futurum in praeterito

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.
Post Reply
vir litterarum
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 722
Joined: Sat Sep 24, 2005 4:04 am
Location: Chicago, IL

futurum in praeterito

Post by vir litterarum »

could someone explain to me how the pluperfect subjunctive becomes a future tense?

User avatar
benissimus
Global Moderator
Posts: 2733
Joined: Mon May 12, 2003 4:32 am
Location: Berkeley, California
Contact:

Re: futurum in praeterito

Post by benissimus »

vir litterarum wrote:could someone explain to me how the pluperfect subjunctive becomes a future tense?
does it? to what are you referring?
flebile nescio quid queritur lyra, flebile lingua murmurat exanimis, respondent flebile ripae

Feles in silva
Textkit Member
Posts: 116
Joined: Tue Dec 21, 2004 2:21 am

Re: futurum in praeterito

Post by Feles in silva »

vir litterarum wrote:could someone explain to me how the pluperfect subjunctive becomes a future tense?
The perfect subjunctive conjugates like the future perfect (excpet for first person singular).

The pluperfect subjunctive is unique (+isse+personal endings).

User avatar
benissimus
Global Moderator
Posts: 2733
Joined: Mon May 12, 2003 4:32 am
Location: Berkeley, California
Contact:

Re: futurum in praeterito

Post by benissimus »

Feles in silva wrote:
vir litterarum wrote:could someone explain to me how the pluperfect subjunctive becomes a future tense?
The perfect subjunctive conjugates like the future perfect (excpet for first person singular).

The pluperfect subjunctive is unique (+isse+personal endings).
if that is what vir means, the perfect subjunctive did not become the future perfect indicative, they merely coincide in form (like the present active infinitive and the imperfect subjunctive stem). The perfect subjunctive can also have a long i in the termination, distinguishing it from the future perfect indicative which has always a short i.
flebile nescio quid queritur lyra, flebile lingua murmurat exanimis, respondent flebile ripae

ReceptviCanatvr
Textkit Neophyte
Posts: 4
Joined: Tue Nov 15, 2005 8:59 am

Post by ReceptviCanatvr »

I think that he may have been referring to the pluperfect subjunctive's ability to represent an event of a time more advanced than that of the leading verb:

Demonstravit, si id fecissent, mvltos interitvros (esse). (This is not a contrafactual conditional sentence. It is a future-less-vivid conditional sentence subordinated by a verb in the perfect.)

He showed that, if they should have done this, many would die.

Oratia Recta: Si id fecerint, mvlti intereant. (Future-less-vivid conditional sentence)

If they should have done this, many should die.


'Demonstravit' is furthest in the past.
'fecissent' represents an event which takes place after 'demonstravit'.
'interitvros (esse)' is the most chronologically advanced event of the three.

vir litterarum
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 722
Joined: Sat Sep 24, 2005 4:04 am
Location: Chicago, IL

Post by vir litterarum »

What I do not understand is how a perfect such as demonstravit can be conceived as being further back in time than the pluperfect fecissent. Isn't pluperfect by nature a tense which expresses an action which happened before another action in the past. I don't see how fecissent can express future action off of the perfect tense.

User avatar
Lucus Eques
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 2037
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2004 12:52 pm
Location: Pennsylvania
Contact:

Post by Lucus Eques »

Neither do I, Vir. Could you give us some examples?
L. Amādeus Rāniērius · Λ. Θεόφιλος Ῥᾱνιήριος 🦂

SCORPIO·MARTIANVS

vir litterarum
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 722
Joined: Sat Sep 24, 2005 4:04 am
Location: Chicago, IL

Post by vir litterarum »

I was looking at conditions in Allen and Greenough's grammar and I was confused by this excerpt.


The futurum in praeterito is a tense future relatively to a time absolutely past. It denotes a future act transferred to the point of view of past time, and hence is naturally expressed by a past tense of the Subjunctive: thus dixisset, he would have said= dicturus fuit, he was about to say [but did not]. As that which looks towards the future from some point in the past has a natural limit in present time, such a tense (the imperfect subjunctive) came naturally to be used to express a present condition purely ideal, that is to say, contrary to fact.

Post Reply