte quae dīcerem, I had these things to say about old age;

nōn habēbant quō sē reciperent, they had no place to which to flee (lit. whither they might flee).

a. Quī in such clauses is equivalent to ut is, ut ego, etc.; ubi to ut ibi; unde to ut inde; quō to ut eō.

3. Relative Clauses of purpose follow dignus, indignus, and idōneus; as,—

idōneus fuit nēmō quem imitārēre, there was no one suitable for you to imitate (cf. nēmō fuit quem imitārēre, there was no one for you to imitate);

dignus est quī aliquandō imperet, he is worthy to rule sometime.

4. Purpose Clauses often depend upon something to be supplied from the context instead of upon the principal verb of their own sentences; as,—

ut haec omnia omittam, abiimus, to pass over all this, (I will say that) we departed.

Clauses of Characteristic.

283. 1. A relative clause used to express a quality or characteristic of a general or indefinite antecedent is called a Clause of Characteristic, and usually stands in the Subjunctive; as,—

multa sunt, quae mentem acuant, there are many things which sharpen the wits.

Clauses of Characteristic are opposed to those relative clauses which are used merely to state some fact about a definite antecedent, and which therefore take the Indicative; as,—

Catō, senex jūcundus, quī Sapiēns appellātus est, Cato, a delightful old man, who was called 'The Wise.'

The Clause of Characteristic implies 'a person of the sort that does something'; the Indicative relative clause implies 'a particular person who does something.'

2. Clauses of Characteristic are used especially after such expressions as, est quī; sunt quī; nēmō est quī; nūllus est quī; ūnus est quī; sōlus est quī; quis est quī; is quī; etc. Thus:—

sunt quī dīcant, there are (some) who say;

nēmō est quī nesciat, there is nobody who is ignorant;

sapientia est ūna quae maestitiam pellat, philosophy is the only thing that drives away sorrow;

quae cīvitās est quae nōn ēvertī possit, what state is there that cannot be overthrown?

nōn is sum quī improbōs laudem, I am not the sort of man that praises the wicked.

a. Sometimes (very rarely in Cicero and Caesar) the clause of characteristic is used after comparatives; as,—

nōn longius hostēs aberant quam quō tēlum adigī posset, the enemy were not too far off for a dart to reach them (lit. further off than [a point] to which a dart could be cast).

3. The Clause of Characteristic often conveys an accessory notion of cause (since) or opposition (although). Thus:—

a) Cause. The relative is then frequently accompanied by ut, quīppe, utpote; as,—

ō fortūnāte adulēscēns, quī tuae virtūtis Homērum praecōnem invēnerīs, O fortunate man, since you have found a Homer as the herald of your valor;

ut quī optimō jūre eam prōvinciam obtinuerit, since he held that province by excellent right.

b) Opposition:—

egomet quī sērō Graecās litterās attigissem, tamen complūrēs diēs Athēnīs commorātus sum, I, although I had taken up Greek literature late in life, nevertheless tarried several days at Athens.

4. Clauses of Characteristic may also be introduced by quīn = quī (quae, quod) nōn; as,—

nēmō est quīn saepe audierit, there is no one who has not often heard;

nēmō fuit mīlitum quīn vulnerārētur, there was no one of the soldiers who was not wounded.

5. Related to Clauses of Characteristic are also phrases of the type:

quod sciam, so far as I know; quem (quam, quod), audierim, so far as I have heard.

Clauses of Result.

284. 1. Clauses of Result are usually introduced by ut (that, so that), negative ut nōn (so that not), and take the Subjunctive. The main clause often contains tantus, tālis, tot, is (= tālis), tam, ita, sīc, adeō, or some similar word. Thus:—

quis tam dēmēns est ut suā voluntāte maereat, who is so senseless as to mourn of his own volition?

Siciliam ita vāstāvit ut restituī in antīquum statum nōn possit, he so ravaged Sicily that it cannot be restored to its former condition;

mōns altissimus impendēbat, ut facile perpaucī prohibēre possent, a very high mountain overhung, so that a very few could easily stop them;

nōn is es ut tē pudor umquam ā turpitūdine āvocārit, you are not so constituted that shame ever called you back from baseness.

2. A Result Clause is often introduced by a Relative Pronoun or Adverb, quī (= ut is), quō (= ut eō), etc.; as,—

nēmō est tam senex quī sē annum nōn putet posse vīvere, nobody is so old as not to think he can live a year;

habētis eum cōnsulem quī pārēre vestrīs dēcrētīs nōn dubitet, you have a consul such as does not hesitate to obey your decrees.

a. These Relative Clauses of Result are closely related to the Clause of Characteristic, and sometimes it is difficult to distinguish the two constructions. It is best to class the relative clause as one of Characteristic, unless the result idea is clear and unmistakable.

3. Result clauses may also be introduced by quīn = ut nōn; as,—

nihil tam difficile est quīn quaerendō invēstīgārī possit, nothing is so difficult that it cannot be discovered by searching;

nēmō est tam fortis quīn reī novitāte perturbētur, no one is so steadfast as not to be thrown into confusion by a strange occurrence.

4. Note the use of quam ut (sometimes quam alone) to denote Result after comparatives; as,—

urbs erat mūnītior quam ut prīmō impetū capī posset, the city was too strongly fortified to be taken at the first attack (lit. more strongly fortified than [so] that it could be taken, etc.).

Causal Clauses.

285. Causal clauses are introduced chiefly by the following particles:—

286. The use of moods is as follows:—

1. Quod, quia, quoniam take the Indicative when the reason is that of the writer or speaker; they take the Subjunctive when the reason is viewed as that of another. Thus:—

Parthōs timeō quod diffīdō cōpiīs nostrīs, I fear the Parthians, because I distrust our troops.

Themistoclēs, quia nōn tūtus erat, Corcyram dēmigrāvit, Themistocles, since he was not safe, moved to Corcyra.

neque mē vīxisse paenitet, quoniam bene vīxī, I do not regret having lived, since I have lived well.

Sōcratēs accūsātus est quod corrumperet juventūtem, Socrates was arraigned on the ground that he was corrupting the young. (Here the reason is not that of the writer but of the accuser. Hence the Subjunctive.)

Haeduī Caesarī grātiās ēgērunt quod sē perīculō līberāvisset, the Haedui thanked Caesar because he had delivered them from danger. (The reason of the Haedui.)

quoniam Miltiadēs dīcere nōn posset, verba prō eō fēcit Tīsagorās, since Miltiades could not speak, Tisagoras spoke for him. (The reason of Tisagoras.)

noctū ambulābat Themistoclēs, quod somnum capere nōn posset, Themistocles used to walk at night because (as he said) he couldn't sleep.

a. Verbs of thinking and saying often stand in the Subjunctive in causal clauses as though the act of thinking or saying, and not the contents of the thought or language, constituted the reason. Thus:—

Bellovacī suum numerum nōn complēvērunt quod sē suō nōmine cum Rōmānīs bellum gestūrōs dīcerent, the Bellovaci did not furnish their complement, because they said they were going to wage war with the Romans on their own account.

b. Nōn quod, nōn quō (by attraction for nōn eō quod), nōn quia, not that, not because; and nōn quod nōn, nōn quō nōn, nōn quīn, not that ... not; not because ... not; not but that, are usually employed merely to introduce a hypothetical reason, and hence take the Subjunctive; as,—

id fēcī, nōn quod vōs hanc dēfēnsiōnem dēsīderāre arbitrārer, sed ut omnēs intellegerent, this I did, not because I thought you needed this defense, but that all might perceive;

Crassō commendātiōnem nōn sum pollicitus, nōn quīn eam valitūram apud tē arbitrārer, sed egēre mihi commendātiōne nōn vidēbātur, I did not promise a recommendation to Crassus, not that I did not think it would have weight with you, but because he did not seem to me to need recommendation.

c. But clauses introduced by nōn quod, nōn quīa take the Indicative if they state a fact, even though that fact is denied to be the reason for something; as,—

hōc ita sentiō, nōn quia sum ipse augur, sed quia sīc exīstimāre nōs est necesse, this I think, not because I am myself an augur (which I really am), but because it is necessary for us to think so.

2. Cum causal regularly takes the Subjunctive; as,—

quae cum īta sint, since this is so;

cum sīs mortālis, quae mortālia sunt, cūrā, since you are mortal, care for what is mortal.

a. Note the phrase cum praesertim (praesertim cum), especially since; as,—

Haeduōs accūsat, praesertim cum eōrum precibus adductus bellum suscēperit, he blamed the Haedui, especially since he had undertaken the war at their entreaties.

3. Quandō (less frequent than the other causal particles) governs the Indicative; as,—

id omittō, quandō vōbīs ita placet, I pass over that, since you so wish.

Temporal Clauses introduced by Postquam, Ut, Ubi, Simul ac, etc.

287. 1. Postquam (posteāquam), after; ut, ubi, when; cum prīmum, simul, simul ac (simul atque), as soon as, when used to refer to a single past act regularly take the Perfect Indicative; as,—

Epamīnōndās postquam audīvit vīcisse Boeōtiōs, 'Satis' inquit 'vīxī,' Epaminondas, after he heard that the Boeotians had conquered, said, 'I have lived enough;'

id ut audīvit, Corcyram dēmigrāvit, when he heard this, he moved to Corcyra;

Caesar cum prīmum potuit, ad exercitum contendit, Caesar, as soon as he could, hurried to the army;

ubi dē Caesaris adventū certiōrēs factī sunt, lēgātōs ad eum mittunt, when they were informed of Caesar's arrival, they sent envoys to him.

a. The Historical Present may take the place of the Perfect in this construction.

2. To denote the repeated occurrence of an act, ut, ubi, simul atque, as often as, when following an historical tense, take the Pluperfect Indicative (compare §§ 288, 3; 302, 3); as,—

ut quisque Verris animum offenderat, in lautumiās statim coniciēbātur, whenever anybody had offended Verres's feelings, he was forthwith put in the stone-quarry;

hostēs, ubi aliquōs ēgredientēs cōnspexerant, adoriēbantur, whenever the enemy had seen any men disembarking, they attacked them.

a. In Livy and succeeding historians the Imperfect and Pluperfect Subjunctive are used to denote this repeated occurrence of an act ('Indefinite Frequency'); as,—

id ubi dīxisset hastam mittēbat, whenever he had said that, he hurled a spear.

3. Occasionally the above conjunctions are followed by the Pluperfect Indicative of a single occurrence. This is regularly the case with postquam in expressions denoting a definite interval of time (days, months, years, etc.), such as post tertium annum quam, trienniō postquam. Thus:—

quīnque post diēbus quam Lūcā discesserat, ad Sardiniam vēnit five days after he had departed from Luca he came to Sardinia;

postquam occupātae Syrācūsae erant, profectus est Carthāginem, after Syracuse had been seized, he set out for Carthage.

4. The Imperfect Indicative also sometimes occurs, to denote a continued state; as,—

postquam Rōmam adventābant, senātus cōnsultus est, after they were on the march toward Rome, the Senate was consulted;

postquam strūctī utrimque stābant, after they had been drawn up on both sides and were in position.

5. Rarely postquam, posteāquam, following the analogy of cum, take the Subjunctive, but only in the historical tenses; as,—

posteāquam sūmptuōsa fieri fūnera coepissent, lēge sublāta sunt, after funerals had begun to be elaborate, they were done away with by law.

Temporal Clauses introduced by Cum.

A. Cum REFERRING TO THE PAST.

288. 1. Cum, when referring to the past, takes,—

A. The Indicative (Imperfect, Historical Perfect, or Pluperfect) to denote the point of time at which something occurs.

B. The Subjunctive (Imperfect or Pluperfect) to denote the situation or circumstances under which something occurs.

Examples:—

INDICATIVE.

an tum erās cōnsul, cum in Palātiō mea domus ārdēbat, or were you consul at the time when my house burned up on the Palatine?

crēdō tum cum Sicilia flōrēbat opibus et cōpiīs magna artificia fuisse in eā īnsulā, I believe that at the time when Sicily was powerful in riches and resources there were great crafts in that island;

eō tempore pāruit cum pārēre necesse erat, he obeyed at the time when it was necessary to obey;

illō diē, cum est lāta lēx dē mē, on that day when the law concerning me was passed.

SUBJUNCTIVE.

Lysander cum vellet Lycūrgī lēgēs commūtāre, prohibitus est, when Lysander desired to change the laws of Lycurgus, he was prevented;

Pythagorās cum in geōmetriā quiddam novī invēnisset, Mūsīs bovem immolāsse dīcitur, when Pythagoras had discovered something new in geometry, he is said to have sacrificed an ox to the Muses.

a. Note that the Indicative is much less frequent in such clauses than the Subjunctive, and is regularly confined to those cases where the main clause has tum, eō diē, eō annō, eō tempore or some similar correlative of the cum. Sometimes it depends entirely upon the point of view of the writer whether he shall employ the Indicative or Subjunctive.

2. Cum Inversum. When the logical order of the clauses is inverted, we find cum with the Perfect Indicative or Historical Present, in the sense of when, when suddenly. The main clause in such cases often has jam, vix, aegrē, nōndum; as,—

jam Gallī ex oppidō fugere apparābant, cum mātrēs familiae repente prōcurrērunt, the Gauls were already preparing to flee, when suddenly the matrons rushed forth (logically, the matrons rushed forth as the Gauls were preparing to flee);

Trēvirī Labiēnum adorīrī parābant, cum duās legiōnēs vēnisse cognōscunt, the Treviri were preparing to attack, when (suddenly) they learned that two legions had arrived.

3. To denote a recurring action in the past, cum is followed by the Indicative, particularly of the Pluperfect (compare §§ 287, 2; 302, 3); as,—

cum ād aliquod oppidum vēnerat, eādem lectīcā ad cubiculum dēferēbātur, whenever he had arrived at some town, he was (always) carried in the same litter to his room;

cum equitātus noster sē in agrōs ējēcerat, essedāriōs ex silvīs ēmittēbat, whenever our cavalry had advanced into the fields, he would send his charioteers out from the woods.

a. Sometimes the Imperfect or Pluperfect Subjunctive is thus used; as,—

saepe cum aliquem vidēret minus bene vestītum, suum amiculum dedit, often, wherever he saw some one more poorly clothed, he gave him his own mantle;

cum prōcucurrissent, Numidae effugiēbant, as often as they had advanced, the Numidians ran away.

This construction is frequent in Livy and subsequent historians.

B. Cum REFERRING TO THE PRESENT OR FUTURE.

289. When cum refers to the Present or Future it regularly takes the Indicative; as,—

tum tua rēs agitur, pariēs cum proximus ārdet, your own interests are at stake when your neighbor's house is burning;

cum vidēbis, tum sciēs, when you see, then you will know.

a. The Indicative of the Present or Future may denote also a recurring action; as,—

stabilitās amīcitiae cōnfirmārī potest, cum hominēs cupīdinibus imperābunt, firm friendship can be established whenever men shall control their desires.

C. OTHER USES OF Cum.

290. 1. Cum Explicative. Cum, with the Indicative, is sometimes used to indicate the identity of one act with another; as,—

cum tacent clāmant, their silence is a shout (lit. when they are silent, they shout).

2. Cum ... tum. When cum ... tum mean both ... and, the cum-clause is in the Indicative; but when cum has the force of while, though, it may take the Subjunctive; as,—

cum tē semper dīlēxerim, tum tuīs factīs incēnsus sum, while I have always loved you, at the same time I am stirred by your conduct.

Clauses introduced by Antequam and Priusquam.

A. WITH THE INDICATIVE.

291. Antequam and priusquam (often written ante ... quam, prius ... quam) take the Indicative to denote an actual fact.

1. Sometimes the Present or Future Perfect; as,—

prius respondēs quam rogō, you answer before I ask;

nihil contrā disputābō priusquam dīxerit, I will say nothing in opposition, before he speaks.

2. Sometimes the Perfect, especially after negative clauses; as,—

nōn prius jugulandī fīnis fuit, quam Sulla omnēs suōs dīvitiīs explēvit, there was no end of murder until Sulla satisfied all his henchmen with wealth.

B. WITH THE SUBJUNCTIVE.

292. Antequam and priusquam take the Subjunctive to denote an act as anticipated.

1. Thus the Subjunctive may denote—

a) An act in preparation for which the main act takes place; as,—

priusquam dīmicārent, foedus īctum est, i.e. in anticipation of the fight, a treaty was struck.

By an extension of this usage, the Subjunctive is sometimes used of general truths, where the anticipatory notion has faded out; as,—

tempestās minātur antequam surgat, the tempest threatens before it rises.

b) An act anticipated and forestalled; as,—

priusquam tēlum adicī posset, omnis aciēs terga vertit, before a spear could be hurled, the whole army fled.

c) An act anticipated and deprecated; as,—

animum omittunt priusquam locō dēmigrent, they die rather than quit their post.

2. After historical tenses the Imperfect Subjunctive is used, especially by some writers, where the notion of anticipation has practically vanished; as,—

sōl antequam sē abderet fugientem vīdit Antōnium, the sun before it set saw Antony fleeing.

Clauses introduced by Dum, Dōnec, Quoad.

293. 1. Dum, while, regularly takes the Indicative of the Historical Present; as,—

Alexander, dum inter prīmōrēs pugnat, sagittā ictus est, Alexander, while he was fighting in the van, was struck by an arrow;

dum haec geruntur, in fīnēs Venellōrum pervēnit, while these things were being done, he arrived in the territory of the Venelli.

II. Dum, dōnec, and quoad, as long as, take the Indicative; as,—

dum anima est, spēs est, as long as there is life, there is hope;

Lacedaemoniōrum gēns fortis fuit, dum Lycūrgī lēgēs vigēbant, the race of the Lacedaemonians was powerful, as long as the laws of Lycurgus were in force;

Catō, quoad vīxit, virtūtum laude crēvit, Cato, at long as he lived, increased in the fame of his virtues.

III. Dum, dōnec, and quoad, until, take:—

1. The Indicative, to denote an actual event; as,—

dōnec rediit, fuit silentium, there was silence till he came;

ferrum in corpore retinuit, quoad renūntiātum est Boeōtiōs vīcisse, he kept the iron in his body until word was brought that the Boeotians had conquered.

a. In Livy and subsequent historians dum and dōnec in this sense often take the Subjunctive instead of the Indicative; as,—

trepidātiōnis aliquantum ēdēbant dōnec timor quiētem fēcisset, they showed some trepidation, until fear produced quiet.

2. The Subjunctive, to denote anticipation or expectancy; as,—

exspectāvit Caesar dum nāvēs convenīrent, Caesar waited for the ships to assemble;

dum litterae veniant, morābor, I shall wait for the letter to come.

Substantive Clauses.

294. A Substantive Clause is one which as a whole serves as the Subject or Object of a verb, or stands in some other case relation.

A. Substantive Clauses developed from the Volitive.

295. Substantive Clauses Developed from the Volitive are used with the following classes of verbs:—

1. With verbs signifying to admonish, request, command, urge, persuade, induce,^[51] etc. (conjunctions ut, nē, or ut nē); as,—

postulō ut fīat, I demand that it be done (dependent form of the Jussive fīat, let it be done!);

ōrat, nē abeās, he begs that you will not go away;

mīlitēs cohortātus est ut hostium impetum sustinērent, he exhorted his soldiers to withstand the attack of the enemy;

Helvētiīs persuāsit ut exīrent, he persuaded the Helvetii to march forth.

a. Jubeō, command, order, regularly takes the Infinitive.

2. With verbs signifying to grant, concede, permit, allow,^[52] etc. (conjunction ut); as,—

huic concēdō ut ea praetereat, I allow him to pass that by (dependent form of the Jussive ea praetereat, let him pass that by!);

cōnsulī permissum est ut duās legiōnēs scrīberet, the consul was permitted to enroll two legions.

3. With verbs of hindering, preventing,^[53] etc. (conjunctions nē, quōminus, quīn); as,—

nē lūstrum perficeret, mors prohibuit, death prevented him from finishing the lustrum (dependent form after past tense of nē lūstrum perficiat, let him not finish, etc.);

prohibuit quōminus in ūnum coīrent, he prevented them from coming together;

nec quīn ērumperet, prohibērī poterat, nor could he be prevented from rushing forth.

a. Quīn is used only when the verb of hindering is accompanied by a negative, or stands in a question implying a negative; it is not necessarily used even then.

4. With verbs of deciding, resolving,^[54] etc. (conjunctions ut, nē, or ut nē); as,—

cōnstitueram ut prīdiē Īdūs Aquīnī manērem, I had decided to remain at Aquinum on the 12th;

dēcrēvit senātus ut Opīmius vidēret, the Senate decreed that Opimius should see to it;

convēnit ut ūnīs castrīs miscērentur, it was agreed that they should be united in one camp.

5. With verbs of striving,^[55] etc. (conjunctions ut, nē, or ut nē); as,—

fac ut eum exōrēs, see to it that you prevail upon him!

cūrā ut vir sīs, see to it that you are a man!

labōrābat ut reliquās cīvitātēs adjungeret, he was striving to join the remaining states to him.

a. Cōnor, try, always takes the Infinitive.

NOTE.—Verbs of all the above classes also admit the Infinitive, especially in poetry.

6. With a few other expressions, such as necesse est, reliquus est, sequitur, licet, oportet; as,—

sequitur ut doceam, it remains for me to show;

licet redeās, you may return;

oportet loquāmur, we must speak.

On the absence of ut with licet and oportet, see paragraph 8.

7. Here also belong phrases of the type: nūlla causa est cūr, quīn; nōn est cūr, etc.; nihil est cūr, etc.; as,—

nūlla causa est cūr timeam, there is no reason why I should fear (originally Deliberative: why should I fear? There's no reason);

nihil est quīn dīcam, there is no reason why I should not say.

8. Many of the above classes of verbs at times take the simple Subjunctive without ut. In such cases we must not recognize any omission of ut, but simply an earlier form of expression which existed before the ut-clause arose. This is regularly the case with necesse est, licet, and oportet; see 6. Other examples are:—

eōs moneō dēsinant, I warn them to stop;

huic imperat adeat cīvitātēs, he orders him to visit the states.

B. Substantive Clauses developed from the Optative.

296. Substantive Clauses Developed from the Optative occur:—

1. With verbs of wishing, desiring, especially cupiō, optō, volō, mālō (conjunctions ut, nē, ut nē); as,—

optō ut in hōc jūdiciō nēmō improbus reperiātur, I hope that in this court no bad man may be found (here ut reperiātur represents a simple optative of direct statement, viz. reperiātur, may no bad man be found!);

cupiō nē veniat, I desire that he may not come.

a. The simple Subjunctive (without ut) sometimes occurs with verbs of this class. (See § 295, 8.) Examples are: velim scrībās, I wish you would write; vellem scrīpsisset, I wish he had written.

2. With expressions of fearing (timeō, metuō, vereor, etc.). Here nē means that, lest, and ut means that not; as,—

timeō nē veniat, I fear that he will come (originally: may he not come! I'm afraid [he will]);

timeō ut veniat, I fear that he will not come (originally: may he come! I'm afraid [he won't]).

a. Nē nōn sometimes occurs instead of ut, especially where the verb of fearing has a negative, or where the writer desires to emphasize some particular word in the dependent clause; as,—

nōn vereor ne hōc nōn fīat, I am not afraid that this will not happen;

vereor nē exercitum fīrmum habēre nōn possit, I fear that he is unable (nōn possit) to have a strong army.

C. Substantive Clauses of Result.

297. Substantive Clauses of Result (introduced by ut, ut nōn) are a development of pure Result clauses, and occur with the following classes of words:—

1. As object clauses after verbs of doing, accomplishing (especially faciō, efficiō, cōnficiō). Thus:—

gravitās morbī facit ut medicīnā egeāmus, the severity of disease makes us need medicine.

2. As the subject of several impersonal verbs, particularly fit, efficitur, accidit, ēvenit, contingit, accēdit, fierī potest, fore, sequitur, relinquitur. Thus:—

ex quō efficitur, ut voluptās nōn sit summum bonum, from which it follows that pleasure is not the greatest good;

ita fit, ut nēmō esse possit beātus, thus it happens that no one can be happy;

accēdēbat ut nāvēs deessent, another thing was the lack of ships (lit. it was added that ships were lacking).

3. As predicate or appositive after expressions like jūs est, mōs est, cōnsuētūdō est; also after neuter pronouns, hōc, illud, etc. Thus:—

est mōs hominum ut nōlint eundem plūribus rēbus excellere, it is the way of men not to wish the same person to excel in many things.

D. Substantive Clauses introduced by Quīn.

298. Substantive Clauses introduced by quīn (used sometimes as subject, sometimes as object) occur after negative and interrogative expressions of doubt, omission, and the like, particularly after nōn dubitō, I do not doubt; quis dubitat, who doubts?; nōn (haud) dubium est, there is no doubt. The mood is the Subjunctive. Examples:—

quis dubitat quīn in virtūte dīvitiae sint, who doubts that in virtue there are riches?

nōn dubium erat quīn ventūrus esset, there was no doubt that he was about to come.

a. In Nepos, Livy, and post-Augustan writers an Infinitive sometimes takes the place of the quīn-clause after nōn dubitō; as,—

nōn dubitāmus inventōs esse, we do not doubt that men were found

b. Nōn dubitō, I do not hesitate, is regularly followed by the Infinitive, though sometimes by a quīn-clause.

E. Substantive Clauses Introduced by Quod.

299. 1. Quod, the fact that, that, introduces Substantive Clauses in the Indicative. This construction occurs especially—

a) In apposition with a preceding demonstrative, as hōc, id, illud, illa, ex eō, inde, etc. Thus:—

illud est admīrātiōne dignum, quod captīvōs retinendōs cēnsuit, this is especially worthy of admiration, that he thought the prisoners ought to be kept;

hōc ūnō praestāmus vel maximē ferīs, quod colloquimur inter nōs, in this one respect we are especially superior to the beasts, that we talk with each other.

b) After bene fit, bene accidit, male fit, bene facere, mīror, etc.; as,—

bene mihi ēvenit, quod mittor ad mortem, it is well for me that I am sent to death;

bene fēcistī quod mānsistī, you did well in remaining.

2. Quod at the beginning of the sentence sometimes has the force of as regards the fact that. Thus:—

quod multitūdinem Germānōrum in Galliam trādūcō, id meī mūniendī causā faciō, as regards the fact that I am transporting a multitude of Germans into Gaul, I am doing it for the sake of strengthening myself;

quod mē Agamemnona aemulārī putās, falleris, as regards your thinking that I emulate Agamemnon, you are mistaken.

F. Indirect Questions.

300. 1. Indirect Questions are Substantive Clauses used after verbs of asking, inquiring, telling, and the like. They take their verb in the Subjunctive^[56]. Like Direct Questions (see § 162) they may be introduced—

a) By Interrogative Pronouns or Adverbs; as,—

dīc mihi ubi fuerīs, quid fēcerīs, tell me where you were, what you did;

oculīs jūdicārī nōn potest in utram partem fluat Arar, it cannot be determined by the eye in which direction the Arar flows;

bis bīna quot essent, nesciēbat, he did not know how many two times two were.

NOTE.—Care should be taken to distinguish Indirect Questions from Relative Clauses. The difference between the two appears clearly in the following:—

effugere nēmō id potest quod futūrum est, no one can escape what is destined to come to pass; but saepe autem ne ūtile quidem est scīre quid futūrum sit, but often it is not even useful to know what is coming to pass.

b) By num or -ne, without distinction of meaning; as,—

Epamīnōndās quaesīvit num salvus esset clipeus, or salvusne esset clipeus, Epaminondas asked whether his shield was safe;

disputātur num interīre virtūs in homine possit, the question is raised whether virtue can die in a man;

ex Sōcrate quaesītum est nōnne Archelāum beātum putāret, the question was asked of Socrates whether he did not think Archelaus happy.

NOTE.—Nōnne in Indirect Questions occurs only after quaerō, as in the last example above.

2. Often the Indirect Question represents a Deliberative Subjunctive of the direct discourse; as,—

nesciō quid faciam, I do not know what to do. (Direct: quid faciam, what shall I do!)

3. After verbs of expectation and endeavor (exspectō, cōnor, experior, temptō) we sometimes find an Indirect Question introduced by sī; as,—

cōnantur sī perrumpere possint, they try whether they can break through.

a. Sometimes the governing verb is omitted; as,—

pergit ad proximam spēluncam sī forte eō vēstīgia ferrent, he proceeded to the nearest cave (to see) if the tracks led thither.

4. Indirect Double Questions are introduced in the main by the same particles as direct double questions (§ 162, 4); viz.;—

Examples:—

quaerō utrum vērum an falsum sit, quaerō vērumne an falsum sit, quaerō vērum an falsum sit, quaerō vērum falsumne sit, } } I ask whether it } is true or false? }

a. 'Or not' in the second member of the double question is ordinarily expressed by necne, less frequently by an nōn; as,—

dī utrum sint necne, quaeritur, it is asked whether there are gods or not.

5. Haud sciō an, nesciō an, by omission of the first member of the double question, occur with the Subjunctive in the sense: I am inclined to think, probably, perhaps; as,—

haud sciō an ita sit, I am inclined to think this is so.

6. In early Latin and in poetry the Indicative is sometimes used in indirect Questions.

CONDITIONAL SENTENCES.

301. Conditional Sentences are compound sentences (§ 164) consisting of two parts, the Protasis (or condition), usually introduced by sī, nisi, or sīn, and the Apodosis (or conclusion). There are the following types of Conditional Sentences:—

First Type.—Nothing Implied as to the Reality of the Supposed Case.

302. 1. Here we regularly have the Indicative in both Protasis and Apodosis. Any tense may be used; as,—

sī hōc crēdis, errās, if you believe this, you are mistaken;

nātūram sī sequēmur, numquam aberrābimus, if we follow Nature, we shall never go astray;

sī hōc dīxistī, errāstī, if you said this, you were in error.

2. Sometimes the Protasis takes the Indefinite Second Person Singular (§ 356, 3) of the Present or Perfect Subjunctive, with the force of the Indicative; as,—

memoria minuitur, nisi eam exerceās, memory is impaired unless you exercise it.

3. Here belong also those conditional sentences in which the Protasis denotes a repeated action (compare §§ 287, 2; 288, 3); as,—

sī quis equitum dēciderat, peditēs circumsistēbant, if any one of the horsemen fell, the foot-soldiers gathered about him.

a. Instead of the Indicative, Livy and subsequent writers employ the Subjunctive of the Historical tenses in the Protasis to denote repeated action; as,—

sī dīcendō quis diem eximeret, if (ever) anybody consumed a day in pleading; sī quandō adsidēret, if ever he sat by.

4. Where the sense demands it, the Apodosis in conditional sentences of the First Type may be an Imperative or one of the Independent Subjunctives (Hortatory, Deliberative, etc.); as,—

sī hōc crēditis, tacēte, if you believe this, be silent;

sī hōc crēdimus, taceāmus, if we believe this, let us keep silent.

Second Type.—'Should'-'Would' Conditions.

303. Here we regularly have the Subjunctive (of the Present or Perfect tense) in both Protasis and Apodosis; as,—

sī hōc dīcās, errēs, or sī hōc dīxerīs, errāverīs, if you should say this, you would be mistaken;

sī velim Hannibalis proelia omnia dēscrībere, diēs mē dēficiat, if I should wish to describe all the battles of Hannibal, time would fail me;

mentiar, sī negem, I should lie, if I should deny it;

haec sī tēcum patria loquātur, nōnne impetrāre dēbeat, if your country should plead thus with you, would she not deserve to obtain her request?

a. The Subjunctive in the Apodosis of conditional sentences of this type is of the Potential variety.

b. Sometimes we find the Indicative in the Apodosis of sentences of the Second Type, where the writer wishes to assert the accomplishment of a result more positively; as,—

aliter sī faciat, nūllam habet auctōritātem, if he should do otherwise, he has no authority.

Third Type.—Supposed Case Represented as Contrary to Fact.

304. 1. Here we regularly have the Subjunctive in both Protasis and Apodosis, the Imperfect referring to present time, and the Pluperfect referring to past; as,—

sī amīcī meī adessent, opis nōn indigērem, if my friends were here, I should not lack assistance;

sī hōc dīxissēs, errāssēs, if you had said this, you would have erred;

sapientia nōn expeterētur, sī nihil efficeret, philosophy would not be desired, if it accomplished nothing;

cōnsilium, ratiō, sententia nisi essent in senibus, nōn summum cōnsilium majōrēs nostrī appellāssent senātum, unless deliberation, reason, and wisdom existed in old men, our ancestors would not have called their highest deliberative body a senate.

2. Sometimes the Imperfect Subjunctive is found referring to the past, especially to denote a continued act, or a state of things still existing; as,—

Laelius, Fūrius, Catō sī nihil litterīs adjuvārentur, numquam sē ad eārum studium contulissent, Laelius, Furius, and Cato would never have devoted themselves to the study of letters, unless they had been (constantly) helped by them;

num igitur sī ad centēsimum annum vīxisset, senectūtis eum suae paenitēret, if he had lived to his hundredth year, would he have regretted (and now be regretting) his old age?

3. The Apodosis in conditional sentences of this type sometimes stands in the Indicative (Imperfect, Perfect, or Pluperfect), viz.—

a) Frequently in expressions of ability, obligation, or necessity; as,—

nisi fēlīcitās in sōcordiam vertisset, exuere jugum potuērunt, unless their prosperity had turned to folly, they could have thrown off the yoke;

NOTE.—In sentences of this type, however, it is not the possibility that is represented as-contrary-to-fact, but something to be supplied in thought from the context. Thus in the foregoing sentence the logical apodosis is et exuissent understood (and they would have shaken it off). When the possibility itself is conditioned, the Subjunctive is used.

eum patris locō colere dēbēbās, sī ūlla in tē pietās esset, you ought to revere him as a father, if you had any sense of devotion.

b) With both the Periphrastic Conjugations; as,—

sī Sēstius occīsus esset, fuistisne ad arma itūrī, if Sestius had been slain, would you have proceeded to arms?

sī ūnum diem morātī essētis, moriendum omnibus fuit, if you had delayed one day, you would all have had to die.

Protasis expressed without Sī.

305. 1. The Protasis is not always expressed by a clause with sī, but may be implied in a word, a phrase, or merely by the context; as,—

aliōquī haec nōn scrīberentur, otherwise (i.e. if matters were otherwise) these things would not be written;

nōn potestis, voluptāte omnia dīrigentēs, retinēre virtūtem, you cannot retain virtue, if you direct everything with reference to pleasure.

2. Sometimes an Imperative, or a Jussive Subjunctive, serves as Protasis. Thus:—

crās petitō, dabitur, if you ask to-morrow, it shall be given you (lit. ask to-morrow, etc.);

haec reputent, vidēbunt, if they consider this, they will see (lit. let them consider, etc.);

rogēs Zēnōnem, respondeat, if you should ask Zeno, he would answer.

Use of Nisi, Sī Nōn, Sīn.

306. 1. Nisi, unless, negatives the entire protasis; sī nōn negatives a single word; as,—

ferreus essem, nisi tē amārem, I should be hard-hearted unless I loved you; but—

ferreus essem, sī tē nōn amārem, I should be hard-hearted if I did NOT love you.

In the first example, it is the notion of loving you that is negatived, in the second, the notion of loving.

2. Sī nōn (sī minus) is regularly employed:—

a) When an apodosis with at, tamen, certē follows; as,—

dolōrem sī nōn potuerō frangere, tamen occultābō, if I cannot crush my sorrow, yet I will hide it.

b) When an affirmative protasis is repeated in negative form; as,—

sī fēceris, magnam habēbō grātiam; sī nōn fēceris, ignōscam, if you do it, I shall be deeply grateful; if you do not do it, I shall pardon you.

a. But if the verb is omitted in the repetition, only si minus or sin minus is admissible; as,—

hōc sī assecūtus sum, gaudeō; sī minus, mē cōnsōlor, if I have attained this, I am glad; if not, I console myself.

3. Sīn. Where one protasis is followed by another opposed in meaning, but affirmative in form, the second is introduced by sīn; as,—

hunc mihi timōrem ēripe; sī vērus est, nē opprimar, sīn falsus, ut timēre dēsinam, relieve me of this fear; if it is well founded, that I may not be destroyed; but if it is groundless, that I may cease to fear.

4. Nisi has a fondness for combining with negatives (nōn, nēmō, nihil); as,—

nihil cōgitāvit nisi caedem, he had no thought but murder.

a. Nōn and nisi are always separated in the best Latinity.

5. Nisi forte, nisi vērō, nisi sī, unless perchance, unless indeed (often with ironical force), take the Indicative; as,—

nisi vērō, quia perfecta rēs nōn est, nōn vidētur pūnienda, unless indeed, because an act is not consummated, it does not seem to merit punishment.

Conditional Clauses of Comparison.

307. 1. Conditional Clauses of Comparison are introduced by the particles, ac sī, ut sī, quasi, quam sī, tamquam sī, velut sī, or simply by velut or tamquam. They stand in the Subjunctive mood and regularly involve an ellipsis (see § 374, 1), as indicated in the following examples:—

tantus patrēs metus cēpit, velut sī jam ad portās hostis esset, as great fear seized the senators as (would have seized them) if the enemy were already at the gates;

sed quid ego hīs testibus ūtor quasi rēs dubia aut obscūra sit, but why do I use these witnesses, as (I should do) if the matter were doubtful or obscure;

serviam tibi tam quasi ēmerīs mē argentō, I will serve you as though you had bought me for money.

2. Note that in sentences of this kind the Latin observes the regular principles for the Sequence of Tenses. Thus after principal tenses the Latin uses the Present and Perfect (as in the second and third examples), where the English uses the Past and Past Perfect.

Concessive Clauses.

308. The term 'Concessive' is best restricted to those clauses developed from the Jussive Subjunctive which have the force of granted that, etc.; (see § 278) as,—

sit fūr, sit sacrilegus, at est bonus imperātor, granted that he is a thief and a robber, yet he is a good commander;

haec sint falsa, granted that this is false;

nē sit summum malum dolor, malum certē est, granted that pain is not the greatest evil, yet it is certainly an evil.

Adversative Clauses with Quamvīs, Quamquam, etc.

309. Clauses introduced by quamvīs, quamquam, etsī, tametsī, cum, although, while often classed as 'Concessive,' are yet essentially different from genuine Concessive clauses. As a rule, they do not grant or concede anything, but rather state that something is true in spite of something else. They accordingly emphasize the adversative idea, and are properly Subordinate Adversative Clauses. The different particles used to introduce these clauses have different meanings and take different constructions, as follows:—

1. Quamvīs, however much, although, does not introduce a statement of fact, but represents an act merely as conceived. It is followed by the Subjunctive, usually of the present tense; as,—

hominēs quamvīs in turbidīs rēbus sint, tamen interdum animīs relaxantur, in however stirring events men may engage, yet at times they relax their energies;

nōn est potestās opitulandī reī pūblicae quamvīs ea premātur perīculīs, there is no opportunity to succor the state, though it be beset by dangers.

2. Quamquam, etsī, tametsī, although, introduce a statement of fact, and are followed by the Indicative (of any tense); as,—

quamquam omnis virtūs nōs allicit, tamen jūstitia id maximē efficit, although all virtue attracts us, yet justice does so especially;

Caesar, etsī nōndum cōnsilium hostium cognōverat, tamen id quod accidit suspicābātur, Caesar, though he did not yet know the plans of the enemy, yet was suspecting what actually occurred.

a. Etsī, although, must be distinguished from etsī, even if. The latter is a conditional particle and takes any of the constructions admissible for sī. (See §§ 302-304.)

3. Cum, although, is followed by the Subjunctive; as,—

Atticus honōrēs nōn petiit, cum eī patērent, Atticus did not seek honors, though they were open to him.

4. Licet sometimes loses its verbal force (see § 295, 6) and sinks to the level of a conjunction with the force of although. It takes the Subjunctive, Present or Perfect; as,—

licet omnēs terrōrēs impendeant, succurram, though all terrors hang over me, (yet) I will lend aid.

5. Quamquam, with the force and yet, is often used to introduce principal clauses; as,—

quamquam quid loquor, and yet why do I speak?

6. In post-Augustan writers quamquam is freely construed with the Subjunctive, while quamvīs is often used to introduce statements of fact, and takes either the Indicative or the Subjunctive. Thus:—

quamquam movērētur hīs vōcibus, although he was moved by these words;

quamvīs multī opīnārentur, though many thought;

quamvīs īnfēstō animō pervēnerās, though you had come with hostile intent.

Clauses with Dum, Modo, Dummodo, denoting a Wish or a Proviso.

310. These particles are followed by the Subjunctive (negative nē) and have two distinct uses:—

I. They are used to introduce clauses embodying a wish entertained by the subject of the leading verb; as,—

multī honesta neglegunt dummodo potentiam cōnsequantur, many neglect honor in their desire to obtain power (if only they may attain);

omnia postposuī, dum praeceptīs patris pārērem, I made everything else secondary, in my desire to obey the injunctions of my father;

nīl obstat tibi, dum nē sit dītior alter, nothing hinders you in your desire that your neighbor may not be richer than you.

II. They are used to express a proviso ('provided that'); as,—

ōderint, dum metuant, let them hate, provided they fear;

manent ingenia senibus, modo permaneat studium et industria, old men retain their faculties, provided only they retain their interest and vigor;

nūbant, dum nē dōs fiat comes, let them marry, provided no dowry goes with it.

Relative Clauses.

311. Relative Clauses are introduced by Relative Pronouns, Adjectives, or Adverbs.

312. 1. Relative clauses usually stand in the Indicative Mood, especially clauses introduced by those General Relatives which are doubled or have the suffix -oumque; as,—

quidquid id est, timeō Danaōs et dōna ferentēs, whatever it is, I fear the Greeks even when they offer gifts;

quidquid oritur, quālecumque est, causam ā nātūrā habet, whatever comes into being, of whatever sort it is, has its primal cause in Nature.

2. Any simple Relative may introduce a conditional sentence of any of the three types mentioned in §§ 302-304; as,—

quī hōc dīcit, errat, he who says this is mistaken (First Type);

quī hōc dīcat, erret, he would be mistaken who should say this (Second Type);

quī hōc dīxisset, errāsset, the man who had said this would have been mistaken.

INDIRECT DISCOURSE (ŌRĀTIŌ OBLĪQUA).

313. When the language or thought of any person is reproduced without change, that is called Direct Discourse (Ōrātiō Recta); as, Caesar said, 'The die is cast.' When, on the other hand, one's language or thought is made to depend upon a verb of saying, thinking, etc., that is called Indirect Discourse (Ōrātiō Oblīqua); as, Caesar said that the die was cast; Caesar thought that his troops were victorious.

a. For the verbs most frequently employed to introduce Indirect Discourse, see § 331.

MOODS IN INDIRECT DISCOURSE.

Declarative Sentences.

314. 1. Declarative Sentences upon becoming Indirect change their main clause to the Infinitive with Subject Accusative, while all subordinate clauses take the Subjunctive; as,—

Rēgulus dīxit quam diū jūre jūrandō hostium tenērētur nōn esse sē senātōrem, Regulus said that as long as he was held by his pledge to the enemy he was not a senator. (Direct: quam diū teneor nōn sum senātor.)

2. The verb of saying, thinking, etc., is sometimes to be inferred from the context; as,—

tum Rōmulus lēgātōs circā vīcīnās gentēs mīsit quī societātem cōnūbiumque peterent: urbēs quoque, ut cētera, ex īnfimō nāscī, then Romulus sent envoys around among the neighboring tribes, to ask for alliance and the right of intermarriage, (saying that) cities, like everything else, start from a modest beginning.

3. Subordinate clauses which contain an explanatory statement of the writer and so are not properly a part of the Indirect Discourse, or which emphasize the fact stated, take the Indicative; as,—

nūntiātum est Ariovistum ad occupandum Vesontiōnem, quod est oppidum maximum Sēquanōrum contendere, it was reported that Ariovistus was hastening to seize Vesontio, which is the largest town of the Sequani.

4. Sometimes a subordinate clause is such only in its external form, and in sense is principal. It then takes the Infinitive with Subject Accusative. This occurs especially in case of relative clauses, where quī is equivalent to et hīc, nam hīc, etc.; as,—

dīxit urbem Athēniēnsium prōpugnāculum oppositum esse barbarīs, apud quam jam bis classēs rēgiās fēcisse naufragium, he said the city of the Athenians had been set against the barbarians like a bulwark, near which (= and near it) the fleets of the King had twice met disaster.

5. The Subject Accusative of the Infinitive is sometimes omitted when it refers to the same person as the subject of the leading verb, or can easily be supplied from the context; as,—

cum id nescīre Māgō dīceret, when Mago said he did not know this (for sē nescīre).

Interrogative Sentences.

315. 1. Real questions of the Direct Discourse, upon becoming indirect, are regularly put in the Subjunctive; as,—

Ariovistus Caesarī respondit: sē prius in Galliam vēnisse quam populum Rōmānum. Quid sibi vellet? Cūr in suās possessiōnēs venīret, Ariovistus replied to Caesar that he had come into Gaul before the Roman people. What did he (Caesar) mean? Why did he come into his domain? (Direct: quid tibi vīs? cūr in meās possessiōnēs venīs?)

2. Rhetorical questions, on the other hand, being asked merely for effect, and being equivalent in force to emphatic statements, regularly stand in the Infinitive in Indirect Discourse. Thus :—

quid est levius (lit. what is more trivial, = nothing is more trivial) of the Direct Discourse becomes quid esse levius in the Indirect.

3. Deliberative Subjunctives of the Direct Discourse remain unchanged in mood in the Indirect: as,—

quid faceret, what was he to do? (Direct: quid faciat?)

Imperative Sentences.

316. All Imperatives or Jussive Subjunctives of the Direct Discourse appear as Subjunctives in the Indirect; as,—

mīlitēs certiōrēs fēcit paulisper intermitterent proelium, he told the soldiers to stop the battle for a little. (Direct: intermittite.)

a. The negative in such sentences is nē; as,—

nē suae virtūtī tribueret, let him not attribute it to his own valor!

TENSES IN INDIRECT DISCOURSE.

A. Tenses of the Infinitive.

317. These are used in accordance with the regular principles for the use of the Infinitive as given in § 270.

a. The Perfect Infinitive may represent any past tense of the Indicative of Direct Discourse. Thus:—

sciō tē haec ēgisse may mean—

I know you were doing this.(Direct: haec agēbās.)

I know you did this. (Direct: haec ēgistī.)

I know you had done this. (Direct: haec ēgerās.)

B. Tenses of the Subjunctive.

318. These follow the regular principle for the Sequence of Tenses, being Principal if the verb of saying is Principal; Historical if it is Historical. Yet for the sake of vividness, we often find the Present Subjunctive used after an historical tense (Repraesentātiō); as,—

Caesar respondit, sī obsidēs dentur, sēsē pācem esse factūrum, Caesar replied that, if hostages be given, he would make peace.

a. For the sequence after the Perfect Infinitive, see § 268, 2.

CONDITIONAL SENTENCES IN INDIRECT DISCOURSE.

Conditional Sentences of the First Type.

319. A. THE APODOSIS. Any tense of the Indicative is changed to the corresponding tense of the Infinitive (§§ 270; 317, a).

B. THE PROTASIS. The protasis takes those tenses of the Subjunctive which are required by the Sequence of Tenses.

Examples:—

DIRECT. INDIRECT.

sī hōc crēdis, errās, dīcō, sī hōc crēdās, tē errāre; dīxī, sī hōc crēderēs, tē errāre.

sī hōc crēdēs, errābis, dīcō, sī hōc crēdās, tē errātūrum esse; dīxī, sī hōc crēderēs, tē errātūrum esse.

sī hōc crēdideris, errābis, dīcō, sī hōc crēderīs, tē errātūrum esse; dīxī, sī hōc crēdidissēs, tē errātūrum esse.

sī hōc crēdēbās, errāvistī, dīcō, sī hōc crēderēs, tē errāvisse; dīxī, sī hōc crēderēs, tē errāvisse.

a. Note that a Future Perfect Indicative of the Direct Discourse regularly appears in the Indirect as a Perfect Subjunctive after a principal tense, and as a Pluperfect Subjunctive after an historical tense.

Conditional Sentences of the Second Type.

320. A. THE APODOSIS. The Present Subjunctive of the Direct Discourse regularly becomes the Future Infinitive of the Indirect.

B. THE PROTASIS. The Protasis takes those tenses of the Subjunctive demanded by the sequence of tenses.

Examples:—

sī hōc crēdās, errēs, dīcō, sī hōc crēdās, tē errātūrum esse; dīxī, sī hōc crēderēs, tē errātūrum esse;

Conditional Sentences of the Third Type.

321. A. THE APODOSIS.

1. The Imperfect Subjunctive of the Direct Discourse becomes the Future Infinitive.

a. But this construction is rare, being represented in the classical Latinity by a single example (Caesar, V. 29. 2). Some scholars question the correctness of this passage.

2. The Pluperfect Subjunctive of the Direct Discourse becomes:—

a) In the Active Voice the Infinitive in -ūrus fuisse.

b) In the Passive Voice it takes the form futūrum fuisse ut with the Imperfect Subjunctive.

B. THE PROTASIS. The protasis in Conditional Sentences of this type always remains unchanged.

Examples:—

sī hōc crēderēs, errārēs, dīcō (dīxī), sī hōc crēderēs, tē errātūrum esse;

sī hōc crēdidissēs, errāvissēs, dīcō (dīxī), sī hōc crēdidissēs, tē errātūrum fuisse;

sī hōc dīxissēs, pūnītus essēs. dīcō (dīxī), sī hōc dīxissēs, futūrum fuisse ut pūnīrēris.

322. When an apodosis of a conditional sentence of the Third Type referring to the past is at the same time a Result clause or a quīn-clause (after nōn dubitō, etc.), it stands in the Perfect Subjunctive in the form -ūrus fuerim; as,—

ita territī sunt, ut arma trāditūrī fuerint,^[57] nisi Caesar subitō advēnisset, they were so frightened that they would have given up their arms, had not Caesar suddenly arrived;

nōn dubitō quīn, sī hōc dīxissēs, errātūrus fuerīs,^[57] I do not doubt that, if you had said this, you would have made a mistake.

a. This peculiarity is confined to the Active Voice. In the Passive, such sentences, when they become dependent, remain unchanged; as,—

nōn dubitō quīn, sī hōc dīxissēs, vituperātus essēs, I do not doubt that, if you had said this, you would have been blamed.

b. When an Indirect Question becomes an apodosis in a conditional sentence of the Third Type, -ūrus fuerim (rarely -ūrus fuissem) is used; as,—

quaerō, num, sī hōc dīxissēs, errātūrus fuerīs (or fuissēs).

c. Potuī, when it becomes a dependent apodosis in sentences of this Type, usually changes to the Perfect Subjunctive; as,—

concursū tōtīus civitātis dēfēnsī sunt, ut frīgidissimōs quoque ōrātōrēs populī studia excitāre potuerint, they were defended before a gathering of all the citizens, so that the interest of the people would have been enough to excite even the most apathetic orators.

IMPLIED INDIRECT DISCOURSE.

323. The Subjunctive is often used in subordinate clauses whose indirect character is merely implied by the context; as,—

dēmōnstrābantur mihi praetereā, quae Sōcratēs dē immortālitāte animōrum disseruisset, there were explained to me besides, the arguments which Socrates had set forth concerning the immortality of the soul (i.e. the arguments which, it was said, Socrates had set forth);

Paetus omnēs librōs quōs pater suus relīquisset mihi dōnāvit, Paetus gave me all the books which (as he said) his father had left.

SUBJUNCTIVE BY ATTRACTION.

324. 1. Subordinate clauses dependent upon the Subjunctive are frequently attracted into the same mood especially when they do not express a fact, but constitute an essential part of one complex idea; as,—

nēmō avārus adhūc inventus est, cui, quod habēret, esset satis, no miser has yet been found who was satisfed with what he had;

cum dīversās causās afferrent, dum fōrmam suī quisque et animī et ingeniī redderent, as they brought forward different arguments, while each mirrored his own individual type of mind and natural bent;

quod ego fatear, pudeat? should I be ashamed of a thing which I admit?

2. Similarly a subordinate clause dependent upon an Infinitive is put in the Subjunctive when the two form one closely united whole; as,—

mōs est Athēnīs quotannīs in cōntiōne laudārī eōs quī sint in proeliīs interfectī, it is the custom at Athens every year for those to be publicly eulogized who have been killed in battle. (Here the notion of 'praising those who fell in battle' forms an inseparable whole.)

NOUN AND ADJECTIVE FORMS OF THE VERB.

325. These are the Infinitive, Participle, Gerund, and Supine. All of these partake of the nature of the Verb, on the one hand, and of the Noun or Adjective, on the other. Thus:—

As Verbs,—

As Nouns or Adjectives,—

THE INFINITIVE.

Infinitive without Subject Accusative.

326. This is used chiefly as Subject or Object but also as Predicate or Appositive.

NOTE.—The Infinitive was originally a Dative, and traces of this are still to be seen in the poetical use of the Infinitive to express purpose; as, nec dulcēs occurrent ōscula nātī praeripere, and no sweet children will run to snatch kisses.

A. As Subject.

327. 1. The Infinitive without Subject Accusative is used as the Subject of esse and various impersonal verbs, particularly opus est, necesse est, oportet, juvat, dēlectat, placet, libet, licet, praestat, decet, pudet, interest, etc.; as,—

dulce et decōrum est prō patriā morī, it is sweet and noble to die for one's country;

virōrum est fortium toleranter dolōrem patī, it is the part of brave men to endure pain with patience;

senātuī placuit lēgātōs mittere, the Senate decided (lit. it pleased the Senate) to send envoys.

2. Even though the Infinitive itself appears without Subject, it may take a Predicate Noun or Adjective in the Accusative; as,—

aliud est īrācundum esse, aliud īrātum, it is one thing to be irascible, another to be angry;

impūne quaelibet facere, id est rēgem esse, to do whatever you please with impunity, that is to be a king.

a. But when licet is followed by a Dative of the person, a Predicate Noun or Adjective with esse is attracted into the same case; as, licuit esse ōtiōsō Themistoclī, lit. it was permitted to Themistocles to be at leisure. So sometimes with other Impersonals.

B. As Object.

328. 1. The Infinitive without Subject Accusative is used as the Object of many verbs, to denote another action of the same subject, particularly after—

volō, cupiō, mālō, nōlō, dēbeo, ought; statuō, cōnstituō, decide; audeō, dare; studeō, contendō, strive; parō, prepare (so parātus); incipiō, coepī, īnstituō, begin; pergō, continue; dēsinō, dēsistō, cease; possum, can; cōnor, try; cōgitō, meditor, purpose, intend; neglegō, neglect; vereor, timeō, fear; mātūrō, festīnō, properō, contendō, hasten; assuēscō, cōnsuēscō, accustom myself (so assuētus, īnsuētus, assuēfactus); discō, learn; sciō, know how; soleō, am wont;

as,—

tū hōs intuērī audēs, do you dare to look on these men?

Dēmosthenēs ad flūctūs maris dēclāmāre solēbat, Demosthenes used to declaim by the waves of the sea.

2. A Predicate Noun or Adjective with these Infinitives is attracted into the Nominative; as,—

beātus esse sine virtūte nēmō potest, no one can be happy without virtue;

Catō esse quam vidērī bonus mālēbat, Cato preferred to be good rather than to seem so.

Infinitive with Subject Accusative.

329. This is used chiefly as Subject or Object but also as Predicate or Appositive.

A. As Subject.

330. The Infinitive with Subject Accusative (like the simple Infinitive) is used as Subject with esse and Impersonal verbs, particularly with aequum est, ūtile est, turpe est, fāma est, spēs est, fās est, nefās est, opus est, necesse est, oportet, cōnstat, praestat, licet, etc.; as,—

nihil in bellō oportet contemnī, nothing ought to be despised in war;

apertum est sibi quemque nātūrā esse cārum, it is manifest that by nature everybody is dear to himself.

B. As Object.

331. The Infinitive with Subject Accusative is used as Object after the following classes of verbs:

1. Most frequently after verbs of saying, thinking, knowing, perceiving, and the like (Verba Sentiendi et Dēclārandī). This is the regular construction of Principal Clauses of Indirect Discourse. Verbs that take this construction are, among others, the following: sentiō, audiō, videō, cognōscō; putō, jūdicō, spērō, cōnfīdō; sciō, meminī; dicō, affīrmō, negō (say that ... not), trādō, nārrō, fateor, respondeō, scrībō, prōmittō, glōrior. Also the phrases: certiōrem faciō (inform), memoriā teneō (remember), etc.

Examples:—

Epicūrēī putant cum corporibus simul animōs interīre, the Epicureans think that the soul perishes with the body;

Thalēs dīxit aquam esse initium rērum, Thales said that water was the first principle of the universe;

Dēmocritus negat quicquid esse sempiternum, Democritus says nothing is everlasting;

spērō eum ventūrum esse, I hope that he will come.

II. With jubeō, order, and vetō, forbid; as,—

Caesar mīlitēs pontem facere jussit, Caesar ordered the soldiers to make a bridge.

a. When the name of the person who is ordered or forbidden to do something is omitted, the Infinitive with jubeō and vetō is put in the Passive; as, Caesar pontem fierī jussit.

III. With patior and sinō, permit, allow; as,—

nūllō sē implicārī negōtiō passus est, he did not permit himself to be involved in any difficulty.

IV. With volō, nōlō, mālō, cupiō, when the Subject of the Infinitive is different from that of the governing verb; as,—

nec mihi hunc errōrem extorquērī volō, nor do I wish this error to be wrested from me;

eās rēs jactārī nōlēbat, he was unwilling that these matters should be discussed;

tē tuā fruī virtūte cupimus, we desire that you enjoy your worth.

a. When the Subject of both verbs is the same, the simple Infinitive is regularly used in accordance with § 328, 1. But exceptions occur, especially in case of esse and Passive Infinitives as,—

cupiō mē esse clēmentem, I desire to be lenient;

Tīmoleōn māluit sē diligī quam metuī, Timoleon preferred to be loved rather than feared.

b. Volō also admits the Subjunctive, with or without ut; nōlō the Subjunctive alone. (See § 296, 1, a.)

V. With Verbs of emotion (joy, sorrow, regret, etc.), especially gaudeō, laetor, doleō; aegrē ferō, molestē ferō, graviter ferō, am annoyed, distressed; mīror, queror, indignor; as,—

gaudeō tē salvum advenīre, I rejoice that you arrive safely;

nōn molestē ferunt sē libīdinum vinculīs laxātōs ēsse, they are not troubled at being released from the bonds of passion;

mīror tē ad mē nihil scrībere, I wonder that you write me nothing.

a. Instead of an Infinitive these verbs also sometimes admit a quod- clause as Object. (See § 299.) Thus:—

mīror quod nōn loqueris, I wonder that you do not speak.

VI. Some verbs which take two Accusatives, one of the Person and the other of the Thing (§ 178, 1), may substitute an Infinitive for the second Accusative; as,—

cōgō tē hōc facere, I compel you to do this (cf. tē hōc cōgō);

docuī tē contentum esse, I taught you to be content (cf. tē modestiam docuī, I taught you temperance).

Passive Construction of the Foregoing Verbs.

332. Those verbs which in the Active are followed by the Infinitive with Subject Accusative, usually admit the personal construction of the Passive. This is true of the following and of some others:—

a) jubeor, vetor, sinor; as,—

mīlitēs pontem facere jussī sunt, the soldiers were ordered to build a bridge;

pōns fierī jussus est, a bridge was ordered built;

mīlitēs castrīs exīre vetitī sunt, the troops were forbidden to go out of the camp;

Sēstius Clōdium accūsāre nōn est situs, Sestius was not allowed to accuse Clodius.

b) videor, I am seen, I seem; as,—

vidētur comperisse, he seems to have discovered.

c) dīcor, putor, exīstimor, jūdicor (in all persons); as,—

dīcitur in Italiam vēnisse, he is said to have come into Italy;

Rōmulus prīmus rēx Rōmānōrum fuisse putātur, Romulus is thought to have been the first king of the Romans.

d) fertur, feruntur, trāditur, trāduntur (only in the third person); as,—

fertur Homērus caecus fuisse, Homer is said to have been blind;

carmina Archilochī contumēliīs referta esse trāduntur, Archilochus's poems are reported to have been full of abuse.

NOTE.—In compound tenses and periphrastic forms, the last two classes of verbs, c), d), more commonly take the impersonal construction; as—

trāditum est Homērum caecum fuisse, the story goes that Homer was blind.

Infinitive with Adjectives.

333. The Infinitive with Adjectives (except parātus, assuētus, etc.; see § 328, 1) occurs only in poetry and post-Augustan prose writers; as,—

contentus dēmōnstrāsse, contented to have proved;

audāx omnia perpetī, bold for enduring everything.

Infinitive in Exclamations.

334. The Infinitive is used in Exclamations implying scorn, indignation, or regret. An intensive -ne is often attached to some word in the clause. Examples:—

huncine sōlem tam nigrum surrēxe mihi, to think that to-day's sun rose with such evil omen for me!

sedēre tōtōs diēs in vīllā, to stay whole days at the villa.

Historical Infinitive.

335. The Infinitive is often used in historical narrative instead of the Imperfect Indicative. The Subject stands in the Nominative; as,—

interim cottīdiē Caesar Haeduōs frūmentum flāgitāre, meanwhile Caesar was daily demanding grain of the Haedui.

PARTICIPLES.

Tenses of the Participle.

336. 1. The tenses of the Participle, like those of the infinitive (see § 270), express time not absolutely, but with reference to the verb upon which the Participle depends.

2. The Present Participle denotes action contemporary with that of the verb. Thus:—

audiō tē loquentem = you ARE speaking and I hear you;

audiēbam tē loquentem = you WERE speaking and I heard you;

audiam tē loquentem = you WILL BE speaking and I shall hear you.

a. The Present Participle is sometimes employed with Conative force; as,—

assurgentem rēgem resupīnat, as the king was trying to rise, he threw him down.

3. The Perfect Passive Participle denotes action prior to that of the verb. Thus:—

locūtus taceō = I HAVE spoken and am silent;

locūtus tacui = I HAD spoken and then was silent;

locūtus tacēbō = I SHALL speak and then shall be silent.

4. The absolute time of the action of a participle, therefore, is determined entirely by the finite verb with which it is connected.

5. Certain Perfect Passive Participles of Deponent and Semi-Deponent Verbs are used as Presents; viz. arbitrātus, ausus, ratus, gāvīsus, solitus, ūsus, cōnfīsus, diffīsus, secūtus, veritus.

Use of Participles.

337. As an Adjective the Participle may be used either as an attributive or predicate modifier of a Substantive.

1. Attributive Use. This presents no special peculiarities. Examples are:—

glōria est cōnsentiēns laus bonōrum, glory is the unanimous praise of the good;

Conōn mūrōs ā Lysandrō dīrutōs reficit, Conon restored the walls destroyed by Lysander.

2. Predicate Use. Here the Participle is often equivalent to a subordinate clause. Thus the Participle may denote:—

a) Time; as,—

omne malum nāscēns facile opprimitur, every evil is easily crushed at birth.

b) A Condition; as,—

mente ūtī nōn possumus cibō et pōtiōne complētī, if gorged with food and drink, we cannot use our intellects.

c) Manner; as,—

Solōn senēscere sē dīcēbat multa in diēs addiscentem, Solon said he grew old learning many new things daily.

d) Means; as,—

sōl oriēns diem cōnficit, the sun, by its rising, makes the day.

e) Opposition ('though'); as,—

mendācī hominī nē vērum quidem dīcentī crēdimus, we do not believe a liar, though he speaks the truth.

f) Cause; as,—

perfidiam veritus ad suōs recessit, since he feared treachery, he returned to his own troops.

3. Videō and audiō, besides the Infinitive, take the Present Participle in the Predicate use; as,—

videō tē fugientem, I see you fleeing.

a. So frequently faciō, fingō, indūcō, etc.; as,—

eīs Catōnem respondentem facimus, we represent Cato replying to them;

Homērus Laërtem colentem agrum facit, Homer represents Laërtes tilling the field.

4. The Future Active Participle (except futūrus) is regularly confined to its use in the Periphrastic Conjugation, but in poets and later writers it is used independently, especially to denote purpose; as,—

vēnērunt castra oppugnātūrī, they came to assault the camp.

5. The Perfect Passive Participle is often equivalent to a coördinate clause; as,—

urbem captam dīruit, he captured and destroyed the city (lit. he destroyed the city captured).

6. The Perfect Passive Participle in combination with a noun is sometimes equivalent to an abstract noun with a dependent Genitive; as,—

post urbem conditam, after the founding of the city;

Quīnctius dēfēnsus, the defense of Quinctius;

quibus animus occupātus, the preoccupation of the mind with which.

7. Habeō sometimes takes a Perfect Passive Participle in the Predicate construction with a force not far removed from that of the Perfect or Pluperfect Indicative; as,—

equitātus quem coāctum habēbat, the cavalry which he had collected.

8. The Gerundive denotes obligation, necessity, etc. Like other Participles it may be used either as Attributive or Predicate.

a) Less frequently as Attributive. Thus:—

liber legendus, a book worth reading;

lēgēs observandae, laws deserving of observance.

b) More frequently as Predicate.

1) In the Passive Periphrastic Conjugation (amandus est, etc.). In this use Intransitive Verbs can be used only impersonally, but admit their ordinary case-construction (Gen., Dat., Abl.); as,—

veniendum est, it is necessary to come;

oblīvīscendum est offēnsārum, one must forget injuries;

numquam prōditōrī crēdendum est, you must never trust a traitor;

suō cuique ūtendum est jūdiciō, every man must use his own judgment.

2) After cūrō, provide for; dō, trādō, give over; relinquō, leave; concēdō, hand over, and some other verbs, instead of an object clause, or to denote purpose; as,—

Caesar pontem in Ararī faciendum cūrāvit, Caesar provided for the construction of a bridge over the Arar;

imperātor urbem mīlitibus dīripiendam concessit, the general handed over the city to the soldiers to plunder.

9. For the Gerundive as the equivalent of the Gerund, see § 339, 1.

THE GERUND.

338. As a verbal noun the Gerund admits noun constructions as follows:—

1. Genitive. The Genitive of the Gerund is used—

a) With Nouns, as objective or Appositional Genitive (see §§ 200, 202); as,—

cupiditās dominandī, desire of ruling;

ars scrībendī, the art of writing.

b) With Adjectives; as,—

cupidus audiendī, desirous of hearing.

c) With causā, grātiā; as,—

discendī causā, for the sake of learning.

2. Dative. The Dative of the Gerund is used—

a) With Adjectives; as,—

aqua ūtilis est bibendō, water is useful for drinking.

b) With Verbs (rarely); as,—

adfuī scrībendō, I was present at the writing.

3. Accusative. The Accusative of the Gerund is used only with Prepositions, chiefly ad and in to denote purpose; as,—

homō ad agendum nātus est, man is born for action.

4. Ablative. The Ablative of the Gerund is used—

a) Without a Preposition, as an Ablative of Means, Cause, etc. (see §§ 218, 219); as,—

mēns discendō alitur et cōgitandō, the mind is nourished by learning and reflection.

Themistoclēs maritimōs praedōnēs cōnsectandō mare tūtum reddidit, Themistocles made the sea safe by following up the pirates.

b) After the prepositions ā, dē, ex, in; as,—

summa voluptās ex discendō capitur, the keenest pleasure is derived from learning;

multa dē bene beātēque vīvendō ā Platōne disputāta sunt, there was much discussion by Plato on the subject of living well and happily.