si qua fidem tanto est operi latura vetustas: parsing this

[hlawson38]

Please check my parsing of the troublesome line.

Troublesome line marked ** ... **

hic mortis durae casum tuaque optima facta
**si qua fidem tanto est operi latura vetustas**
non equidem nec te, iuvenis memorande, silebo.

Aeneid, Book X, ll. 791-793; Loeb Classical.

my translation of marked line:

If by-any-way belief in-such-great deeds antiquity is to-be-about-to-be-bearing

My parsing:

On my reading, "fidem" is the direct object of the future active participle "latura".

"latura", feminine singular nominative, modifies the noun "vetustas", as a predicate adjective.

"vetustas" is the subject of "est".

[adrianus]

si qua fidem tanto est operi latura vetustas -->
si qua vetustas fidem tanto operi latura est

"if some [future] age is going to set its faith in [/to/for] so great an act"

qua vetustas aliquid latura est = "some/any age is going to bear something"
latura est, the First Periphrastic Conjugation of the verb "fero" (A&G §195)
Prima conjugatio periphrastica est.
so // ergo
vetustas is the subject of the verb "latura est"
subjectum verbi, scilicet "latura est", est vetustas

[hlawson38]

Thanks adrianus for the reply.

"si qua fidem tanto est operi latura vetustas"

On your reading, "qua" is used adjectivally, right? It is nominative singular feminine, and modifies "vetustas".

[adrianus]

Yes, it is and it does. Qua, more than quae, for feminine nominative singular. A&G §149. Not quâ because the "a" is short.
Lego quidem. Qua plus quam quae feminino generi nominativo casu singularis numeri. Non quâ quod correpta syllaba.

[Sceptra Tenens]

This qua, to be clear, is just a shortened form of aliqua. This shortening occurs after certain words like si... I really can't remember the list, though.

[adrianus]

Yes, I think that's a handy way of thinking about it and I've read that elsewhere, but personally I go with A&G (§310) in preferring to see a distinction between quis and aliquis, where quis is most indefinite and aliquis less so. In other words, "qua" is strictly not a shortened "aliqua".

Ita, habilis ut instrumentum ratiocinandi est haec notio et sic alibi legi. Ego autem grammaticam de A&G (in trecentesimâ decimâ sectione) sequor, quae pronomina cuius alicuiusque distinguit, cum perobscurum quis-qua(e)-quod, aliquis-aliqua-aliquod minùs incertum. Aliter dictu, non abbreviatio alicuius pronominis strictim est "qua".

Et Gildersleeve, §315:
http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=Qk7foW63cO0C&pg=PA200&lpg=PA200
"NOTES.—1. Aliquis is used after sī, etc., when there is stress..."

[Sceptra Tenens]

Well, it's certainly no part of quis, because the feminine singular of that pronoun is quae, not qua.

"NOTES.—1. Aliquis is used after sī, etc., when there is stress..."

I see no contradiction here. You say "do not" when there is emphasis on "not", but that doesn't mean that "don't" isn't a shortened form of the same.

[adrianus]

Not really. See A&G §149.
Non verum. Vide sectionem centesimam quadragesimam nonam in A&G.

http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=AG+149

Read also // Lege etiam A&G §310, Gildersleeve, §315: