- •New latin grammar
- •Charles e. Bennett
- •Preface.
- •Preface to the second edition.
- •From the preface to the first edition.
- •European members of the indo-european family.
- •Part I. Sounds, accent, quantity.
- •5. A. Quantity of Vowels.
- •Consonant changes[10]
- •Part II.
- •Inflections.
- •Chapter I.—Declension. A. Nouns.
- •Cases alike in Form.
- •Peculiarities of Nouns of the First Declension.
- •Greek Nouns.
- •Nouns in -vus, -vum, -quus.
- •Peculiarities of Inflection in the Second Declension.
- •Exceptions to Gender in the Second Declension.
- •Greek Nouns of the Second Declension.
- •I. Consonant-Stems.
- •III. Consonant-Stems that have partially adapted themselves to the Inflection of ĭ-Stems.
- •IV. Stems in -ī, -ū, and Diphthongs.
- •V. Irregular Nouns.
- •General Principles of Gender in the Third Declension.
- •Chief Exceptions to Gender in the Third Declension.
- •44. Exceptions to the Rule for Masculines.
- •45. Exceptions to the Rule for Feminines.
- •46. Exceptions to the Rule for Neuters.
- •Greek Nouns of the Third Declension.
- •Peculiarities of Nouns of the Fourth Declension.
- •Exceptions to Gender in the Fourth Declension.
- •Peculiarities of Nouns of the Fifth Declension.
- •Gender in the Fifth Declension.
- •Nouns used in the Singular only.
- •Nouns used in the Plural only.
- •Nouns used only in Certain Cases.
- •Indeclinable Nouns.
- •Heteroclites.
- •Heterogeneous Nouns.
- •Plurals with Change of Meaning.
- •B. Adjectives.
- •Nine Irregular Adjectives.
- •Adjectives of Three Terminations.
- •Adjectives of Two Terminations.
- •Adjectives of One Termination.
- •Irregular Comparison.
- •Defective Comparison.
- •Comparison by Magis and Maximē.
- •Adjectives not admitting Comparison.
- •Adverbs Peculiar in Comparison and Formation.
- •Declension of the Cardinals.
- •Peculiarities in the Use of Numerals.
- •C. Pronouns.
- •Chapter II.—Conjugation.
- •Formation of the Present Stem.
- •Formation of the Perfect Stem.
- •Formation of the Participial Stem.
- •First (ā-) Conjugation.
- •Second (ē-) Conjugation.
- •Third (Consonant) Conjugation.
- •Fourth Conjugation.
- •Part III. Particles.
- •Adverbs.
- •Prepositions.
- •2. Nouns derived from Nouns.
- •3. Nouns derived from Adjectives.
- •1. Adjectives derived from Verbs.
- •2. Adjectives derived from Nouns.
- •3. Adjectives derived from Adjectives.
- •4. Adjectives derived from Adverbs.
- •1. Verbs derived from Verbs.
- •2. Verbs derived from Nouns and Adjectives (Denominatives).
- •II. Compounds.
- •Form of interrogative sentences.
- •Subject and predicate.
- •Simple and compound sentences.
- •Chapter II.—Syntax of Nouns. Subject.
- •Predicate nouns.
- •Appositives.
- •The cases.
- •Accusative of the Person or Thing Affected.
- •Accusative of the Result Produced.
- •Two Accusatives—Direct Object and Predicate Accusative.
- •Two Accusatives—Person and Thing.
- •Two Accusatives with Compounds.
- •Synecdochical (or Greek) Accusative.
- •Accusative of Time and Space.
- •Accusative of Limit of Motion.
- •Accusative in Exclamations.
- •Accusative as Subject of the Infinitive.
- •Other Uses of the Accusative.
- •Dative of Indirect Object.
- •Dative of Reference.
- •Dative of Agency.
- •Dative of Possession.
- •Dative of Purpose or Tendency.
- •Dative with Adjectives.
- •Dative of Direction.
- •Memini, Reminīscor, Oblīvīscor.
- •Admoneō, Commoneō, Commonefaciō.
- •Verbs of Judicial Action.
- •Genitive with Impersonal Verbs.
- •Interest, Rēfert.
- •Genitive with Other Verbs.
- •Ablative of Separation.
- •Ablative of Source.
- •Ablative of Agent.
- •Ablative of Comparison.
- •Ablative of Means.
- •Ablative of Cause.
- •Ablative of Manner.
- •Ablative of Attendant Circumstance.
- •Ablative of Accompaniment.
- •Ablative of Association.
- •Ablative of Degree of Difference.
- •Ablative of Quality.
- •Ablative of Price.
- •Ablative of Specification.
- •Ablative Absolute.
- •Ablative of Place.
- •Ablative of Time.
- •Chapter III.—Syntax of Adjectives.
- •Agreement of adjectives.
- •235. Agreement with Two or More Nouns.
- •Adjectives used substantively.
- •Adjectives with the force of adverbs.
- •Comparatives and superlatives.
- •Other peculiarities.
- •Chapter IV.—Syntax of Pronouns. Personal pronouns.
- •Possessive pronouns.
- •Reflexive pronouns.
- •Reciprocal pronouns.
- •Demonstrative pronouns. Hīc, Ille, Iste.
- •Relative pronouns.
- •Indefinite pronouns.
- •Pronominal adjectives.
- •Chapter V.—Syntax of Verbs. Agreement. With One Subject.
- •With Two or More Subjects.
- •Voices.
- •Tenses.
- •Principal and Historical Tenses.
- •Present Indicative.
- •Imperfect Indicative.
- •Future Indicative.
- •Perfect Indicative.
- •Pluperfect Indicative.
- •Future Perfect Indicative.
- •Epistolary Tenses.
- •Sequence of Tenses.
- •Peculiarities of Sequence.
- •Method of Expressing Future Time in the Subjunctive.
- •The moods.
- •The Indicative in Independent Sentences.
- •The Subjunctive in Independent Sentences.
- •The Imperative.
- •Clauses of Purpose.
- •Clauses of Characteristic.
- •Clauses of Result.
- •Causal Clauses.
- •Temporal Clauses introduced by Postquam, Ut, Ubi, Simul ac, etc.
- •Temporal Clauses introduced by Cum.
- •Clauses introduced by Antequam and Priusquam.
- •Clauses introduced by Dum, Dōnec, Quoad.
- •Substantive Clauses.
- •A. Substantive Clauses developed from the Volitive.
- •B. Substantive Clauses developed from the Optative.
- •C. Substantive Clauses of Result.
- •D. Substantive Clauses introduced by Quīn.
- •E. Substantive Clauses Introduced by Quod.
- •F. Indirect Questions.
- •First Type.—Nothing Implied as to the Reality of the Supposed Case.
- •Second Type.—'Should'-'Would' Conditions.
- •Third Type.—Supposed Case Represented as Contrary to Fact.
- •Protasis expressed without Sī.
- •Use of Nisi, Sī Nōn, Sīn.
- •Conditional Clauses of Comparison.
- •Concessive Clauses.
- •Adversative Clauses with Quamvīs, Quamquam, etc.
- •Clauses with Dum, Modo, Dummodo, denoting a Wish or a Proviso.
- •Relative Clauses.
- •Indirect discourse (ōrātiō oblīqua).
- •Declarative Sentences.
- •Interrogative Sentences.
- •Imperative Sentences.
- •A. Tenses of the Infinitive.
- •B. Tenses of the Subjunctive.
- •Conditional Sentences of the First Type.
- •Conditional Sentences of the Second Type.
- •Conditional Sentences of the Third Type.
- •Noun and adjective forms of the verb.
- •Infinitive without Subject Accusative.
- •Infinitive with Subject Accusative.
- •Passive Construction of the Foregoing Verbs.
- •Use of Participles.
- •Gerundive Construction instead of the Gerund.
- •Chapter VI.—Particles. Coördinate conjunctions.
- •Chapter VII.—Word-order and Sentence-Structure. A. Word-order.
- •B. Sentence-structure.
- •Chapter VIII.-Hints on Latin Style.
- •Adjectives.
- •Pronouns.
- •Peculiarities in the use of the accusative.
- •Peculiarities in connection with the use of the dative.
- •Peculiarities in the use of the genitive.
- •Part VI. Prosody.
- •Quantity of vowels and syllables
- •Quantity of Final Syllables.
- •Verse-structure.
- •Inde torō || pater Aenēās || sīc ōrsus ab altō est.
- •Vergilium vīdī tantum, neo amāra Tibullō
- •Supplements to the grammar.
- •A. Figures of Syntax.
- •B. Figures of Rhetoric.
- •Index of the sources of the illustrative examples cited in the syntax.[63]
- •Abbreviations used in index to the illustrative examples
- •Index to the principal parts of the most important verbs
- •General index.
- •Footnotes
Conditional Sentences of the Second Type.
320. A. THE APODOSIS. The Present Subjunctive of the Direct Discourse regularly becomes the Future Infinitive of the Indirect.
B. THE PROTASIS. The Protasis takes those tenses of the Subjunctive demanded by the sequence of tenses.
Examples:—
sī hōc crēdās, errēs, |
dīcō, sī hōc crēdās, tē errātūrum esse; dīxī, sī hōc crēderēs, tē errātūrum esse; |
Conditional Sentences of the Third Type.
321. A. THE APODOSIS.
1. The Imperfect Subjunctive of the Direct Discourse becomes the Future Infinitive.
a. But this construction is rare, being represented in the classical Latinity by a single example (Caesar, V. 29. 2). Some scholars question the correctness of this passage.
2. The Pluperfect Subjunctive of the Direct Discourse becomes:—
a) In the Active Voice the Infinitive in -ūrus fuisse.
b) In the Passive Voice it takes the form futūrum fuisse ut with the Imperfect Subjunctive.
B. THE PROTASIS. The protasis in Conditional Sentences of this type always remains unchanged.
Examples:—
sī hōc crēderēs, errārēs, |
dīcō (dīxī), sī hōc crēderēs, tē errātūrum esse; |
sī hōc crēdidissēs, errāvissēs, |
dīcō (dīxī), sī hōc crēdidissēs, tē errātūrum fuisse; |
sī hōc dīxissēs, pūnītus essēs. |
dīcō (dīxī), sī hōc dīxissēs, futūrum fuisse ut pūnīrēris. |
322. When an apodosis of a conditional sentence of the Third Type referring to the past is at the same time a Result clause or a quīn-clause (after nōn dubitō, etc.), it stands in the Perfect Subjunctive in the form -ūrus fuerim; as,—
ita territī sunt, ut arma trāditūrī fuerint,[57] nisi Caesar subitō advēnisset, they were so frightened that they would have given up their arms, had not Caesar suddenly arrived;
nōn dubitō quīn, sī hōc dīxissēs, errātūrus fuerīs,[57] I do not doubt that, if you had said this, you would have made a mistake.
a. This peculiarity is confined to the Active Voice. In the Passive, such sentences, when they become dependent, remain unchanged; as,—
nōn dubitō quīn, sī hōc dīxissēs, vituperātus essēs, I do not doubt that, if you had said this, you would have been blamed.
b. When an Indirect Question becomes an apodosis in a conditional sentence of the Third Type, -ūrus fuerim (rarely -ūrus fuissem) is used; as,—
quaerō, num, sī hōc dīxissēs, errātūrus fuerīs (or fuissēs).
c. Potuī, when it becomes a dependent apodosis in sentences of this Type, usually changes to the Perfect Subjunctive; as,—
concursū tōtīus civitātis dēfēnsī sunt, ut frīgidissimōs quoque ōrātōrēs populī studia excitāre potuerint, they were defended before a gathering of all the citizens, so that the interest of the people would have been enough to excite even the most apathetic orators.
IMPLIED INDIRECT DISCOURSE.
323. The Subjunctive is often used in subordinate clauses whose indirect character is merely implied by the context; as,—
dēmōnstrābantur mihi praetereā, quae Sōcratēs dē immortālitāte animōrum disseruisset, there were explained to me besides, the arguments which Socrates had set forth concerning the immortality of the soul (i.e. the arguments which, it was said, Socrates had set forth);
Paetus omnēs librōs quōs pater suus relīquisset mihi dōnāvit, Paetus gave me all the books which (as he said) his father had left.
SUBJUNCTIVE BY ATTRACTION.
324. 1. Subordinate clauses dependent upon the Subjunctive are frequently attracted into the same mood especially when they do not express a fact, but constitute an essential part of one complex idea; as,—
nēmō avārus adhūc inventus est, cui, quod habēret, esset satis, no miser has yet been found who was satisfed with what he had;
cum dīversās causās afferrent, dum fōrmam suī quisque et animī et ingeniī redderent, as they brought forward different arguments, while each mirrored his own individual type of mind and natural bent;
quod ego fatear, pudeat? should I be ashamed of a thing which I admit?
2. Similarly a subordinate clause dependent upon an Infinitive is put in the Subjunctive when the two form one closely united whole; as,—
mōs est Athēnīs quotannīs in cōntiōne laudārī eōs quī sint in proeliīs interfectī, it is the custom at Athens every year for those to be publicly eulogized who have been killed in battle. (Here the notion of 'praising those who fell in battle' forms an inseparable whole.)