adrianus wrote:Adde "sub aquâ" vel "subaquaneus -a -um" adjectivum
Swth\r wrote:I thought that subjunctive occurs only in specific clauses (final, consequential, temporal, indirect questions, etc.) and of course in "oratio obliqua". I know that relative clauses may have subjunctive in direct discourse only if they imply some short of circumstantial meaning (goal/object, condition, consequence, concession, etc.)...
Legatum mittam, qui victoriam nuntiet (= ut is... "in order him to announce victory").
Am I wrong?
Swth\r wrote:You say that here the content of the clause is somehow "subjective", eh?
adrianus wrote:Secundùm Allen & Greenough (§485b) "After a primary tense the Perfect Subjunctive is regularly used to denote any past action [in a dependent clause in a complex sentence]." Meâ sententiâ, "that I ever had" dependens clausula est et praesens tempus (cum "est") principale tempus est, et sententia intricata non simplex est. Fortassè erro.
Anglicè quidem naturaliter dico et "It is the best experience I ever had" et "It is the best experience that I would ever have had"
Exempli gratiâ (inter alia in A&G) "rogo quid feceris" ("I ask what you did") "non dubito quin omnes tui scripserint" ("I do not doubt that all your friends have written")
ingrid70 wrote:I think you should read Allen & Greenough's Sequence of Tenses paragraphs as: when there is reason to use the subjunctive in a dependent sentence, then the rules for the sequence of tenses are...; not as: all dependent sentences are in the subjunctive and follow these rules.
Adrianus wrote:Est etiam "piscatus hastâ subaquaneus", ut "abeo piscatum hastâ subaquaneum" pro "I go underwater spearfishing"
Salvator/Σωτὴρ wrote:But what I know is that in the above clauses subjunctive is always found, as a rule, always, because of the "subjective" force of their content (indirect question, "quin-clause").
Oh, I see. Sorry. I thought "verum" attached to "extrema" to convey "most extreme", i.e, "truly extreme"non modo (solum, tantum) ... verum etiam (quoque),