So far, I've been using common sense to make out the rules for tenses.. but, perhaps there are some idiomatic usages I'm not aware of.
For example, in Ch. 33:
"Iulius dubitabat num magister Marcum laudavisset."
That's fine: "Julius doubted whether the teacher (had) praised Marcus," meaning, praised Marcus prior to Julius's doubt.
But, in the Pensum:
"Si industrius fuisset, te laudavit nec epistulam scripsit."
"If you had been busy (working), he would have praised you and would not have written the letter."
Is that correct?
Subj. Pluperfect in Lingua Latina
-
- Textkit Neophyte
- Posts: 5
- Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2008 2:49 am
- Location: Brooklyn, NY
-
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 3270
- Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 9:45 pm
Re: Subj. Pluperfect in Lingua Latina
Salve, Ille Segnis/The Sloth
"Si industrius fuisses, te laudavisset nec epistulam scripsisset."
What you had ("Si" + pluperfect. subjunctive, + main clause in Perfect tense) is odd.
In Latin and English, there is no tense which anticipates (goes further back than) the pluperfect, so if the main clause is pluperfect ("he would have praised/written"—pluperfect subjunctive), here the "si" clause can go back only to the pluperfect also ("If he would have been busy" in Latin—conditional, it didn't actually happen). There is no "plu-pluperfect".
Et latinè et anglicè, tempus deest quod plusquamperfectum anteit. Si plusquamperfecto tempore est clausula major, sicut etiam hîc clausula conditionalis (cum "si"). "Plusquam-plusquamperfectum" deest.
No, it's not correct, The Sloth. Falsum est, Ille Segnis.The Sloth wrote:Si industrius fuisset, te laudavit nec epistulam scripsit."
"If you had been busy (working), he would have praised you and would not have written the letter."
Is that correct?
"Si industrius fuisses, te laudavisset nec epistulam scripsisset."
What you had ("Si" + pluperfect. subjunctive, + main clause in Perfect tense) is odd.
In Latin and English, there is no tense which anticipates (goes further back than) the pluperfect, so if the main clause is pluperfect ("he would have praised/written"—pluperfect subjunctive), here the "si" clause can go back only to the pluperfect also ("If he would have been busy" in Latin—conditional, it didn't actually happen). There is no "plu-pluperfect".
Et latinè et anglicè, tempus deest quod plusquamperfectum anteit. Si plusquamperfecto tempore est clausula major, sicut etiam hîc clausula conditionalis (cum "si"). "Plusquam-plusquamperfectum" deest.
-
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 3270
- Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 9:45 pm
Re: Subj. Pluperfect in Lingua Latina
Common sense gets you so far and no further. You have to learn the rules and their conditions. I'm like you, struggling to remember them.The Sloth wrote:So far, I've been using common sense to make out the rules for tenses.. but, perhaps there are some idiomatic usages I'm not aware of.
Adeò nec plus ultrà , sensus communis te adjuvabit. Regulae et accidentia sua discenda sunt. Ego tui similis sum, et difficile mihi est ea memorare.
Last edited by adrianus on Tue Oct 14, 2008 1:38 am, edited 1 time in total.