I reckon so, too. (A&G, §531.2)vir litterarum wrote:Is the subjunctive being used in this relative clause because the clause is expressing purpose...
eo ludo impediebar quominus celeriter discerem litteras, quibus maior deformius luderem.
Augustinus, Confessiones, 1.9.15 wrote:sed maiorum nugae negotia vocantur, puerorum autem talia cum sint, puniuntur a maioribus, et nemo miseratur pueros vel illos vel utrosque. nisi vero approbat quisquam bonus rerum arbiter vapulasse me, quia ludebam pila puer et eo ludo impediebar quominus celeriter discerem litteras, quibus maior deformius luderem. aut aliud faciebat idem ipse a quo vapulabam, qui si in aliqua quaestiuncula a condoctore suo victus esset, magis bile atque invidia torqueretur quam ego, cum in certamine pilae a conlusore meo superabar?
But the trifles of adults are called business; those of boys however, although they are no different, are punished by adults, and no one feels anything for boys,—either those punished or whatever ones. Unless indeed any [so-called] good judge of things approves that I was beaten, because I used to play ball as a boy and, as a result, I was held back from quickly learning letters, so that as an adult I might play with letters in a more offensive way. For did the very same one by whom I was beaten do something else, who, if he were beaten by a fellow teacher in some trivial question, would be more tortured by bile and jealousy than I when, in a ball match, I would lose to my competitor?
[You don't think it a good thing, do you, that, because playing ball held me back from my lessons, I should have been beaten that I might [better] play at letters later on in life in a worse way!? Didn't the very same teacher who beat me behave habitually with more bitterness and jealously than I upon losing in a ball game to my competitor, when he was bested in some trivial argument by a colleague!]
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], Google Adsense [Bot], Majestic-12 [Bot], wilhelmjohnson and 82 guests