elduce wrote:1. I don't understand 'futurum'. 'To be' can work actively but passively it doesn't make sense. What of the future active participle? is futururum correct?
is the future participle actually. In this textbook, if a verb is intransitive but still has a future participle, then the future participle is given instead of the perfect passive participle as with other verbs. There are a couple other verbs in Wheelock's that have the future participle listed as the 4th principal part, such as fugio, fugere, fugi, fugiturum
; you will know it is the future participle by the -ur- before the ending. The supine stem (4th principal part minus the -um/-us ending) always ends in T or S, so if it ends in R you should already know something is up.
multus, -a, -um
2. How does the comparative for more, many, most work? Always use the Genitive in these instances? Thanks.
plus, gen. pluris
plurimus, -a, -um
With the comparative, plus
, you use the partitive genitive to say "more (of) ____", or "very many (of) ____" if you prefer. This is because the form plus
is really more a neuter noun or substantive adjective, like satis
, etc. You will rarely see plus
in the singular in any cases other than the nominative and accusative (which are indentical), and the dative singular does not exist in classical Latin. The genitive and rarely ablative are mostly restricted to expressions of value (unfortunately not covered in Wheelock's), e.g. ager multo pluris est
"the farm is of much more (worth)".
In the plural, plures, plura
, you just use it like a regular adjective without the partitive genitive.
flebile nescio quid queritur lyra, flebile lingua murmurat exanimis, respondent flebile ripae