It'll work if you have firefox and is in alpha stages (and this version is far older in code development and data specification than the version I have on my box at home). Its purpose is to act like a "501 Spanish Verbs" style book which simply shows all the conjugations of a verb with some commentary about them when necessary. It is intended for composition, not translation.]
After staring a LONG time (days) at pharr 807, 810, and 811, I think I finally saw near enlightenment about how the principal parts relate to the tense system and individual inflections of a verb.
I think I've been labeling--and thinking about, principal parts wrongly:
They should be specified (in my verb grinder) like this instead:
2. Future OR Future Mediopassive
3a. First Aorist
3b. Second Aorist
4a. First Perfect Active
4b. Second Perfect Active
5. Perfect Mediopassive
6a. First Aorist Passive
6b. Second Aorist Passive
In the above, unless the voice is specified in pharr 807, it means all voices, and since no modes are specified, it means all modes (for each principal part). This was one of the major parts I didn't really understand until just now.
Although, I'm a little confused in pharr 810 over the terminology "first (or second) perfect active)". Does this mean either or, or could it mean both?
However, now if I had the "present" principal part (for lu/w), that means the same stem (lu-) is used for (channeling pharr 807):
Code: Select all
Active Indicative Present Imperfect Subjunctive Present Optative Present Imperative Present Middle Indicative Present Imperfect Subjunctive Present Optative Present Imperative Present
Is this right?
So, a small question, basic as it is, is how come there is no "Active Subjunctive Future" for lu/w, and would there EVER be such a thing (and what would it mean)?
A large question is how do I know what tenses can go with what modes in general for a verb? Another question is how do the endings for the (say above specified present principal part specification) relate to the fact the stem is being used there? No relation at all? This is what I'm figuring.... Simply the stem is used in the right place and nothing more....
I just stumbled across this:
http://www.orbilat.com/Languages/Latin/ ... is_13.html
"Note: There is no Future Subjunctive or Future Perfect Subjunctive, for a perfectly logical reason: The idea of the Future is part of a quasi-real set of parameters (Past Present Future), whereas the basic idea of the Subjunctive is vested in "Un-reality". In the realm of the Future the idea of Subjunctivity or un-reality simply does not fit!"
Hopefully, I'm slowly beginning to understand this stuff.
Am I on the right track?
P.S. This is one of the major reasons why I'm so late with my homeworks for pharr-c. I just HAD to understand this stuff before I could continue. I was being destroyed by my misunderstandings on this topic since the verbs forms are all introduced so quickly and you're supposed to be able to understand how to inflect them as a combination of voice, mode, and tense, with a dictionary definition of only principal parts.