Cum Clauses and other questions....(urgent..!)

Here you can discuss all things Latin. Use this board to ask questions about grammar, discuss learning strategies, get help with a difficult passage of Latin, and more.
Post Reply
Zanisimo
Textkit Neophyte
Posts: 7
Joined: Mon May 03, 2004 9:53 pm
Location: Ireland

Cum Clauses and other questions....(urgent..!)

Post by Zanisimo » Mon May 03, 2004 10:05 pm

Salvete!
I am new to the forum and was very happy indeed to find it! i have an exam on wednesday and am unsure about a few points..
if anyone can help, i would be so grateful.
i will write the sample questions first and the what i think the answers are....

e) Sunt qui mortem sic metuant, ut vivere non possint.
Identify the main clause, and define and explain the subordinate clause(s)

There are people who fear death so much that they can not live. (ie. live a decent life)

main clause:
vivere non possint

Subordinate Clauses:
Sunt qui + subjunctive 'possint' = relative clause of characteristic
sic......ut...= result clause


i) 1) Orationem fecit quae populo persuasit.
2) Orationem fecit quae populo persuaderet.

Explain the difference between the two sentences.

1)He made the speech that persuaded the nation.
2)He made the sort of speech that would have persuaded the nation.


the first sentence is in the indicative,active, perfect tense.
i really wasn't sure about the 2nd, is it a relative clause of characteristic? or is it just a regular sentence with a subjunctive verb that implies doubt? (He made the speech that might have persuaded the nation) ?????



c) Cum fueris felix, gratias dis maximas age.
what is the function of CUM in the sentence, how is it best translated?

When you have been fortunate, give the greatest thanks to the gods.

it is a 'cum temporal contruction'.
it tells us the time that the action of 'thanking' is to take place in.
i know that "fueris" means 'you shall have been' (fut perf) but is it ok to translate it the way i did?

thank you so much for taking the time to look at this :)

User avatar
benissimus
Global Moderator
Posts: 2733
Joined: Mon May 12, 2003 4:32 am
Location: Berkeley, California
Contact:

Re: Cum Clauses and other questions....(urgent..!)

Post by benissimus » Tue May 04, 2004 4:29 am

Zanisimo wrote:Salvete!
I am new to the forum and was very happy indeed to find it! i have an exam on wednesday and am unsure about a few points..
if anyone can help, i would be so grateful.
I will try to help you to the best of my abilities 8)
i will write the sample questions first and the what i think the answers are....

e) Sunt qui mortem sic metuant, ut vivere non possint.
Identify the main clause, and define and explain the subordinate clause(s)

There are people who fear death so much that they can not live. (ie. live a decent life)

main clause:
vivere non possint

Subordinate Clauses:
Sunt qui + subjunctive 'possint' = relative clause of characteristic
sic......ut...= result clause
Your translation is correct, but you have mislabeled the clauses. The main clause is very short and consists only of Sunt, with the subject implied (after all, a clause only requires a verb in Latin). Then there are two subordinate clauses, a relative clause of characteristic and a result (concessive) clause. The relative clause is qui mortem sic metuant, the result clause is ut vivere non possint. If you have any questions as to why this is so, just ask.

i) 1) Orationem fecit quae populo persuasit.
2) Orationem fecit quae populo persuaderet.

Explain the difference between the two sentences.

1)He made the speech that persuaded the nation.
2)He made the sort of speech that would have persuaded the nation.


the first sentence is in the indicative,active, perfect tense.
i really wasn't sure about the 2nd, is it a relative clause of characteristic? or is it just a regular sentence with a subjunctive verb that implies doubt? (He made the speech that might have persuaded the nation) ?????
Yes, the second sentence is most likely a relative clause of characteristic. Just as the present subjunctive would usually be used if the main clause were in the present, the imperfect subjunctive is going to be used in the relative clause if the main clause is in the past. It really means something like "He made the sort of speech that would persuade people", not really saying whether it actually did or not. To say "would have" explicitly says that it did not persuade people, which is not the same thing.

c) Cum fueris felix, gratias dis maximas age.
what is the function of CUM in the sentence, how is it best translated?

When you have been fortunate, give the greatest thanks to the gods.

it is a 'cum temporal contruction'.
it tells us the time that the action of 'thanking' is to take place in.
i know that "fueris" means 'you shall have been' (fut perf) but is it ok to translate it the way i did?

thank you so much for taking the time to look at this :)
Fueris here is a perfect subjunctive. Nevertheless, you have translated correctly again! :D Because of the cum + subj. it means "when you have been fortunate", but really "at any time when you have been fortunate" as opposed to cum + indic. "at the precise time when you have been fortunate".
flebile nescio quid queritur lyra, flebile lingua murmurat exanimis, respondent flebile ripae

tdominus
Textkit Member
Posts: 122
Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2003 12:15 pm
Location: Terra Australis
Contact:

Post by tdominus » Tue May 04, 2004 12:55 pm

Zanisimo,
what level latin are you studying? Where do you study?

User avatar
Timothy
Textkit Enthusiast
Posts: 374
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2004 3:16 pm
Location: Baltimore

Post by Timothy » Tue May 04, 2004 2:21 pm

tdominus wrote:Zanisimo,
what level latin are you studying? Where do you study?
Credo: Lingua Latina per Dei et alibi Mortale XII.

- Tim

User avatar
ptran
Textkit Neophyte
Posts: 34
Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2004 5:45 pm
Location: Portland ME

Post by ptran » Tue May 04, 2004 3:44 pm

With all due respect, that "cum...fueris" sentence is most likely "cum" causal. "Because you have been..." makes more sense than "When you have been..."

Zanisimo
Textkit Neophyte
Posts: 7
Joined: Mon May 03, 2004 9:53 pm
Location: Ireland

Post by Zanisimo » Tue May 04, 2004 3:52 pm

Hi Timothy,
I have been learning Latin for 7 or 8 months...
I'm in first year in University College Dublin, Ireland.
and you ?

Zanisimo
Textkit Neophyte
Posts: 7
Joined: Mon May 03, 2004 9:53 pm
Location: Ireland

Post by Zanisimo » Tue May 04, 2004 3:54 pm

whoops, i actually meant to say 'hi tdominus...'

User avatar
Timothy
Textkit Enthusiast
Posts: 374
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2004 3:16 pm
Location: Baltimore

Post by Timothy » Tue May 04, 2004 8:28 pm

Zanisimo wrote:Hi Timothy,
I have been learning Latin for 7 or 8 months...
I'm in first year in University College Dublin, Ireland.
and you ?
Salve!

Well, if you peek at the beginning latin D'Ooge forum you will see that I'm somewhere in the 3rd and 4th conjugations. So you're probably far ahead of my meager ability. This is my second go at Latin with a short 30 year break between. Today, between nightly sessions with Mr. D'Ooge, I spend my time programming computers to perform tasks for the construction industry.

And you, a person after my own heart, from the Mother Country! Very nice! If I ever finish Latin so that I can converse with Bennissimus et al. and not sound like a "hick form the sticks" I might try my hand at the Irish. :)

- Tim

User avatar
benissimus
Global Moderator
Posts: 2733
Joined: Mon May 12, 2003 4:32 am
Location: Berkeley, California
Contact:

Post by benissimus » Tue May 04, 2004 9:27 pm

ptran wrote:With all due respect, that "cum...fueris" sentence is most likely "cum" causal. "Because you have been..." makes more sense than "When you have been..."
Yes, you are right. Zanisimo and I were talking about it in private. If you really think about it though, all of these can be expressed by the word "when", but other words like "since" just create smoother English.
flebile nescio quid queritur lyra, flebile lingua murmurat exanimis, respondent flebile ripae

Post Reply