Salvete,
I'm trying to figure out why the subjunctive is used in the following sentence from LA VI in Wheelock:
Mea quidem sententia, pax quae nihil insidiarum habeat semper quaerenda est
The Relative Clause of Characteristic comes to mind..."the type of peace" etc. Anyone have any other suggestions?
Thanks.
L.A. VII
-
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 3270
- Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 9:45 pm
Re: L.A. VII
Potential subjunctive.
Potentialis modus subjunctivus est.
Potentialis modus subjunctivus est.
I'm writing in Latin hoping for correction, and not because I'm confident in how I express myself. Latinè scribo ut ab omnibus corrigar, non quod confidenter me exprimam.
-
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 1093
- Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2006 6:08 am
- Location: Toronto
Re: L.A. VII
adrianus, how would you render it in English in terms of a potential subjunctive?
-
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 3270
- Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 9:45 pm
Re: L.A. VII
The potential subjunctive was the "other suggestion" I had, because it refers to an immediate future when a peace will be framed.
Modus subjunctivus potentialis erat suggestio altera quam proferre potui, quià tempus pacis faciendae ad temporem futurum nullâ re intercedente pertinet.
"Mea quidem sententia, pax quae nihil insidiarum habeat semper quaerenda est"
"Certainly according to my thinking, a peace/reconciliation which would have no loopholes ought to be sought" id est "no possibility of treacheries"
I think about the "semper" now, which, rereading the post, I notice I didn't translate. Maybe that changes things, because the sentence with it refers to all futures and not just an immediate one, so "clause of characteristic" may be the only good interpretation. But I'm not sure it couldn't be both. What do you think?
"Semper" adverbium nunc considero, quod è traductione omisi, ut epistulâ relectâ subitò animadverto. Id forsit rem mutat, quòd cum eo sententia ad omnia tempora futura pertinet, non solùm ad illud appariturum. Eâ ratione, fortassè "clausula ad rerum descriptionem pertinens" sola bona interpretatio sit. At alterutram interpretationem aptam esse possibile est, etiam credo. Quid putatis?
Modus subjunctivus potentialis erat suggestio altera quam proferre potui, quià tempus pacis faciendae ad temporem futurum nullâ re intercedente pertinet.
"Mea quidem sententia, pax quae nihil insidiarum habeat semper quaerenda est"
"Certainly according to my thinking, a peace/reconciliation which would have no loopholes ought to be sought" id est "no possibility of treacheries"
I think about the "semper" now, which, rereading the post, I notice I didn't translate. Maybe that changes things, because the sentence with it refers to all futures and not just an immediate one, so "clause of characteristic" may be the only good interpretation. But I'm not sure it couldn't be both. What do you think?
"Semper" adverbium nunc considero, quod è traductione omisi, ut epistulâ relectâ subitò animadverto. Id forsit rem mutat, quòd cum eo sententia ad omnia tempora futura pertinet, non solùm ad illud appariturum. Eâ ratione, fortassè "clausula ad rerum descriptionem pertinens" sola bona interpretatio sit. At alterutram interpretationem aptam esse possibile est, etiam credo. Quid putatis?
Last edited by adrianus on Sun Dec 13, 2009 10:56 am, edited 3 times in total.
I'm writing in Latin hoping for correction, and not because I'm confident in how I express myself. Latinè scribo ut ab omnibus corrigar, non quod confidenter me exprimam.
-
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 1093
- Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2006 6:08 am
- Location: Toronto
Re: L.A. VII
That makes sense -- that's how I understand the meaning of the subjunctive here. In fact I might say that "would" there could be classified as a "would characteristic" , so I don't think there's much difference. I believe I read somewhere that the subjunctive in relative clauses of characteristic developed from this sense of the potential subjunctive. But anyway, I was just wondering, since the potential subjunctive can cover quite a bit of ground in English.
-
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 3270
- Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 9:45 pm
Re: L.A. VII
Three corrections to my latin in my previous post! No doubt there are yet other mistakes I don't see. It's still all uphill.
Ter meam epistulam ultimam correxi! Non dubito alia vitia insupèr exstare quae non video. Minus utinàm onus fiat!
Ter meam epistulam ultimam correxi! Non dubito alia vitia insupèr exstare quae non video. Minus utinàm onus fiat!
I'm writing in Latin hoping for correction, and not because I'm confident in how I express myself. Latinè scribo ut ab omnibus corrigar, non quod confidenter me exprimam.