ptolemyauletes wrote:I suspect that your initial suspicion may be correct, that concurrent, should read concurrerent.
You're likely right, ptolemyauletes, and furrykef. It's a mistake. Look at the sentence as a whole. The future indicative doesn't belong there. The sense can't be intended to be somehow more vivid. It's a present condition contrary to fact, so imperfect subjunctive in apodosis and protasis, followed by a past condition contrary to fact so pluperfect subjunctive in both.
Probè dicis, ptolemyauletes, et tu, furrykef. Peccatum typographicum. Sententiam in totâ spectate. Tempus futurum modo indicativo ibi non inest. Sensus ausus aliquà vividus non est. Est conditio à facto diversa quae tempus imperfectum modo subjunctivo et in apodosi et in protasi requirit. Consequitur, notate benè, conditio tempore praeterito cum verbo tempore plusquamperfecto modo subjunctivo in utrâ clausulâ. "Because if that were to be said, the letters will [sic] run together obscenely, as indeed just now they would have, if I had not interposed "autem".
Cicero, Orator ad M. Brutum, §154, wrote: Libenter etiam copulando verba iungebant, ut sodes pro si audes, sis pro si vis. Iam in uno capsis tria verba sunt. Ain pro aisne, nequire pro non quire, malle pro magis velle, nolle pro non velle, dein etiam saepe et exin pro deinde et pro exinde dicimus. Quid, illud non olet unde sit, quod dicitur cum illis, cum autem nobis non dicitur, sed nobiscum? Quia si ita diceretur, obscaenius concurrerent litterae, ut etiam modo, nisi autem interposuissem, concurrissent.
Words have happily been joined by coupling them, as "sodes" for "si audes", "sis" for "si vis". There are even three in one in "capsis" ["cape si vis"]. "Ain" for "aisne", "nequire" for "non quire', "malle" for "magis velle", "nolle" for "non velle", and we also often say "dein" and "exin" for "deinde" and "exinde". That doesn't whiff of [/hint at] why it should be that "cum illis" is said, yet "cum nobis" isn't but "nobiscum". Because if that were to be said, the letters would run together obscenely, as indeed just now they would have, had I not interposed "autem".
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.