This might be a silly question, but is it possible to stack enclitics, like: Tuquene me amas? (“You too love me?”)? Not that you need to use it very often, but if you can do like that, it’s cool.
Probably, though I would avoid it. I would be more inclined to put -ne before -que though, don’t ask me why…
it cannot be done.
~D
what about words in which the enclitic has been absorbed into the word? could you say itaquene…? “and so…?”
in theory if an enclitic form was syncretised with the preceding word to form a new lexeme, as with itaque and atque, a new separate enclitic could be placed onto it. the reality is, however, that the -que force of these two words was still evident, if only phonetically, and neither *itaquene nor *atquene is ever found. in very bad and very late, i.e. Rennaissance, Latin, itaqueue is used, but without Classical precedent this can safely said to be a solecism.
~D
Wasn’t -ne generally attached to the word in the question upon which we want to place emphasis? Surely itaque, by the very meaning of the word, would be incapable of carrying such stress?
An enclitic (from Greek enklino) leans on the word that is before it. Two enclitics would fall, because they would be to heavy for one not-enclitic word. So this is an other way to say, no you cannot put enclitics together.
Itaque: = et ita: ‘and this way’, cannot have an extra enclitic. Don’t use itaquene or something like that.
But itaque in a causal sense is considered as one word, theoretically it can have an encliticon attached to it, but enclitics mostly are attached to important words in the sentence. So in texts I don’t think you will find it often. Mostly enclitics are attached to a word you want to emphazise or if there is no other word to a verb or an adverb.
intelligisne?
intellego atque ita putavi, gratias utrique vestrum.
(It’s better to say utrique vestrum than vobis duobus)