Relative Adjectives?

[Decanus45545]

As I understand it, Latin isn't supposed to have relative adjectives. Where it appears they might exist (e.g. Dido: urbem quam statuo vestra est Aen. 1.573,), other explanations are sometimes offered (e.g. attraction).

However, Pinkster speaks of the "so-called adjectival" use of the relative and provides as an example this:

Quibus est dictis dignus, usque oneremus ambo.
(‘Let’s both give him a good load of the language he deserves!’, Pl. Mer. 978)

https://www.harmpinkster.nl/files/artic ... (2012).pdf

His use of "so-called" may intend to indicate that he doesn't accept the concept of an adjectival relative, but I think it is just rather than he prefers to use "determiner" rather than "adjective." Besides, later on he lists the relative under "substantival/adjectival":

substantival/adjectival:
qui ‘who’, ‘that’, quisque ‘whoever’, ‘whatever’, quisquis ‘whoever’, ‘whatever’ (all from
Early Latin onwards)

Furthermore, Maclardy, in reference to quem si fata virum servant in 1.546, says: "... qui, quae, quod, which may be pronoun or adjective" (Maclardy, The Aeneid of Virgil, p. 230; incidentally he explains urbem quam as attraction).

So, can we say that Latin does have an adjectival use of the relative? Thoughts?

[mwh]

Isn’t it just “with what words he deserves” i.e. “with the words of which he is worthy” ([eis] dictis quibus est dignus), with the quasi-noun dictis drawn into the relative clause and the whole thing collapsed? It’s much less remarkable than urbem quam statuo vestra est, since here there’s no case conflict.

[Decanus45545]

Isn’t it just “with what words he deserves” i.e. “with the words of which he is worthy” ([eis] dictis quibus est dignus), with the quasi-noun dictis drawn into the relative clause and the whole thing collapsed? It’s much less remarkable than urbem quam statuo vestra est, since here there’s no case conflict.

Yes, that might not have been the best example he could have chosen.