Textkit Logo

Sallust: Catilinae Coniuratio: 12.5

Here's where you can discuss all things Latin. Use this board to ask questions about grammar, discuss learning strategies, get translation help and more!

Moderator: thesaurus

Sallust: Catilinae Coniuratio: 12.5

Postby aprotosimaki » Wed Mar 31, 2010 10:44 am

Hi,

I am a little stuck with the last part of this sentence, specifically the use of the subjunctive 'esset', and I was hoping someone could shine some light on it for me. Thank you in advance.

[ Sallust: Catilinae Coniuratio: 12.5 ]

At hi contra, ignavissumi homines, per summum scelus omnia ea sociis adimere, quae fortissumi viri victores reliquerant: proinde quasi iniuriam facere id demum esset imperio uti.

But in contrast these men [ i.e. current day Romans ], the most cowardly types, through the worst kind of criminality take from our allies all of their possessions, which the bravest of men had left behind: just as if inflicting harm is the only (demum) use of imperium.


Is 'esset' a potential subjunctive? Or am I looking at the protasis of a Future Less Vivid (the apodosis being supplied by 'quasi iniuram facere')?
aprotosimaki
Textkit Neophyte
 
Posts: 9
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2003 11:26 am

Re: Sallust: Catilinae Coniuratio: 12.5

Postby adrianus » Wed Mar 31, 2010 1:28 pm

Salve aprotosimaki

"adimere" = "used to take" = historic infinitive (like imperfect tense)// historicus modus infinitivus (sicut tempus imperfectum)

"just as if inflicting harm was the only/ultimate use of power/authority"
"as if the exercise of power were ultimately just to inflict harm"

Isn't it a conditional subjunctive (of comparison) in a dependent clause, requiring the imperfect because of the sequence of tenses (after a secondary tense, the past, in the main clause) and continuous or habitual action?
Nonnè subjunctivus est modus quià conditionalis (comparationis) est clausula dependens quae tempus imperfectum post secondarium (praeteritum scilicet in apodosi) requirit causâ sequentiae temporum actionisque continuae vel usu contractûs?

main clause // apodosis = hi ignavissimi homines omnia ea sociis adimere/adimebant
subordinate or dependent clause // protasis seu dependens clausula = quasi iniuriam facere esset imperio uti
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.
adrianus
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 3270
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 9:45 pm

Re: Sallust: Catilinae Coniuratio: 12.5

Postby Kynetus Valesius » Thu Apr 01, 2010 5:36 am

fieri postest ut errem sed rem aliter video - isn't this a case of a contrary to fact condition in the present; they did these things exactly if such abuse were (but it isn't) the only purpose of empire?
phpbb
Kynetus Valesius
Textkit Fan
 
Posts: 217
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 1:34 pm
Location: Washington DC

Re: Sallust: Catilinae Coniuratio: 12.5

Postby aprotosimaki » Thu Apr 01, 2010 3:40 pm

adrianus wrote:
Isn't it a conditional subjunctive (of comparison) ..



I think you are 100% correct. I consulted my trusty A+G New Latin Grammar and found it under section 524 "Conditional Clauses of Comparison". The most relevant example they use is this:

quasi vero non specie visa iudicentur: as if in truth visible things were not judged by their appearance.

Good eye and thanks for the pointer.


...in a dependent clause.
main clause // apodosis = hi ignavissimi homines omnia ea sociis adimere/adimebant
subordinate or dependent clause// quasi iniuriam facere esset imperio uti


I am not sure I agree with you that it is a subordinate clause where the apodosis is supplied by "hi ignavissimi ...". My understanding is that in such constructions the apodosis is assumed.
aprotosimaki
Textkit Neophyte
 
Posts: 9
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2003 11:26 am


Return to Learning Latin

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google Adsense [Bot] and 43 guests