Infinitive and Gerund

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
User avatar
cweb255
Textkit Fan
Posts: 251
Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2004 12:15 am

Infinitive and Gerund

Post by cweb255 » Sat Sep 03, 2005 4:49 am

The question is posed here. Any takers, either here or there?
phpbb

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

Post by benissimus » Sat Sep 03, 2005 5:06 am

I would say gerund.
flebile nescio quid queritur lyra, flebile lingua murmurat exanimis, respondent flebile ripae

User avatar
cweb255
Textkit Fan
Posts: 251
Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2004 12:15 am

Post by cweb255 » Sat Sep 03, 2005 5:37 am

Er, wait, are you saying that the infinitive is the nominative of the gerund? :?:
phpbb

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

Post by benissimus » Sun Sep 04, 2005 1:40 am

Is that what you were asking?
flebile nescio quid queritur lyra, flebile lingua murmurat exanimis, respondent flebile ripae

User avatar
cweb255
Textkit Fan
Posts: 251
Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2004 12:15 am

Post by cweb255 » Sun Sep 04, 2005 9:32 am

I was asking whether or not the infinitive is the nominative of the gerund, even though the gerund is a. neuter and b. the nominative then wouldn't match the accusative. However, reading over carefully what was originally written, it's not that the infinitive is the gerund nominative, but it supplies it, i.e. it takes the place of it.
phpbb

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

Post by benissimus » Sun Sep 04, 2005 9:41 am

Ah links don't show up very well here. I thought you were just being silly! I don't consider infinitive to be the nominative of the gerund; I just know to supply the infinitive when a gerund nominative is needed. The infinitive cannot be defined to such a strict role because it functions in other ways that the gerund could not, such as complementary infinitive (which can be considered accusative). I have no idea if the ancient grammarians viewed it as a gerund nominative.

Nice to see that there is another (fairly) active Latin forum around, but it still looks pretty barren.
flebile nescio quid queritur lyra, flebile lingua murmurat exanimis, respondent flebile ripae

User avatar
Episcopus
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 2563
Joined: Sat Jun 14, 2003 8:57 pm

Post by Episcopus » Sun Sep 04, 2005 2:27 pm

evening, cweb.

as S. justly stated supra, the function of the infinitive is not as coercite as that of the gerund. c'est à dire, the inf. has, as you should know, a multitude of other functions. take the prolative infinitive for example, tu potes tam decore quam canis latine loqui - we already have the subject (tu, it is a pronoun as you should know), therefore loqui, a deponent yet nonetheless infinitive, as you should know, verb form would appear, for want of any other grammatical term, meaningless. only an american would say I can. a going to tha mall? etc. another example, taken from http://www.personal.kent.edu/~bkharvey/ ... fincom.htm, which almost made my list of top 60 classics sites of all time but it was american, canis cenam edere vult "the dog wants to eat his dinner", is one of my top 60 examples of the complementary infinitive, as you should know. here the infinitive may be considered accusative. finally, i ask you, whether you can consider the inf. a nom. gerund when it is often used as a historic infinitive. i suggest you pick up your pen and study for your entire life (but a conservative estimate) the language, culture, history and architecture of the ancient infinitive. i hold my breath.

~E
phpbb

User avatar
whiteoctave
Textkit Enthusiast
Posts: 603
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2003 11:42 pm
Location: Cambridge

Post by whiteoctave » Sun Sep 04, 2005 6:58 pm

I would fain read more such lampoons, E., certain small matters of detail making them the more funny. Or rather, 'hejsan omnes, tutemetne potes maiora talia scribere? I would 1/odi to bulk up my anterior deltoids with whiteoctave's mor and hurl some bouncy balls at the teacher, thus hence whereby providing pleasure wherewith I would feel not no satisfaction...D'ooge and 200g protein/day make school more fun: I once set fire to the teacher with my friend Stik and in the combobulation from her inflagration the congregation felt elation. oh yes, j'aime beaucoup les plaisanteries en école!! Now I will listen to Das Rap, O friends: cweb is my bebis. (ps. I am not Mexican but one of my worst character traits is ignorance.)' uel sim.

~D
as to the matter in discussion about the relationship of the usage of the infinitive and gerund to represent verbal nouns, is it not stated in every book, even the most elementary, that the infinitive (neuter in gender) serves as the nominative of the gerund?
phpbb

User avatar
Episcopus
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 2563
Joined: Sat Jun 14, 2003 8:57 pm

Post by Episcopus » Sun Sep 04, 2005 7:57 pm

Quantam insolentiam! Quantoque stupore ista risuumve perlegi!

Now, octave, I wasn't going to do this...

Image
phpbb

User avatar
whiteoctave
Textkit Enthusiast
Posts: 603
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2003 11:42 pm
Location: Cambridge

Post by whiteoctave » Sun Sep 04, 2005 8:18 pm

Hmm, well I don't recognise Mr Bipoculus, but I do recognise the Ball wristband and the background gardens, so I conclude that you have found your photo from some site containing photos from the Clare May Ball '05. I was planning on going this year but couldn't get tickets, so Jesus it was.

~D
phpbb

Chris Weimer
Textkit Enthusiast
Posts: 533
Joined: Mon Feb 13, 2006 9:34 am

Post by Chris Weimer » Wed Feb 15, 2006 8:15 am

whiteoctave wrote:as to the matter in discussion about the relationship of the usage of the infinitive and gerund to represent verbal nouns, is it not stated in every book, even the most elementary, that the infinitive (neuter in gender) serves as the nominative of the gerund?
Oh it does, but I was wondering what the ancients saw it as, if they saw it at all. And you never answered my question, which is vital. If the infinitive is neuter nominative, then the accusative must be the same as the nominative, and we know it's not. Whether or not it serves the same purpose is regardless of the question. We know it ultimately serves the same purpose...but how so? What's the precise relationship? Did they think that it was the gerund nominative? Examples?

Thank you for indulging me.

Michaelyus
Textkit Fan
Posts: 200
Joined: Fri Apr 23, 2004 8:47 pm
Location: London, UK

Post by Michaelyus » Wed Feb 15, 2006 3:36 pm

One should not think of the infinitive as a noun. The infinitive is not declined. It is conjugated. One should think of it as a non-finite part of a verb which may step in for the gerund if needed.
phpbb

bellum paxque
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 718
Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2005 2:29 pm
Location: nanun Hanguge issoyo (in Korea sum)
Contact:

Post by bellum paxque » Wed Feb 15, 2006 3:41 pm

In the introduction to an edition I have libri primi taciti annalium, it is said that the infinitive was originally the dative of a noun. According to the editor, the infinitive retained some of the functions of the dative, even after it had lost most of its nounness. The complementary infinitive is adduced, I believe, as one example of this quality. Unfortunately, I don't have that edition with me right now - or any other useful information to share, for that matter.

-David

User avatar
fierywrath
Textkit Neophyte
Posts: 58
Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2005 9:55 am

Post by fierywrath » Sun Feb 19, 2006 4:30 pm

Chris Weimer wrote:If the infinitive is neuter nominative, then the accusative must be the same as the nominative, and we know it's not.
s' ita CREDERE uis
phpbb

Chris Weimer
Textkit Enthusiast
Posts: 533
Joined: Mon Feb 13, 2006 9:34 am

Post by Chris Weimer » Sun Feb 19, 2006 4:39 pm

fierywrath wrote:
Chris Weimer wrote:If the infinitive is neuter nominative, then the accusative must be the same as the nominative, and we know it's not.
s' ita CREDERE uis
I'm not sure exactly what you intend by that statement, but it doesn't answer the question. The neuter gerundive ends in -um "ad dicendum".

Post Reply