I am afraid;' 'I dread your coming,' 'I am afraid that you will come.' Vereor ut. On the other hand ut is a conjunction, being a member of the great joining family of which qui is the head; and meaning properly in which way or manner.' So vereor ut possit means I have fears as to the way in which he may be able;' that is, ‘I fear he wont be able.' Hence the Rule-After verbs of fearing, the Subjunctive is used with ne, if the action is not desired; with ut, if the action is desired: as, vereor ne veniat, I fear that he will come;' vereor ut veniat, 'I fear that he will not come.' Observe that we use the future where the Latin has an imperfect tense: and that we use the negative where the Latin does not, and don't use it where the Latin does. 23 Consensit. Observe that certain verbs are not necessarily followed by the subjunctive, but that the construction depends upon the sense. Fieret is in the subjunctive, because it is not stated that war was made: but in the next sentence we have the accusative and infinitive, or two nouns in the accusative, after consentiunt, because we are speaking of actual things: 'all men agree about God being,' that God is.' So with persuadeo and moneo in the next sentences. It just 24 Terrear. Notice this use of the subjunctive after sum. gives a touch of indefiniteness to that which is really meant as a statement, but which would sound rather bald if directly stated (note 2). Sunt qui dicant, there are some who say,' 'persons are found to say,' does not sound so bald as sunt qui dicunt, they who say exist.' 6 So through the following sentences the idea of non-statement runs; generally rendered in English by the Infinitive, just as we have seen the Purpose is. So after dignus (241) 'you do not seem worthy to be free, you have not such worth that you should be free.' So after habeo (250) I have not wherewithal to pay my fare.' 25 Inhiberi. Here we have the subjunctive after verbs that denote hindering &c. (f. 5). There is no real difference between these and the former sentences, the use of the subjunctive being in all alike owing to the fact that the action is not stated. Only in these the English use seems somewhat different. The boy can hardly be kept from throwing stones.' But this is merely the ablative of the verbal, while with the former verbs we had the accusative of the verbal. You do not deserve to be free;' or, 'you do not deserve being free.' 'I urged him to go;' or, 'I urged his going;' and so on. 6 26 Quin-quominus. These conjunctions, which are commonly used after verbs of hindering, are the same in origin. Quin is compounded of the old dative (denoting at ') of the relative and the negative adverb ne: quominus of the ablative of the relative and 'minus 'less,' used as a weak negative. The boy can scarcely be held in a way in which he would not throw stones.' 'What stands in the way by which he should not do this?' Occasionally ne only is used, as in line 263. That I was not to do-some accident stood in the way' (note 21). Notice the use of quin, as the dative in line 263: there is hardly a day on which;' qui-n being in the dative denoting time 'at,' just like heri, vesperi, &c. (Ix. n. 19). 27 Quin diceret. Here quin is compounded of the nominative qui and ne. Sometimes of the Interrogative quid and ne; as, Quin conscendimus equos? Why don't we mount our horses?' 'Let us mount our horses.' 28 Feceris. Here we have the Subjunctive in Indirect Question: and the Subjoiner is no longer the Relative adjective or adverb; as qui 'which,' ut 'in which manner;' but the Interrogative, as qui 'what?' ut 'in what manner?' Notice the Sequence of tenses according to Rem. o. 29 Scripserim. Notice that scripserim here, as pressus sim in line 307, is in the aorist subjunctive. 30 Amem. Here we have the Subjunctive in Indirect Statement. All that the writer states is that the woman makes the report. He does not state that I love the boy-the woman states thatand he shows that he does not state it by using the Subjunctive. The Subjoiner here is the Relative, not the Interrogative. See Rem. p. 31 Incolunt. By the Law (Rem. p. III.) a verb in the Bye-sentence, of a Direct statement is put in the Subjunctive, if the statement be Indirect, for the reason given in the last note. But if the fact is such that the writer can vouch for it-a geographical fact for instance, as here he sometimes makes the statement his own, and shows that he does so by using the indicative, as here. Not always thus we have incolerent in the last sentence. : 32 Occiderint. Who, as they said, perished.' Cæsar gives the statement, not as his own, though it was a real fact, but as that of the grumblers. So in the next sentence: who, as he said, was desirous' and in the following, 'which, as he urged, they had promised.' 33 Sudet. Here we begin with the uses of the Secondary Subjunctive; that is, where the action is spoken of as really taking place. And first we have the verb in the Subjunctive denoting the Result of the Main action, commonly after ut in the sense of 'so that.' In English this is always rendered by the Indicative (g. 1). For the tenses see Rem. o. II. 34 Esuriret. Occasionally it is not quite clear whether the Primary or Secondary Subjunctive is intended. This may mean either, The boy ran in order that he might be hungry'-Purpose and Primary or so that he was hungry'-Result and Secondary. 35 Possent. Here we have the Reason for the main action (h. 2). It is a fact that they were not able, but it is a fact introduced not by itself, but as dependent on the main action. Hence the Subjunctive. But, like all Secondary Subjunctives, it can be turned into an Indicative; they were not able, and therefore they sent.' 36 Qui-vellet. The Reason for' is commonly subjoined by the Conjunction-adverb quum, the Subjunctive giving it the sense of 'since.' But it is often subjoined by the Conjunction-adjective, or Relative, qui, as here: since he wished.' Qui volebat would simply state the fact that he wished: qui vellet makes this fact dependent on the main action; namely the reason for it. 37 Quum-posset. Here we have the Reason against the Main action (h. 3); so that quum has the sense of though.' But it may be subjoined by qui, as in line 420; though he had kept.' 38 Consedisset. Here we have the Pluperfect-subjunctive after quum (h. 4). Originally used when there was some dependence implied, it was used so frequently that it came to be used with quum even when little, if any, idea of dependence was meant to be conveyed. Sometimes even with the Imperfect tenses the idea of dependence is almost lost. But, as a Rule, Quum with the Imperfect tenses of the Subjunctive means 'since' or 'though;' giving, that is, some idea of dependence on, or connection with, the main verb: but with the Pluperfect it means 'when,' no idea of dependence being necessarily implied. It is thus commonly rendered by a perfect active participle. 39 Queror. It is unnecessary to give many instances for the Laws of the Sequence of Tenses (Remark o), as they are to be found all through this chapter, especially in lines 77, 298, 328, &c. But a few are put together here. 40 Ducerentur. By the Laws the Present-perfect and the Aorist tenses of the Indicative are followed by different tenses of the Subjunctive: but, since there is only one form for both of these tenses, as scripsi, we cannot always tell which is meant. And often there is not much difference between the two. If a man says to me, 'Is the doctor at home?' I may answer either, 'No, he went to town this morning;' or, 'No, he is gone to town this morning' the only difference being, that the latter answer connects him in thought with me now, the former does not. And so in Latin sentences, the writer may view an action somewhat differently from what we should expect; and may use the aorist (for instance) where we should rather expect the present-perfect. Thus in the text we might rather be inclined to say, 'I have explained,' which would require ducantur: but it is, quite as well to say, 'I explained,' which requires ducerentur. And so in the two following sentences either tense will do quite as well. 41 Esset. Here we have the subjoined verb denoting the Result; which by our Laws will be in the imperfect subjunctive, if it denote a continued action, as in lines 450, 1; but if it denote a single action, it may be in either the imperfect or aorist subjunctive, as in lines 452, 3. See also 406, 8. 42 Orat. Here we have the Historic present followed, first by the present and perfect subjunctive, to agree with the form; then, and more commonly, by the imperfect and pluperfect, to agree with the sense. 43 Venturas. We have seen that there is no form in Latin for the future infinitive or subjunctive (Rem. m); and here we have the compounds which answer the purpose. In order to understand them we must change the indicative form, as veniet, which cannot pass through the subjunctive and infinitive, into a compound which can, as venturus est; and then est will pass regularly according to the Laws for the Sequence of Tenses (Rem. o and p). 44 Necentur. We have seen (xIx. 8) that in the passive voice there is a compound for the future infinitive, made up of the supine and iri, as in line 484: but this was not much liked and was not made to pass through the subjunctive, as eatur, iretur. Nor could there be a compound like the one in the active voice, as the passive has no future participle, like venturus. So a compound was made thus. Est ut means 'it happens that;' as, est ut vir ordinet, 'it happens that a man plants,' line 392. Hence erit ut reges necentur means, it will happen that kings are killed.' But this is not enough: for though erit has an infinitive, as fore, it has no subjunctive. Hence the expression futurum est ut, &c., 'it is about to happen that kings are killed. And now est can pass through all the changes according to the Laws. 45 Floreat. This compound is very rarely used with active verbs which have the future participle; but it is the only expression possible for active verbs which have not got it, as floreo, pudet. 46 Interiturus fui. Here we have a similar Compound for the past conditional should have.' Interissem has no infinitive or subjunctive: therefore, to be used in indirect speech, it must be changed into a Compound which has; as interiturus fui, 'I was on the point of dying' when you came: which implies that if you had not come I should have died. 47 Caderer. But the passive voice has no future participle. Hence the double compound; 'it was on the point of coming to pass that I should be killed' when you came. And, similarly, this is necessary for active verbs which have no future participle, as floreo, line 522. 48 Eundum fuit. 'If you had not come, I should have had to go to Rome.' There was by my side an (unfinished) going to Rome:' which can only mean that I had to go, unless prevented by your coming. 49 Instituisti. Here we have a few instances of the commonest conjunctions in illustration of Rem. m. Ut is the adverb of the Relative; in, or at, which manner, or time,' 'as,' or 'when.' But also of the Interrogative: 'in what manner,' 'how,' as line 562 (direct); and 565 (indirect). 50 Confiderent. Quod 'because' is followed by the indicative, as in last sentence (Rem. m. I.). But here it is followed by the subjunctive because the action is not stated as known. 51 Sublevetur. So too here, because these are the words, not of the writer but of the accuser (Rem. m. III.). 52 Accidit. Si with the indicative does not seem to imply any opinion of the speaker as to whether the action takes place or not; but it puts the supposition in a peremptory straightforward way as if it were a statement, to be followed inevitably by its consequence. I don't say or think that anything has happened, but I put it thus: Something has happened, has it? Well, it has happened to me. So in the next sentence, both alternatives are supposed, the true and the false; I can't believe them both, but I can bring them both forward as statements, to be followed each by its consequences. So in Sentences 31, 32, the speaker implies that he does not believe the supposition introduced by si. In fact to bring forward a supposition after si, is the same as asking a question in the form of a statement, merely implying the question by the voice, as in line 607. 53 Bibis. Here we have a few examples of Questions: firstly Single Questions, both Direct and Indirect; and then Compound, both Direct and Indirect. The Indirect of course require the Subjunctive, according to Rem. f. 6. 54 Vinum. Here the question is put as a statement, the interrogative force being supplied by the voice. But for the indirect question, the interrogative particle is required. 55 Necne. Ne is hardly ever used with the second member of the Direct Interrogative, except after nec: but it is with the Indirect (688). 56 Dixerit. The Rule is that an is only used with the Second or later member of a Compound Question: but here it appears to be need in a binge Indirect estica. But the Rule holds. The speaker says, as it were. Haud scio utrum bene an male dixerit: bat, inelizing in opinion to the latter alternative, he drops the first, and merely says, Haud scio an male dizerit: which therefore means, 'I am not sure, but I am disposed to think, he has spoken weil.' 57 Impetrarent. This is an example of Ungoverned Indirect Speech, as explained in Rem. g. It is very common in Latin; but to be illustrated properly it requires continued discourse. XXIV. 1 Suo. Ilia, commonly called Rhea Silvia, was the daughter of Numitor, king of Alba, whose brother Amulius had driven him from the throne, made Ilia a vestal, and put his son to death. When therefore Ilia become the mother of twins, Amulius dreaded them as lawful heirs to the throne which he unjustly held. 'The vestal Ilia had given birth to babes divine, Her father's brother holding at the time the throne.' 2 Istis. 'What dost thou? Of those twins thou treatest thus, one will be Romulus.' 3 Quaque. The conjunction-adverb que couples on equal terms ubi, the old dative, and qua, the later ablative, of the Relative: each meaning 'at which place,' 'where.' Or, to speak more accurately, que couples hic, the antecedent to ubi, and the omitted antecedent to qua. The valley occupied by the Circus Maximus lay between the Palatine and the Aventine. 4 Larentia. Larentia was the wife of Faustulus the king's shepherd, who found the children suckled by the wolf, and took them to his own house, where they were brought up. 5 Solidum. 'Down to the hard a ditch is dug.' 6 Fungitur. Fungor, a lengthened imperfect form from fug, 'flee,' like jungo from jug, is used in the special sense of fleeing, or ridding ourselves, from a work by doing it. Thus fungimur officio means 'we discharge our duty:' functus erat dapibus (Fast. II. 791) means, he had enjoyed the feast:' and so here, fungitur seems to mean, does its part by,' 'gets rid of by enjoying,” ́enjoys the kindled flame.' |