Page 1 of 1

A blunder in the official answer key?

Posted: Sun May 09, 2010 8:01 am
by furrykef
Chapter 34, Practice & Review #16: "If those four soldiers had followed us, we would not have dared to put the weapons on the ship."

The answer key gives:
"Sī illī quattuor mīlitēs nōs secūtī essent, arma in nāve pōnere nōn ausī sumus."

Wait a sec. "Ausī sumus"? Since the condition uses the imperfect subjunctive, surely the conclusion should as well, making it "ausī essēmus"? I can't think of any way the indicative makes sense here.

This must be a pretty big blunder if even I can spot it... :lol:

Now I'm beginning to wonder about the quality of the other English -> Latin sentences in the answer key...

Re: A blunder in the official answer key?

Posted: Tue May 11, 2010 6:02 pm
by modus.irrealis
You're right that it should be "ausi essemus", but technically this is the pluperfect subjunctive (of sequor and audeo).

Re: A blunder in the official answer key?

Posted: Wed May 12, 2010 3:17 am
by furrykef
Ah, right. The verb "esse" itself is in the imperfect subjunctive, which threw me off; of course when combined with the participle, it is the pluperfect.

Re: A blunder in the official answer key?

Posted: Tue May 18, 2010 6:24 am
by furrykef
Here's another one that I'm wondering about, though it isn't as obviously wrong as the previous one.

Q: Since his hope is becoming very small, let him confess that he commanded those two men not to do it.
A: Cum spēs (eius) fit minima, fateātur sē illīs duōbus (virīs) imperāvisse nē id facerent.

Should that be "fīat minima"? I was under the impression that "cum" is followed by the subjunctive when it means "since", or indeed in any sense but the temporal sense of "when" or "while". This appears to be a "circumstantial clause", which should take the subjunctive, right?

Re: A blunder in the official answer key?

Posted: Thu May 20, 2010 1:50 am
by modus.irrealis
Yes, I believe you're right: in Classical Latin when "cum" means "since" it always takes the subjunctive.

Re: A blunder in the official answer key?

Posted: Mon Jun 14, 2010 4:13 am
by furrykef
I think I found another:

Q: Cicero, who was the greatest Roman orator, was a consul who would obey the senate.
A: Cicerō, quī fuit maximus ōrātor Rōmānus, fuit cōnsul quī senātuī pāreat.

The 'pāreat' at the end seems to disobey the rules for sequence of tenses. Since 'fuit' is past tense, one would employ the imperfect subjunctive (pārēret), right?

Re: A blunder in the official answer key?

Posted: Sun Jun 20, 2010 11:32 pm
by furrykef
Yet another, this one from chapter 39, P&R 16:

Q: We urged the consul to save the state and preserve our dignity by attacking these injustices.
A: Hortatī sumus cōnsulī ut hīs inuriīs oppugnandīs cīvitātem servāret et dignitātem nostram cōnservāret.

But in chapter 36, the book said that "hortor" takes the accusative, not the dative, so it should be cōnsulem, not cōnsulī. I tried to verify with Cassell's that "cōnsulī" is wrong, but it didn't seem to make it perfectly clear. Lewis & Short does seem to agree that the dative is not possible.

Re: A blunder in the official answer key?

Posted: Mon Jun 21, 2010 12:40 am
by furrykef
And yet another, in chapter 40, P&R 16:

Q: You do recognize how great the danger is, do you not?
A: Nōnne recognōvistī (recognōvistis) quantum esse perīculum?

Surely it should be "quantum sit", since it's an indirect question?

Re: A blunder in the official answer key?

Posted: Mon Jun 21, 2010 6:30 pm
by modus.irrealis
I agree with you. You do use accusative + infinitive if it's a rhetorical question but here, I'd say the whole question is rhetorical, while "how great is the danger" is a genuine question, although maybe there's some kind of attraction going on here.

Re: A blunder in the official answer key?

Posted: Mon Jun 21, 2010 6:57 pm
by furrykef
What about the other two posts I made before that one?

Re: A blunder in the official answer key?

Posted: Tue Jun 22, 2010 3:35 am
by modus.irrealis
You're right in both cases as far as I can see.