New Latin Grammar

Examples:—

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

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

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

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

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

CONDITIONAL SENTENCES.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

b) With both the Periphrastic Conjugations; as,—

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

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

Protasis expressed without Sī.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Use of Nisi, Sī Nōn, Sīn.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Conditional Clauses of Comparison.

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

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

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

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

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

Concessive Clauses.

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

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

haec sint falsa, granted that this is false;

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

Adversative Clauses with Quamvīs, Quamquam, etc.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

quamquam quid loquor, and yet why do I speak?

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

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

quamvīs multī opīnārentur, though many thought;

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Relative Clauses.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

INDIRECT DISCOURSE (ŌRĀTIŌ OBLĪQUA).

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

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

MOODS IN INDIRECT DISCOURSE.

Declarative Sentences.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Interrogative Sentences.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Imperative Sentences.

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

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

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

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

TENSES IN INDIRECT DISCOURSE.

A. Tenses of the Infinitive.

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

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

sciō tē haec ēgisse may mean—

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

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

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

B. Tenses of the Subjunctive.

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

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

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

CONDITIONAL SENTENCES IN INDIRECT DISCOURSE.

Conditional Sentences of the First Type.

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

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

Examples:—

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

Conditional Sentences of the Second Type.

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

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

Examples:—

Conditional Sentences of the Third Type.

321. A. THE APODOSIS.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Examples:—

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

IMPLIED INDIRECT DISCOURSE.

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

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

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

SUBJUNCTIVE BY ATTRACTION.

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

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

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

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

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

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

NOUN AND ADJECTIVE FORMS OF THE VERB.

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

As Verbs,—

As Nouns or Adjectives,—

THE INFINITIVE.

Infinitive without Subject Accusative.

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

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

A. As Subject.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

B. As Object.

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

as,—

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

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

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

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

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

Infinitive with Subject Accusative.

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

A. As Subject.

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

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

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

B. As Object.

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

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

Examples:—

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

cupiō mē esse clēmentem, I desire to be lenient;

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Passive Construction of the Foregoing Verbs.

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

a) jubeor, vetor, sinor; as,—

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

pōns fierī jussus est, a bridge was ordered built;

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

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

b) videor, I am seen, I seem; as,—

vidētur comperisse, he seems to have discovered.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Infinitive with Adjectives.

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

contentus dēmōnstrāsse, contented to have proved;

audāx omnia perpetī, bold for enduring everything.

Infinitive in Exclamations.

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

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

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

Historical Infinitive.

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

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

PARTICIPLES.

Tenses of the Participle.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

locūtus taceō = I HAVE spoken and am silent;

locūtus tacui = I HAD spoken and then was silent;

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

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

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

Use of Participles.

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

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

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

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

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

a) Time; as,—

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

b) A Condition; as,—

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

c) Manner; as,—

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

d) Means; as,—

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

e) Opposition ('though'); as,—

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

f) Cause; as,—

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

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

videō tē fugientem, I see you fleeing.

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

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

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

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

vēnērunt castra oppugnātūrī, they came to assault the camp.

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

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

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

post urbem conditam, after the founding of the city;

Quīnctius dēfēnsus, the defense of Quinctius;

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

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

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

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

a) Less frequently as Attributive. Thus:—

liber legendus, a book worth reading;

lēgēs observandae, laws deserving of observance.

b) More frequently as Predicate.

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

veniendum est, it is necessary to come;

oblīvīscendum est offēnsārum, one must forget injuries;

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

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

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

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

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

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

THE GERUND.

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

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

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

cupiditās dominandī, desire of ruling;

ars scrībendī, the art of writing.

b) With Adjectives; as,—

cupidus audiendī, desirous of hearing.

c) With causā, grātiā; as,—

discendī causā, for the sake of learning.

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

a) With Adjectives; as,—

aqua ūtilis est bibendō, water is useful for drinking.

b) With Verbs (rarely); as,—

adfuī scrībendō, I was present at the writing.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

5. As a rule, only the Genitive of the Gerund and the Ablative (without a preposition) admit a Direct Object.

Gerundive Construction instead of the Gerund.

339. 1. Instead of the Genitive or Ablative of the Gerund with a Direct Object, another construction may be, and very often is, used. This consists in putting the Direct Object in the case of the Gerund (Gen. or Abl.) and using the Gerundive in agreement with it. This is called the Gerundive Construction. Thus:—

2. The Gerundive Construction must be used to avoid a Direct Object with the Dative of the Gerund, or with a case dependent upon a Preposition; as,—

locus castrīs mūniendīs aptus, a place adapted to fortifying a camp;

ad pācem petendam vēnērunt, they came to ask peace;

multum temporis cōnsūmō in legendīs poētīs, I spend much time in reading the poets.

3. In order to avoid ambiguity (see § 236, 2), the Gerundive Construction must not be employed in case of Neuter Adjectives used substantively. Thus regularly—

philosophī cupidī sunt vērum invēstīgandī, philosophers are eager for discovering truth (rarely vērī invēstīgandī);

studium plūra cognōscendī, a desire of knowing more (not plūrium cognōscendōrum).

4. From the nature of the case only Transitive Verbs can be used in the Gerundive construction; but ūtor, fruor, fungor, potior (originally transitive) regularly admit it; as,—

hostēs in spem potiundōrum castrōrum vēnerant, the enemy had conceived the hope of gaining possession of the camp.

5. The Genitives meī, tuī, suī, nostrī, vestrī, when used in the Gerundive Construction, are regularly employed without reference to Gender or Number, since they were originally Neuter Singular Adjectives used substantively. Thus:—

mulier suī servandī causā aufūgit, the woman fled for the sake of saving herself;

lēgātī in castra vēnērunt suī pūrgandī causā, the envoys came into camp for the purpose of clearing themselves.