DEPENDENT USAGES of the SUBJUNCTIVE:
Clauses introduced by "Ut":
1. PURPOSE CLAUSE with "UT": The purpose clause explains the
reason (purpose) why the action of the independent clause was taken. The
action of the independent clause was taken in order to cause the action
of the dependent clause. e.g. Caesar rem publicam delevit,
[ut is ipse rex sit.] Caesar destroyed the republic, [so that he
himself would be king.]
2. RESULT CLAUSE with "UT": The result clause does not explain
the action of the main clause, rather, it indicates the result of that action.
e.g. Caesar rem publicam delevit, [ut Cassius Caesarem interficere
velit.] Caesar destroyed the republic, [with the result that Cassius wants
to assassinate Caesar.]
3. NEGATIVE RESULT CLAUSE with "UT + NON": Same as the previous,
but with a negative outcome. e.g. Caesar rem publicam delevit,
[ut Cassius Caesarem non amet.] Caesar destroyed the republic, [with
the result that Cassius does not love Caesar.]
Clauses introduced by "Ne":
1. NEGATIVE PURPOSE CLAUSE with "NE": The negative purpose
clause explains the reason (purpose) why the action of the independent clause
was taken. The action of the independent clause was taken in order to avoid
the action of the dependent clause. e.g. Caesar rem publicam delevit,
[ne Senatu necetur.] Caesar destroyed the republic, [lest
he be killed by the Senate.]
Clauses introduced by "Cum":
1. TEMPORAL CLAUSE with "CUM" [When...]: The temporal clause
with cum is most commonly seen with the perfect and pluperfect tenses, though
it can be used with the present and imperfect. e.g. C. Iulius Caesar,
[cum Galliam oppugnaverit,] magnam pecuniam rapere cupivit. Gaius Iulius
Caesar, [when he attacked Gaul,] wanted to seize much money.
2. CAUSAL CLAUSE with "CUM" [Since...]: The causal clause
explains the action of the main clause much as would a phrase with "quia."
e.g. Caesar rem publicam delet, [cum vir improbissimus sit.] Caesar is
destroying the republic, [since he is a most wicked man.]
3. CONCESSIVE CLAUSE with "CUM" [Although...]: The concessive
clause expresses an idea that is in conflict with the idea of the main clause
so that it is necessary to concede that that the information of the dependent
clause is true. e.g. [Cum Caesar rem publicam deleret,] vir probus
fuit. [Although Caesar was destroying the republic,] he was a morally upright
(elite) man.
Nota Bene:
- [Cum] is often replaced by other words with similar meaning. e.g.
Caesar rem publicam delet, [quod] vir improbissimus sit. Caesar is destroying
the republic, since (due to the fact that) he is a most wicked man.
Relative Clauses with Subjunctive Verbs:
1. RELATIVE CLAUSE of CHARACTERISTIC: As any relative clause, the relative
clause of characteristic gives further information concerning the antecedent
of the relative pronoun, with the difference that instead of reporting a
fact with the indicative, it indicates the sort of actions that the antecedent
would perform (the character or nature of the antecedent). e.g. Caesar,
[qui matrem suam necet,] rem publicam delere vult. Caesar,
who would kill his own mother, wants to destroy the republic.
2. RELATIVE PURPOSE CLAUSE: Much like a purpose clause with "ut,"
to the extent that the sentence could make sense if the relative were replaced
with "ut." e.g. Caesar nuntium missit, [qui (ut) Brutum
amicum suum esse persuaserit.] Caesar sent a messenger, [who would
persuade (so that he would persuade) Brutus to be his friend.]
3. RELATIVE CLAUSE in INDIRECT SPEECH: When a relative clause occurs
in indirect speech, its verb should be in the subjunctive. Brutus Caesarem,
[qui in Gallia urbes oppugnet,] furem esse dicit.
Brutus says that Caesar, [who is attacking cities in Gaul,] is a thief.
Indirect Question:
1. INDIRECT QUESTION: The indirect question looks much like a deliberative
subjunctive, with the difference being that the indirect question is a dependent
usage and delivered indirectly (in indirect speech). The indirect question
is not asked but rather reported. e.g. Caesar Brutum, [quid Cassius in
Senatu fecerit,] interrogavit. Caesar asked Brutus [what
Cassius did in the Senate.]
Conditional Statements:
(if/then statements; the conditional clause is the protasis,
the result clause is the apodosis)
1. FUTURE MORE VIVID: The future more vivid uses verbs in the INDICATIVE
mood. A future (or future perfect) indicative in the protasis and a future
(or future perfect) indicative in the apodosis are used to express a definite
outcome. e.g. Si Caesar trans Rubiconem fluvium progredietur,
scelus erit. If Caesar shall advance across the Rubicon river, he shall
be a criminal.
2. FUTURE LESS VIVID: The future less vivid uses a present subjunctive
in the protasis and a present subjunctive in the apodosis to express a potential
outcome. e.g. Si Caesar trans Rubiconem fluvium progrediatur,
scelus sit. If Caesar should advance across the Rubicon river, he would
be a criminal.
3. PRESENT CONTRARY to FACT: (Present Contrafactual) The present contrafactual
uses an imperfect subjunctive in the protasis and an imperfect subjunctive
in the apodosis to express what could be if conditions were different.
e.g. Si Pompeius tam fortis quam Caesar esset, in bello vinceret.
If Pompey were being as brave as Caesar, he would be conquering in the
war .
4. PAST CONTRARY to FACT: (Past Contrafactual) The past contrafactual
uses a pluperfect subjunctive in the protasis and a pluperfect (or imperfect)
subjunctive in the apodosis to express what could be if conditions had been
different. e.g. Si Pompeius tam fortis quam Caesar fuisset, in
bello vicisset. If Pompey had been as brave as Caesar, he
would have conquered in the war .
|