BLD §§ 201-205 Perfect Passive Participle

[Timothy]

I'm having a mental block with how to "inflect" the perfect passive.

1. Is this called inflection because of the dual nature of the form? As opposed to decline or conjugate?

2. As I understand the construction of a compound case, you would decline the base like bonus, -a, -um. However, I can't quite see where you would use anything but a one case: nominative. It must agree with the word it modifies in gender, and number but for the life of me I can't see how anything but a subject could be used. How would I use the genitive case?

...puellae amatae erat, ...of the girl had been loved (???)

Or is it that there is an implied pronoun here (who)?

...of the girl (who) had been loved.

nom. puella amata eram the girl who had been loved
gen puellae amatae eram of the girl who had been loved
dat. puellae amatae eram to the girl who had been loved
acc. puellam amatam eram the girlf who had been loved
abl. puella amata eram by the girl who had been loved

So this is the nature of the participle? It's mainly a modifier? Or am I missing it altogether?

- Tim

[benissimus]

I'm having a mental block with how to "inflect" the perfect passive.

1. Is this called inflection because of the dual nature of the form? As opposed to decline or conjugate?

"Inflection" is any changing of the endings, including both conjugation and declension. In the case of the perfect passive participle, you are inflecting it by declining.

2. As I understand the construction of a compound case, you would decline the base like bonus, -a, -um. However, I can't quite see where you would use anything but a one case: nominative. It must agree with the word it modifies in gender, and number but for the life of me I can't see how anything but a subject could be used. How would I use the genitive case?

Genitive case - Superbia puellae amatae est mala "The arrogance of a loved girl is bad / The arrogance of a girl who is loved is bad"
Dative case - Multa dona puellis servatis dedit "He gave many gifts to the protected girls"
Accusative - Laudatum amicum videbam "I saw my praised friend / I saw my friend who was praised"
Ablative - Via ornata festinate "Hurry on the decorated road"

[benissimus]

nom. puella amata eram the girl who had been loved
gen puellae amatae eram of the girl who had been loved
dat. puellae amatae eram to the girl who had been loved
acc. puellam amatam eram the girlf who had been loved
abl. puella amata eram by the girl who had been loved

You would never have anything but the nominative agreeing with a verb, in this case esse. The participle only functions like a verb when it is in the nominative, otherwise it is strictly a participle modifying the noun.

[Timothy]

You would never have anything but the nominative agreeing with a verb, in this case esse. The participle only functions like a verb when it is in the nominative, otherwise it is strictly a participle modifying the noun.

But how do I express the tense when used as an adjective?

I want to have the Gods favor those who will be lovers and kill off the loners.

"The Gods favor the boys who shall love and..."
Dei pueros amatos erunt amant et...

But this is incorrect. So to use the nominative I should say,

pueri amati erunt deos amantur.
"The boys who shall have loved are favored by the Gods."

Sorry if I'm being dense here. Is it simply that the compound form (as in esse) is only form where a tense is expressed? Otherwise it is simply a perfect participle used as an adjective in the same tense as the main verb.

side Q: Laudaum amicum videbam.

What makes you select this word order? Am I being too narrow in regularly using noun-adjective? (amicum laudaum) Or is there a preference for using a verb form before a noun when used as an adjective? Or is this just what came through the keyboard?

- Tim

[Timothy]

I botched the ablative there, didn't I?

- Tim

[benissimus]

You would never have anything but the nominative agreeing with a verb, in this case esse. The participle only functions like a verb when it is in the nominative, otherwise it is strictly a participle modifying the noun.

But how do I express the tense when used as an adjective?

The tense is already expressed as perfect. A perfect participle can never be anything other than perfect in relation to the main verb.

I want to have the Gods favor those who will be lovers and kill off the loners.

"The Gods favor the boys who shall love and..."
Dei pueros amatos erunt amant et...

"Boys who shall love" would be a future active participle, not perfect passive: Dei pueros amaturos amant et... = "The gods favor the boys who will love and..."

But this is incorrect. So to use the nominative I should say,

pueri amati erunt deos amantur.
"The boys who shall have loved are favored by the Gods."

You can only have one finite verb in a sentence without a conjunction and also, you are trying to use a passive participle actively. Pueri amaturi would be the future active participle, but since you want to say "shall have loved", it is a future perfect and you have to express with the relative qui.

Sorry if I'm being dense here. Is it simply that the compound form (as in esse) is only form where a tense is expressed? Otherwise it is simply a perfect participle used as an adjective in the same tense as the main verb.

When you have an instance of '(nominative) participle+esse', it is functioning as a verb. Otherwise, it is only an adjective and you don't use esse.

side Q: Laudaum amicum videbam.

What makes you select this word order? Am I being too narrow in regularly using noun-adjective? (amicum laudaum) Or is there a preference for using a verb form before a noun when used as an adjective? Or is this just what came through the keyboard?

While there are regularities in Latin word order, few of them are set in stone. Adjective/noun order are particularly flexible, although in certain situations you could say it was done for emphasis.

It is extremely important that you understand the participle system. It is difficult, but keep at it until you understand. I have a feeling you need to see more questions answered.

[Timothy]

[I do apologise for the length but I've been feeling my way around here too much of late.]

Light dawns on marblehead! I'm such a dolt!

I went over these sections very carefully now and think I see my problem. This is a tricky section of the book, IMO. It's very easy to misconstrue what is being said.

The four sections (§§ 201-204) introduce the perfect participle and the perfect passive tense.

First, we get the perfect passive participle and how to derive the perfect participle stem.

Second, we are told that the perfect participle stem forms the perfect, pluperfect and future perfect passive tenses.

Third, we are told that the perfect participle (but not the perfect passive tenses) may be used as an adjective and it agrees in gender, number, and case with the noun it modifies.

My trolley went off the track right here but I didn't know it. In my head I had the only form so far presented, the perfect passive tenses, suddenly taking on the job of an adjective rather than the perfect participle.

Fourth, we are told how the perfect participle is declined (when used as an adjective) and conjugated in the passive form.

This is when I was asked to inflect the passive forms of a verb list. Now again, in my mind, the language is inflected by declining nouns and adjectives and conjugating verbs. Sematics? Yeah, I guess. sigh. I do get hung up on these sorts of things. sigh, sigh.

So first, I missed the point of the third section. I failed to see the perfect participle as an adjective. When you presented the usage (puellae amatae, puellis servatis, laudum amicum) I got thrown because I was looking for the auxiliary verb. Then you pointed out that as a verb it had damn well better have a nominative to agree with esse and at that point my trolley rolled over on its side and caught fire. So I also missed the "otherwise" part of the sentence.

But I believe I get it now.

adjective

Magister pueris fauturis multa dona dabit.
Magister pueris fauturis multa dona dat.
Magister pueris fauturis multa dona dabat.
Multa dona magistro pueris fauturis dantur.
"to the favored boys" is independent of the verb tense and

Multa dona magistro puero fauturo dantur.
Multa dona magistro puellae fauturae dantur.

faveo here is dependent only on puer/puella.

Passive verb

Pueri fauturi sunt magistro.
Pueri fauturi erant magistro.
Pueri fauturi erunt magistro.
Puellae fauturae sunt magistro.

And just to throw a bit more fuel on the fire:

Puer fauturus multa dona puellae pulchrae fauturae dat.

How's that?

- Tim

[benissimus]

I think you have it

[Episcopus]

Just remember the perfect passive participle as what it is: "having been -ed", consequently the tenses in english translation will vary dependent on those of the main verb in the latin.

Be careful to remember it is an intransitive verb which can not take a direct object therefore the perfect passive participle can not be in such a passive way. With dative verbs of indirect objects credere, favere, placere etc. the passive is expressed by an impersonal with the dative of person retained. "The boy is favoured" therefore would not render "Puer favetur" but "Puero favetur" (lit. It is favoured to the boy). The passive supine stem as you correctly wrote is used to make the future active participle "about to ...".

[Timothy]

Just remember the perfect passive participle as what it is: "having been -ed", consequently the tenses in english translation will vary dependent on those of the main verb in the latin.

I think that is what the next section is going to force on me. I think it's a long list of verbs. I'm about to get a lot practice in endings.

Be careful to remember it is an intransitive verb which can not take a direct object therefore the perfect passive participle can not be in such a passive way. With dative verbs of indirect objects credere, favere, placere etc. the passive is expressed by an impersonal with the dative of person retained. "The boy is favoured" therefore would not render "Puer favetur" but "Puero favetur" (lit. It is favoured to the boy). The passive supine stem as you correctly wrote is used to make the future active participle "about to ...".

That has been one of those lingering questions for me. I've seen this note in a number of texts without quite getting the idea. This should help me remember why.

Thanks

- Tim

[Timothy]

I think you have it

with some help.

This was one of those times when you're learning a laguage when you get both a positive and negative reaction.

At this point in the book a lot of new material is just slightly different from previous material. So I've noticed that, on first reading, I grasp the general idea quickly and the new forms have a natural feeling and fit. That's a Good Thing.

And when they don't have that feeling it's quite jarring and sets off alarm bells that I've misunderstood something. That's a Good Thing too.

The bad part is that I'm not quite at the point where, without further reflection, I have confidence that I haven't misunderstood whole tracks of the text! I have to remind myself that I've only been at this a short time. I can read a good deal more than I ever could in the past and fairly easily. And when I do have problems I can explain it in a reasonable way so that a short dialog such as this can resolve it. That's a Very Good Thing.

Thanks.

I'm off to inflect the heck out of some verbs!

- Tim