HW: 39A 1,3,5,7,8,9,10 39B 7
INDEPENDENT CLAUSES WITH SUBJUNCTIVE VERBS
Section 392
OPTATIVE (From Latin optare "to wish" or "to choose")
Optative subjunctive is sometimes marked by an utinam (or less commonly si modo).
Wishes for the future use present subjunctive.
English: Would that he come! I wish he would come! May he come!
Latin: (Utinam/si modo) veniat! {present subjunctive
Contrary-to-Fact or Unreal Wishes for the present use imperfect subjunctive.
English: Would that he were here! I wish he were here! Were he only here!
Latin: (Utinam/si modo) abesset!
Contrary-to-Fact or Unreal Wishes for the past use pluperfect subjunctive.
English: Would that he had left! I wish he had left! Had he only left!
Latin: (Utinam/si modo) discessisset!
Negative optative subjunctives use ne, not non.
English: May he not come! Would that he had not died!
Latin: (Utinam) ne veniat! (Utinam) ne mortuus esset!
Section 393
DELIBERATIVE
Used when someone is deliberating or thinking over what is/was/had to be done.
Deliberation about present/future action uses present subjunctive.
English: What am I to do? What should I do? What shall I do?
Latin: Quid faciam?
Deliberation about past action uses imperfect subjunctive.
English: What was he to say? What would/could/should he say?
Latin: Quid faceret?
Section 394
REPORTED DELIBERATIVE
In English reported deliberative questions are often expressed with an infinitive. In Latin you still use the subjunctive as in regular deliberative questions and regular indirect questions.
English: We want to find out *what to do*.
Latin: Cupimus invenire *quid faciamus*.
English: He learned *what to eat*
Latin: Didicit *quo vesceretur*.
Section 395
POTENTIAL
This is most commonly found in conditions. When not in a conditional clause, potential subjunctive is often used with second person verbs in expressions like: You would say so too. You would all believe me.
Such statements as these imply a conditional such as "if you were there."
Future potential uses present subjunctive.
English: You may do the same. (if this happens to you someday)
Latin: Facias idem.
Present potential uses imperfect subjunctive.
English: You would/could/might say this too. (if you saw what I did)
Latin: Diceres quoque hoc.
Past potential uses pluperfect subjunctive.
English: You would/could/might have done the same thing.
Latin: Fecisses idem.
POLITE POTENTIALS
Potential subjunctives (generally 1st person forms) are also used in polite expressions like "I would rather (not)" or "I should/would like to". As explained in your book, these potential subjunctives of volo, malo, and nolo may be followed by an optative subjunctive of another verb.
Future (present subjunctive of volo/nolo/malo and pres. subj. of other verb)
English: I would/should like him to leave.
Latin: Velim discedat.
English: I would not like him to come.
Latin: Nolim veniat.
Present (imperfect subjunctives)
English: I should/would/could rather he were here.
Latin: Mallem adesset.
English: I would/should like it were they gone. ...for them to be gone.
Latin: Vellem abessent.
Past (imperfect subjunctive of volo/malo/nolo + plup. subj. of other verbs)
English: I would rather we had won.
Latin: Mallem vicissemus.
English: I would/should like it had he died.
Latin: Vellem mortuus esset.
Section 396
They seem to be making it more complex than necessary. In the example for this section, the putares could just be translated "you would think" rather than "you would have thought". It is the context with the perfect infinitive "audivisse" that made them want to use the perfect in English. However, neither English nor Latin requires perfect here for the potential expression. The imperfect subjunctive in Latin (and "would think" which is English preterite subjunctive) shows that it is a general statement that is really meant to be possible at any time (given the understood circumstances).
Friday, October 29, 2010
Wednesday, October 27, 2010
Ch. 38
HW: 38A 1,2,4,5,6,8,9; 38B 2 and the following for extra credit:
Compose an English sentence with the idiom “the more…the more…” or "the -er...the -er" (see sect. 384) and then translate it into Latin.
This chapter is pretty straightforward; much of it is review or things we have mentioned before.
Section 381
In addition to what the book says here, I will tell you that ablative of comparison is almost never used except when the first thing being compared is nominative or accusative (usually subject or direct object of its clause).
Example:
No one is dumber than Marcus.
Nemo(nom. subj.) est stupidior Marco (abl.).
Section 382
Warns you that "than" (quam) is not needed in Latin in comparisons with "more than" or "less than" followed by a number.
more than 5 > plus quinque (V)
less than a thousand > minus mille (M)
In origin, this is probably because the number was treated as an ablative of comparison--only most numbers have no case endings.
Yet it also applies to cases where the numbers have endings:
Minus ducentos (acc.) homines vidi. I saw less (than) two hundred people.
Section 383
Where we only use one comparative is an expression like "more rich than smart", Latin uses comparatives for both adjectives. Literally the Latin will say something like: He is stronger (rather) than smarter.
Examples:
The ditch is deeper than it is wide. Fossa altior quam latior est.
The man was stronger than he was skilled. Vir validior/fortior quam peritior erat.
You ran more swiftly than far. Celerius quam longius cucurristi.
Section 384
In expressions like the "The more I fight, the more I lose," or "The faster I run, the more quickly I get home," each comparative will usually be proceeded by an ablative of degree or measure of difference (unless a form of quis intervenes). One of the ablatives will be eo or tanto (or occasionally "hoc"/"illo"), the other will be quo or quanto.
Examples:
The more (often) I win, the less you do.
Quo plus (or "saepius") vinco, eo minus tu.
The slower I walk, the later I will get home.
Quo lentius ambulo, eo serius ad domum adveniam.
The more gravely/seriously I hurt someone, the faster they* ran away.
Quanto cui^ gravius nocui, tanto celerius effugit*.
^cui is here used instead of alicui just as after si, nisi, num, and ne.
*Notice where we typically say "they" (though "he" is more proper), Latin uses a 3rd singular form reflecting the singular indefinite pronoun cui (= alicui after quanto, "someone").
Section 385
This warns you to use multo with comparative to say things like "much larger" or "far smaller" but use longe with superlative expressions like "much the richest" or "by far the longest"
Examples:
much larger
multo maior
far smaller
multo parvior
much the richest
longe ditissimus
by far the wisest
longe sapientissimus
Section 386 & 387
The superlative is usually used to translate phrases like "very good" and "as small as possible" (with preceding quam) except when "very" appears in a negative construction where "too" or "more" (or -er) could be substituted with no change in meaning.
Examples:
She is very strong.
Ea est validissima/fortissima.
Run as quickly as you can (or "as possible").
Curre quam celerrime.
Comparative in negative construction:
They were hoping the enemy would not arrive very quickly.
Restated: They were hoping the enemy would not arrive too quickly(or "more quickly (than they hoped)").
Sperabant ne hostes celerius advenirent. {Fear or negative optative clause
Section 388
Superlatives are used to praise or criticize people. Duh!
Use homo with negative-sounding superlatives and vir (or femina) with positive-sounding ones. Typically the superlatives follow the noun.
They want you to use superlatives in this chapter for regular adjectives such as "brave" or "evil" when they praise or criticize someone. In English we can achieve the same emphasis with a regular positive that we mark with our tone of voice: "he is a BAD guy", "she is a GREAT friend". Latin tends to use the superlative in most examples of praise and criticism.
Examples:
A BAD fellow, The worst fellow
homo pessimus
A SMART woman, The smartest woman
Femina intelligentissima
Compose an English sentence with the idiom “the more…the more…” or "the -er...the -er" (see sect. 384) and then translate it into Latin.
This chapter is pretty straightforward; much of it is review or things we have mentioned before.
Section 381
In addition to what the book says here, I will tell you that ablative of comparison is almost never used except when the first thing being compared is nominative or accusative (usually subject or direct object of its clause).
Example:
No one is dumber than Marcus.
Nemo(nom. subj.) est stupidior Marco (abl.).
Section 382
Warns you that "than" (quam) is not needed in Latin in comparisons with "more than" or "less than" followed by a number.
more than 5 > plus quinque (V)
less than a thousand > minus mille (M)
In origin, this is probably because the number was treated as an ablative of comparison--only most numbers have no case endings.
Yet it also applies to cases where the numbers have endings:
Minus ducentos (acc.) homines vidi. I saw less (than) two hundred people.
Section 383
Where we only use one comparative is an expression like "more rich than smart", Latin uses comparatives for both adjectives. Literally the Latin will say something like: He is stronger (rather) than smarter.
Examples:
The ditch is deeper than it is wide. Fossa altior quam latior est.
The man was stronger than he was skilled. Vir validior/fortior quam peritior erat.
You ran more swiftly than far. Celerius quam longius cucurristi.
Section 384
In expressions like the "The more I fight, the more I lose," or "The faster I run, the more quickly I get home," each comparative will usually be proceeded by an ablative of degree or measure of difference (unless a form of quis intervenes). One of the ablatives will be eo or tanto (or occasionally "hoc"/"illo"), the other will be quo or quanto.
Examples:
The more (often) I win, the less you do.
Quo plus (or "saepius") vinco, eo minus tu.
The slower I walk, the later I will get home.
Quo lentius ambulo, eo serius ad domum adveniam.
The more gravely/seriously I hurt someone, the faster they* ran away.
Quanto cui^ gravius nocui, tanto celerius effugit*.
^cui is here used instead of alicui just as after si, nisi, num, and ne.
*Notice where we typically say "they" (though "he" is more proper), Latin uses a 3rd singular form reflecting the singular indefinite pronoun cui (= alicui after quanto, "someone").
Section 385
This warns you to use multo with comparative to say things like "much larger" or "far smaller" but use longe with superlative expressions like "much the richest" or "by far the longest"
Examples:
much larger
multo maior
far smaller
multo parvior
much the richest
longe ditissimus
by far the wisest
longe sapientissimus
Section 386 & 387
The superlative is usually used to translate phrases like "very good" and "as small as possible" (with preceding quam) except when "very" appears in a negative construction where "too" or "more" (or -er) could be substituted with no change in meaning.
Examples:
She is very strong.
Ea est validissima/fortissima.
Run as quickly as you can (or "as possible").
Curre quam celerrime.
Comparative in negative construction:
They were hoping the enemy would not arrive very quickly.
Restated: They were hoping the enemy would not arrive too quickly(or "more quickly (than they hoped)").
Sperabant ne hostes celerius advenirent. {Fear or negative optative clause
Section 388
Superlatives are used to praise or criticize people. Duh!
Use homo with negative-sounding superlatives and vir (or femina) with positive-sounding ones. Typically the superlatives follow the noun.
They want you to use superlatives in this chapter for regular adjectives such as "brave" or "evil" when they praise or criticize someone. In English we can achieve the same emphasis with a regular positive that we mark with our tone of voice: "he is a BAD guy", "she is a GREAT friend". Latin tends to use the superlative in most examples of praise and criticism.
Examples:
A BAD fellow, The worst fellow
homo pessimus
A SMART woman, The smartest woman
Femina intelligentissima
Monday, October 25, 2010
Ch. 35 Extra Credit Sentences
Here are the correct extra credit sentences; I give alternatives with better word order for the first two.
Good job, Kyle, Harry, and Hanna!
Some of you others were close.
Exivi matrem visum./Matrem visum exii. Kyle
Venit ad ludum lectum libros./Ad ludum libros lectum venit. Harry
Gladiatores adfuerunt pugnatum. Hanna
Good job, Kyle, Harry, and Hanna!
Some of you others were close.
Exivi matrem visum./Matrem visum exii. Kyle
Venit ad ludum lectum libros./Ad ludum libros lectum venit. Harry
Gladiatores adfuerunt pugnatum. Hanna
Ch. 37
HW: 37A 1,2,4,5,8,10 37B 2 & 6
CORRELATIVES
Correlative expressions correlate (connect or associate) separate words or clauses.
See section 371 in your book for a list. Many of them are t- and q- words such as tam and quam or tot and quot. Is, ea, id (and occasionally other demonstratives such as ille, illa, illud or hic, haec, hoc) in its various forms is correlated with qui, quae, quod.
Examples:
Tam magnus quam tu est.
Literal: He is so big as you (are).
Usual English: He is as big as you.
Tot homines quot ille scio.
Literal: I know so many people as he (does)
Usual English: I know as many people as he (does).
Tanta bella quanta umquam fuerant erant.
Literal: So great were the wars as had ever been.
Usual English: The wars were as great as had ever been.
Ea (abl.) qua (abl.) veni veniet.
*Note the ablative ea understands a Latin "via" with it
Literal: He will come by that (way) by which I came.
Usual English: He will come the same way (that*) I did.
*The that may be omitted.
Eo* ire voluit quo* omnes iebant.
*Note Latin has to use the special place to which adverbs (eo/quo) instead of place where (ibi/ubi) since they here denote destinations. Also omnes is plural in Latin, but everyone is singular in English.
Literal: He wanted to go thither* whither* all were going.
*Archaic English place to which adverbs.
Usual English: He wanted to go the same place (that/where*) everyone was going.
*The that or where may be omitted.
Special examples with superlative in relative clause
Note the superlative moves from the main clause in normal English to the relative clause in normal Latin.
Normal English: I saw the biggest man who was there.
Rephrased, Awkward English: I saw him (or "the guy") who was the biggest there.
Normal Latin: Vidi eum qui maximus ibi erat.
Normal English: I gave the sword to the most deserving person whom I knew.
Rephrased, Stilted/Archaic English: I gave the sword to him whom I knew (to be) most worthy.
Normal Latin: Gladium ei quem dignissimum noveram dedi.
CORRELATIVES
Correlative expressions correlate (connect or associate) separate words or clauses.
See section 371 in your book for a list. Many of them are t- and q- words such as tam and quam or tot and quot. Is, ea, id (and occasionally other demonstratives such as ille, illa, illud or hic, haec, hoc) in its various forms is correlated with qui, quae, quod.
Examples:
Tam magnus quam tu est.
Literal: He is so big as you (are).
Usual English: He is as big as you.
Tot homines quot ille scio.
Literal: I know so many people as he (does)
Usual English: I know as many people as he (does).
Tanta bella quanta umquam fuerant erant.
Literal: So great were the wars as had ever been.
Usual English: The wars were as great as had ever been.
Ea (abl.) qua (abl.) veni veniet.
*Note the ablative ea understands a Latin "via" with it
Literal: He will come by that (way) by which I came.
Usual English: He will come the same way (that*) I did.
*The that may be omitted.
Eo* ire voluit quo* omnes iebant.
*Note Latin has to use the special place to which adverbs (eo/quo) instead of place where (ibi/ubi) since they here denote destinations. Also omnes is plural in Latin, but everyone is singular in English.
Literal: He wanted to go thither* whither* all were going.
*Archaic English place to which adverbs.
Usual English: He wanted to go the same place (that/where*) everyone was going.
*The that or where may be omitted.
Special examples with superlative in relative clause
Note the superlative moves from the main clause in normal English to the relative clause in normal Latin.
Normal English: I saw the biggest man who was there.
Rephrased, Awkward English: I saw him (or "the guy") who was the biggest there.
Normal Latin: Vidi eum qui maximus ibi erat.
Normal English: I gave the sword to the most deserving person whom I knew.
Rephrased, Stilted/Archaic English: I gave the sword to him whom I knew (to be) most worthy.
Normal Latin: Gladium ei quem dignissimum noveram dedi.
Friday, October 22, 2010
Ch. 35
HW: 35A 1-7, 35B 3,4 and for extra credit do the following:
Compose an English sentence with a purpose infinitive and then translate it into Latin using an accusative supine.
This chapter is mostly just review of previous ways to translate an English infinitive "to verb" in different contexts.
New Supines and Result Clause after "too"
The new constructions are the accusative supine (4th pp with -um), which is another way to show purpose in Latin, and the result clause in an expression like "too weak to lift the rock".
The supine is a 4th declension masculine verbal noun (not a participle though it looks like the perfect passive participle) usually made from the fourth principal part stem with a -um accusative ending. Here are some accusative examples: monitum, ductum, captum, pugnatum.
Accusatve Supine Sentences
Venit nos visum. He came to see us.
Caesar milites pabulatum mittit. Caesar is sending soldiers to forage.
*Note that the accusative supine is most commonly used with verbs with meanings like: come, go, leave, and send--the same kinds of verbs that also often use a relative clause of purpose.
"too x to y"
We ran too slowly to escape the enemy.
Change to one of the following constructions before translating into Latin:
Option 1 (from your book):
Rephrased: We ran more slowly than that we might escape the enemy.
*Note that this sounds nonsensical or at least really awkward in English but is good Latin.
Tardius cucurrimus quam ut hostes effugeremus. (result clause after comparative)
Option 2 (my alternative):
Rephrased: We did not run so fast as to escape the enemy.
Non tam celeriter cucurrimus ut hostes effugeremus. (negative main clause)
PURPOSE OPTIONS IN LATIN
Remember Latin never uses a purpose infinitive like English! With the accusative supine we now have all the main ways of showing purpose in Latin.
Purpose Clause (the only one used for negative purpose)
...ut/ne videat. "so that he may (not) see"
Relative Purpose Clause
...qui videat. "so that he may (not) see"
Gerunds/Gerundives with ad
ad videndum "to see", ad nos videndos "to see us"
Gerunds/Gerundives with causa/gratia
videndi causa "for the sake of seeing", videndi Caesaris gratia "for the sake of seeing Caesar"
Dative of Purpose/Predicative Dative (dative usually of a noun with verbal idea, object, if any, will be objective genitive)
auxilio "for help", munificationi castrorum, "for the (purpose of) fortification of the camp"
Accusative of Supine
visum "to see", nos visum "to see us"
Compose an English sentence with a purpose infinitive and then translate it into Latin using an accusative supine.
This chapter is mostly just review of previous ways to translate an English infinitive "to verb" in different contexts.
New Supines and Result Clause after "too"
The new constructions are the accusative supine (4th pp with -um), which is another way to show purpose in Latin, and the result clause in an expression like "too weak to lift the rock".
The supine is a 4th declension masculine verbal noun (not a participle though it looks like the perfect passive participle) usually made from the fourth principal part stem with a -um accusative ending. Here are some accusative examples: monitum, ductum, captum, pugnatum.
Accusatve Supine Sentences
Venit nos visum. He came to see us.
Caesar milites pabulatum mittit. Caesar is sending soldiers to forage.
*Note that the accusative supine is most commonly used with verbs with meanings like: come, go, leave, and send--the same kinds of verbs that also often use a relative clause of purpose.
"too x to y"
We ran too slowly to escape the enemy.
Change to one of the following constructions before translating into Latin:
Option 1 (from your book):
Rephrased: We ran more slowly than that we might escape the enemy.
*Note that this sounds nonsensical or at least really awkward in English but is good Latin.
Tardius cucurrimus quam ut hostes effugeremus. (result clause after comparative)
Option 2 (my alternative):
Rephrased: We did not run so fast as to escape the enemy.
Non tam celeriter cucurrimus ut hostes effugeremus. (negative main clause)
PURPOSE OPTIONS IN LATIN
Remember Latin never uses a purpose infinitive like English! With the accusative supine we now have all the main ways of showing purpose in Latin.
Purpose Clause (the only one used for negative purpose)
...ut/ne videat. "so that he may (not) see"
Relative Purpose Clause
...qui videat. "so that he may (not) see"
Gerunds/Gerundives with ad
ad videndum "to see", ad nos videndos "to see us"
Gerunds/Gerundives with causa/gratia
videndi causa "for the sake of seeing", videndi Caesaris gratia "for the sake of seeing Caesar"
Dative of Purpose/Predicative Dative (dative usually of a noun with verbal idea, object, if any, will be objective genitive)
auxilio "for help", munificationi castrorum, "for the (purpose of) fortification of the camp"
Accusative of Supine
visum "to see", nos visum "to see us"
Friday, October 15, 2010
Ch. 33 & 34
HW: 33A 1,7,11; 33B 1; 34A 1,3,7; 34B 6
GERUNDS AND GERUNDIVES
The gerund is a verbal noun made from the neuter singular forms of the gerundive. It has no nominative, and it is never used as a subject, a direct object, or a complement to an intransitive verb that takes an infinitive (like possum or soleo).
Examples: amandi (gen.), amando (dat.), amandum (acc.), amando (abl.)
In English we can sometimes use infinitives (to see) and gerunds (seeing) interchangeably.
To see is to believe./Seeing is believing.
Latin is more particular. Infinitives are reserved for subjects, predicate nominatives, direct objects, and verb complements.
Examples:
To see is to believe.
Videre (subject) est credere (predicate nominative).
He dared to come.
Venire (direct object) audebat.
We are able to leave.
Possumus discedere (verbal complement).
Gerunds may be used as an objective genitive or genitive complement to a noun or adjective. They are often found with a following causa or gratia (for the sake/purpose of) to show purpose.
Examples:
desirous of loving
cupidus amandi
opportunity for leaving
occasio/facultas discedendi
time for coming
tempus veniendi
to help/for the sake of helping
adiuvandi causa/gratia
They may be dative as the dative complement to a verb or other word (some adjectives take dative). These are often akin to a dative of purpose (for/for the purpose of).
Examples:
suitable for fighting
aptus/idoneus pugnando
He is eager to go.
Studet eundo.
In accusative gerunds are typically the object of ad or occasionally in. They usually show purpose and can be used in many of the same ways as ad + accusative gerund.
Examples:
He sent them to help.
Eos ad adiuvandum misit.
The book is suitable for reading.
Liber est idoneus ad legendum.
In ablative, a gerund may be used as an ablative of means/instrument without a preposition or sometimes with in or de + ablative.
Examples:
They destroyed the city by burning (it).
Incendendo urbem deleverunt.
We talked about leaving.
De discedendo loquebamur.
Gerundives are often used in place of gerunds when a gerund would have an accusative direct object, but keep the gerund with verbs that are intransitive or take other cases (e.g. Kevin's "amor pugnandi cum ursis", "love of fighting with bears" because pugno is intrasitive). The gerundive, when used in place of a gerund and direct object, does not show necessity and is usually translated in English by a gerund (verbing) or infinitive (to verb). In Latin the noun and the gerundive go into the same gender, number, and case--the case being subject to the function in the sentence just as with a gerund.
Examples:
He came to see you all.
Ad vos videndos venit.
He fought for the sake of saving his country.
Patriae servandae gratia pugnavit.
The pen/quill is suitable for writing books.
Idonea penna ad libros scribendos (or "libris scribendis") est.
By defeating the enemy we have acquired freedom.
Hostibus vincendis libertate potiti sumus.
Beware that you should not use a gerundive however, if it would agree with a neuter pronoun in the genitive, dative, or ablative case when the gender would be ambguous.
It is suitable for helping those things (things/not people).
Ambiguous, Bad Latin: Idoneum est adiuvandis eis*. *could be masc. or neuter
Good Latin 1: Idoneum est ad ea adiuvanda. {Gerundive avoids ambiguous case.
Good Latin 2: Idoneum est ea adiuvando. {Gerund with accusative pl. neuter object.
The Romans, and especially Caesar, also often avoided the jingling two syllable rhyme of phrases like "eORUM videndORUM causa" and "puellARUM puniendARUM occasio" by substituting a gerund with accusative object, "eos videndi causa" and "puellas puniendi occasio".
Genitives of personal pronouns used with gerundives must be the objective forms: mei, tui, sui, nostri (not nostrum which is for partive genitive), vestri (not vestrum which is for partive genitive).
A noun and gerund may be the object of a verb that means to manage or undertake an action. Curo, curare is the verb most often used this way.
Examples:
I see to it that the fort is built. ...that the fort be built.
Castrum aedificandum curo.
He managed to have the town destroyed. ...that the town be destroyed.
Oppidum delendum curavit.
They will undertake to defeat us. ...that we be defeated.
Suscipient nos vincendos.
GERUNDS AND GERUNDIVES
The gerund is a verbal noun made from the neuter singular forms of the gerundive. It has no nominative, and it is never used as a subject, a direct object, or a complement to an intransitive verb that takes an infinitive (like possum or soleo).
Examples: amandi (gen.), amando (dat.), amandum (acc.), amando (abl.)
In English we can sometimes use infinitives (to see) and gerunds (seeing) interchangeably.
To see is to believe./Seeing is believing.
Latin is more particular. Infinitives are reserved for subjects, predicate nominatives, direct objects, and verb complements.
Examples:
To see is to believe.
Videre (subject) est credere (predicate nominative).
He dared to come.
Venire (direct object) audebat.
We are able to leave.
Possumus discedere (verbal complement).
Gerunds may be used as an objective genitive or genitive complement to a noun or adjective. They are often found with a following causa or gratia (for the sake/purpose of) to show purpose.
Examples:
desirous of loving
cupidus amandi
opportunity for leaving
occasio/facultas discedendi
time for coming
tempus veniendi
to help/for the sake of helping
adiuvandi causa/gratia
They may be dative as the dative complement to a verb or other word (some adjectives take dative). These are often akin to a dative of purpose (for/for the purpose of).
Examples:
suitable for fighting
aptus/idoneus pugnando
He is eager to go.
Studet eundo.
In accusative gerunds are typically the object of ad or occasionally in. They usually show purpose and can be used in many of the same ways as ad + accusative gerund.
Examples:
He sent them to help.
Eos ad adiuvandum misit.
The book is suitable for reading.
Liber est idoneus ad legendum.
In ablative, a gerund may be used as an ablative of means/instrument without a preposition or sometimes with in or de + ablative.
Examples:
They destroyed the city by burning (it).
Incendendo urbem deleverunt.
We talked about leaving.
De discedendo loquebamur.
Gerundives are often used in place of gerunds when a gerund would have an accusative direct object, but keep the gerund with verbs that are intransitive or take other cases (e.g. Kevin's "amor pugnandi cum ursis", "love of fighting with bears" because pugno is intrasitive). The gerundive, when used in place of a gerund and direct object, does not show necessity and is usually translated in English by a gerund (verbing) or infinitive (to verb). In Latin the noun and the gerundive go into the same gender, number, and case--the case being subject to the function in the sentence just as with a gerund.
Examples:
He came to see you all.
Ad vos videndos venit.
He fought for the sake of saving his country.
Patriae servandae gratia pugnavit.
The pen/quill is suitable for writing books.
Idonea penna ad libros scribendos (or "libris scribendis") est.
By defeating the enemy we have acquired freedom.
Hostibus vincendis libertate potiti sumus.
Beware that you should not use a gerundive however, if it would agree with a neuter pronoun in the genitive, dative, or ablative case when the gender would be ambguous.
It is suitable for helping those things (things/not people).
Ambiguous, Bad Latin: Idoneum est adiuvandis eis*. *could be masc. or neuter
Good Latin 1: Idoneum est ad ea adiuvanda. {Gerundive avoids ambiguous case.
Good Latin 2: Idoneum est ea adiuvando. {Gerund with accusative pl. neuter object.
The Romans, and especially Caesar, also often avoided the jingling two syllable rhyme of phrases like "eORUM videndORUM causa" and "puellARUM puniendARUM occasio" by substituting a gerund with accusative object, "eos videndi causa" and "puellas puniendi occasio".
Genitives of personal pronouns used with gerundives must be the objective forms: mei, tui, sui, nostri (not nostrum which is for partive genitive), vestri (not vestrum which is for partive genitive).
A noun and gerund may be the object of a verb that means to manage or undertake an action. Curo, curare is the verb most often used this way.
Examples:
I see to it that the fort is built. ...that the fort be built.
Castrum aedificandum curo.
He managed to have the town destroyed. ...that the town be destroyed.
Oppidum delendum curavit.
They will undertake to defeat us. ...that we be defeated.
Suscipient nos vincendos.
Wednesday, October 13, 2010
Ch. 31 & 32
HW 31-2
HW: 31A 1,3,9; 31B 1; 32A 1,2,8, 32B 2
Obligation and Gerundives
Gerundives are the same thing as the future passive participle, which means that they are verbal adjectives. They agree with nouns/pronouns that they modify in gender number and case.
To form the gerundive for 1st, 2nd, or 3rd conjugation,
1) Take the -re off the 2nd principal part to get the present stem.
2) Add -ndus.
3) The -us ending will decline like bonus -a -um.
To form the gerundive for 3rd io and 4th conjugation,
1) Take the -ere or -ire off the 2nd principal part.
2) Add -iendus.
3) The -us ending will decline like bonus -a -um.
The most literal translation is "to-be-verbed" in the sense of "going-to-be". Compare these English examples.
He is a man to be watched.
i.e He is a guy who should/must be watched.
That was a dinner not to be missed.
i.e. That dinner was one which should/ought not to have been missed.
Passive Periprhastic
A common use of the gerundive is with a form of the being verb. This almost always shows necessity or obligation. If an agent is wanted for the passive verb, you should use a dative of interest, often here called dative of agent.
Examples:
Spectandus est/erat/erit. He must be watched. ...had to be watched. ...will have to be watched.
Epistula scribenda mihi (dat. of agent) erat. The letter had to be written by me.
Dixit eos nobis (dat. of agent) vincendos esse. He said that they had to be conquered by us.
If two datives of people would be found in the passive periphrastic clause, the agent may be expressed with a/ab + ablative as it usually is with other passive verbs.
Good English: Caesar has to be believed by the soldiers.
A militibus Caesari* credendum est.
*Note Caesar is dative even though it is the subject in English because credo is an intransitive dative verb in the impersonal passive (ch. 26). Militibus would usually be dative of agent with no preposition, but here Latin allows a/ab + ablative to avoid ambiguity.
The Literal translation of the above is: It has to be believed in Caesar by the soldiers.
When a gerundive is not used in a passive periphrastic it may often be translated "to-be-verbed".
I gave him a book to-be-read. i.e., ...which he was supposed to read.
Librum legendum ei dedi.
PRICE AND VALUE
Genitive of indefinite value (probably locative in origin) is used with inexact terms listed in section 322.
In addition to facio and aestimo, any other Latin verb that means think or consider may take such a genitive. Habeo (in the meaning "hold in mind"/"consider") is a common alternative.
Habeo nihili eum.
Literal, Bad English Translation: I consider him of nothing.
Good English: I consider him worth nothing.
Aestimaverunt magni me.
Literal, Bad English Translation: They considered/valued me of great.
Good English: They valued me highly. / They considered me to be worth a lot.
Ablative of price (subcategory of means) is used to express exact prices and occasionally also indefinite prices. Note we often say "for (an amount of money)" in English, but Latin uses ablative, not dative.
I will buy the book for 5 denarii (silver coins).
Emam librum V denariis.
He sold his sword for 4 aurei (gold coins).
Gladium IV aureis vendidit.
The house costs a lot.
Domus magno constat/stat.
They were sold as slaves for 100,000 sesterces each.
Illi venebant (or "venierunt") C milibus (sestertiis*) servi.
*A sesterce (In English pronounced sehs-tersh, Latin sestertius, -i m.) was a large bronze or small silver coin which was the usual unit used in pricing, so when no monetary designation is given it is assumed to be in sesterces. Furthermore, in real written Latin large values might be given by writing a line over the Roman numeral to indicate the number times one-thousand. Thus CCV with a line above means 205,000. A line above and on both sides would mean the number times 100,000. Thus XIV with a line above and on each side means 1,400,000.
SESTERTIUS (2 and 1/2 asses originally, then 4)
DENARIUS (originally 10 asses, then 16)
AUREUS
It cost two bucks(sesterces).
Constitit duobus.
Note the special adverbs in section 325 which refer to price but are in the genitive case instead of the normal ablative.
Examples:
He bought it for so much.
Id tanti emit.
How much did you sell the horse for?
Quanti equum vendidisti?
In section 326, it misleadingly implies that consto (and sto) takes the dative for price. This verb does take a dative of interest for people sometimes but when it refers to costs it will generally take an ablative of price.
Liber mihi(dat. of interest) tribus denariis(abl. of price) constat. The book costs me 3 denarii.
HW: 31A 1,3,9; 31B 1; 32A 1,2,8, 32B 2
Obligation and Gerundives
Gerundives are the same thing as the future passive participle, which means that they are verbal adjectives. They agree with nouns/pronouns that they modify in gender number and case.
To form the gerundive for 1st, 2nd, or 3rd conjugation,
1) Take the -re off the 2nd principal part to get the present stem.
2) Add -ndus.
3) The -us ending will decline like bonus -a -um.
To form the gerundive for 3rd io and 4th conjugation,
1) Take the -ere or -ire off the 2nd principal part.
2) Add -iendus.
3) The -us ending will decline like bonus -a -um.
The most literal translation is "to-be-verbed" in the sense of "going-to-be". Compare these English examples.
He is a man to be watched.
i.e He is a guy who should/must be watched.
That was a dinner not to be missed.
i.e. That dinner was one which should/ought not to have been missed.
Passive Periprhastic
A common use of the gerundive is with a form of the being verb. This almost always shows necessity or obligation. If an agent is wanted for the passive verb, you should use a dative of interest, often here called dative of agent.
Examples:
Spectandus est/erat/erit. He must be watched. ...had to be watched. ...will have to be watched.
Epistula scribenda mihi (dat. of agent) erat. The letter had to be written by me.
Dixit eos nobis (dat. of agent) vincendos esse. He said that they had to be conquered by us.
If two datives of people would be found in the passive periphrastic clause, the agent may be expressed with a/ab + ablative as it usually is with other passive verbs.
Good English: Caesar has to be believed by the soldiers.
A militibus Caesari* credendum est.
*Note Caesar is dative even though it is the subject in English because credo is an intransitive dative verb in the impersonal passive (ch. 26). Militibus would usually be dative of agent with no preposition, but here Latin allows a/ab + ablative to avoid ambiguity.
The Literal translation of the above is: It has to be believed in Caesar by the soldiers.
When a gerundive is not used in a passive periphrastic it may often be translated "to-be-verbed".
I gave him a book to-be-read. i.e., ...which he was supposed to read.
Librum legendum ei dedi.
PRICE AND VALUE
Genitive of indefinite value (probably locative in origin) is used with inexact terms listed in section 322.
In addition to facio and aestimo, any other Latin verb that means think or consider may take such a genitive. Habeo (in the meaning "hold in mind"/"consider") is a common alternative.
Habeo nihili eum.
Literal, Bad English Translation: I consider him of nothing.
Good English: I consider him worth nothing.
Aestimaverunt magni me.
Literal, Bad English Translation: They considered/valued me of great.
Good English: They valued me highly. / They considered me to be worth a lot.
Ablative of price (subcategory of means) is used to express exact prices and occasionally also indefinite prices. Note we often say "for (an amount of money)" in English, but Latin uses ablative, not dative.
I will buy the book for 5 denarii (silver coins).
Emam librum V denariis.
He sold his sword for 4 aurei (gold coins).
Gladium IV aureis vendidit.
The house costs a lot.
Domus magno constat/stat.
They were sold as slaves for 100,000 sesterces each.
Illi venebant (or "venierunt") C milibus (sestertiis*) servi.
*A sesterce (In English pronounced sehs-tersh, Latin sestertius, -i m.) was a large bronze or small silver coin which was the usual unit used in pricing, so when no monetary designation is given it is assumed to be in sesterces. Furthermore, in real written Latin large values might be given by writing a line over the Roman numeral to indicate the number times one-thousand. Thus CCV with a line above means 205,000. A line above and on both sides would mean the number times 100,000. Thus XIV with a line above and on each side means 1,400,000.
SESTERTIUS (2 and 1/2 asses originally, then 4)
DENARIUS (originally 10 asses, then 16)
AUREUS
It cost two bucks(sesterces).
Constitit duobus.
Note the special adverbs in section 325 which refer to price but are in the genitive case instead of the normal ablative.
Examples:
He bought it for so much.
Id tanti emit.
How much did you sell the horse for?
Quanti equum vendidisti?
In section 326, it misleadingly implies that consto (and sto) takes the dative for price. This verb does take a dative of interest for people sometimes but when it refers to costs it will generally take an ablative of price.
Liber mihi(dat. of interest) tribus denariis(abl. of price) constat. The book costs me 3 denarii.
Monday, October 11, 2010
Winners for Fear Clause Sentences
Here are the results from the rankings I got. Congrats to all those who had perfect sentences.
1. Richard
timeo ut hodie magister cadat!
2. Kyle
timeo ut nunc vivat.
3. Trevor
timeo ut urbem possim inire.
1. Richard
timeo ut hodie magister cadat!
2. Kyle
timeo ut nunc vivat.
3. Trevor
timeo ut urbem possim inire.
Ch. 29 & 30
HW: 29A 1,2,7 29B 1; 30A 1,2,11 (do not use genitive for "his"),19
Predicative Datives
This is a subcategory of what is sometimes called a dative of reference, and in my opinion it is similar to a dative of purpose. The name "predicative" comes from the dative noun being used as if it were a predicate adjective. When translating from Latin into English you may use the expressions "a source of___" or "serves as ____" or change the dative noun into an adjective as shown in the charts in sections 293-4.
Examples:
He is useful.
Change to Latin construction: He is for a use. (Bad English!)
Good Latin: Usui est. (usui is dative)
They were helpful.
Changed: They were for a help. (They were a source of help.)
Good Latin: Auxilio erant.
Other Things to Note
The double dative is when you have a predicative dative (or dative of purpose) with a dative of interest (typically a person or sentient being) in the same clause.
Example:
Caesar is troublesome/grievous to me.
Rephrased: Caesar is for a pain to me. (or "Caesar is a source of pain for me.")
Good Latin: Caesar mihi (dat. of interest) dolori (pred. dative) est.
The verb odi (I hate) has no passive so you must use the predicative dative odio and a dative of interest for the person/people by whom the subject is hated.
Example:
He is hated by the Romans.
Ille odio (pred. dative) Romanis (dat. of interest) est.
Literally: That guy is for a hatred (i.e. "a source of hatred") to the Romans.
Occasionally predicative datives (and double datives) appear with other verbs besides esse as noted in section 295. These I (and many others) call datives of purpose.
Example:
Milites auxilio (pred. dative) nobis (dat. of interest) venerunt.
The soldiers came as a source of aid for us.
Pastores praesidio (pred. dative) pecoribus (dat. of interest) exierunt.
The shepherds went out as a guard for the sheep. {Note the use of "as" to translate the dative.
DATIVE USES
Unfortunately dative case uses are perhaps the most confusing of any case categories, since several of them overlap in strange ways.
A dative of interest is virtually any dative that is a person or sentient being.
Subcategories include: dative of possession, ethical dative, dative of advantage/disadvantage, dative of separation, dative of agent.
Other dative uses include dative of purpose, predicative dative, dative of advantage/disadvantage,
Datives of advantage/disadvantages are subcategories of the above depending on whether something is good or bad for the dative.
The datives mentioned in section 301 are not best understood as indirect objects. Indirect objects are a subcategory of datives of interest. I would encourage you to think of these as datives of interest (or disadvantage) or datives of separation (with verbs that mean take away).
What is called a dative of advantage in section 302 is more specifically understood as an ethical dative or simply a dative of interest. It is most commonly used to show to whom a body part belongs (where we might expect a genitive of possession). Compare German Ich kaemme mir das Haare.
The datives of purpose in section 303 are related to the predicative datives but used in different contexts. Usually they may be represented in English with "for" or "for the purpose of". Note that a dative like munificationi castrorum (for the fortification of the camp) does a job very similar to a purpose clause (ut castra muniant).
Predicative Datives
This is a subcategory of what is sometimes called a dative of reference, and in my opinion it is similar to a dative of purpose. The name "predicative" comes from the dative noun being used as if it were a predicate adjective. When translating from Latin into English you may use the expressions "a source of___" or "serves as ____" or change the dative noun into an adjective as shown in the charts in sections 293-4.
Examples:
He is useful.
Change to Latin construction: He is for a use. (Bad English!)
Good Latin: Usui est. (usui is dative)
They were helpful.
Changed: They were for a help. (They were a source of help.)
Good Latin: Auxilio erant.
Other Things to Note
The double dative is when you have a predicative dative (or dative of purpose) with a dative of interest (typically a person or sentient being) in the same clause.
Example:
Caesar is troublesome/grievous to me.
Rephrased: Caesar is for a pain to me. (or "Caesar is a source of pain for me.")
Good Latin: Caesar mihi (dat. of interest) dolori (pred. dative) est.
The verb odi (I hate) has no passive so you must use the predicative dative odio and a dative of interest for the person/people by whom the subject is hated.
Example:
He is hated by the Romans.
Ille odio (pred. dative) Romanis (dat. of interest) est.
Literally: That guy is for a hatred (i.e. "a source of hatred") to the Romans.
Occasionally predicative datives (and double datives) appear with other verbs besides esse as noted in section 295. These I (and many others) call datives of purpose.
Example:
Milites auxilio (pred. dative) nobis (dat. of interest) venerunt.
The soldiers came as a source of aid for us.
Pastores praesidio (pred. dative) pecoribus (dat. of interest) exierunt.
The shepherds went out as a guard for the sheep. {Note the use of "as" to translate the dative.
DATIVE USES
Unfortunately dative case uses are perhaps the most confusing of any case categories, since several of them overlap in strange ways.
A dative of interest is virtually any dative that is a person or sentient being.
Subcategories include: dative of possession, ethical dative, dative of advantage/disadvantage, dative of separation, dative of agent.
Other dative uses include dative of purpose, predicative dative, dative of advantage/disadvantage,
Datives of advantage/disadvantages are subcategories of the above depending on whether something is good or bad for the dative.
The datives mentioned in section 301 are not best understood as indirect objects. Indirect objects are a subcategory of datives of interest. I would encourage you to think of these as datives of interest (or disadvantage) or datives of separation (with verbs that mean take away).
What is called a dative of advantage in section 302 is more specifically understood as an ethical dative or simply a dative of interest. It is most commonly used to show to whom a body part belongs (where we might expect a genitive of possession). Compare German Ich kaemme mir das Haare.
The datives of purpose in section 303 are related to the predicative datives but used in different contexts. Usually they may be represented in English with "for" or "for the purpose of". Note that a dative like munificationi castrorum (for the fortification of the camp) does a job very similar to a purpose clause (ut castra muniant).
Friday, October 8, 2010
Ch. 27 & 28
HW: 27A 1,3,9; 27B 7; 28A 1, 2, 3 (need double negative for positive); 28B 2
Since both 27 & 28 deal with relative clauses, here are some general comments on relative clauses.
They are typically introduced by a relative pronoun (qui, quae, quod). Sometimes a negative relative clause starts with the negative relative adverb "quin"--this is typically when the main clause is also negative. Normal relative clauses just have regular indicative verbs unless they are attracted to subjunctive in indirect discourse (see section 226 and blog notes on ch. 22). The relative pronoun will take its gender, number, and person (1st, 2nd, 3rd) from its antecedent (the word it refers back to or describes), but its case will be based on its role in the relative clause.
Examples:
Is that the man whom you know?
Estne ille quem* scis?
*quem is masculine & singular agreeing with its antecedent ille, but it is accusative as the direct object of the relative clause, not nominative as ille.
Do you know the woman who is standing there?
Scisne feminam quae^ ibi stat*?
^quae is feminine & singular agreeing with its antecedent feminam, but it is nominative as the subject of the relative clause, not accusative as feminam.
*indicative
He knows that you know the girl who is approaching.
Scit puellam^ te novisse quae appropinquat/appropinquet*.
^quae is feminine & singular agreeing with its antecedent puellam, but it is nominative as the subject of the relative clause, not accusative as puellam.
*Here the verb in the normal relative clause may be attracted to subjunctive in the indirect statement.
Subjunctive Relative Clauses
Besides Normal Relative Clauses there are also other types that use a subjunctive verb (following sequence of tenses). One type is usually called a Relative Clause of Characteristic though your book calls it a Generic Relative Clause. This kind of clause describes a sort of thing/person. In English, there is not always an actual relative clause so you may have to rephrase it.
(See your grammar section 534 on Clauses of Characteristic)
Examples:
You are the man to call.
This means: You are the sort of man whom I should/would call./You are the sort of man whom I call.
Latin: Tu es quem vocem.
There was no one so mean.
This means: There was no one who would be so mean.
Latin: Nemo erat qui tam crudelis esset.
Note: This could also be done without a clause of characteristic, Nemo erat tam crudelis.
There are people with whom I would not live.
Latin: Sunt quibuscum non vivam. {Note: The Latin has no word for "people" because Latin relative clauses do not always need antecedents--quibus is in the masculine ablative plural which indicates a group of people.
Relative Final/Purpose Clauses
(See your grammar section 531.2)
These kinds of clauses and Relative Clauses of Result (below) are both in my opinion (and many others agree) varieties of Relative Clauses of Chracteristic (above).
As your book indicates Relative Purpose/Final Clauses are most commonly found with main verbs meaning things like send, leave, come, or choose. For such cases, it is far more common (though not 100% necessary as your book suggests) to have a purpose clause begin with a form of the relative pronoun (qui,quae,quod) instead of ut or ne. As with the Relative Clause of Characteristic, there may not be (and indeed almost never is) an actual relative clause in the corresponding English sentence. Note that the Latin relative pronoun can often be seen as representing ut + a form of is, ea, id.
Examples:
He is sending men to help.
Mittit qui adiuvent. (qui=ut ei)
Note: The Latin does not need a word like "viros" or "homines" as antecedent for qui.
We were left behind so that they would find us./...for them to find us.
Relicti sumus quos^ invenirent. (quos=ut nos)
^quos refers back to the understood subject of relicti sumus so there is no need for an "us" in Latin.
Latin can do some cool things with these kinds of clauses when they have no antecedent (see 273).
Examples:
I have something to say.
This means: I have (something) which I may say.
Latin: Habeo quod dicam. (quod=aliquid quod)
There is nowhere to go.
This means: There is (no place) whither I may go.
Latin: Non est quo eam. (quo=ullus locus quo)
Was there someone to help?
This means: Was there (someone) who might help?
This means: Eratne qui adiuvaret? (qui=aliquis qui)
Comparative Relative Clauses of Purpose
If there is a comparative in the relative clause of purpose, use the ablative neuter form "quo" to begin the relative clause. It is an ablative of means, measure, or cause (depending on how you look at it).
I sent you immediately so as to tell him more quickly.
This means: I sent you immediately by which (i.e. by means of the fact that I sent you immediately) you would would tell him more quickly.
Misi te quo ei (dative) celerius diceres.
They walked quickly so as to make the journey shorter.
This means: They walked quickly by means of which they might make the journey shorter.
Celeriter ambulabant quo iter brevius facerent.
Relative Result/Consecutive Clauses and Relative Clauses of Characteristic
(See your grammar section 537.2)
As with other result clauses, so here the subjunctive verb's tense need not follow the sequence of tenses but should rather mimic the tense of the verb in English. Again as with Relative Clauses of Purpose the relative pronoun will act in the place of ut + a form of is, ea, id (quod=ut id, quibus=ut eis, quem=ut eum). Most of what your book describes as Consecutive Relative Clauses (or Relative Clauses of Result) are better understood simply as Relative Clauses of Characteristic.
Examples:
Who is so strong as to lift a mountain?
This means: Who is so strong that he lifts mountains?
Latin: Quis est tam fortis qui montes tollat?
Marcia was the sort of woman that/whom all the men loved.
Marcia erat ea (nom.s.f.) quam omnes viri amarent.
There will be some who may/will dislike it. (...to whom it may be displeasing.)
Erunt quibus id non placeat.
Negative Relative Clauses of Result After a Negative Main Verb
Use quin (contraction of adverbial ablative qui + negative ne) in place of qui, quae, quod + non.
There will be nothing that he does not try.*
Latin: Nihil erit quin temptet.
*i.e. He will try absolutely everything.
The commander sent no one who did not fight well.
Imperator neminem misit quin bene pugnaret.
Since both 27 & 28 deal with relative clauses, here are some general comments on relative clauses.
They are typically introduced by a relative pronoun (qui, quae, quod). Sometimes a negative relative clause starts with the negative relative adverb "quin"--this is typically when the main clause is also negative. Normal relative clauses just have regular indicative verbs unless they are attracted to subjunctive in indirect discourse (see section 226 and blog notes on ch. 22). The relative pronoun will take its gender, number, and person (1st, 2nd, 3rd) from its antecedent (the word it refers back to or describes), but its case will be based on its role in the relative clause.
Examples:
Is that the man whom you know?
Estne ille quem* scis?
*quem is masculine & singular agreeing with its antecedent ille, but it is accusative as the direct object of the relative clause, not nominative as ille.
Do you know the woman who is standing there?
Scisne feminam quae^ ibi stat*?
^quae is feminine & singular agreeing with its antecedent feminam, but it is nominative as the subject of the relative clause, not accusative as feminam.
*indicative
He knows that you know the girl who is approaching.
Scit puellam^ te novisse quae appropinquat/appropinquet*.
^quae is feminine & singular agreeing with its antecedent puellam, but it is nominative as the subject of the relative clause, not accusative as puellam.
*Here the verb in the normal relative clause may be attracted to subjunctive in the indirect statement.
Subjunctive Relative Clauses
Besides Normal Relative Clauses there are also other types that use a subjunctive verb (following sequence of tenses). One type is usually called a Relative Clause of Characteristic though your book calls it a Generic Relative Clause. This kind of clause describes a sort of thing/person. In English, there is not always an actual relative clause so you may have to rephrase it.
(See your grammar section 534 on Clauses of Characteristic)
Examples:
You are the man to call.
This means: You are the sort of man whom I should/would call./You are the sort of man whom I call.
Latin: Tu es quem vocem.
There was no one so mean.
This means: There was no one who would be so mean.
Latin: Nemo erat qui tam crudelis esset.
Note: This could also be done without a clause of characteristic, Nemo erat tam crudelis.
There are people with whom I would not live.
Latin: Sunt quibuscum non vivam. {Note: The Latin has no word for "people" because Latin relative clauses do not always need antecedents--quibus is in the masculine ablative plural which indicates a group of people.
Relative Final/Purpose Clauses
(See your grammar section 531.2)
These kinds of clauses and Relative Clauses of Result (below) are both in my opinion (and many others agree) varieties of Relative Clauses of Chracteristic (above).
As your book indicates Relative Purpose/Final Clauses are most commonly found with main verbs meaning things like send, leave, come, or choose. For such cases, it is far more common (though not 100% necessary as your book suggests) to have a purpose clause begin with a form of the relative pronoun (qui,quae,quod) instead of ut or ne. As with the Relative Clause of Characteristic, there may not be (and indeed almost never is) an actual relative clause in the corresponding English sentence. Note that the Latin relative pronoun can often be seen as representing ut + a form of is, ea, id.
Examples:
He is sending men to help.
Mittit qui adiuvent. (qui=ut ei)
Note: The Latin does not need a word like "viros" or "homines" as antecedent for qui.
We were left behind so that they would find us./...for them to find us.
Relicti sumus quos^ invenirent. (quos=ut nos)
^quos refers back to the understood subject of relicti sumus so there is no need for an "us" in Latin.
Latin can do some cool things with these kinds of clauses when they have no antecedent (see 273).
Examples:
I have something to say.
This means: I have (something) which I may say.
Latin: Habeo quod dicam. (quod=aliquid quod)
There is nowhere to go.
This means: There is (no place) whither I may go.
Latin: Non est quo eam. (quo=ullus locus quo)
Was there someone to help?
This means: Was there (someone) who might help?
This means: Eratne qui adiuvaret? (qui=aliquis qui)
Comparative Relative Clauses of Purpose
If there is a comparative in the relative clause of purpose, use the ablative neuter form "quo" to begin the relative clause. It is an ablative of means, measure, or cause (depending on how you look at it).
I sent you immediately so as to tell him more quickly.
This means: I sent you immediately by which (i.e. by means of the fact that I sent you immediately) you would would tell him more quickly.
Misi te quo ei (dative) celerius diceres.
They walked quickly so as to make the journey shorter.
This means: They walked quickly by means of which they might make the journey shorter.
Celeriter ambulabant quo iter brevius facerent.
Relative Result/Consecutive Clauses and Relative Clauses of Characteristic
(See your grammar section 537.2)
As with other result clauses, so here the subjunctive verb's tense need not follow the sequence of tenses but should rather mimic the tense of the verb in English. Again as with Relative Clauses of Purpose the relative pronoun will act in the place of ut + a form of is, ea, id (quod=ut id, quibus=ut eis, quem=ut eum). Most of what your book describes as Consecutive Relative Clauses (or Relative Clauses of Result) are better understood simply as Relative Clauses of Characteristic.
Examples:
Who is so strong as to lift a mountain?
This means: Who is so strong that he lifts mountains?
Latin: Quis est tam fortis qui montes tollat?
Marcia was the sort of woman that/whom all the men loved.
Marcia erat ea (nom.s.f.) quam omnes viri amarent.
There will be some who may/will dislike it. (...to whom it may be displeasing.)
Erunt quibus id non placeat.
Negative Relative Clauses of Result After a Negative Main Verb
Use quin (contraction of adverbial ablative qui + negative ne) in place of qui, quae, quod + non.
There will be nothing that he does not try.*
Latin: Nihil erit quin temptet.
*i.e. He will try absolutely everything.
The commander sent no one who did not fight well.
Imperator neminem misit quin bene pugnaret.
Perfect Negative Fear Clauses
Congrats to all for your perfect fear clauses. Translate all 7 sentences into English and rank your top 3 to gain up to 7 points of extra credit on a HW grade.
NEGATIVE FEAR CLAUSES
timeo ut domum reveniat. Harry
timeo ut nunc vivat. Kyle
timeo ut urbem possim inire. Trevor
timeo ut rus veniat. Hanna
timeo ut discessurus sit. E
timui ut rus venires. Lizzy
timeo ut hodie magister cadat! Richard
NEGATIVE FEAR CLAUSES
timeo ut domum reveniat. Harry
timeo ut nunc vivat. Kyle
timeo ut urbem possim inire. Trevor
timeo ut rus veniat. Hanna
timeo ut discessurus sit. E
timui ut rus venires. Lizzy
timeo ut hodie magister cadat! Richard
Wednesday, October 6, 2010
Ch. 25 & 26
HW: 25A 1,5,9; 25B 5; 26A (part 1) 1, 7; 26A (part2) 1; 26B 1
DATIVE VERBS
Self explanatory...
Try to learn the categories and kinds of verbs (such as compounds of sum) that take a dative object. Memorize at least some of the common dative verbs such as credo, placeo, and noceo.
IMPERSONAL PASSIVES OF INTRANSITIVE VERBS
As your book says, Latin can have intransitive verbs (i.e. verbs that do not take a direct object) in impersonal passive forms (with a vague "it" subject). In such cases, English will either use a personal passive (with a real subject) or not use a passive at all.
Example:
ACTIVE INTRANSITIVE
We were going. (Good English)
Ibamus. (Good Latin)
PASSIVE INTRANSITIVE
It was gone. (BAD English! English would say "Some people went.")
Itum est. (Good Latin)
All Latin verbs that do not take an accusative direct object will have to be impersonal (3rd singular form with vague "it" subject) if used in the passive voice. If the doer of the action is expressed, it will be with ablative of agent (a/ab + abl.), but often there will be no expressed agent because impersonal passives tend to put emphasis on the action rather than the actor.
Often English will allow personal passives for verbs that have intransitive Latin equivalents. Thus we can say "He will be believed." and "They were harmed." but Latin cannot because Latin versions of believe (credo) and harm (noceo) are intransitive, so Latin instead says "Marco(dat.) credetur." (Literally: "It will be believed to/in Marcus.") and "Eis(dat.) nocitum est." (Literally: "It was harmed to them.").
Just as the above literal translations of the Latin sound ridiculous to us, so it would be ridiculous to a Latin speaker if you said "Is credetur." ("He will be believed.") or "Nocebantur." ("They were harmed.") because these literal translations are COMPLETE NONSENSE in Latin.
Examples:
Itum est Romam. (Good Latin)
Literally: It was gone to Rome.
Means: There was a journey to Rome.
or We/they went to Rome. (Context would tell us the required subject; the emphasis is on the action, not the actor.)
Caesari* creditur. (Good Latin)
*dative because credo takes dative object)
Literally: It is trusted to/in Caesar.
Means: Caesar is trusted.
Hostibus* totum diem resistebatur. (Good Latin)
*dative because resisto takes dative object
Literally: It was resisted to/against the enemy all day.
Means: The enemy was resisted all day.
DATIVE VERBS
Self explanatory...
Try to learn the categories and kinds of verbs (such as compounds of sum) that take a dative object. Memorize at least some of the common dative verbs such as credo, placeo, and noceo.
IMPERSONAL PASSIVES OF INTRANSITIVE VERBS
As your book says, Latin can have intransitive verbs (i.e. verbs that do not take a direct object) in impersonal passive forms (with a vague "it" subject). In such cases, English will either use a personal passive (with a real subject) or not use a passive at all.
Example:
ACTIVE INTRANSITIVE
We were going. (Good English)
Ibamus. (Good Latin)
PASSIVE INTRANSITIVE
It was gone. (BAD English! English would say "Some people went.")
Itum est. (Good Latin)
All Latin verbs that do not take an accusative direct object will have to be impersonal (3rd singular form with vague "it" subject) if used in the passive voice. If the doer of the action is expressed, it will be with ablative of agent (a/ab + abl.), but often there will be no expressed agent because impersonal passives tend to put emphasis on the action rather than the actor.
Often English will allow personal passives for verbs that have intransitive Latin equivalents. Thus we can say "He will be believed." and "They were harmed." but Latin cannot because Latin versions of believe (credo) and harm (noceo) are intransitive, so Latin instead says "Marco(dat.) credetur." (Literally: "It will be believed to/in Marcus.") and "Eis(dat.) nocitum est." (Literally: "It was harmed to them.").
Just as the above literal translations of the Latin sound ridiculous to us, so it would be ridiculous to a Latin speaker if you said "Is credetur." ("He will be believed.") or "Nocebantur." ("They were harmed.") because these literal translations are COMPLETE NONSENSE in Latin.
Examples:
Itum est Romam. (Good Latin)
Literally: It was gone to Rome.
Means: There was a journey to Rome.
or We/they went to Rome. (Context would tell us the required subject; the emphasis is on the action, not the actor.)
Caesari* creditur. (Good Latin)
*dative because credo takes dative object)
Literally: It is trusted to/in Caesar.
Means: Caesar is trusted.
Hostibus* totum diem resistebatur. (Good Latin)
*dative because resisto takes dative object
Literally: It was resisted to/against the enemy all day.
Means: The enemy was resisted all day.
Monday, October 4, 2010
English to Latin Words
English to Latin Glossary
http://wredmond.home.texas.net/alittera.html
English to Latin Dictionary, Smith.
http://books.google.com/books?id=MItiAAAAMAAJ
http://digilander.libero.it/Marziale/Grex/biblio/smith/
Meissner Latin Phrase Book
http://books.google.com/books?id=WFxFAAAAYAAJ
The best modern Latin dictionary is put out by the Vatican; see on line at:
http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/institutions_connected/latinitas/documents/rc_latinitas_20040601_lexicon_it.html
However, it translates from Italian to Latin, so you would need to find the modern Italian equivalent first.
http://wredmond.home.texas.net/alittera.html
English to Latin Dictionary, Smith.
http://books.google.com/books?id=MItiAAAAMAAJ
http://digilander.libero.it/Marziale/Grex/biblio/smith/
Meissner Latin Phrase Book
http://books.google.com/books?id=WFxFAAAAYAAJ
The best modern Latin dictionary is put out by the Vatican; see on line at:
http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/institutions_connected/latinitas/documents/rc_latinitas_20040601_lexicon_it.html
However, it translates from Italian to Latin, so you would need to find the modern Italian equivalent first.
Ch. 23
HW: 23A 1,2,5,10; 23B 1,3,6,7 and the following:
Create one sentence with a negative fear clause. Give your English version and then translate into normal Latin. (This one is worth 5 points EC if you do it perfectly.)
FEAR CLAUSES
The formation of Fear Clauses is very similar to Purpose/Final Clauses and to Indirect Commands. They use subjunctive verbs following the sequence of tenses.
In English Fear Clauses will begin with "that" or "lest".
Though it may seem backwards, ne introduces a positive fear clause and ut introduces a negative fear clause ("that..not...").
Many fear clauses are set in a later time relative to the main verb. These typically take present (in primary sequence) or imperfect (in secondary) subjunctive.
Examples:
I feared lest he win (that he would win).
Timebam ne vinceret. (secondary sequence)
They are afraid lest you leave. (that you will leave).
Verentur ne discedas. (primary sequence)
Other fear clauses are set in the same or earlier time than the main verb.
I am afraid that he is not here now.
Timeo ut nunc adsit. (primary)
You feared that we had already left.
Veritus es ne iam discessissemus. (secondary)
Create one sentence with a negative fear clause. Give your English version and then translate into normal Latin. (This one is worth 5 points EC if you do it perfectly.)
FEAR CLAUSES
The formation of Fear Clauses is very similar to Purpose/Final Clauses and to Indirect Commands. They use subjunctive verbs following the sequence of tenses.
In English Fear Clauses will begin with "that" or "lest".
Though it may seem backwards, ne introduces a positive fear clause and ut introduces a negative fear clause ("that..not...").
Many fear clauses are set in a later time relative to the main verb. These typically take present (in primary sequence) or imperfect (in secondary) subjunctive.
Examples:
I feared lest he win (that he would win).
Timebam ne vinceret. (secondary sequence)
They are afraid lest you leave. (that you will leave).
Verentur ne discedas. (primary sequence)
Other fear clauses are set in the same or earlier time than the main verb.
I am afraid that he is not here now.
Timeo ut nunc adsit. (primary)
You feared that we had already left.
Veritus es ne iam discessissemus. (secondary)
Friday, October 1, 2010
Ch. 21 & 22
HW 21-2
HW: 21A 1,5,8; 21B 1; 22A 1,3,4; 22B 4
Final clauses and commands
After si, nisi, num, and ne all the ali's fall away...
quis/quid (normally "who"/"what") means someone/something/anyone/anything (usually aliquis/aliquid) after ne.
Section 211 just says to use quis, quid after ne instead of quisquam, quidquam or ullus, -a, -um which come after nec/necque.
See the comparative chart in 212 for which pronouns and adverbs to use after each
Example:
He ordered us to leave lest we ever be captured. (or "to avoid ever being captured")
Iussit nos discedere ne quando caperemur.
Section 213 introduces negative purpose clauses, also called negative final clauses, or clauses of prevention. We have already mentioned how to form them. They use ne instead of ut and have a subjunctive verb following sequence of tenses. NOTE: English often uses an infinitive ("to avoid being defeated") but Latin must use a negative purpose clause.
E.g.
He left lest he be caught. (or "to avoid being caught"/"so as not to be caught")
Discessit ne caperetur. (imperfect subjunctive after secondary main verb)
He is coming lest anyone be killed. ("to prevent anyone from being killed")
Venit ne quis interficiatur. (present subjunctive after primary main verb)
Section 215 notes that sometimes purpose clauses may be signposted (similar to result clauses) by using a word or phrase that means something like "with this plan/idea/intention..." or "therefore/so".
E.g.
He arranged his soldiers with this intention, that they not be defeated.
Milites instruxit eo consilio ne vincerentur. (imperfect subjunctive after secondary main verb)
I will walk with this purpose, to come to Rome.
Ambulabo ideo (or "hac causa"), ut Romam adveniam. (present subjunctive after primary main verb)
Clauses of Reported Speech
Sections 221-3 remind you that many verbs may take more than one type of indirect discourse (reported speech).
Examples:
He warned you that they were dying.
Indirect Statement} Monuit te mori eos.
He warned you to help them. (or "that you should help them")
Indirect Command} Monuit te ut eos adiuvares.
We asked them to fight bravely.
Indirect command} Rogavimus eos ut fortiter pugnarent.
We will ask whether they fought bravely.
Indirect Question} Rogabimus num fortiter pugnaverint.
If "tell" in English means order, you must use iubeo or veto (tell not to...) or impero + dat. and indirect command.
Examples:
He tells us that life is good.
Indirect Statement} Narrat nobis vitam esse bonam.
She tells us to run. (or "that we should run")
with iubeo} Ea iubet nos currere.
Indirect Command} Ea nobis imperat ut curramus.
We were telling you (pl.) not to go away.
with veto} Vetabamus vos abire.
Indirect Command} Imperabamus vobis ne abiretis.
Section 225 shows two common ways of expressing future indirect statements.
The normal way that you have already learned is with a future infinitive for the verb and accusative for the subject (normal indirect statement), such as:
He hopes that he will see you there.
Sperat se(subject) te ibi visurum esse (future active infinitive).
It is harder to do future passive indirect statements. One way is to use the infinitive fore or futurum esse with an ut clause (noun clause of result) as its subject. The ut clause will be construed like a result clause with a subjunctive verb. This way is often used to express indirect statements in the future passive, since Latin has no normal future passive infinitive.
Direct statement/quotation "You all will be killed."
Options in indirect discourse:
Noveram vos interfectum iri. (interfectum is accusative supine & iri
is present passive infinitive of eo)
Noveram posse vos facile interfici. Literally: I knew that you all
could easily be killed. (not quite the same sense but close)
Noveram futurum esse ut interficeremini. /
Noveram fore ut interficeremini. Literally: I knew that it would be
(or "would happen") that you all were killed.
EXAMPLES:
I hope that he will not be killed. (or "that it will be that he not be killed")
Spero fore (or "futurum esse") ut non interficiatur.
They thought that you (pl.) would be conquered. (or "that it would be that you be conquered")
Putabant fore (or "futurum esse") ut vinceremini.
Suboblique Subjunctive
Section 226 is wrong in saying that subordinate/dependent clauses in indirect speech MUST have a subjunctive verb, but it is VERY COMMON, and is virtually necessary when the subordinate clause expresses an idea held by someone in the indirect statement but not necessarily by the speaker or author. In short, if the dependent clause in a indirect statement is not a known fact or a personal opinion of the main subject, then it should always be subjunctive. Even if it is a known fact or personal opinion of the main subject, it may be attracted into the subjunctive. Thus to be safe, you may always use the subjunctive for subordinate clauses in indirect discourse.
Examples:
I knew that you were coming because you wanted to see me.
Noveram/Scivi te venire quod me videre velles.
Since the reasoning in the causal quod clause is clearly in the mind of the "you" (te) subject of the indirect statement, we use the subjunctive form velles.
I know that you lost (or "were defeated") because [as I know] you are weak.
Scio/novi te victum esse quoniam invalidus es/sis.
Here the causal quoniam clause is clearly in the mind of the main subject. Thus one might keep an indicative or change it to subjunctive by attraction within indirect discourse.
I heard that earlier* he ran away when he saw the enemy.
*In Latin we can leave out "earlier" and simply put the infinitive into perfect tense to show earlier time.
Audivi eum fugisse ubi/cum hostes vidisset.
Here the temporal ubi/cum clause represents something reported to the speaker by a third party. Since it is not a fact the speaker can directly vouch for nor a statement of opinion from the speaker himself (i.e. the main clause subject), it should have a subjunctive verb.
You will keep asking what I did until you find out.
Rogabis iterum iterumque quid fecerim dum invenias.
The until (dum) clause is a purpose in the mind of both speaker and person being spoken to so it must use subjunctive (it would even be subjunctive if not in an indirect question).
HW: 21A 1,5,8; 21B 1; 22A 1,3,4; 22B 4
Final clauses and commands
After si, nisi, num, and ne all the ali's fall away...
quis/quid (normally "who"/"what") means someone/something/anyone/anything (usually aliquis/aliquid) after ne.
Section 211 just says to use quis, quid after ne instead of quisquam, quidquam or ullus, -a, -um which come after nec/necque.
See the comparative chart in 212 for which pronouns and adverbs to use after each
Example:
He ordered us to leave lest we ever be captured. (or "to avoid ever being captured")
Iussit nos discedere ne quando caperemur.
Section 213 introduces negative purpose clauses, also called negative final clauses, or clauses of prevention. We have already mentioned how to form them. They use ne instead of ut and have a subjunctive verb following sequence of tenses. NOTE: English often uses an infinitive ("to avoid being defeated") but Latin must use a negative purpose clause.
E.g.
He left lest he be caught. (or "to avoid being caught"/"so as not to be caught")
Discessit ne caperetur. (imperfect subjunctive after secondary main verb)
He is coming lest anyone be killed. ("to prevent anyone from being killed")
Venit ne quis interficiatur. (present subjunctive after primary main verb)
Section 215 notes that sometimes purpose clauses may be signposted (similar to result clauses) by using a word or phrase that means something like "with this plan/idea/intention..." or "therefore/so".
E.g.
He arranged his soldiers with this intention, that they not be defeated.
Milites instruxit eo consilio ne vincerentur. (imperfect subjunctive after secondary main verb)
I will walk with this purpose, to come to Rome.
Ambulabo ideo (or "hac causa"), ut Romam adveniam. (present subjunctive after primary main verb)
Clauses of Reported Speech
Sections 221-3 remind you that many verbs may take more than one type of indirect discourse (reported speech).
Examples:
He warned you that they were dying.
Indirect Statement} Monuit te mori eos.
He warned you to help them. (or "that you should help them")
Indirect Command} Monuit te ut eos adiuvares.
We asked them to fight bravely.
Indirect command} Rogavimus eos ut fortiter pugnarent.
We will ask whether they fought bravely.
Indirect Question} Rogabimus num fortiter pugnaverint.
If "tell" in English means order, you must use iubeo or veto (tell not to...) or impero + dat. and indirect command.
Examples:
He tells us that life is good.
Indirect Statement} Narrat nobis vitam esse bonam.
She tells us to run. (or "that we should run")
with iubeo} Ea iubet nos currere.
Indirect Command} Ea nobis imperat ut curramus.
We were telling you (pl.) not to go away.
with veto} Vetabamus vos abire.
Indirect Command} Imperabamus vobis ne abiretis.
Section 225 shows two common ways of expressing future indirect statements.
The normal way that you have already learned is with a future infinitive for the verb and accusative for the subject (normal indirect statement), such as:
He hopes that he will see you there.
Sperat se(subject) te ibi visurum esse (future active infinitive).
It is harder to do future passive indirect statements. One way is to use the infinitive fore or futurum esse with an ut clause (noun clause of result) as its subject. The ut clause will be construed like a result clause with a subjunctive verb. This way is often used to express indirect statements in the future passive, since Latin has no normal future passive infinitive.
Direct statement/quotation "You all will be killed."
Options in indirect discourse:
Noveram vos interfectum iri. (interfectum is accusative supine & iri
is present passive infinitive of eo)
Noveram posse vos facile interfici. Literally: I knew that you all
could easily be killed. (not quite the same sense but close)
Noveram futurum esse ut interficeremini. /
Noveram fore ut interficeremini. Literally: I knew that it would be
(or "would happen") that you all were killed.
EXAMPLES:
I hope that he will not be killed. (or "that it will be that he not be killed")
Spero fore (or "futurum esse") ut non interficiatur.
They thought that you (pl.) would be conquered. (or "that it would be that you be conquered")
Putabant fore (or "futurum esse") ut vinceremini.
Suboblique Subjunctive
Section 226 is wrong in saying that subordinate/dependent clauses in indirect speech MUST have a subjunctive verb, but it is VERY COMMON, and is virtually necessary when the subordinate clause expresses an idea held by someone in the indirect statement but not necessarily by the speaker or author. In short, if the dependent clause in a indirect statement is not a known fact or a personal opinion of the main subject, then it should always be subjunctive. Even if it is a known fact or personal opinion of the main subject, it may be attracted into the subjunctive. Thus to be safe, you may always use the subjunctive for subordinate clauses in indirect discourse.
Examples:
I knew that you were coming because you wanted to see me.
Noveram/Scivi te venire quod me videre velles.
Since the reasoning in the causal quod clause is clearly in the mind of the "you" (te) subject of the indirect statement, we use the subjunctive form velles.
I know that you lost (or "were defeated") because [as I know] you are weak.
Scio/novi te victum esse quoniam invalidus es/sis.
Here the causal quoniam clause is clearly in the mind of the main subject. Thus one might keep an indicative or change it to subjunctive by attraction within indirect discourse.
I heard that earlier* he ran away when he saw the enemy.
*In Latin we can leave out "earlier" and simply put the infinitive into perfect tense to show earlier time.
Audivi eum fugisse ubi/cum hostes vidisset.
Here the temporal ubi/cum clause represents something reported to the speaker by a third party. Since it is not a fact the speaker can directly vouch for nor a statement of opinion from the speaker himself (i.e. the main clause subject), it should have a subjunctive verb.
You will keep asking what I did until you find out.
Rogabis iterum iterumque quid fecerim dum invenias.
The until (dum) clause is a purpose in the mind of both speaker and person being spoken to so it must use subjunctive (it would even be subjunctive if not in an indirect question).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)