Pronouns (personal or possessive) in In Catilinam

Latin Learning Latin
1

The New Latin Grammar says that the forms nostrum et vestrum are to be used partitively. However, i cant see any partitive sense in this clause by Cicero:

Hic sunt, nostro in numero, patres conscripti, in hoc urbis terrae sanctissimo gravissimoque concilio, qui de meo nostrumque omnium interitu … cogitent.

I dont see why he used nostrum, a personal pronoun in the genitive plural, instead of the possesive pronoun (that works like an adjective as in meo, right?) in the ablative: nostro.

Thanks.

:blush: PS:: i guess im quite off the mark, arent I?

2

qui de meo nostrumque omnium interitu … cogitent.

This can be translated as “the sort who think about the distruction of me and all of us.” In fact, the expression “all of us” in English is much the same, a partitive genitive. So nostrum is a partitive genitive dependent on omnium.

Note that nostrum is not the genitive plural*: it looks like the neuter nominative or accusative. But it must be learned as the partitive genitive form of nos, just as vestrum must be learned as the partitive genitive form of vos.

Good luck in your studies!

David

*However, in old Latin and in poetry, -um can signify the genitive plural in the 2nd declension, such as divum = divorum, virum = virorum, etc.

3

My text book transalates it as “my destruction and of us all”, wich set me thinking from the beginning that omnium was an adjective in the genitive plural. But omnium as a noun, as you rendered it, accounts better for the genitive nostrum. You see, this nostrum, in my former thought, i considered as dependent on interitu.

one thing more.

"Note that nostrum is not the genitive plural: *: it looks like the neuter nominative or accusative. > But it must be learned as the partitive genitive form of nos> "

Why cant it be a genitive plural in fact, instead of only being learned as such? The New Latin Grammar, in its § 141, goes: " These special forms are, in general, survivals of a very ancient form of declesion differing from that of nouns." So, although they dont follow any of the five declensions, they have one of their own. I guess, but havent checked it, it happens the same with the numeral unus, the adjective totus, and others that cant be fitted in any of the 5 decl.

Thank you for your help.

4

I understand your confusion about omnium nostrum interitu. To be honest, I haven’t really memorized all of the uncommon forms (like the alternative genitives of the personal pronouns). I need to.

Why cant it be it in fact, and not only?

I’m sorry; I don’t understand the question.

The New Latin Grammar, in its § 141, goes: " These special forms are, in general, survivals of a very ancient form of declesion differing from that of nouns." So, although they dont follow any of the five declensions, they have one of their own. I guess, but havent checked it, it happens the same with the numeral unus, the adjective totus, and others that cant be fitted in any of the 5 decl.

Well, unus, totus, and those like it (UNUS NAUTA = unus, nullus, ullus, solus, neuter, alius, uter, totus, alterus) do follow a slightly different scheme, which is remarkably similar to many of the demonstrative pronouns (iste, ille, is, idem, etc.) But the primary differences are in some of the neuter singular forms (id, aliud, istud) and in the genitive and dative singular (unius, uni; totius, toti). Though I still forget the alternate dative endings (i.e. illi, NOT illo) on occasion, the fact that many of these are common forms makes memorizing them easier.

This isn’t quite the same as nostrum, though.

Best luck,

David

5

I’m sorry; I don’t understand the question

mea culpa, i didnt finish it. it was about nostrum.

I believe it to be in fact the genitive plural* of nos; and not a neuter nominative or accusative tha must be learnt as the partitive genitive form of this pronoun. But that’s really of no importance to the comprehension of the text.

*the singular nostri not being the adequate form to be used partitively.