Textkit Logo

more subjunctive issues

Here you can discuss all things Latin. Use this board to ask questions about grammar, discuss learning strategies, get help with a difficult passage of Latin, and more.

Moderator: thesaurus

more subjunctive issues

Postby hlawson38 » Sun Mar 19, 2017 1:49 am

Context: Horace discusses how he intends to use his wealth temperately, and without fretting over the prospect that after he's gone, his heir might be unhappy with the legacy received.


Horace, Epistles 2, 2, lines 190 ff.
[quote]
utar et ex modico, quantum res poscet, acervo
tollam, nec metuam quid de me iudicet heres,
quod non plura datis invenerit;

I shall enjoy and take from my modest fortune
what the occasion will call for
and I won't worry about what my heir might think
because he found no more than he was given;

I'm reading utar, poscet, tollam, and metuam as simple future indicative. There is no uncertainty or hesitation. This is what the poet means to do.

iudicet: this is present subjunctive active. Primary sequence is determined by metuam, simple future; the poet says he will not dread, during his life, what his heir might think even farther in the future, after the poet is dead.

invenerit: if I have this correct, invenerit is perfect subjunctive. The sequence is determined by iudicet, which is present subjunctive. The heir first finds out how much he gets (invenerit), and then after that, he forms his judgment.
hlawson38
Textkit Enthusiast
 
Posts: 406
Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2010 12:38 am

Re: more subjunctive issues

Postby bedwere » Sun Mar 19, 2017 2:33 am

I think invenerit may actually be future perfect, in connection with the preceding future
User avatar
bedwere
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
 
Posts: 2365
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 10:23 pm
Location: Didacopoli in California

Re: more subjunctive issues

Postby hlawson38 » Sun Mar 19, 2017 7:43 pm

bedwere wrote:I think invenerit may actually be future perfect, in connection with the preceding future


Thank you for the reply bedwere. I am deeply perplexed by the time relations of the verbs in this passage.

This is one of those cases where I think, maybe wrongly, that I have a satisfactory meaning for the sentence, even though I can't analyze its grammar. In at least one other instance, Horace deplores the man who fears being judged at fault, after he is dead, because the heirs are disappointed in size of the inheritance. It seems to me that Horace is saying here, "I mean to spend my money temperately, and not worry about what they heirs think later." Maybe I have the wrong hypothesis on the meaning.
hlawson38
Textkit Enthusiast
 
Posts: 406
Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2010 12:38 am

Re: more subjunctive issues

Postby mwh » Mon Mar 20, 2017 12:38 am

utar et ex modico, quantum res poscet, acervo
tollam, nec metuam quid de me iudicet heres
quod non plura datis invenerit;

Seems to me that if invenerit were fut.perf. then the quod clause would be directly dependent on nec metuam: “I won’t be afraid, because he won’t have found more.” But clearly that’s not the meaning. The quod non invenerit clause is subordinate to the quid iudicet clause: “(I won’t be afraid of) what he may think of me (pres.subj.) because he hasn’t found more (perf.subj.).” The heir’s not coming into a richer inheritance will be the cause of his (unfavorable) opinion of Horace.
In other words, hlawson38, I think you were right.
mwh
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 2052
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 2:34 am

Re: more subjunctive issues

Postby hlawson38 » Mon Mar 20, 2017 1:41 am

Thanks to both mwh and bedwere for the trouble they took commenting on my query.

Studying the grammar connected with sequence of tense and subordinate clauses has been an ordeal, since I have to do it on my own, and the responders here on textkit have my warmest gratitude.
hlawson38
Textkit Enthusiast
 
Posts: 406
Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2010 12:38 am


Return to Learning Latin

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Exabot [Bot], hlawson38, Jandar and 141 guests