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.
Monday, October 11, 2010
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)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)