Vocab discrepancy
-
- Textkit Fan
- Posts: 207
- Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2004 2:01 am
- Location: Massachusetts
Vocab discrepancy
In ch. 10, I noticed that fugere is given as "fugo, fugere, fugi, <b>fugiturum</b>", but in both Jenney's and my dictionary (Barnum) the fourth principal part is listed as "fugitum." Is this an error?
-
- Textkit Enthusiast
- Posts: 603
- Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2003 11:42 pm
- Location: Cambridge
everyone loves posting these errors. i'm not sure who is responsible for writing the key, but whoever did certainly put a lot of work in and no doubt the monotony of the tedious typographical task introduced discrepancies. or perhaps said typer desired a masc. acc. / neut. nom/acc. future active participle in place of the supine.
interesting either way,
~d
interesting either way,
~d
- benissimus
- Global Moderator
- Posts: 2733
- Joined: Mon May 12, 2003 4:32 am
- Location: Berkeley, California
- Contact:
Wheelock does this with several 'intransitive' verbs, for which the perfect passive participle is rare, because they still have a future active participle and you need to know the supine stem. I have never seen any form of the part fugitum, but that is not to say it doesn't exist. I have certainly seen fugio in the passive.
flebile nescio quid queritur lyra, flebile lingua murmurat exanimis, respondent flebile ripae