Exercises on pg. 166 of the workbook; answers on pg. 31 of the answer key.
382.I.
You prefer, you don’t want, you (pl.) want, we don’t want. 2. That he doesn’t want, that we would want, that he prefers. 3. “Don’t”, to want, to have not wanted, to prefer. 4. He wants, you (pl.) prefer, that he would not want, “don’t” (pl.). 5. With the sun rising, the birds began to sing. 6. With the shouts having been heard, the barbarians were refusing to proceed. 7. With Caesar having encourage the legions, the soldiers fought a little braver. 8. With these things having been known, the Helvetii persuaded their neighbors to make a march with them. 9. With the toils having been completed, the soldiers were asking (from) Caesar to give them rewards. 10. With a meeting having been summoned, the chiefs responded in the following way. 11. Since the leader was delaying in the lands of the Helvetii for more days, he set many villages on fire. 12. With the size of the Germans having been known, some of the Romans were afraid. 13. With the merchants having been asked, Caesar could find out no more.
II.
4. Rumore audito Caesar legionibus imperavit ut celerius progrederentur.
7. His relictis, reliqui quam celerrime properaverunt/maturaverunt.
Some cosmetic changes. Also, since you is actually the second person plural pronoun which is normally used in place of the obsolete singular thou, it makes more sense to indicate when this is the case.
Hi Anto. Looks like it, but the subject of the infinitive must be in the accusative.
Impero> , I command, in model prose takes only the inf. passive or deponent; in SALLUST, HIRTIUS, CURTIUS, TACITUS, and the Poets sometimes the active. > (Hannibal) imperavit quam plurimas venenatas serpentes vivas colligi> , NEP., 23, 10; Hannibal ordered as many poisonous serpents as possible to be caught alive.
I think I am wrong. Because “impero” takes the dative of the person ordered + a subjunctive clause of the thing ordered done. While “iubeo” takes the infinitive as in English:
Impero> , order (with the dative of the person ordered and a subjunctive clause of the thing ordered done)
N.B, Remember that > iubeo> , order, takes the infinitive as in English. Compare the sentences: lubeo eum venire> , I order him to come Impero ei ut veniat> , I give orders to him that he is to come
That’s probably the construction that’s expected in the exercise, which is correct and standard, but not the only one possible. Since you chose progredi, a deponent verb, accusative (legiones) + infinitive is in this case a perfectly acceptable alternative, and that’s exactly what your question was about.
Further examples:
This accusative and passive infinitive is also fairly common after > impero> , instead of the more usual > ut> -clause: Cic. > Cat. > 1, 27 > nonne hunc in vincla duci imperabis? > ‘Will you not order this man’s imprisonment?’ (Woodcock 141 n. (i))
Mox Corneliam maximam virginem, absolutam olim, dein longo intervallo repetitam atque convictam defodi imperavit > (Svet.)
Yes, I see the point. Therefore, my only mistake was to put the dative with the infinitive, instead of accusative (which is subject) with the infinitive. Thank you again.