indirect discourse

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
spqr
Textkit Fan
Posts: 240
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2011 6:13 pm
Location: Hemet, CA, USA

indirect discourse

Post by spqr »

Most textbooks give the infinitive tenses only in the active voice and only rarely use the passive. Also I would assume that it is possible to use the subjunctive as well. Is there a website that I can access that includes passive and subjunctive examples that I could use? I have consulted some Latin grammars but to no avail.

hlawson38
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 1076
Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2010 12:38 am
Location: Tampa, Florida, USA

Re: indirect discourse

Post by hlawson38 »

Hello spqr. I usually ask questions rather than answer them. So consider I could be wrong.

The subjunctive and the infinitive are different moods. Hence, unless I am mistaken, to think of subjunctive infinitives is a category error.

Allen & Greenough, New Latin Grammar, Dover Books, can be purchased at a very modest price. I believe it is also available for download on textkit.

Besides that, you can consult Allen and Greenough here:

http://tinyurl.com/69yykzl

Or you can do as Qimmik suggests, and consult the paper version to find information, and use the online version for reference in posts here.
A more basic grammar is the one in Moreland and Fleischer, Latin: An Intensive Course, which contains a grammatical appendix, as well as a pretty useful index to the appendix.
Hugh Lawson

User avatar
swtwentyman
Textkit Enthusiast
Posts: 463
Joined: Fri Sep 19, 2014 12:28 am

Re: indirect discourse

Post by swtwentyman »

I'm also just a student but for passive constructions just use the passive infinitives:

Dixit eum interficere Caesarem
Dixit Caesarem interfici
Dixit eum interfecisse Caesarem
Dixit Caesarem interfectum esse

I very likely may have missed something, though, so someone please correct me if I messed up.

mwh
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 4791
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 2:34 am

Re: indirect discourse

Post by mwh »

Hi again spqr. It's not altogether clear what you're asking. For indirect statement, it’s the infinitive that’s used, not the subjunctive. (And as hlawson38 rightly says, there can be no such thing as a subjunctive infinitive.) The construction is acc. & inf. See swtwentyman’s examples, which are quite correct (except that if the speaker is the one who killed Caesar, eum would be se). Any grammar book will give you the passive infinitives.

The subjunctive comes into play only in indirect question. E.g.
Dixit quare Caesarem interfecisset. He said why he’d killed Caesar. (active)
Dixit quare Caesar interfectus esset. He said why Caesar had been killed. (passive)

Does this help?

User avatar
calvinist
Textkit Enthusiast
Posts: 474
Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2005 7:24 pm
Location: San Diego, CA

Re: indirect discourse

Post by calvinist »

spqr wrote:Most textbooks give the infinitive tenses only in the active voice and only rarely use the passive. Also I would assume that it is possible to use the subjunctive as well. Is there a website that I can access that includes passive and subjunctive examples that I could use? I have consulted some Latin grammars but to no avail.
Your question is a little confusing. In Classical Latin the accusative/infinitive construction is the only one used for indirect discourse, and of course a passive infinitive will convert a passive finite verb. In later Latin quia/quod/quoniam + subjunctive gradually replaced the accusative/infinitive construction. Eventually, the quia/quod/quoniam was felt sufficient to subordinate the clause and the indicative was allowed. For example:

Gaius est bonus --> Scio Gaium esse bonum./Scio quia Gaius sit bonus./Scio quia Gaius est bonus.

spqr
Textkit Fan
Posts: 240
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2011 6:13 pm
Location: Hemet, CA, USA

Re: indirect discourse

Post by spqr »

My goof. The subjunctive is indeed a mood, not a tense. I searched for on internet where the passive infinitives are used in indirect statements. I now have a clearer understanding of how the infinitive forms are used.

mwh
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 4791
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 2:34 am

Re: indirect discourse

Post by mwh »

Yes any finite verb is either indicative or subjunctive. The infinitive is also sometimes called a mood, but is by definition not finite; it doesn't conjugate, as finite verbs do, and has fewer tenses.

I wondered whether you were confused by AG 580, which I see says
In Indirect Discourse the main clause of a Declaratory Sentence is put in the Infinitive with Subject Accusative. All subordinate clauses take the Subjunctive.
The second sentence of this means that the verb of any clause dependent on the acc.&inf. will be in the subjunctive. The clause is part of the indirect discourse, but is subordinate to the acc.&inf.

AG gives as one example
[dīcit] esse nōn nūllōs quōrum auctōritās plūrimum valeat (B. G. 1.17) , he says there are some, whose influence most prevails. [Direct: sunt nōn nūllī ... valet.]
The direct statement would be "There are some (sunt nonnulli), whose influence most prevails" (valet indic.). In indirect form, here introduced by dicit, what in direct speech was the main clause becomes acc.&inf. (esse nonnullos) and indic.valet in the subordinate clause becomes subjunctive valeat.

The verbs here are active, but it works just the same way with passives.

e.g. dicit dici esse non nullos quorum auctoritas plurimum valere putetur(subjunctive)
"He says there are said to be some [dici pass.inf.], whose influence is thought to most prevail."
[Direct: Dicuntur esse non nulli quorum auctoritas plurimum valere putatur(indic.) "There are said to be some, whose influence is thought to most prevail."]
Here the verb of the subordinate clause, putetur, is in the subjunctive because the clause belongs to the indirect statement dici esse nonnullos.

This makes it sound quite complicated, but really it's very simple once you grasp the principle.

If it's classical latin you're trying to learn, as I believe it is, you don't need to bother—yet—about the later latin constructions mentioned by calvinist. If you look at them however you'll see they approach the modern construction which uses "that" (quia in calvinist's examples, cf. Fr. que, It. che, Germ. dass, etc etc)—but this is not classical use.

Post Reply