Salvēte amīcī,
I'm a little lost over what Oerberg is doing with tantum in this sentence...
Nōlī ā mē postulāre ut tantum pecūniae statim solvam.
His note specifically introduces tantum as an adjective, but in that case what is it agreeing with? The only candidate I can see is pecūniae, which can only be the genitive or dative singular or nominative plural, none of which agrees with tantum. And why isn't it (pecūniam) in the accusative anyway, as the object of solvam?
The only thing I can think of is that tantum is agreeing with a implied neuter noun in the accusative on the lines of "sum / pile / lot / heap /bunch" etc, with pecūniae as a singular genitive also hanging off that noun - ie "Don't ask that I should pay you such a big wad of cash immediately!"
Is that reasonable or am I completely missing the point as usual...?
Many thanks
David