The Oxford Latin Syntax Volume II The Complex Sentence and Discourse 9780199230563 0199230560 Compress
The Oxford Latin Syntax Volume II The Complex Sentence and Discourse 9780199230563 0199230560 Compress
LATIN SYNTAX
VOLUME 2
Volume II
The Complex Sentence and Discourse
HA R M P I N K S T E R
1
1
Great Clarendon Street, Oxford, OX2 6DP,
United Kingdom
Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford.
It furthers the University’s objective of excellence in research, scholarship,
and education by publishing worldwide. Oxford is a registered trade mark of
Oxford University Press in the UK and in certain other countries
© Harm Pinkster 2021
The moral rights of the author have been asserted
First Edition published in 2021
Impression: 1
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in
a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the
prior permission in writing of Oxford University Press, or as expressly permitted
by law, by licence or under terms agreed with the appropriate reprographics
rights organization. Enquiries concerning reproduction outside the scope of the
above should be sent to the Rights Department, Oxford University Press, at the
address above
You must not circulate this work in any other form
and you must impose this same condition on any acquirer
Published in the United States of America by Oxford University Press
198 Madison Avenue, New York, NY 10016, United States of America
British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data
Data available
Library of Congress Control Number: 2020937312
ISBN 978–0–19–923056–3
DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780199230563.001.0001
Printed and bound by
CPI Group (UK) Ltd, Croydon, CR0 4YY
Links to third party websites are provided by Oxford in good faith and
for information only. Oxford disclaims any responsibility for the materials
contained in any third party website referenced in this work.
CONTENTS
Preface xxvii
Signs and other conventions xxix
Abbreviations xxxi
Copyngrted 11ater al
Contents ix
Copyngrted 11ater al
Contents xi
Copyngrted 11ater al
Contents xiii
Copyngrted 11ater al
Contents xv
19 Coordination 583
Copyngrted 11ater al
Contents xix
20 Comparison 715
Copyngrted 11ater al
Contents xxi
Copyngrted 11ater al
Contents xxiii
Copyngrted 11ater al
Contents xxv
24 Discourse 1138
Colour versions of Figures 15.1, 19.1, and 23.1 can be found on the book's companion
website at www.oup.co.uk/ companion/pinkster
Copyngrted 11ater al
PR EFACE
This second (and final) volume of The Oxford Latin Syntax appears six years after the
first. My considerations for writing this Syntax can be found in the Preface to the first
volume and they are still valid. Inevitably, I changed my mind on some minor points
(for example, on the use of the notion ‘subjunct’ and of the term ‘comparative clause’)
and some of the things promised in the first volume I decided not to deal with at all.
The title of this volume is ‘The complex sentence and discourse’, but in reality
this volume contains more, for example word order. A number of items might also
have been dealt with in the first volume. I hope that the two volumes together are a
useful instrument for people working with Latin texts and/or interested in how Latin
works.
The first volume has been received very positively and I am grateful to the reviewers
for their reports and for their suggestions. I am also grateful to readers who have sent
me their suggestions. In preparing this volume I myself have noted several minor
mistakes and omissions. Some of these have been corrected silently in the second
impression and others will be corrected in a later one. In addition, I have collected
more serious corrections and references to publications which are not in the
Bibliography of the first volume in a list of addenda and corrigenda at the end of this
volume.
Most of the work for this volume was done at home in Amsterdam and sometimes
in the Library of the University of Amsterdam, but I have also spent much time in the
Regenstein Library of the University of Chicago and in the Bodleian Library in
Oxford. I am very grateful for their support and hospitality.
It is time now to thank a number of people who greatly contributed to my work, in
the first place, PhD students of the University of Chicago. I have been very fortunate
to profit from Branden Kosch’s acumen for most chapters in this volume, even after
he finished his PhD and started his own academic career. Of other graduate students
of the University of Chicago who assisted me I thank especially David (Douglas)
Williams for his work on the final chapters. I also thank Stephen van Beek in
Amsterdam for his assistance in the final stage.
Jim Adams, James Clackson, Cynthia Damon, Helma Dik, Andy Dyck, Daan den
Hengst, Alex Mazzanti, Josine Schrickx, and Jaap Wisse discussed various items with
me, asked questions, and sent suggestions. A number of colleagues read one or more
chapters and sent me their comments. Esperanza Torrego organized a wonderful dis-
cussion day in Madrid with the community of Spanish Latin linguists, which was
followed by written comments by several participants. I mention especially Olga
Álvarez Huerta, José Miguel Baños, Conchita Cabrillana, Antonio Revuelta, Eusebia
xxviii Preface
Tarriño, Luis Unceta, and Jesús de la Villa. Esperanza herself sent me her comments
on several chapters, as did Caroline Kroon, Hannah Rosén, and Peter White. Guus
Bal and Roland Hoffmann read the whole work and contributed detailed comments.
In the final stage of proof reading, several friends mentioned above contributed much
more than just reading the proofs, as did Rodie Risselada and Hans Smolenaars. Olga
Spevak not only generously commented on several versions but also undertook the
making of the Index of grammatical terms and Latin words. I thank them all, not only
for their learned comments, but also for the moral support it implied. Last but not
least I thank my daughter Akke Pinkster, who again did the Index locorum and helped
me with the bibliography.
I thank Julia Steer, commissioning editor at OUP, Vicki Sunter, assistant editor, and
Clare Jones, production editor, for their efficient and competent support. I have
greatly benefitted from the acribia, learning, and good advice of Malcolm Todd, copy-
editor, and Ginny Catmur, copy-editor and proof-reader. It was a privilege to work
with them.
At the end of my Odyssey of twenty-four chapters I thank my daughters Fenne and
Akke and their families, Willy van Wetter, and all my friends for their support and
their patience.
Like the first, this volume is dedicated to the memory of Machtelt Bolkestein and
Simon Dik.
Amsterdam and Chicago
October 2019 / January 2021
SIGNS A ND OTHER CON VENTIONS
The Oxford Latin Syntax. Harm Pinkster, Oxford University Press (2021). © Harm Pinkster.
DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780199230563.003.0014
Subordinate clauses: properties and internal structure
which they form a complex sentence. For that reason they are called subordinate
clauses. By contrast, the clauses containing sinam, iussit, and miser est are called
superordinate clauses. In all three cases, since the superordinate clauses are not
themselves again part of another clause, they are also main clauses.
(ii) Compound clauses (coordination, also called: conjunction)
The situation is entirely different with compound clauses. An example is (d). Here two
grammatically independent clauses (indicated by curly brackets) are combined into a
whole by the coordinator et, which, unlike postquam and qui in (b) and (c), does not
belong to the clause that follows:² whereas from a grammatical point of view the order
of the clauses in (b) and (c) could be switched, it would be impossible to put the
sequence et . . . proficisci in front. Also in compound sentences in which the events
themselves could be inverted, as in (e)—amo et odi is quite well possible—inversion is
excluded: *et amo odi.
(d) {Haec evincit in consilio sententia} et {prima luce postridie constituunt
proficisci.}
(‘This opinion prevailed in the meeting, and they decided to set out the following day
at first light.’ Caes. Civ. 1.67.6)
(e) Odi et amo.
(‘I hate and love.’ Catul. 85.1)
So both in (a)–(c) and in (d) and (e) simple clauses are combined into larger units, but
the two types of clause combining are different.³
There are two further differences between subordination and coordination. In the
first place, some of the coordinating devices, notably et, can also be used to connect
independent sentences, as in (f). As the example shows, it is not always clear whether
we are dealing with coordination of clauses that belong to the same sentence or con-
nexion of different sentences, and editors vary sometimes in their decisions. In the
domain of subordination only relative clauses can be used as independent sentences
(see § 18.28 on relative connexion).
(f) Hac oratione habita (sc. Caesar) concilium dimisit. Et (del. Meusel) secun-
dum ea multae res eum hortabantur quare sibi eam rem cogitandam et sus-
cipiendam putaret . . .
(‘With this speech he dissolved the convention. And straightway many consider-
ations induced him to suppose that he must take thought and action in the matter.’
Caes. Gal. 1.33.2)
² Editors put a comma after sententia, probably to suggest that there is a semantic relation of conse-
quence between the second conjoin and the first. In English a comma would be normal.
³ The notions of subordination and coordination are relatively recent in the history of grammar. See
Pfister (1995).
Subordinate clauses and other forms of clause combining
More importantly, et is often used to coordinate constituents within clauses, for which
no parallel exists in the case of subordinators. Examples are (g) and (h), with two
coordinated pronouns and adjectives, respectively.
(g) Quid? Auspicia, quibus ego et tu, Crasse, cum magna rei publicae salute
praesumus.
(‘What of augury, over which you and I, Crassus, preside, greatly to the welfare of the
Republic?’ Cic. de Orat. 1.39)
(h) Iustam rem et facilem esse oratam a vobis volo.
(‘I want to ask you for a just and a small favour.’ Pl. Am. 33)
(iii) Comparison
Another category of expressions that are usually regarded as subordinate clauses are
‘clauses of comparison’.⁴ These clauses are usually divided into two types: ‘clauses of
manner’ and ‘clauses of degree’. The first type is illustrated by (i), the second by ( j) and
(k) below.
(i) Ut sementem feceris, ita metes.
(‘As ye sow, so shall ye reap.’ Cic. de Orat. 2.261—tr. May and Wisse)
The ut clause in (i) resembles the postquam clause in (b) in that (i) it is an optional
constituent (a satellite) with respect to metes; (ii) ut belongs to the clause with sementem
feceris and the whole clause could be placed after (ita) metes. For these reasons such
manner clauses are discussed in the Chapter on satellite clauses in this Syntax
(§§ 16.33–6).
The ‘clauses of degree’ in ( j) and (k) are different. There is no indication of subor-
dination. In addition, as the examples suggest, it is very rare to find a verb like the
supplied est in the part after quam. The comparison is rather between two constitu-
ents within the same clause. In this respect comparison of this type resembles coord-
ination. Such comparative expressions have a chapter of their own (Chapter 20).
( j) Meus equus tam celer est quam tuus (est).
(‘My horse is as fast as yours is.’)
(k) Meus equus celerior est quam tuus (est).
(‘My horse is faster than yours is.’)
(iv) Secondary predicates
There is one more type of expressions which are usually not described as ‘clauses’ that
are part of a larger unit, but which are often regarded as more or less equivalent to
subordinate clauses proper. The clearest examples are so-called ‘predicatively used’
participles, for which in this Syntax the term ‘secondary predicate’ is used. An example
⁴ For this paragraph, see Woodcock (1959: 205), from whom the examples are taken. They are called
‘Vergleichende Adverbialsätze’ in K.-St.’s (II.448) terminology.
Subordinate clauses: properties and internal structure
is (l).⁵ Although Woodcock’s paraphrase with ‘while’ suggests that we are dealing with
a satellite clause comparable with the postquam clause in (b), in reality scribens is
related in some way to the subject qui (see Chapter 21). Grammatically speaking
scribens has nothing to do with subordination nor with clause-combining proper.
(l) . . . Platonis, qui uno et octogesimo anno scribens est mortuus . . .
(‘. . . of Plato, who died writing in his eighty-first year . . .’ Cic. Sen. 13—‘while he
was writing’)
Figure 14.1 indicates the various forms of combining discussed above and their rela-
tive similarity: secondary predicates, at least the participles, are only semantically
related to the other types of clauses. Subordinate clauses in the broad sense (sensu
lato) are different from coordinate and comparative expressions. A further distinction
can be made between subordinate clauses in the narrow sense (sensu stricto) and rela-
tive clauses (see (v) below).
y secondary
predication
subordination s.l. z
⁵ The example is also used by Woodcock (1959: 72), where a clear exposition of the standard descrip-
tion can be found.
Subordinate clauses and other forms of clause combining
from two so-called paratactic, or juxtaposed, simple clauses. Since all known lan-
guages have complex sentences, such an assumption is not very helpful, and even
though specific devices of historic times may go back to originally paratactic struc-
tures, ‘the paratactic stage had been passed centuries before Plautus’.⁷
Latin possesses a wide array of subordinate clauses in the narrow sense discussed in
the preceding section. A distinction can be made between verbal clauses, which can
be either finite or non-finite, and verbless nominal clauses. Table 14.1 presents a sur-
vey of the various possibilities.
⁷ So Bennett: I.255, discussing the use of the simple subjunctive as a subordinating device. See also
Pinkster (1972: 167–9) and Sznajder (2003: 14–16) on ‘le mythe de la “parataxe primitive”’.
⁸ For this argument, see Bennett: I.244–5.
⁹ For a discussion of these properties applied to clauses with a simple subjunctive, see Sznajder (2003:
37–69).
Subordinate clauses and other forms of clause combining
(i) Most subordinate clauses are formally marked as such. For non-finite clauses,
such as the accusative and infinitive clause in (a), the fact that the verb form is an
infinitive and the subject an accusative (and not a finite form and a nominative) is a
clear signal of its subordinate status. With regard to the ablative absolute, the parti-
cipial clause naturally lacks a finite verb form, as in (c), and the participle is marked
by the regular case for satellites, the ablative.
(c) Victores victis hostibus legiones reveniunt domum . . .
(‘With the enemy conquered, our legions are returning home as conquerors . . .’ Pl.
Am. 188)
Finite clauses, in turn, are almost always marked by a subordinator (for exceptions,
see below), like postquam in (b) in § 14.1.
(ii) Moreover, the finite verb forms are often subjunctives for which a regular semantic
explanation along the lines of § 7.8 can hardly be given. See §§ 7.130 and 7.138.
(iii) The tense of finite subordinate clauses in the subjunctive is often determined
by the tense of the superordinate clause (according to the ‘rules of the sequence of
tenses’, consecutio temporum—see § 7.85). This is the case with haberes in (b), where
the imperfect tense is adjusted to the perfect form duxisti of the superordinate clause,
if one assumes that haberes is contemporaneous with duxisti.
(iv) Negator climbing (see § 8.6) is another form of ‘domination’ of a subordinate
by the superordinate clause, as can be seen in (d). Here, the negator non precedes the
verb puto, but it has in fact esse venalis in its scope, not puto.
(d) Clodiae (sc. horti) sane placent, sed non puto esse venalis.
(‘Clodia’s gardens would be admirable, but I don’t think they’re for sale.’ Cic. Att.
12.38a.2)
(v) Sometimes constituents that semantically belong to a finite subordinate clause
function as pseudo-object in the superordinate clause, as in (e), where te is syntactic-
ally the object of faciam, but semantically the first argument of miserrumus . . . sis (see
§ 9.17).
(e) . . . ego te faciam miserrumus mortalis uti sis.
(‘I’ll make sure you’re the most wretched mortal on earth.’ Pl. Aul. 443)
(vi) A feature shared by finite and non-finite subordinate clauses concerns the use
of the reflexive pronoun and the reflexive possessive adjective to refer to a constituent,
usually the subject, of the superordinate clause. This use of the so-called indirect
reflexive is shown for an accusative and infinitive clause in (f) and for an ut clause in
(g) (see § 11.127).¹⁰
(f) Me sibix epistulas dedisse dicitx.
(‘He says that I have given him the letters.’ Pl. Trin. 896)
(g) Nam illa mulierx lapidem silicem subigere ut sex amet potest.
(‘That woman could force a flintstone to love her.’ Pl. Poen. 290)
(vii) In addition, there are a number of tests to prove the subordinate status of a
clause. A subordinate clause can be given in answer to a question word or phrase, as
the accusative and infinitive clause is given in reply to quid in (h), the object of its
clause. Also, a subordinate clause may be announced by a preparative (or: cataphoric)
expression, as in (i). Here hoc, the object of dicito, announces the accusative and
infinitive clause facturum me . . ., which functions as object as well. A subordinate
clause may be coordinated with a noun phrase, as in ( j), where the quia clause is
coordinated by means of non . . . sed with the cause adjunct in the ablative iactantia.¹¹
(h) Quid dicis? An bello fugitivorum Siciliam virtute tua liberatam?
(‘What are you saying? That Sicily was saved from the war with the revolted slaves by
your courage?’ Cic. Ver. 5.5)
(i) Quin etiam illi hoc dicito, / facturum <me> ut ne etiam aspicere aedis
audeat . . .
(‘Well now, you just tell him this—that I shall see to it he does not dare give that
dwelling so much as a glance.’ Pl. Mos. 422–3)
( j) Quod non iactantia refero, sed quia collegio quindecimvirum antiquitus
ea cura . . .
(‘A fact which I recall not out of vanity, but because from of old this responsibility
belonged to the College of Fifteen . . .’ Tac. Ann. 11.11.1)
(viii) Finally, it should be mentioned that in indirect speech main clauses become
accusative and infinitive clauses and subordinate clauses as a rule stay more or less as
they are (see § 2.2 and, for exceptions, § 15.109).¹²
Unfortunately, we do not have access to the best criterion for determining the sta-
tus of clauses, namely intonation. Just as in contemporary languages, the intonation
contour must have been the best indicator for determining whether a given sequence
of clauses constituted a single complex sentence or several independent sentences.
As for pragmatic and semantic aspects of the subordinate clauses in Table 14.1, the
various types differ in the degree to which they allow and exhibit the characteristics
that are typical of independent sentences. Most of them lack an illocutionary force of
their own and do not contain connectors or interactional particles that belong to the
clauses themselves (and not to the complex sentence to which they belong). Finite
clauses in the left hand column of the Table exhibit many of the internal properties of
independent sentences. Although there are certain constraints on tense and mood,
especially for argument clauses, and although the governing verb may also constrain
the category voice (see § 15.2), these clauses are less restricted in terms of type and
number of obligatory and optional constituents than non-finite and nominal clauses.
¹¹ For more instances from Tacitus, see Sánchez Martínez (2000: 244–53).
¹² For this test and some exceptions, see Pfister (1995: 245).
Subordinate clauses and other forms of clause combining
Of the non-finite clauses the accusative and infinitive clause allows for relative tense
distinctions, but the category of mood is irrelevant. For the other non-finite clauses
the number of constraints is higher. The nominal clauses in the right hand column
lack most sentential properties. There are, therefore, considerable differences between
the various clauses in their degree of ‘desententialization’.¹³ Further details are pro-
vided in the following sections.
Whereas in most cases identifying subordinate clauses (and also main clauses) as such
is unproblematic, there are also cases where two different analyses are possible and
even cases which seem to have a status in-between one complex sentence and two
independent simple sentences.¹⁴ First person singular forms of a number of cognition
verbs (which may also govern an accusative and infinitive clause) can be used as
qualified truth disjuncts (see § 10.101) to modulate the illocutionary force of declara-
tive (§ 6.2), interrogative (§ 6.21), and imperative sentences (§ 6.29). Examples of the
verb credo used in the sense of ‘presumably’ are (a) and (b). In the former credo is usu-
ally described as a parenthesis, a more or less independent structure that is inserted in
another structure, without being syntactically a part of that structure. It functions as a
modulator of the assertive illocutionary force of the sentence. In (b) credo is best
taken as modifying ad uxorem meam. In the case of (c), where credo precedes a com-
plete sentence, it is more difficult to regard it as unrelated to what follows: the fact that
it is the first word creates the expectation that something will follow expressing what
the I believes, so the sequence may have been perceived as a single sentence. In this
particular case, however, one cannot be sure, since it is impossible to know what the
intonation contour was.
(a) Pol ea ipsa credo ne intro mittatur cavet . . .
(‘She herself avoids being let in, I suppose . . .’ Pl. Aul. 101)
(b) Intro edepol abiit, credo ad uxorem meam.
(‘He went inside, to my wife I believe.’ Pl. Am. 1045)
(c) Credo aurum inspicere volt, ne surruptum siet.
(‘I think he wants to look at his gold to make sure that it hasn’t been stolen.’ Pl.
Aul. 39)
In (d) the segment ni nocias meos might be taken as a subordinate imperative clause
with rogo (see § 15.67), but comparison with (e) and (f) may also suggest that it should
be regarded as an independent prohibition: nolei (= noli) and the perfect subjunctive
feceris signal independent prohibitions. See also (g) with an imperative.
¹⁸ For the relatively rare instances of ut clauses with dignus, see TLL s.v. 1152.24ff.
The internal properties of subordinate clauses
infinitive is not excluded, as is shown by (m).¹⁹ For different subjects in the main and
the accusative and infinitive clause, see (n). When the subjects are different, it is also
possible to use a finite clause with or without ut, as in (o) and (p), respectively.
(l) [Immo] hoc primum volo, / quaestioni accipere servos.
(‘This I want first, to accept his servants for questioning.’ Pl. Mos. 1091–2)
(m) Magnufice volo me viros summos accipere, ut mi rem esse reantur.
(‘I want to entertain some high-class gentlemen in grand style so that they think I
have money.’ Pl. Ps. 167)
(n) Vera volo loqui te, nolo assentari mihi.
(‘I want you to tell the truth, I don’t want you simply to agree with me.’ Pl. Am. 751)
(o) Quid vis? # Hos ut accipias coquos . . .
(‘What do you want? # That you take these cooks . . .’ Pl. Aul. 351)
(p) Le/no argentum hoc vo/lo a me accipiat . . .
(‘I want the pimp to receive this money from me . . .’ Pl. Ps. 1121a–23)
Details concerning the distribution of argument clauses are discussed in Chapter 15.
A common feature of finite clauses is, of course, that they have finite verb forms and
therefore can be marked for tense, mood, and person/number. The rules for the use of
the tenses and moods in the individual types of subordinate clauses are discussed in
§§ 7.85ff. and §§ 7.128ff., respectively. Historic infinitives are exceptional.
In most finite clauses the identity of the subject is inferrable from the verb form
(notably for the first and second person) and/or is expressed explicitly. Examples in
which the subject has to be inferred are (a) and (b). The subject of fieret in (a) is iden-
tical to is in the main clause; in (b) the subject of curet is Naevius, to be inferred from
the object of the main clause.
(a) Is speculatum huc misit me, ut quae fierent fieret particeps.
(‘He sent me here to watch out so that he’d have his share in knowledge of what’s
happening.’ Pl. Aul. 605)
¹⁹ For such instances in Plautus, see Lodge s.v. volo 909 § 2a.
Subordinate clauses: properties and internal structure
(m) . . . et cibum recusat et multum bibet, propter quod ardorem siccum pulmo-
nis patitur.
(‘. . . and he rejects food and drinks a lot, because he suffers a dry burning of the lungs.’
Mulom. Chir. 170)
Scholars have had difficulty describing combinations such as praeter quod, that is
combinations in which a word that is used as both a preposition and an adverb is fol-
lowed by a subordinator. Praeter in the combination praeter quod ‘except that’ is
described as an adverb by TLL s.v. praeter 1001.33ff. The OLD makes a distinction
between praeter adverb (§ B) and praeter conjunction (§ C) and calls it a conjunction
in the cases under discussion ( praeter id quod is attested earlier, from Mela onwards).
For other combinations meaning ‘except that’, see § 16.84.
A number of verbs that govern argument clauses with ut are also used with subordin-
ate clauses in the subjunctive without a subordinator, and with some verbs this is quite
common (with facio, for example). Two examples are (n) and (o) (the null sign ‘Ø’
indicates the missing ut). In this Syntax such clauses are called ‘clauses with a simple
subjunctive’. For further illustrations of this type of clause, see § 15.83, and, for excep-
tional instances of satellite clauses, § 16.4.
(n) Rogo vos Ø quam primum mihi rescribatis.
(‘I beg you to answer this letter as promptly as possible.’ D. Brut. Fam. 11.15)
(o) Qui Summanu’s? Fac Ø sciam.
(‘How come you’re Summanus? Let me know.’ Pl. Cur. 414)
The ‘non-finite clauses’ as in Table 14.1 constitute a very heterogeneous set; they are
discussed separately below. The main concern here will be the internal structure of
these clauses. Their distribution is discussed in Chapters 15, 16, and 17.
²² Also Liv. 5.15.11, Gaius Inst. 3.160, Cypr. Ep. 57.5. See Panchón (2007: 166–9). See also § 7.71,
Appendix.
The internal properties of subordinate clauses
²³ For the increase of the use of (active and passive) future infinitives in Classical Latin as compared to
Early Latin, see Perrochat (1932b: 1–83).
Subordinate clauses: properties and internal structure
(g) . . . Scipio cum existimasset pro suo beneficio sine dubio ab his gratias sibi
actum iri, potestatem iis dicundi fecit.
(‘Since Scipio had determined that gratitude would undoubtedly be expressed by
them for his kindness, he gave them permission to speak.’ B. Afr. 45.1)
(h) . . . videbat re publica oppressa nihil posse decerni.
(‘. . . he saw that with the Republic crushed nothing could be decreed.’ Cic. Phil. 8.5)
In (a) the accusative and infinitive clause functions as the object of active audivistin’;
it could be replaced by id or something similar. This can be seen from (b), where the
AcI clause as a whole constitutes the answer to the preceding question, replacing the
object quid in that question. The subject of the accusative and infinitive clause fulfils
no function in the main clause, nor does the infinitive. In this respect the accusative
and infinitive clause differs from the accusative and prolative infinitive construction
(see § 14.11). When the governing verb is in the so-called impersonal passive, the AcI
clause functions as the subject, as in (d), where clipeum esse salvum is the subject. The
fact that dictum (est) is neuter singular shows that the accusative and infinitive clause
counts as neuter singular.
Supplement:
Modal expression: . . . cum (sapiens) sibi cum capitali adversario, dolore, depugnan-
dum videret . . . (Cic. Fin. 4.31)
Passive infinitive with explicit agent: . . . sophistas . . . lusos videmus a Socrate. (Cic.
Fin. 2.2); . . . ut ab ipsis Stoicis scriptum videmus . . . (Cic. Fin. 4.15); . . . ne fando qui-
dem auditum est crocodillum . . . violatum ab Aegyptio. (Cic. N.D. 1.82).
Accusative and infinitive clauses have their own illocutionary force, as was shown in
(g) above by the use of the disjunct sine dubio. Most often they are declarative. For
interrogative AcI clauses, see § 15.105. For the use of the AcI in relative clauses, see
ex. (m) in § 14.1 and § 15.107.
When the context offers sufficient support, the subject of the AcI clause is quite
often not expressed.²⁴ The unexpressed subject is easier to supply if it is identical with
the subject of the main clause, as in (i), but sometimes it must be inferred from the
context, as in ( j), where eum has to be supplied referring to the barber in his shop who
is mentioned before. Implicit subjects are particularly common in comedy, but they
are also found in early tragedy, in Cicero (most examples one finds quoted are from
the letters, but see (k) and (l)), Caesar, and other authors. There is no reason to assume
that it was typical of a lower variety of (spoken) Latin.²⁵ In the examples below the
null sign ‘Ø’ indicates an unexpressed subject.
²⁴ For a survey of accusative and infinitive clauses without an explicit subject in Early Latin, see
Bennett: I.383–8. For other authors, see the references in Sz.: 362.
²⁵ See de Melo (2006). For Cicero, see Lebreton (1901b: 378). For Tertullian, see Hoppe (1903: 49–50=
1985: 101).
The internal properties of subordinate clauses
(i) . . . neque ego hau committam ut, si quid peccatum siet, / Ø fecisse dicas de
[me] mea sententia.
(‘I won’t run the risk that if any mistake is made you might say that you had done it
according to my verdict.’ Pl. Bac. 1037–8)
( j) Sed utrum strictimne Ø adtonsurum dicam esse an per pectinem, / nescio.
(‘But whether I should say that he’s going to give him a close shave or one through the
comb, I don’t know.’ Pl. Capt. 268–9)
(k) Hic alios negasse Ø audere, alios respondisse Ø non putare id perfici posse.
(‘At this, some of them had said they would not dare to try it, others had replied that
they did not believe it could be managed.’ Cic. Ver. 23)
(l) Qui negare noluit esse in eo numero Sullam . . . Ø nescire dixit.
(‘The man who did not like to deny that Sulla was among that number said he did not
know.’ Cic. Sul. 39)
Supplement:
Id ego aecum ac iustum fecisse expedibo atque eloquar. (Enn. scen. 148J); Pol si istuc
faxis, hau sine poena feceris, / si ille huc rebitet, sicut confido affore. (Pl. Capt. 695–6);
Ut, si sequentur me, hac abiisse censeant. (Pl. Men. 556); Nisi forte illud quod dictu-
rum te esse audio, quaestorem illius fuisse. (Cic. Div. Caec. 59); Iam ne nocte quidem
turba ex eo loco dilabebatur refracturosque carcerem minabantur, cum remisso eo,
quod erepturi erant, ex senatus consulto Manlius vinclis liberatur. (Liv. 6.17.6); Certe
enim oblitos (sc. esse) agitis. (Tert. Apol. 10.6); Meminerat certe, nisi circumcisum
scirent, non admittendum in sancta sanctorum. (Tert. Marc. 4.7.7)
The subjects of present active infinitives with a future reference (quite common in
Early Latin, see §§ 7.68–9) are relatively often identical to the subject of the main
clause, which explains why they are more often implicit than in accusative and infini-
tive clauses that contain another infinitive. Another facilitating factor is the endings
of the participial elements of perfect passive and future active infinitives, as well as
adjective endings (de Melo 2006). An example is (m), where the ending -am makes it
clear that the speaker is talking about his daughter.
(m) Postremo etiam, si voles, / desponsam quoque esse dicito.
(‘And finally, if you want, even say that my daughter is engaged.’ Ter. Hau. 865–6)
Sometimes one may have difficulty in deciding whether the infinitive is part of an
accusative and infinitive clause (without a subject) or a prolative infinitive.
With manipulation verbs, the use of an AcI clause is for most governing verbs
restricted to their use as a two-place verb. The AcI clause may be active or passive, but
it is restricted in other ways. For details, see § 15.100.
Accusative and infinitive clauses can be used as subject or object at the clause level
(see § 15.93), and as argument with certain nouns and adjectives (see § 17.13 and
§ 17.28). For rare instances of AcI clauses in a satellite position, see § 14.16, ex. (f).
Subordinate clauses: properties and internal structure
There has been extensive debate in the literature on the origin and structure of
the AcI (see § 12.5). For the distinction between the accusative and infinitive and
the prolative infinitive clauses, see Bolkestein (1976a, 1976b, 1977b, and 1979)
and, from a diachronic perspective, Hettrich (1992). See also Adams (2005a) on
documentary data.
(f) (sc. Pelias) . . . quem medicamento et suis venenis (sc. Medea) dicitur / fecisse
rursus ex sene adulescentulum . . .
(‘(sc. Pelias) . . . whom she’s said to have turned from an old man into a young one
again with her medicine and potions . . .’ Pl. Ps. 870–1)
(g) Amplissime laudari existimabatur qui ita laudabatur.
(‘One so praised was thought to be praised most honourably.’ Cato Agr. praef. 2)
Apart from the formal differences, the AcI and NcI constructions differ in many other
respects as well. Firstly, unlike the accusative and infinitive clause, the nominative and
infinitive construction cannot be said to fulfil a function within a superordinate
clause; it thus resembles the ‘fused’ clauses discussed in §§ 14.10–13 in the require-
ment of identity of the subject of the main verb and the agent or patient of the infini-
tive. Secondly, it seems unlikely that attitudinal disjuncts were allowed with the
nominative and infinitive. Thirdly, there are differences in the contexts in which the
AcI and NcI can be used (see § 15.111). For these reasons the NcI will be regarded as
a distinct construction in this Syntax.
of reverti is identical to eum, the object of rogo. A comparable example of the supine
is (f).
(d) Postremo imperavi egomet mihi / omnia adsentari.
(‘Finally I ordered myself to agree with them in everything.’ Ter. Eu. 252–3)
(e) Sed nunc quoque eum reverti / maturius ex Dalmatia rogo.
(‘But now I appeal to him to hasten his return from Dalmatia.’ Stat. Silv. 4.pr.20)
(f) Pamphilam / cantatum provocemu’.
(‘Let’s summon Pamphila to sing.’ Ter. Eu. 442–3)
Prolative infinitive clauses are of several types.²⁶ The examples used in the preceding
section and repeated here illustrate two types: those functioning as object with two-
place verbs, as in (a), and those functioning as object with three-place verbs, as in (b).
The object status of monere te in (a) appears from the presence of the cataphorically
used pronoun hoc. With so-called impersonal verbs like licet ‘it is permitted’, the pro-
lative clause functions as the subject, as in (c).
(a) At hoc volo, monere te.
(‘But what I want is to warn you.’ Pl. Ps. 915)
(b) Postremo imperavi egomet mihi / omnia adsentari.
(‘Finally I ordered myself to agree with them in everything.’ Ter. Eu. 252–3)
(c) Nunc licet mi libere quidvis loqui.
(‘Now it is permitted to me to say anything freely.’ Pl. Am. 393)
If the prolative infinitive clause contains the copula sum, the subject complement agrees
with a constituent of the superordinate clause: in (d), callidus and veterator agree with
homo luteus, the subject of vult; in (e), quieto agrees with tibi, the second argument of
licet. The same goes for secondary predicates, like tacitus with os tuum praebere in (f).
(For the rules of agreement involved, and some exceptions, see § 13.18.)
(d) Deinde in hoc homo luteus etiam callidus ac veterator esse vult . . .
(‘In the second place, this dirty fellow wants even in this to seem cunning and wily . . .’
Cic. Ver. 3.35)
(e) Per hanc curam quieto tibi licet esse.
(‘As far as that worry is concerned, you can be calm.’ Pl. Epid. 338)
(f) . . . iis (sc. testibus) tacitus os tuum praebere malueris . . .
(‘. . . you who preferred to show them your face without speaking a word . . .’ Cic. Ver. 3.41)
²⁶ ‘The infinitive used in this way with a finite verb is called the Prolative Infinitive because it “carries
on” or extends the sense of the finite verb.’ (Woodcock 1959: 16).
The internal properties of subordinate clauses
With three-place verbs such as rogo—see (e) in § 14.10—the second argument func-
tions as object; accordingly, when the verb is passive, the second argument functions
as subject, as in (g).
(g) Et sane cum quis rogatur accepta certa quantitate portionem restituere,
duplex est fideicommissum . . .
(‘Certainly, when a man is asked, after he has accepted a certain sum, to restore his
portion, the fideicommissum is double . . .’ Ulp. dig. 32.11.3)
Formally, quis rogatur restituere in (g) resembles the first type of nominative and
infinitive construction illustrated by Demaenetus dicitur habitare in ex. (a) in § 14.9.
However, there is a semantic difference: whereas quis in (g) is the person the question
is addressed to, Demaenetus is not the addressee of dicitur. The addressee with the
verb dico is in the dative and can also be expressed in a nominative and infinitive
construction with dico, as in (h).
(h) Dicitur mihi tuus servus anagnostes fugitivus cum Vardaeis esse.
(‘They tell me that a runaway slave of yours, a reader, is with the Vardaei.’ Vat. Fam.
5.9.2)
Another important difference between (g) and the nominative and infinitive con-
struction is that the infinitive in a prolative infinitive clause is usually restricted to the
present (see §§ 7.68–9, where there are also examples of a few other infinitives). In
addition, with three-place rogo the second type of nominative clause with a passive
infinitive (see § 14.9) is excluded. For further details concerning the prolative infini-
tive at the clause level, see §§ 15.114ff.²⁷
With three-place verbs of accusing and convicting there are no restrictions, as is
shown in (i) and ( j) (for accusative and infinitive clauses with these verbs when
meaning ‘to prove’ or ‘to allege’, see § 15.130).
(i) . . . insimulant eum (sc. Ulixem) tragoediae simulatione insaniae militiam
subterfugere voluisse.
(‘. . . the tragedies charge him (sc. Ulysses) with having wanted to escape a
soldier’s service by feigning madness.’ Cic. Off. 3.97—perfect infinitive)
( j) . . . incusabatur facile toleraturus exilium . . .
(‘. . . the charge was made that he would carry his exile lightly . . .’ Tac. Ann.
6.3.3—future infinitive)
The combination of a prolative infinitive clause and volo in (a) and vult in (d) looks like but
is actually not an auxiliary + infinitive phrase; for the difference, see § 4.98. Prolative infini-
tive clauses are also used with nouns and adjectives (see § 17.15 and § 17.29, respectively).
In Early Latin and in poetry infinitive clauses can also be used as adjuncts with verbs
of movement, as in (k), and with the verb do ‘to give’ and related verbs, as in (l). The
²⁷ For the restrictions that hold for prolative infinitive clauses, see Bolkestein (1976a and 1976b).
Subordinate clauses: properties and internal structure
term ‘prolative’ is not used for such infinitive clauses in this Syntax. For further
details, see § 16.86.
(k) Illa autem in arcem abiit aedem visere / Minervae.
(‘She has gone to the acropolis to visit the temple of Minerva.’ Pl. Bac. 900–1)
(l) Age, circumfer mulsum, bibere da usque plenis cantharis.
(‘Go on, pass the honey-wine round, give us to drink from full goblets.’ Pl.
Per. 821)
(a) Homines enim ad deos nulla re propius accedunt quam salutem hominibus
dando.
(‘For in nothing do men more nearly approach the gods than in doing good to their
fellow-men.’ Cic. Lig. 38—NB: parallelism with nulla re)
(b) Deinde saepius dando (sc. munus gladiatorum) et modo volneribus tenus,
modo sine missione, etiam [et] familiare oculis gratumque id spectaculum
fecit . . .
(‘Then by frequent repetitions, by sometimes allowing the fighters to go only as far as
wounding one another, sometimes permitting them to fight without giving quarter,
he made the sight familiar and even pleasing . . .’ Liv. 41.20.12)
(c) . . . duorum labori ego hominum parsissem lubens, / mei te rogandi et tis
respondendi mihi.
(‘. . . I’d have been happy to spare two people from trouble, me from asking you and
you from answering me.’ Pl. Ps. 4–5)
The first argument of the gerundial clause is almost always identical to the subject of
the superordinate clause. When ipse is used in the gerundial clause, it agrees with this
subject, as in (d). An exception to the rule of coreferentiality is (e): with the zero-
valent verb pluit (see § 4.90) coreferentiality is excluded. For further exceptions, see
§ 16.101 fin., (f).
The internal properties of subordinate clauses
(d) Sed eos Ser. Sulpicius Galba . . . prensando ipse . . . stimulaverat ut frequentes
ad suffragium adessent.
(‘But Servius Sulpicius Galba had egged on the men to appear for voting in full num-
bers, by buttonholing the men himself.’ Liv. 45.35.8)
(e) . . . Mucius . . . diceret omnem aquam oportere arceri quae pluendo crevisset.
(‘. . . Mucius would come to argue that all water which has risen because of rain should
be excluded.’ Cic. Top. 38)
For the categorial status of the two supines and their relation, see § 3.21. The first
supine (in -um) functions as a purpose adjunct at the clause level, whereas the second
supine (in -u) is almost restricted to adjectives. With the first supine arguments are
not uncommon nor is it difficult to find adjuncts, as in (c) in § 14.10 and in (a) below,
with an object and a beneficiary adjunct. With the second supine arguments and sat-
ellites are rarely attested, which may be due to its infrequency. A rare instance of a
satellite is Latino sermone in (b). With both supines disjuncts and discourse particles
are excluded. For further details, see §§ 16.111–13.
(a) Iam hercle ego per hortum ad amicam transibo meam / mi hanc occupatum
noctem.
(‘Now I’ll go over to my girlfriend through the garden in order to secure this night for
myself.’ Pl. St. 437–8)
(b) Ex his (sc. oppidis) digna memoratu aut Latino sermone dictu facilia, a flu-
mine Ana litore Oceani oppidum Ossonoba . . .
(‘Worthy of mention in this district, or easy to say in Latin, are: on the ocean coast
beginning at the river Guadiana, the town Ossonoba . . .’ Plin. Nat. 3.7)
Another type is the gerundival clause lamentando . . . filio in (d). Here, too, filio alone
would be difficult to interpret.
²⁹ For the development of the use of the various categories in the ablative absolute, see Flinck-
Linkomies (1929). For numerical data, see Steele (1902: 298; 1904: 315) on Livy and the letters used for
Table 14.2 respectively, partially repeated in Flinck-Linkomies (1929: 138).
The internal properties of subordinate clauses
As for the subject of these clauses, it is usually a noun or a noun phrase (or a proper
name). However, the subject may also be a pronoun, and this is the most frequent
category in Early Latin. Interrogative and relative pronouns and phrases functioning
as subject of a participial phrase deserve special mention. Two examples of interroga-
tive expressions are given in (e) and (f). For autonomous relative clauses and for argu-
ment clauses functioning as subject of participial clauses, see § 16.91.
(e) . . . tu vero quibus rebus gestis, quo hoste superato contionem donandi causa
advocare ausus es?
(‘But what victory had you won, what enemy had you defeated, that you should dare
to summon a public meeting at which to make such presentations?’ Cic. Ver. 3.185)
(f) Musa, mihi causas memora, quo numine laeso / quidve dolens regina deum
tot volvere casus / insignem pietate virum, tot adire labores / impulerit.
(‘Tell me, O Muse, the causes; wherein thwarted in will or wherefor angered, did the
Queen of heaven drive a man, of goodness so wondrous, to traverse so many perils,
to face so many toils.’ Verg. A. 1.8–12)
The clausal character of the expressions under discussion deserves some further elab-
oration. In (g), the combination of the participle occisus and the noun dictator func-
tions as the subject of the subordinate clause.
(g) . . . cum occisus dictator . . . pulcherrimum facinus videretur.
(‘. . . when the slaughter of the dictator . . . seemed the finest of acts.’ Tac. Ann. 1.8.6—
tr. Woodman)
This combination, just like Sulla vivo in (c), has at first sight all the properties of a
noun phrase. The perfect passive participle occisus agrees with the human common
noun dictator in the same way as an attributive participle, and the unit as a whole is
singular, as can be seen from its agreement with the third person singular verb form
(videretur). Semantically, however, the unit does not refer to a human being with the
property of being dead, but to the fact that this particular human being has been
killed. Thus the unit behaves as an event noun from the semantic point of view (for
³¹ However, participial clauses differ from deverbal nouns in several respects. See Spevak (2018).
³² Holland (1986) discusses the various forms of absolute constructions in older Indo-European
languages. He suggests that absolute constructions are essentially nominal sentences that have been
grammaticalized and received different case forms in the various languages. The idea that the ablative
absolute functions as a clausal unit and not as an expanded noun phrase has been supported inter alios
by Flinck-Linkomies (1929: especially 92–6), Heick (1936), Pinkster (1972), Helander (1977: 28–9 and
passim), Serbat (1979), Bolkestein (1981a), Lavency (1986), Hoff (1989), Longrée (1995), Nikitina and
Haug (2016), and Spevak (2018).
³³ The equivalence of the ablative absolute clause with a finite temporal clause was already noted by
Priscianus (18.14ff.): me vidente puerum cecidisti = dum ego video, puerum cecidisti. See also § 16.88 and
§ 16.89.
³⁴ This point is illustrated by Storme (2010: 126–7).
The internal properties of subordinate clauses
(l) Servius . . . [[conciliata prius voluntate plebis (agro {capto ex hostibus} viritim
diviso)]] ausus est ferre ad populum vellent iuberentne se regnare.
(‘Servius . . . with the goodwill of the commons having first been obtained through a
division among all the citizens of the land captured from the enemy, made bold to
call upon the people to vote whether they were desiring or ordering him to rule.’
Liv. 1.46.1)
Another proof of the clausal character of participial clauses is the use of negators, as
in (m).³⁵
(m) Atque ex omnibus illa plaga est iniecta petitioni tuae non tacente me maxima . . .
(‘And the greatest of all these blows against your campaign fell not without a warning
from me.’ Cic. Mur. 48)
The examples discussed so far showed clauses functioning at the sentence level.
However, participial and gerundival clauses can also be used at the noun phrase and
the adjective phrase levels, as in (n), repeated from § 3.20. Here the gerundival clause
is in the genitive, just like the noun phrase with which it is coordinated. The clauses
discussed in this section are as a whole marked by the case or the preposition that is
suitable in the context. (For further details, see Chapter 17.)
(n) . . . habere utramque debet disciplinam, et agri culturae et pecoris pascendi . . .
(‘. . . he ought to have a knowledge of both pursuits, agriculture and cattle-raising . . .’
Var. R. 2.pr.5)
Table 14.3 presents a survey of the various functions participial and nominal clauses
may fulfil in their sentences. There are not attestations for all the structurally possible
³⁵ For the use of negators with participles in general, see Flinck-Linkomies (1929: 39–44).
Subordinate clauses: properties and internal structure
expressions, and some attested expressions are rare and only found in mannered liter-
ary texts, for example in the works of Tacitus. These expressions are printed in bold.
Examples follow below.
(o) . . . occisus dictator . . . pulcherrimum facinus videretur.
(‘. . . the slaughter of the dictator . . . seemed the finest of acts.’ Tac. Ann. 1.8.6—tr.
Woodman)
(p) Fugiens . . . Pompeius mirabiliter homines movet.
(‘The picture of Pompey on the run affects people marvellously.’ Cic. Att. 7.11.4)
(q) . . . filius legati orator publicae causae satis ostenderet necessitate expressa
quae per modestiam non obtinuissent.
(‘. . . the sight of their general’s son pleading the common cause showed plainly enough
that the things which they could not have obtained by orderly methods had been
extracted by force.’ Tac. Ann. 1.19.5)
(r) Augebat metum gnarus Romanae seditionis et, si omitteretur ripa,
invasurus hostis.
(‘To add to the alarm, the enemy was cognizant of the disaffection of the Roman
ranks, and invasion was certain if the Rhine bank was abandoned.’ Tac. Ann. 1.36.2)
(s) (sc. Cethegus) recitatis litteris . . . repente conticuit.
(‘(Cethegus,) after his letter was read out . . . suddenly fell silent.’ Cic. Catil. 3.10)
(t) . . . orta luce sub sinistra Britanniam relictam conspexit (sc. Caesar).
(‘. . . at sunrise (Caesar) sighted Britain left behind on the port side.’ Caes. Gal. 5.8.1)
(u) . . . nullo hoste prohibente aut iter demorante incolumem legionem in
<N>antuates . . . perduxit ibique hiemavit.
(‘. . . as there was no enemy to hinder him or delay his march, he brought the legion
safely into the territory of the Nantuates . . . and there wintered.’ Caes. Gal. 3.6.4)
(v) Nicias . . . etsi invito me tamen eodem me auctore, profectus est.
(‘Nicias . . ., on my advice though against my will, set out.’ Cic. Att. 13.28.3)
(w) Hostibus victis, civibus salvis . . . / . . . vobis gratis habeo atque ago, quia probe
sum ultus meum inimicum.
(‘Now that the foes are conquered, the citizens safe . . . I say and give thanks to
you . . . because I have taken proper revenge on my enemy.’ Pl. Per. 753–6)
(x) Amicitiam nonne facile (sc. defendere fuit) ei qui ob eam summa fide, con-
stantia iustitiaque servatam maximam gloriam ceperit?
(‘Would not the defence of friendship be easy for that man who on account of his
preserving it with the utmost fidelity, constancy and sense of justice has gained the
greatest renown?’ Cic. Amic. 25)
(y) . . . mortuus est annis LXXXVI ipsis ante me consulem.
(‘. . . he died . . . exactly eighty-six years before my consulship.’ Cic. Brut. 61)
Relationship between subordinate and superordinate clauses
(z) Sibi enim bene gestae, mihi conservatae rei publicae dat testimonium.
(‘He bears witness to the state having been by him well served, by me saved.’ Cic.
Att. 2.1.6)
Grammarians have used various terms and notions for these clauses. This Syntax will
use the expression dominant (participle) construction.³⁶
³⁶ The term ‘dominant participle’ was introduced by A.G. de Man in his Dutch school grammar Accipe
ut reddas (1965). A more common term is ab urbe condita construction. See Woodcock (1959: 75–7),
Bolkestein (1980b; 1980c; 1981b; 1983), Lambertz (1982: 568–86), and Haspelmath (1987).
³⁷ For a very complete survey of correlative devices, see Herman (1963: 74–104).
³⁸ See Bodelot (2000: 41–158) on ‘complétives et construction appositionnelle’. Also Bodelot (2003:
201–5; 2010; 2016) and Lavency (2003: 115–25).
³⁹ For a few exceptional instances of the plural, see TLL s.v. ille 348.40f. (e.g. Cic. Phil. 5.17).
⁴⁰ In the corpus used by Bodelot (2000: 121). See also her p. 139 for the use of the individual words in
various text types. For her description of their meanings, see pp. 122–38.
⁴¹ See Bodelot (2000: 122).
Subordinate clauses: properties and internal structure
(a reason adjunct) suits the meaning of causa ‘reason’. In addition there are prepara-
tive adverbs, as in (q). In all these cases the preparative device is optional and merely
gives emphasis, since the subordinators have a clear enough meaning for ensuring the
correct interpretation even without it.
(n) At non eo, quia tibi non cupiam quae velis . . .
(‘But not because I wouldn’t wish you to have what you want . . .’ Pl. As. 844–5)
(o) Sed ego apud me te esse ob eam rem, miles cum veniat, volo, / quia, quom tu
aderis, huic mihique haud faciet quisquam iniuriam.
(‘But when the soldier comes, I’d like you to be with me for the simple reason that
when you’re there, no one will wrong her or me.’ Pl. Bac. 58–9)
(p) Is dicere solebat ob hanc causam praestare nostrae civitatis statum ceteris
civitatibus, quod in illis singuli fuissent fere quorum suam quisque rem
publicam constituisset . . .
(‘Cato used to say that our constitution was superior to those of other States on
account of the fact that in those it had generally been down to individuals, each of
whom had established his own state . . .’ Cic. Rep. 2.2)
(q) Nam partim ideo fortes in decernendo non erant, quia nihil timebant, partim
quia timebant <omnia>.
(‘Thus, some were disinclined to take firm measures because they were not afraid of
anything, others because they were afraid of everything.’ Cic. Mur. 51)
In (n)–(q) the preparative expression and the subordinator are semantically more or
less equivalent. However, there are also combinations of a preparative device and a
subordinator where this is not the case. Examples are (r)–(t).⁴⁵ In all these instances,
the si clauses are prepared by an expression that functions as argument in the main
clause. (In (r), the si clause seems also possible without a preparative element; in (s)
and (t) this looks more problematic.)
(r) Idne irascimini, si quis superbior est quam nos?
(‘Are you mad about it, if someone is more arrogant than we are?’ Cato orat. 169)
(s) Sed totum est in eo, si ante quam ille ineat magistratum.
(‘But everything depends on this, whether (you come) before he starts his term of
office.’ Cic. Att. 2.22.5)
(t) . . . plus esse in eo iudicabant, si uxor et soror tua quam si Augustae
dicerentur.
(‘. . . they believed there was more in this, whether they were spoken of as your wife
and sister, than in whether (they were spoken of as) Augustae.’ Plin. Pan. 84.6)
⁴⁵ Examples (r) and (t) are taken from the OLD s.v. si § 12c. See also TLL s.v. in 779.16ff. for in eo cum
and in eo dum combinations in translations of the Bible.
Relationship between subordinate and superordinate clauses
⁴⁶ See Bodelot (2000: 54–9) for this use of relative (and other types of) clauses.
⁴⁷ Quod seems to be first attested in Suet. Tit. 8.1, according to the OLD.
⁴⁸ See Lavency (2004). For the use of ita with facio ut, see Taillade (2019: 174–5).
Subordinate clauses: properties and internal structure
The same expressions that are used as preparative elements (see § 14.16) can also be
used as resumptive expressions. However, the resumptive use of pronouns and deter-
miners is much less frequent than the preparative use. Most common is the anaphoric
pronoun/determiner is, as is to be expected, followed by hic; ille and iste are very
rare.⁴⁹ Examples of resumptive pronouns and of a resumptive determiner (+ res)
referring to argument clauses are given in (a)–(c) and (d), respectively.
(a) Nondum egressum esse eum, id miror tamen.
(‘That he has not come out yet, that surprises me.’ Pl. Rud. 1201)
(b) Nos secundum ferri nunc per urbem haec omnia, / ne quis tibi hoc vitio vortat.
(‘All this stuff now being carried behind us throughout the city, I’m afraid that some-
one might find fault with you for it.’ Pl. Mil. 1349–50)
(c) Ut filius / cum illa habitet apud te, hoc vostrum consilium fuit?
(‘That my son lives with her in your house, was that your scheme?’ Ter. Ph. 933–4)
(d) Nisi forte quod apud publicanos gratiosus fuisti, in ea re spes te aliqua con-
solatur.
(‘Unless by chance some hope consoles you in the fact that you were popular with the
revenue contractors.’ Cic. Ver. 2.169)
Examples of the same devices with satellite clauses are (e)–(h).
(e) Quia tam misere hoc esse cupio verum, eo vereor magis.
(‘I so desperately want this to be true; for that reason I’m all the more nervous.’ Ter.
Ad. 698)
(f) Acrius ex ira quod enim se quisque parabat / ulcisci quam nunc concessumst
legibus aequis, / hanc ob rem est homines pertaesum vi colere aevom.
(‘For because each man in his wrath would make ready to avenge himself more
severely than is permitted now by just laws, for this reason men were utterly weary of
living in violence.’ Lucr. 5.1148–50)
(g) Videte igitur quam inique accidat, quia res indigna sit, ideo turpem existima-
tionem sequi; quia turpis existimatio sequatur, ideo rem indignam non
vindicari.
(‘See, then, how iniquitously it happens, that because an action is infamous, therefore
a discreditable reputation should attach to it, because a loss of reputation would
ensue, for that reason a scandalous action is not punished.’ Cic. Caec. 8)
(h) Quamquam gravatus fuisti, non nocuit tamen.
(‘Even though you objected, nevertheless it still didn’t hurt you.’ Pl. St. 722)
The resumptive use of id in (a) above resembles its anaphoric use to refer to all or part
of the content of a preceding clause or even passage (see § 11.136). In (i) id refers to
the content of the quamquam clause, whereas tamen resumes the subordinator itself.
In ( j), illud refers to the content of the postquam clause.
(i) Quorum autem officiorum praecepta traduntur, ea quamquam pertinent ad
finem bonorum, tamen minus id apparet . . .
(‘But as regards special duties for which positive rules are laid down, though
they are affected by the doctrine of the supreme good, still that is not so
obvious . . .’ Cic. Off. 1.7)
( j) Ceterum postquam parte muri arietibus decussa per ipsas ruinas transcen-
derunt in urbem armati, illud principium velut novi atque integri laboris fuit.
(‘But when a section of the wall was thrown down by the battering-rams and
the soldiers had entered the city over the ruins, that was, so to speak, the
beginning of new and fresh toil.’ Liv. 32.17.6)
Certain particles can also be used to tighten the relationship between superordinate
and subordinate clauses. An example is the use of iam in main clauses that are accom-
panied by subordinate clauses of manner or time, and especially with conditional clauses,
as in (a)–(d). Here iam puts emphasis on the specific semantic relation between the
subordinate clause and its main clause.⁵⁰ For a similar use of demum, see (e).⁵¹
(a) Iam iurgio enicabit (sc. uxor), si intro rediero.
(‘Now she’ll kill me with her nagging if I go back in.’ Pl. Mer. 557)
(b) Nam si cogites, remittas iam me onerare iniuriis.
(‘For if you were to think about it, you would now stop troubling me with your unjust
demands.’ Ter. An. 827)
(c) Ut igitur paulo ante animum inter Fidenatem Romanamque rem ancipitem
gessisti, ita iam corpus passim distrahendum dabis.
(‘Therefore, just as a little while ago you bore a heart divided between the interests of
Fidenae and Rome, so now you’ll give up your body to be torn apart.’ Liv. 1.28.9)
(d) Id tu, Brute, iam intelleges, cum in Galliam veneris.
(‘You will understand presently what I mean, Brutus, when you come to Gaul.’ Cic.
Brut. 171)
⁵⁰ For this use of iam as an emphasizing particle, see Kroon and Risselada (1998; 2002: 73–5). For
critical comments, see Rosén (2009: 360). See also § 22.40.
⁵¹ For demum, see Rosén (1993, especially p. 178) and § 22.39.
Subordinate clauses: properties and internal structure
⁵² For further examples of the use of particles and adverbs with subordinate clauses, see Rosén (2008:
220–1). For etiam, see also § 22.22.
Relationship between subordinate and superordinate clauses
⁵³ The term is used by Rosén (1989b: 398–9; 2009: 343–6), from whom the examples are taken. For
further examples of conditional clauses, see § 16.57.
⁵⁴ ‘Forthwith’, ‘lo and behold’ are the translations of OLD s.v. § 6. See also TLL s.v. atque 1075.82ff.
‘et statim’.
Subordinate clauses: properties and internal structure
modifier of the noun equos in the main clause. Note that in both instances the form of
the modifier is determined by the clause to which it syntactically belongs.
(a) . . . ego te faciam miserrumus mortalis uti sis.
(‘I’ll make sure you’re the most wretched mortal on earth.’ Pl. Aul. 443)
(b) Nisi qui meliorem afferet / quae mi atque amicis placeat condicio magis, /
quasi fundum vendam . . .
(‘Unless anyone offers a better deal, which I and my associates like more, as if I were
selling a plot by auction . . .’ Pl. Capt. 179–81)
(c) . . . non sunt tabellae sed equos quem misere Achivi ligneum.
(‘These aren’t tablets, but the wooden horse which the Achaeans sent.’ Pl. Bac. 936)
Whereas in the examples above the form of the ‘transposed’ constituent is adjusted to
suit the structure to which it belongs, in another form of interlacing no such adjust-
ment occurs. In (d) eri lenitas belongs to a subordinate clause together with quorsum
evaderet, from which it is separated by the governing verb verebar. Semper, which
belongs with verebar to the superordinate clause, separates eri (topical information)
from lenitas. The forms are the same as if the order had been: semper verebar quorsum
eri lenitas evaderet. (For further discussion, see § 23.65.)
(d) Mirabar hoc si sic abiret et eri semper lenitas / verebar quorsum evaderet.
(‘I was surprised if it could end this way, and I’ve been afraid all the time of where our
master’s calmness was leading.’ Ter. An. 175–6)
Subordinators are often preceded by constituents that form a link with a preceding
sentence, notably relative and anaphoric pronouns and determiners. See § 23.20–8.
14.20 Subordinators
Latin offers a broad spectrum of subordinators, some of which have a very precise
meaning, for example postquam ‘after’, while others have a broader meaning, for
example cum (quom) ‘when’, ‘since’, ‘although’. In addition, their interpretation may
vary depending on the context in which they are used (in the case of cum one can
think of its purely temporal, its causal, or its concessive interpretation). Some subor-
dinators are only used in satellite clauses (for example the two just mentioned,
although there is some doubt about the status of cum clauses with verbs of praising
and thanking—see § 15.23), while others are used in both argument and satellite
clauses (notably ut). Some of the words involved belong to only one lexical category
(e.g. postquam: subordinator—see also below),⁵⁵ others have homonyms in one or
more other categories (e.g. ut (uti): subordinator and interrogative/relative manner
⁵⁵ For Late instances of the use as adverb, see TLL s.v. 250.8ff.
Subordinators
adverb ‘how’).⁵⁶ Some of them are more or less stable over the period covered by this
Syntax, others undergo significant changes: in Early and Classical Latin there are
instances in which post and postea are combined with quam even though particles or
full words intervene between them, as in (a). This shows the development of the com-
bination of adverb + comparative particle into a subordinator. Another example is
licet, the development of which from an ‘impersonal’ verb ‘it is permitted’ into a con-
cessive subordinator can be seen from Cicero’s time onwards; this development is
shown in (b), where licet is on its way to becoming a subordinator (for further details,
see § 16.81).⁵⁷
(a) Itaque Calpurnius cum . . . cognosset . . . Claudium aedes postea proscripsisse
quam esset ab auguribus demoliri iussus, arbitrum illum adegit . . .
(‘And so, when Calpurnius . . . had discovered that Claudius had advertised his house
for sale only after the augurs had ordered them (sc. the parts of the house obstructing
the augurs’ view) to be pulled down, he summoned the former owner before a
court . . .’ Cic. Off. 3.66)
(b) Licet iste dicat emisse, sicuti solet dicere, credite hoc mihi, iudices.
(‘Verres may say, as he usually does say, that he bought everything; but believe me,
gentlemen.’ Cic. Ver. 4.133)
Several subordinators are used both with argument and with satellite (adjunct and
disjunct) clauses. The four most prominent ones in all periods of Latin are quod, ut
(uti) and ne, and si. The question of how to distinguish formally between, for example,
an ut argument and an ut satellite clause has received considerable attention in the last
few decades.⁵⁸ Apart from the fact that an ut argument clause occupies one of the
obligatory positions required by the meaning of the governing verb, there are a num-
ber of objective tests that one can use to determine the status of a particular clause.
One such test is to determine which type of correlative device can be used with a given
subordinate clause (see §§ 14.16–17), for example id . . . ut (argument clause) vs
ideo . . . ut (a satellite purpose clause). Another test consists in determining which
question words may trigger the subordinate clause as an answer, for example quid? vs
cur? A third one is to determine whether clauses of both types are found juxtaposed
in one complex sentence, as in (a) with an ut argument and an ut satellite purpose
clause.⁵⁹ For a similar instance of a quod argument and a quoniam reason clause, see (b).
⁵⁶ For the use of the form uti, see Panchón (2013). For Ennius and Vitruvius, see Adams (2016: 9–10).
⁵⁷ For a study of subordinators in satellite clauses from a typological perspective, see Hoffmann (2013,
also in: 2018a: 191–224).
⁵⁸ For ut, see Bolkestein (1977a), LSS § 7.4.1, and Bodelot (2000: 210–42; 2002a); for si, see Bodelot
(2000: 161–210).
⁵⁹ For another instance of two ut clauses (‘at first sight puzzling’ (Dyck ad loc.)), see Cic. Cael. 8.
Subordinate clauses: properties and internal structure
(a) . . . intellexi . . . nihil mihi optatius cadere posse quam ut tu me quam primum
consequare, ut, cum ex Italia profecti essemus . . ., tuo tuorumque praesidio
uteremur . . .
(‘I see that nothing could be more desirable to me than that you should overtake me
as soon as possible, so that when I leave Italy I may have the protection of you and
your people . . .’ Cic. Att. 3.1.1)
(b) Sane gaudeo quod te interpellavi, quoniam quidem tam praeclarum mihi
dedisti iudicii tui testimonium.
(‘I am very glad indeed that I interrupted you, since you have given me so fine a proof
of your good opinion.’ Cic. Leg. 3.1)
Another question which has received attention for a much longer period of time
than the preceding one is how to explain the use of the same subordinator in both
argument and subordinate clauses. Here ut may again serve as an illustration.⁶⁰ It
can be used as a subordinator in argument clauses with manipulation verbs, as in
(c), and as a subordinator in various satellite clauses, for example in purpose clauses,
as in (d).
(c) Impero auctorque <ego> sum ut tu me quoivis castrandum loces.
(‘I order and command you to hand me over to anyone you like for castration.’ Pl.
Aul. 251)
(d) Explicari mihi tuum consilium plane volo, ut penitus intellegam.
(‘I certainly do want to have your advice set out for me so that I thoroughly under-
stand it.’ Cic. Att. 8.12.1)
In (c), the person who gives the order indicates to the ‘you’ that the latter is respon-
sible for the action me quoivis castrandum loces and has to perform it. Completely
different is the situation in (d). The ut clause is optional from the point of view of the
main clause. The person who is asked to explain his plan clearly has no control over
the ‘I’ who has to understand the matter; the ‘I’ could not be ordered to understand
things, because he would have no control over this. So on first sight ut argument and
ut purpose clauses may be thought to share a semantic feature like ‘working towards
the achievement of a future state of affairs’, but in reality they are different from a
semantic point of view. Whereas ut in (d) contributes to the interpretation of the sub-
ordinate clause as ‘purpose’, ut in (c) is ‘only’ a linking device, and the interpretation
of the subordinate clause depends on the governing expression.⁶¹
The difficulty involved in finding a common explanation for the use of ut on the
argument and satellite levels is even greater for so-called ut temporale, as in (e) (for
details, see § 16.24).
⁶⁰ For an extensive discussion of the etymology and the diversity of use of ut, see Panchón (2003:
335–66).
⁶¹ See also Bodelot (2000: 215–18), who discusses ex. (d), and Panchón (2003: 461–6).
Subordinators
Spatial satellite clauses (see § 16.6) are linked to the superordinate clause by means
of a relative adverb. In (a) the second ubi ‘where’ marks the (independently used)
clause as the location where the ego in the previous sentence will be: (eris) ubi
maxime esse vis. In its own clause ubi functions as the space argument with esse in its
meaning ‘to be somewhere’. Like the other space adverbs, relative ubi has interrogative
and indefinite homonyms (see the first ubi? in (a)). Ubi clauses may also function as
adnominal relative clauses with a noun (phrase), as in (b) with aedis. In addition, ubi
may introduce autonomous relative clauses, which can fulfil various functions in
the superordinate clause, for example as the object with invenires in (c). For details,
see § 18.16.
(a) Ubi ego ero? # Ubi maxime esse vis.
(‘Where will I be? # Where you want to be most.’ Pl. Mos. 392)
(b) . . . hasce aedis esse oportet / Demaenetus ubi dicitur habitare.
(‘. . . it ought to be this house here where Demaenetus is said to live.’ Pl. As. 381–2)
(c) Ubi habitaret invenires saltem, si nomen nequis.
(‘You should have at least found out where he lives, if you can’t find out his name.’ Pl.
Mer. 636)
The situation is less clear with the linking devices of temporal satellite clauses (§ 16.7).
Quando ‘when’ resembles spatial ubi in the coexistence of relative, interrogative, and
indefinite homonyms. Also, just like spatial adverbs, quando can be combined with
cumque (quandocumque). However, cum (quom) is different. Etymologically it is
related to the relative/indefinite pronoun/determiner qui, quae, quod,⁶² but it has no
interrogative and indefinite homonyms, and it cannot be combined with cumque.⁶³ It
can be used in the same way as an adnominal relative clause with words denoting time
(tempus cum ‘a time at which’) (see § 18.38), but there are no instances of autonomous
cum clauses parallel to the autonomous ubi clause in (c). In this Syntax cum is treated
as one of the broad variety of temporal subordinators of various origins.⁶⁴
Ut is even more complicated. In the OLD it is labelled an adverb and a conjunction.
There are two adverbial homonyms (interrogative/exclamative ‘how?/!’ and relative
‘in the same way as’). In its temporal use ut (see (e) in § 14.21) is described as being a
‘temporal conjunction’. Apart from that OLD distinguishes ut as a ‘conjunction’ in
argument and purpose and other satellite clauses. In this Syntax two adverbial ut’s and
one subordinator ut (including the temporal use) will be distinguished.⁶⁵
In the period covered by this Syntax a number of major changes took place in the
system of subordinating devices.⁶⁶ Some of these are mentioned here, but detailed
discussion is provided in the following chapters. First of all one can observe the
decrease in the use of a number of non-finite clauses: the accusative and infinitive
clause lost ground—very slowly—to quod (and also to quia) as the subordinating
device with verbs of perception, cognition, and communication (see § 15.9 and
§ 15.113). Quod clauses and accusative and infinitive clauses were already competitors
in several other contexts. Supine clauses gradually disappeared and so did gerundival
clauses. The present infinitive replaced the gerund in certain contexts (see § 16.86). Of
the subordinators (and relative adverbs) used in finite clauses ut as an interrogative/
relative adverb of manner lost ground to quomodo (and qualiter) (see § 16.33) and as
a subordinator to quod (see §§ 15.25–7). There is no trace of it in the Romance lan-
guages. Cum as a temporal subordinator was gradually replaced by dum (see § 16.17)
and quando; it too left no trace in the Romance languages. Quod, which already in
Cicero’s works is used in a broad spectrum of contexts (see Figure 15.1, p. 60),
expanded its functions and so became a ‘general’ subordinator.⁶⁷ At the same time the
number of combinations of quod with prepositional phrases and adverbs increased
considerably (see § 14.6). Although there is no direct etymological relation, que
in French and che in Italian play a role in the Romance languages similar to quod
in Latin.
Appendix: The common Romance subordinator (French) que, (Italian) che, etc. can-
not be derived from quod, nor from quia. Especially in Merovingian Latin (relatively
well documented) one finds forms which must be the predecessor of the Romance
subordinator, spelled as que, but also found as quae or quem, pronounced [ke], as
in (a).
These forms are most likely some sort of merger of relative quae and quem. Note that
synchronically quod was not only a subordinator, but also a relative pronoun.⁶⁸
⁶⁸ Discussion can be found in Herman (1963: 123–5), with special reference to Jeanjaquet (1894).
⁶⁹ For example: ambitus, circuitus, and comprehensio (Cic. Brut. 162; Orat. 204).
⁷⁰ Compare the requirement in K.-St.: II.629 that a period must represent one unified idea (‘die Einheit
eines Gedanken’). See also Sz.: 732.
⁷¹ In fact, periods consisting of one membrum were also accepted. For the ancient ideas about period,
colon, and comma, see Lausberg (1990: §§ 923–47).
Subordinate clauses: properties and internal structure
(both at the clause level and below) can be modified by adnominal relative clauses and
can be expanded by appositions and secondary predicates, which can be complex as
well. Finally, at all these points the complexity can be increased by coordination. In
spontaneous spoken language there is a certain limit, both for the speaker and for the
hearer, to the number and the type of clauses that can be incorporated within one
sentence. In prepared speeches, however, and in writing sentences can be extended
considerably. The period in Cicero’s oration pro Archia 3, for example, contains some
twenty-five clauses. (We are dealing with grammatically correct and fully understand-
able sentences, not with anacoluthons.)
In the examples of periods that follow, the clauses of which they consist are num-
bered.⁷² Some of the clauses are interrupted, which explains why the same number
returns at different places. The first example, (b), is used twice by Quintilian as an
illustration and is still much discussed.⁷³ The sentence consists of three coordinated si
clauses, each with its own internal complexity, and a heavy main clause at the end (in
bold). The structure of (c) is completely different. Here the short main clause encom-
passes a sequence of a secondary predicate (circumsessa), a cum temporal clause, and
two ablative absolute clauses, of which the first is complex in itself. These four seg-
ments are arranged in chronological order to illustrate the sequence of events leading
to the surrender of the town. For again a different structure in a different type of text,
see (d), where the main clause is followed by a complex ablative absolute clause.⁷⁴
(b)
1. Si quid est in me ingeni, iudices,
2. quod
3. sentio
2. quam sit exiguum,
4. aut si qua exercitatio dicendi,
5. in qua me
6. non infitior
5. mediocriter esse versatum,
7. aut si huiusce rei ratio aliqua ab optimarum artium studiis ac disciplina
profecta,
8. a qua
9. ego
8. nullum
9. confiteor
8. aetatis meae tempus abhorruisse,
⁷² For a discussion and graphical presentation of these and other complex sentences, see
Coleman (1983).
⁷³ For an analysis of this sentence, see Gotoff (1979: 96–100). For the rhetorical effect, see von Albrecht
(2003: 198–202).
⁷⁴ For Pliny’s sentence structure, see Pinkster (2005: 248–50).
The period
(c)
1. Ea urbs
2. circumsessa
3. cum a Celtiberis auxilia arcessisset,
4. morantibus iis,
5. non quia ipsi cunctati sunt,
6. sed quia
7. profectos domo
6. inexplicabiles continuis imbribus viae et inflati amnes tenebant,
8. desperato auxilio suorum
1. in deditionem venit.
(‘When this town was besieged, it sent for assistance from the Celtiberians but
they were slow to arrive, not from any hesitation on their part but because after
leaving home they were held up by roads made impassable by incessant rain
and by swollen rivers. Thus, losing hope of receiving aid from its friends, the
town surrendered.’ Liv. 44.33.2)
(d)
1. Nilus
2. incertis ortus fontibus,
3. ut per deserta et ardentia et inmenso longitudinis spatio ambulans
4. famaque tantum inermi quaesitus sine bellis,
5. quae ceteras omnes terras invenere,
1. originem,
6. ut Iuba rex potuit exquirere,
1. in monte inferioris Mauretaniae non procul Oceano habet
7. lacu protinus stagnante,
8. quem vocant Nilidem.
(‘The sources from which the Nile rises have not been ascertained, proceeding
as it does through scorching deserts for an enormously long distance and only
having been explored by unarmed investigators, without the wars that have
discovered all other countries; but so far as King Juba was able to ascertain, it
Subordinate clauses: properties and internal structure
has its origin in a mountain of lower Mauretania not far from the Ocean, and
immediately forms a stagnant lake called Nilides.’ Plin. Nat. 5.52)
Sentences with such a degree of complexity are common in prose from Cicero
onwards. The frequency with which they are used and the types that are used vary
between authors and text types. In Cicero there is a difference between his personal
and official letters, between his judicial and political orations, and even between parts
of the same oration, depending upon the audience and the intended rhetorical effect.
Periods are not limited to prose. However, the use of periodic sentence structure is
mainly a matter of individual style and this short introduction must suffice.⁷⁵
⁷⁵ For a historical survey, see Sz.: 732–9 and Wilkinson (1963: 167–88). For Cicero’s style in general, see
von Albrecht (2003).
Direct and indirect speech
Both (a,ii) and (b) contain the verb respondeo. In (a,ii) the direct speech is not syntac-
tically related to respondit, whereas in (b) it is (it is the object). In (a,ii) the direct
speech is prepared by hoc. It could also have been used in (b).
In principle each text in direct speech can be also be expressed in indirect speech,
albeit with some limitations. The indirect AcI clause corresponding to Ego pol . . . scio
in (a,ii) could not contain pol (*respondit se pol Sauream non novisse neque qua facie
esset scire), nor could immo in (c) be used in a corresponding indirect expression.⁷⁶
Apart from these limitations there are also a number of formal differences. In the
indirect version the accusative se corresponds to the nominative ego in the direct ver-
sion and the infinitive novisse to the finite verb form novi. Furthermore, the imperfect
esset in the relative clause has respondit as its reference point, whereas the present sit
in the direct speech has the time of speaking as its reference point (for details on the
use of the tenses in indirect speech, see § 7.113). The indirect version of Si erum
vis . . . adduce would be Si erum vellem Demaenetum, quem ipse novit, adducerem,
where the past subjunctive adducerem corresponds to the present imperative adduce
(see § 7.62). (For interrogative and exclamatory sentences in the AcI, see §§ 15.105–6.
For interrogative sentences in the subjunctive, see § 7.61.)⁷⁷
Due to its ‘indirectness’ the preferred contexts for indirect speech are words or
opinions of crowds and rumours, accusations, and summaries of spoken or written
texts. The content of the indirect speech can be coloured or characterized by the
choice of governing verb. The range of verbs governing indirect speech is accordingly
much wider than the range of verbs introducing direct speech.⁷⁸
The term ‘indirect speech’ is used in various ways. Some grammarians do not include
verbs of thinking, others include manipulation verbs like hortor ‘I urge’, which do not
necessarily imply verbal behaviour at all.
It is important to realize that the speech presented as ‘direct’ is usually not what
was actually spoken and is almost always fictitious. This is not only the case in liter-
ary dialogue, but is shown by Cicero’s and Sallust’s quotations of a letter in the
Catilinarian affair.⁷⁹
(d) Erant autem sine nomine, sed ita: ‘Quis sim scies ex eo quem ad te misi.
Cura ut vir sis, et cogita quem in locum sis progressus. Et vide quid tibi iam
sit necesse et cura ut omnium tibi auxilia adiungas, etiam infimorum’.
(‘The letter was unsigned but read as follows: “You will know who I am from
the man whom I have sent to you. Be resolute and take stock of your pos-
ition. See what you must now do and take care that you get the support of
everyone, even the lowest.”’ Cic. Catil. 3.12)
⁷⁶ For ‘unreportable entities’ in indirect speech, see Bolkestein (1990a; 1990b). See also Rosén (2013:
243–5), who, however, incorrectly suggests that certe and similar words cannot occur in indirect speech.
⁷⁷ For a discussion of the linguistic properties of indirect speech, see Adema (2017: 32–75; 2019a:
295–6, with references).
⁷⁸ See the lists of verbs in Lambert (1946: 56–7) and Wiesthaler (1956: 79–83).
⁷⁹ For Cicero’s way of reporting, see Wiesthaler (1956: 23–8).
Subordinate clauses: properties and internal structure
(e) ‘Qui sim ex eo quem ad te misi cognosces. Fac cogites in quanta calamitate
sis, et memineris te virum esse. Consideres quid tuae rationes postulent.
Auxilium petas ab omnibus, etiam ab infumis’.
(‘ “My present situation you will learn from the person I have sent you. See
to it that you bear in mind in what a desperate situation you are, and remem-
ber that you are indeed a man. Consider what your interests demand; seek
help from all, even the lowliest.”’ Sall. Cat. 44.5)
Indirect speech is also regularly used without an introductory verb of speaking or
thinking. The term used for this in this Syntax is free indirect speech.⁸⁰ A common
English term is ‘implied indirect discourse’. In such cases there is some contextual
information from which the notion of speaking or thinking can be inferred. A simple
form is when an accusative and infinitive with a governing verb precedes (so that it is
not always clear whether we are dealing with free indirect speech), but there are also
less direct ways. Ex. (f) has the free indirect speech preceded by an exhortation. In (g),
there is a verb of refusing; in (h), the noun mandata. Here an imperative sentence in
the subjunctive is followed by a declarative sentence in the AcI. In (i), the free indirect
speech continues the command vox . . . ut.
(f) Pro quibus rebus hortatur ac postulat ut rem publicam suscipiant atque una
secum administrent. Sin timore defugiant illis se oneri non futurum et per se
rem publicam administraturum.
(‘For all these reasons he exhorted the senators and asked them to take charge of the
state and administer it with him. “But if fear makes you shirk the task, I will not be a
burden to you but will administer the state myself.”’ Caes. Civ. 1.32.7)
(g) In senatum venit. Mandata exposuit. Sententiam ne diceret recusavit.
Quamdiu iure iurando hostium teneretur non esse se senatorem.
(‘He came into the senate and stated his mission; but he refused to give his own vote
on the question; for, he held, he was not a member of the senate so long as he was
bound by the oath sworn to his enemies.’ Cic. Off. 3.100)
(h) Illi <re> deliberata respondent scriptaque ad eum mandata per eos remit-
tunt. Quorum haec erat summa: Caesar in Galliam reverteretur, Arimino
excederet, exercitus dimitteret; quae si fecisset Pompeium in Hispanias
iturum . . .
(‘After deliberation they replied in writing and sent the message to Caesar through
Roscius and Lucius Caesar. The gist was this: Caesar was to return to Gaul, leave
Ariminum, dismiss his army. If he did this, Pompey would go to Spain.’ Caes. Civ.
1.10.2–3)
(i) Nam non multo ante urbem captam exaudita vox est a luco Vestae, qui a
Palatii radice in novam viam devexus est ut muri et portae reficerentur; futu-
rum esse, nisi provisum esset, ut Roma caperetur.
⁸⁰ For properties of free indirect discourse, see Adema (2017: 22–30, esp. p. 29).
Direct and indirect speech
(‘Not long before the capture of the city by the Gauls, a voice, issuing from Vesta’s
sacred grove, which slopes from the foot of the Palatine Hill to the New Road, was
heard to say, “the walls and gates must be repaired; unless this is done the city will be
taken.”’ Cic. Div. 1.101)
There are other indirect ways in which a speaker or writer can allude to another per-
son’s words or thoughts. Two illustrations are ( j) and (k). In ( j), the sentence with the
three imperfect forms reflects Curtius’ story about what Caesar was doing at the time
of Curtius’ visit to Cicero. In (k), Virgil reports Aeneas’ deliberations, resulting in the
sententia mentioned a few lines later (the subjunctive is deliberative; usually it is first
person—see § 7.42).⁸¹ In instances like these formal clues are absent, and the inter-
pretation is purely contextual.
( j) Vixdum epistulam tuam legeram cum ad me currens ad illum (sc. Caesarem)
Postumus Curtius venit, nihil nisi classis loquens et exercitus; eripiebat
Hispanias, tenebat Asiam, Siciliam, Africam, Sardiniam, confestim in
Graeciam persequebatur.
(‘I had hardly read your letter when Curtius Postumus arrived at my door hurrying
to join Caesar and with nothing but fleets and armies on his tongue. He (Caesar) was
snatching Spain, holding Asia, Sicily, Africa, Sardinia, pursuing Pompey hot-foot
into Greece.’ Cic. Att. 9.2a.1–2)
(k) (sc. Aeneas) ardet abire fuga dulcisque relinquere terras / attonitus tanto
monitu imperioque deorum. / Heu quid agat? Quo nunc reginam ambire
furentem / audeat adfatu? Quae prima exordia sumat? . . . Haec alternanti
potior sententia visa est.
(‘He burns to flee away and quit that pleasant land, awed by that warning and divine
commandment. Ah, what to do? With what speech now dare he approach the fren-
zied queen? What opening words choose first? . . . This, as he wavered, seemed the
better counsel.’ Verg. A. 4.281–7)
The interest of Latinists in indirect ways of representing the words (or thoughts) of
characters in a narrative started with the publications of Bayet (1931; 1932), which
were stimulated by studies on the frequent use of this narrative mode in modern
literature.⁸²
⁸¹ The interpretation of ( j) is disputed. See Rosén (2013: 234–6). For instances like (k) in Virgil, see
Laird (1999: 167–83).
⁸² See Hyart (1954—sceptical), Laird (1999: 84–102), Biraud and Mellet (2000), Sznajder (2005),
Rosén (2013; 2015), and Adema (2017). See also Nølke et al. (2004: 57–83).
CHAPTER 15
With certain types of verbs or comparable expressions (see below) one of the argu-
ments may or must be a clause belonging to one of the classes indicated in Table 15.1
(p. 58). These clauses are called argument clauses in this Syntax; they are also
referred to in the literature as ‘nominal’ or ‘noun’ clauses, as ‘substantive’ clauses, and
as ‘complement’ clauses. The argument clauses themselves consist of a verb or a com-
parable expression together with its argument(s) and possibly other constituents.
The best-known contexts in which argument clauses are used are those in which
they function as argument of a verb. An example is (a), where the accusative and
infinitive clause is the object of the verb spero ‘to hope (that)’.
(a) Speroque me ob hunc nuntium aeternum adepturum cibum.
(‘And I expect that for this message I’ll get food forever.’ Pl. Capt. 780)
However, accusative and infinitive clauses can also be used with various expressions
containing the related noun spes ‘hope’: for example, spes est (b), spem habere (c), and in
spem venire (d). The verbs in these combinations can be regarded as support verbs (see
§ 4.4), and the combinations can be regarded as alternate expressions for spero, more or
less equivalent to sperare potes in (b), aliquantum sperare in (c), and valde sperare in (d).
The accusative and infinitive clauses with these expressions are argument clauses.
(b) . . . aliquid aliqua aliquo modo / alicunde ab aliqui aliqua tibi spes est fore
mecum fortunam.
(‘. . . you have some hope to have a fortune with me, something, somehow, in some
way, from somewhere, from someone.’ Pl. Epid. 332–3)
(c) . . . tu mihi videris spem non nullam habere haec aliquando futura meliora.
(‘. . . you appear to cherish a hope that things will one day get better.’ Cic. Fam. 5.13.3)
(d) . . . magnamque in spem veniebat pro suis tantis populique Romani in eum
beneficiis . . . fore uti pertinacia desisteret.
(‘. . . he began to have a good hope that, in consideration of the signal benefits con-
ferred upon him by Caesar and the Roman people, . . . (sc. Ariovistus) would abandon
his obstinacy.’ Caes. Gal. 1.42.3)
The Oxford Latin Syntax. Harm Pinkster, Oxford University Press (2021). © Harm Pinkster.
DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780199230563.003.0015
The functions and types of argument clauses 53
Whereas in (b)–(d) the accusative and infinitive clauses depend on the combination
of spes and the verbs involved, this analysis is excluded for (e). Here the accusative and
infinitive clause sibi id utile futurum depends solely on spe, in a way that is comparable
to largitionis further on. Cases like these are discussed in Chapter 17. Note also in (e)
the ne clause depending on metu.
(e) Ducuntur enim aut benivolentia aut beneficiorum magnitudine aut dignita-
tis praestantia aut spe sibi id utile futurum aut metu ne vi parere cogantur
aut spe largitionis promissisque capti . . . aut . . . mercede conducti.
(‘They may be influenced by good-will; by gratitude for generous favours conferred
upon them; by the eminence of that other’s social position or by the hope that their
submission will turn to their own account; by fear that they may be compelled per-
force to submit; they may be captivated by the hope of gifts of money and by liberal
promises . . . or . . . they may be bribed with money.’ Cic. Off. 2.22)
The difference between (b)–(d) on the one hand and (e) on the other is rather clear-
cut. Some other cases are not so easy to classify as belonging to one or the other types
discussed above.1
Another familiar context in which argument clauses can be used is with neuter forms
of adjectives that function as subject or object complement, as in (f) and (g), respect-
ively. Argument clauses with adjectives in other functions are dealt with in Chapter 17.
(f) . . . in urbes Campaniae, quas satis certum erat non mutasse fidem, perfugerunt.
(‘. . . they fled for refuge to those cities of Campania of which it was known that they
had not changed sides.’ Liv. 23.17.6)
(g) (sc. consules) Certum habere maiores . . . dimicationem subituros fuisse . . .
(‘They felt certain that their forefathers . . . would have faced any conflict whatso-
ever . . .’ Liv. 4.2.9)
1 For a discussion of the problems involved, see Bodelot (1995; 2010), Lavency (2003: 115–25), from
whom exx. (d) and (e) are taken, and especially Hoffmann (2015; 2018b).
54 Subordinate clauses filling an argument position
certain verbs or other governing expressions can be used with more than one class of
subordinate clause. (Autonomous relative clauses are different; they can be used as
subject with all sorts of verbs. Ex. (h) will suffice. Further illustrations of these relative
clauses can be found in § 18.16.)
(In the examples, subordinators are shown in italics; the class to which clauses
without a subordinator belong is indicated in the translation line.)
(a) Aut pol haec praestigiatrix multo mulier maxuma est / aut pateram hic inesse
oportet.
(‘Either this woman is by far the greatest trickster or the bowl ought to be in here.’ Pl.
Am. 782–3—accusative and infinitive clause)
(b) . . . quo id factum nomine appellari oporteat constat . . .
(‘. . . it is clear by what term the act should be defined . . .’ Cic. Inv. 1.12—indirect
question)
(c) Prorsus nihil abest quin sim miserrimus.
(‘There is really nothing wanting to make me the most miserable of mankind.’ Cic.
Att. 11.15.3)
(d) Hoc loco percommode accidit quod non adest is qui paulo ante adfuit . . .,
C. Aquilius.
(‘Now it happens most conveniently at this point that there is absent from the court
one who was here but recently…, Gaius Aquilius.’ Cic. Caec. 77)
(e) Interdum accidit ut non habeat furti actionem is cuius interest rem salvam esse.
(‘It sometimes happens that there is no action for theft available to the person who
has an interest in the safety of the thing.’ Gaius dig. 47.2.49)
(f) Non fuisse ei grave nec difficile eam causam excipere . . .
(‘It was not hard or difficult for him to make an exception of the excuse . . .’ Cic. Inv.
2.130—prolative infinitive clause)
(g) Videtur tempus esse ut eamus ad forum . . .
(‘It seems to be time for us to go to the forum . . .’ Pl. Mil. 72)
(h) Quem di diligunt / adulescens moritur, dum valet, sentit, sapit.
(‘He whom the gods love dies young, while he has his strength, senses, and wits.’ Pl.
Bac. 816–17—autonomous relative clause)
Subordinate clauses can be used as second argument with a variety of two- and three-
place verbs. Examples from various classes are (i)–(p).
(i) Audivistin’ tu me narrare haec hodie?
(‘Did you hear me tell her about this today?’ Pl. Am. 748—accusative and infinitive
clause)
( j) Nemo fere vestrum est quin quemadmodum captae sint a M. Marcello
Syracusae saepe audierit . . .
The functions and types of argument clauses 55
(‘There can hardly be any among you who has not often heard how Syracuse was
captured by Marcus Marcellus . . .’ Cic. Ver. 4.115—indirect question)
(k) Abs quivis homine . . . beneficium accipere gaudeas.
(‘You should be happy to receive a kindness from anybody.’ Ter. Ad. 254—prolative
infinitive clause)
(l) Metuo in commune ne quam fraudem frausus sit.
(‘I’m afraid he might have got into some mischief involving the two of us.’ Pl. As. 286)
(m) Sane gaudeo quod te interpellavi . . .
(‘I am very glad indeed that I interrupted you . . .’ Cic. Leg. 3.1)
(n) . . . nonnumquam interdiu, s<a>epius noctu si perrumpere possent conati . . .,
hoc conatu destiterunt.
(‘(the Helvetii) . . . having attempted sometimes by day, more often by night to see if
they could break through . . ., abandoned this attempt.’ Caes. Gal. 1.8.4)
(o) Curabo ut praedati pulchre ad castra convertamini.
(‘I’ll make sure that you return to the camp after acquiring booty in fine style.’ Pl.
Per. 608)
(p) . . . obiurgavit Albium Granius quod . . . valde absoluto Scaevola gauderet . . .
(‘. . . Granius reproved Albius because the latter was much delighted by Scaevola’s
acquittal.’ Cic. de Orat. 2.281—participial clause)
(v) . . . ne quid inpediare quin ad hanc utilitatem pariter nobiscum progredi possis.
(‘. . . so that you may in no way be kept from being able to make equal progress with
me towards the mastery of this useful art.’ Rhet. Her. 3.1)
(w) . . . quos ad capiendam fugam naturae et virium infirmitas inpediret.
(‘. . . whom weakness of nature and strength hampered from taking flight.’ Caes. Gal.
7.26.3—gerundival clause)
Whereas in the examples discussed so far the argument clauses fulfil functions that
would be marked by the nominative, accusative or other case if we were dealing with
argument noun phrases, the following examples concern arguments that are marked
by prepositions or similar expressions. In (x) id functions as a pronominal support for
the ut clause, which cannot be governed by a preposition directly. The combination ad
id ut . . . simillimi functions as the second argument of accedunt. Similarly, the eo . . . ut
clause in (y) functions as the second argument of pertinet. (For this use of preposi-
tions, see § 14.6, with further references.) Comparable is the role of the adverb huc in
(z), with an indirect question.2
(x) Qui proxume accedunt ad id ut omnia habeant eadem vocantur gemini,
simillimi.
(‘Those who come nearest to having them all alike, are called most like, as it were,
twins.’ Var. L. 10.4)
(y) Hoc eo pertinet ut nihil existiment esse tam difficile quod non pro te mihi
susceptum iucundum sit futurum.
(‘The point is that they must think nothing too difficult for me to undertake with
pleasure on your behalf.’ Cic. Fam. 6.10a.3)
(z) Ubi friget, huc evasit quam pridem pater / mihi et mater mortui essent.
(‘When the conversation flagged, she turned off to this point, asking how long ago my
father and mother had died.’ Ter. Eu. 517–18)
Supplement:
Desunt omnino ei populo multa, <qui> sub rege est, in primisque libertas, quae non in eo
est ut iusto utamur domino, sed ut nul<lo>. (Cic. Rep. 2.43); Tamen tantum afuit ab eo ut
ulla ignominia iis exercitibus quaereretur ut et urbs Roma per eum exercitum . . .
reciperaretur. . . (Liv. 25.6.11–12); Hoc autem ad id pertinet quod, qui fida gratia inter
se iuncti sunt, numquam ab amicitia resolvuntur. (Porph. Hor. Carm. 3.21.22)
2 The example is taken from Bodelot (2003: 202–3), where further discussion can be found.
Finite declarative clauses 57
exclamatory subordinate clauses. The last mentioned are difficult to distinguish from
interrogative clauses.3 These clause types share certain properties with the sentence types
discussed in Chapter 6. An important distinction between declarative and interrogative
argument clauses on the one hand and imperative clauses on the other is the use of the
negator. Characteristic of declarative and interrogative clauses is that their negation is by
non (and not by ne); one of the zero quantifiers, such as nemo ‘nobody’ and nihil ‘nothing’;
or by a negative verb, such as nolo ‘to wish not’. Another characteristic of these clauses is
that there are no restrictions on tense. Finally, in imperative argument clauses true passive
verb forms are exceptional, due to the fact that their content is ‘controlled’; in declarative
clauses, by contrast, these verb forms are not uncommon.
Some of the classes mentioned in Table 15.1 are typical of a specific clause type: The
accusative and infinitive clause is typical of declarative clauses; ut (negation ne) clauses are
typical of imperative clauses; clauses with a question particle or question word are
typical of interrogative clauses.4
Table 15.1 contains an overview of the contexts in which the main classes of declara-
tive finite argument clauses can be used. Also included are the accusative and infini-
tive clause and the nominative and infinitive construction. Some of the contexts are
determined by the meaning of the governing verb (emotion verbs, for example), others
are of a different kind: in (a), for example, the clause is anticipated by the preparative
pronoun hoc (on this example, see § 14.16); in (b), the main clause is negated.
(a) Habet hoc sollicitudo, quod omnia necessaria putat.
(‘Anxiety has this quality, that it supposes all things necessary.’ Plin. Ep. 6.9.2—object
clause )
(b) . . . non dubitabam quin te ille aut Dyrrachi aut in istis locis uspiam visurus
esset.
(‘. . . I didn’t doubt that he would be seeing you at Dyrrachium or somewhere else over
there.’ Cic. Att. 1.17.2)
quod quia quoniam other ut (non) ut (ne) ne (non) quin si AcI NcI
‘to be added to’ (accedit) + L L + (+)
‘to leave unmentioned’ (mitto, praetereo) + (L) +
‘emotion’ ( gaudeo) + ? L + +
‘fearing’ (timeo) L + L
‘perception’, ‘cognition’, ‘communication’ (video, scio, dico) + L L + +
‘praising’, ‘blaming’, ‘congratulating’ (laudo, arguo, + (+)L + + +
gratulor)
‘to be surprised’ (miror) + +
‘to wait’, ‘to try’ (exspecto, conor) ? + +
‘to happen’ (evenit, fit, accidit) + (+) (+)
‘to conclude’, ‘to follow’ (relinquitur) + +
transition expressions (reliquum est, restat) +
various other verbs and expressions (refert, satis) + + +
verbs of happening (bene accidit) + +
preparative pronouns and other expressions (illud, hoc) + + + +
negated main clauses (non dubito) (L) (L) + + (S)
As observed above, a feature that declarative clauses have in common is that there are
no restrictions on the tense of the verb and that they are negated by non. Exceptions
to these general properties will be signalled below. The established subordinating
form for most classes of declarative clauses is, from the beginning of our records
onward, the accusative and infinitive clause (for its description see §§ 15.92ff.).5 This
remained the dominant subordinating construction for the entire period covered by
this Syntax, although in Late Latin finite constructions became more frequent in cer-
tain types of expression and also are preferred more generally by certain authors.
Finite declarative clauses are discussed according to the subordinators. The internal
order of the discussion of each subordinator will be the same as that given in Table 15.1.
. The use of quod clauses with the verb accedit ‘to be added to’ or ‘to
constitute an addition to’
Quod is used in argument clauses with accedit ‘to be added to’ or ‘to constitute an
addition to’. In (a) the quod clause refers to a factual situation, which accounts for the
use of the indicative habent. In (b) the subjunctive esset is counterfactual (sc. si istic
5 For statistical data concerning Pl. As., see Serbat (2003: 529).
6 For the etymology and development, see Sz.: 572–3. For a synchronic sketch of the relation between
the various uses, see Taylor (1951).
7 Based on Merguet (Reden). For more numerical data, see Herman (1963: 108–11) and Serbat (2003:
734–8).
8 For quia, see Baños (1991a) and (2014: 54–6).
60 Subordinate clauses filling an argument position
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
disjunct
reason
reason + cor
non reason
addition
emotion
praise
cleft
preparatives
various
quod quia
Figure 15.1 Distribution of quod and quia clauses in Cicero’s orations (in percentages)
Quod N = 935; quia N = 200
non sederes). The main clause may contain a preparative expression, as in (c). For the
semantic difference from accedit ut, see § 15.26.
(a) Accedit quod orationis etiam genus habent fortasse subtile et certe acutum . . .
(‘There is the further point that they have a way of speaking that is perhaps subtle and
undoubtedly penetrating . . .’ Cic. de Orat. 3.66)
(b) Huc accedit quod paulo tamen occultior . . . ista cupiditas esset.
(‘There must be added to this, that that cupidity of yours should have been a little
more concealed.’ Cic. S. Rosc. 104)
(c) Accedit illa quoque causa quod a ceteris forsitan ita petitum sit ut dicerent
ut . . .
(‘There is this reason, also, that perhaps the request to undertake this cause was made
to the others so that . . .’ Cic. S. Rosc. 4—subjunctive because of forsitan)
Supplement:
Accedit etiam quod . . . T. Annio devota et constituta ista hostia esse videtur. (Cic.
Har. 7); . . . cum ad has suspiciones certissimae res accederent quod per fines
Sequanorum Helvetios traduxisset, quod obsides inter eos dandos curasset, quod ea
omnia . . . inscientibus ipsis fecisset, quod a magistratu Haeduorum accusaretur, satis
esse causae arbitrabatur . . . (Caes. Gal. 1.19.1); Ceterum id quoque ad gloriam acces-
sit quod cum illo simul iusta ac legitima regna occiderunt. (Liv. 1.48.8); Eo accedit
quod Enoch apud Iudam apostolum testimonium possidet. (Tert. Cult. fem. 1.3)
Finite declarative clauses 61
. The use of quod clauses with verbs and expressions meaning
‘to leave unmentioned’
Quod is used with a variety of verbs and expressions meaning ‘to pass over’, ‘to leave
unsaid’. There are two Early Latin examples of this usage which was to become a com-
mon rhetorical device in Cicero. Examples are (a) and (b). With this type of expres-
sion the accusative and infinitive is used as well (see § 15.96).
(a) Nam ut mittam quod ei amorem difficillimum et / carissimum, a meretrice
avara virginem / quam amabat, eam confeci sine molestia . . .
(‘Not to mention that I’ve secured for him without trouble a very difficult and very
expensive love affair, since the girl he loved belonged to a greedy courtesan . . .’ Ter. Eu.
926–8)
(b) Praetereo quod . . . eam sibi domum sedemque delegit . . .
(‘I pass over the fact that . . . she chose as her own residence and home the very
house . . .’ Cic. Clu. 188)
. The use of quod clauses with verbs and expressions of emotion
Quod is used from Early Latin onward as a marker of object and subject clauses with
verbs of emotion such as gaudeo ‘to be glad’, doleo ‘to be grieved at’, miror ‘to be sur-
prised’, moleste fero ‘to be annoyed at’, me pudet ‘to be ashamed’.9 However, it is used
much less often than the accusative and infinitive in this context (see § 15.97), and in
Early Latin it is also less frequent than both quia, which itself is not used that frequently
(see § 15.18), and quom (see § 15.23).10 Sometimes it is difficult to decide whether the
quod clause is an argument or a reason adjunct. It is not easy to tell what determines
the choice between the accusative and infinitive clause and the finite subordinate
clause. According to K.-St.: II.277 the quod clause is used to emphasize the factuality
of the emotion, but there is no objective evidence for this.11 Examples are (a)–(e). For
the (indicative) mood, see § 7.131.
(a) Quod male feci crucior.
(‘I am tormented by the thought that I treated him badly.’ Pl. Capt. 996)
9 There are a few instances of metuo and timeo ‘to fear’ in Late Latin.
10 For the development from Early to Classical Latin—increase of the accusative and infinitive—see
Perrochat (1932b: 95–131).
11 For discussion, see Bolkestein (1989b: 47–8).
62 Subordinate clauses filling an argument position
(b) Sane gaudeo quod te interpellavi, quoniam quidem tam praeclarum mihi
dedisti iudicii tui testimonium.
(‘I am very glad indeed that I interrupted you, since you have given me so fine a proof
of your good opinion.’ Cic. Leg. 3.1)
(c) Doluisse se quod populi Romani beneficium sibi per contumeliam ab inimi-
cis extorqueretur.
(‘He was indignant that a benefit to him from the Roman people was being insolently
wrested from him by his enemies.’ Caes. Civ. 1.9.2)
(d) Molestissime autem fero quod te ubi visurus sim nescio.
(‘I am very upset, however, that I don’t know where I will see you.’ Cic. Fam. 3.6.5)
(e) Nunc quoque ne pudeat quod sis mihi nupta . . .
(‘Even now be not ashamed that you are wedded to me.’ Ov. Tr. 4.3.61)
Supplement (in alphabetical order by governing expression):
. . . ad officium pertinere aegre ferre quod sapiens non sis . . . (Cic. Tusc. 3.68); Angebatur
tamen animi necessario quod domum eius exornatam atque instructam fere iam iste
reddiderat nudam . . . (Cic. Ver. 2.84); . . . neque te tam commovebat quod ille cum toga
praetexta quam quod sine bulla venerat. (Cic. Ver. 1.152); Itaque non tam ista me sapi-
entiae . . . fama delectat . . . quam quod amicitiae nostrae memoriam spero sempiternam
fore . . . (Cic. Amic. 15—NB: coordination with fama); Nunc me delectat quod fugerunt
treceni. (Sen. Suas. 2.8); Sed de maiestatis iudicio duo mihi illa ex tuis litteris iucundis-
sima fuerunt: unum quod te ab ipsa re publica defensum scribis . . . (Cic. Fam. 3.11.3);
Atque illud in primis mihi laetandum iure esse video quod in hac insolita mihi ex hoc
loco ratione dicendi causa talis oblata est in qua oratio deesse nemini possit. (Cic. Man.
3); Ergo mirabar quod dudum scapulae gestibant mihi (Pl. As. 315); Miror quod
mihi tot tempus nihil rescripsti (CEL appendix Vindol. r 4–6 (Vindolanda, c. ad
105)); . . . mirabar quod non mitterentur mihi bestiae. (Passio Perp. 10.5—NB: unmoti-
vated subjunctive); Mirum quod (sc. a certain plant) eodem die germinat quo iniectum
est. (Plin. Nat. 13.129); Eho an te paenitet / in mari quod <semel> elavi . . . (Pl. Rud.
578–9); Pol haud perit quod illum tantum amo. (Pl. Truc. 581); Placet tamen inter haec
quod inaestuas et pio metu antevertis necessitatem. (Symm. Ep. 4.54.3); Adiutorium
hoc ad causam putatis? Me pudet quod rogatus sum. ([Quint.] Decl. 9.9); Eho tu, inpu-
dens, non satis habes quod tibi dieculam addo . . .? (Ter. An. 710)
It is common to include in this semantic class of emotion verbs the verbs queror ‘to
complain’, conqueror ‘to complain’, and glorior ‘to boast’, although they would better be
described as denoting the verbal manifestation of emotions (TLL s.v. glorior:
‘plerumque fere i.q. gloriose loqui’), since they seem to behave more like communica-
tion verbs (proportionally they are found more often with the accusative and infini-
tive than the emotion verbs proper). Examples are (f) and (g).
(f) Sed . . . (sc. Scipio) querebatur quod omnibus in rebus homines diligentiores
essent.
(‘But (sc. Scipio) used to complain that men were more painstaking in all other
things.’ Cic. Amic. 62)
Finite declarative clauses 63
(g) . . . qui glorianti cuidam mercatori quod multas navis in omnem oram
maritimam demisisset . . . inquit . . .
(‘. . . who, . . . when a certain trader boasted that he had dispatched a great number of
ships to every distant coast, remarked . . .’ Cic. Tusc. 5.40)
. The use of quod clauses with verbs and expressions of perception,
cognition, and communication
Quod, just like quia (see § 15.19), is also used in subordinate clauses with verbs and
expressions indicating perception, cognition, and communication, which in Early and
Classical Latin normally govern an accusative and infinitive clause (see § 15.98).12 There
are very few instances before the second century ad, but ecclesiastical authors from
Tertullian onwards use it with increasing frequency (together with quia and—much less
frequently—quoniam, later also quomodo, quemadmodum, and qualiter) as an alternative
for the accusative and infinitive expression.13 However, the accusative and infinitive
clause remained the normal expression throughout the period taken into account in this
Syntax. The spread of quod, quia, and quoniam was stimulated by Ø~t (hóti) and ot~t
(dihóti) in Greek texts, although the accusative and infinitive is also found in translations
of Greek. The ‘advantages’ of the finite quod clause over the accusative and infinitive are
first that it avoids potential ambiguity about which entity is the subject and which the
object, and second that it allows for the expression of grammatical mood. These ‘advan-
tages’ may indeed be the explanation for the use of the subjunctive in the very first attested
instances of quod clauses, with the cognition verb scio ‘to know’ in Plautus, (a), and with
the communication verb renuntio ‘to report’, (b): the speaker/author of the main clauses
does not necessarily subscribe to the truth of the content of the quod clauses (see my
paraphrase of (a); for (b), see the continuation of the story in B. Hisp. 37).14
(a) Equidem scio iam filius quod amet meus / istanc meretricem . . .
(‘Well, I already know that (people say that) my son is in love with that prostitute . . .’
Pl. As. 52–3)
Although proper verbs of communication are exceptionally found with a quod clause,
the verb addo ‘to add’ in its meaning ‘to add (orally or in writing)’ is used with a quod
clause (in the indicative) from Terence onwards, as in (c).15 (For the AcI, see § 15.98.)
(c) . . . ut ne addam quod sine sumptu ingenuam, liberalem nactus es / quod
habes, ita ut voluisti, uxorem sine mala fama palam.
(‘. . . to say nothing of the fact that without any expense you’ve got yourself a respect-
able freeborn woman and have married her, just as you wanted, all in the open and
without any harm to your reputation.’ Ter. Ph. 168–9)
Supplement:
Adde quod inbecilla nimis primordia fingit. (Lucr. 1.847); Adde huc quod perferri
litterae nulla condicione potuerunt (Pol. Fam. 10.31.4); Adicite ad haec quod foedus
aequum deditis . . . (Liv. 23.5.9)
Quod is initially more frequent than quia, but the latter increases in frequency from
the Bible translations found in Cyprian’s writings onwards (c. ad 250). Of the pair
quia and quod the former seems to be used by less educated language users more often
than the latter. This distinction between the two can be seen as early as Petronius, and
it becomes particularly apparent later on from the way Augustine uses them. He
strongly prefers quod in his more formal writings, quia in his more popular Sermones.16
Quod (+ subjunctive) is strongly preferred by Jerome and is also used in his Vulgate
Bible translation when he translates from the Hebrew (Old Testament). Quia is used
to translate Greek Ø~t in the New Testament.17 A regional difference has been suggested
between the use of quod and quia in very Late writings of the fifth and sixth centuries.
Quod is used more frequently in Merovingian Latin texts, quia in Italy and Spain.
However, these differences probably have other explanations.18 For the use of the
moods in these clauses, see § 7.131.
Quod clauses normally follow the main verb, both for pragmatic reasons (usually
non-topical information) and because quod is a polysemous subordinator. By contrast,
the subjects of accusative and infinitive clauses are often topical and coreferential with
an entity that is already present in the preceding context, especially if the AcI clause
precedes the main clause.19
Supplement (in alphabetical order by governing expression):
Perception: . . . et cum audisset quod iam evenerat . . . (Pass. Perp. 20.9); Unde in
Plinio Secundo legimus quod (Mazzarino; quoniam Keil) nominativus singularis
non debet esse ‘iuger’, sed hoc ‘iugerum’. (Pomp. V. 193.36sqq. K); Dein cum
metuens sibi quisque mussaret monstraretque perspicua veritas quod repulsus
forsitan ariditate vel altitudine montium ad aquas redire non poterit miles . . . (Amm.
24.7.5); At illa gaudio exultans ‘vides’ inquit ‘Chrysis mea, vides quod aliis leporem
excitavi?’ (Petr. 131.7); (Pharao) . . . quando vidit quod filii Israhel dimiserant
eum . . . (Pereg. 8.5)
Cognition: Omnium est aestimare . . . quod (sc. fama) ab uno aliquando principe
exorta sit necesse est. (Tert. Apol. 7.11); Adiuro enim tuum mihi carissimum caput
nulli me prorsus ac ne tibi quidem ipsi adseveranti posse credere quod tu quicquam
in meam cogitaveris perniciem. (Apul. Met. 3.14.3—NB: subjunctive); . . . et nos credi-
mus quod tu sis Christus (Tert. Prax. 21.18 (paraphrasing Joh. 6.69)—NB: subjunct-
ive); . . . credo quod litteras meas libenter accipias . . . (Symm. Ep. 9.1—NB: subjunctive);
Nec Hiberum pro ea re dubitare puto quod rem non permissam facit . . . (Proc. dig.
8.2.13);20 Malo quod illum talem inveni quam si multiplicatum hoc ad me de quo
loquebar alia via pervenisset. (Sen. Ben. 2.3.3); . . . affirmans et praescisse se olim et
praedixisse quod centenario iam contiguus sepelietur in solo Romano. (Amm.
24.1.10); Puto quod nec ipse audeas adversum talem ac tantum virum, tibi veritatem,
illi mendacium reputare. (Hier. C. Iohan. 10—NB: subjunctive); Atque etiam recorda-
tus quondam super cenam quod nihil cuiquam toto die praestitisset, memorabilem
illam meritoque laudatam vocem edidit: amici, diem perdidi. (NB: subjunctive) (Suet.
Tit. 8.1); Illic reputans ideo se fallacibus litteris accitam et honore praecipuo habitam
quodque litus iuxta non ventis acta, non saxis impulsa navis summa sui parte veluti
terrestre machinamentum concidisset. (Tac. Ann. 14.6.1—NB: coordination of an
accusative and infinitive and a quod clause (in the subjunctive)); Scis enim quod epu-
lum dedi binos denarios. (Petr. 71.9 (Trimalchio speaking)); Sciendum quod hodie is
<qui> praevaricati sunt poena iniungitur extraordinaria. (Ulp. dig. 47.15.2); Sciendum
etiam quod de capillis his qui cum homine nascuntur certiora sint signa (Physiogn.
13—NB: subjunctive); . . . sciens quod, si remanserit usquam, exsectis cruribus
relinquetur. (Amm. 23.5.21); Unum sane sciendum est quod Germani omnes cum
ad auxilium essent rogati a Proculo, Pro<bo> servire maluerunt quam cum Bonoso
et Proculo <imperare>. (Hist. Aug. Prob. 18.7)
Communication: Non commemoro quod draconis saevi sopivi impetum, / non
quod domui vim taurorum et segetis armatae manus. (Enn. scen. 274–5V—NB: for
the attribution of this text to Ennius, see Jocelyn, p. 350); Denuntiavi enim litem
moventi quod ad me causa pertineat nec defuturum eis meae actionis auxilium.
(Symm. Ep. 9.24.2—NB: subjunctive); . . . non sine causa dicetur quod usuras quoque
percipere debeat . . . (Paul. dig. 17.2.67.2—NB: subjunctive); In summa autem dicendum
19 For the pragmatic differences between the AcI and quod (and quia) clauses, see Herman (1989),
Cuzzolin (1994), Greco (2008), and the summarizing discussion in Greco (2012: 44–50). For Merovingian
texts, see Greco (2014).
20 For later instances, also with the subjunctive, see TLL s.v. 2088.1ff.
66 Subordinate clauses filling an argument position
est quod omnibus stellis noceat vicinitas Solis. (Firm. Mat. 2.8.2—NB: subjunct-
ive); . . . docetque quod apud Parisios natus in Galliis et equestri militans turma vin-
dictam quondam commissi facinoris timens ad Persas abierat profugus exindeque
morum probitate spectata sortita coniuge liberisque susceptis speculatorem se mis-
sum ad nostra saepe veros nuntios reportasse. (Amm. 18.6.16—NB: parallelism with
accusative and infinitive); Fama est quod Ampelium et quosdam alios de Sardinia, ut
adseritur, senatores in crimen adductos forum conpetens observare praeceperis.
(Symm. Ep. 2.33a—NB: subjunctive); Deinde cum esset in Asia bellum Mithridaticum
gerens, per Lucium Titium ei mandatum est a Iove quod esset Mithridatem super-
aturus, et factum est. (August. Civ. 2.24—NB: subjunctive); Promiseras enim quod
non dares sanctum tuum videre corruptionem, et nunc in sepulcro tegitur. (Hier.
Tract. psal. 88.272—NB: subjunctive); Veritas . . . sanctis fidelibusque promittit quod
erunt aequales angelis Dei. (August. Civ. 11.13); At hercule nemo refert quod Italia
externae opis indiget, quod vita populi Romani per incerta maris et tempestatum
cotidie volvitur. (Tac. Ann. 3.54.4)
For exceptional instances of eo quod in the same context as quod, see (d). In some
cases the interpretation of the eo quod clause as a reason clause is not excluded.21
(d) Nam dicent eo quod filii Israhel in honore ipsorum eas (sc. statuas)
posuerint.
(‘And the people will tell you that the children of Israel set them up in their
honour.’ Pereg. 8.2—tr. Wilkinson)
For the use of quod, quia, and quoniam as introducers of direct speech in ecclesiastical
authors, see Sz.: 578–9.
Appendix: Quod in the following much-debated fragment of Cato can be taken as an
interrogative determiner modifying bonum.
(e) Dicam de istis Graecis suo loco, Marce fili, quid Athenis exquisitum habeam,
et quod bonum sit illorum litteras inspicere, non perdiscere.
(‘I shall speak about those Greek fellows in their proper place, Marcus, my
son, and point out the result of my enquiries at Athens, and convince you
what benefit comes from dipping into their literature, and not making a
close study of it.’ Cato Fil. 1(J))
. The use of quod clauses with verbs and expressions of accusing and
convicting and of blaming, excusing, praising, congratulating, and thanking
A quod clause (and—less often—quia) is the regular construction that is used with
verbs and expressions of blaming, excusing, praising, congratulating, and thanking.
These verbs can be found with a second argument which is either the addressee who
21 See Herman (1963: 47–9), Väänänen (1987: 73), and Baños (2014: 158–9). For a causal interpretation of
eo quod in (d), see Griffe (2011).
Finite declarative clauses 67
is blamed, praised, etc. or the content of the blame, as in (a). They can also be found
with three arguments, with both the addressee and the content. With some verbs the
addressee is in the accusative, as in (b), with others in the dative, as (c). There are also
related expressions with which the quod clause is the subject, as in (d). As illustrated
by (e), it is not always easy to decide whether the quod or quia clause is the content of
the praise, blame, etc. or the reason for praising or blaming somebody.22 In Early
Latin cum (quom) is relatively common as an alternative to quod (see § 15.23). With
some verbs the accusative and infinitive clause is also possible (see § 15.99).
(a) Nec vos arguerim, Teucri, nec foedera nec quas / iunximus hospitio dextras.
(‘Yet I would not blame you, Trojans, nor our covenant, nor the hands we clasped in
friendship.’ Verg. A. 11.164–5)
(b) . . . cum obiurgavit Albium Granius quod . . . absoluto Scaevola gauderet . . .
(‘. . . when Granius reproached Albius with being delighted by Scaevola’s acquittal . . .’
Cic. de Orat. 2.281)
(c) Tibi . . . tamen quod abes gratulor, vel quia non vides ea quae nos, vel quod
excelso et illustri loco sita est laus tua . . .
(‘But all the same, I congratulate you on your absence. On the one hand, you do not
see what we are seeing; on the other, your renown is situated in a lofty and distin-
guished place . . .’ Cic. Fam. 2.5.1—NB: co-occurrence of a quod argument clause and
reason adjunct clauses with quia and quod )
(d) Quod te in tanta hereditate ab omni occupatione expedisti valde mihi gra-
tum est.
(‘It is very good news to me that you have freed yourself from business although you
have so large an inheritance to think of.’ Cic. Att. 3.20.2)
(e) Eo in metu arguere Germanicum omnes quod non ad superiorem exercitum
pergeret . . .
(‘Amid the alarm all condemned Germanicus for not going to the upper army . . .’ Tac.
Ann. 1.40.1)
Supplement (in alphabetical order by verb or comparable expression):
Without an addressee: . . . accusabat quidam vilitate ipsa despectus quod, cum
imperium Procopius affectasset, aliqua pro eo locuti sunt bona. (Amm. 29.3.7); ‘Nihil
aliud scio’, inquit, ‘nihil arguo, nisi quod cum ferro comisatum venerunt.’ (Liv. 40.14.5);
Non quidem sibi ignarum posse argui quod tam recenti dolore subierit oculos sena-
tus. (Tac. Ann. 4.8.3); . . . criminabatur etiam quod Titum filium, qui postea est
Torquatus appellatus, ab hominibus relegasset . . . (Cic. Off. 3.112); Hoc tu igitur in cri-
men vocas quod cum iis fuerit C. Rabirius . . .? (Cic. Rab. Perd. 24); . . . (sc. litterae)
videntur . . . quasi exprobrare quod in ea vita maneam in qua nihil insit nisi propagatio
miserrimi temporis. (Cic. Fam. 5.15.3); Gaudeo et gratulor quod Fusco Salinatori
filiam tuam destinasti. (Plin. Ep. 6.26.1); . . . quod te intro misi gratiam referat mihi.
22 For gratias ago, see Ros (2005), with arguments in favour of considering quod clauses with this
expression as reason adjuncts. See also Ripoll (2012).
68 Subordinate clauses filling an argument position
(Lucil. 835M=904K); Gratulemur quod iam nulla civitas fame laborat. ([Quint.]
Decl. 12.10); Quod minuit auctionem decemviralem laudo, quod regi amico cavet
non reprehendo, quod non gratis fit indignor. (Cic. Agr. 2.58); Quod bene cogitasti
aliquando laudo; quod non indicasti gratias ago; quod non fecisti ignosco. (Cic.
Phil. 2.34)
Accusative addressee: Accusat eos quod eius modi de se sermones habuerint. (Cic.
Ver. 5.102); Pacem petebat excusabatque sese quod per Aetolos recuperasset pater-
num regnum. (Liv. 38.3.2); Laudor quod osculavi privignae caput. (Titin. com. 155—
NB: unless to be regarded as causal quod ); Phalereus Demetrius, qui Periclem . . .
vituperat quod tantam pecuniam in praeclara illa propylaea coniecerit. (Cic. Off. 2.60)
Dative addressee: Criminique ei tribunus inter cetera dabat quod filium iuve-
nem . . . prope in carcerem atque in ergastulum dederit . . . (Liv. 7.4.4); Quod bene fecisti
referetur gratia. (Pl. Capt. 941); Fecisti mihi pergratum quod Serapionis librum ad
me misisti. (Cic. Att. 2.4.1); . . . cum laetor tandem longi erroris vobis finem factum
esse, tum quod secundis potissimum vestris rebus hic error est sublatus et vobis et
propter vos rei publicae gratulor. (Liv. 5.3.3); Ago tibi gratias quod me dign<um>
habuisti et sequrum fecisti. (CEL 142.7–8 (Karanis, c. ad 115)); Obicio tibi quod
occidisti hominem . . . (Sen. Con. 7.2.8); Vitio mihi dant quod mortem hominis neces-
sari graviter fero atque eum quem dilexi perisse indignor. (Matius Fam. 11.28.2)
Damno and condemno ‘to condemn’ are included in this semantic class by K.-St.: II.276.
However, the quia and quod clauses in (f)–(i) are better taken as reason adjuncts.23
(f) . . . C. Decianus, de quo tu saepe commemoras, quia, cum hominem omni-
bus insignem notis turpitudinis, P. Furium, accusaret summo studio bono-
rum omnium, queri est ausus in contione de morte Saturnini, condemnatus
est. At Sex. Titius, quod habuit imaginem L. Saturnini domi suae, condemna-
tus est.
(‘But take the case of Gaius Decianus, whom you are so fond of quoting: he
was condemned because—while with the entire approval of all good citizens
he was accusing Publius Furius, a man notorious for every kind of infamy—
he dared to lament in the course of his speech the death of Saturninus. And
Sextus Titius also was condemned because he had a portrait of Saturninus in
his house.’ Cic. Rab. Post. 24)
(g) Et ii qui Fabrici libertum, quia minister in maleficio fuerat, patronum, quia
conscius esset condemnassent, ipsum principem atque architectum sceleris
absolverent?
(‘And could those who had condemned the freedman of Fabricius, because
he had been an agent in the crime, and his patron, because he had been
privy to it, acquit the principal and original contriver of the whole wicked-
ness?’ Cic. Clu. 60—see also Clu. 61)
(h) In qua cognitione magis utra pars Romanis, utra regi favisset quaesitum est
quam utra fecisset iniuriam aut accepisset; . . . A. Baebius unus est damnatus,
quod milites Romanos praebuisset ad ministerium caedis.
23 Examples taken from TLL s.v. condemno 124.65f.; s.v. damno 15.49ff.
Finite declarative clauses 69
(‘In this investigation, the question was more which side had favoured the
king and which the Romans, than which had done wrong or had been
wronged; . . . only Aulus Baebius was condemned for furnishing Roman
soldiers to help carry out the slaughter.’ Liv. 45.31.1–2)
(i) . . . arguimus nos ipsi penitusque re visa atque inspecta damnamus, quod
humanitatis iure deposito naturalis initii consortia ruperimus.
(‘. . . we ourselves accuse and condemn ourselves when the thing is seen and
looked into thoroughly, because, neglecting the law which is binding on
men, we have broken through the bonds which naturally united us at the
beginning.’ Arn. Nat. 7.4—tr. Bryce)
In (a)–(c) the quod clauses function as subject of a clause whose verb consists of a form
of sum in combination with a subject complement; in the first two examples the subject
complement is an adjective (neuter singular form), in the last a noun phrase. A quod
clause functioning as object in combination with an object complement is shown in
(d). The main clause can have a preparative pronoun as its object, as in (e). Note that
the nouns and adjectives involved are semantically related to the verbs discussed above.
(a) . . . nihil praeclarius quam quod eosdem . . . praeesse voluerunt . . .
(‘. . . but no action of theirs was ever more wise than their desire that the same men
should superintend. . .’, Cic. Dom. 1)
(b) Est autem in hoc genere molestum quod in maximis animis . . . existunt hono-
ris, imperii . . . cupiditates.
(‘But the trouble about this matter is that it is in the greatest souls that lust for honour
and power emerges.’ Cic. Off. 1.26)
(c) Parumne est malai rei quod amat Demipho . . .?
(‘Is it not enough of a bad thing that Demipho is in love . . .?’ Pl. Mer. 692)
(d) Maximum vero eius beneficium numero quod hoc animo in rem publicam
est . . .
(‘But I count it as his greatest benefaction that he is of this mind toward the
Republic . . .’ Cic. Phil. 13.7)
(e) Nisi hoc indignum putas quod vestitum sedere in iudicio vides quem tu e
patrimonio . . . nudum expulisti.
(‘Unless you think it scandalous to see in this court sitting fully clothed the man
whom you have driven naked out of his patrimony.’ Cic. S. Rosc. 147)
Supplement (in alphabetical order by governing expression):
Sed causa erat iudici postulandi quod ex edicto professus non esset. (Cic. Ver. 3.39);
Praecipuum destinationis meae documentum habete quod de nemine queror. (Tac.
Hist. 2.47.3); Tot luctibus funesta civitate pars maeroris fuit quod Iulia Drusi filia,
70 Subordinate clauses filling an argument position
quondam Neronis uxor, denupsit in domum Rubellii Blandi . . . (Tac. Ann. 6.27.1);
Alterum est vitium quod quidam nimis magnum studium multamque operam in res
obscuras atque difficiles conferunt . . . (Cic. Off. 1.19)
Fuerit verecundiae tuae quod nihil hactenus nobis adloquii detulisti. (Symm. Ep. 8.8)
Quod autem idem maestitiam meam reprehendit, idem iocum, magno argumento
est me in utroque fuisse moderatum. (Cic. Phil. 2.40); . . . nisi etiam quod omnino
coluit crimini fuerit. (Cic. S. Rosc. 49); Cn. Octavio . . . honori fuisse accepimus quod
praeclaram aedificasset in Palatio . . . domum . . . (Cic. Off. 1.138); . . . indicio fuit quod
ipse expulso Dionysio imperium dimittere noluit. (Nep. Tim. 2.3); Voluptati mihi est
quod vales. (Symm. Ep. 7.37)
Cuius ex omni vita nihil est honestius quam quod cum mima fecit divortium.
(Cic. Phil. 2.69); Optimum vero quod dictaturae nomen in perpetuum de re publica
sustulisti (Cic. Phil. 2.91)
Quod Thebae cecidere meum est (Ov. Met. 13.173); Nostrum est quod evocavi-
mus ad causam dicendam eos . . . (Liv. 39.36.13)
Quam ob rem etsi magis est quod gratuler tibi quam quod te rogem, tamen etiam
rogo . . . (Cic. Att. 16.5.2)24
With a preparative pronoun: Nec vero illud non eruditorum temporum argumen-
tum est quod et deorum pulvinaribus et epulis magistratuum fides praecinunt . . .
(Cic. Tusc. 4.4)
Quamquam illud est egregium quod hac lege ante omnia veneunt . . . (Cic. Agr.
2.71); Id vero egregium quod provisu deum vidua iungeretur principi sua tantum
matrimonia experto. (Tac. Ann. 12.6.2); Hoc quidem hau molestum est iam quod
collus collari caret. (Pl. Capt. 357)
Apart from the more or less precise semantic contexts dealt with in the preceding sec-
tions, quod argument clauses are used with a broad range of other expressions, which
by their meaning allow a quod argument clause referring to a factive content. It is this
enormous variety that testifies to the role of quod as a ‘general’ subordinator, even in
Cicero’s time. A few examples must suffice.25 In (a) and (b), the quod clauses function
as subject with the two-place verbs habeo and adiuvo, respectively. In (c), the quod
clause functions as subject of two-place (so-called impersonal) refert.26 In many
instances some form of preparative expression anticipates the quod clause.
(a) Quod vero ita avocatur a Mutina . . . quam habet ignominiam . . .!
(‘Now he is ordered off from Mutina in such a fashion . . . what a disgrace does that
entail!’ Cic. Phil. 6.6)
(b) Quam ad spem multum eos adiuvabat quod Liger ex nivibus creverat . . .
24 For the various expressions with magis est, see TLL s.v. magis 64.47ff.
25 One can get a good impression by browsing through Merguet’s lexicons to Cicero’s Orations and
Philosophica s.v. quod. For the relationship between these various uses, see Taylor (1951) and
Woolsey (1953).
26 For more instances of verbs of advantage, importance, etc., see Serbat (2003: 579–82).
Finite declarative clauses 71
(‘The fact that the Loire was so swollen from the melting of the snows contributed
greatly to this hope.’ Caes. Gal. 7.55.10)
(c) Nec refert quod inter se specie differunt, cum genere consentiant.
(‘It matters nothing that they differ in special points, seeing that they are generically
alike.’ Tac. Dial. 25.4)
Supplement (in alphabetical order by governing expression):
Quod clause as object: Ille dedit quod non anima haec Cyclopis in ora / venit . . . (Ov.
Met. 14.174–5—NB: ut or a prolative infinitive would be normal); Quid habet mea
domus religiosi nisi quod impuri et sacrilegi parietem tangit? (Cic. Har. 33); Neque
satis habuit quod eam in occulto vitiaverat, quin eius famam prostitueret. (Cato hist.
36=27C); At quo teste, di immortales, non satis quod uno, non quod ignoto, non
quod levi. (Cic. Scaur. 29)
Quod clause as subject: Interfecit Opimius Gracchum. Quid facit causam? Quod rei
publicae causa (sc. interfecit), cum ex senatus consulto ad arma vocasset. (Cic. de
Orat. 2.132)
Appendix: Quod clauses are also used in headings in Cato’s Agr. An example is (d).
(d) De brassica quod concoquit.
(‘About cabbage that it promotes digestion.’ Cato Agr. 156.1)
Quod clauses are used as subject with a variety of main clauses which have in common
that they contain an expression that, from a semantic point of view, can be understood
as an evaluation of the content of the quod clause. The phenomenon is particularly
common with verbs and expressions of happening when the superordinate clause con-
tains an evaluative expression. Examples are perincommode in (a) and bene in (b).27 In
these examples the adverbs perincommode and bene constitute the salient information;
the content of the quod clause is ‘factive’ and known information. For the combination
of accidit and an evaluative adverb with a non-clausal subject, see (c).28
(a) Sed accidit perincommode quod eum nusquam vidisti.
(‘It is most unfortunate that you did not see him at all.’ Cic. Att. 1.17.2)
(b) Magna me, inquit, spes tenet, iudices, bene mihi evenire quod mittar ad mortem.
(‘ “I entertain, gentlemen of the jury, high hopes,” said he, “that it is for my good that
I am sent to death.” ’ Cic. Tusc. 1.97)
(c) Quod consilium etsi in eiusmodi casu reprehendendum non est, tamen
incommode accidit.
(‘This plan, though not reprehensible in such an emergency, had an unfortunate
result.’ Caes. Gal. 5.33.4)
The verbs with which such quod clauses are attested are the verbs of happening accidit
‘to happen’, cadit ‘to happen’, evenit ‘to happen’, and fit ‘to occur’. With these verbs ut is
normal when there are no evaluative expressions present (see § 15.27). For accusative
and infinitive clauses in similar contexts, see § 15.94.29
A counterpart of subject clauses with verbs and expressions of happening are object
clauses with the verb facio ‘to do’, as in (d) and (e).
(d) Bene facis, inquit, quod me adiuvas . . .
(‘ “You do a service to me,” he said, “in helping me . . .” ’ Cic. Fin. 3.16)
(e) Sed fecit humaniter Licinius quod ad me misso senatu vesperi venit . . .
(‘Licinius acted kindly toward me in calling on me this evening after the Senate had
risen.’ Cic. Q. fr. 2.1.1)
The expressions involved are mainly adverbs like the ones in (a)–(e). Less common
are noun phrases in the ablative expressing cause, as in (f) and (g).
(f) Num tu, inquit, harum rerum natura accidere arbitraris, quod ‘unam terram’
et ‘plures terras’ . . . dicamus . . .
(‘Surely you do not think that it happens from the nature of these things that we say
“one land” and “several lands”.’ Caes. gram. 3a—tr. Garcea)
(g) Noli putare pigritia me facere quod non mea manu scribam . . .
(‘You must not suppose it is out of laziness that I do not write in my own hand . . .’ Cic.
Att. 16.15.1)
Supplement (in alphabetical order by verb):
Hoc loco percommode accidit quod non adest . . . C. Aquilius. (Cic. Caec. 77); Sed
hoc tamen cecidit mihi peropportune quod . . . ad Antonium audiendum venistis.
(Cic. de Orat. 2.15); Numquam edepol quicquam iamdiu quod mage vellem evenire /
mi evenit quam quod modo senex intro ad nos venit errans. (Ter. Eu. 1002–3); . . .
scripseras velle te bene <e>venire quod de Crasso domum emissem . . . (Cic. Fam.
5.6.2); . . . dicere est solitus benigne sibi a populo Romano esse factum quod nimis
magna procuratione liberatus modicis regni terminis uteretur (Cic. Deiot. 36); Itaque
sive casu accidit sive consilio, percommode factum est quod . . . de morte et de
dolore . . . disputatum est. (Cic. Tusc. 4.64)
Pervorse facis. # Quodne amem? (Pl. Mer. 573); Quod scribis scire te mihi illam
rem fore levamento, bene facis. (Cic. Att. 12.43.2); . . . cave suspiceris contra meam
voluntatem te facere quod non sis mecum. (Cic. Fam. 16.22.1); Qua re facis tu qui-
dem fraterne quod me hortaris . . . (Cic. Q. fr. 2.14.2); Tu autem Fanni, quod mihi
tantum tribui dicis quantum ego nec adgnosco nec postulo, facis amice. (Cic. Amic.
9); Bene facitis quod abominamini. (Liv. 6.18.9); Bene fecisti, quod libertum ali-
quando tibi carum reducentibus epistulis meis in domum, in animum recepisti.
(Plin. Ep. 9.24)30
29 For the use of quod clauses and the difference from ut clauses with these verbs, related to quod’s
causal meaning, see Baños (1990).
30 More instances in TLL s.v. facio 106.84ff.
Finite declarative clauses 73
…nec mehercules possum dicere inhumanitate tua fieri quod non audeo . . . (Sen.
Con. 10.1.1); Non magnam rem facis quod vivere sine regio apparatu potes . . . (Sen.
Ep. 110.12)
An exceptional Late Latin instance of a quia clause in a similar context is (h). Ex. (i)
is different: there quia means ‘because’ (compare Pl. Aul. 643).31
(h) Et bene accidit quia nos laboraturos Dominus sciebat . . .
(‘And it is fortunate that the Lord knew that we were going to work . . .’ Ambr.
Virgin. 130)
(i) Istuc male factum arbitror, quia non latus fodi.
(‘I think that (threatening you) was a mistake because I should have stabbed
you in the side.’ Pl. Aul. 418)
There are a few instances with quom in Plautus, as in ( j).
( j) . . . et bene et benigne facitis, quom ero amanti operam datis.
(‘. . . and you are acting well and kindly . . . by helping my lovesick master.’ Pl.
Poen. 588)
Noteworthy instances of combinations of accidit and quod are (k) and (l). In (k) the
context shows that fortuitum (which would require ut—see § 15.27) must be inter-
preted as ‘as an accident’.32 In (l) nihil novi looks like the subject of accidisse, with the
quod clause as its explanation, but it is probably better to take the quod clause as the
subject and nihil novi as equal to non aliquid novi, ‘not as something new’.33
(k) Accidit fortuitum, sed non tamquam fortuitum, quod . . . Certus . . . implicitus
morbo decessit.
(‘It happened by coincidence, though it seemed no mere coincidence, . . . that
Certus fell ill and died.’ Plin. Ep. 9.13.24)
(l) . . . nihil novi accidisse respondit, quod duo senatores in re publica dis-
sentirent . . .
(‘. . . he said that it was nothing strange for two senators to hold different
views in the state . . .’ Tac. Hist. 2.91.3)
31 K.-St.: II.275, Sz.: 579, and Panchón (2003: 408–9) take this as an instance of quia as a marker of a
clause with male facere. Baños (2014: 54) and Taillade (2019: 168–9) take it as a reason adjunct.
32 See Ehlers (1971) and Cuzzolin (1996: 230).
33 See Gerber and Greef s.v. quod 1342, § n; OLD s.v. quod § 6. For a different analysis, see Cuzzolin
(1996: 228) and Serbat (2003: 575).
74 Subordinate clauses filling an argument position
clause would serve as an argument on its own (see § 15.11). However, the pronoun is
not always omissible, as can be seen in (b) (repeated from § 15.4), since habeo does
not govern an argument clause.34 Ex. (c) shows the use of the determiner illa as a
modifier of antiqua. Illa can either be understood as cataphoric or—more likely—as
exophoric (see § 11.107), ‘the well-known ancient story’. According to this interpret-
ation, the quod clause functions as an appositive clause specifying illa antiqua (see
§ 14.16). In (d) the quod clause is prepared for by the pronoun id (for quod clauses
with vitium as their subject complement, see § 15.11). The use of the interrogative
pronoun quid in (e) can be compared with the use of the preparative pronouns in (a)
and (b). Ex. (f) can be compared with (c). For a resumptive pronoun, see (g).
(a) Quid illuc est quod illi caperrat frons severitudine?
(‘What’s the reason that his forehead is wrinkled from grave thoughts?’ Pl. Epid. 609)
(b) Habet hoc sollicitudo, quod omnia necessaria putat.
(‘Anxiety has this quality, that it supposes all things necessary.’ Plin. Ep. 6.9.2)
(c) Nam illa nimis antiqua praetereo quod C. Servilius Ahala Sp. Maelium novis
rebus studentem manu sua occidit.
(‘I pass over that well-known ancient story that Gaius Servilius Ahala with his own
hand killed Spurius Maelius, who was pursuing revolution.’ Cic. Catil. 1.3)
(d) Id illi vitium maxumum est / quod nimis tardus est advorsum mei animi
sententiam.
(‘It’s his greatest fault that he’s too slow, against my heart’s wishes.’ Pl. Mer. 596–7)
(e) Quid quod Staienus est condemnatus?
(‘What of the fact that Staienus was condemned?’ Cic. Clu. 99)
(f) . . . miretur profecto quae sit tanta atrocitas huiusce causae quod diebus fes-
tis . . . hoc iudicium exerceatur . . .
(‘. . . he would in truth wonder what great atrocity there is in this particular cause such
that this trial alone should proceed during these days of festival and public games . . .’
Cic. Cael. 1)
(g) Quod discordis dispersasque Vitellii legiones . . . fudisset, id pulcherrimum et
sui operis.
(‘As to the fact that he had put to rout the discordant and scattered legions of Vitellius,
Antonius called that a most beautiful achievement and the work of his own hand.’
Tac. Hist. 3.53.2)
Supplement (in alphabetical order by preparative expression):
NB: In some of the instances cited below we find both some sort of preparative
device, on the basis of which they have been placed in this category, and a main verb
that fits in with one of the categories in the preceding sections.
34 For the preparative use of ille, see TLL s.v. 348.36ff.; for is, TLL s.v. 477.66 (quia) and 478.1ff. (quod );
for iste, TLL s.v. 508.28ff. See also Merguet (Phil.) s.v. quod 332B; (Reden) 221A. Ex. (b) is taken from
Bodelot (2000: 76).
Finite declarative clauses 75
Sed quid hoc est quod foris concrepuit proxima vicinia? (Pl. Mos. 1062); Sed hoc inter
me atque illum interest quod ille . . . inimicos suos ultus est . . . (Cic. Red. Pop. 20); Hoc
enim uno praestamus vel maxime feris quod conloquimur inter nos et quod exprimere
dicendo sensa possumus. (Cic. de Orat. 1.32—NB: for praesto, see § 4.57)
Quaeso ut sat habeas id, pater, quod Chrysalus / me obiurigavit . . . (Pl. Bac. 1019–
20); . . . semperque id valuisse plurimum quod in se auctoritatis habuisset aequi-
tatisque plurimum . . . (Cic. Caec. 80); Ceterum id quoque ad gloriam accessit quod
cum illo simul iusta ac legitima regna occiderunt. (Liv. 1.48.8); At Pallas id maxime
in Agrippina laudare quod Germanici nepotem secum traheret. (Tac. Ann. 12.2.3)
Hoc nimirum est illud quod non longe a gradibus Aureliis haec causa dicitur. (Cic.
Flac. 66); An illa non gravissimis ignominiis monumentisque huius ordinis ad pos-
teritatis memoriam sunt notanda quod unus M. Antonius in hac urbe post conditam
urbem palam secum habuerit armatos? (Cic. Phil. 5.17); Non ego illud parvi aestimo,
milites quod nemo est vestrum cuius . . . (Liv. 21.43.17)
Quid istuc est quod meos te dicam fugitare oculos, Tyndare . . . (Pl. Capt. 541)
Supplement:
Hoc, / hoc est quod <cor> peracescit. / Hoc est demum quod percrucior . . . (Pl. Bac.
1099–1101); Hoc erat, alma parens, quod me per tela, per ignis / eripis . . .? (Verg. A.
2.664–5)
Sed quid est quod tuo nunc animo aegre’st? (Pl. Cas. 178); Sci’n quid est quod ego
ad te venio? (Pl. Men. 677); Quid est quod tu exanimatus iam hos multos dies / gestas
tabellas tecum . . . (Pl. Ps. 9–10); Quid est quod de voluntate caelestium dubitare pos-
simus? (Cic. Phil. 4.10); Quid est quod diligenter conficiamus tabulas? (Cic. Q. Rosc.
7); Quid erat quod confirmabat se abs te argentum esse repetiturum . . .? (Cic. Ver. 4.43)36
NB: Quid fecerat quod eum totiens per insidias interficere voluistis? (Cic. Dom. 59)
. The use of quia clauses with the verb accedit ‘to be added’, or ‘to
constitute an addition to’
Quia is used with accedit ‘to constitute an addition to’ from Augustine onward. An
example is (a).
(a) Huc accedit quia ipse dies. . . incertus est.
(‘To this fact is added that the day itself . . . is uncertain.’ August. Serm. 17.7)
. The use of quia clauses with verbs and expressions meaning
‘to leave unmentioned’
Quia with verbs and expressions meaning ‘to leave unmentioned’ is very rare and
Late. An example is (a).37
(a) Non praeterimus quia aliqui nec in Hebraeo putant esse, nec in ceteris inter-
pretationibus . . .
(‘We do not fail to record the fact that some do not believe that it is either in the
Hebrew or in other versions . . .’ Ambr. Hex. 3.5.20)
. The use of quia clauses with verbs and expressions of emotion
There are only a few instances in Early Latin and in later periods of quia as a marker
of clauses with verbs and expressions denoting emotion (verba affectuum). An example
is (a). Since with this class of verbs the reason for the emotion is sometimes expressed,
there are instances where one may interpret the quia clause as a reason adjunct. The
36 See Lebreton (1901a: 318–19). For more instances in Cicero, see Merguet (Phil.) s.v. quis 312A;
(Reden) s.v. quod 223, § 7c; Bennett: I.136–7. See also Löfstedt (1966: 262–4; 2000: 85–6).
37 See TLL s.v. praetereo 1020.74ff.
Finite declarative clauses 77
accusative and infinitive is—by far—the normal construction with emotion expres-
sions, of which gaudeo is the only representative with a considerable number of
instances of quia clauses.
(a) . . . ut mi volup est . . . quia vos . . . / rediisse video . . .
(‘. . . as it is a pleasure for me to see that you’ve both . . . returned home . . .’ Pl. St. 506–7)
As with quod (see § 15.8), instances of queror quia are often included in this class of
verbs. An example from Cicero is (b).
(b) . . . secum Titinium et Servium questos esse quia non . . . remisisset . . .
(‘. . . that Titinius and Servius have grumbled to him for not making the concession . . .’
Cic. Att. 10.3a.2)
. The use of quia with verbs and expressions of perception, cognition,
and communication
The first two instances of quia marking an argument clause with a perception and a
communication verb are found in Petronius (the freedman Echion speaking in his
substandard variety of Latin),38 one of which is (a). This use became more common in
ecclesiastical authors, probably stimulated by the use of Ø~t (hóti) with comparable
verbs in Greek. However, just like quod, it always remained a minor competitor of the
accusative and infinitive, except in the Bible translations in Cyprian (c. ad 250) and in
the Peregrinatio, where it is more frequent than the accusative and infinitive. (For the
relative development of quia and quod, see § 15.9.)
(a) Sed subolfacio quia nobis epulum daturus est Mammaea . . .
(‘I scent that Mammaea is going to give us a meal . . .’ Petr. 45.10 (Echion speaking))
Supplement (in alphabetical order by governing expression):
Perception expressions: Sed et haec audivi quia daemonium illos occidit. (Vulg.
Tob. 6.14); . . . quia ubi legebant venturum Christum, ibi legebant quia occisuri erant
Christum. (Aug. Serm. 92.1)
Cognition expressions: . . . et nos credidimus et cognovimus quia tu es Christus . . .
(Vulg. Joh. 6.70); . . . hoc intelligis quia . . . (Mulom. Chir. 118); Novit enim quia, si
dederit illam viro alio, morte periet . . . (Vulg. Tob. 6.13); An opinatus es quia aurum
tuum desiderarem? (Ambr. Ep. 4.14); . . . et putans quia ex potu calicis inimicae gentes
interficerentur et ruerent calicem meri libenter accepit non intellegens in omnibus
gentibus etiam Hierusalem conprehendi. (Hier. Ep. 18A.15); Scio enim quia valde me
bene ames. (Scaev. dig. 44.7.61.1); Scit enim quia mortis est fabricatrix voluptas. (Lact.
Inst. 6.22.3); Scias quia his oculis aestimatur etiam Alexander magnus fuisse. (Physiogn.
33); Spero autem de deo quia dabit tibi . . . ampliorem laetitiam. (Hist. Apoll. RA 40)
Manifestum est ergo quia homines dixit deos ex gratia sua deificatos, non de sub-
stantia sua natos. (August. Psal. 49.2)
Communication expressions: Ego illi iam tres cardeles occidi, et dixi quia mustella
comedit. (Petr. 46.4 (Echion speaking)); . . . prophetavit quia Iesus moriturus erat pro
gente . . . (Hier. Is. 15.56.8.9)
. The use of quia clauses with verbs and expressions of blaming, praising,
congratulating, and thanking
With verbs and expressions meaning ‘to blame’, ‘to praise’, ‘to congratulate’, and ‘to
thank’ quia is rarely found before ecclesiastical authors started using it. Just as with
quod (see § 15.10) it is not always clear whether the quia clause is an argument or a
reason adjunct clause.
(a) Quod laudas quia oblivisci me scripsi ante facta et delicta nostri amici, ego
vero ita facio.
(‘As to your praising me for writing that I forget the past actions and errors of our
friend, indeed I do forget them.’ Cic. Att. 9.9.1)
Instances of quia in argument clauses combined with a preparative pronoun are found
from Early Latin onward, but this use of quia is relatively infrequent, quod being the
normal subordinator in this function. An example is (a). In some cases quia is used
with the same verbs without a preparative element.
(a) Eheu, huic illud dolet / quia nunc remissus est edendi exercitus.
(‘Oh, oh, oh, this one ( points to his stomach) is in pain because the army for eating
has been dismissed now.’ Pl. Capt. 152–3)
Finite declarative clauses 79
Supplement:
Idne pudet te quia captivam genere prognatam bono / in praeda es mercatus? (Pl.
Epid. 107–8); An id doles, soror, quia illi suom officium / non colunt, quom tu tuom
facis? (Pl. St. 34–6)
Sin ea’st causa retinendi apud vos / quia aegra’st, te mihi iniuriam facere
arbitror . . . (Ter. Hec. 255–6)
39 For Tertullian, see Hoppe (1903: 76–7 = 1985: 148–9). 40 See Sznajder (2019).
41 Irenaeus shows an idiosyncratically strong preference for quoniam. See Svennung (1948: 46).
42 See Bülow-Jacobsen in Cuvigny (2012: 352–5).
80 Subordinate clauses filling an argument position
Beelzebub habet et quia in principe daemonum eicit daemonia. (Vulg. Marc. 3.22—
NB: coordination); . . . legitur in domo tua de minore filio tuo quoniam ‘mortuus
erat et revixit’, perierat et inventus est. (August. Conf. 8.6); . . . scitote quoniam me
primo odit. (Cypr. ad Fort. 11.7); Dic tu aliter ut scias quoniam necessitate hoc fit.
(Pomp. V.253.32K)
NB: . . . laetati sunt quoniam siluerunt . . . (Vet. Lat. Psal. 106.30—NB: Vulg. has quia)
perspectives on reality can compete: ‘I saw how he fell’ presupposes ‘I saw that he fell’.
An illustration is (a). There are a few borderline cases mentioned in the literature,
especially of quomodo, one of which is (b). The parallelism with the context makes it
likely that this is still a case of strained use of the interrogative adverb and not a sub-
ordinator in statu nascendi. There are, however, from the fourth century onward cases
that cannot be interpreted as interrogative at all. Apart from the semantic overlap
mentioned above, this evolution of quomodo may have been stimulated by its becom-
ing the substitute for interrogative ut as well (see § 15.60). The equivalent use of
quemadmodum is less frequent.44
(a) Non meminisse nos ratu’s, / quo modo trecentos Philippos Collybisco vilico /
dederis . . .
(‘Didn’t you think we’d remember how you gave your overseer Collybiscus three hun-
dred Philippics . . .’ Pl. Poen. 557–9)
(b) Scis Gnaeum quam sit fatuus, scis quomodo crudelitatem virtutem putet,
scis quam se semper a nobis derisum putet.
(‘You know how foolish Gnaeus is, how he takes cruelty for courage, how he thinks
we always made fun of him.’ Cas. Fam. 15.19.4)
The regular negation is non, which distinguishes these clauses from imperative ut
argument clauses, in which the negator is ne (the latter clauses are often called ‘final
noun clauses’). In the case of coordination of multiple clauses, the negator in the sec-
ond (or following) clause is neque. In declarative ut clauses the subordinator ut cannot
be omitted (but see § 15.30). These clauses are discussed in § 7.130 (v) from the point
44 Examples can be found in TLL s.v. modus 1283.10ff; 1290.75ff. For a discussion of the evolution of
quomodo, see Herman (1957; 1963: 58–9); for its development in the Romance languages, see Herman
(1963: 166–74).
45 ‘Konsekutive Substantivsätze’ in K.-St.: II.234–47.
82 Subordinate clauses filling an argument position
. The use of ut clauses with the verb accedit ‘to be added to’ or ‘to
constitute an addition to’
With the verb accedit the subject clause is more often a quod clause (see § 15.6). The
difference in meaning between a quod and an ut clause is not always obvious. A much-
discussed example is (a), where there can be no doubt that Appius Claudius was
indeed blind, the typical context for factive quod. The common explanation, reflected
in the translation below, which follows Powell ad loc., is that the ut clause indicates
that the content is of relatively major importance.47 However, this is difficult to prove.
(a) Ad Appi Claudi senectutem accedebat etiam ut caecus esset. Tamen is, cum
sententia senatus inclinaret ad pacem cum Pyrrho foedusque faciendum,
non dubitavit dicere . . .
(‘In addition to Appius Claudius’ old age it was his misfortune that he should be (ital-
ics Powell) blind; yet when the sentiment of the senate was inclining towards making
peace and an alliance with Pyrrhus, he did not hesitate to say . . .’ Cic. Sen. 16)
(b) Accedit eodem ut etiam ipse candidatus totum animum atque omnem
curam, operam diligentiamque suam in petitione non possit ponere.
(‘A further result is that even the candidate himself cannot devote all his attention, all
his care and all his unremitting effort to the campaign.’ Cic. Mur. 45)
Supplement:
Accedit ut accusatorum alterius crudelitate, alterius indignitate conturber. (Cic.
Deiot. 2); Huc accedit uti quicque in sua corpora rursum / dissolvat natura . . . (Lucr.
1.215–16); Nam ad cetera id quoque accesserat ut ne alendi quidem exercitus nisi ex
Bruttio agro spes esset . . . (Liv. 28.12.7)
NB: TLL s.v. accedo 269.83 and K.-St.: II.242 refer to an exceptional negation by ne
in Cels. 4.8.1, but the text seems uncertain.
The verbs addo, adicio, and adiungo are also mentioned in this context, but for those
verbs the ut (or ne) clause must be explained as with dico (see § 15.64).
Ut (non) is the regular subordinator with verbs and expressions of happening and
befalling. Examples are (a)–(c). A few ‘deviant’ negated clauses are given in the
Supplement alongside normal ones with ut non. The use of ne is required if human
participation or some external force is implied in the context, as it is for example by
procuratione in (d).48 Non is required when the negation is local (see § 8.7), as in (e),
where non goes with casu incideret, in contrast with iudicio perveniret.49 For the use of
quod with these verbs, see § 15.13. Whereas the quod clause is usually factive and
contains known information, the ut clause is usually non-factive (or ‘virtual’) and
contains new information (but see ex. (a)).50
(a) Velut / mi evenit ut ovans praeda onustus incederem.
(‘Just as it has become my lot to be marching along rejoicing and weighed down with
booty.’ Pl. Bac. 1068–9)
(b) ‘Insperanti’, inquit, ‘mihi et Cottae, sed valde optanti utrique nostrum, cecidit
ut in istum sermonem, Crasse, delaberemini.’
(‘ “We never looked for it,” exclaimed Sulpicius, “but it has fallen out, Crassus, just as
both I and Cotta earnestly hoped, I mean that you two should slip into this particular
conversation.’ Cic. de Orat. 1.96)
48 See Calboli (1995/6: 147), who also mentions the relative frequency of instances of ne in the jurists.
49 For statistical information concerning the distribution of ut non and ne with fio ‘to happen’, see Kirk
(1923: 263), with further discussion.
50 See Bolkestein (1989b: 48–9), Rosén (1989a), and Greco (2012: 36–7).
84 Subordinate clauses filling an argument position
(c) . . . cum accidere possit ut (sc. curator) negotio . . . habilis non sit . . .
(‘. . . for it could happen that he is not suited to the business . . .’ Nerat. dig. 27.10.9)
(d) Nihil autem est pro certo futurum, quod potest aliqua procuratione accidere
ne fiat.
(‘But nothing is “certain to happen” which there is some means of dealing with so as
to prevent its happening.’ Cic. Div. 2.21)
(e) Gallus Vibius . . . cui hoc accidisse uni scio ut <in> insaniam non casu inci-
deret, sed iudicio perveniret.
(‘Vibius Gallus, to whom alone, as far as I know, the following happened: he did not
fall into madness by chance but rather came to it by an act of judgement.’ Sen. Con.
2.1.25)
Supplement (in alphabetical order by governing expression):
Eadem nocte accidit ut esset luna plena . . . (Caes. Gal. 4.29.1—NB: factive); Id cum
appararetur, priusquam classis exiret, accidit ut una nocte omnes Hermae, qui in oppido
erant Athenis, deicerentur . . . (Nep. Alc. 3.2); Ac forte acciderat ut eam gentem
Rhenum transgressam avus Agrippa in fidem acciperet. (Tac. Ann. 12.27.1); Quod
numquam opinatus fui neque alius quisquam civium / sibi eventurum, id contigit ut
salvi poteremur domi. (Pl. Am. 186–7); Quoniam autem tecum ut essem non con-
tigit, utinam tui consili certior factus essem! (Cic. Att. 8.11d.5); . . . ni antehac vidis-
semus fieri / ut apud lenones rivales filiis fierent patres. (Pl. Bac. 1209–10); Cum hoc,
ut fere fit, in via sermonem contulit; ex quo factum est ut illud iter familiarius facere
vellent. (Cic. Inv. 2.14); Locos quidem quosdam, si videbitur, transferam, et maxime
ab iis quos modo nominavi, cum inciderit ut id apte fieri possit . . . (Cic. Fin. 1.7); . . .
cum . . . Marco Metello obtigisset ut is de pecuniis repetundis quaereret . . . (Cic. Ver.
1.21); Sed ex eo credo quibusdam usu venire ut abhorreant a Latinis, quod . . .
(Cic. Fin. 1.8)
Negated clauses:. . . cum ipsius vitio acciderit ne mandatori possit actionibus cedere.
(Papin. dig. 46.3.95.11.pr.); De possessore quoque furioso quaeri potest, si quid ne in
rerum natura esset per furorem eius accidisset. (Pomp. dig. 26.7.61); Tam facile innocens
occisus est in ea civitate in qua sibi putat aliquis tam facile posse contingere ne reus
fiat? (Quint. Decl. 294.8); Nam si multi gavisi sunt ibi se habuisse divitias suas, quo
contigit ut hostis non accederet . . . (August. Civ. 1.10); Quo evenit ne Hasdrubal cum
duobus se consulibus proeliaturum prius sciret quam utriusque virtute prosterner-
etur. (V. Max. 7.4.4); Sed ob id quod furtum fecit servus aut noxam nocuit evenit quo
minus eum habere domino liceat, sicuti ob id quod obligatus est fundus accidere
possit ut eum habere domino non liceat. (Pomp. dig. 30.45.1); In hoc genere saepe
fieri potest ut non plane par numerus sit syllabarum . . . (Rhet. Her. 4.28);51 Id ne fieri
posset obsidione atque oppidi circummunitione fiebat. (Caes. Civ. 1.19.5); Ita fit ne
decidant fructus. (Plin. Nat. 17.253); Forte ita inciderat ne duo violenta ingenia
matrimonio iungerentur fortuna, credo, populi Romani, quo diuturnius Servi regnum
esset constituique civitatis mores possent. (Liv. 1.46.5)52
51 TLL s.v. possum 135.34ff. mentions two instances of ut ne in Terence (An. 699; Ph. 245), but they
seem to be wrongly analysed.
52 See Ogilvie ad loc. and Panchón (2003: 457–8).
Finite declarative clauses 85
Ut clauses can function as subject of a third person singular form of sum, meaning ‘to
be the case’ (see also § 4.15). An example is (a). Future forms are relatively common,
as in (b). The combination looks like the ‘periphrastic’ use of facio and committo dis-
cussed in § 15.36.53
(a) . . . quando denique fuit ut quod licet non liceret?
(‘. . . when, in fact, was it that what is allowed was not allowed?’ Cic. Cael. 48)
(b) Quodsi esset aliquando futurum ut aliquis de L. Flacci pernicie cogitaret . . .
(‘And if it was fated ever to happen that any one should devise mischief to Lucius
Flaccus . . .’ Cic. Flac. 2)
Supplement:
Non erat ut, qui modus <a>moribus fuerat, idem esset iniuriae. (Cic. Dom. 65—add.
Nisbet); Ille erat ut odisset primum defensorem salutis meae . . . (Cic. Mil. 35—illi cj.
Clark); Non est igitur ut mirandum sit ea praesentiri a divinantibus quae nusquam
sint. (Cic. Div. 1.128); Qui fuit ut tutas agitaret Daedalus alas, / Icarus immensas
nomine signet aquas? (Ov. Tr. 3.4.21–2); Neque est ut putemus ignorari ea ab ani-
malibus. (Plin. Nat. 18.3)
Future forms: Quodsi diutius alatur controversia, fore uti pars cum parte civitatis
confligat. (Caes. Gal. 7.32.5); Ipse parat sese porro speratque futurum / ut videat
quod consequitur rem quamque. (Lucr. 4.805–6); Quod si permittatur, perpaucis lus-
tris futurum ut deserta oppida deserti agri nullum militem dare possent. (Liv. 41.8.7);
Sed si hoc optinuerit, futurum est ut in potestate eius . . . sit compromissum eludere.
(Ulp. dig. 4.8.30)
Negation by ne: Continuo enim rex adfirmavit fore ne amplius de se Ptolomaeus
quereretur . . . (V. Max. 6.4.3)
Sometimes the main clause has a preparative pronoun or determiner as the subject
(so-called ‘explicative’ ut). An example is (c). Another way of announcing the ut clause
is shown in (d).
(c) Sed fuit hoc in utroque eorum ut Crassus non tam existimari vellet non didi-
cisse, quam . . .
(‘There was nevertheless this point of difference between the two men, that Crassus
did not so much wish to be thought to have learned nothing, as . . .’ Cic. de Orat. 2.4)
(d) Sed si ita est ut tu sis Iahonis filius, / signum esse oportet in manu laeva tibi . . .
(‘But if it’s true that you are Iahon’s son, you should have a mark on your left hand . . .’
Pl. Poen. 1072–3)
Supplement:
In qua velim sit illud quod saepe posuisti ut non necesse sit consumere aetatem atque
ut possit is illa omnia cernere qui tantummodo aspexerit. (Cic. de Orat. 3.145); Cf.:
Tum Catulus ‘est’, inquit, ‘ut dicis, Antoni, ut plerique philosophi nulla tradant prae-
cepta dicendi . . . Sed Aristoteles . . . (Cic. de Orat. 2.152); Quod si ita est ut neque quis-
quam nisi bonus vir et omnes boni beati sint, quid philosophia magis colendum aut
quid est virtute divinius? (Cic. Fin. 3.76)
. The use of ut clauses with verbs and expressions meaning ‘the conclusion
is’, ‘it follows’
Ut is used in argument clauses with verbs and expressions meaning ‘the conclusion is’
or ‘it follows’. Examples are (a)–(c).
(a) Relinquitur ut id quod dicitis non modo non fecerim, sed ne potuerim qui-
dem facere.
(‘It follows that I not only did not do what you say, but that I was not even able to do
it.’ Cic. Inv. 1.45)
(b) Restat ut aut summa negligentia tibi obstiterit aut unica liberalitas.
(‘The only alternative is that extreme negligence or unparalleled generosity prevented
you.’ Cic. Quinct. 41)
(c) . . . consequens esse videtur ut scribas tu idem de legibus.
(‘. . . I consider it a logical thing that . . . you should also write about its laws.’ Cic.
Leg. 1.15)
Supplement (in alphabetical order by governing expression):
At si tu possideas, consequens est ut utilis mihi actio adversum te dari debeat. (Gaius
Inst. 2.78); Ex quo efficitur ut quod sit honestum, id sit solum bonum. (Cic. Tusc.
5.45); Linquitur ut merito maternum nomen adepta / terra sit, e terra quoniam sunt
cuncta creata. (Lucr. 5.795–6—NB: presence of the attitudinal disjunct merito within
the ut clause); Reliquum est ut per servos id admiserit. (Cic. S. Rosc. 77); Quod si fit,
ut me excutiam atque egrediar domo / id restat. (Ter. Ph. 586–7); Nec enim sequitur
ut, cui cor sapiat, ei non sapiat palatus. (Cic. Fin. 2.24); Superest ut nec te consilii nec
me paeniteat obsequii. (Plin. Ep. 1.1.2)
NB: exceptional negation: Reliquum est ne quid stulte, ne quid temere dicam aut
faciam contra potentis. (Cic. Fam. 9.16.5); Sequitur enim ne ultra velis id te esse
quod, si prius scisses, non fuisses. (Tert. Apol. 8.9)
. The use of ut clauses with verbs and expressions meaning ‘it remains to
be done’, ‘it is sufficient’
With verbs and expressions meaning ‘it remains to be done’ and ‘it is sufficient’ ut
subject clauses can be used alongside quod clauses and accusative and infinitive
clauses, usually with a clear difference in meaning. Examples are (a)–(c).
(a) Sequitur ut de frumento empto vos, iudices, doceam . . .
(‘My next business, gentlemen, is to put before you the purchase of corn . . .’ Cic. Ver.
3.163)
Finite declarative clauses 87
There are two attestations of a subject clause with reliquum est without ut, emended
by earlier editors (Cic. Fam. 15.21.5 and Dolab. Fam. 9.9.3). See also in the preceding
section Cic. Fam. 9.16.5 with ne.
. The use of ut clauses with various third person singular verb forms
(so-called impersonal verbs)
Subject ut clauses can be used with a few other verbs. Examples are (a)–(c). In (c) the
first ut clause is the subject of abest, the second depends on tantum. Note in (a) the use
of the preparative pronoun hoc as subject. With some of these verbs the accusative
and infinitive is more common.
(a) Quodsi hoc apparet in bestiis . . . ut se ipsae diligant . . .
(‘Now if it is evident in animals . . . that they love themselves . . .’ Cic. Amic. 81)
(b) Quomodo, oro te, convenit ut et Diogenen mireris et Daedalum?
(‘How, I ask, is it consistent that you admire both Diogenes and Daedalus?’ Sen. Ep.
90.14)
(c) . . . tantumque abest ut aliquam mihi bonam gratiam quaesisse videar, ut
multas me etiam simultates . . . intellegam . . . suscepisse.
(‘It is so far from being the case that I have sought any popularity for myself, that I am
aware of having even incurred many enmities . . .’ Cic. Man. 71)
88 Subordinate clauses filling an argument position
An exceptional instance of ‘raising’ of the subject of a subject clause with abest to the
position of subject of the main clause is (d). The second argument of absum may also
be filled by an ut clause, in that case in combination with the prepositional expression
ab eo, as in (e) (see also § 14.6).54
(d) Hoc detrimento milites nostri tantum afuerunt ut perturbarentur, ut incensi
atque incitati magnas accessiones fecerint in operibus hostium expugnandis.
(‘Our troops were so far from being dismayed by this reverse that, impas-
sioned and stimulated, they carried out large-scale sallies in the course of
storming the enemy’s defence-works.’ B. Alex. 22.1—NB: cf. tantum afuit ut
milites nostri hoc detrimento perturbarentur ut . . .)
(e) Tantum autem abest ab eo ut malum mors sit . . . ut verear ne homini nihil sit
non malum aliud certius . . .
(‘So wide of the truth, however, is the view that death is an evil . . . that I incline
to think that nothing else is more assuredly not an evil for a human being . . .’
Cic. Tusc. 1.76)
. The use of ut clauses with expressions consisting of the copula and an
adjective functioning as subject complement
There is a large number of neuter singular forms of adjectives which function as subject
complement with the copula or a copular verb and which have an ut clause as the sub-
ject. Examples are (a)–(e). In many of these combinations the accusative and infinitive
is possible as well or even more common (see § 15.102), not always with a clear differ-
ence in meaning. With many of these adjectives a prolative infinitive is also possible
(see §§ 15.127–8), and in some cases an imperative interpretation is possible as well
(see § 15.78). Some of these adjectives resemble the meaning classes discussed in the
preceding sections but others do not. Several of them are bivalent adjectives; many are
evaluative. The main clause often has a preparative pronoun as subject, as in (f).
(a) Iustum est <ut> tuos tibi servos tuo arbitratu serviat.
(‘It’s only just that your slave serves you according to your wishes.’ Pl. Bac. 994)
(b) Aequom videtur tibi ut ego alienum quod est / meum esse dicam?
(‘Does it seem right to you that I should say that something belonging to someone
else belongs to me?’ Pl. Rud. 1230–1)
(c) Non est veri simile ut Chrysogonus horum litteras adamarit . . .
(‘It is improbable that Chrysogonus took a fancy to their culture . . .’ Cic. S. Rosc.
121—NB: perfect subjunctive)
(d) . . . consentaneum est huic naturae ut sapiens velit gerere et administrare rem
publicam . . .
(‘. . . it follows from this natural disposition that the Wise Man should desire to engage
in politics and government . . .’ Cic. Fin. 3.68)
(e) Difficile est quidem ut ad haec hilariora studia tam vehementer perculsus
animus tam cito possit accedere.
(‘It would be difficult indeed for a mind so severely smitten to approach so quickly
this lighter kind of literature.’ Sen. Dial. 11.8.3)
(f) Mi illud videri mirum ut una illaec capra / uxoris simiai dotem ambederit.
(‘It seemed strange to me that that one goat should have eaten up the monkey’s wife’s
dowry.’ Pl. Mer. 240–1—NB: perfect subjunctive)
. The use of ut clauses with expressions consisting of the copula and a noun
or noun phrase functioning as subject complement
Ut subject clauses can be used as subject with various combinations of nouns and
noun phrases (cf. §§ 9.22, 9.29–35) that function as subject complement. Examples
are (a) and (b). Quite often the main clause has a preparative pronoun as the subject,
as in (c). The accusative and infinitive (see § 15.102) and the prolative infinitive (see
§ 15.128) are possible as well. In some cases an imperative interpretation is also pos-
sible (see also § 15.79).55
(a) Fuit occasio, si vellet, iam pridem argentum ut daret.
(‘There was an opportunity for him to give me the money long ago if he’d wanted to.’
Pl. Ps. 285)
(b) Caput autem est in omni procuratione negotii et muneris publici ut avaritiae
pellatur etiam minima suspicio.
(‘But the chief thing in all public administration and public service is that even the
slightest suspicion of self-seeking should be avoided.’ Cic. Off. 2.75)
(c) Sed mos numquam <ille> illi fuit patri meo / ut exprobraret quod bonis
faceret boni.
(‘It was never my father’s habit to cast in good people’s teeth what good turns he was
doing them.’ Pl. Am. 46–7)
Supplement (in alphabetical order by noun (phrase)):
Consuetudo eorum omnium est ut sine utribus ad exercitum non eant. (Caes. Gal.
1.48.7); Iliaci cineres et flamma extrema meorum, / testor, in occasu vestro nec tela
nec ullas / vitavisse vices, Danaum et, si fata fuissent / ut caderem, meruisse manu.
55 Most examples are taken from K.-St.: II.244–6, where more can be found.
Finite declarative clauses 91
(Verg. A. 432–4); Sed est mos hominum ut nolint eundem pluribus rebus excellere.
(Cic. Brut. 84); Natura rerum est ut qui balbutiunt plus loquantur. (Symm. Ep. 1.76);
Satis est enim certe in virtute ut fortiter vivamus. (Cic. Tusc. 5.53)
Est miserorum ut malevolentes sint atque invideant bonis. (Pl. Capt. 583); . . . negavit
moris esse Graecorum ut in convivio virorum accumberent mulieres. (Cic. Ver.
1.66); Nam et sapientis est consilium explicare suum de maximis rebus et honesti et
diserti ut mente providere, auctoritate probare, oratione persuadere possis. (Cic. de
Orat. 2.233—NB: parallelism of infinitive and ut clause)
With a preparative pronoun as subject: Ea causa fuit <ut> aedis haec dedicare<tur>.
(Cic. Leg. 2.58); Est enim hoc Gallicae consuetudinis uti et viatores etiam invitos
consistere cogant . . . (Caes. Gal. 4.5.2); In propriis igitur est verbis illa laus oratoris ut
abiecta atque obsoleta fugiat . . . (Cic. de Orat. 3.150); Non ignoro omnium fere qui
abdicantur hunc esse morem ut acta iam causa ad preces convertantur . . . (Quint.
Decl. 258.10); Ea natura rerum est, patres conscripti, ut qui sensum verae gloriae
ceperit . . . nihil cum hac gloria comparandum putet. (Cic. Phil. 5.49); Summa denique
huius generis haec est ut, si in refellendo adversario firmior esse oratio quam in con-
firmandis nostris rebus potest, omnia in illum conferam tela. (Cic. de Orat. 2.293); Id
erat forte tempus anni ut frumentum in areis Hispani haberent. (Liv. 34.9.12); Est
enim hoc commune vitium magnis liberisque civitatibus ut invidia gloriae comes
sit . . . (Nep. Cha. 3.3)
. The use of ut clauses with expressions consisting of the copula and other
categories that function as subject complement
Ut subject clauses are also found with other combinations of subject complements
with the copula. Examples are (a), a possessive adjective (neuter singular form), and
(b), a prepositional phrase.
(a) Hoc meum est ut faciam sedulo.
(‘This is my task: to do my best.’ Pl. Per. 46)
(b) In rem hoc tuam est. # Ut quidem emoriar prius quam ducam.
(‘It’s for your own good. # Certainly, that I die before I marry.’ Pl. Aul. 154)
Supplement:
Adverb: Quibus si finitum malum non fuerit, prope est ut perpetuum sit. (Cels.
3.23.8).
Prepositional phrases: Ex tua re est ut ego emoriar. (Pl. Ps. 336); Est igitur in tua
potestate ut ille in me satis sibi praesidi putet esse. (Cic. Fam. 13.39.1); Nos uti per
otium tuti simus, in vostra manu est, patres conscripti. (Sal. Jug. 14.13)
A cleft-like example is (c), more or less equivalent to magis ipse moleste fert.56 (For
‘cleft’ constructions, see § 22.12.)
56 See Löfstedt (1966: 273–5; 2000: 100) and Norberg (1937: 112ff.).
92 Subordinate clauses filling an argument position
(c) . . . magis est ut ipse moleste ferat errasse se . . . quam ut istius amicitiae crimen
reformidet.
(‘. . . there is more reason that he should himself be troubled that he made a mis-
take . . . than that he should be in fear of such a friendship being made a matter of
accusation.’ Cic. Cael. 14)
Supplement:
Quin etiam quanto in partes res quaeque minutas / distrahitur magis, hoc magis est
ut cernere possis / evanescere paulatim stinguique colorem. (Lucr. 2.826ff.); Sed
prius est ut vobis, quod initio facere debueram, vel nunc saltem referam, quis iste vel
unde fuerit. (Apul. Met. 10.18.1); Vix est ut occurrat talis oratio . . . (August. Psal.
85.7); . . . ante est ut ostendat et probet esse illic ecclesiam. (Cypr. Sent. 55); Prope est
ut veniat tempus. (Vulg. Is. 14.1)
. The use of ut clauses with verbs and expressions of perception, cognition,
and communication
Supplement:
. . . non esse credendum ut in id genus mortis exposuerit Creator filium suum quod
ipse maledixerat. (Tert. Marc. 3.18.1); Quis hoc crederet ut barbara Getarum lingua
Hebraicam quaereret veritatem . . . (Hier. Ep. 106.1)
(c) Nam Abderites quidem Protagoras, cuius a te modo mentio facta est,
sophistes temporibus illis vel maximus, cum in principio libri sic
posuisset ‘de divis neque ut sint neque ut non sint habeo dicere’,
Atheniensium iussu urbe atque agro est exterminatus . . .
57 See Sz.: 645–6. For the use of ut in imperative clauses with dico and other verbs, see § 15.66.
58 For discussion and references, see Greco (2012: 36–9).
59 So Pease ad loc. See also Coleman (1971: 215) and Panchón (2003: 371).
Finite declarative clauses 93
(‘Since as for Protagoras of Abdera, perhaps the greatest sophist of that age,
to whom you just now alluded, for beginning a book with the words ‘About
the gods I am unable to affirm either that they exist or that they do not exist,’
he was sentenced by a decree of the Athenians to be banished from the city
and the country . . .’ Cic. N.D. 1.63)
Appendix: Gregory of Tours has a few instances of verbs of this class governing a
clause with a simple subjunctive, as in (d).60
(d) Quod credo Ø providentia Dei fecisset.
(‘I believe that the providence of God did this.’ Greg. Tur. Hist. 8.20)
In a way that resembles its use with imperative sentences (see § 6.29), facio can be
used to emphasize the active involvement of a person in the action that he is (was, will
be) undertaking.61 Examples are (a) and (b). Another verb used in a similar way is ago
‘to bring it about that’, as in (c). Compare also committo ‘to perpetrate’ in (d). Most
instances come from Cicero. This use is sometimes called ‘periphrastic’.
(a) Etsi . . . videbam te hanc epistulam cum ad urbem esses esse lecturum, . . .
tamen . . . faciendum mihi putavi ut tuis litteris brevi responderem.
(‘Although . . . I see that you won’t read this till you are at the gates of Rome . . ., yet . . . I
thought I ought to be careful to give your letter a brief answer.’ Cic. Fam. 3.8.1)
(b) Invitus feci ut fortissimi viri T. Flaminini fratrem L. Flamininum e senatu
eicerem . . .
(‘Against my will I brought it about that I expelled from the Senate Lucius Flamininus,
the brother of that most valiant man, Titus Flamininus . . .’ Cic. Sen. 42)
(c) Atqui ne ex eo quidem tempore id egit Sestius ut a suis munitus tuto in foro
magistratum gereret . . .
(‘But not even since that time has Sestius worked towards being able to discharge the
duties of his magistracy safely in the forum under the guard of his own men.’ Cic.
Sest. 79)
(d) Nam profecto non est meum . . . committere ut neglegens <non> scribendo
fuisse videar . . .
(‘It would hardly be in character . . . to commit the error of appearing negligent
through failure to write . . .’ Cic. Fam. 3.9.3)
Supplement:
Heia, Megadore, haud decorum facinus tuis factis facis / ut inopem atque innoxium
abs te atque abs tuis me inrideas. (Pl. Aul. 220–1); Quapropter et his qui eos ludos
habent et his qui eo venire consuerunt visum est faciundum ut ostenderemus nostram
sententiam, nobis non placere. (Edictum adversos Latinos rhetores apud Gel.
15.11.2); . . . negavi me esse facturum ut de periculo publico non ad consilium publi-
cum rem integram deferrem. (Cic. Catil. 3.7); . . . fecimus et alias saepe et nuper in
Tusculano ut ad eam consuetudinem disputaremus. (Cic. Tusc. 5.11); Euntibus vero,
domesticis praesertim, ut nihil ad te dem litterarum facere non possum . . . (Cic. Att.
8.14.1); Eo feci ut [eo] celeriter eunti darem. (Cic. Att. 11.23.2); Faciebat hoc Sextius,
ut consummato die . . . interrogaret animum suum. (Sen. Dial. 5.36)
Id agis ut . . . effugias ex urbe inanis. (Pl. Trin. 699–701); Id egit ut amicos obser-
vantia, rem parsimonia retineret. (Cic. Quinct. 59); Non ergo id agitur ut aliquid
adsensu meo comprobem . . . (Cic. Luc. 126); Adice nunc quod id agis ut et iram feras
et iniuriam. (Sen. Dial. 5.26)
Neque ego hau committam ut, si quid peccatum siet, / fecisse dicas de [me] mea
sententia. (Pl. Bac. 1037–8); Id me commissurum ut patiar fieri ne animum induxeris.
(Pl. Trin. 704); At vero posthac frustra potius dabo quam, si recte dari potuerint,
committam ut non dem. (Cic. Att. 5.11.1); . . . Volumnius ‘Quoniam in collegae
voluntate interpretanda’ inquit ‘erravi, non committam ut quid vos velitis obscurum
sit: manere an abire me velitis clamore significate.’ (Liv. 10.19.11)
(‘However, I’m not afraid that the moderation of my career will be too little a defence
against false reports in time to come; nor am I afraid that . . .’ Mat. Fam. 11.28.8)
(e) Accepi tuas litteras, quibus intellexi te vereri ne superiores mihi redditae non
essent.
(‘I got your letter, through which I found out that you were afraid that your earlier
letters had not been delivered to me.’ Cic. Fam. 14.5.1)
From Early Latin onwards ut is used in argument clauses with verbs and expressions
of fearing. The origin and the meaning of ut is disputed: in about half of the instances
in Plautus, Terence, Cicero, and Caesar the interpretation of the ut clause as an indirect
question with ut meaning ‘how’ is perfectly possible, as in (f) (‘I’m afraid how I would
be able . . .’), but in other instances it is preferable to interpret ut as ne non, as in (g) and
(h). In Early Latin ut was four times commoner than ne non, whereas in Cicero’s works
the proportion is the reverse.62
(f) Ornamenta quae locavi metuo ut possim recipere.
(‘I’m afraid I might not be able to get back the costumes I hired out.’ Pl. Cur. 464)
(g) Id paves (vv.ll.) ne ducas tu illam. Tu autem ut ducas.
(‘You fear that you’re going to marry her, you (to Charinus) that you’re not.’ Ter. An.
349—NB: Donatus ad loc.: pro ne non ut posuit)
(h) Quod enim tu afuisti, vereor ut satis diligenter actum in senatu sit de litteris
meis.
(‘For I’m afraid that because of your absence the deliberation in the Senate concern-
ing my letter was not careful enough.’ Cic. Att. 6.4.2)
Supplement (in alphabetical order by governing expression):
Eo plus horreo ne illae magis res nos ceperint quam nos illas. (Liv. 34.4.3); Metuo in
commune ne quam fraudem frausus sit. (Pl. As. 286); At metuo ut satis sis subdola.
(Pl. Mil. 355); Metuo te atque istos expiare ut possies. (Pl. Mos. 465); Ehem, te hercle
ego circumspectabam, nimis metuebam male ne abiisses. (Pl. Ps. 912); Primum
omnium iam hunc comparem metuo meum / ne deserat med atque ad hostis transeat.
(Pl. Ps. 1026–7—NB: with pseudo-object, see § 9.17); Metui’ ne non, quom velis,
convincas esse illum tuom? (Ter. Hau. 1017); Ecquid paves ne scelus feceris? (Quint.
Decl. 340.7); Quod mihi ne eveniat non nullum periculum est. (Pl. Capt. 91); Numquid
subtimes ne ad te hoc crimen pertinere videatur? (Cic. Phil. 2.36); . . . rem frumen-
tariam ut satis commode supportari posset timere dicebant. (Caes. Gal. 1.39.7); . . . timeo
ne male facta antiqua mea sint inventa omnia. (Pl. Truc. 774); Timere non debeo ne
non unus iste civis Romanus illa cruce dignus, ceteri omnes simili periculo indignis-
simi iudicentur. (Cic. Ver. 5.171); . . . sed firmae haec vereor ut sint nuptiae. (Ter. Hec.
101); Sed quod vereor ne plures sint futuri qui de hoc genere me quod nimium multa
[re]scripserim reprehendant . . . (Var. L. 7.109); . . . ne verendum quidem est ut tenere
se possit, ut moderari, ne honoribus nostris elatus intemperantius suis opibus
62 So Woodcock (1959: 144–5). OLD s.v. ut § 3 classifies the use of ut with verbs of ‘anxiety or misgiv-
ing’ as indirect interrogative adverb. For the various explanations offered for the use of ut, see Sz.: 534–5
and Ripoll (2012: 303–5).
96 Subordinate clauses filling an argument position
utatur. (Cic. Ph. 5.48); Quorum si nemo verum vidit de natura deorum, verendum est
ne nulla sit omnino. (Cic. N.D. 1.94); Unum vereor ne senatus propter urbanarum
rerum metum Pompeium nolit dimittere. (Cic. Att. 5.18.1); Si manet, vereor ne exer-
citum firmum habere non possit. (Cic. Att. 7.12.2)
NB: Me nihil magis pudebat quam ne Eumolpus sensisset, quicquid illud fuerat, et
homo dicacissimus carminibus vindicaret . . . (Petr. 113.12)
Further examples of coordination: Pertimuerunt ne caritate patriae ductus ali-
quando ab ipsis descisceret et cum suis in gratiam rediret. (Nep. Alc. 5.1); O colo-
nia, quae . . . vereris . . . ne supinus eat cavaque in palude recumbat. (Catul. 17.1–8);
Etenim vereor ne aut celatum me illis ipsis non honestum aut invitatum refugisse
mihi sit turpissimum. (Cic. Phil. 2.32); . . . veriti ne noctu impediti sub onere con-
fligere cogerentur aut ne ab equitatu Caesaris in angustiis tenerentur . . . (Caes. Civ.
1.66.2)
Exceptional forms of coordination: Magis curae est magisque afformido ne is
pereat neu corrumpatur. (Pl. Bac. 1078); Eos nunc homines metuo mihi ne opsint
neve opstent uspiam . . . (Pl. Mil. 996); . . . non possumus <non> vereri ne male com-
parati sitis nec tantum rei publicae prosit . . . (Liv. 40.46.4)63
Problematic is the use of ut in (i). Various explanations have been suggested,64 but
Madvig’s emendation ne may be the best solution. Much discussed also is ut in Hor.
S. 1.3.120–1, which is best taken as ironic.
(i) Neque erat ulla satis firma statio opposita, quia nihil minus quam ut egredi
moenibus auderent timeri poterat.
(‘And no outpost in sufficient strength had been stationed to face them,
since nothing less could be feared than that they should venture to sally out
from the walls.’ Liv. 28.22.12)
(b) . . . quid abest quin actum nobis nihil sit quod a Philippo liberavimus
Graeciam . . .?
(‘. . . how does this differ from saying that nothing was accomplished by us in freeing
Greece from Philip . . .?’ Liv. 35.16.12)
(c) . . . haud procul afuit quin violarentur.
(‘. . . they weren’t far from suffering violence.’ Liv. 25.1.11)
Supplement:
Abesse non potest quin eiusdem hominis sit probos improbare qui improbos probet.
(Gracch. orat. 24); . . . naves . . . longas XXVIII invenit instructas neque multum abesse
ab eo quin paucis diebus deduci possint. (Caes. Gal. 5.2.2); . . . quid abest quin prodi-
tis Sidicinis non Romanorum solum sed Samnitium quoque dicto pareamus . . . ? (Liv.
8.4.2); Sed re prospere gesta non multum afuit quin a Bructero quodam occidere-
tur . . . (Suet. Tib. 19.1)
NB: Paene factum est quin castra relinquerent atque cederent hosti. (Quad. hist.
58=59C)66
Supplement:
Quid ergo dubitas quin lubenter tuo ero meus quod possiet / facere faciat male . . . (Pl.
Poen. 881–2); Nam hoc haud dubium’st quin Chremes / tibi non det gnatam. (Ter. An.
391–2—NB: with preparative hoc); Equidem non dubito qui<n> animadverteris item
in ea[m] innumerabilem similitudinum numerum . . . (Var. L. 9.32); . . . dubitandum
non est quin numquam possit utilitas cum honestate contendere. (Cic. Off. 3.11);
Quis igitur . . . dubitet quin in virtute divitiae sint? (Cic. Parad. 48—NB: the quin
clause expresses a state); An dubium est quin nihil sit habendum in eo genere quo
vita beata compleatur, si id possit amitti? (Cic. Tusc. 5.40); Non enim dubitabat Xeno
quin ab Ariopagitis invito Memmio impetrari non posset. (Cic. Att. 5.11.6); Itaque
non dubito quin ad Pisonem, quin ad Servium scripserit. (Cic. Att. 7.17.3); <Vi>de
quam turpi leto pereamus, et dubita, si potes, quin ille, seu victus seu victor redierit,
caedem facturus sit. (Cic. Att. 10.10.5); Illud non dubito quin, si te mea summa erga
te studia parum mihi adiunxerint, res publica nos inter nos conciliatura coniunctu-
raque sit. (Cic. Fam. 5.7.2—NB: with preparative illud ); Nam de equitibus hostium,
quin nemo eorum progredi modo extra agmen audeat ne ipsos quidem debere dubi-
tare. (Caes. Gal. 7.66.6); Dubitas ergo quin sedendo superaturi simus eum qui senes-
cat in dies . . . (Liv. 22.39.15); Numquid enim dubium esse cuiquam potest quin nihil
sit tam inquietum quam aër, tam versabile et agitatione gaudens? (Sen. Nat. 6.16.4);
Non tamen puto dubites, Vinici, quin magis pro re publica fuerit manere adhuc
rudem Corinthiorum intellectum quam in tantum ea intellegi et quin hac prudentia
illa imprudentia decori publico fuerit convenientior. (Vell. 1.13.5—NB: coordination
by et); Nemo dubitat quin substitutus ultimum diem aditionis exspectare non solet.
(Paul. dig. 29.2.72)
Related expressions (in alphabetical order by governing expression):67 . . . neque
ambigitur quin Brutus idem qui tantum gloriae Superbo exacto rege meruit pessimo
publico id facturus fuerit . . . (Liv. 2.1.3); Nec diu anquirendum quin Agrippina clari-
tudine generis anteiret. (Tac. Ann. 12.6.1); At controversia non erat quin verum
dicerent. (Cic. Caec. 31); Nemo enim est qui aliter dixerit quin omnium naturarum
simile esset id ad quod omnia referrentur . . . (Cic. Fin. 4.32); Nec discrepat quin
dictator eo anno A. Cornelius fuerit. (Liv. 8.40.1); Si istaec vera sunt, divinitus / non
metuo quin meae uxori latae suppetiae sient. (Pl. Am. 1105–6); . . . nec iam aliter
sentire . . . quin paene circumvallati atque omni exitu et pabulatione interclusi
viderentur. (Caes. Gal. 7.44.4)
NB: no overt negation in the main clause: Nam si quis coactus aliquid boni fecit,
quin nos non obliget, manifestius est. (Sen. Ben. 6.7.2)
The various expressions of ‘no doubt’ have a strong assertive illocutionary force.
Possible alternatives for the quin clause are the accusative and infinitive clause (from
Terence onwards—see § 15.98), the nominative and infinitive construction (from
Tac. Ann. 3.8.2 onwards), the quod clause (see § 15.9), and also the quia clause (a few
Late Latin instances).68
Quin argument clauses are also found with a few other negated expressions of cogni-
tion and communication, with which the accusative and infinitive clause is regular.
Examples are (g) and (h).69
(g) Atqui alterum dici non potest quin i qui nihil metuant . . . beati sint . . .
(‘Well at any rate there can be no question of the one point—that those who have no
fear . . . are happy . . .’ Cic. Tusc. 5.17)
(h) Nec pol me multum fallit quin quod suspicor sit quod velit.
(‘And I can’t be too far from the mark in thinking that what I have in mind is what he
wants.’ Ter. Hec. 728)
Supplement:
Non potest dici quin commode fiat . . . (Rhet. Her. 4.39); Quamquam quis ignorat, qui
modo umquam mediocriter res istas scire curavit, quin tria Graecorum genera sint
vere? (Cic. Flac. 64); Illud te non arbitror fugere quin homines in dissensione domes-
tica debeant, quam diu civiliter sine armis certetur, honestiorem sequi partem. (Cael.
Fam. 8.14.3); Itaque negare non posse quin rectius sit etiam ad pacatos barba-
ros . . . exercitum mitti. (Liv. 40.36.2)
Noteworthy: Neque eum consilium suum fefellit quin hostes eo proelio audito nihil
iam de bello essent cogitaturi. (B. Alex. 32.2—NB: alongside the subject consilium suum)
In a way that resembles the use of ut in ‘periphrastic’ constructions (see § 15.36), quin
can also be used in argument clauses with expressions like non possum quin ‘I cannot
but’,70 facere non possum ‘I cannot bring it about that . . .’ and fieri non potest ‘it is not
possible that . . .’, where it is almost equivalent to ut non. When a quin clause is used
with these expressions, its content is negative. Examples are (i) and ( j). For a parallel
with a more emphatic negation by ut non, see (l).
(i) Video non potesse quin tibi eius nomen eloquar.
(‘I see that it’s not possible for me not to tell you his name.’ Pl. Bac. 559)
( j) Ut mihi rem narras, Callicles, nullo modo / potest fieri prosus quin dos detur
virgini.
(‘The way you tell me the story, Callicles, it’s absolutely impossible that a dowry not
be given to the girl.’ Pl. Trin. 729–30)
(k) Tamen facere non possum quin cottidie ad te mittam ut tuas accipiam.
(‘Still I can’t resist sending you a daily letter so as to get your replies.’ Cic. Att. 12.27.2)
(l) Fieri, inquam, Triari, nullo pacto potest ut non dicas quid non probes eius a
quo dissentias.
(‘It’s in no way possible’, I say, ‘that you do not say what you do not approve of in the
views of the man with whom you disagree.’ Cic. Fin. 1.27)
Supplement:
Eheu, nequeo quin fleam, / quom aps ted abeam. (Pl. Mil. 1342–3); Sati’n, si quis
amat, nequit quin nihili sit atque improbis se artibus expoliat? (Pl. Truc. 553); Non
enim faciam quin scias. (Pl. Mil. 283); Sed quom orata huiu’ reminiscor nequeo quin
lacrumem miser. (Ter. Hec. 385); Fieri nullo modo poterat quin Cleomeni parceretur.
(Cic. Ver. 5.104); . . . facere non potui quin tibi et sententiam et voluntatem declara-
rem meam. (Cic. Fam. 6.13.1)
Related examples (in alphabetical order by governing expression): Tribus non
conduci possum libertatibus, / quin ego illis hodie comparem magnum malum /
quinque hanc omnem rem meae erae iam faciam palam. (Pl. Cas. 504–6); . . . ut effici
non possit quin eos tam oderim quam rem publicam diligo. (Cic. Phil. 11.36); Non
possum pati / quin tibi caput demulceam. (Ter. Hau. 761–2); . . . non esse in nostra
potestate quin illa eveniant quorum causae fuerint . . . (Cic. Fat. 45)
With a couple of verbs and expressions of waiting in expectation and trying, si argu-
ment clauses in the subjunctive refer to situations which are uncertain or the outcome
of which is uncertain. The verbs involved are also found with ut argument clauses that
express aiming at the realization of a state of affairs.71 Examples of si clauses are (a)
and (c); for ut clauses with the same verbs, see (b) and (d). In (e), res seems to function
as a preparative device. The si clause normally follows the main clause; negated clauses
seem not to be attested. With some of these verbs, indirect questions with an inter-
rogative particle occur as well (see § 15.46). These argument clauses must be distin-
guished from the purpose si clauses discussed in § 16.59.
(a) Miror huc iam non arcessi in proxumum uxorem meam, / quae iam dudum
si arcessatur ornata exspectat domi.
(‘I’m surprised that my wife is not yet being sent for to go next door. She’s all dressed up
and has been waiting at home for a long time already in case she’s sent for.’ Pl. Cas. 539–40)
(b) Nisi exspectare vis / ut eam sine dote frater nuptum conlocet.
(‘Unless you want to wait for her brother to give her in marriage without dowry.’ Pl.
Trin. 734–5)
(c) Helvetii . . . nonnumquam interdiu, s<a>epius noctu si perrumpere possent
conati . . . hoc conatu destiterunt.
(‘The Helvetii, after having made attempts sometimes by day, more often by night, to
see if they could break through . . . abandoned this attempt.’ Caes. Gal. 1.8.4)
(d) . . . Caesar intellexit nihil aliud eos conari nisi ut se cogerent castra eo loco
ponere . . .
(‘. . . Caesar realized that what they were trying to do was no less than force him to
pitch camp at a spot . . .’ B. Afr. 69)
(e) Temptata res est si primo impetu capi Ardea posset.
(‘An attempt was made to see if Ardea could be seized by an initial attack.’ Liv. 1.57.3)
Supplement:
Ei rei operam dare te fuerat aliquanto aequius / si qui probiorem facere posses, non
uti / in eandem tute accederes infamiam . . . (Pl. Trin. 119–21); . . . non recusavit quo
minus vel extremo spiritu si quam opem rei publicae ferre posset experiretur. (Cic.
Phil. 9.2); Haec (sc. vipera) cum temptaret siqua res esset cibo, / Limam momordit.
(Phaed. 4.8.4–5); Temptemus tamen si adhuc sorbilia sunt. (Petr. 33.5 (Trimalchio
speaking)); At Germanicus . . . dandum adhuc spatium ratus si recenti exemplo sibi
ipsi consulerent praemittit litteras ad Caecinam . . . (Tac. Ann. 1.48.1—NB: depends
on dandum spatium)
Si clauses are used relatively frequently in combination with the verb miror ‘to be sur-
prised’, with which the accusative and infinitive is more common and which is also
found with a factive quod clause, just like emotion verbs (see § 15.8). Although one
may sometimes hesitate as to whether the si clauses are really argument clauses, and
not conditional satellites, the argument status is sometimes proved by the presence of
preparative pronouns like id in (b) and illud in (c). The si clause normally follows the
main clause. The main clause is often negative or understood as negative. The si
expression differs in meaning from the other two expressions.72 There are a few
attestations of negation by nisi, as in (d), unless it is a conditional clause. Instances of
negation by si non are attested in Augustine, as in (e).73
(a) Edepol minime miror si te fugitat aut oculos tuos / aut si te odit, qui istum
appelles Tyndarum pro Philocrate.
(‘Seriously, I’m not surprised at all if he’s avoiding you, or eye-contact with you, or if
he hates you, since you address him as Tyndarus instead of Philocrates.’ Pl. Capt.
545–6)
(b) Idne tu mirare si patrissat filius?
(‘Are you surprised if the son takes after his father?’ Pl. Ps. 442)
(c) Enim vero illud praeter alia mira miror maxume / si haec habet [pateram]
illam.
(‘Honestly, I am astonished if she has that bowl more than I am astonished about the
other astonishing things.’ Pl. Am. 772–3)
(d) Mirarer nisi pro tam bono patre fuisset qui mori vellet.
(‘I should have been surprised had there been no son who was willing to die for so
good a father.’ Sen. Con. 9.4.8)
(e) Ubi miror si non scelere graviore mercedem tantam tanto sceleri reddiderunt.
(‘Here I wonder if it was not a greater crime for them to bestow so great a reward on
so great a crime.’ August. Civ. 3.15.11)
Most if not all of the instances of si clauses with other emotion verbs mentioned in
K.-St. (II.424–5)74 can be understood as conditional satellites. An example is (f). TLL
s.v. ignosco 318.81 gives (g) as an illustration of ignosco governing a si clause, but the
parallelism with the quoniam clause shows that this is incorrect. Notable is the use of
the conditional clause in (h), mentioned in K.-St., but it is not the counterpart of a
factive quod clause.
(f) (sc. Demosthenes) Qui dolere se aiebat, si quando opificum antelucana vic-
tus esset industria.
(‘(Demosthenes) who said that he was grieved if ever he had been beaten by
the diligence of workmen rising before the break of day.’ Cic. Tusc. 4.44)
(g) Si quid in te peccavi, ac potius quoniam peccavi, ignosce. In me enim ipsum
peccavi vehementius.
(‘If I have treated you badly in any way, or rather since I have done so, forgive
me. I have treated myself worse.’ Cic. Att. 3.15.4)
(h) Commoti patres vice fortunarum humanarum, si ille praepotens opibus
populus . . . adeo infractos gereret animos ut se ipse suaque omnia potestatis
alienae faceret.
(‘The Fathers were profoundly moved by the vicissitudes of human fortune,
considering how that great and opulent people . . . was become so broken in
spirit as to yield itself up with all its possessions to the dominion of another.’
Liv. 7.31.6)
NB: In (i) si non is local negation (see § 8.7).
(i) Minus mirandum est illaec aetas si quid illorum facit / quam si non faciat.
(‘It’s less of a surprise if a man of that age does some of those things than if
he doesn’t.’ Pl. Bac. 409–10)
Si clauses are also used in combination with various so-called impersonal expressions.
An example is (a) with impersonal interest ‘it makes a difference’. More common are
combinations of est with a subject complement like mirum est ‘it is remarkable’, as in
(b)–(d). With these expressions several other types of clauses are found as well (notably
quod clauses, accusative and infinitive clauses, and indirect questions). These clauses
function as arguments. The si clauses, by contrast, are ‘normal’ conditional satellite
clauses.75
(a) Nihil interesse autem non modo si omni ex parte eiusdem modi sint sed
etiam si discerni non possint.
(‘That it makes no difference not only if they are alike in every aspect but also if they
cannot be distinguished from each other.’ Cic. Luc. 40)
74 See also Sz.: 666. 75 See K.-St.: II.425 for the examples quoted below (and more).
Finite declarative clauses 103
Supplement:
Plusque proficit si ponetur spes utilitatis futurae quam praeteriti beneficii commemo-
ratio. (Cic. de Orat. 2.206); Quin et verba Flavi vulgabantur non referre dedecori si
citharoedus demoveretur . . . (Tac. Ann. 15.65.1)
Volup est quod agas si id procedit lepide at<que ex> sententia. (Pl. Mil. 947);
Mirum tibi videtur si tu loquendo talentum quaesisti? (Gracch. orat. 44); Aut, si haec
dici non poterunt, dicendum erit illud extremum, non esse mirum si nunc primum
deliquerit. (Cic. Inv. 2.34); ‘Minime mirum’, inquit Antonius, ‘si ista res adhuc nostra
lingua inlustrata non est.’ (Cic. de Orat. 2.55); Obprobrio fuisse adulescentibus si
amatores non haberent. (Cic. Rep. 4.3); Quod si eam veniam sibi dedisset tantisque
implicatum rebus sublevasset, magno ei praemio futurum. (Nep. Paus. 4.6); Illud te
mihi ignoscere, P. Corneli, aequum erit, si . . . ne tuam quidem gloriam bono publico
praeponam. (Liv. 28.41.1); . . . si pavetis aciem, indignum id quidem . . . (Tac. Hist.
4.58.4)
The negation in these cases is by non, except in the combination mirum est/mira sunt
ni, as in (e). Nisi in this context is rare, but there are already three instances of mira
nisi in Plautus.76
(e) . . . mirumque adeo est ni hunc fecere sibi Aetoli agoranomum.
(‘. . . and it would be a surprise indeed if the Aetolians haven’t made him their
market inspector.’ Pl. Capt. 824)
(a) Ita praecipito mulieri atque ancillulae, / ut simulet se tuam esse uxorem et
deperire hunc militem, / quasique hunc anulum faveae suae dederit . . .
(‘Instruct the woman and her maid that the woman has to pretend to be your wife
and to be madly in love with this soldier, and that she has to act as though she were
giving this ring to her favourite slave girl . . .’ Pl. Mil. 795–7)
Whereas in (a)–(c) the content of the accusation or shame is at the same time the
reason for it, this is different for (d) and (e), where the governing expressions are verbs
of communication.
78 For the meaning of tamquam in these contexts, see Bodelot (2011: 271–2) and Baños (2014: 73).
79 For the use of tamquam (si) in argument clauses and its development from satellite clauses (see
§ 16.66), see Bennett (1900) and Bodelot (2011; 2014b). For quasi, see Bennett (1900). See also Rosén and
Shalev (2017).
Finite interrogative clauses (indirect questions) 105
(d) (sc. Plautius Silvanus) . . . turbata mente respondit tamquam ipse somno
gravis atque eo ignarus et uxor sponte mortem sumpsisset.
(‘. . . he replied in a disturbed state of mind to the effect that he had been heavily asleep
and therefore unaware and that his wife took death upon herself.’ Tac. Ann. 4.22.1—
tr. Woodman, with adjustment)
(e) Nam quo pertinuit . . . differri . . . etiam per externos tamquam veneno inter-
ceptus esset . . .
(‘And what was the point of its being spread abroad, and among foreigners too, that
he had met a premature death from poison?’ Tac. Ann. 3.12.4—tr. Woodman)
The notion ‘indirect question’ covers a variety of expressions, only some of which cor-
respond to direct questions in that they refer to a situation in which a speaker or
writer wants to obtain information from an addressee (see §§ 6.5–26). This is the situ-
ation in (a), where the indirect question sit which is dependent on rogas corresponds
to the immediately preceding direct question which is directed to an addressee. In (b),
however, the indirect question does not presuppose an addressee. Exx. (a) and (b) do,
nevertheless, share a common feature in that they both refer to a lack of information.
The notion ‘indirect question’ is also used for indirect exclamatory argument clauses,
such as (c). In such cases there is no lack of information involved (see § 15.89).
(a) Estne ea intu’? # Sit rogas?
(‘Is she inside? # Are you asking whether she’s inside?’ Ter. Hau. 454)
(b) Pol ego haud scio quid post fuat.
(‘I don’t know what’ll happen later on.’ Pl. Aul. 426)
(c) Vide palliolum ut rugat.
(‘Look how your cloak is all crumpled.’ Pl. Cas. 246)
For the use of the moods in indirect questions see § 7.133–7; for the tenses, see § 7.98.
Appendix: In Late Latin the infinitive is occasionally found in indirect questions
instead of a subjunctive finite form.82 An example is (f).
(f) . . . non habent quid respondere.
(‘. . . they do not know what response to make.’ August. Psal. Don. 40)
81 This is the way the two examples are treated in the TLL s.v. dico 983.46 and 983.18f., respectively. In
TLL s.v. an 6.47 (e) is treated as an independent question.
82 Examples are discussed by Martínez-Pais (1994).
83 Following Bodelot (1987: 25–51; 2003: 211–14).
Finite interrogative clauses (indirect questions) 107
‘to find out by trial’ (OLD § 3c), viso ‘to go and look at’; verbs of this class
constitute 11 per cent of the expressions governing an indirect question.
3 verba declarandi, comprising verbs of communication, such as dico ‘to say’,
narro ‘to tell’, scribo ‘to write’, and statuo ‘to make up one’s mind’ (OLD § 14);
verbs of this class constitute 20 per cent of the expressions governing an
indirect question.
4 verba sciendi, sentiendi, etc., comprising verbs of perception and cognition,
such as dubito ‘to be in doubt’, existimo ‘to think’, intellego ‘to understand’,
miror ‘to be surprised’, paenitet ‘to give reason for regret’, scio ‘to know’ and
nescio ‘not to know’, timeo ‘to fear’, and video ‘to see’; verbs of this class con-
stitute 63 per cent of the expressions governing an indirect question.
It is only for verbs of the first class that the indirect questions may reflect real ques-
tions, but even with these verbs this is often not the case: the reported words are so
general that it is difficult to reconstruct a particular utterance from them, for example
in (a), where the original wording of the question cannot be determined with any
precision.
(a) Rogant me servi quo eam. Dico me ire quo saturi solent.
(‘The servants asked me where I was going. I said I was going where those who are
full normally go.’ Pl. Cur. 362)
As for the distribution of the two types of indirect questions, viz. clausal questions
(corresponding to ‘sentence questions’ in § 6.8) and ‘constituent questions’ (see
§ 6.19), the former are relatively uncommon with verbs and expressions belonging to
classes (iii) and (iv), and certain combinations are excluded for obvious reasons.
Typical combinations are (b) and (c), whereas something like (d) is not attested or
conceivable.84
(b) Requireres, / rogitares quis esset aut unde esset, qua prosapia, / civisne esset
an peregrinus.
(‘You should have inquired and asked who he was or where he was from, from what
family, and whether he was a citizen or a foreigner.’ Pl. Mer. 633–5)
(c) Scio quam rem agat.
(‘I know what he’s up to.’ Pl. Aul. 574)
(d) *Scio civisne sit.
Again, just as with direct questions (see § 6.7), simple indirect questions can be sub-
divided into clausal questions, exemplified by (a), and constituent questions, exempli-
fied by (b). The same verb may govern coordinated pairs belonging to these two types
of clauses, as in (c).
(a) Rogato servos veneritne ad eum tuos.
(‘You must then ask whether your slave has come to him.’ Pl. Poen. 181)
(b) Quid nos opinemur audietis ex iuratis.
(‘What we think, you will learn from the evidence of witnesses on oath.’ Cic. Cael. 4)
(c) . . . cum ex me quidam quaesisset quo die Roma exissem et num quidnam
esset novi.
(‘. . . when someone asked me on what day I had left Rome, and whether there was any
news.’ Cic. Planc. 65)
85 See Sz.: 542. For a problematic passage in Cic. Tusc. 1.60, see Lundström (1986: 32–6).
Finite interrogative clauses (indirect questions) 109
Supplement:
De Theopompo, summo homine, negleximus, qui ubi terrarum sit, quid agat, vivat
denique an mortuus sit, quis aut scit aut curat? (Cic. Phil. 13.33); Rure<ne> iam
redierim quaeris. (Hirt. Att. 15.6.2—add. Wesenberg); Debes hoc etiam rescribere sit
tibi curae (si tibi curae <est> cj. Chabot) / quantae conveniat Munatius. (Hor. Ep.
1.3.30–1); Tu pande vivat coniugis frater mei / et pande teneat quas soror sedes mea.
(Sen. Ag. 404–5)
It is not surprising that there are so few attestations: with most governing verbs a
subordinate clause without a subordinating device would be ambiguous.
86 For the general decrease of -ne, especially in prose, see TLL s.v. 261.25ff.; for its decrease in indirect
questions, see 271.71f. For quantitative and distributional data concerning these question particles, see
Bodelot (2002b).
87 So K.-St.: II.513.
110 Subordinate clauses filling an argument position
going to occur, e.g.“If we leave Carthage untouched, will any harm come to the
Roman state?” ’ Cic. Inv. 1.11)
After the classical period -ne and num are gradually replaced by an. To give one example,
whereas in Classical Latin there are numerous instances of -ne and num with the verb
quaero ‘to inquire’, with no sure attestation of an,88 in Seneca, by contrast, an is normal,
as in (c).89 Instances of variation of the two particles as in (d) provide further evidence
for their equivalence in Post-Classical Latin.
(c) Hoc tam invisum vitium an inpunitum esse debeat quaeritur . . .
(‘Some raise the question whether a vice so odious as this ought to go unpunished . . .’
Sen. Ben. 3.6.1)
(d) Ubi in balneum venit, paulisper resistere experirique num tempora adstrin-
gantur et an sudor aliqui oriatur.
(‘On arriving at the bath, he should sit for a while to try whether his temples become
tightened, and whether any sweat arises.’ Cels. 2.17.6)
15.52 The use of -ne in indirect clausal questions The regular context of -ne is with
verbs and expressions that indicate or imply a request for information: examples are
(a)–(b). However, other governing verbs are also found from Plautus onwards, as in
(c). Examples for the four classes of governing verbs mentioned in § 15.46 can be found
in the Supplement. The particle is normally attached to the first full word of the
indirect question, as in (a). That word is usually the verb of the clause, but it can
be another word that constitutes the scope of the question (for scope, see § 6.8). The
particle is occasionally attached to a question word, as in (d).
(a) Quid tu igitur rogitas tene obiurigem?
(‘Then why do you ask if it’s you that I’m reproaching?’ Pl. Trin. 70)
(b) . . . ex quibus quaererem signa scirentne fuisse quae non essent.
(‘. . . I would make them say whether they knew of the previous existence of statues
that were no longer there.’ Cic. Ver. 1.51)
(c) Contempla, amabo, mea Scapha, sati’n haec me vestis deceat.
(‘Look me over, please, my dear Scapha, to see if this dress suits me nicely.’ Pl. Mos. 166)
(d) . . . Teutonorum legatus respondit interrogatus quantine eum aestimaret
donari sibi nolle talem vivum verumque.
(‘. . . the Teuton envoy when asked what he thought was the value of it said that he
would rather not have even the living original as a gift.’ Plin. Nat. 35.25)
88 For a few (apparent) exceptions, most textually uncertain, see K.-St.: II.522.
89 For the use of an in Seneca, see Brodmuehler (1914: 45–6).
Finite interrogative clauses (indirect questions) 111
15.53 The use of nonne in indirect clausal questions Nonne is only attested six times,
and only in Cicero, as in (a), expecting the answer ‘yes’.
(a) Quaero igitur a te, L. Piso, nonne oppressam rem publicam putes, si tot tam
impii, tam audaces, tam facinerosi recepti sint.
(‘Then I ask you, Lucius Piso, whether you would not regard the Republic as crushed
if so many who are so wicked, so bold, and so vicious are taken back.’ Cic. Phil. 12.15)
15.54 The use of num in indirect clausal questions In Cicero about half of the instances
of indirect questions with num depend on verbs and expressions that indicate or imply
a request for information. In most of these the num clause refers to a situation that is
viewed as negative in some way by the person who requests the information, as in
direct questions. Examples are (a) and (b). Sometimes in a similar context it is difficult
to see a negative implication, as in (c). For a rare example of another type of governing
verb with which a num clause is used, again with a negative implication, see (d).
Normally with such verbs the negative implication is absent.90
(a) Tum (sc. Sophocles) senex dicitur eam fabulam quam in manibus habebat et
proxime scripserat, Oedipum Coloneum, recitasse iudicibus quaesisseque
90 For a discussion of all the Ciceronian instances of num, see Stegmann (1890: 25–9).
112 Subordinate clauses filling an argument position
num illud carmen desipientis videretur. Quo recitato sententiis iudicum est
liberatus.
(‘Thereupon, it is said that the old man read to the jury his play, Oedipus at Colonus,
which he was carrying with him and had just written, and that he inquired whether
that poem seemed to be the work of an imbecile. When he had finished reciting it he
was acquitted by the verdict of the jury.’ Cic. Sen. 22)
(b) Quaerit ex proximo vicino num feriae quaedam piscatorum essent, quod eos
nullos videret. ‘Nullae, quod sciam’ ille . . .
(‘He asked his next-door neighbour whether it was a fishermen’s holiday, since he did
not see a sign of them. “Not so far as I know,” he said . . .’ Cic. Off. 3.59)
(c) Velim . . . alicui des negotium qui quaerat Q. Staberi fundus num quis in
Pompeiano Nolanove venalis sit.
(‘Please . . . commission someone to find out whether there is a farm belonging to
Q. Staberius for sale in the district of Pompeii or Nola.’ Cic. Att. 13.8.1)
(d) Nunc huc intro ibo, visam hesternas reliquias, / quierintne recte necne, num
infuerit febris, / opertaen’ fuerint, ne quis obreptaverit.
(‘Now I’ll go in here and and check on yesterday’s leftovers to see whether they have
slept well or not, whether they’ve caught a fever, and whether they’ve been covered,
so that no one could have approached them stealthily.’ Pl. Per. 77–9—NB: infuerit is
often emended)
Num becomes less frequent from the Augustan period onwards, its place being taken
by an—already normal in Silver Latin—and by numquid, for example in Seneca (see
also § 6.13). An example is (e).
(e) Observa te itaque numquid vestis tua domusque dissentiant, numquid in te
liberalis sis, in tuos sordidus, numquid cenes frugaliter, aedifices luxuriose.
(‘Observe yourself, then, and see whether your dress and your house are inconsistent,
whether you treat yourself lavishly and your family meanly, whether you eat frugal
dinners and yet build luxurious houses.’ Sen. Ep. 20.3)
Supplement (in alphabetical order by verb):
Class 1 (see § 15.46): A quibus si qui quaereret sedissentne iudices in C. Fabricium,
sedisse se dicerent. Si interrogarentur num quo crimine is esset accusatus praeter-
quam veneni eius quod quaesitum Habito diceretur, negarent. (Cic. Clu. 105); Hic
iam de ipso accusatore quaero, qui P. Sestium queritur cum multitudine in tribunatu
et cum praesidio magno fuisse, num illo die fuerit? Certe non fuit. (Cic. Sest. 78); An
Lacedaemonii Philippo minitante per litteras se omnia quae conarentur prohibitu-
rum quaesiverunt num se esset etiam mori prohibiturus. (Cic. Tusc. 5.42);
Interrogatusque a Tiberio num se mandante eam sententiam prompsisset, sponte
dixisse respondit . . . (Tac. Ann. 1.8.4)
Class 2: Quaeso, reputate cum animis vostris num id mutare melius sit . . . (Sal. Jug.
85.10); Simul circumvehi procul castra iubet specularique num auctum aliqua parte
sit vallum, et ut attendant semel bisne signum canat in castris. (Liv. 27.47.3); Vide
ergo num satius sit aut invulnerabilem animum dicere aut animum extra omnem
Finite interrogative clauses (indirect questions) 113
patientiam positum. (Sen. Ep. 9.2); Nequeo mirari satis / quo ille abire ignavo’ possit
longius, nisi si domum / forte ad nos rediit. # Vise amabo num sit. # Iam faxo scies.
(Ter. Eu. 661–3)
Class 3: Et haud facile dixerim num illa tanto expeditiora sint discentibus artificia,
quanto minus ampla sunt. (Col. 11.1.9); Tu tamen mitte, quaeso, mihi obviam lit-
teras numquid putes rei publicae nomine tardandum esse nobis. (Cic. Att.
6.7.2); . . . perscribe ad me omnia, sed diligentissime in primisque num quid iudicio-
rum status aut factorum aut futurorum etiam laboret. (Cic. Att. 5.13.3); Volo uti mihi
respondeas num quis ex toto collegio legem sit ausus ferre praeter unum te? (Cic.
Vat. 17—NB: editors assume a lacuna at this point, with various proposals to emend)
Class 4: Dubito num idem tibi suadere quod mihi debeam. (Plin. Ep. 6.27.1);
Opperiar, ut sciam num quid nam haec turba tristitiae adferat. (Ter. An. 235); Sed
velim scire quid adventus Octavi, num qui concursus ad eum, num quae xp~p{t}wzŪ
suspicio. (Cic. Att. 14.5.3)
The precise contribution of num to the meaning of the indirect question is much dis-
puted. The presentation given above follows essentially Stegmann (1890). For a more
sceptical view of the negative interpretation of num clauses, see Bodelot (2003: 251–5).
Noteworthy is the use of num expecting a negative answer ‘whether by any chance’
in combination with permoveor ‘I am filled with concern’ in (f).
(f) . . . plerumque permoveor num ad ipsum referri verius sit . . .
(‘I have often been moved <to consider> whether it might be more probable
for it to be ascribed to the man himself . . .’ Tac. Ann. 4.57.1—tr. Martin and
Woodman)
15.55 The use of utrum in indirect clausal questions Utrum alone is used in simple
indirect questions in literary Late Latin.91 An example is (a).
(a) Utrum Mediolani etiam nunc posito pagina ista reddenda sit in ambiguo
conloco.
(‘I am in doubt whether, on the assumption that you are still in Milan, this page
should be sent to you there.’ Symm. Ep. 1.86)
15.56 The use of an in indirect clausal questions In Early and Classical Latin, indirect
questions with an very rarely reflect true questions. Its usual contexts are expressions
of uncertainty (haud scio, nescio, dubito) (class 4), as in (a)–(c). The verb rogo is used
with an only from Ovid onwards, as in (d), a request to obtain information (class 1).
Verbs of communication (class 3) are exceptional.
(a) Nunc hunc hau scio an colloquar.
(‘Now I don’t know if I should talk to him.’ Pl. Mos. 783)
(b) De accessione dubito an Apronio ipsi data sit merces operae atque inpudentiae.
(‘As for the fee, it may possibly have been given to Apronius himself as the pay for his
trouble—and his unblushing knavery.’ Cic. Ver. 3.76)
In the Classical period the combinations haud scio an and nescio an functioned as
idioms, meaning more or less ‘perhaps’. An example is (e). The idiomatic status of
these expressions appears also from their use below the clause level, for example as a
modifier of an adjective, as in (f). They resemble the expressions fortasse an, forsitan,
fors fuat an (for which see (g)).
(e) Constantiam dico. Nescio an melius patientiam possim dicere.
(‘I call it constancy. Perhaps it would be better to say “endurance”.’ Cic. Lig. 26)
(f) Quorum quidem testem non mediocrem, sed haud scio an gravissimum
Regulum nolite quaeso vituperare.
(‘And pray do not disparage Regulus, as no unimportant witness—nay, I am
rather inclined to think he was the very best witness—to the truth of their
doctrine.’ Cic. Off. 3.105)
Finite interrogative clauses (indirect questions) 115
(g) Nam istaec quae tibi renuntiantur, filium / te velle amantem argento circum-
ducere, / fors fuat an istaec dicta sint mendacia.
(‘Well, as for the things reported to you, that your lovesick son wants to
swindle you out of your money, perhaps those words are lies.’ Pl. Ps. 430–2)
15.57 The use of si in indirect clausal questions The use of si in indirect clausal ques-
tions is first attested with verbs and expressions of seeing, in rare instances like (a) and
(b). It is much more common for these verbs to be used with indirect question particles
such as -ne. Note the instances with -ne in (c) and with num in (d). Ex. (e) shows si
clauses functioning in basically the same way as the -ne clauses in the following
sentence, with both being governed by the verb quaero ‘to inquire’, ‘to examine’ in the
preceding text. Ex. (f) has the si indirect question preceded by preparative id, which
shows beyond doubt that it is an argument clause, and not a satellite.92 Note that here
the si clause is in the indicative (more examples in the Supplement). By the time of
Vitruvius, si is firmly established as an indirect question particle. It survives in the
Romance languages.93
(a) Viso huc amator si a foro rediit domum . . .
(‘I’m popping by here to see if our lover has come back home from the market . . .’
Pl. Cas. 591)
(b) Vide vero si tibi satis placet.94
(‘But see if you like it well enough.’ Pl. Per. 825)
(c) Abi, vise redieritne iam an nondum domum.
(‘Go and see if he’s returned home yet or not.’ Ter. Ph. 445)
(d) Vide num moratur.
(‘See if he keeps you waiting.’ Pl. Mos. 614)
(e) (quaeritur) De expetendo et fugiendo huius modi: Si expetendae divitiae, si
fugienda paupertas. De aequo et iniquo: Aequumne sit ulcisci a quocumque
iniuriam acceperis.
(‘Questions about what to seek and what to avoid are like this: Whether riches should
be sought? Whether poverty should be avoided. A question about right and wrong:
Whether it is right to take vengeance on whomsoever has wronged you.’ Cic. Top. 84)
(f) Nulla lex satis commoda omnibus est. Id modo quaeritur, si maiori parti et in
summam prodest.
(‘No law is entirely convenient for everyone; this alone is asked, whether it is good for
the majority and on the whole.’ Liv. 34.3.5)
Indirect questions with si normally follow the main clause. However, (g) has the
reverse order, which is the normal one for si conditional clauses; a translation ‘in case
95 A collection of instances can be found in Arias (1995: 304–8), not all of them convincing.
96 Väänänen (1987: 96, n. 223) assumes that the actual words were spoken in Greek.
97 For another interpretation (variation of ablative absolute and si clause), see Woodman and Martin
ad loc.
Finite interrogative clauses (indirect questions) 117
si Iuppiter unam / esse velit Tyriis urbem Troiaque profectis, / miscerive probet
populos aut foedera iungi. (Verg. A. 4.110–12); De ipsa autem testa, si sit optima seu
vitiosa ad structuram, statim nemo potest iudicare . . . (Vitr. 2.8.19); Nescio si quid
amplius ad controversiam baptismi ventilatur. (Tert. Bapt. 15.1); Nescio si versatur
ante oculos vestros nisi Christus . . . (August. Serm. 45.6); Tum mihi naturae libeat
perdiscere mores, /. . . sub terris sint iura deum et tormenta nocentum, / Tisiphones
atro si furit angue caput . . . (Prop. 3.5.25–40)
There is a rich literature on the question of how this interrogative use of si developed.98
It is plausible that the use of si was extended from its use with verbs and expressions
like exspecto, where the si clause refers to an ‘undetermined situation’99 (see § 15.40),
to verbs like viso and video (in a context that implies obtaining information, for
instance an imperative form like vide). Both with verbs and expressions of ‘waiting in
expectation’ and ‘trying’ as well as in indirect questions, the situation referred to in the
subordinate clause is uncertain. With exspecto, indirect questions with the regular
question particles are exceptional. However, they do occur with viso and video. Si
therefore occupied a position that was already available in the frames of these verbs.
I do not believe, as some scholars do, that si in the Plautine (i) is interrogative; an
interpretation as a conditional satellite clause is perfectly possible. Convincing
instances with verba declarandi are (much) later, but this may have to do with the
overall low frequency of indirect questions with this type of verb. There is also a ten-
dency to point to instances like ( j) as early signs of the development of an interroga-
tive si. In this case the si clause is not a straightforward ‘conditional’, but the fact that
the object position of perscrutabor is filled by fanum is a proof of the satellite function
of the si clause. The use of the same subordinating device in conditional and inter-
rogative clauses is not restricted to Latin. Parallels are provided by pà (ei) in Greek
and if in English. Sometimes Greek influence is assumed for the use of si in Latin, but
this is not necessary, given the fact that other languages have developed this double
possibility independently from one another.
(i) Dicito, si (dic si cj. Lindemann) quid vis.
(‘If you want something, tell me.’ Pl. Am. 391)
( j) Ibo hinc intro, perscrutabor fanum, si inveniam uspiam / aurum, dum hic
est occupatus.
(‘I’ll go inside and search the shrine, to see if I can find the gold anywhere
while he’s busy.’ Pl. Aul. 620–1)
15.58 The use of nē (not clitic) in pseudo-indirect clausal questions With a number of
verbs of perception and cognition, notably with video ‘to see’, the subordinate clauses
introduced by nē (‘to check that not’) come close to being indirect questions and ne
resembles a question particle with the sense of num ‘whether not’. Examples are (a)–(c).
In (a), the subordinate clause is not something the subject of visam can control himself
98 See Arias (1995) and Bodelot (2000: 165–72; 2003: 258–63). A survey of earlier literature can be
found in Calboli (1968: 412–13).
99 I adopt the term ‘undetermined situation’, used by OLD s.v. si § 13.
118 Subordinate clauses filling an argument position
(note also the perfect tense turbaverint). In (b) and (c), the subordinate clauses contain
the negator non. In Late Latin ne is so used with verbs with an interrogative meaning as
well, as in (d). Note the parallelism with utrum. See also § 6.11, Appendix, with refer-
ences.100 For imperative clauses with verbs of perception and cognition, see § 15.74 fin.
(a) Ego ibo ad fratrem ad alios captivos meos, / visam ne nocte hac quippiam
turbaverint.
(‘I’ll go to my brother’s to my other prisoners. I’ll check that they didn’t create trouble
last night.’ Pl. Capt. 126–7)
(b) Quod si auctoritatem interponis sine armis, magis equidem laudo, sed vide
ne hoc ipsum non sit necesse.
(‘If, however, you are bringing into play the respect in which you are held without any
implication of armed force, the more credit to you, say I; but consider whether even
this very act is unnecessary.’ Cic. Phil. 13.15—NB: the translation under Philologic
runs: ‘but beware lest this thing itself be quite unnecessary’.)
(c) Caput illud est, ut, si ista vita tibi commodior esse videatur, cogitandum
tamen sit ne tutior non sit.
(‘The capital point is this: if you feel the life you are leading suits you better, you must
still consider whether it is equally secure.’ Cic. Fam. 4.9.4)
(d) Quaerimus utrum tu sis Christus . . . Quaerimus ne forte praecursor illius
sis . . . Quaerimus ne forte aliquis multum praeveniens praeco es . . .
(‘We ask whether you are the Christ . . . We ask whether you perchance are His
precursor . . . We ask, if perchance you are some herald come long before . . .’ August.
Ev. Jo. 4.8—tr. Gibb)
Supplement:
Vide ne quae illic insit alia sortis sub aqua. (Pl. Cas. 380); Sed speculabor ne quis aut
hinc aut ab laeva aut dextera nostro consilio venator adsit . . . (Pl. Mil. 607–8); Cum
circumspiceret ne quid praeterisset . . . (Var. R. 2.9.16); Atque erit observandum dili-
genter ne nihil ad id quo de agatur pertineat id quod iudicatum sit. (Cic. Inv. 1.82);
Sed vide ne quid Catulus attulerit religionis. (Cic. de Orat. 2.367—NB: perfect tense);
Vide igitur ne nulla sit divinatio. (Cic. Div. 2.12); Aeque ambigentibus inter se ne ipse
esset Christus . . . (Tert. Prax. 22.1); Verum tamen interrogate fideliter animas vestras
ne forte de isto integritatis et continentiae vel pudicitiae bono vos inflatius extulis-
tis . . . (August. Civ. 1.28—NB: perfect tense and indicative mood)
15.59 Indirect questions with indefinite pronouns, determiners, adjectives, adverbs, and
particles formed with ec-
Some general information concerning ec- indefinites is given in § 6.18. In indirect
questions they are mainly used with the first two classes of verbs mentioned in § 15.46
and with verbs and expressions of fearing.101 Examples of pronouns are (a) and (b); of
100 For further instances, see TLL s.v. ne 313.54ff. For Tertullian, see Hoppe (1903: 72=1985: 141–2).
101 See TLL s.v. ecquis 56.38ff.
Finite interrogative clauses (indirect questions) 119
a determiner, (c); of a particle, (d); of adverbs, (e) and (f). Most attested instances
come from Early Latin and from Cicero.
(a) . . . percontabor ecquis hunc adulescentem noverit.
(‘I’ll ask if anyone knows this young man here.’ Pl. Capt. 459)
(b) . . . ubi sint, quid agant, ecquid agant / nec participant nos, nec redeunt.
(‘. . . they aren’t returning, and they don’t let us know . . . where they are, what they’re
doing, if they’re doing anything.’ Pl. St. 32–3—NB: variation quid . . . ecquid )
(c) Ibo in Piraeum, visam ecquae advenerit / in portum ex Epheso navis mercatoria.
(‘I’ll go to the Piraeus and check if any merchant ship from Ephesus has arrived in the
harbour.’ Pl. Bac. 235–6)
(d) Tace, subauscultemus ecquid de me fiat mentio.
(‘Be quiet, let’s listen to hear if any mention is made of me.’ Pl. Mil. 993)
(e) . . . coepi opservare, ecquī maiorem filius / mihi honorem haberet quam eius
habuisset pater.
(‘. . . I began to observe whether his son would in any way hold me in greater honour
than his father had.’ Pl. Aul. 15–16)
(f) Simul etiam illud volo uti respondeas . . . ecquando dubitaris contra eas leges
cum plebe agere et concilium convocare.
(‘I should also like you to answer this . . . whether you ever hesitated, contrary to those
laws, to transact business with the commons and summon a meeting.’ Cic. Vat. 18)
102 For quantitative data and the distribution concerning these question words, see Bodelot (2002b).
103 For further instances of nam, see TLL s.v. 29.43ff. and Holmes (2012).
120 Subordinate clauses filling an argument position
Supplement:
Pronouns: Nunc experiemur nostrum uter sit blandior. (Pl. Cas. 264); Videamus
qui hinc egreditur. (Pl. Men. 349);104 Timeo quid siet. (Pl. Mer. 110); Nunc igitur
primum quae ego sim et quae illaec siet / huc quae abiit intro, dicam . . . (Pl. Trin.
6–7); Video cui sit Apulia attributa, quis habeat Etruriam . . . (Cic. Catil. 2.6);
Quoniam cuius consilio occisus sit invenio, cuius manu sit percussus non laboro.
(Cic. S. Rosc. 97); Ex tuis litteris plenus sum exspectatione de Pompeio quidnam de
nobis velit aut ostendat. (Cic. Att. 3.14.1); Neque enim ei deesse volebam et quid
possem timebam. (Cic. Att. 12.24.1); scribit mihi ut ei no / tum faciam quid
gessero (T. Vindol. 645)
Determiners: Obsecro vos ego, mi auxilio, / oro obtestor, sitis et hominem demon-
stretis quis eam abstulerit. (Pl. Aul. 715–16—NB: with hominem as pseudo-object, cf.
Neque hercle ego habeo, neque te quis homo sis scio. (Pl. Men. 301)); Quin percon-
tatu’s hominis quae facies foret / qui illam emisset. (Pl. Mer. 622–3); Quo genere aut
qua in patria nata sit aut quibus parentibus / . . . volo te percontari. (Pl. Per. 596–8); . . .
videte, per deos immortales, quem in locum rem publicam perventuram putetis.
(Cic. S. Rosc. 153); Iam vero in bonis Q. Opimi vendendis quas iste praedas, quam
aperte, quam improbe fecerit, longum est dicere. (Cic. Ver. 1.156)
Adjectives: Dic mihi quali me arbitrare genere prognatum. (Pl. Aul. 212); . . . quom
illum rescisces criminatorem meum / quanto in periclo et quanta in pernicie siet.
(Pl. Bac. 826–7—NB: with illum . . . as pseudo-object); Eho an paenitet te quanto hic
fuerit usui. (Pl. Ps. 305); Recordamini qui dies nudius tertius decimus fuerit, quantus
consensus vestrum, quanta virtus, quanta constantia. (Cic. Phil. 5.2); In qua docet
quot a civitate sua nautas acceperit, quot et quanti quemque dimiserit, quot secum
habuerit. (Cic. Ver. 5.112)
Adverbs: Exspecto quam mox recipiat sese Geta. (Ter. Ph. 606);. . . quaero unde nata
sit aut quo modo. (Cic. Luc. 23); . . . ista tamen amicitia, tametsi vereor quomodo
accepturi sitis, tamen dicam, vos me privastis. (Rhet. Her. 4.29); Ibi cum velut saeptos
montium altitudo teneret Gallos circumspectarentque quanam per iuncta caelo iuga
in alium orbem terrarum transirent . . . (Liv. 5.34.7); Qui cum illi breviter constanter-
que respondissent per quem ad eum quotiensque venissent . . . (Cic. Catil. 3.11); Sed
id genus quid ita populo Romano in urbe fieri non oporteat exponam . . . (Vitr.
2.8.16); . . . non iniuria tibi defleo qualiter ecclesiasticas caulas . . . lupus . . . arrodat.
(Sid. Ep. 7.6.2); Nec quid dicatis scire nec me quor ludatis possum. (Pl. As. 730);
Animus audire expetit / ut gesta res sit. (Pl. Cist. 554–5); Eu ecastor, quom ornatum
aspicio nostrum ambarum, paenitet / exornatae ut simus. (Pl. Poen. 284–5)
104 Qui in this example is taken as a relative by Gratwick. See, however, Bennett: I.120–2 and, for the
variation between quis (before vowels) and qui (before s) in Plautus, see Adams (2016: 48–51). See also § 15.61.
Finite interrogative clauses (indirect questions) 121
Just like direct questions (see § 6.19), indirect constituent questions may contain more
than one question word, as in (f)–(g).
(f) Quam ob rem etiam atque etiam considera, C. Piso, quis quem fraudasse
dicatur.
(‘Therefore, Gaius Piso, consider again and again who is said to have cheated, and
who to have been cheated.’ Cic. Q. Rosc. 21)
(g) . . . reliquum est, iudices, ut nihil iam quaerere aliud debeatis nisi uter utri
insidias fecerit.
(‘. . . it only remains for you to decide, gentlemen, which of the two was guilty of con-
spiracy against the other.’ Cic. Mil. 23)
Supplement:
Da pignus, ni nunc perieres, in savium, uter utri det. (Pl. Poen. 1242); Mica uter
utrubi accumbamus. (Pl. St. 696); . . . postremo habere regulam qua vera et falsa iudi-
carentur et quae quibus propositis essent quaeque non essent consequentia. (Cic.
Brut. 152); Quos autem numeros cum quibus tanquam purpuram misceri oporteat
nunc dicendum est . . . (Cic. Orat. 196); . . . Iuniam familiam a stirpe ad hanc aetatem
ordine enumeraverit notans qui a quo ortus quos honores quibusque temporibus
cepisset. (Nep. Att. 18.3); . . . commemorantium ex quantis opibus quo reccidissent
Carthaginiensium res. (Liv. 30.42.18); . . . ego quid cui debeam scio. (Sen. Ben. 4.32.4);
Illud tibi geometres potest dicere, quantum abesse debeat corpus ab imagine et qualis
forma speculi quales imagines reddat. (Sen. Ep. 88.27); . . . sed plurimum refert com-
positionis quae quibus anteponas. (Quint. Inst. 9.4.44)
NB: with an ablative absolute clause: Sed tamen videmus quibus extinctis oratoribus
quam in paucis spes, quanto in paucioribus facultas, quam in multis sit audacia.
(Cic. Off. 2.67)
Indirect constituent questions are less restricted with respect to the governing expres-
sions than indirect clausal questions (for which, see § 15.46). In addition to (a) above,
consider (h)–(k), in which indirect questions are found with the verbs habeo ‘to
have’, impero ‘to order’, sum ‘to be’, and ‘impersonal’ paenitet ‘to cause dissatisfaction’,
respectively.105 For ambiguous situations, see the next section.
(h) Nunc de peripetasmatis quemadmodum te expedias non habes.
(‘Whereas now you have no way of clearing yourself about these tapestries.’ Cic.
Ver. 4.28)
(i) Non imperabat coram quid opu’ facto esset puerperae . . .
(‘She didn’t give instructions concerning what needed to be done for the woman in
childbirth . . .’ Ter. An. 490)
( j) . . . neque est quor [non] studeam has nuptias mutatier.
(‘. . . and I have no reason why I should be keen to have this marriage replaced by
another one.’ Pl. St. 52)
105 For further instances, see TLL s.v. habeo 2437.13ff.; impero 586.3ff.
122 Subordinate clauses filling an argument position
Closer examination of instances such as (a) and (b) shows that the contexts in which
Cicero chooses the relative or the interrogative option are different. One difference
can be seen in (b), the addition of a satellite quaque de re in the indirect question. In
instances such as (b) the addressee of the verb of communication is regularly
expressed. Pragmatically, the focus in the relative option is on the main clause, often
just the verb dico itself, whereas in the interrogative option it is the interrogative clause
or a constituent of that clause. Also, interrogative clauses more often precede the main
clause than relative clauses.108
106 The example is wrongly taken as an example of an ‘ut completive’ clause (which would then belong
to § 15.31 of this Syntax) by Fedriani (2014: 52).
107 For a list of verbs of cognition and communication governing an autonomous relative clause in
Cicero, see Eckert (1992: 17–26).
108 For further details, see Eckert (1992: 65–97). See also Bodelot (2002b) on habeo quid . . . /habeo
quod . . .
Finite interrogative clauses (indirect questions) 123
Videndum est primum utrum eae velintne an non velint. (Pl. Mos. 681—NB: A
has aut instead of an); Si virum illa meliorem habeat, quam tu habes, utrumne tuum
virum malis an illius? (Cic. Inv. 1.51); . . . quaerendumque utrum una species et lon-
gitudo sit earum anne plures . . . (Cic. Orat. 206)
Nec vero Protagoras, qui sese negat omnino de deis habere quod liqueat, sint non
sint qualesve sint, quicquam videtur de natura deorum suspicari. (Cic. N.D. 1.29);
Velit nolit scire difficile est. (Cic. Q. fr. 3.6.4)
Whereas the alternatives in (a)–(f) concern entire clauses, those in (g)–(i) are con-
stituents.
(g) . . . tuos servos servet Venerine eas det an viro.
(‘. . . your slave shall watch whether she is giving them to Venus or to a man.’ Pl. As. 805)
(h) . . . non illud iam in iudicium venit, occisusne sit, quod fatemur, sed iure an
iniuria . . .
(‘. . . the point before the court today is not, whether Clodius was slain—for we admit
it—but whether the act was justifiable or not . . .’ Cic. Mil. 31)
(i) . . . illos, qui omnia sic incerta dicunt ut stellarum numerus par an impar sit,
quasi desperatos aliquos relinquamus.
(‘. . . let us leave on one side as a hopeless sort of persons the others who say that all
things are as uncertain as whether the number of the stars is odd or even.’ Cic. Luc. 32)
Supplement:
Ferro an fame acrius urgear, incertus sum. (Sal. Jug. 24.3); . . . docete nos agri cultura
quam summam habeat, utilitatemne an voluptatem an utrumque. (Var. R. 1.2.12);
Quid tu, malum, curas, / utrum crudum an coctum ego edim . . . (Pl. Aul. 429–30);
Cremutius Cordus et ipse ait Ciceronem secum cogitasse utrumne Brutum an
Cassium an Sex. Pompeium peteret. (Sen. Suas. 6.19)
For negation of the second or later member of a multiple indirect question, see § 6.20.
Necne, a few illustrations of which are given in the Supplement, is used less frequently
in Early Latin, but is more common in Cicero than an + non or another negator. It is
rare in poetry.110
Supplement:
Non edepol scio / molestum necne sit, nisi dicis quid velis. (Pl. Epid. 461–2); Sed ego
is non sum qui statuere debeam iure quis proficiscatur necne. (Cic. Att. 10.10.2);
Quaesisti proxime, Fabi frater, fugiendum necne sit in persecutione, quod nescio
quid annuntiaretur. (Tert. Fug. 1)
. . . rogitare oportet prius et <per>contarier, / adsitne ei animus necne adsit quem
advocet. (Pl. Cas. 571–2); Quaero enim potueritne Roscius ex societate suam partem
petere necne. (Cic. Q. Rosc. 52)
. . . quaeram utrum emeris necne et quomodo et quanti emeris . . . (Cic. Ver. 4.35)
111 More examples in OLD s.v. -ne § 5c; TLL s.v. -ne 276.26ff. For discussion, see Norberg (1944:
99–100).
126 Subordinate clauses filling an argument position
Finite imperative argument clauses, commonly called ‘final noun (or: substantive)
clauses’,113 differ from finite declarative argument clauses with respect to negation: the
latter are negated by non, the former either by the negation adverb ne, in combination
with the subordinator (mostly ut) (see § 8.13) or by the negative subordinator ne (see
§ 8.23) (see also § 15.84). They are in the subjunctive mood and are used with govern-
ing expressions that belong to various semantic classes (see § 15.65). Some of these
governing expressions can also govern non-finite subordinate clauses, with or with-
out a difference in meaning. This is shown in exx. (a)–(b) and (c)–(d) for the verbs
dico ‘to tell’ and hortor ‘to urge’, respectively. In (a), dicebam refers to an order; the ne
clause is a finite imperative clause that functions as the object of the verb. In (b), by
contrast, dicere refers to stating a fact, and the subordinate clause te . . . Sosiam esse is a
non-finite accusative and infinitive clause which as a whole functions as the object of
dicere. Here the difference in class of subordinate clause corresponds to a difference in
meaning.
(a) Dicebam, pater, tibi ne matri consuleres male.
(‘I told you, father, not to play tricks on mother.’ Pl. As. 938)
(b) Tun’ te audes Sosiam esse dicere, / qui ego sum?
(‘You dare say that you are Sosia, the one I am?’ Pl. Am. 373–4)
In the case of hortor, however, the choice of subordinate clause does not affect the
meaning of the sentence. In (c) hortabitur resembles dicebam in (a) with respect to its
meaning; the ut and following clauses are finite imperative clauses that function as the
object of the verb. The meaning of hortatus sum in (d) is the same as that of hortabitur
112 For more instances, see TLL s.v. aut 1575.39ff. 113 ‘Finale Substantivsätze’ in K.-St.: II.208.
Finite imperative clauses 127
in (c); the subordinate clause isto proficisci is a non-finite prolative infinitive clause
that functions as the object of hortatus sum. The agent of proficisci is identical with the
object eum in the main clause. Thus there is no difference in meaning that corresponds
to the difference in form between (c) and (d). The only difference in this case of vari-
ation in form is that (c) is attested earlier than (d). (For hortor meaning ‘to give as one’s
opinion’ with an accusative and infinitive clause, see § 15.100 (iii).)114
(c) Ille extemplo illam hortabitur / ut eat, ut properet, ne matri morae sit.
(‘He’ll instantly encourage her to go and to hurry, so as not to waste her mother’s
time.’ Pl. Mil. 1189–90)
(d) Sed ego eum non solum hortatus sum verum etiam coegi isto proficisci . . .
(‘However, I have not only urged but also compelled him to leave for the place where
you are . . .’ Planc. Fam. 10.17.2)
On closer inspection there are certain factors that influence the choice between a
finite clause and a prolative infinitive.115 When the subject of the governing clause has
a high degree of control on the state of affairs of the subordinate clause the prolative
infinitive is preferred, as is illustrated by (d), where coegi is used alongside hortatus
sum. Factors that favour the use of a finite clause are (i) negation of the main clause,
as in (e), and (ii) forms of modalizing the content of the main clause, as in (f)—with
a non-factive mood— and in (g)—with an attitudinal manner clause (see § 16.35).
(e) . . . nihil prohibet quominus mense Iulio vervacta subigantur.
(‘. . . there is no objection to breaking fallow land in the month of July.’ Col. 2.4.5)
(f) Di prohibeant, iudices, ne hoc quod maiores consilium publicum vocari
voluerunt praesidium sectorum existimetur!
(‘Heaven forbid, gentlemen, that this which our ancestors willed should be called the
public council, would be thought to be a safeguard for brokers.’ Cic. S. Rosc. 151)
(g) Impedior non nullius offici, ut ego interpretor, religione quominus exponam
quam multa . . .
(‘A certain regard for what is due to a colleague, as I interpret the matter, makes me
scruple to set out how many . . . ’ Cic. Sest. 8)
114 For the gradual expansion of the accusative and prolative infinitive expression in place of ut + sub-
junctive, see Perrochat (1932b: 207–22).
115 This section follows Torrego (2016a) on verba impediendi, cogo, and iubeo. She presents statistical
data at p. 48.
116 For other combinations, see K.-St.: II.211.
128 Subordinate clauses filling an argument position
117 In Cic. Off. 1.91 editors read neve, with Nonius and one recent cod.; all other codd. have nec.
Finite imperative clauses 129
(o) Caesar ad Lingonas litteras nuntiosque misit ne eos frumento neve alia re
iuvarent.
(‘Caesar sent letters and messengers to the Lingones (with orders) that they should
not assist them with corn or with anything else.’ Caes. Gal. 1.26.6)
(p) Modo magis Pausanias perturbatus orare coepit ne enuntiaret nec se meri-
tum de illo optime proderet.
(‘Pausanias, still more disturbed, began to beg him not to report and betray one who
had always deserved well of him.’ Nep. Paus. 4.6)
Supplement:
. . . te obtestor ne abs te hanc segreges neu deseras. (Ter. An. 291); Praeclara senatus
consulta fecisti ne qua post Idus Martias immunitatis tabula neve cuius benefici
figeretur. (Cic. Phil. 2.91); Quae ego ne frustra subierim nive (v.l. neve), prius quam
reliquias meae diligentiae consequar, decedere cogar valde laboro. (Lent. Fam.
12.14.5); . . . obsecrat ne quam contumeliam remanere in exercitu victore neve hostis
inultos abire sinat. (Sal. Jug. 58.5); . . . orabat ne quod scelus Ap. Claudi esset sibi
attribuerent neu se ut parricidam liberum aversarentur. (Liv. 3.50.5)
Conspirasse inde ne manus ad os cibum ferrent nec os acciperet datum nec dentes
quae acciperent conficerent. (Liv. 2.32.10); . . . legiones . . . veterem ad morem reduxit
ne quis agmine decederet nec pugnam nisi iussus iniret. (Tac. Ann. 11.18.2)
118 The terms with inverted commas in this section are taken from Bennett: I.xiv–xv.
119 For the characteristics of ut clauses with these verbs, see Bolkestein (1976b). For differences between
ut clauses and prolative infinitives when it comes to the degree of control exercised by the subject, see
§ 15.64.
130 Subordinate clauses filling an argument position
Table 15.2 Survey of classes of imperative clauses and their governing expressions
(selected)
Semantic and other properties ut / Ø ne / quin / prol. other
of the superordinate clause ut+ne / ne quominus infin.
(i) (a) ordering and commanding + + – + +
(b) begging, requesting, etc. + + – + +
(c) advising, warning, exhorting, + + – + +
reminding, admonishing, etc.
(d) inducing, persuading, etc. + + – + +
(e) permitting, granting, allowing + + – + +
(f) forcing + + – + +
(g) hindering, preventing, etc. L – + + +
(ii) (a) wishing, desiring, preferring, etc. + + – + +
(b) striving + + – + +
(iii) causation + + – (+) +
(iv) deciding, resolving, etc. + + – + +
(v) deserving + – – + –
(vi) adjective as subject or object complement + + – + –
(vii) noun as subject or object complement + (+) – + –
(viii) so-called impersonal verbs much individual variation, see § 15.80
Legend: ‘+’ = is attested; ‘–’ = is not attested; ‘(+)’ = is very rare; ‘Ø’ symbolizes the absence of ut; ‘prol.
infin.’ = prolative infinitive; ‘L’= Late Latin
120 For the use of preparative pronouns, see note 34. See also Merguet (Phil.) s.v. ut 889A; (Reden)
1037B.
Finite imperative clauses 131
(c) Distinguunt illud etiam, ut libido sit earum rerum, quae dicuntur de quodam
aut quibusdam, quae ul~rnz{iwl~l dialectici appellant, ut habere divitias,
capere honores . . .
(‘They distinguish also this, that lust may be of the predicates affirmed of a person or
persons (which the logicians call ul~rnz{iwl~l), as for instance a man longs to have
riches, to obtain distinctions . . .’ Cic. Tusc. 4.21)
. The use of finite imperative clauses with verbs and expressions of
ordering and commanding (class (i) (a))
Exx. (a)–(c) show imperative clauses functioning as object of the three-place verb
impero ‘to order’, with ut + subjunctive, with the simple subjunctive, and with a prola-
tive infinitive, respectively. The prolative infinitive construction is relatively rare (see
§ 15.115). Whereas with impero the addressee (recipient of the order) is expressed in
the dative, with other verbs in this class it is in the accusative (see the Supplement).
Ex. (d) has a declarative clause as the object of two-place impero, in the typical form
of an accusative and infinitive clause; there is no addressee constituent. The accusative
and infinitive clause is in the passive, but this is not required (see § 15.100 (iii)). Ex.
(e) is a rare instance of a nominative and infinitive construction (see § 15.111).121
Verbs of communication can be used with a declarative or an imperative subordinate
clause, of which the latter is with ut (ne), as in (f), or Ø. For an expression functioning
as an order, see (g). For the verbs iubeo and veto, see § 15.100 (vi).
(a) . . . Apollo mihi ex oraclo imperat / ut ego illic oculos exuram . . .
(‘. . . Apollo tells me through a divine communication to burn out that woman’s
eyes . . .’ Pl. Men. 840–1)
(b) Huic imperat Ø quas possit adeat civitates horteturque ut populi Romani
fidem sequantur . . .
(‘Him he commanded to visit what states he could and to exhort them to seek the
protection of Rome . . .’ Caes. Gal. 4.21.8—NB: ut is present in the lower-level clause
governed by hortetur)
(c) Postremo imperavi egomet mihi / omnia adsentari.
(‘In short I told myself to agree to everything.’ Ter. Eu. 252–3—prolative infinitive)
(d) Princeps Cleomenes . . . malum erigi, vela fieri, praecidi ancoras imperavit.
(‘Cleomenes, as commander-in-chief . . . ordered the mast to be erected, the sails to be
set, the anchor to be weighed.’ Cic. Ver. 5.88)
(e) In has lautumias siqui publice custodiendi sunt etiam ex ceteris oppidis
Siciliae deduci imperantur.
(‘Into these quarries men are commanded to be brought even from other cities in Sicily,
if they are commanded by the public authorities to be kept in custody.’ Cic. Ver. 5.68)
121 For parallels of (d) and (e), see TLL s.v. impero 585.54ff.
132 Subordinate clauses filling an argument position
122 This is one of the earlier instances cited by Mayen (1889: 57–62) as an example of the use of ut
discussed in § 15.35.
Finite imperative clauses 133
. The use of finite imperative clauses with verbs and expressions of begging,
requesting, etc. (class (i) (b))
Exx. (a)–(c) illustrate imperative clauses functioning as third argument of the three-
place verb oro ‘to beseech’. The addressee, if expressed, is in the accusative. Ex. (d) has
a declarative accusative and infinitive clause (in the passive) with two-place oro.123 In
addition, oro is used (‘in the Greek manner’ according to Servius) by poets and later
prose authors as a two-place verb with a prolative infinitive (compare cupio), as in (e):
the subject of transmittere is coreferential with the agent of orantes, as appears from
the nominative form of the secondary predicate primi. A verb like peto when govern-
ing an imperative clause is often combined with an ab prepositional phrase that indi-
cates the source (for its status, see § 4.3), as in (f).124
(a) Velatis manibus orant Ø ignoscamus peccatum suom . . .
(‘With covered hands they asked us to forgive them their transgression.’ Pl. Am. 257)
(b) . . . nunc te oro per precem . . . ne me secus honore honestes . . .
(‘. . . I’m now asking you by way of entreaty . . . not to honour me less than . . .’ Pl. Capt.
244–7)
(c) Orant (sc. Thesea) succedere muris / dignarique domos.
(‘They beg him to come inside their walls and honour their homes.’ Stat. Theb.
12.784–5—prolative infinitive)
(d) . . . occultas preces quis permitti Meherdaten patrium ad fastigium orabant.
(‘. . . secret pleas in which they begged that Meherdates be admitted to his ancestral
pinnacle.’ Tac. Ann. 11.10.4—tr. Woodman)
(e) Stabant orantes primi transmittere cursum . . .
(‘They stood, pleading to be the first ferried across . . .’ Verg. A. 6.313)
(f) . . . petam a vobis ut me, dum de his singulis disputo iudiciis, attente audiatis.
(‘. . . I ask you to give me your careful attention while I deal with these trials one by
one.’ Cic. Clu. 89)
123 For (late) non-passive accusative and infinitive clauses and further instances of the passive, see TLL
s.v. oro 1041.15ff.; for parallels of (e), see ibid. 1040.76ff.
124 For the use of rogo in requests, see Halla-aho (2009: 81–5) and Coleman (2012:199–206).
134 Subordinate clauses filling an argument position
(Cic. Fam. 5.18.1); Ø Meam dignitatem commendatam habeas rogo. (Planc. Fam.
10.21a); Roga patrem tuum Ø cedat tibi. (Sen. Con. 10.2.17); Rogo Ø cures Ø quanti
aequum est emat. (Plin. Ep. 1.24.2)
Fac ut exores Plesidippum ut me <manu> emittat. (Pl. Rud. 1218); At pro me supe-
riores consules semper ut referrent flagitati sunt. (Cic. Red. Pop. 11); Difficile est ab eo
qui peccatorum vindex esse debet ut ignoscat impetrare. (Cic. Inv. 2.104); Qui omnes
ad eum multique mortales oratum in Albanum obsecratumque venerant ut ne meas
fortunas desereret cum rei publicae salute coniunctas. (Cic. Pis. 77); . . . ita ted obtes-
tor per senectutem tuam / perque illam, quam tu metuis, uxorem tuam/ . . . ut tibi
superstes uxor aetatem siet / atque illa viva vivos ut pestem oppetas. (Pl. As.
18–22); . . . peto a vobis ut tantum orationi meae concedatis quantum et pio dolori et
iustae iracundiae concedendum putetis. (Cic. Sest. 4); Verum id te quaeso ut prohi-
bessis, Fides. (Pl. Aul. 611); Cuius causam dignitatemque mihi ut commendaret,
rogavit ut eam ne oppugnarem, si nollem aut non possem tueri. (Cic. Fam. 1.9.9);
His rebus permotus Quintus Titurius . . . interpretem suum Gnaeum Pompeium ad
eum mittit rogatum ut sibi militibusque parcat. (Caes. Gal. 5.36.1); rogo ut eum
commen \ <dare> digneris (T. Vind. 250.10–11); Quia tamen in hoc quoque indul-
sisti, admoneo simul et impense rogo, ut Attium Suram praetura exornare digneris,
cum locus vacet. (Plin. Ep. 101.2.2)
In the same semantic class can be included two-place verbs of demanding, such as
posco and postulo. Examples of finite imperative clauses are (g) and (h). A source
constituent may optionally be added, as in aps te in (h). Flagito in its two-place pat-
tern has the same possibilities (for the three-place pattern, see the Supplement
above).
(g) Ø rem cognoscas simul et dictis animum adtendas postulo.
(‘I ask you to look into this with me and bend your mind to what I say.’ Lucil.
693M=707K)
(h) Postulo aps te ut mi illum reddas servom . . .
(‘I demand that you give me back that slave . . .’ Pl. Capt. 938)
Supplement (in alphabetical order by verb):
Repente cuncti consona voce flagitant . . . Ø iudicium tantum theatro redderetur.
(Apul. Met. 3.2.6); . . . quin adeas vatem precibusque oracula poscas / Ø ipsa canat
vocemque volens atque ora resolvat. (Verg. A. 3.456–7); . . . plura dicemus postulabi-
musque Ø ex qua lÄ{h}pt ‘vi hominibus armatis’ deiectus sis in eam restituare. (Cic.
Fam. 15.16.3)
. . . semper flagitavi ut convocaremur. (Cic. Phil. 5.30); Miles aegre teneri, clamare
et poscere ut perculsis instare liceat. (Liv. 2.65.2); Atque a me postulat primum ut
clam colloquatur mecum vel Capuae vel non longe a Capua. (Cic. Att. 16.8.1)
. The use of finite imperative clauses with verbs and expressions of
advising, warning, exhorting, reminding, admonishing, etc. (class (i) (c))
Exx. (a)–(c) illustrate imperative clauses functioning as object of the three-place verb
suadeo ‘to recommend’, ‘to advise’. With this verb the addressee, if expressed, is in the
Finite imperative clauses 135
dative. Suadeo in this sense is rarely used with an accusative and infinitive clause (see
§ 15.100 (iii)).
(a) Proinde istuc facias ipse quod Ø faciamus nobis suades.
(‘So you should practise yourself what you’re preaching to us.’ Pl. As. 644)
(b) Infit lenoni suadere ut secum simul / eat in Siciliam.
(‘He began to advise the pimp to come to Sicily with him.’ Pl. Rud. 54–5)
(c) Tamen nemo suaserit studiosis dicendi adulescentibus in gestu discendo his-
trionum more elaborare.
(‘Yet no one will urge young devotees of eloquence to toil like actors at the study of
gesture.’ Cic. de Orat. 1.251—prolative infinitive)
Supplement (in alphabetical order by verb and other governing expressions):
Adhortor Ø properent. (Ter. Eu. 583); Hunc admonet Ø iter caute diligenterque
faciat. (Caes. Gal. 5.49.2); . . . amicosque . . . hortatus sum Ø regis sui vitam . . . omni
cura custodiaque defenderent. (Cic. Fam. 15.2.6); . . . eos hoc moneo Ø desinant . . .
(Cic. Catil. 2.20); Quamobrem te quoque, Hortensi . . . moneo Ø videas etiam atque
etiam et consideres quid agas . . . (Cic. Ver. 5.174); Meam sororem tibi Ø dem suades
sine dote? (Pl. Trin. 681)
Adhortatus milites ne necessario tempore itineris labore permoveantur . . . (Caes.
Gal. 7.40.4); . . . Lysimache, auctor sum ut me amando enices. (Pl. Mer. 312); At hic
dehortatus est me ne illam tibi darem. (Ter. Ph. 910); Pol bene facta tua me hortantur
/ tuo ut imperio paream. (Pl. Per. 841–1a); Quae cum esset locutus, monui regem ut
omnem diligentiam ad se conservandum adhiberet . . . (Cic. Fam. 15.2.6); Id modo
simul orant ac monent ut ipsis ab invidia caveatur . . . (Liv. 3.52.11); (sc. Pompeius) . . .
cum Crasso se dixit loqui velle mihique ut idem faceret suasit. (Cic. Q. fr. 2.8.2)
NB: Cohortarer vos quo animo fortiores essetis nisi vos fortiores cognossem quam
quemquam virum. (Cic. Fam. 14.7.2)
. The use of finite imperative clauses with verbs and expressions of
inducing, persuading, etc. (class (i) (d))
Exx. (a)–(c) illustrate imperative clauses functioning as object of the three-place verb
persuadeo ‘to persuade’. With persuadeo the addressee, if expressed, is in the dative. With
this verb declarative accusative and infinitive clauses are rare, but see (d) and (e).125
(a) Huic Sp. Albinus . . . persuadet Ø . . . regnum Numidiae ab senatu petat.
(‘Spurius Albinus persuaded this man to ask the senate for the throne of Numidia.’
Sal. Jug. 35.2)
(b) Hoc nunc mi viso opu’st, / huic persuadere quo modo potis siem, / ut illam
vendat neve det matri suae.
(‘This is my task now, to try to persuade him as best I can . . . to sell her and not to give
her to his mother.’ Pl. Mer. 330–2)
. The use of finite imperative clauses with verbs and expressions of
permitting, granting, allowing (class (i) (e))
Exx. (a)–(c) illustrate imperative clauses functioning as object of the three-place verb
permitto ‘to permit’, ‘to allow’, and (d) shows a declarative accusative and infinitive
clause.126 When the latter type of clause is used, it is not possible to add an addressee.
For the verbs patior and sino, see § 15.100 (vi). For (impersonal) licet, see § 15.80.
(a) (sc. Cicero praetoribus) Cetera Ø uti facto opus sit ita agant permittit.
(‘As to the rest, he left it up to them to carry out the operation according to what
action was needed.’ Sal. Cat. 45.1)
(b) Nec tamen Epaminondae permitteremus . . . ut is nobis sententiam legis inter-
pretaretur . . .
(‘Nevertheless we should not permit Epaminondas . . . to interpret to us the meaning
of the law . . .’ Cic. Inv. 1.70)
(c) . . . ut iam ipsis iudicibus sine mea argumentatione coniecturam facere
permittam . . .
(‘. . . that I may now allow the members of this Court, without listening to any argu-
ments of my own, to infer for themselves . . .’ Cic. Ver. 5.22—prolative infinitive)
(d) . . . impetrato prius a consulibus ut in Gallum tam inmaniter adrogantem
pugnare sese permitterent . . .
126 For corresponding instances of the nominative and infinitive construction, see TLL s.v. 1561.28ff.
Finite imperative clauses 137
(‘. . . first obtaining the consuls’ permission to fight with the Gaul who was boasting so
vainly . . .’ Quad. hist. 12)127
. The use of finite imperative clauses with verbs and expressions of forcing
(class (i) ( f))
Exx. (a)–(c) illustrate imperative clauses functioning as third argument of the three-
place verb cogo ‘to compel’. With this class of verbs subordinate clauses without ut are
rare. For a non-declarative passive accusative and infinitive clause (without an
addressee), see (d) (for further examples, see § 15.100).
(a) Institi itaque gubernatori et illum, vellet nollet, coegi Ø peteret litus.
(‘Therefore, I urged and indeed forced my pilot to make for the shore, willy-nilly.’
Sen. Ep. 53.3)
(b) Iamne isti abierunt, quaeso, ex conspectu meo, / qui me vi cogunt ut validus
insaniam?
(‘Are they out of my sight now, I ask, those two who absolutely compelled me, sound
though I am, to go insane?’ Pl. Men. 876–7)
(c) Non med istanc cogere aequom est meam esse matrem, si nevolt.
(‘It wouldn’t be fair of me to force her to be my mother if she doesn’t want to be.’ Pl.
Epid. 586—prolative infinitive)
(d) Hic . . . indicta causa civem Romanum capitis condemnari coegit.
(‘. . . he forced a citizen to be condemned on a charge involving his life and citizenship
without a hearing of his case.’ Cic. Rab. Perd. 12)
Supplement (in alphabetical order by verb and other governing expressions):
Si modo id liceat, vis ne opprimat, / quae vis Ø vim mi afferam ipsa adigit. (Pl. Rud. 680–1)
Elicerem ex te cogeremque ut responderes, nisi vererer . . . (Cic. Fin. 2.119); Nec tu
me quidem umquam subiges redditum ut reddam tibi . . . (Pl. Cur. 540); Illi se numerare
velle, urgere ut acciperet. (Cic. Att. 5.21.12)
. The use of finite imperative clauses with verbs and expressions of
hindering, preventing, etc. (class (i) (g))
Exx. (a) and (b) illustrate finite imperative clauses functioning as third argument of
the three-place verb prohibeo ‘to prevent’. With this class of verbs the subordinate
clause has one of the negative subordinators ne, quin, or quominus, without a negative
meaning: see §§ 8.24, 8.27, and 8.31.128 Ex. (c) has a prolative infinitive (see also
§ 15.121). With quin the main clause is usually negated in some way (see § 8.26).
Prohibeo can also be used with an accusative and infinitive clause, as in (d). In that
case it is not possible to add an addressee (see § 15.100). A number of related two-
place verbs are also in this class, such as recusabo in (e).
(a) Simul prohibet Ø faciant advorsum eos quod nolint.
(‘At the same time it prevents them from doing anything they don’t want against
them.’ Pl. Ps. 206–7—NB: unique instance of Ø; the verse is normally bracketed)
(b) Tun’ me prohibeas / meam ne tangam?
(‘Are you forbidding me to lay hands on my own girl?’ Ter. Eu. 806–7)
(c) Tu modo ne me prohibeas accipere, si quid det mihi.
(‘You just shouldn’t prevent me from receiving something if he gives it to me.’ Pl. Trin.
370—prolative infinitive)
(d) Tirones autem iubet inter legiones dispertiri et Cominium cum Ticida in
conspectum suum prohibet adduci.
(‘As for the recruits, he ordered them to be drafted among the legions, and would not
allow Cominius together with Ticida to be brought into his presence.’ B. Afr. 46.3)
(e) Nec vero, ut noster Lucilius, recusabo quo minus omnes mea legant.
(‘Nor yet shall I object, like our Lucilius, to all the world’s reading what I write.’ Cic.
Fin. 1.7)
128 For this class of verbs, see Orlandini (2003: 496–510). For prohibeo, see Torrego (2014).
Finite imperative clauses 139
Ac ne bello quidem Italico, mox civili omissum quin multa et diversa scisceren-
tur . . . (Tac. Ann. 3.27.2); Nec me Iuppiter nec di omnes id prohibebunt, si volent, /
quin sic faciam uti constitui. (Pl. Am. 1051–2); Quei / ager · compascuos · erit · in ·
eo · agro quo · minus · pecus <p>ascere · Genuates · Veituriosque · liceat · ita
· utei · incetero · agro / Genuati · compascuo · niquis · prohibeto . . . (CIL
I2.584.33–4 (Sent. Minuc., Genoa, 117 bc)); Hiemem credo adhuc prohibuisse quo-
minus de te certum haberemus quid ageres . . . (Cic. Fam. 12.5.1); Reprimam me ne
aegre quicquam ex me audias. (Ter. Hau. 765)
NB: Si ut inopia magna sit meum nomen in causa est, cur nihil impedio ut sit
feracitas maxima? (Arn. Nat. 1.16);129 Di prohibeant, iudices, ut (ne cj. Whitte) hoc
quod maiores consilium publicum vocari voluerunt praesidium sectorum existimetur!
(Cic. S. Rosc. 151)130
. The use of finite imperative clauses with verbs and expressions of wishing,
desiring, preferring, etc. (class (ii) (a))
The verbs of this class, in contrast with those discussed above in the subclasses of class
(i), are two-place verbs. With the verbs volo ‘to wish’, nolo ‘not to wish’, and malo ‘to
prefer’, subordinate clauses with a simple subjunctive are common, certainly in Early
Latin. For details, see § 15.83. Examples of imperative clauses with the verb volo are
(a)–(c). In (c), the person being referred to by bonus . . . esse is coreferential with the
subject of the main clause. A declarative accusative and infinitive clause with volo is
shown in (d). With some expressions an object constituent in the main clause is pos-
sible, as in (e). Unlike those used with the verbs in § 15.67, these object constituents
are not also the subject of the subordinate clause, nor should they be confused with
the pseudo-objects of § 9.17. The subordinate clause may contain an anterior tense,
just as in unrealizable wishes (for which, see § 7.58). An example is (f).
(a) Amicus sum, Ø eveniant volo tibi quae optas.
(‘I’m your friend, I want your wishes to come true.’ Pl. Per. 293)
(b) Eum ego ut requiram atque uti redimam volo.
(‘I want to find him and set him free.’ Pl. Per. 696—NB: ut is rarely used when the
subjects of the governing and subordinate clauses are the same)
(c) Bonus volo iam ex hoc die esse.
(‘From this day onward I want to be good.’ Pl. Per. 479—prolative infinitive)
(d) Nunc volo me emitti manu.
(‘Now I want to be set free.’ Pl. Aul. 823)
(e) Equidem sana sum et deos quaeso ut salva pariam filium.
(‘I am sane and I ask the gods that I may safely give birth to a son.’ Pl. Am. 720)
129 For further late instances, see TLL s.v. impedio 534.75ff.
130 Dyck ad loc. retains ut. Orlandini (2003: 499) prefers ne. For later instances of ut, see TLL s.v. prohi-
beo 1789.71ff.
140 Subordinate clauses filling an argument position
. The use of finite imperative clauses with verbs and expressions of striving
(class (ii) (b))
The verbs in this class are two-place verbs. Clauses with a simple subjunctive are rare.
Examples of imperative clauses with the verb curo ‘to undertake’ are (a)–(c). In (c) the
agent of defendere is coreferential with the subject of the main clause. Ex. (d) shows a
declarative accusative and infinitive clause.
(a) Per aestatem Ø boves aquam bonam et liquidam bibant semper curato.
(‘See that the cattle always have good, clear water to drink in summer-time.’ Cato
Agr. 73.1)
(b) Curabo ut praedati pulchre ad castra convortamini.
(‘I’ll make sure you return to the camp loaded with booty in fine style.’ Pl. Per. 608)
Finite imperative clauses 141
(c) . . . si qui sunt qui desertum illum Carneadeum <finem> curent defendere.
(‘. . . if there are any who would make an effort to defend that moral end of Carneades.’
Cic. Tusc. 5.87—prolative infinitive)
(d) Curatum est — esse te senem miserrumum.
(‘Care has been taken — that you should be a most miserable old man.’ Pl. Bac. 1067)
Verbs of perception and cognition can be used in a similar way. Examples are (e) and
(f). See also § 15.58.
(e) Vide ne me ludas.
(‘Make sure you aren’t making fun of me.’ Pl. Cur. 325–6)
(f) Hic erit considerandum ne quid perturbate, ne quid contorte dicatur, ne
quam in aliam rem transeatur, ne ab ultimo repetatur, ne ad extremum pro-
deatur, ne quid, quod ad rem pertineat, praetereatur.
(‘On this point care will have be taken not to say anything in a confused or intricate
style, not to shift to another subject, not to go back to ultimate beginnings nor to go
on too far, and not to omit anything pertinent to the case.’ Cic. Inv. 1.29)
142 Subordinate clauses filling an argument position
. The use of finite imperative clauses with verbs of causation (class (iii))
This class consists of the verb facio ‘to make’ (in its two-place frame) and its com-
pounds.131 With this verb, clauses with a simple subjunctive are very common in
Early Latin (of imperative forms more than half are combined with simple subjunct-
ives) (see also § 15.83).132 Examples of imperative clauses with facio are (a)–(c). Note
in (c) the pseudo-object te ipsam (see § 9.17). Such pseudo-objects are relatively com-
mon in Early Latin with non-imperative forms of facio.133 With the exception of a few
further instances in Late Latin, the prolative infinitive in (d) is unique and as a result
is often emended.134
(a) . . . date viam qua fugere liceat, facite Ø totae plateae pateant.
(‘. . . make way for me to flee, clear all the streets.’ Pl. Aul. 407)
(b) . . . facturum <me> ut ne etiam aspicere aedis audeat . . .
(‘. . . I’ll make sure that he won’t even dare to look at the house . . .’ Pl. Mos. 423)
(c) . . . te ipsam culleo ego cras faciam ut deportere—in pergulam.
(‘. . . I’ll make sure that you yourself will be carried in a leather bag—to the common
brothel.’ Pl. Ps. 214)
(d) . . . visum est faciendum, quoquo modo res se haberet, vos certiores facere.
(‘. . . stand the matter how it may, I feel it my duty to inform you.’ Sulp. Ruf. Fam.
4.12.1)
Supplement:
Dabuntur, Ø animo sis bono face, exoptata optingent. (Pl. As. 726); Iam faxo Ø
ipsum hominem manufesto opprimas. (Pl. As. 876); Tum illam . . . . / faxo Ø se hau
dicat nactam quem derideat. (Pl. Bac. 863–4—NB: illam is a pseudo-object); . . . in
lapicidinas facite Ø deductus siet. (Pl. Capt. 736); Eadem istaec facito Ø mulier ad me
transeat / per hortum. (Pl. Per. 445–6); . . . eo quia paupertas fecit Ø ridiculus forem.
(Pl. St. 178)
131 K.-St.: II.212–13 also include praesto in its meaning ‘to produce (a result, an effect, etc.)’ (OLD § 12).
See also TLL s.v. 2praesto 921.56ff. For facio, see Álvarez Huerta (2014).
132 See Bennett: I.224–8 and Mazzanti (2020) for detailed statistics.
133 For pseudo-objects with facio + ut, see Bortolussi (2014).
134 See TLL s.v. facio 104.53ff. and Shackleton Bailey ad loc.
Finite imperative clauses 143
Collyrae facite ut madeant et colyphia . . . (Pl. Per. 92); Ac te faciet ut sis civis Attica
atque libera. (Pl. Poen. 372—NB: te is a pseudo-object); Iam pol ego illam pugnis
totam faciam uti sit merulea . . . (Pl. Poen. 1289—NB: illam is a pseudo-object); Feci
hodie ut fierent . . . (Ter. An. 603); Si poterit fieri ut ne pater per me stetisse cre-
dat . . . (Ter. An. 699); . . . puer ut satur sit facito. (Ter. Hec. 769); . . . fecisti ut ne cui
innocenti maeror tuus calamitatem et falsum crimen adferret. (Cic. Clu. 168); Di
immortales faxint ne sit alter (sc. Sulla). (Cic. Ver. 3.81); Alterum facio, ut caveam,
alterum, ut non credam, facere non possum. (Cic. Att. 2.20.1); Alterum facio libenter,
ut . . . per litteras tecum quam saepissime colloquar. (Cic. Fam. 1.7.1); Tu me refi-
cisque fovesque, / tu facis ut silvas, ut amem loca sola. (Ov. Met. 7.818–19); Ille, si
[unum] se sequerentur, quo celerius fieret, facturum dixit. (Liv. 41.4.2); Ita fit ne
decidant fructus. (Plin. Nat. 17.253); . . . verba legis Papiae faciunt ut . . . debeatur.
(Gaius Inst. 3.47)
Sicut ego efficiam, quae facta hic turbavimus, / profecto ut liqueant omnia et tran-
quilla sint . . . (Pl. Mos. 416–17); (sc. sol) . . . quoque efficiat ut omnia floreant et in suo
quaeque genere pubescant. (Cic. N.D. 2.41)
Perficito argentum hodie ut habeat filius, / amicae quod det. (Pl. As. 103–4);
Perfeci ut spectarentur. (Ter. Hec. 20); Perfeceratque Fortuna ne quid tale scribere
possem aut omnino cogitare. (Cic. Fam. 4.13.1); Perfice ut ne minus res publica tibi
quam tu rei publicae debeas. (Cic. Fam. 10.12.5)
NB: Quo tardius certior fierem de proeliis apud Mutinam factis Lepidus effecit . . . (Pol.
Fam. 10.33.1)
(e) Splendor vester facit ut peccare sine summo rei publicae detrimento . . . non
possitis.
(‘Your eminence makes it so that you could not err without the greatest injury to the
state.’ Cic. Ver. 1.22)
(f) Nulla res magis penetrat in animos . . . talesque oratores videri facit, quales
ipsi se videri volunt.
(‘Nothing else so penetrates the mind . . . and causes orators to seem such men as they
wish to seem.’ Cic. Brut. 142)
(g) . . . si potest virtus efficere ne miser aliquis sit . . .
(‘. . . if virtue can bring it about that a man not be miserable . . .’ Sen. Ep. 92.15)
Appendix: In their section on causation verbs K.-St.: I.212–13 also deal with Early
Latin poti’n (= potisne) ut/ne ‘is it possible that (not)?’ and with causa est ut/ne ‘there
135 Álvarez Huerta (2014: 85–7) calls such instances ‘causativité faible’.
144 Subordinate clauses filling an argument position
is a reason to/not to’, as in (h) and (i), respectively. The reason for treating the subor-
dinate clauses with these expressions as imperative is the negation, as in ( j).
(h) Poti’n ut taceas?
(‘Isn’t there any way for you to be quiet?’ Pl. Poen. 916)
(i) An vero non iusta causa est ut vos servem sedulo . . .?
(‘But don’t I have good reason to guard you carefully . . .?’ Pl. Capt. 257)
( j) Poti’n ut mihi molestus ne sis?
(‘Isn’t there any way for you to stop being a nuisance to me?’ Pl. Cist. 465)
. The use of finite imperative clauses with verbs and expressions of
deciding, resolving, etc. (class (iv))
The verbs in this class are two-place verbs. Clauses with a simple subjunctive are rare.
Examples of imperative clauses with the verb decerno ‘to decide’ are (a)–(c). Ex.
(c) shows a prolative infinitive, (d) a declarative accusative and infinitive clause.
(a) . . . senatus decrevit Ø darent operam consules ne quid res publica detrimenti
caperet.
(‘. . . the senate decreed “that the consuls should see to it that the state suffer no harm”. ’
Sal. Cat. 29.2)
(b) Decrevit quondam senatus uti L. Opimius consul videret ne quid res publica
detrimenti caperet.
(‘The Senate once decreed that the consul Lucius Opimius should see to it that the
state suffer no harm.’ Cic. Catil. 1.4)
(c) Quidquid peperisset decreverunt tollere.
(‘Whether it’s a boy or girl, they have decided to raise it.’ Ter. An. 219)
(d) Uxorem decrerat dare sese mi hodie.
(‘He had resolved that he himself would give me a wife today.’ Ter. An. 238)
. The use of finite imperative clauses with verbs and expressions of
deserving (class (v))
This class concerns the two-place verb mereo(r) ‘to deserve’ and its compounds. With
these verbs clauses with a simple subjunctive are not atttested. Examples of imperative
clauses are (a) and (b). An exceptional declarative accusative and infinitive clause is
shown in (c).137
(a) . . . ego te meruisse ut pereas scio . . .
(‘. . . I know you’ve deserved to perish . . .’ Pl. Poen. 1407)
(b) Qua merui culpa fieri tibi vilis, Achille?
(‘Because of what fault do I deserve to be cheap to you, Achilles?’ Ov. Ep.
3.41—prolative infinitive)
(c) Peculium et ex eo consistit quod parsimonia sua quis paravit vel officio
meruerit a quolibet sibi donari . . .
(‘A peculium is made up of anything a slave has been able to save by his own economies
or has been given by a third party in return for meritorious services . . .’ Florent. dig.
15.1.39)
. The use of finite imperative clauses in combination with a neuter singular
adjective or a comparable expression that functions as subject or object
complement (class (vi))
Subordinate clauses with these expresssions can be understood as imperative, if the per-
son involved in the main clause (explicit—usually in the dative—or implicit) is the same
137 For a few more Late Latin instances, see TLL s.v. mereo 808.65ff.
138 For the negation in argument clauses with mereo, see TLL s.v. 810.63f.
146 Subordinate clauses filling an argument position
as the subject of the subordinate clause, as in (a). Unfortunately, there are no attestations
of negated clauses, which would make it possible to determine whether such clauses are
declarative or imperative. Ex. (b) shows a comparable object complement.
(a) Quid mi meliu’st, quid magis in rem est, quam a corpore vitam ut secludam?
(‘What’s better for me, what’s more useful, than to take my life away from my body?’
Pl. Rud. 220)
(b) . . . nec habui quicquam antiquius quam ut Pansam statim convenirem.
(‘. . . nor did I hold anything more important than that I should meet Pansa immedi-
ately.’ D. Brut. Fam. 11.4.1)
The other possibilities are illustrated for optimum and melius (est) in (c)–(g).139 In exx.
(c)–(e), it is suggested that the subject of the subordinate clause will undertake some
action to bring about the state of affairs referred to by the subordinate clause. It is only
in (e) that this subject is present in the governing clause (huic urbi). The fact that an
action is required to achieve something can be made explicit by the addition of the
supine factu, as in (f). Ex. (g) illustrates a declarative accusative and infinitive clause.
For declarative ut clauses with adjectives, see § 15.32. For declarative quod clauses
with adjectives, see § 15.11.
(c) Nunc adeam Ø optumum est . . .
(‘It’s best to go up to him now . . .’ Pl. As. 448)
(d) Semper tu hoc facito, Lesbonice, cogites / id optumum esse tute uti sis optu-
mus. / Si id nequeas, saltem ut optumis sis proxumus.
(‘Lesbonicus, always make sure that you consider it to be best to be the best yourself;
if you can’t be that, at least that you should be next to the best.’ Pl. Trin. 485–7)
(e) Moveri sedibus huic urbi melius est atque in alias, si fieri possit, terras
demigrare . . .
(‘It would be better for this city to be moved from her foundations and to migrate,
were it possible, to other lands . . .’ Cic. Phil. 13.49—prolative infinitive)
(f) Nunc hoc mihi factu est optumum, ut ted auferam, / aula, in Fidei fanum.
(‘Now this is the best thing for me to do, my pot: to carry you off into the shrine of
Good Faith.’ Pl. Aul. 582–3)
(g) . . . utrum tandem putes huic civitati . . . melius fuisse et praestabilius me civem
in hac civitate nasci an te?
(‘. . . would you suppose it would have been better and preferable for this State for me
or for you to have been born in it as a citizen?’ Cic. Vat. 10)
neges creatorem indulsisse aliquando delicta . . . (Tert. Marc. 4.10.4); Reliquum est Ø
tuam profectionem amore prosequar, reditum spe exspectem, absentem memoria
colam, omne desiderium litteris mittendis accipiendisque leniam. (Cic. Fam. 15.21.5)
. . . bonum hercle factum pro se quisque ut meminerit. (Pl. Poen. 45); Ex tua re est
ut ego emoriar. (Pl. Ps. 336); Neque enim ad mare admovit, quod ei fuit illa manu copi-
isque facillimum ut in agrum Rutulorum Aboriginumque procederet . . . (Cic. Rep. 2.5)
Appendix: There are also combinations of necesse ‘necessary’ and the copula (or
something similar).140 Exx. (h)–(k) illustrate the well-known imperative clauses,
(l) an accusative and infinitive clause.141 The simple subjunctive is much more common
than ut + subjunctive, which is the reason to regard these clauses as imperative.142
(h) Ø . . . hoc iudicium reprehendas . . . necesse est . . .
(‘. . . you are bound to find fault with this decision.’ Cic. Clu. 114)
(i) Nam hoc necesse est ut is qui nobis causam adiudicaturus sit aut inclinatione
voluntatis propendeat in nos . . .
(‘For it is necessary that a person who is to decide a case in our favour should
either lean in our direction because his sympathies are so inclined . . .’ Cic. de
Orat. 2.129)
( j) Atque ille eo tempore paruit cum parere senatui necesse erat.
(‘And he obeyed at a time when obedience to the Senate was inevitable.’ Cic.
Lig. 20)
(k) Mihi necesse est ire hinc.
(‘It’s necessary for me to go away from here.’ Pl. Am. 501—prolative infini-
tive, see § 15.127)
(l) Nam necesse est hodie Sicyoni me esse aut cras mortem exsequi / . . .
(‘I need to be in Sicyon today or die tomorrow . . .’ Pl. Ps. 995)
Interpretation of this type of expression as imperative is most likely when the noun
indicates an obligation or necessity. A good example is officium ‘duty’.143 Ex. (a) shows
the only attested instance of a simple subjunctive. There is one attestation of the negator
ne (see the Supplement). For a declarative accusative and infinitive clause, see (d). Ex.
(e) shows an ut clause in combination with an object complement. Often there is a
preparative pronoun as subject, as in (e).
140 For the unclear categorial status of necesse, see de Vaan (2008: 103–4).
141 Two meanings of necesse can be distinguished, ‘deontic’ and ‘inferential’; see Bolkestein (1980a) and
Núñez (1991). The examples in the text are all deontic.
142 K.-St.: II.236–7 take it as declarative (‘konsekutiv’).
143 For further instances, see TLL s.v. officium 525.82ff.
148 Subordinate clauses filling an argument position
(a) Primum ego officium scriptoris existimo Ø (v.l. ut) titulum suum legat . . .
(‘I think a writer’s first duty is to read his title . . .’ Plin. Ep. 5.6.42)
(b) Fuit meum officium ut facerem, fateor.
(‘It would have been my duty to do so, I admit it.’ Pl. Ps. 913)
(c) Non matronarum officium est, sed meretricium, / viris alienis, mi vir, sub-
blandirier.
(‘My dear husband, it’s not the job of wives, but of prostitutes, to charm other wom-
en’s husbands.’ Pl. Cas. 585–6—prolative infinitive)
(d) Quid fuit officium meum me facere?
(‘What was it my duty to do?’ Pl. Trin. 174)
(e) Hoccin’ boni esse officium servi existumas, / ut eri sui corrumpat et rem et
filium?
(‘Is this what you consider the duty of a good servant, to ruin his master’s wealth and
son?’ Pl. Mos. 27–8)
. The use of finite imperative clauses with so-called impersonal expressions
(class (viii))
Imperative clauses are also used as subject with a few so-called impersonal verbs (for the
term ‘impersonal’, see § 4.13). The evidence for the imperative status, in the form of the
negation that is used, is very limited (see the Supplement). The verb licet ‘to be permit-
ted’ serves as an illustration. Exx (a)–(c) are imperative clauses, (d) is declarative. With
Finite imperative clauses 149
licet, clauses with a simple subjunctive are very common; ut is attested for the first time
in Late Latin, and only rarely there.144 It is from this use of licet with a simple subjunctive
that its use as a concessive subordinator developed (see § 16.81). With decet ‘it is proper’,
the example with a simple subjunctive in the Supplement seems to be unique, and ut is
rarely attested (in Late Latin).145 With oportet ‘it is proper’, ut is rarely attested (in Late
Latin). The prolative infinitive is also only attested in Late Latin.146
(a) Estne empta mi istis legibus? # Ø Habeas licet.
(‘Has she been bought by me on those terms? # You can have her.’ Pl. Epid. 471)
(b) Si credis ex toto corde tuo . . . licet ut baptizeris.
(‘If you believe with all your heart, you may be baptized.’ Vet. Lat. Act. 8.37)
(c) Per hanc curam quieto tibi licet esse —
(‘As far as that worry is concerned, you can be calm —’ Pl. Epid. 338)
(d) . . . gladium ut ponat et redire me intro ut liceat.
(‘. . . that she should put down the sword and let me return inside.’ Pl. Cas. 706)
Supplement (in alphabetical order by verb):
. . . decet / Ø animo aequo nunc stent . . . (Pl. Poen. 21–2); Licet Ø laudem Fortunam,
tamen ut ne Salutem culpem. (Pl. As. 718); Licet Ø iste dicat emisse, sicuti solet dicere,
credite hoc mihi iudices. (Cic. Ver. 4.133); Illa licet Ø non det (sc. oscula), non data
sume tamen. (Ov. Ars 1.664—NB: local negation by non); . . . Ø faber haec faciat oportet.
(Cato Agr. 14.1); Ø Omnia fecerit oportet . . . (Cic. Phil. 7.26); . . . multa oportet Ø discat
ac dediscat . . . (Cic. Quinct. 56); Ø Ego crimen oportet diluam . . . (Cic. S. Rosc. 36)
Hominem . . . decuerat ne voluisset aliter reverti. ([Quint.] Decl. 5.2—NB: a unique
(?) negated clause); Filius autem cum sit verus, oportet ut de divina illa substantia
patris genitus cognoscatur. (Filastr. 66.4 (4th cent. ad (late))
If an imperative clause is negative, the regular negation is either by the adverb ne (in
ut ne), which is also used in negative imperative sentences (see § 8.13), or by the
144 See TLL s.v. liceo 1361.72ff. 145 See TLL s.v. deceo 135.5ff.
146 See TLL s.v. oportet 742.14ff.; 741.42ff., respectively.
150 Subordinate clauses filling an argument position
subordinator ne (see § 8.23). However, with many of the verbs and expressions dis-
cussed in §§ 15.66–80, ut + non is found as well (see also §§ 15.25 and 15.27 for the
reverse situation).147 Most of these instances can be understood in one of the follow-
ing ways: if (i) there is no obvious entity that controls the action the clause is about, or
if (ii) the negation does not affect the clause as a whole, but only part of it, or if (iii) the
content of the clause is in contrast with something else, non is the necessary negator.
An example of efficio, a verb that usually has a negative clause with ne, is (a); however,
here we have a clear contrast with bonum etiam esse mortem in the preceding context,
so non is what one would expect.148 An additional factor in the use of non where ne
might be expected is the gradual decrease in the use of ne, both in independent
sentences and in subordinate clauses.
(a) Ut doceam, si possim, non modo malum non esse, sed bonum etiam esse
mortem. # . . . Ut enim non efficias quod vis, tamen mors ut malum non sit
efficies.
(‘To show you if I can that death is not merely no evil but positively a good.’ # . . . ‘For
though you may not achieve what you wish, still you will succeed in showing that
death is not an evil.’ Cic. Tusc. 1.16)
For the use of neque and neve in coordinated imperative clauses, see §§ 8.38–40.
From Early Latin onwards the combination ut(i) ne is much less common than the
subordinator ne, especially, it seems, in argument clauses: in Cicero’s orations there
are about thirty-five instances of ut ne argument clauses and about thirty-five of satel-
lite clauses, each half a column in Merguet’s lexicon; the instances of ne argument
clauses take up more than eight columns, those of ne satellite clauses three and a half.
In the same texts juxtaposed ut ne is as frequent as separated ut . . . ne.149
Much attention has been devoted to the question of whether the subordinator ne
must be explained as a reduced form of ut ne or ut ne as an extended form of ne. The
latter position is more attractive, but there is no proof.150
Among the utterances that contain one of the governing expressions discussed in
§§ 15.66–80 and a clause with a simple subjunctive (that is: without a subordinator),
a large number belong to only a few of these expressions, viz. those of begging and
requesting (§ 15.67), causation verbs (§ 15.75), and a few others, and to these only in
a very stereotyped form.
The first class consists of utterances in which a clause containing a first person sin-
gular present indicative form of a verb of asking (e.g. oro ‘to supplicate’, quaeso ‘to ask’,
147 A very complete collection of verbs that are used with (ut) ne and ut non can be found in Kirk (1923).
For discussion, see Panchón (2003: 448–60).
148 Panchón (2003: 449–50) discusses the same example and explains non as due to the fact that a state
of affairs like mors malum est ‘death is an evil’ is not controllable. Still another explanation is that of K.-St.:
II.246: brachylogy instead of ut mortem malum non esse putem.
149 The data in Merguet (Reden) can be found s.v. ne, p. 253. For Plautus and Terence, see Panchón
(2003: 451).
150 See Panchón (2003: 451–2), with references.
Finite imperative clauses 151
and rogo ‘to ask’) is followed or preceded by a clause with a subjunctive verb form in
the second person. The apparently governing expressions more often follow the sub-
ordinate clause, as in (a), or are inserted parenthetically, as in (b); however, they may
also precede, as in (c). What seems at first to be a subordinate clause functions in fact
as an independent imperative sentence, with the verb of asking functioning almost as
a question particle (like English ‘please’), in the same way as oro functions in (d) with
the imperative dic. (See § 6.29 on modulation of the directive illocutionary force of
imperative sentences.)
(a) Modo Ø pacem faciatis oro, ut ne mihi iratus siet.
(‘Just make peace between us, please, so that he isn’t angry with me.’ Pl. Mer. 992)
(b) Opsecro ego vos, Ø mi auxilio, / oro optestor, sitis et hominem demonstretis
quis eam apstulerit!
(‘I beg you, I entreat you: please help me and show me the man who’s taken it away.’
Pl. Aul. 715)
(c) Quaeso Ø ignoscas, siquid stulte dixi atque imprudens tibi.
(‘Please forgive me if I said anything stupid to you without being aware of it.’ Pl. Men.
1073)
(d) Sed tu dic, oro, pater meus tune es?
(‘But please do tell me: are you my father?’ Pl. Capt. 1021)
In less stereotyped contexts the verb of asking more often precedes and ut is more
common, as illustrated by (e) and (f). In (e) the form of oro is future tense, and the
subject of the ut clause is third person. In (f) oro governs an object (te) and the clause
is longer. In instances like these the governing expressions cannot be regarded as
modulators added to independent imperative sentences. (Obviously, in individual
instances with a first person form it may be difficult to tell whether we are dealing
with its idiomatic use or with its full lexical meaning—see also § 14.3.)151
(e) Igitur orabo ut manu me emittat.
(‘Then I’ll ask him to set me free.’ Pl. Aul. 817)
(f) Et te oro Ø porro in hac re adiutor sis mihi.
(‘And I ask you to continue to stand by me in this.’ Ter. Hec. 721)
A similar idiomatic use (very common in Cicero’s letters) can be observed for the first
person singular present subjunctive form of the verb volo ‘to wish’ (velim) in combin-
ation with a subordinate clause in the second person, as in (g) and (h). The subjunctive
clause might also be regarded as independent in questions with vis and vi’n ( = visne)
‘do you want?’, as in (i). But in ( j), with a third person subject in the clause, such an
analysis is excluded. Note the presence of ut.
(g) Ø Vera dicas velim.
(‘I wish you would tell the truth.’ Pl. Cas. 234)
151 For the use of rogo with and without ut in non-literary letters, see Halla-aho (2009: 81–5).
152 Subordinate clauses filling an argument position
(h) Et velim Ø cogites, id quod mihi pollicitus es, quem ad modum bibliothecam
nobis conficere possis.
(‘And please give some thought to how you are to procure a library for me as
you have promised.’ Cic. Att. 1.7)
(i) Vi’n vocem huc ad te? # Voca.
(‘Do you want me to call him over here to you? # Yes, call him.’ Pl. Capt. 360)
( j) Velim ut tibi amicus sit.
(‘I hope he will remain your friend.’ Cic. Att. 10.16.1)
Supplement:
Et quo die Roma te exiturum putes velim Ø ad me scribas, ut . . . (Cic. Att. 2.5.3); Et Ø
scribas mihi velim de gladiatoribus, sed ita bene si rem gerunt; non quaero male si se
gesserunt. (Cic. Att. 4.8.2); Ø Dionysium velim salvere iubeas et eum roges ut te
hortetur quam primum venias . . . (Cic. Att. 4.15.10—NB: ut is used in the lower-level
subordinate clause governed by roges)
Cf.: Nolo Ø ames. (Pl. Cas. 233); Ø Erum exhibeas volo. (Pl. Mil. 546); Ø Tu vellem
ego vel cuperem adesses. (Cic. Att. 2.18.4)
Malim hercle ut verum dicas quam ut des mutuom. (Pl. Trin. 762)
The second class of expressions that are used with clauses in the subjunctive without
a subordinator consists of imperatival forms of facio ‘to make’, sino ‘to permit’, and
caveo ‘to beware’. In Early Latin there are 180 simple subjunctives with such forms
of facio vs eighty-seven with ut, of sino sixty-four simple subjunctives vs zero ut,
and of caveo sixty-seven simple subjunctives vs twenty-four ne. Examples of these
imperative forms are (k)–(o). In (k) fac might be omitted (it functions as a metadi-
rective—see § 6.29): second person singular present subjunctive assis alone is not
impossible. In (l), cave (formally a second person singular imperative form) func-
tions de facto like the negator ne with the second person plural subjunctive form
dirumpatis; therefore it is not omissible. Comparable is (m), where cave explains the
use of quicquam (instead of nihil). The other two examples are different. In (n) the
use of second person singular present subjunctive scribas to express an invitation to
write is not excluded, but the coordination of scribas plane et probe with adde would
be strange; so vide is necessary here. In (o) the verb of the subordinate clause is first
person; sinite could be omitted, but the interpretation of the subordinate clause
would be different.
The simple subjunctive is attested in clauses with most of the other classes of expres-
sions or with other forms of the verbs mentioned above, but ut + subjunctive in these
cases is the normal expression. Examples are supplied in the relevant chapters. The
degree to which authors (until Late Latin) use the simple subjunctive varies; it is rela-
tively common in Early Latin, in poetry,152 and in poeticizing and archaizing prose.153
It has been suggested that (at least in Cicero) the use of ut is more formal than the
simple subjunctive. Thus Cicero in his ad Familiares uses rogo ut thirty-nine times
and the simple subjunctive only twice, whereas his correspondents prefer the latter
(eight vs four). However, the rogo ut instances in Cicero differ from the rogo + sub-
junctive ones in several respects: (i) the former are often combined with expressions
insisting on the seriousness of the request (vehementer, etiam atque etiam); (ii) ut
seems to be preferred also when the subordinate clause is complex; (iii) ut seems to be
preferred when the clause is separated from the governing verb by intervening con-
stituents; the simple subjunctive most often stands next to the governing verb.
(iv) Furthermore, the simple subjunctive seems to be preferred when repetition of ut
can be avoided, as in (p) and (q). It seems, then, that complexity and requirements of
transparency are the main determinants.154
(p) Tanta est exspectatio vel animi vel ingeni tui ut ego te obsecrare obtestarique
non dubitem Ø sic ad nos conformatus revertare ut, quam exspectationem
tui concitasti, hanc sustinere ac tueri possis.
(‘The anticipation of your spirit and talents is so great that I don’t scruple to beg and
adjure you to return to us with a character so finished, as to be able to support and
maintain the expectations which you have excited.’ Cic. Fam. 2.1.2)
(q) Illud abs te peto, Ø des operam, id quod mihi adfirmasti, ut te ante Kal. Ian.
ubicumque erimus sistas.
(‘I only ask you to try, as you assured me you would, to present yourself wherever
I am before the Kalends of January.’ Cic. Att. 3.25)
Caesar uses simple subjunctives sparingly, but whereas in Plautus the bulk of the
instances are found with a limited number of governing expressions, the distribution
in Caesar is more even; this is not a sign of informality but rather is part of a general
endeavour in the text segments in which they are found to be brief.155 In the
Vindolanda Tablets the simple subjunctive predominates (twelve (+two?) : five).156
The relationship between the governing expression and the clause it governs in the
stereotyped expressions discussed above is sometimes called ‘paratactic’, and many
scholars assume that it was from such ‘paratactic’ combinations that the less stereo-
typed combinations like (e) and (f) above developed. However, the latter show all the
characteristics of subordination mentioned in § 14.2 and must therefore be regarded
as subordinate.157
The subordinator ne is used with a negative meaning in most of the classes discussed
in §§ 15.65–80, with the exception of verbs of hindering and preventing (§ 15.72). See
also § 8.23.
The subordinator quin is used without a negative meaning with verbs and expressions of
hindering, preventing, and hesitating (see § 15.72; also § 8.27) and of striving (see
§ 15.74). The main clause is almost always negative. There are a few exceptions, which are
explained as intrusions of quin into the domain of quominus.158 The first instance is (a).
(a) . . . ut . . . alii morari (nihil morari recc.) Caesarem dicerent quin naves con-
scendere iuberet . . .
(‘. . . that . . . some asserted that Caesar was being slow in giving orders to embark.’
B. Alex. 7.1)
Supplement:
. . . Veranius . . . quin ultra bellum proferret morte prohibitus est . . . (Tac. Ann.
14.29.1); . . . nocturnas tenebras sibi causabatur obsistere quin clavem curiose abscon-
ditam repperiret. (Apul. Met. 9.20.3)
The subordinator quominus is used without a negative meaning with verbs and
expressions of hindering, preventing, and hesitating (see § 15.72; also § 8.31).
The subordinator quo is very rarely used more or less in the sense of ut in combination
with a comparative expression in imperative clauses governed by verbs and expressions
155 See Sznajder (1987). 156 The data are taken from Adams (1995: 117).
157 See Bennett: I.244–5 and Sznajder (1996; 2001a; 2003: 37–69; 2012).
158 See K.-St.: II.262.
Finite imperative clauses 155
of admonishing (§ 15.68) and causation (§15.75). See the examples quoted in these
sections. See also (a), which shows the relationship with quominus in § 15.86.
(a) Nemo est enim quin sciat quo minus discessio fieret per adversarios tuos esse
factum.
(‘For there is no one that is ignorant of the fact that it was all the doing of your
opponents that no division took place.’ Cic. Fam. 1.4.2)
The interrogative/relative adverb quī is sometimes used in Early Latin in a way that
resembles the use of ut in imperative argument clauses. An example is (a). Note the
negator ne.
(a) . . . / facite, fingite, invenite, efficite qui detur tibi. / Ego id agam mihi qui ne
detur.
(‘. . . plot, scheme, contrive to have her given to you. I’ll do the same to have her not
given to me.’ Ter. An. 334–5)
Supplement:
Nolo ego mi te tam prospicere qui meam egestatem leves, / sed ut inops infamis ne
sim . . . (Pl. Trin. 688–9); Haud facile’st defensu qui ne comburantur proxumae. ( pall. 47)
This section deals with finite exclamatory argument clauses; accusative and infinitive
clauses that function as independent exclamatory sentences are discussed in § 6.35,
exx. (t)–(y) + Supplement. Finite exclamatory clauses consist of a finite verb form and
one of the exclamatory pronouns, determiners, adjectives, or adverbs which are also
used in exclamatory sentences (see § 6.35, exx. (a)–(g) + Supplement). Formally these
exclamatory words cannot be distinguished from the question words listed in § 6.19.
As a consequence, exclamatory clauses resemble interrogative clauses and in gram-
mars are often not treated as a separate clause type (see § 15.45).159
Examples of exclamatory clauses are (a)–(e), with a pronoun in (a), a determiner in
(b), a manner adverb in (c), and an adverb of degree modifying largus in (d).
(a) Videti’n viginti minae quid pollent quidve possunt?
(‘Can you see what power and what might twenty minas has?’ Pl. As. 636)
(b) Quae hic monstra fiunt anno vix possum eloqui.
(‘I could barely tell you in a year what apparitions take place here.’ Pl. Mos. 505)
(c) Vide palliolum ut rugat.
(‘Look how your cloak is all crumpled.’ Pl. Cas. 246—repeated from § 15.45)
159 See, however, Bodelot (2005) from whom most of the examples in this section have been taken.
156 Subordinate clauses filling an argument position
The subordinate clauses in (a)–(d) do not refer to missing knowledge the addressee might
be interested in; rather, they draw attention to something in the communicative situation
that is surprising, unexpected, or extraordinary. The governing expressions make an
appeal to the addressee or show the involvement of the speaker. In Early Latin, the mood
in these clauses is regularly the indicative, as in the examples above. In fact, in several cases
omission of the governing expression would result in a correct independent exclamatory
sentence. Later on the subjunctive becomes ever more common (see § 7.133–5).
Supplement:
Papae, / audi’n tu ut deliramenta loquitur? (Pl. Men. 918–20); O scelera: illuc vide /
ut in ipso articulo oppressit. (Ter. Ad. 228–29); Non dici potest quam cupida eram
huc redeundi . . . (Ter. Hec. 91–2); Et vide quam conversa res est (sit cj. Lambinus):
illum quo antea confidebant metuunt, hunc amant quem timebant. (Cic. Att. 8.13.2);
Aspice venturo laetentur ut omnia saeclo! (Verg. Ecl. 4.52); Servilius atque Atilius,
proximi consules, vide quemadmodum eum ludificati sint. (Liv. 22.39.17); Vide
quam sit se contentus: aliquando sui parte contentus est. (Sen. Ep. 9.4)
Two classes of infinitival argument clauses are distinguished: accusative and infinitive
(AcI) clauses and prolative infinitive clauses. The difference between the two classes
can be demonstrated with the three-place verb admoneo that allows both. In its mean-
ing ‘to advise or remind (that something is the case)’ it may govern an accusative and
infinitive clause, as in (a); in its meaning ‘to advise or recommend (to do something)’
it may govern a prolative infinitive clause, as in (b).
(a) Tantum te admonebo si illi absenti salutem dederis, praesentibus te his daturum.
(‘I will merely remind you that, if you grant life to the absent Ligarius you will grant
it to all these here present.’ Cic. Lig. 38)
(b) Nonne te . . . Quinta illa Claudia aemulam domesticae laudis . . . esse admonebat?
(‘Did not even that celebrated Quinta Claudia admonish you to emulate the praise
belonging to our house?’ Cic. Cael. 34)
Infinitival clauses 157
In (a), the infinitive daturum has its own subject te (which happens to be coreferential
with the addressee te of admonebo). In (b), by contrast, esse has no subject of its own;
its subject has to be inferred from te, the addressee of admonebat. Thus it is a type of
‘fused’ clause (see § 14.10). In (a), the infinitive is part of an accusative and infinitive
construction that as a whole functions as the third argument of admonebo, whereas in
(b) esse itself (with its subject complement aemulam) is the third argument of admone-
bat. Both have their passive counterpart with the addressee constituent as subject, as
in (c) and (d), respectively.
(c) . . . admonitus sum ab illo multo maiore auctoritate illis de rebus dici posse, si
ipse loquerer de re publica . . .
(‘It was suggested to me that a discourse on such subjects could be given with much
greater force if I spoke of the state in my own person.’ Cic. Q. fr. 3.5.1)
(d) . . . nostrique detrimento admonentur diligentius exploratis locis stationes
disponere . . .
(‘. . . and our own troops were taught by the disaster to post their pickets only after the
prospective locations had been reconnoitred more carefully.’ Hirt. Gal. 8.12.7)
The accusative and infinitive clause with admoneo is a declarative clause, and alterna-
tive finite clauses with quod are also attested for this verb (from Gaius onwards). The
prolative infinitive clause, by contrast, is an imperative clause, and ut clauses can also
be used with admoneo and in fact are more common.
160 Some scholars deny that in this context the AcI has the function subject. For discussion, see Lavency
(2003: 102–9).
158 Subordinate clauses filling an argument position
In addition, the AcI can be used with all sorts of preparative expressions, which is
sometimes called its explicative use.
The following sections (§§ 15.93–102) deal with the classes of governing expres-
sions with which the AcI is regular; the ordering is the same as for finite subordinate
clauses with quod and quia in §§ 15.5–21. In narrative texts or in narrative passages a
large proportion of accusative and infinitive clauses does not depend on a specific
governing verb.161 Examples are (a)–(d). In (a), repeated from § 14.25, the accusative
and infinitive in the main clause of the second sentence follows an imperative clause
governed by hortatur ac postulat. With hortor the accusative and infinitive is excep-
tional.162 In (b), the accusative and infinitive clause follows an indirect question gov-
erned by rogitantibus, which is not found with an accusative and infinitive clause (for
rogo, see § 15.100). In (c), it is likely that loquitur is used absolutely and does not
immediately govern the AcI (for loquor + AcI, see § 15.98). In (d), criminatus est gov-
erns a personal object (Q. Metellum) and is then continued by an AcI clause. See also
§ 14.25 for ‘free indirect discourse’.
(a) Pro quibus rebus hortatur ac postulat ut rem publicam suscipiant atque una
secum administrent. Sin timore defugiant illis se oneri non futurum et per se
rem publicam administraturum.
(‘For all these reasons he exhorted the senators and asked them to take charge of the
state and administer it with him. “But if fear makes you shirk the task, I will not be a
burden to you but will administer the state myself.” ’ Caes. Civ. 1.32.7)
(b) Ac plerisque rogitantibus dimissi ecquod feminis quoque asylum aperuis-
sent; id enim demum compar conubium fore.
(‘And they were dismissed by numerous people asking if they had opened a sanctuary
for women as well as for men, for in that way only would they obtain suitable wives.’
Liv. 1.9.5)
(c) Audiente utroque exercitu loquitur Afranius: non esse aut ipsis aut militibus
suscensendum, quod fidem erga imperatorem suum Cn. Pompeium con-
servare voluerint.
(‘While each army was listening, Afranius spoke: he said that they shouldn’t be angry
with them or their soldiers because they wanted to keep their loyalty to their general
Cn. Pompeius.’ Caes. Civ. 1.84.3)
(d) C. Marius, cum a spe consulatus longe abesset et iam septimum annum post
praeturam iaceret neque petiturus umquam consulatum videretur, Q. Metellum,
cuius legatus erat, summum virum et civem, cum ab eo, imperatore suo,
Romam missus esset, apud populum Romanum criminatus est. Bellum illum
ducere. Si se consulem fecissent, brevi tempore aut vivum aut mortuum
Iugurtham se in potestatem populi Romani redacturum.
161 See Sznajder (2001b: 613–18). In a corpus analysed by her the majority of accusative and infinitive
clauses are not governed by verbs and expressions that regularly allow the accusative and infinitive clause.
162 Such an exception is Verg. A. 2.33. For instances of continuation of hortor with an AcI, see TLL s.v.
3012.4f. With postulo the accusative and infinitive is not uncommon (see § 15.100).
Infinitival clauses 159
(‘When Gaius Marius was far removed from any hope of gaining the consulship and
was in obscurity in what was already the seventh year after his praetorship and it
appeared that he would never seek the office of consul, when he was sent to Rome by
his commander Quintus Metellus’ order, before the Roman people he lodged an
accusation against Metellus, a great man and citizen, under whom he was a lieuten-
ant. That man was prolonging the war; if they would make him consul, then within a
short time he would deliver Jugurtha alive or dead into the hands of the Roman
People.’ Cic. Off. 3.79)
What these examples have in common is that the notion of communication is present
in the immediately preceding context, and the AcI clauses reflect what the speaker(s)
said: we are dealing with some form of independent or free indirect speech.
However, it is important to realize that indirect speech is only one of the uses of
accusative and infinitive clauses. When, for example, an AcI functions as the sub-
ject of a verb of happening (see § 15.94), the notion of indirect speech does not
apply at all.
15.94 The use of the accusative and infinitive clause as subject or object with verbs and
expressions of happening and befalling or causing to happen
Accusative and infinitive clauses are rare with verbs and expressions of happening.
Examples are (a) and (b). Ut clauses are the regular expression (see §15.27).
(a) Nimis opportune mi evenit rediisse Alcesimarchum.
(‘It’s a very convenient coincidence for me that Alcesimarchus has come back.’ Pl.
Cist. 309)
(b) Videte igitur quam inique accidat, quia res indigna sit, ideo turpem existimatio-
nem sequi; quia turpis existimatio sequatur, ideo rem indignam non vindicari.
(‘See, then, how iniquitously it happens, that because an action is infamous, therefore
a discreditable reputation should attach to it, but because a loss of reputation would
ensue, for that reason a scandalous action is not punished.’ Cic. Caec. 8)
Supplement (in alphabetical order by verb):
Illud vero mihi permirum accidit tantam temeritatem fuisse in eo adulescente . . . (Cic.
Fam. 3.10.5); Ceterum Tiberio haud ingratum accidit turbari res Orientis. (Tac. Ann.
2.5.1); Sed inpuberes quidem in tutela esse omnium civitatium iure contingit. (Gaius
Inst. 1.189); Evenerat autem isdem diebus . . . Adonea ritu vetere celebrari . . . (Amm.
22.9.15); Ex qua mea disputatione forsitan occurrat illud . . . non posse ea quae inter
se discrepant eisdem praeceptis atque una institutione formari. (Cic. de Orat. 3.34)
The accusative and infinitive construction is also found as object with the verbs of
causation facio and efficio; however, ut clauses are much more common (see § 15.75).
Examples are (c) and (d). This use of facio is very common in translations of the
Bible.163 In some (late) instances the use of facio and efficio resembles that of iubeo, as
163 See Thielmann (1886: 180–91), TLL s.v. facio 115.37ff., Heine (1990: 6), and Hoffmann (2008; 2014;
2016a: 49–52). For the non-relatedness with Romance causative expressions, see Vincent (2016).
160 Subordinate clauses filling an argument position
in (e). With these verbs the nominative and infinitive construction (see § 15.111)
seems to be excluded. In other contexts, facio means more or less fingo, as in (f).164
(c) . . . desiderium marcescere facit volucres . . .
(‘. . . the longing makes the birds grow thin . . .’ Var. R. 3.5.3)
(d) . . . calida umoris ieiunitas . . . vehementer efficit ea coire . . .
(‘. . . the hot desiccation . . . causes them to combine vehemently . . .’ Vitr. 2.6.4)
(e) . . . quem digredientem post epulas hospitalis officii sanctitate nefarie violata
trucidari securum effecit.165
(‘. . . as he (sc. Gabinius) was departing after the feast and suspected no treachery,
Marcellianus, with abominable violation of the sacred duties of hospitality, had him
murdered.’ Amm. 29.6.5)
(f) . . . nuper fecit servo currenti in via / decesse populum . . .
(‘. . . who recently portrayed a crowd making way for a running slave in the street . . .’
Ter. Hau. 31–2)
Supplement:
Si timuisse eos facis qui discesserunt, concede non timuisse eos qui remanserunt.
(Cic. Dom. 10);166 . . . nulla res magis . . . tales . . . oratores videri facit quales . . . (Cic.
Brut. 142); Quin ipsum Isocratem, quem divinus auctor Plato suum fere aequalem
admirabiliter in Phaedro laudari fecit ab Socrate . . . (Cic. Opt. Gen. 17); Quem tamen
Homerus apud inferos conveniri facit ab Ulixe . . . (Cic. N.D. 3.41); . . . quod faciat nos /
vivere cum sensu . . . (Lucr. 3.100–1); Facit . . . capitis gravitatem . . . sudoresque frigi-
dos manare. (Larg. 180); . . . et factum est illi venire Alexandrie con tirones
et me reliquid con matrem meam . . . (CEL 146.21–3 (Karanis, c. ad 115)—NB: illi
is a dative instead of an accusative);167 Tutores et curatores . . . satisdare debere verba
edicti faciunt. (Gaius Inst. 4.99); Nam et in evangelio Mathei (sc. 5.32): qui dimiserit,
inquit, uxorem suam praeter causam adulterii, facit eam adulterari. (Tert. Marc.
4.34.6—NB: .ztpś lß~ÿx wztpsōxlt); Haec omnia mixta . . . defervere facies. (Mulom.
Chir. 158)
Quidam debitor epistulam quasi a Titio mitti creditori suo effecit, ut ipse liberetur.
(Ulp. dig. 4.3.38); . . . ut instar ducis rerum experientia clari ad arbitrium suum audiri
efficeret causas. (Amm. 19.12.5)
15.95 The use of the accusative and infinitive clause as subject with accedit ‘to be
added to’ or ‘to constitute an addition to’
There is only one attestation of the use of the AcI with the verb accedit, viz. (a). Quod
clauses are the norm (§15.6).
a) Quod superest, nescio morum gloriae an indignationis dolori accedat inter
tot Metellos tam sceleratam C. Atini audaciam semper fuisse inultam.
164 See TLL s.v. facio 117.82ff. 165 So Thielmann (1886: 191–206).
166 For these instances, see Thielmann (1886: 177–80). 167 See Adams (1977: 63–4).
Infinitival clauses 161
(‘For the rest I know not whether it adds to the credit of our morals or to the anguish
of our indignation that among so many Metelli that criminal audacity of Gaius
Atinius for ever went unpunished.’ Plin. Nat. 7.146)
15.96 The use of the accusative and infinitive clause as subject or object with verbs and
expressions meaning ‘to leave unmentioned’
The accusative and infinitive clause is occasionally used with expressions meaning ‘to
leave unmentioned’. An example is (a). Quod clauses are the norm, for which see § 15.7.
(a) Etsi paene praeterii chartam tibi deesse.
(‘Although I almost failed to mention that you are short on paper.’ Cic. Att. 5.4.4)
Supplement:
. . . mitto cupiditate matris expulsam ex matrimonio filiam. (Cic. Clu. 188); Nec illud
praeteribo, aspidum naturae halicacabum in tantum adversam ut . . . (Plin. Nat. 21.182)
15.97 The use of the accusative and infinitive clause with verbs and expressions
of emotion
The AcI is found with verbs and expressions of emotion from Early Latin onward,
both as the object, as with gaudeo in (a), and as the subject, as with pudeat te in (b),
and with the neuter singular adjective iucundum in (c). From the same time on, finite
clauses with quod and other subordinators are found as well, but these are less com-
mon in Early and Classical Latin: they make up less than 10 per cent of the total num-
ber of subordinate clauses dependent on this class of verbs (see § 15.8). For subject
infinitives with the impersonal verbs of emotion, see § 15.129.
(a) Placiturum tibi esse librum II suspicabar, tam valde placuisse quam scribis
valde gaudeo.
(‘I thought you would like Book II, but I’m very glad you liked it so very much as you
say in your letter.’ Cic. Q. fr. 2.8.1)
(b) . . . pudeat te ausum illum umquam esse incedere tamquam tuum competitorem.
(‘. . . you would be ashamed that he ever dared to parade as your competitor.’ Cael.
Fam. 8.9.1)
(c) Qua in re non tam iucundum mihi videri debuit non interfectum <me> a te
quam miserum te id impune facere potuisse.
(‘In this affair the fact that I was not killed by you was necessarily not so pleasing to
me as the thought that you could have done so with impunity was lamentable.’ Cic.
Phil. 2.5)
2.1.2); . . . Hoc tibi non invideo, caruisse te pulcherrimo spectaculo . . . (Cic. Fam.
8.4.1); . . . laetor tandem longi erroris vobis finem factum esse . . . (Liv. 5.3.3); Istuc tibi
ex sententia tua obtigisse laetor. (Ter. Hau. 683); Maiorum optenui laudem, ut
sibei me esse creatum / laetentur. (CIL I2.15.6–7 (Scip. Elog., Rome, c.135
bc?)); . . . qui eam (sc. patriam) nimium tarde concidere maererent. (Cic. Sest. 25);
Sed ut maestus est sese hasc’ vendidisse. (Pl. Mos. 796); . . . populi Romani exercitum
hiemare atque inveterascere in Gallia moleste ferebant . . . (Caes. Gal. 2.1.3); Vitio
mihi dant quod mortem hominis necessari graviter fero atque eum quem dilexi per-
isse indignor. (Mat. Fam. 11.28.2)
Iuvat me haec praeclara nomina artificum, quae isti ad caelum ferunt, Verris aesti-
matione sic concidisse. (Cic. Ver. 4.12); Nec vero paenitere potest rem publicam me
pro eo spopondisse . . . (Cic. ad Brut. 26.4); . . . simul me piget parum pudere te. (Pl.
Trin. 661); Pudet prodire me ad te in conspectum, pater. (Pl. Bac. 1007); Dolet
pudetque Graium me et vero piget. (Acc. trag. 471); Carthaginienses . . . ita pigebat
inriti incepti, pudebatque adeo se spretos ut . . . (Liv. 26.37.6)
The accusative and infinitive construction is also the usual one with the verbs queror
and conqueror ‘to complain’ and glorior ‘to boast’, which denote the verbal manifest-
ation of an emotion (for quod, see § 15.8, exx. (f) and (g) + Supplement).
(d) Nam quod se similem esse Catilinae gloriari solet, scelere par est illi, indus-
tria inferior.
(‘For as to the fact that he is accustomed to boast of being like Catilina, he is equal to
him in wickedness, but inferior in energy.’ Cic. Phil. 4.15)
Supplement (in alphabetical order by governing expression):
Iam vero quomodo ego illam labem ignominiam calamitatemque totius ordinis con-
querar, hoc factum esse in hac civitate . . . (Cic. Ver. 40); . . . (sc. homines) qui glorian-
tur se talem habuisse civem . . . (August. Civ. 1.152); Questus est libertum suum Flacco
praetore esse damnatum. (Cic. Flac. 87)
15.98 The use of the accusative and infinitive clause with verbs and expressions of
perception, cognition, and communication
From Early Latin onward, the accusative and infinitive clause is the regular argument
clause with two-place verbs and expressions of perception and cognition, and with
two- and three-place verbs of communication (the traditional Latin term for these
classes of verbs is verba sentiendi et dicendi (sometimes declarandi)).
(i) When with a perception verb the accusative and infinitive clause refers to a state
of affairs that is actually perceived as going on at the moment of perception, the infini-
tive is either a present infinitive or a perfect infinitive indicating a state resulting from
an anterior action. Examples are (a) and (b). Note in (b) the parallelism of the perfect
infinitive versa (sc. esse) and the present infinitive ferre.
(a) Non ego te modo hic ante aedis . . . / vidi astare?
(‘Didn’t I see you standing here in front of the house . . . just now?’ Pl. Men. 632–3)
Infinitival clauses 163
(b) . . . (sc. vestigia) omnia foras versa vidit nec in partem aliam ferre . . .
(‘. . . he saw that they were all turned outward and yet did not lead to any other place . . .’
Liv. 1.7.6)
Supplement:
Audio: Audivisti’n tu me narrare haec hodie? (Pl. Am. 747); Audi’n illum? # Ego vero
ac falsum dicere. (Pl. Am. 755—NB: this is a nice illustration of the immediateness of
the perception: hearing someone doing something implies hearing that person);
Numquam audivi in Epicuri schola Lycurgum, Solonem . . . Epaminondam nomi-
nari . . . (Cic. Fin. 2.67); . . . ut Catonem dicere audivi . . . (Cic. Amic. 76); . . . satis
lubenter te ausculto loqui. (Pl. Ps. 523a)
Sentio: . . . aestuosas sentio aperiri fores . . . (Pl. Truc. 350); Postquam se amari sen-
sit . . . (Petr. 91.7); . . . ubi (sc. sepiae) sensere se adprehendi . . . (Plin. Nat. 9.84); . . . invidia
animalis mori se sentientis. (Plin. Nat. 37.158); . . . validiorem fieri se sentiat. (Plin.
Nat. 20.80); Sensit immensa vi quadam urgente morborum ultimae necessitatis
adesse praescripta . . . (Amm. 30.6.6)
Video: Ut si illic concriminatus sit advorsum militem / meus conservos, eam vidisse
hic cum alieno osculari . . . (Pl. Mil. 242–3); . . . quos semper videas bibentes168 esse in
thermopolio . . . (Pl. Cur. 292); Interea intro ire neminem / video, exire neminem.
(Ter. An. 363–4); Video’n ego Getam currentem huc advenire? / Is est ipsus. (Ter. Ph.
177–8); . . . videmus ex acie efferri saepe saucios . . . (Cic. Tusc. 2.38); M. . . .
Cethegum . . . quanto studio exerceri in dicendo videbamus etiam senem. (Cic. Sen.
50); . . . quorum alterum sedere in accusatorum subselliis video . . . (Cic. S. Rosc. 17); . . .
ut per quietem solet, videbat coniugem suam absentem sedere . . . (Amm. 30.5.18)
Quid vos maestos tam tristesque esse conspicor? (Pl. Bac. 669)
In such contexts, the accusative and infinitive clause is to some extent in competition
with an entirely different construction in which someone perceives an entity while
that entity is engaged in a certain state of affairs, as in (c).
(c) Quis hic est quem astantem video ante ostium?
(‘But who’s this I see standing in front of the door?’ Pl. Bac. 451)
Here quem, the object of the perception verb video, is expanded by the present parti-
ciple astantem, which functions as a secondary predicate (the so-called accusative
and participle construction—see § 21.8). Although instances like (c) are seman-
tically close, they differ structurally from the accusative and infinitive construction.
There are also contexts in which the accusative and participle construction is excluded,
for example, when the embedded clause is passive: Latin has no present passive parti-
ciple. The instances with a participle usually do not contain many additional constitu-
ents and are therefore usually simpler than those with an accusative and infinitive.169
However, most instances of accusative and infinitive clauses with perception verbs
do not refer to actual perception, but rather to knowledge and reflection based on
some form of perception.170 This is certainly the case when the infinitive in the AcI
clause refers to an anterior or to a posterior event, as in (d) and (e), respectively, but it
is also quite common when the clause has a present infinitive, as in (f). The governing
verbs function de facto as cognition verbs, which explains why in the Latin terminology
the two classes are not distinguished (verba sentiendi). As such, they behave like verbs
such as disco ‘to learn’, cognosco ‘to get to know’, and lego ‘to read’.
(d) P. Clodium, Appi f., credo te audisse cum veste muliebri deprehensum domi
C. Caesaris . . .
(‘I imagine you will have heard that P. Clodius, son of Appius, was caught dressed up
as a woman in C. Caesar’s house . . .’ Cic. Att. 1.12.3)
(e) In hac discordia video Cn. Pompeium senatum quique res iudicant secum
habiturum . . .
(‘In the present quarrel I see that Cn. Pompeius will have with him the Senate and the
people who sit on juries . . .’ Cic. Fam. 8.14.3)
(f) Nam ego illum audivi in amore haerere apud nescio quam fidicinam.
(‘I’ve heard that he is fixated on a love affair with some lyre girl or other.’ Pl. Epid. 191)
Supplement:
Audio: Postquam ante ostium / me audivit stare, adproperat. (Ter. An. 474–5); . . . hunc
audiebant antea, nunc praesentem vident tanta temperantia (sc. esse) . . . (Cic. Man.
13); Audivi ex maioribus natu hoc idem fuisse in P. Scipione Nasica . . . (Cic. Off.
1.109—NB: source of information added); . . . longius eum progressum audiebat
neque ulla de reditu eius fama adferebatur . . . (Caes. Gal. 6.36.1); Audimus quidem te
omne munus consulis obisse, sed audimus. (Plin. Pan. 59.3)
Sentio: Fac te patrem esse sentiat. (Ter. Hau. 925); Sentiri haec putat, ut calere ignem,
nivem esse albam, dulce mel. (Cic. Fin. 1.30); . . . nihil adpetunt, nulla re egent, nihil
sibi deesse sentiunt, nihil requirunt. (Cic. Parad. 52); Falsa haec esse Pompei et
Herculaneum sensere. (Sen. Nat. 6.26.4)
Video: Video hercle ego te me arbitrari, Euclio, hominem idoneum / quem senecta
aetate ludos facias . . . (Pl. Aul. 252–3); . . . videbat re publica oppressa nihil posse
decerni. (Cic. Phil. 8.5); Nonne ad servos videtis rem venturam fuisse? (Cic. Sest. 47);
Sumam annum tertium, quod et recentissimus est et ab isto ita administratus ut cum
se certe decessurum videret, non laboraret, si aratorem in Sicilia nullum omnino
esset relicturus. (Cic. Ver. 3.104); . . . sophistas . . . lusos videmus a Socrate. (Cic. Fin.
2.2); . . . etsi nullum consecuturum emolumentum vident. (Cic. Fin. 2.45); . . . (sc.
homines) ea perferant quae Philoctetam videmus in fabulis. (Cic. Fin. 5.32); . . . nos-
tros victores flumen transisse conspexerant . . . (Caes. Gal. 2.24.2)
(ii) Verbs and expressions of cognition cover a wide range of mental activities.
Examples with a present, future, and perfect infinitive are (g)–(i), respectively. With
verbs and expressions of deciding, resolving, etc., such as statuo, an imperative ut
clause is possible as well—see § 15.76.
171 For the use of accusative and infinitive clauses with non dubito in Tertullian, see Hoppe (1903:
50–1= 1985: 103).
166 Subordinate clauses filling an argument position
ita censuit ex auctoritate Hadriani] cetera vero iura eius legis ad peregrinos non per-
tinere. (Gaius Inst. 1.47); Id me insimulatam perperam falsum esse somniavi. (Pl.
Mil. 392); . . . te speras modo / potesse dissimulando infectum hoc reddere. (Pl. Mos.
1014–15); Occasione / inventa spero me celerius aput te venturum (CEL
147.9–11 (Karanis, ad 100–25)); . . . proprium hoc statuo esse virtutis, conciliare
animos hominum et ad usus suos adiungere. (Cic. Off. 2.17)
NB: . . . nec adducar aut in extis totam Etruriam delirare aut eandem gentem in fulgo-
ribus errare aut fallaciter portenta interpretari . . . (Cic. Div. 1.35—with TLL s.v.
602.59ff. one may understand a prolative infinitive like putare ‘to think’ with adducar
(see § 15.118))
(iii) The term communication is here used in a wider sense, comprising both verbs
which indicate the production of an utterance, such as clamo ‘to shout’ (a two-place
verb) and verbs that indicate the transfer of information to an addressee, such as dico
‘to tell’ (a three-place verb). Many verbs and expressions of the latter type allow both
a declarative and an imperative clause. The accusative and infinitive is used when the
clause is declarative. For imperative ut clauses with verbs and expressions of advising,
warning, exhorting, reminding, admonishing, etc., see § 15.68. Examples of accusa-
tive and infinitive clauses with these verbs are ( j)–(l), with a present, future, and per-
fect infinitive, respectively. Some verbs of transfer can also function as communication
verbs, like addo, as in (m). Often the notion of communication is implied by the con-
text, as in (n).172
( j) Ibo intro et dicam te hic astare Erotio . . .
(‘I’ll go inside and tell Erotium that you’re standing here . . .’ Pl. Men. 331)
(k) Iura te non nociturum esse homini de hac re nemini . . .
(‘Swear that you won’t harm anyone for this . . .’ Pl. Mil. 1411)
(l) . . . post id si prehensi simus, excusemus ebrios / nos fecisse amoris causa.
(‘. . . if we were caught afterwards, we could say as an excuse that we did so while
drunk and out of love.’ Pl. Aul. 749–50)
(m) Mercator hoc addebat: e praedonibus / unde emerat se audisse abreptam e
Sunio.
(‘The merchant added this, that he had heard from the pirates from whom he had
bought her that she had been kidnapped from Sunium.’ Ter. Eu. 114–15)
(n) Ostendit sese iam mihi medullitus: / se mi infidelem numquam, dum vivat,
fore.
(‘She revealed herself to me from the depths of her heart: that she’ll never be unfaith-
ful to me for as long as she lives.’ Pl. Truc. 439–40)
Supplement (in alphabetical order by governing expression):
Summam spem . . . nuntiabant fore ut . . . Addebant etiam me desiderari, subaccusari.
(Cic. Att. 16.6.4); Ille adicit ab eodem scriptore, si locus umectus sit, ibi cacumina
populorum serenda et harundinetum. (Var. R. 1.24.4); Ille autem affirmat coniugem
esse adulteram . . . (Phaed. 3.3.9); Is ait se mihi allaturum cum argento marsuppium.
(Pl. Men. 1043); Omnis res gestas esse Athenis autumant . . . (Pl. Men. 8); Ecce autem
maxima voce clamat populus neque se uni neque paucis velle parere. (Cic. Rep.
1.55); . . . cum aliquid, quod contra dicatur, aequum esse concedimus . . . (Cic. Inv.
1.96); . . . in novissima parte corporis totum me periturum deflebam. (Apul. Met.
7.24.1); Cingetorigi, quem ab initio permansisse in officio demonstravimus, princi-
patus atque imperium est traditum. (Caes. Gal. 6.8.9); P. Clodium meo consilio inter-
fectum esse dixisti. (Cic. Phil. 2.21); Nec enim hunc ipsum mundum pro certo
rutundum esse dicitis . . . (Cic. N.D. 2.48—NB: pro certo is a disjunct); Tandem hic
exclamat eum / sibi esse sodalem. (Pl. Capt. 510–10a); Fateor eam esse importunam
atque incommodam. (Pl. As. 62); Hisce eum tragoediis liberatum ferebat (sc.
Rutilius). (Cic. de Orat. 1.228); . . . me discedere flevit . . . (Verg. Ecl. 3.78); Et Celsus
inquit vino legato, etiamsi non sit legatum cum vasis, vasa quoque legata videri . . .
(Ulp. dig. 33.6.3.1);173 Loquebantur omnes tamen (credo, quod volebant) in Syria te
esse, habere copias. (Cic. Fam. 12.5.1); Iuppiter e terra genitam mentitur, ut auctor /
desinat inquiri. (Ov. Met. 1.615–16—NB: subject of AcI is implicit); <Ille> aute<m>
negavit se habere aspros. (CEL 141.9 (Karanis, ad 100–25)); . . . sed etiam puer
ipse sibi persuasit te omnia mea causa facturum esse . . . (Cic. Fam. 13.61.1); Itaque
tantum verbo posuit Sacerdote praetore Sthenium litteras publicas corrupisse.
(Cic. Ver. 2.93); praecipiendum habeo, stercus omne . . . segetibus esse maxime
utile . . . (Colum. 2.14.9); Promitto tibi non offuturum, si id hodie effeceris. (Pl. As.
97–8—NB: subject of AcI is implicit); Is nunc ducentos nummos Philippos militi, /
quos dare se promisit, dabit. (Pl. Bac. 969–70); Illud . . . His ego iudicibus non probabo
C. Verrem contra leges pecuniam cepisse? (Cic. Ver. 1.10); Et hunc planius (cj. Storr-
Best) locutum esse Latine quam Hirr[i]um praetorem renuntiatum Romam in
senatum scriptum habemus. (Var. R. 2.5.5); Hospes respondit Zacynthi ficos fieri
non malas. (Pl. Mer. 943); Vincone argumentis te non esse Sosiam? (Pl. Am. 433)
NB: facio = fingo: . . . quem tamen Homerus apud inferos conveniri facit ab Ulixe . . .
(Cic. N.D. 3.41); Si timuisse eos facis qui discesserunt, concede non timuisse eos qui
remanserunt. (Cic. Dom. 10)174
With three-place verbs that have a double accusative pattern, such as admoneo and doceo
(see § 4.72), the third argument may be an accusative and infinitive clause. Examples are
(o) and (p). In the passive the second argument becomes the subject, as is shown by (q)
and (r). (With both verbs an imperative clause is possible as well—see § 15.68.)
(o) Docuerunt enim me periti homines . . . ad Volusium traferri nomen a Valerio
non potuisse.
(‘Experts informed me . . . that the debt could not be transferred from Valerius to
Volusius.’ Cic. Fam. 5.20.3)
(p) Hi, ut dico, hominem admonent rem esse praeclaram . . .
(‘These persons, I say, pointed out to him that the property was a very noble one . . .’
Cic. Ver. 2.36)
173 The use of the AcI with inquam is rare. See TLL s.v. inquam 1778.67ff.
174 For these instances, see Thielmann (1886: 177–80).
168 Subordinate clauses filling an argument position
(q) (sc. Romani) . . . docti . . . a ducibus erant horridum militem esse debere, non
caelatum auro et argento sed ferro et animis fretum.
(‘The Romans had been taught by their generals that a soldier should be rough to
look on, not adorned with gold and silver but putting his trust in iron and in courage.’
Liv. 9.40.4)
(r) . . . admonitus sum ab illo . . . illis de rebus dici posse . . .
(‘. . . I was told by him that concerning these matters it could be said . . .’ Cic. Q. fr. 3.5.1)
In the same way the three-place verb persuadeo is found with a dative addressee and
either a prolative infinitive, when meaning ‘to succeed in urging’ (see § 15.118), or an
accusative and infinitive clause, when meaning ‘to induce acceptance of (a statement)’
(OLD). Examples of the latter are (s) and (t). In (s) the AcI clause is the object of per-
suadere; in (t), the subject of persuasum sit.
(s) Cum vero hoc nemini persuadere possis, te tam amentem fuisse ut . . .
(‘Since you can’t persuade anyone of this, that you were so insane as to. . .’ Cic. Ver. 3.91)
(t) Ecquis est iudex cui non . . . persuasum sit istum in aratorum bona fortunasque
impetum fecisse?
(‘Is there one member of this Court who has not been convinced that he (sc. Verres)
made a violent assault on the property and livelihood of the farmers?’ Cic. Ver. 3.142)
Occasionally—in later Latin—communication verbs are found governing an accusa-
tive and infinitive clause that has to be understood as a command; in such cases the
infinitive is present passive (see also § 15.100 (iii)). An example is (u).175
(u) . . . (sc. mulier) subiungi machinae novicium clamabat asinum . . .
(‘. . . the woman shouted that the newly purchased donkey should be yoked
to the mill-wheel . . .’ Apul. Met. 9.15.1)
Appendix: With the verbs discussed in this section poets especially (but already
Plautus) sometimes use a prolative infinitive construction, instead of an accusative
and infinitive clause with a subject that is coreferential with the subject of the governing
175 Sz.: 355 calls this the ‘voluntative use’ of verba sentiendi and dicendi. For Apuleius’ usage, see Callebat
(1968: 306–8).
Infinitival clauses 169
verb. Examples are (v) and (w). This is usually taken as a Graecism, but it can also be
understood as an extension of the use of the prolative infinitive on the analogy of
verbs of wishing and striving (see §§ 15.122–3).176 Some scholars use the term ‘nom-
inative and infinitive’ also for these instances.177
(v) (sc. minae) . . . quas hodie adulescens Diabolus ipsi daturus (sc. esse) dixit . . .
(‘. . . which young Diabolus said he’d give to her today . . .’ Pl. As. 634—NB:
daturus P, daturum M, many scholars reject -us)
(w) Phaselus ille quem videtis, hospites, / ait fuisse navium celerrimus (cj.
Parthenius; -um OGR) . . .
(‘The pinnace you see, my friends, says that she was once the fleetest of
ships . . .’ Catul. 4.1–2)
Supplement:
Altera (sc. puella) non fama dixerit esse prior. (Verg. Cat. 9.24); Sabinus ille quem
videtis, hospites, / ait fuisse mulio celerrimus . . . (Verg. Cat. 10.1–2); Vir bonus et
sapiens dignis ait esse paratus . . . (Hor. Ep. 1.7.22); Iurabo bis sex integer esse dies.
(Prop. 3.6.40); . . . rettulit Aiax / esse Iovis pronepos . . . (Ov. Met. 13.141–2); . . . ventu-
raque (sc. esse) rauco ore minatur hiems . . . (Stat. Theb. 1.347–8); . . . quoad summos
illi promitterent honores habituri (sc. esse) mihi. (Apul. Met. 7.14.3); Felix cum et
domus tuae cultor esse diceret . . . (Symm. Ep. 9.56)
(sc. vox) . . . quam ego non sine admiratione et, cum diceretur, audisse memini et
deinde aliis narrasse . . . (Sen. Cl. 2.1.1)178
Different from the instances discussed above are combinations of a verb that normally
governs an AcI with a perfect participle which agrees with the subject of the verb. The
first attested instance of a verb of perception is (x); of a verb of communication, (y).
It is also attested with other verbs, as in (z), where it is not clearly distinct from the
use of participles as secondary predicate (see § 21.7).179 The use of the participle with
these verbs is common in Greek.180
(x) Dixit, et extemplo (neque enim responsa dabantur / fida satis) sensit medios
delapsus in hostis.
(‘He spoke, and at once—for no reply that he could well trust was offered—
he realized that he had fallen into the midst of foes.’ Verg. A. 2.376–7—NB:
Gr. ĝ}sp~z §w.p}x)
(y) (sc. ianua) . . . pulsata indignis saepe queror manibus . . .
(‘I complain that I have oft been battered by ill-bred hands . . .’ Prop. 1.16.6)
(z) Gaudent perfusi sanguine fratrum . . .
(‘They take joy in being covered in brothers’ blood . . .’ Verg. G. 2.510)
176 See the discussion in Calboli (2009: 121–30), with references. Norberg (1943: 46–63) has the fullest
discussion of the relationship between these instances and other expressions where Greek influence is
unlikely or excluded.
177 For example, Sz.: 365. 178 For this and similar cases, see Haverling (1988: 248–9).
179 For further instances of gaudeo, see TLL s.v. 1709.63ff., also with present participles.
180 See K.-G.: II.50ff.
170 Subordinate clauses filling an argument position
Supplement:
Superata fateri / cogor opemque tuam timidis exposcere votis. (Ov. Met. 9.545–6); Si
libidinosa essem, quererer decepta. Nunc etiam languori tuo gratias ago. (Petr.
129.4); Invidiae nefariae letali plaga percussi sero sentitis. (Apul. Met. 4.34.4)
Quo nunc Turnus ovat spolio gaudetque potitus. (Verg. A. 10.500); Iniecta mon-
stris terra dolet suis . . . (Hor. Carm. 3.4.73)
15.99 The use of the accusative and infinitive clause with verbs and expressions
of praising, blaming, and thanking
The accusative and infinitive is found with verbs and expressions of praising, blaming,
congratulating, and thanking, although in Classical Latin a quod clause is more com-
mon (see § 15.10; also § 15.23 for cum (quom) clauses). The use of the accusative and
infinitive is especially rare when the person who is praised or blamed is identified
explicitly or implied by the context. (For verbs of accusing and convicting, see § 15.130.)
(a) . . . neque ille haud obiciet mihi / pedibus sese provocatum.
(‘. . . and he shan’t throw at me that he was challenged to a footrace.’ Pl. Epid. 664–5)
(b) Gratulor nobis Quintum filium exisse.
(‘I congratulate ourselves that young Quintus has gone out of town.’ Cic. Att. 15.22)
Supplement (in alphabetical order by governing expression):
With the person praised or blamed expressed: Boeotis exprobratum societatem eos
cum Perseo iunxisse. (Liv. 42.38.5); Dis gratias agebat, tempu’ sibi dari, / ubi Phaedriae
esse ostenderet nihilo minus / amicum sese quam Antiphoni. (Ter. Ph. 596–8); Exstinxisse
nefas tamen et sumpsisse merentis / laudabor poenas . . . (Verg. A. 2.585–6—NB: passive);
Ah, cave tu illi obiectes nunc in aegritudine / te has emisse. (Pl. Mos. 810–11)
Not expressed: Pergi’n servom me exprobrare esse, id quod vi hostili optigit? (Pl.
Capt. 591); . . . et id gratum fuisse advorsum te habeo gratiam. (Ter. An. 42); Hercules,
decumam esse adauctam tibi quam vovi gratulor. (Pl. St. 386); . . . iterum cum oppres-
sum Seianum apud eosdem gratularetur. (Suet. Claud. 6.1); Obiciebant (sc. eum)
etiam eloquentiae laudem uni sibi adsciscere . . . (Tac. Ann. 14.52.3)
(i) verbs and expressions of wishing, desiring, preferring, such as volo ‘to wish’;
(ii) verbs and expressions of deciding and determining, such as placet ‘it seems
good’ and censeo ‘to decide’;
(iii) many of the manipulation verbs in class (i) of Table 15.2 (p. 130), such as
impero ‘to order’ and prohibeo ‘to hinder’, when used as two-place verbs;
Infinitival clauses 171
181 For the use of the perfect infinitive with verbs of wishing, see § 7.76.
172 Subordinate clauses filling an argument position
NB: . . . tametsi multitudo . . . terrebat eum clamore . . . atque aliis omnibus quae ira
fieri amat, vicit tamen inpudentia. (Sal. Jug. 34.1—NB: ira is nominative; Graecism
according to Koestermann ad loc.)); . . . easque (sc. statuas) . . . auro curant imbrat-
teari . . . (Amm. 14.6.8)
The situation with this class of verbs is more complex than the summary above sug-
gests. In the case of referential identity between the subject of the governing clause and
the agent of the embedded clause, Terence, Cicero, and Caesar use the accusative and
infinitive when the infinitive is the copula, as in (d), or a passive infinitive, as in (e). In
other cases the prolative infinitive is preferred unless there is a special reason to make
the subject explicit, as in (f). Plautus uses the subject accusative more freely.182
(d) . . . Ulixes . . . cum . . . in omni sermone omnibus affabilem [et iocundum] esse
se vellet.
(‘. . . Ulysses . . . when he strove in every word to be courteous to all.’ Cic. Off.
1.113)
(e) . . . a quo Verres minime se accusari velit.
(‘. . . by whom Verres wants least of all to be prosecuted.’ Cic. Div. Caec. 22)
(f) Me enim quam socios tua frui virtute malebam . . .
(‘I should have preferred that I rather than my allies enjoy your virtue . . .’
Cic. Planc. 13)
(ii) The use of an accusative and infinitive clause as subject of impersonal placet is
attested from Terence onwards, as in (g). In an official political context it can be used
to refer to a decision being made, mainly by the senate, as in (h). Visum est can be used
in the same way, as in (i). The cognition verb censeo (see § 15.98) is also used in the
sense of making decisions or voting in favour of, as in ( j). A more explicit way of
expressing the desirability of a certain action is by using the gerund or gerundive, as
in (k). The verb decerno in its sense ‘to declare’ also belongs here.
(g) Placet non fieri hoc itidem ut in comoediis . . .
(‘I don’t want this to happen in the same way as it does in comedies.’ Ter. Hec. 866)
(h) . . . si hic ordo placere sibi decreverit te ire in exsilium, obtemperaturum te
esse dicis.
(‘. . . if this body decides to vote for you to go into exile, you say you will obey.’ Cic.
Catil. 1.20)
(i) Ita deinde diis visum nec inritam conditoris templi vocem esse . . .
(‘It pleased the gods, in the sequel, that neither should the words of the founder of the
temple be in vain . . .’ Liv. 1.10.7)
( j) Equidem cum ante legatos decerni non censuissem, hoc me tamen consolabar . . .
(‘Though on the previous occasion I had voted against the ambassadors being decreed,
still I consoled myself with this reflection . . .’ Cic. Phil. 8.21)
(k) Haec recitata a consule ita movere senatum ut non exspectanda comitia con-
suli censeret, sed . . . extemplo in provinciam redeundum.
(‘These statements as read by the consul so swayed the senate that it decided that the
consul must not wait for the elections but that . . . he must at once return to his prov-
ince.’ Liv. 27.5.14)
Supplement (in alphabetical order by governing verb):
. . . senatus populique Romani verbis nuntient velle et censere eos ab armis
discedere . . . (Sal. Jug. 21.4); De bonis regiis, quae reddi ante censuerant, res integra
refertur ad patres. (Liv. 2.5.1); . . . bellum gerendum fuisse censerent hostibus et
Syracusanorum et populi Romani, et urbem recipi, non capi, et receptam legibus anti-
quis et libertate stabiliri, non fessam miseranda servitute bello adfligi. (Liv. 26.32.2—
NB: variation of construction);. . . variae fuere sententiae, ut primus vivam cremari
censeret puellam, secundus bestiis obici suaderet, tertius patibulo suffigi iuberet, quar-
tus tormentis excarnificari praeciperet. (Apul. Met. 6.31.1); Curatum est—esse te
senem miserrumum. (Pl. Bac. 1067); Aditus a parentibus virginis raptae eum qui
violarat convictum relegari decrevit. (Amm. 16.5.12);183 Et Apronianum Romae decre-
vit esse praefectum . . . (Amm. 23.1.4); Deliberatum est tamen id quoque lenius vindi-
cari . . . (Amm. 17.13.2); Hoc sibi pulchra suum ferri Proserpina munus / instituit.
(Verg. A. 6.142–3); De exercitu autem C. C<aes>aris ita censeo decernendum: ‘senatui
placere militibus veteranis qui Caesaris pontificis <pro praetore auctoritatem secuti
libertatem populi Romani> auctoritatemque huius ordinis defenderint atque defendant
i<ps>is liberisque eorum militiae vacationem esse, utique C. Pansa A. Hirti[c]us con-
sules . . . cognoscerent . . .’ (Cic. Phil. 5.53—NB: variation of construction); . . . senatui
placere C. Cassium pro consule provinciam Syriam obtinere . . . (Cic. Phil. 11.30); Hos
corripi dilato ad tempus Sabino placitum . . . (Tac. Ann. 4.19.1)
(iii) The various manipulation verbs mentioned in Table 15.2 (p. 130) are usually
used as three-place verbs, governing either an ut clause (see §§ 15.66–72) or a prola-
tive infinitive (see §§ 15.115–21). However, when there is no (explicit) addressee and
the governing verbs function de facto as two-place verbs, the AcI is not uncommon.
Examples of such AcI clauses functioning as object are (l)–(n); as subject, (o). The
clause is mostly passive and, in accordance with the meaning of the governing verb,
has to be understood as imperative. The states of affairs of the AcI clause must be
controlled; they cannot be anterior or posterior to the tense of the governing verb.184
For this usage with iubeo, see the discussion in (vi).185
(l) Impera suovitaurilia circumagi.
(‘Bid the suovitaurilia to be led around.’ Cato Agr. 141.1)
(m) . . . missusne sis a me consule Puteolos, ut inde aurum exportari argentumque
prohiberes?
183 For Ammianus, see den Boeft et al. ad 23.1.4. See also TLL s.v. decerno 144.70ff.
184 For these and other constraints that are typical of imperative clauses, see Bolkestein (1976a: 284–95).
185 For instances from juridical texts, see Kalb (1912: 84–6). For the extension of the AcI to other verbs
in Fredegar, see Bodelot (2014b).
174 Subordinate clauses filling an argument position
(‘. . . were you not sent by me when I was consul to Puteoli, that you might prevent gold
and silver from being exported from there?’ Cic. Vat. 12)
(n) Vergilius alternis cessare arva suadet.186
(‘Virgil advises letting the fields “lie fallow every other year”.’ Plin. Nat. 18.187)
(o) Item inpuberem apud populum adoptari aliquando prohibitum est, ali-
quando permissum est.
(‘Again, for a person below the age of puberty to be adopted before the people has
sometimes been forbidden and sometimes permitted.’ Gaius Inst. 1.102)
186 For the accusative and infinitive when suadeo means ‘to seek to persuade (that)’, see OLD s.v. § 4.
187 For this use of cogo, see Torrego (2016b: 303, 308–9).
188 For this exceptional use of hortor, see Bolkestein (1976a: 298–9).
189 For this exceptional use of moneo, see Bolkestein (1976a: 297–9).
Infinitival clauses 175
33.3); Quae cura intercisionis venarum quoquo loco faciendum praecipio . . . (Mulom.
Chir. 104)190
Active infinitive: Nec minus in certo dentes cadere imperat aetas / tempore et
inpubem molli pubescere veste / et pariter mollem malis demittere barbam. (Lucr.
5.672–4); Caesar celeriter de navibus imperat omnes egredi atque . . . milites exspectare.
(B. Afr. 11.2); Irin ad Hersiliam descendere . . . / imperat . . . (Ov. Met. 14.830–1); . . .
quot haberet corpora pulvis, / tot mihi natales contingere vana rogavi. (Ov. Met.
14.137–8)191
(iv) Of the verbs of demanding that can govern an AcI, postulo is the most com-
mon.192 The subject of the AcI clause may be identical to the subject of the governing
clause, as in (p), or different, as in (q). Note in (p) the use of a future infinitive, which
shows that there are no restrictions on the infinitive, as is normal for accusative and
infinitive clauses (see § 14.8). With this class of verbs ut clauses are also common (see
§ 15.67) and prolative infinitives are possible as well (see § 15.116). These verbs are
two-place verbs, with the exception of flagito, which also has a three-place pattern
(see § 15.67).193
(p) Iam postulabas te, impurata belua, / totam Siciliam devoraturum insulam?
(‘You dirty beast, did you expect you’d immediately swallow the whole island of
Sicily?’ Pl. Rud. 543–4)
(q) . . . nos nostras aedis postulas comburere?
(‘. . . do you expect us to burn down our house?’ Pl. Aul. 361)
(v) Examples of verbs of allowing and tolerating governing an accusative and infini-
tive clause are (r) and (s) (see also (o) above). Permitto also has a three-place pattern
(see § 15.70 and § 15.119).
(r) Aliam tecum esse equidem facile possum perpeti.
(‘I can easily handle another girl being with you.’ Pl. As. 845)
(s) Ferunt enim aures hominum cum illa quae iucunda . . . tum etiam illa, quae
mirabilia sunt in virtute, laudari.
(‘Men’s ears can endure it when both those aspects of virtue which are pleasing . . . and
also those that are admirable are praised.’ Cic. de Orat. 2.344)
190 More examples and references in Aalto (1949: 86). 191 See Bömer ad loc.
192 For the material, see TLL s.v. postulo 271.16ff. 193 See TLL s.v. 845.33ff.
176 Subordinate clauses filling an argument position
(vi) The verbs iubeo, veto (voto), patior, and sino deserve separate attention.194 Most
scholars assume that iubeo and veto are three-place verbs governing an accusative
object and a prolative infinitive. K.-St., however, distinguish two major constructions,
depending on whether the infinitive is active or passive.195 Examples for these four
verbs are (t)–(w) and (x)–(aa). In the first—active—series, the accusative is taken by
K.-St. as the object/patient of the governing verb and the infinitive—in the terminology
used in this Syntax—as a prolative infinitive. The examples in the passive series, by
contrast, are taken as instances of a ‘proper’ accusative and infinitive clause, which as
a whole functions as object of the verb. In other words, the first series represents a
three-place, the second a two-place pattern.196
194 The verb censeo can also govern an imperative AcI. See Bolkestein (1998a: 25–6). For iubeo salvere,
see Torrego (2013); for veto, see Torrego (2017a).
195 K.-St.: I.715–18. The examples (p)–(z) are taken from their discussion. For further examples of
iubeo, see TLL s.v. 577.5ff. For a discussion of the imperative use of the AcI with iubeo, see Bolkestein
(1976a: 284–95).
196 This is essentially also the position taken in LSS § 7.4.3. Bennett: I.379–82 regards all clauses gov-
erned by ‘verba voluntatis’ as object clauses—that is, in the terminology of this Syntax, as accusative and
infinitive clauses.
Infinitival clauses 177
However, these examples can also be taken as nominative and infinitive constructions
of the agent type as discussed in § 15.111 for verbs like dico and audio. Interestingly,
just like these verbs, iubeo is also common in constructions of the patient type, as in
(ae) and (af).
(ae) . . . proxumo iussa’st dari (sc. puella) . . .
(‘. . . she has been ordered to be given to her nearest relative . . .’ Ter. Ph. 416)
197 K.-St. also cite Ter. Ph. 864: Ait (sc. se) esse vetitum intro ad eram accedere, and so does Bennett:
I.389. Alternatively one may regard the infinitive accedere as the subject. See at the end of this section.
There are obviously no passive examples for patior.
178 Subordinate clauses filling an argument position
Secondly, there are also instances of an accusative with a non-passive infinitive where
the accusative cannot be regarded as the object of the governing verb, and in the case
of iubeo as the addressee of the order (see the examples directly below). This is quite
obvious for instances with a passive infinitive like (x)—the main reason for K.-St.’s
positing an AcI—but it is also evident in many other cases: in (ag) it is clearly not the
narrative that is being commanded, and in (ah), which occurs in a legal context, it is
unlikely that the me and te personally received an order. Similarly in (ai) Caesar will
not have first summoned the cavalry to pass on his orders to them directly. Interesting
too is the parallelism of an ut clause and an accusative and infinitive sequence in the
decretum of L. Aemilius Paullus in (aj), which must both be taken as object clauses.
(ag) Iam vero narrationem quod iubent veri similem esse et apertam et brevem,
recte nos admonent.
(‘Then again, in requiring the statement of the case to be plausible, lucid and brief,
they advise us well.’ Cic. de Orat. 2.83)
(ah) Sed quaero a te, putesne, si populus iusserit me tuum aut te meum servum
esse, id iussum ratum atque firmum futurum?
(‘But I ask you: if the people gave the order for me to be your slave, or for you to be
mine, do you think that this command would be binding and valid?’ Cic. Caec. 96)
(ai) Caesar ab opere legiones revocat, equitatum omnem convenire iubet . . .
(‘Caesar recalled his legions from their work, ordered that the entire cavalry assem-
ble . . .’ Caes. Civ. 1.82.2)
(aj) L Aemilius · L · F · inpeirator · decreivit / utei · quei · hastensium ·
servei / in · turri · Lascutana · habitarent / leiberei · essent. · Agrum ·
oppidumqu(e) / quod · ea · tempestate · posedisent / item · possidere ·
habereque / iousit · . . .
(‘Lucius Aemilius, son of Lucius, commander-in-chief, decreed that the slaves of the
people of Hasta dwelling in the tower of Lascuta should be free. The land and the
town which they had possessed at that time he ordered that they should possess and
hold as heretofore . . .’ CIL I2.614.1–7 (near Cadiz, 189 bc)
There are many other instances of iubeo with an accusative and an active infinitive
that could be analysed as proper AcI clauses; in such cases iubeo could be translated
‘to ordain’ or ‘to decree’.198
Thirdly, there are instances of parallelism or coordination of active and passive
clauses, as in (ak) and (al)—coordinated clauses—and (am)—coordinated infinitives.
It is preferable to explain them in the same way (as AcI clauses).
198 García de la Calera (2008) takes the position that in Caesar and Sallust all combinations of iubeo
with an accusative and an active infinitive represent in fact accusative and infinitive clauses. Gavoille
(2014: 218) characterizes iubeo as ‘un verbe de parole . . . constatif ’, for which the AcI is the normal expres-
sion. See also Hoffmann’s (2016a: 50–1) discussion of iubeo as a non-causative verb.
Infinitival clauses 179
Fourthly, if iubeo were being used with a three-place frame, one might expect a more
or less synonymous parallel accusative + (ut +) subjunctive pattern (see § 15.114).
However, convincing instances of such a pattern for iubeo are rare: most of the examples
cited in the TLL lack an entity that could be interpreted as the addressee of the order.199
There are two instances with an accusative constituent plus a simple subjunctive
clause in Plautus, one of which is (an), but these accusatives must be taken as pseudo-
objects (on which see § 9.17). In (ao), with passive alter consul iussus, the active
infinitive gerere is continued by an ut clause. For a few more straightforward later
examples, see the Supplement.
(an) Tu servos iube / hunc ad me ferant.
(‘You tell your slaves to bring him here to me.’ Pl. Men. 955–6)
(ao) Alter consul, cui Italia provincia evenisset, cum Boiis iussus bellum gerere utro
exercitu mallet ex duobus quos superiores consules habuissent, alterum ut mit-
teret Romam, eaeque urbanae legiones essent paratae quo senatus censuisset.
(‘The other consul, to whom Italy should have fallen as a province, was ordered to
carry on war with the Boii, using whichever he preferred of the two armies which the
preceding consuls had had, and to send the other to Rome, and that these, as reserve
legions, should be ready to move wherever the senate should direct.’ Liv. 36.1.9)
There are instances of a double accusative construction with iubeo; this concerns
especially pronouns, as in § 4.76. Examples are (ap), active, and (aq), passive.200
(ap) Heia, hoc face quod te iubet soror.
(‘Now, now, do what your sister tells you.’ Pl. Aul. 153)
(aq) Quod iussus sum eo tempore atque ita feci ut appareret invito imperatum
esse.
(‘I did what I was ordered at a time and in such a way that it was apparent
that I had been ordered against my will.’ Pol. Fam. 10.31.3)
199 TLL s.v. 579.73ff. 200 See TLL s.v. iubeo 582.4ff.
180 Subordinate clauses filling an argument position
Supplement:
Passive infinitive: . . . cum alia lex iubet aut permittit, alia vetat quippiam fieri . . . (Rhet.
Her. 1.20); . . . interea sarcinas in unum locum conferri et eum ab iis, qui in superiore
acie constiterant, muniri iussit. (Caes. Gal. 1.24.3—NB: explicit agent); Papirius Cursor
ea tempestate dictator securem per lictorem expediri . . . iussit . . . (Amm. 30.8.5)
Cf.: . . . quem digredientem post epulas hospitalis officii sanctitate nefarie violata tru-
cidari securum effecit. (Amm. 29.5.6)
NB: Pleonastic combination with a gerundival clause: . . . ut iuberes dandam in
absentem sententiam? (Lucif. Athan. 1.25, l.23 D)201
Non-passive infinitive: Iubeo / illam te amare et velle uxorem, hanc esse Clitiphonis.
(Ter. Hau. 702–3)
Active and passive coordinated: Eos · fineis · facere · terminosque · statui ·
iuserunt. (Sent. Minuc., CIL I2.584.3 (Genoa, 117 bc))
(ut +) subjunctive: Ubi Britannico iussit Ø exsurgeret progressusque in medium
cantum aliquem inciperet . . . (Tac. Ann. 13.15.2—NB: dative, cf. Tac. Ann. 13.40.2);
Silo Pompeius, dum praeceptum sequitur quo iubemur ut, quotiens possumus, de
omnibus legis verbis controversiam faciamus, illam quaestionem movit: . . . (Sen. Con.
1.2.15); Hunc tribunus militum . . . occidit lectis codicillis quibus ut id faceret iubeba-
tur. (Suet. Tib. 22);202 Eosdem / camellos iube Ø adaquentur . . . (M 1107.6–8
(see § 9.17, (k)); . . . iubere eum debeb<i>t proconsul ut idonee caveat. (Gaius dig.
5.3.41.pr.)
NB: coordination with repetition of nos: Iussit vel nos atriensem vel nos uxorem
suam / defraudare (Pl. As. 365–6)
The strongest argument against assuming that the sequence accusative + active infini-
tive is a proper AcI and that this sequence as a whole functions as the object of iubeo
is that there are said to be no passive counterparts attested of iubetur or iussum est in
combination with an accusative and infinitive clause as the subject,203 as discussed in
§ 15.110; but see (ar).
(ar) Nepesinis inde edictum ut arma ponant parcique iussum inermi.
(‘The Nepesini were then commanded to lay down their weapons and the order was
given to spare such as were unarmed.’ Liv. 6.10.5)
Supplement:
Rogo / quam ob rem retineat me. Ait esse vetitum intro ad eram accedere. (Ter. Ph.
863–4—but see note 197); Alio mihi debita fato / summa dies, vetitumque (sc. sum-
mam diem) dari mortalibus armis. (Stat. Theb. 3.623–4)
For all these reasons, in this Syntax iubeo will be taken to have two verb frames: a
three-place frame with an accusative object/addressee and a prolative infinitive, and a
two-place frame, the second argument of which can be filled by a non-declarative
accusative and infinitive clause (as with the verbs discussed in (iii) above). This is
201 Examples from Lucifer can be found in Diercks’ edition (1978: XCII).
202 Following the interpretation of OLD s.v. iubeo § 3, where also Hyg. Fab. 196.1 is quoted.
203 See Lavency (2003: 111–13), who regards the infinitive with iubeo and veto as a prolative infinitive.
Infinitival clauses 181
close to K.-St.’s position, but with the added recognition that the two-place frame may
contain either an active or a passive infinitive.
Iubeo and the other verbs can also be used with an active infinitive when the identity
of the agent of the infinitive is sufficiently clear or irrelevant, as in (as) and (at),
respectively.
(as) Hic apud me hortum confodere iussi.
(‘I ordered people to dig up the garden here at my place.’ Pl. Aul. 243)
(at) Quocirca bene praecipiunt qui vetant quicquam agere . . .
(‘Wherefore those who bid us not to do anything . . . give us an excellent
precept.’ Cic. Off. 1.30)
Appendix: The situation for the three other verbs is to some extent different from
that of iubeo. For patior there is no evidence at all for a three-place pattern, and the
TLL describes the infinitival clauses as AcI, as does the OLD. For sino the OLD has a
section that is explicitly labelled ‘prolative’ (§ 5), but it also devotes a section to AcI
clauses, including clauses with non-passive infinitives (§ 2b). The same organization
of examples is used for veto (§ 2a and § 1b, respectively). This analysis of the two
verbs is also adopted in this Syntax.
15.101 The use of the accusative and infinitive clause as subject with one-place and
so-called impersonal verbs
Accusative and infinitive clauses can be used as subject of a wide variety of one-place
verbs, among these the so-called impersonal verbs of obligation and permission
oportet and licet (see §§ 4.8; 4.12; 4.14).204 (For est + AcI, see also § 4.15.)
(a) Nam lege quidem bona venire non potuisse constat.
(‘For it is evident that the property could not have been sold by virtue of the law.’ Cic.
S. Rosc. 128)
(b) Adparet servom hunc esse domini pauperis / miserique.
(‘It’s obvious that this man is the slave of a wretched poverty-stricken master.’ Ter. Eu.
486–7)
(c) Itaque me malum esse oportet . . .
(‘Therefore it’s necessary that I be malicious . . .’ Pl. Am. 268)
(d) Non licet donati opsoni me participem fieri?
(‘Is it not permitted to me to have my share of the provisions I gave as a gift?’ Pl.
Truc. 747)
Supplement (in alphabetical order by governing verb):
Verbs of obligation and permission: Nam iniusta ab iustis impetrari non decet . . . (Pl.
Am. 35); . . . tum verborum omnium definitiones, in quibus neque abesse quicquam
decet neque redundare. (Cic. de Orat. 2.83); . . . teque hilari animo esse et prompto ad
iocandum valde me iuvat. (Cic. Q. fr. 2.12.1); ‘Hanc te’, inquit, ‘capere non licuit.’
(Cic. Flac. 56); Sed si properabas magis, / pridie nos te advocatos huc duxisse
oportuit. (Pl. Poen. 525–6); Patrem familias vendacem, non emacem esse oportet.
(Cato Agr. 2.7); Totam enim rem, Catule, Lucullo integram servatam oportuit.
(Cic. Luc. 10)205
Verbs of excellence and desirability: Convenit stellas in occasu vespertino proximas
esse terrae et altitudine et latitudine . . . (Plin. Nat. 2.68); Patrem familiae villam . . . bene
aedificatam habere expedit . . . (Cato Agr. 3.2); Nimio impendiosum praestat te quam
ingratum dicier. (Pl. Bac. 396); Alioquin non prodest eum exheredari. (Gaius Inst.
2.127)
Other verbs: In ceteris partibus vitae continentissimum constat ac sine suspicione
ullius vitii. (Suet. Aug. 72.1); Sed inpuberes quidem in tutela esse omnium civitatium
iure contingit. (Gaius Inst. 1.189) . . . cum hoc nescio quo modo apud eos increbruis-
set me in causis maioribus sicuti te solere versari . . . (Cic. de Orat. 1.82); Cum pateat
igitur aeternum id esse quod se ipsum moveat . . . (Cic. Tusc. 1.54); Restat Bactra
novis, restat Babylona tributis / frenari. (Stat. Silv. 4.1.40–1)
Appendix: In this context, grammars often deal with other expressions that in reality
involve two-place verbs. Examples are (e) and (f). With placet in (e), a dative argu-
ment for the person who is pleased would be normal.206 In (f), the person who should
feel ashamed is in the usual accusative (te). For the latter, see § 15.97 (emotion verbs).
(e) Apage, non placet me hoc noctis esse (= edere). Cenavi modo.
(‘Away with you! I don’t like eating at this time of night. I’ve just had my din-
ner.’ Pl. Am. 310)
(f) . . . pudeat te ausum illum umquam esse incedere tamquam tuum competi-
torem.
(‘. . . you would be ashamed that he ever dared to parade as your competitor.’
Cael. Fam. 8.9.1)
205 For the use of the perfect infinitive in such contexts, see § 7.76.
206 See, for example, TLL s.v. placeo 2261.16ff.
Infinitival clauses 183
15.102 The use of accusative and infinitive clauses in combination with expressions
that function as subject or object complement
Accusative and infinitive clauses can be used as subject of a wide variety of expressions
consisting of the copula and a subject complement. The most common ones are com-
binations of the copula and a noun (or noun phrase) or a neuter singular adjective, as
in (a) and (b), but other types of subject complements (see §§ 9.20ff.) are used as well.
An example of a possessive genitive, sometimes called genetivus proprietatis (see § 9.30)
is (c); of a predicative dative (see § 9.34), (d); of a prepositional phrase (see § 9.37), (e).
Ex. (f) shows the related use of an accusative and infinitive clause with an object com-
plement. Ex. (g) has a preparative pronoun as the subject of the main clause.
(a) Stultitia est ei te esse tristem quoius potestas plus potest.
(‘It’s stupidity to be sulky with someone who has greater authority.’ Pl. Cas. 282)
(b) Si aequom siet / me plus sapere quam vos, dederim vobis consilium catum . . .
(‘If it were proper for me to be wiser than you, I’d give you a smart plan . . .’ Pl. Epid.
257–8)
(c) Sed nunc ea me exquirere / iniqui patris est.
(‘Well, for me to look into that now is to behave like an unreasonable father.’ Ter. An.
186–7—tr. Brown)
(d) . . . num molestiae est / me adire ad illas propius?
(‘Is there any harm in me coming closer to them?’ Pl. Rud. 830)
(e) Ea si dicam non esse e re publica dividi . . .
(‘If I were to say that it is contrary to public interest that those properties should be
brought under assignment . . .’ Cic. Fam. 13.8.2)
(f) . . . antea semper pro indignissimo habuerant se patrio regno tutoris fraude
pulsos . . .
(‘. . . they had always considered it the greatest outrage that they had been ousted from
their father’s kingship by the crime of their guardian . . .’ Liv. 1.40.2)
(g) Illa enim est gloria divina Pompei, . . . praedones . . . redactos esse omnes in
potestatem . . .
(‘This is the superhuman achievement of Pompeius: that he brought under control all
those pirates . . .’ Cic. Flac. 30)
exercitum obsideri. (Liv. 40.27.10); Res nova et inusitata supplicium de studiis sumi.
(Sen. Con. 10.pr.5); Iam tum erat suspicio / dolo malo haec fieri omnia. (Ter. Eu.
514–15); ‘Sed tempus est’ inquit ‘iam hinc abire, me, ut moriar, vos, ut vitam agatis.’
(Cic. Tusc. 1.99)
With a preparative pronoun: Haec igitur sit prima partitio, quod facete dicatur, id
alias in re habere, alias in verbo facetias. (Cic. de Orat. 2.248); Nimirum haec est natura
rerum, haec potentia eius, saevissimas ferarum maximasque numquam vidisse quod
debeant timere et statim intellegere, cum sit timendum. (Plin. Nat. 8.10)
Adjectives (neuter singular forms): Non possum durare, certum est exulatum hinc
ire me. (Pl. Mer. 644); . . . consequens esse beatam vitam virtute esse contentam . . .
(Cic. Tusc. 5.18); An decorum est advorsari meis te praeceptis? (Pl. As. 508); Nimium
difficile est reperiri amicum . . . (Pl. Trin. 620); Feci ego ista ut commemoras, et te
meminisse id gratum est mihi. (Pl. Capt. 414); Lautissimum quippe habetur e nardi
folio eas dari aut veste Serica versicolori, unguentis madida. (Plin. Nat. 21.11); Sed
maximum est in amicitia parem esse inferiori. (Cic. Amic. 69—NB: generic subject);
Longe optimum est febrem omnino non esse. (Cels. 2.8.6); Sed par est omnis omnia
experiri . . . (Cic. Orat. 4); . . . quanto fuerat praestabilius ubivis gentium agere
aetatem . . . (Ter. Hec. 284); Tanto rarius est servatorem unum a servatis donari. (Plin.
Nat. 22.9); . . . (sc. gladiatores) quos promiscue spectari sollemne olim erat . . . (Suet.
Aug. 44.2); Accusatores multos esse in civitate utile est . . . (Cic. S. Rosc. 55); Bene fac-
tum et volup est me hodie his mulierculis / tetulisse auxilium. (Pl. Rud. 892–3)
NB: possessive adjective: Haud tuom istuc est te vereri. (Pl. St. 718)
Predicative datives: Satis scio, quibuscumque dis cordi fuit subigi nos ad necessi-
tatem dedendi res quae ab nobis ex foedere repetitae fuerant, iis non fuisse cordi tam
superbe ab Romanis foederis expiationem spretam. (Liv. 9.1.4); . . . tibi curae est
sentire cives tuos quanto per te onere leventur . . . (Liv. 30.31.3); Circa rem nostram
Siculam turbidum esse Nectarium indicio erunt litterae quas nuper Euscius misit.
(Symm. Ep. 6.66.2); Ita nunc per urbem solus sermoni omnibu’st, / eum velle amicam
liberare . . . (Pl. Ps. 418–19)
Prepositional phrases: Eundem in fame vesci terra inter auguria. (Plin. Nat. 8.83);
An, si pro illo fuit fieri vim quoi facta dicitur, non teneatur qui fecit? (Sen. Con. 9.5.6)
Adverb: . . . cum palam esset per errorem ingressos . . . (Liv. 31.14.8)
Object complement: Tu’n verberes, qui pro cibo habeas te verberari? (Pl. As. 628);
Pompeium pro certo habemus per Illyricum proficisci in Galliam. (Cic. Att. 10.6.3)
15.103 The use of the accusative and infinitive clause with a preparative pronoun
Accusative and infinitive clauses are often announced by preparative pronouns (and
adverbs). Examples with a preparative pronoun are (a) and (b). Compare also (c), with
the preparative adverb ita.207 In (d), the relative pronoun serves a similar function.
(a) Scelestissume, audes mihi praedicare id, / domi te esse nunc, qui hic ades?
(‘You hardened criminal, do you really dare to say that to me, that you, who are here,
are at home now?’ Pl. Am. 561–2)
207 For the use of ita and sic as preparative devices with accusative and infinitive clauses, see
Lavency (2004) and Bodelot (2005).
Infinitival clauses 185
(b) Inter omnis igitur hoc constat, . . . virorum esse fortium . . . toleranter dolorem
pati.
(‘It is universally agreed then . . . that it is characteristic of men who are brave . . . to
suffer pain with patience.’ Cic. Tusc. 2.43)
(c) . . . mecum Tadius locutus est te ita scripsisse, nihil esse iam quod laborare-
tur . . .
(‘. . . Tadius has told me that you have written him word that there is no need to worry
any longer . . .’ Cic. Att. 1.5.6)
(d) Quod cum audivisset adulescens filius, negotium exhiberi patri, accurrisse
Romam . . . dicitur.
(‘It is said that when the son, who was then a young man, heard this, namely that his
father was in trouble on his account, he hastened to Rome.’ Cic. Off. 3.112)
Accusative and infinitive clauses are rarely used in combination with a neuter pro-
noun in non-argument positions in the sentence. An example is (e), where the abla-
tive neuter pronoun illo (an ablativus comparationis) serves as a preparative expression
for the accusative and infinitive clause and, together with the clause, serves as the
basis of comparison (see § 20.1) with esse certius. Ex. (f) has a prepositional phrase
with the same function (see also § 14.16 and § 16.84).
(e) . . . potest illo quicquam esse certius, in tua potestate atque in tuis horreis omne
frumentum Siciliae per triennium atque omnis fructus agri decumani fuisse?
(‘. . . can there be any fact more certain than that for three years all the corn of Sicily,
all the harvests of the tithe-paying land, were in your granaries and under your con-
trol?’ Cic. Ver. 3.178)
186 Subordinate clauses filling an argument position
(f) Itaque narrabat eum graviter et copiose de hoc ipso, nihil esse bonum nisi
quod esset honestum, cubantem disputavisse . . .
(‘And accordingly he related that from his sickbed the philosopher had earnestly and
fully discussed this very proposition “that there is nothing good except what is
honourable” . . .’ Cic. Tusc. 2.61)
The AcI can be used without an overt governing expression. A very common use is in
free indirect speech, where it may correspond to a declarative or an interrogative
(rhetorical) sentence in direct speech, but it is also used more or less independently in
utterances expressing indignance or surprise, as in (a).
(a) Criminin’ me habuisse fidem?
(‘To think that I believed that accusation?’ Pl. Bac. 629)
15.105 The use of the accusative and infinitive clause in interrogative clauses
and sentences
Accusative and infinitive clauses may correspond to independent declarative sen-
tences (this is the normal situation), but also to interrogative sentences with an
indirect assertive illocutionary force (so-called rhetorical questions, see § 6.23).
Interrogative AcI clauses are not uncommon in historical writers,208 who report
speeches or messages, and occasionally thoughts, which have an indirect assertive
illocutionary force. However, some instances could be construed instead as exclam-
ations. The negation word is non, just as in finite interrogative sentences. Usually there
is no governing verb. Following the distinction made in § 6.7, sentence questions and
constituent questions are dealt with separately.
Instances of simple sentence questions are (a)–(e). Such sentences may, but need
not, contain one of the question particles.
(a) (Caesar ita respondit) . . . quod si veteris contumeliae oblivisci vellet, num
etiam recentium iniuriarum . . . memoriam deponere (sc. se) posse?
(‘(Caesar replied as follows) . . . but even if he were willing to forget their former affront,
could he also lay aside the remembrance of recent outrages?’ Caes. Gal. 1.14.3)
(b) Hocine patiendum fuisse, si ad nutum dictatoris non responderit vir consu-
laris?
(‘Was this the penalty a consular must undergo, if he did not respond to the nod of a
dictator?’ Liv. 6.17.3)
(c) Quid? Ipsorum magistratuum nonne plerosque variis libidinibus obnoxios?
(‘Well, were not too many of the magistrates themselves vulnerable to temptation in
more shapes than one?’ Tac. Ann. 3.34.3)
208 The fullest collection of examples is Kraz (1862). For discussion, see Orlandini (1994).
Infinitival clauses 187
(d) Romam, caput orbis terrarum, petentibus quicquam adeo asperum atque
arduum videri quod inceptum moretur?
(‘To those seeking Rome, the capital of the world, does anything seem so difficult and
arduous that it should delay the endeavour?’ Liv. 21.30.10)
(e) Adeo neminem isdem in terris ortum, qui principem locum impleat, nisi . . .?
(‘Was it so indisputable that there was not a man born upon the same soil as them-
selves who was competent to fill the princely station . . .?’ Tac. Ann. 11.16.3)
Supplement:
Quid censes, si ratio esset in beluis, non suo quasque generi plurimum tributuras
fuisse? (Cic. N.D. 1.78); Quid tandem? Illi non licere, si quid consules superbe in
aliquem civium aut crudeliter fecerint, diem dicere, accusare iis ipsis iudicibus,
quorum in aliquem saevitum sit? (Liv. 3.9.9); Itaque id quemquam mirari posse,
cur . . . (Liv. 36.40.6)
With question particles: Quid igitur censes Apim illum sanctum Aegyptiorum bovem
nonne deum videri Aegyptiis? (Cic. N.D. 1.82); Nonne Canuleio duce se speraturos
Capitolium atque arcem scandere posse? (Liv. 4.2.14); Potuisse patres plebi scito pelli
honoribus suis. Num etiam in deos immortales inauspicatam legem valuisse? (Liv.
7.6.11); An aequum esse dediticios suos illa fertilitate atque amoenitate perfrui . . .?
(Liv. 7.38.7); An quia victus proelio foret, inexpiabile bellum factum? (Liv. 33.12.8);
An praetorias cohortes, quae binos denarios accep<er>i<n>t, quae post sedecim annos
Penatibus suis reddantur, plus periculorum suscipere? (Tac. Ann. 1.17.6); Easdem artes
Drusum rettulisse numquamne ad se nisi filios familiarum venturos? (Tac. Ann. 1.26.2)
Multiple questions with (utrum) . . . an are rare. Ex. (f), from Cicero, is controversial.
The Livian exx. (g) and (h) and the Tacitean (i) are accepted without comment.
(f) Intellexi hominem moveri, utrum Crassum inire eam gratiam quam ipse
praetermisisset an esse tantas res nostras quae tam libenti senatu laudaren-
tur, ab eo praesertim qui mihi laudem illam eo minus deberet quod meis
omnibus litteris in Pompeiana laude perstrictus esset.
(‘I noticed that the man was agitated, whether at Crassus earning the grati-
tude which he had himself neglected, or at the fact that my achievements
were of such magnitude that the senate was so glad to hear them praised,
especially by a man who was the less under an obligation to praise me,
because in everything I ever wrote my praise of Pompey was practically a
reflection on him.’ Cic. Att. 1.14.3)
(g) Quod naturae damnum utrum nutriendum patri, si quidquam in eo humani
esset, an castigandum ac vexatione insigne faciendum fuisse?
(‘But ought not his father to have healed and mended this infirmity of
nature—if he had a particle of humanity about him—or should he have
chastised it and made it conspicuous by persecution?’ Liv. 7.4.6)
(h) Utrum enim partem regni petiturum esse an totum erepturum?
(‘Was he in doubt whether to seek for part of the kingdom, or to seize it all?’
Liv. 45.19.15)
188 Subordinate clauses filling an argument position
209 For further examples with dico, see TLL s.v. dico 895.62ff.
210 See Winterbottom ad loc.: ‘an astonishing construction’.
Infinitival clauses 189
superbo, cum imperio venire? (Tac. Hist. 4.14.3); Cogitavit etiam de Homeri car-
minibus abolendis, cur enim sibi non licere dicens quod Platoni licuisset, qui eum e
civitate quam constituebat eiecerit? (Suet. Cal. 34.2—NB: with the governing verb
expressed)
(b) . . . Croesi filium, cum esset infans, locutum. Quo ostento regnum patris et
domum funditus concidisse.
(‘. . . Croesus’ son, when an infant, had spoken. With this serving as a portent his
father’s kingdom and house were utterly overthrown.’ Cic. Div. 1.121)
(c) Postea demonstrabitur ne . . . quidem . . . potuisse hunc ipsum de illa suppli-
cium sumere. Quare esse indignum eum, qui . . .
(‘After that it will be pointed out that he himself could not have inflicted the punish-
ment on her; therefore it is intolerable that he who . . .’ Cic. Inv. 2.82)
(d) Fama est aram esse in vestibulo templi cuius cinerem nullo umquam
move<ri> vento.
(‘It is reported that in the space in front of the temple there is an altar whose ashes are
never stirred by any wind.’ Liv. 24.3.7)
Supplement:
Quem iam ingredientem in navem et Verri nimis atrociter minitantem ab se retrac-
tum esse et adservatum . . . (Cic. Ver. 5.160); Quod item fieri nullo modo posse, nisi
cognosset is qui . . . (Cic. de Orat. 1.87); Deinde, quos in senatu ne tenuissima quidem
suspicione attigerat, eos nominavit: <L.> Lucullum, a quo solitum esse ad se mitti
C. Fannium, illum qui in P. Clodium subscripserat, L. Domitium, cuius domum con-
stitutam fuisse unde eruptio fieret. (Cic. Att. 2.24.3); Qui si alicuius iniuriae sibi con-
scius fuisset, non fuisse difficile cavere. (Caes. Gal. 1.14.2); Quibus proeliis
calamitatibusque fractos . . . coactos esse Sequanis obsides dare nobilissimos civita-
tis . . . (Caes. Gal. 1.31.7); Cuius rei magnam partem laudis atque existimationis ad
Libonem perventuram si illo auctore atque agente ab armis sit discessum. (Caes. Civ.
1.26.4); Qua oratione deterritos amplius iugulationem non fecisse. (B. Hisp. 16.4);
Quem si Romanis tradidisset, fore ut illi plurumum deberetur. (Sal. Jug. 111.1);
Nobiles iuvenes quosdam, quorum principem L. Caecilium Metellum (sc. esse),
mare ac naves spectare, ut deserta Italia ad regum aliquem transfugiant. (Liv.
22.53.5); . . . illum, quia male administratae provinciae aliorumque criminum urgeba-
tur, culpam invidia velavisse, frustra conterrita uxore, quam etsi nocentem periculi
tamen expertem fuisse. (Tac. Ann. 6.29.1); . . . tuta pone tergum Achaia Asiaque, quas
inermes exponi Vitellio, ni praesidiis firmarentur. (Tac. Hist. 2.83.2); Trepidus ad
haec Vitellius pauca purgandi sui causa respondit culpam in militem conferens, cuius
nimio ardori imparem esse modestiam suam. (Tac. Hist. 3.70.4); Britanniam petisse
spe margaritarum, quarum amplitudinem conferentem interdum sua manu exegisse
pondus. (Suet. Jul. 47.1)
(a) Ex quo intellegi potuit id quod saepe dictum est, ut mare quod sua natura
tranquillum sit ventorum vi agitari atque turbari, sic populum Romanum
sua sponte esse placatum, hominum seditiosorum vocibus ut violentissimis
tempestatibus concitari.
(‘From which one could easily understand what has often been said—that as the sea,
which by its own nature is tranquil, is often agitated and disturbed by the violence of
the winds, so, too, the Roman people is, when left to itself, calm, but is easily roused
by the language of seditious men, as if by raging storms.’ Cic. Clu. 138)
(b) . . . eas (sc. res) a Stoicis esse perspectas, eisdemque de rebus hos cum acutius
disseruisse, tum sensisse gravius et fortius . . .
(‘. . . Those matters were understood clearly by the Stoics, and concerning the same
subjects they had both engaged in more insightful discussions and had perceived
them with greater depth and strength . . .’ Cic. Fin. 4.62)
Supplement:
Ut cum in sole ambulem, etiam si ego aliam ob causam ambulem, fieri natura tamen ut
colorer, sic . . . sentio illorum tactu orationem meam quasi colorari. (Cic. de Orat. 2.60);
Huc accedit uti videamus, corpus ut ipsum / suscipere inmanis morbos durumque
dolorem, / sic animum curas acris luctumque metumque. (Lucr. 3.459–61); . . . et tot
acies ut hostium exercitus delesse, ita victoris etiam copias parte aliqua minuisse. (Liv.
23.12.4); . . . quem ad modum, si non dedatur obses pro rupto foedus se habiturum, sic
deditam <intactam> inviolatamque ad suos remissurum. (Liv. 2.13.8); . . . admonemus
cives nos eorum esse et, si non easdem opes habere, eandem tamen patriam incolere?
(Liv. 4.3.3); Ut enim qui in villis intra consaepta morarentur, quam qui foris terram
molirentur, ignaviores habitos, sic eos . . . segniores visos. (Col. 1.pr.17); Quorum
favorem ut largitione et ambitu male adquiri, ita per bonas artes haud spernendum.
(Tac. Hist. 1.17.2); Ceterum quis tam stultus . . . est ut audeat repugnare hominem a Deo
ut primum potuisse fingi ita posse denuo reformari? (Min. Fel. 34.9)
In a similar way, when two clauses are compared, for example with ante . . . quam, both
can be accusative and infinitive, as in (c).213
(c) Censes ante coronam herbae exstitisse quam conceptum esse semen?
(‘Do you think the crown of herbs appeared before their seeds were formed?’ Cic.
Div. 2.68)
15.109 The use of the accusative and infinitive in subordinate (especially satellite)
clauses with a subordinator
The use of the accusative and infinitive in subordinate clauses with a subordinator, for
example in a causal clause with the subordinator quia, is rare in Latin (though it is
amply attested in Classical Greek).214 Two examples are (a) and (b). An instance with
cum is (c).
(a) . . . id, quod falsum fuerit, sine ulla dubitatione pro vero probasse. Quia si
dubitarit, summae fuisse amentiae dubia spe inpulsum certum in periculum
se committere.
(‘. . . he undoubtedly held what was false as true. For if he was in doubt it was stark mad-
ness to rush into certain danger through the lure of a doubtful hope.’ Cic. Inv. 2.27)
(b) Ideo se moenibus inclusos tenere eos. Quia (quippe cj. Friedersdorff) si qui
evasissent aliqua, velut feras bestias per agros vagari, et laniare et trucidare
quodcunque obvium detur.
(‘He was keeping them shut up inside the walls for the reason that, if any escaped in
some way, they roamed like wild beasts over the country and mangled and slew all
that met them.’ Liv. 26.27.12)
(c) Iacere tam diu inritas actiones, quae de suis commodis ferrentur, cum interim
de sanguine ac supplicio suo latam legem confestim exerceri et tantam vim
habere.
(‘The measures which had been proposed in their interests lay all this while neglected,
whereas the law that was passed concerning their punishment and their lives was
carried out at once, and was being strictly enforced.’ Liv. 4.51.4)
Unproblematic are accusative and infinitive sentences with the connector quamquam
and with the ironic combination nisi forte, as in (d) and (e), respectively: these are not
subordinate clauses.215
(d) Quamquam nullam nobilitatem, nullos honores, nulla merita cuiquam ad
dominationem pandere viam.
(‘To be sure no nobility, no honours, no merits, opened wide the road to
tyranny for any man.’ Liv. 4.15.5)
(e) Nisi forte clarissimo cuique pluris curas, maiora pericula subeunda, deleni-
mentis curarum et periculorum carendum esse.
(‘Unless your distinguished men must endure more responsibilities and
greater dangers but must lack the relaxations compensating those responsi-
bilities and those dangers.’ Tac. Ann. 2.33.3)
. The use of the accusative and infinitive as subject of passive two- and
three-place verbs
The AcI can be used as subject of a passive main verb. This construction is often called
the impersonal passive construction as opposed to the personal passive construction
of § 15.111 (the nominative and infinitive construction). It is greatly preferred if the
main verb is a complex form (for example perfect passive (a) or gerundive + sum);
when the main verb is governed by a modal verb such as possum ‘to be able’, as in (b);
215 For a discussion of (e), see Goodyear ad loc. A different approach can be found in Sz.: 360–1, who
explains (e) as a subordinate accusative and infinitive clause.
Infinitival clauses 193
and when the main verb is specified by one or more agent, addressee, or satellite
constituents, like mihi in (c).216 In the case of simplex forms, the personal passive is
much more common than the impersonal. However, there are also situations in which
a nominative and infinitive construction is excluded, for example when the AcI clause
contains an impersonal verb. There are only a few attestations in Early Latin.217
(a) In hac habitasse platea dictum’st Chrysidem . . .
(‘It has been reported to me that Chrysis lived in this street . . .’ Ter. An. 796)
(b) . . . ut recte dici possit omnia officia eo referri, ut adipiscamur principia naturae . . .
(‘. . . so that it may correctly be said that all “appropriate acts” are means to the end of
attaining the primary needs of nature.’ Cic. Fin. 3.22)
(c) . . . dici mihi memini ludorum Romanorum diebus L. Crassum quasi colli-
gendi sui causa se in Tusculanum contulisse.
(‘I remember that it was said to me that Lucius Crassus, as if for the sake of recruiting
his energies, went to his seat at Tusculum during the days of the Roman Games.’ Cic.
de Orat. 1.24)
216 For quantitative data on prose authors from the Rhetorica ad Herennium up to and including
Suetonius, see Kirk (1938).
217 See Bennett: I. 389–96.
218 This instance is the starting point of a detailed treatment of the ‘impersonal construction’ by Calboli
(1962: 3–115).
194 Subordinate clauses filling an argument position
hora decima denique ei nuntiabatur? (Cic. Mil. 48); . . . nuntiatum est nobis a
M. Varrone venisse eum Roma pridie . . . (Cic. Ac. 1.1); Nuntiatur Afranio magnos
commeatus, qui iter habebant ad Caesarem, ad flumen constitisse. (Caes. Civ.
1.51.1); . . . nuntiatum regi patribusque est in monte Albano lapidibus pluvisse. (Liv.
1.31.2); Nam istum doctum et sapientem virum fuisse memoriae traditum est. (Cic.
Parad. 23)
As can be seen from these examples, most verbs are verba sentiendi et declarandi.
However, the AcI is also found as subject of the expression mihi videtur ‘it seems to
me’, which is then more or less synonymous with censeo, as in the much discussed (d).
(d) Non mihi videtur ad beate vivendum satis posse virtutem.
(‘It does not appear to me that virtue is enough for leading a happy life.’ Cic. Tusc.
5.12)219
Supplement:
Neque eum ad me adire neque me magni pendere / visum est. (Pl. Cur. 262–3);
Natare autem eos posse ideo videtur, quod terra est de qua ducuntur pumicosa.
(Vitr. 2.3.4)
In addition to the use of the accusative and infinitive as subject of a passive (singular
neuter) verb form (a so-called impersonal passive construction), Latin has another
passive construction, the so-called nominative and infinitive construction (for its
internal properties, see § 14.9). An example is (a). Here, the person who is meant to
be the comrade of Hercules is unexpressed. This person is identical with qui, the sub-
ject of the passive form diceris. However, this qui is not the patient of the action of
saying and, as a consequence, cannot be regarded as the normal passive subject of
dico. From Early Latin—with few attestations220—onwards this construction is par-
ticularly frequent with passive forms of dico ‘to say’,221 but it is in principle possible
with all passivizable perception, cognition, and communication verbs, as can be seen in
(b) and (c). The infinitives may be active (or equivalent), as in (a)–(c) and (e)—the
‘agent’ type (see § 14.9)—or, less frequently,222 passive, as in (d) and (f)— the ‘patient’
type. The range of governing verbs expands from Cicero onwards, especially in
Lucretius, and in Ovid and other Augustan poets.223 Complex forms are rare, but see
219 Discussion in Orlandini (2000: 340–3). See also the note on videor on p. 197 below.
220 See Bennett: I.388–9.
221 In Kirk’s (1938) prose sample there are 457 instances of the personal passive expression with dico
and only 24 of the impersonal. For credo the figures are 114 against 14. Conversely, for nuntio the figures
are ten against forty-five. For Pliny the Elder, see Tarriño (2002: 276–7). Merguet (Phil.) s.v. dico 679ff. and
(Reden) s.v. dico 96ff. has a large collection of instances, with only a few impersonal forms. See Heine
(1990: 8–9).
222 See Tarriño (2002: 282–4). In her corpus of Pliny the Elder, in twenty-eight NcI’s fourteen infinitives
are ‘transitive’, ten ‘intransitive’ and four passive. With the forty-seven impersonal AcI clauses in the same
corpus it is just the other way around.
223 For Ovid, see Bömer ad Ov. Met. 2.42.
Infinitival clauses 195
est dicta in (e). Specifications of the main verb (for example, addressee, agent, and
satellite constituents or a modal verb) are very rare, but see possit in (d) and the agent
ab suis in (f). See also § 15.110 for the use of these specifications with the so-called
impersonal construction.
(a) . . . qui <et> Herculei socius esse diceris . . .
(‘(you) who are said to be Hercules’ companion . . .’ Pl. Rud. 161)
(b) Ut enim mel . . . suo tamen proprio genere saporis, non comparatione cum
aliis dulce esse sentitur . . .
(‘Just as honey is perceived to be sweet by its own particular kind of flavour and not
by being compared with something else . . .’ Cic. Fin. 3.34)
(c) Qui habitus et quae figura non procul abesse putatur a vitae periculo . . .
(‘That type of condition and build which is commonly thought of as incurring risk of
life itself . . .’ Cic. Brut. 313)
(d) Hoc commode reprehenditur, si dici possit ex hostibus equus esse captus . . .
(‘A proper answer is made to this if a horse can be said to have been captured from
the enemy . . .’ Cic. Inv. 1.85)
(e) Anus / quae est dicta mater esse ei antehac non fuit.
(‘The old woman who was previously said to be her mother wasn’t.’ Ter. Hau. 269–70)
(f) . . . pueri quidam visi ab suis erant inter obsides Illyrios ducti . . .
(‘. . . some boys were seen by their relatives being led along with the Illyrian hostages . . .’
Liv. 44.35.3)
Supplement (in alphabetical order by governing verb):
Simple forms:
Perception verbs:
‘Agent’ type: Bibulus nondum audiebatur esse in Syria. (Cic. Att. 5.18.1); Iam Caesar
a Gergovia discessisse audiebatur . . . (Caes. Gal. 7.59.1); . . . quod sub te duce, te iubente,
cessi, / quod tu maximus arbiter meaeque / victor perpetuus legere ripae. (Stat. Silv.
4.3.82–4); . . . quae, si forte notasti, / oscula sentiri non esse sororia possent. (Ov. Met.
9.538–9)
‘Patient’ type: . . . ut lapide hoc uni nupta fuisse legar. (Prop. 4.11.36)
Cognition verbs:
‘Agent’ type: Tametsi mihi nihil fuit optatius quam ut primum abs te ipso, deinde
a ceteris omnibus quam gratissimus erga te esse cognoscerer, tamen . . . (Cic. Fam.
1.5a.1); . . . pro certo creditur necato filio vacuam domum scelestis nuptiis fecisse.
(Sal. Cat. 15.2); Puer o dignissime credi / esse deus . . . (Ov. Met. 4.320–1); . . . plures
aliquanto necaturus (sc. fuisse) . . . creditur . . . (Suet. Tib. 62.3); . . . ut haec inveniantur
hodie esse huius filiae. (Pl. Poen. 1171); Etiamque ubi nunc triglyphi constituuntur, si
ibi luminum spatia fuisse iudicabuntur, isdem rationibus denticuli in Ionicis fenes-
trarum occupavisse loca videbuntur. (Vitr. 4.2.4); . . . P. Sulpicius, qui deinceps eum
magistratum petiturus putabatur. (Cic. de Orat. 1.26); . . . in eas Italiae partis
Pythagoras venisse reperitur. (Cic. Rep. 2.28); Ceterae Illyrici legiones secuturae
sperabantur. (Tac. Hist. 2.74.1)
196 Subordinate clauses filling an argument position
‘Patient’ type: Et tamen apud illam facilius creditur Iuppiter taurus factus aut
cycnus quam vere homo Christus penes Marcionem. (Tert. Carn. 4.7); Haec palam et
vitato omni secreto. Neque dubitabantur praescripta ei a Tiberio . . . (Tac. Ann. 3.8.2);
Existimatur etiam equestres census pollicitus singulis. (Suet. Iul. 33); . . . Hecubam
autem putant propter animi acerbitatem quandam et rabiem fingi in canem esse
conversam. (Cic. Tusc. 3.63); Nam Deus omnipotens mente una omnium et communi
mortalitatis adsensu neque genitus scitur neque . . . (Arn. 1.34.2); Quia igitur plurimae
gentes vi maiore collaturae capita sperabantur, dubia bellorum coniectans sobrius
rector magnis curarum molibus stringebatur. (Amm. 17.3.1)
Communication verbs:
‘Agent’ type: Necessitudo autem infertur, cum vi quadam reus id, quod fecerit,
fecisse defenditur, hoc modo. (Cic. Inv. 2.98); Sub idem tempus e familia Scriboniorum
Libo Drusus defertur moliri res novas. (Tac. Ann. 2.27.1); . . . hasce aedis esse oportet
/ Demaenetus ubi dicitur habitare. (Pl. As. 381–2); Cretae . . . dicitur platanus esse
quae folia hieme non amittat . . . (Var. R. 1.7.6); Dicitur mihi tuus servus anagnostes
fugitivus cum Vardaeis esse. (Vat. Fam. 5.9.1); . . . ut . . . minime . . . pecuniae cupidus
fuisse doceatur. (Cic. Inv. 2.36);224 . . . libere respondisse fertur (sc. Hannibal) . . . (Cic.
de Orat. 2.75); De eo qui naufragus et ante agrorum sterilitate vexatus in scholis fin-
gitur se suspendisse. (Quint. Inst. 8.5.22); . . . incusabatur facile toleraturus exilium . . .
(Tac. Ann. 6.3.3);225 Is (sc. Socrates) autem memoratur prudenter doctissimeque
dixisse . . . (Vitr. 3.pr.1); Caesar enim adventare iam iamque et adesse eius equites falso
nuntiabantur. (Caes. Civ. 1.14.2); . . . complures . . . civitates renovare belli consilia
nuntiabantur . . . (Hirt. Gal. 8.1.1); . . . crebris motibus terrae ruere in agris nuntiaban-
tur tecta. (Liv. 4.21.5); Illis (sc. comis) contulerim, quas quondam nuda Dione /
pingitur umenti sustinuisse manu. (Ov. Am. 1.14.33–4); Cervis in capite inesse ver-
miculi . . . produntur. (Plin. Nat. 11.135); Bubonis oculorum cinis collyrio mixtus
claritatem oculis facere promittitur. (Plin. Nat. 29.127); . . . haec avis scribitur conchis
se solere complere . . . (Cic. N.D. 2.124); Blemmyis traduntur capita abesse ore et
oculis pectori adfixis. (Plin. Nat. 5.46)
‘Patient’ type: . . . ne quis in provincia simul virtute tanta et felicitate perdomita
relictus hostis dici posset. (Liv. 28.32.12); Nobili Graecorum et ampla civitate Ephesi
lex vetusta dicitur a maioribus dura condicione sed iure esse non iniquo constituta.
(Vitr. 10.pr.1); Primum ad oppugnationes aries sic inventus memoratur esse. (Vitr.
10.13.1); Oppugnata domus C. Caesaris, clarissimi et fortissimi viri, multas noctis
horas nuntiabatur. (Cic. Mil. 66); . . . alius postea in paradisum ereptus debet ostendi
cui permissum sit eloqui quae paulo mutire non licuit. (Tert. Praescr. 24.6); Plures
(sc. soles) quam tres simul visi ad hoc aevi numquam produntur. (Plin. Nat. 2.99)
Complex forms (including forms of sum understood):
‘Agent’ type: Adnotatusque miles qui fascem lignorum gestabat ita praerigui-
sse manus ut oneri adhaerentes truncis brachiis deciderent. (Tac. Ann. 13.35.3);
(sc. apes) [Cum] a mellario cum id fecisse sunt animadversae . . . (Var. R.
3.16.30); . . . saepe auditus multo antehac rettulisse . . . (Amm. 19.12.10); Septimum
224 Note that the subject of doceatur corresponds with the subject of the AcI in the active parallel
construction and not with the object/patient of doceo.
225 For the NcI with verbs of accusing and convicting in Tacitus, see Draeger (1882: 63).
Infinitival clauses 197
decimum Kal. Aprilis interclusa anima creditus est mortalitatem explevisse. (Tac. Ann.
6.50.4); Sin fuisse aliis quoque causa faciendi videbitur, aut potestas defuisse aliis
demonstranda est aut facultas aut voluntas. (Cic. Inv. 2.24); Qui autem dictus est
adiutor fuisse et conscius, P. Asicius, iudicio est liberatus. (Cic. Cael. 23); Is ingenio et
industria magna praeter reliquos excellens dictus est artificiosis rebus se delectare.
(Vitr. 9.8.2); Fortasse mirabuntur i qui multa ventorum nomina noverunt quod a nobis
expositi sunt tantum octo esse venti. (Vitr. 1.6.9); Regnum adpetisse est iudicatus. (Cic.
Dom. 101); Apud Arbilam Magni Alexandri victoria luna defecisse noctis secunda hora
est prodita eademque in Sicilia exoriens. (Plin. Nat. 2.180); . . . quia tanta sapientia fuisse
in iure constituendo putanda est quanta fuit in his tantis opibus imperi comparandis.
(Cic. de Orat. 1.196); Reliquae (sc. naves) . . . Uticam versus petere visae sunt. (B. Afr. 7.3)
‘Patient’ type: Prius data est quam tibi dari dicta . . . (Pac. trag. 167—NB: dicta =
promissa); Quae quom sit lex, lege quoque consociati homines cum dis putandi
sumus. (Cic. Leg. 1.23)
There is much discussion about the origin of the nominative and infinitive construction
and its relation to the accusative and infinitive. The best synchronic explanation seems
to be that the entity which becomes the subject in the personal passive construction is
selected for that function for pragmatic reasons, more or less the same ones that deter-
mine the choice between active and passive: it is often topical (see § 5.10), but it can also
be used to introduce a new entity in presentative-like utterances.226 As a consequence
that entity is ‘raised’ from its relation with the infinitive to a relation with the main verb
(for the notion of ‘raising’ in connexion with the accusative and infinitive, see § 12.5).227
Heberlein (2002: 179–81), focusing on dicor in particular, states that it mainly func-
tions as a ‘quotative’ modal verb, comparable with German sollen. However, this
explanation only applies to those instances in which the action of saying is specified
in one of the ways mentioned above.
Combinations of videor, formally the passive counterpart of video ‘to see’, and an
infinitive are usually also treated as nominative and infinitive constructions. However,
with very few exceptions videor in this combination does not mean ‘to see’. In this
Syntax it is taken either as a copular verb (see § 4.97) or as an auxiliary (see § 4.98).
Mihi videtur + AcI (see § 15.110) is different.
As for diachronic explanations, the most common one is to regard the personal
passive with a verb like dico as an extension of the use of the passive of a verb like
admoneo with a prolative infinitive (see § 15.117). Other scholars refer to the object
+ object (passive: subject + subject) complement construction that is found with a
verb like dico, as in tu diceris bonus (esse) ‘you are said to be good’.228
The NcI is in principle also possible with verbs and expressions of praising, blaming,
congratulating, and thanking that govern an accusative and infinitive construction,
but instances such as (g) are very rare.
226 For such cases in Pliny the Elder, see Tarriño (2002: 280).
227 For factors influencing the choice between AcI and NcI, see Bolkestein (1981a; 1983; 1985).
228 So Torrego (1987) and Lavency (2003: 179–83). Interestingly, Roby (1882: II.143) considers the
infinitive a secondary predicate.
198 Subordinate clauses filling an argument position
Supplement:
Extinxisse nefas tamen et sumpsisse merentis / laudabor poenas . . . (Verg. A.
2.585–6—NB: belongs to a section (567–88) that is rejected by many editors; see
Conte ad loc. and Horsfall (2008: App. 1))
Nominative and infinitive constructions of the ‘patient’ type can also be used with
iubeo (on which see § 15.100 (vi))229 and a few other verbs that are discussed in
§ 15.100 (iii). Examples are (h)–(k).
(h) Proximo iussa’st dari . . .
(‘She has been ordered to be given to her nearest relative . . .’ Ter. Ph. 416)
(i) His igitur rebus praeclare commendatus iussus es renuntiari consul et qui-
dem cum ipso.
(‘Since you were admirably commended by these qualities, Caesar gave orders for
you to be declared elected consul, and with himself as your colleague.’ Cic. Phil. 2.79)
( j) . . . nec patefieri quae scientiam eius latebant permissis . . .
(‘. . . and without those things which were concealed from his knowledge having been
allowed to be explained . . .’ Amm. 20.2.5)
(k) In has lautumias siqui publice custodiendi sunt etiam ex ceteris oppidis
Siciliae deduci imperantur.
(‘Into these quarries men are commanded to be brought even from other cities in
Sicily, if they are ordered by the public authorities to be kept in custody.’ Cic. Ver. 5.68)
It has been suggested (by, among others, Sz.: 364) that in (h) iussa est dari is the regu-
lar passive of iussi eam dari, but this is impossible, since eam is not the object of iussi,
nor is dari a prolative infinitive: the passive is incompatible with ‘ordering’ situations
(see § 7.66).
Examples of the ‘agent’ type of NcI constructions with these verbs are given in § 15.100
(vi), exx. (x)–(z). Additional examples are (l) and (m).
(l) Ubei ea dies venerit quo die iusei erunt adesse . . .
(‘When the day shall have come on which the parties shall be ordered to appear . . .’
CIL I2.583.63 (Lex Acilia, 122 bc))
(m) Nam et volgo quaesitam sororem quis vetatur uxorem ducere.
(‘For a man is forbidden to marry his sister even if she is illegitimate.’ Scaev. dig. 23.2.54)
Inevitably, with two more or less equivalent expressions mixed utterances (contam-
ination) occur. An example (sometimes emended) is (o). Fertur is personal passive,
with Papinianus as its subject; however, the sentence continues with dicentem, as if
Papinianum had preceded.230
(o) Et fertur quidem Papinianus, cum raptus a militibus ad Palatium traheretur
occidendus, praedivinasse dicentem (dicens cj. Petschenig) e<u>m stultissi-
mum fore qui in suum subrogaretur locum, nisi adpetitam crudeliter
praefecturam vindicaret.
(‘And it is further related that Papinian, when, seized by the soldiers, he was
being dragged to the Palace to be put to death, foretold the future, saying that
whoever should succeed to his position would be an utter fool if he did not
take vengeance for this brutal attack on the prefecture.’ Hist. Aug. Carac. 8.8)
Resembling the personal passive construction with cognition, perception, and com-
munication verbs are rare infinitival constructions with intransitive verbs with
roughly the same meaning, such as clueo ‘to be spoken of ’, ‘to be known as’ in (a), and
the expression in suspicionem venio ‘to come under suspicion’ in (b). These construc-
tions are extended in poetry.
(a) Atridae duo fratres cluent fecisse facinus maxumum . . .
(‘The two brothers, the sons of Atreus, are said to have done a most famous deed . . .’
Pl. Bac. 925).
(b) Nonnullis etiam ipsi magistratus veniebant in suspicionem detinuisse nos et
demorati esse . . .
(‘In some quarters the magistrates themselves were suspected of having deliberately
detained and delayed us . . .’ Lent. Fam. 12.15.5)
Supplement (in alphabetical order by verb):
. . . (sc. barathrum) quod quondam caesis montis fodisse medullis / audit falsiparens
Amphitryoniades . . . (Catul. 68.111–12); . . . tu cum mendax esse clarueris . . . (Lucif.
Athan. 2.25); Esse per gentes cluebat omnium miserrimus. (Enn. scen. 366V); . . . nec
mea conveniunt duro praecordia versu / Caesaris in Phrygios condere nomen avos.
(Prop. 2.1.41–2).231 . . . ut innotesceret praetor curam agere . . . (Ulp. dig. 4.9.3.1);
Hosce opinor Cibyrae cum in suspicionem venissent suis civibus fanum expilasse
Apollinis, veritos poenam iudicii ac legis domo profugisse. (Cic. Ver. 4.30)
The label nominative and infinitive is also used for personal expressions that are occa-
sionally found alongside impersonal expressions with which the accusative and infini-
tive can be used as subject. These impersonal expressions, for example apparet ‘it
appears’ and constat ‘to be an established fact’, are discussed in § 15.101. Examples of
personal use are (c) and (d). In (c) apparent is plural in agreement with haec; in (d),
constarent with quae.
(c) Haec apparent magis ita esse in latioribus regionibus, simplicia cum sunt.
(‘These things are more clearly present in broad stretches, when they are uniform.’
Var. R. 1.6.2)
(d) Quae si omnia e Ti. Coruncani scientia . . . acta esse constarent . . .
(‘But if all these things were known to have been done in a manner equal to the
knowledge of Coruncanius . . .’ Cic. Dom. 139)
231 For this instance and a few others, see Sánchez Martínez (1996).
Infinitival clauses 201
In the same way modal expressions that are normally impersonal are sometimes used
personally, like decet ‘to be right’ and oportet ‘to be proper’ and with the impersonal
expression opus est ‘to be essential’ (for the impersonal expressions, see § 15.101).
Examples of personal use are (e)–(g), respectively.
(e) Quae ab imperatore decuerint (sc. provideri) omnia suis provisa . . .
(‘All those things which ought to be provided by a leader were provided for his
troops . . .’ Sal. Jug. 49.2)
(f) Adhuc, Archylis, quae adsolent quaeque oportent (v.l. oportet) / signa esse
ad salutem, omnia huic esse video.
(‘As yet, Archylis, all the symptoms which are normal and which ought to exist
toward recovery, I perceive in her.’ Ter. An. 481–2)
(g) Tu, quae istic opus erunt administrari, prospicies ut . . .
(‘In regard to those things which will need to be done at Rome, please look to it
that . . .’ D. Brut. Fam. 11.11.2)
Supplement (in alphabetical order by verb):
Quae (sc. porticus) videntur ita oportere conlocari, uti . . . (Vitr. 5.9.2); Haec enim
Marcioni displicere oportebant. (Tert. Marc. 5.19.4); . . . nisi ea quae nil opu’ sunt
scire. (Ter. An. 337); . . . atque quot iuga boum opus fuerint (fuerit edd.) ibi versari, ita
finiantur. (Vitr. 6.6.1)
With the verb possum in its epistemic meaning ‘to be possible’, the personal construc-
tion is the normal one, as in (h)–( j).232
(h) Non esse servos peior hoc quisquam potest / nec magis vorsutus . . .
(‘There can’t be a worse slave than this one, or one cleverer . . .’ Pl. As. 118–19)
(i) Nam unum aliquid aut alterum potest in istum casu cecidisse suspiciose . . .
(‘To be sure, some one or two of these things can by chance have happened in such a
way so as to throw suspicion upon this defendant . . .’ Rhet. Her. 4.53)
( j) Sed cum haec scribebam V Kal., Pompeius iam Brundisium venisse poterat.
(‘But as I write on the 25th it is possible that Pompey has already reached Brundisium.’
Cic. Fam. 8.9a.2)
232 More examples OLD s.v. possum 5; TLL s.v. possum 133.51ff. Discussion in Núñez (1991: 176–84).
202 Subordinate clauses filling an argument position
The verb debeo ‘must’ in its deductive epistemic meaning is normally found in per-
sonal expressions (see § 7.22). An impersonal exception in Classical Latin is (k); there
are more instances in Late Latin.233
(k) . . . nunc credo eo magis quod debet etiam fratris Appi amorem erga me cum
reliqua hereditate crevisse . . .
(‘. . . I believe that he is more (well-disposed) now because it must be the case
that his brother Appius’ affection for me has grown along with the rest of his
estate . . .’ Cic. Att. 6.1.10)
The accusative and infinitive gradually came to be used with a wider range of verbs. This
is especially true for verbs of wishing (see § 15.100). Nevertheless, on the whole it lost
territory to finite clauses with subordinators, especially quod, quia, and quoniam, in this
order of frequency, with quoniam decreasing from the third century onwards. Early
examples of the use of quod with verbs of perception, cognition, and communication
are cited in § 15.9 and § 15.19. On the speed of this development opinions vary; in the
written evidence the AcI remains the normal expression by far.234
The use of subordinators is particularly strong in translations of the Bible. The
quotations from this text in ecclesiastical authors show variation between authors.
Jerome uses quod and quia in his Vulgate translation where Vetus Latina versions have
the AcI. For the distribution of quod and quia, see § 15.9.235 In their own works eccle-
siastical writers largely maintained the accusative and infinitive, as can be seen from
Table 15.3. Particularly interesting in this respect is Augustine. Before his conversion
to Christianity the proportion of AcI and finite clauses is 55 : 1. In his Confessiones the
proportion is 11 : 1, and in his Sermones 2 : 1. Similar adaptations to uneducated readers
and hearers are found elsewhere in his work.
Claudius Terentianus uses only AcI clauses, which Adams considers an indication for
the late spread of finite clauses with these verbs (Adams 1977: 61). Calboli (1990)
suggests that the consistent use of the AcI is a sign of Terentianus’ endeavour to write
correct Latin. For a relativizing reaction, see Halla-aho (2003). Adams (2005a: 195)
observes that quod clauses are entirely absent from non-literary Latin texts. Quia and
quod clauses are frequent in Augustine’s correspondent Publicola (Adams 2016: 389).
According to Herman (1989: 135), in the Christian texts he examined about 10 per
cent of the object clauses with these verbs are with a subordinator, 90 per cent are
with AcI. Almost the opposite is the case in the Vitae Patrum, where the AcI is only
half as frequent as the finite alternatives (Salonius 1920), but in most other authors
the AcI predominates. In Greg. Tur. the proportion is still AcI : quod, etc. = 3 : 1.236
Quod finite clauses are also found in pagan authors, so for example in Ammianus,
who definitely strives after an elevated style and uses them as a source of variation,237
as appears from the parallelism in (a). There are a few Late Latin instances of an
accusative and infinitive construction in combination with the subordinator quod. An
example is (b), possibly also intended as variation.
(a) . . . latentem invenimus militem . . . qui . . . docet . . . quod . . . ad Persas abierat
profugus exindeque . . . speculatorem se missum ad nostra saepe veros nun-
tios reportasse.
(‘. . . we found one soldier hiding who said that he had deserted to the Persians, and
then that he was sent as a spy to our territories and often brought back trustworthy
news.’ Amm. 18.6.16)
(b) Sed hactenus responderunt, quod, cum interiora occupaverint protinus gra-
dientes Romani, se quoque utpote regnorum sequellas victoribus accessuros.
(‘But they went so far as to reply, that as soon as the Romans by further advance had
got possession of the interior, they also would go over to the victors, as appendages of
the kingdom.’ Amm. 24.2.1)
. The use of the prolative infinitive with verbs and expressions of ordering
and commanding (class (i) (a))
The use of the prolative infinitive with verbs and expressions of ordering and command-
ing (class (i) (a)) is less common than finite imperative clauses (see § 15.66), but it is
preferred by poets and poeticizing prose writers.239 Examples with impero are (a) and (b).
(a) Animo nunciam otioso esse impero.
(‘Now then, I bid you set your minds at ease.’ Ter. An. 842)
(b) Flectere iter sociis terraeque advertere proras / imperat . . .
(‘He bids his comrades change their course and turn their prows to land . . .’ Verg. A.
7.35–6)
Supplement (in alphabetical order by verb):
(sc. Augustus) Etiam discedens eodem modo sedentibus valere dicebat. (Suet. Aug.
53.3); Tu, Voluse, armari Volscorum edice maniplis . . . (Verg. A. 11.463—NB: auto-
causative passive); Oblitus es quemadmodum inter vos officia divisa sint: illi oblivio
inperata est, tibi meminisse mandavimus. (Sen. Ben. 7.22.1)
NB: On the analogy of impero, etc. the dative is also introduced with verbs like iubeo,
with a (disputed) early example in Catullus (c).240
238 For Lucretius’ ‘very extended’ use of the prolative infinitive, see Bailey (1949: I.101–2). For Virgil, see
Görler (1985: 271–2). For the use of the infinitive instead of other finite and non-finite expressions, see
also Banniard (2012: 65–7).
239 For a comparison of impero and iubeo, see Gavoille (2014).
240 For an extensive discussion, also of the developments in French, see Norberg (1945: 83–95). See also
TLL s.v. iubeo 577.39ff.
Infinitival clauses 205
(c) . . . non haec miserae (-am ed. 1472) sperare iubebas, / sed conubia laeta . . .
(‘. . . not this didst thou bid me hope, ah me, but a joyful wedlock . . .’ Catul.
64.140–1)
Supplement:
Quamquam hae mihi (me cj. Corradus) litterae Dolabellae iubent ad pristinas cogi-
tationes reverti. (Cic. Att. 9.13.2); Perdicca pueris (-os edd.) equos iussit conscen-
dere . . . (Curt. 10.8.4); . . . ipsis hostibus iussit suum vincire rectorem. (Amm. 26.8.5); . . .
natura rerum praeceptis physicorum veras patitur habere explicationes . . . (Vitr. 2.1.9)
. The use of the prolative infinitive with verbs and expressions of begging,
requesting, etc. (class (i) (b))
With verbs of begging, requesting, etc., the prolative infinitive is very rare. There are
some instances with rogo.
(a) . . . qui rogetur de patrimonio sumptus faciendos committere gratiae petentis . . .
(‘. . . who is asked to entrust expenditure at his own cost to the pleasure of the peti-
tioner . . .’ Vitr. 6.pr.5)
Supplement:
Quare, si sapiet, viam vorabit, / quamvis candida milies puella / euntem revocet,
manusque collo / ambas iniciens roget morari . . . (Catul. 35.7–10)
As in § 15.66, two-place verbs of demanding, such as posco and postulo, can be added
here. An example is (b).
(b) Hae duae partes . . . quarum altera dici postulat ornate, altera apte . . .
(‘These two divisions, the first of which demands that an oration be spoken with
embellishment, the second that it be spoken in a suitable manner . . .’ Cic. de Orat. 3.91)
Supplement:
. . . Iliacosque iterum demens audire labores / (sc. Dido) exposcit . . . (Verg. A. 4.78–9); . . .
Perna magis et magis hillis / flagitat immorsus refici . . . (Hor. S. 2.4.60–1); Esse sacer-
dotes delubraque vestra tueri / poscimus et quoniam concordes egimus annos, /
auferat hora duos eadem . . . (Ov. Met. 8.707–9—NB: infinitives continued by a clause
with a simple subjunctive)241
. The use of the prolative infinitive with verbs and expressions of advising,
warning, exhorting, reminding, admonishing, etc. (class (i) (c))
With this class of verbs prolative infinitives are well attested. Examples are (a)—
repeated from § 15.91—and (b). These verbs are also found with an accusative and
infinitive clause instead of a prolative infinitive (see § 15.91).
241 It seems that Bömer ad loc. regards this as an accusative and infinitive clause without an explicit
subject (on which, see § 14.8).
206 Subordinate clauses filling an argument position
. The use of the prolative infinitive with verbs and expressions of inducing,
persuading, etc. (class (i) (d))
With this class prolative infinitives are well attested. The verb persuadeo is here used in
its meaning ‘to succeed in urging’ (OLD); in its meaning ‘to induce acceptance of (a
statement)’ (OLD) it is also used with an accusative and infinitive clause (see § 15.98).
(a) [cum] Equus matrem salire cum adduci non posset, <cum> eum capite
obvoluto auriga adduxisset et coegisset matrem inire . . .
(‘When a horse could not be induced to mount his dam and when the groom, having
covered his head, led him up, and forced him to do so . . .’ Var. R. 2.7.9)
(b) Hoc quoque quaerentibus remittamus, quis Romanis primus persuaserit
navem conscendere.
(‘We may excuse also those who inquire into this—who first induced the Romans to
go on board a ship.’ Sen. Dial. 10.13.4)
(c) At ex regulis prior Mithridates Pharasmanen perpulit dolo et vi conatus suos
iuvare . . .
(‘Of the chieftains, Mithridates was the first to induce Pharasmanes to support his
attempts by fraud and by force . . .’ Tac. Ann. 6.33.1)
Supplement (in alphabetical order by verb):
. . . nulla calamitate victus Correus excedere proelio silvasque petere aut invitantibus
nostris ad deditionem potuit adduci . . . (Hirt. Gal. 8.19.8—NB: parallelism of the two
Infinitival clauses 207
prolative infinitives and the prepositional phrase with ad ); Musa, mihi causas
memora, quo numine laeso / quidve dolens regina deum tot volvere casus / insignem
pietate virum, tot adire labores / impulerit. (Verg. A. 1.8–11); Sed tua me virtus
tamen et sperata voluptas / suavis amicitiae quemvis efferre laborem / suadet et
inducit noctes vigilare serenas . . . (Lucr. 1.140–2)
Persuadeo in the meaning discussed in this section can also be used with an accusative
and infinitive clause, if there is no specific addressee involved. An example is (d).242
The infinitives are usually passive. (See also § 15.100 (iii).)
(d) Sed quotiens id fieri publica utilitas persuadet; tyrannis saevitia cordi est.
(‘Yes, but only when the good of the state induces one that this should be
done. It is tyrants for whom cruelty is a source of delight.’ Sen. Cl. 1.12.1)
. The use of the prolative infinitive with verbs and expressions of
permitting, granting, allowing, etc. (class (i) (e))
Prolative infinitives are very well attested for this class, especially for permitto, as in
(a). Examples are (a)—active—and (b)—passive. Permitto can also be used with an
accusative and infinitive clause, when used as a two-place verb. See § 15.100 (iii).
Concedo in its meaning ‘to admit the truth of ’ (OLD § 10b) can be used with an
accusative and infinitive clause.
(a) . . . ut iam ipsis iudicibus sine mea argumentatione coniecturam facere
permittam . . .
(‘. . . that I may now allow the members of this Court, without listening to any argu-
ments of my own, to infer for themselves . . . ’ Cic. Ver. 5.22)
(b) . . . ita animus si in iram, amorem aliosque se proiecit adfectus, non permit-
titur reprimere inpetum.
(‘. . . so with the mind, if it plunges into anger, love, or the other passions, it has no
power to check its impetus.’ Sen. Dial. 3.7.4)
242 For more, mostly late, instances, see TLL s.v. 1761.54ff. Ex. (d) is also in the OLD s.v. § 1.c.
243 See Domínguez and Martín Rodríguez (1993) for the development of this use of do (from Lucretius
and Virgil onwards in poetry, from Vitruvius onwards in prose).
208 Subordinate clauses filling an argument position
autem nec lapideis nec marmoreis epistyliis uti datur . . . (Vitr. 3.3.5); . . . qui per val-
lum Barbationis transiere securi ideo labi permissi, quod . . . (Amm. 16.11.6); . . . non
baptizati in regnum caelorum non permittuntur intrare . . . (August. Anim. 3.13.19)
. The use of the prolative infinitive with verbs and expressions of forcing
(class (i) ( f))
The most common representative of this class is the verb cogo.244 Examples are (a)—
active, repeated from § 15.71, and (b)—passive. When used as two-place verbs, these
verbs may also govern an accusative and infinitive clause (see § 15.100 (iii)).
(a) Non med istanc cogere aequom est meam esse matrem, si nevolt.
(‘It wouldn’t be fair of me to force her to be my mother if she doesn’t want to be.’ Pl.
Epid. 586)
(b) Atque hoc tantum lucri coguntur dare publice . . .
(‘And they are compelled as a community to pay him that huge bonus . . .’ Cic. Ver. 3.75)
Supplement (in alphabetical order by verb):
Active: . . . tua tristis imago / saepius occurrens haec limina tendere adegit. (Verg. A.
6.696); Num te emere coegit qui ne hortatus quidem est? (Cic. Off. 3.55); Denique
tanto opere in dubiis trepidare periclis / quae mala nos subigit vitai tanta cupido?
(Lucr. 3.1076–7); Obvia Persephone comites heroidas urget / adversas praeferre
faces. (Culex 261–2)
Passive: . . . avaritiam . . . adactam opes suas spargere et domui rebusque in unum con-
latis inicere ignem. (Sen. Dial. 4.36.6); . . . gnate, ego quem in dubios cogor dimittere
casus . . . (Catul. 64.216); Suppeditatur enim confestim lumine lumen / et quasi pro-
telo stimulatur fulgere fulgur. (Lucr. 4.189–90); Mea vi subacta est facere. (Pl. Am.
1143); Dolere integre non potest qui urgetur irasci. (Calp. Decl. 11)
. The use of the prolative infinitive with verbs and expressions of
hindering, preventing, etc. (class (i) (g))
The use of the prolative infinitive with this class of verbs is relatively common.
Examples of prohibeo are (a)—active, repeated from § 15.72, and (b)—passive. When
it is used as a two-place verb, it can be used with an accusative and infinitive clause as
well (see § 15.100 (iii)). For related two-place verbs, see the Supplement.
(a) Tu modo ne me prohibeas accipere, si quid det mihi.
(‘You just shouldn’t prevent me from receiving something if he gives it to me.’ Pl. Trin. 370)
(b) . . . certe violare alterum naturae lege prohibemur.
(‘. . . we are certainly forbidden by Nature’s law to wrong our neighbour.’ Cic. Off. 3.27)
244 For the use of cogo with a prolative infinitive, see Torrego (2016b: 299–310).
Infinitival clauses 209
. The use of the prolative infinitive with verbs and expressions of wishing,
desiring, preferring, etc. (class (ii) (a))
The prolative infinitive is very common with verbs and expressions of wishing, desiring,
preferring, etc., and their antonyms, though not with all of them. Examples are (a) and
(b). The agents of the infinitives are coreferential with the subject of the governing verbs.
(a) Voluit in cubiculum abducere me anus.
(‘The old lady wanted to draw me to the bedroom.’ Pl. Mos. 696)
(b) Age igitur. Nolo advorsari tuam advorsum sententiam.
(‘Go on then; I don’t want to oppose your decision.’ Pl. Mer. 377)
Supplement (in alphabetical order by governing expression):
Nam si potuisset, nihil ei fuisset antiquius quam ad Capitonem . . . reverti . . . (Cic.
Fam. 13.29.3); . . . vacui curis etiam quid in caelo fiat scire avemus . . . (Cic. Fin. 2.46);
Cupio aliquem <mi> emere puerum . . . (Pl. Cur. 382); Diligit ipsa alios, a me fastidit
amari. (Ov. Rem. 305); Iam hercle amplexari, iam osculari gestio. (Pl. Cas. 471);
Pergi’n, sceleste, intendere hanc arguere? (Pl. Mil. 380); Regiones colere mavellem
Accherunticas. (Pl. Bac. 199); Si dabor ut condar loculis, exire negabo . . . (Ov. Am.
2.15.19); Sed mea desidia spem deserere nolui. (Pl. Rud. 92); Tun’ domo prohibere
peregre me advenientem postulas? (Pl. Am. 361); . . . tum maxime illo tempore totum
onus sustinere non recusabant . . . (B. Alex. 11.3); Quae mihi ipsi, qui volo et esse et
haberi gratus, grata non essent . . . (Cic. Fin. 2.72)
NB: relatively uncommon: Haec enim scire desidero. (Cic. N.D. 1.65); Quor tu, opsecro,
immerito meo me morti dedere optas? (Pl. As. 608); Nam iam saepe homines patriam
carosque parentis / prodiderunt vitare Acherusia templa petentes. (Lucr. 3.85–6)
. The use of the prolative infinitive with verbs and expressions of striving
(class (ii) (b))
The prolative infinitive is very common with verbs and expressions of striving and the
reverse. Examples are (a) and (b). The agents of the infinitives are coreferential with
the subject of the governing verbs.
210 Subordinate clauses filling an argument position
. The use of the prolative infinitive with verbs of causation (class (iii))
The verb facio in its three-place frame can be used with the prolative infinitive and is
in this sense sometimes paraphrased by iubeo.245 However, as with iubeo (see § 15.100
(vi)), many of the examples cited in the TLL can be regarded as accusative and infini-
tive clauses (see § 15.93). Two examples where the accusative constituents can be
regarded as agents of the action denoted by the infinitive which is forced upon him or
her by another person are (a) and (b).
(a) (sc. tibi) . . . qui nati coram me cernere letum / fecisti . . .
(‘. . . you who have made me look on my own son’s murder . . .’ Verg. A. 2.538–9)
(b) Ille dedit vitam. Tu quam dedit ille tueris / et facis (sc. me) accepto munere
posse frui.
(‘He gave me life. You preserve the life he gave and you make me able to enjoy the
boon I have received.’ Ov. Tr. 5.9.13–14)246
Supplement:
. . . deinde fecit reporrigere (sc. phialam) Caesari (Caesarem cj. Scheffer) et illam in
pavimentum proiecit. (Petr. 51.2 (Trimalchio speaking));247 (sc. cucurbitas) Fervere
facias et inferes. (Apic. 4.2.8—NB: unless it is an AcI);248 Sic enim efficitur ut . . . insur-
gant filii in parentes et mori eos faciant. (Vet. Lat. Mat. 10.21 = Tert. Scorp. 10.17—
NB: most codd. and Vulg. have morte eos afficient); Illos aetas facit putare quod non
est, hos stultitia. (Lact. Inst. 1.22.14)
. The use of the prolative infinitive with verbs and expressions of deciding,
resolving, etc. (class (iv))
The use of the prolative infinitive with verbs and expressions of deciding, resolving,
etc. is very common from Early Latin onwards. Examples are (a)–(c).
(a) Mirum ni hic me quasi murenam exossare cogitat.
(‘It would be odd if he isn’t thinking about filleting me like a lamprey.’ Pl. Am. 319)
(b) Nam illi mihi dotem iam constituerunt dare.
(‘They’ve already agreed to hand over the dowry to me.’ Ter. Ph. 676)
(c) Age iam, id ut ut est, etsi est dedecori, patiar, facere inducam animum.
(‘Go on now, whatever it’s like, even if it’s a disgrace, I’ll bear it, I’ll bring myself to do
it.’ Pl. Bac. 1191)
. The use of the prolative infinitive with verbs and expressions of
deserving (class (v))
Prolative infinitives are attested with mereo and mereor and its compounds from
Propertius and Ovid onwards. An example is (a).249
(a) Haec merui sperare?
(‘Have I deserved to expect this?’ Prop. 2.5.3)
. The use of the prolative infinitive in combination with a neuter singular
adjective that functions as subject or object complement (class (vi))
249 For very late instances of prolative infinitives with promereo(r), see TLL s.v. 1845.38ff.
Infinitival clauses 213
. The use of the prolative infinitive in combination with other expressions
that function as subject or object complement (class (vii))
Prolative infinitives are used with noun phrases in various cases or with prepositional
phrases functioning as subject or object complement from Early Latin onwards and in
that period they are more common than gerundial and gerundival clauses.250 Examples
of such constituents functioning as subject complement are (a)–(c). In (a), officium is
in the nominative (see § 9.22); in (b), saluti is a predicative dative (see § 9.34); in (c),
patris is a so-called possessive genitive (see § 9.30); in (d), the prepositional phrase in
rem functions as subject complement (see § 9.37). Ex. (e) shows a prolative infinitive
in combination with an object complement.
(a) Non matronarum officium est, sed meretricium, / viris alienis, mi vir, sub-
blandirier.
(‘My dear husband, it’s not the job of wives, but of prostitutes, to charm other women’s
husbands.’ Pl. Cas. 585–6)
(b) (sc. homines) . . . quibus insputari saluti fuit atque is profuit.
(‘. . . for whom being spat on was helpful and beneficial.’ Pl. Capt. 555)
(c) Neque adeo arbitrari patris est aliter.
(‘Indeed, it’s not for her father to think otherwise.’ Ter. Hec. 529)
(d) . . . cetera quae cognosse in rem erat summa omnia cum cura inquirendo
exsequebatur.
(‘. . . he then went to work with all possible diligence to learn . . . everything, in short,
which it was important to find out.’ Liv. 22.3.2)
(e) Haec . . . haud ab re duxi verbis quoque ipsis, ut tradita nuncupataque sunt,
referre.
(‘These particulars I have thought it not foreign to my purpose to repeat, and in the
very words in which they were formulated and handed down.’ Liv. 8.11.1)
Supplement (in alphabetical order by noun (phrase) or prepositional phrase):
. . . non est meae consuetudinis initio dicendi rationem reddere qua de causa
quemque defendam . . . (Cic. Rab. Perd. 1); Praecipuamque curam duxit sensum
animi quam apertissime exprimere. (Suet. Aug. 86.1); Et vere tantum laboris . . .
suscipere . . . dementia ducebatur. (Paneg. 3 (11).20.2); Facinus est vincire civem
Romanum, scelus verberare, prope parricidium necare: quid dicam in crucem tol-
lere? (Cic. Ver. 5.170); Leporem et gallinam et anserem gustare fas non putant.
(Caes. Gal. 5.12.6); Ergo erat in fatis Scythiam quoque visere nostris . . . (Ov. Tr.
3.2.1); Nam hoc mi haud labori est, laborem hunc potiri . . . (Pl. Rud. 191); Quia mos
est oblivisci hominibus / nec novisse quoius nihili sit faciunda gratia. (Pl. Capt.
985–6); Communes loci (de iis loquor quibus citra personas in ipsa vitia moris est
perorare, ut in adulterum . . . (Quint. Inst. 2.4.22); . . . nunc adest occasio / bene facta
cumulare . . . (Pl. Capt. 423–4); . . . hoc servi esse officium reor, / retinere ad
salutem . . . (Pl. Aul. 593–4); Quid opus nota noscere? (Pl. Mil. 636); Verum ubi nulla
datur dextra adfectare potestas . . . (Verg. A. 3.670); . . . potestatem habeo dimittere
te . . . (Vulg. Ioh. 19.10); Germanico pretium fuit convertere agmen . . . (Tac. Ann.
1.57.3); An pro illo fuerit rapi. (Sen. Con. 9.5.6); Nec pudor est oculos tenui signare
favilla . . . (Ov. Ars 3.203); Quae petit ille refert, ceterum narrare pudori / qua tulerit
mercede. (Ov. Met. 7.687–8—NB: the text is much disputed); Tempus est subducere
hinc me. (Pl. As. 912)
With a number of these nouns a gerundial clause is also possible, as in (f) (for gerundial
clauses functioning as attribute, see § 17.18).
(f) Tacendi tempus est, nam crepuerunt fores.
(‘It’s time to be quiet: the door has creaked.’ Pl. Poen. 741)
Infinitival clauses 215
. The use of the prolative infinitive with so-called impersonal expressions
(class (viii))
The prolative infinitive is used with a variety of so-called impersonal expressions from
Early Latin onwards. Examples are (a) and (b).
(a) . . . decet et facta moresque huius habere me similis item.
(‘. . . I also ought to have similar ways and habits.’ Pl. Am. 267)
(b) Qui lubitum est illi condormiscere?
(‘How could it please him to fall asleep?’ Pl. Mil. 826)
Subject infinitives can also be used with impersonal expressions of emotion such as
piget (me) ‘to be affected with displeasure’ (for which see also §§ 15.8, 15.18, and
15.97). Although they do not properly belong here, because the content of the infini-
tive is factive, this usage is illustrated below. An example with a present infinitive is
(c); with a perfect infinitive, (d).
(c) . . . ut te ne pigeat dare operam mihi quod te orabo, senex.
(‘. . . do not begrudge attending to me in what I ask of you, old man.’ Pl. Rud. 634)
(d) . . . bene si amico feceris / ne pigeat fecisse, ut potius pudeat si non feceris.
(‘. . . if you’ve done a friend a good turn, you shouldn’t be upset to have done so, and
so that you should rather feel shame if you haven’t done so.’ Pl. Trin. 347–8)
Perfect infinitive: . . . neque me vixisse paenitet . . . (Cic. Sen. 84); Non dedisse (sc. vig-
inti minas) istunc pudet: me quia non accepi piget. (Pl. Ps. 282); Nec genuisse pudet
Sparten Hyacinthon. (Ov. Met. 10.217)
. The use of the infinitive with verbs of accusing and convicting
Three-place verbs of accusing and convicting have (in the active) an object/patient
argument in the accusative and a third argument that indicates the charge. When
this argument is a noun phrase, it is usually in the genitive (see § 4.63). These verbs
can also be used with an infinitive, which, unlike the cases discussed in the previous
sections, can be both a present and a perfect infinitive. An example is (a) with the
perfect infinitive occidisse, which can be taken as a charge argument parallel to geni-
tive of the charge. The agent of the infinitive is coreferential with the object/patient
aliquem.
(a) Sin autem sic agetis ut arguatis aliquem patrem occidisse. . .
(‘But if you act in such a manner as to endeavour to prove that someone has mur-
dered his father . . .’ Cic. S. Rosc. 57)
This situation formally resembles that of several classes of three-place verbs that are
used with an object and a prolative infinitive, for example verbs of advising, warning,
etc., discussed in § 15.117. This is, in fact, the analysis adopted by many, but not all
Latinists, for (a). Those who do not follow the analysis presented here take aliquem
patrem occidisse as an accusative and infinitive clause.251 The OLD s.v. arguo § 2, for
example, distinguishes for arguo a sense ‘to allege, assert, affirm’—that is, it takes arguo
as a two-place verb. There are facts that can be used as support for either analysis. Ex.
(b) is a straightforward example of an accusative and infinitive clause. In the sense
‘to bring a charge against, to accuse’ (OLD § 4b) the charge can be expressed as an
accusative and infinitive clause, as in (c) (see also further on in this text). Note that the
object/patient is expressed as well: the first me. Ex. (d) can be taken either as the pas-
sive counterpart of the three-place frame where the object/patient has become the
subject/patient or as a personal passive construction, resembling the nominative and
infinitive with verba declarandi (see § 15.100).
(b) . . . cives Romanos necatos esse arguo.
(‘. . . I am making the charge that Roman citizens were put to death.’ Cic. Ver. 5.149)
(c) Nam arguere in somnis me meus mihi familiaris visu’st / me cum alieno
adulescentulo, quasi nunc tu, esse osculatam . . .
(‘A household member of mine seemed to accuse me in my dream of having kissed
an unknown young man, just as you’re doing now . . .’ Pl. Mil. 389–90)
251 My analysis follows K.-St.: I.688 (but see the note further on), Burkard and Schauer (2000: 677), and
Lavency (2003: 110–1). Bennett: I.367ff. and Ernout and Thomas (1953: 321) deal with these verbs as verba
declarandi which govern an accusative and infinitive clause. Many treatments are vague.
Infinitival clauses 217
The position taken in this Syntax is that the verbs of this class have two frames, a
three-place frame, as described above, and a two-place frame in which the second
argument can be filled by an accusative and infinitive clause.252 A comparable situ-
ation exists for manipulation verbs (see § 15.100 (iii)) and also for iubeo (see § 15.100
(vi)). (For quod clauses with these verbs, see § 15.10.)
The accusative and infinitive clauses with these verbs are not restricted to passive
clauses such as (b). In some instances there will be clear signals for interpreting the
utterance as an accusative and infinitive clause. In (e)–(g), for example, the subject
constituents in the accusative and infinitive clauses cannot be conceived of as object/
patient of the governing verb, and in (h) the subject of the governing verb is inani-
mate. In (i), however, there are no such signals, and it is only by using common sense
that one is able to determine that one is dealing with an accusative and infinitive
clause: this is simply not about a situation in which someone accuses his conservus.
Many instances, however, are not so easy to construe and must be regarded as cases of
ambiguity.
(e) Metui’ ne non, quom velis, convincas esse illum tuom?
(‘Are you afraid that you cannot prove that he is yours, whenever you please?’ Ter.
Hau. 1017)
(f) . . . in vultu tacitas arguis esse notas.
(‘. . . you charge that in her face were unspoken signals.’ Ov. Am. 2.7.6)
(g) . . . cumque defectionem eius nullam posse excusationem [eius] impruden-
tiae recipere coarguisset . . .
(‘. . . and when he had demonstrated that no excuse for his imprudence could account
for his failure . . .’ B. Alex. 68.1)
(h) Eodem modo Hirtuleium dissolvisse publicae tabulae coarguunt.
(‘The public account-books prove that Hirtuleius in his payments followed the same
method.’ Cic. Font. 2)
(i) . . . eam / arguam vidisse apud te contra conservom meum / cum suo amatore
amplexantem atque osculantem.
(‘I’ll rebut my fellow slave and say that he’s seen this one at your place embracing and
kissing her lover.’ Pl. Mil. 243–5)
The infinitive with these verbs in their three-place frame is not restricted to the present,
as is the case with the regular prolative infinitives. For a perfect infinitive—by far the
most frequent—see (a); for a present infinitive, see ( j); for a future infinitive, see (k).
( j) . . . Sullanas res defendere criminor (me criminatur cj. Lambinus)
(‘. . . I am accused of defending the acts of Sulla.’ Cic. Agr. 3.13)
(k) . . . incusabatur facile toleraturus exilium . . .
(‘. . . the charge was made that he would carry his exile lightly . . .’ Tac. Ann. 6.3.3)
facta convicerimus . . . (Quint. Inst. 12.1.41); Si quis instrumentum litis suae a procu-
ratore adversario proditum esse convicerit . . . (Paul. dig. 48.19.38.8); (sc. litterae ad
Hannibalem) . . . [quibus] non Capuam solam traditam in manum hostibus, sed se
quoque et praesidium in omnes cruciatus proditos incusabant. (Liv. 26.12.11); Nisi
etiam hoc falso dici insimulaturus es. (Pl. Am. 902); . . . insimulat privigni veneno
filium suum interceptum. (Apul. Met. 10.5.3)
NB: nominative and infinitive construction of the ‘patient’ type (see § 14.9): Aut
enim de iure dubitari potest eius qui rogat, ut de P. Clodi, qui non rite creatus tribu-
nus arguebatur. (Quint. Inst. 2.4.35)
. The use of the (present) infinitive with auxiliary verbs and verbs with a
related meaning
Auxiliary verbs are dealt with in § 4.98. On the basis of the criteria discussed in that
section seven clear-cut auxiliaries are distinguished: the modal verbs debeo ‘must’,
possum ‘to be able to’, ‘to be possible’, ‘to be allowed to’, queo ‘to be able’ and nequeo ‘to
be unable’; the habitual auxiliary soleo ‘to be accustomed to’; and the phasal verbs
incipio (coepi) ‘to begin’ and desino ‘to stop’. In their auxiliary meaning, these verbs are
used with a present infinitive. In addition to auxiliaries proper, there is a large number
of verbs that (at least in one of their senses) are semantically similar to the proper
auxiliaries and which can also be used with a present infinitive.
Related to the modal auxiliaries are the verbs scio in its sense ‘to know how to’, ‘to be
able to’ and its negative counterpart nescio; disco ‘to learn how to’ and a number of its
compounds; and habeo in its senses ‘to be able to’ and ‘to have to’.253 Examples are (a)–(c).
For the development of habeo (+ infinitive) into a temporal auxiliary, see § 7.27.
(a) Nescio ego istaec: philosophari numquam didici neque scio.
(‘I don’t know that; I’ve never learned to philosophize and I don’t know how to.’ Pl.
Mer. 147)
(b) Habeo etiam dicere quem . . . de ponte in Tiberim deiecerit.
(‘I can even give you an example of a man whom he threw from the bridge into the
Tiber.’ Cic. S. Rosc. 100)
(c) Quid habui facere? Perducere illum ad patruum? Non feci.
(‘What could I do? Take him to my uncle? I did not do it.’ Sen. Con. 1.1.19)
Related to the habitual auxiliary soleo are suesco ‘to get used to’ and a number of its
compounds. An example is (d).
(d) . . . ut eculi consuescant et videre eorum faciem et e motu audire crepitus.
(‘. . . so that the young horses may become accustomed both to the sight of it and to
hearing the jingling from its motion.’ Var. R. 2.7.12)
253 For further instances, see TLL s.v. 2454.12ff. (= possum) and 2454.53ff. (= debeo). For a discussion
of the modal uses of habeo, and references, see Adams (2013: 654–7).
220 Subordinate clauses filling an argument position
A number of verbs that are related in meaning to the phasal auxiliaries proper are
discussed in § 4.98. Two further examples are (e) and (f).
(e) Maiores nos res scribere ingressos, C. Trebati, . . . e cursu ipso revocavit
voluntas tua.
(‘When I had set out to write on a larger subject, my dear Trebatius, your request
recalled me from my course.’ Cic. Top. 1)
(f) Iam de istoc rogare omitte. Non vides nolle eloqui?
(‘Stop asking about this now—can’t you see she doesn’t want to tell?’ Pl. Per. 642)
Supplement (in alphabetical order by verb):
Quod facile est, si quam plurimis constitutionibus aggredietur id inprobare. (Cic. Inv.
2.75); Quem ferunt . . . instituisse . . . non quid ipse sentiret ostendere, sed . . . (Cic. de
Orat. 3.67); . . . reliquis consecutis diebus non intermittebas quasi donum aliquod
cotidie adferre rei publicae. (Cic. Phil. 1.32); Iam scrutari mitto. Redde huc. (Pl. Aul.
651); Sed maneam etiam opinor, namque hoc commodum orditur loqui. (Pl. Trin.
1136); Nunc domum ibo atque ex uxore hanc rem pergam exquirere . . . (Pl. Am. 1015)
The internal structure of participial clauses is dealt with in § 14.14. The term intro-
duced there is ‘dominant participle’. This section examines the use of dominant parti-
ciples as arguments of complex sentences. Participial argument clauses are used from
Early Latin onwards; they are relatively popular in authors who strive to construct
complex periods (Livy, for example) and / or to condense information (poets and
Tacitus, for example). The most common form is with a perfect passive participle.
However, the other participles can be used as well (see § 14.14). The perfect passive
participle clause is found in all argument positions, but present and future active par-
ticipial clauses seem to be used only as subjects. Participial clauses (and related nom-
inal ones) can be used in a broad variety of other positions as well, in clauses, in noun
phrases and in prepositional phrases. A survey can be found in § 14.14.254
NB: The participial clauses that are discussed in the following sections should not
be confused with the accusative and participle construction, for which see § 15.98, ex.
(c) and § 21.8.
254 The best survey of the construction in the period from Plautus to Suetonius is Heick (1936, with
statistical data at pp. 71–2—NB: to be read selectively; see Spevak (2019)). For Cicero, see Laughton (1964:
Ch. 4); for Tacitus, Adams (1972: 371); for Ammianus, Blomgrén (1937: 88).
Participial clauses (dominant participles) 221
found with human agents meaning ‘to constrain or inhibit by fear’ ‘to terrorize’, ‘to
overawe’ (OLD § 1a), but it would be odd to speak of people causing this fear after they
have been arrested. It is therefore unlikely that deprehensi functions as an attribute
with the nouns. An example with a present participle, first attested in Cicero, is (b).
The future participle is used in this way from Livy onwards (see the Supplement).
Note that the verb of the superordinate clause agrees with the subject of the dominant
participle construction, plural in (a), singular in (b). Exceptional is the use of a dominant
participle with a clause as its subject, as auditum + postero . . . proficisci in (c). However,
this is more common when such a combination functions as satellite (with the parti-
ciple in the ablative—see § 16.91).
(a) . . . ne eum Lentulus et Cethegus aliique ex coniuratione deprehensi terrerent . . .
(‘ . . . that the arrest of Lentulus and Cethegus and the others from the conspiracy
should not scare him . . .’ Sal. Cat. 48.4)
(b) In quo vehementer eum consentiens Etruria movebit.
(‘Under this head the unanimous feeling of Etruria will have great influence on him.’
Cic. Fam. 6.6.8)
(c) Haud procul iam Carthagine aberant cum ex obviis auditum postero die omnem
exercitum cum M. Silano in Lacetanos proficisci . . . metu . . . liberavit eos . . .
(‘They were now not far from (New) Carthage when the news, heard from those they
met, that on the next day the entire army would set out under Marcus Silanus against
the Lacetani, relieved them of their fear . . .’ Liv. 28.26.6)
Supplement:
Passive Perfect Participle: (sc. ea) Perdita perdidit me. (Pl. Cist. 686—NB: unless
perdita is taken as a secondary predicate); . . . nec aequitati quicquam tam infestum est
quam convocati homines et armati. (Cic. Caec. 33—NB: parallelism); Irridebatur
haec illius reconciliatio et persona viri boni suscepta . . . (Cic. Clu. 101—NB: coord-
ination); . . . dubitabat nemo quin violati hospites, legati necati, pacati atque socii
nefario bello lacessiti, fana vexata hanc tantam efficerent vastitatem. (Cic. Pis.
85); . . . omnibus amicis quorum benevolentiam nobis conciliarat per me quondam te
socio defensa res publica . . . (Cic. Fam. 4.13.2); . . . ea res saepe temptata etsi impetus
eius consiliaque tardabat . . . (Caes. Civ. 1.26.2); Non illi paucitatem nostrorum mili-
tum . . . non abscisum in duas partes exercitum . . . causae fuisse cogitabant. (Caes.
Civ. 3.72.2); . . . ademptus Hector / tradidit fessis leviora tolli / Pergama Grais. (Hor.
Carm. 2.4.10–12); Alterum (sc. Horatium) intactum ferro corpus et geminata victo-
ria ferocem in certamen tertium dabat. (Liv. 1.25.11); Haec dicta vulgo creditaque
cum indignitate angerent consulis animum, vocato ad concilium populo summissis
fascibus in contionem escendit. (Liv. 2.7.7); Equidem, sicubi loco cessum, si terga
data hosti, si signa foede amissa obici nobis possent, tamen hoc a te impetrari aequum
censerem, ut nos virtute culpam nostram corrigere et abolere flagitii memoriam nova
gloria patereris. (Liv. 7.13.4); Temptatum domi per dictatorem ut ambo patricii con-
sules crearentur rem ad interregnum perduxit. (Liv. 7.22.1—NB: ut clause as the sub-
ject of temptatum); . . . maximum vinculum erant trecenti equites, nobilissimus
quisque Campanorum, in praesidia Sicularum urbium delecti ab Romanis ac missi.
222 Subordinate clauses filling an argument position
(Liv. 23.4.8); Ceterum transportati milites in Siciliam—et erant maior pars Latini
nominis sociorumque—prope magni motus causa fuere. (Liv. 27.9.1); Ad Prusiam
regem legatus T. Quinctius Flamininus venit, quem suspectum Romanis et receptus
post fugam Antiochi Hannibal et bellum adversus Eumenen motum faciebat. (Liv.
39.51.1); Nec terra mutata mutavit genus aut mores. (Liv. 37.54.19); Ultima pestis
urbis fuit cuniculo subrutus murus, per cuius ruinas hostis intravit. (Curt. 4.6.23);
Urebat nobilem populum mare ablatum, raptae insulae, dare tributa, quae iubere
consueverat. (Flor. Epit. 1.22); Britannos . . . visa classis obstupefaciebat . . . (Tac. Agr.
25.2); Observatum id antiquitus comitiis dirimendis non terruit Galbam . . . (Tac.
Hist. 1.18.1); An excidit trucidatus Corbulo? (Tac. Hist. 2.76.3); . . . filios, e quibus
Zammac comiti nomine Romano acceptus latenter a fratre Firmo peremptus dis-
cordias excitavit et bella. (Amm. 29.5.2)
Active Present Participle: Fugiens denique Pompeius mirabiliter homines movet.
(Cic. Att. 7.11.4); Quod principium favoris et mater Agrippina spem male tegens
perniciem adceleravere. (Tac. Ann. 4.12.1—NB: coordination); Id perniciabile reo et
Caesar truci vultu defensionem accipiens . . . (Tac. Ann. 4.34.2)
Active Future Participle: Nec his nec illis periculum suum, publicum imperium ser-
vitiumque obversatur animo futuraque ea deinde patriae fortuna quam ipsi fecis-
sent. (Liv. 1.25.3); Ab hoc affectu reges suam flevere potentiam, nec illos magnitudo
fortunae suae delectavit, sed venturus aliquando finis exterruit. (Sen. Dial. 10.17.1);
Augebat metum gnarus Romanae seditionis et, si omitteretur ripa, invasurus hostis.
(Tac. Ann. 1.36.2—NB: parallelism)
NB: Si ambo praesentes, sol occasus (solis Q) suprema tempestas esto. (Lex XII ap.
Gel. 17.2.10)
Comparable with (c) is the use of the adjective notum ‘well-known’ in (d).255
(d) Duri magno sed amore dolores / polluto notumque furens quid femina pos-
sit, / triste per augurium Teucrorum pectora ducunt.
(‘But the cruel pangs when deep love is profaned, and knowledge of what a
woman can do in frenzy, lead the hearts of the Trojans amid sad forebodings.’
Verg. A. 5.6–8—NB: duri dolores and notum coordinated)
There are exceptional instances of a neuter singular perfect passive participle of one-place
verbs functioning as subject of the sentences, as in (e) and (f). In (e) responsum, haesi-
tatum, and titubatum are parallel to deprehensum aliquid; note also visus (sc. reus).256
(e) Haec proprie attingunt eos ipsos qui arguuntur, ut telum . . . ut deprehensum
aliquid, quod ablatum ereptumve videatur, ut responsum inconstanter, ut
haesitatum, ut titubatum, ut cum aliquo visus . . .
(‘These intimately touch the actual persons accused—for instance, a weapon . . . the
discovery of some article that looks as if it had been taken away or snatched from the
victim, an inconsistent answer, hesitation, stammering, having been seen in company
with somebody . . .’ Cic. Part. 114)
255 See Williams ad loc. 256 For more instances, some of which are disputable, see K.-St.: I.769.
Participial clauses (dominant participles) 223
(f) Quin ea arte aequasset superiores reges ni degeneratum in aliis huic quoque
decori offecisset.
(‘Indeed he would have equalled in this art the kings who had gone before him, if his
degeneracy in other things had not also dimmed his glory here.’ Liv. 1.53.1)
Supplement:
Diu non perlitatum tenuerat dictatorem ne ante meridiem signum dare posset. (Liv.
7.8.5); Equidem, sicubi loco cessum, si terga data hosti, si signa foede amissa obici nobis
possent, tamen . . . (Liv. 7.13.4—NB: parallel with dominant participles of two-place
verbs)
Supplement:
. . . in re publica me a se dissentientem non tulit . . . (Cic. Q. fr. 3.4.2); . . . tantum quod
momen mutatum dicere possis. (Lucr. 2.220); . . . cum visa atque audita et obversa-
tum totiens somno Iovem, minas irasque caelestes repraesentatas casibus suis expo-
suisset . . . (Liv. 2.36.6); Scipio . . . cum . . . Carthagini ab se captae captam ab eo
Orongin aequasset . . . (Liv. 28.4.2); Occisum Ciceronem malos mores voco. (Sen.
Con. 7.2.1); Neque populus ademptum ius questus est . . . (Tac. Ann. 1.15.1)
257 Examples of an accusative and infinitive can be found in TLL s.v. fero 538.1ff; without esse 538.19ff.
258 For cause expressions in the ablative, see Baños (2007: 19, n. 7).
224 Subordinate clauses filling an argument position
Supplement:
Genitive: . . . (sc. pacem) cuius impetratae ab insita animis levitate ante deductum
Cremera Romanum praesidium paenituit. (Liv. 2.49.12); . . . cum L. Scipio et accusatus et
damnatus sit pecuniae captae ab rege . . . (Liv. 38.56.8); . . . adnitar ne quem pacis per me
partae paeniteat. (Liv. 30.30.30); . . . ne eius (sc. Marii) nati rem publicam paeniteret . . .
(Vell. 2.12.5); . . . accusatur rei publicae laesae. (Sen. Con. 10.1.13); . . . quia (sc. Labeo)
male administratae . . . provinciae aliorumque criminum urgebatur . . . (Tac. Ann.
6.29.2—NB: coordination)
Dative: Reditum ad vestitum confectae victoriae reservate. Confectio autem huius
belli est D. Bruti salus. (Cic. Phil. 14.1—NB: continuation by confectio); Si . . . peri-
turaeque addere Troiae / teque tuosque iuvat, patet isti ianua leto . . . (Verg. A.
2.659–61)
Ablative: Eas leges quas ipse nobis inspectantibus recitavit, pronuntiavit, tulit, qui-
bus latis gloriabatur . . . evertendas putamus? (Cic. Phil. 1.24); Aut quidnam fracta
gaudes, Neptune, carina? (Prop. 3.7.15); Quae posteaquam litteris Scipionum Romae
volgata sunt, non tam victoria quam prohibito Hasdrubalis in Italiam transitu laeta-
bantur. (Liv. 23.29.17); Classes et Pontica signa / atque indignatos temerato litore
reges / mente agitet . . . (Val. Fl. 1.800–2)
From Early Latin onwards instances are found of the so-called impersonal expressions
opus est and usus est ‘it is needed’ with what seems a dominant (perfect) participle
construction in the ablative, as in (e).259
(e) Celeriter mi hoc homine convento’st opus.
(‘It’s necessary that I meet this man quickly.’ Pl. Cur. 302)
Supplement:
Quid istis nunc memoratis opu’st, quae commeminere? (Pl. Mil. 914); Si duobus
praefurnis coques, lacuna nihil opus erit; cum cinere eruto opus erit, altero prae-
furnio eruito, in altero ignis erit. (Cato Agr. 38.2); Primum ut id iniquissimum
esse confitear eius modi est, ut commutatis eis opus sit legibus, non ut his quae
sunt non pareamus. (Cic. Clu. 150); . . . nihil Oaeneo capto opus esse . . . (Liv.
43.19.4)
Recita modo: ex tabellis iam faxo scies, / quam subito argento mi usus invento
siet. (Pl. Ps. 49–50)
Gerundial arguments are used with both verbs and verbal phrases (§§ 15.136–8) and
with two-place adjectives (§ 15.139). Gerundial clauses do not function as subject (see
§ 5.42) or as object in the accusative, but they do function as non-accusative second
or third argument with a number of verbs and adjectives.
Gerundial clauses can be used as second or third arguments, both as bare case forms
and in prepositional expressions, from Early Latin onwards. The dative is the most
common case form of bare case gerunds functioning as argument; particularly com-
mon is the expression scribendo adsum ‘to attend the writing’, exemplified by (a). Ex.
(b) is a rare instance of a gerund functioning as a complement in the ablative (for
absisto + abl., see § 4.44). An equally rare and late example of a genitive complement
is (c) (for admoneo + gen., see § 4.66). A prepositional expression is exemplified by
(d). The gerund may itself govern an argument in the appropriate case, as in (e), where
a gerund in the dative case (quaerendo) governs an accusative object Epidicum.
However, instances like (e) are relatively infrequent, gerundival clauses being the nor-
mal expression (see §§ 15.140–2.). There are a few instances of satellites belonging to
a gerundial argument clause (see the Supplement).
cedebant virtute nostris. (Caes. Civ. 2.6.3); . . . is censendo finis factus est. (Liv.
1.44.2); . . . prodendo obstat ingens verecundia . . . (Plin. Nat. 28.29); Occasionem
loquendo capto, nec mehercules possum dicere inhumanitate tua fieri, quod non
audeo . . . (Sen. Con. 10.1.1); . . . eo quod nemo e familia restaurando sufficeret . . . (Tac.
Ann. 3.72.2); ‘Parce’, inquit, ‘in verba ista haec tam absurda tamque immania men-
tiendo.’ (Apul. Met. 1.2.5);260 . . . cum / cuncta parasset / edendo . . . (sc. muneri)
(CIL VIII.241.5–7 (Sbeitla (Sufetula), 2nd cent. ad))
Ablative: (sc. Masinissa) Verminam . . . taedio et desperatione tandem fessum absis-
tere sequendo coegit. (Liv. 29.33.8); Desiste canendo, / nata. (Stat. Theb. 4.583–4);
see also § 15.138, ex. (c)
Prepositional expressions:
(ab): Deterrent ab saliendo. (Var. R. 2.2.14); Nullum tempus illi umquam vacabat
aut a forensi dictione aut a commentatione domestica aut a scribendo aut a cogitando.
(Cic. Brut. 272—NB: coordination with abstract nouns); A scribendo prorsus abhor-
ret animus. (Cic. Att. 2.6.1)
(ad): Ita sum inritatus, animum ut nequeam ad cogitandum instituere. (Ter. Ph.
240); Nulla enim res tantum ad dicendum proficit quantum scriptio. (Cic. Brut. 91);
Quod me hortaris ad scribendum, amice tu quidem, sed me scito agere nihil aliud.
(Cic. Att. 16.11.3); . . . ut spatium ad colligendum se homines haberent . . . (Planc. Fam.
10.23.3); . . . pedites . . . rapiditate fluminis ad transeundum impedirentur. (Caes. Civ.
1.62.1); Itaque ad remedium iam diu neque desideratum nec adhibitum, dictatorem
dicendum, civitas confugit. (Liv. 22.8.5—NB: in apposition to a prepositional
phrase); . . . me debilitatum aegre ad exurgendum compellunt. (Apul. Met. 6.25.5); . . .
cogendum se ad ducendum eam uxorem. . . (Suet. Claud. 26.3); . . . Quod autem per-
tineat ad consuetudinem refutandum. (Firmil. ap. Cypr. Ep. 75.19.1)
(cum): Nam et scribendi ratio coniuncta cum loquendo est et . . . (Quint. Inst. 1.4.3)
Gerundial clauses in the dative are also used as argument with the verb sum in its
meaning ‘to be capable of ’. Especially common from Cicero onwards is the use of sum in
this sense with the dative gerund form solvendo ‘(up to) paying’. In later times solvendo
became an idiom yielding utterances like unus non solvendo decessit ‘one . . . died insolvent’
(Modest. dig. 3.5.25). In addition to this combination of sum and a dative gerund,
there are also a few others. (For parallel gerundival expressions, see § 15.141.)
(f) . . . cum solvendo civitates non essent.
(‘. . . although the states were not capable of paying.’ Cic. Fam. 3.8.2)
Supplement:
Tu nec solvendo eras nec te ullo modo nisi eversa re publica fore incolumem putabas.
(Cic. Phil. 2.4); Iamque ferendo / vix erat illa gravem maturo pondere ventrem . . .
(Ov. Met. 9.684–5)
It is a matter of dispute whether there are also gerundial clauses in the accusative that
function as second argument. An example that is cited in the literature is (g).261 Here
faciundum looks like a gerund in the accusative that functions as the object of
coiraverunt and which itself governs a number of object constituents in the accusative.
260 For the interpretation of the prepositional in phrase, see TLL s.v. parco 333.70ff.
261 So, for example, Aalto (1949: 84–5) and Blümel (1979: 86).
Gerundial clauses 227
262 See Warmington IV.188, n. 4. For a discussion of this inscription, see Baldi (1999: 217). As an alter-
native to the explanation given above he suggests that the neuter form faciundum may have been chosen
because the nouns it agrees with are of different gender, but then one would expect plural faciunda (see
§§ 13.9 and 13.17).
263 Examples can be found in Diercks’ edition (1978: XCI).
264 Further examples from Fredegar can be found in Odelstierna (1926: 45–56).
228 Subordinate clauses filling an argument position
Another area for competition between the gerund and the infinitive is in more
or less idiomatic phrases that consist of sum and nouns that function as subject
complement, such as mos est ‘it is the/a custom’. With this particular phrase the
normal construction is the prolative infinitive, as in (f), but (g) may be analysed in
the same way. Compare also (h). However, here one might take mala . . . et impia as
the subject complement and contra deos disputandi as the adnominal argument of
consuetudo (see also §§ 17.17–18).265 A step further is (i). Here the explanation
must be that Tacitus wanted to avoid the more common use of the infinitive
vitare.266
(f) Quia mos est oblivisci hominibus . . .
(‘Because it’s people’s custom to forget . . .’ Pl. Capt. 985)
(g) . . . sed quia mos est ita rogandi, rogo.
(‘. . . but because it is the custom to ask in this way, I ask . . .’ Cic. Fam. 12.17.1)
(h) Mala enim et impia consuetudo est contra deos disputandi . . .
(‘For it is a wicked and impious practice to argue against the gods.’ Cic. N.D. 2.168)
(i) Vologaesi vetus et penitus infixum erat arma Romana vitandi . . .
(‘With Vologeses it was an old and deep-seated principle to avoid the Roman arms . . .’
Tac. Ann. 15.5.3)
Supplement:
Mos vero liberos genitos protinus obiciendi saevissimis earum eoque genere pudici-
tiam coniugum experiendi . . . (Plin. Nat. 7.14.2); Nec grave manumissis per idem
obsequium retinendi libertatem . . . (Tac. Ann. 13.26.3); Decernaturque et maneat
provincialibus potentiam suam tali modo ostentandi. (Tac. Ann. 15.21.2); . . . monu-
mentum · refecit · ex / subscriptione · eorum quorum iuris est · dandi . . . (CIL
VI.9035.9–10 (Rome, 1st cent. ad (late))); Iam propositi erat . . . ad Asiam acce-
dendi . . . (Pereg. 23.10); . . . cum id iustitia ipsa persuadeat ab eo haec recognosci, qui
evocandi personas sua interesse crediderit. (Cod. Just. 7.62.6.2); . . . quod eis nec
donandi nec testandi aut capiendi vel ab aliis derelictum penitus subiaceret . . . (Vict.
Vit. 3.9)
Appendix: In Late Latin there are a few instances where the subject complement
analysis seems acceptable, but here a more general confusion between infinitival and
gerundial expressions may be an additional explanation as well, a confusion which is
apparent in other contexts, for example in ( j).
( j) Set quid aliut fieri potest nisi naturae ser/viendum?
(‘But what else can be done except obey nature?’ (CIL VIII.23245.2–3 (Hr
Djuana)).
265 One might occasionally prefer to regard the gerundial clause as the subject of the sentence. A dis-
cussion of these cases can be found in Norberg (1943: 225ff.) and Wistrand (1967).
266 For these exceptional instances in Tacitus, see Löfstedt (1942/1933: I.106).
Gerundival clauses 229
15.139 The use of gerundial clauses with two-place adjectives that function as subject
or object complement
Gerundial clauses can be used with two-place adjectives that function as subject com-
plement or as object complement. The gerunds may be either bare case forms in the
genitive, dative, or ablative, or they may be prepositional expressions (mainly with ad
‘to’). An example with a dative gerund is (a). There are a few instances of such gerundial
clauses with an argument (or a satellite), but the expression normally used in such
cases is the gerundival clause. An example is (b). The gerundial clause videndi—itself
in the genitive—contains an argument vos, in the expected accusative case form, and
an adjunct, hic. The two other gerunds are combined with a space argument.
(a) Illud ediscendo scribendoque commune est . . .
(‘This is common to learning by heart and writing . . .’ Quint. Inst. 11.2.35)
(b) . . . quam cupida eram huc redeundi, abeundi a milite, / vosque hic videndi . . .
(‘. . . how eager I was to come back here, to get away from the soldier, and to see all of
you here . . .’ Ter. Hec. 91–2)
Supplement:
Genitive: Harum partium quaeque suis muneribus fungitur, si modo vinitor gnarus
est iis utendi[s]. (Col. 4.25.1); Armorum et equitandi peritissimus, laboris ultra
fidem patiens erat. (Suet. Jul. 57.1—NB: coordination with a noun)
Dative: Est autem utilis sulpurata (sc. aqua) nervis, aluminata paralyticis aut simili
modo solutis, bituminata aut nitrosa, qualis Cutilia est, bibendo itaque purgationi-
bus. (Plin. Nat. 31.59—NB: coordination with a noun)
Ablative: . . . culpando<o> nihilum dignus, set dignus amari . . . (anth. II.1.650.2 (ad 360))
Prepositional phrase: At quidem hercle est <ad> perdundum magis quam ad
scribundum cito. (Pl. Bac. 738); Non sati’ tutus est ad narrandum hic locus. (Ter. Ph.
818); Ut enim nulla materies tam facilis ad exardescendum est . . . (Cic. de Orat.
2.190); Ac ne me existimaris ad manendum esse propensiorem . . . (Cic. Att. 8.3.6); . . .
ut (sc. balineae) habiles ad lavandum fierent . . . (Scaev. dig. 32.35.3); . . . solers ad
audiendum, clemens ad ignoscendum . . . (CIL V.6725.7 (Vercelli, 5th cent. ad))
For the internal structure of gerundival clauses and their ‘dominant’ character, see
§ 14.14. Dominant gerundival clauses resemble dominant participial clauses with a
past passive participle, the difference between them being that the gerundival clause
denotes something that still has/had to take place (see § 5.41), while the participial
clause refers to something that has/had already taken place. This is illustrated by ex.
(a). The same difference can be seen in Livy’s famous temporal adjunct ante conditam
condendamve urbem in (b).267
267 For the difference in meaning between the participial and the gerundival clauses, see Bolkestein
(1980b: 93).
230 Subordinate clauses filling an argument position
(a) Non praesentem solum dictatorem obstitisse rei bene gerendae, sed absentem
etiam gestae obstare . . .
(‘Not only had the dictator prevented a successful engagement being fought while he
was present, but even when absent he objected to the victory now that it was won . . .’
Liv. 22.25.4)
(b) Quae ante conditam condendamve urbem poeticis magis decora fabulis
quam incorruptis rerum gestarum monumentis traduntur, ea nec adfirmare
nec refellere in animo est.
(‘The things which have been handed down since before the city was founded or
rather was presently to be founded and which are rather adorned with poetic legends
than based upon trustworthy historical proofs, I purpose neither to affirm nor to
refute.’ Liv.1.pr. 6)
Gerundival arguments are found both with verbs (§ 15.141) and with two-place adjectives
(§ 15.142).
doque dilectu dat operam . . . (Liv. 22.2.1); Portoriisque et tributo plebes liberata, ut
divites conferrent, qui oneri ferendo essent: pauperes satis stipendii pendere, si liberos
educarent. (Liv. 2.9.6); Experiundam rem denique in uno aut altero esse sitne aliqui
plebeius ferendo magno honori . . . (Liv. 4.35.9); . . . Domitium Corbulonem retinendae
Armeniae praeposuerat . . . (Tac. Ann. 13.8.1); Et ne ponti iniciendo impedimentum
hostiles turmae adferrent . . . (Tac. Ann. 15.9.1); . . . quod inter spectandum epistulis libel-
lisque legendis aut rescribendis vacaret . . . (Suet. Aug. 45.1); . . . dum magister meus
lectulo probe coaptando destrictus inservit . . . (Apul. Met. 10.35.1); . . . si quis pecuniis
faenerandis, agris colendis, mercaturis redempturisque faciendis praeposuerit (sc.
institorem) . . . (Ulp. dig. 14.3.5.2); . . . qui / cautionibus accipiendis de/sunt . . . (CIL
II.2959.5–7 (Pamplona, ad 119)); . . . qui · se · numini · eius · in perpetuum · / colendo
· obligaverunt . . . (CIL XII.4333.11–12 (Narbonne, ad 11)); (sc. provinciae) . . . quas
natura agro potius eluctando commodavit . . . (Tert. Pal. 4)
Prepositional phrase: A ducenda autem uxore sic abhorret ut libero lectulo neget esse
quicquam iucundius. (Cic. Att. 14.13.5); . . . revocant ab inpugnandis operibus armatos
murisque disponunt. (Hirt. Gal. 8.43.2); . . . cum · domi re/pelleretur · a · gerendis
· honoribus . . . (CIL XIII.1668. I.14–15 (Lyon, ad 48)); Seneca missum ad se Natalem
conquestumque nomine Pisonis, quod a visendo eo prohiberetur, seque rationem
valetudinis et amorem quietis excusavisse respondit. (Tac. Ann. 15.61.1); . . . nec ulla
lege (sc. testes) a dicendo testimonio excusantur. (Charis. dig. 22.5.1.1); Iam se ad prohi-
benda circumdari opera Aequi parabant (Liv. 3.28.7); Hoc ius ad rapa condienda
optime facit. (Col. 12.57.1); . . . quae ad solutionem pecuniae aut operam praebendam
pertinent. (Javol. dig. 4.8.39.1—NB: coordination with a noun phrase)
There are also gerundival clauses functioning as object (and as subject in the passive,
as in (e)), although their existence is ignored in some grammars.268 The clearest
instances occur with the verb curo, as in (d).
(d) . . . cum ad has suspiciones certissimae res accederent . . . quod obsides inter
eos dandos curasset . . .
(‘. . . since to these suspicions the most unequivocal facts were added . . . namely that
he had caused hostages to be given between them.’ Caes. Gal. 1.19.1)
(e) Ne quis concedat quo olea legunda et facienda carius locetur . . .
(‘No one shall form a combination in order that the harvesting and milling of olives
might be contracted out at a higher price. . .’ Cato Agr. 144.4)
This use is limited to the verbs curo ‘to cause to be done’, do ‘to impose (a task)’, and
loco ‘to contract for having done’. The construction is normally regarded as identical
to the use of the gerundive as a secondary predicate (see § 21.9), as in (f).
(f) Sanguinis ingenui mulierem praetor . . . triumviro in carcere necandam tradidit.
(‘A praetor handed over a woman of free birth . . . to the Triumvir to be executed in
prison.’ V. Max. 5.4.7)
268 So K.-St.: I.731 and Sz.: 371–2. Not so Bennett: I.444. The view taken in this Syntax is that of
Odelstierna (1926: 15). She rightly argues that a ‘final’ interpretation is impossible with curare. More or less
similarly Blümel (1979: 88–9) and Töttössy (1998).
232 Subordinate clauses filling an argument position
However, with these three verbs, and unlike the secondary predicate instances, the
entities the objects refer to very often (in the case of curare always) are the result of the
action denoted by the gerundive (they resemble ‘effected’ objects (in the passive sub-
jects), for which see § 2.12 and § 4.20). By contrast, with the other verbs with which a
gerundive may be used as a secondary predicate, we are dealing with an ‘affected’ object
of the governing verb, as in (g) (see § 2.12 and § 4.20). There are also a few (very) Late
Latin instances of facio ‘to do’ with a gerundival clause as object, but these date from a
period in which infinitive and -nd- forms were confused regularly (see § 15.138).
Supplement (satellites of the gerundival clause indicated in italics):
Cura adservandum vinctum, atque audi’n? Quadrupedem constringito. (Ter. An.
865); . . . deinde ipsum Aurium . . . tollendum interficiendumque curavit. (Cic. Clu.
23); . . . monumentum quam amplissimum locandum faciendumque <curent>. (Cic.
Phil. 14.38); . . . pontem in Arari faciendum curat atque ita exercitum traducit. (Caes.
Gal. 1.13.1); . . . quod Atheniensium legem probantes me arte erudiendum
curaverunt . . . (Vitr. 6.pr.4); . . . aut ullo alio genere (sc. eum) persequendum cura-
bis . . . (Petr. 109.2)
Ibi nunc statuam volt dare auream / solidam faciundam ex auro Philippo . . . (Pl.
Cur. 439–40); Calcem partiario coquendam qui dant, ita datur: . . . (Cato Agr. 16);
Lectulos—in sole—ilignis pedibu’ faciundos dedit. (Ter. Ad. 585); C. Mario L. Valerio
consulibus senatus rem publicam defendendam dedit. (Cic. Phil. 8.15)
(sc. terminos) statuendos locaverunt (CIL I2.400.5–6 (near Rome, 5th cent. bc
(early))); . . . ut tu me quoivis castrandum loces. (Pl. Aul. 251); Villam aedificandam si
locabis novam ab solo, faber haec faciat oportet. (Cato Agr. 14.1); † trapeti † facito si
operarii conducti erunt aut facienda locata erit, pro eo resolvito, aut deducetur. (Cato
Agr. 145.1); Magno cum luctu . . . simulacrum Dianae tollendum locatur. (Cic. Ver.
4.76—NB: subject in a passive sentence); Opera deinde facienda ex decreta in eam
rem pecunia, lacus sternendos lapide, detergendasque, qua opus esset, cloacas in
Aventino, et in aliis partibus qua nondum erant faciendas locaverunt. (Liv. 39.44.5)269
?uxsor benemerenti / faciendum fecit (CIL II.2549.4–5 (Hisp. Tarr.—‘inscriptio
male descripta’270))
269 Note that in this example detergendas presupposes the existence of cloacae, whereas faciendas
does not.
270 So TLL s.v. facio 87.51.
Gerundival clauses 233
(h) Nec caelestes modo caerimonias, sed iusta quoque funebria placandosque
manes ut idem pontifex edoceret . . .
(‘And the pontifex was to teach not only ceremonies relating to the gods
above, but also proper funeral observances and the propitiation of the spirits
of the dead . . .’ Liv. 1.20.7)
Supplement:
. . . moverat eum et primi periculi casus . . . et subeunda dimicatio totiens quot coniu-
rati superessent . . . (Liv. 2.13.2)271
Gerundival clauses can also be used as subject complement with the copula sum ‘to be’
or with another copular verb to denote a future state of affairs that is likely to occur.
Such clauses are sometimes described as ‘final’ gerundival expressions, but they should
not be confused with gerundival purpose adjuncts described in § 16.106, where no
copular verb is involved. An example of a subject complement is (i). For a gerundival
clause that functions as object complement, see ( j) (for the genitive, see § 9.42).
(i) . . . quae res evertendae reipublicae solent esse . . .
(‘. . . which matters usually ruin the state . . .’ Cic. Ver. 2.132)
( j) (sc. Marius) Quae postquam gloriosa modo neque belli patrandi cognovit . . .
(‘But after Marius realized that such exploits merely brought him glory and did not
tend to finish the war . . .’ Sal. Jug. 88.4)
Supplement:
. . . multa contra morem consuetudinemque militarem fierent quae dissolvendae dis-
ciplinae severitatisque essent . . . (B. Alex. 65.1); Si plebeiae leges displicerent, at illi
communiter legum latores et ex plebe et ex patribus, qui utrisque utilia ferrent quaeque
aequandae libertatis essent, sinerent creari. (Liv. 3.31.7); Lectis rerum summis cum
animum advertisset pleraque dissolvendarum religionum esse . . . (Liv. 40.29.11); . . .
quaeque alia conciliandae misericordiae videbantur . . . (Tac. Ann. 11.3.1)
. The use of gerundival clauses with adjectives that function as subject or
object complement
271 For ‘variety and inconcinnity’ in Livy, see Catterall (1938), especially p. 313.
234 Subordinate clauses filling an argument position
(c) At nunc causa mihi est orandae sola salutis / dignum donanda, Caesar, te
credere vita.
(‘But now my only reason for begging for life, is that I think you, Caesar, are worthy
to grant it.’ Luc. 4.346–7)
(d) . . . quod illa aetas magis ad haec utenda idonea’st . . .
(‘. . . since that age is more suitable for enjoying them . . .’ Ter. Hau. 133)
Supplement (satellites of the gerundive are indicated in light italics):
Genitive: Mercatorem autem strenuum studiosumque rei quaerendae existimo . . .
(Cato Agr. pr. 3); Pacis inter civis conciliandae te cupidum esse laetor. (Cic. Fam.
10.27.1); Nam ut ad bella suscipienda Gallorum alacer ac promptus est animus,
sic . . . (Caes. Gal. 3.19.6); Fuit enim disertus, impiger, laboriosus, rei militaris peritus
neque minus civitatis regendae. (Nep. Tim. 1.1—NB: coordination with a noun
phrase); Latiaris, ut rettuli, praecipuus olim circumveniendi Titii Sabini et tunc
luendae poenae primus fuit. (Tac. Ann. 6.4.1); Eutrapelus . . . corrumpendorum
hominum callidus fuit . . . (Porph. ad Hor. Ep. 1.18.31)
Dative: Sed hoc non liquet nec satis cogitatum est, / . . . utram aetati agundae arbitrer
firmiorem. (Pl. Trin. 227–9); Facilis impetrandae veniae Claudius, Fulvio durior sen-
tentia erat. (Liv. 26.15.1); . . . qui perferendis militum mandatis habebatur idoneus ob
promptum ingenium. (Tac. Ann. 1.23.4); At ego referendis laudibus tuis exilis inge-
nio et adhibendis sacrificiis tenuis patrimonio. (Apul. Met. 11.25.5)
Ablative: (sc. patres) . . . nec iam possidendis publicis agris contentos esse . . . (Liv.
6.14.11); . . . et uberrimum gignendis uvis solum est. (Curt. 6.4.21);272 . . . dum flumen
gignendo sale fecundum et conterminum vi trahunt . . . (Tac. Ann. 13.57.1)
Prepositional phrase: Gonlegium . . . opiparum a<d> veitam quolundam . . . (CIL
I2.364b.1–2 (Falerii, c.150 bc)); (sc. glaebas) . . . aptiores facere ad accipiendum
imbrem . . . (Var. R. 1.27.2); Haec igitur opera grata multis et ad beneficiis obstringen-
dos homines accommodata. (Cic. Off. 2.65)
(see § 4.96). Although they are acceptable on a structural level (given the fact that they
are quite common in satellite positions (see §§ 16.114ff.)), the fact that they occur in
only a few very experimental authors suggests that they are literary exploitations of a
structure that was probably not in use in everyday Latin.
(a) . . . filius legati orator publicae causae satis ostenderet necessitate expressa
quae per modestiam non obtinuissent.
(‘The fact that their commander’s son was serving as pleader of the common cause
clearly showed that they had wrested by compulsion what they had failed to obtain by
good behaviour.’ Tac. Ann. 1.19.5)
(b) Augebat metum gnarus Romanae seditionis . . . hostis.
(‘The fact that the enemy was aware of the Roman mutiny heightened the alarm.’ Tac.
Ann. 1.36.2)
Supplement:
Noun (phrase): Et quantum misericordiae saevitia accusationis permoverat, tantum
irae P. Egnatius testis concivit. (Tac. Ann. 16.32.2—NB: parallelism with saevitia
accusationis)
Adjective: Multa me dehortantur . . .: opes factionis, vostra patientia, ius nullum, ac
maxume quod innocentiae plus periculi quam honoris est. (Sal. Jug. 31.1); Sed minuit
furorem / vix una sospes navis ab ignibus . . . (Hor. Carm. 1.37.12–13); Ceterum
plena Caesarum domus, iuvenis filius, nepotes adulti moram cupitis adferebant.
(Tac. Ann. 4.3.1)
K.-St.: I.770 analyse the noun phrases in (c)–(d) and a few others as argument clauses.
In these cases the information provided by the attributes is definitely salient, but this
does not make the expressions argument clauses.
(c) . . . praeclara . . . est aequabilitas in omni vita et idem semper vultus eademque
frons . . .
(‘. . . an unruffled temper is excellent in every condition of life, as well as an
unchanging expression and the same countenance . . .’ Cic. Off. 1.90)
(d) Quae postquam oppidani cognovere, res trepidae, metus ingens, malum
inprovisum, ad hoc pars civium extra moenia in hostium potestate coegere,
uti deditionem facerent.
(‘After the inhabitants perceived these things, their state of consternation and
extreme dread, the suddenness of the calamity, and, moreover, the consid-
eration that part of their fellow-citizens were outside the walls in the enemy’s
power compelled them to surrender.’ Sal. Jug. 91.5)
Supplement:
Accedere matrem muliebri impotentia. (Tac. Ann. 1.4.5); Facilem adsensum Gallo
sub nominibus honestis confessio vitiorum et similitudo audientium dedit. (Tac.
Ann. 2.33.4)
236 Subordinate clauses filling an argument position
Just as there are participial clauses functioning as argument with the expression opus
est ‘it is needed’ (see § 15.134), there are a few instances of nominal clauses in that
position, as in (e).
(e) Quid opu’st me advocato . . .
(‘What need is there for me to be an advocate . . .’ Pl. Am. 1038)
Supplement:
Noun (phrase): Si quis tamen virtutibus vitia pensarit, vir magnus ac memorabilis
fuit, et in cuius laudes <ex>equendas Cicerone laudatore opus fuerit. (Liv. ap. Sen.
Suas. 6.22)
Adjective: . . . sobrio tanta ad mala / opus est Thyeste. (Sen. Thy. 900–1)
CHAPTER 16
Finite satellite clauses contain an indicative or a subjunctive verb form. For the
tenses and moods required or allowed in the various satellites clauses, see §§ 7.85ff.
The Oxford Latin Syntax. Harm Pinkster, Oxford University Press (2021). © Harm Pinkster.
DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780199230563.003.0016
238 Subordinate clauses filling a satellite position
1 For the use of the historic infinitive in the historians, especially Tacitus, see Perrochat (1932a: 67–70).
Finite satellite clauses 239
Some of the subordinators used in satellite clauses are formally identical to ones used
in argument clauses. See § 14.4. Further, a number of subordinators occur in more
than one type of satellite clause.
Satellite clauses without a subordinator are very rare. Examples are (c) and (d)—
purpose clauses—and (e)—a result clause. There are more instances in (very) Late
Latin texts by less educated authors.2
(c) Siquidem mihi saltandum est, tum vos date bibat tibicini.
(‘If I have to dance, then you two must give the flute player something to
drink.’ Pl. St. 757)
(d) Da quaeso scribae recitet ex codice professionem. Recita.
(‘Kindly hand this to the clerk so that he can read aloud from the volume the
passage about the returns to be made. Read it, please.’ Cic. Ver. 3.26)
(e) Et si fistula erit, turundam intro trudito; si turundam non recipiet, diluito,
indito in vesicam, eo calamum alligato, ita premito in fistulam introeat.
(‘If there is a fistula, insert a pellet; or if it will not admit a pellet, make a
solution, pour it into a bladder, attach a reed to it, and squeeze the bladder
in such a way that the solution enters into the fistula.’ Cato Agr. 157.14)
For the use of the historic infinitive in subordinate clauses, see § 7.71, Appendix, and
§ 7.122. For the use of the accusative and infinitive in subordinate satellite clauses, see
§ 15.109. Also, just as in other types of clauses and sentences, a finite verb (and other
constituents) may be absent for various reasons.
2 For further references, see Sz.: 531–2. For Late Latin, see Svennung (1934).
3 For a discussion of these and related instances, see Bodelot (2005: 469–73).
240 Subordinate clauses filling a satellite position
Space satellite clauses locate the event of the superordinate clause in space. There
are four types, introduced by position, direction, source, or path expressions. Each of
these types is typically introduced by one of the subordinators (or more precisely:
relative adverbs—see § 16.4 and below) given in Table 16.1. The main clause may
contain one of the demonstrative or anaphoric adverbs in the right hand column,
which may either precede (their preparative use) or follow (their resumptive use).
Examples of each of the four types are (a)–(d), respectively.4
(e) Rursus autem ex cognitionis consultatione, ubi sit necne sit aut fuerit futu-
rumve sit quaeritur, unum genus est quaestionis . . .
(‘And again, under the consideration of learning, in cases where it is inquired
whether a thing is (or was, or will be) or not, one class of question is . . .’ Cic.
Part. 64)
The correlative pairs may have different functions in their own clause, as is shown by
exx. (f), repeated from § 16.4, and (g). In (f) unde is part of a subordinate clause,
where it functions as a source argument with discedere; the clause as a whole functions
as a direction argument with the verb revertamur in the main clause, as is made
explicit by eo. Ex. (g) shows unde functioning as source adjunct. In (h) and (i) there is
no such correlating element.
(f) . . . eo unde discedere non oportuit aliquando revertamur.
(‘. . . let me at length return to those pursuits from which I never should have
departed.’ Cic. Att. 2.16.3)
(g) Eo inpendi laborem ac periculum unde emolumentum atque honos speretur.
(‘Toil was bestowed and danger risked, they said, in causes from which benefit and
honour could be hoped for.’ Liv. 4.35.7)
(h) Sed redeat unde aberravit oratio.
(‘But my discourse should return to the point from which it wandered.’ Cic.
Tusc. 5.66)
(i) . . . ut unde deiecisset restitueret.
(‘. . . to restore to the place whence he had ejected.’ Cic. Caec. 23)
Space clauses as exemplified above are in fact autonomous relative clauses functioning
as space satellites. They are dealt with in this Chapter to maintain the same organiza-
tion of satellites as in Chapter 10. Autonomous and adnominal space clauses are also
used in other functions at the sentence and noun phrase levels. For details, see § 18.36.
Just as with noun phrases functioning as direction and source expressions, it is often
difficult to decide whether the clausal constituents in such sentences are an argument
or a satellite. To a lesser extent this holds also for position expressions. This problem
is ignored in this section, because the internal and external properties of the two
types of clause are very much the same.
Time satellite clauses locate the event of their superordinate clause in time. More
precisely they indicate the temporal relation of the event referred to in the super-
ordinate clause with respect to the event in the time clause. This is illustrated by (a)–
(c), in which time clauses are used independently as answers to a question with
quando ‘when?’
242 Subordinate clauses filling a satellite position
The temporal relationship between the events of the subordinate and the superordin-
ate clause may be one of simultaneity, as in (a) and (b); anteriority, as in (c); or poster-
iority, as in (d).
(d) Prius quam intro redii, exanimatus fui.
(‘Before I returned inside, I was practically dead.’ Pl. Aul. 208)
The subordinators used to mark these three types of relationship are given in Table 16.2.
Some of these are in fact relative adverbs (see §16.10 and § 18.38 on cum (quom)).
The lexical meaning of the subordinators interacts with the semantic value of the
types of states of affairs and the tenses used in the two clauses, which explains why
some subordinators are used in more than one subclass of time clauses. The most
conspicuous subordinator in this respect is dum, which can be translated as both ‘as
long as’ and ‘until’ depending on the type of state of affairs and the tenses and moods
used (for details, see § 16.15 and § 16.17, respectively).6
6 For dum and the types of events with which it occurs see TLL s.v. dum 2202.50ff.
Time clauses 243
Depending on the context, the relationship between a time clause and the main
clause may be interpreted as causal (cum, dum, postquam, quando), concessive (or
adversative) (cum, dum, postquam, quando), conditional (dum and quando), or final
(antequam, priusquam). In most of these cases the mood of the temporal clause is
subjunctive. Cum especially can be used in a wide range of contexts, and it resembles
in this respect ablative absolute clauses.7
There are a few instances of et and atque ‘and’ in the (following) main clause after
finite and non-finite temporal subordinate clauses. See § 19.12.
. Time clauses that locate the event of the main clause in time (cum, dum,
quando, quoniam, quotiens)
The first four time clauses that locate the event of the main clause in time (with cum,
dum, quando, or quoniam) are discussed in separate sections. For quotiens, see § 16.13,
Appendix. The use of quoniam and of quando and its compounds as temporal subor-
dinators is relatively uncommon and mostly attested in Early Latin. The use of dum in
a locating sense is poetic and Late.
the next section special attention will be given to so-called cum inversum clauses,
which in most cases have an indicative verb form. In narrative texts the locating func-
tion of the cum clause is less prominent, and its function is rather to introduce and set
the stage for the event in the main clause, as in (e).11
(a) Quom exibam, hic erat.
(‘When I came out, she was here.’ Pl. Mil. 181)
(b) Praesagibat mi animus frustra me ire, quom exibam domo.
(‘My mind felt a premonition that I was going in vain when I left the house.’ Pl. Aul.
178—NB: Cicero Div. 1.65 quotes it with subjunctive exirem)
(c) Plus triginta annis natus sum, quom interea loci / numquam quicquam faci-
nus feci peius nec scelestius / quam hodie . . .
(‘It’s been more than thirty years since I was born, during which time I’ve never com-
mitted a worse or more wicked crime than today . . .’ Pl. Men. 446–8)
(d) . . . medico quem tecum tu eduxeras imperasti ut venas hominis (sc. Platoris)
incideret; cum quidem tibi etiam accessio fuit ad necem Platoris Pleuratus
eius comes, quem necasti verberibus summa senectute confectum.
(‘. . . you ordered the physician whom you had taken out with you to open the man’s
veins. To the murder of Plator you added that of Pleuratus his friend, whom you
scourged to death, worn out though he was with extreme old age.’ Cic. Pis. 83–4)
(e) Ut Alexandrum regem videmus, qui cum interemisset Clitum familiarem
suum, vix a se manus abstinuit.
(‘As for instance we see King Alexander did, who after he had killed his friend Clitus
could scarcely keep his hands off himself.’ Cic. Tusc. 4.78)
Supplement:
Litteras in contione recitasti quas tibi a C. Caesare missas diceres ‘CAESAR
PULCHRO’, cum etiam es argumentatus amoris esse hoc signum, <quod> cogno-
minibus tantum uteretur . . . (Cic. Dom. 22); Recordare cetera, quam cito senatum illo
die facta sortitione coegerim, quam multa de te verba fecerim, cum tu ipse mihi
dixisti orationem meam non solum in te honorificam sed etiam in collegas tuos con-
tumeliosam fuisse. (Cic. Fam. 5.2.3); Cum Caesar in Galliam venit, alterius factionis
principes erant Haedui, alterius Sequani. (Caes. Gal. 6.12.1)
Primo actu placeo; quom interea rumor venit / datum iri gladiatores, populu’ con-
volat. (Ter. Hec. 39–40); (sc. Piso) . . . domum se abdidit; inde nocte intempesta . . .
navem conscendit . . . et ultimas Hadriani maris oras petivit, cum interim Dyrrachii
milites domum . . . obsidere coeperunt . . . (Cic. Pis. 92)
. . . sed uterque nostrum cedere cogebatur magnitudini animi orationisque gravi-
tati, cum quidem ille maxima laude et gratulatione omnium vestrum pollicitus est se
quod velletis esse facturum . . . (Cic. Phil. 9.9)
Neque est ille vir passus in ea re publica quam ipse decorarat atque auxerat diutius
vestrorum scelerum pestem morari, cum tamen ille (sc. Gabinius), qualiscumque est,
qui est ab uno te improbitate victus . . . conlegit ipse se vix . . . (Cic. Pis. 27); Torpebat
Vitellius et fortunam principatus inerti luxu ac prodigis epulis praesumebat . . ., cum
tamen ardor et vis militum ultro ducis munia implebat . . . (Tac. Hist. 1.62.2)
Cum is a temporal relative adverb, which is used both adnominally (fuit tempus
cum ‘there was a time when’ (see § 18.38)) and autonomously, as in this section.
Some scholars indeed deal with these clauses as relative clauses.12 Cum is also
used as a subordinator in argument clauses with gaudeo ‘to rejoice’ and related
verbs (see § 15.23). For cum clauses that resemble secondary predicates, see
§ 21.15, Appendix.
Unlike quando and its locative counterpart ubi, cum does not have a correspond-
ing interrogative homonym (nor an indefinite one).13
The relationship between a cum clause and its superordinate clause may be made
more precise by various adverbs (see § 14.18), as is illustrated by (f)–(h).
(f) At primum istae ipsae leges quas recitas, ut mittam cetera, significant, quam
noluerint maiores nostri, nisi cum pernecesse esset, hominem occidi.
(‘But, in the first place those very laws which you read—to say nothing of
other points—prove how utterly our ancestors disapproved of any man
being slain, unless it was absolutely unavoidable.’ Cic. Tul. 49)
(g) Omnia cum adprobatione ingenti sunt audita, praeterquam cum ad mentio-
nem Nabidis ventum esset.
(‘The whole speech was received with great applause, except when mention
was made of Nabis.’ Liv. 34.48.5)
(h) (sc. legionem) . . . incitatissimam retinui aegre mehercules, nec retinuissem si
uno loco habuissem, utpote cum singulae quaedam cohortes seditionem
fecerint.
(‘Nevertheless I have managed to retain it though in a most restless state: nor
should I have retained it, if I had kept it united and stationary, for certain
cohorts have actually mutinied.’ Pol. Fam. 10.32.4)
Cum inversum clauses are used to express that a more or less unexpected incident
occurs in the midst of another event or just after another event. This relationship
between the main and cum clauses is often made more explicit by satellites in the
main clause like vix ‘scarcely’ and iam ‘by this time’, ‘already’, as in (c) and in (d)–(f).
The events in the cum clause are most often expressed in the historic present or the
perfect. However, this combination of main and cum clause is exploited in artistic
narrative, and other tenses (including the historic infinitive) are found as well, as in
(e) and (f). The cum clause may contain an expression of unexpectedness like repente
‘suddenly’ or subito ‘all of a sudden’. The cum inversum construction became a favourite
‘technique de rupture’ (interruption technique) in narrative prose and poetry.15
(d) Vix ea fatus eram, gemitu cum talia reddit.
(‘Scarcely had I said the words, when with a groan he answers thus.’ Verg. A. 2.323)
(e) Iamque adeo donati omnes opibusque superbi / puniceis ibant evincti tem-
pora taenis, / cum . . . inrisam sine honore ratem Sergestus agebat.
(‘And now all had their gifts and, proud of their wealth, were going their way, their
brows bound with purple fillets, when . . . Sergestus brought in his ridiculed, inglori-
ous boat.’ Verg. A. 5.268–72)
(f) Iamque Ostiam invectum multitudo ingens, iam in urbe clandestini coetus
celebrabant, cum Tiberium anceps cura distrahere . . .
14 The best discussion of the relationship between the cum clause and its main clause is still
Nehring (1929: 141–54). See also Lavency (1975).
15 For ‘techniques de rupture’ in narrative prose, see Chausserie-Laprée (1969: part IV), with statistical
data on cum pp. 592–5. For the use of cum inversum as a ‘Diskursstrategie’, see Wehr (1984: 181–7),
Heberlein (2008), and Viti (2013). Virgil’s use of the cum inversum and related coordinate constructions is
discussed by Hahn (1956: 179–89). See also § 19.24 on the use of the coordinators et, -que, and atque. For
the similarity of cum and nisi in certain contexts ‘de rupture’, see Orlandini and Poccetti (2019b).
Time clauses 247
(‘Already huge crowds were greeting his arrival in Ostia, already there were clandes-
tine receptions in the capital itself, when the dilemma began to distract Tiberius . . .’
Tac. Ann. 2.40.1)
Supplement:
Cum + historic present: Iam [hosce] apsolutos censeas, / quom incedunt infectores
corcotarii . . . (Pl. Aul. 520–1); Erat hiemps summa . . . cum iste imperat lictoribus ut
Sopatrum de porticu, in qua ipse sedebat, praecipitem in forum deiciant nudumque
constituant. (Cic. Ver. 4.86); Vixdum epistulam tuam legeram, cum ad me . . . Postumus
Curtius venit . . . (Cic. Att. 9.2a.3); Iamque paulum a fuga aberant, quom Sulla profli-
gatis iis, quos advorsum ierat, rediens ab latere Mauris incurrit. (Sal. Jug. 101.8);
Iamque fere spatio extremo fessique sub ipsam / finem adventabant, levi cum san-
guine Nisus / labitur infelix . . . (Verg. A. 5.327–9); Romae interim plerumque obsidio
segnis et utrimque silentium esse . . . cum repente iuvenis Romanus admiratione in
se civis hostesque convertit. (Liv. 5.46.1); Metuque concessum barbarus ratus
moliri portas et claustra refringere parat, cum patefactis repente portis cohortes
duae . . . ingenti cum tumultu erumpunt . . . (Liv. 23.18.2–3); Iam haud procul castris
aberant pedites equitesque, et Thracum quidam in vagos palatosque per agros hostes
impetum fecerant, cum repens terror castris infertur. (Liv. 33.15.6); Nos interim ves-
titi errare coepimus, immo iocari magis et circulis ludentium accedere, cum subito
videmus senem calvum, tunica vestitum russea, inter pueros capillatos ludentem
pila. (Petr. 27.1); Itaque ad casae ostiolum processi, cum ecce tres anseres . . . impetum
in me faciunt . . . (Petr. 136.4—NB: this is the reading of L, which is defended by
Petersmann (1977: 276–7); most editors assume a lacuna because of the perfect tense
in the main clause); . . . cedendum potius quam pellerentur ignavi specie prudentium
admonebant, cum interim cognoscit hostes pluribus agminibus inrupturos. (Tac.
Agr. 25.3); Nec procul seditione aberant, cum Hordeonius Flaccus abire legatos,
utque occultior digressus esset, nocte castris excedere iubet. (Tac. Hist. 1.54.2)
Cum + imperfect: Nulla nota, nullus color, nullae sordes videbantur his sententiis
adlini posse, cum iste repente ex alacri atque laeto sic erat humilis atque demissus ut
non modo populo Romano, sed etiam sibi ipse condemnatus videretur. (Cic. Ver. 17);
Vix erat hoc plane imperatum, cum illum spoliatum stipatumque lictoribus videres.
(Cic. Ver. 4.86—NB: potential subjunctive of the past)
Cum + perfect: Vix annus intercesserat ab hoc sermone cohortationis meae, cum iste
accusavit C. Norbanum defendente me. (Cic. de Orat. 2.89); Iamque haec facere
noctu apparabant cum matres familiae repente in publicum procurrerunt flentesque
proiectae ad pedes suorum omnibus precibus petierunt ne . . . (Caes. Gal. 7.26.3); Et
iam finis erat, cum Iuppiter aethere summo / despiciens mare velivolum terrasque
iacentis / litoraque et latos populos, sic vertice caeli / constitit et Libyae defixit lumina
regnis. (Verg. A. 1.223–6); Sensit utraque acies unius viri casum, cedebatque inde
Romanus, cum M. Fabius consul transiluit iacentis corpus obiectaque parma ‘hoc
iurastis,’ inquit, ‘milites, fugientes vos in castra redituros?’ (Liv. 2.46.5); Necdum sci-
ebamus, <quo> mitteremus suspiciones nostras, cum extra triclinium clamor subla-
tus est ingens, et ecce canes Laconici etiam circa mensam discurrere coeperunt. (Petr.
40.2); C. Asinio C. Antistio consulibus nonus Tiberio annus erat compositae rei publi-
cae, florentis domus (nam Germanici mortem inter prospera ducebat), cum repente
turbare fortuna coepit, saevire ipse aut saevientibus viris praebere. (Tac. Ann. 4.1.1)
248 Subordinate clauses filling a satellite position
Cum + pluperfect: His ex sententia rectoris et militum ordinatis vix dies intercessere
pauci, cum Mamertinum . . . Avitianus ex vicario peculatus detulerat reum. (Amm.
27.7.1)
Cum + (historic) infinitive: Fusis Auruncis victor tot intra paucos dies bellis
Romanus promissa consulis fidemque senatus expectabat, cum Appius et insita
superbia animo et ut collegae vanam faceret fidem, quam asperrime poterat, ius de
creditis pecuniis dicere. Deinceps et qui ante nexi fuerant creditoribus tradebantur et
nectebantur alii. (Liv. 2.27.1); Iam legiones in testudinem glomerabantur, et alii tela
saxaque incutiebant, cum languescere paulatim Vitellianorum animi. (Tac. Hist. 3.31.1)
Certain cum clauses, as in (g) and (h), are sometimes taken as cum inversum clauses,
but they do not exhibit the ‘incident’ character of the latter; rather, they are parallel
events (‘while’, ‘on which occasion’—OLD § 11).16
(g) Itaque multum diei processerat, quom etiam tum eventus in incerto erat.
(‘And so a considerable part of the day had passed, when the outcome of the
battle was still uncertain.’ Sal. Jug. 51.2)
(h) Tria milia ferme aberat, cum hauddum quisquam hostium senserat.
(‘He was some three miles away when not one of the enemy had yet noticed
them.’ Liv. 28.2.1)
Supplement:
Evolarat iam e conspectu fere fugiens quadriremis, cum etiam tum ceterae naves uno
in loco moliebantur. (Cic. Ver. 5.88); Eoque ad te tardius scripsi quod cottidie te
ipsum exspectabam, cum interea ne litteras quidem ullas accepi . . . (Cic. Fam. 3.6.5);
De quo et praesens tecum egi diligenter, cum tu mihi humanissime respondisti, et
scripsi ad te accurate antea. (Cic. Fam. 13.75.1); Iamque dies consumptus erat, quom
tamen barbari nihil remittere atque, uti reges praeceperant, noctem pro se rati acrius
instare. (Sal. Jug. 98.2)
(c) . . . quoniam nuntiatum est / istarum venturos viros, ibi festinamus omnis.
(‘. . . when it was announced that these women’s husbands were going to come, at that
point we all bustled about.’ Pl. St. 676–7)
(d) Quoniam ei qui me aleret nil video esse relicui, / dedi ei meam gnatam qui-
cum <una> aetatem exigat.
(‘When I saw that he had nothing left with which to maintain me, I gave him my
daughter to spend his life with.’ Pl. Trin. 14–15)
Appendix: Quotiens ‘as often as’, quotienscumque ‘every time that’ and quotiensque
‘every time that’ indicate iterativity. Examples are (e)–(i). The regular mood is the
indicative, but the subjunctive is found from Pliny the Elder onwards and then
expands (for a comparable development in cum clauses, see § 7.125).17 The main
clause may contain the correlative adverb totiens, as in (g).
(e) . . . quoius quotiens sepulcrum vides, sacruficas / ilico . . . Orco hostiis . . .
(‘. . . whenever you see her tomb, you immediately sacrifice victims . . . to
Orcus . . .’ Pl. Epid. 175–6)
(f) . . . se . . . si tot consulibus meruisset quotiens ipse consul fuit, omnia iura
belli perdiscere ac nosse potuisse.
(‘. . . that if he had served under consuls as often as he himself was consul, he
might have learnt and become thoroughly acquainted with all the laws of
war.’ Cic. Balb. 47)
(g) Quotienscumque dico, totiens mihi videor in iudicium venire . . .
(‘Every time I make a speech I feel I am submitting to judgement . . .’ Cic.
Clu. 51)
(h) Quid tu huc occursas in urbem quotienscumque advenimus?
(‘Why do you keep running here every time we come into town?’ Pl.
Truc. 282)
(i) . . . quotiensque habebis cui des ad me litteras nolim praetermittas.
(‘. . . and as many times as you have anyone to whom you can give a letter for
me, please don’t fail.’ Cic. Att. 11.13.5)
16.14 Time clauses with dum locating the event of the main clause in time
From Ovid onwards instances of dum occur where it locates the state of affairs of the
main clause in time instead of indicating the extent of time (for which see § 16.15).18
Examples are (a) and (b). In later authors this locating use of dum increases at the
expense of cum.19
(a) Forsitan admotis etiam tangere labellis, / rumpere dum niveo vincula dente
volet.
(‘Perchance thou wilt even be touched by her approaching lips when she seeks to
break thy bands with her snowy tooth.’ Ov. Ep. 18.18–19)
(b) Finisque adurendi est, dum ex omni parte sensus doloris est.
(‘The cauterizing is stopped when pain is felt all over the lesion.’ Cels. 5.28.1B)
Supplement:
Ac dum . . . fruendi laborarem inopia, casu scilicet pessumo lucerna fervens oleum
rebullivit in eius umerum. (Apul. Met. 5.26.5); Viderimus de fide istorum, dum suo
loco digeruntur. (Tert. Nat. 1.7.30); Dum promissionem Dei audivit, non haesitavit
omnino. (August. Serm. 16A.12)
. Time clauses indicating the extent of time of the event in the main clause
Time clauses indicating the extent of time can be divided into three groups: (i) the
clause contains an event that is co-extensive with the event of the main clause: ‘while’
or ‘as long as’ (dum and quamdiu; for donec and quoad see below); (ii) the clause con-
tains an event that is co-extensive with the event of the main clause, but lasts longer
than this event: ‘while still’ or ‘during the time that’ (dum); (iii) the clause contains an
event that constitutes the limit of the event of the main clause: ‘up to the time that’ or
‘until’ (donec (donicum, donique, doneque),20 dum, quamdiu (in Late Latin), and
quoad (quaad)).21 The relationship between clauses of the third type and their main
clause is by implication also one of posteriority (see Table 16.2 on p. 242).
Supplement:
Donec gratus eram tibi / nec quisquam potior bracchia candidae / cervici iuvenis
dabat, / Persarum vigui rege beatior. (Hor. Carm. 3.9.1–4); Donec eris sospes, multos
numerabis amicos. (Ov. Tr. 1.9a.5); Sed donec stetit ante signa Mago, gradum sensim
referentes ordines et tenorem pugnae servabant. (Liv. 30.18.12); Vulgus trucidatum
est, donec ira et dies permansit. (Tac. Ann. 1.68.5)
Mane dum scribit. (Pl. Bac. 737); Ovibus frondem viridem, usque dum habebis,
praebeto. (Cato Agr. 30); . . . dum id rescitum iri credit, tantisper cavet. (Ter. Ad.
70); . . . nam antea / qui scire posses aut ingenium noscere, / dum aetas metus magis-
ter prohibebant? (Ter. An. 52–4); C. Claudius . . . usus est hoc Cupidine tam diu dum
forum dis inmortalibus populoque Romano habuit ornatum . . . (Cic. Ver. 4.6); Nec
enim dum eram vobiscum, animum meum videbatis, sed eum esse in hoc corpore ex
iis rebus quas gerebam, intellegebatis. (Cic. Sen. 79)
Est quidam Graecus qui cum isto vivit, homo, vere ut dicam—sic enim cognovi—
humanus, sed tamdiu quamdiu aut cum aliis est aut ipse secum. (Cic. Pis. 68); . . .
quamdiu facta est caedes civium, domo se tenuit . . . (Nep. Ep. 10.3)
. . . a tutela et cura excusantur, quatenus rei publicae causa absunt, et interea cur-
ator loco eorum datur. (Justin. Inst. 1.25.2)
Anniculis iam factis dandum hordeum et furfures, usque quaad erunt lactantes.
(Var. R. 2.7.12); Custodiatur igitur vita mea rei publicae eaque, quoad vel dignitas vel
natura patietur, patriae reservetur. (Cic. Phil. 12.30); . . . liciti sunt usque adeo quoad
se efficere posse arbitrabantur. (Cic. Ver. 3.77); Et defendebatur egregie quoad tela
suppeditarunt. (Liv. 30.25.6); A multis tentatus non modo nullum detrimentum exis-
timationis fecit, sed, quoad vixit, virtutum laude crevit. (Nep. Ca. 2.4)
The first instance of a pluperfect in this type of dum clause is (k). As the imperfects in
the preceding sentence show, the pluperfect of terminative averto is equivalent to a
state in the past. Something similar is the case with the future perfect inveneris in (l)
(quoted by Sz.: 612).
(k) Eodem tempore Romani et ruinas muri supervadebant et scalas ad stantia
moenia inferebant. Et dum in unam partem oculos animosque hostium cer-
tamen averterat, pluribus locis scalis capitur murus, armatique in urbem
transcenderunt.
(‘At the same moment the Romans were both climbing over the ruins of the
wall and moving their ladders against the standing ramparts. And while the
eyes and thoughts of the enemy were fixed on the conflict, the wall in several
places was taken by escalade and the soldiers climbed over into the city.’ Liv.
32.24.5)
(l) . . . ut, dum illa legis et in his aliquid doctrinae . . . inveneris, putes tibi quoque
scripta esse quae scripta sunt.
(‘. . . so that, while you read those and find in these some teaching, you may
think that what has been written has been written also for you.’ Hier. Ep. 32.1.3)
For the use of dum in stipulative clauses, see § 16.53. This use is related to its purely
temporal co-extensive meaning.
254 Subordinate clauses filling a satellite position
16.17 Dum clauses indicating an event that lasts longer than the event of the
main clause
Dum clauses indicating an event that lasts longer than the event of the main clause
(‘while yet’, ‘during the time that’) are found from Early Latin onwards. The main
clause may contain an expression like interea and interim ‘in the meantime’, as in (a)
and (b), or subito and repente ‘suddenly’, as in (c)–(e), which shows that the event of
the main clause is an incident that occurs while the event of the dum clause is going
on. Note in (e) the extent of time expression paucos dies. The verbs of these dum
clauses are usually in the present indicative no matter what the tense of the main
clause is (for details and examples, see § 7.126).
(a) Quid fit deinde? # Dum haec aguntur, interea uxorem tuam / nec gementem
nec plorantem nostrum quisquam audivimus.
(‘What happened next? # Meanwhile, while this was going on, none of us heard your
wife groaning or weeping.’ Pl. Am. 1098–9)
(b) Interim dum de condicionibus inter se agunt . . . paulatim circumventus
interficitur.
(‘While they two were discussing terms together . . . he was gradually surrounded and
slain.’ Caes. Gal. 5.37.2)
(c) Ego dum in provincia omnibus rebus Appium orno, subito sum factus accu-
satoris eius socer.
(‘While I was still in my province honouring Appius with all manner of compliments,
I suddenly became his accuser’s father-in-law.’ Cic. Att. 6.6.1)
(d) Dum spoliandis iis . . . tempus teritur, repente milites . . . concurrerunt.
(‘While time was being taken to strip them . . ., suddenly soldiers . . . came running.’
Liv. 29.9.5)
(e) Dum paucos dies ad Vesontionem rei frumentariae commeatusque causa
moratur . . . tantus subito timor omnem exercitum occupavit ut . . .
(‘While he was tarrying a few days at Vesontio for the provision of corn and other
supplies . . . so great a fear suddenly seized upon all the army, that . . .’ Caes. Gal. 1.39.1)
Dum clauses are increasingly found with an imperfect subjunctive from the time of
Virgil and Livy onwards, the first sure instance being (f). This semantically unmoti-
vated use of the subjunctive is possibly influenced by the fact that from this time
onwards dum is increasingly used as a locating (instead of as a duration) subordinator,
more or less equivalent to cum, with which the subjunctive became normal in Cicero’s
time (see § 7.142).23
(f) Hic, dum in opere nostri distenti essent, complures ex superiori loco adver-
sariorum decucurrerunt . . .
(‘At this point, while our men were busily engaged in the operation, a fair number of
the enemy swooped down upon them from higher ground . . .’ B. Hisp. 23.2)
(g) Illa quidem, dum te fugeret per flumina praeceps, / immanem ante pedes
hydrum moritura puella / servantem ripas alta non vidit in herba.
(‘She, in truth, while fleeing headlong from you along the river, saw not the mon-
strous serpent that before her feet, doomed maiden, hugged the banks amid the deep
grass.’ Verg. G. 4.457–9)
(h) In quae haud magno certamine impetu facto, dum praedae magis quam pug-
nae memores tererent tempus, triarii Romani . . . conglobati ad praetorium
redeunt . . .
(‘There, after they had forced an entrance without much opposition, while they were
frittering away their time, their thoughts more taken up with the booty than with the
battle, the Roman reserves . . . closed up their ranks and returned to the praetorium . . .’
Liv. 2.47.5)
16.18 Time clauses indicating an event that concludes the event of the main clause
The main subordinators that are used in clauses denoting an event that constitutes the
limit of the event of the main clause (‘up to the time that’, ‘until’) are donec, dum, and
quoad. Of these dum is found in all periods of Latin (but see below), quoad is very rare
before the Classical period, and donec is very rare in the Classical period. Quamdiu is
rarely used in this type of clause in juridical texts and in Late Latin. The main clauses
often contain expressions denoting duration or limitation, such as tam diu ‘for such a
long time’, usque ‘up to the time that’, adeo usque ‘right until’, ad eum finem ‘up to the
point when’, tantisper ‘for such time (as)’. The regular tenses in this type of subordinate
clause are the present, perfect, and future perfect, as is shown in (a)–(c), respectively,
but the simple future occurs as well, as in (d). Dum is rarely used in clauses with the
perfect tense in Early and Classical Latin:24 for the ‘until’ interpretation, the subjunct-
ive of an infectum tense is normal. For the use of the subjunctive in these clauses when
intention or design is involved, see § 7.141. Donec is increasingly used with an infec-
tum tense (in the subjunctive), so for example in Tacitus and in Late Latin authors.25
(a) Age age, mansero / tuo arbitratu, vel adeo usque dum peris.
(‘All right, all right, I’ll wait just as you wish, or even until you die.’ Pl. As. 327–8)
(b) . . . impedit / piscis usque adeo donicum eduxit foras.
(‘. . . he keeps the fish entangled until he’s taken them out.’ Pl. Truc. 38–9)
(c) Usque ero domi, dum excoxero lenoni malam rem aliquam.
(‘I’ll be at home throughout until I’ve cooked up some misfortune for the pimp.’
Pl. Per. 52)
(d) Erroris ambo ego illos et dementiae / complebo . . . / adeo usque satietatem
dum capiet pater / illius quam amat.
(‘I’ll fill both of them . . . with misunderstandings and madness until my father gets
enough of the woman he’s in love with . . . .’ Pl. Am. 470–3)
Supplement:
. . . ne quoquam exsurgatis, donec a me erit signum datum. (Pl. Bac. 758); . . . coquito
usque donec commadebit bene, aquam defundito. (Cato Agr. 156.5); Suadere orare
usque adeo donec perpulit. (Ter. An. 662); . . . tamen usque eo timui, nequis de mea
fide atque integritate dubitaret, donec ad reiciundos iudices venimus. (Cic. Ver. 1.17);
Hic iam ter centum totos regnabitur annos / gente sub Hectorea, donec regina sacer-
dos / Marte gravis geminam partu dabit Ilia prolem. (Verg. A. 1.272–4); Ita de comi-
tiis, donec rediit Marcellus, silentium fuit. (Liv. 23.31.9); Sed neque credes tu mihi,
donec compleris sanguine campum . . . (Liv. 25.12.6); . . . laetique interdum nuntii vul-
gabantur, donec provisis, quae tempus monebat simul excessisse Augustum et rerum
potiri Neronem fama eadem tulit. (Tac. Ann. 1.5.4); . . . hostium potius exercitibus
illum furorem, illam discordiam inicerent orabat, donec fatisceret (v.l. fatiscere) sedi-
tio et extremo iam die sua quisque in tentoria dilaberentur. (Tac. Hist. 3.10.4); . . . tes-
tudinem lanceis contisque scrutantur, donec soluta compage scutorum exsangues
aut laceros prosternerent multa cum strage. (Tac. Hist. 3.27.3)
Eodem modo latitudinem orbiculis ligneis aut armillis ferreis temperato, usque
dum recte temperabitur. (Cato Agr. 22.2); Delibera hoc dum ego redeo, leno. (Ter.
Ad. 196); Si non, saepius facito, usque dum odorem malum dempseris. (Cato Agr.
110); [ea] Mansit in condicione atque pacto usque ad eum finem dum iudices reiecti
sunt. (Cic. Ver. 16); Nunc et Scaevola, quoniam in Tusculanum ire constituit paulu-
lum requiescet, dum se calor frangat . . . (Cic. de Orat. 1.265); Tibi igitur hoc censeo,
latendum tantisper ibidem dum effervescit haec gratulatio et simul dum audiamus
quem ad modum negotium confectum sit. (Cic. Fam. 9.2.4—NB: dum + indicative
followed by dum + subjunctive); Tityre, dum redeo (brevis est via), pasce capel-
las . . . (Verg. Ecl. 9.23); Ille quidem lateat malim, dum tempora dentur / laetitiae mix-
tos non habitura metus. (Ov. Ep. 16.5–6); . . . me satiavit, usque dum lassis animis et
marcidis artibus defatigati simul ambo corruimus inter mutuos amplexus animas
[h]anhelantes. (Apul. Met. 2.17.4)
Igitur hanc dotem periculo mulieris esse dico, quamdiu dominus vel pater ratam
promissionem vel donationem habuerit. (Julian. dig. 23.3.46); . . . non cogitare . . .
noctem tamdiu esse quamdiu inlucescat dies . . . (Cypr. Ep. 59.11.2)
Milo autem cum in senatu fuisset eo die quoad senatus est dimissus, domum
venit . . . (Cic. Mil. 28); An id exspectamus quoad ne vestigium quidem Asiae civi-
tatum atque urbium relinquatur? (Cic. Phil. 11.25); Atque hoc scitis omnes, usque
adeo hominem in periculo fuisse quoad scitum est Sestium vivere. (Cic. Sest.
82); . . . tamen non faciam finem rogandi quoad nobis nuntiatum erit te id fecisse
quod magna cum spe exspectamus. (Cic. Att. 16.16e.2); Quoad dedita arx est, caedes
tota urbe passim factae . . . (Liv. 26.46.10)
In historical prose from Livy onwards donec clauses are used to introduce an unex-
pected or sudden interruption of an ongoing state of affairs, comparable with cum
Time clauses 257
inversum (see § 16.11) and ni ‘de rupture’ (see § 16.62) clauses.26 Examples of donec ‘de
rupture’ are (e) and (f). In (e), the main clause has a perfect tense; in (f), an imperfect.
As in the case of sentences containing a cum inversum clause, the imperfect tense is
the most common one in main clauses with a donec ‘de rupture’ clause, but it does not
predominate to the same degree.
(e) Nec minor caedes in urbe quam in proelio fuit donec abiectis armis nihil
praeter vitam petentes dictatori deduntur.
(‘Nor was the slaughter in the city less than it had been in the battle, until, with their
weapons cast aside, they surrendered to the dictator, seeking nothing but their lives.’
Liv. 4.34.3)
(f) Pugnabaturque in angustiis ambigue donec Germani transnatantes terga
Labeonis invasere.
(‘A battle was fought in this narrow space without a decisive issue until the Germans
swam across the river and attacked Labeo’s rear.’ Tac. Hist. 4.66.2)
An exceptional instance of a donec clause with an imperfect cited in the literature is (g).
This is a beautiful illustration of Tacitus’ exploitation of the limits of the tense system.
See also § 7.124. (For a historic infinitive in a donec clause in Tacitus, see § 7.122.)
(g) Inferioris Germaniae legiones diutius sine consulari fuere, donec missu
Galbae A. Vitellius aderat . . .
(‘The soldiers of Lower Germany were without a general of consular rank for a con-
siderable time, until A. Vitellius was present by dispatch of Galba . . .’ Tac. Hist. 1.9.1)
Appendix: Donec, dum, and quoad clauses are also regularly found with the verb
exspecto ‘to wait in expectation’, which is also used with argument clauses, both with
an accusative and infinitive and with an ut clause (see § 15.98 (ii) and § 15.40, respect-
ively). In this combination they resemble to some extent argument clauses, as in (h).
(h) Num exspectatis dum L. Metellus . . . de istius scelere improbitate audacia
testimonium dicat?
(‘You’re not going to wait till L. Metellus gives testimony concerning Verres’
wickedness, dishonesty, and audacity, are you?’ Cic. Ver. 3.122)
indicate parallel events, and anteriority of the clause has to be inferred from the con-
text or is expressed by the tense of the verb and/or by adverbs denoting succession.
Examples of such adverbs are primum ‘for the first time’, as in the combination ut
primum ‘as soon as’ (from Cicero’s time onwards), statim ‘immediately’, as in statim ut
(from Cicero onwards), and mox ‘soon’, as in mox ut (in Late Latin).
Time clauses with cum (quom) that denote an anterior event are dealt with in § 7.125.
The anterior interpretation of these clauses is a consequence of the use of one of the
tenses of the perfectum stem. Two examples are (a) and (b). An example of the com-
bination of cum with primum is (c).
(a) Prima pars cum adorta oppugnare est (esset cj. Riemann), atrox sane et
anceps proelium fuit.
(‘After the first third began to attack, there was, to be sure, a fierce and indecisive
battle.’ Liv. 28.3.6)
(b) Cum Ilium captum est, Hannibal . . . omnes statuas aeneas . . . incendit.
(‘After Ilium was taken, Hannibal set fire to all the bronze sculptures.’ Petr. 50.5
(Trimalchio speaking))28
(c) Haec quom primum acta est, vicit omnis fabulas.
(‘When it was first staged, it surpassed all other plays.’ Pl. Cas. 17)
Postquam and in prose also posteaquam (especially in Varro and Cicero) are the most
common subordinators indicating anteriority. The elements of the compound—the
adverb post(ea) and the comparative particle quam—are still regularly separated by
particles like vero in Classical prose, as in (a). Postquam is preferred over posteaquam
when the time elapsed is specified, as in (b) (the same holds for the adverbs post and
postea—see § 10.30).29
(a) Postea vero quam intellexerunt isti virum fortem quem summe provincia
expectabat Q. Arrium, non succedere, statuerunt . . .
(‘But after they understood that that brave man, Quintus Arrius, whom the province
was eagerly looking for, was not his successor, they then settled . . .’ Cic. Ver. 4.42)
(b) . . . Habonio opus in acceptum rettulit quadriennio post quam diem operi
dixerat.
(‘. . . at last he enters the work in Habonius’ name as undertaken by him, four years
after the day which he had fixed for its completion.’ Cic. Ver. 1.149)
Because of the basically comparative meaning of these subordinators, anteriority
need not be expressed in the verb, although it sometimes is. This is illustrated in
(a) above: both the postea . . . quam clause and the main clause are in the perfect tense.
Another example with two perfects is (c); one with two historic presents is (d); one
with two (actual) presents is (e). In (b) above, by contrast, with the pluperfect dixerat,
and in (f) with the perfect sunt . . . meriti, anteriority is expressed in the verb; in both
cases the tense indicates anteriority with respect to the tense of the main clause. In
Classical prose the pluperfect is preferred when the time elapsed is indicated (as in
(b) above by quadriennio, a so-called ablativus mensurae, see § 20.10), but it also
occurs in other contexts (ex. (g)), especially in Sallust, Livy, and Tacitus. The relative
order of the two clauses may be relevant as well. For the use of the imperfect in a post-
quam clause, see § 7.124.
(c) Postquam peperit, pueros lavere iussit nos.
(‘After she gave birth, she told us to wash the boys.’ Pl. Am. 1102)
(d) Abeo ab illis, postquam video me sic ludificarier.
(‘I left them after I saw I was being made a fool of this way.’ Pl. Capt. 487)
(e) Nunc ego illam me velim / convenire, postquam inanis sum, contemptricem
meam.
(‘Now I’d like her to meet me, now that I have nothing, that woman who despises me.’
Pl. Bac. 530–1)
(f) Nam illi qui nil metuont postquam sunt malum meriti, / stulta sibi expetunt
consilia.
(‘For those who don’t fear anything, even after deserving a thrashing, are seeking
stupid counsel for themselves.’ Pl. Mos. 860–1)
(g) Nam omnis posthabui mihi res, ita uti par fuit, / postquam id tanto opere vos
velle animum advorteram.
(‘I’ve put off all my other business, as was only proper after I’d realized you were so set
on the marriage.’ Ter. Ph. 908–9)
The regular mood in the postquam clause is the indicative. The subjunctive (influ-
enced by its use with cum) is found five times in Cicero (quam in each case being
emended to quom or cum)30 and rarely elsewhere, in less elevated texts or in Late
Latin, as in (h) and (i) below.31
(h) Postquam Iuba ante portas diu multumque primo minis pro imperio egisset
cum Zamensibus, dein cum se parum proficere intellexisset, precibus orasset
30 See Sz.: 598–9 and TLL s.vv. posteaquam 196.58ff. and postquam 252.44ff.
31 For further examples of the subjunctive, see TLL s.v. postquam 251.44ff.
260 Subordinate clauses filling a satellite position
uti se ad suos deos penates admitterent . . . petit ab eis ut sibi coniuges liberos-
que redderent ut secum eos asportaret.
(‘After Juba for a long time earnestly treated with the men of Zama before the gates of
the town and at first employed threats, as his authority warranted, but then, when he
realized that he was making but little headway, he besought them with entreaties to
let him have access to his own hearth and home . . . he begged them to hand over to
him his wives and children, so that he could carry them away with him.’ B. Afr. 91.3)
(i) Inter quae illud elucere clarius potuit, si Macrianum regem ea tempestate ter-
ribilem vivum capere potuisset, ut industria magna temptarat, postquam
eum evasisse Burgundios, quos ipse admoverat Alamannis, maerens didicis-
set et tristis.
(‘And among these it would have been a most glorious feat if he had been able to take
King Macrianus alive, who was at that time formidable. He had made great efforts to
do so after he learned with grief and sorrow that the king had escaped from the
Burgundians, whom Valentinian himself had aroused against the Alamanni.’ Amm.
30.7.11)
Time clauses with simul ‘as soon as’ alone or in combination with ac and atque—also
written as one word—and (in Cicero) also with et, are rare in Early Latin but common
in Cicero’s time. Whereas in Classical prose the longer forms are preferred, simul
becomes more popular in poetry from the Augustan poets onwards and then also in
literary prose from Livy onwards. The choice between ac and atque is mainly phono-
logically determined (see § 19.26). There are also instances of the combination of
simul(ac/atque) with primum, as in (d).32
(a) Simul herbae coeperint nasci, eximito.
(‘Clear off the weeds as soon as they begin to grow.’ Cato Agr. 48.2)
(b) Id quidem tibi hercle fiet, / ut vapules, Demaenetum simul ac conspexero
hodie.
(‘That’ll happen to you, getting beaten, as soon as I set eyes on Demaenetus today.’ Pl.
As. 478–9)
(c) Simul et quid erit certi, scribam ad te.
(‘As soon as there is anything definite I shall write to you.’ Cic. Att. 2.20.2)
(d) Simulac primum ei occasio visa est . . ., aversa pecunia publica quaestor con-
sulem exercitum sortem provinciamque deseruit.
(‘As soon as an opportunity presented itself to him . . ., the quaestor, having embezzled
the public money, deserted his consul, his consul’s army, the lot and his sphere of
duty.’ Cic. Ver. 1.34)
As for the use of the tenses, the same tendency applies in essence to simul (ac/atque)
as was said about the use of the perfect with postquam to denote an event that is anter-
ior to a past event in the main. The indicative is the normal mood, with a few instances
of the subjunctive in Silver and Late Latin (see OLD s.v. § 11b).
A few other temporal adverbs are—rarely—used as a subordinator in combination
with the coordinator atque. Ulpian has a couple of instances of statim atque (see OLD
s.v. statim § 4). TLL s.v. atque 1084.71ff. also mentions Late Latin instances of ilico
atque and protinus atque.
Clauses with ubi in a temporal sense ‘at or after the time in or at which’, ‘when’ are
common in Early Latin comedy and are not rare in the Classical period. The combin-
ation with primum meaning ‘as soon as’ is used by Plautus a few times; it is absent
from Cicero, but frequent in the historians Livy and Tacitus. Examples are (a)–(e).
There are also a few instances of ubi combined with semel ‘once’.33 See also § 7.124.
(a) Nam ubi me aspiciet, ad carnuficem rapiet continuo senex.
(‘As soon as he sees me, the old man will drag me to the executioner.’ Pl. Bac. 688)
(b) Principio ut illo advenimus, ubi primum terram tetigimus, / continuo
Amphitruo delegit viros primorum principes.
(‘First, when we arrived there, as soon as we touched the shore, Amphitruo immedi-
ately chose the leading men among those of high rank.’ Pl. Am. 203–4)
(c) Quod ubi iste audivit, usque eo commotus est ut . . .
(‘When Verres heard this, he was so thoroughly upset that . . .’ Cic. Ver. 4.39)
(d) At hostes ubi primum nostros equites conspexerunt . . ., impetu facto celeriter
nostros perturbaverunt.
(‘However, as soon as the enemy saw our cavalry, they charged, and speedily threw
our men into confusion.’ Caes. Gal. 4.12.1)
(e) Sed ubi minitari Artabanus et parum subsidii in Armeniis, vel, si nostra
vi defenderetur, bellum adversus Parthos sumendum erat, rector Syriae
Creticus Silanus excitum custodia circumdat . . .
(‘But, when Artabanus started menacing and too little support for Vonones was com-
ing from the Armenians (the alternative, if he was to be defended by our might, was
taking up war against the Parthians), the governor of Syria, Creticus Silanus, sum-
moned him and surrounded him with guards . . .’ Tac. Ann. 2.4.3—tr. Woodman; NB:
historic infinitive coordinated with an imperfect indicative—see § 7.122)
The normal mood in temporal ubi clauses is the indicative, as in the examples above.
However, the subjunctive is found in those clauses that refer to a repeated event (the
so-called iterative use of the subjunctive—see § 7.142) from Livy onwards, as in (f)
and (g). This use is almost completely confined to the imperfect and pluperfect, but
see (h). Most authors who allow the subjunctive use the indicative as well and often
more frequently. An instance of the exceptional use of the subjunctive for a one-time
event is (i).34
(f) . . . consilium et modum adhibendo, ubi res posceret, priores erant.
(‘. . . they surpassed him in using wisdom and restraint when the need arose.’ Liv.
3.19.3)
(g) Id ubi dixisset, hastam in fines eorum emittebat.
(‘After he said this, he would hurl his spear into their territory.’ Liv. 1.32.13)
(h) Mox, ubi sanguis <se> in artus extremos suffuderit, levi ictu cruorem eliciunt
atque in vicem lambunt.
(‘Then, when the blood has run to the extremities, they draw it out with a slight
incision, and each prince licks it in turn.’ Tac. Ann. 12.47.2)
(i) Quod ubi coeptum est fieri et equis concitatis Iuliani impetum fecissent,
Pacideius suos equites exporrigere coepit in longitudinem . . .
(‘When this manoeuvre was under way and the Julians had delivered their attack at
full gallop, Pacideius began to deploy his horsemen on a broader front . . .’ B. Afr.
78.4—NB: coordinated with a ‘correct’ perfect)
Supplement:
. . . Titianus et Proculus, ubi consiliis vincerentur, ad ius imperii transibant. (Tac.
Hist. 2.40); Amicorum libertorumque, ubi in bonos incidisset, sine reprehensione
patiens, si mali forent, usque ad culpam ignarus. (Tac. Hist. 1.49.3); . . . erat tamen
interdum timidus ad audaces, contra timidos celsior, ut videretur, cum sibi fideret, de
coturno strepere tragico et, ubi paveret, omni humilior socco. (Amm. 27.11.2—NB:
parallelism with cum clause)
Clauses with ut (rarely uti in poetry from Virgil onwards)35 in a temporal sense ‘when’,
‘as soon as’, and ‘since’ (see OLD s.v. §§ 25, 26, 27) are found from Early Latin onwards.
Examples are (a)–(c). They are less frequent than simulac, ubi, and cum clauses. The
combination with primum in the sense of ‘as soon as’ is common in Cicero’s time, as
in (d). Later authors use it with varying frequency. It is relatively frequent in Petronius
(but not among the freedmen).36 A few instances of ut combined with semel are found
from Plautus onwards, as in (e). The precise interpretation of the ut clause depends
among other things on the tense in that clause: the simultaneous interpretation ‘when’,
34 For the instances in Livy, see Riemann (1885: 296–7). See also K.-St.: II.364.
35 So Sz.: 635.
36 Details in Jones (1906: 233–45). For Petronius, see Petersmann (1977: 274).
Time clauses 263
for example, correlates with the imperfect (an ongoing event in the past), as in (g) and
(h). See also § 7.124.
(a) Verum in tonstrina ut sedebam, me infit percontarier / ecquem filium
Stratonis noverim Demaenetum.
(‘But as I was sitting at the barber’s he began to ask me if I knew a certain Demaenetus,
the son of Strato.’ Pl. As. 343–4)
(b) Nam <ego> ut dudum hinc abii, accessi ad adulescentes in foro.
(‘When I went away from here some time ago, I approached young men in the mar-
ket.’ Pl. Capt. 478)
(c) Quid ego, qui illam ut primum vidi, numquam vidi postea?
(‘What should I have done? After seeing her for the first time I never saw her again.’
Pl. Epid. 600)
(d) Qui ut primum in illud oppidum venit, statim tamquam ita fieri non solum
oporteret . . . ita continuo signum ut demolirentur et Messanam deportarent
imperavit.
(‘Who, as soon as he came to their city, in a moment, as if it were not only a becoming
thing to be done . . . in a moment, I say, ordered them to take the statue down and to
transport it to Messana.’ Cic. Ver. 4.84)
(e) Quia septem menses sunt, quom in hasce aedis pedem / nemo intro tetulit,
semel ut emigravimus.
(‘Because it’s seven months since anyone put a foot into this house once we’d moved
out.’ Pl. Mos. 470–1)
(f) Ut cuique aliquid acciderit qua re commodius sit esse plebeium, simili
ratione adoptabitur.
(‘Whenever anything happens to anyone to make it more convenient for him to be a
plebeian, he will be adopted in the same manner.’ Cic. Dom. 37)
(g) . . . praegressus Tullius ad caput Ferentinum, ut quisque veniret, primores
eorum excipiens querendo indignandoque, et eos ipsos sedulo audientes
secunda irae verba et per eos multitudinem aliam in subiectum viae campum
deduxit.
(‘. . . Tullius, who had gone ahead, arrived before them at the source of the Ferentina.
There, when any of their chief men arrived, he met them with words of complaint and
indignation, and he led to a field which lay below the road both the leaders them-
selves, who listened eagerly to words which ministered to their anger, and through
their influence the rest of the throng also.’ Liv. 2.38.1)
(h) . . . hac sic communicantibus nobis, iam ut exiremus de aecclesia, dederunt
nobis presbyteri loci ipsius eulogias . . .
(‘. . . and when the oblation had been duly made, at which we communicated, and as
we were coming out of the church, the priests of the place would give us blessed
gifts . . .’ Pereg. 3.6—tr. McClure and Feltoe)
264 Subordinate clauses filling a satellite position
A number of adverbs that in earlier periods were used in combination with cum, ubi,
and ut to indicate the rapid succession of events came to be used independently, that
is as subordinators, in Late Latin (sometimes combined with atque or quam). Mox
‘soon’ is so used in Vetus Latina versions of the Bible, but also in other texts, as in (a).
A (disputed) example with primum is (b); with statim, (c).38
(a) Mox autem primus pullus cantaverit, statim descendet episcopus . . .
(‘As soon as the first cock has crowed, the bishop immediately comes down . . .’
Pereg. 24.9)
(b) Proinde horrifico adversum fragore terrente, primum apud Argentariam . . .
concurri est coeptum, sagittarum . . . pulsibus crebriores hinc indeque
sternebantur.
(‘Therefore, when from the opposite side the terrifying battle-cry was heard, as soon
as the battle began at Argentaria, many were struck down on both sides by wounds
from . . . flying arrows.’ Amm. 31.10.8—NB: usually emended to ubi primum)
(c) . . . statim est adeptus imperium (sc. Carus), Sarmatas . . . contudit . . .
(‘. . . as soon as he (Carus) received the imperial power, he crushed the Sarmatians . . .’
Hist. Aug. Car. 9.4)
Time adjuncts with the preposition ex in the temporal sense ‘since’ are common from
Plautus onwards (see § 10.29). Time clauses with ex and the relative pronoun quo are
37 See Riemann (1885: 297) and Väänänen (1987: 81). Also K.-St.: II.364.
38 TLL s.v. mox 1553.1ff.; s.v. prior 1368.10ff. See also Jones (1906) and Sz.: 637. For ‘reduction of
subordinators’, see Heberlein (2011: 291–4).
Time clauses 265
attested from Cicero’s time onwards. Two examples are (a)—with quo used as a rela-
tive determiner with tempore—and (b)—with corresponding ex illo.
(a) Ex quo tempore concordia de civitate sublata est, libertas sublata est.
(‘Since the time when concord disappeared from our state, liberty disappeared.’ Rhet.
Her. 4.19)
(b) Impius ex quo / Tydides sed enim scelerumque inventor Ulixes /. . . / corripu-
ere sacram effigiem / . . . / ex illo . . .
(‘But from the time that the ungodly son of Tydeus and Ulysses, the contriver of
crime . . . snatched up the sacred image . . . from that time . . .’ Verg. A. 2.163–9)
39 Distributional data in Sz.: 600. Contextual criteria for determining whether one is dealing with one
or with two words are given in TLL s.v. priusquam 1410.34ff.
266 Subordinate clauses filling a satellite position
Specifications of the time elapsed beforehand are normal with antequam but very rare
with priusquam. A normal instance of an ablative of measure with antequam is (e).40
An exceptional instance with prius . . . quam is (f).
(e) Itaque vitem triduo antequam inserant desecant . . .
(‘For this reason they cut off the vine three days before grafting . . .’ Var. R. 1.41.3)
(f) . . . / puer septuennis surrupitur Carthagine, / sexennio prius quidem quam
moritur pater.
(‘. . . (sc. the only son) is kidnapped from Carthage as a seven-year-old boy, six years
before his father dies.’ Pl. Poen. 66–7)
There are rare instances of prius = priusquam in Late Latin (TLL s.v. prius 1344.41ff.).
For pridie quam, postridie quam, and related expressions, see § 20.5.
. The interpretation of cum (quom) clauses as indicating the reason for
the content of the main clause
Scholars have different views on the need to distinguish a separate use of cum as a
subordinator of reason. There is also disagreement both about when the first instances
of causal cum can be found and about when the first instances of this cum with a sub-
junctive can be found.43 There is no strong evidence for a separate causal meaning:44
there are no instances of a cum clause in answer to a cur or quare ‘why’ question in the
LLT material. Also, instances of cum with the correlating adverbs idcirco, ideo, and
propterea are exceptional.45 An example of a cum clause with such a correlating
expression is (a). Further support for regarding the causal interpretation as only con-
textually determined can be found in the fact that some authors combine cum with
various expressions to underline the causal interpretation of the cum clause. Examples
are (in decreasing order of frequency) the adverb praesertim ‘especially’ (often in
Cicero), as in (b); the particle quippe ‘as is natural when’, ‘inasmuch as’ (relatively
frequent in Cicero and Pliny the Elder), as in (c);46 or utpote ‘as one might expect’, ‘as
is natural’ (a favourite of Pliny the Elder), as in (d). These words are very rarely, if ever,
combined with quia, quod, quoniam, and quando in the authors covered by the LLT.
Christian authors do not use utpote with any of these subordinators. Quippe is
occasionally combined with cum, quod, and quia in later Christian authors (not in
Tertullian) and there are more instances of praesertim combined with cum and quia,
notably in Augustine. These three considerations argue against postulating a context-
independent causal meaning of cum. Nevertheless, a few examples that are sometimes
cited in the literature as causal cum clauses are added in the Supplement.47 (For the
use of the moods in causally interpreted cum clauses, see § 7.143.)
(a) . . . praefatus idcirco se hunc iudicandi modum secutum, cum liqueret sibi
Titinium . . . coniugium expetisse.
(‘. . . prefacing that he had followed this mode of judgement because it was clear to
him that Titinius had sought to marry . . .’ V. Max. 8.2.3)
(b) Praesertim quom is me dignum quoi concrederet / habuit, me habere
honorem eius ingenio decet.
(‘Because he has considered me worthy, a man whom he could trust, it’s only fair that
I should respect his inclinations.’ Pl. As. 80–1)
(c) Intellego te, frater, alias in historia leges observandas putare, alias in poëmate.
# Quippe quom in illa omnia ad veritatem, Quinte, referantur, in hoc ad
delectationem pleraque.
(‘As I understand it, then, brother, you believe that one set of principles must be
observed in writing history, another in poetry. # Certainly, Quintus, since in the
former all things are judged by reference to the truth, while in the latter most things
are judged by reference to pleasure.’ Cic. Leg. 1.5)
(d) Me . . . incommoda valetudo, e qua iam emerseram utpote cum sine febri
laborassem . . . tenebat duodecimum iam diem Brundisi.
(‘An indisposition, from which I have now recovered (as is to be expected since I was
ill without a fever) . . . has kept me these twelve days at Brundisium.’ Cic. Att. 5.8.1)
Supplement:
Isto tu pauper es quom nimis sancte piu’s. (Pl. Rud. 1234); Ei obviam bubulcus de
plebe Venusina advenit et per iocum, cum ignoraret qui ferretur, rogavit num mor-
tuum ferrent. (Gracch. orat. 49 ap. Gel. 10.3.5); Sed demiror / quid sit quam ob rem
hunc tanto opere omnis nos celare volueris / partum, praesertim quom et recte et
tempore suo pepererit. (Ter. Hec. 529–31); . . . ut non intellegam, quare aut hic vetet
intercedere aut quemquam intercessurum putet, cum intercessio stultitiam interces-
soris significatura sit, non rem impeditura. (Cic. Agr. 2.30); Nam cum solitudo et vita
sine amicis insidiarum et metus plena sit, ratio ipsa monet amicitias comparare . . .
(Cic. Fin. 1.66); ‘Quem hunc appellas, Zeno?’ ‘Beatum,’ inquit. ‘Etiam beatissimum?’
‘Quippe,’ inquiet, ‘cum tam docuerim gradus istam rem non habere quam virtutem,
46 For quippe cum, see Schrickx (2011: 120–4). 47 More examples in OLD s.v. § 6.
268 Subordinate clauses filling a satellite position
in qua sit ipsum etiam beatum.’ (Cic. Fin. 5.84); Superabatur navium multitudine.
Dolo erat pugnandum, cum par non esset armis. (Nep. Han. 10.4); Hanc (sc. aquam)
putant nimio frigore esse noxiam, utpote cum profluens ipsa lapidescat. (Plin.
Nat. 31.28)
. The interpretation of dum clauses as indicating the reason for the
content of the main clause
Causal interpretations of dum clauses are found from Pliny the Elder onwards.49
Examples are (a) and (b). Most instances are much later. As with cum, there is little
reason to assume a context-independent causal meaning.
(a) (sc. Apollodorum) . . . crebro perfecta signa frangentem, dum satiari cupidi-
tate artis non quit, ideoque insanum cognominatum.
(‘. . . often breaking his statues in pieces after he had finished them because he was
unable to be satisfied due to his passion for his art, and consequently he was given the
surname of the Madman.’ Plin. Nat. 34.81)
(b) . . . sectam de auctoris appellatione<m> mut<u>ari utique probum usitatumque
ius est, dum philosophi quoque de auctoribus cognominentur Pythagorici et
Platonici . . .
(‘. . . it is no doubt a fair and usual custom that a sect should be marked out by the
name of its founder, since philosophers are called Pythagoreans and Platonists after
their masters.’ Tert. Nat. 1.4.1—tr. Holmes)
The relationship between a cum clause and the main clause may, depending on the
content of the clauses, be interpreted as adversative (‘while’, ‘whereas’) or as conces-
sive (‘though’, ‘even when’). Early instances cited in this connexion are (a)—indicative,
the regular mood in this time period—and (b)—subjunctive.50 Note in (a) the use of
the correlative concessive adverb tamen. Instances of this adverb and also of nihilomi-
nus ‘nevertheless’ are rare, but they can be found until Late Latin. A Classical example
is (c), in the subjunctive which is normal in that period, although there are also
instances of the indicative. A Late Latin example is (d)—in the indicative, although in
other authors the subjunctive is predominant.51 As in causally interpreted clauses, one
occasionally finds praesertim, as in (e), an adverb which is not found with true con-
cessive subordinators.
(a) Servi qui, quom culpa carent, tamen malum metuont, / i solent esse eris
utibiles.
(‘Those slaves who fear a thrashing even when they’re free from guilt are generally
useful to their masters.’ Pl. Mos. 858–9)
(b) Eo vos vostrosque adeo pantices madefactatis, quom ego sim hic siccus.
(‘With that you irrigate yourselves and also your bellies, while I am dry here.’ Pl.
Ps. 184)
(c) . . . Socrates . . . cum facile posset educi e custodia, noluit . . .
(‘. . . Socrates . . . though he could easily have been removed from prison, refused . . .’
Cic. Tusc. 1.71)
(d) Et cum hi (sc. montes) omnes, qui per girum sunt, tam excelsi sint . . ., tamen
ipse ille medianus . . . tanto altior est omnibus illis . . .
(‘And though all the peaks in the group attain such a height, yet the central one . . . is
so much higher than them all . . .’ Pereg. 2.6)
(e) . . . nihil nos magnopere mirari cum praesertim neque necessitati
subveniatur . . .
(‘. . . we are not very greatly astonished, even though by it no extreme need is
relieved . . .’ Cic. Off. 2.56)
Supplement:
Classical indicative forms: . . . etiam cum alienissimos defendimus, tamen eos
alienos, si ipsi viri boni volumus haberi, existimare non possumus. (Cic. de Orat.
2.192); Quom tabulas signa toreumata emunt, nova diruunt, alia aedificant, postremo
omnibus modis pecuniam trahunt vexant, tamen summa lubidine divitias suas
vincere nequeunt. (Sal. Cat. 20.12)
50 The examples (‘adversative’ in his terminology) are taken from Bennett: I.141f.; 303.
51 See Bertocchi and Maraldi (2011: 168–70) and Spevak (2005b: 176–80) for the Late Latin use of cum
‘concessivum’.
270 Subordinate clauses filling a satellite position
In specific contexts the temporal relationship between a postquam clause and its main
clause may be interpreted as a reason (cf. quoniam), as in (a); or even as concessive, as
in (b), where the main clause contains tamen.52
(a) Nam postquam haec aedes ita erant ut dixi tibi, / continuo est alias aedis
mercatus sibi.
(‘Well, after our house was the way I told you, he immediately bought himself another.’
Pl. Mos. 647–8)
(b) Postquam obtineri non poterat, tamen labefactandae legis Treboniae causa
effectum est, ut cooptarentur tribuni plebis C. Lacerius et M. Acutius . . .
(‘Although this could not be obtained, nevertheless, in order to invalidate the
Trebonian law, it was brought about that Gaius Lacerius and Marcus Acutius should
be chosen tribunes . . .’ Liv. 5.10.11)
Manner clauses denote the manner in which the event of the main clause takes
(took or will take) place or the way the event has to be understood. They are intro-
duced by the relative adverbs ut(i) and sicut(i), also velut(i), ‘just as’, ‘like’; by the rela-
tive phrases quemadmodum (also: quem ad modum) and quomodo (also quo modo)
‘in the manner in which’, ‘as’; and the subordinator ceu ‘as (if)’—found mainly in
poetry, in prose from Seneca onwards. The manner expressions based on modus
‘manner’ are relatively infrequent in Early and Classical Latin. The conditional com-
parative subordinators quasi ‘as if ’, tamquam ‘as though’, and velut ‘as if ’ are dealt with
separately in § 16.66. Ut clauses can function as adjuncts and as (attitudinal or illocut-
ionary) disjuncts. The clauses with a subordinator other than ut are mainly used as
52 For further examples of a reason interpretation, see OLD s.v. postquam § 3; TLL s.v. postquam
246.71ff.; 248.33ff. For an ‘adversative force implied’, see OLD s.v. postquam § 3. See also Sz.: 599.
Manner clauses 271
adjuncts. The clauses discussed in this section are usually called ‘comparative clauses
of manner’ or ‘clauses of comparison’.53
Manner clauses can also function as subject complement, as in (a) and (b) (see
§ 9.36).
(a) Haec res sic est ut narro tibi.
(‘This is just as I’m telling you.’ Pl. Mos. 1034)
(b) Ero ut me voles esse.
(‘I will be as you want me to be.’ Pl. Capt. 228)
53 For a discussion of the terminology and the various uses of manner clauses with ut, see
Revuelta (2002). A monograph on the subject is Fontana (1997). See also Tarriño (2011: 399–420) and
Van Laer (2013, 2014, 2015).
54 A large number of correlative expressions can be found in Lodge, s.v. ut 922B–923A; Merguet
(Reden) s.v. ut 1053B–1054A; TLL s.v. modus 1285.55ff. (quemadmodum); 1294.41ff. (quomodo). See also
Revuelta (2002: 210–16).
272 Subordinate clauses filling a satellite position
(g) Impastus stabula alta leo ceu saepe peragrans / (suadet enim vesana fames),
si forte fugacem / conspexit capream aut surgentem in cornua cervum, /
gaudet . . . / . . ., / sic ruit in densos alacer Mezentius hostis.
(‘Even as often an unfed lion, ranging the deep coverts, for maddening hunger
prompts him, if haply he has spied a timorous roe or stately-antlered stag, exults . . .,
so Mezentius springs lightly upon the massed foemen.’ Verg. A. 10.723–9)
Supplement:
An te auspicium commoratum est an tempestas continit (cj. Luchs, continet P), / qui
non abiisti ad legiones, ita uti dudum dixeras? (Pl. Am. 690–1); Satis audacter. # Ut
pudicam decet. (Pl. Am. 838); Faciam ita ut iubes (Pl. Am. 1144); Quid tu? recte’n
atque ut vis vales? (Pl. Aul. 183—NB: coordination with a manner adverb); Eandem
puellam peperit quam a me acceperat, / sine opstetricis opera et sine doloribus, / item
ut aliae pariunt quae malum quaerunt sibi. (Pl. Cist. 140–2); Diespiter me sic
amabit— # Ut quidem edepol dignus es. (Pl. Poen. 869); Proinde ut decet amat virum
suom, cupide expetit. (Pl. St. 284); Ut potero feram. (Ter. An. 898); Non, si ex capite sis
meo / natus, item aiunt ut Minervam esse ex Iove . . . (Ter. Hau. 1035–6); Quapropter
ut invitus saepe dissensi a Q. Fufio, ita sum eius sententiae libenter adsensus. (Cic.
Phil. 11.15); Nimirum eodem modo haec aspicitis ut priora. (Cic. Phil. 13.26); Ut fru-
menta nata sunt, ita decumae veneunt. (Cic. Ver. 3.147); Nimirum ut hic nomen
suum conprobavit, sic ille cognomen. (Cic. Ver. 4.57); At reliquarum legionum
milites . . . a tribunis militum legatisque, ut erat a Caesare praeceptum, retinebantur.
(Caes. Gal. 7.47.3); Utque volans alte raptum cum fulva draconem / fert aquila . . . /
haut aliter praedam Tiburtum ex agmine Tarchon / portat ovans. (Verg. A. 11.751–8);
Quare ars est aput te ministrare nec temere et ut libet conlocatur argentum sed
perite struitur et est aliquis scindendi obsonii magister? (Sen. Dial. 7.17.2—NB:
coordination); Hunc ego non ut multi sed artissime diligo. (Plin. Ep. 6.8.2—NB:
coordination)55
Estne intus nunc Phronesium? # Utut aliis, tibi quidem intus. (Pl. Truc. 188)
Itaque ille perfectus quem iam dudum nostra indicat oratio, utcumque se affectum
videri et animum audientis moveri volet, ita certum vocis admovebit sonum. (Cic.
Orat. 55); (sc. Theophrastus scripsit) . . . quae essent in re publica rerum inclinationes
et momenta temporum, quibus esset moderandum, utcumque res postularet. (Cic.
Fin. 5.11)
Sicut tuom vis unicum gnatum tuae / superesse vitae sospitem et superstitem, / ita
ted optestor . . . (Pl. As. 16–18); Atque utinam, sicut mihi tota in hac causa versatus
<es> ante oculos, sic nunc horum te offeras mentibus . . . (Cic. Scaur. 49)
Suspensaeque diu lacrimae fluxere per ora, / qualiter abiecta de nive manat aqua.
(Ov. Am. 1.7.57–8)
Non enim quem ad modum si quaesitum ex eo sit stellarum numerus par an
impar sit, item si de officio multisque aliis de rebus, in quibus versatus exercitatus<que
sit>, nescire se dicat. (Cic. Luc. 110); . . . primo in magna spe fuit quemadmodum
Rhodiam classem ad Samum circumsessis ad exitum faucibus portus expugnasset, sic
et Romanam expugnaturum. (Liv. 37.28.6); Et quo modo hominum inter homines
iuris esse vincula putant, sic homini nihil iuris esse cum bestiis. (Cic. Fin. 3.67); Quo
modo in militia aut via fessus adminiculum orarem, ita in hoc itinere vitae
senex . . . praesidium peto. (Tac. Ann. 14.54.2); Nam quomodo fama non est unius
sermo nec infamia unius mala existimatio, sic nec claritas uni bono placuisse. (Sen.
Ep. 102.8)
Ceu cum frigore inhorruimus, tremor sequitur, sic terras quoque spiritus extrin-
secus accidens quassat. (Sen. Nat. 6.24.4)
Some of the corresponding adverbs (e.g. proinde) are also found with the compara-
tive particle atque/ac. There the particle and the phrase or clause it introduces must
be considered obligatory constituents required by the valency of proinde in the same
way as atque in expressions like aliter atque and idem atque—see § 20.15.
Sometimes two events may be compared which are in contrast with each other, with
ita or sic in the main clause and (sic)ut in the manner clause (‘while . . . at the same
time’ (OLD s.v. ut § 5b)). Seneca has an instance of quemadmodum used in this way.
Examples are (h)–(k).
(h) Nam ut (sc. Pausanias) virtutibus eluxit, sic vitiis est obrutus.
(‘For while he possessed conspicuous merits, yet he was overloaded with
defects.’ Nep. Paus. 1.1)
(i) Saguntini ut a proeliis quietem habuerant . . . ita non nocte, non die umquam
cessaverant ab opere . . .
(‘The Saguntines, though they had had a rest from fighting . . . neither by
night nor by day had ever ceased from labour . . .’ Liv. 21.11.5)
(j) Ceterum iter multo quam [ut] in ascensu fuerat, ut pleraque Alpium ab
Italia sicut breviora ita adrectiora sunt, difficilius fuit.
(‘The rest of the path was much more difficult than it was along the ascent,
as indeed most parts of the Alps from the Italian side are shorter but more
precipitous.’ Liv. 21.35.11)
(k) Nam quemadmodum sola non prosunt, sic curationem adiuvant.
(‘For though, by themselves, they are of no avail, yet they are a help towards
the cure.’ Sen. Ep. 94.36)
If the main and subordinate clause would contain more or less identical constituents
one of them may remain implicit in either clause, as is shown in (m) and (n): nomina-
batur is not repeated as nominatur; erat not as est.
(m) Mensa vinaria rotunda nominabatur cilibantum, ut etiam nunc in castris.
(‘A round table for wine was formerly called a cilliba, as even now it is in the camp.’
Var. L. 5.121)
(n) Antiquis enim torus e stramento erat, qualiter etiam nunc in castris.
(‘For people in old times had bedding of straw, in the same way as in camp now.’ Plin.
Nat. 8.193)
57 Gibert (2007) deals with attitudinal manner clauses; some examples are taken from his article. For
terminology and criteria, see also Revuelta (2002: 203–25). Many examples can be found in Lodge s.v. ut
924B–925A, who observes: ‘comparatio parenthetica est, non genuina’. Also OLD s.v. ut §§ 20–2. In Sz. the
use of ut in expressions like ut opinor is called ‘parenthetical’ (634). So also Fontana (1997),
Bolkestein (1998a)—on the differences between parenthetical expressions of opinion in the use of ut—
and already K.-St.: II.450. For the causal interpretation of ut clauses, see Baños (2014: 73–7) and Van
Laer (2014).
58 So Kroon (2009b: 154).
Manner clauses 275
59 For more instances from Pliny the Elder, see Tarriño (2004: 364). For Pliny the Elder’s use of sicut(i),
see also Duarte (2019).
276 Subordinate clauses filling a satellite position
non potes neque ollam denariorum implere, Romam tibi remig<r>andum est.
(Cic. Fam. 9.18.4); Quo modo quidem nunc se res habet, modo ut haec nobis loca
tenere liceat . . . (Cic. Fam. 14.14.1); Sed quomodo dicunt—ego nihil scio, sed
audivi—cum Incuboni pilleum rapuisset, et thesaurum invenit. (Petr. 38.8
(Hermeros speaking))
Style: O praeclarum custodem ovium, ut aiunt, lupum! (Cic. Phil. 3.27); Venio
nunc ad istius quemadmodum ipse appellat studium, ut amici eius, morbum et insa-
niam, ut Siculi, latrocinium. (Cic. Ver. 4.1); Quam ob rem, si ornate locutus est, sicut
et fertur et mihi videtur, physicus ille Democritus, materies . . . (Cic. de Orat. 1.49);
Quamvis sphaeram in scaenam, ut dicitur, attulerit Ennius, tamen in sphaera fornicis
similitudo inesse non potest. (Cic. de Orat. 3.162); . . . cum isdem ad calcem ut dicitur
pervenire. (Cic. Amic. 101); . . . de omni animi, ut ego posui, perturbatione, morbo,
ut Graeci volunt, explicabo. (Cic. Tusc. 3.13); Hunc censes primis ut dicitur labris
gustasse physiologiam id est naturae rationem, qui quicquam quod ortum sit putet
aeternum esse posse? (Cic. N.D. 1.20); Hic tum, ut ait Ennius, nostri ‘cessere
parumper’. (B. Hisp. 23.3)
In nullo genere aeque facilis mixtura cum fero, qualiter natos antiqui hybridas
vocabant . . . (Plin. Nat. 8.213)
Appendix: Causally interpreted ut clauses (as in (f) above) are sometimes treated as
identical to the use of ut clauses that characterize the property of a constituent in the
main clause (see § 20.25).60 A few more examples in which a causal interpretation is
possible are:
Atque in pauca, ut occupatus nunc sum, confer quid velis. (Pl. Ps. 278); . . . aiunt homi-
nem, ut erat furiosus, respondisse . . . (Cic. S. Rosc. 33); Horum auctoritate finitimi
adducti, ut sunt Gallorum subita et repentina consilia, eadem de causa Trebium
Terrasidiumque retinent . . . (Caes. Gal. 3.8.3); . . . exploratores hostium, ut omni flu-
minis parte erant dispositi, inopinantes quod . . . a nostris opprimuntur. (Caes. Gal.
7.61.1); Sed ubi ille adsedit, Catilina, ut erat paratus ad dissimulanda omnia, demisso
voltu, voce supplici postulare a patribus coepit, ne quid de se temere crederent. (Sal.
Cat. 31.7); . . . consulem invenerunt, quam poterant maxime miserabilem bonis sociis,
superbis atque infidelibus, ut erant Campani, spernendum. (Liv. 23.5.1); Ipsi, ut est
volgus sine rectore praeceps pavidum socors, adventante Civile raptis temere armis
ac statim omissis, in fugam vertuntur. (Tac. Hist. 4.37.1)
This type of ut clause can also be used with constituents at a lower level, as in (g),
where ut Poenus justifies the qualification expressed by the attribute acutus. Such
cases are discussed in § 20.27.
(g) A Clitomacho sumam . . . homo et acutus ut Poenus et valde studiosus ac
diligens.
(‘I shall take it from Clitomachus . . . a clever fellow as being a Carthaginian, and also
extremely studious and industrious.’ Cic. Luc. 98)
60 So K.-St.: II.451–2.
Manner clauses 277
61 For the illocutionary use of ut clauses, see Griffe (1985). For instances with the verb dico, see TLL s.v.
973.48ff. and Garcea (2003: 192–4).
62 For the word order demonstratum est, typical for this type of clause, see Devine and Stephens (2006:
189–90).
278 Subordinate clauses filling a satellite position
Nuper quidem, ut scitis, me ad regiam paene confecit. (Cic. Mil. 37); Piso igitur
hoc modo, vir optimus tuique, ut scis, amantissimus. (Cic. Fin. 4.73); L. Coelius
Antipater scriptor, quemadmodum videtis, fuit ut temporibus illis luculentus, iuris
valde peritus, multorum etiam, ut L. Crassi, magister. (Cic. Brut. 102)
Autonomous relative clauses with quod can be used to indicate the degree to which
what is stated in the main clause is (was, will be) realized. Examples are (a)–(b). These
clauses are normally in the indicative.63 Quantum is occasionally found as well, as in
(d)–(f). These clauses resemble the clauses of qualification discussed in § 16.83.
(a) Ill’, quod in se fuit, accuratum habuit quod posset mali / faceret in me . . .
(‘As far as was in his power he took pains to do me all the harm he could.’ Pl. Bac.
550–1)
(b) Di istaec prohibeant! # Deos nescio. Ego, quod potero, sedulo.
(‘May the gods forbid it. # I don’t know as to the gods; so far as I shall be enabled, I
will carefully prevent it.’ Ter. Hau. 1038)
(c) Quae tibi mandavi et quae tu intelleges convenire nostro Tusculano velim, ut
scribis, cures, quod sine molestia tua facere poteris.
(‘What I commissioned you to get for me, and anything you see suitable to my
Tusculan villa, I should be glad if you will, as you say in your letter, procure for me,
so far as you can without putting yourself to too much trouble.’ Cic. Att. 1.5.7)
(d) Postidea domum / me rursum quantum potero tantum recipiam.
(‘Afterwards I’ll return home again as quickly as I can.’ Pl. Aul. 118–19)
(e) Quam (sc. fidem) qui laedit oppugnat omnium commune praesidium et,
quantum in ipso est, disturbat vitae societatem.
(‘One who violates this promise attacks what is the common safeguard of all, and, as
far as it is in his power, ruins all social life.’ Cic. S. Rosc. 111)
(f) Illum deum <induci> (cj. Eden) ab Iove, quem, quantum quidem in illo fuit
damnavit incesti?
(‘That he was made god by Iuppiter, whom he, as far as was in his power, condemned
on the accusation of incest?’ Sen. Apoc. 8.2)
There are related expressions with the relative adverbs quatenus ‘to the extent to
which’ (OLD s.v. 7a) and quoad ‘to the degree that’ (OLD s.v. 3a), as in (g) and (h),
respectively. See also § 16.53 on stipulative clauses.
(g) . . . vulgus quod absit a perfecto non fere intellegit, quatenus autem intellegit,
nihil putat praetermissum.
(‘. . . the common crowd does not, as a rule, comprehend how far it falls short of real
perfection, but, to the extent to which they do comprehend they think there is no
deficiency.’ Cic. Off. 3.15)
(h) . . . animo non deficiam et id quod suscepi, quoad potero, perferam.
(‘. . . I will not lose courage, but will accomplish to the best of my ability the task which
I have undertaken.’ Cic. S. Rosc. 10)
Most grammars distinguish two types of comparative clauses, those of manner (dis-
cussed in this Syntax in §§ 16.33–6) and those of degree, which are discussed in this
paragraph. For comparative clauses with ut, see §§ 20.24–7. See also § 16.83.64
Respect clauses identify a state of affairs or an entity for which the information
contained in the main clause is particularly relevant. The subordinating device is quod
‘as for’, ‘with regard to’. These clauses, which are usually found in sentence-initial pos-
ition, present the frame for the information of the main clause and often make refer-
ence to the preceding context or to an earlier exchange, as in (a) and (b). For an
embedded quod clause, see (c). They are illocutionary disjuncts.65 (See also § 16.83.)
(a) Quod ille gallinam aut columbam se sectari aut simiam / dicat, disperistis, ni
usque ad mortem male mulcassitis.
(‘As to the fact that he might say he was chasing a hen or a dove or a monkey, you’re
done for, unless you savagely beat him to death.’ Pl. Mil. 162–3)
(b) Romae quod scribis sileri, ita putabam.
(‘As to the fact that you write that there is silence in Rome, so I thought.’ Cic. Att.
2.13.2)
(c) Quare quo<nia>m ad analogias quod pertineat non est ut omnia similia
dicantur . . .
(‘Since therefore so far as concerns the Regularities it is not essential that all words
that are spoken should be alike in their systems . . .’ Var. L. 9.83)
Supplement:
Quod illa aut amicum aut patronum nominet / aut quod illa amicai <eum> ama-
torem praedicet, / fores occlusae omnibus sint nisi tibi. (Pl. As. 757–9); Ingenium
patris habet, quod sapit. (Pl. Poen. 1198a);66 Sane quod tibi nunc vir videatur esse
hic, nebulo magnus est. (Ter. Eu. 785); Nam ita me di ament, quod me accusat nunc
vir, sum extra noxiam. (Ter. Hec. 276); Quod quisque pecudes in calleis viasve
publicas it<i>neris causa indu<xerit ibeique paverit . . . pro eo pecore quod
64 For a discussion of the status of degree clauses, see Tarriño (2011: 397–9), with references.
65 For this section, see Serbat (2003: 546–69). See also OLD s.v. quod § 6a,b. The Early Latin instances
of quod can be found in Bennett: I.125–6.
66 For more instances in Plautus, see Lodge: II.520.
280 Subordinate clauses filling a satellite position
The main clause may contain a resumptive expression that refers to the content, or
part of the content, of the preceding quod clause, as in (d) and (e).69
(d) Quod itinerum meorum ratio te non nullam in dubitationem videtur
adducere, visurusne me sis in provincia, ea res se sic habet.
(‘As to the fact that my itineraries seem to lead you into some doubt about whether
you are going to see me in the province, that matter stands as follows.’ Cic. Fam.
3.5.3)
(e) Quod multitudinem Germanorum in Galliam traducat, id se sui muniendi,
non Galliae oppugnandae causa facere.
(‘As to the fact that he was bringing a host of Germans into Gaul, he said that he was
doing that to protect himself, not to attack Gaul.’ Caes. Gal. 1.44.6)
Supplement:
Istuc quod das consilium mihi, / tecum illa verba facere de ista re volo. (Pl. Mil.
1114–15); Teque ante quod me amare rebar, ei rei firmasti fidem. (Ter. Hec. 581); Quod
Salas te cum Clodio loqui vult, potes id mea voluntate facere . . . (Cic. Att. 12.30.1); Item
de hortis me quod admones, nec fui umquam valde cupidus et nunc domus suppeditat
mihi hortorum amoenitatem. (Cic. Q. fr. 3.1.14); Quod discordis dispersasque Vitellii
legiones . . . fudisset, id pulcherrimum et sui operis. (Tac. Hist. 3.53.2)
Another type of quod clause is illustrated by (f) and (g), with the verbs attineo ‘to
concern’70 and pertineo ‘to relate’. Here the quod clause serves to introduce an entity
for which the content of the main clause is particularly relevant, and not, as above, a
whole state of affairs. Argumentum in (g) and populum in (h) are to be understood as
the subject and the object of their respective main clauses. In these two examples the
quod clauses function as theme constituents (see § 22.14).
67 For more instances in Cicero, see Merguet (Phil.) s.v. quod 312, § VI; (Reden) s.v. quod 224, § VI and
Garcea (2003: 194–6).
68 On the use of quod in this example, see Szantyr (1972).
69 For further examples, see Serbat (2003: 557–9).
70 See OLD s.v. attineo § 6.c; s.v. pertineo § 4.
Reason clauses 281
Supplement:
Quantum vero ad causam infantium pertinet . . . (Cypr. Ep. 64.2.1)
Quod attinet clauses may also be used below the clause level, as in (j), where the quod
clause pertains to (hominem . . .) non ingratum.
(j) Caninium perdidi, hominem, quod ad me attinet, non ingratum.
(‘I have lost Caninius, a man who was not ungrateful as far as concerns me.’ Cic. Att.
16.14.4)
Supplement:
Qui omnes, quod ad me attinet, vellem viverent. (Cic. S. Rosc. 90); (sc. Antonius scripsit)
Quam honorifice, quod ad me attinet, ex ipsius litteris cognosces . . . (Cic. Att. 1.4.13.6)
Reason (or: causal) satellite clauses are marked by one of the subordinators quod
and quia ‘because’, the originally temporal subordinators quandoque ‘whereas’
72 For discussion, see Bolkestein (1991), Fugier (1989), and Mellet (1994; 1995).
73 Mellet (1994) refers to a contribution by Jean Kerger to the Budapest (1991) Colloquium on Latin
Linguistics about the use of quia and quod in answers, in which it was shown that quia is by far the most
frequently used subordinator. See also Baños (2014: 83–5), with a Table on p. 84.
Reason clauses 283
Ex. (i) shows a reason adjunct clause coordinated with a reason adjunct in the abla-
tive (a so-called ablativus causae, see § 10.87).78
(i) Belli Fidenatis contagione inritati Veientium animi et consanguinitate—nam
Fidenates quoque Etrusci fuerunt—et quod ipsa propinquitas loci . . . stimula-
bat, in fines Romanos excucurrerunt . . .
(‘The Veientes, their minds irritated by contact with the war from Fidenae both
because of kinship—for the Fidenates were Etruscans as well—and because the very
proximity of the place was inciting them, made a raid into Roman territory . . .’ Liv.
1.15.1—NB: the Latin sentence is anacoluthic)
Disjunct reason clauses denote the reason (i) for asserting, questioning, or demand-
ing the content of the main clause, (ii) for the form chosen for that content, or (iii) for
the transition to another part of the discourse. They are introduced by the subordina-
tors quoniam ‘now that’, ‘seeing that’, ‘since’, quando (quidem) ‘in view of the fact that’,
‘since’, ‘as’, also written as one word, quandoque ‘inasmuch as’, and quatenus ‘inasmuch
as’. Cum (quom) ‘when’ is also sometimes found in similar contexts, as in (l) (see
also § 16.29).
(j) Peregre quoniam advenis, cena detur.
(‘Since you’ve arrived from abroad, you’ll be given a dinner.’ Pl. Truc. 127)
(k) At etiam maledicis? # Immo, salvos quandoquidem advenis . . .
(‘What, do you even abuse me? # No, since you’ve arrived safe and sound . . .’ Pl.
Trin. 991)
(l) Salvos quom peregre advenis, / cena detur.
(‘Since you’ve returned from abroad safe and sound, you’ll be given a dinner.’ Pl. Bac.
536–7)
The distribution of these subordinators differs. Quoniam is spread evenly from Plautus
onwards, quando (quidem) is relatively frequent in some authors (Plautus, Terence,
Lucretius, and Tacitus) but (almost) absent from others. Quandoque is used by Cicero
in a few formulaic expressions, but is otherwise rare in this causal meaning. Causal
quatenus is introduced by Lucretius, and is then used with some frequency in prose
from Quintilian onwards, but, generally speaking, it is rare (until very Late Latin).
It has been noted that quia is sometimes found in contexts that are typical for quon-
iam and the two might be said to overlap to some extent.79 However, a speaker has a
choice, albeit limited, between presenting the content of the subordinate clause as a
justification for what he says in the main clause and indicating a cause and effect rela-
tionship between the two clauses. For examples, see § 16.40. Conversely, quoniam is
used more or less in the sense of quia and quod from the first century ad onwards. For
examples, see § 16.42.
78 Such cases of variatio are particularly common in Tacitus (Martin 1953: 91–2).
79 See Mellet (1995: 226–7) and Baños (2014: 153).
Reason clauses 285
80 For the use of the moods in quod and quia clauses (§ 7.146), see Orlandini (2001: 347–55).
81 See Herman (1957) for examples of quare and for a discussion of the various explanations. See also
Bodelot (2003: 243) and Baños (2014: 56–8). See TLL s.v. cur 1451.30ff. for examples.
286 Subordinate clauses filling a satellite position
Quia is sometimes used in contexts where quoniam is possible as well. See (e) and (f).
This need not imply that the two are (partly) synonymous. Note in (g) the parallelism
between the quia and quoniam clauses.82 In (h), the quia clause serves as a justifica-
tion for the correctness of the content of the main clause, a typical context for quon-
iam. In Late Latin instances of this use of quia as a disjunct are common.
(e) Non quidem mihi opus est, sed quia tam valde vis, faciam tibi mei potestatem.
(‘I really do not need it, but since you so much wish it, I will surrender my will to
yours.’ Sen. Ben. 2.24.3)
(f) Addam, quoniam ita vis, eodem Q. Labienum, patruum tuum.
(‘I will add, since you wish it, that your uncle Quintus Labienus was there too.’ Cic.
Rab. Perd. 20)
82 See Mellet (1995: 226–7) and Baños (2011; 2014: 137–9) for further examples; discussion in
Pinkster (2009).
Reason clauses 287
(g) Tenue locis quia non potis est adfigere adhaesum, / liquitur extemplo et
revocatum cedit abortu. / Crassius hinc porro quoniam concretius aequo /
mittitur, aut non tam prolixo provolat ictu / aut . . .
(‘The thin, because it cannot stick and adhere to the parts, at once flows away and
departs withdrawn in untimely birth. That which is too thick, again, since it is emit-
ted too closely clotted, either does not leap forward with so far-reaching a blow, or . . .’
Lucr. 4.1242–6)
(h) Ergo (sc. sapiens) non miseretur, quia id sine miseria animi non fit.
(‘He, consequently, does not suffer pity, because there cannot be pity without mental
suffering.’ Sen. Cl. 2.6.1)
Supplement:
Nam quia vos tranquillos video, gaudeo et volup est mihi. (Pl. Am. 958—NB: various
interpretations);83 Amicitiarum autem ratio, quoniam partim sunt religionibus iunc-
tae, partim non sunt, et quia partim veteres sunt, partim novae . . . ex causarum dig-
nitatibus . . . ex vetustatibus habebitur. (Cic. Inv. 2.168); Consularia insignia
Nymphidio <Sabino decreta, de quo> quia nunc primum oblatus est, pauca repetam.
(Tac. Ann. 15.72.2—NB: textually uncertain); Et quia de publicandis dispositionibus
mentio contigit: ubi aliquos voluisset vel rectores provin<c>iis dare . . . nomina eorum
proponebat . . . (Hist. Aug. Alex. 45.6); Vigilate ergo, quia nescitis qua die Dominus
vester venturus sit. (Vulg. Mat. 24.42—NB: Greek has Ø~t)
From the Vetus Latina versions of the Bible onwards new causal subordinators or
subordinator-like expressions based on a causal preposition and the subordinator
quod emerged, so for example propter quod (‘because’, lit.: ‘because of ’ + ‘that’, as in
(c), and pro quod.87
(c) Dedit mihi Deus mercedem meam propter quod dedi ancillam meam
viro meo.
(‘God has given me my payment because I gave my maidservant to my husband’. Vet.
Lat. Gen. 30.18 (quia Vulgate))
Supplement:
‘Mellitidina’ dicunt pro quod . . . apes manducant. (Diosc. 3); . . . et cibum recusat et
multum bibet, propter quod ardorem siccum pulmonis patitur. (Mulom. Chir. 170)
specific meaning, the frequency of its use varies across individual authors (and types
of text). Cicero uses quoniam clauses quite frequently, while Livy, given the character
of his work, does not, except (as is to be expected) in the speeches (thirty-nine times
out of a total of forty-six).
In (a) the quoniam clause explains why the speaker is telling the truth in vain. In (b)
it refers to the critique of Cicero by his opponent. It forms the reason to ask the ques-
tion in the main clause. Ex. (c) indicates the speaker’s motive for his exposé. Ex. (d)
indicates the transition of the discourse from one topic to another.
(a) Vera dico, sed nequiquam, quoniam non vis credere.
(‘I’m telling the truth, but in vain, since you don’t want to believe me.’ Pl. Am. 835)
(b) Et quoniam hoc reprehendis, quod solere me dicas de me ipsum gloriosius
praedicare, quis umquam audivit cum ego de me nisi coactus ac necessario
dicerem?
(‘Since you criticize me for this in saying that I am accustomed to talk too boastfully
about myself, who has ever heard me when I was talking about myself except when
constrained to do so and when it was absolutely necessary?’ Cic. Dom. 93)
(c) Equidem vobis, quoniam ita voluistis, fontes, unde hauriretis atque itinera
ipsa ita putavi esse demonstranda, non ut . . .
(‘For my part, I thought that I should show you, since that is what you wanted, the
sources from which you might draw and the paths leading to them, not so that . . .’
Cic. de Orat. 1.203)
(d) Quoniam de genere belli dixi, nunc de magnitudine pauca dicam.
(‘Since I have spoken about the nature of the war, I will now say a few words about its
magnitude.’ Cic. Man. 20)
Supplement:
Attitudinal disjuncts: Mater ancillas iubet, / quoniam iam decumus mensis adven-
tat prope, / aliam aliorsum ire . . . (Pl. Truc. 401–3—NB: combination quoniam iam);
Quaeso edepol, Charine, quoniam non potest id fieri quod vis, / id velis quod possit.
(Ter. An. 305–6); Vos, Quirites, quoniam iam est nox, . . . in vestra tecta dis-
cedite . . . (Cic. Catil. 3.29—NB: imperative main clause); Ubi igitur crimen est, quon-
iam quidem furtum nusquam reprehendis, edictum probas, iudicatum fateris . . .?
(Cic. Flac. 68—NB: interrogative main clause); Quare etsi nefarie fecisti, tamen, quon-
iam in meo inimico crudelitatem exprompsisti tuam, laudare non possum, irasci
certe non debeo. (Cic. Mil. 33); Nunc quoniam hostis est iudicatus Dolabella, bello est
persequendus. (Cic. Phil. 11.16); Et forsitan in suscipienda causa temere impulsus
adulescentia fecerim. Quoniam quidem semel suscepi, licet Hercules undique omnes
minae terrores periculaque impendeant omnia, succurram ac subibo. (Cic. S. Rosc.
31);92 An tu quoniam hoc non audes dicere, illuc confugies, vecturae difficultate
adductus ternos denarios dare maluisse? (Cic. Ver. 3.191—NB: interrogative main
clause); Gratulemurque nobis, quoniam mors aut meliorem, quam qui est in vita, aut
92 For the interpretation of quidem and references, see Solodow (1978: 134–5).
Reason clauses 291
certe non deteriorem adlatura est statum. (Cic. Leg. frg. 1—quoted by Lactantius Inst.
3.19.2); Quoniam habes istum equum, aut emeris oportet aut hereditate possideas
aut munere acceperis aut domi tibi natus sit aut, si eorum nihil est, subripueris necesse
est. (Cic. Inv. 1.84); Tuus est enim profecto, quoniam quidem est missus ad te. (Cic.
Att. 12.6.2); Nam quoniam Fundis sum cum Ligure nostro, discrucior Sestulli fun-
dum a verberone Curtilio possideri. (Cic. Att. 14.6.1); Quoniam autem ex tribus
medicinae partibus, ut difficillima, sic etiam clarissima est ea quae morbis (sc. victu)
medetur, ante omnia de hac dicendum est. (Cels. 1. pr.12); ‘Quomodo ergo’ inquis
‘venti fiunt, quoniam hoc negas fieri?’ (Sen. Nat. 5.4.1); Et quoniam religione vita
constat, prolibare diis nefastum habetur vina . . . (Plin. Nat. 14.119)
Illocutionary disjuncts: Quoniam ad hunc locum perventum est, non alienum esse
videtur de Galliae Germaniaeque moribus et quo differant hae nationes inter sese
proponere. (Caes. Gal. 6.11.1); Sed quoniam in eas regiones per Leptitanorum nego-
tia venimus, non indignum videtur egregium atque mirabile facinus duorum
Carthaginiensium memorare. (Sal. Jug. 79.1); Quoniam sementi terram docuimus
praeparare, nunc seminum genera persequamur. (Col. 2.6.1); Et quoniam de frugum
terraeque generibus abunde diximus, nunc de arandi ratione dicemus . . . (Plin. Nat.
18.167); Sed quoniam de his rebus diximus, nunc terrae positionem definiemus et
mare, quibus locis interfusum videatur, ordine exponemus. (Hyg. Astr. 1.8)
Ammianus Marcellinus has thirty-six instances of sentence-initial Et quoniam (out of
a total of eighty-three) and thirty-two instances of Et quia (out of seventy-four).
Cicero has Et quia only twice. He has eleven combinations of quoniam and igitur,
none of quia and igitur. Ammianus has quia igitur seven times. Quoniam autem is
found eight times in Cicero and a few times elsewhere; quia autem is non-existent in
the LLT until very late.
Quoniam is said to have become ‘entirely synonymous’93 with quod and quia in Silver
Latin (especially in Celsus, Columella, Pliny the Elder, and later authors), which leads
one to wonder what happened to its original, more specific function (see the
Appendix). On closer inspection, the main function of quoniam remained that of a
disjunct (see examples above), although there are instances where quoniam is more or
less equivalent to quia.94 Ex. (e) is sometimes taken as an early example of the equiva-
lence of quoniam to quia since Lucretius has several instances of the sequence quia . . .,
propterea fit, but there is nothing against taking quoniam in its normal sense.95
Correlative causal expressions are relatively rare. An example is (f).96 A remarkable
instance in answer to a cur? question is (i). Note the position of the quoniam clause
after the main clause in (g) and (h).
(e) Postremo quoniam non omnia corpora vocem / mittere concedis neque
odorem, propterea fit / ut non . . .
(‘Lastly, since you grant that not all bodies emit sound or smell, for that reason it fol-
lows that . . . not . . .’ Lucr. 2.834–6)
(f) Quod tamen in labris ideo non est necessarium, quoniam excidere commo-
dius est.
(‘This procedure is not necessary for any ulcer on the lips since excision is more con-
venient.’ Cels. 6.15.4)
(g) . . . non est opus ignibus aut flammis, quoniam fumo et fuligine sapor olei
corrumpitur.
(‘. . . fire or flame should not be used, as the taste of oil is spoiled by smoke and soot.’
Col. 1.6.18)
(h) Omne oleo tranquillari, et ob id urinantes ore spargere, quoniam mitiget
naturam asperam lucemque deportet.
(‘That all (sc. sea water) is made smooth by oil, and for that reason divers sprinkle oil
from their mouth because it calms the rough element and carries light down with
them.’ Plin. Nat. 2.234—NB: ob id refers to the preceding clause)
(i) Cur ita? Quoniam subsequens sermo prophetae exprobrat eis dicens: . . .
(‘Why so? Because the subsequent discourse of the prophet reproaches them, say-
ing . . .’ Tert. Iud. 3.5—tr. Therwell)
Supplement:
With a correlative device: An quoniam agrestem detraxit ab ore figuram / Iuppiter,
idcirco facta superba dea es? (Prop. 2.33a.13–14); Obscurarum vero causarum et
naturalium actionum quaestionem ideo supervacuam esse contendunt, quoniam non
comprehensibilis natura sit. (Cels. 1.pr.27); Et idcirco veteres vineas mergis propagare
potius quam totas sternere idem ipse Atticus praecepit, quoniam mergi mox facile
radicentur . . . (Col. 4.2.2); Meminerimus idcirco te in istam provinciam missum, quon-
iam multa in ea emendanda adparuerint. (Tra. Plin. Ep. 10.32.1); Quodsi . . . idcirco
vobis quoque irascuntur, quoniam de nostra eradica<tione n>eglegitis, absolutum
est . . . (Tert. Nat. 1.9.10)
NB: Parallelism: Nam quoniam nec sublimiter potest nec per longa spatia volitare,
tum etiam quia furis et noxiorum animalium rapinae metus non est, sine custode
tuto vagatur . . . (Col. 8.11.1); Ne Tiberium quidem caritate aut rei publicae cura suc-
cessorem adscitum sed, quoniam adrogantiam saevitiamque eius introspexerit, com-
paratione deterrima sibi gloriam quaesivisse. (Tac. Ann. 1.10.7); Si recte imperat,
non, quia imperat, parendum, sed quoniam id fieri ius est, faciendum est. (Gel.
2.7.7); Et tormentum quidem appellatur ex eo quod omnis explicatio torquetur, scor-
pio autem, quoniam aculeum desuper habet erectum . . . (Amm. 23.4.7)
Appendix: The preposition pro can sometimes be interpreted in a causal sense, espe-
cially in Late Latin.97 The complex subordinator (on which see § 16.84) pro eo quod
‘for this reason that’ is used in Late Latin, especially in the Vulgate, as a causal subor-
dinator functioning more or less as quoniam. An example is (j).98
97 See TLL s.v. pro 1434.7ff.; for examples of pro eo quod, see 1435.35ff.
98 For quantitative data and discussion, see Baños (2014: 159–66).
Reason clauses 293
(j) Propterea haec dicit Dominus exercituum: pro eo quod non audistis verba
mea, / ecce ego mittam et adsumam universas cognationes aquilonis . . .
(‘Therefore thus says the Lord of hosts, “Because you have not obeyed My
words, behold, I will send and take all the families of the north . . .” ’ Vulg. Jer.
25.8–9—NB: Gr. §.ptoi)
99 See Solodow (1978: 135–6). The combination quippe quando occurs in Pl. Capt. 886.
100 For the differences between quando and quoniam, see Mellet (1994: 204–14; 1995: 212–20) and
Baños (2014: 65–7). For their distribution, see Baños (2014: 65). For the use of quando in Livy, see
Fatello (2016).
294 Subordinate clauses filling a satellite position
(g) Sed quoniam non possunt omnia simul dici, haec in praesentia nota esse
debebunt, voluptatem semovendam esse, quando ad maiora quaedam, ut
iam apparebit, nati sumus.
(‘But since not everything can be said at the same time, for the present it will have to
be noted that pleasure must be discarded on the ground that, as will become apparent
later, we were born for greater things.’ Cic. Fin. 5.21)
In Silver and Late Latin quando(quidem) is used more or less as an equivalent to a
causal adjunct. Examples are (h) and (i). In the jurists this use is quite common.
(h) Quidam omnium id ducum consilium fuisse, ostentare potius urbi bellum
quam inferre, quando validissimae cohortes a Vitellio descivissent.
(‘Some held that it was the advice of all the leaders to threaten Rome with war rather
than make war on her, since the strongest cohorts had already abandoned Vitellius.’
Tac. Hist. 3.78.2)
(i) Et illi mecum furti servi nomine agere possunt, quando et noxa caput sequitur.
(‘And they can bring theft against me on the slave’s account since delictual liability
attaches to the person.’ Afric. dig. 13.6.21.1)
which is (b), where the clause is used for the purpose of discourse management. Later
authors, among them Tertullian, as in (c), continue to use it but only infrequently.101
(a) Tu fac utrumque uno subiungas nomine eorum / atque animam verbi causa
cum dicere pergam, / mortalem esse docens, animum quoque dicere credas, /
qua tenus est unum inter se coniunctaque res est.
((talking about anima and animus) ‘Be it yours to link both of these in a single name,
and when, to choose a case, I proceed to speak of the soul, proving that it is mortal,
suppose that I speak of the mind as well, inasmuch as they are one each with the other
and compose a single thing.’ Lucr. 3.421–4)
(b) Sed quatenus etiam forte quadam pervenimus ad difficilius narrationum
genus, iam de eis loquamur, in quibus res contra nos erit.
(‘Since we have now inadvertently arrived at the more difficult kind of narratives, let
us speak of those in which the facts are against us.’ Quint. Inst. 4.2.66)
(c) Quatenus ita scripturae docent, haec dicimus et in filium competisse et in his
filium venisse et in his semper egisse et sic ea in se hominibus manifestasse.
(‘In as much as the scriptures so teach, we say that these also have applied to the Son,
and that in these the Son came, and in these always acted, and thus in himself mani-
fested them to men.’ Tert. Prax. 17.2—tr. Evans)
103 For the use of quo as a reason subordinator, see Torrego (1988: 324–7) and Baños (2014: 50–4).
Purpose and stipulative clauses 297
Purpose (or: final) satellite clauses indicate for what purpose the event of the main
clause is, was, or will be undertaken. They are found both as adjuncts (stating the
purpose why an event takes place) and as attitudinal and illocutionary disjuncts (in
the latter case they may indicate the purpose for which a statement is made).105 The
final subordinators are ut(i) (negative ut(i) ne or ne), quo ‘so that thereby’ (exception-
ally made negative with ne in Horace—see below), and rarely (in Early Latin) qui
‘in order that by this means’.106 Of these only ut clauses function as disjuncts.107 (For
so-called relative clauses of purpose, see § 18.26 and § 21.15.)
Purpose adjuncts are typically only used when the main clause contains a control-
lable event.108 They are strongly integrated in their governing clauses, as appears from
the fact that the tense of the purpose clause is usually determined on the basis of the
104 See Blaise (1955: 159–60—not very reliable), Sz.: 647–8, and Baños (2014: 74–7).
105 See Vester (1994).
106 For subjunctive clauses without ut, see § 16.4 fin. Mss. vary at Vitr. 2.pr.1 (Ø S; ut HEG).
107 See Torrego (1988: 328).
108 For contextual factors that facilitate a purpose interpretation of an ut clause when the main clause
does not really contain a controllable verb, see Torrego (2001).
298 Subordinate clauses filling a satellite position
same reference point as the governing clause (the rules of the ‘sequence of tenses’
apply—see § 7.85) and from the fact that the reflexive pronoun is used to refer to the
‘source’ of the wished outcome, usually the subject of the governing clause, as in (e).
In (f), eius refers to Pompeius, the subject of the immediate superordinate clause and
not to necessarii, the real ‘source’ of the purpose clause, which explains why there is no
reflexive pronoun.109 Ut and (ut) ne purpose clauses occur as answer to questions
with cur ‘why’, quare ‘why’, quam ob rem ‘for what reason’, and other ‘why’ questions.
The same question words may also elicit reason clauses (see § 16.39).110 Examples
answering cur are (a)–(c). See also (d), answering quo? ‘what for?’
(a) Sed iube / . . . / . . . agnum afferri proprium pinguem. # Quor? # Ut sacrufices.
(‘But order . . . a suitable fat lamb to be brought here. # Why? # So you can sacrifice it.’
Pl. Capt. 860–2)
(b) Tene me, opsecro. # Quor? # Ne cadam.
(‘Hold me, please. # Why? # So that I won’t fall.’ Pl. Mil. 1260)
(c) Ad hunc legatos? Cur? An ut eorum reditu vehementius pertimescatis?
(‘Envoys to this man? Why? So that on the envoys’ return you may be in greater
panic?’ Cic. Phil. 8.20)
(d) Hoc quo? Ut si per dilationes iudicis effectum sit, ut actio eximatur, fiat
restitutio.
(‘What is the point of this? So that restitutio can be made, if through adjournments
made by a judge it comes about that an action is lost.’ Ulp. dig. 4.6.26.4)
(e) Nam erus meus me Eretriam misit, domitos boves uti sibi mercarer.
(‘You see, my master has sent me to Eretria to purchase some plough-broken oxen for
him.’ Pl. Per. 259)
(f) . . . cum eius necessarii fidem implorarent Pompei, praestaret quod proficiscenti
recepisset, ne per eius auctoritatem deceptus videretur . . .
(‘. . . while his friends implored Pompeius to keep his word and fulfil the promise he
made him at his departure, so that he would not seem to have been deceived through
the influence of Pompey’s authority . . .’ Caes. Civ. 3.82.4)
The correlating expressions found with ut and (ut) ne purpose clauses are practically the
same as those with reason clauses: idcirco ‘for that reason’, ideo ‘for the reason (that)’,
ob eam causam ‘as a result of this’, eo consilio ‘for this purpose’, etc. Examples are (g)–(j).
(g) Legum ministri magistratus, legum interpretes iudices, legum denique idcirco
omnes servi sumus ut liberi esse possimus.
(‘The magistrates who administer the law, the jurors who interpret it—all of us in
short—are slaves to the law so that we can be free.’ Cic. Clu. 146)
109 For the aspect of control, and exceptions, see Torrego (2001), Bodelot (2002a), and Cabrillana (2011:
41–6). For the high degree of integration of purpose clauses, see Ros (2001) and Pieroni (2010: 439–43).
110 For the relationship between reason clauses and purpose clauses, see Torrego (1988: 319–21).
Purpose and stipulative clauses 299
(h) Idcirco nemo superiorum attigit ut hic tolleret? Ideo C. Claudius Pulcher ret-
tulit ut C. Verres posset auferre?
(‘Was it for this reason that none of his predecessors ever touched these things, that
he might be able to carry them off? Was this the reason why Caius Claudius Pulcher
restored them, that Caius Verres might be able to steal them?’ Cic. Ver. 4.7)
(i) Qui ob eam causam natus videtur ne omnium mortalium turpissimus esset
M. Antonius.
(‘Who seems to have been born for this reason, that Marcus Antonius might not be
the basest of all living men.’ Cic. Phil. 10.22)
(j) Haec ego non eo consilio disputo ut homines eruditos redarguam.
(‘I do not treat these matters for the purpose of contradicting accomplished people.’
Cic. de Orat. 2.138)
Purpose clauses functioning as attitudinal or illocutionary disjuncts (often called
‘pseudo-final clauses’) are not restricted to main clauses that refer to a controllable
event—see (n) and (o); are not used in answer to ‘why’ questions; and are not com-
bined with a correlating expression in the main clause. The verb of the ut clause is
usually in the present tense, but see the rare non-anterior use of the perfect form
dixerim in (q).111 Exx. (k)–(m) contain attitudinal disjuncts, (n)–(p) illocutionary
disjuncts. More examples are given in the section on ut below.112
(k) Atque ego quidem hercle ut verum tibi dicam, pater, / ea res me male habet.
(‘And to tell you the truth, father, that does make me feel down.’ Pl. As. 843–4)
(l) . . . in quibus inerat ille etiam annus qui nos hoc <non> defendente, ne dicam
gravius, adflixerat . . .
(‘. . . among which was also that year which ruined me, without his defending me (not
to put it more strongly) . . .’ Cic. Att. 9.5.2)
(m) Ut breviter finiam, morbus est iudicium in pravo pertinax, tamquam valde
expetenda sint quae leviter expetenda sunt.
(‘To give a brief definition: “disease” is a persistent perversion of the judgement,
so that things which are mildly desirable are thought to be highly desirable.’ Sen. Ep.
75.11)
(n) Nunc de Alcumena ut rem teneatis rectius, / utrimque est gravida, et ex viro
et ex summo Iove.
(‘Now as for Alcumena, so that you can understand the situation clearly: she’s preg-
nant from both, from her husband and from great Jupiter.’ Pl. Am. 110–11)
(o) Nunc adeo, ut tu scire possis, leno, meam sententiam, / libera haec est . . .
(‘And now, so you can know my opinion, pimp, this girl is free . . .’ Pl. Cur. 715–16)
111 Possibly influenced by expressions such as pace tua dixerim (§ 7.57) (Jeremy Brightbill, p.c.).
112 A good collection of what he calls ‘parenthetische Folgesätze’ and ‘Absichtssätze’ can be found in
Dahl (1882: 198–202; 225–8). For instances with the verb dico, see TLL s.v. 973.30ff. For discussion, see
Fedriani and Molinelli (2013).
300 Subordinate clauses filling a satellite position
(p) Quare ut ad id quod institui revertar, tolle mihi e causa nomen Catonis . . .
(‘Wherefore to return to the subject which I began to speak of, please take the name
of Cato out of the case . . .’ Cic. Mur. 67)
(q) Vetera maiestas quaedam et, ut sic dixerim, religio commendat.
(‘A certain majesty and religious awe, so to speak, commended antiquity to us.’ Quint.
Inst. 1.6.1)
Supplement:
Adjunct purpose clauses: Asta ut descendam nunciam in proclivi . . . (Pl. As.
710—NB: the ‘source’ of the purpose is the person who gives the order); Nunc amanti
ero filio senis, / . . . regias copias aureasque optuli, / ut domo sumeret neu foris quaer-
eret. (Pl. Bac. 645–8); Vis tibi ducentos nummos iam promittier, / ut ne clamorem hic
facias neu convicium? (Pl. Bac. 873–4); Conducta veni ut fidibus cantarem seni . . . (Pl.
Epid. 500); Gripe, animum advorte ac tace. / # Utin’ istic prius dicat? (Pl. Rud.
1062–3); Canes interdiu clausos esse oportet, ut noctu acriores et vigilantiores sint.
(Cato Agr. 124); Da veniam, Chremes. / Sine te exorem. # Egon’ mea bona ut dem
Bacchidi dono sciens? (Ter. Hau. 1049–50); Sed ut olim te ostendisti, eadem esse nil
cessavisti usque adhuc / ut filiam ab eo abduceres neu quod ego egissem esset ratum.
(Ter. Hec. 544–5); Quo animo? # Ut id fieret quod factum est. (Cic. Tul. 25); Maximam
autem partem ad iniuriam faciendam aggrediuntur, ut adipiscantur ea quae concu-
piverunt. (Cic. Off. 1.24); Tractatum est autem a nobis id genus aegritudinis . . . ut eo
sublato reliquorum remedia ne magnopere quaerenda arbitraremur. (Cic. Tusc. 3.81);
Cuius adventu cognito Pompeius ne duobus circumcluderetur exercitibus ex eo loco
discedit . . . (Caes. Civ. 3.30.7); Praeterea oppida incendi oportere . . ., ne (v.l. neu) suis
sint ad detractandam militiam receptacula neu Romanis proposita ad copiam
commeatus praedamque tollendam. (Caes. Gal. 7.14.9); . . . dispositis exploratoribus,
necubi effecto ponte Romani copias traducerent . . . (Caes. Gal. 7.35.1); . . . ne ducem
suum neve secretum imperium propriave signa haberent, miscuit manipulos ex
Latinis Romanisque . . . (Liv. 1.52.6); Meam culpam esse oportet ut mea poena sit.
(Sen. Con. 9.3.9—NB: control implied); . . . vetera novis et quieta turbidis antehabeo,
neque ob praemium sed ut me perfidia exsolvam . . . (Tac. Ann. 1.58.3—NB: coordin-
ation with ob prepositional phrase)114
Attitudinal disjunct purpose clauses: Est ei quidam servos, qui in morbo cubat,
immo / hercle vero in lecto, ne quid mentiar; (Pl. Cas. 37–8); Quid? Illud quod supra
dixi, solere me cedere et, ut planius dicam, fugere ea, quae valde causam meam pre-
merent. . . (Cic. de Orat. 2.303); . . . si maxime verum sit ad corpus omnia referre sapi-
entem sive, ut honestius dicam, nihil facere nisi quod expediat . . . (Cic. Tusc. 3.51); Si
non esse domi, quos des, causabere nummos, / littera poscetur—ne didicisse iuvet.
(Ov. Ars 1.427–8); ‘Quam mala’, dicebam, ‘nostrae sunt crura puellae!’ / Nec tamen,
ut vere confiteamur, erant. / ‘Bracchia quam non sunt nostrae formosa puellae!’ / Et
tamen, ut vere confiteamur, erant. (Ov. Rem. 317–20); Qui si ex habitu novae fortu-
nae novique, ut ita dicam, ingenii, quod sibi victor induerat, spectetur . . . (Liv.
9.18.2); . . . cuius (sc. lyrae) cum se imperitum Themistocles confessus esset, ut verbis
Ciceronis utar, ‘est habitus indoctior’. (Quint. Inst. 1.10.19); Rhodii quidam, plurimi
Athenienses oratores extiterunt, apud quos omnia populus, omnia imperiti, omnia,
ut sic dixerim, omnes poterant. (Tac. Dial. 40)
Illocutionary disjunct purpose clauses: Vix incedo inanis, ne ire posse cum onere
existimes. (Pl. Am. 330); Viri quoque armati idem istuc faciunt, / ne tu mirere eius
mulierem. (Pl. Mil. 1273–4);115 Quid est? # Huic, non tibi habeo, ne erres. (Ter. An. 704);
Nunc adeo, ut tu sis sciens, / nisi puerum tolli’, iam ego hunc in mediam viam /
provolvam . . . (Ter. An. 775–7); Equidem ut de me confitear, iudices, . . . numquam . . .
tantum periculum mihi adire visus sum . . . (Cic. Ver. 3); . . . ut vetera exempla, quorum
est copia digna huius imperi gloria, relinquam neve eorum aliquem qui vivunt nomi-
nem . . . (Cic. Sest. 101); Ac ne plura complectar (sunt enim innumerabilia), bene
laudata virtus voluptatis aditus intercludat necesse est. (Cic. Fin. 2.118); . . . senectus
est natura loquacior, ne ab omnibus eam vitiis videar vindicare. (Cic. Sen. 55); Ne
longior sim, vale. (Cic. Fam. 15.19.4); Ut frontem ferias, sunt qui etiam Caesonium
putent. (Cic. Att. 1.1.1); Ne forte credas interitura quae / longe sonantem natus ad
Aufidum, / non ante vulgatas per artis / verba loquor socianda chordis. (Hor. Carm.
4.9.1–4);116 Neve haec commenta putetis, / admonitu quamquam renovetur luctus
amarus, / perpetiar memorare tamen. (Ov. Met. 14.464–6); Ne praedictum negetis,
patres conscripti, adest ingens seditio. (Liv. 2.29.1); . . . ‘ne nihil actum’, inquit, ‘hac
legatione censeatis, expiatum est quidquid ex foedere rupto irarum in nos caeles-
tium fuit.’ (Liv. 9.1.3); Ac, ne saepius dicendum sit, illud ignorari non oportet,
plurima ossa in cartilaginem desinere, nullum articulum non sic finiri. (Cels. 8.1.21);
Oportet autem comburi omnia eodem modo, ut semel dicamus, in vase fictili novo
argilla circumlito atque ita in furnum indito. (Plin. Nat. 29.98); Et, ne quid desit
ovorum gratiae, candidum ex iis admixtum calci vivae glutinat vitri fragmenta.
(Plin. Nat. 29.51);117 Sed ut illo revertar, unde decessi, et in eadem materia ostendam
supervacuam quorundam diligentiam. (Sen. Dial. 10.13.8)
Whereas with most purpose adjuncts with ut/ne the event in the main clause is con-
trollable, with a human agent who is responsible for that event, purpose clauses are
also found when some form of control over the event is implied in the context or is
suggested by the author, for example as the premeditated outcome of fate (‘voluntas
fati’). An instance in which control is implied in some way is (f): the presence of a
dictator is the consequence of decisions by the citizens. A typical instance of voluntas
fati from Livy is (g). A ‘sarcastic’ instance from Tacitus is (h). Some scholars take these
clauses as result clauses, with the negator ne equivalent to ut non. Others use the label
‘pseudo-final’ as it is used for the disjuncts described above.118 Finally, there are
instances like (i) and (j), where control seems to be entirely absent.119
(f) Dictatorem quoque hic annus habuit M. Fabium nullo terrore belli, sed ne
Licinia lex comitiis consularibus observaretur.
(‘There was a dictator in this year also, namely, Marcus Fabius, not because of any
threatened war, but in order that the Licinian law not be preserved in the consular
election.’ Liv. 7.22.10—NB: coordination of a reason adjunct and a purpose adjunct)
(g) Inde L. Genucio et Q. Servilio consulibus et ab seditione et a bello quietis
rebus, ne quando a metu ac periculis vacarent, pestilentia ingens orta.
(‘Then, when Lucius Genucius and Quintus Servilius were consuls and affairs were at
rest from strife and war, in order that things never be free from fear and dangers, a
great pestilence broke out.’ Liv. 7.1.7)
(h) Isque illi finis inscitiae erga domum suam fuit. Haud multo post flagitia uxo-
ris noscere ac punire adactus, ut deinde ardesceret in nuptias incestas.
(‘And that was the end of his blindness toward his own house: not much later he was
driven to note and to avenge the excesses of his wife—only to burn afterwards for an
incestuous union.’ Tac. Ann. 11.25.5)
(i) . . . Raetiis quos loca ipsa efferarunt, ne quid ex antiquo praeter sonum lin-
guae, nec eum incorruptum, retinerent.
(‘. . . the Raetians, whom the very nature of the country rendered savage, so that they
might preserve nothing from ancient times except the sound of their speech, and not
even that in an uncorrupted form.’ Liv. 5.33.11)
(j) Decii corpus ne eo die inveniretur nox quaerentes oppressit.
(‘Night overtook those who were searching for the body of Decius so that it could not
be found on that day.’ Liv. 8.10.10)
Appendix: Ne and nedum ‘much less’, ‘still less’, ‘let alone’ clauses can be regarded as
attitudinal disjuncts in expressions like (k) and (l). But see also § 19.72 on quasi-
coordinators.
(k) Quippe secundae res sapientium animos fatigant: ne illi conruptis moribus
victoriae temperarent.
(‘In truth, prosperity tries the souls even of the wise; still less then could
men of depraved character like these make a moderate use of victory.’ Sal.
Cat. 11.8)
(l) Satrapa si siet / amator, numquam sufferre eius sumptus queat: / nedum tu
possis.
(‘If she had a satrap for a lover, he’d never be able to sustain her extravagance,
let alone you.’ Ter. Hau. 452–4)
From Terence onwards ut purpose clauses are used in combination with interrogative
expressions, as in (m), functioning as an independent sentence, and in (n), elliptic-
ally. In Late Latin ecclesiastical writers use it often, as in (o), probably under Greek
influence (Èxl ~j ).120
(m) Quid ex ea re tandem ut caperes commodi?
(‘What would you achieve by that, if I may ask?’ Ter. Eu. 573)
(n) ‘Depugna’, inquis, ‘potius quam servias.’ Ut quid? Si victus eris, proscribare,
si viceris, tamen servias?
(‘ “Fight rather than be a slave”, you say. For what? Proscription if you’re
beaten and if you win slavery just the same?’ Cic. Att. 7.7.7)
120 For references, see Sz.: 460. Ex. (o) might be taken as a result clause (David Williams p.c.).
304 Subordinate clauses filling a satellite position
121 For a historical survey, see Sz.: 679–80. For the use of quo by the historians, see Steele (1898: 272–4).
Purpose and stipulative clauses 305
Supplement:
Corrupisse dicitur A. Cluentius iudicium pecunia, quo inimicum suum innocentem
Statium Albium condemnaret. (Cic. Clu.. 9); Eoque magis properaret ad urbem
adcedere, quo et ceterorum animos reficeret et illi facilius e periculo eriperentur.
(Sal. Cat. 48.4); . . . ob eam rem, quo populus Romanus scelere impio sit solutus, hosce
homines vobis dedo. (Liv. 9.10.9); Id ego mando remandata / quo is apud deos
inferos ut pereant/ et efficiantur quo ego heres sim. (AE 1975. 449 (Cremona,
end 1st cent. ad));122 Et Vologeses, quo bellum ex commodo pararet, an ut aemula-
tionis suspectos per nomen obsidum amoveret, tradit nobilissimos ex familia
Arsacidarum. (Tac. Ann. 13.9.4—NB: parallelism); (sc. Vitellius) . . . senatum et popu-
lum ante se agens, quo minus ut captam urbem ingrederetur . . . (Tac. Hist. 2.89.1)
With a comparative expression in the quo clause: Id amabo adiuta me, quo id fiat
facilius. (Ter. Eu. 150); . . . eo scripsi quo in suadendo plus auctoritatis haberem. (Cic.
Att. 8.9.1); (sc. Pompeius) . . . ignesque fieri prohibuit quo occultior esset eius adven-
tus. (Caes. Civ. 3.30.6); At non antiquos Macedonum reges <rem ita gessisse> sed acie
bellare solitos, urbibus parcere quantum possent, quo opulentius haberent impe-
rium. (Liv. 32.33.12)
Quo is the ablative singular neuter form of the relative pronoun qui functioning as a
manner/instrument adjunct in the relative clause. In quo clauses with a comparative
expression quo must not be confused with the ablative of comparison (for which see
§ 20.7).
122 The curse tablet is discussed by Solin (2004: 123–6). For more examples of quo clauses, see OLD s.v.
quo § 3 a,b.
123 For more examples, see OLD s.v. qui2 § 4a. For a negated argument clause with qui (negator ne), see
§ 15.88.
124 See Wölfflin (1888: 408–11).
306 Subordinate clauses filling a satellite position
(c) Tunc licentiam habeat vel curator furiosae, vel cognati adire iudicem com-
petentem, quatenus necessitas imponatur marito, omnem talem mulieris
sustentationem sufferre . . .
(‘Here the insane woman’s curator or her relatives can go to a competent
judge in order that a compulsion may be imposed on the husband to give all
this sort of support to the woman . . .’ Ulp. dig. 24.3.22.8)
The use of modo as a subordinator derives from its use as an adverb ‘only’ in inde-
pendent imperative sentences. In some of the instances cited above one might opt for
another punctuation, making the modo sequences independent sentences. Its pos-
ition in the clause is more flexible than that of dum.
More or less equivalent to stipulative clauses are quod, ut, and ne clauses in combin-
ation with the prepositional expression cum eo tamen, as in (f).127
(f) . . . recte medicina ista tentatur, cum eo tamen ne praecordia dura sint neve
ea tumeant . . .
(‘. . . this treatment may properly be tried, so long as the parts below the ribs are
neither indurated nor swollen . . .’ Cels. 2.17.4)
In Late Latin si tamen can be used in a stipulative sense, as in (g).128
(g) Si vultis videre aquam . . . potestis videre, si tamen volueritis laborem vobis
imponere ut de via camsemus forsitan miliario sexto.
(‘If you would like to see the water . . . you can, on condition that you have the energy
to turn off the road at about the sixth milestone.’ Pereg. 10.8)
Appendix: In Early Latin, especially legal, texts quod is used as a subordinator in the
sense of ‘provided that’. An example from a legal text is (h); from Plautus, (i).129
(h) Seiquas · vias . . . III<I>vir II vir aedilisve . . . / . . . munire · volet · intra /
eos · fineis · quei · eius · municipi · erun<t>, quod · eius · sine · iniuria
· . . . · id · ei · facere / · liceto.
(‘If a member of a Board of Four . . . or an aedile . . . shall be minded to pave
any roads within those boundaries which belong to the said borough, he
shall be allowed to do this, provided that it can be done without damage to
any person.’ CIL I2.590.39–42 (Taranto, 1st cent. bc (early)))
(i) Neu quisquam posthac prohibeto adulescentem filium / quin amet et scor-
tum ducat, quod bono fiat modo.
(‘And from now on let no one prevent his young son from being in love and
hiring a prostitute, so long as it happens in moderation.’ Pl. Mer. 1021–2)
Result (consecutive) clauses denote an event that is caused by or follows from the
event in the main clause. Two types of result clauses must be distinguished: an expan-
sion type and a non-expansion type.130 In the expansion (also called: correlative)
type, exemplified by (a) and (b), the main clause contains a manner (for example sic
127 For the material, see TLL s.v. cum 1367.16ff. See also § 14.6.
128 See Bertocchi and Maraldi (2003: 459–61).
129 See Sz.: 572–3, Siegert (1939: 45), and D’Elia (1975).
130 For these two types of result clauses, see Heberlein (2001 and 2002). He uses the term ‘correlative’.
Touratier (1994: 639ff.) uses the term ‘expansion’. For correlating expressions, see Cabrillana (1998).
Result clauses 309
‘so’ or ita ‘so’)131 or degree adverb (tam ‘that much’), a manner or degree adjective (for
example, talis ‘such’ or tantus ‘so large’), or another expression of manner or degree.
As the examples show, ut clauses of the correlative type are triggered by a manner or
degree expression in the main clause and are in a sense obligatory. They can be
regarded as an ‘expansion’ of these manner and degree expressions which function as
manner or degree satellites in their own clause.132 These expressions are also com-
bined with so-called consecutive relative clauses (see § 18.19). Anaphoric and demon-
strative determiners can also be used with result clauses, as in (c) (they are then
usually paraphrased as talis or tantus).133
(a) Sin dormitet, ita dormitet servom sese ut cogitet.
(‘And if he sleeps, he should sleep in such a way that he doesn’t forget that he’s a slave.’
Pl. Aul. 591)
(b) Tanta . . . dulcedine me tenuit et traxit (sc. liber tuus) ut illum sine ulla
dilatione perlegerim.
(‘With such sweetness did your book possess and pull me that I finished it without
any postponement.’ Sen. Ep. 46.1)
(c) Itaque si vir bonus habeat hanc vim ut, si digitis concrepuerit, possit in
locupletium testamenta nomen eius inrepere, hac vi non utatur . . .
(‘And so if a good man were to possess such power that, if he snapped his fingers, his
name could steal into rich men’s wills, he would not avail himself of that power . . .’
Cic. Off. 3.75)
The other, non-expansion, type of result clause, illustrated by (d) and (e), is less
closely integrated into the main clause. This type of clause, which describes a simple
result or logical inference, is relatively rare and often difficult to distinguish from a
purpose clause.134 The main clause may contain any type of event (and thus is not, as
main clauses of purpose clauses are, restricted to controllable events). The event in the
result clause may follow the event of the main clause in time, but this is not necessar-
ily the case, as a comparison between (d) and (e) shows.
(d) Si quando non pluet, uti terra sitiat, aquam inrigato leniter in areas.
(‘Whenever there is no rain with the result that the ground dries out, water the beds
lightly.’ Cato Agr. 151.4)
(e) Fuit etiam disertus, ut nemo ei Thebanus par esset eloquentia . . .
(‘Epaminondas was also well-spoken, so that no Theban equalled him in eloquence . . .’
Nep. Ep. 5.1)
131 For the difference between ita . . . ut and sic . . . ut in a number of works of Cicero, see Mellet (1998).
132 For the development of talis ut from Latin to French, see Gallego (2012).
133 See TLL s.v. hic 2731.69ff.; ille 354.76ff.; is 478.80ff.; iste 508.29ff. See also Bodelot (2010: 177–8),
from whom ex. (e) is taken. See also § 14.16 on the use of these pronouns/determiners as preparative
devices with all sorts of subordinate clauses.
134 The category of ‘simple result’ or ‘logical inference’ is discussed by Krylová (1997). For a discussion
of the relationship between purpose and result clauses, see Vester (1994), Eckert (2003: 68–70), and
Cabrillana (2011).
310 Subordinate clauses filling a satellite position
For the use of the tenses in result clauses, see § 7.102. The regular mood is the sub-
junctive (see § 7.153). The label ‘consecutive clause’ is also used for ut clauses like (f),
which are in fact argument clauses and so are dealt with in § 15.27.135
(f) . . . mi / evenit ut ovans praeda onustus cederem.
(‘Just as it has become my lot to be marching along rejoicing and weighed down with
booty.’ Pl. Bac. 1068–9)
Supplement:
Expansion type (in alphabetical order by preparative expression): Sus usque adeo
pinguitudine crescere solet ut se ipsa stans sustinere non possit neque progredi
usquam. (Cato hist. 39=48C)
. . . neque sunt eius generis ut si optime tenerem digna essent ista tua sapientia ac
tuis auribus. (Cic. de Orat. 1.165)
Qui confitetur atque ita libenter confitetur ut non solum fateri sed etiam profiteri
videatur, recuperatores. (Cic. Caec. 24); Magistratuum autem nostrorum iniurias ita
multorum tulerunt ut numquam ante hoc tempus ad aram legum praesidiumque
vestrum publico consilio confugerint . . . (Cic. Ver. 2.8); Haec vos antea iudices
audistis, verum fortasse ita audistis ut auctorem rumorem haberetis sermonemque
hominum. (Cic. Ver. 3.49); Inclusum in curia senatum habuerunt Salaminum ita
multos dies ut interierint non nulli fame. (Cic. Att. 6.2.8)
Tales enim nos esse putamus ut iure laudemur . . . (Cic. Off. 1.91); Consuetudo
enim talis est ut ante pullorum cantum loca sancta non aperiantur. (Pereg. 24.8)
Tamen nemo tam sine oculis, tam sine mente vivit ut quid sit sementis ac messis,
quid arborum putatio ac vitium, quo tempore anni aut quo modo ea fiant omnino
nesciat. (Cic. de Orat. 1.249)
Quamquam nostra cura in tantum iam processit ut . . . a me rustici mercentur . . .
(Col. 3.3.13)
Sic census habitus est te praetore ut eo censu nullius civitatis res publica posset
administrari. (Cic. Ver. 2.138); Sic vivimus ut deprendi sit subito adspici. (Sen.
Ep. 43.4)
Haec erat studiorum in mea salute contentio ut ii qui a senatu de me rogabantur
eidem senatui pro me supplicarent. (Cic. Sest. 130); Sed illud os, illam impuritatem
caeni fuisse ut hos iudices legere auderet! (Cic. Phil. 5.16); Nunc vero ea vis est in
homine, ut ei multo rhetoricam citius quis ademerit, quam philosophiam conces-
serit. (Cic. Inv. 1.8); Sit mens ista quidem cunctis ut vestra recusent / fata, nec haec
alius committat proelia miles. (Luc. 3.324–5)
Non-expansion type: Mi istaec videtur praeda praedatum irier, / ut cum maiore dote
abeat quam advenerit. (Pl. Rud. 1242–3); Quaeso ut sat habeas id, pater, quod
Chrysalus / me obiurigavit plurumis verbis malis / et me meliorem fecit praeceptis
suis, / ut te ei habere gratiam aequom sit bonam. (Pl. Bac. 1019–22); Tum illa, ut
consuetum facile amorem cerneres, / reiecit se in eum flens quam familiariter!
(Ter. An. 135–6—NB: remarkable position of the ut clause); Omnes enim qui fuerunt,
aut sua pertinacia vitam amiserunt, aut tua misericordia retinuerunt, ut aut nulli
135 For a survey of the opinions on the relationship between these argument and satellite clauses, see
Heberlein (2001).
Result clauses 311
supersint de inimicis aut qui fuerunt sint amicissimi. (Cic. Marc. 21); Nudavit se in
sanctissimo templo, quoniam vita talis et civis et viri fidem non faciebat, ut eo tacente
res ipsa loqueretur. (Cic. Mil. 66—NB: remarkable quoniam clause in the result
clause?);136 Si quid acciderit, ut mutandum consilium sit, te certiorem faciam statim.
(Cic. Fam. 5.21.5); Unum (sc. iter) per Sequanos, angustum et difficile, inter montem
Iuram et flumen Rhodanum, vix qua singuli carri ducerentur, mons autem altissimus
inpendebat, ut facile perpauci prohibere possent. (Caes. Gal. 1.6.1); Haeret (sc.
emplastrum), ut fascia non sit opus. (Larg. 214); Possum pedes movere ut non cur-
ram: currere non possum ut pedes non moveam. (Sen. Dial. 2.7.5); Nam praeter
errantis barbariae aut adiectum aut deminutum clamorem miscebat Atellanicos
versus, ut tunc primum me etiam Vergilius offenderit. (Petr. 68.5); Forte tunc
Crassus genere divitiis dignitate florebat, ut vellet tamen auctioris opes. (Flor. Epit.
2.13.10)
The main subordinator used in result clauses is ut(i) ‘that’, as in the examples above.
The regular negator is non. However, when the content of the main clause is negative—
explicitly or by implication—quin ‘so that . . . not’ (equivalent to ut non) is regularly
used. Exx. (g) and (h) illustrate the use of quin without a manner or degree expression
in the main clause, (i) its expansion use.137 Ut non is also sometimes used after a
negative main clause, as is shown in (j), in parallel with ut in the preceding clause. For
relative clauses expanding expressions like tantus, see § 18.19.
(g) Iam hunc non ausim praeterire quin consistam et colloquar.
(‘Now I wouldn’t care to walk past him without stopping and accosting him.’ Pl.
Aul. 474)
(h) Quis umquam templum illud adspexit, quin avaritiae tuae, quin iniuriae,
quin audaciae testis esset?
(‘Who has ever looked at that temple without becoming a witness to your rapacity
and injustice and reckless wickedness?’ Cic. Ver. 1.154)
(i) Nec quisquam est tam ingenio duro nec tam firmo pectore, / quin, ubi
quicque occasionis sit, sibi faciat bene.
(‘Nobody has such a strong character or such a hard heart that he wouldn’t enjoy
himself when the occasion presents itself.’ Pl. As. 944–5)
(j) Nam neque tam est acris acies in naturis hominum et ingeniis, ut res tantas
quisquam nisi monstratas possit videre, neque tanta tamen in rebus obscuri-
tas, ut eas non penitus acri vir ingenio cernat, si modo aspexerit.
(‘For there is not such a keenness in the nature and character of men that anyone can
discern such great matters without having had them pointed out to him, and yet
there is not such obscurity in them that a man of keen intelligence cannot see to the
bottom of them, provided he has looked closely.’ Cic. de Orat. 3.124)
Supplement:
Expansion type: . . . numquam erit tam avarus quin te gratiis emittat manu. (Pl. Capt.
408); Nulla’st tam facilis res quin difficilis siet, / quam invitu’ facias. (Ter. Hau.
805–6); Numquam tam male est Siculis quin aliquid facete et commode dicant . . . (Cic.
Ver. 4.95); Nemo est tam fortis quin rei novitate perturbetur. (Caes. Gal. 6.39.3)
Non-expansion type: . . . nec recedit loco quin statim rem gerat. (Pl. Am. 239); Si
cades, non cades quin cadam tecum. (Pl. Mos. 329); Numquam accedo quin abs te
abeam doctior. (Ter. Eu. 791); Quis enim fundum colit nostrum quin sues habeat, et
qui non audierit patres nostros dicere . . . (Var. R. 2.4.2—NB: coordinated with a rela-
tive clause); Quis a signo Vortumni in circum maximum venit quin is uno quoque
gradu de avaritia tua commoneretur? (Cic. Ver. 1.154); Nego in Sicilia tota . . . ullum
argenteum vas . . . fuisse . . . quin conquisierit, inspexerit, quod placitum sit abstulerit.
(Cic. Ver. 4.1); Nam curiosus nemo est quin sit malevolus. (Pl. St. 208); Nemo nos-
trum est, Eruci, quin sciat tibi inimicitias cum Sex. Roscio nullas esse. (Cic. S. Rosc.
55); Sed in castello nemo fuit omnino militum quin vulneraretur . . . (Caes. Civ.
3.53.3); Nihil est illorum quin ego illi dixerim. (Pl. Bac. 1012); Nihil est in hac provin-
cia, quod aut in oppidis aut in agris maiores nostri proprium nobis reliquerint, quin
id venire iubeat. (Cic. Agr. 2.48); Nullum enim patiebatur esse diem quin aut in foro
diceret aut meditaretur extra forum. (Cic. Brut. 302); Quorum nulli ex itinere
excedere licebat quin ab equitatu Caesaris exciperetur. (Caes. Civ. 1.79.5)
In result clauses with a non-negative main clause the negator is non (nemo, nullus,
etc.), as in (k) and (l). A coordinated negative clause has neque (nec), as in (m).
Whereas there is a clear distinction between the subordinators of negated purpose
and result clauses in Early and Classical Latin (ne and ut non, respectively), this dis-
tinction disappears in Silver Latin. A rare example from Cicero of ne in a result clause
is (n).138
(k) Non enim possunt una in civitate multi rem ac fortunas amittere, ut non
pluris secum in eandem trahant calamitatem.
(‘It is, indeed, impossible for many individuals in a single State to lose their property
and fortunes without involving still greater numbers in their own ruin.’ Cic. Man. 19)
(l) Tanta vis admonitionis inest in locis ut non sine causa ex iis memoriae ducta
sit disciplina.
(‘So great a power of suggestion is present in places that it is not without reason that
the art of memory is derived from them.’ Cic. Fin. 5.2)
(m) Sed ita peragrat per animos, ita sensus hominum mentisque pertractat, ut
non desideret philosophorum descriptiones neque exquirat oratione, sum-
mum illud bonum in animone sit an in corpore . . .
(‘But in such way does he range over men’s souls, and explore their feelings and
thoughts, that he needs no philosophers’ definitions, and does not inquire in his dis-
course whether “the supreme good” is subjective or objective.’ Cic. de Orat. 1.222)
138 For negation in result clauses, see Mellet (1992) and Cabrillana (1997: 559–62).
Result clauses 313
(n) Qua re illa calamitas, si ita est appellanda, exussit hoc genus totum maledicti,
ne quisquam iam audeat reprehendere consulatum meum . . .
(‘Thus my misfortune, if misfortune it must be called, has burnt up all slander of
this kind, so that no one any more dares to cast aspersions on my consulship . . .’ Cic.
Dom. 76)
Supplement:
Non and other ‘normal’ negators: Num geometriam Euclide aut Archimede . . . num
ipsas litteras Aristophane aut Callimacho tractante tam discerptas fuisse ut nemo
genus universum complecteretur atque ut alius aliam sibi partem in qua elaboraret
seponeret? (Cic. de Orat. 3.132)
Ut neque . . . neque: Adeo’n’ ingenio esse duro te atque inexorabili / ut neque miseri-
cordia neque precibu’ molliri queas! (Ter. Ph. 497–8); Tamen tanta universae Galliae
consensio fuit libertatis vindicandae . . . ut neque beneficiis neque amicitiae memoria
moverentur . . . (Caes. Gal. 7.76.2)
Ut ne: . . . omnium instituta atque edicta praetorum fuerunt eiusmodi ut nequis cum
telo servus esset. (Cic. Ver. 5.7)
Ne: Philippum quoque satis implicatum bello finitimo ratus ne Italiam Poenosque et
pacta cum Hannibale posset respicere, Corcyram ipse se recepit. (Liv. 26.24.16);
Quae res avibus amorem loci sic conciliat ne umquam deserant. (Col. 8.8.7); Mox
libellos et auctores recitat Caesar, ita moderans ne lenire neve asperare crimina
videretur. (Tac. Ann. 2.29.2—NB: coordination); Sed illi malitia et furore caecantur,
ne videant . . . (Lact. Inst. 5.13.2)139
It is not always easy to decide between a purpose, a result, or a stipulative interpret-
ation of (ut) ne clauses in combination with ita, sic, tantus, or similar expressions in
the main clause.140 There are also situations in which both expressions are semantic-
ally possible. A debated example from Terence is (o), most likely a result clause.141
See also (p) from Caesar (most likely purpose: the position was intentionally
arranged) and (q) from Cicero (most likely stipulative). Several instances are cited
from didactic texts, where a purpose interpretation is more likely, such as (r). In com-
bination with the verb facio the ut clause expanding ita or sic resembles argument
clauses with verbs of causation (see § 15.75). An example is (s).142
(o) Hisce ego illam dictis ita tibi incensam dabo / ut ne restinguas lacrumis si
exstillaveris.
(‘I’ll incense her so much by what I’m going to tell her that you won’t be able
to put out the fire even if you dissolve into tears.’ Ter. Ph. 974–5)
(p) . . . tantumque a vallo eius prima acies aberat uti ne telum tormento adigi
posset.
(‘. . . and his front rank was only so far from the rampart to prevent a weapon
from being cast at it from a catapult.’ Caes. Civ. 3.55.1)
139 The fullest discussion of the choice between ne and ut non is in Kirk (1923: 267–8). See also Sz.:
641–2.
140 For further examples, especially of ita, see TLL s.v. 309.11ff.
141 Purpose according to Calboli (1995/6: 147). 142 Mazzanti (p.c.).
314 Subordinate clauses filling a satellite position
(q) Danda opera est omnino si possit utrisque nec minus ut etiam singulis con-
sulatur sed ita ut ea res aut prosit aut certe ne obsit rei publicae.
(‘We should by all means attend to both kinds of service, if possible; and no
less attention should be paid to protecting the interests of individuals, pro-
vided that what we do for them is beneficial, or at least not prejudicial, to the
state.’ Cic. Off. 2.72)
(r) Tabulata inter se ne minus ternis pedibus absint atque ita formentur, ne
superior ramus in eadem linea sit, qua inferior.
(‘The “stages” should be not less than three feet apart from one another and
so shaped that an upper branch may not be in the same line as a lower.’ Col.
5.6.12)
(s) Ut . . .erilem copem facerem filium / ita feci ut auri quantum vellet
sumeret . . .
(‘So as to make master’s son rich, I made sure he could take as much gold as
he wishes . . .’ Pl. Bac. 351–2)
The relative pronoun quo is rarely used in result clauses, but see (t) (for its use in
purpose clauses, see § 16.51; see also § 18.19). There are a few attestations in Late
Latin.143 For rare instances of quatenus in a consecutive sense in (very) Late Latin, see
Wölfflin (1888: 411–12).
(t) Num tibi nam, amabo, ianua est mordax mea, / quo intro ire metuas . . .?
(‘Please, you don’t think my door will bite you, do you, so that you should be
afraid to go in?’ Pl. Truc. 352–3)
There are rare instances of the use of the infinitive in ecclesiastical texts, which can
best be explained as influenced by Greek or else as simply incorrect.144
Conditional (or: ‘hypothetical’) clauses refer to a state of affairs which the speaker
expresses as an assumption or condition under which the state of affairs of the main
clause must be understood. That state of affairs may or may not correspond to
reality.145 The regular subordinator is si ‘if ’, ‘supposing that’, ‘in case that’ (sei in early
inscriptions and occasionally as an archaism elsewhere). The assumptive (or: hypo-
thetical) value of the si clause is nicely illustrated by (a) and (b), where it is contrasted
with a temporal cum clause.146
(a) Quae, si prodierit atque adeo cum prodierit—scio enim proditurum esse—
audiet.
(‘All these exploits of his, if, or rather when, he comes forward as a witness—for I
know that he will do so—he shall hear of from me.’ Cic. S. Rosc. 100)
143 See Sz.: 680. 144 See Sz.: 639 and Panchón (2007: 164, 170–4).
145 Lehmann (1977: 238) uses the term ‘disjunctive situation’ for what the si clause refers to.
146 Discussed inter alios by Núñez (1996: 261).
Conditional clauses 315
(b) Si damnatus eris, atque adeo cum damnatus eris—nam dubitatio damna-
tionis illis reciperatoribus quae poterat esse?—virgis te ad necem caedi
necesse erit.
(‘If you are found guilty, or rather when you are found guilty—for before those
assessors what doubt could there be of it?—you will have to be flogged to death.’ Cic.
Ver. 3.70)
The interpretation of a si clause as a strict condition (‘only if ’) depends on the rela-
tionship between the states of affairs in the two clauses, as is described by Cicero in
(c). (Here we are dealing with a logical deduction; see § 16.57.) A conditional inter-
pretation may also appear from the presence of particles or adverbs in the si clause
and/or in the main clause (see § 16.57).
(c) Nam hoc quidem: ‘Si spiritum ducit, vivit’, ‘si dies est, lucet’ eiusmodi est, ut
cum priore necessario posterius cohaerere videatur.
(‘For instance the sentences, “If he is breathing, he is alive,” “If it is daytime, it is light,”
are of such a nature that the conclusion seems to be necessarily connected with the
condition.’ Cic. Inv. 1.86—NB: cf. Cic. Luc. 143)
The subordinators formed with si (etsi, etiamsi, and tamenetsi) are described in
§ 16.76–16.80 (concessive clauses). For conditional dum, dummodo, and modo,
see § 16.53. For the conditional interpretation of adjacent independent sentences, see
§ 24.47. For the conditional interpretation of ablative absolute clauses and secondary
predicates, see § 16.89 and § 21.17, respectively.147
In the combination of the conditional and the main clause, the former is usually
called the protasis, the latter the apodosis (also ‘antecedent’ and ‘consequent’). The
combination of protasis and apodosis is called a conditional (or: hypothetical)
period. In this Syntax the terms ‘si clause’ and ‘main clause’ are the ones used
most often.
Si clauses can function as adjuncts and as attitudinal or illocutionary disjuncts.
These three types of conditional clause have different syntactic properties, especially
with regard to the position of the conditional clause, the use of correlative expressions
in the main clause, and the type of main clauses with which they occur.
The speaker is free to present the state of affairs in the conditional and in the main
clause as factive (‘realis’), as possible or not unlikely (‘potentialis’), or as counterfac-
tual (‘irrealis’). The indicative mood marks the realis, the subjunctive I (present or
perfect) the potentialis, the subjunctive II (imperfect or pluperfect) the irrealis (for
details see § 7.8). Examples of these three types are (d)–(f), respectively.
(d) Si Fabius oriente Canicula natus est, Fabius in mari non morietur.
(‘If Fabius was born at the rising of the dogstar, Fabius will not die at sea.’ Cic. Fat.
12—perfect and future indicatives)
147 The most detailed study of conditional clauses is Nutting (1925). The most recent discussion of the
literature can be found in Bertocchi and Maraldi (2011).
316 Subordinate clauses filling a satellite position
(e) Nam si sciat noster senex fidem non esse huic habitam, / suscenseat . . .
(‘For if our old man was to know you didn’t trust him, he’d be angry . . .’ Pl. As.
458–9—present subjunctives)
(f) Si venisses ad exercitum, a tribunis militaribus visus esses. Non es autem ab
his visus: non es igitur ad exercitum profectus.
(‘If you had come to the army you would have been seen by the military tribunes. But
you were not seen by them. Therefore you did not set out for the army.’ Cic. Inv.
1.87—pluperfect subjunctives)
Although statistically the moods (and tenses) are often the same in both clauses, this
is not a grammatical rule (details on the moods in §§ 7.154–7).
The term ‘hypothetical’ is used in many ways and is in certain conditional periods a
more precise term than ‘conditional’.148
Appendix: Alongside the various recognized uses of quod (see § 16.83) there are also
a few late instances of quod where si is expected. However, those few instances do not
constitute sufficient evidence to assume that quod ever functioned as a conditional
subordinator.149 For the use of the preposition absque (apsque) in a way that resem-
bles the use of a conditional subordinator, see § 4.15, Appendix. For alternative
conditional clauses with sive/seu, see § 16.65.
148 See Touratier (1998) on si as the marker of a ‘supposition’. See also Wakker’s definition (1994:
49–50). For discussion of the terminology, see Wakker (1994: 21–3) and Declerck and Reed (2001: 13–15).
They prefer the term ‘conditional’ as the overall term. See also Bertocchi and Orlandini (2002).
149 See Sz.: 580 and Svennung (1936: 508–9).
150 For these forms of negation, see Di Bene (1963: 7–52) and Bertocchi and Maraldi (2011: 114–24).
151 See Ernout (1929).
Conditional clauses 317
(Virgil 5/25; Ovid 265/22). Livy, Tacitus, and Ammianus liked it (386/163; 198/71;
64/78). Columella (193/0), Pliny the Elder (459/50), and Petronius (48/5—three in
poetry, not in the Cena) avoided it. It is a rare archaism in Late Latin. There is much
variation in the manuscripts, possibly favouring nisi.152
Nisi is used as a conditional subordinator, but also as an adverb (see § 16.67 fin.). The
overall meaning of nisi clauses, based on nisi’s meaning ‘unless’, is ‘on condition that
something is not the case’. However, if the nisi clause follows the main clause, it often
means ‘making an exception for X’ or ‘setting aside X’. Negation of a conditional clause
with si by non means ‘on the assumption that something is not the case’. Ni is used in
both ways. There are situations in which both nisi and si non can be used, depending
on how the language user wants to present the state of affairs. This is illustrated by (a)
and (b). Sometimes the two forms of negation are used within the same sentence, as
in (c).153
(a) Quae nisi subest res ab oratore percepta et cognita, inanem quandam habet
elocutionem et paene puerilem.
(‘Unless there is such knowledge, well-grasped and comprehended by the speaker,
there must be something empty and almost childish in the utterance.’ Cic. de
Orat. 1.20)
(b) Haec autem oratio, si res non subest ab oratore percepta et cognita, aut nulla
sit necesse est aut omnium inrisione ludatur.
(‘Yet this style, if the underlying subject-matter is not comprehended and mastered
by the speaker, must inevitably be of no account or even become the sport of univer-
sal derision.’ Cic. de Orat. 1.50)
(c) . . . decem illi quos post Cannensem pugnam iuratos ad senatum misit
Hannibal se in castra redituros ea quorum erant potiti Poeni nisi de redi-
mendis captivis impetravissent, si non redierunt vituperandi.
(‘. . . those ten whom Hannibal sent to the senate on parole after the battle of Cannae,
who had taken an oath that they would return to the camp which the Carthaginians
captured if they did not succeed in negotiating an exchange of prisoners—if they did
not return, they ought to be reproved.’ Cic. Off. 3.113)
(i) Ni (for ni in quid ni and quidni, see § 8.4). There are a number of instances where
a ni clause is in contrast with a preceding si clause, as in (d). In those cases ni equals si
non. When there is no explicit contrast this is less obvious; the overwhelming major-
ity of ni clauses are in conditional periods where ni equals nisi. Frequent, especially in
comedy, is its use in threats, execrations, and other emotional statements, as is illus-
trated by (e). Ex. (f) illustrates its use in an open condition. It is also found with main
152 Counts based on BTL, with corrections on the basis of a few lexica. For the historical development,
see Sz.: 667–8, also for exceptional ni forte in Quint. Inst. 11.2.27. For the manuscripts of Statius, see
Hall (2008: 383–6).
153 Taken from K.-St.: II.412.
318 Subordinate clauses filling a satellite position
clauses referring to purely hypothetical states of affairs, such as the ‘almost situation’
in (g) (see § 16.62).154
(d) Si in ius vocat, <ito>. Ni it, antestamino.
(‘If plaintiff summons defendant to court, he shall go. If he does not go, plaintiff shall
call witness thereto.’ Lex XII I.1)
(e) Nunc quando ego sum, vapulabis, ni hinc abis, ignobilis.
(‘Now that I am him, you’ll get a thrashing unless you go away from here, you
unknown creature.’ Pl. Am. 440)
(f) Tace, tace, meus hic est homo, / ni omnes di . . . deserunt.
(‘Be quiet, be quiet, this chap is mine, unless all the gods . . . leave me in the lurch.’
Pl. Ps. 600–600a)
(g) Vide sis, ego ille doctus leno paene in foveam decidi, / ni hic adesses.
(‘Just look, I, that clever pimp, almost fell into a pit, if you hadn’t been present.’
Pl. Per. 594–5)
Supplement:
= si non: Si is homo qui devotus est moritur, probe factum videri. Ni moritur, tum
signum . . . in terram defodi . . . (Liv. 8.10.12); . . . legati Aurunci senatum adeunt ni
decedatur Volsco agro bellum indicentes. (Liv. 2.26.4—NB: or = nisi?)
= nisi: Nam nec Bellona mi umquam nec Mars creduat, / ni illum exanimalem faxo, si
convenero, / nive exheredem fecero vitae suae. (Pl. Bac. 847–9—NB: coordination); Ni
abeas, quamquam tu bella es, / malum tibi magnum dabo iam. (Pl. Bac. 1172a–3);
Moriar, ni, quae tua gloria est, puto te malle a Caesare consuli quam inaurari! (Cic.
Fam. 7.13.1)
Atque edepol mirum ni subolet iam hoc huic vicinae meae. (Pl. Cas. 554); Mirum
ni illa salva’st et ego perii. (Ter. Hau. 663)
Nam ni ita esset, tecum orarem ut ei quod posses mali / facere faceres. (Pl. Bac.
554–5); Animum inducam facile ut tibi istuc credam ni te noverim. (Pl. Poen. 877);
Ni / doleres tu, ego dolerem. (Pl. Ps. 1320–20a); . . . ni partem maxumam / existu-
marem scire vostrum, id dicerem. (Ter. Hau. 8–9); Haec ego iudices, non auderem
proferre, ni vererer ne forte plura de isto ab aliis in sermone quam a me in iudicio vos
audisse diceretis. (Cic. Ver. 4.55); Nam ni ita esset, quo iure equitatum a consule
abduceret? (Cic. Phil. 11.27); Quod ni Catilina maturasset pro curia signum sociis
dare, eo die post conditam urbem Romam pessumum facinus patratum foret. (Sal.
Cat. 18.8); Et ni / posces ante diem librum cum lumine, si non / intendes animum
studiis et rebus honestis, / invidia vel amore vigil torquebere. (Hor. Ep. 1.2.34–7);
Causticis namque curabatur, ni usque in ossa corpus exustum esset, rebellante taedio.
(Plin. Nat. 26.3); Vitellius litteras ad Titianum, fratrem Othonis, composuit, exitium
ipsi filioque eius minitans, ni incolumes sibi mater ac liberi servarentur. (Tac. Hist.
1.75.2); Arsissetque bello provincia, ni Quadratus, Syriae rector, subvenisset. (Tac.
Ann. 12.54.3–4)155
154 For a discussion of such ni instances, see Gratwick (2002: 54–5). He also supports Merula’s conjec-
ture ni instead of nisi in Cato Agr. pr. 1.
155 For Tacitus’ use of ni (not in Ann. 13–16), see Löfstedt (1942/1933: II.284).
Conditional clauses 319
Me non perdent. Illum ut perdant facere possum, si velim, / meum erum ut per-
dant, ni mihi metuam, Milphio. (Pl. Poen. 864–5); Multa me dehortantur a vobis,
Quirites, ni studium rei publicae omnia superet. (Sal. Jug. 31.1)
(ii) Si non. A si clause containing the negator non indicates the assumption that
something is not the case. Non may function either as a clause negator or as a local
negator (for this distinction, see § 8.1). Examples of the former are (h)–(j). The
scope (see § 8.2) may also be on a particular word, as in (k), where tangendi is in
contrast with videndi. A following main clause often contains an adversative coord-
inator (at, sed) and/or an adverb of certainty or contrast (certe, tamen) or a particu-
larizing particle (quidem, saltem), as in (l). A possible example of local negation
is (m).
(h) Quis ego sum saltem, si non sum Sosia?
(‘Then who am I, if I’m not Sosia?’ Pl. Am. 438)
(i) Si non nos materiarius remoratur, quod opu’s<t> qui det / —novi indolem
nostri ingeni—cito erit parata navis.
(‘If the supplier of timber, who should give us what we need, doesn’t delay us—I
know what sort of characters we have—the ship will be ready quickly.’ Pl. Mil.
920–1)
(j) Ludunt formosae. Casta’st quam nemo rogavit. / Aut, si rusticitas non vetat,
ipsa rogat.
(‘The beautiful keep holiday. Chaste is she whom no one has asked—or, if rusticity
does not prevent her, she herself asks first.’ Ov. Am. 1.8.43–4)
(k) Quid? Nil? Si non tangendi copia’st, / eho ne videndi quidem erit?
(‘How do you mean “nothing”? If I don’t have the opportunity to touch her, hey,
won’t I even get to see her?’ Ter. Eu. 638–9)
(l) Si illud non licet, / saltem hoc licebit.
(‘If that’s not permitted, at least this will be.’ Ter. Eu. 639–40)
(m) . . . acceptum face redditumque votum, / si non illepidum neque invenustum’st.
(‘. . . record the vow as received and duly paid, if it is not out of taste nor inelegant.’
Catul. 36.16–17)
Supplement:
Si affers, tum patent. Si non est quod des, aedes non patent. (Pl. As. 242); Nam si
mutuas non potero, certum est sumam faenore. (Pl. Aul. 248); Id si relinquo ac non
peto omnes ilico me suspicentur, credo, habere aurum domi. (Pl. Aul. 109); Si non
ubi sedeas locus est, est ubi ambules . . . (Pl. Capt. 12); Di illum perduint! / Quid, si
non veniet? Maneamne usque ad vesperum? (Ter. Hec. 441–2); O miserum te, si
haec intellegis, miseriorem, si non intellegis hoc litteris mandari, hoc memoriae
prodi . . . (Cic. Phil. 2.54); Quod si non ita est . . . cur tam repente pacis est facta men-
tio? (Cic. Phil. 12.3); Neque enim bonitas nec liberalitas nec comitas esse potest non
plus quam amicitia si haec non per se expetantur sed ad voluptatem utilitatemve
referantur. (Cic. Off. 3.33); Quia, si mala sunt, is qui erit in iis beatus non erit. Si
mala non sunt, iacet omnis ratio Peripateticorum. (Cic. Fin. 5.86); Si id non feceris,
320 Subordinate clauses filling a satellite position
mirabor. Sed confido te esse facturum. (Cic. Att. 3.3); In eo enim totum est positum
id quod cogitamus. Quae cogitatio si non incidisset, mihi crede, istuc ut cetera non
laborarem. (Cic. Att. 13.32.1); Denique, si fuit magni animi non esse supplicem vic-
tori, vide ne . . . si re publica non possis frui, stulti sit nolle privata. (Cic. Fam. 4.9.4);
Solus eram, si non saevus adesset Amor. (Ov. Am. 1.6.34); Et peream, si non invitant
omnia culpam. (Ov. Ep. 7.183); . . . victi necessitate legatos mittunt, qui primum
pacem aequam peterent; si pacem non inpetrarent, uti provocarent ad pugnam.
(Liv. 9.4.2); Hoc tamen nuntia, melius me morituram fuisse si non in funere meo
nupsissem. (Liv. 30.15.7)
With particles or adverbs in the superordinate clause (in alphabetical order by
particle or adverb): Si non sum ex eo loco deiectus quo prohibitus sum accedere, at
ex eo sum deiectus quo accessi unde fugi. (Cic. Caec. 84); Sin hoc non licet per
Cratippum, at illud certe dabis quod honestum sit id esse maxime propter se expeten-
dum. (Cic. Off. 3.33); . . . tacente te, qui, si non plus ingenio valebas quam ego, certe
timebas minus. (Cic. Att. 3.15.7); Cum saepius mater et avia pueri postularent, uti si
non redderet pecuniam nec rationem daret, diceret saltem quantum pecuniae
Malleoli deportasset . . . (Cic. Ver. 1.92); Si non licuit, tamen illo mortuo non modo
filius sed quivis heres rectissime potuit auferre. (Cic. Flac. 59)
(iii) Nisi resembles English ‘unless’ or ‘except if ’.156 The nisi clause formulates
the state of affairs that will prevent the state of affairs in the main clause from com-
ing into effect. Nisi is used in threats and related statements, much like ni, as in (n),
which is very similar to the Plautine ni example (e) given above. In (o) the order of
the clauses is reversed, but the semantic relation is the same. Ex. (p) illustrates its
use in strong asseverations. Ex. (q) represents the most common use of nisi: here,
the fact that the speaker has another obligation excludes the possibility of inviting
the addressee (‘if not’). Ex. (r) has the reverse order. Nisi is also found in ‘almost
situations’, as in (s)—compare (g). For nisi ‘except that’ in clauses of exception, see
§ 16.67.
(n) Hercle vero vapulabis, nisi iam loquere aut hinc abis.
(‘Honestly, you’ll get a beating unless you tell me now or go away.’ Pl. Mer. 168)
(o) Nunc adeo nisi abis actutum . . . / . . . ego hic te, mulier . . . pedibus proteram.
(‘Now unless you leave this instant . . ., I’ll stamp you with my feet here, woman . . .’ Pl.
Truc. 267–8)
(p) Di deaeque omnes me . . . interficiant, / nisi ego illam anum interfecero
siti . . .
(‘May all the gods and goddesses kill me . . ., if I don’t kill that old woman with thirst . . .’
Pl. Mos. 192–3)
(q) Vocem te ad cenam, nisi egomet cenem foris.
156 See OLD s.v. nisi § 1. The etymology of nisi is not certain: ne + si (OLD) or ni (< nĕ + ī) + si (de Vaan
2008: 408; 561).
Conditional clauses 321
(‘I’d invite you to dinner, if I weren’t out myself.’ Pl. St. 190)
(r) Nisi te amarem plurumum, / non facerem.
(‘If I didn’t love you most, I wouldn’t have done it.’ Pl. Am. 525–6)
(s) Ego autem si mihi imposuisset aliquid, quod paene fecit nisi tua malitia
adfuisset, animo iniquo tulissem.
(‘If he had put something over on me, as he very nearly did but for your cunning on
my side, I should have been vexed.’ Cic. Att. 15.26.4)
Supplement:
Quid mi refert Chrysalo esse nomen nisi factis probo? (Pl. Bac. 704); Nisi sciero prius
ex te, tu ex me numquam hoc quod rogitas scies. (Pl. Per. 218); Quam ob rem, per
deos immortales, colligite vos, tribuni plebis, deserite eos a quibus, nisi prospicitis,
brevi tempore deseremini . . . (Cic. Agr. 1.26); Nisi me suspendo, occidi. (Pl. Rud.
1415); Etenim nec iustitia nec amicitia esse omnino poterunt, nisi ipsae per se
expetuntur. (Cic. Fin. 3.70); Vitis quidem quae natura caduca est et nisi fulta est,
fertur ad terram, eadem ut se erigat, claviculis suis quasi manibus quicquid est nacta,
complectitur. (Cic. Sen. 52); Negat Epicurus iucunde posse vivi, nisi cum virtute
vivatur . . . (Cic. Tusc. 3.49)
Satis aps te accipiam, nisi videam mihi te amicum esse, Antipho. (Pl. St. 508); Nam
ita me Venus amoena amet, / ut ego huc iam dudum simitu exissem vobiscum foras, /
nisi me vobis exornarem. (Pl. St. 742–4); Quae fuisset igitur iusta causa restituendi
mei, nisi fuisset iniusta eiciendi? (Cic. Mil. 36); Quae quidem ego non ferrem nisi me
in philosophiae portum contulissem et nisi haberem socium studiorum meorum
Atticum nostrum. (Cic. Fam. 7.30.2); Ergo ego nisi peperissem, Roma non oppugna-
retur; nisi filium haberem, libera in libera patria mortua essem. (Liv. 2.40.8); Folia
erant plantaginis, nisi angustiora essent et magis laciniosa convexaque in ter-
ram . . . (Plin. Nat. 25.124)
Minus, originally used as a milder form of negation than non (see § 8.20), is occasion-
ally used by Plautus in conditional periods, as in (t), but it becomes more common
from the Classical period onwards, where it equals si non. Sometimes minus can
also be understood as a degree adverb.157 Condensed si(n) minus is more common
(see § 16.57 fin.).
(t) Redi modo huc intro: monebo, siquidem meministi minus.
(‘Just return in here: I’ll remind you if you don’t remember it well.’ Pl. Cas. 998)
(u) Si quid ad me scripseris, ita faciam ut te velle intellexero. Sin autem tu minus
scripseris, ego tamen omnia quae tibi utilia esse arbitrabor summo studio
diligenterque curabo.
(‘If you write to me, I shall act as I understand you want me to. But if you do not write,
I shall nonetheless pay most zealous and particular heed to everything that seems to
me for your advantage.’ Cic. Fam. 6.22.3)
Supplement:
Ne et hic varientur virgis et loris domi, / si minus curassint, quom eri reveniant
domum. (Pl. Poen. 26–7); Quare si ipsa ratio minus perficiet, ut mortem neglegere
possimus, at vita acta perficiat, ut satis superque vixisse videamur. (Cic. Tusc.
1.109); . . . eo consilio, ut, si possent, castellum, cui praeerat Quintus Titurius legatus,
expugnarent pontemque interscinderent, si minus potuissent, agros Remorum popu-
larentur . . . (Caes. Gal. 2.9.4–5)
158 Núñez (1998: 598, n. 6) observes that in his corpus non-adjunct conditional clauses are very infre-
quent (much less than 20%).
159 For differences in what may be expressed in conditional and time clauses in general, see
Wakker (1994: 123–5).
Conditional clauses 323
The precise relationship between the si clause and the main clause may be specified by
the use of various particles and adverbs in the former. The conditional relation may be
made more restrictive by the particles modo and tantummodo ‘only’, as in (e) and (f).
The particle quidem in (g) has a similar function. In Late Latin tamen is used in a
comparable way; an early instance is (h). In (i) and (j) the particle iam, in its ‘polar’
use, indicates that the hypothetical situation described in the si clause is contrary to
what Cicero expects.161
(e) Id modo si mercedis / datur mi, ut meus victor vir belli clueat, / satis mi esse
ducam.
(‘Only if my reward is that my husband is renowned as victor in war, will I consider
this enough for me.’ Pl. Am. 646–8)
160 For discussion of this sequence of subordinate clauses preceding their main clause, see
Blänsdorf (1967: 11–13).
161 For this use of si tamen, see Bertocchi and Maraldi (2003; 2011: 129–33). For iam, see Kroon and
Risselada (1998: 434–5; 2002: 71–2), from whom I take example (i). More examples in TLL s.v. iam
127.59ff. (‘vi concessiva’).
324 Subordinate clauses filling a satellite position
(f) Ac si tum P. Sestius, iudices, in templo Castoris animam quam vix retinuit
edidisset, non dubito quin, si modo esset in re publica senatus, si maiestas
populi Romani revixisset, aliquando statua huic ob rem publicam interfecto
in foro statueretur.
(‘And if, gentlemen, Publius Sestus had then in the Temple of Castor breathed out his
last breath, which he held on to with difficulty, I have no doubt, if only there were a
Senate in the State, if the majesty of the Roman People should come to life again, that
a statue would one day be set up to him in the Forum as having been slain in defence
of the State.’ Cic. Sest. 83)
(g) . . . vehes pol hodie me, si quidem hoc argentum ferre speres.
(. . . you’ll carry me on your back today, at least if you hope to get this money.’ Pl.
As. 699)
(h) . . . hoc prohibete nefas scelerique resistite nostro, / si tamen hoc scelus est.
(‘. . . keep this sin from me and fight off my crime, if indeed it is a crime.’ Ov. Met.
10.322–3)
(i) At si rogem iam quid est quod peccem aut quam ob rem hoc facias, nescias.
(‘If I were to ask you now what it is I am doing wrong or why you are doing this, you
wouldn’t have any idea.’ Ter. Hau. 1008)
(j) Nunc, si iam res placeat, agendi tamen viam non video.
(‘As it is, even if I were to approve in principle, I see no way of going to work.’ Cic.
Att. 5.4.1)
Adverbs may fulfil a similar function, as is illustrated by (k)–(o) (for subordinate
clauses in general, see § 14.18). The conditional interpretation of the si clause is
strengthened in this way.
(k) Ne quis concedat, quo olea legunda et facienda carius locetur, extra quam si
quem socium in praesentiarum dixerit.
(‘No one shall form a combination for the purpose of raising the contract price for
harvesting and milling olives, unless he names his associate at the time.’ Cato Agr.
144.4)
(l) De classe Carthaginiensibus remissum, praeterquam si quid navium ex
foedere deberent.
(‘The Carthaginians were released from their promise about the fleet, except if they
had a treaty obligation to provide ships.’ Liv. 36.4.9—NB: see Briscoe ad loc.)
(m) Quare . . . potius in seminariis surculos de ficeto quam grana de fico expedit
obruere, praeter si aliter nequeas . . .
(‘It is therefore better to plant in the nursery shoots from the fig tree than grains from
the fruit unless you are unable to do this for other reasons . . .’ Var. R. 1.41.5)
(n) . . . nec mi umbra hic usquam est, nisi si in puteo quaepiam est.
(‘. . . and I don’t have shade anywhere here, unless there’s some in the well.’ Pl.
Mos. 769)
Conditional clauses 325
(o) Si ea seposita, ut dicis, essent, tuque valde spectandi cupidus esses, non dubi-
tares rogare dominum, ut proferri iuberet, praesertim si esset familiaris.
(‘If these were laid aside, as you describe, and you had a strong desire to behold them,
you would not hesitate to ask the master of the house to order them to be brought
out, especially if you were his familiar friend.’ Cic. de Orat. 1.162)
Supplement:
Sed ne inornata [quae] sunt quidem, nisi cum sunt infra rei, de qua loquendum est,
dignitatem, excepto si obscena nudis nominibus enuntientur. (Quint. Inst. 8.3.38)
Illa autem exceptio cui probari tandem potest, quod negant sapientem susceptu-
rum ullam rei publicae partem, extra quam si eum tempus et necessitas coegerit?
(Cic. Rep. 1.10)
Sed etiam superioribus invidetur saepe vehementer et eo magis si intolerantius se
iactant et aequabilitatem communis iuris praestantia dignitatis aut fortunae suae
transeunt. (Cic. de Orat. 2.209)
Aliter ampla domus dedecori saepe domino est, si est in ea solitudo; et maxime si
aliquando alio domino solita est frequentari. (Cic. Off. 1.139)
Quin nos hinc domum / redimus, nisi si historiam scripturi sumus? (Pl. Men.
247–8); Sed ubi est is? # Advenit simul. # Ubi is ergo est? Nisi si in vidulo / aut si in
mellina attulisti. (Pl. Epid. 22–3); Dixisset etiam conlega meus, patruus tuus, nisi si tu
es solus Antonius. (Cic. Phil. 2.70); Hic noster, hic plebis nostrae habitus fuit eritque
semper, nisi si quando a vobis proque vobis arma acceperimus. (Liv. 6.26.5); In
socium nostrum praetor populi Romani animadvertit in privato, nocte, tumultuario
tribunali, ebrius fortasse, ne calceatus quidem—nisi si, ut omnia spectaret meretrix,
diligenter exegit. (Sen. Con. 9.2.24)
Habes causam opinionis meae: et tamen velim scire quid cogites in primisque si
quid etiam nunc novi est. (Cic. Att. 10.17.4)
Nec quotus annus eat, nec quo sit nata require / consule, quae rigidus munera
censor habet, / praecipue si flore caret . . . (Ov. Ars 2.663–5)
With conditional adjuncts a preceding main clause may contain various expressions
that strengthen the conditional relation between the clauses, notably the manner
adverbs sic and ita ‘in that case’, as in (p) and (q), or noun phrases with, for example,
condicio ‘condition’.
(p) Tu, quoniam necesse nihil est, sic scribes aliquid si vacabis.
(‘Seeing as there’s no real need, only write to me if you have time.’ Cic. Att. 12.38.2)
(q) . . . crebris nos litteris appellato, atque ita si idem fiet a nobis.
(‘. . . salute me with letters in plenty, on the understanding that the same shall be forth-
coming on my side.’ Cic. Fam. 15.20.2)
Supplement:
Nam hoc ipsum ita iustum est, quod recte fit, si est voluntarium. (Cic. Off. 1.28); Ita
enim senectus honesta est, si se ipsa defendit, si ius suum retinet, si nemini emanci-
pata est, si usque ad ultimum spiritum dominatur in suos. (Cic. Sen. 38); Cuius
ita aliqua spes est, si eam, quem ad modum ut victor fert Hannibal, sic vos ut victi
audietis . . . (Liv. 21.13.5); Erat mihi in animo etiam tum sic uti beneficio eius si tu
326 Subordinate clauses filling a satellite position
concessisses. (Cic. Att. 14.13a.2); Decreverunt enim, ut, cum populus regem iussisset,
id sic ratum esset, si patres auctores fierent. (Liv. 1.17.9)
Ea lege hoc adeo faciam, si facit / quod ego hunc aequom censeo. (Ter. Hau.
1054–5); Sed tamen ego filio dixeram librum tibi legeret et auferret, aut ea condicione
daret si reciperes te correcturum, hoc est, si totum alium faceres. (Caec. Fam. 6.7.4)
162 For the ‘pseudo-apodotic’ use of at, see Kroon (1995: 344–8).
163 For correlative patterns of si, see Rosén (2011: 140–2).
Conditional clauses 327
950–1); Pecuniam si cuipiam fortuna ademit aut si alicuius eripuit iniuria, tamen,
dum existimatio est integra, facile consolatur honestas egestatem. (Cic. Quinct. 49)
Si ego minam non ultus fuero probe quam lenoni dedi, / tum profecto me sibi
habento scurrae ludificatui. (Pl. Poen. 1280–1); Si igitur rettulit falsum senatus con-
sultum, tum est rogatio. Si non rettulit, nulla est. (Cic. Dom. 50)
Preceding si clauses are often closely related to the preceding context and in that way
serve as a ‘bridge’ between what precedes and the apodosis. In relation to the preced-
ing context, they may resume or summarize, as in (t) and (u)—note the anaphoric
expression ita feceris in (u)—serve as a contrast, as in (v), provide an illustration, as
in (w), or contain one out of several alternative possibilities, as in (x). They have top-
ical features, which means that the apodosis usually contains salient information.164
Following si clauses often express a proviso or a correction, as in (y).
(t) Non licet donati opsoni me participem fieri? / # Si volebas participari,
auferres dimidium domum.
(‘May I not have my share of the provisions I gave as a gift? # If you wanted to have
your share, you should have taken half home.’ Pl. Truc. 747–8)
(u) Bubilia bona, bonas praesepis, Faliscas clatratas. Clatros interesse oportet
pede. Si ita feceris, pabulum boves non eicient.
(‘(sc. have) Good stalls, stout pens, and latticed feed-racks. The rack bars should be
a foot apart. If you make them in this way the cattle will not scatter their feed.’ Cato
Agr. 4)
(v) Si quid est quod doleat, dolet. Si autem non est, tamen hoc hic dolet.
(‘If I have anything to feel pain with, I feel pain; but if I don’t, I still feel it here.’
Pl. Cist. 67)
(w) (The discussion is about whether Zeno and other Stoics were excused in using
new expressions for their concepts.) Si enim Zenoni licuit, cum rem aliquam
invenisset inusitatam, inauditum quoque ei rei nomen imponere, cur non
liceat Catoni?
(‘If when Zeno invented some novel idea he was permitted to denote it by an equally
unheard-of word, why should not Cato be permitted to do so too?’ Cic. Fin. 3.15)
(x) (There are two possible hostes.) Si igitur Caesar hostis, cur consul nihil refert
(v.l. referat) ad senatum?
(‘If, then, Caesar was the enemy, why does the consul not refer to the senate?’ Cic.
Phil. 3.21—see Manuwald ad loc.)
(y) Meus quidem hercle numquam fiet. # Si sapies quidem.
(‘It’ll never become mine. # If you’re smart at least.’ Pl. Trin. 559)
164 For these forms of contextual dependency, see Wakker (1994: 61–4) with references. For the
pragmatic saliency of the apodosis in such cases, see Rosén (2007a). For a description of preceding si
clauses as themes, see Cabrillana (1999a). Orlandini (1993: 132–4, with reference to Maurel) uses the term
‘echo’ protasis.
328 Subordinate clauses filling a satellite position
A special type of conditional adjunct is illustrated by (z) and (aa). Here, the state of
affairs of the main clause is logically inferred from the state of affairs of the si clause.
This ‘predictive’165 use of the conditional period for logical reasoning is a subtype of
the regular conditional period in that the si clause conditions the validity of what is
stated in the main clause. This type continues to receive much attention in logic. The
main clause may contain one of the consecutive particles ergo ‘then’ and igitur ‘then’,
as in (ab) and (ac), respectively.166
(z) Necessarie demonstrantur ea, quae aliter ac dicuntur nec fieri nec probari
possunt, hoc modo: ‘Si peperit, cum viro concubuit’.
(‘Those things are proved irrefutably which cannot happen or be proved otherwise
than as stated, for example, “If she has borne a child, she has lain with a man.” ’ Cic.
Inv. 1.44—NB: compare: quoniam peperit, cum viro concubuit in Cic. Inv. 1.74)
(aa) Haec tum vera sunt, hoc pacto: ‘Quoniam cicatrix est, fuit vulnus.’ Tum veri
similia, hoc modo: ‘Si multus erat in calceis pulvis, ex itinere eum venire
oportebat.’
(‘Arguments of this kind are sometimes true—for example, “Since there is a scar,
there has been a wound”—sometimes they are only plausible, for instance: “If there
was much dust on his shoes, he must have been on a journey.” ’ Cic. Inv. 1.47)
(ab) Si neque emisti neque hereditate venit neque donatus est neque domi natus
est, necesse est ergo subripueris.
(‘If you did not buy it nor inherit it nor receive it as a present, and it was not foaled
on your farm, then you must have stolen it.’ Cic. Inv. 1.84)
(ac) Si neque inimicitiae fuerunt nec metus ullus nec spes [ex morte illius] ali-
cuius commodi neque ad amicum huius aliquem mors illius pertinebat,
relinquitur igitur, ut ab hoc non sit occisus.
(‘If there was no enmity, and no fear, and no hope of any advantages from his death
and his death was of no interest to any friend of the defendant, it therefore follows
that the defendant did not kill him.’ Cic. Inv. 1.45)
Supplement:
Nam si nemo hac praeter iit, postquam intro abii, / cistella hic iaceret. (Pl. Cist.
683–4); Si nil mali esset, iam hic adessent. (Ter. Hau. 238); Ergo, si his rationibus
locupletatus non est, sicut omnes videtis, aut isti domi nascitur aurum, aut, unde non
est licitum, pecunias cepit. (Rhet. Her. 4.33); Si conservator rei publicae Brutus, hos-
tis Antonius. (Cic. Phil. 4.8); Si, quo die ista caedes Romae facta est, ego Athenis eo
die fui, in caede interesse non potui. (Cic. Inv. 1.63); Narrare vero rem quod breviter
iubent, si brevitas est appellanda, cum verbum nullum redundat, brevis est L. Crassi
oratio. (Cic. de Orat. 2.326); Si pecunia signata argentum est, legata est mulieri. (Cic.
Top. 53); Quae si populo Romano iniuste imperanti accidere potuerunt, quid debent
165 See Bertocchi (2001a: 230–1). It is called ‘epistemic’ by Sweetser (1990) and Toledo (2016).
166 TLL s.v. ergo 767.1ff.; s.v. igitur 261.39ff. Igitur occurs also in non-inferential conditional clauses,
e.g. Pl. Am. 209–10. See Kroon (2004b: 73).
Conditional clauses 329
putare singuli? (Cic. Off. 2.29); Etenim, si ille tali ingenio exitum non reperiebat, quis
nunc reperiet? (Cic. Att. 14.1.1); Quod quoniam non est, illud quoque necesse est,
cum videamus esse dies inaequales, et solem alio loco hodie occasurum et alio heri
occidisse. Si igitur aliis locis occidit et oritur, necesse est eum moveri, non stare.
(Hyg. Astr. 4.13)
Both the protasis and the apodosis of a conditional period can be ‘condensed’167 or
reduced, and either of them may be entirely absent if the context is clear enough.
Ex. (ad) shows a condensed protasis, (ae) a condensed apodosis, (af) a brachylogi-
cal sentence containing a protasis without an apodosis,168 and (ag) an apodosis
without a protasis. A si clause without a main clause may be interpreted as a wish,
as in (ah).
(ad) Fiat, fiat tribunus plebis, si nihil aliud, ut eo citius tu ex Epiro revertare.
(‘Yes, let him become Tribune, so that, if nothing else, you can return sooner from
Epirus.’ Cic. Att. 2.15.2)
(ae) Quid nunc mi auctores estis? # Ut frugi sies. / # Quid si animus esse non sinit?
(‘What do you advise me to do now? # To be decent. # What if my mind doesn’t allow
it?’ Pl. Poen. 721–2)169
(af) Flexuosum iter habet (sc. auditus), ne quid intrare possit si simplex et direc-
tum pateret.
(‘The auditory passage is winding, to prevent anything from being able to enter, as it
might if the passage were clear and straight.’ Cic. N.D. 2.144—instead of: quod fieri
posset si . . . pateret)
(ag) Vix reprimor quin te manere iubeam. # Cave istuc feceris. / Dicant te men-
dacem nec verum esse . . .
(‘I can barely refrain from ordering you to stay. # Don’t do that. People would say that
you’re a liar and not truthful . . .’ Pl. Mil. 1368–9)
(ah) Quod male feci, crucior. Modo si infectum fieri possiet.
(‘I’m in agony because I treated him badly; if only it could be undone!’ Pl.
Capt. 996)
Both the protasis and the apodosis may be related to a specific constituent instead
of an entire clause, as in (ai) and (aj). In (ai) the secondary predicate neganti is
interpreted conditionally (i.e. si negasset) (see also § 21.7), whereas in (aj) the noun
mortem is interpreted as a future event (i.e. se mortem illaturum esse) that will take
place if what is expressed in the conditional clause does not happen.170
(ai) Nemo ei neganti non credidisset . . .
(‘No one would have refused to believe him if he denied it . . .’ Cic. Mil. 50)
167 The term is used by Nutting (1925: 5–34). 168 See Pease ad loc.
169 Many instances can be found in Lodge s.v. si 643B–644A.
170 See Pasoli (1966: 119; 125) with references.
330 Subordinate clauses filling a satellite position
(aj) Quorum utrique mortem est minitatus, nisi sibi hortorum possessione
cessissent . . .
(‘He threatened both of these with death if they did not vacate their
mansions in his favour . . .’ Cic. Mil. 75)
Conditional clauses expressing an alternative condition which are introduced by sīn
(< sī + ne) ‘if however’, ‘but if ’ usually contain a state of affairs that is in contrast with
that of a preceding conditional clause, as in (ak), but there are also instances where
this is not the case, as in (al). Sin is more common than combinations of si with adver-
sative connectors like autem, vero, and sed. It can itself be combined with autem
and—rarely, after the Classical period—with vero. (For si . . . sive, see § 19.5.)
(ak) Si domi sum, foris est animus, sin foris sum, animus domi est.
(‘If I’m at home, my mind is outside, but if I’m outside, my mind is at home.’ Pl. Mer. 589)
(al) Non licet colloqui te? / # At mihi non lubet. # Sin tuam est quippiam in rem?
(‘Can’t we speak to you? # But I don’t want to. # But what if it’s something in your
interest?’ Pl. Ps. 252–3)
Supplement:
With a preceding si clause: Si est pauper atque haud malus, nequam habetur, / sin
dives malu’st, is cliens frugi habetur. (Pl. Men. 577–9); Si malus aut nequam est, male
res vortunt quas agit, / sin autem frugi est, eveniunt frugaliter. (Pl. Per. 453–4); Ego
nullo possum remedio me evolvere ex his turbis / quin, si hoc celetur, in metu, sin
patefit, in probro sim. (Ter. Ph. 824–5); Haec nisi omnia perspexeritis in causa,
temere a nobis illam appellari putatote. Sin erunt et aperta et nefaria, Cluentio
ignoscere debebitis . . . (Cic. Clu. 18); Si id actum est, fateor me errasse qui hoc malu-
erim, fateor insanisse qui cum illis senserim; tametsi inermis, iudices, sensi. Sin
autem victoria nobilium ornamento atque emolumento rei publicae populoque
Romano debet esse, tum vero optimo et nobilissimo cuique meam orationem gratis-
simam esse oportet. (Cic. S. Rosc. 142); . . . si gemitus in dolore ad confirmandum
animum valebit, utemur. Sin erit ille gemitus elamentabilis, si inbecillus, si abiectus, si
flebilis, ei qui se dederit, vix eum virum dixerim. (Cic. Tusc. 2.57); Equidem ego vobis
regnum trado firmum, si boni eritis, sin mali, inbecillum. (Sal. Jug. 10.6); De admis-
surae temporibus inter auctores fere constitit, primum esse vernum Parilibus, si sit
ovis matura, sin vero feta circa Iulium mensem. (Col. 7.3.11)
Without a preceding si clause: Ne me attrecta, subigitatrix. # Sin te amo? (Pl. Per.
227); Qui ager frigidior et macrior erit, ibi oleam Licinianam seri oportet. Sin in loco
crasso aut calido severis, hostus nequam erit . . . (Cato Agr. 6.2); Quo utinam velis pas-
sis pervehi liceat! Sin reflantibus ventis reiciemur, tamen eodem paulo tardius refera-
mur necesse est. (Cic. Tusc. 1.119); Haec nisi vides expediri, quam in spem me vocas?
Sin autem spei nihil est, quae est mihi vita? (Cic. Att. 3.15.6)
(‘If I have leisure for a visit to Tusculum before the Nones, I shall see you there. If not,
I shall follow you to Cumae.’ Cic. Fam. 9.5.3)
(an) In quibus si quae praeterea est ars, facile patitur, sin minus, virtute eorum et
innocentia contentus est.
(‘If they are masters of some accomplishment besides, the people have no objection,
but if not, they are content with their virtue and innocence.’ Cic. Planc. 62)
Supplement:
Quae potestas si mihi saepius sine meo vestroque periculo fiet, utar. Si minus, quan-
tum potero, non tam mihi me quam rei publicae reservabo. (Cic. Phil. 1.38); Omnis
cura mea solet in hoc versari semper—dicam enim saepius—si possim ut boni effi-
ciam aliquid dicendo. Si id minus, ut certe ne quid mali. (Cic. de Orat. 2.306—NB:
some editors read sin); Quae si eadem Romanae classi darent, revocaturum se a
populatione milites. Si minus, pro hostibus eos habiturum. (Liv. 37.28.2–3); Cf.: Educ
tecum etiam omnis tuos, si minus, quam plurimos. (Cic. Catil. 1.10)
Tu si quid .{lnwl~tuăx habes rescribe. Sin minus, populi §.t}rwl}jlx et mimo-
rum dicta perscribito. (Cic. Att. 14.3.2); Si tu is es cui nuptam esse me arbitror, et
virum et regem appello. Sin minus, eo nunc peius mutata res est quod istic cum
ignavia est scelus. (Liv. 1.47.3); Ego principes dico, vos firmate, si placet, sin minus,
meliores ostendite. (Hist. Aug. Maximin. 2.7)
Si uxorem velit, / lege id licere facere. Sin aliter, negat. (Ter. Ph. 115–16); Si id quod
oportet responderis, idem videare respondisse quod Servius. Sin aliter, etiam contro-
versum ius nosse et tractare videare. (Cic. Mur. 28)
Nunc autem, si haec civitas est, civem esse me, si non, exsulem esse non incom-
modiore loco quam si Rhodum <me> aut Mytilenas contulissem. (Cic. Fam. 7.3.5)
Qui si conservatus erit, vicimus. Sin, quod di omen avertant, omnis omnium
cursus est ad vos. (Cic. Fam. 12.6.2)
(aq) Nam si vir scortum duxit clam uxorem suam, / id si rescivit uxor, impune
est viro.
(‘If a man hires a prostitute behind his wife’s back and the wife finds out about it, the
husband goes unpunished.’ Pl. Mer. 819–20)
Supplement:
Si nox furtum faxsit, si im occisit, iure caesus esto. (Lex XII 8.12); Si quid scis me
fecisse inscite aut improbe, / si id non me accusas, tute ipse obiurgandus es. (Pl. Trin.
95–6); Sin autem is tu sis qui multam utilitatem rei publicae atque hominum soci-
etati, si in vita remaneas, adferre possis, si quid ob eam causam alteri detraxeris, non
sit reprehendendum. (Cic. Off. 3.30)
The instances above are often treated as similar to the ‘purpose’ si clauses, for which
see § 16.59. Not so by Bodelot (2000: 177ff.), from whom I take (b) and a few of the
examples given in the Supplement. OLD s.v. si § 11 contains both examples of the
type illustrated above and of ‘purpose’ si clauses. Núñez (1998) also does not seem
to make a distinction. Although it is not always possible to assign instances unam-
biguously to one of these two types, the main difference is that in the instances
discussed above, substitution of si by ut is not possible, and that in many of the si
clauses, the state of affairs is not under the control of the subject of the main verb.
Sometimes these instances are treated in the same way as what in this Syntax are
described as illocutionary conditional clauses (see § 16.64), for instance, by van de
334 Subordinate clauses filling a satellite position
Griend (1989) and Núñez (1998). One famous English example, often quoted or
adapted in the literature, is: If you’re hungry there’s food in the fridge. Of course, the
food is there even if the addressee is not hungry. Illocutionary conditional clauses
represent the point of view of the speaker/author, which is not the case with the
‘abbreviated’ periods presented here.174
Another type of abbreviation is present in idiomatic expressions with pignus (do or
accipio), attested six times in the comedies of Plautus, and also attested once in
Gellius. A common translation for pignus do is ‘to make a bet’. The actual situation in
which the expression is used is one in which two persons X and Y disagree (more or
less explicitly) about a certain situation. The conditional clause reflects the position
taken by Y who is urged or invited by X to give a security if he (Y) thinks that the
situation is indeed (not) a fact. An outsider will decide on whether or not this is the
case. If not, Y will lose his pignus. Examples are (g) and (h).175 In (h), Y holds ‘she is
not my/a (the situation is ambiguous—on purpose) daughter’. X asks Y, if it is his
opinion that she is not, to deposit a security (which Y will lose if he is wrong). A
similar form of abbreviation is found in Pl. Rud. 1380–1 referring to the involvement
of a iudex + a ni clause. It is not entirely clear how expressions with sponsio (see the
Supplement) are related to this.
(g) Aio, vel da pignus, ni ea sit filia.
(‘I do say so. If you like, make a bet if she isn’t the daughter.’ Pl. Epid. 699—
NB: ea’st (i.e. ea est) cj. Brugmann)
(h) Sed contra librarius in quodvis pignus vocabat, si in una uspiam littera delic-
tum esset.
(‘But the bookseller for his part offered to wager any amount whatever that
there were not a mistake even in a single letter.’ Gel. 5.4.2)
Supplement:
Da hercle pignus ni omnia memini et scio / et quidem si scis tute quot hodie habeas
digitos in manu. (Pl. Per. 186–7); Pignus da ni ligneae haec sint (A, sunt P) quas
habes Victorias. (Pl. Truc. 275); Nunc si sponsionem fecissent Gellius cum Turio, ni
vir melior esset Gellius quam Turius, nemo, opinor, tam insanus esset, qui iudicaret
meliorem esse Gellium quam Turium. (Cato orat. 206); Cogere eum coepit, cum
ageret <nemo>, nemo postularet, sponsionem II milium nummum facere cum lictore
suo, NI FURTIS QUAESTUM FACERET. (Cic. Ver. 5.141)
Sometimes si clauses may be interpreted as denoting the purpose of the main clause,
in which case si may be translated with ‘in the hope that’ or ‘to see if ’.176 Often the
subjects of the two clauses or the object of the main clause and the subject of the si
clause are the same. The si clause often contains the verb possum ‘to be able’. Examples
are (a)–(c). The state of affairs in the main clause is controllable, and the si clause fol-
lows the main clause. Often an alternative regular purpose clause with ut is possible as
well (though not semantically equivalent: in the si clause there is ‘doubt as to the
attainment of the goal’;177 in ut clauses possum is used less frequently). With move-
ment verbs relative clauses of purpose are another alternative (see § 18.26).
(a) Ibo hinc intro, perscrutabor fanum, si inveniam uspiam / aurum, dum hic est
occupatus.
(‘I’ll go inside and search the shrine, to see if I can find the gold anywhere while he’s
busy.’ Pl. Aul. 620–1)
(b) Quae res mihi non mediocrem consolationem attulit volo tibi commemorare,
si forte eadem res tibi dolorem minuere possit.
(‘I want to tell you of something which has brought me no slight comfort, in the hope
that perhaps it may have some power to lighten your sorrow too.’ Cic. Fam. 4.5.4)
(c) Circumfunduntur hostes ex reliquis partibus, si quem aditum reperire
possint.
(‘The enemy spread themselves on the other sides, to see if they could find an entry.’
Caes. Gal. 6.37.4)
Some scholars (for example, K.-St.: II.425) explain this use of the si clause by assum-
ing that in the context something like ‘trying’ or ‘waiting in expectation’ is under-
stood. Verbs with such a meaning govern a si argument clause (see § 15.40).
Supplement:
Intus illa te, si se arcessas, manet. (Pl. Cas. 542); Strabacem hic opperiar modo, / si
rure veniat. (Pl. Truc. 692–3); Ego hunc adibo, si quid me velit. (Ter. Hec. 429); . . .
Lucium Minucium Basil[i]um cum omni equitatu praemittit, si quid celeritate iti-
neris atque o<p>portunitate temporis proficere possit. (Caes. Gal. 6.29.4–5); Aeneas
scopulum interea conscendit et omnem / prospectum late pelago petit, Anthea
siquem / iactatum vento videat . . . (Verg. A. 1.180–2); . . . pergit ad proximam spelun-
cam, si forte eo vestigia ferrent. (Liv. 1.7.6); . . . seu ita placuerat principibus
Gallorum . . . ostentari quaedam incendia terroris causa, si compelli ad deditionem
caritate sedum suarum obsessi possent . . . (Liv. 5.42.1); . . . quattuor collegis . . . ad
praesidium urbis et si qui ex Etruria novi motus nuntiarentur—omnia enim inde sus-
pecta erant—relictis. (Liv. 6.22.1—NB: coordination); Consul postquam profectum
Persea audivit, ad Gonnum castra movet, si potiri oppido posset. (Liv. 42.67.6);
Eoque intentius Vologaeses premere obsessos . . . propius incedens quam mos Parthis,
si ea temeritate hostem in proelium eliceret. (Tac. Ann. 15.13.1–2)
Note in (d) the use of the reflexive pronoun se and in (e) the use of the reflexive pos-
sessive adjective sua in the si clauses. This use resembles the use of the reflexive in
argument clauses and in purpose clauses with ut (see § 16.49).
A remarkable pair of clauses in combination with eo/hoc consilio are (f), with an ut
clause, and (g), with a si clause. There are similar combinations with ea causa.
(f) . . . ad urbem quam primum cum exercitu accederet. Id autem eo consilio
ut . . . praesto esset . . .
(‘. . . and that he should march on Rome with his army as soon as possible.
That was to be done with the intention that . . . he should be ready in per-
son . . .’ Cic. Catil. 3.8)
(g) . . . captos ante oppidum instructos constituit. Id hoc consilio si posset
Vergilius . . . a pertinacia deduci.
(‘. . . and these he now drew up in array in front of the town: his object in so
doing was to see if Vergilius . . . could be drawn out of his obstinate resist-
ance . . .’ B. Afr. 86.2)
For alternative purpose si clauses the correlative pair sive/seu . . . sive/seu can be used
as in (h) (see also § 16.65).
(h) . . . principesque earum civitatum . . . prima luce cotidie ad se convenire iube-
bat, seu quid communicandum seu quid administrandum videretur.
(‘. . . and the chiefs of those states . . . he would order to assemble at dawn daily at his
quarters in case there should seem to be anything to communicate or to arrange.’
Caes. Gal. 7.36.3)
In some conditional periods the state of affairs of the main clause is or seems unex-
pected or contradictory with respect to the state of affairs of the si clause. This incom-
patibility may become more obvious if the contrast is emphasized by the wording of
the si clause and/or by the presence of adversative, concessive, or other expressions in
the main clause. Instances of conditional clauses that can be interpreted as adversative
are (a) and (b). Note the use of at in (b).178 In (c), the concessive interpretation of the
si clause is encouraged by the use of the particularizing particle maxume (see § 22.37).
In (d), the use of non in the si clause and tamen in the main clause has the same effect.
In (e), the contrast is between centum and parum. This use of si comes close to the use
of etiamsi and other concessive subordinators (see § 16.76).179
(a) Non omnes possunt olere unguenta exotica, / si tu oles . . .
(‘Not everybody can smell of exotic ointments even if you do . . .’ Pl. Mos. 42–3)
178 See Kroon (1994; 1995: Ch. 12). 179 See Bertocchi and Maraldi (2011: 164–5).
Conditional clauses 337
180 See Bertocchi (2001a: 227–30), Fugier (1989: 104–5), Lavency (1999: 378–80).
338 Subordinate clauses filling a satellite position
(‘For if he had a mark of knowledge in this case, he would employ the same mark in
all other cases, but since he has not got it, he employs probabilities.’ Cic. Luc. 110)
Si clauses can be combined with reason expressions in the main clause, such as the
adverbs idcirco and ideo and the prepositional phrase ob eam rem ‘therefore’ in the
main clause, as in (h), or by the connector igitur ‘then’, as in (i).
(h) An si in ipsa latione tua capta iam urbe lapides iacti, si manus conlata non
est, idcirco tu ad illam labem atque eluviem civitatis sine summa vi pervenire
potuisti?
(‘Or if at the actual voting, when the city was in your hands, there was throwing of
stones, but no actual fighting, could you on that account have brought about the ruin
and destruction of the state, without a resort to extreme violence?’ Cic. Dom. 53)
(i) Quodsi melius geruntur ea quae consilio quam quae sine consilio adminis-
trantur, nihil autem omnium rerum melius administratur quam omnis mun-
dus, consilio igitur mundus administratur.
(‘Therefore if those things are administered better which are governed by design than
those which are administered without design, and nothing is governed better than
the universe, then the universe is governed by design.’ Cic. Inv. 1.59)
Siquidem (and si quidem) is sometimes used even though the content of the clause is
an obvious fact. It then resembles the use of quoniam in attitudinal reason clauses
(and, like them, was originally followed by the indicative). There are instances from
Plautus onwards. The meaning of this so-called causal siquidem is approximately
‘assuming that’ or ‘seeing that’.181 Examples are (j) and (k). More straightforward
examples of causal use are found in Late Latin, as in (l), where it almost functions as
a connector, and (m)—note the subjunctive in the latter.182
(j) Patiundum est, siquidem me vivo mea uxor imperium exhibet.
(‘I have to bear it seeing that my wife is in command while I’m alive.’ Pl. Cas. 409)
(k) Iam explorata nobis sunt ea quae ad domos nostras quaeque ad rem publi-
cam pertinent, siquidem quid agatur in caelo quaerimus?
(‘Have we already acquired a perfect knowledge of those matters that relate to our
own homes and to the State, seeing that we are now seeking to learn what is going on
in the sky? Cic. Rep. 1.19)
(l) Siquidem unus ex passeribus duobus non cadit in terram sine Patris
voluntate.
(‘If, indeed, “one of two sparrows does not fall to the ground without the Father’s
will”.’ Tert. Mon. 9.1)
181 See OLD s.v. siquidem § 3, Solodow (1978: 130), Bertocchi and Maraldi (2011: 133–5), and
Baños (2014: 77–80).
182 For Tertullian, see Hoppe (1903: 83=1985: 159).
Conditional clauses 339
(m) Deus enim cum videret malitiam . . . ita valuisse, ut iam nomen eius ex homi-
num memoria fuisset paene sublatum—siquidem Iudaei quoque . . . aberras-
sent nec increpiti per prophetas reverti ad Deum vellent—filium suum
principem angelorum legavit ad homines . . .
(‘For God, when He saw that wickedness . . . had so prevailed, that His name had now
also been taken away from the memory of men (since even the Jews . . . had gone
astray and when rebuked by the prophets did not choose to return to God), He sent
His Son, the chief of angels, as an ambassador to men . . .’ Lact. Inst. 4.14.17)
Supplement:
Peccavit vero nihilo minus, siquidem est peccare tamquam transire lineas. (Cic.
Parad. 20); Nam loci laetitia plures, exilitas pauciores desiderat, siquidem luxuriosa
vitis, nisi fructu conpescitur, male deflorescit . . . (Col. 4.21.2); Magna differentia est et
in ipso genere motus, pluribus siquidem modis quatitur. (Plin. Nat. 2.198); Eamque
partem Britanniae quae Hiberniam aspicit copiis instruxit, in spem magis quam ob
formidinem, si quidem Hibernia, medio inter Britanniam atque Hispaniam sita et
Gallico quoque mari opportuna, valentissimam imperii partem magnis in vicem usi-
bus miscuerit. (Tac. Agr. 24.1); Siquidem ante paucos dies quam aedilitatem iniret,
venit in suspicionem conspirasse cum Marco Crasso . . . (Suet. Jul. 9.1); Fors fuat an
dies longa quandoque hebetet laxatum dolorem; siquidem malis omnibus finis de
tempore venit. (Symm. Ep. 3.6.1)
In many languages there is an overlap in the use of temporal and conditional adjuncts
in that there are situations in which both expressions are possible; of course, this does
not mean that they are synonymous. Early instances cited in the literature are (a) and
(b). With semel si in (a) one could compare temporal semel ut (see § 16.24). A tem-
poral interpretation is especially attractive when the state of affairs the period refers
to is repeated (iterative), as with siquando in (b). In (c), the si clause in the first sen-
tence is paralleled by a cum clause in the second. In (d), the main clause contains the
correlative adverb tum ‘then’.
(a) Saepe edunt (sc. aves). Semel si captae sunt, rem solvont aucupi.
(‘They eat often; but once they’re caught they give the fowler his reward.’ Pl. As. 218)
(b) Siquando ad eam accesserat / confabulatum, fugere e conspectu ilico, / videre
nolle.
(‘Whenever Sostrata went up to her for a chat, she would immediately disappear
from sight and refuse to see her.’ Ter. Hec. 181–3)
(c) Si mons erat ascendendus, facile ipsa loci natura periculum repellebat, quod
ex locis superioribus qui antecesserant, desuper ascendentis protegebant.
Cum vallis aut locus declivis suberat . . ., tum magno erat in periculo res.
(‘If a hill had to be climbed, the nature of the ground in itself averted peril, since from
the higher ground those who had gone in front protected their comrades who were
340 Subordinate clauses filling a satellite position
ascending; whenever a valley or slope lay before them . . . then indeed the position
was most critical.’ Caes. Civ. 1.79.2–3)
(d) Contende ergo uter sit tergo—verior. / Ni offerrumentas habebis pluris in
tergo tuo / quam ulla navis longa clavos, tum ego ero mendacissumus.
(‘Then compare which of us has a back that’s . . . truer: unless you have more scars on
your back than any warship has nails, I’ll be the biggest liar.’ Pl. Rud. 752–4)
Supplement:
Ad quem si accessit aut si a me discessit unquam . . . tum existimetur Caelius Catilinae
nimium familiaris fuisse. (Cic. Cael. 10); Sed tum id audirem, si tibi soli viveres aut si
tibi etiam soli natus esses. (Cic. Marc. 25)
In Early Latin such a si clause is in the indicative. However, the subjunctive came into
use from the Classical period onwards, as with cum (see § 7.142), and it became the
norm by the time of Suetonius. This use of the moods in iterative clauses has nothing
to do with the semantically based use of the moods in ‘normal’ si clauses. An early
example of an iterative si clause with a subjunctive cited in the literature is (e) from
Caesar; however, here the subjunctive can be explained as potential (see § 7.156). This
is less likely in (f) and (g). In some Late texts both moods are used indiscriminately in
such si clauses.
(e) Fugitivis omnibus nostris certus erat Alexandriae receptus certaque vitae
condicio . . . Quorum siquis a domino prehenderetur, consensu militum
eripiebatur . . .
(‘All our own fugitive slaves had a sure place of refuge at Alexandria and assurance of
their lives . . . And if any one of them was arrested by his owner, he would be rescued
by the common consent of the soldiery. . .’ Caes. Civ. 3.110.4)
(f) Ceterum ex omni multitudine non amplius quadraginta memores nominis
Romani grege facto locum cepere paulo quam alii editiorem, neque inde
maxuma vi depelli quiverunt, sed tela eminus missa remittere, pauci in pluri-
bus minus frustrari. Sin Numidae propius adcessissent, ibi vero virtutem
ostendere et eos maxuma vi caedere, fundere atque fugare.
(‘But out of the entire number not more than forty, who remembered that they were
Romans, gathered together and took a position a little higher than the rest, from
which they could not be dislodged by the greatest efforts of the enemy, but they
threw back the weapons which were thrown from a distance, and few against many
could hardly miss. But if the Numidians came nearer, they then showed their real
quality, slaughtering them with the greatest fury, routing and scattering them.’ Sal.
Jug. 58.3)
(g) Si quis collegam appellasset, ab eo ad quem venerat ita discedebat ut paeni-
teret non prioris decreto stetisse.
(‘If any person appealed to a colleague, he left the one to whom he had appealed in
such a manner as to regret that he had not abided by the sentence of the former.’ Liv.
3.36.8—tr. Spillan)
Conditional clauses 341
Supplement:
Caesaris interim non amplius III aut IIII milites veterani si se convertissent et pila
viribus contorta in Numidas infestos coniecissent amplius duum milium numero ad
unum terga vertebant ac rursus ad aciem passim conversis equis se colligebant atque
in spatio consequebantur et iacula in legionarios coiciebant. (B. Afr. 70.4); Si hastati
profligare hostem non possent, pede presso eos retro cedentes in intervalla ordinum
principes recipiebant. (Liv. 8.8.9); Famae nec incuriosus nec venditator; pecuniae
alienae non adpetens, suae parcus, publicae avarus; amicorum libertorumque, ubi
in bonos incidisset, sine reprehensione patiens, si mali forent, usque ad culpam
ignarus. (Tac. Hist. 1.49.3—NB: variation); Si flumina morarentur, nando traiciens
vel innixus inflatis utribus, ut persaepe nuntios de se praevenerit. (Suet. Jul. 57.1); Si
quis enim militarium vel honoratorum aut nobilis inter suos rumore tenus esset
insimulatus fovisse partes hostiles, iniecto onere catenarum in modum beluae trahe-
batur . . . (Amm. 14.5.3)
Ni/nisi clauses, with nisi or ni ‘if not’ and an imperfect or a pluperfect subjunctive verb
form, are used in combination with a main clause in the imperfect (and rarely the
pluperfect) indicative to mark the interruption (hence the French term ‘de rupture’)183
of the event in the main clause (see § 7.20, ex. (l)). Examples are (a) and (b). In (a), the
event in the imperfect labebar longius ‘I would have kept going on even further’ is
interrupted by the event of the subordinate clause; the main clause is understood as
‘I had almost wavered further’. The event that did not take place is expressed in the
indicative (as factive), whereas the event that did take place is expressed in the coun-
terfactual subjunctive. The stylistic effect is underlined by the order of the clauses,
with the ni/nisi following the main clause. Similarly, tenebam in (b) implies ‘I had
almost reached the shore’. (For examples of the pluperfect indicative used in a similar
way, see § 7.31, exx. (v) and (w).) In these periods the ni/nisi clause is certainly not a
condition for the main clause to take place.184
(a) Quin labebar longius, nisi me retinuissem.
(‘Indeed, I would have kept going on even further, if I had not prevented myself.’ Cic.
Leg. 1.52)
(b) Paulatim adnabam terrae. Iam tuta tenebam, / ni gens crudelis /. . . ferro
invasisset praedamque ignara putasset.
(‘Little by little I was swimming to shore: already I was grasping safe ground, if a
barbaric people . . . had not attacked me with a sword and, ignorant, deemed me a
prize.’ Verg. A. 6.358–61)
183 For interruption devices in the historians, see Chausserie-Laprée (1969: 543–648). For nisi, see
Orlandini (2001: 178–84). For Livy, see Pausch (2011: 200–2).
184 See Torrego (1999) for a number of characteristics of these clauses.
342 Subordinate clauses filling a satellite position
Supplement:
Iam fames quam pestilentia tristior erat, ni dimissis circa omnes populos legatis, qui
Etruscum mare quique Tiberim accolunt, ad frumentum mercandum annonae foret
subventum. (Liv. 4.52.5); At ille moriturum potius quam fidem exueret clamitans fer-
rum a latere diripuit elatumque deferebat in pectus, ni proximi prensam dextram vi
attinuissent. (Tac. Ann. 1.35.4); Trudebanturque in paludem gnaram vincentibus,
iniquam nesciis, ni Caesar productas legiones instruxisset. (Tac. Ann. 1.63.2); Caecina
dum sustentat aciem, suffosso equo delapsus circumveniebatur, ni prima legio sese
opposuisset. (Tac. Ann. 1.65.6); . . . ibaturque in eam sententiam ni durius contraque
morem suum palam pro accusatoribus Caesar inritas leges, rem publicam in prae-
cipiti conquestus esset. (Tac. Ann. 4.30.2); Nec multo post urbem ingredienti offere-
bantur communes liberi, nisi Narcissus amoveri eos iussisset. (Tac. Ann. 11.34.3);
Cumque pauciores utrubique fierent bellatores et Persae truderentur ad ultima, ni
potior ratio succurrisset, impensiore opera procursus temptabatur ex castris . . .
(Amm. 20.11.18)
Inclusam Danaen . . . / tristes excubiae munierant satis / nocturnis ab adulteris, / si
non Acrisium virginis abditae / custodem pavidum Iuppiter et Venus / risissent. (Hor.
Carm. 3.16.1–7)
A factor contributing to the special stylistic effect of the ni/nisi clauses is the absence
of a cause and effect relation between the events in the subordinate and main clause.
This distinguishes them from similar constellations of the same tense and mood
forms with preceding si and ni clauses, examples of which are (c) and (d).
(c) Si per L. Metellum licitum esset, iudices, matres illorum miserorum sororesque
veniebant.
(‘If Lucius Metellus had let them come, the mothers, gentlemen, and the
sisters of those hapless men were eager to come too.’ Cic. Ver. 5.129)
(d) Quod ni tam in tempore subvenisset, victoribus victisque pariter perniciosa
fames instabat.
(‘Had it not arrived so opportunely, a famine equally destructive to victors
and vanquished was impending.’ Liv. 25.31.14)
(e) . . . et si non servasset integram simulationem, periclitabatur totam paene
tragoediam evertere.
(‘. . . and if he could not keep up all his pretence he ran the risk of upsetting
the applecart.’ Petr. 140.6)
There are also a few cases cited in the literature of a perfect indicative in the main
clause of a ‘de rupture’ period. This is remarkable because the perfect lacks the feature
of the imperfect ‘was going on’. Examples cited in the literature are (f) and (g). Note,
however, in (f) conati sunt. In (g) the person saying nec veni has in fact arrived. Both
examples are strange conditionals, not instances of ‘de rupture’. Note also prope
‘almost’ in (h) and paene ‘almost’ in (i) in combination with a perfect tense.
(f) Non modo enim sequi recusarunt bene monentem, sed obsistere ac retinere
conati sunt, ni strictis gladiis viri fortissimi inertis summovissent.
Conditional clauses 343
(‘They not only refused to follow him who gave them good advice, but
endeavoured to oppose and hold him back, if some men of the greatest brav-
ery, with swords drawn, had not removed the cowards.’ Liv. 22.60.17)
(g) Nec veni, nisi fata locum sedemque dedissent, / nec bellum cum gente gero.
(‘I have not come, if fate had not assigned me here a place and a home, nor
do I wage war with your people.’ Verg. A. 11.112–13)
(h) Iurgia primum, mox rixa inter Batavos et legionarios, dum his aut illis studia
militum adgregantur, prope in proelium exarsere, ni Valens animadversione
paucorum oblitos iam Batavos imperii admonuisset.
(‘At first a quarrel arose between the Batavians and the legionaries, and then
a brawl. Finally, as the soldiers took sides with one or the other, they broke
out almost into open battle, had not Valens, by the punishment of a few
men, reminded the Batavians of the authority which they had forgotten.’
Tac. Hist. 1.64.2)
(i) Pons sublicius iter paene hostibus dedit, ni unus vir fuisset, Horatius Cocles.
(‘The bridge of piles almost afforded an entrance to the enemy, had it not
been for one man, Horatius Cocles.’ Liv. 2.10.2)
For an explicit form of the ‘almost’ effect of these sentences, one could compare
penetrassent in (j).
(j) Faces in prominentem porticum iecere et sequebantur ignem ambustasque
Capitolii fores penetrassent, ni Sabinus revolsas undique statuas, decora
maiorum, in ipso aditu vice muri obiecisset.
(‘They threw firebrands on a projecting colonnade and followed the fire, and
would have penetrated the burnt gates of the Capitol, if Sabinus had not torn
down all the statues, memorials to the glory of our ancestors, and piled them
up across the entrance as a barricade.’ Tac. Hist. 3.71.2)
conditional clauses are often found inserted in or following the main clause, as in (c).
Correlative expressions do not occur. Nisi is common, ni rare.
(a) Nam, nisi me animus fallit, hi sunt gemini germani duo.
(‘Yes, unless my mind deceives me, these two are twin brothers!’ Pl. Men. 1082)
(b) Sed, nisi fallor, citius te quam scribis videbo.
(‘But if I am not mistaken I shall see you sooner than you say.’ Cic. Att. 4.19.1)
(c) Haec est una, si vere cogitare volumus, in toto imperio tuo difficultas.
(‘If we want to look the facts in the face, this is your only really difficult administra-
tive problem.’ Cic. Q. fr. 1.1.32)
(d) Nam quid in dicendo rectum sit aut pravum ego iudicabo, si modo is sum qui
id possim aut sciam iudicare.
(‘What is right or wrong in a man’s speaking I shall be able to judge, if only I have the
ability and knowledge to judge.’ Cic. Brut. 184)
Supplement:
Certe edepol, nisi me animu’ fallit aut parum prospiciunt oculi, / meae nutricem
gnatae video. (Ter. Ph. 735–6); Iam tum erat senex, senectus si verecundos facit.
(Ter. Ph. 1023); Adfuit is, si modo adfuit, quem tu impulisti, soror rogavit, mater
coegit. (Cic. Dom. 118–19); Deinde tui municipes sunt illi quidem splendidissimi
homines, sed tamen pauci, siquidem cum Atinatibus conferantur. (Cic. Planc. 21);
In agris erant tum senatores id est senes, siquidem aranti L. Quinctio Cincinnato
nuntiatum est eum dictatorem esse factum. (Cic. Sen. 56); Hoc quid intersit, si tuos
digitos novi, certe habes subductum. (Cic. Att. 5.21.13); Nisi me omnia fallunt,
deseret. (Cic. Att. 8.7.1); Sed Pansa furere videtur de Cloelio itemque Deiotaro et
loquitur severe, si velis credere. (Cic. Att. 14.19.2); Iamque dies, nisi fallor, adest,
quem semper acerbum, / semper honoratum (sic di voluistis) habebo. (Verg. A.
5.49–50); Sed tum, forte cava dum personat aequora concha, / demens, et cantu
vocat in certamina divos, / aemulus exceptum Triton, si credere dignum est, / inter
saxa virum spumosa immerserat unda. (Verg. A. 6.171–4);187 Prisco si credis,
Maecenas docte, Cratino, / nulla placere diu nec vivere carmina possunt / quae
scribuntur aquae potoribus. (Hor. Ep. 1.19.1–3); Hac quoque, ni fallor, populo
dignissima nostro / atria Libertas coepit habere sua. (Ov. Fast. 4.623–4); . . . hoc pro-
hibete nefas scelerique resistite nostro, / si tamen hoc scelus est. (Ov. Met. 10.322–3);
Quod si vera licet mihi dicere, quaeritur istis / quam mihi maior honos . . . (Ov. Met.
13.95–6); Si Valerio Antiati credas, nec classe adiutum ab eo praetorem esse, cum
saepe eum litteris accersisset, tradit, nec . . . (Liv. 44.13.12); Dies status inchoandae,
ut quadam lege naturae, si scire aut observare homines vellent, tricensimus ab
educto examine, fereque Maio mense includitur haec vindemia. (Plin. Nat. 11.35);
Spatium eius (sc. Hiberniae), si Britanniae comparetur, angustius, nostri maris insu-
las superat. (Tac. Agr. 24.2)
187 On this type of hedge and its function of drawing attention to the content of the main clause, see
Stinton (1976).
Conditional clauses 345
188 See van de Griend (1989). For the use of conditional clauses in requests, see Barrios-Lech (2018).
346 Subordinate clauses filling a satellite position
legitis (si quid mihi, Maxime, credis), / scribimus invita vixque coacta manu. (Ov.
Pont. 1.5.9–10); Cuius adhuc nomen nostros tacuisse libellos, / si modo permittis
dicere vera, pudet. (Ov. Pont. 4.2.3–4); O genitor, cui Cocyti penetralia parent, / si
modo vera mihi fas est impune profari, / vota tibi cedent. (Petr. 121.1); Plane si mihi
proponas . . . dicendum erit . . . (Ulp. dig. 16.1.8.13)189
Another type of illocutionary si clause is shown in (e) and (f), where the si clause
contains a comment on or justification of the wording chosen in the main clause.
(e) Factum a vobis duriter / inmisericorditerque atque etiam, si est, pater, /
dicendum magis aperte, inliberaliter.
(‘You have acted cruelly, pitilessly, and, if it must be said even more candidly, father,
in a manner unworthy of a gentleman.’ Ter. Ad. 662–4)
(f) Atque haec cives, cives inquam, si eos hoc nomine appellari fas est, de patria
sua et cogitant et cogitaverunt.
(‘And citizens, citizens I say, if it is right to call them by that name, have planned and
are continuing to plan these crimes against their fatherland.’ Cic. Mur. 80)
Supplement:
Quid dicemus? Armatos, si Latine loqui volumus, quos appellare vere possumus?
(Cic. Caec. 60); Itaque posteaquam est nata haec vel circumscriptio vel compre-
hensio vel continuatio vel ambitus, si ita licet dicere, nemo, qui aliquo esset in
numero, scripsit orationem . . . (Cic. Orat. 208); Quo magis tum in summo otio
maximaque copia quasi helluari libris, si hoc verbo in tam clara re utendum est,
videbatur. (Cic. Fin. 3.7); Quod ad te antea atque adeo prius scripsi (sic enim
mavis), ad scribendum, <si licet> tibi vere dicere, fecisti me acriorem. (Cic. Att.
15.13.3); Non potes invitae Cereris gener esse. Roganda, / non rapienda fuit.
Quodsi conponere magnis / parva mihi fas est, et me dilexit Anapis . . . (Ov. Met.
5.415–17); Divus Augustus fuit mitis princeps, si quis illum a principatu suo aes-
timare incipiat. (Sen. Cl. 1.9.1); Eo denique discriminum ventum est ut foedus et
pax cum hoste—si modo hostis Pompei filius—tamen feriretur. (Flor. Epit.
4.8.3); . . . fecerunt magis desiderium imponendi mihi laboris, ut etiam usque ad
illa loca accederem, si tamen labor dici potest, ubi homo desiderium suum com-
pleri videt. (Pereg. 13.1)
189 For more instances, see Honoré (1982: 61). 190 Example taken from Woodcock (1959: 147).
Conditional clauses 347
(a) Qua re sive habes quid sive nil habes, scribe tamen aliquid teque cura.
(‘So whether you have anything to say or nothing, write something all the same, and
take good care of yourself.’ Cic. Att. 12.12.2)
In this case, too, there are two alternative conditions, but for the content of the main
clauses, or the apodosis in general, it does not matter which condition is fulfilled; in
(a) the addressee, Atticus, is encouraged to write whatever the circumstances (note
tamen). The correlative expression corresponds to English ‘whether . . . or’.
In the attested instances in Plautus and Terence the first sive/seu is usually emended
to si, as in (b).191 However, the correlative expressions are very common from the
Classical period onwards, as in (c) and (d). (For the use of these correlative expres-
sions as disjunctive coordinators, see § 19.54.)
(b) Seu (P, deest A; sei cj. Müller) tu Cylindrus seu Coriendru’s, perieris.
(‘Whether you’re Cylindrus or Coriendrus, go to hell.’ Pl. Men. 295)
(c) At, sive ille (sc. litteras) misit sive tu finxisti, certe consilium tuum de Catonis
honore illarum litterarum recitatione patefactum est.
(‘At all events, whether he sent them or whether you forged them, your intention with
respect to the honours conferred upon Cato was revealed by the reading of those
letters.’ Cic. Dom. 22)
(d) Veniet tempus, et quidem celeriter, sive retractabis sive properabis.
(‘The time will come and that quickly, whether you shrink back or are in a hurry.’ Cic.
Tusc. 1.76)
Supplement:
Seu (si cj. Bothe) canum seu istuc (sc. caput) rutilum sive atrum est, amo. (Pl. Mer.
306); . . . sive ego sive quis iussu meo fecerit, uti id recte factum siet (Cato Agr. 139.1—
NB: quotation from a prayer); Haec Andria, / si[ve] ista uxor sive amica’st, gravida e
Pamphilo’st. (Ter. An. 215–16); Si fatum tibi est ex hoc morbo convalescere, sive tu
medicum adhibueris sive non adhibueris, convalesces; item, si fatum tibi est ex hoc
morbo non convalescere, sive tu medicum adhibueris sive non adhibueris, non con-
valesces. (Cic. Fat. 28); Facilem esse rem, seu maneant seu proficiscantur, si modo
unum omnes sentiant ac probent. (Caes. Gal. 5.31.2); Nam sive aqua inter cutem
quem implevit, sive in magno abscessu multum puris coit, simul id omne effudisse
aeque mortiferum est ac si quis sani corporis vulnere factus exsanguis est. (Cels.
2.8.27); Sed sive recisa in dupundium et semissem talea sive tota prostrata depone[re]
tur, exstent earum cacumina, quae si obruta sunt, totae putrescunt. (Col. 4.32.2)
NB: with reduction of the verb and possibly other constituents: (sc. homines nobiles)
Seu recte seu perperam facere coeperunt, ita in utroque excellunt ut nemo nostro
loco natus adsequi possit. (Cic. Quinct. 31); Itaque sive Sulla sive Marius sive uterque
sive Octavius sive Cinna sive iterum Sulla sive alter Marius et Carbo sive qui alius
civile bellum optavit, eum detestabilem civem rei publicae natum iudico. (Cic. Phil.
13.1); Pacem cum Scipione Sulla sive faciebat sive simulabat, non erat desperandum,
191 ‘secundum morem Plautinum’ (Lindsay ad loc.). For a survey of emendations in Plautus and
Terence, see Enk ad Pl. Mer. 306. K.-St.: II.435 accepts (b), Sz.: 670 considers it incorrectly transmitted.
348 Subordinate clauses filling a satellite position
si convenisset, fore aliquem tolerabilem statum civitatis. (Cic. Phil. 13.2); Nunc, sive
illa defensione uti voluisses sive hac qua uteris, condemneris necesse est. (Cic. Tul.
32); Et, si causa est in argumentis, firmissima quaeque maxime tueor, sive plura sunt
sive aliquod unum. (Cic. de Orat. 2.292); . . . (sc. alvus) arcet . . . et continet sive illud
aridum est sive umidum quod recepit, ut id mutari et concoqui possit . . . (Cic. N.D.
2.136); <Vi>de quam turpi leto pereamus et dubita, si potes, quin ille, seu victus seu
victor redierit, caedem facturus sit. (Cic. Att. 10.10.5); . . . quo paratiores essent ad
insequendum omnes, sive noctu sive interdiu erumperent. (Caes. Civ. 1.81.2); Seu
pacem seu bella geram, tibi maxima rerum / verborumque fides. (Verg. A. 9.279–80); . . .
omnibus / quicumque terrae munere vescimur / enaviganda, sive reges / sive inopes
erimus coloni. (Hor. Carm. 2.14.5–8); Haec consternatio muliebris, sive sua sponte
sive auctoribus vobis, M. Fundani et L. Valeri, facta est, haud dubie ad culpam mag-
istratuum pertinens nescio vobis, tribuni, an consulibus magis sit deformis. (Liv.
34.2.7); Hi terram si non attigere, sanguinem sistunt adalligati, sive ex vulnere fluat
sive ore sive naribus sive haemorrhoidis. (Plin. Nat. 23.137); . . . sive praenomen eius
sive nomen dixisses sive cognomen, idem tamen ille esset. (Sen. Ben. 4.8.3); Sane
inter fratrem et sororem prohibitae sunt nuptiae, sive eodem patre eademque matre
nati fuerint sive alterutro eorum. (Gaius Inst. 1.61)
192 See Petersmann ad loc. 193 See Cabrillana (2002) on the use of quasi in Terence.
Conditional clauses 349
(< tam quam) ‘as though’, rarely by velut and sicut. The main clause often contains a
manner expression or an expression that indicates the degree of similarity, like ita and
sic ‘so’, perinde ‘in the same way’, proinde ‘in the same way or degree’, similiter ‘in a
similar manner’, aeque ‘to an equal degree’, pariter ‘equally’, and siremps(e) ‘in precisely
the same way’ (in the legal formula lex siremps(e) esto). Since the content of the man-
ner clauses is hypothetical, the mood in these clauses is the subjunctive (most of the
time a potential, but also when required a counterfactual subjunctive). Examples are
(a)–(g). Not infrequently there is no main clause, as in (g). The subordinate clause
usually follows the main clause, but the reverse order is also possible.
Combinations of these words with the conditional subordinator si ‘if ’ (quasi si—
rare; tamquam si, ut si, ceu si) are used with more or less the same meaning and for
that reason are dealt with in this section. Structurally they are combinations of a com-
parative item and a conditional clause in the same way as these comparative words are
found in combination with time clauses (see § 20.9). For the use of tamquam in argu-
ment clauses, see § 15.44.
(a) Quid est? Quid ridetis? Novi omnis, scio fures esse hic compluris, / qui ves-
titu et creta occultant sese atque sedent quasi sint frugi.
(‘What is it? What are you laughing for? I know you all; I know there are plenty of
thieves here who are hiding under smart clothes and make-up and sitting still as if
they were decent.’ Pl. Aul. 718–19)
(b) Tam a me pudica est quasi soror mea sit . . .
(‘From me she’s as chaste as if she were my sister . . .’ Pl. Cur. 51)
(c) . . . eiq. · omnium · rerum · siremps · lexs · esto, · quasei · sei · is · haace ·
lege <pequniam quae s.s.e. exigeret.>
(‘. . . and statute is to apply to him in all matters exactly as if he <were exacting the sum
which is written down above> according to this statute.’ CIL I2.582.12 (Lex Incerta,
Banzi, c.100 bc—tr. Crawford))
(d) Tamquam si claudus sim, cum fusti est ambulandum.
(‘As if I were lame I have to walk around with a cane.’ Pl. As. 427)
(e) Mater ubi accepit, coepit studiose omnia / docere, educere, ita ut<i> si esset filia.
(‘When my mother received her, she set about teaching and educating her as
devotedly as if she were her own daughter.’ Ter. Eu. 116–17)
(f) Sed si eodem modo putant exercitu in foro et in omnibus templis, quae cir-
cum forum sunt, conlocato dici pro Milone decuisse, ut si de re privata ad
unum iudicem diceremus, vim eloquentiae sua facultate, non rei natura
metiuntur.
(‘But if they think that, when the army was stationed in the Forum and in all the
temples that surround it, it was fitting that my speech in defence of Milo be given in
the same way as if we were pleading a private case before a single referee, they meas-
ure the power of eloquence by their own limited ability, not by the nature of the art.’
Cic. Opt. Gen. 10)
350 Subordinate clauses filling a satellite position
(g) Nugae sunt istae magnae. Quasi tu nescias / repente ut emoriantur humani
Ioves.
(‘That’s a load of rubbish. As if you didn’t know how suddenly human Jupiters die.’ Pl.
Cas. 333–4)
Supplement:
Quoniam sentio / errare, extemplo, quasi res cum ea esset mihi, / coepi assentari. (Pl.
Men. 481–3); Proinde habet orationem quasi ipse sit frugi bonae . . . (Pl. Poen. 845);
Quodvis genus ibi hominum videas quasi Acheruntem veneris . . . (Pl. Poen. 831);
Atque ille homo . . . exposuit vasa Samia quasi vero esset Diogenes Cynicus mortuus
et non divini hominis Africani mors honestaretur . . . (Cic. Mur. 75); Lucius Lucullus
ferebatur quasi commodissime respondisset . . . duo se habere vicinos . . . (Cic. Leg.
3.30); Cuius sermone ita tum cupide fruebar, quasi iam divinarem id quod evenit,
illo extincto fore unde discerem neminem. (Cic. Sen. 12–13)
NB: pleonastic: Putem ego, quem videam aeque esse maestum ut quasi dies si dicta
sit? (Pl. As. 838)194
Sed quid hoc refert pendere (sc. terram) ipsam ac non cadere nobiscum, ceu spir-
itus vis, mundo praesertim inclusi, dubia sit . . . (Plin. Nat. 2.160); Fulgit item, nubes
ignis cum semina multa / excussere suo concursu, ceu lapidem si / percutiat lapis aut
ferrum. (Lucr. 6.160–2)
Postremo dissimulandi causa aut sui expurgandi, sicut iurgio lacessitus foret, in
senatum venit. (Sal. Cat. 31.5)
Facito tamquam faex fiat. (Cato Agr. 87); Parvi enim primo ortu sic iacent, tam-
quam omnino sine animo sint. (Cic. Fin. 5.42); Plancum . . . sic contemnit tamquam
si illi aqua et igni [in] interdictum sit. (Cic. Phil. 6.10)
Itidem ut cognata si sit, id quod lex iubet / dotis dare, abduce hanc, minas quinque
accipe. (Ter. Ph. 409–10)
At ille temeraria usus ratione non cessit maiorum natu auctoritati, velut in sua
manu esset fortuna. (Nep. Timoth. 3.4)
The nisi clause usually contains a state of affairs that is factual and is therefore in the
indicative. It normally follows the main clause and often functions as a sort of after-
thought. It is sometimes difficult to decide whether we are dealing with two clauses or
195 For the use of nisi as an ‘exception négativeʼ, see Orlandini (2001: 164–78; 2002a), Bertocchi (2002b),
Orlandini and Poccetti (2008: 190–1; 2019a), and Galdi (2016b; 2016d), with references. See also the
section vi adversativa in Lodge s.v. nisi 174B.
352 Subordinate clauses filling a satellite position
with two independent sentences the second of which constitutes an exception to the
content of the preceding sentence. Sometimes the nisi sentence is entirely independ-
ent, suggesting an absurd alternative line of argumentation, as in (d). Editors vary
in the way they punctuate such sequences. The likelihood that the exception will
come true may be made more explicit by the use of forte ‘perhaps’ and vero ‘really’—
in an ironical or sarcastic sense, popular with Cicero and Augustine—or tamen
‘nevertheless’.
(d) Nisi vero existimatis dementem P. Africanum fuisse, qui cum a C. Carbone,
tribuno pl., seditiose in contione interrogaretur, quid de Ti. Gracchi morte
sentiret, responderit iure caesum videri.
(‘Unless indeed you hold that Publius Africanus was mad when, on being maliciously
asked in a public meeting by Gaius Carbo, tribune of the plebs, what was his opinion
concerning the death of Tiberius Gracchus, he replied that he thought he had been
deservedly slain.’ Cic. Mil. 8)
(e) Nil ad me attinet? # Nisi forte factu’s praefectus novos.
(‘It has nothing to do with me? # Unless perhaps you’ve been made a new magistrate.’
Pl. Mos. 941)
(f) Nemo enim fere saltat sobrius, nisi forte insanit . . .
(‘For almost no one dances while sober, unless, by chance, he is out of his mind . . .’
Cic. Mur. 13)
The status of nisi in these examples resembles that of quamquam, etsi, and tametsi
used as contrastive connectors (see § 16.68).
Supplement:
Nisi forte magis erit parricida, si qui consularem patrem quam si quis humilem
necarit . . . (Cic. Mil. 17); Quam ob rem, nisi forte es iam defessus et si tibi non graves
sumus, refer ad illa te, quae ad ipsius orationis laudem splendoremque pertinent.
(Cic. de Orat. 3.147—NB: difference between nisi and si . . . non); Immo octoginta
annis fuit, nisi forte sic vixisse eum dicis, quomodo dicuntur arbores vivere. (Sen. Ep.
93.4); Audi illam, et vide quia sic te alloquitur, nisi forte oblitus es quia pro nobis pas-
sus est Christus . . . (August. Serm. 163B.6)
Quod exspectavi, iam sum adsecutus, ut vos omnes factam esse aperte coniuratio-
nem contra rem publicam videretis; nisi vero si quis est qui Catilinae similis cum
Catilina sentire non putet. (Cic. Catil. 2.6); Et ego quaero unde orationem, unde
numeros, unde cantus; nisi vero loqui solem cum luna putamus cum propius acces-
serit, aut ad harmoniam canere mundum, ut Pythagoras existimat. (Cic. N.D. 3.27);
Quo magis miror, quod scribis fuisse quosdam qui reprehenderent quod orationes
omnino recitarem; nisi vero has solas non putant emendandas. (Plin. Ep. 7.17.2);
Prorsus etiam hic clamabo. Ipse fecit nos et non ipsi nos, nisi vero aliud apostolica
doctrina commendat . . . (August. Gest. Pelag. 14.34)
Nunc servom esse ubi dicam meum † Strolum † non reperio. Nisi etiam hic oppe-
riar tamen paullisper. (Pl. Aul. 804–5); Nihil mihi gratius facere potes; nisi tamen id
erit mihi gratissimum, si quae tibi mandavi confeceris . . . (Cic. Att. 5.14.3); Plura de
Conditional clauses 353
Iugurtha scribere dehortatur me fortuna mea, et iam antea expertus sum parum fidei
miseris esse; nisi tamen intellego illum supra quam ego sum petere neque simul
amicitiam vostram et regnum meum sperare. (Sal. Jug. 24.4–5); Quod multi per
ambitionem fieri aiebant: [quod] a pueritia consuetam duritiam et alia, quae ceteri
miserias vocant, voluptati habuisse; nisi tamen res publica pariter atque saevissumo
imperio bene atque decore gesta. (Sal. Jug. 100.5—NB: main clause not negated); . . .
aquae frigidae cyathi tres bibendi sunt, nisi tamen fauces vomitus exasperarint.
(Cels. 1.3.23)
The syntactic relationship between the nisi clause and the main clause is not like that
between a conditional clause and its main clause, but instead resembles the relation-
ship between two coordinate clauses with an adversative coordinator sed ‘but’. This is
suggested by the fact that in indirect discourse both clauses are in the accusative and
infinitive, as in (g).196
(g) Distinctos senatus et equitum census, non quia diversi natura, sed, ut locis
ordinibus dignationibus antistent, ita iis quae ad requiem animi aut salubri-
tatem corporum parentur, nisi forte clarissimo cuique plures curas, maiora
pericula subeunda, delenimentis curarum et periculorum carendum esse.
(‘Senators and knights had a special property qualification, not because they differed
in kind from their fellow-men, but in order that those who enjoyed precedence in
place, rank, and dignity should enjoy it also in the easements that make for mental
peace and physical well-being. And justly so—unless perhaps your distinguished
men, while saddled with more responsibilities and greater dangers, were to be
deprived of the relaxations compensating those responsibilities and those dangers.’
Tac. Ann. 2.33.3)
This ‘exceptive’ use of nisi is also very common in other configurations at or below the
level of the clause, with various phrases and finite and non-finite subordinate
clauses.197 In these cases nisi is an adverb. Examples are (h)–(k). Just as with the nisi
clauses discussed above, the clauses or sentences in which this nisi is used are usually
negative or negative by implication; (j) is an exception.
(h) Ut enim neminem alium nisi T. Patinam . . . rogasset, scire potuit . . .
(‘For even supposing that he had asked no one else save Titus Patina, he might have
known . . .’ Cic. Mil. 46)
(i) Quid est pietas nisi voluntas grata in parentes?
(‘What is filial affection, if not a benevolent gratitude to one’s parents?’ Cic. Planc. 80)
(j) Aulas calicesque omnes confregit nisi quae modiales erant.
(‘He smashed all pots and dishes to pieces, except those that were bucket-sized.’ Pl.
Capt. 916)
(k) . . . coepi . . . nihil aliud nisi de iudicio agere et cogitare.
(‘. . . I began . . . to devote my thoughts and energies to the trial alone.’ Cic. Ver. 26)
196 See Orlandini (1994). 197 See Orlandini (2001; 2002a) and Galdi (2016b; 2016d).
354 Subordinate clauses filling a satellite position
Supplement:
Scibam equidem nullum esse nobis nisi me servom Sosiam. (Pl. Am. 385); Neque ego
hanc superbiai / causa pepuli ad meretricium quaestum nisi ut ne esurirem. (Pl. Cist.
40–1);198 Hic nisi de opinione certum nil dico tibi. (Pl. Rud. 1092); Hic ego nunc de
praetore Macedoniae nihil dicam amplius nisi eum et civem optimum semper et
mihi amicum fuisse . . . (Cic. Planc. 99); Erat enim historia nihil aliud nisi annalium
confectio . . . (Cic. de Orat. 2.52); Quae est enim alia fortitudo nisi animi adfectio . . .
(Cic. Tusc. 5.41); . . . in ea (sc. loca) non est potestas omnibus intro eundi nisi invita-
tis . . . (Vitr. 6.5.1); Congesta sunt adversus miseram debilitatem ferrum, cruor, vene-
num et quicquid non potest esse negligentiae nisi nescientis. ([Quint.] Decl. 2.2);199 . . .
id agens ne quis Romae deus nisi Heliogabalus coleretur. (Hist. Aug. Heliog. 3.4)
(For nisi quod clauses, see § 16.84; for the use with alius, see also § 20.20.)
The term concessive is used in this Syntax for what other grammars sometimes call
‘adversative’ or ‘adversative/concessive’. The relation between two states of affairs A
and B is called ‘concessive’ if in the communicative setting the speaker and the
addressee would normally on the basis of state of affairs A expect state of affairs B (in
other words: state of affairs A normally implies or entails state of affairs B), but this
expectation turns out to be wrong. In (a), a person would normally not visit some-
body who is annoyed with him, but the speaker does so nevertheless. It is this ‘con-
trary to expectation’ feature that distinguishes concessive clauses from conditional
and reason clauses, to which they are otherwise semantically close. The subordinator
quamquam ‘although’ marks this relation between the two states of affairs explicitly.
In (b), the concessive relation is marked by the subordinator quamquam in the subor-
dinate clause and the adversative adverb tamen ‘all the same’, ‘nevertheless’ in the
main clause. In (c), tamen marks the concessive relation between two independent
sentences. See also § 24.47, on sane.
(a) Nunc ibo intro ad hanc meretricem, quamquam suscenset mihi . . .
(‘Now I’ll go inside to that prostitute, although she is angry with me . . .’ Pl. Men. 1048)
(b) Quamquam ego sum sordidatus, / frugi tamen sum . . .
(‘Even though I look shabby I’m decent just the same. . .’ Pl. As. 497–8)
(c) At negabas daturum esse te mi: tamen das.
(‘But you said you wouldn’t give it to me: you’re giving it nevertheless.’ Pl. Ps. 1314)
In comparison with other types of satellite clauses, the number of subordinators
and the changes in their use over the history of Latin are striking. Of the concessive
198 For a discussion of this and related instances, see Galdi (2016d: 104–6).
199 For a discussion of this and a few other instances in the pseudo-Quintilian Declamationes, see
Galdi (2016d: 106–7). See also Krapinger and Stramaglia ad loc.
Concessive clauses 355
subordinators in use in the Classical period two are formed with quam: quamquam (it
was already established as concessive subordinator in Early Latin and its development
into it is situated in prehistory) and quamvis (which in Early Latin is almost only used
as a degree adverb with gradable words ‘however much you please’, formed with the
degree adverb quam ‘to what extent’ and vis ‘you wish’). There are four compounds of
the conditional subordinator si ‘if ’: etsi, etiamsi, tametsi, and (possibly) tamenetsi. Of
these etiamsi and to a lesser extent etsi are also used with their conditional meaning
(sometimes printed as two words). There are in the Classical period a few proofs of
the development of the use of the impersonal verb licet ‘it is permitted’ as a concessive
conditional and then as a plainly concessive subordinator. Details about the individ-
ual words are given below in §§ 16.76–80. The frequency with which these words are
used by individual authors and in individual works varies, due partly to the suitability
of the specific meaning of the concessive words in the specific type of text, partly to
metrical considerations, partly to individual preference. Caesar, for instance, has no
instance of quamquam, a very common concessive subordinator in Cicero (Caesar
prefers etsi), and the si compounds are avoided in poetry. There is also a diachronic
dimension to the variation in frequency (see below on the individual subordinators).
Tametsi becomes infrequent after the Classical period. In Late Latin licet in prose and
quamvis in poetry are the main concessive subordinators (with individual differences
between authors). The other Classical concessive subordinators are occasionally used
by authors aspiring to a more Classical style.200 None of these subordinators survived
in the Romance languages.
Table 16.3 shows the distribution of the concessive words in the four types of Cicero’s
prose. Included are the instances of so-called corrective use of quamquam, etsi, and
tametsi, as well as the adverbial use of quamvis. Information on licet is more difficult
to obtain.201
The negation word in concessive clauses is non. The concessive clause more often
precedes the main clause, but it may also follow, or be inserted. As in other complex
sentences, the actual order depends on the distribution of topical and focal informa-
tion over main and subordinate clauses.
Main clauses that follow the subordinate clause often contain an adversative adverb
(especially tamen, also nihilominus and the connector at). Here, too, there is variation
from author to author, and the frequency of concessive or adversative expressions in
the main clause varies by concessive subordinator. Only 12 out of 255 instances of the
subordinator quamquam in Cicero’s prose are found without tamen in the main
clause; figures for etsi (17/307) and tametsi (1/65) show a similar proportion. By con-
trast, the scalar concessive quamvis and the concessive conditional etiamsi occur
without tamen much more frequently (quamvis 50/99; etiamsi 192/342).202 A few
examples with quamquam are (d)–(f).203 In (g), the first tamen connects the entire
complex sentence with the preceding sentence.204 More instances of such expressions
in the main clause can be found in the sections on the individual subordinators.
(d) . . . et quamquam hoc tibi aegre est, tamen fac accures.
(‘. . . and although this upsets you, make sure you prepare it nevertheless.’ Pl. Cas. 421)
(e) Quod ego quamquam quid sit nescio, tamen hoc statuo, hunc, si amicus
esset Pompeio, laudaturum illum non fuisse.
(‘Although I do not know what this means, nevertheless my conviction is that if
Clodius were a friend to Pompeius he would not have congratulated him.’ Cic.
Har. 52)
(f) Quamquam ego vinum bibo, at mandata / non consuevi simul bibere una.
(‘Even though I do drink wine, it isn’t my custom to drink down your commands at
the same time.’ Pl. Per. 170–70a)
(g) Sed tamen Lurconem quamquam pro sua dignitate moderatus est in testimo-
nio dicendo religio<se oratio>ni suae, tamen iratum Flacco esse vidistis.
(‘Nevertheless, you saw that, although Lurco with his usual dignity restrained himself
when giving evidence, he was nevertheless angry with Flaccus.’ Cic. Flac. 87)
Three of these words (quamquam, etsi, and tametsi) are also used as contrastive con-
nectors of sentences as in (h), where the connector etsi is followed by the subordinator
quamvis, and in (i), where quamquam is the connector and etsi the subordinator. The
relationship between such independent sentences and the preceding sentences is one
of comment, correction, or clarification. It therefore resembles the relationship
between attitudinal and illocutionary concessive clauses and their corresponding
main clauses. In Cicero roughly half of the instances of these words are sentence
202 See Martín Puente (2002: 50, 88, 103, 135), Eckert (2003: 226–37), and Spevak (2005c: 147–9;
2006c: 225, Table 2). There are sequences of tamen in a main clause and concessive subordinators in a
following concessive clause, but no real instances of correlation (see also Spevak 2005c: 154).
203 A survey of correlating expressions with etiamsi and etsi can be found in TLL s.v. 968.21ff. and
974.49ff.; 976.44ff.
204 The example is taken from Martín Puente (1998a: 314).
Concessive clauses 357
connectors (quamquam more than half, etsi less).205 Often it is difficult to decide
whether the sentences are really independent. Editors vary in the way they punctuate
before such concessive sequences. See also § 24.34.
(h) Etsi, quamvis non fueris suasor et impulsor profectionis meae, at probator
certe fuisti, dum modo Kal. Ian. Romae essem.
(‘All the same, although you did not recommend or instigate my trip, you certainly
did approve of it, provided I was back in Rome on the Kalends of January.’ Cic.
Att. 16.7.2)
(i) Quamquam haec quidem iam tolerabilia videbantur, etsi aequabiliter in
rem publicam, in privatos, in longinquos, in propinquos, in alienos, in
suos inruebat.
(‘Still, such acts as these came to be looked on as endurable, although he encroached
equally upon the state, upon individuals, upon those at hand, upon those at a dis-
tance, upon foreigners, upon his very own.’ Cic. Mil. 76)
Etsi, quamquam, and later licet are also used as concessive particles with constituents
below the clause level. This use is relatively rare in the Classical period, but it becomes
more frequent in later authors. The following examples show the types of constituent
modified by concessive particles (no chronology implied). In (j) and (k) etsi and
quamquam, respectively, modify attributive adjectives (note tamen in (k)). In (l)–(n)
etsi and quamquam are used with appositive adjectives (note tamen in (m) and the
position of quamquam in (n)). Ex. (o) shows the use of quamquam with an adverb
functioning as a satellite. Exx. (p) and (q) show a prepositional and a noun phrase
functioning as satellites.
(j) Nam etsi iustum dolorem pudor impediebat.
(‘For shame impeded his pain, even though it was just.’ Tac. Ann. 11.35.2)
(k) Et patres quamquam rem parvam, tamen . . . laeti accepere id . . .
(‘The senators, though it was a small matter, nevertheless gladly welcomed it . . .’ Liv.
4.8.5)
(l) . . . quaedam adferunt per se adiuvantia, etsi non necessaria . . .
(‘. . . and add certain things which themselves give aid, although they are not neces-
sary . . .’ Cic. Top. 59)
(m) . . . Metelloque Numidia evenerat, acri viro et, quamquam advorso populi
partium, fama tamen aequabili et inviolata.
(‘. . . Numidia had fallen to Metellus, a man of spirit and, although he was an opponent
of the popular party, of a nevertheless consistently unblemished reputation.’ Sal.
Jug. 43.1)
(n) Haec, mira quamquam, fidem ex eo trahebant . . .
(‘The tale, though remarkable, drew credibility from this . . .’ Tac. Ann. 6.30.4)
206 For the definition of ‘concession’ and the various forms in which this may be expressed, see
Bertocchi and Maraldi (2011: 139–43) and Spevak (2005b: Introduction), with references. Also—briefly—
Martín Puente (2002: 21–5).
207 Crevels (2000) distinguishes four types of concessive relations within the framework of Functional
Grammar: content, epistemic, speech-act, and textual (the latter concern sentence connexion). For
another, related, approach, see Spevak (2005b).
208 See TLL s.v. 908.22ff.
Concessive clauses 359
sense from Early Latin onwards (though for that period the combination of it with si
is not beyond doubt). From signalling an extreme condition etiamsi developed into a
concessive subordinator. In Cicero’s time it is used in both senses. The conditional
interpretation of etsi and etiamsi clauses is especially likely in cases like (b) and (e),
with the subjunctive mood.209 The scalar concessive subordinator quamvis resembles
etiamsi insofar as it may indicate that what its clause refers to is indeed the case to a
very high or extreme degree (for details, see below, § 16.75). However, it lacks the
conditional aspect of etiamsi.210 Additionally, strengthening of the conditional subor-
dinator (like etiamsi) and of free-choice indefinites (like quamvis) is a well-known
source for concessive expressions in many languages.211 For a conditional interpret-
ation of licet, see (f).
(a) Etsi pervivo usque ad summam aetatem, tamen / breve spatium est perfe-
rundi quae minitas mihi.
(‘Even if I live to a great age, it’s still only a short period for me to bear what you’re
threatening me with.’ Pl. Capt. 742–3)
(b) Pol etsi taceas, palam id quidem est. Res ipsa test’est.
(‘Even if you were to be silent it would be obvious: the facts speak for themselves.’
Pl. Aul. 421)
(c) Etiamsi dudum fuerat ambiguom hoc mihi, / nunc non est, quom eam
[con]sequitur alienus puer.
(‘Even if this had been in doubt for me for a long time, it’s not now, since someone
else’s child is following her.’ Ter. Hec. 648–9)
(d) Eundem igitur esse creditote, etiamsi nullum videbitis.
(‘Believe therefore that the same thing exists, even if you do not see it.’ Cic.
Sen. 79)
(e) Etiamsi propter amicitiam vellet illum ab inferis evocare, propter rem publi-
cam non fecisset.
(‘Even if he had been desirous for friendship’s sake of summoning him from the
dead, for the commonwealth’s sake he would have refrained from doing so.’ Cic.
Mil. 79)
(f) . . . nec tibi parsero, licet mehercules Iovem Olympium clames.
(‘. . . and I shall not spare you, even though by Hercules you cry out to Olympian Jove.’
Petr. 58.5 (Hermeros speaking))
209 For etsi, see TLL s.v. 974.10ff., Mellet (2002), and Spevak (2005b: 107, n. 91). The concessive condi-
tional interpretation of etsi is rejected by Martín Puente (2002) and Bertocchi and Maraldi (2011:
148–50). For etiamsi, see TLL s.v. 965.78ff., Martín Puente (1998b), and Mellet (2002: 258–9).
210 For a different view, see Bertocchi and Maraldi (2010a).
211 See König and Siemund (2000), Spevak (2005b: 11–25), Bertocchi and Maraldi (2010a; 2011:
140–2).
360 Subordinate clauses filling a satellite position
transfunctoria expugnatio. (Tert. Val. 6.2); Quamquam sitierit te anima mea, tamen
multo te plus carnis meae labore quaesivi . . . (Hier. Ep. 122.1.13)
Quamvis sphaeram in scaenam, ut dicitur, attulerit Ennius, tamen in sphaera fornicis
similitudo inesse non potest. (Cic. de Orat. 3.162); Nam quamvis de mensura minus
auctoribus convenit, hanc tamen videri commodissimam docuit noster usus. (Col.
2.9.1); Palumbis et turtur plurimum terna nec plus quam bis vere pariunt, atque ita,
si prior fetus corruptus est et ut, quamvis III pepererint, numquam plus II educant.
(Plin. Nat. 10.158); Neque miseratus est posthac Tiberius, quamvis domus Hortensii
pudendam ad inopiam delaberetur. (Tac. Ann. 2.38.5); Nec ipsa mali relevatio fit per
communionem cladis sed per solatium caritatis, ut quamvis alii ferendo patiuntur
alii cognoscendo compatiuntur, communis sit tamen tribulatio . . . (August. Ep. 99.2)
Sed quod crebro videt, non miratur, etiamsi, cur fiat, nescit. (Cic. Div. 2.49); Nam
ista veritas, etiam si iucunda non est, mihi tamen grata est. (Cic. Att. 3.24.2); Apud
quem etiam si caritate a fratre maiore vincor, misericordia certe reus vinci non
debeo. (Liv. 40.15.15); In hac controversia, etiamsi coniecturalis est et habet quasi
certum tritumque iter, fuit tamen aliqua inter declamantis dissensio. (Sen. Con.
7.7.10); Etiamsi credideris, nego te velle. Etiamsi volueris, nego te posse. (Tert. Apol.
8.4); . . . semper tamen credidi et esse te et curam nostri gerere, etiamsi ignorabam vel
quid sentiendum esset de substantia tua vel quae via duceret aut reduceret ad te.
(August. Conf. 6.5.8)
Etsi mihi facta iniuria’st, verum tamen / . . . abduce hanc, minas quinque accipe.
(Ter. Ph. 407–10); Quam etsi spero falsam esse, numquam tamen extenuabo. (Cic.
Marc. 21); . . . Caesar . . . huc iam deduxerat rem, ut equites, etsi difficulter atque aegre
fiebat, possent tamen atque auderent flumen transire . . . (Caes. Civ. 1.62.1); Quae
singula etsi distrahebant rem publicam, exercebant tamen illorum temporum elo-
quentiam . . . (Tac. Dial. 36.4); Nam, etsi a Numa concepta est curiositas superstitiosa,
nondum tamen aut simulacris aut templis res divina apud Romanos constabat.
(Tert. Apol. 25.12); Qua iniquitate percitus qui audiebatur ‘etsi me,’ inquit, ‘despicit
imperator, negotii tamen est magnitudo, ut non nisi iudicio principis nosci possit et
vindicari.’ (Amm. 20.2.4)
Non eo genere sumus prognatae, tametsi sumus servae, soror, / ut deceat nos
facere quicquam quod homo quisquam irrideat. (Pl. Poen. 1201–2); Nolebat in
agendo discere, tametsi non provinciae rudis erat et tiro . . . (Cic. Ver. 2.17); Nostri
tametsi ab duce et a fortuna deserebantur, tamen omnem spem salutis in virtute
ponebant . . . (Caes. Gal. 5.34.2); At ille, tametsi omnia potiora fide Iugurthae rebatur,
tamen, quia penes eosdem, si advorsaretur, cogendi potestas erat, ita, uti censuerant
Italici, deditionem facit. (Sal. Jug. 26.2); Quae tametsi maestitiam sollicito incuterent
principi, residua tamen non contemnebat urgentia, dum pugnandi tempus ei veniret
optatum. (Amm. 22.14.1)
Quod bonum felix et faustum itaque, licet salutare non erit, Photis illa temptetur.
(Apul. Met. 2.6.8); Si furioso . . . rem tradideris, licet ille non erit adeptus possessio-
nem, tu possidere desinis. (Gaius dig. 41.2.18.1); Omnibus licet membris lavet quoti-
die Israel, numquam tamen mundus est. (Tert. Or. 14); Qui credit in me, licet moriatur,
vivet . . . (Cypr. Mort. 21); . . . et privatus licet dici velles, inhaesit tibi ingenita maiestas.
(Paneg. 7.12.4); . . . itaque quoniam episcopus, licet Siriste noverit, tamen semper
Grece loquitur et nunquam Siriste. (Pereg. 47.3); . . . si quis eum adisset . . . hoc non
362 Subordinate clauses filling a satellite position
When the concessive and the main clause (would) have the same verb, it is normally
expressed only once, as in (g) and (h). In (g) audiebat has to be understood in the
etiamsi clause, in (h) continentur has to be understood in the main clause.
(g) Erat surdaster M. Crassus, sed aliud molestius, quod male audiebat, etiamsi,
ut mihi videbatur, iniuria.
(‘Marcus Crassus was half-deaf; still he suffered another worse annoyance, in hearing
himself spoken ill of, even if, as I thought at the time, what he heard was unjust.’ Cic.
Tusc. 5.116)
(h) Coniuges autem et liberi et fratres et alii, quos usus familiaritasque coniunxit,
quamquam etiam caritate ipsa, tamen amore maxime continentur.
(‘Wives, however, and children and brothers and others, who become attached to us
by association and familiarity, although (they are bound to us) by actual esteem as
well, are bound to us chiefly by affection.’ Cic. Part. 88)
Supplement:
Nec refert de Graeco an de Latino loquar, quamquam Graecum esse priorem placet.
(Quint. Inst. 1.4.1); Non videt autem (sc. mens) quod minimum est, formam suam
(quamquam fortasse id quoque, sed relinquamus). (Cic. Tusc. 1.67); Haec si torrea-
tur aequa parte rubrica admixta, sandycem facit, quamquam animadverto Vergilium
existimasse herbam id esse illo versu. (Plin. Nat. 35.40)
Certe nisi sole adverso non fiunt nec umquam nisi dimidia circuli forma nec
noctu, quamvis Aristoteles prodat aliquando visum, quod tamen fatetur idem non
nisi XXX luna posse fieri. (Plin. Nat. 2.150); Impune erratur nisi delinquatur—quam-
vis et errare delinquere est—impune, inquam, vagatur qui nihil deserit. (Tert. Praescr.
11.1); Quem quidem Aurelianus idcirco dicitur occidisse, quod superbior illa epistula
ipsius diceretur dictata consilio, quamvis Syro esset sermone contexta. (Hist. Aug.
Aur. 30.3)213
Talia esse scripta eius non dubito, etiam si magis reminiscor quam teneo . . . (Sen.
Ep. 100.12); Levissimum autem longe genus ex verbo, etiam si est apud Ciceronem in
Clodiam . . . (Quint. Inst. 9.2.99)
Quam ob rem . . . etsi utile est etiam subito saepe dicere, tamen illud utilius, sumpto
spatio ad cogitandum, paratius atque accuratius dicere. (Cic. de Orat. 1.150); Etsi
hoc, inquit, fortasse non poterit sic abire, cum hic adsit—me autem dicebat, tamen
audebo te ab hac Academia nova ad veterem illam vocare . . . (Cic. Fin. 5.7); Ubi
etsi adiectum aliquid numero sit, magna certe caedes fuit. (Liv. 3.8.10); Terra etsi
aliquanto specie differt, in universum tamen aut silvis horrida aut paludibus
foeda . . . (Tac. Ger. 5.1)
Quorum tametsi utrumque convenit orationi, tamen possis illud grammaticum,
hoc rhetoricum magis dicere. (Quint. Inst. 9.3.2)
Et licet multa sunt eius laudanda in huiusmodi controversiis, unum tamen sufficiet
poni, ad cuius similitudinem acta vel dicta sunt. (Amm. 18.1.3); Septima decima
mansio, quam in ‘lateres’ possumus vertere, licet quidam Lebona transferentes male
‘candorem’ interpretati sunt. (Hier. Ep. 78.19)
The relationship between the attitudinal concessive clause and the main clause is often
one of contrast. The main clause may either contain generally acknowledged informa-
tion, as in (d), or refer to someone else’s words or actions, as in (e), which is repeated
from § 16.68. In these cases, the concessive clause almost always precedes. With such
contrastive concessive clauses, the main clause often contains tamen or a related
expression, as in (f), but also epistemic adverbs like certe ‘certainly’, utique ‘absolutely’,
and profecto ‘assuredly’, as in (g)–(h).214
(d) De futuris autem rebus etsi semper difficile est dicere, tamen interdum
coniectura possis propius accedere . . .
(‘Although it is always difficult to speak of things to come, nevertheless you can
sometimes come quite close to the mark by guessing.’ Cic. Fam. 6.4.1)
(e) Etsi, quamvis non fueris suasor et impulsor profectionis meae, at probator
certe fuisti, dum modo Kal. Ian. Romae essem.
(‘All the same, although you did not recommend or instigate my trip, you certainly
did approve of it, provided I was back in Rome on the Kalends of January.’ Cic. Att.
16.7.2)
(f) . . . quamquam omnis virtus nos ad se allicit . . ., tamen iustitia et liberalitas id
maxime efficit.
(‘. . . although every virtue attracts us . . . still justice and generosity do so most of all.’
Cic. Off. 1.56)
(g) Et erat tam demens hic cui vos ingenium certe tribuitis, etiam si cetera ini-
mica oratione detrahitis, ut omnis suas fortunas alienis servis committeret?
(‘And this man, whom you certainly credit with some ability, although you deprive
him of other qualities with your hostile language—was so great a fool as to entrust all
his fortunes to another person’s slaves?’ Cic. Cael. 57)
(h) Vos, etiamsi tunc faciendum non fuerit, nunc utique faciendum putatis.
(‘You think that even if then it ought not to have been done, yet now at any rate it
ought.’ Liv. 5.53.3)
Supplement:
Sed omnis loquendi elegantia, quamquam expolitur scientia litterarum, tamen auge-
tur legendis oratoribus et poetis. (Cic. de Orat. 3.39); Qua quidem de re quamquam
assentior iis, qui haec omnia regi natura putant—quae si natura neglegat, ipsa esse non
possit—tamen concedo ut qui de hoc dissentiunt existiment quod velint . . . (Cic. Fin.
5.33); Ego valeo, quamvis animus aeger bonum sanitatis ignoret. (Symm. Ep. 4.74.2);
Quamquam voluntas non sit in crimine, error in culpa est. (Hier. Ep. 22.8.5); Victorino
martyri in libris suis, licet desit eruditio, tamen non deest eruditionis voluntas. (Hier.
Ep. 70.5.2)
215 See Crevels (2000: 32). One of her examples is: The answer is on page 200, although I’m sure you
already know that.
216 For (a), see Spevak (2005b: 40).
Concessive clauses 365
(b) Sed ea tametsi vos parvi pendebatis, tamen res publica firma erat, opulentia
neglegentiam tolerabat.
(‘But although you were wont to give little weight to my words, yet the state was
unshaken; its prosperity put up with your neglect.’ Sal. Cat. 52.9)
Supplement:
Mihi quoque, inquit Brutus, [et] exspectanda sunt ea quae Attico polliceris, etsi for-
tasse ego a te huius voluntarius procurator petam, quod ipse, cui debes, incommodo
exacturum negat. (Cic. Brut. 17); . . . teque ad hoc studium religiosa exhortatione desti-
mulo, licet bona voluntas quae ex ingenio venit non sit agitanda calcaribus. (Symm.
Ep. 5.94)
217 For the relationship between quamquam as a concessive subordinator and sed and other adversative
coordinators, see Maraldi (2001). For its use as a connector, see § 24.34.
218 See Wisse et al. ad loc.
219 So also in Tertullian and Cyprian. See Waszink ad Tert. An. 38.1.
220 Details and references in Sz.: 602–3. For Livy (no semantically unmotivated instances of the
subjunctive), see Ladouceur (1981).
366 Subordinate clauses filling a satellite position
(b) Quae (sc. eloquentia) quamquam (quamvis L) contemnatur ab eis, necesse est
tamen aliquem cumulum illorum artibus adferre videatur.
(‘Although it might be despised by them, still it must seem to add some embellish-
ment to their skills.’ Cic. de Orat. 3.143)
(c) Ita nobismet ipsis accidit ut, quamquam essent multo magis alia lugenda,
tamen hoc doleremus quod . . .
(‘So it befell me that, although other things were to be lamented much more, still I
grieved over the fact that . . .’ Cic. Brut. 8)
(d) Nec praeteribo, quamquam nonnullis leve visum iri putem . . . non amplius
quam terna milia peraeque in singulos menses ex ephemeride eum expen-
sum sumptui ferre solitum.
(‘I shall not pass over the fact, although I suppose that some will regard it as trivial,
that we know from the entries in his day-book that he consistently limited his
expenses to not more than three thousand sesterces each month.’ Nep. Att. 13.6)
Supplement:
Semantically justified subjunctives: Sed in versibus res est apertior, quamquam
etiam a modis quibusdam cantu remoto soluta esse videatur oratio . . . (Cic. Orat.
183); Quamquam enim sensus abierit, tamen suis et propriis bonis laudis et gloriae,
quamvis non sentiant, mortui non carent. (Cic. Tusc. 1.109); Nam vi quidem regere
patriam aut parentis, quamquam et possis et delicta corrigas, tamen inportunum
est . . . (Sal. Jug. 3.2); Nec vero Alciden me sum laetatus euntem / accepisse lacu, nec
Thesea Pirithoumque, / dis quamquam geniti atque invicti viribus essent. (Verg. A.
6.392–4—a reported statement ‘although, as they said . . .’); Quamquam expertum
exercitum adsuetumque imperio, qui in Volscis erat mallet, nihil recusavit.
(Liv. 6.9.6)
Semantically unmotivated subjunctives: Neve haec commenta putetis, / admonitu
quamquam renovetur luctus amarus, / perpetiar memorare tamen. (Ov. Met. 14.464–6);
Hae flexere virum voces, et, tempora quamquam / sint aliena toris iam fato in bella
vocante, / foedera sola tamen vanaque carentia pompa / iura placent sacrisque deos
admittere testes. (Luc. 2.350–3); At hercule Germanicum, Druso ortum, octo apud
Rhenum legionibus imposuit adscirique per adoptionem a Tiberio iussit, quam-
quam esset in domo Tiberii filius iuvenis . . . (Tac. Ann. 1.3.5); Quamquam autem et
retro praestruxerimus . . . pubertatem quoque animalem cum carnali dicimus conve-
nire . . . (Tert. An. 38.1)
and Cicero onwards, although it continues to be used as a scalar adverb as well, for
which see (b), where it is found next to licet. A clear instance of its use as a subordina-
tor is (c), repeated from § 16.70: civis Romanus is not gradable (not all scholars agree
on this—see OLD s.v. quamvis § 3b). The regular mood in such quamvis clauses is the
subjunctive. The earliest undisputed instance of an indicative is (e), repeated from
§ 16.71, where the indicative fits in with the (attitudinal) type of concessive clause,
namely a factual comment (see also the examples in the Supplement). Usually the
indicative is explained on the analogy of quamquam. The use of both an indicative
and a subjunctive in the same quamvis clause in Ammianus (ex. (f)) can only be
understood as stylistic variation influenced by Greek.221
(a) Quamvis malam rem quaeras, illi reperias.
(‘However bad the thing you’re looking for, you could find it there.’ Pl. Trin. 554)
(b) Et praeter eos quamvis enumeres multos licet, quom deni creentur, non nul-
los in omni memoria reperies perniciosos tribunos . . .
(‘And beyond these, you could count as many as you like; for when a college of ten is
elected, you will find some tribunes in every period whose activities are harmful . . .’
Cic. Leg. 3.24)
(c) . . . ut . . . quamvis civis Romanus esset, in crucem tolleretur.
(‘. . . that even if he were a Roman citizen, he might be put on the cross.’ Cic. Ver.
5.168—NB: the imperfect subjunctive esset cannot depend on vis in quamvis)
(d) . . . constantiam . . . quam ego quamvis ipse probarem ut probo, tamen non
commemorarem nisi a te cognovissem in primis eam virtutem solere
laudari.
(‘. . . the constancy which, though I respected it myself, as I do respect it, I nevertheless
would not mention, unless I had known that that virtue in particular is accustomed
to be praised by you.’ Cic. Lig. 26)
(e) Erat enim inter eos dignitate regia, quamvis carebat nomine . . .
(‘As a matter of fact, he enjoyed the rank of king among them, although he didn’t hold
that title . . .’ Nep. Milt. 2.3)
(f) Et quamvis offundebatur oculis altitudo pulveris et aestus calescens officeret
alacritati membrorum, tamen velut exauctoratus amisso ductore sine parsi-
monia ruebat in ferrum.
(‘And although high clouds of dust blinded the eyes, and the burning heat weak-
ened the activity of their limbs, yet as though discharged by the loss of their leader
without sparing themselves, they rushed upon the swords of the enemy.’ Amm.
25.3.10)222
221 For the development of quamvis from a scalar adverb (see § 11.97) into a scalar concessive subordi-
nator, see Schaffner (1954), Bertocchi (2002a), Spevak (2005b: 74–81), Leuschner (2008), and Bertocchi
and Maraldi (2011: 156–60). For the use of the moods, see Sz.: 603–4.
222 See Ehrismann (1886: 45).
368 Subordinate clauses filling a satellite position
Supplement:
Subjunctive: Nunc quamvis sint homines qui mortuum Cn. Carbonem oderint,
tamen hi debent, non quid illi accidere voluerint, sed quid ipsis in tali re metuendum
sit cogitare. (Cic. Ver. 1.39); . . . et si tibi pro P. Rutilio non philosophorum more, sed
tuo licuisset dicere, quamvis scelerati illi fuissent, sicuti fuerunt . . . , tamen omnem
eorum importunitatem ex intimis mentibus evellisset vis orationis tuae. (Cic. de
Orat. 1.230); . . . quamvis sint sub aqua, sub aqua maledicere temptant. (Ov. Met.
6.376); Ad <ea> flumina cum pecora suis temporibus anni parantur ad conceptio-
nem partus, per id tempus adiguntur eo cotidie potum, ex eoque, quamvis sint alba,
procreant aliis locis leucophaea, aliis locis pulla, aliis coracino colore. (Vitr. 8.3.14);
Neronem enim transeo, quamvis sciam non corrumpi in deterius, quae aliquando
etiam a malis, sed honesta manere, quae saepius a bonis fiunt. (Plin. Ep. 5.3.6)
Indicative: Ut quisque duo verba in quattuor formis finxeri[n]t similiter, quamvis
haec nolemus (nolimus Spengel), tamen erunt sequenda, ut † Iuppiti, Marspitrem.
(Var. L. 8.33); Hoc ille natus, quamvis patrem numquam viderat, tamen . . . in pater-
nae vitae similitudinem deductus est. (Cic. Rab. Post. 4—NB: various emendations
for quamvis and for viderat); Nec bonus Eurytion praelato invidit honori, / quamvis
solus avem caelo deiecit ab alto. (Verg. A. 5.541–2); Non tibi quamvis infesto animo
et minaci perveneras (secl. Novák), ingredienti fines ira cecidit? (Liv. 2.40.7); Ex quo
casu, quamvis vita redditur, tamen id fere membrum debilitatur. (Cels. 2.4.7); Iam
scies patrem tuum mercedes perdidisse, quamvis et rhetoricam scis. (Petr. 58.8
(Hermeros speaking)); Quamvis non minus sudoris habuimus, etiam postquam ad
stabulum pervenimus. (Petr. 79.5); De vita tua aeterna certus eram, quamvis eam in
aenigmate et quasi per speculum videram. (August. Conf. 8.1)
The subjunctive is semantically justified in instances like (a) above, where quamvis
modifies malam (for this ‘concessive’ use of the subjunctive, see § 7.59).223 The sub-
junctive in (g) from Cicero may be explained along the same lines, although in other
cases this may seem artificial. On the other hand, the indicative is perfectly under-
standable in (h) and (i), cited as early instances of the use of this mood: the clauses
describe plain facts. (For the indicative in an attitudinal clause, see above, (e).)
(g) Quamvis sis molestus, numquam te esse confitebor malum.
(‘However distressing you might be, I shall never admit that you are an evil.’
Cic. Tusc. 2.61)
(h) Quamvis est circum caesis lacer undique membris / truncus, adempta anima
circum membrisque remota / vivit et aetherias vitalis suscipit auras.
(‘However much the trunk is mangled with the limbs hewn all around,
though the soul be rent from him all around and wrested from his body, he
lives and draws in the breath of heaven to give him life.’ Lucr. 3.403–5—quam-
vis modifies lacer; text and translation by Bailey)
(i) Neque aliud magis tempus pestilentiae patet, cuiuscumque ea generis est,
quamvis variis rationibus nocet.
(‘Nor is any other period of the year more exposed to pestilence, of whatever
sort it is and no matter how various the ways in which it is harmful.’ Cels.
2.1.9—NB: quamvis modifies variis)
Quamvis is a combination of the degree adverb quam ‘how’ and the second person
singular form vis of the verb volo. Other personal forms are also attested, as in (j) and
(k). Such expressions are also found as degree expressions with adjectives and
adverbs, as in (l).
(j) Quam volent in conviviis faceti, dicaces, non numquam etiam ad vinum
diserti sint, alia fori vis est . . .
(‘However humorous, witty, sometimes glib they may be at dinner parties
over drinks, the idea of court is one thing. . .’ Cic. Cael. 67—NB: the mss.
vary)
(k) Quam volumus licet, patres conscripti, ipsi nos amemus, tamen . . . omnis
gentis nationesque superavimus.
(‘However good be our conceit of ourselves, conscript fathers, neverthe-
less . . . we have excelled every race and every nation.’ Cic. Har. 19—Note the
presence of licet)
(l) Quod commodum est, expectate facinus quam voltis improbum.
(‘As is convenient, expect a deed however immoral you wish.’ Cic. Ver. 5.11)
Quamlibet ‘in whatever degree one likes’ is used as a scalar degree modifier of adjec-
tives and adverbs (see § 11.97). It is relatively popular in Ovid and later in Augustine,
but infrequent in other authors; a rare example is (m). From Silver Latin onwards it
is also occasionally found on the clause level, resembling the use of quamvis as a
subordinator ‘however much’ (with a subjunctive), as in (n).
(m) . . . Curionem video se dupliciter iactaturum, primum ut aliquid Caesari
adimat, inde ut aliquid Pompeio tribuat, quodvis quamlibet tenue
munusculum.
(‘. . . I envisage that Curio will make his weight felt in two directions: first he’ll
try to take something away from Caesar, then give something to Pompey,
any little douceur, however trifling.’ Cael. Fam. 8.10.3)
(n) Nam certe quamlibet parvum sit, quod contulerit aetas prior, maiora tamen
aliqua discet puer ipso illo anno, quo minora didicisset.
(‘For though the knowledge contributed by the earlier years may be small,
still the boy will be learning some more important things in the year in
which he would otherwise have been learning more elementary matters.’
Quint. Inst. 1.1.18).
Concessive subordinators formed with si ‘if ’ are found from Early Latin onwards. As
with si clauses, these clauses may be in the indicative or in the subjunctive (potential
and counterfactual). The degree to which these subordinators are used varies by
author and text.224 In poetry they are avoided. Tamenetsi (or: tamen etsi) is very rare
in all periods of Latin. Etsi is the most common concessive subordinator in this group
in all periods of Latin (and so absent from Sallust). Tametsi is the most common con-
cessive subordinator in Rhet. Her. and in Sallust and is also relatively frequent in
Cicero’s orations and in the jurists, but it is rare in other authors and texts. Etiamsi (or:
etiam si) is the most frequent concessive subordinator in argumentative texts, Cicero’s
included. It is the only one used by Seneca the Elder and almost the only one used
by Seneca the Younger in his philosophical works. It is also predominant in Pliny
the Elder and in Petronius. Tertullian, however, strongly prefers etsi over etiamsi.
Augustine uses both, with a slight preference for etsi.
225 For information about the use of etsi in various authors, see TLL s.v. etsi 973.62ff.
Concessive clauses 371
Senate-house—granting that the other arts may not be specially brought into play,
still it is made easily discernible whether the speaker has merely floundered about in
this declamatory business or whether he has come to the task of speaking with train-
ing in all the liberal arts.’ Cic. de Orat. 1.73)
(e) . . . ignes, quibus etsi propria desit (defit cj. Orelli) / forma, per appositi nos-
cuntur lumina signi.
(‘. . . stars, which, even though a constellation of their own may be lacking, are recog-
nized through the lights of a constellation nearby.’ Germ. Arat. 377–8)
than the actual concessive subordinators. On the other hand, the epistemic adverbs
certe ‘certainly’ (ex. (e)) and profecto ‘assuredly’ are used more often with etiamsi.226
Convincing concessive instances in which the ‘contrary to expectation’ feature is pre-
sent are found from Seneca the Elder onwards, as in (f).227 The moods are the same as
in si clauses. The first attested semantically unmotivated subjunctives are found in the
freedmen’s passages in Petronius (ex. (g)).228
(a) Atque equidem filium / tum etiam si nolit, cogam ut cum illa una cubet.
(‘And indeed, I would force your son to sleep together with her, even if he were
unwilling.’ Ter. Ad. 850–1)
(b) Omniane bonis viris quae facere possunt facienda sunt, etiamne, si turpia, si
perniciosa erunt, si facere omnino non licebit?
(‘Are good men to do everything they have the power to do, even if those things
are base, if they are pernicious, if it will be altogether unlawful to do them?’ Cic.
Phil. 13.14)
(c) Si haec . . . non ad homines, verum ad bestias, aut etiam ut longius progrediar,
si . . . haec conqueri ac deplorare vellem, tamen omnia muta . . . commoverentur.
(‘If I were speaking . . . not even to human beings, but to brute beasts, or to go even
further, if I were minded to tell this tale of suffering and wrong . . . even all that is mute
and lifeless would be moved.’ Cic. Ver. 5.171)
(d) Hoc . . . ita vobis planum faciemus, ut hoc statuatis, etiamsi spatium ad dicen-
dum nostro commodo vacuosque dies habuissemus, tamen oratione longa
nihil opus fuisse.
(‘This fact . . . we will make so plain to you that you will conclude that, even we had
had days to spare and time to speak at leisure, there would still have been no need to
speak at any great length.’ Cic. Ver. 56)
(e) Nimirum enim inops ille, si bonus est vir, etiam si referre gratiam non potest,
habere certe potest.
(‘For presumably that poor man, if he is a good man, even if he is not able to return a
favour, can at least be grateful.’ Cic. Off. 2.69)
(f) Etiamsi multa contra expectationem accidunt, numquam tamen futurum
putavi, ut . . .
(‘Even though many things happen contrary to expectation, still I never thought it
would come about that . . .’ Sen. Con. 2.1.1)
(g) Diffusus hac contentione Trimalchio ‘Amici,’ inquit, ‘et servi homines sunt et
aeque unum lactem biberunt, etiam si illos malus fatus oppresserit (oppressit
cj. Buecheler).
(‘Trimalchio expanded at this dispute and said, “Ah, my friends, a slave is a man and
drank his mother’s milk like ourselves, even if a cruel fate has trodden him down.” ’
Petr. 71.1 (Trimalchio speaking))
The impersonal deontic modal verb licet ‘it is permitted’, ‘one may’ is used with a finite
complement clause in the subjunctive from Plautus onwards, as in (a) (for more
examples and—in Plautus’ time much more frequent—alternative constructions, see
§ 4.14). Its use with an epistemic meaning is attested in the Classical period, for
instance in (b), where it signals a possible line of reasoning. Licet is also used with this
meaning in combination with an infinitive, as in (c). Note that in (b) the tense of eli-
gerent and probarent is imperfect: in its epistemic meaning there is no restriction on
the tense of the embedded clause with licet. It is difficult to determine when precisely
licet developed into a concessive subordinator. Concessive interpretations of the rela-
tion between a complex of licet (and also, in Classical and Silver Latin, other forms,
229 Example (a) is rejected as an example of the use of tamenetsi as a concessive subordinator by Martín
Puente (2002). For discussion, see also Bertocchi and Maraldi (2011: 151–2).
374 Subordinate clauses filling a satellite position
like the future licebit) and a subjunctive verb form, on the one hand, and a preceding
or following clause on the other can be found from the time of Cicero onwards, as in
(d). Clear contexts in which licet is not used as a modal verb are exemplified by (e)–
(g). In (e) esset gestum is a pluperfect tense form, a tense which is not normally
found in independent concessive sentences (see § 6.34) and which is also rare in
complement clauses with the modal licet.230 In (f) erit is an early instance of an
indicative form, semantically fully justified in its context. The indicative is common
in the Digests, although the subjunctive is predominant (many concessive clauses
are of the attitudinal type, but the indicatives may also be due to the Greek com-
pilers of the Digests).231 It is also relatively frequent in Ammianus, who also uses
the subjunctive. In (g) licet introduces an ablative absolute, in a way comparable
with other subordinators (see § 16.89). In Late Latin the order main clause / licet
clause became quite rare, except in attitudinal and illocutionary licet clauses (see
§§ 16.71–2). It is important to note that licet continued to be used as a modal verb
throughout Latinity.232
(a) Estne empta mi istis legibus? # Habeas licet.
(‘She is mine on those terms? # You can have her.’ Pl. Epid. 471)
(b) Licet enim eligerent et probarent quemlibet, qui sibi in omnes res subpedi-
taret exempla, vel poetam vel oratorem, cuius auctoritate niterentur.
(‘For they might choose and approve whom they would, poet or orator to supply
them with examples for all cases, one on whose authority they could rely.’ Rhet.
Her. 4.7)
(c) Crescere itemque dies licet et tabescere noctes, / et minui luces . . .
(‘Days may also increase and nights may wane, and days again may diminish . . .’ Lucr.
5.680–1)
(d) Licet iste dicat emisse, sicuti solet dicere, credite hoc mihi iudices . . .
(‘Verres may say, as he usually does say, that he bought everything; but believe me,
gentlemen . . .’ Cic. Ver. 4.133)
(e) Quod factum licet necopinantibus nostris esset gestum, tamen . . .
(‘But although this operation had come as a surprise to our men, yet . . .’ B. Hisp. 16.3)
(f) . . . licet salutare non erit, Photis illa temptetur.
(‘. . . even if it will not be salutary, let Photis be assailed.’ Apul. Met. 2.6.8)
(g) . . . ut diem suum sibi domus facia[n]t licet sole nolente.
(‘. . . so that the house creates its own sunlight even with the sun denying its rays.’
Apul. Met. 5.1.6)
230 For imperfect and pluperfect subjunctive forms with licet, see Purnelle (2001: 579–80).
231 So Kalb (1888: 66). Details in TLL s.v. licet 1365.81ff.
232 For the history of the development of licet, see Núñez (1991: 184–6), Maraldi and Orlandini (1998),
Martín Puente (1998a), Purnelle (1998; 2001), and Spevak (1998; 2005b: 82–92), as well as TLL s.v. licet
1364.1ff.
Concessive clauses 375
Supplement:
Past tense subjunctive in the licet clause: . . . neque multa ab eo (sc. verborum etyma
dici possent), quem non erunt in lucubratione litterae prosecutae, multum licet
legeret. (Var. L. 7.2); Croeso divitior licet fuissem, / Iro pauperior forem, Charine, / si
conchem totiens meam comesses. (Mart. 5.39.8–10); Ad cenam si me diversa vocaret
in astra / hinc invitator Caesaris, inde Iovis, / astra licet propius, Palatia longius
essent, / responsa ad superos haec referenda darem . . . (Mart. 9.91.1–4); Improbitas
illo fuit admirabilis aevo, / credebant quo grande nefas et morte piandum / si iuvenis
vetulo non assurrexerat et si / barbato cuicunque puer, licet ipse videret / plura domi
fraga et maiores glandis acervos. (Juv. 13.53–7)
Indicative mood in the licet clause: Respondi apparere id actum esse, ut id quoque
accederet, licet scriptura non continetur. (Labeo dig. 18.1.78 pr.); . . . valet transactio,
quia fructus habitationis praestatur, licet ruinae vel incendio subiecta transactio est.
(Ulp. dig. 2.15.8.25); Super quorum moribus licet in actibus principis Marci et postea
aliquotiens memini rettulisse, tamen nunc quoque pauca de isdem expediam carp-
tim. (Amm. 14.4.2)
There are a few instances of quamvis licet and licet quamvis in the same clause, as in
(h) and (i); quamvis in such cases has its normal scalar meaning. In Late Latin licet is
found with other concessive subordinators (and also with si) as well. These combin-
ations seem to function as reinforced equivalents of licet.233
(h) Proinde licet quamvis caelum terramque reantur / incorrupta fore aeternae
mandata saluti. / Et tamen . . .
(‘So let them think as much as they like that heaven and earth will be indes-
tructible, entrusted to some everlasting protection. And yet . . .’ Lucr.
6.601–3—following Bailey ad loc.)
(i) Quamvis licet insectemur istos, ut Carneades solebat, metuo ne soli philo-
sophi sint.
(‘However we may attack such men, as was the way of Carneades, I have a
misgiving they are the only true philosophers.’ Cic. Tusc. 4.53)
233 See TLL s.v. licet 1367.63ff.; references in Sz.: 605. See also Schaffner (1954: 37).
234 For the concessive interpretation of ut clauses, see Iordache (1985), Maraldi (1998), Spevak (2005b:
112–14, 182), and Bertocchi and Maraldi (2011: 170–2).
376 Subordinate clauses filling a satellite position
(a) Iam in hac re, ut taceam, quoivis facile scitu’st quam fuerim miser.
(‘And in such a situation, even if I were to remain silent, it must be obvious to anyone
how miserable I was.’ Ter. Hec. 296)
(b) Ut enim non efficias quod vis, tamen, mors ut malum non sit, efficies.
(‘For though you may not succeed in your wish, still you will succeed in showing that
death is not an evil.’ Cic. Tusc. 1.16)
(c) Et tamen hoc quoque uti concedam scire, at id ipsum / quaeram . . . / unde
sciat . . .
(‘And yet even if I grant that he knows that, still I will ask just this: . . . how he knows . . .’
Lucr. 4.473–5)
(d) . . . sed, ut iam nos hoc fallat, de Buthroto te non fallet.
(‘. . . but even supposing I am deceived in that, you shall not be disappointed over
Buthrotum.’ Cic. Att. 15.2.2)
Supplement:
Ut enim neminem alium nisi T. Patinam familiarissimum suum rogasset, scire potuit
illo ipso die Lanuvi a dictatore Milone prodi flaminem necesse esse. (Cic. Mil. 46);
Mihi porro, ut ego non dicam, quis omnium mortalium non intellegit quam longe
progredi sit necesse? (Cic. Ver. 5.179); Ut enim quaeras omnia, quomodo Graeci
ineptum appellent, non reperies. (Cic. de Orat. 2.18); Ut enim rationem Plato nullam
adferret—vide, quid homini tribuam—ipsa auctoritate me frangeret. (Cic. Tusc.
1.49); Verum ut hoc non sit, tamen, sive ruet <sive eri>get rem publicam, praeclarum
spectaculum mihi propono, modo te consessore spectare liceat. (Cic. Att. 2.15.2); In
iis autem rebus quae nihilo minus ut ego absim confici poterunt peto a te ut me ratio-
nem habere velis . . . (Cic. Fam. 10.2.2); Ac iam ut omnia contra opinionem acciderent,
tamen se plurimum navibus posse . . . (Caes. Gal. 3.9.6); Ut desint vires, tamen est
laudanda voluntas. (Ov. Pont. 3.4.79); Quod cum ita sit quae, malum, ratio est expertis
talia experiri, cum iam ut virtus vestra transire alio possit, fortuna certe loci huius
transferri non possit? (Liv. 5.54.6); Albucius in duas partes declamationem divisit.
Primum negavit ullam esse proditionem, deinde, ut esset, ad se non pertinere. (Sen.
Con. 7.7.10); Ecce hic dies ultimus est. Ut non sit, prope ab ultimo est. Vale. (Sen. Ep.
15.11); . . . utque familiae ipsae iam exstinctae sint, reperies, qui ob similitudinem
morum aliena malefacta sibi obiectari putent. (Tac. Ann. 4.33.4); Iam, ut (sc. Roma)
venalis fuisset, habuit emptorem. (Flor. Epit. 1.36.18)
Ut clause follows: Nihilominus tamen agi posse de compositione, ut haec non remit-
terentur, neque hanc rem illi esse impedimento. (Caes. Civ. 3.17.4); In eo nullum
periculum est, etiam ut (v.l. etiamsi) nulla curatio adhibeatur. Maturescit enim per
se, atque erumpit. (Cels. 5.28.8)
This concessive use of ut clauses is treated as a variant of the use of ut clauses func-
tioning as result satellite, the decisive reason being the use of the negator non. For a
survey of existing explanations and an explanation of her own, see Maraldi (1998).
The only example of ut ne mentioned in the literature is (e), but this may well be
explained differently, as a purpose disjunct (see § 16.50).
Concessive clauses 377
(e) Sin quaeris, qui sint Romae regnum occupare conati, ut ne replices anna-
lium memoriam, ex domesticis imaginibus invenies.
(‘But if you ask who have tried to establish tyrannies at Rome, I will tell you
so that you don’t have to search through historical records: you will find
them in your own family tree.’ Cic. Sul. 27)
235 Hale (1891) accounts for the use of the subjunctive as being related to the fact that the main clauses
are usually negative.
236 For the development of these quod clauses, see Taylor (1951).
237 See TLL s.v. equidem 721.73ff.
378 Subordinate clauses filling a satellite position
usurpata est. (Fro. Ant. 1.2.12); Iam dudum, quod sciam, fidei atque parciloquio meo
perpendisti documenta, nec eo setius adprobabitur tibi nunc etiam firmitas animi
mei. (Apul. Met. 5.13.1); Totum, quod sciam, Vetus Testamentum omnis haereticus
inridet. (Tert. Marc. 5.5.10); Si frigus fuerit et brumales nives, ligna non coemam.
Calidius vigilabo vel dormiam, certe, quod sciam, vilius non algebo. (Hier. Ep. 43.3)
Quantum is used in the same context as quod, as in (d). However, unlike the clauses
with quod, those with quantum are found in the indicative as well, as in (e). Quantum
is also found with other verbs; an example is (f). Probably influenced by this expres-
sion is quanta ingenia in (g).238
(d) Usque in hunc diem, Iulia, quantum quidem ego sciam, adsiduus viri tui
comes . . . dedisti operam, ne quid . . .
(‘Up to this day, Julia, at least so far as I am aware, as the constant companion of your
husband . . . you have taken pains, that nothing . . .’ Sen. Dial. 6.4.3)
(e) . . . nemo adhuc correptus hoc malo, quantum ego scio, expeditus est.
(‘. . . no one who has been struck by this illness has ever been cured, as far as I know.’
Larg. 171)
(f) Ac te ipsum, quantum ego opinione auguror, . . . aetas mitigabit.
(‘And, so far as I can surmise, . . . age will mellow you.’ Cic. Mur. 65)
(g) Ego enim, quantum auguror coniectura quantaque ingenia in nostris
hominibus esse video, non despero fore aliquem aliquando . . .
(‘For personally, so far as I can form a prediction, and judging from the vast supply of
talent which I see existent among our fellow-citizens, I do not despair of its coming
to pass that some day some one . . .’ Cic. de Orat. 1.95)
Supplement:
Hic illam vidit osculantem, quantum hunc audivi loqui. (Pl. Mil. 275); Enimvero,
Dave, nil loci’ st segnitiae neque socordiae, / quantum intellexi modo senis senten-
tiam de nuptiis. (Ter. An. 206–7); Deficio, nostrisque, a corpore quantum / auguror,
accedent tempora parva malis. (Ov. Tr. 4.6.39–40); Romanorum primus, quantum
ego quidem sciam, condidit aliqua in hanc materiam M. Cato . . . (Quint. Inst. 3.1.19);
Saturnum itaque, quantum litterae, neque Diodorus Graecus . . . neque ullus com-
mentator eiusmodi antiquitatum aliud quam hominem promulgaverunt. (Tert.
Apol. 10.7)
A device that developed from the Classical period onwards is that of prepositional
phrases followed by quod, serving as a complex subordinating device.239 These expres-
sions superficially look like quod clauses with a preparative pronoun (discussed in
§ 15.14), but they are different, because an expression like cum eo in (a) cannot be
omitted without making the resulting utterance ungrammatical. Some of them, like
(b), also look like preparative expressions with causal quod (see § 16.39), but here too
quod alone could hardly be interpreted as causal. This use of quod is part of its devel-
opment into an omnipurpose subordinator, parallels of which can be found outside
Latin/Romance. In Dutch, for example, dat ‘that’ has the same range of uses. Other
instances that illustrate this phenomenon for quod are (c)–(e). The subordinate clauses
connected in this way to the main clause are declarative. There are also a few instances
of quia used in this way. One example will suffice: (f), in which a causal interpretation
of quia seems not entirely excluded.240
(a) Sit sane . . ., sed tamen cum eo, credo, quod sine peccato meo fiat.
(‘So be it . . . but with the proviso surely that it be done without any fault on my part.’
Cic. Att. 6.1.7)
(b) . . . cum Hannibal Carthagine expulsus Ephesum ad Antiochum venisset exul
proque eo quod eius nomen erat magna apud omnis gloria, invitatus esset ab
hospitibus suis, ut eum quem dixi, si vellet, audiret . . .
(‘. . . when Hannibal, banished from Carthage, had come in exile to Antiochus at
Ephesus and, inasmuch as his name was highly honoured all the world over, had been
invited by his hosts to hear the philosopher in question, if he so pleased . . .’ Cic. de
Orat. 2.75)
(c) Prata dicta ab eo quod sine opere parata.
(‘Prata “meadows” are named from this, that they are parata “prepared” without
labour.’ Var. L. 5.40)
(d) . . . ex eo intellegi potest quod vos de <ea> re iudicare non debetis.
(‘. . . may be understood from the fact that you are not supposed to decide upon this
question.’ Cic. Caec. 102)
(e) Nec vero Aristoteles non laudandus in eo quod omnia quae moventur aut
natura moveri censuit aut vi aut voluntate.
(‘Aristotle is also to be commended for his view that all things that move do so by
nature, force, or will.’ Cic. N.D. 2.44)
(f) Sed (sc. Isocrates) cum ex eo quia quasi committeret contra legem ‘quo quis
iudicio circumveniretur’ saepe ipse in iudicium vocaretur, orationes aliis
destitisse scribere . . .
(‘But when it happened repeatedly that he was summoned as having violated a law
like ours “providing against circumvention or chicanery by judicial process,” he
ceased to write speeches for others . . .’ Cic. Brut. 48)
Supplement:
With is: Dilectuque decreto nemo nomen dedit, furente Appio et insectante ambitio-
nem collegae, qui populari silentio rem publicam proderet et ad id quod de credita
pecunia ius non dixisset, adiceret ut ne dilectum quidem ex senatus consulto haberet.
(Liv. 2.27.10); Ad id quod sua quemque mala cogebant auctoritate publica evocati
omnia delubra inplent. (Liv. 3.7.8); Medium ferme diei erat, et ad id quod sua sponte
cedente in mare aestu trahebatur aqua acer etiam septentrio ortus inclinatum stag-
num eodem quo aestus ferebat . . . (Liv. 26.45.8)
Cum eo quidem quod vix ullus est tam communis locus, qui possit cohaerere cum
causa nisi aliquo propriae quaestionis vinculo copulatus . . . (Quint. Inst. 2.4.30); Nec
fortuiti sermonis contextum mirabor umquam, quem iurgantibus etiam mulierculis
videamus superfluere cum eo quod, si calor ac spiritus tulit, frequenter accidit ut suc-
cessum extemporalem consequi cura non possit. (Quint. Inst. 10.7.13)
Non enim tam multa dixit de rationibus non relatis quam de eo quod civis impro-
bus ut optimus laudatus esset. (Cic. Opt. 21—NB: parallelism)
Causa fortissimis optimisque consulibus Kalendis Ianuariis de re publica primum
referendi fuit ex eo quod <a. d.> XIII Kalendas Ianuarias senatus me auctore decre-
vit. (Cic. Phil. 6.1); At Caesar . . . et ex eventu navium suarum et ex eo quod obsides
dare intermiserant fore id quod accidit suspicabatur. (Caes. Gal. 4.31.1—NB:
parallelism)
Neque in eo solum offenderat quod patriae male consuluerat, sed etiam quod
amicitiae fidem non praestiterat. (Nep. Phoc. 2.2); In eo quoque plebs superior fuit
quod tenuit ne consules in proximum annum crearentur. (Liv. 4.30.16); Labdacismum
vitium in eo esse dicunt quod eadem littera vel subtilius a quibusdam vel pinguius
ecfertur. (Consent. V.394.22K.)
Nam praeter id quod his levissimi cuiusque animus facillime terretur, nescio an
etiam naturaliter apud plurimos plus valeat malorum timor quam spes bono-
rum . . . (Quint. Inst. 3.8.40)
Habitus cum se ab omni eius modi negotio removisset, tamen pro loco, pro anti-
quitate generis sui, pro eo quod se non suis commodis sed etiam suorum municipum
ceterorumque necessariorum natum esse arbitrabatur, tantae voluntati universorum
Larinatium deesse noluit. (Cic. Clu. 43—NB: parallelism); Sin autem pro magnitu-
dine iniuriae proque eo quod summa res publica in huius periculo temptatur haec
omnes vindicarent . . . (Cic. S. Rosc. 148—NB: coordination); Quin pro eo quod pluri-
bus verbis vos . . . fatigavi veniam a vobis . . . velim . . . (Liv. 38.49.13)
Haec vulgo iactata super id quod nullo auctore certo firmantur prompte refuta-
veris. (Tac. Ann. 4.11.1)
. . . Marcellus etiam adverso rumore esse, superquam quod primo male pugnaverat,
quia vagante per Italiam Hannibale media aestate Venusiam in tecta milites abduxis-
set. (Liv. 27.20.10)241
Cf.: . . . si in eo crimen est quia suffragium tulit, quis non tulit publicanus? (Cic.
Planc. 35)
With hic: Prima atque praecipua opinionum circa hoc differentia quod alii malos
quoque viros posse oratores dici putant . . . (Quint. Inst. 2.15.1); . . . in hoc sumus sapi-
entes quod naturam optumam ducem tamquam deum sequimur eique paremus.
(Cic. Sen. 5); Quae non laudantur modo a plerisque, sed, quod est peius, propter hoc
ipsum quod sunt prava laudantur. (Quint. Inst. 2.5.10)
241 For superquam ‘in addition to the fact that’, see Iordache (2010: 10).
Complex subordinators 381
242 The precise category of these items is difficult to assess. They are sometimes called prepositions,
sometimes adverbs. See also § 14.6.
243 See Sz.: 589 for earlier postulations of an original difference in meaning.
244 See Bertocchi and Maraldi (2011: 115–18).
245 For the development of excepto, see Löfstedt (1976: 136 (= 2000: 188–9)) and Molinelli (2001). See
also § 12.24 and TLL s.v. excipio 1249.26ff.
382 Subordinate clauses filling a satellite position
quod . . . verecundia inde inposita est senatui ex patribus iubendi aediles curules
creari. (Liv. 7.1.4–6); Vixeruntque mira concordia, per mutuam caritatem et in vicem
se anteponendo, nisi quod in bona uxore tanto maior laus, quanto in mala plus cul-
pae est. (Tac. Agr. 6.1); . . . infelix, qui huic uni rei vivit, ut altilia decenter secet, nisi
quod miserior est, qui hoc voluptatis causa docet quam qui necessitatis discit. (Sen.
Ep. 47.6); Nec ullum miserae reformationis video solacium, nisi quod mihi iam
nequ[e]eunti tenere Fotidem natura crescebat. (Apul. Met. 3.24.6); . . . arescunt omnia
siti perpetua, nisi quod in puteis aqua repperitur exilis, quid agerent . . . (Amm.
18.7.9); Quid est homo, nisi quod memor es eius? (August. Serm. 163.12)
Nam praeter quod246 diurnae quietis imagines falsae perhibentur, tunc etiam noc-
turnae visiones contrarios eventus nonnumquam pronuntiant. (Apul. Met. 4.27)
Ego me in Cumano et Pompeiano, praeter quam quod247 sine te, ceterum satis
commode oblectabam . . . (Cic. Q. fr. 2.13.1); Hoc autem loco tantum explicemus haec
honesta, quae dico, praeterquam quod nosmet ipsos diligamus, praeterea suapte
natura per se esse expetenda. (Cic. Fin. 5.61); Nam praeterquam quod in populo
nihil erat praesidii sublata provocatione, intercessionem quoque consensu sustule-
rant . . . (Liv. 3.36.6); Praeterquam quod nomina tantum ducum in Hispania Romani
habeant, exercitum quoque inde veterem deductum. (Liv. 29.1.21)
Intestinas meas noverat. Tantum quod mihi non dixerat quid pridie cenaveram.
(Petr. 76.11 (Trimalchio speaking))
Iter commode explicui, excepto quod quidam ex meis adversam valetudinem
ferventissimis aestibus contraxerunt. (Plin. Ep. 8.1.1); Nos autem, excepto quod
Christiani sumus, . . . sumus etiam praepositi . . . (August. Serm. 46.2)
Incedere inde agmen coepit primoribus, super quam quod dissenserant ab con-
silio, territis etiam duplici prodigio, milite in vulgus laeto ferocia ducis, cum spem
magis ipsam quam causam spei intueretur. (Liv. 22.3.14); Haec vulgo iactata super id
quod nullo auctore certo firmantur, prompte refutaveris. (Tac. Ann. 4.11.1)
. . . ad Dei filium pertinet iuxta quod Deus est. (Ambrosiast. in Rom. 1.1.3)248
De publicis scribenda non suppetunt absque eo quod in Traiani platea ruina unius
insulae pressit habitantes. (Symm. Ep. 6.37)249
The same phenomenon can be observed with ut clauses in the subjunctive, often
called result (consecutive) clauses. Thus one finds cum, in, and pro + eo + ut, as illus-
trated by (m) and (n).
(m) . . . debeo profecto, quantumcumque possum, in eo quoque elaborare ut sint
opera, studio, labore meo doctiores cives mei . . .
(‘. . . however much I am able, I assuredly must also work to make my fellow citizens
more educated through my zeal, enthusiasm, and labour . . .’ Cic. Fin. 1.10)
(n) Lanuvinis civitas data sacraque sua reddita cum eo ut aedes lucusque Sospitae
Iunonis communis Lanuvinis municipibus cum populo Romano esset.
246 TLL s.v. praeter 1001.72 makes a distinction between ‘respectu admittendi’, as in the examples
provided here, and ‘respectu excludendi’ in later texts.
247 On praeterquam, see Iordache (2010: 8–12).
248 See TLL s.v. iuxta 754.6ff.
249 For the history of this use of absque, see Haverling (1988: 45–8).
Infinitival clauses 383
(‘The Lanuvini were given citizenship, and their worship was restored to them, with
the stipulation that the temple and grove of Juno Sospita should be held in common
by the burghers of Lanuvium and the Roman people.’ Liv. 8.14.2)
Supplement:
Et Antium nova colonia missa, cum eo ut Antiatibus permitteretur, si et ipsi adscribi
coloni vellent. (Liv. 8.14.8); Si nihil reliqua proficiunt, sanguis mittendus est, sed
paulatim cotidieque pluribus diebus, cum eo ut cetera quoque eodem modo serven-
tur. (Cels. 3.22.7); Romae sicut plebis victoria fuit in eo ut quae mallent, comitia
haberent, ita eventu comitiorum patres vicere. (Liv. 4.56.1); Galli, quos praedae
populationumque conciverat spes, postquam pro eo ut ipsi ex alieno agro raperent
agerentque, suas terras sedem belli esse premique utriusque partis exercituum
hibernis videre, verterunt retro <in> Hannibalem ab Romanis odia. (Liv. 22.1.2)
Appendix: For an example of a comparable combination, but this time with a subor-
dinate interrogative clause (an indirect question), see (o).
(o) . . . in omnibus quae aguntur ex eo quomodo quisque natus est . . . quid deceat
exquirimus . . .
(‘. . . in all that is undertaken we try to find out what is proper for everyone on
the basis of how he was born . . . ’ Cic. Off. 1.119)
250 For Virgil’s extensive use of infinitives, see Görler (1985: 271–2). For a diachronic survey, see
Perrochat (1932b: 164–9).
251 See Burton (2000: 187–8).
384 Subordinate clauses filling a satellite position
252 For a survey of the development of the infinitive in general (which she calls ‘prospective’), see
Fruyt (1996). For the Romance development, see Roegiest (1983). For instances with the verb do, see TLL
s.v. 1688.59ff. See also Norberg (1943: 216). For a discussion of the infinitive as one of the purpose expres-
sions, see Cabrillana (2011).
Infinitival clauses 385
Further Late Latin examples and discussion can be found in Norberg (1943: 206–31),
also useful for the rest of this section. In certain text types (poetry, translations of
the Bible) the influence of Greek cannot be excluded, but the increase in the use of
the infinitive at the cost of the gerund and gerundive is mainly an internal Latin
development.
From Early Latin onwards the infinitive is also found with verbs of (implied) move-
ment.253 Examples are (f) and (g). The most common non-finite purpose expression
is the supine in -um, as in (h) (see also § 16.112). Hardly used in Early Latin is the
gerundival purpose adjunct expression (ibit ad aurum arcessendum), as in (i) (see also
§ 16.106), which is common in Classical prose. In Augustan poetry the range of verbs
with which the infinitive is used is widened, under Greek influence.254 The infinitive
is used in Bible translations and in quotations from the Bible, where the Greek koine
text has an infinitive and the agent of the infinitive is coreferential with the subject of
the governing verb. An example is (j).255 Christian authors rarely use infinitives in
their own texts. As with the verb do (see above), predecessors of a Romance expres-
sion can be found from the Vetus Latina onwards in the form of an ad + infinitive
expression, as in (k).
(f) Illa autem in arcem abiit aedem visere / Minervae.
(‘She has gone to the Acropolis to visit the temple of Minerva.’ Pl. Bac. 900–1)
(g) Senex in Ephesum ibit aurum arcessere.
(‘The old man will go to Ephesus to fetch the gold.’ Pl. Bac. 354)
(h) Tune es qui hau multo prius / abiisti hinc erum accersitum?
(‘Aren’t you the one who went away a little earlier to fetch his master?’ Pl. Rud.
1055–6)
(i) . . . legati ad arcessendum Hannibalem . . . venerunt.
(‘. . . legates came to invite Hannibal . . .’ Liv. 24.13.8)
(j) Paene universa civitas convenit audire verbum Domini.
(‘Almost the whole city came together to hear the word of God.’ Vulg. Act. 13.44)
(k) Cum veneris ad bibere, accede et illuminare.
(‘Since you have come to drink, come forward and be illuminated.’ August. Serm.
225.4)
Supplement:
Ecquis currit pollinctorem accersere? (Pl. As. 910); Militis parasitus modo / venerat
aurum petere hinc. (Pl. Bac. 631–31a); Ego hunc missa sum ludere. (Pl. Cas. 688);
Recipe te et recurre petere <re> recenti (Pl. Trin. 1015); . . . nunc ad amicam venis
253 For statistical information about Plautus and Terence and discussion, see Adams and Vincent (2016:
266–8).
254 See Penney (1999: 253–8) and Calboli (2009: 131–3). For the history of the infinitive with the verbs
eo and venio, see Adams and Vincent (2016).
255 See Burton (2000: 187–8).
386 Subordinate clauses filling a satellite position
querimonias referre. (Pl. Truc. 167); Nostra ilico / it visere ad eam. (Ter. Hec. 188–9);
Sempronius Lilybaeo celocem in Africam mittit visere locum, ubi exercitum exponat.
(Coel. hist. 12=9C); A quo est in Sota Enni: ‘Ibant malaci viere Veneriam corollam’.
(Var. L. 5.62); . . . cum . . . visere venissemus . . . (Var. R. 2.1.1); . . . nec dulces occurrent
oscula nati / praeripere . . . (Lucr. 3.895–6); Non nos aut ferro Libycos populare pena-
tis / venimus, aut raptas ad litora vertere praedas . . . (Verg. A. 1.527–8); . . . idem omnis
simul ardor agit nova quaerere tecta. (Verg. A. 7.393); Atqui non ego te tigris ut
aspera / Gaetulusve leo frangere persequor. (Hor. Carm. 1.23.9–10); An potius mari-
tum, qui tuo vulnere periclitatur, intervisere venisti? (Apul. Met. 6.9.2); Utriusque
nominis testes esse vel magi adsunt. (Tert. Apol. 22.2); Non venerant mori, ideo nec
nasci. (Tert. Carn. Chr. 6.5); . . . et iam unusquisque hiens ad domum suam festinat
manducare . . . (Pereg. 30.3); . . . statim unusquisque animosi vadent in Syon orare ad
columnam illam . . . (Pereg. 37.1); . . . venimus adorare eum. (Vulg. Mat. 2.2); . . . et ipse
salvator non venit iustos vocare, sed peccatores. (Hier. Ep. 11.2); Ergo quantum in
medico est, sanare venit aegrotum. (August. Tract. Io. 12.12); Ad tua, sanctae, limina
veni, nihil aliud quam parvitatis meae vota deferre. (Greg. Tur. Jul. 21)
NB: Ipsum elegit . . . ad offerre sacrificium Deo. (Vet. Lat. (cod. Tolet.) Sirach 45.20—
cf. Tob. 3.25 with later instances to follow in the 7th century).
In Late Latin the infinitive is also occasionally found as a purpose adjunct with other
verbs besides those mentioned above, for which Early or Classical examples are
lacking and where the Greek original is copied.256 An instance of this is (l).
(l) . . . et sedit populus comedere ac bibere et surrexerunt ludere.
(‘. . . and the people sat down to eat and drink, and they stood up to play.’ Vulg.
Ex. 32.6)
Supplement:
. . . non stabam frui Deo meo, sed rapiebar ad te . . . (August. Conf. 7.23); Et rursus
Esaias ait erit radix Iesse et qui exsurget regere gentes in eo gentes sperabunt. (Vulg.
Rom. 15.12)
From Cicero’s time onward, but especially in poetry, the infinitive is also found with
manipulation verbs such as rogo ‘to ask’, hortor ‘to urge on’, and moneo ‘to warn’.
Although these infinitival expressions are often called ‘final’, they are actually argu-
ments of the governing verbs and not satellites. See the discussion of this ‘prolative’
use of the infinitive in §§ 15.114ff.
256 For a discussion of possible Greek influence, see Calboli (2009: 131–3).
Participial clauses 387
(‘Then Cethegus . . . when his letter was read out (by me) . . . suddenly fell silent.’ Cic.
Catil. 3.10)
Perfect passive participles are the most common form of participle used in participial
clauses, as in the example above. However, the present active, present and perfect
deponent, and future active participles are allowed as well, as illustrated by (b)–(e).
(b) Fugiens . . . Pompeius . . . homines movet.
(‘The picture of Pompey on the run affects men.’ Cic. Att. 7.11.4)
(c) . . . senatus consultum factum ut . . . is . . . potissimum consulibus ad bellum
profectis urbi praeesset.
(‘. . . the senate decreed that . . . he . . . should be in charge of the city when the consuls
took the field.’ Liv. 24.9.5)
(d) . . . qui non nascentibus Athenis sed iam adultis fuerunt . . .
(‘. . . who belonged to Athens not in her infancy but in her maturity . . .’ Cic. Brut. 27)
(e) Augebat metum . . . invasurus hostis.
(‘The enemy being about to invade heightened the alarm.’ Tac. Ann. 1.36.2)
For a discussion of the internal structure of participial clauses and their relation to
gerundival and non-verbal clauses, see § 14.14.257
Participial ablative absolute (ablativus absolutus) clauses are found in all periods
of Latin and in all types of texts and registers, although with varying distributions and
degrees of internal complexity.258 Perfect participles are relatively rare in the comedies
of Plautus and Terence, but seem to be fully exploited by the early historians of the
second century bc. Passive participles are much more common than deponent ones.
Present participles are used with much lower frequency than perfect participles. They
are relatively rare in Early Latin but become a normal part of the narrative technique
of the early historians. They are relatively frequent in Cicero’s works, where they serve
as an alternative for substantival ablative absolute clauses (see § 16.116) and are char-
acteristic of the narrative style of Caesar and the Caesarean corpus. Finally they are
fully integrated into the narrative techniques of Livy, Tacitus, and most other authors
with literary aspirations until Late Latin.259 In didactic texts, such as Pliny the Elder,
ablative absolute clauses were a convenient way to condense information.260 However,
257 For the development of absolute constructions from Latin to the Romance languages, see Müller-
Lancé (1994).
258 For the history of the analysis of this construction from Antiquity onwards, see Flinck-
Linkomies (1929: 7–27), Sluiter (2000), and Copeland and Sluiter (2009: 314–38). For the history of
the term ‘ablativus absolutus’ (found for the first time c.1050), see also Scaglione (1970) and Keydana
(1997: 6–7).
259 For the relative frequency of the present participle in participial satellite clauses in late (fifth- and
sixth-century) historians, see Galdi (2016c) and Gayno (2016: 38–9).
260 For Pliny the Elder’s use of the ablative absolute, see Cova (1986).
388 Subordinate clauses filling a satellite position
the present participle is rare in stylistically less elaborated texts, such as the Cena
Trimalchionis and the Vetus Latina translations of the Bible. Future participles are
very uncommon in all periods of Latin. The first attestation is from Asinius Pollio (see
§ 16.89), followed by several instances in Livy.
As for the stylistic register of ablative absolute clauses, Flinck-Linkomies (1929: 227–44;
250–6) shows, among other things, that in the Vetus Latina translations of the Bible
present participle ablative absolute clauses are avoided, whereas in the Vulgate trans-
lation they are used to translate Greek participial clauses. There is a similar difference
between the ‘vulgar’ version of the Epistula Alexandri ad Aristotelem and the more lit-
erary version by Leo Presbyter. To a lesser extent this also holds for the use of perfect
passive participles (ibid.: 250–6).
The development of the complex ablative absolute clauses of the Classical authors,
especially the historians, was influenced by ‘the syntactic models of classical Greek
literary prose’ (Coleman 1989: 364).
In the following sections attention will be paid to five different aspects of the parti-
cipial ablative absolute clause:
(i) The semantic relationship between the participial clause and the matrix
clause (§ 16.89);
(ii) The relationship between arguments of the participial and matrix clauses
(§ 16.90);
(iii) The internal complexity of the participial clause (§ 16.91);
(iv) Participial ablative absolute clauses without a corresponding noun (phrase)
(§ 16.92);
(v) The impersonal use of perfect passive participles (§ 16.93).
16.89 The semantic relationship between the participial ablative absolute clause and
the main clause
The most common use of the ablative absolute clause is as an adjunct, as (a), repeated
from § 16.87, and (b). The latter is an example of the ‘ablatif absolu de reprise’ (sum-
marizing absolute ablative) which is typical of Caesar’s narrative, but also found in
Sallust, Livy, and Tacitus.261
(a) Tum Cethegus . . . recitatis litteris (a me, sc. Cicerone) . . . repente conticuit.
(‘Then Cethegus . . . when his letter was read out (by me) . . . suddenly fell silent.’ Cic.
Catil. 3.10)
(b) . . . omnibus navibus ad unam incolumibus milites exposuit. . . . Expositis
militibus naves eadem nocte Brundisium a Caesare remittuntur . . .
(‘…he landed the soldiers from all of his ships without losing a single ship. . . . Once
the soldiers were on land, Caesar sent the ships back to Brundisium the same night . . .’
Caes. Civ. 3.6.3–8.1)
261 For an exhaustive discussion, see Chausserie-Laprée (1969: 109–20). For Tacitus, see Enghofer (1961:
114–20). See also § 23.67.
Participial clauses 389
Although most ablative absolutes function as adjunct, they can also be used as dis-
juncts, as in (c), where viso . . . favo provides the evidence for a statement in the main
clause (it is an attitudinal disjunct).
(c) Aliubi enim favi cera spectabiles gignuntur, ut in Sicilia, Paelignis, aliubi
copia mellis, ut in Creta, Cypro, Africa, aliubi magnitudine, ut in septentri-
onalibus, viso iam in Germania octo pedum longitudinis favo in cava
parte nigro.
(‘In some places honeycombs distinguished for their wax are formed, as in Sicily and
the Abruzzi, in other places for quantity of honey, as in Crete, Cyprus, Africa, in
others for size, as in the northern countries, a comb having before now been seen in
Germany that was 8 ft. long, and black in its hollow part.’ Plin. Nat. 11.33)
Ablative absolute clauses cover a broad range of meanings (position in time, cause,
condition, concession, or manner, and especially—but more vaguely—circumstance).
However, unlike finite satellite clauses with a similar meaning, the semantic relation-
ship with the matrix clause is not marked by a subordinator;262 as a result, the precise
relationship between an ablative absolute and the main clause must be inferred.263 The
examples given below to exemplify the various semantic relations must therefore be
seen as groupings of more or less similar interpretations (argument and satellite constitu-
ents within the ablative absolute are marked in italics and bold italics, respectively).
Ablative absolute clauses in their ‘circumstance’ interpretation are often more or less
equated with cum clauses. Baños (1992, 1994) shows that the ablative absolute clauses
and cum clauses are more or less in complementary distribution: cum clauses are
required when there are structural limitations on the use of an ablative absolute, or
when the clause is structurally complex.264
Supplement:
Position in time:
Perfect participle: . . . patriam deseres, / cognatos, affinitatem, amicos factis nup-
tiis. (Pl. Trin. 701–2); Pallam ad phrygionem fert confecto prandio / vinoque expoto,
parasito excluso foras. (Pl. Men. 469–70); (sc. L. Mummius) Achaia · Capt(a) ·
Corinto / deleto · Romam · redieit / triumphans. (CIL I2.626.3–5 (Rome, 142 bc));
Custodibus discessis multi interficiuntur. (Coel. hist. 32=29C); His sic tractatis accu-
sator utetur loco communi . . . (Rhet. Her. 2.21); Nunc, absoluta a nobis difficillima
parte rhetoricae, hoc est inventione perpolita atque omne causae genus adcommo-
data, tempus est ad ceteras partes proficisci. (Rhet. Her. 3.8); Quam ob rem, quoniam
Dolabella hesterno die hoste decreto bellum gerendum est, imperator est deligen-
dus. (Cic. Phil. 11.16); Tamen ante Periclem, cuius scripta quaedam feruntur, et
262 Another difference between finite satellite clauses and participial ones is that the former locate the
state of affairs in time, whereas participial clauses only indicate relative time.
263 Krisch (1988) takes the temporal/circumstantial meaning as the basic meaning of the participial
clauses and explains the other interpretations as contextually determined.
264 See also Hoff (1989: 409–10). For Late Latin authors, including Ammianus Marcellinus, see
Gago (1998).
390 Subordinate clauses filling a satellite position
Thucydidem, qui non nascentibus Athenis sed iam adultis fuerunt, littera nulla est,
quae quidem ornatum aliquem habeat et oratoris esse videatur. (Cic. Brut. 27); Dein
Sulla omnia265 pollicito docti, quo modo apud Marium, item apud senatum verba
facerent, circiter dies quadraginta ibidem opperiuntur. (Sal. Jug. 103.7); . . . in quo uno
tantum esset, ut, quoad ille viveret, ipsi securi esse non possent, interfecto nihil habi-
turi negotii essent. (Nep. Eum. 12.1—NB: parallelism with quoad clause); P. et Cn.
Scipionibus inter se partitis copias . . . (Liv. 23.26.2); . . . misso Syphace et captivis,
ceteras urbes Numidiae quae praesidiis regiis tenebantur adiuvante Masinissa
recipit. (Liv. 30.12.22); . . . gratum elocuta consiliantibus / Iunone divis . . . (Hor. Carm.
3.3.17–18); Septentrionalis vero Oceanus maiore ex parte navigatus est, auspiciis Divi
Augusti Germaniam classe circumvecta ad Cimbrorum promunturium . . . (Plin. Nat.
2.167); Adde quod omne caput fluvii . . . / . . . ingresso vere tumescit / prima tabe nivis.
(Luc. 10.223–5); Ex · auctoritate / Imp(eratoris) · Caesaris / Vespasiani ·
Aug(usti) · / loca · publica · a privatis / possessa · T(itus) · Suedius · Clemens /
tribunus · causis · cognitis · et / mensuris · factis · rei / publicae Pompeianorum
/ restituit. (CIL X.1018 (Pompeii)); Occasione / inventa spero me celerius
aput te / venturum. (CEL 147.9–11 (Karanis, ad 100–25)); Conferti tantum et
pilis emissis post umbonibus et gladiis stragem caedemque continuarent, praedae
immemores. Parta victoria cuncta ipsis cessura. (Tac. Ann. 14.36.2); Quo mortuo
aut capite deminuto revertitur ad eum tutorem tutela, qui cessit. (Gaius Inst.
1.170); . . . Sticho statim libertatem consecuto . . . (Scaev. dig. 34.1.18.2); Contra illi, qui
nos oderunt, dolere, non gaudere debebant, consecutis nobis quod elegimus. (Tert.
Apol. 49.6); Nuncupato igitur Licinio imperatore Maximinus iratus nec Caesarem se
nec tertio loco nominari volebat. (Lact. Mort. 32.1); Lecto ergo eo loco et annuntiata
Pascha fit missa. (Pereg. 29.5)
Present participle: Interea prope iam occidente sole inhorrescit mare, / tenebrae
conduplicantur . . . (Pacuv. trag. 411–12); Piro florente dapem pro bubus facito. (Cato
Agr. 131, cf. Var. R. 1.37.5; Plin. Nat. 18.243); . . . queritur priore patrono causam
defendente numquam perorari potuisse . . . (Cic. Quinct. 34); Hanc opinionem dis-
cipulus eius Pythagoras maxime confirmavit, qui cum Superbo regnante in Italiam
venisset, tenuit Magnam illam Graeciam . . . (Cic. Tusc. 1.38); Dubitante Caesare
atque eorum studio cupiditatique resistente sibique eruptione pugnari non placere
clamitante etiam atque etiam aciem sustentante subito dextro cornu iniussu Caesaris
tubicen a militibus coactus canere coepit. (B. Afr. 82.3); Fracti bello fatisque repulsi /
ductores Danaum, tot iam labentibus annis, / instar montis equum divina Palladis
arte / aedificant . . . (Verg. A. 2.13–16); Potantibus ergo nobis et accuratissime lautitias
mirantibus larvam argenteam attulit . . . (Petr. 34.8); Prius fuit a litore stadiis X—mari-
timum etiam Vipsania porticus habet—Iuba vero prodente <L> p. (Plin. Nat. 6.139);
Etiamsi albescente caelo exire voluero (Tab. Vindon. 46 (Windisch, between
ad 30 and 101)); Quo tenente regnum Aeneas ab Ilio Troia a Graecis expugnata in
Italiam venit statimque bello exceptus . . . (Justin. 43.1.10)
Future participle: (sc. Rex apum) procedit foris non nisi migraturo examine.
(Plin. Nat. 11.54)
265 Perfect deponent participles governing an argument are not attested until this example. A full list of
such instances can be found in Schmalz (1884).
Participial clauses 391
Cause:
Perfect participle: . . . qui cursum rerum eventorumque consequentiam diuturni-
tate pertractata notaverunt . . . quid futurum sit, intellegunt. (Cic. Div. 1.128—NB: if
this is the correct interpretation; see Pease ad loc.); C. Flaminium Coelius religione
neglecta cecidisse apud Transumenum scribit cum magno rei publicae vulnere. (Cic.
N.D. 2.8); Nec dissolutio navigii sequebatur, turbatis omnibus et quod plerique
ignari etiam conscios impediebant. (Tac. Ann. 14.5.2—NB: coordination with a
quod clause)
Present participle: Ad quas adero, et omni ope atque opera enitar, adiuvante me
scilicet auctoritate tua et gratia et summa aequitate causae, ut de Buthrotiis senatus
consultum quale scribis fiat. (Cic. Att. 14.14.6); Cum duce adsumpto Alexandrini . . .
eludentibus . . . militibus regis aetatem atque infirmitatem magnum dolorem accipe-
rent . . . (B. Alex. 25.1); Honesta res est, sollemnitate publica exigente, induere domui
tuae habitum alicuius novi lupanaris! (Tert. Apol. 35.4); . . . ubi incensus est vitulus
ipse, iubente sancto Moyse . . . (Pereg. 5.6); . . . hos patri / inscripsi v<er> / sus
dictante / dolore . . . (CIL VIII.1359.15–18 (Testur (Africa Proconsularis), ad
408/21))
Future participle: Huius ergo viri tot tantisque operibus mansuris266 in omne
aevum praedicare de ingenio atque industria superva<cuum est>. (Asin. Pollio apud
Sen. Suas. 6.24); Parumper silentium et quies fuit nec Etruscis, nisi cogerentur,
pugnam inituris et dictatore arcem Romanam respectante . . . (Liv. 4.18.6);
Carthaginienses…prima luce oppugnaturis hostibus / castra saxis undique . . . con-
gestis augent vallum… (Liv. 28.15.12–3); Ceterum propalam conprehendi Dareus
non poterat tot Persarum milibus laturis opem regi. Graecorum quoque fides time-
batur. (Curt. 5.10.7); Exercitum Vitellii universum advenisse, nec multum virium a
tergo, quoniam Galliae tumeant et deserere Rheni ripam inrupturis tam infestis
nationibus non conducat. (Tac. Hist. 2.32.1)
Condition:
Perfect participle: Quae potest esse vitae iucunditas sublatis amicitiis? (Cic.
Planc. 80)
Present participle: . . . maximas vero virtutes iacere omnis necesse est voluptate
dominante. (Cic. Fin. 2.117); Denique nihil me sciente frustra voles. (Sal. Jug. 110.5)
Concession:
Perfect participle: Is me nunc renuntiare repudium iussit tibi. / # Repudium rebus
paratis, exornatis nuptiis? (Pl. Aul. 783–4)
Present participle: Conligavit? # Atque equidem orante ut ne id faceret Thaide.
(Ter. Eu. 956); Atque ex his horum contraria facile tacentibus nobis intellegentur.
(Cic. Inv. 2.157); Itaque acrius de integro coortum est bellum pluribusque partibus
vix accipientibus quibusdam opera locis vineae coeptae agi admoverique aries. (Liv.
21.8.2)
Manner/Circumstance:
Perfect participle: Qui (sc. rex apum) tamen et ipse spoliandus est alis, ubi saepius
cum examine suo conatur eruptione facta profugere. (Col. 9.10)
Present participle: Egone istuc dixi? # Tute istic, etiam astante hoc Sosia. (Pl. Am.
747); . . . resistam et aut concedente aut etiam adiuvante Milone eius conatum
refutabo . . . (Cic. Har. 7); . . . . nullo hoste prohibente aut iter demorante inco-
lumem legionem in <N>antuates, inde in Allobroges perduxit ibique hiemavit.
(Caes. Gal. 3.6.5)
Hand in hand with the increasing use of elaborate and complex sentences, especially
(but not solely) in historical and didactic works, authors began to insert constituents
either in the matrix clause or in the ablative absolute clause to make the semantic
relationship between them more explicit, such as deinde ‘thereafter’ and tamen ‘nev-
ertheless’ in the main clause, and nisi ‘unless’ and quamvis ‘although’ in the ablative
absolute clause. (For the same development in participial secondary predicates, see
§ 21.18.) The ‘autonomous’ clausal character of ablative absolute clauses was in this
267 For this use of the ablative absolute (which he calls rallonge ‘extension’), see Chausserie-Laprée (1969:
318–27); Enghofer (1961: 130–8); Longrée (1995; 1996a). In their commentary on Tac. Ann. IV Martin
and Woodman (1989: 23–4) use the term ‘appendix’. For the frequent use of such ‘appended’ clauses in late
historical texts, see Galdi (2016c: 653–5).
Participial clauses 393
way further enhanced. Examples are (f) and (g). However, semantically related finite
clauses still remained on the average more complex.
(f) (Dicaearchus) . . . qui collectis ceteris causis . . . deinde comparat . . .
(‘(Dicaearchus) . . . who, after gathering together all the other causes (of destruc-
tion) . . ., then proceeds to show by way of comparison . . .’ Cic. Off. 2.16)
(g) Etsi aliquo accepto detrimento tamen . . . locum . . . capi posse.
(‘Though some loss should be sustained, yet the place . . . can be captured.’ Caes. Civ.
1.67.5)
Supplement:
NB: for each adverb/subordinator only the earliest attestations are given. This
is not an exhaustive survey of all the particles/subordinators found.268
In the main clause: . . . castris positis populatur inde agrum Romanum . . . (Liv.
2.39.5); Conferti tantum et pilis emissis post umbonibus et gladiis stragem caedemque
continuarent, praedae immemores. (Tac. Ann. 14.36.2); Sed confecto proelio, tum
vero cerneres, quanta audacia quantaque animi vis fuisset in exercitu Catilinae. (Sal.
Cat. 61.1); Hisce omnibus rebus consideratis, tum denique id, quod primum est
dicendum, postremum soleo cogitare, quo utar exordio. (Cic. de Orat. 2.315)
Atque haec eo pertinet oratio ut perditis rebus omnibus tamen ipsa virtus se sus-
tentare posse videatur. (Cic. Fam. 6.1.4); . . . quo defendente nullo tamen armatis
ascendere esset difficile . . . (Hirt. Gal. 8.33.1)
Caesar interim consilio hostium cognito iubet aciem in longitudinem quam maxi-
mam porrigi et alternis conversis cohortibus ut una post altera ante signa tenderet ita
coronam hostium dextro sinistroque cornu mediam dividit . . . (B. Afr. 17.1)
In the ablative absolute clause: Decemviri querentes se in ordinem cogi non ante
quam perlatis legibus, quarum causa creati essent, deposituros imperium se aiebant.
(Liv. 3.51.13); Postero die sub ortum solis instruxere ab alto naves velut ad iustum
proelium navale et tamquam exituris contra Romanis. (Liv. 30.10.11);269 Aetoli cam-
pos Thessaliae opimos ad praedam petiere, sequente quamquam non probante
Amynandro nec effusas populationes Aetolorum nec castra quo fors tulisset loco sine
ullo discrimine aut cura muniendi posita. (Liv. 31.41.7); . . . praesidens certamini
Neroneo cupientem inter citharoedos contendere nec quamvis flagitantibus cunctis
promittere audentem ideoque egressum theatro revocaverat . . . (Suet. Vit. 4); Non
loquar nisi pace facta . . . (Pl. Am. 390); Iste quasi praeda sibi advecta . . . eos in hostium
numero ducit. (Cic. Ver. 5.64); Me tueor ut oppressis omnibus non demisse,
ut tantis rebus gestis parum fortiter. (Cic. Att. 2.18.3); Ac venti velut agmine
facto / . . . ruunt . . . (Verg. A. 1.82–3); Parthi, penes quos velut divisione orbis cum
Romanis facta nunc Orientis imperium est, Scytharum exules fuere. (Justin. 41.1.1);
Simul et in hostis iam pavidos quippe fuso suae partis validiore cornu impetum facit.
(Liv. 3.63.2)
268 A very complete (but not always reliable) list of subordinators can be found in Lease (1928; 1931).
Livy has the most abundant and varied use.
269 For Livy’s use of ut and tamquam with participial clauses and secondary predicates, see
Traenkle (1968: 139–40).
394 Subordinate clauses filling a satellite position
The semantic relationship between the ablative absolute clause and the main clause
may also be specified by the incorporation of other types of constituents, such as the
adverb statim ‘at once’, as in (h).
(h) Opuntii quoque ab eadem ira increpiti quod, cum trahere obsidionem in
adventum suum potuissent, viso statim hoste prope in voluntariam deditio-
nem concessissent.
(‘The men of Opus also were no less angrily upbraided because, although they could
have dragged out the siege until his coming, at the first sight of the enemy they had
almost willingly surrendered.’ Liv. 28.7.9)
Supplement:
Sed a Caesare perfecto demum scelere magnitudo eius intellecta est. (Tac. Ann.
14.10.1); Candente itaque protinus die signo ad arma capienda . . . dato . . . (Amm.
31.7.10)270
16.90 The relationship between arguments of the participial ablative absolute and the
main clause
In (a), repeated from § 16.87 and § 16.89, the argument of the ablative absolute clause
(litteris), semantically the patient of recitatis, does not have the same referent as the
argument of the main clause (Cethegus), semantically the agent of conticuit.
(a) Tum Cethegus . . . recitatis litteris (a me, sc. Cicerone) . . . repente conticuit.
(‘Then Cethegus . . . when his letter was read out (by me) . . . suddenly fell silent.’ Cic.
Catil. 3.10)
The predominant situation, at least in Classical Latin, is that these constituents of the
two clauses are referentially distinct, as in (a), and this is often formulated as a rule
that the subject of the ablative absolute clause should not be a constituent of the main
clause. School books in particular tend to be very rigid about the need to use the abla-
tive absolute clause if the constituents are distinct and to use a participle as secondary
predicate (the so-called participium coniunctum) in the case of identity. However,
there are many exceptions to this generalizing statement, even in the ‘Classical
authors’.271 Examples of referential identity between constituents of the ablative abso-
lute clause and the main clause are (b) and (c). In the latter example the object of the
main clause has to be inferred from the ablative absolute clause. More examples can
be found in the Supplement.
(b) . . . non modo permittente patre, sed etiam suadente ab eo semigravit . . .
(‘. . . then not only with the permission of his father, but even with his advice, he
separated from him . . .’ Cic. Cael. 18)
270 The placement of protinus is ‘cursus causa’, according to den Boeft et al. ad loc.
271 For a discussion of deviations from the rules in Caesar, see Hoff (1989). For Sallust and Livy, see
Kruijer and la Roi (2018).
Participial clauses 395
(c) (sc. Vercingetorix) . . . convocatis suis clientibus facile incendit (sc. eos).
(‘(Vercingetorix), having summoned his own dependents, easily fired their spirit.’
Caes. Gal. 7.4.1)
In (b) something like (b') (with a secondary predicate) may not seem an impossible
alternative (but see below). However, something like (c') sounds odd, because the
participle used in this way refers to a state the clientes are in, and less to a sequence of
actions of Vercingetorix.272 So there are cases where the two constructions are not
interchangeable, that is to say, they are not just two morphological variants for the
same message.
(b') A patre non modo permittente sed etiam suadente semigravit.
(c') Vercingetorix suos clientes convocatos facile incendit.
Moreover, as is sometimes stated in the literature, instances like (b) and (c) may have
had certain advantages: some ablative absolute clauses are more or less set phrases
(especially those with invito and absente, for which see § 16.117). Repeating two iden-
tical entities stresses this identity; the structure of the entire sentence is more trans-
parent and events are more clearly sequenced than when a secondary predicate is
used. Also, the ablative absolute clause usually contains topical information and
therefore precedes the main clause. Finally, it is sometimes the case that no gram-
matical alternative secondary predicate is available.
Supplement:
Quaeso tamen, tu meam partem, infortunium / si dividetur, me apsente accipito
tamen. (Pl. Mil. 865–6); In qua (sc. re publica) quidem nunc me restituto vivit mecum
simul exemplum fidei publicae. (Cic. Sest. 50); . . . praesertim cum eius essem civitatis
ex qua C. Mucius solus in castra Porsenae venisset eumque interficere proposita sibi
morte conatus esset. (Cic. Sest. 48); Qua re tibi nuntiata, ut constabat inter eos qui
una fuerunt, concidisti. (Cic. Phil. 2.107); Quibus (sc. navibus) effectis armatisque
diebus XXX a qua die materia caesa est adductisque Massiliam his D. Brutum
praeficit, C. Trebonium legatum ad oppugnationem Massiliae relinquit. (Caes. Gal.
1.36.5—NB: dative his immediately follows the ablative absolute); Turribus autem
excitatis tamen has altitudo puppium ex barbaris navibus superabat . . . (Caes. Gal.
3.14.4); Ubi se diutius duci intellexit . . . convocatis eorum principibus quorum mag-
nam copiam in castris habebat . . . graviter eos accusat quod, cum neque emi neque ex
agris sumi possit . . . ab iis non sublevetur . . . (Caes. Gal. 1.16.5–6); Exinde duabus
admotis quadrigis in currus earum distentum inligat Mettium . . . (Liv. 1.28.10); Illo
loco aut cadendum esse aut stratis hostibus per corpora eorum evadendum. (Liv.
10.35.18); Cameris dispositis et intextis imum caelum earum trullissetur, deinde
harena dirigatur, postea autem creta aut marmore poliatur. (Vitr. 7.3.3); Sed a Caesare
perfecto demum scelere magnitudo eius intellecta est. (Tac. Ann. 14.10.1); Interim
cunctantibus prolatantibusque spem ac metum Epicharis quaedam, incertum
272 Helttula (1987: 17–19) does regard the ablative absolute in this case as a variant of a direct object
modified by a participle.
396 Subordinate clauses filling a satellite position
quonam modo sciscitata (neque illi ante ulla rerum honestarum cura fuerat), accen-
dere et arguere coniuratos . . . (Tac. Ann. 15.51.1)
Clam nuntiis ad Milonem missis . . . atque eo in Italiam evocato . . . sibi (sc. eum) con-
iunxit atque eum in Thurinum ad sollicitandos pastores praemisit. (Caes. Civ. 3.21.4).
In the initial example (a), repeated as (d), the implied agent of the passive participle in
the ablative absolute clause (Cicero) is distinct from the subject of the matrix clause
(Cethegus). Other examples are given in the Supplement.
(d) Tum Cethegus . . . recitatis litteris (a me) . . . repente conticuit.
(‘Then Cethegus . . . when his letter was read out (by me) . . . suddenly fell silent.’ Cic.
Catil. 3.10)
Supplement:
Nihil prodest narratio tum, cum ab adversariis re exposita nostra nihil interest
iterum aut alio modo narrare. (Cic. Inv. 1.30); Post autem aliquanto, toto iam indicio
exposito atque edito, surrexit . . . (Cic. Catil. 3.11); . . . Belgas . . . solos . . . esse qui patrum
nostrorum memoria omni Gallia vexata (sc. a Teutonis Cimbrisque) Teutonos
Cimbrosque intra suos fines ingredi prohibuerint. (Caes. Gal. 2.4.2); . . . concilio prius
inter sese habito senatum adeunt factaque dicendi potestate equis se suis stipendia
facturos promittunt. (Liv. 5.7.5); Quae tibi virginum / sponso necato barbara serviet?
(Hor. Carm. 1.29.5–6); Tum Amyntas facta dicendi potestate ‘Si nihil’, inquit, ‘inter-
est regis, peto, ut, dum dico, vinculis liberer.’ (Curt. 7.1.18); Defuncto autem Herode
ecce apparuit angelus Domini in somnis Ioseph . . . (Vulg. Mat. 2.19)273
Much more often, however, and throughout the history of Latin, although there is
some fluctuation among authors, the agent of a passive ablative absolute clause and
the subject of the matrix clause are referentially identical, as in (e). The agent of the
passive ablative absolute clause may be explicitly specified, as in (f). Another possibil-
ity is to insert the subject of the main clause, which is also the agent of the participial
clause, into the participial clause, as in (g). Livy in particular274 sometimes underlines
the identity of agent and subject by the insertion of ipse ‘self ’ into the ablative absolute
clause, as in (h). However, sometimes such an inserted ipse seems only to stress the
personal involvement of the agent of the ablative absolute clause, as in (i) (see also
§ 14.18 and § 23.67). In (j), inserted Caesar is the recipient of the action in the ablative
absolute clause.
(e) Haec eadem locutus sum domi meae adhibito Quinto, fratre meo . . .
(‘I said these same things at my house, with Quintus, my brother, having been invited.’
Cic. Fam. 10.25.3)
(f) Quis enim potest aut deserta per se patria aut oppressa beatus esse?
(‘For who can be happy when he has either deserted his country or oppressed it?’ Cic.
Att. 10.4.4)
273 The Vetus Latina version has Cum autem mortuus esset (see also note 256).
274 Material in Riemann (1885: 259–61). For discussion, see Traenkle (1968: 140–2).
Participial clauses 397
(g) Hac re statim Caesar per speculatores cognita insidias veritus . . . exerci-
tum . . . castris continuit.
(‘Caesar learnt this at once through his scouts; and fearing an ambush he kept the
army in camp.’ Caes. Gal. 2.11.2)
(h) Romani quoque imperatores . . . iunctis et ipsi exercitibus . . . ad sedem hos-
tium pervenere . . .
(‘The Roman commanders on their part . . . when they had united their armies . . . also
reached the place where their enemies had concentrated . . .’ Liv. 29.2.1)
(i) . . . causa ipse pro se dicta . . . damnatur.
(‘. . . having pleaded his own cause . . ., he was condemned.’ Liv. 4.44.10)
(j) Quibus litteris circiter media nocte Caesar adlatis suos facit certiores eosque
ad dimicandum animo confirmat.
(‘The dispatch was brought in about midnight; Caesar informed his troops thereof,
and encouraged them for the fight.’ Caes. Gal. 5.49.4)
Supplement:
‘Quid dubitas igitur’, inquam, ‘summo bono a te ita constituto, ut id totum in non
dolendo sit, id tenere unum, id tueri, id defendere?’ (Cic. Fin. 2.11); . . . concilio prius
inter sese habito senatum adeunt . . . (Liv. 5.7.5)
Quo tamen incommodo Domitius accepto reliquias exercitus dissipati collegit . . .
(B. Alex. 40.5); Recepta cocus tunica cultrum arripuit porcique ventrem hinc atque
illinc timida manu secuit. (Petr. 49.9)
275 For further examples of perfect deponents with an argument, see K.-St.: I.783–4.
276 For historical accounts and data, see Flinck-Linkomies (1929), Serbat (1979), Coleman (1989), and
Keydana (1997: 239–57).
398 Subordinate clauses filling a satellite position
instances can be found in Ammianus Marcellinus.277 Such clauses are often loosely
integrated in their sentence.
(a) Pallam ad phrygionem fert confecto prandio / vinoque expoto, parasito
excluso foras.
(‘He’s taking the mantle to the embroiderer after the lunch is finished off, the wine
drunk out, and the hanger-on locked out.’ Pl. Men. 469–70)
(b) . . . concursus est ad templum Concordiae factus senatum illuc vocante
Metello consule.
(‘. . . the mob flocked to the temple of Concord, whither the consul Metellus was sum-
moning the senate.’ Cic. Dom. 11)
(c) Dein Sulla omnia pollicito docti . . . circiter dies quadraginta ibidem opperi-
untur.
(‘Then, after Sulla had promised to do all . . . they lingered there for about forty days.’
Sal. Jug. 103.7)
(d) Qua oratione habita graviter et sententiose maxime demittitur animus
hominum . . .
(‘When such a passage is delivered gravely and sententiously, the spirit of man is
greatly abased . . .’ Cic. Inv. 1.106)
(e) At hostes . . . conlocatis insidiis bipertito in silvis opportuno atque occulto
loco a milibus passuum circiter duobus Romanorum adventum exspecta-
bant . . .
(‘But the enemy . . . posted a double ambush in the woods, in a convenient and covert
spot about two miles away; and there they awaited the coming of the Romans.’ Caes.
Gal. 5.32.1)
Supplement:
. . . me . . . absentem principe Cn. Pompeio referente et de corpore rei publicae tuorum
scelerum tela revellente revocarant. (Cic. Pis. 25); Me Cn. Pompeius multis obsisten-
tibus eius erga me studio atque amori semper dilexit . . . (Cic. Pis. 76); . . . Lusitanis a
Ser. Galba praetore contra interpositam, ut existumabatur, fidem interfectis
L. Libone tribuno plebis populum incitante et rogationem in Galbam privilegi simi-
lem ferente . . . M. Cato legem suadens in Galbam multa dixit. (Cic. Brut. 89)
Various other factors may contribute to the complexity of participial ablative abso-
lute clauses. One is to use autonomous relative clauses as subject (see § 18.16), as
in (f).
(f) . . . Hiberum copias traiecit praemissis qui . . . specularentur.
(‘. . . he led his troops across the Ebro, after sending agents ahead to explore . . .’ Liv.
21.23.1)
Supplement:
Quo enim omnia iudicantur sublato reliqua se negant tollere. (Cic. Luc. 33); . . . ullis
ad signa redeuntibus et qui reliqui erant per summa flagitia detractantibus mili-
tiam . . . (Sal. Jug. frg. 10a); Deinde eos quoque ipsos exigua parte pontis relicta revo-
cantibus qui rescindebant cedere in tutum coegit. (Liv. 2.10.7); Rapto poculo
argenteo ex oppidani domo Plemini miles fugiens sequentibus quorum erat obvius
forte Sergio et Matieno tribunis militum fuit. (Liv. 29.9.2); Calas huic regioni prae-
positus est, ipse adsumptis qui ex Macedonia nuper advenerant Cappadociam petiit.
(Curt. 3.1.24); . . . qui penetratis omnibus Hispaniae gentibus ingenti vi hominum
urbiumque potitus numero aditis quae vix audita erant Gallaeci cognomen meruit.
(Vell. 2.5.1); . . . avulsa . . . . tamquam impedimento coniugii cum qua cubare solitus
eram . . . (Aug. Conf. 6.25)
Cf.: . . . cruenta fora templaque, passim trucidatis ut quemque fors obtulerat. (Tac.
Hist. 4.1.1)
Another factor that contributes to complexity is the use of a perfect passive participle
with an argument clause, the earliest example of which is (g).278 This becomes more
frequent from the Augustan period onward, mostly with verbs of thinking and saying.
(For such combinations functioning as subject, see § 15.133.)
(g) . . . impetrato prius a consulibus ut . . . permitterent progreditur . . .
(‘. . . with consent having first been obtained from the consuls, he proceeds . . .’ Quad.
hist. 12)
Supplement:
Sin vita ante acta ignorabitur, hoc loco praeterito et cur praetereatur demonstrato
argumentis accusationem statim confirmare oportebit. (Cic. Inv. 2.34); Perfecto enim
et concluso neque virtutibus neque amicitiis usquam locum esse . . . (Cic. Fin. 2.85);
At Lucullus audito Q. Marcium Regem pro consule per Lycaoniam cum tribus
legionibus in Ciliciam tendere . . . (Sal. Hist. 5.14); Haec tibi dictabam post fanum
putre Vacunae, / excepto quod non simul esses cetera laetus. (Hor. Ep. 1.10.48–9);279 . . .
lato . . ., ut solet, ad populum ut equum escendere liceret . . . (Liv. 23.14.2); Sed
Tiberius saepe apud se pensitato an coerceri tam profusae cupidines possent . . . postremo
litteras ad senatum composuit . . . (Tac. Ann. 3.52.3); . . . et miles nomine Calusidius
strictum obtulit gladium addito acutiorem esse (Tac. Ann. 1.35.5); . . . petito . . . ut
intrare illi urbem et deos eorum adorare liceret . . . (Justin. 43.5.6); . . . conperto quod
homines essent sine litteris et idiotae admirabantur et cognoscebant eos . . . (Vulg.
Act. 4.13)
The clausal character of the participial ablative absolute clause can be further exploited
by the expansion of the noun phrase with attributive participial constituents and the
addition of satellites, among which are other participial clauses including ablative
278 The source of the text is Gel. 9.11.6, where it belongs to what seems to be a quotation. It was attrib-
uted to Quadrigarius by Peter, but no longer so by Briscoe in Cornell’s edition. The literature on the sub-
ject is abundant. See e.g. Lebek (1970: 263–4) and Ambrosetti in her edition, Appendice, pp. 354–74.
279 For excepto developing into an adverb and preposition, see note 245. Compare also conpleto matu-
tinas ‘after the morning’ (Itin. Anton. Plac. 11, quoted by Väänänen (1981: 167)).
400 Subordinate clauses filling a satellite position
absolute clauses. An example of a participial clause is (h), where his rebus gestis is a
constituent of omni Gallia pacata.
(h) His rebus gestis omni Gallia pacata tanta huius belli ad barbaros opinio per-
lata est, uti . . .
(‘When Gaul had been pacified by the accomplishment of these things, so mighty a
report of this campaign was carried to the natives that . . .’ Caes. Gal. 2.35.1)
Supplement:
. . . prope iam desperata salute nonnullae eiusmodi sententiae dicebantur, ut impedi-
mentis relictis eruptione facta isdem itineribus, quibus eo pervenissent, ad salutem
contenderent. (Caes. Gal. 3.3.3); Servius . . . conciliata prius voluntate plebis agro capto
ex hostibus viritim diviso ausus est ferre ad populum, vellent iuberentne se regnare.
(Liv. 1.46.1); Ignara matre, dein frustra obnitente (sc. Acne) penitus inrepserat per
luxum et ambigua secreta ne senioribus quidem principis amicis adversantibus
muliercula (sc. Acne) nulla cuiusquam iniuria cupidines principis explente . . . (Tac.
Ann. 13.12.2)280
The instances given above in this section are all illustrations of the internal complexity
of ablative absolute clauses. Another form of complexity involves the use of more than
one ablative absolute clause in a sentence. An early example of this is (i) from Plautus,
possibly a parody of a commander’s military report.281 Caesar and Livy are very fond
of such strings of ablative absolutes.282
(i) Hostibus victis, civibus salvis, re placida, pacibus perfectis, / bello exstincto,
re bene gesta, integro exercitu et praesidiis, . . . eas vobis gratis habeo . . .
(‘Now that our foes are vanquished, the citizens safe, the state tranquil, peace treaties
concluded, war come to an end, the affair successfully concluded, the army and gar-
risons intact . . . I give thanks to you . . .’ Pl. Per. 753–6)
Supplement:
Confecta Britannia, obsidibus acceptis, nulla praeda, imperata tamen pecunia
exercitum ex Britannia reportabant. (Cic. Att. 4.18.5); Caesar ab decimae legionis
cohortatione ad dextrum cornu profectus, ubi suos urgeri signisque in unum locum
conlatis duodecimae legionis confertos milites sibi ipsos ad pugnam esse impedimento
vidit, quartae cohortis omnibus centurionibus occisis signiferoque interfecto, signo
amisso, reliquarum cohortium omnibus fere centurionibus aut vulneratis aut occi-
sis, in his primipilo P. Sextio Baculo fortissimo viro multis gravibusque vulneribus
confecto . . . (Caes. Gal. 2.25.1–2); Re publica felicissume gesta atque liberatis
<sociis,> vectigalibus restitutis, exercitum salvom atque incolumem plenissimum
praeda domum reportavit; iterum triumphans in urbem Romam redit. (Liv. 41.28.9)
280 For Tacitus’ usage, see Enghofer (1961). 281 So Leeman (1963: 176).
282 For Caesar, see Odelman (1972: 130–4).
Participial clauses 401
always easy to do. Such instances must be seen as extremes of the general communica-
tive rule that known entities may be left out. The examples cited in the literature come
especially from Livy and later historians. An example is (a).
(a) Haec atque talia agitantibus gravescere valitudo Augusti . . .
(‘As men were churning over such things as these, there was a deterioration in
Augustus’ health . . .’ Tac. Ann. 1.5.1)
In this example the ones who are agitantes are in general the people surrounding
Augustus. There are examples of this omission with present active, perfect passive
participles, and—less frequent—perfect deponent participles.
Supplement:
Present active participles: Eranam autem, quae fuit non vici instar sed urbis, quod
erat Amani caput, itemque Sepyram et Commorim, acriter et diu repugnantibus,
Pomptino illam partem Amani tenente, ex antelucano tempore usque ad horam diei
X magna multitudine hostium occisa cepimus castellaque vi capta complura incendi-
mus. (Cic. Fam. 15.4.9); Attalus quoque Pteleon nihil minus quam tale quicquam in
alterius oppugnatione urbis timentibus oppressit. (Liv. 31.46.13); Curatum ea scio
omnibus fere ossibus confractis prolapsum ex arbore alta putatorem, circumdata
universo corpori, aquam suam adspergentibus, quotiens inaresceret, raroque nec
nisi deficientem herbam mutationis causa resolventibus, convaluisse vix credibili
celeritate. (Plin. Nat. 27.69)
Perfect passive participles: Profectus dictator cum exercitu proelio uno Marsos fun-
dit. Conpulsis deinde in urbes munitas, Milioniam, Plestinam, Fresiliam intra dies
paucos cepit . . . (Liv. 10.3.5); . . . in Macedoniam rediit, missis ad accolas Histri flu-
minis barbaros ut in Italiam inrumperent sollicitandos. (Liv. 39.35.4); Biduo deinde ad
quietem dato militibus iussisque et classem et machinas pariter admovere, ut undique
territis instaret, ipse in altissimam turrem ascendit ingenti animo, periculo maiore.
(Curt. 4.4.10); Sed plurimum trepidationis in publico, ut quemque nuntium fama
attulisset, animum vultumque conversis, ne diffidere dubiis ac parum gaudere pros-
peris viderentur. (Tac. Hist. 1.85.2)
Perfect deponent participles: Caralitani, simul ad se Valerium mitti audierunt, non-
dum profecto ex Italia sua sponte Cottam ex oppido eiciunt. (Caes. Civ. 1.30.3)
283 Woodman and Martin ad loc. prefer to take it as a position in time adjunct, pointing to triumviratu
in the preceding context, while Enghofer (1961: 73, 111) takes it ‘beyond doubt’ as an ablative absolute.
402 Subordinate clauses filling a satellite position
In the course of time, participial ‘absolute’ clauses in cases other than the ablative
developed, with most examples dating from the Late Latin period. They have the same
general characteristics as the ablative absolute, but they do not have the same distribu-
tion. While some instances must be explained as due to Greek influence, such as the
genitive absolutes which are literal translations of Greek texts, others are simply
ungrammatical.284
infirmus. (Vict. Vit. 1.2); Mater autem . . . negata (i.e. necata), soror ipsius in monas-
terio . . . transmittitur . . . (Greg. Tur. Hist. 5.39)
The following example is sometimes taken as a nominative absolute,287 but it is better
to regard the si clause as lacking a finite verb form.
(b) Si ambo praesentes sol occasus suprema tempestas esto.
(‘If both be present, sunset shall be the time-limit.’ Lex XII 1.9 ap. Gel.
17.2.10)
Appendix: Due to the increasing similarity in use of the present participle and the
gerund, there are also a few examples of a ‘gerundial absolute clause’ instead of a
nominative participle, the first instance being in Epist. Alex. (p. 206.17–19K.):
Quorum (sc. elephantorum) equites caedendo poplites admodum nongentos con-
gregatos octoginta occidimus . . .288
287 See Holland (1986: 169), referring to Schrijnen (1939) and Krisch (1988: 8).
288 See Aalto (1949: 80–2), Sz.: 144, and Kooreman (1989: 221).
289 See Sz.: 142, Murru (1977), and Maiocco (2005: 42–62). For the (dubious) instances in the Bellum
Hispaniense, see Gaertner (2010: 244–5).
290 Earlier and much disputed passages are discussed by Helttula (1987), who has written the most
comprehensive monograph on the topic. For Pelagonius, see Gitton (2003).
404 Subordinate clauses filling a satellite position
Present participles: Sequere hac, mea gnata, me, cum dis volentibus. (Pl. Pers. 332);
Describam nunc ego cruciatus et miseram corporis patientiam inter tyrannica tor-
menta saevientia. (Sen. Con. 2.5.6); . . . ob excedentia ripas suas . . . flumina . . . fertiles
(sc. sunt). (Mela 2.15); Secuti exemplum veterani haud multo post in Raetiam mit-
tuntur, specie defendendae provinciae ob imminentis Suebos, ceterum ut avelleren-
tur castris trucibus adhuc non minus asperitate remedii quam sceleris memoria.
(Tac. Ann. 1.44.4); . . . post Dauni stagnantia regna . . . (Sil. 12.43)
NB: . . . ante proelium in Thessalia factum cognitum . . . (Caes. Civ. 3.100.3)
There are a few gerundial clauses in the genitive that must be interpreted as purpose
adjuncts. Whether on the basis of this small number one wants to assume that there
ever existed a rule of Latin grammar in conformity with which these utterances
were produced depends on the importance one attaches to a very few genitive noun
phrases which seem to be meant as purpose adjuncts (see § 10.83) and to the corres-
ponding gerundival expressions (see § 16.106). Some examples are given below in the
Supplement.
The dative, as in (a), is much more common, although not frequent either. It is not
always easy to distinguish the gerundial satellites from the gerundial arguments pre-
sented in § 15.137.
(a) Utuntur (sc. scirpis) in vinea alligando fasces . . .
(‘They use (rushes) in the vineyard for tying up bundles of fuel . . .’ Var. L. 5.137)
Prepositional expressions with ad ‘to’, causa ‘for the purpose of, for the sake of ’, gratia
‘for the sake of ’, and a few others are more often used as purpose adjuncts than the
above types (those with ad are sometimes difficult to distinguish from gerundial argu-
ments). However, outside of Caesar and legal texts, finite clauses with ut are much
more common.298 When used with verbs of giving and receiving, this purpose expres-
sion is sometimes in competition with the much more common use of gerundives as
secondary predicates, as discussed in § 21.9. Examples with ad are (b) and (c). Clauses
297 On the satellite status of gerunds and gerundives, see Vester (1990).
298 Statistics in Steele (1898). See also Odelman (1972: 92ff.).
Gerundial clauses 407
with causa are relatively frequent in Caesar299 and in legal or administrative texts.
Gratia is used much less often.
(b) Tribunus et quadringenti ad moriendum proficiscuntur.
(‘The tribune and his four hundred marched forth to death.’ Gel. 3.7.11)
(c) . . . propones illi exempla ad imitandum.
(‘. . . you will set before him examples for imitation.’ Cic. Phil. 10.5)
Supplement:
Genitive: . . . ne id adsentandi mage quam quo habeam gratum facere existumes.
(Ter. Ad. 270) (NB: parallelism with the quo purpose clause); porcas piaculares
duas luco coinquendi et operis faciendi immolavit (CIL VI.2065.II.19–20
(Rome, ad 87)); . . . posterior magis admonendi emptoris et liberandi se eandem
legem repetierit . . . (Paul. dig. 18.7.9—NB: Kuebler inserts causa)300
Variant readings in the manuscript tradition are an additional problem in the fol-
lowing passages: <Ratio est> quae causam facit et continet defensionem, hoc
modo, ut docendi causa in hac potissimum causa consistamus. (Rhet. Her. 1.26—NB:
some of the mss. omit causa, but cf. inter alia Cic. Inv. 1.18); Tum Scipio: ‘Sunt ista
ut dicis; sed audisse te credo Tubero, Platonem Socrate mortuo primum in
Aegyptum discendi causa, post in Italiam et in Siciliam contendisse, ut Pythagorae
inventa perdisceret . . .’ (Cic. Rep. 1.16—NB: causa is added on the basis of Nonius’
quotation).301
299 They are almost as frequent as ut subjunctive clauses. See Steele (1898).
300 Compare also the use of the genitive in Isidore of Seville, for which see Maltby (2002: 227–9).
301 For other debatable instances, see Aalto (1949: 60–1). See also Pasoli (1963; 1966: 40–2).
302 Aalto (1949: 76–7) takes this as a purpose adjunct in the ablative.
408 Subordinate clauses filling a satellite position
In (very) Late Latin bare accusative case forms of the gerund are found instead of
prepositional expressions with ad, especially with verbs of movement.305 This has its
parallel in gerundival clauses (see § 16.106) and is part of a more general confusion
between the functions of the present infinitive and the gerund (see § 15.138). The
disappearance of the supine in -um may also have played a role (see § 16.111). An
example of a bare accusative case form of the gerund in a purpose adjunct is (e).
(e) . . . alio die ambulandum ducere . . .
(‘. . . on another day (you should) take him for a walk . . .’ Mulom. Chir. 133)
A few late examples of a bare case accusative are cited by Aalto (1949: 86), for example
the gerundival clause in (f). Of course, the very use in this context of the term ‘bare
303 Textually uncertain or debatable instances of ad expressions can be found in Aalto (1949: 89–90).
304 For a discussion of combinations of ad + gerund with the verb habeo, see Norberg (1943: 216).
305 Odelstierna (1926: 32–42) has collected some thirty instances with verbs of movement and seven
with other verbs, most of them taken from Fredegar. An example of such a gerund with a verb that does
not indicate movement is Fredeg. Chron. 4.66: Spolia eorum Sarracini per legatus Heraclio recipiendum
offerunt. A survey in Sz.: 379.
Gerundial clauses 409
accusative’ is questionable as it projects the Classical Latin case system onto the utter-
ances from this period. What is written as an accusative need not correspond with
what was actually spoken. It may also be the product of ignorance or a mistaken
display of learning (‘Hyperurbanismus’ according to Norberg (1943: 223)). Most
likely in such instances all these factors are in play.
(f) Censeo igitur ut adorandum me venias . . .
(‘I recommend therefore that you come to adore me.’ Jul. Valer.
I.42.51K.=I.1348 R.—NB: Rossellini now reads ut <ad>)
The most widespread use of the gerundial clause is that of describing the method used
in effecting something, the action leading up to a certain result, or the manner in
which something is obtained, as in (a), (c), and (d). Sometimes the semantic relation-
ship with respect to the main clause is even less specific, for example when the gerund
indicates the circumstances, as in (b). The appropriate case form for this semantic
relation is the ablative.306 Examples are found from a very early date until the end of
the period covered by this Syntax. The gerund may govern an argument in the case
required by the verb, as in (c); this becomes quite normal in Late Latin.307 There are
also instances of gerunds with a satellite. Gerundial clauses in the ablative became a
normal element in building periodic sentences in Livy and then in other historians, as
well as in didactic texts by authors striving for conciseness.
(a) . . . mendicum malim mendicando vincere.
(‘. . . I’d rather outdo a beggar in begging.’ Pl. Bac. 514)
(b) . . . mobilitatem . . . quae crescit eundo . . .
(‘. . . velocity which grows by moving . . .’ Lucr. 6.341)
(c) Quaeris quomodo illa tua facias? Dona dando.
(‘Do you ask how you can make them your own? By bestowing them as gifts!’ Sen.
Ben. 6.3.3)
(d) (sc. Hannibal) . . . qui senex vincendo factus Hispanias . . . monumentis ingen-
tium rerum complesset.
(‘(Hannibal) . . . who, grown old through victories, had filled the Spanish lands . . . with
the evidence of his mighty deeds.’ Liv. 30.28.5)
Supplement (arguments in italics, satellites in bold italics):
. . . Macel<amque opidom p>ucnandod · cepet. (CIL VI.1300.4–5 (Rome, 260 bc));
Male fidem servando illis quoque abrogant etiam fidem . . . (Pl. Trin. 1048); Ego
vapulando, ill’ verberando, usque ambo defessi sumus. (Ter. Ad 213); Sed haec
306 Gerundial adjuncts in the ablative are discussed by Vester (1983: 101–21) and, from a diachronic
perspective, by Kooreman (1989). For the wide range of semantic relations between the gerund and its
clause from Early Latin onwards, see Adams (2013: 725–40).
307 See Kooreman (1989: 224–5 + Table 3 on p. 229).
410 Subordinate clauses filling a satellite position
omittamus; augemus enim dolorem retractando. (Cic. Att. 8.9a.1); . . . sic ulcis-
car . . . malos civis rem publicam bene gerendo, perfidos amicos nihil credendo
atque omnia cavendo, invidos virtuti et gloriae serviendo . . . (Cic. Red. Pop. 21);
Mucius . . . diceret omnem aquam oportere arceri quae pluendo crevisset. (Cic. Top.
38); Iam vero alia animalia gradiendo, alia serpendo ad pastum accedunt, alia
volando, alia nando, cibumque partim oris hiatu et dentibus ipsis capessunt, partim
unguium tenacitate arripiunt partim aduncitate rostrorum, alia sugunt, alia carpunt,
alia vorant, alia mandunt. (Cic. N.D. 2.122); Quodsi expectando et desiderando pen-
demus animis . . . (Cic. Tusc. 1.96); Quis enim ad me non perscripsit te non solum
auctoritate, oratione, sententia tua, quibus ego a tali viro contentus eram, sed etiam
opera, consilio, domum veniendo, conveniendis meis nullum onus offici cuiquam
reliquum fecisse? (Cic. Fam. 3.13.1—NB: coordination with nouns and gerundival
clause); Tua nunc opera meae puellae / flendo turgiduli rubent ocelli. (Catul. 3.17–18);
Tu coniunx, tibi fas animum temptare precando. (Verg. A. 4.113); Omne tulit punc-
tum qui miscuit utile dulci, / lectorem delectando pariterque monendo. (Hor. Ars
343–4); Milanion nullos fugiendo, Tulle, labores / saevitiam durae contudit Iasidos.
(Prop. 1.1.9–10); Satis superque humilis est, qui iure aequo in civitate vivit, nec infe-
rendo iniuriam nec patiendo. (Liv. 3.53.9—NB: parallelism with iure aequo); Neutrum
faciam, patres conscripti, et si nulla alia re, modestia certe et temperando linguae
adulescens senem vicero. (Liv. 28.44.18—NB: coordination); . . . ut . . . auctorem . . . se
exhibendo ac velut visa, quae dubia erant, narrando concitaret iras hominum. (Liv.
24.31.14); Iis simul prudenter simul magnifice utendo effecit primum ut sibi deinde
ut aliis non indignus videretur regno. (Liv. 33.21.2); Ea lege male utendo alii sociis alii
populo Romano iniuriam faciebant. (Liv. 41.8.9); . . . triduum fere consumpsit incerta
consilia volvendo. (Curt. 10.8.7); Cum ergo fuerit hoc ita perstratum, supra nucleus
inducatur et virgis caedendo subigatur. (Vitr. 7.1.7); Deinde pilae manibus versando
efficiuntur . . . (Vitr. 7.11.1); . . . tenuitas eius minus valendo faciliter rumpitur . . . (Vitr.
7.3.8); Deinde cum aeris unda nitentes, cum perventum ad montes, ab eorum offensa
et procellis propter plenitatem et gravitatem liquescendo disparguntur (sc. nubes) et
ita diffunditur in terras. (Vitr. 8.2.2); . . . circumagendo rotundationem utrarumque
manuum et pedum digiti linea tangentur. (Vitr. 3.1.3); . . . Scipionis Aemiliani, quem
in adoptionem dando duarum familiarum ornamentum esse voluisti . . . (V. Max.
2.10.4); Nam quod invidiam facis nobis ingenuos honestosque clamando, vide ne
deteriorem facias confidentia causam. (Petr. 107.10); Sperando enim timebimus,
timendo cavebimus, cavendo salvi erimus. Contra si praesumamus, neque timendo
neque cavendo difficile salvi erimus. (Tert. Cult. 2.2.3); . . . pestem fugiendo
vitate . . . (Cypr. Ep. 43.5.3); Haec aliaque in eundem modum saepius replicando
maiorem exercitus partem primae barbarorum opposuit fronti . . . (Amm. 16.12.34);
Et licet potuit, quoad vixit, ingentia largiendo et intervallando potestates assid-
uas. . . (Amm. 27.11.2); . . . omnia loca quae filii Israhel tetigerant eundo vel redeundo
ad montem Dei . . . (Pereg. 5.11); . . . novum . . . testamentum cui prophetando scienter
utiles fuerunt, qualis David fuit. (August. c. Faust. 22.84)
There is one much discussed case at Cic. Dom. 1, where the manuscripts have: Cum
multa divinitus, pontifices, a maioribus nostris inventa atque instituta sunt, tum nihil
praeclarius quam quod eosdem et religionibus deorum immortalium et summae
rei publicae praeesse voluerunt, ut amplissimi et clarissimi cives rem publicam bene
Gerundial clauses 411
As in the above examples, the agent of the gerundial clause is almost always identical
with the subject of the matrix clause/sentence. This identity may be underlined by the
presence of ipse ‘himself ’ in the gerundial clause. Agent/subject identity is also typical
of the use of the present active participle as a secondary predicate. This explains the
structure in (e), where the participial phrase recipientes umorem is parallel with the
gerund siccescendo. See also § 21.14 for the development of the gerund.
(e) (sc. craticii parietes) . . . recipientes umorem turgescunt, deinde siccescendo
contrahuntur . . .
(‘(walls of wattlework) . . . taking up moisture they swell, then by drying they con-
tract . . .’ Vitr. 2.8.20)
Supplement:
. . . unus ex Romanis ex propinquo murum contemplans numerando lapides aesti-
mandoque ipse secum quid in fronte paterent singuli, altitudinem muri quantum
proxime coniectura poterat permensus . . . ad Marcellum rem defert. (Liv. 25.23.11);
Sed eos Ser. Sulpicius Galba . . . prensando ipse . . . stimulaverat ut frequentes ad suf-
fragium adessent. (Liv. 45.35.8); Ita et sua sponte irarum pleni et incitati domos inde
digressi sunt instigandoque suos quisque populos effecere, ut omne Volscum nomen
deficeret. (Liv. 2.38.6); Non dissimilem offensionem et Aemiliani subiit L. Hostilius
Mancinus, qui primus Carthaginem inruperat, situm eius oppugnationesque depic-
tas proponendo in foro et ipse adsistens populo spectanti singula enarrando, qua
comitate proximis comitiis consulatum adeptus est. (Plin. Nat. 35.23)
Vitex ignis et aeris habendo satietatem, umoris temperate, parum autem terreni
habens leviore temperatura comparata egregiam habere videtur in usu rigiditatem.
(Vitr. 2.9.9); Credo libero commeantes mari saepiusque adeundo ceteris incognitas
terras elegisse sedes iuventuti . . . (Curt. 4.4.20); . . . Piso . . . modo semet adflictando,
modo singulos nomine ciens, praemiis vocans seditionem coeptabat . . . (Tac. Ann.
2.81.1); Impetu pervagatum incendium plana primum, deinde in edita adsurgens et
rursus inferiora populando anteiit remedia velocitate mali . . . (Tac. Ann. 15.38.3)
As for parallelism, see Aalto (1949: 70), who refers to different versions of the same
message, for instance Vet. Lat. Luc. 18.18 quid faciendo vs. faciens in the Vulgate.
Exceptions to agent/subject identity are rare. An early instance is (f), where the
person hurt by walking is me (see also § 5.35 on the voice value of the gerund).
(f) . . . ut me ambulando rumperet.
(‘. . . he’d burst my guts with running errands.’ Ter. Hec. 435)
Supplement (arguments in italics, satellites in bold italics):
Lumbi sedendo, oculi spectando dolent, / manendo medicum, dum se ex opere
recipiat. (Pl. Men. 882–3); Id opprimi sustentando et prolatando nullo pacto
potest. (Cic. Catil. 4.6); Alitur vitium vivitque tegendo . . . (Verg. G. 3.454); Crescit
412 Subordinate clauses filling a satellite position
enim assidue spectando (spectandi N, spectanti cj. Müller) cura puellae. (Prop. 3.21.3);
Paulatim deinde recipiendo in civitatem qui arma aut non ceperant aut deposuerant matu-
rius vires refectae sunt . . . (Vell. 2.16.4); Nec sine canendo tibicines dicti . . . (Var. L. 6.75)
The gerund is used in various prepositional expressions to locate the state of affairs of
the main clause in time. Examples are (a) and (b).
(a) . . . in pariundo aliquot adfuerunt liberae.
(‘. . . there were several free women present at the birth.’ Ter. An. 771)
(b) . . . vociferari inter vapulandum incipit . . .
(‘. . . while the lashing still went on, he began to shout . . .’ Gel. 1.26.7)
Supplement (in alphabetical order by preposition):
Namque ante domandum / ingentis tollent animos . . . (Verg. G. 3.206–7); Pol magis
metuo ne defuerit mihi in monendo oratio. (Pl. Bac. 37); In supponendo ova obser-
vant ut sint numero imparia. (Var. R. 3.9.12); Iam istuc te quoque impediet in navi-
gando et in conserendo, in uxore ducenda in liberis procreandis, plurimisque in
rebus, in quibus nihil sequere praeter probabile. (Cic. Luc. 109); Quid praeterea ad te
scribam non habeo, et mehercule eram in scribendo conturbatior. (Cic. Att. 1.12.4);
Tum Apollinaris, ut mos eius in reprehendendo fuit, . . . (Gel. 13.20.5); . . . si erravit in
solvendo . . . (Ulp. dig. 15.3.3.1); . . . in retinendo iura rerum suarum singulare ius
est. (Jav. dig. 41.2.23.1): . . . in proscindendo duritiam soli . . . convellit armos. (Veg.
Mulom. 4.18); inter ponendum (Enn. fr. inc. 2); Tum inter laudandum hunc timi-
dum tremulis palpebris / percutere nictu. Hic gaudere et mirarier. (Caecil. Com.
193–4); Inter loquendum. (Afran. Com. 423); . . . inter agendum / occursare capro—
cornu ferit ille—caveto. (Verg. Ecl. 9.24–5); . . . suscepta obligatio inter dandum
accipiendumque. (Paul. dig. 13.6.17.3)
NB: Qui cum ad matrem confugissent, in gremio eius inter ipsa oscula trucidantur,
proclamante Arsinoë, quid tantum nefas aut nubendo aut post nuptias contraxisset.
(Justin. 24.3.7–8).
Appendix: There are some ungrammatical instances, resulting from literal transla-
tions from Greek, such as: In autem dormiendo homines venit inimicus (Vet. Lat. Mat.
13.25—NB: corresponding to a subject in a finite clause). See also Wistrand (1967:
71) for discussion.
Prepositional expressions with causa, gratia, and (in Early Latin) ergo ‘for the sake of ’
in combination with the genitive of the gerund are a very common way of expressing
a person’s motive for doing something. In rare instances, the preposition ob is also
used in this way.
Gerundial clauses 413
(a) . . . omnia aliorum causa esse generata, ut eas fruges atque fructus quos terra
gignit animantium causa, animantes autem hominum, ut ecum vehendi
causa, arandi bovem, venandi et custodiendi canem.
(‘. . . all things were created for the sake of some other thing: thus the corn and fruits
that the earth produces were created for the sake of animals, and animals for the sake
of man: for example the horse for riding, the ox for ploughing, the dog for hunting
and keeping guard.’ Cic. N.D. 2.37)
Supplement:
Eadem nunc nego. / Dicendi, non rem perdendi gratia haec nata est mihi. (Pl. Cur.
705–6); . . . quae (frequentia) convenit uno tempore undique comitiorum, ludorum
censendique causa. (Cic. Ver. 54—NB: coordination); Qui primum illud valde gra-
viter tulerunt, promulgatum ex senatus consulto fuisse ut de eis qui ob iudicandum
accepissent quaereretur. (Cic. Att. 1.17.8)
The bare ablative of the gerund can function as an adjunct of respect (see § 10.90),
as in (a):
(a) . . . cum disserendo par esse non posset . . .
(‘. . . since he was not able to be his equal in discussion . . .’ Cic. de Orat. 1.240)
Supplement:
P. Scipio . . . Latine loquendo cuivis erat par . . . (Cic. Brut. 128); Sim digna merendo, /
cuius honoratis ossa vehantur avis. (Prop. 4.11.101–2—NB: avis is a conjecture for
mss. aquis)
NB: Textually uncertain: . . . ut neglegens <non> scribendo fuisse videar . . . (Cic. Fam.
3.9.3—so Shackleton Bailey; <in> Lambinus); Etenim quis est tam scribendo (v.l. in
scribendo) impiger quam ego? (Cic. Fam. 2.1.1)
The use of genitive gerundival clauses as purpose adjuncts (see also § 10.83) is a typ-
ically Tacitean extension of Latin grammar, although there are earlier instances (some
of them disputed).308 An example is (a). The dative is more common, as in (b), though
still not frequent. Very rare are instances of ablative gerundival clauses that seem to be
intended as purpose adjuncts, as in (c). Prepositional gerundival phrases, by contrast,
are quite common as purpose adjuncts, especially those with ad ‘to’, as in (d). Note
that in (e) it is difficult to find the feature ‘control’ in the main clause, which is usual
with purpose clauses (see also § 16.50).309
(a) . . . Germanicus Aegyptum proficiscitur cognoscendae antiquitatis.
(‘Germanicus set out for Egypt to view its antiquities.’ Tac. Ann. 2.59.1)
(b) Serviendae servituti ego servos instruxi mihi . . .
(‘I schooled my slaves to serve me . . .’ Pl. Mil. 745)
(c) . . . Nero . . . prosequitur abeuntem . . . sive explenda simulatione, seu . . .
(‘. . . Nero . . . escorted her on her way . . . either in order to consummate his hypocrisy,
or . . .’ Tac. Ann. 14.4.4)
(d) Ad aquam praebendam commodum adveni domum.
(‘I’ve come home in the nick of time, to fetch water.’ Pl. Am. 669)
(e) Flamen interim Quirinalis virginesque Vestales . . . quae sacrorum secum
ferenda, quae, quia vires ad omnia ferenda deerant, relinquenda essent
consultantes . . .
(‘Meanwhile the flamen of Quirinus and the Vestal virgins . . . were consulting which
of the sacred things they should carry with them, and which, because they were not
strong enough to carry them all, they must leave behind . . .’ Liv. 5.40.7)
Supplement:
Genitive: Cum dicat Orestes se patris ulciscendi matrem occidisse . . . (Rhet. Her.
1.26); . . . ut si arborum trunci sive naves (trabes cj. Schneider) deiciendi operis causa
308 For a discussion of Greek influence, see Calboli (2009: 83–93). For the use of the genitive in Isidore
of Seville, see Maltby (2002: 227–9).
309 For this example, see Torrego (2001: 633).
Gerundival clauses 415
essent a barbaris missae . . . (causa deest l) (Caes. Gal. 4.17.9);310 . . . arma civilia.
Quae ille adversum divina et humana omnia cepit non pro sua aut quorum simulat
iniuria sed legum ac libertatis subvertundae. (Sal. Hist. 1.77.11); Opus erat partibus
auctoritate gratia, cuius augendae (causa add. Laurent) C. Marium cum filio de exilio
revocavit quique cum iis pulsi erant. (Vell. 2.20.5); . . . clementiam suam obstringens
crebris orationibus, quas Seneca testificando, quam honesta praeciperet, vel iactandi
ingenii voce principis vulgabat. (Tac. Ann. 13.11.2—NB: parallelism with the dative
gerundial clause); Namque hoc genus orationis non capitis defendendi nec suaden-
dae legis nec exercitus adhortandi nec inflammandae contionis scribitur, sed face-
tiarum et voluptatis. (Fro. Laudes fumi et pulveris 3, p. 215.21 vdH—NB: coordination
with genitive nouns; gratia vel causa add. Novák); Quid enim si amicos adhibendos
debitor requirat vel expediendi debiti vel fideiussoribus rogandis? (Ulp. dig.
22.1.21.pr.)
Dative: Ius iurandum rei servandae, non perdendae conditum est. (Pl. Rud. 1374);
Ager oleto conserundo, qui in ventum Favonium spectabit et soli ostentus erit, alius
bonus nullus erit. (Cato Agr. 6.2); Quaeritur argentum puerisque beata creandis /
uxor . . . (Hor. Ep.1.2.44–5); Scipio . . . protinus causis regulorum civitatiumque
cognoscendis . . . Tarraconem rediit. (Liv. 28.16.9–10); . . . ea (sc. testa) non potest in
structura oneri ferendo esse firma. (Vitr. 2.8.19); Temporibusque Augusti dicendis
non defuere decora ingenia . . . (Tac. Ann. 1.1.2); Nec ad invidiam ista, sed concilian-
dae misericordiae refero. (Tac. Ann. 2.37.4—NB: coordination with the ad
phrase); . . . aliquid cibatus refovendo spiritu desidero. (Apul. Met. 1.18.7); Proinde
aurum, aes, argentum, ebur, lignum et quaecumque fabricandis idolis materia capia-
tur, quis in saeculo posuit nisi saeculi auctor Deus? (Tert. Spect. 2.9); (sc. Zenobia) . . . ut
ne virum suum quidem scierit nisi temptandis (cj. Cornelissen, temptatis P) concep-
tionibus. (Hist. Aug. trig. tyr. 30.12); (sc. Zenobia) . . . iterum potestatem quaerendis
liberis dabat. (Hist. Aug. trig. tyr. 30.12); Et quia nec arietibus admovendis nec ad
intentandas machinas vel, ut possint forari cuniculi, inveniebatur locus usquam habi-
lis disparatione brevi civitatem Natisone amni praeterlabente, commentum excogi-
tatum est cum veteribus admirandum. (Amm. 21.12.8—NB: parallelism)
NB: with the verb esse: Poenam illorum sibi oneri, inpunitatem perdundae rei pub-
licae fore credebat. (Sal. Cat. 46.2); . . . ea modo quae restinguendo igni forent por-
tantes in agmen Romanum ruebant. (Liv. 30.6.3)
Ablative: Iam qui ad muros differenda morte properaverant aut fossas cadaveribus
aequabant aut . . . (Paneg. 2.34.3)
Prepositional phrases (in alphabetical order by preposition): Hic in noxa’st. Ille ad
defendundam causam adest. (Ter. Ph. 266); Cum ad rem publicam liberandam
accessi . . . (Cic. Fam. 11.10.5); Magnam haec res Caesari difficultatem ad consilium
capiendum adferebat . . . (Caes. Gal. 7.10.1); Dimisso conventu decem legati . . . ad libe-
randas suae quisque regionis civitates discesserunt . . . (Liv. 33.35.1); Carcer enim ad
continendos homines, non ad puniendos haberi debet (Ulp. dig. 48.19.8.9); . . . si
arborum trunci sive trabes deiciendi operis causa essent a barbaris missae . . . (Caes.
Gal. 4.17.10—NB: causa is omitted in one part of the manuscript tradition); Qui
accepto oraculo carendi furoris causa . . . (Hyg. Fab. 261); Ex hoc tanto numero
310 Eden (1962: 92) considers causa ‘a quite usual instance of trivialization’.
416 Subordinate clauses filling a satellite position
deductus est nemo, et cum illam pecuniam nominatim Flacco datam referant,
maiorem aliam cum huic eidem darent in aedem sacram reficiendam se perscrip-
sisse dicunt, quod minime convenit. (Cic. Flac. 44); Qui in navem exstruendam
vel instruendam credidit vel etiam emendam . . . (Paul. dig. 42.5.26); Praeterea ad
Troiam cum misi ob defendendam Graeciam . . . (Enn. scen. 313V—see Jocelyn
p. 394); . . . eadem precor ab isdem dis immortalibus ob eiusdem hominis consula-
tum una cum salute obtinendum, et ut vestrae mentes atque sententiae cum populi
Romani voluntatibus suffragiisque consentiant eaque res vobis populoque Romano
pacem tranquillitatem otium concordiamque adferat. (Cic. Mur. 1—NB: parallelism
with ut clause); Ac primo mediocria gerebat, existumans Iugurtham ob suos tutandos
in manus venturum. (Sal. Jug. 89.2); Cum L. Papirius Cursor dictator reversus in
urbem ab exercitu esset propter auspicia repetenda, Q. Fabius, magister equitum,
occasione bene gerendae rei invitatus, contra edictum eius prospere adversus
Samnites pugnavit. (Liv. Per. 8); . . . propter terrendos miseros viatores in summo
atque edito sarcinarum cumulo ad instar exercitus sedulo composuerat. (Apul. Met.
10.1.2)
In (very) Late Latin bare accusative gerundival clauses occur as purpose adjuncts (in
place of prepositional expressions with ad), especially with verbs of movement. The
same occurs with gerundial clauses (see § 16.100). The earliest instance, which is
dubious, is (f).311
(f) Probabili argumento firmandam fidem (<ad> firmandam edd.) reperto . . .
(‘Having invented a plausible means for strengthening his confidence . . .’ Amm.
15.5.21)
Supplement:
. . . iste homo Dei, qui a Deo obiurgandum Hieroboam regem fuerit missus . . . (Lucif.
Cal. Non Conv. 3)
311 More instances, mainly from Fredegar, can be found in Odelstierna (1926: 32–42).
Gerundival clauses 417
(b) Qui partis honoribus eosdem in foro gessi labores quos petendis.
(‘(I,) who, after my honours have been won, have spent the same labour in the forum
as when I was seeking them.’ Cic. Phil. 6.17)
Supplement:
Nisi patrem materno sanguine exanclando ulciscerem . . . (Enn. scen. 147V=144J);
Aggerundaque aqua sunt viri duo defessi. (Pl. Poen. 224); Iane pater, te hac strue
ommovenda bonas preces precor, uti sies volens propitius mihi . . . (Cato Agr. 134.2);
Ancillas, servos, nisi eos qui opere rustico / faciundo facile sumptum exsercirent
suom, / omnis produxi ac vendidi. (Ter. Hau. 142–4); . . . ne dicendis sententiis
aliquem tribunum alienarem. (Cic. Att. 7.4.2); Qua cum ipsi Caesari nihil esset
utilius, gratiam quoque nos inire ab eo defendenda pace arbitrabamur. (Cic. Fam.
4.2.3); . . . tractandis condicionibus et simulatione deditionis extracto primo noctis
tempore . . . (Caes. Civ. 3.28.5); Tam felix vobis corrumpendis fuit, qui servitia non
commovit auctor? (Liv. 3.17.2); L. Trebonius . . . insectandis . . . patribus, unde Aspero
etiam inditum est cognomen, tribunatum gessit. (Liv. 3.65.3–4); Reliquum diei expe-
diendis armis et curatione corporum consumptum, et maior pars noctis quieti data
est. (Liv. 25.38.23—NB: coordination with a noun phrase); Inopiae quoque abietis
aut sappinorum vitabuntur utendo cupresso . . . (Vitr. 1.2.8); Omnibus quidem virtu-
tum generibus exercendis colendisque populus Romanus e parva origine ad tantae
amplitudinis instar emicuit . . . (Gel. 20.1.39)
Prepositional phrase: Efficeretur per exceptionem mihi opponendam . . . (Paul. dig.
2.14.27.5)
However, there are also instances in which the agent and the subject are not identical,
as in (c), and instances in which the state of affairs of the main clause is [–control], as
in (d). In such cases the semantic relationship between the gerundival and the matrix
clause is more difficult to describe. (See also § 16.101 on gerundial satellite clauses
with these semantic functions and § 5.37 on the voice value of the gerundive.)
(c) . . . <cum multitudo> . . . plausum meo nomine recitando dedisset, habui con-
tionem.
(‘. . . when the people had applauded at the reading out of my name, I addressed them.’
Cic. Att. 4.1.6)
(d) . . . Antonius coniectura movenda aut sedanda suspicione aut excitanda
incredibilem vim habebat . . .
(‘. . . Antonius possessed incredible skill in creating a presumption of probability, in
allaying or in provoking a suspicion . . .’ Cic. Brut. 144)
Supplement:
Ita te aggerunda curvom aqua faciam probe, / ut postilena possit ex te fieri. (Pl. Cas.
124–5); At puer Ascanius . . . triginta magnos volvendis mensibus orbis / imperio
explebit . . . (Verg. A. 1.267–70); . . . ut contra eo violentior potestas tribunicia inpedi-
endo dilectu esset . . . (Liv. 6.31.4); Prolatandis igitur comitiis cum dictator magistratu
abisset, res ad interregnum rediit. (Liv. 7.21.2); Rem per se popularem ita dextere
egit, ut medendis corporibus animi multo prius militum imperatori reconciliaren-
tur . . . (Liv. 8.36.7); Nam fruendis voluptatibus crescit carendi dolor. (Plin. Ep. 8.5.2)
418 Subordinate clauses filling a satellite position
Sometimes the semantic relationship is made explicit (see § 16.89 for this phenom-
enon in participial clauses) by the presence of a subordinator or an adverb, which
enables a wider range of semantic relations between the gerundival and matrix clauses.
Supplement:
Quam ob rem eas manibus ipsis agricolarum ingessit vertique iussit ipsa die folia et
esse confecti sideris signum, nec silvestrium arborum remotarumque, ut in saltus
devios montesque eundum esset quaerentibus signa, non rursus urbanarum quaeque
topiario tantum coluntur, quamquam his et in villa visendis. (Plin. Nat. 18.265—NB:
the clause seems to indicate a possibility); . . . pars Philippopolim exindeque Serdicam,
alia Macedoniam cum intemeratis opibus, quas vehebant, omni studio properandum
(<ad> properandum add. Lindenborg) excogitato currebant velut in regionibus illis
repperiendo Valente. (Amm. 31.16.2)
The gerundive developed into a form of future passive participle in Late Latin (see
§ 7.84). There are a few instances in Ammianus Marcellinus of a gerundival satellite in
which the gerundive is used in this way.
Supplement:
Pauca itaque super benevolo omnium flumine Nilo, quem Aegyptum Homerus
appellat, praestringi conveniet mox ostendendis aliis, quae sunt in his regionibus
admiranda. (Amm. 22.15.3); At in Galliis fervorum tenore gliscente diffusis per nos-
tra Germanis iamque Alpibus ad vastandam Italiam perrumpendis nihil multa et
nefanda perpessis hominibus praeter lacrimas supererat . . . (Amm. 25.4.25); Sex
milium enim annorum in sex diebus tempus ostenditur, quo circa mundum est ober-
ratum et quodam generationum circulo circumcursatum, eodem ipso mundo ad
tubae vocem in tempore septimo millesimo resolvendo, sola ecclesia . . . reservanda.
(Hil. Myst. 2.10)
Clear-cut instances of bare case temporal gerundival clauses do not exist. There are a
few which may be labelled ‘circumstantial’. In any case, the distinction between these
instances and those in the preceding section is vague. Prepositional expressions (espe-
cially with in ‘at’) are not uncommon.
(a) . . . labores qui sint re publica (<in> re p. add. Schuetz) defendenda sus-
tinendi . . .
(‘. . . the labours that must be performed in the defence of the state . . .’ Cic. Rep. 1.4)
(b) . . . quod · in · incendio / restinguendo · interi<t>.
(‘. . . because he died while trying to put out a fire.’ CIL XIV.4494.6–7 (Ostia, time of
Augustus))
Supplement:
Ablative: Accitus, sicut Romulus augurato urbe condenda regnum adeptus est, de se
quoque deos consuli iussit. (Liv. 1.18.6); Ipse cum peditum agmine castris egreditur,
Gerundival clauses 419
nec ex ordine solito quicquam acie instruenda (<in> acie instruenda edd., but see
Weissenborn ad loc.) mutat. (Liv. 28.14.11)
Prepositional phrase (in alphabetical order by preposition): . . . ante conditam
condendamve urbem . . . (Liv. praef. 6); Nam in prologis scribundis operam abuti-
tur . . . (Ter. An. 5); Magnum crimen vel in legatis insidiandis vel in servis ad hos-
pitem domini necandum sollicitandis, plenum sceleris consilium, plenum audaciae!
(Cic. Cael. 51); Sic in interpretando, in definiendo, in explicanda aequitate nihil
erat Crasso copiosius. (Cic. Brut. 144); Principia autem in sententiis dicendis brevia
esse debebunt. (Cic. Part. 97); Sed ego nulla in re malo quam in te amando constans
et esse et videri. (Cic. ad Brut. 1.15.13); . . . rei publicae, quae te in me restituendo
multum adiuvisset . . . (Cic. Fam. 1.9.4); Ex victoribus ducenti triginta septem milites
perierunt, plures in matutina fuga quam in recipiendis castris. (Liv. 41.4.8—NB:
coordination with a prepositional phrase); . . . et in versu faciendo / saepe caput sca-
beret . . . (Hor. S. 1.10.70–1); Puer ipse quem vult sequatur, ut sit illi saltem in eli-
gendo fratre [salva] libertas. (Petr. 80.5); Sed inter rem agendam istam erae huic
respondi quod rogabat. (Pl. Cist. 721); . . . et ille inter aurum accipiendum et in spem
pacis solutis animis Gallos adgressus sit . . . (Liv. 6.11.5); Comitiali quoque morbo bis
inter res agendas correptus est. (Suet. Jul. 45.1)
There are a few gerundival reason clauses, with ob and propter. It is not easy to distin-
guish them from purpose expressions (see § 16.106).
(a) Si erunt plures qui ob innocentem condemnandum pecuniam acceperint . . .
(‘Should there be several who have taken a bribe to condemn an innocent man . . .’
Cic. Clu. 129)
Supplement:
Ergo ut omittam tuos peculatus, ut ob ius dicendum pecunias acceptas, ut eiusmodi
cetera quae forsitan alii quoque etiam fecerint, illud in quo te gravissime accusavi,
quod ob iudicandam rem pecuniam accepisses, eadem ista ratione defendes, fecisse
alios? (Cic. Ver. 3.206); Propter litem inofficiosi testamenti ordinandam exheredato
filio . . . (Papin. dig. 26.2.26.2)
There are very few gerundival clauses that function as a respect adjunct. The gerund-
ive in (a) finds support in the use of an ablative noun with melior ‘better’ in Virgil (see
§ 11.92, Supplement).
(a) Ipse pugnae avidus et contemnendis quam cavendis hostibus melior . . .
(‘Himself eager for battle and better in despising than in guarding against enemies . . .’
Tac. Hist. 4.71.1)
420 Subordinate clauses filling a satellite position
Supplement:
. . . qualis excipiendo hoste, quam resistenti vehemens, quam facilis supplicanti.
(Paneg. 4.37.2)
Gerundival clauses are used in various other semantic functions, depending on the
meaning of the prepositions involved. Examples are (b) and (c).
(b) Qui de amittenda Bacchide aurum hic exiget.
(‘Who’ll demand money here for letting Bacchis go.’ Pl. Bac. 223)
(c) Consiliis tuis quae scribis de quattuor legionibus deque agris adsignandis ab
utroque vestrum vehementer adsentior.
(‘I emphatically agree with your advice in what you write about the four legions and
the assignment of lands by the two of you.’ Cic. Fam. 11.21.5—NB: explicit agent)
Supplement (in alphabetical order by preposition; arguments in italics):
Fuit (sc. Tubero) autem patricius et transit a causis agendis ad ius civile . . . (Pompon.
dig. 1.2.2.46); Atque hoc etiam Plato ibidem dicit non defugiendas esse neque
respuendas huiuscemodi exercitationes adversum propulsandam vini violen-
tiam . . . (Gel. 15.2.6); Inde illa veterum circa occultandam eloquentiam simulatio,
multum ab hac nostrorum temporum iactatione diversa. (Quint. Inst. 4.1.9); Circa
conlocandos quoque calices observari oportet ut ad lineam ordinentur . . . (Fron. Aq.
113.1); A. d. XIII Kal. Ian. senatus [aut] frequens mihi est adsensus cum de ceteris
rebus magnis et necessariis tum de provinciis ab iis qui obtinerent retinendis neque
cuiquam tradendis nisi qui ex senatus consulto successisset. (Cic. Fam. 12.22a.1—
NB: explicit agent); Alterum quod sine edicto satis commode transigi non potest, de
hereditatum possessionibus, de bonis possidendis, magistris faciendis, <bonis>
vendendis, quae ex edicto et postulari et fieri solent. (Cic. Att. 6.1.15—NB: coordin-
ation with abstract noun); De mercennariis testibus a suis civitatibus notandis,
nisi iam factum aliquid est per Flaccum, fiet a me cum per Asiam decedam. (Cic.
Fam. 3.11.3—NB: explicit agent); (sc. fama) erga haec explicanda, quae Romae
sunt, obsolescit . . . (Amm. 16.10.17); Leno te argentum poscit, solida servitus, /
pro liberanda amica . . . (Pl. Per. 425–6); Quod divo Marco pro libertatibus con-
servandis placuit . . . (Papin. dig. 40.4.50 pr.); Quae autem in testamento diximus
super prohibendis testimoniis . . . (Ulp. dig. 28.1.20.3); . . . missurum ad impera-
torem Romanum legatos super petenda Armenia et firmanda pace respondet . . .
(Tac. Ann. 15.5.4)
idiomatic expressions by the time of Cicero, but were to some extent revitalized in
poetry and literary prose, sometimes beyond the structural properties we know from
Early Latin. They did not survive in the Romance languages.
. The use of the first supine (in -um) as a purpose adjunct
The first supine (in -um) is found with one- or two-place verbs of movement (e.g. eo
‘to go’, venio ‘to come’, and mitto ‘to send’) and with verbs implying movement (e.g.
voco ‘to call’, do ‘to give’) to express the purpose of that action. By far the most com-
mon verb with which the first supine occurs is eo, both when physical movement is
involved, as in (a), and in a more abstract sense, as in (b). It is in the latter sense that
it is also used as a substitute for the future passive infinitive, as in (c) (further details
in § 7.72). The first supine, usually regarded as an accusative form (see § 3.21), is
sometimes explained as the goal of the movement, indicating ‘whither’, but the pres-
ence of two explicit goal constituents in (a) (huc and ad vicinam) shows that questum,
whatever its prehistory, is not a goal constituent (see also the first note below). The
subject of eo is animate, mostly human (with a very few Late exceptions).312 The sec-
ond and third argument of the supine can be expressed, like erum in (f). Satellites are
almost unattested except after the Classical authors. The supine in -um is relatively
common in Early Latin in a restricted number of combinations (partly due to the fact
that there is much coming and going in Latin comedy), but it gradually loses ground
to competing purpose expressions, especially the active infinitive and gerundi(v)al
clauses. However, poets and historians use it in varying degrees, expanding its clausal
possibilities. It is relatively popular in the archaizing authors Apuleius and Gellius.313
(a) Nunc huc meas fortunas eo questum ad vicinam.
(‘Now I’m going here to my neighbour to complain about my misfortunes.’ Pl.
Cas. 162)
(b) Mox hercle vero post transactam fabulam, / argentum si quis dederit, ut ego
suspicor, / ultro ibit nuptum, non manebit auspices.
(‘But soon, after the play has reached its end, I suspect if anyone gives her money
she’ll marry him willingly and won’t wait for the augurs.’ Pl. Cas. 84–6)
(c) . . . nisi se sciat vilico non datum iri.
(‘. . . unless she knows she won’t be given to the overseer.’ Pl. Cas. 699)
(d) Inde partem equitatus atque ferentarios praedatum misit.
(‘Then he sent out part of the cavalry and the light troops to go looting.’ Cato Mil. 6(J))
(e) . . . quo me in silvam venatum vocas?
(‘. . . where are you calling me to hunt in the woods?’ Pl. Men. 835)
(f) Tune es qui hau multo prius / abiisti hinc erum accersitum?
(‘Aren’t you the one who went away a little earlier to fetch his master?’ Pl. Rud. 1055–6)
Supplement:
Eam ero nunc renuntiatum est nuptum huic Megadoro dari. (Pl. Aul. 604); Vos in
aram abite sessum. (Pl. Rud. 707); Libii qui aquatum ut lignatum videntur ire
securim atque lorum ferunt . . . (Cato hist. 33=30C); Siquando illa dicet ‘Phaedriam /
intro mittamu’ comissatum’, Pamphilam / cantatum provocemu’. (Ter. Eu.
441–3); . . . illud videndum, ut satis sit verecundi etiam illam in eandem arenam
vocare pugnatum. (Var. L. 10.2.19); . . . et unde hospites atque amici gratulatum
Romam concurrerent repente exsistet ipse nuntius suae calamitatis! (Cic. Mur.
89); . . . senatoribus singulis spectatum e senatu redeuntibus. (Cic. Sest. 117); . . . tamen
quid potius faciam prius quam me dormitum conferam, non reperio. (Cic. Fam.
9.26.1); Proximo die praesidio in castris relicto universas ad aquam copias educunt.
Pabulatum emittitur nemo. (Caes. Civ. 1.81.5); . . . sororem ex matre et propinquas
suas nuptum in alias civitates collocasse. (Caes. Gal. 1.18.7); Bello Helvetiorum
confecto totius fere Galliae legati principes civitatum ad Caesarem gratulatum con-
venerunt. (Caes. Gal. 1.30.1); Remiges interim qui aquatum e navibus exierant . . .
(B. Afr. 7.5); Ipse in finitima regione Persidis hiematum copias divisit . . . (Nep. Eum.
8.1—NB: movement implied); Inde frumentatum duas exercitus partes mittebat.
(Liv. 22.23.9); Cum sole eunt cubitum (sc. galli gallinacei) . . . (Plin. Nat. 10.46);
Praeponam enim unum ex libertis sepulcro meo custodiae causa, ne in monumen-
tum meum populus cacatum currat. (Petr. 71.8 (Trimalchio speaking)); . . . omnem
viciniam suppetiatum convocans . . . (Apul. Met. 7.7.2); . . . abeunt libidinatum ad
filias Moab . . . (Tert. Scorp. 3.4)
With arguments (and satellites) expressed (in italics and bold italics, respect-
ively): . . . nunc venis etiam ultro irrisum dominum. (Pl. Am. 587); Quid ego <de te
d>emerui, adulescens, mali, / quam ob rem ita faceres meque meosque perditum ires
liberos? (Pl. Aul. 735–6); . . . qui magis potueritis mi honorem ire habitum . . . (Pl. Cist.
4); Iam hercle ego per hortum ad amicam transibo meam / mi hanc occupatum
noctem. (Pl. St. 437–8); . . . tum venias. # Vae aetati tuae! / # Vasa lautum non ad
cenam dico. (Pl. St. 594–5); Ego . . . / prosilui amicum castigatum innoxium (Pl. Trin.
215–16); Atque equidem ipsus ultro venit Philto oratum filio. (Pl. Trin. 611); Alii di
isse ad villam aiebant servis depromptum cibum. (Pl. Trin. 944); . . . missa’st ancilla
ilico / obstetricem accersitum ad eam et puerum ut adferret simul. (Ter. An. 514–15—
NB: coordination with purpose ut clause); Idque adeo venio nuntiatum, Demipho, /
paratum me esse. (Ter. Ph. 906–7); Quid tum? ‘Inde ibi ego te ex iure manum conser-
tum voco’. (Cic. Mur. 26); Etsi admonitum venimus te, non flagitatum. (Cic. de Orat.
3.17); Quo ex oppido cum legati ad eum venissent oratum, ut sibi ignosceret suaeque
vitae consuleret . . . obsides dari iubet. (Caes. Gal. 7.12.3); . . . Nectenebin adiutum pro-
fectus regnum ei constituit. (Nep. Cha. 2.1); Nupta tu quoque quae tuus / vir petet
cave ne neges / ni petitum aliunde eat. (Catul. 61.151–3); . . . licentiam in vos auctum
atque adiutum properatis. Neque ego vos ultum iniurias hortor . . . (Sal. Hist. 3.48.
16–17—NB: remarkable use of hortor); Tamen interim transfugas et alios opportunos,
Iugurtha ubi gentium aut quid agitaret, cum paucisne esset an exercitum haberet, ut sese
victus gereret, exploratum misit (sc. Metellus). (Sal. Jug. 54.2); Si fortuna permittitis uti
/ quaesitum Aenean et moenia Pallantea, . . . (Verg. A. 9.240–1—NB: quaesitum is
Supine clauses 423
taken as a supine from Antiquity onwards, but it is very odd in its context; see Dingel
ad loc., who suggests it is a perfect passive participle); Hic sponsum vocat, hic audi-
tum scripta . . . (Hor. Ep. 2.2.67); . . . atque in me veniat mictum atque cacatum / Iulius
et fragilis Pediatia furque Voranus. (Hor. S. 1.8.38–9); In ea castra Q. Fabius,
P. Volumnius, A. Postumius legati ab Roma venerunt questum iniurias et ex foedere
res repetitum. (Liv. 3.25.6); . . . eamque iniuriam excidio ipsius ultum iturum. (Tac.
Ann. 12.45.1); Tradunt plerique eorum temporum scriptores crebris ante exitium
diebus inlusum isse pueritia<e> Britannici Neronem . . . (Tac. Ann. 13.17.2); . . . quin
omni sententiarum via servatum ire socios niteretur. (Gel. 6.3.44); Corvus et vulpis
unam offulam simul viderant eamque raptum festinabant . . . (Apul. Soc. Prol. 4)314
There is one instance of a supine in an answer to a question with quo ‘whither’, clearly
a joke:
(g) Quo nunc ibas? # Exulatum.
(‘Where were you going just now? # Into exile.’ Pl. Mer. 884)
There are a number of idiomatic expressions consisting of supine (-like) forms like
pessum and venum in combination with verbs like eo and do, which occur with actual
supines as well. Another idiom is herctum cieo. (See also § 10.8.)
The so-called second supine construction is found from Early Latin onwards. It is
not very frequent (some 600 instances reported); a large number of the supine forms
come from a limited number of verbs with a fairly general meaning, such as factu,
auditu, dictu. The regular construction consists of a combination of an adjective and
a second supine form which can function as subject or object complement at the
clause level, as in (a), where facilia factu is the subject complement in the passive
clause with facta haec sunt, or as an attribute at the noun phrase level, as in (b)—
repeated from § 3.21. In (c), factu optumum is combined with the copula.315
(a) . . . quorum opera mihi facilia factu facta haec sunt quae volui effieri.
(‘. . . through your hard work the things I wanted done became easy for me to do.’ Pl.
Per. 761)
(b) Bonam atque iustam rem oppido imperas et factu facilem.
(‘That’s an absolutely fine and reasonable suggestion—and easy enough to carry out.’
Ter. Hau. 704)
(c) Nunc hoc mihi factu est optumum, ut ted auferam, / aula, in Fidei fanum.
(‘Now this is the best thing for me to do, my pot: to carry you off into the shrine of
Good Faith.’ Pl. Aul. 582–3)
In the above examples factu might be omitted without making the remaining expres-
sion ungrammatical or meaningless. The situation is different in (d) and (e).
(d) Virtus difficilis inventu est, rectorem ducemque desiderat.
(‘Virtue is difficult to find; it needs a director and guide.’ Sen. Nat. 3.30.8)
(e) In his igitur rebus cum bona sint, facile est intellectu quae sint contraria.
(‘As then there are good things in these departments, it is easy to understand what
things are the opposite of good.’ Cic. Part. 88)
In (d), inventu seems to be optional: virtus difficilis est is syntactically correct. However,
semantically, virtus is the patient of inventu. An alternative, more or less synonymous,
formulation would be: difficile est virtutem invenire ‘it is difficult to find virtue’, where
virtutem is the object of the infinitive invenire and the combination virtutem invenire
the subject of difficile est. In (e), the indirect question quae sint contraria is the subject
of facile est intellectu. Unlike in (d), leaving out intellectu would not result in a seman-
tically and syntactically acceptable formulation. Semantically, the indirect question is
the patient of intellectu. An alternative formulation would be facile est intellegere, with
a present infinitive instead of the supine. In that case the infinitive would be the sub-
ject of facile est and quae sint contraria the object of intellegere. On the basis of
instances like (d) and (e) the subjects in (a) and (c) can also be interpreted as seman-
tically related to factu. An analogous explanation can be given for rem in (b).
At the clause level various types of constituents may function as subject. In (a), it is
the autonomous relative clause haec . . . quae volui effieri; in (c), an ut clause with a
preparative pronoun hoc; in (e), an indirect question; accusative and infinitive clauses
are also not uncommon. These clauses more often follow the supine. For a noun, see
virtus in (d). The subject is rarely a human being or concrete entity.
The adjectives with which the second supine is used are evaluative, indicating the
feasibility or easiness of performing a certain action or the moral or physical quality
of the entity involved in such an action. Most of the adjectives involved are one-place,
as in (f) and (g). Noteworthy exceptions are dignus ‘worthy’ and indignus ‘unworthy’,
which govern an ablative, as in (h) (see § 4.101). Some adjectives with which the
supine is used also occur with dative arguments, for example, iucundus ‘pleasant’ (see
§ 4.100). See also facilis in (l) with a dative and a supine.
(f) Estne hoc miserum memoratu?
(‘Isn’t this a sorry tale?’ Pl. Cist. 229)
(g) . . . incredibile memoratu est quam facile coaluerint.
(‘. . . it is unbelievable to relate how easily they merged.’ Sal. Cat. 6.2)
(h) . . . nihil dignum memoratu actum.
(‘. . . nothing worthy of relation was accomplished.’ Liv. 4.43.2)
(i) Aut (sc. quid est) tam iucundum cognitu atque auditu quam sapientibus
sententiis gravibusque verbis ornata oratio et polita?
(‘Or what is so pleasing to the understanding and the ear as a speech adorned and
polished with wise reflections and dignified language?’ Cic. de Orat. 1.29)
Supine clauses 425
As to the supine forms that are used, authors like Cicero and Livy, who have many
instances of the second supine (due to the size of the preserved corpus), on average
use each supine form about four times. The supine has limited verbal properties:
satellites, as Latino sermone in (j), or argumentlike constituents, as in (k) and (l), are
very rare. Many instances are parenthetical, as is the well-known Virgilian expression
in (m).
(j) Ex his (sc. oppidis) digna memoratu aut Latino sermone dictu facilia, a flumine
Ana litore Oceani oppidum Ossonoba . . .
(‘Worthy of mention in this district, or easy to say in Latin, are: on the ocean coast
beginning at the river Guadiana, the town Ossonoba . . .’ Plin. Nat. 3.7)
(k) Quod scire vis qua quisque in te fide sit et voluntate, difficile dictu est de
singulis.
(‘As to your desire to know how this person and that has behaved and felt towards
you, it is difficult to speak of individuals.’ Cic. Fam. 1.7.2)
(l) Sed ea cuncta Romanis ex tenebris et editioribus locis facilia visu magnoque
hortamento erant.
(‘Now, all this was easy to see for the Romans from their higher position in the
darkness and encouraged them greatly.’ Sal. Jug. 98.7)
(m) Infert se saeptus nebula (mirabile dictu) / per medios miscetque viris, neque
cernitur ulli.
(‘Veiled in a cloud, he enters—wondrous to tell—through their midst, and mingles
with the people, seen by none.’ Verg. A. 1.439–40)
Supplement:
Clause level: Ita ridicula auditu iteratu ea (sc. facta) sunt, quae ego intus turbavi. (Pl.
Cas. 880); Simul flare sorbereque hau factu facile est. (Pl. Mos. 791); . . . difficile est
hoc genus exornationis inventu . . . (Rhet. Her. 4.39); Difficile est dictu, Quirites,
quanto in odio simus apud exteras nationes . . . (Cic. Man. 65); Nec hoc tam re est
quam dictu inopinatum atque mirabile. (Cic. Parad. 35—NB: parallelism); Incredibile
dictu est quam multi Graeci de harum valvarum pulchritudine scriptum reliquerint.
(Cic. Ver. 4.124); . . . nascenti cui tris animas Feronia mater / —horrendum dictu—
dederat . . . (Verg. A. 8.564–5); Sapiens, vitatu quidque petitu / sit melius, causas red-
det tibi. (Hor. S. 1.4.115–16); Id dictu quam re, ut pleraque, facilius erat. (Liv.
31.38.3—NB: parallelism); Ista dabunt formam, sed erunt deformia visu, / multaque,
dum fiunt, turpia, facta placent. (Ov. Ars 3.217–18); Nec proinde diiudicari potest
quid optimum factu fuerit quam pessimum fuisse quod factum est. (Tac. Hist. 2.39.2);
Tum magister comperto, quamobrem malum desideraret, non, uti iussus erat,
maiorem, sed quem esse magis idoneum aptioremque faciendo arieti facilioremque
portatu existimabat, minorem misit. (Gel. 1.13.12—NB: parallel gerundival clause);
Est enim paene supra humanum modum ne in cogitationem quidem admittere quod
sit vel factu malum vel inprobum dictu. (Lact. Inst. 6.13.8); . . . si quod inpossibile
nobis est factu, illi possibile atque ad modum obsecutionis paratum? (Arn. 2.35)
Noun phrase level: Tanta factu modo mira miris modis / intus vidi . . . (Pl. Cas.
625–6—NB: mira used substantivally); . . . hasce herbas huius modi in suom alvom
426 Subordinate clauses filling a satellite position
congerunt / formidulosas dictu, non esu modo. (Pl. Ps. 823–4); . . . quam levia genere
ipso, quam falsa re, quam brevia responsu! (Cic. Clu. 164—NB: parallelism); O rem
non modo visu foedam sed etiam auditu! (Cic. Phil. 2.63); O rem cum auditu
crudelem, tum visu nefariam! (Cic. Planc. 99); . . . cum paucis amicis et quaestore
nostro quasi obvius honoris causa procedit in tumulum facillumum visu insidianti-
bus. (Sal. Jug. 113.5); Ipse arduus altaque pulsat / sidera (di talem terris avertite pes-
tem!) / nec visu facilis nec dictu affabilis ulli. (Verg. A. 3.619–21); Sed si vera potius
quam dictu speciosa dicenda sunt, cupido imperii duos cognatos vicinosque populos
ad arma stimulat. (Liv. 1.23.7); . . . eximuntur grana piperis magnitudine, candida,
dulcia, facilia purgatu. (Plin. Nat. 27.95); Quaedam pudenda dictu tanta auctorum
adseveratione commendantur, ut praeterire fas non sit . . . (Plin. Nat. 29.61); Nescio quid
visu dubium incertumque moveri / corporaque ire videt. (Stat. Theb. 10.391–2); . . .
lagoena iuxta orificio caesim deasceato patescens facilis (facili cj. Luetjohann)
<h>auritu . . . (Apul. Met. 2.15.6)
The second supine can be used with the nouns fas and nefas in combination with the
verb sum ‘it is (not) permissible’, which has more or less the same meaning as the
adjectives mentioned above. In (n), an accusative and infinitive clause functions as
the subject; in (o), hoc. From the combination with gerundive forms like horrendus
‘terrible’ and pudendus ‘shameful’ the step to the combination of a finite verb form
with a supine seems to have been made by Tacitus in (p). There are a few continu-
ations of both constructions in Late Latin.
(n) Quia profecto videtis nefas esse dictu miseram fuisse talem senectutem.
(‘Because you surely realize now that it would be monstrous to call unhappy such an
old age as his.’ Cic. Sen. 13)
(o) Humanus . . . animus . . . cum alio nullo nisi cum ipso deo, si hoc fas est dictu,
comparari potest.
(‘The human mind . . . can be compared with nothing else, if it is right to say so, save
God alone.’ Cic. Tusc. 5.38)
(p) . . . nisi si Gallos et Germanos et—pudet dictu—Britannorum plerosque . . .
fide et adfectu teneri putatis.
(‘. . . unless you suppose that Gauls and Germans, and even—to their shame be it
spoken—many of the tribes of Britain . . . are attached to Rome by loyalty and liking.’
Tac. Agr. 32.1)
The second supine was clearly in decline in the Classical and Silver Latin periods. It is
absent from Petronius. The archaists Apuleius and Gellius have it relatively often.
Among the ecclesiastical authors Arnobius uses it often, Tertullian not at all.
Alternative expressions were gerundial and gerundival clauses (see §§ 17.32–3) and
the passive infinitive—especially in poetry—(see § 17.29).
It is sometimes difficult to make a distinction between a second supine and the abla-
tive form of a deverbal noun in -us functioning as respect adjunct (see § 10.91 and
§ 11.92), but sometimes the semantics helps, as in (q) and (r). Note in (r) and (s) the
parallelism with the other adjective phrases.
Nominal (verbless) satellite clauses 427
Nominal ablative absolute clauses consist of a noun (phrase) or pronoun that forms
the subject of the clause and a subject complement (see § 14.14). This complement can
be a noun or an adjective (very rarely a pronoun); accordingly, a distinction is made
between substantival and adjectival ablative absolute clauses.
316 Some scholars take habitus as a noun. For discussion, see Petersmann (ad loc.).
317 Sihler (1995: 613), Meiser (1998: 225), and Fruyt (2019a: 197) take it as a dative.
428 Subordinate clauses filling a satellite position
Expressions of the type consulatu Xgenitive or post consulatu Xgenitive become more fre-
quent from the mid fourth century ad onwards (examples are Amm. 20.1.1 and CIL
X.4712 (Cales, ad 306), resp.). Inscriptional material in Ruggiero (1956: II.709).
These nominal ablative absolute clauses are almost always non-complex. The range of
their semantic relations with their main clauses is smaller than that of participial
clauses (see § 16.89). Most of them are adjuncts, but there are also disjuncts, for
example with auctor ‘initiator’ and testis ‘witness’, as in (e) and (f).
(e) Potestne virtus, Crasse, servire istis auctoribus . . .
(‘Can Virtue be a slave, Crassus, according to those authorities of yours . . .’ Cic. de
Orat. 1.226)
(f) XV p. in longitudinem quas diximus fauces Oceani patent, V in latitudinem,
a vico Mellaria Hispaniae ad promunturium Africae Album, auctore Turranio
Gracile iuxta genito.
318 A list of nouns used in substantival ablative absolute clauses can be found in Flinck-Linkomies
(1929: 262–3). For information about the frequency with which they are used in Plautus and in Cicero’s
orations and philosophical works, see Flinck-Linkomies (1929: 72; 130–1, respectively).
319 Especially in Cicero’s orations and letters (Flinck-Linkomies 1929: 130–1).
Nominal (verbless) satellite clauses 429
(‘The ocean straits mentioned are fifteen miles long and five miles broad, from the
village of Mellaria in Spain to the White Cape in Africa, as given by Turranius
Gracilis, a native of the neighbourhood.’ Plin. Nat. 3.3)320
Supplement:
Atqui aut hoc emptore vendes pulchre aut alio non potis. (Pl. Per. 580); Impetrabit
te advocato atque arbitro. (Pl. Trin. 1161); Nam me puero venter erat . . . (Pl. ap.
Gel. 3.3.5); C. Licinio praetore remiges scribti cives Romani sub portisculum, sub
flagrum conscribti veniere passim. (Cato Orat. 190); ager publicus populi
Romanei quei in italia P(ublio) Mucio L(ucio) Calpurnio co(n)s(ulibus)
fuit, eius agri . . . (CIL I2.585.15 (Lex Agr., 111 bc)); <cur(atore)> viar(um) · T. ·
Vibio · . . . (CIL I2.808.6 (Rome, c.80 bc)); Et quidem licet adicias, inquam, pastorum
vitam esse incentivam, agricolarum succentivam, auctore doctissimo homine
Dicaearcho . . . (Var. R. 1.2.16); . . . L. Considio Sex. Saltio, quem ad modum ipsi
loquebantur, ‘praetoribus’ . . . (Cic. Agr. 2.92); Rectissime, et quidem ista (sc. natura)
duce errari nullo pacto potest. (Cic. Leg. 1.20); Est enim ius iurandum affirmatio
religiosa. Quod autem affirmate et quasi deo teste promiseris id tenendum est. (Cic.
Off. 3.104); . . . tenent nihilo minus illis mortuis senatus alteram partem, dissidentem
a vobis auctore Metello et P. Mucio . . . (Cic. Rep. 1.31); Omnia summa consecutus es
virtute duce, comite Fortuna . . . (Cic. Fam. 10.3.2); Postremo quid esse levius aut
turpius quam auctore hoste de summis rebus capere consilium? (Caes. Gal. 5.28.6);
Itaque magnifice Datamen donatum ad exercitum misit, qui tum contrahebatur duce
Pharnabazo et Tithrauste ad bellum Aegyptium . . . (Nep. Dat. 3.5); . . . quis adiutori-
bus regem adgressus inpellit, uti advorsus Romanos bellum incipiat. (Sal. Jug. 80.3);
Auctoribus qui aderant ut sequeretur, ad tribunal Appi perventum est. (Liv. 3.44.9—
NB: an autonomous relative clause as subject); Eo tribunorum militarium nulla
mentio his consulibus fuit. (Liv. 4.10.9); . . . bellum . . . parare Antiochum Hannibale
ministro . . . (Liv. 34.60.1); . . . laudator temporis acti / se puero . . . (Hor. Ars 173–4);
Custode rerum Caesare non furor / civilis aut vis exiget otium . . . (Hor. Carm.
4.15.17–18); Ovem rogabat cervus modium tritici / lupo sponsore. (Phaedr. 1.16.
3–4); Trinos soles et antiqui saepius videre, sicut Sp. Postumio Q. Mucio et
Q. Marcio M. Porcio et M. Antonio P. Dolabella et M. Lepido L. Planco cos., et
nostra aetas vidit Divo Claudio principe, consulatu eius Cornelio Orfito collega.
(Plin. Nat. 2.99); Antiquissimum in cibis hordeum, sicut Atheniensium ritu
Menandro auctore apparet et gladiatorum cognomine, qui hordearii vocabantur.
(Plin. Nat. 18.72); [Sed] memini Safinium. Tunc habitabat ad arcum veterem me
puero, piper, non homo. (Petr. 44.6); Caesar indicium haud aspernatus congressus
abnuit. Posse enim eodem Flacco internuntio sermone<s> commeare. (Tac. Ann.
2.28.2); Impuberes tutore auctore obligantur . . . (Iulian. dig. 26.8.13); Quid etiam est,
Aemiliane, quod non te iudice refutaverim? (Apul. Apol. 102); Bene autem quod
omnia tempus revelat, testibus etiam vestris proverbiis atque sententiis ex disposi-
tione naturae . . . (Tert. Apol. 7.13); . . . revertar ad te hoc eodem tempore vita comite
et habebit Sara filium. (Vulg. Gen. 18.14); . . . spes una salutis / nam mihi fit
chr<istu>s, quo duce mors moritur. (Inscr. Christ. 3420.5–6 (Rome)); . . . Palatina
cohors palinodiam in exitium concinens nostrum invenit tandem amplam nocendi
fortissimo viro auctore et incitatore coetu spadonum . . . (Amm. 18.5.4) Propter hoc
nullis auribus credidi quod primum me censore damnaveram. (Sidon. 8.15.2)
NB: Non Bibulo quiddam nuper sed Caesare factum est. / Nam Bibulo fieri consule
nil memini. (Suet. Jul. 20.2—NB: a popular distichon: sc. consule)
321 A list of adjectives found in the ablative absolute clause can be found in Flinck-Linkomies (1929:
263–4).
322 Uno te is explained as an ‘ablative of degree of difference’ by Christenson ad loc.
323 A useful list of what he does not regard as ablative absolute clauses but as ‘sociative’ ablatives can be
found in Flinck-Linkomies (1929: 265–6).
Nominal (verbless) satellite clauses 431
ter tanti invito eo quei dabit accipito (CIL I2.585.84 (Lex. Agr., 111 bc)); Haec
omnia, iudices, imprudente L. Sulla facta esse certe scio. (Cic. S. Rosc. 21); Mutari
etiam mores hominum saepe dicebat, alias adversis rebus, alias aetate ingravescente.
(Cic. Amic. 33); Cum iam amplius horis sex continenter pugnaretur ac . . . hostes acrius
instarent languidioribusque nostris vallum scindere et fossas complere coepis-
sent . . . (Caes. Gal. 3.5.1); At Varinius, dum haec aguntur a fugitivis, aegra parte mili-
tum autumni gravitate . . . quaestorem suum C. Thoranium . . . <Roma>m miserat.
(Sal. Hist. 3.96 A); . . . M. Scaurus . . . trepida etiam tum civitate . . . effecerat, uti ipse in
eo numero crearetur. (Sal. Jug. 40.4); Tum ad equites dictator advolat obtestans, ut
fesso iam pedite descendant ex equis et pugnam capessant. (Liv. 2.20.10); Dant tamen
arma, non volgo, tantum ut incerto hoste praesidium satis fidum ad omnia esset. (Liv.
3.15.8); . . . duae quinqueremes haud cuiquam dubio quin hostium essent opprimique
a pluribus . . . possent nihil aliud quam tumultum ac trepidationem simul militum ac
nautarum . . . fecerunt. (Liv. 28.17.14); Vivo patre et hoc parricidium est. (Sen. Con.
7.3.5); Imperator adulescens renuntiatus est omnibus laetis praeter patrem. (Sen.
Con. 7.7.1); Hoc multo fortius est, ebrio ac vomitante populo siccum ac sobrium
esse . . . (Sen. Ep. 18.4); Attonitis admiratione universis ‘salvo’ inquit ‘tuo sermone’
Trimalchio ‘si qua fides est . . .’ (Petr. 63.1); . . . Sallustius Crispus . . . metuens ne reus sub-
deretur iuxta periculoso ficta seu vera promeret monuit Liviam . . . (Tac. Ann. 1.6.3);
Et cuncta ad rem publicam referri, qua tenui angustas civium domos, postquam eo
magnificentiae venerit, gliscere singulos. (Tac. Ann. 2.33.2); De Atimeto supplicium
sumptum, validiore apud libidines principis Paride, quam ut poena adficeretur. (Tac.
Ann. 13.22.2); Haud procul inde agebat Marius Maturus, Alpium maritimarum
procurator, fidus Vitellio, cuius sacramentum cunctis circa hostilibus nondum
exuerat. (Tac. Hist. 3.42.2); Sed et si credat aliquis invito domino se rem contrectare,
domino autem volente id fiat, dicitur furtum non fieri. (Gaius Inst. 3.198); Triumphum
ipse distulit maesta civitate clade Variana. (Suet. Tib. 17.2); Ne<c> mora, cum iam in
meridiem prono iubare rursum nos ac praecipue me longe gravius onustum produ-
cunt illi latrones stabulo. (Apul. Met. 4.4.1); Praevia igitur spe meliorum Romani
duces . . . Gothos, quidquid molirentur, sagaciter observabant . . . (Amm. 31.7.6);
. . . vibam (= vivam) te sospite semp<er> . . . (CIL VI.25128.14 (Rome))
Noun/pronoun in abl. abs. coreferential with an argument in the main clause:
Spectamen bono servo id est, qui rem erilem / procurat, videt, collocat cogitatque, /
ut apsente ero <tam> rem eri diligenter / tutetur, quam si ipse assit, aut rectius. (Pl.
Men. 966–9); . . . nequod iudicium . . . illo absente de existimatione eius constituere-
tur. (Cic. Ver. 2.60)
324 See the index of CIL VI.6.fasc. 3: ‘passim’. 325 For vivo suo and the like, see Galdi (2000).
432 Subordinate clauses filling a satellite position
There are a few instances in Livy and Tacitus where the subject of the ablative absolute
clause is a clause itself, as in (h).
(h) . . . haud cuiquam dubio quin (sc. duae quinqueremes) hostium essent
opprimique a pluribus priusquam portum intrarent possent . . .
(‘. . . it being doubtful to no one that they belonged to the enemy and that they could
be surprised by superior numbers before they entered the harbour . . .’ Liv. 28.17.14)
Supplement:
Secundum hanc pugnam, nondum gnaris eius qui Messanae erant, Ti. Sempronius
consul Messanam venit. (Liv. 21.50.7); . . . trepidis et verba iuris iurandi per varias
artes mutantibus quis flagitii conscientia inerat. (Tac. Hist. 4.41.1)
In § 9.36 instances are given of adverbs functioning as subject complement. Tacitus
extends this use to the ablative absolute clause, as in (i) and (j).
(i) Inter quae nulla palam causa delapsum Camuloduni simulacrum Victoriae
ac retro conversum, quasi cederet hostibus.
(‘Meanwhile, for no apparent reason, the statue of Victory at Camulodunum
fell, with its back turned as if in retreat from the enemy.’ Tac. Ann. 14.32.1)
(j) Sed ubi diem ex die prolatabant, multis coram et adprobantibus Surena
patrio more Tirida<te>n insigni regio evinxit.
(‘However, as day after day found them still procrastinating, the Surena,
with a crowd being present and expressing its approval, fastened, in the
traditional style, the royal diadem upon the brows of Tiridates.’ Tac. Ann.
6.42.4)
As with participial ablative absolute clauses (cf. § 16.89 fin.), here too subordinators
are sometimes used to make the semantic relationship between the ablative absolute
clause and its matrix clause more explicit, as in (k)–(m).
(k) Qui si me audissent, quamvis iniqua pace honeste tamen viverent.
(‘Had they listened to me, they would at least be living honourably, however
harsh the terms of peace.’ Cic. Fam. 7.3.6)
(l) Nicias a Dolabella magno opere arcessitus (legi enim litteras) etsi invito me
tamen eodem me auctore profectus est.
(‘Nicias having been urgently summoned by Dolabella—for I read the letter—
has gone against my will, yet at the same time on my advice.’ Cic. Att. 13.28.3)
Nominal (verbless) satellite clauses 433
Nominal absolute clauses in cases other than the ablative seem not to be recorded,
except in substandard inscriptions like (a), where it is difficult to define the case
at all.326
(a) Cucumio et Victoria / se vivos fecerunt.
(‘Cucumius and Victoria made this monument, while they were alive.’ CIL VI.
9232.1–2 (Rome))
Prepositional nominal absolute clauses are not infrequent, especially those with
nouns referring to functions in society, such as praetor and consul.327 An example is
(a). There are also a few instances with adjectives, as in (b). The range of preposi-
tions is more restricted than with the participial ab urbe condita expressions
(§ 16.98). Most attested instances are time adjuncts. They can be found in all periods
of Latin.
(a) Anno ante me censorem mortuus est, novem annis post meum consulatum . . .
(‘He died in the year before I was censor, nine years after my consulship . . .’ Cic.
Sen. 19)
(b) Voltis a Romulo, voltis post liberam civitatem ab iis ipsis, qui liberaverunt?
(‘Will you start with Romulus, or will you start after the liberation of the state with
the liberators themselves?’ Cic. Parad. 11)
326 For variants of the se vivo expression in epigraphic texts, see Zelenai (2018).
327 See note 318.
434 Subordinate clauses filling a satellite position
The Oxford Latin Syntax. Harm Pinkster, Oxford University Press (2021). © Harm Pinkster.
DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780199230563.003.0017
Subordinate clauses with nouns, adjectives, and adverbs
(‘I would that the government had stood fast in the position it had begun to assume
and had not fallen into the hands of men desirous not so much of reforming as
abolishing the constitution.’ Cic. Off. 2.3)
(d) Ardeo cupiditate incredibili neque, ut ego arbitror, reprehendenda nomen ut
nostrum scriptis illustretur et celebretur tuis.
(‘I have a burning desire, of a strength you will hardly credit but ought not, I think, to
blame, that my name should gain lustre and celebrity through your works.’ Cic. Fam.
5.12.1)
(e) De quo ut quem optas quam primum nuntium accipias tua medius fidius
magis quam mea causa cupio.
(‘Upon my word, it’s for your sake rather than my own that I want you to get the news
you are praying for concerning him as soon as may be.’ Cael. Fam. 8.3.1)
As for subordinate clauses depending on adverbs, there is no attestation of cupide
with a dependent clause, but see (f), with a gerundial clause depending on apte.
(f) (sc. oratio) . . . qua praecepta salutis et laudis apte ad persuadendum edat suis
civibus . . .
(‘. . . by which he might publish precepts conducive to health and praise in a manner
suited to persuading his fellow-citizens . . .’ Cic. Leg. 1.62)
The preceding examples contain clauses that are comparable with arguments. Such
clauses occur commonly enough. By contrast, it is much less common to find subor-
dinate clauses below the clause level that are comparable with satellites. A few examples
are given in §§ 17.20; 29; 34.
¹ Quirk et al. (1985: 1049) use the term ‘appositive’, but this covers only part of the instances discussed here.
Introductory remarks
When a noun functions as subject or object of the verb in the superordinate clause, it
is sometimes difficult to decide whether a clause should be described as an attribute
of that noun alone or as an argument of a complex expression consisting of a verb
and the noun. When nouns are used with a support verb (see § 4.4), for example
potestatem do or facio ‘to give the power, a chance, opportunity, or right’ (OLD s.v.
potestas § 5), it may be more attractive to consider an ut clause like the one in (a), the
argument that depends on the combination of noun and verb.²
(a) . . . tibi potestatem dedi / cum hac annum ut esses . . .
(‘. . . I’ve given you the power to be with her for a year . . .’ Pl. As. 847–8)
The situation in (b), however, is different. Here the most convincing explanation for
the ne clause is that it is an (obligatory) argument of (hoc) praeceptum (officii): teneo
itself cannot govern an ut or ne clause, at least not in the meaning required here,³ but
the verb praecipio and hence praeceptum can. The determiner hoc has a preparative
function and serves to strengthen the relation between the noun and the attributive
clause.
(b) Atque etiam hoc praeceptum officii diligenter tenendum est ne quem umquam
innocentem iudicio capitis arcessas.
(‘Again, the following rule of duty is to be carefully observed: never bring a capital
charge against any person who may be innocent.’ Cic. Off. 2.51)
In other contexts the situation is more complicated, for example in the case of legem
promulgavit in (c), which could be paraphrased by: rogavit ‘he proposed’. However,
legem is found with a wide range of verbs in more or less the same sense,⁴ and pro-
mulgo is not found with an ut clause when it does not govern a noun such as legem.⁵
An ut clause is also possible when lex functions as a satellite, as in (d), or as an
attribute, as in (e). All this suggests that in (c) the ut clause is the attribute of legem
alone; it is a specification of the rights and duties for those who are subject to the
law. The clause is imperative and the use of ut (and not of declarative quod) is fully
understandable.
(c) . . . legem promulgavit ut sexenni die sine usuris . . . creditae pecuniae
solvantur.
(‘. . . he promulgated a law that the money owed shall be paid without accumulation of
interest six years from that day.’ Caes. Civ. 3.20.5)
² For a discussion of the status of these subordinate clauses, see Heine (1990: 5–6), with criticism of
their treatment in LSS. For argument clauses with the combination of a support verb and a noun, see
Hoffmann (2015). For criteria to decide whether a clause depends on the combination of support verb and
noun or the noun by itself, see also Hoffmann (2018b). He would deal with many of the examples in this
Chapter as having support verbs (p.c.).
³ For ut/ne clauses with teneo in its meaning ‘to make good one’s point (that)’, see OLD s.v. § 16c.
⁴ See TLL s.v. lex 1254.27ff. See also s.v. 1244.62ff. for combinations like ea lege ut/ne.
⁵ See TLL s.v. promulgo 1904.9. There is one attestation of promulgo with an accusative and infinitive
clause (Plin. Nat. 27.9 (v.l. provulg . . .)).
Subordinate clauses with nouns, adjectives, and adverbs
(d) . . . dilectu per omne Samnium habito nova lege ut qui iuniorum non convenisset
ad imperatorum edictum quique iniussu abisset caput Iovi sacraretur.
(‘. . . a levy having been held throughout Samnium under this new ordinance, that
whosoever of military age did not report in response to the proclamation of the gen-
erals, or departed without their orders, should forfeit his life to Jupiter.’ Liv. 10.38.3)
(e) Ferretne civitas ulla latorem istius modi legis ut condemnaretur filius aut
nepos, si pater aut avus deliquisset?
(‘Would any state tolerate the passer of a law dictating that a son or grandson be sen-
tenced if his father or grandfather had committed a crime?’ Cic. N.D. 3.90)
The status of lex in (f) is ambiguous. It is usually taken as the subject of existential est
(see the translation) and in that interpretation the ut clause is the argument of lex,
that is: at the noun phrase level. If, however, lex is taken as the subject complement
(i.e. it is a law at Rhodes that . . .), the ut clause is subject at the sentence level. In that
case it belongs in § 15.11.
(f) Lex est apud Rhodios ut, si qua rostrata in portu navis deprehensa sit, publicetur.
(‘There is a law at Rhodes that if any ship with a ram is caught in the harbour it
is confiscated.’ Cic. Inv. 2.98)
Still other relations between a noun (and verb) and an ut clause are illustrated by (g)
and (h). In (g), the ut clause can be explained on the basis of the valency not only of
facultatem,⁶ but also of assequi, as becomes clear if hanc facultatem is excised. The use
of hanc resembles that of hoc in (b). However, the need to win the sympathy of one’s
fellow-men has already been mentioned in Off. 2.17, and this may explain the use of
hanc: it is an anaphoric determiner. The word facultatem itself has not been used
before, so the ut clause seems to fulfil an ‘explanatory’ function.⁷ In (h), the ut clause
can neither be regarded as the argument of reperiebant nor as that of remedia alone.
Without preparative haec the ut clause would be impossible.
(g) Quibus autem rationibus hanc facultatem assequi possimus ut hominum stu-
dia complectamur eaque teneamus dicemus . . .
(‘I shall presently discuss the means by which we can gain the ability to win and hold
the affections of our fellow-men . . .’ Cic. Off. 2.19)
(h) Quibus rebus nostri usu docti haec reperiebant remedia ut alio loco ignes
facerent, <alio excubarent>.
(‘Our men, taught by experience, discovered the following remedies for these emer-
gencies, to light fires in one place, <and keep watch in another>.’ Caes. Civ. 3.50.2)
The nouns in the examples discussed so far belong to different categories. Praeceptum
is morphologically and semantically related to praecipio; it refers to the content of a
For finite clauses a further distinction is made between three types that correspond to
the distinction ‘declarative’, ‘interrogative’, and ‘imperative’ in Chapter 15.
⁸ See, for example, Gerber and Greef s.v. quod 1343–4, where many instances can be found.
Subordinate clauses with nouns, adjectives, and adverbs
. Declarative clauses with quod and quia at the noun phrase level
The most common subordinator to mark declarative subordinate clauses at the clause
level is quod. One would therefore expect this subordinator to be used with nouns
that indicate emotion, praise, and blame, and in later periods perception, cognition,
and communication (for the verbs, see §§ 15.8–10), but such combinations turn out
to be relatively infrequent. Examples are (a)–(c). However, quod clauses are used with
other nouns as well, in a way that is often called ‘explicative’ (see also § 17.2), as
in (d).⁹
(a) Non enim tua ulla culpa est, si te aliqui timuerunt, contraque summa laus
quod minime timendum fuisse senserunt.
(‘For no blame is yours if some have feared you, but rather the greatest commenda-
tion, that they knew that you were to be feared so little.’ Cic. Marc. 20)
(b) In litteris veteribus memoria exstat quod par quondam fuit vigor et acritudo
amplitudoque populi Romani atque Poeni.
(‘In ancient records there is an account that the strength, the spirit and the numbers
of the Roman and the Carthaginian people were once equal.’ Gel. 10.27.1)
(c) Nunc . . . confiteare necesse est te opinionem multum fefellisse quod existimaris
me causam A. Cluenti non facto eius sed lege defensurum.
(‘Now . . . you must admit that you were greatly deceived by the opinion that I should
base my defence of my client’s case not upon its merits but upon its legal aspect.’ Cic.
Clu. 143)
(d) Additurque atrocior saevitia quod caput amputatum latumque in Urbem
Poppaea vidit.
(‘And there was the addition of a more frightful savagery, in that Poppaea saw the
head after it had been amputated and carried into the city.’ Tac. Ann. 14.64.2—tr.
Woodman (adapted))
Supplement (in alphabetical order by noun):
Quid enim aliud ille dicebat, quam causam sui dementissimi consili et facti adfere-
bat, nisi quod intercessio neglecta, ius tribunicium sublatum, circumscriptus a sen-
atu esset Antonius? (Cic. Phil. 2.53); . . . (sc. se) licentiam arrogantiamque reprehendere
quod plus se quam imperatorem de victoria atque exitu rerum sentire existimarent.
(Caes. Gal. 7.52.3); Catilinam luxuria primum, tum hinc conflata egestas rei familiaris,
⁹ For examples in Cicero, see Merguet (Phil. and Reden) s.v. quod, §§ III and IV.
Finite clauses at the noun phrase level
Clauses with quia at the noun phrase level are extremely rare.¹⁰ The best example is
(e). In (f) the quia clause is most likely a reason adjunct.
(e) Sed ego uno utor argumento quam ob rem me ex animo vereque arbitrer
diligi quia et nostra fortuna ea est et illorum ut simulandi causa non sit.
(‘But I only employ one proof to convince me that I am loved from the heart and in
sincerity—namely, that my fortune and theirs is of such a kind as to preclude any
motive on their part for pretending.’ Cic. Fam. 9.16.2)
(f) Quod eo errore dixisti, quia existumas ab is providentiam fingi quasi quan-
dam deam singularem . . .
(‘You said this in error, because you imagine that providence is fashioned by them as
a kind of special deity . . .’ Cic. N.D. 2.73)
Declarative clauses with ut at the noun phrase level are difficult to distinguish from
imperative clauses, as is the case with declarative and imperative ut clauses at the
clause level (see § 15.25). Examples are (a)–(c) (ex. (a) is repeated from § 17.2). Ex. (b)
has a determiner, which may be anaphoric in its context.
(a) . . . usus essem mea consuetudine ut diligenter et quid actum esse<t> et quid
ex eo futurum sperarem perscriberem.
(‘. . . I should follow my usual practice of describing in detail both what had happened
and what consequences I expected to follow.’ Cael. Fam. 8.5.3)
(b) Ceterum si nihilo minus permaneret in eo vitio ut circa fana bacchari soleret
et quasi demens responsa daret . . . vitium tamen esse . . ..
(‘But if he persist in that bad habit of cavorting around the shrines and uttering virtu-
ally demented ravings . . . it is still a defect . . .’ Ulp. dig. 21.1.1.10)
¹⁰ See K.-St.: II.271, from whom ex. (e) is taken. Ex. (f) is taken from TLL s.v. is 477.66ff.
Subordinate clauses with nouns, adjectives, and adverbs
(c) Antiquum etiam re<t>tulit morem ut, quo mense fasces non haberet, accen-
sus ante eum iret, lictores pone sequerentur.
(‘He also revived a bygone custom, that during the months when he did not have
the fasces an orderly should walk before him, while the lictors followed him.’ Suet.
Jul. 20.1)
Just as with the related verbs (see § 15.37), ne is the subordinator of argument clauses
with nouns of fearing, as in (a) and (b).
(a) Ergo iste metus me macerat, quod ille fastidiosu’st, / ne oculi eius sententiam
mutent, ubi viderit me . . .
(‘Well then, since he’s picky, the fear is wearing me out that his eyes might change his
decision when he’s seen me . . .’ Pl. Mil. 1233–4)
(b) Itaque metu ne per tantam gratiam solus rerum poteretur contra eam nisi sua
et ipsius consilia disturbaverunt.
(‘And out of fear that through such great influence he might gain sole mastery of
affairs, they strove against that influence, and thus upset their own planned course of
action and his as well.’ Sal. Rep. 2.6.5)
¹¹ For further instances of opinio + ut clause, see TLL s.v. 718.55ff. (called ‘epexegeticum’).
Finite clauses at the noun phrase level
With a preparative determiner: Ille quidem semper inpendebit timor ne rex, quod
plerumque evenit, exsistat iniustus. (Cic. Rep. 2.50)
Declarative clauses with quin at the noun phrase level are infrequent; the nouns they
modify belong to the same semantic classes as the verbs with which they occur (see
§ 15.38). An example is dubitatio in (a).
(a) Cum igitur hic locus nihil habeat dubitationis quin homines plurimum
hominibus et prosint et obsint, proprium hoc statuo esse virtutis . . .
(‘Since, therefore, there can be no doubt that man is the source of both the greatest
help and the greatest harm to man, I set it down as the peculiar function of virtue . . .’
Cic. Off. 2.17)
Supplement:
. . . nulla dubitatio relinquetur quin honore mortui quam vivo iniuriam fecimus sar-
ciamus. (Cic. Phil. 9.8); Nulla enim nec disceptatio nec dubitatio fuit quin omnes
eosdem genti Achaeorum hostes et amicos quos populus Romanus censuisset iudi-
carent . . . (Liv. 35.50.2)
. The use of tamquam and quasi clauses with nouns of emotion, cognition,
and communication
Just as with the corresponding verbs (see § 15.44), nouns of emotion, cognition, and
communication can be combined with tamquam and quasi clauses, as in (a).¹²
(a) . . . famam diffudit tamquam ultro a Syphace accerseretur.
(‘. . . he spread abroad the report that he was expressly sent for by Syphax.’ Fron.
Str. 2.7.4)
¹² See Bennett (1900), Bodelot (2014a: 202–4), and Rosén and Shalev (2017).
Subordinate clauses with nouns, adjectives, and adverbs
However, apart from these verb-related nouns there are other nouns as well with
which interrogative clauses can function as attributes, such as causa in (i) and difficul-
tate in (j).
(i) An vero non iusta causa est quor curratur celeriter . . .
(‘Well, isn’t there a just cause for running quickly . . .?’ Pl. Poen. 533)
(j) Eo cum venisset, magna difficultate adficiebatur qua ratione ad exercitum
pervenire posset.
(‘When he arrived there he was confronted with a great difficulty, as to the means
whereby he could reach the army.’ Caes. Gal. 7.6.2)
pulvis . . . (Vitr. 2.6.4); . . . regressus ad Dium est dubitatione omnibus exempta quid
intercluso ab Thessalia patiendum fuisset . . . (Liv. 44.7.7); . . . alteri (sc. hoc faciendum
est), si plane causam redarguendo explicarit, enumeratione ut quidque diluerit et
miseratione ad extremum. (Cic. Part. 122); Utendum etiam est excusatione adversus
eos, quos invitus offendas, quacumque possis, quare id, quod feceris, necesse fuerit
nec aliter facere potueris . . . (Cic. Off. 2.68); Sum in exspectatione omnium rerum,
quid in Gallia citeriore, quid in urbe mense Ianuario geratur. (Cic. Fam. 10.4.4); Ei
mihi, quom istaec blanda dicta quo evenant madeo metu. (Pl. Mos. 395); . . . omnisque
ille sermo ductus <est> a percontatione fili quid in senatu esset actum. (Cic. Brut.
218); Propositioque quid sis dicturus . . . (Cic. de Orat. 3.203)
NB: with a preparative pronoun: . . . cum id in controversiam venit qua quis lege
puniendus vel honorandus sit. (Quint. Inst. 7.4.41)
¹³ For examples see Lodge s.v. ut II.938A; Merguet (Reden) s.v. ut 1044B–1045B; (Phil.) s.v. ut 893;
(Caesar) s.v. ut 1129A–1130A; TLL s.v. ne 29828ff.
Finite clauses at the noun phrase level
NB: Some of the examples cited above might be taken as manifesting a support verb
construction, for example those with copia and potestas.
Imperative clauses with quominus can be used with nouns that are semantically
related to the verbs discussed in § 15.72. An example is (f).
(f) Num quando tibi moram adtulerit quo minus concilium advocares legemque
ferres . . . ?
(‘Did it ever cause you a delay so that you could not summon a meeting and pass a
law…?’ Cic. Vat. 15)
Subordinate clauses with nouns, adjectives, and adverbs
The non-finite verbal argument clauses will be discussed in the following sections in
the same order as in Chapter 15 (see § 15.90), according to the traditional morpho-
logical classification of infinitives (§§ 17.13–15), participles (§ 17.16), and gerunds
and gerundives (§§ 17.17–20).
Accusative and infinitive clauses can be used with nouns that are semantically related
to the verbs that can govern an accusative and infinitive clause, especially verbs of
cognition and emotion (see §§ 15.94–102).
(a) . . . ut illa opinio, quae semper fuisset, tolleretur alterum non doctissimum,
alterum plane indoctum fuisse.
(‘. . . in order that that notion, which had always prevailed, be dispelled, (namely) that
one of them had no great learning and the other none at all.’ Cic. de Orat. 2.7)
Infinitival clauses at the noun phrase level
In § 15.128 a discussion can be found of the use of the prolative infinitive with nouns
that function as subject or object complements. The infinitive is also common with
noun–verb combinations that in their meaning resemble simple verbs with which the
infinitive is regular. An example is consilium capio, which resembles the class of verbs
described in § 15.125, and which is indeed treated there as a support verb construc-
tion. An additional example is (a).¹⁵
(a) . . . eadem te hora consilium cepisse hominis propinqui fortunas funditus
evertere.
(‘. . . at the very same hour you formed the plan to ruin utterly the fortunes of one who
was your kinsman.’ Cic. Quinct. 53)
The use of the prolative infinitive with nouns in other functions is rare. Where such
instances do occur, some scholars assume Greek influence.¹⁶ The gerund or gerundive
is much more common.
(b) Quod plerique omnes faciunt adulescentuli / ut animum ad aliquod studium
adiungant, aut equos / alere aut canes ad venandum aut ad philosophos . . .
(‘He behaved as all young lads tend to do, involving themselves in some pursuit like
breeding horses or hunting-dogs or studying philosophy . . .’ Ter. An. 55–7)
(c) Magnam molestiam suscepit et minime necessariam primus Zeno, post
Cleanthes, deinde Chrysippus, commenticiarum fabularum reddere
rationem . . .
(‘First Zeno, then Cleanthes, then Chrysippus undertook the great and completely
unnecessary labour of rationalizing purely fanciful myths . . .’ Cic. N.D. 3.63)
¹⁵ For further examples, see TLL s.v. consilium. See also the discussion in K.-St.: I.742–3.
¹⁶ Discussion in Sz.: 351. See also Skutsch ad Enn. Ann. 294V=255S and Binder (2019: I.352–3).
¹⁷ The actual document is from the Flavian period. See Crawford (1996: I.395).
Participial clauses at the noun phrase level
interesting variation in Mat. 9.6, where the Vetus Latina version (cod. d) has the
infinitive dimittere while the Vulgate version has the gerund dimittendi, showing the
difference in register.
(d) . . . ut (sc. equites) haberent facultatem turmas Iulianas circumeundi et . . .
pugnare.
(‘. . . so they might have the ability to swarm round Caesar’s squadrons and fight.’
B. Afr. 78.4)
Supplement:
Summa eludendi occasio’st mihi nunc senes / et Phaedriae curam adimere argenta-
riam . . . (Ter. Ph. 885–6—NB: parallelism, see § 17.13); Et dedit ei potestatem con-
gregandi exercitum et fabricare arma. (Vulg. I Macc. 10.6)¹⁸
urbis Graecarum dei tibi dederunt, Marcelle. (Liv. 25.29.4);¹⁹ Huius patrati (sc. belli)
gloria penes M. Crassum fuit . . . (Vell. 2.30.6); Cum vero . . . provincia tibi ista manu-
pretium fuerit eversae per te et perditae civitatis . . . (Cic. Pis. 57); Syria et Macedonia
quas vobis invitis et oppressis pestiferi illi consules pro perversae rei publicae prae-
miis occupaverunt. (Cic. Prov. 3); Hoc pretium positae virginitatis habe. (Ov. Fast.
6.128); Ob hasce res gestas consul cum . . . videret . . . ad solacium aequatae repulsae
sibi quoque negare triumphum . . . (Liv. 10.37.6–7); . . . cum in [hanc] suspicionem
C. Flavi equitis Romani occisi venisset . . . (V. Max. 8.4.2); . . . iniuriam corporis et ultio-
nem violatae per vim pudicitiae confessa viro est . . . (Liv. 38.24.9)
Prepositional phrase: Nam quas ex itinere antequam ex Asia egressus es ad me lit-
teras misisti, unas de legatis a me prohibitis proficisci, alteras de Appi<an>orum
aedificatione impedita, legi perinvitus. (Cic. Fam. 3.9.1); Tamquam enim clausa sit
Asia, sic nihil perfertur ad nos praeter rumores de oppresso Dolabella . . . (Cic. Fam.
12.9.1)
¹⁹ For instances of gloria with a dominant participle, see TLL s.v. 2071.82ff.
Gerundial and gerundival clauses at noun phrase level
content can be conveyed with a prepositional purpose expression with ad, as in (d).
Similarly, the word deversorium ‘lodging’ is, at first sight, a clear example of a noun
that does not require another entity to complete its meaning (it is a first-order entity;
see § 3.6). However, in its non-literal meaning it is used by Cicero with a genitive of
the gerund, as in (e), as it is used figuratively with nouns implying certain actions, as
in (f).
(c) (sc. Simonides) . . . deliberandi sibi unum diem postulavit.
(‘(Simonides) . . . requested a day’s grace for consideration.’ Cic. N.D. 1.60)
(d) Noctem sibi ad deliberandum postulavit.
(‘He asked for a night to consider.’ Cic. Sest. 74)
(e) Commorandi enim natura deversorium nobis, non habitandi dedit.
(‘For nature gave us lodging for passing the time in, not for dwelling in.’ Cic.
Sen. 84)
(f) Studiorum enim suorum M. Varro voluit illud, non libidinum deversorium.
(‘For Varro wished that house to be a retreat for his own studies, not for his lusts.’ Cic.
Phil. 2.104)
There are, however, also instances that cannot be explained in this way: they are
clearly optional constituents (satellites). A humorous example from Plautus is (g),
repeated from § 14.16 and § 15.21. Historical authors, especially Tacitus, expand the
range of head constituents with which the genitive of the gerundive may occur to
non-relational nouns such as victima ‘sacrifice’²⁰—in Livy—and pecunia ‘money’—in
Tacitus. Such gerundival clauses are often called ‘final’, and they are indeed not always
easy to distinguish from gerundival purpose adjuncts (see § 16.106). This is a literary
development that did not affect the language system as a whole and left no trace in the
history of Latin. An early example is (h). A large step even further away from rela-
tional head nouns is Sallust’s use of a gerundival clause with the substantival plural
neuter quantifier omnia ‘everything’ in (i).
(g) Eheu, huic illud dolet, / quia nunc remissus est edendi exercitus.
(‘Oh, oh, oh, this one (points to his stomach) is in pain because the army for eating has
been dismissed now.’ Pl. Capt. 152–3)
(h) . . . M. Aemilius . . . exercitum opprimendae libertatis habet . . .
(‘. . . Marcus Aemilius . . . has an army for the purpose of overthrowing our liberties . . .’
Sal. Hist. 1.77.3)
(i) . . . ut . . . omnia retinendae dominationis honesta aestimet.
(‘. . . that . . . he regards every means of retaining his supremacy as honourable.’ Sal.
Hist. 1.55.8)
²⁰ Aalto (1949: 106–7) quotes instances like immolavit · porcas piaculares · duas · luco coin-
quiendo et / operis · faciundi (from the Acta Arv. of ad 120—CIL VI.2080.36–7) as parallels.
Subordinate clauses with nouns, adjectives, and adverbs
Supplement:
…placuit averruncandae deum irae victimas caedi . . . (Liv. 8.6.11); . . . sulcus desig-
nandi oppidi coeptus . . . (Tac. Ann. 12.24.1); . . . quia pecuniam a Vario Ligure omit-
tendae delationis ceperant . . . (Tac. Ann. 6.30.1); . . . cenam dabat amicis ac magistris
sub urbe in rusculo celebrandae lucis annuae . . . (Gel. 19.9.1)
After the Classical period there are also instances in which a gerundival clause defines
the content of a noun (phrase) (sometimes referred to as a genetivus explicativus), but
just as with the use of the genitive to mark nouns or noun phrases as the attribute of a
head constituent, the semantic range is very wide, and precise labelling makes no
sense. Examples to illustrate the wide semantic range are (j) and (k).
(j) . . . et proverbium inde natum suspendio arborem eligendi.
(‘. . . and from that was born the proverb of “choosing the tree for hanging oneself.”’
Plin. Nat. pr. 29)
(k) Unde ista tormenta cruciandae simplicitatis et suspendendae veritatis?
(‘Why adopt such excruciating means of torturing simple knowledge and crucifying
the truth?’ Tert. An. 18.7—tr. Holmes)
Finally there is (l), a passage from the Vulgate which tries to follow the Greek original
(which has an infinitive!).
(l) Qui habet aures audiendi . . .
(‘He that has ears to hear . . .’ Vulg. Marc. 4.9)
There are several types of gerundial expressions found as argument with nouns: geni-
tive bare case gerunds and prepositional expressions, with ad ‘to’ being the most com-
mon preposition. Examples of a gerund in the genitive are (a) and (b). An example of
a prepositional gerundial expression is (c).
(a) Et meam partem loquendi et tuam trado tibi.
(‘I grant you both my share of speaking and yours.’ Pl. As. 517)
(b) In hunc me casum vos vivendi auctores impulistis.
(‘Such is the dilemma into which you advocates of living have pushed me.’ Cic.
Att. 3.9.1)
(c) . . . perfecistis ut . . . mihi summa facultas ad accusandum daretur . . .
(‘…You have brought it about that the greatest ability to accuse was granted to me. . .'
Cic. Ver. 2.178)
The gerund may govern an argument (in the case required by the verb—see below for
a few exceptions), and satellites are also used occasionally. An example of a gerund in
the genitive with an object constituent is (d), where tutores is in the accusative, the
Gerundial and gerundival clauses at noun phrase level
regular case with do ‘to give’. Gerundival clauses are (much) more common for this in
all periods of Latin, certainly before Livy.²¹
(d) Ius dandi tutores datum est omnibus magistratibus municipialibus . . .
(‘The right of appointing tutors is granted to all municipal magistrates . . .’ Ulp. dig.
26.5.3)
²¹ K.-St.: I.735 report that in Cicero there are 587 gerundival clauses in comparison with only 24 ger-
undial clauses in the genitive with an argument. Curtius, according to their report, is the only one who
prefers the gerundial clause.
²² For argument clauses with causa, see Spevak (2014b).
²³ See note 17.
²⁴ Ungrammatical, and possibly inspired by a Greek source, is a unique utterance in Macrobius
(1.8.8): . . . certo iam tempore finis factus est procedendi de caelo semina (NB: corresponding with a subject
in a finite clause) ad elementorum conceptionem . . . Discussion in Wistrand (1967: 70–1), with a critical
comment on putative instances of ‘subjects’ of gerundial clauses mentioned by Sz.: 376.
²⁵ For ad + gerundi(v)al clauses modifying nouns, see TLL s.v. ad 504.61ff.; 538.82ff.
Subordinate clauses with nouns, adjectives, and adverbs
There are a number of instances of a noun governing a genitive of the gerund, with
another noun seemingly depending on the gerund—not, however, in its regular case,
but in the genitive. An example is (e). However, I would argue that tuendi is governed
by copiam, the combination of which is modified by lucis.²⁶
(e) Quia mi item ut parentes lucis das tuendi copiam.
(‘Because like parents you give me a chance of seeing the light.’ Pl. Capt. 1008)
Gerundival clauses are found with the same head constituents as the gerundial clauses,
which are discussed in the previous section. Typical examples, in the genitive, are (a)
and (b). Examples of gerundival clauses in the dative and in a prepositional phrase are
(c) and (d), respectively.
(a) . . . natura cupiditatem ingenuit homini veri videndi . . .
(‘. . . nature has engendered in mankind the desire of seeing truth . . .’ Cic. Fin. 2.46)
²⁶ The precise relationship between governing noun, gerund, and depending genitive noun is much
debated. See Bolkestein (1989a: 7–9), who analyses the fifty-two known instances from the point of view
of word order.
Gerundial and gerundival clauses at noun phrase level
40.18.1); Nam cum dies venisset rogationi ex senatus consulto ferendae . . . (Cic. Att.
1.14.5); . . . vectigalibusve publiceis fruendeis locandeis vendundeis legem
deixerunt . . . (CIL I2.585.85 (Lex Agr., Rome, c.111 bc)); Fama est adpulsa nave
mercatorum nitri, cum sparsi per litus epulas pararent nec esset cortinis attollendis
lapidum occasio, glaebas nitri e nave subdidisse… (Plin. Nat. 36.191); Origo quaes-
toribus creandis antiquissima est . . . (Ulp. dig. 1.13.1)
Prepositional phrase: Actione de rationibus distrahendis nemo tenetur . . . (Paul.
dig. 27.3.2.pr.); . . . aut inpudentia et huic et ceteris magnam ad se defendendum facul-
tatem dabit. (Cic. Cael. 50); Eis ad ignoscendum (‘to obtain pardon’) nulla facultas est
data et a militibus nostris interfecti sunt. (B. Hisp. 12.2); . . . qui morae ad decernendum
bellum ad Naupactum [auctor] fuerat . . . (Liv. 31.40.9); Eam occasionem Polyxenidae
ad rem gerendam fore. (Liv. 37.26.7); . . . et speculatores omnia visendi et Scipio ad
comparanda quae in rem erant tempus habuit. (Liv. 30.4.6—NB: parallelism with a
gerund clause); Instructius deliberatiusque fore arbitramur theorematium hoc de
mandatis huiuscemodi obsequendis, si exemplum quoque P. Crassi Muciani, clari
atque incluti viri, apposuerimus. (Gel. 1.13.9)
Gerundival clause with agent nouns:
Genitive: . . . te et non suscipiendi belli civilis gravissimum auctorem fuisse et
moderandae victoriae? (Cic. Fam. 11.27.8); Multa illi opera opu’st ficturae qui se fic-
torem probum / vitae agundae esse expetit. (Pl. Trin. 365–6)
Dative: . . . ille legibus per vim et contra auspicia ferendis auctor . . . (Cic. Att. 8.3.3)
NB: agent nouns referring to magistrates: . . . Demosthenes curator muris reficiendis
fuit . . . (Cic. Opt. Gen. 19); . . . curator · vi(i)s · sternundis . . . (CIL VI.1283.b2 (Rome,
181 bc)); . . . curator · pecuniae· publicae · exi / gendae · et · attribuendae . . . (CIL
XIV.376.13–14 (Ostia Antica, c. ad 150)); . . . alterum triumvirum coloniis deducundis . . .
(Sal. Jug. 42.1)
. Optional gerundial and gerundival clauses at the noun phrase level
All sorts of nouns may be modified by optional gerundial and gerundival clauses with
various prepositions.
(a) . . . sed etiam commemorant sodalitatem in accusando . . .
(‘. . . but in accusing they even harp on their fraternity . . .’ Cic. Cael. 26)
(b) . . . si mihi libeat totius gentis in testimoniis dicendis explicare levitatem.
(‘. . . if I wanted to display the untrustworthiness of the whole nation in giving evi-
dence.’ Cic. Flac. 12)
As with governing nouns in earlier sections of this Chapter three types of clauses are
distinguished that correspond more or less to declarative, interrogative, and impera-
tive subordinate clauses at the sentence level. However, this threefold distinction is
especially relevant for adjectives that denote cognition, as is shown in (a)–(c), with
the adjective memor ‘mindful’. Ex. (a) is a rare example of a declarative quod clause;
(b) of a not uncommon interrogative clause; (c) of an exceptional imperative clause
(note the coordination with diligens).²⁸
(a) Igitur Antiochus memor quod . . . frater propter segnitiam contemptus
fuisset . . . civitates . . . summa industria persequitur . . .
(‘Therefore Antiochus . . . remembering that his brother had been despised for his
indolence . . . proceeded to make war, with the utmost vigour, on the provinces . . .’
Justin. 36.1.9)
(b) (sc. Hortensius) Adtuleratque minime volgare genus dicendi . . . memor et
quae essent dicta contra quaeque ipse dixisset.
(‘And he brought to the Forum a style which was far from commonplace . . . summariz-
ing what had been said on the other side, and what he himself had said.’ Cic. Brut. 302)
(c) Et memor sum et diligens ut quae imperes compareant.
(‘I’m mindful and careful that what you order should appear.’ Pl. Am. 630—NB: par-
allelism)
With the idiom certiorem facio aliquem ‘to inform somebody’ all three types of clauses
are well attested.²⁹ An example of an imperative clause is (d).
(d) . . . Bibulus Pompeium fecerat certiorem ut caveret insidias, in quo ei Pompeius
gratias egerat.
(‘. . . Bibulus had sent information to Pompeius warning him of a plot, for which
Pompeius had thanked him.’ Cic. Att. 2.24.3)
²⁸ For a very Late instance of memor ut, see TLL s.v. 661.46.
²⁹ See TLL s.v. certus 922.12ff.
³⁰ For such clauses with memor in translations of the Bible, see TLL s.v. 660.52ff.
Subordinate clauses at adjective/adverb phrase level
Examples of a ne clause with an adjective of fearing and worrying are (b) and (c).
(b) Ego pol quoque etiam timida sum, quom venit mi in mentem quae sim, / ne
nomen mihi quaesti obsiet.
(‘I am also, by heaven, rather apprehensive, when I remember what I am, that the
reputation of my profession will count against me.’ Ter. Hec. 734–5)
(c) . . . ne qua seditio aut bellum oriretur anxius erat.
(‘. . . he worried that some rebellion or war might erupt.’ Sal. Jug. 6.3)
Ut clauses can also be used after a comparative expression + quam, as in (c) and (d).
For autonomous relative clauses after such expressions, see § 18.19.
(c) Quis enim . . . non intellegit Canachi signa rigidiora esse quam ut imitentur
veritatem?
(‘For who . . . does not recognize that the statues of Canachus are too rigid to repro-
duce the truth of nature?’ Cic. Brut. 70)
Subordinate clauses at adjective/adverb phrase level
(d) Hannibali nimis laeta res est visa maiorque quam ut eam statim capere animo
posset.
(‘To Hannibal the idea was too joyous and too vast for him to grasp it at once with his
mind.’ Liv. 22.51.3)
Supplement:
Sed si haec maior esse ratio videtur quam ut hominum possit sensu aut cogitatione
comprehendi . . . (Cic. de Orat. 3.21); (sc. Isocrates) Maiore mihi ingenio videtur esse
quam ut cum orationibus Lysiae comparetur . . . (Cic. Orat. 41); . . . clarior res erat quam
ut tegi ac dissimulari posset . . . (Liv. 26.51.11); Vulva . . . in mulieribus vero, nisi ubi
gravidae sunt, non multo maior quam ut manu conprehendatur. (Cels. 4.1.12); Est
enim sapientis rustici reputare num maiore fructu vitis se induerit quam ut perferre
eum possit. (Col. 4.27.5); . . . in quis erant sagittarii, sicuti ante dictum est, gravioribus
telis quam ut apte excuti possent. (Curt. 8.13.6); Itaque nonnullos reperias qui sibi
eloquentiores videantur quam ut causas agant. (Quint. Inst. 12.6.6); . . . validiore apud
libidines principis Paride quam ut poena adficeretur. (Tac. Ann. 13.22)
The following sections deal with infinitival, participial, and gerundial and gerundival
clauses functioning as argument or satellite at the adjective phrase level. For the
supine, see § 16.113.
The adjectives with which accusative and infinitive clauses can be used as attribute
most often denote cognition or emotion, as in (a) and (b), respectively. Instances can
be found in all periods of Latin.
(a) Postquam mihi responsum est, abeo ab illo maestus ad forum / med illo
frustra advenisse.
(‘After receiving this answer, I went away from him to the market, sad that I’d gone
there for nothing.’ Pl. Cur. 336–7)
(b) Constituunt enim . . . duo genera causarum . . . ignari omnis controversias ad
universi generis vim et naturam referri.
(‘They posit two classes of cases—without realizing that all disputes can be related to one
about the essential nature of a general category.’ Cic. de Orat. 2.133—tr. May and Wisse)
Subordinate clauses with nouns, adjectives, and adverbs
Infinitival clauses are found with adjectives that are semantically, and sometimes for-
mally, related to verbs with which infinitival clauses are common, as in (a) and (b);³¹
however, in poetry and in poeticizing prose, infinitives are used with other adjectives
as well. This usage was certainly stimulated by the use of infinitival clauses in similar
contexts in Greek.³² In (Classical) prose other expressions are more common, such as
gerundival clauses, the supine in -u (for which, see § 16.113), and relative clauses with
a subjunctive.³³ The infinitive can refer to a state of affairs that is controlled by the
entity the adjective is related to, as in (a)–(d), but this is not necessary, as is shown by
(e) and (f).³⁴
(a) . . . nihili est autem suom qui officium facere immemor est, nisi est ammonitus.
(‘. . . but someone who is forgetful in doing his duty unless he’s reminded is worthless.’
Pl. Ps. 1104)
(b) Insignita fere tum milia militum octo / duxit delectos bellum tolerare
potentes.
(‘Then he led some eight thousand warriors, wearing badges, chosen men, strong to
bear war well.’ Enn. Ann. 10.332–3V=330–1S)
(c) Illa dolos dirumque nefas in pectore versat, / certa mori, variosque irarum
concitat aestus.
(‘She revolves in her heart wiles and dreadful crime, fixed on dying, and awakens the
swirling surge of anger.’ Verg. A. 4.563–4)
³¹ For the frequency of the use of the infinitive in Christian writers, see Perrochat (1932b: 188–91).
³² For possible Greek influence, see Calboli (2009: 133–4).
³³ For further instances, see K.-St.: I.683–7; Sz: 350–1.
³⁴ For further instances of dignus, see TLL s.v. 1152.32ff.
Subordinate clauses at adjective/adverb phrase level
(d) Aut nihil aut paulo cui tum concedere digna / lux mea se nostrum contulit in
gremium . . .
(‘Either not at all or a little deserving to give place to that one, my bright one came
into my arms . . .’ Catul. 68.131–2)
(e) Et puer ipse fuit cantari dignus . . .
(‘The boy himself was worthy to be sung . . .’ Verg. Ecl. 5.54)
(f) Campus erat, campi claudebant ultima colles / silvaque montanas occulere
apta feras.
(‘There was a plain; hills and a forest suited for hiding mountain animals enclosed its
borders.’ Ov. Fast. 2.215–16)
Supplement (in alphabetical order by adjective):
. . . avidi committere pugnam . . . (Ov. Met. 5.75); Cur non, Mopse, boni quoniam con-
venimus ambo, / tu calamos inflare levis, ego dicere versus, / hic corylis mixtas inter
consedimus ulmos? (Verg. Ecl. 5.1–3); . . . amicum, / praesertim cautum dignos
adsumere . . . (Hor. S. 1.6.50–1); O celere<s> at mala vota dei / has audire ·
preces . . . (CIL X.7570.4–5 (Cagliari, 2nd cent. ad (first half))); . . . Caesar . . . certus
procul urbe degere. (Tac. Ann. 4.57.1); Cum diabolo temptante congreditur et inimi-
cum tantum vicisse contentus nihil ultra verba conatur. (Cypr. Pat. 6); (Iulianus dixit)
Verum non uno modo vicisse contentus argumenti tui, cuius impietatem prodidi,
coarguam falsitatem. (August. Jul. 5.39); . . . cupidus falsis attingere gaudia palmis . . .
(Prop. 1.19.9); . . . durus componere versus. (Hor. S. 1.4.8); Ah nimium faciles aurem
praebere puellae, / discite desertae non temere esse bonae! (Prop. 2.21.15–16); . . .
(materiam) spiritalem et penetrare et insidere facilem per substantiae suae subtili-
tatem. (Tert. Bapt. 4.1); Septima post decumam felix et ponere vitem / et prensos
domitare boves et licia telae / addere. (Verg. G. 1.284–6); . . . impiger hostium / vexare
turmas . . . (Hor. Carm. 4.14.22–3); Ingens ferre mala et Fortunae subdere colla /
nescius . . . (Sil. 10.215–16); . . . ademptus Hector / tradidit fessis leviora tolli /
Pergama Grais. (Hor. Carm. 2.4.10–12); . . . Creator omnium et multum potens for-
mare nostra deformia. (Aug. Conf. 9.6); Is recens praetura, modicus dignationis et
quoquo facinore properus clarescere . . . (Tac. Ann. 4.52.1); Nomentanus erat super
ipsum, Porcius infra, / ridiculus totas semel absorbere placentas. (Hor. S. 2.8.23–4); . . .
portu, quo non spatiosior alter / innumeras cepisse rates et claudere pontum . . . (Sil.
8.481–2)
Passive infinitive: . . . gens barbara, aspera et regi difficilis . . . (V. Max. 7.3.6); . . . ne
totiens falli digna fuisse puter. (Ov. Fast. 3.490); Necdum ora patent, dubiusque
notari / signa dabat magnae longe manifesta ruinae / planctuque et gemitu. (Stat.
Theb. 3.42–4); Quamquam ipse videri / exiguus, gravia ossa tamen nodisque
lacerti / difficiles. (Stat. Theb. 6.844–6); . . . et facilis spargi munda sine arte rosa . . .
(Prop. 4.8.40); unde et acetaria appellantur, facilia concoqui nec one<r>atura
sensu<s> cibo et quae minime accenderent desiderium panis. (Plin. Nat.
19.58); . . . urit grata protervitas / et vultus nimium lubricus adspici. (Hor. Carm.
1.19.7–8); . . . maiorque videri / nec mortale sonans adflata est numine quando /
iam propiore dei. (Verg. A. 6.49–51); (sc. vitulus) . . . niveus videri, / cetera fulvos.
(Hor. Carm. 4.2.59–60)
Subordinate clauses with nouns, adjectives, and adverbs
Table 17.1 gives a number of adjectives found with gerundial and gerundival clauses
with an indication of their first attestation in that construction. Gerundial and
gerundival clauses in this context rarely contain arguments or satellites. In the
examples given in the following sections, adjectives are included which are used as
head constituent (so-called substantival use) or which function as appositives.
Examples with a gerund in the genitive and the dative are given in § 17.31, (a) and (b),
respectively. Prepositional expressions are illustrated by (a) below. An example of an
ablative gerundial clause is (b). Extension of the gerund to adjectives that do not
require another entity is shown in (c).
(a) . . . minime aptum ad dicendum genus.
(‘. . . a sort ill-suited to public speaking.’ Cic. Brut. 131)
(b) . . . cul<p>and<o> nihilum dignus, set dignus amari . . .
(‘. . . not at all worthy of blaming, but worthy to be loved . . .’ CIL III.9504.2–4 (=CLE
650.2, Salona, ad 360))
(c) . . . tenebatque animos nostros homo ille fandi dulcissimus . . .
(‘. . . and that man most sweet at speaking held our minds enthralled . . .’ Gel. 16.3.1)
Supplement (in alphabetical order by adjective; some examples are rather
satellites):
Genitive: Thebis hebetes et brutos nasci relatum est, Athenis sapiendi dicendique
acutissimos . . . (Tert. An. 20.3);³⁶ . . . Dominum . . . percutiendi et saeviendi alienum . . .
(Tert. Marc. 5.12.8); Nam Tiberius cuncta per consules incipiebat, tamquam vetere re
publica et ambiguus imperandi. (Tac. Ann. 1.7.3); Aeneas celsa in puppi, iam certus
eundi, / carpebat somnos rebus iam rite paratis. (Verg. A. 4.554–5); Ut si quis apud
³⁶ For Tertullian’s frequent use of the genitive with adjectives, see Hoppe (1903: 21ff.=1985: 54ff.).
Subordinate clauses with nouns, adjectives, and adverbs
equites Romanos cupidos iudicandi Caepionis legem iudiciariam laudet. (Cic. Inv.
1.92); Qua ex parte homines bellandi cupidi magno dolore adficiebantur. (Caes.
Gal. 1.2.4); Secunda activa est quae tantum vitae commodis anxiata, ornatui petax,
habendi insatiata, rapiendi cauta, servandi sollicita geritur. (Fulg. Myth. 2.66); . . . (sc.
Hasdrubal) mercandi dextras largus belloque parata / prodigere in bellum facilis.
(Sil. 15.495–6); Orator est, Marce fili, vir bonus, dicendi peritus. (Cato Fil.
14(J)); . . . naves, piscatoriae pleraeque, conspectae peritis nandi dedissent effugium.
(Liv. 23.1.7)
Dative: . . . hominem non imperando habilem . . . (Paneg. 4(10)8.2); Nam emporitica
inutilis scribendo involucris chartarum segestriumque mercibus usum praebet, ideo
a mercatoribus cognominata. (Plin. Nat. 13.76); Quem ubi equites quoque tegendo
satis latebrosum locum circumvectus ipse oculis perlustravit . . . (Liv. 21.54.1)
Ablative: . . . lassos itinere ac proeliando milites ad oppugnanda castra succedere
noluit. (B. Alex. 30.2—NB: coordination)
Prepositional phrase: . . . in ipsius paterno genere fuit noster ille amicus, dignus huic
ad imitandum . . . (Cic. Rep. 1.30); (Nilus) . . . irrigat adeo efficacibus aquis ad gene-
randum alendumque ut . . . (Mela 1.9.52); . . . non unam aut facilem ad subigendum
frenat et domat <beluam> . . . (Cic. Rep. 2.67); Principium est, cum statim auditoris
animum nobis idoneum reddimus ad audiendum. (Rhet. Her. 1.6); Incidit per id tem-
pus ut tempestates ad navigandum idoneas non haberet. (B. Afr. 1.3); Oratorem
autem . . . eum puto esse, qui et verbis ad audiendum iucundis et sententiis ad proban-
dum accommodatis uti possit . . . (Cic. de Orat. 1.213); Itaque ficus, malus Punica et
vitis propter femin<e>am mollitiam ad crescendum prona, contra palma et cupres-
sus et olea in crescendo tarda. (Var. R. 1.41.4–5)
Gerundival clauses with adjectival attributes and subject and object complements can
be found in all periods of Latin, in spite of their complexity. Examples of a genitive,
dative, ablative, and prepositional gerundival clause are (a)–(d), respectively. The
clauses are normally not complex in themselves.
(a) . . . qui perpessus est omnia potius quam conscios delendae tyrannidis
indicaret.
(‘. . . who endured every torment rather than be brought to divulge his accomplices in
the plot to overthrow tyranny.’ Cic. Tusc. 2.52)
(b) Referundae ego habeo linguam natam gratiae.
(‘I have a tongue that was made for returning thanks.’ Pl. Per. 428)
(c) . . . dum flumen gignendo sale fecundum et conterminum vi trahunt . . .
(‘. . . while they attempt to appropriate by force a river fertile in producing salt and one
which served as the frontier line between the tribes . . .’ Tac. Ann. 13.57.1)
(d) . . . magnum quoddam ornamentum orationis et aptum ad animos concilian-
dos vel maxime, saepe autem etiam ad commovendos.
(‘. . . a considerable ornament of style, and extremely effective in calming down an
audience and often also in exciting it.’ Cic. de Orat. 3.204)
Subordinate clauses at adjective/adverb phrase level
(a) . . . nequis iniussu vilici exierit neque vilicus iniussu domini longius quam ut
eodem die rediret . . .
(‘. . . no one shall leave the farm without the direction of the overseer, nor the overseer
without the direction of the master, for longer than so as to return on the same day . . .’
Var. R. 1.16.5)
(b) (sc. oratio) . . . qua praecepta salutis et laudis apte ad persuadendum edat suis
civibus . . .
(‘. . . by which he might publish precepts conducive to health and praise in a manner
suited to persuading his fellow-citizens . . .’ Cic. Leg. 1.62)
Supplement:
Nam et vera esse et apte ad repraesentandam iram deum ficta possunt. (Liv.
8.6.3); . . . sed is est orator qui de omni quaestione pulchre et ornate et ad persuaden-
dum apte dicere . . . possit. (Tac. Dial. 30.5); . . . gressum reciperavi, nondum quidem ad
innitendum idonee, sed . . . (Apul. Flor. 16.23–4)
CHAPTER 18
Relative clauses
18.1 Introduction
Relative clauses consist minimally of a relative expression and a finite verb form
(rarely a historic infinitive—see § 7.71, Appendix, and § 7.122—or an accusative and
infinitive clause—see § 15.107). There are two types of expressions involving relatives:
relative words and relative phrases. Latin has three classes of relative words: rela-
tive pronouns, relative adjectives, and relative adverbs. The most common relative
pronoun is qui, quae, quod ‘who’, ‘which’, illustrated by (a). Ex. (b) shows the use of the
relative adjective qualis, here used as a subject complement with es. Ex. (c) illustrates
the use of the relative adverb ubi.
(a) Nam improbus est homo qui beneficium scit accipere et reddere nescit.
(‘For a man who knows how to receive a good turn, but doesn’t know how to return
it, is worthless.’ Pl. Per. 762)
(b) Pariter suades qualis es.
(‘Your advice is of the same quality as you are.’ Pl. Rud. 875)
(c) Ubi se adiuvat, ibi me adiuvat.
(‘When she’s helping herself, she’s helping me.’ Pl. Per. 304)
Relative phrases consist of a head noun or noun phrase and a relative determiner
or a relative adjective that modifies that noun or noun phrase. An example of a rela-
tive determiner is quibus . . . dictis in (d); of a relative adjective, quale bellum in (e).
(d) Quibus est dictis dignus usque oneremus ambo.
(‘Let’s both burden him with the words he deserves.’ Pl. Mer. 978)
(e) In hoc . . . bello, quale bellum nulla umquam barbaria cum sua gente gessit . . .
(‘In this war, . . . a war such as no tribe of barbarians ever fought among its own
people . . .’ Cic. Catil. 3.25)
As a comparison of (a) and (d) shows, qui, quae, quod can be used both as a pronoun
and as a determiner. Most scholars use the terms ‘substantival’ and ‘adjectival’ to
distinguish between these two uses (for determiners, see § 3.8 and §§ 11.25–8).
The Oxford Latin Syntax. Harm Pinkster, Oxford University Press (2021). © Harm Pinkster.
DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780199230563.003.0018
472 Relative clauses
Instances in Late Latin of utterances which look like a combination of a main clause
with a relative clause in which a relative pronoun is missing are mentioned by
Sz.: 532. Just as in other types of clauses and sentences a finite verb (and other con-
stituents) may be absent for various reasons.
Latin has a large number of relative words, some more common than others.
Many are built with qu-, of which the most frequent are cited in Table 18.1 (for
examples see the OLD). Not included are most of the indefinite relative pronouns
and adverbs. Latin has formations with -cumque ‘-ever’ as in quicumque ‘who-
ever’, ‘whatever’ (from Early Latin onwards), many of which are attested from
Cicero’s time onwards. Reduplicated forms of the type quantusquantus ‘however
great’ and ubiubi ‘wherever’ are also present from Early Latin onwards. In Silver
or Late Latin other formations are used as well, with -libet (such as quantuslibet
‘however great’ (from Quintilian onwards)) and with -vis (for instance, quivis
‘whoever’ (fourth century ad)).
As for the internal structure of relative clauses, there are no restrictions as far as argu-
ments and adjuncts are concerned. The relative pronoun may be expanded with a
secondary predicate, such as maesti in (f) and meorum . . . commotus in (g). Relative
clauses may contain other relative clauses, as is shown in (g). For sentence type and
Types of relative clauses 473
the illocutionary force of individual types of relative clauses, see § 18.6 fin. and
§§ 18.23–6.
(f) Pauci tamen boni inerant, quos reiectione fugare ille non potuerat, qui maesti
inter sui dissimilis et † maerentes † sedebant et contagione turpitudinis vehe-
menter permovebantur.
(‘Even so there were a few honest men whom the accused had not been able to drive
off at the challenge and who sat there, gloomy and shamefaced (?) in this incongru-
ous party, sadly uncomfortable to feel themselves exposed to the miasma of disrepu-
tability.’ Cic. Att. 1.16.3)
(g) An ego, qui meorum lacrimis me absente commotus simultates quas mecum
habebat deposuisset, meaeque salutis non modo non oppugnator, ut inimici
mei putarant, sed etiam defensor fuisset, huius in periculo non significarem
dolorem meum?
(‘Would you have me exhibit no symptoms of grief when danger threatened one who
had been so affected by the tears of my dear ones, when I myself was far away, that he
had waived his old differences with me, and, so far from standing forth, as my
enemies had anticipated, as the assailant of my well-being, had actually become its
champion?’ Cic. Planc. 76)
Relative adjectives and adverbs are treated separately in §§ 18.34–9. The sections that
follow are mainly about the pronoun/determiner qui and related relative words.1
1 Relative clauses have received much attention, both in general linguistics and in studies of Latin.
Major contributions are Touratier (1980), Lehmann (1984), Lavency (1998a), and Pompei (2011c). For
indications of the relative frequency of relative clauses and participial constructions in various authors,
see Calboli (2006). For the frequency of use of relative clauses by various authors, see Meyers (2019: 280).
2 For these two types of relative clauses, see Touratier (2002), with references.
474 Relative clauses
(b) Mercurius, Iovis qui nuntius perhibetur, numquam aeque patri / suo nun-
tium lepidum attulit quam . . .
(‘Mercury, who is said to be Jupiter’s messenger, never brought his father a message
as delightful as . . .’ Pl. St. 274–5)
In (a), the relative clause quem tute dederas ad eum ut ferret filio functions as attribute
of the noun symbolum, which in turn is the head of the relative clause. The relative
pronoun quem refers to the same entity as symbolum; in other words, it is coreferen-
tial with symbolum. In its clause, quem functions as the object, while symbolum is the
object of the main clause. A common label for the head of a relative clause is ante-
cedent, but in reality relative clauses do not always follow their heads. In this Syntax
the term ‘head’ is used in most cases. Ex. (b) resembles (a) in that qui is coreferential
with Mercurius, but the semantic relationship between the relative clause and its head
in (b) is less close than in (a): in (a), the relative clause is essential for a correct under-
standing of which token is meant, while in (b) it contains supplementary information;
Mercurius is well-known and omission of the relative clause does not result in an
incomprehensible or bizarre text. The relative clause in (a) will be called restrictive,
the one in (b) non-restrictive (often called appositive). In spoken Latin, the two
types of relative clauses were probably distinguished by intonation, with a pause
before the non-restrictive type. These two types of relative clauses, which both func-
tion as attribute at the noun phrase level, are called adnominal relative clauses
in this Syntax.
The term ‘adnominal’ is slightly misleading since it suggests that the relative clause
always modifies a noun. In reality an adnominal relative clause often modifies a
noun phrase. This can be seen in (c), where quae Caryatides dicuntur modifies the
entire phrase statuas marmoreas muliebres stolatas and not statuas alone. Also, non-
restrictive relative clauses can be used with personal pronouns and with anaphoric
and anaphorically used pronouns (see § 18.6).
(c) . . . si quis statuas marmoreas muliebres stolatas, quae Caryatides dicuntur,
pro columnis in opere statuerit . . .
(‘. . . if anyone in his work sets up, instead of columns, marble statues of long-
robed women, which are called caryatids. . .’ Vitr. 1.1.5)
The use of relative clauses at the clause level is illustrated by (d) and (e), the former
with a relative pronoun (qui), the latter with a relative phrase (qui homo). These
clauses differ from (a) and (b) in that there is no head constituent in the main clause:
they are ‘headless’ relative clauses. In this Syntax, they are called autonomous rela-
tive clauses. Other scholars use the term ‘nominal relative clause’,3 or ‘free relative
clause’. In (d), the clause qui amat functions as the subject of the main clause misera
affligitur aerumna. In English it could be translated as ‘a lover’. In his translation de
Melo has added he, which functions more or less as an antecedent of who. In contem-
porary English some form of antecedent is required with who, but in ‘archaic English’
3 So, for example, Quirk et al. (1985: 1056) and Lavency (1998a). Lehmann (1984: 45) has the term
‘substantivisch.’
Types of relative clauses 475
one could say who holds the sea, perforce doth hold the land.4 With what an antecedent
is excluded, as in What happened upset him and I love what I do.5 Generally speaking,
there are more restrictions on this type of relativization in English than in Latin.
Likewise in (e), qui homo mature quaesivit pecuniam functions as the subject of the
main clause mature esurit. There is no possibility of translating this into English while
keeping the structure of the Latin. The difference between (e) and (f)—an adnominal
relative clause—is that qui in (f) has an ‘external’ head that belongs to another clause,
whereas qui in (e) has an ‘internal’ head within its own clause.6 But note that de Melo
uses the same translation: ‘a man who’.
(d) Edepol qui amat . . . misera affligitur aerumna.
(‘Truly, he who is in love . . . is struck by miserable sorrow.’ Pl. Cur. 142)
(e) Qui homo mature quaesivit pecuniam / . . . mature esurit.
(‘A man who has made money quickly . . . goes hungry quickly.’ Pl. Cur. 380–1)
(f) O Libane, uti miser est homo qui amat.
(‘Oh Libanus! How wretched is a man who’s in love.’ Pl. As. 616)
The essential difference between adnominal and autonomous relative clauses is that
the former function at the level of the noun phrase (as attribute), whereas the latter
function at the level of the clause, as subject, object, or in other functions (see § 18.16).
They can also function at the level of the adjective phrase (see § 18.19).
Autonomous relative clauses are often described as a variant of adnominal relative
clauses, that is, as relative clauses of which the head is ‘omitted’7 or is incorporated
into or ‘contained’8 in the relative clause. An objection to this analysis is that the fre-
quency of the autonomous type (see below) is such that there is no need to regard the
adnominal type as the original one from which the autonomous type is a deviation.
Also, the syntactic behaviour of autonomous relative clauses is very different from
that of adnominal relative clauses.9 In Dutch the adnominal relative pronoun (die,
dat) is formally distinct from the autonomous relative pronoun (wie, wat).
As to the frequency with which these types of relative clauses are used, this varies with
the type of text and the author involved. Table 18.2 gives an impression of the fre-
quency in a number of texts.10 Note that the percentage of autonomous relative clauses
is far from negligible. (For connective relative clauses, see § 18.28.)
4 Example taken from The New Oxford Dictionary of English s.v. who. The Dutch equivalent with wie
is fully acceptable.
5 See Quirk et al. (1985: 1056–9). Whoever relative clauses are also less restricted.
6 Some scholars use the term ‘internally headed relative clause’, e.g. Fabb (1999: 321).
7 So Allen and Greenough § 307 c. The idea that with autonomous relative clauses a head is missing is
already expressed by Priscian 17.128.8–14K.
8 As in Quirk et al. (1985: 1056).
9 See Serbat (1988b: 37–43) on the failure to describe all varieties of relative clauses in terms of ‘adjec-
tival clauses’. For the need to deal with the two types of relative clauses separately, see Taylor (1951: 238).
10 Frequency data can also be found in Addabbo (2001) and Fruyt (2019c), on Cato Agr.; Serbat (1988b:
37–43), on Ter., Pl. Aul., Cic. Off. 1, Apul. Met. 11; Fruyt (2019d), on Sen. Nat. See also Pompei (2011c:
529–39) for diachronic considerations. The research for Table 18.2 was done by Jeremy Brightbill.
476 Relative clauses
Table 18.2 Relative frequency (in %) of types of relative clauses (50 clauses per text)
Pl. Cic. Cic. Caes. Liv. Plin. Tac. Lucr. Verg. Ov.
Rud. Att. Catil. Civ. 3 9 Nat. 2 Ann. 1 3 A.1 Met.1
Autonomous 40 54 48 24 50 40 32 28 26 26
Adnominal 58 38 34 58 42 52 54 54 66 56
Restrictive 18 16 18 18 16 12 18 10 20 12
Non-restrictive 40 22 16 40 26 40 36 44 46 44
Connective 2 8 18 18 8 8 14 18 8 18
(‘Now that we have learned the nature of this kind of rhythm, let us proceed to
explain the third topic—the well-knit rhythm of prose. There are some people who
do not feel this, but I do not know what sort of ears they have, nor whether they are
human at all.’ Cic. Orat. 168)
In all these examples the first pronoun is coreferential with a constituent in the pre-
ceding clause (or with the clause as a whole or a more extended text). Thus, the pro-
noun is ‘adnominal’. The second relative pronoun belongs to an autonomous relative
clause that has its own function in a superordinate clause.11
The use of an adnominal relative expression within an autonomous relative clause
is a common feature of the Classical prose of Caesar and Cicero, but is less frequent in
other authors.
Supplement:12
Quae (sc. arma) qui non habuerint, eos inermos fuisse vinces. (Cic. Caec. 61); Non
enim eloquentem quaero neque quicquam mortale et caducum sed illud ipsum,
cuius qui sit compos, sit eloquens. (Cic. Or. 101); (sc. Epicurus) Est enim, quod tibi
ita videri necesse est, non satis politus iis artibus quas qui tenent eruditi appellantur.
(Cic. Fin. 1.26); Nihil est enim virtute amabilius, quam qui adeptus erit ubicumque
erit gentium a nobis diligetur. (Cic. N.D. 1.121); Qualia igitur ista bona sunt quae qui
habeat miserrimus esse possit? (Cic. Tusc. 5.45); Aequiculis autem in Italia et in
Alpibus natione Medullorum est genus aquae, quam qui bibunt efficiuntur turgidis
gutturibus. (Vitr. 8.3.20); Susis autem, in qua civitate est regnum Persarum, fonticu-
lus est, ex quo qui biberint, amittunt dentes. (Vitr. 8.3.23); Spiracula vocant, alii
Charonea, scrobes mortiferum spiritum exhalantes, item in Hirpinis Ampsancti
ad Mephitis aedem locum, quem qui intravere moriuntur. (Plin. Nat. 2.208); Nam
sunt quaedam cognata, ut dicunt, id est eiusdem generis, in quibus qui alia specie
quam oportet utetur, non minus quam ipso genere permutato deliquerit. (Quint.
Inst. 1.5.49)
The examples above should not be confused with other complex formations involv-
ing relative pronouns, such as those in which an adnominal relative clause contains
another subordinate clause (e.g. a satellite clause), as in (k), or an autonomous rela-
tive clause, as qui audiunt ‘the listeners’ in (l)—quem is not object of audiunt, but
subject of the accusative and infinitive clause, which in turn is the object of
arbitrantur—or where an adnominal relative clause modifies an autonomous relative
clause, as in (m), or where the entire utterance is anacoluthic, as in (n).
(k) (M. Horatius ille Pulvillus), qui, cum eum multi propter invidiam fictis reli-
gionibus impedirent, restitit . . .
(‘. . . Horatius Pulvillus, who, when many men were moved by jealousy to
interfere with his actions on false pleas of religious hindrances, still stood his
ground . . .’ Cic. Dom. 139)
11 A generative explanation is given by Maurel (1989) and Danckaert (2012). For examples, see also
Ambrosini (1992: 174–8).
12 Most of the examples are taken from K.-St.: II.315–19.
478 Relative clauses
(l) Magna est enim admiratio copiose sapienterque dicentis quem qui audiunt
intellegere etiam et sapere plus quam ceteros arbitrantur.
(‘For there is great admiration for the eloquent and judicious speaker, and
those who hear him judge him to have greater understanding and wisdom
than all others.’ Cic. Off. 2.48)
(m) Quicquid eiusdem generis habebis dignum Academia tibi quod videbitur,
ne dubitaris mittere et arcae nostrae confidito.
(‘Anything you may have of the same sort which you think suitable for the
Academy, don’t hesitate to send it and trust my purse.’ Cic. Att. 1.9.2)
(n) Edepol ne me eius patris misere miseret, qui quom istaec sciet / facta ita,
amburet ei misero corculum carbunculus.
(‘Honestly, I feel terribly sorry for his father; once he knows what’s been
done, a coal will burn this wretched man’s poor heart.’ Pl. Mos. 985–6)
Supplement:
Non laudandu’st quoi plus credit qui audit quam <ille> qui videt. (Pl. Truc. 487); Mihi
autem aequius videbatur Zenonem cum Polemone disceptantem, a quo quae essent
principia naturae acceperat . . . (Cic. Fin. 4.45); Est autem infima condicio et fortuna
servorum, quibus non male praecipiunt qui ita iubent uti ut mercennariis: operam
exigendam, iusta praebenda. (Cic. Off. 1.41); Propositum hoc est de quo qui rerum
potiuntur sunt dimicaturi . . . (Cael. Fam. 8.14.2); Decessit filius tuus, id est, decucur-
rit ad hunc finem, ad quem quae feliciora partu tuo putas properant. (Sen. Dial.
6.11.2); Simile est regnum caelorum thesauro abscondito in agro quem qui invenit
homo abscondit . . . (Vulg. Mat. 13.44)
Also with other types of subordinate clauses: Itaque illud indecorum, quod quale
sit ex decoro debet intellegi, hic quoque apparet . . . (Cic. Orat. 82); Errare mehercule
malo cum Platone, quem tu quanti facias scio . . . (Cic. Tusc. 1.39); De decumis, de
civium Romanorum condicione in arationibus disputo, qui quem ad modum
essent accepti, iudices, audistis ex ipsis. (Cic. Ver. 3.59); Sed eo vidisti multum,
quod praefinisti quo ne pluris emerem. (Cic. Fam. 7.2.1—NB: quo is an ablativus
comparationis)13
13 See K.-St.: II.210. 14 ‘Adjektivsätze’ in German. For discussion, see Touratier (2011).
Adnominal relative clauses 479
Several subtypes of restrictive relative clauses can be distinguished. In (a), the relative
clause serves to identify which symbolum is meant: it is thus an identifying relative
clause. In (b), the relative clause specifies what kind of slave is useful: this type is called
descriptive. The modifiers in both examples reduce the number of possible referents
of the heads. However, the distinction between the two types is not always obvious.
(a) Eo praesente homini extemplo ostendit symbolum / quem tute dederas ad
eum ut ferret filio.
(‘In his presence he promptly showed him the token, the one you yourself had given
your son to bring to him.’ Pl. Bac. 263–4)
(b) Servi qui, quom culpa carent, tamen malum metuont, / i solent esse eris
utibiles.
(‘Those slaves who fear a thrashing even when they’re free from guilt are generally
useful to their masters.’ Pl. Mos. 858–9)
Just like noun phrases in general (see §§ 11.100–8), a noun phrase consisting of a head
and its relative clause may be definite, as in (a), or indefinite, as in (c). Ex. (b) illus-
trates a generic noun phrase containing a relative clause. Note that in (b) the constitu-
ent servi qui . . . metuont as a whole is resumed by the anaphoric pronoun i.
(c) Adulescens venit modo qui id argentum attulit.
(‘A young man’s just come who has brought this money with him.’ Pl. As. 337)
Supplement:
Identifying relative clauses: . . . ut ego tua magnufica verba neque istas tuas magnas
minas / non pluris facio quam ancillam meam quae latrinam lavat. (Pl. Cur. 579–80);
Cum factum tuum gratum omnibus debet esse, tum vero oratio qua recitatis litteris
usus es. (Cic. Phil. 10.1); Miraculo primo esse Romanis qui proximi steterant, ut
nudari latera sua sociorum digressu senserunt. (Liv. 1.27.7); Nervus ex quo testiculus
dependet plenior fit, simulque indurescit. (Cels. 7.18.11); Oppida Aegae, in quo sepe-
liri mos reges, Beroea et in regione quae Pieria appellatur a nemore, Aeginium. (Plin.
Nat. 4.33)
Descriptive relative clauses: Habe’n tu amicum aut familiarem quempiam / quoi
pectus sapiat? (Pl. Trin. 89–90); Sunt enim certa vitia quae nemo est quin effugere
cupiat. (Cic. de Orat. 3.41); Utrisque ad animum occurrit unum esse illud tempus
quo maxime contendi conveniat. (Caes. Gal. 7.85.2); Mali etiam morbi signum
est . . . habere sudores non per totum corpus aequales quique febrem non finiant; et
eas febres quae quotidie tempore eodem revertantur; quaeve semper pares acces-
siones habeant, neque tertio quoque die leventur; quaeve sic continuent, ut . . . (Cels.
2.4.4–5); Obiecisti mihi ultimum nefas et quod qui tantum suspicatus est noluit
vivere. (Sen. Con. 8.3.fin.)
Supplement:
Postea L. Sulla homo . . . cum eius rei quaestionem hac ipsa lege constitueret qua vos
hoc tempore iudicatis, populum Romanum . . . adligare novo quaestionis genere ausus
non est. (Cic. Clu. 151); Argumentum evidens, quod omnia superiora e caelo
decidentia (sc. fulmina) obliquos habent ictus, haec autem quae vocant terrena
rectos. (Plin. Nat. 2.138)
Numquam edepol fuit neque fiet ill’ senex insanior / ex amore quam ille adulescens
quoi ego do hanc operam, pater. (Pl. Mer. 446–7); Ego cum illo quocum tum uno rem
habebam hospite / abii huc. (Ter. Eu. 119–20); . . . si Philonem, illum architectum qui
Atheniensibus armamentarium fecit, constat perdiserte populo rationem operis sui
reddidisse . . . (Cic. de Orat. 1.62); . . . Eandem hanc aliqui esse dicunt, alii similem illi
(sc. herba) quam militarem vocant . . . (Plin. Nat. 24.168)
Qua re istam orationem qua es usus omittas licet, post illam sententiam quam
dixeram de annona pontificum animos esse mutatos. (Cic. Dom. 31)
Etiam opilio qui pascit, mater, alienas ovis / aliquam habet peculiarem qui spem
soletur suam. (Pl. As. 539–40); si . . . neque aliquod negotium exstiterit quod honeste
subterfugere non possit . . . (Cic. Agr. 1.26); Quod si te, Cotta, arbitrarer aut te, Sulpici,
15 ‘Generic’, for example, Woodcock (1959: 114–19); ‘consecutive’, Roby (1882: 294).
Adnominal relative clauses 481
de iis rebus audire velle, adduxissem huc Graecum aliquem qui nos istius modi dis-
putationibus delectaret. (Cic. de Orat. 1.104); Esse aliquam in terris gentem quae sua
impensa . . . bella gerat . . . (Liv. 33.33.5)
Est ei quidam servos qui in morbo cubat . . . (Pl. Cas. 37); Hic quandam noram
quoi(u)s vir uxorem . . . (Ter. Ph. 941); Ennium esse quendam cuius bona teneat
Habitus. (Cic. Clu. 163); Appositus erat Venuleius quidam qui emeret. (Cic. Ver.
3.99); Quod non tam interfuit mea . . . quam rei publicae, quod erant quidam improbi
qui contentionem fore aliquam mihi cum Pompeio ex rerum illarum dissensione
arbitrarentur. (Cic. Att. 1.19.7)
(h) Coquos equidem nimis demiror, qui utuntur condimentis, / eos eo condimento
uno non utier omnibus quod praestat.
(‘I’m highly surprised that cooks, who use spices, don’t use this one spice which
surpasses all others.’ Pl. Cas. 219–20)
(i) Meruisse vero stipendia in eo bello quod tum populus Romanus non modo
maximum sed etiam solum gerebat virtutis . . . fuit.
(‘However, by serving in the war which was the most important—in fact the only—
war then being fought by the Roman people he gave proof of his bravery.’ Cic.
Mur. 12)
( j) In digitis nihil ultra fieri debet, quam quod in iis qui sunt in manu posi-
tum est.
(‘For the toes nothing else is required than what was laid down for the fingers.’
Cels. 6.24)
(k) Cape, opsecro hercle, cum eo <tu> una iudicem / —sed eum videto ut capias
qui credat mihi.
(‘Please, choose an arbitrator together with him (but make sure that you choose one
who believes me).’ Pl. Mos. 557–8)
(l) Non sum autem ego is consul qui, ut plerique, nefas esse arbitrer Gracchos
laudare . . .
(‘I am not one of those consuls who, like the majority, think it a crime to praise the
Gracchi . . .’ Cic. Agr. 2.10)
16 For the instances of is . . . qui in Caesar, see Lavency (1996a). See also Vester (1989: 342),
Lavency (1998a: 30–1), and Pompei (2011b: 71–2).
17 See Lehmann (1984: 290) and his example: ‘Ich suche den Regenschirm, der unter zwanzig Mark
kostet.’
482 Relative clauses
Supplement:
Indicative mood: Ubi is homo est quem dicis? (Pl. Truc. 826); Nam impediebantur,
verum ea lege quam idem iste de Macedonia Syriaque tulerat. (Cic. Dom. 70); At
Sugambri ex eo tempore quo pons institui coeptus est . . . finibus suis excesserant . . .
(Caes. Gal. 4.18.4); . . . tertiae cohortis centuriones ex eo quo stabant loco recesse-
runt . . . (Caes. Gal. 5.43.6); . . . in eo volumine quod scripsit Nicodoro Atheniensium
magistratu, qui fuit urbis nostrae CCCCXL anno. (Plin. Nat. 3.58)
Subjunctive mood: Non enim latroni, sed regi credidit, nec regi inimico populi
Romani, sed ei cuius reditum consuli commendatum <a> senatu videbat, nec ei regi
([ei] Olechowska) qui alienus ab hoc imperio esset, sed ei quicum foedus feriri in
Capitolio viderat. (Cic. Rab. Post. 6); Nam et legem ullam omnino abrogari est indig-
natus, et eam praecipue legem quae luxuriae muliebris coercendae causa lata esset.
(Liv. 34.6.1); Idem tradit in Paphlagonia effodi pisces . . . in iis locis in quibus nullae
restagnent aquae . . . (Plin. Nat. 9.178—NB: the subjunctive may be oblique)
Is in the examples above does not have its regular anaphoric function. Combinations
of is + noun + relative where is is indeed anaphoric are extremely rare. In such
instances the relative clause is of course non-restrictive.18
Noun phrases that consist of a head noun and a restrictive relative clause may be
modified in various other ways, for example by quantifiers like nonnulli, omnes, or
pauci. This is shown by (m)–(o). In general, there are no restrictions on the type of
determiner allowed.
(m) Adhuc neminem cognovi poetam . . . qui sibi non optumus videretur.
(‘So far I have known no poet . . . who did not think himself the best.’ Cic. Tusc. 5.63)
(n) H[u]ic quoque accidit—quod fuit necesse—ut nonnulli milites qui ligna-
tionis munitionisque causa in silvas discessissent repentino equitum adventu
interciperentur.
(‘In his case also it happened—as was inevitable—that some soldiers who had gone
off into the woods to get timber for entrenching were cut off by the sudden arrival of
the enemy’s horsemen.’ Caes. Gal. 5.39.2)
(o) Huc omnes mulieres quibuscum iste consuerat conveniebant . . .
(‘All the women with whom he had associated came together here.’ Cic. Ver. 5.30)
(p) . . . ut intellegatis, quantam locus ipse adferat superbiam, quae paucis diebus
quibus illo colonia deducta est perspici atque intellegi potuit.
(‘. . . so you may understand what pride the very place inspires, as could be clearly
seen and understood within the first few days during which the colony was estab-
lished.’ Cic. Agr. 2.92)
As is shown above, a noun phrase that consists of a head noun and a restrictive rela-
tive clause can contain determiners like hic or ille. This combination may be referred
to with a resumptive pronoun which indicates the function of the preceding noun
phrase in the main clause, usually the anaphoric pronoun is. A resumptive pronoun
18 See TLL s.v. is 474.63ff. Vester (1989: 342) denies the existence of such instances.
Adnominal relative clauses 483
seems to be preferred if the entity to which it refers continues to be the topic of the
following sentence.19 Examples from Plautus are (q) (repeated from (d) above)–(s).
Note that in (q) and (r) hic . . . senex and pallam illam have the same case form as the
resumptive pronouns, which is the case required in their clause. In (s), by contrast,
the cases are different and, moreover, hunc chlamydatum has the same case as the
relative pronoun quem, an instance of attractio inversa (see § 18.8). The combination
of head noun + adnominal relative clause followed by a resumptive pronoun resem-
bles some of the theme constituents discussed in § 22.14.20
(q) Et hic qui poscet eam sibi uxorem senex, / is adulescentis est illius avunculus /
qui illam stupravit noctu, Cereris vigiliis.
(‘And this old man who’s going to ask for her hand, he’s the uncle of that young fellow
who violated her chastity by night during the vigil held in honour of Ceres.’ Pl.
Aul. 34–6)
(r) Immo edepol pallam illam, amabo te, quam tibi dudum dedi, / mihi eam
redde.
(‘No by Pollux, please return that mantle I gave you a while ago.’ Pl. Men. 678–9)
(s) Hunc chlamydatum quem vides, / ei Mars iratu’st.
(‘This man in a cloak you can see, Mars is angry with him.’ Pl. Poen. 644–5)
The various possibilities for head nouns + restrictive relative clauses are expressed in
Table 18.3. The brackets () mark optional elements.
Restrictive relative clauses are not excluded in the case of proper names. Consider
for instance the phrase the young Cicero (as opposed to Cicero when he was old) in
English. Examples are (t)–(v).
(t) Qui Phormio? # Is (sc. Phormio) qui istanc—
(‘Which Phormio? # The one who got the girl.’ Ter. Ph. 618)
(u) Ei mihi qualis erat, quantum mutatus ab illo / Hectore qui redit exuvias
indutus Achilli . . .
(‘Ah me, what aspect was his! How changed he was from that Hector who
returns after donning the spoils of Achilles . . .’ Verg. A. 2.274–5)
(v) Se quoque eundem dictatorem Mam. Aemilium esse qui antea Veientium
Fidenatiumque adiunctis Faliscis ad Nomentum exercitus fuderit . . .
(‘That he was himself the same dictator Mamercus Aemilius who had for-
merly put to flight the armies of the Veientes and the Fidenates, with the
Faliscans added, before Nomentum . . .’ Liv. 4.32.3)
Restrictive adnominal relative clauses cannot be interrogative or imperative, unlike
non-restrictive ones (for which, see § 18.6, (h)–( j)). Modern languages are said not to
allow attitudinal or illocutionary disjuncts in such cases, but there is no evidence to
prove or disprove this claim for Latin.21
Supplement:
Quis tu homo es? / # Libertus illius, quem omnes Summanum vocant. (Pl. Cur.
412–13); . . . melanthi acetabulum, quod medici vocant zmurnaeum, conterito . . . (Cato
Agr. 102.1); Nunc te patria, quae communis est parens omnium nostrum, odit ac
metuit . . . (Cic. Catil. 1.17); C. Marius . . . Q. Metellum, cuius legatus erat, summum
virum et civem, . . . criminatus est . . . (Cic. Off. 3.79); Haec duo Graeci illi, quorum
copiosior est lingua quam nostra, uno nomine appellant. (Cic. Tusc. 2.35); Erat aeger
in praesidio relictus Publius Sextius Baculus, qui primum pilum apud Caesarem dux-
erat, cuius mentionem superioribus proeliis fecimus, ac diem iam quintum cibo caru-
erat. (Caes. Gal. 6.38.1); Bellovaci autem defectione Haeduorum cognita, qui ante
erant per se infideles, manus cogere atque aperte bellum parare coeperunt. (Caes.
Gal. 7.59.2); . . . Larisamque—non illam in Thessalia nobilem urbem, sed alteram,
quam Cremasten vocant—subito adventu praeter arcem cepit. (Liv. 31.46.12);
Militavi senex, militavi exsanguis, militavi qui iam vicarium dederam. (Sen. Con.
8.5.med.—NB: parallelism with secondary predicates); . . . in eo volumine, quod
scripsit Nicodoro Atheniensium magistratu, qui fuit urbis nostrae CCCCXL anno.
(Plin. Nat. 3.58); In hoc tractu interierunt Boi, quorum tribus CXII fuisse auctor est
Cato, item Senones, qui ceperunt Romam. (Plin. Nat. 3.116); Oro te, Romule Arpinas,
qui egregia tua virtute omnis Paulos Fabios Scipiones superasti, quem tandem locum
in hac civitate obtines? ([Sal.] Cic. 7)
Non-restrictive adnominal relative clauses share certain properties with independent
sentences with relative connexion, to such an extent that the two types often cannot
be distinguished. This is especially the case when the relative clause follows the clause
that contains its head noun. Frequency counts of relative connexion in the same text
show different results and the punctuation of texts varies considerably.23 There are
three distinctive properties that non-restrictive adnominal relative clauses and sen-
tences with relative connexion have in common. The first regards sentence type. Most
relative clauses are declarative, but they can also be interrogative or imperative.
Examples are (h)–( j). In (h) and (i) the relative clauses have imperative verb forms. In
( j) note the interrogative adverb quid.24
(h) Hic ille iam vertetur orbis, cuius naturalem motum atque circuitum a primo
discite adgnoscere.
(‘At this point that orbit will turn, with whose natural motion and circular course you
must become acquainted from its beginning.’ Cic. Rep. 2.45)
(i) Multas ad res perutiles Xenophontis libri sunt, quos legite quaeso studiose,
ut facitis.
(‘Xenophon’s writings are very instructive on many subjects, and I beg you to keep
reading them studiously as you have been doing.’ Cic. Sen. 59)
( j) Navigabit igitur, cum erit tempus, maximis classibus et ad Italiam accedet, in
qua nos sedentes quid erimus?
(‘He will take to the sea, therefore, as soon as the season permits, with an enormous
fleet, and will approach the shores of Italy: and what then will be our position who
remain there doing nothing?’ Cic. Att. 10.8.4)
Supplement:
Itaque haesitantem te . . . ad communem ambitus causam contulisti, in qua desinamus
aliquando, si videtur, vulgari et pervagata declamatione contendere. (Cic. Planc. 47); . . .
primum M. Metellum amicissimum, deinde Hortensium consulem non solum, sed
etiam Q. Metellum, qui quam isti sit amicus attendite. (Cic. Ver. 26); Hic · tumulus ·
Fructi sacer · est ·, quem · laedere · noli, / hospes. (CIL VI.5767.2–3 (Rome))
Capitalis oratio est ad aequationem bonorum pertinens, qua peste quae potest esse
maior? (Cic. Off. 2.73)
The second property is that non-restrictive adnominal relative clauses and sentences
with relative connexion may have the form of an accusative and infinitive construc-
tion. An example is (k). Further examples can be found in § 15.107.
(k) Intellegitur enim a beata inmortalique natura et iram et gratiam segregari;
quibus remotis nullos a superis inpendere metus.
(‘For it is understood that from the nature of a blessed and immortal being both
anger and favour are excluded and that, with these removed, no terrors hang over us
from the gods above.’ Cic. N.D. 1.45)
The third common property is the acceptability of the particle quidem, of the adverb
tamen, and of attitudinal disjuncts such as profecto and peropportune, in (l)–(o),
respectively. See also § 18.24 fin. for quin, ut, and utpote.25
(l) Reliqua vero multitudo, quae quidem est civium, tota nostra est . . .
(‘However, the rest of this throng, so far as it consists of citizens, is entirely ours . . .’
Cic. Mil. 3)
(m) Causam tibi exposuimus Ephesi; quam tu tamen coram facilius meliusque
cognosces.
(‘I explained the case to you in Ephesus, but you will acquaint yourself with it more
easily and accurately face to face.’ Cic. Fam. 13.55.1)
(n) . . . commendo vobis parvum meum filium, cui profecto satis erit
praesidi . . .
(‘. . . I entrust to you my little son, who will surely receive protection enough . . .’ Cic.
Catil. 4.23)
(o) Tandem relatum responsum quibusdam, quia nimis cupere Romanus pacem
videbatur, iniquis per occasionem adiectis, quae peropportune cupienti
tollere indutias Scipioni causam praebuere.
(‘At last the answer was returned. Because the Roman seemed extremely desirous of
peace, certain unreasonable terms were adroitly added, which most opportunely
offered a pretext to Scipio, who desired to denounce the truce.’ Liv. 30.4.8)
(f) . . . ecce ad me advenit / mulier, qua mulier alia nulla est pulchrior.
(‘. . . lo and behold, a woman came to me, than whom no other woman is more beauti-
ful.’ Pl. Mer. 100–1)
(g) Nunc hodie Amphitruo veniet huc ab exercitu / et servos, quoius ego hanc
fero imaginem.
(‘Now today Amphitruo will come here from the army, and also his slave, whose
likeness I bear.’ Pl. Am. 140–1)
(h) Quarum prima pars est quae ducitur ab ea ratione quae docet esse deos. Quo
concesso confitendum est eorum consilio mundum administrari.
(‘Of these parts, the first issues from the principle that propounds that the gods do
exist; if this is granted, it must be admitted that the world is governed by their wis-
dom.’ Cic. N.D. 2.75)
(i) Nam Cassiae legis culpam Scipio tuus sustinet, quo auctore lata esse dicitur.
(‘Your beloved Scipio received the blame for the Cassian Law, since his support is said
to have made its enactment possible.’ Cic. Leg. 3.37)
The grammatical gender of a relative pronoun in an adnominal relative clause is
determined by agreement with the head constituent. For discussion, see the sec-
tions on cross-clausal agreement (§ 13.27, § 13.28, and § 13.33). Occasionally, the
pronoun agrees with something that is implied by a modifier of the head constitu-
ent, that is there is some form of notional agreement, as in ( j), where plural quos
can be explained by the fact that the head servili tumultu implies a plurality of
slaves.26 The instances cited in the literature only concern non-restrictive relative
clauses.
( j) Factum etiam nuper in Italia servili tumultu, quos tamen aliquid usus ac
disciplina quam a nobis accepissent sublevarent.
(‘Danger also came about recently in Italy, during the rebellion of the slaves, whom,
however, the experience and training which they had received from us assisted to
some degree.’ Caes. Gal. 1.40.5)
Supplement:
Hoc dicendi genus ad patrocinia mediocriter aptum videbatur, ad senatoriam vero
sententiam, cuius erat ille princeps, vel maxume. (Cic. Brut. 112); Certamina domi
finita. Veiens bellum exortum, quibus Sabini arma coniunxerant. (Liv. 2.53.1);
† regis † haec Romana esse, non versutiarum Punicarum neque calliditatis Graecae,
apud <quos> fallere hostem quam vi superare gloriosius fuerit. (Liv. 42.47.7); Tu
vero, cui numerati sunt capilli nostri, errore omnium qui mihi instabant ut discerem
utebaris ad utilitatem meam, meo autem, qui discere nolebam, utebaris ad poenam
meam, qua plecti non eram indignus tantillus puer et tantus peccator. (August.
Conf. 1.19)
As is stated and shown in § 18.7, the case form of a relative expression is normally
determined by its function within the relative clause. There are, however, exceptions
to this general rule in which the case form of the relative expression is the same as that
of its head in the main clause.27 The term used for this phenomenon is attraction
(attractio relativi). Examples are (a) and (b), with quo instead of expected quod in (a)
and quibus instead of expected quos in (b). The only Latin author with a considerable
number of instances (thirteen) is Gellius. There are relatively many instances of this
phenomenon in the Bible translations, following the Greek original.28
(a) . . . notante / iudice quo nosti, populo, qui stultus honores / saepe dat
indignis . . .
(‘. . . even when rated by the people—the judge you know so well, who in folly often
gives office to the unworthy . . .’ Hor. S. 1.6.14–16)
(b) . . . quibus poterat sauciis ductis secum . . . ad urbem proximis itineribus
pergit.
(‘. . . he carried with him such of the wounded as he was able and took the nearest road
to the City.’ Liv. 4.39.9)
Supplement:
Si solitudine delectare, cum scribas et aliquid agas eorum quorum consuesti, gaudeo
neque reprehendo tuum consilium. (Lucc. Fam. 5.14.1); (sc. Hostius Quadra) fecit . . .
specula huius notae cuius modo rettuli imagines longe maiores reddentia . . . (Sen.
Nat. 1.16.2); Atque haec quidem in his quibus dixi libris pervulgata sunt. (Gel.
10.23.1); ‘Suprema’ multa est eius numeri cuius diximus ultra quem multam dicere in
dies singulos ius non est . . . (Gel. 11.1.3); . . . ex necessitate qua diximus . . . (Tert. Mon.
3.5); . . . vel si . . . una de duabus . . . aliam tali quali diximus radiatione respexerit. (Firm.
Mat. 3.6.31); Et reversi sunt pastores . . . laudantes Deum in omnibus quibus audierunt
et viderunt (Vet. Lat. Luc. 2.20—copying Greek §.ā .ľ}tx zÊ| ·uz}lx; cf. in omnibus
quae . . . Vulg.); Conprehenduntur in consiliis quibus cogitant. (Vulg. Ps. 9.23)
Cf.: Ut vero iam equitum clamor exire iubentium instabat . . . raptim quibus quisque
poterat elatis cum larem ac penates tectaque . . . relinquentes exirent, iam continens
agmen migrantium inpleverat vias . . . (Liv. 1.29.4–5)
In the following instance from Ovid, Hall and other editors read quod instead of
quo, which is found in some of the manuscripts. In this way, they also eliminate a
clearly unexplainable form of attraction: Elige nostrorum minimum quodcumque
malorum. / Isto, quod reris, grandius illud erit. (Ov. Tr. 5.6.35–6).
27 See K.-St.: II.287ff.; 289ff.; Sz.: 566ff. According to Kurzová (1981: 48), ‘attractio’ is much more
frequent in Greek, whereas in Latin ‘attractio inversa’ occurs more often. See also Comrie (1989: 146–8)
and Lehmann (1984: 306–8) on other languages. For possible Greek influence, see Calboli (2009: 168–9),
with references.
28 The material is collected by Foerster (1902). Discussion in Thomas (1956: 317–19).
490 Relative clauses
A very exceptional case is the following, where in quo is equivalent to quem (some
mss. read quo without a preposition, as in the Greek original): . . . in viro in quo statuit
fidem praebens omnibus . . . (Vulg. Act. 17.31).29
Some of the instances given above resemble instances like (c) at first sight. The differ-
ence is that in (c) it is not difficult to supply from the context a verb form with which
the case of the relative pronoun is fully understandable. There are, of course, also
instances where it is difficult to decide whether a verb should be supplied.30
(c) Scire hoc vis? # Hac quidem causa qua dixi tibi.
(‘Do you really want to know? # Yes, for the reason I’ve already told you.’ Ter. Hau.
87—sc. Hac causa scire volo, qua me scire velle tibi dixi.)
Supplement:
. . . nulla beatior possit esse . . . et delectatione qua (v.l. quam; de qua cj. Opitz) dixi et
saturitate (Cic. Sen. 56); Nos tamen hoc confirmamus illo augurio quo diximus . . .
(Cic. Att. 10.8.7)
NB: Ibi Cn. Scipio cum quibus ante dictum est copiis substitit. (Liv. 25.32.10); Singilis
fluvius in Baetim quo dictum est ordine inrumpens Astigitanam coloniam adluit . . .
(Plin. Nat. 3.12)
Attraction is also found in the idiomatic expression qui et (vocatur), as in (d).31
(d) Cyprianus qui et Thascius Florentio cui et Puppiano fratri s(alutem).
(‘Cyprian, who is also called Thascius, sends greetings to his brother
Florentius, who is also called Puppianus.’ Cypr. Ep. 66—NB: parallelism)
Less infrequent than attraction is the reverse phenomenon inverse attraction
(attractio inversa): in these cases the head has the case form of the relative expression.
There are a significant number of instances in Plautus, but it is rare in later texts and
is not found in high literature. Examples are (e)–(h). In (e), Naucratem is the subject
of the main clause and therefore the nominative would be appropriate. A similar case
presents itself in (f), unless we take quem as determiner of eunuchum (see § 18.15). In
(g), illis is picked up by i, which has the expected nominative form. In (h), ill’ is picked
up by the resumptive eum. See also § 22.14 on theme constituents.32
(e) Naucratem, quem convenire volui, in navi non erat . . .
(‘Naucrates, whom I wanted to get hold of, wasn’t on the ship . . .’ Pl. Am. 1009)
(f) Eunuchum quem dedisti nobis quas turbas dedit!
(‘That eunuch you gave us, what trouble he’s caused!’ Ter. Eu. 653)
36 Lehmann (1984: 213–14) and Pompei (2011b: 80; 2011c: 482) observe that there are no instances of
relative clauses attached to an adnominal prepositional phrase, but this may well be due to chance.
37 For a typological study of the constituents with which relative clauses can be combined, see
Lehmann (1986). For Latin relative clauses in a typological perspective based on Caes. Gal., see
Pompei (2011a; 2011b: 78–88).
38 The German term is ‘relative Verschränkung und Verschmelzung’ (‘crossing and merging’) (K.-St.:
II.315); cf. Sz.: 568–9. Rosén (1999: 165–73) uses the term ‘interlacing’. Mihaileanu (1907) has a complete
survey of Cicero’s usage. I have not been able to consult Kunst (1908). For a generative approach, see
Maurel (1989). Bortolussi (2005: 490) has a table on Cicero’s use of the various types of clauses with which
interlacing occurs. Danckaert (2012) discusses relative clauses in a broader context of expressions that
may precede a subordinator.
Adnominal relative clauses 493
the passive participle inflammati, which functions as secondary predicate in its clause.
In (d), qua is governed by usum, which is a secondary predicate with the object eum
with Plato facit (see § 21.7). When the relative clause is interlaced with a finite subor-
dinate clause the relative expression precedes the subordinator, as in (a), (b), and (e).39
(a) Omnia perfecit quae senatus salva republica ne fieri possent perfecerat.
(‘He accomplished all that the senate had managed to prevent from being done so
long as the Republic survived.’ Cic. Phil. 2.55)
(b) O rem miseram! Si quidem id ipsum deterrimum est quod recusari non
potest, et quod ille si faciat, iam a bonis omnibus summam ineat gratiam.
(‘A wretched situation indeed if the worst of all contingencies is something which
cannot be refused and which, should he accept it, would make all the honest men
immediately and heartily grateful to him!’ Cic. Att. 7.9.3)
(c) Nullas enim consequuntur voluptates, quarum potiendi spe inflammati
multos labores magnosque susceperant.
(‘For they never attain any of the pleasures, inflamed by the hope of acquiring which
they undertook many great labours.’ Cic. Fin. 1.60)
(d) Quae est igitur eius oratio, qua facit eum Plato usum apud iudices iam morte
multatum?
(‘What then is the speech which Plato represents him as having given before his
judges when condemned to death?’ Cic. Tusc. 1.97)
(e) Auctore utar Simonide, de quo cum quaesivisset hoc idem tyrannus Hiero,
deliberandi sibi unum diem postulavit.
(‘I shall follow the example of Simonides, who having the same question put to him
by the great Hiero, requested a day’s grace for consideration.’ Cic. N.D. 1.60)
Supplement:40
. . . permansit hoc ius terra humandi. Quam41 quom proxumi fecerant obductaque
terra erat . . . (Cic. Leg. 2.63); Is enim fueram, cui cum liceret aut maiores ex otio fruc-
tus capere quam . . . non dubitaverim . . . (Cic. Rep. 1.7); Cum quibus cum discubuisset
rex, paulisper epulatus convivio egreditur. (Curt. 8.5.9); . . . nec Alpes aliae sunt, quas
dum superant comparari nova possint praesidia. (Liv. 21.41.15); Odio enim tui, in
quo etsi omnis propter tuum in me scelus superare debeo, tamen ab omnibus paene
vincor, sic sum incitatus ut . . . (Cic. Vat. 1); ‘Noli, oro te’, inquit Pomponius, ‘adversum
eos me velle ducere, cum quibus ne contra te arma ferrem, Italiam reliqui.’ (Nep.
Att. 4.2); At ego basilicus sum, quem nisi oras, guttam non feres. (Pl. Rud. 431);
Nonnumquam etiam in olea unus ramus ceteris aliquanto est laetior, quem nisi
recideris, tota arbor contristabitur. (Col. 5.9.18); Ex quo exsistit et illud, multa esse
probabilia, quae quamquam non perciperentur, tamen . . . his sapientis vita regeretur.
(Cic. N.D. 1.12—NB: resumptive his); . . . Arcadas insuetos acies inferre pedestris / ut
39 For quantitative data concerning the preposing of relative pronouns and phrases and other constitu-
ents, see Danckaert (2012: 121).
40 Most of the examples in the Supplement are taken from K.-St.: II.315–19.
41 Editors read quod, but see Löfstedt (1942/1933: II.146). Further references in Dyck (2004) ad loc.
494 Relative clauses
vidit Pallas Latio dare terga sequaci, / aspera quis (= quibus) natura loci dimittere
quando / suasit equos . . . / nunc prece, nunc dictis virtutem accendit amaris. (Verg. A.
10.364–8);42 . . . corona a populo data est . . . quam quod amor civium et non vis
expresserat, nullam habuit invidiam magnaque fuit gloria. (Nep. Thr. 4.1); Atque ede-
pol in eas plerumque esca imponitur, / quam si quis avidus poscit escam avariter, /
decipitur in trasenna avaritia sua. (Pl. Rud. 1237–9); Fuit . . . talis, quales si omnes
semper fuissent, numquam desideratus vehemens esset tribunus. (Cic. Planc. 28);
Aberat omnis dolor, qui si adesset, nec molliter ferret et tamen medicis plus quam
philosophis uteretur. (Cic. Fin. 2.64); ‘Video equidem’ inquam, ‘sed tamen iam infici
debet iis artibus, quas si, dum est tener, combiberit, ad maiora veniet paratior.’ (Cic.
Fin. 3.9); Nolo enim hunc de me optime meritum existimare ea me suasisse Pompeio
quibus ille si paruisset esset hic quidem clarus in toga et princeps . . . (Cic. Fam. 6.6.5);
Quod si factum esset, votum rite solvi non posse. (Liv. 31.9.7); Dedit gladiatores ses-
tertiarios iam decrepitos, quos si sufflasses cecidissent. (Petr. 45.11 (Echion speak-
ing)); Ceterum, dum ea res geritur, L. Sulla quaestor cum magno equitatu in castra
venit, quos uti ex Latio et a sociis cogeret, Romae relictus erat. (Sal. Jug. 95.1)
Indirect questions: Itaque illud indecorum, quod quale sit ex decoro debet intellegi,
hic quoque apparet . . . (Cic. Orat. 82); Errare mehercule malo cum Platone, quem tu
quanti facias scio et quem ex tuo ore admiror, quam cum istis vera sentire. (Cic. Tusc.
1.39); Omnia enim erant suspensa propter exspectationem legatorum, qui quid egis-
sent nihildum nuntiabatur. (Cic. Fam. 11.8.1); Quibus omnibus ita demum similis
adolescet, si imbutus honestis artibus fuerit, quas plurimum refert a quo potissimum
accipiat. (Plin. Ep. 3.3.2)
NB: with connecting relatives: De quo, iudices, neque quomodo dicam neque quo-
modo taceam reperire possum. (Cic. S. Rosc. 124); . . . ipse opinione celerius venturus
esse dicitur. Cui utrum obviam procedam an hic eum exspectem cum constituero,
faciam te certiorem. (Cic. Fam. 14.23)
Participial secondary predicates: Illa tamquam cycnea fuit divini hominis vox et
oratio, quam quasi expectantes post eius interitum veniebamus in curiam . . . (Cic. de
Orat. 3.6); . . . ipsius in mente insidebat species pulchritudinis eximia quaedam, quam
intuens in eaque defixus ad illius similitudinem artem et manum dirigebat. (Cic.
Orat. 9); Non sunt igitur ea bona dicenda nec habenda, quibus abundantem licet esse
miserrimum. (Cic. Tusc. 5.44); Quorum oratione permotus Varus praesidium quod
introduxerat ex oppido educit ac profugit. (Caes. Civ. 1.13.2); . . . accepit trecentos
milites, quos adhortatus ut virtute sua exercitum servarent in mediam vallem decu-
currit. (Fron. Str. 1.5.15)
Accusative and infinitive with connecting relative ablative absolute clause: Dixi
apud pontifices istam adoptionem . . . pro nihilo esse habendam. Qua sublata intelle-
gis totum tribunatum tuum concidisse. (Cic. Dom. 38)
would be expected may be omitted. Examples are (a)–(c). In (a), fuisse in the
subordinate clause corresponds with sum in the main clause. In (b), in quibus sunt
can be supplied for quibus. In (c), the verbs in the two clauses are semantically
similar. The preposition is normally expressed in the relative clause if the function
of the relative would become unclear, as in (d), where quos agebatur would be
incomprehensible.
(a) Nam ego in ista sum sententia, qua te fuisse semper scio . . .
(‘I am of the same opinion as I know you have always been.’ Cic. Leg. 3.33)
(b) Quae sunt isdem in erratis fere quibus ea quae de Platone dicimus.
(‘Utterances that involve almost the same mistakes as those which we quoted from
Plato.’ Cic. N.D. 1.31)
(c) . . . si bellatum prospere esset resque publica in eodem, quo ante bellum fuis-
set, statu permansisset.
(‘. . . if they proved victorious and the Republic remained in the same state in which it
had been before the war.’ Liv. 22.9.10)
(d) Res agitur per eosdem creditores per quos, cum tu aderas, agebatur.
(‘The business is being managed with the aid of the same creditors by whom it was
managed when you were here.’ Cic. Fam. 1.1.1)
Supplement:
Quicum litigas, Olympio? / # Cum eadem qua tu semper. # Cum uxore’n mea?
(Pl. Cas. 317–18); In eadem propemodum brevitate qua illae bestiolae reperiemur.
(Cic. Tusc. 1.94); Nunc quoniam in eadem inopia egestate patientia, qua Germani,
permanent, eodem victu et cultu corporis utuntur. (Caes. Gal. 6.24.4); Romanus
imperator . . . urbem magnam et in ea parte, qua sita erat, arcem regni nomine Zamam
statuit oppugnare . . . (Sal. Jug. 56.1); Quibus rebus cum unus in civitate maxime flo-
reret, incidit in eandem invidiam quam pater suus ceterique Atheniensium principes.
(Nep. Cim. 3.1); Prorogatum et L. Veturio Philoni est ut pro praetore Galliam eandem
provinciam cum iisdem duabus legionibus obtineret quibus praetor obtinuisset. (Liv.
27.22.5); . . . cum hoc Dominus propter humilitatis formam quam docendam venerat
commendaverit . . . (August. Ep. 55.33)
Rerum autem amplificatio sumitur eisdem ex locis omnibus e quibus illa quae dicta
sunt ad fidem. (Cic. Part. 55); Fecimus hoc in eo libro in quo nosmet ipsos, quantum
potuimus, consolati sumus. (Cic. Tusc. 1.83)
When the verb of an adnominal relative clause would be the same as in the governing
clause it may be omitted. Examples are (e) and (f).
(e) . . . ut haberet in consilio . . . omnis Metellos . . ., in quibus Numidicum illum . . .
(‘. . . that he had as his councillors . . . all the Metelli, among whom the hero of
Numidia . . .’ Cic. Red. Sen. 25)43
43 For parallels of in quibus, see Draeger (1878: I.211) and TLL s.v. in 776.84ff.
496 Relative clauses
(f) . . . eius soceri L. Pisonis avum, L. Pisonem legatum, Tigurini eodem proelio
quo Cassium interfecerant.
(‘. . . the Tigurini had slain Lucius Piso the lieutenant (of Cassius), the grandfather of
Lucius Calpurnius Piso, his (Caesar’s) father-in-law, in the same battle as the one in
which they killed Cassius.’ Caes. Gal. 1.12.7)
Supplement:
. . . deceperat omnes, / in quibus Aiacem, sumptae fallacia vestis. (Ov. Met. 13.163–4);
Et pars equitum . . . nobilissimos Belgarum, in quis ducem Valentinum, cepit. (Tac.
Hist. 4.71.5)
NB: reduction in the main clause: . . . quae nullis sunt partibus aucta, / non possunt
ea quae debet genitalis habere / materies . . . (Lucr. 1.631–3)
These instances of reduction of verbs are often described as ellipse, but the pattern is
so common that it is better to deal with these as with other forms of reduction.
See § 19.3.
18.12 The relative order of the adnominal relative clause and its head
The normal position of an adnominal relative clause is after its head. Instances of this
order can be found passim above. There are a few instances in which the relative clause
belonging to a specific head constituent is positioned farther away in the sentence, as
in (a)–(c).44 Note that in (b) and (c) there is the risk of ambiguity.
(a) . . . materies illa fuit physici de qua dixit, ornatus vero ipse verborum oratoris
putandus est.
(‘. . . the material he spoke about belonged to the province of the natural philosopher,
but the actual distinction of his language must be considered the property of the ora-
tor.’ Cic. de Orat. 1.49—tr. May and Wisse)
(b) Sed me, iudices, non minus . . . Ser. Sulpici conquestio quam Catonis accusa-
tio commovebat, qui gravissime et acerbissime <se> ferre dixit me . . .
(‘But, gentlemen, the complaint of Servius Sulpicius affected me no less than the
accusation made by Cato, who said that he was deeply and bitterly hurt that I . . .’
Cic. Mur. 7)
(c) Bellovaci autem defectione Haeduorum cognita, qui ante erant per se infide-
les, manus cogere atque aperte bellum parare coeperunt.
(‘But when they learned of the revolt of the Aedui, the Bellovaci, who had previously
been treacherous to one another, began to assemble forces and openly to prepare for
war.’ Caes. Gal. 7.59.2)
Supplement:
Cavendum vero ne etiam in graves inimicitias convertant se amicitiae, ex quibus
iurgia maledicta contumeliae gignuntur. (Cic. Amic. 78); Quod huic officium, quae
44 See K.-St.: II.286 and Lundström (1964: 52). For instances in Livy, see Pettersson (1930: 39, n. 2).
More references in Sz.: 692.
Adnominal relative clauses 497
laus, quod decus erit tanti, quod adipisci cum dolore corporis velit, qui dolorem
summum malum sibi esse persuaserit? (Cic. Tusc. 2.16)
The relative clause may also be enclosed between a determiner and its head. Examples
are (d)–(g). Note that in theory quem in (f) could be taken as the determiner of
numerum, the whole clause (and in that analysis, autonomous) being determined by
eum, as in the second relative construction of (g). For more examples of this construc-
tion, see § 18.16.
(d) . . . exponit ea quibus abundabat plurima et pulcherrima vasa argentea . . .
(‘. . . he set out those most lovely and numerous silver vessels, of which he had an
ample stock.’ Cic. Ver. 4.62)
(e) Discessu Liburnarum ex Illyrico M. Octavius cum iis quas habebat navibus
Salonas pervenit.
(‘At the departure of the Liburnian ships from Illyricum, Marcus Octavius went to
Salonae with the ships he had available.’ Caes. Civ. 3.9.1)
(f) . . . atque eum quem supra demonstravimus numerum expleverat.
(‘. . . and had thus filled up the number I stated above.’ Caes. Civ. 3.4.6)
(g) At ii qui in iugo constiterant . . . neque in eo quod probaverant consilio perma-
nere, ut se loco superiore defenderent, neque eam quam profuisse aliis vim
celeritatemque viderant imitari potuerunt . . .
(‘But the part which had taken post on the ridge . . . could neither abide by the plan
that they had approved, namely that they would defend themselves on higher ground,
nor could they imitate the vigour and the speed which they had seen to be of
assistance to others . . .’ Caes. Gal. 6.40.6)
Supplement:
. . . pro meis in vos singularibus studiis proque hac quam perspicitis ad conservandam
rem publicam diligentia . . . (Cic. Catil. 4.23); . . . ea ipsa de qua disputare ordimur elo-
quentia obmutuit. (Cic. Brut. 22); . . . celeriter ad eas quas diximus munitiones per-
venerunt . . . (Caes. Gal. 3.26.2); Ea quae secuta est hieme . . . Usipetes Germani et item
Tenctheri magna multitudine hominum flumen Rhenum transierunt . . . (Caes. Gal.
4.1.1); En illa, illa quam saepe optastis libertas . . . (Sal. Cat. 20.14); . . . illa quae iniuria
depulsa fuerat ancilla totam faciem eius fuligine larga perfricuit . . . (Petr. 22.1)
NB: between adjective and head: Igitur Romanus qui aderat exercitus sextum post
cladis annum trium legionum ossa . . . condebant. (Tac. Ann. 1.62.1)45
In prose it is uncommon for adnominal relative clauses to precede their head, but in
poetry this order is not at all rare, as for instance in Ovid. Examples are (h) and (i).
(h) . . . quaeque diu steterant in montibus altis, / fluctibus ignotis insultavere
carinae . . .
(‘. . . and keels of pine, which long had stood upon high mountainsides, now leapt
insolently over unknown waves . . .’ Ov. Met. 1.133–4)
45 For a discussion on the appropriateness of Romanus (he suggests omnis), see Goodyear ad loc.
498 Relative clauses
46 For further instances of repeated relative pronouns in Cicero, see Lebreton (1901b: 103–5).
Adnominal relative clauses 499
ora verberabo . . . (Pl. Capt. 813–16); Quin mihi ancillulam ingratiis postulat, / quae
mea est, quae meo educta sumptu siet, / vilico suo se dare. (Pl. Cas. 193–5); Quin
etiam leges latronum esse dicuntur quibus pareant, quas observent. (Cic. Off.
2.40); . . . (sc. Belgae) proximique sunt Germanis, qui trans Rhenum incolunt, quibus-
cum continenter bellum gerunt. (Caes. Gal. 1.1.3); Confidentes garrulique et malevoli
supra lacum, / qui alteri de nihilo audacter dicunt contumeliam / et qui ipsi sat
habent quod in se possit vere dicier. (Pl. Cur. 477–9); Homines qui gestant quique
auscultant crimina, / si meo arbitratu liceat, omnes pendeant . . . (Pl. Ps. 427–8); . . . cum
iis una Commium, quem ipse Atrebatibus superatis regem ibi constituerat, cuius et
virtutem et consilium probabat, et quem sibi fidelem esse arbitrabatur, cuiusque auc-
toritas in his regionibus magni habebatur, mittit. (Caes. Gal. 4.21.6–7); . . . ex adverso
terrebat tanta vis navium cum ingenti sono fluminis et clamore vario nautarum
militum<que>, et qui nitebantur perrumpere impetum fluminis et qui ex altera ripa
traicientes suos hortabantur. (Liv. 21.28.1–2)
Examples of nesting are (c)–(e). In these cases the first relative clause is restrictive, the
second non-restrictive. Note in (c) the subjunctive in the first, restrictive, clause; the
indicative in the second, non-restrictive clause. The difference in grammatical rela-
tion between the two clauses was probably also reflected in intonation. Editors some-
times use a comma to mark the difference, as in the examples below, but there is both
individual and national variation.
(c) Histriones eos vidimus quibus nihil posset in suo genere esse praestantius,
qui non solum in dissimillimis personis satis faciebant, cum tamen in suis
versarentur, sed . . .
(‘We have seen actors whose superiors in their own class cannot be found, who not
only gained approval in utterly different parts while confining themselves to their
own proper spheres of tragedy and comedy, but . . .’ Cic. Orat. 109)
(d) Quam copiose ab eo agri cultura laudatur in eo libro qui est de tuenda re
familiari, qui Oeconomicus inscribitur!
(‘With what copious eloquence is agriculture lauded in his book that treats of the
management of estates, which is entitled The Householder!’ Cic. Sen. 59)
(e) Quid? Illa vis quae tandem est quae investigat occulta, quae inventio atque
excogitatio dicitur?
(‘Again, what, I ask, is the power which investigates hidden secrets, which is known
as discovery and contrivance?’ Cic. Tusc. 1.62)
Supplement:
Affatim est hominum in dies qui singulas escas edint, / quibus negoti nihil est, qui
esum nec vocantur nec vocant. (Pl. Men. 457–8); Habet enim certos sui studiosos qui
non tam habitus corporis opimos quam gracilitates consectentur, quos, valetudo
modo bona sit, tenuitas ipsa delectat . . . (Cic. Brut. 64—NB: variation of mood); Sed
omnium oratorum sive rabularum qui et plane indocti et inurbani aut rustici etiam
fuerunt, quos quidem ego cognoverim, solutissimum in dicendo et acutissimum
iudico nostri ordinis Q. Sertorium, equestris C. Gargonium. (Cic. Brut. 180); Quae
lex hanc sententiam continet, ut omnes leges tollat quae postea latae sunt, quae
500 Relative clauses
tegunt omni ratione suffragium, ne quis inspiciat tabellam, ne roget, ne appellet. (Cic.
Leg. 3.38); Tenebam enim quosdam senariolos quos in eius monumento esse inscrip-
tos acceperam, qui declarabant in summo sepulcro sphaeram esse positam cum
cylindro. (Cic. Tusc. 5.64)
48 For other views on the role of these relative clauses, see Pompei (2011c: 460–2), with references. For
Greek, see Probert (2015: 71–3) on ‘relative clauses of the third kind’.
502 Relative clauses
Autonomous relative clauses of this type can be used as a substitute for deverbal
nouns (abstract and concrete) and are therefore relatively common in technical
prose, especially as paraphrases or translations of Greek terminology, for example qui
laborat = ‘the patient’.49
Supplement:
Instances of coordination: Eo die feriae bubus et bubulcis et qui dapem facient.
(Cato Agr. 132.1); Hae rei materiam et quae opus sunt dominus praebebit. (Cato Agr.
14.3); In hac discordia video Cn. Pompeium senatum quique res iudicant secum
habiturum . . . (Cael. Fam. 8.14.3); Horum vocibus . . . milites centurionesque quique
equitatui praeerant perturbabantur. (Caes. Gal. 1.39.5); Quod postquam Scipio
quique cum eo erant cognoverunt . . . (B. Afr. 57.1); Inde ruunt alii . . . et acutae
vocis Hylactor / quosque referre mora est. (Ov. Met. 3.209–25); L. Atilio, praefecto
praesidii, quique cum eo milites Romani erant clam in portum deductis . . . (Liv.
24.1.9); . . . Tiberiumque ipsum victoriarum suarum quaeque in toga per tot annos
egregie fecisset admonuit. (Tac. Ann. 1.12.3)
Exx. (d)–(f) are instances of autonomous relative clauses with a relative phrase con-
sisting of a relative determiner and a head noun. In (d), the relative clause quam . . . vir-
ginem is the subject of the clause ut ei detur. In (e), qui . . . dubiis is the subject of nauci
non erit. In (f), quae . . . oblata is the object of suscepi. The number, gender, and case of
the relative determiners are determined by their respective head nouns. The deter-
miner normally precedes its head. Exx. (g) and (h) are different in that the relative
phrase consists of a relative pronoun and a noun or noun phrase in the genitive (a
so-called genetivus partitivus). Note that in (h) the relative clause is coordinated with
sua omnia by praeterquam.
(d) . . . ut ei detur quam istic emi virginem . . .
(‘. . . that the girl whom I purchased there be given to him . . .’ Pl. Cur. 433)
(e) Qui homo timidus erit in rebus dubiis nauci non erit.
(‘Someone who is timid in emergencies won’t be worth a farthing.’ Pl. Mos. 1041)
(f) . . . quae prima innocentis mihi defensio est oblata suscepi . . .
(‘. . . I undertook the first defence of an innocent man that was offered me . . .’ Cic. Sul. 92)
(g) . . . navium quod ubique fuerat unum in locum coegerant.
(‘. . . they had collected in one place every single ship they had anywhere.’ Caes. Gal.
3.16.2)
(h) Integraque sua omnia, praeterquam quod vini cibique absumptum erat,
receperunt.
(‘And they recovered all their possessions in their entirety, except for the wine and
food that had been consumed.’ Liv. 41.4.4)
49 See Nägelsbach and Müller (1905: 168–72). For instances in medical prose, see Langslow (2000:
396–408; 418–30). For Cicero’s use of relative clauses in his translation of Plato’s Timaeus to render Greek
definite expressions, see Meyers (2011). For the use of autonomous relative clauses in the Vulgate transla-
tion of the Bible and in Augustine, see Bortolussi and Sznajder (2017).
Autonomous relative clauses 503
Supplement:
L. · Aemilius · L. · f. · inpeirator · decreivit / utei · quei · hastiensium · servei /
in · turri · Lascutana · habitarent / leiberei · essent. (CIL I2.614.1–4 (Gades,
189 bc)); Scyphos quos utendos dedi Philodamo, rettulitne? (Pl. As. 444); Quod tibi
nomen est fecit mihi. (Pl. Men. 1128); Agrum quem Volsci habuerunt campestris
plerus Aboriginum fuit. (Cato hist. 7=24C);50 Agrum quem vir habet tollitur. (Cato
orat. 159—NB: determiner follows); Quo cum venerit, quae primum navigandi
nobis facultas data erit, utemur. (Cic. Fam. 3.3.2); Ex hac fuga protinus quae undique
convenerant auxilia discesserunt . . . (Caes. Gal. 5.17.5); Qua vehimur navi fertur,
cum stare videtur. (Lucr. 4.387); Urbem quam statuo vestra est. (Verg. A. 1.573—NB:
usually taken as an instance of attractio inversa);51 Hannibal, ab Nola remisso in
Bruttios Hannone cum quibus venerat copiis, ipse Apuliae hiberna petit circaque
Arpos consedit. (Liv. 23.46.8); At quae aliae segetes vel umidae moveri possunt
melius tamen siccae sariuntur . . . (Col. 2.11.5); Singilis fluvius, in Baetim quo dictum
est ordine inrumpens, Astigitanam coloniam adluit . . . (Plin. Nat. 3.12); Reliqua Iudaea
dividitur in toparchias decem quo dicemus ordine: Hiericuntem palmetis consitam,
fontibus riguam, Emmaum, Lyddam, Iopicam, Acrabatenam, Gophaniticam,
Thamniticam . . . (Plin. Nat. 5.70); . . . Germanicus Caesar a. d. VII. Kal. Iunias trium-
phavit de Cheruscis C(h)attisque et Angrivariis quaeque aliae nationes usque ad
Albim colunt. (Tac. Ann. 2.41.2)52
The noun of a relative phrase may be modified by an adjective, as in (i). In ( j) the
noun of the relative phrase is modified by alio.53
(i) Quibus iniuriis gravissimis tamen illud erat misero solacium, quod id
perdere videbatur, quod alio praetore eodem ex agro reparare posset.
(‘Yet while suffering these terrible wrongs, he had at least this consolation in
his misery, that he saw himself losing what, under some other governor, he
would be able to regain from that same land.’ Cic. Ver. 3.199)
( j) . . . eique statuam equestrem inauratam in rostris aut quo alio loco in foro
vellet ex huius ordinis sententia statui placere.
(‘. . . and that it pleases the senate that by the decision of this body a gilt
equestrian statue to him be placed on the Rostra or in any other position in
the Forum which he may choose.’ Cic. Phil. 5.41—a proposal for a senatus
consultum)
Autonomous relative clauses of this type are a relatively infrequent relativization
device, used in Cicero especially in cases of relative connexion. In Plautus they
cover c. three columns in Lodge’s lexicon of a total of c. sixty-three columns for all
relative clauses. In Cicero’s orations they cover 14 of 182 columns in Merguet’s
Lexikon.
Both types of autonomous relative clauses can be combined with resumptive pro-
nouns from Early Latin onwards (especially is, much less often hic,54 ille—rarely, in
Varro, Lucretius, and later poets—and rarely idem). Examples are (k)–(m). These
resumptive pronouns have the case form that is appropriate in their clause: eum in (k)
is the object of optruncabo, ibus in (l) is the indirect object with denumerem. The
number and gender of the resumptive pronoun agree with the preceding relative
clause. In (m), eandem is the object of vis. In instances like (n), with mulier in initial
position in the sentence, one may debate whether it is an instance of attractio inversa
(see § 18.8) or, preferably, the preposed head of the relative phrase quae mulier.55
When preposed, these relative clauses are usually at the beginning of the sentence to
which they belong, but see (l). These preposed relative clauses resemble theme con-
stituents (see § 22.14).56 (For resumptive phrases with a determiner, see § 18.18.)
(k) Quemque hic intus videro / cum Philocomasio osculantem, eum ego optrun-
cabo extempulo.
(‘Whomever I see here inside kissing Philocomasium, I’ll slaughter him on the spot.’
Pl. Mil. 460–1)
(l) Videtur tempus esse ut eamus in forum, / ut in tabellis quos consignavi hic
heri / latrones ibus denumerem stipendium.
(‘It seems to be time for us to go to the forum so that I can count out the pay to the
soldiers that I enlisted in my tablets here yesterday.’ Pl. Mil. 72–4)
(m) . . . quae te volt eandem tu vis.
(‘. . . you want the same woman who wants you.’ Pl. Mil. 1071)
(n) Mulier quae se suamque aetatem spernit, speculo ei usus est.
(‘A woman who is dissatisfied with herself and her age needs a mirror.’ Pl. Mos. 250)
These combinations of a relative clause with a resumptive pronoun or phrase (some-
times called ‘diptychs’) have received much attention in studies on the origin of the
relative pronouns. The order of the clauses is considered to reflect an older stage with
indefinite pronouns, from which relative pronouns developed later on.57
Some scholars regard the combination of a relative with a resumptive pronoun as
a special type of clause combining, called correlation.58 However, this distinction
seems unnecessary.
54 TLL s.v. hic 2711.36ff.; ille 349.29ff. For Plautus’ usage, see Blänsdorf (1967: 98); for Caesar’s,
Lavency (1996a).
55 For further instances, see Havers (1925: 245–6). For a discussion of attractio inversa and postposed
relative determiners, see Vonlaufen (1974: 25–30) and Lehmann (1984: 350). There is even a third
possibility, a variant of attractio inversa, which is to take mulier as a theme constituent (‘nominativus
pendens’) modified by an adnominal relative clause. So Halla-aho (2016: 370–2). See also Probert
and Dickey (2016: 393) and § 22.14. For the material in Plautus, Terence, and Cicero Att., see
Bertelsmann (1885).
56 See Lehmann (1984: 350–2), Halla-aho (2016), and Probert and Dickey (2016).
57 See Lehmann (1984: 368–75; 2008: 216–21) and Pompei (2011c: 518–29).
58 For discussion, see Touratier (1994: 696–700), Bodelot (2004), Fruyt (2004; 2005b), and Probert and
Dickey (2016)—also for diachronic observations.
Autonomous relative clauses 505
Supplement:
Relative pronouns: Vi’n qui in hac villa habitat eius arbitratu fieri? (Pl. Rud. 1035);
Olim quos abiens affeci aegrimonia, / eos nunc laetantis faciam adventu meo. (Pl. St.
406–7); . . . et quos ferro trucidari oportebat, eos nondum voce volnero! (Cic. Catil.
1.9); . . . Qui inter tot annos ne appellarit quidem Quinctium cum potestas esset
agendi cotidie, qui quo tempore primum male agere coepit in vadimoniis differendis
tempus omne consumpserit, qui postea vadimonium quoque missum fecerit, hunc
per insidias vi de agro communi deiecerit, qui cum de re agendi nullo recusante
potestas fuisset sponsionem de probro facere maluerit, qui cum revocetur ad id iudi-
cium unde haec nata sunt omnia condicionem aequissimam repudiet, fateatur se non
pecuniam sed vitam et sanguinem petere, is non hoc palam dicit? . . . (Cic. Quinct.
46); Quibuscum vivi bona nostra partimur, iis praetor adimere nobis mortuis bona
fortunasque poterit? (Cic. Ver. 1.113); Quae in quem cadunt, in eundem cadit ut
serviat . . . (Cic. Tusc. 3.14); qui · nostrum · mentitur · / eum · nec · di · penates ·
nec · inferi · recipiant. (AE 1964, 160 (Pompeii, 1st cent. ad (early)))
Relative phrases: Tum Saturno filius qui primus natus est, eum necaverunt. (Enn.
var. 72—NB: relative determiner follows); Nunc ibo ut pro praefectura mea ius dicam
larido / et quae pendent indemnatae pernae, is auxilium ut feram. (Pl. Capt. 907–8);
Qui ager frigidior et macrior erit, ibi oleam Licinianam seri oportet. (Cato Agr. 6.2—
NB: resumptive adverb); Arbores crassiores digitis quinque quae erunt, eas praeci-
sas serito oblinitoque fimo summas et foliis alligato. (Cato Agr. 28.2); Ab arbore abs
terra pulli qui nascentur, eos in terram deprimito . . . (Cato Agr. 51.1—NB: relative
determiner follows);59 Sed vina quae heri vendidi vinario Exaerambo, / iam pro eis
satis fecit Sticho? (Pl. As. 436–7—NB: relative determiner follows); Himera deleta
quos civis belli calamitas reliquos fecerat, ii se Thermis conlocarant in iisdem agri
finibus nec longe ab oppido antiquo. (Cic. Ver. 2.86); Quae hic rei publicae vulnera
imponebat, eadem ille sanabat. (Cic. Fin. 4.66); Signa quae nobis curasti, ea sunt ad
Caietam exposita. (Cic. Att. 1.3.2—NB: relative determiner follows); Quas Numestio
litteras dedi, sic te iis evocabam ut nihil acrius neque incitatius fieri posset. (Cic. Att.
2.24.1); Nam ad senatum quas Bibulus litteras misit, in iis quod mihi cum illo erat
commune sibi soli attribuit. (Cic. Fam. 2.17.7); . . . et, quae gravissime adflictae erant
naves, earum materia atque aere ad reliquas reficiendas utebatur et, quae ad eas
res erant usui, ex continenti comparari iubebat. (Caes. Gal. 4.31.2); Nam quae ab
reliquis Gallis civitates dissentirent, has sua diligentia adiuncturum . . . (Caes. Gal.
7.29.6); . . . (sc. milites) quam · fidem · pietatemq · domui · aug · parerent · eam ·
sperare / perpetuo · praestaturos. (S.C. de Gn. Pisone patre Copy A.161–2
(ad 20))
Just like nouns and noun phrases, autonomous relative clauses may be definite or
indefinite, and when indefinite either specified or not. They may also be generic. The
normal situation, certainly when the relative clause is sentence-initial, is that it is
indefinite. Explicit means to mark an autonomous relative clause as definite are
the demonstrative determiners hic, ille, and iste (discussed immediately below) and
the anaphoric determiner is (discussed further on). These determiners normally
immediately precede the relative pronoun.60 This usage is common with relative pro-
nouns, as in (o) and (p), but rare with relative determiners. There are only a few,
mainly poetic, instances of a determiner modifying a relative phrase, as in (q).61
Occasionally, a determined autonomous relative clause is picked up by a resumptive
expression, as in (r). The various possibilities are shown in Table 18.4. The brackets ( )
indicate optional elements.
60 For further examples, see Eckert (1992: 70–2; 2003: 172–82). In the 1992 sample of object clauses
with verbs of communication from Cicero there are forty-seven instances without and twenty-five with
a determiner.
61 Munro in his commentary on Lucretius has a collection of examples (ad 1.15).
Autonomous relative clauses 507
. . . cum illud quo iam semel est imbuta veneno . . . (Enn. Ann. 535V=476S—NB:
fragmentary text); . . . confluere ex ipso possunt elementa vaporis / et simul ex illa
quae tum res excipit ictum. (Lucr. 6.312–13); Illi scripta quibus comoedia prisca viris
est / hoc stabant, hoc sunt imitandi. (Hor. S. 1.10.16–17)
Idem de istis licet omnibus dicas quos supra capita hominum . . . delicatos lectica
suspendit. (Sen. Ep. 80.8)
With a resumptive pronoun: Haec quae possum, ea mi profecto cuncta vehementer
placent. (Pl. Mos. 841); Quid? Istanc quam emit, quanti eam emit? (Pl. Epid. 51)
The most common determiner of autonomous relative clauses is the anaphoric deter-
miner is (see §§ 11.105–6).62 Two situations must be distinguished. On the one hand
there are instances of a form of is in combination with an autonomous relative clause
where is has its regular anaphoric meaning: it adds the element ‘already mentioned or
referred to in the preceding context’ even in more or less set phrases such as id quod
in (s). The same goes for (t) and (u). In (v) we see an example of a non-restrictive
adnominal relative clause with anaphoric eos, which refers to Brutis in the preceding
sentence (repeated from § 18.6).63
(s) Nam primum, id quod dixi, cum ceteris in coloniis duumviri appellentur, hi
se praetores appellari volebant.
(‘In the first place, as I have said, whereas in all the other colonies the magistrates are
called duumviri, those of Capua desired that they should be called praetors.’ Cic. Agr.
2.93)
(t) Quid id quod vidisti? Ut munitum muro tibi visum oppidum est?
(‘How about that which you have observed? How did the city appear to be fortified
with its wall?’ Pl. Per. 553—Cf. 550: urbis speciem vidi)
(u) Dic mihi, si audes, quis ea est quam vis ducere uxorem?
(‘Tell me, if you please, who is she whom you want to marry?’ Pl. Aul. 170—NB: there
has been some talking going on about marriage)
(v) Quod est tibi cum Brutis bellum? Cur eos, quos omnes paene venerari
debemus, solus oppugnas?
(‘What war you have with the Bruti? Why do you alone attack those men, whom we
are all bound almost to worship?’ Cic. Phil. 10.4)
That is in cases like (s)–(v) has a clear semantic value is confirmed by instances like
(w) and (x). In (w), is is followed by quidem, which normally serves to emphasize a
constituent in its sentence (see § 22.26). Note also the distance between is and qui. Ex.
(x) is cited as an example of ‘emphatic’ use of is, more or less like talis ‘such’.
(w) Certo is quidem nihili est / qui nil amat.
(‘But surely the man who doesn’t love at all is worthless.’ Pl. Per. 179–80)
62 The use of is is very common in legal texts and in the jurists. See Selig (1992: 34–40) and Reggio (2005).
For the use of ille in this function in Late Latin, see Fruyt (2005a). For Caesar’s usage of is qui, see
Lavency (1996a).
63 See also TLL s.v. 474.60ff.
508 Relative clauses
(x) Itaque ego is qui sum, quantuscumque sum ad iudicandum, omnibus auditis
oratoribus, sine ulla dubitatione sic statuo et iudico . . .
(‘And I, being what I am, and so far as I am competent to judge, after hearing all the
orators, do unhesitatingly decree and pronounce as follows . . .’ Cic. de Orat. 2.122)
There are, on the other hand, definitely instances of is for which no semantic justifica-
tion can be given. The sole function of is in these instances is to serve as a bearer of
case information for the relative clause: is is a ‘semantically empty preparative’ deter-
miner.64 Latin, like other languages,65 has no means to mark autonomous relative
clauses for the syntactic function they fulfil in their superordinate clause. In the case
of clauses functioning as argument their status will as a rule be clear on the basis of
the meaning of the verb to which they belong. However, for clauses that function as
satellite or as attribute at the noun phrase level there is no such contextual support.
Exx. (y) and (z) will serve as illustrations. In (y), the autonomous relative clause
eorum . . . contra quos diceret is governed by the preposition causa. In Latin it is impos-
sible to combine this type of clause with a preposition, so in this case eorum serves as
a linking device, that is, it makes no semantic contribution of its own (see also § 14.6
for other types of subordinate clauses). In (z), the relative clause eorum . . . senati qui
columen cluent functions as attribute of sanguinem. Here too, eorum cannot be
explained by its meaning, but rather it serves as marker of the syntactic relation
between the head noun and the clause. See also § 18.16. The use of this ‘semantically
empty’ is is most common with autonomous relative clauses in the indicative.66
(y) Consecutus itaque est, ut aliquid eorum quoque causa videretur facere contra
quos diceret.
(‘He thus succeeded in seeming to do something even for the sake of those against
whom he was speaking.’ Quint. Inst. 11.1.85)
(z) Iam ego me convortam in hirudinem atque eorum exsugebo sanguinem /
senati qui columen cluent.
(‘Now I’ll turn myself into a leech and suck out the blood of these so-called pillars of
the senate.’ Pl. Epid. 188–9)
Supplement:
Determiner + relative pronoun: Bene ei qui invidet mi / et ei qui hoc gaudet. (Pl.
Per. 776–6a); Di faciant ut id bibatis quod vos numquam transeat. (Pl. Per. 823); Sed
ea quae demissurus eris sumito paulo acerbiora. (Cato Agr. 101); Destiti stomachari
et me unum ex iis feci qui ad aquas venissent. (Cic. Planc. 65); Sed iam forma ipsa
restat et l{lu~ÿ{ ille qui dicitur. (Cic. Orat. 134);67 Quare si potest esse beatus is qui
est in asperis reiciendisque rebus, potest is quoque esse qui est in parvis malis. (Cic.
Fin. 5.78); Obtrectatio autem est, ea quam intellegi qrvz~.jlx volo, aegritudo ex eo
64 The description is Lehmann’s (1984: 308). See also Touratier (1980: 139–46). Lavency (1998a: 59),
Serbat (1988b: 37–43), and Meyers (2011: 228) are more or less along the same lines.
65 See Lehmann (1984: 308). Icelandic has only pronominally headed autonomous relative clauses
(Andrews 2007: 214).
66 See Lavency (2005).
67 For the use of determiners with this type of relative clauses, see Nicolas (1999: 55–6).
Autonomous relative clauses 509
quod alter quoque potiatur eo quod ipse concupiverit. (Cic. Tusc. 4.17); Neque enim
tu is es qui quid sis nescias . . . (Cic. Fam. 5.12.6); Est autem non modo eius qui sociis
et civibus sed etiam eius qui servis, qui mutis pecudibus praesit eorum quibus praesit
commodis utilitatique servire. (Cic. Q. fr. 1.1.24); At Sugambri ex . . . fuga comparata
hortantibus iis quos ex Tenctheris atque Usipetibus apud se habebant finibus suis
excesserant. (Caes. Gal. 4.18.4); Neque inmemor eius quod initio consulatus
inbiberat reconciliandi animos plebis, saucios milites curandos dividit patribus. (Liv.
2.47.12); Addunt pavorem mota e castris signa eorum qui in praesidio relicti fuerant.
(Liv. 1.14.9); Iis quorum agros urbesque populatus esset redderet res quae compa-
rerent. (Liv. 32.10.3); Quidam eos qui hoc e thynnis faciant pompilos vocant. (Plin.
Nat. 9.51)
Determiner + relative phrase: Pignus da ni ligneae haec sunt quas habes Victorias.
(Pl. Truc. 275); Quem oportebat omnium eorum quos antehac habui liberos par-
tis eorum tolerare atque curare . . . (Cornelia Nep. fr. 2); Hic .{zŵuzxzwr}gwrx
quid<d>am pßulj{| de iis quae in Sestium apparabantur crimina . . . (Cic. Q. fr.
2.3.6); . . . neque eam quam profuisse aliis vim celeritatemque viderant imitari
potuerunt . . . (Caes. Gal. 6.40.6); Quare illud satis est si nobis is datur unis / quem
lapide illa dies (diem ed. 1473)68 candidiore notat. (Catul. 68.147–8); Ipse cum admo-
dum exiguis copiis Genuam repetit, eo qui circa Padum erat exercitus Italiam defen-
surus. (Liv. 21.32.5); . . . duo legati venerunt, Philocles et Apelles . . . speculatum magis
inquisitumque missi de iis quorum Perseus Demetrium insimulasset sermonum . . .
habitorum. (Liv. 40.20.3); . . . ut eas quae in Sicilia naves essent reficeret atque
expediret . . . (Liv. 42.27.2); At . . . transcendere ad ea quis maxime fidebant in populum
Romanum officiis . . . (Tac. Ann. 4.56.1)
With a resumptive pronoun: Id quod in rem tuam optumum esse arbitror, / ted id
monitum advento. (Pl. Aul. 144–5); Igitur id quod agitur, <ei> hic primum praevorti
decet. (Pl. Mil. 765); Ergo id quod natura ipsa et quaedam generosa virtus statim
respuit . . ., in eo magistra vitae philosophia tot saecula permanet. (Cic. Tusc. 2.16)69
NB: Id quod providet, illius rei constat imago. (Lucr. 4.885)70
With inanimate entities the combination of is and res functions more or less in the
same way as is alone. Compare (aa) and (ab).
(aa) Cuius hoc dicto admoneor, ut aliquid etiam de humatione et sepultura
dicendum existimem, rem non difficilem, is praesertim cognitis quae de
nihil sentiendo paulo ante dicta sunt.
(‘And I am reminded by this saying of his that I think something should also
be said about interment and burial—no difficult matter, especially when
those things have been understood which were said a little while back about
absence of sensation.’ Cic. Tusc. 1.102)
68 For parallels for the remarkable word order, see Schuster (1950/1: 51–2).
69 The interpretation of this passage is disputed. See Giusta (1991: 198–200).
70 For Lucretius’ ‘remarkable idiom . . . of using res and the neuter as interchangeable’, see Bailey (1949:
I.94–5). The example can also be regarded as an instance of attractio inversa (see § 18.8 and Vonlaufen
1974: 132).
510 Relative clauses
(ab) Pompeius his rebus cognitis quae erant ad Corfinium gestae Luceria profi-
ciscitur Canusium atque inde Brundisium.
(‘After learning what had happened at Corfinium, Pompey set out from
Luceria for Canusium and from there for Brundisium.’ Caes. Civ. 1.24.1)
71 Very clearly stated in K.-St.: II.279 Hostes, qui fugiunt, non sunt timendi; Ea, quae vera sunt, dicam.
For the view that we are dealing with determiners that mark the function of the relative clause, see
Vester (1989: 342), Eckert (1992: 152), Touratier (1994: 628–9), Addabbo (2001: 163–4). For discussion,
see also Pompei (2011b: 69) and Halla-aho (2018: 48–51).
72 For discussion of the status of is, see especially Lehmann (1979: 9); Serbat (1984), Longrée (1991:
95–8), and Lavency (1998a: 57).
73 See TLL s.v. idem 194.67ff. and Gibert (2011).
Autonomous relative clauses 511
(ah) Apud bonos iidem sumus quos reliquisti, apud sordem urbis et faecem multo
melius quam reliquisti.
(‘With the honest men I stand as I did when you left, with the dregs of the city popu-
lace much better than when you left.’ Cic. Att. 1.16.11)
Autonomous relative clauses marked as indefinite by the pronouns quidam (specify-
ing indefinite) and aliqui (indefinite) are relatively rare. Examples are (ai) and (aj). On
the one hand these pronouns can be left out without causing the remaining construc-
tion to become ungrammatical (which suggests they are the modifiers). On the other
hand they can also function independently, in which case the relative clauses are
modifiers.
(ai) Iam quidam qui nos absentis defenderunt incipiunt praesentibus occulte
irasci, aperte invidere.
(‘Already, now that I am here, certain men who championed me when I was away
are beginning to resent me secretly and to express their jealousy of me openly.’ Cic.
Att. 4.1.8)
(aj) Quem ament igitur? # Aliquem id dignus qui siet. / Nam nostrorum nemo
dignu’st.
(‘Then whom should they love? # Someone who deserves it: none of us does.’ Pl.
Poen. 860–1)
Supplement:
Video enim esse hic in senatu quosdam qui tecum una fuerunt. (Cic. Catil.
1.8); . . . raros esse quosdam qui ceteris omnibus pro nihilo habitis rerum naturam
studiose intuerentur. (Cic. Tusc. 5.9); Sunt quidam qui nolint nisi secreto accipere.
(Sen. Ben. 2.23.1)
Saltem aliquem velim qui mihi ex his locis / aut viam aut semitam monstret. (Pl.
Rud. 211–12); Fuisse credo tum quoque aliquos qui discerptum regem patrum mani-
bus taciti arguerent . . . (Liv. 1.16.4); In Cn. Pompeium terra marique victorem fuit qui
carmen componeret, uno, ut ait, digito caput scalpentem. Fuit aliquis qui licentia
carminis tres auratos currus contemneret! (Sen. Con. 10.1.8)
Examples of generic autonomous relative clauses are (ak) and (al). Qui laborat in (ak)
means ‘the patient’ in general—that is, not a specific patient. Note the coordination of
the relative clause with the likewise generic nouns polypi et murenae in (al).
(ak) Sed si nullum tamen appareat aliud auxilium, periturusque sit qui laborat,
nisi temeraria quoque via fuerit adiutus.
(‘If, however, there appears to be no other remedy, and if the patient is likely to die
unless he be helped even at some risk . . .’ Cels. 2.10.7)
(al) Exeunt in terram et qui marini mures vocantur et polypi et murenae, quin et
in Indiae fluminibus certum genus piscium ac deinde resilit.
(‘The fish which are called the sea-mouse also come out onto the land, as do the poly-
pus and the moray; so also does a certain kind of fish in the rivers of India and then
jumps back again.’ Plin. Nat. 9.71)
512 Relative clauses
Autonomous relative clauses may be modified in various ways other than by the
determiners dealt with above. Exx. (am) and (an) illustrate the use of the quantifiers
omnes and pauci.
(am) Omnes qui amant graviter sibi dari uxorem ferunt.
(‘All lovers resent being given a wife.’ Ter. An. 191)
(an) . . . donec pauci qui proelio superfuerant paludibus abderentur.
( ‘. . . until the few who escaped battle could hide themselves in the swamp.’ Tac. Hist.
1.79.4)
Supplement:
Cum vero is quem nemo vestrum vidit umquam, nemo qui mortalis esset audivit,
tantum dicit . . . (Cic. Flac. 40); Neminem qui aut libertate dignus esset aut vellet omnino
liber esse, sibi amicum arbitrabatur. (Cic. Tusc. 5.63); . . . ut in hac confusa atque uni-
versa defensione nihil a me quod ad vestram quaestionem, nihil quod ad reum, nihil
quod ad rem publicam pertineat praetermissum esse videatur. (Cic. Sest. 5)74
. . . ex quo sunt nonnulli qui tuam legem de civitate natam, Crasse, dicant . . . (Cic. de
Orat. 2.257)
Hac oratione ab Diviciaco habita omnes qui aderant magno fletu auxilium a
Caesare petere coeperunt. (Caes. Gal. 1.32.1); . . . Iugurtha, homo omnium quos terra
sustinet sceleratissumus . . . (Sal. Jug. 14.2); (sc. vomitus necessarius est) Ergo omnibus
qui ante febres horrore et tremore vexantur. Omnibus qui cholera laborant. (Cels.
2.13.1); Nam ex omnibus qui nunc se philosophos vocant vix unum aut alterum
invenies tanta sinceritate, tanta veritate. (Plin. Ep. 3.11.6)
Sunt autem multi . . . qui eripiunt aliis quod aliis largiantur . . . (Cic. Off. 1.43); . . . a
multis qui e Samnio Apuliaque veniebant admoniti sumus . . . (Cic. Att. 8.11d.3); . . . foe-
diore multorum qui perpeti medicinam toleraverant cicatrice quam morbo. (Plin.
Nat. 26.3); . . . multa in terris fieri caeloque tuentur, / quorum operum causas nulla
ratione videre / possunt . . . (Lucr. 1.152–4); Huc addent divi quam plurima quae
Themis olim / antiquis solita est munera ferre piis. (Catul. 68. 153–4)
Notice also the use of aliarum in (ao), ceterorum in (ap), and omnibus in (aq) in com-
bination with relative phrases.75
(ao) Is illius laudare infit formam virginis / et aliarum itidem quae eius erant
mulierculae.
(‘This fellow begins to praise that girl’s figure and those of the other girls who are in
his keeping.’ Pl. Rud. 51–2)
(ap) . . . qu<a>eram, cur idem nostra nomina et Persarum et ceterorum quos
vocant barbaros cum casibus dica<n>t.
(‘. . . then I shall ask why the same persons use a full set of case forms not only for our
own personal names, but also for those of the Persians and of the others whom they
call barbarians.’ Var. L. 8.64)
(aq) Illud in his igitur rebus meminisse decebit, / non ex omnibus omnino quae-
cumque creant res / sensilia extemplo me gigni dicere sensus . . .
(‘Herein it will be right to remember this, that I do not say that sensations are begot-
ten at once from all and every of the things which give birth to sensible things . . .’
Lucr. 2.891–3)
In addition to examples such as (q) (page 506 above) which illustrate demonstra-
tive pronouns (all poetic) and is (also in prose) modifying an autonomous relative
clause with a relative phrase, there are a few remarkable instances in which a word
of another category modifies such a clause, such as alii in (ar). Even more striking
is the use of a normal adjective in (as), where meliorem goes with condicio. This
form of anticipation can probably be attributed in part to the influence of Greek
examples.76
(ar) Eupolis atque Cratinus Aristophanesque poetae / atque alii quorum comoe-
dia prisca virorum est . . .
(‘Eupolis and Cratinus and Aristophanes the poets, and the other men to
whom Old Comedy belongs . . .’ Hor. S. 1.4.1–2)
(as) ‘Nisi qui meliorem afferet / quae mi atque amicis placeat condicio magis,’ /
quasi fundum vendam . . .
(‘ “It’s settled unless anyone offers a better deal, which I and my associates
like more.” As if I were selling a plot by auction . . .’ Pl. Capt. 179–81)
Supplement:
Quis non malarum amor quas curas habet / haec inter obliviscitur? (Hor. Ep.
2.37–8—NB: all sorts of emendations have been proposed, see Watson ad loc.)
Appendix: Autonomous relative clauses may also be combined with ipse, either pre-
ceding, or following. Examples are (at)–(au)—‘pregnant’ ipse—and (av)—‘discretive’
ipse (for the terminology, see § 11.144).77 In these examples ipse is functioning as
some sort of secondary predicate (see § 21.3). It is incorrect to consider the relative
clauses as adnominally related to ipse, which is often regarded as the head of the
combination.
(at) Sed tamen, tu nempe eos asinos praedicas / vetulos, claudos, quibus suptri-
tae ad femina iam erant ungulae? / # Ipsos qui tibi subvectabant rure huc
virgas ulmeas.
(‘But are you talking about those old, lame donkeys whose hooves had been
worn away up to the thighs? # Exactly, the ones which used to carry elm-
rods from the country here for you.’ Pl. As. 339–41)
(au) Septimus (sc. locus), per quem ad ipsos qui audiunt [similem in causam]
convertimus . . .
(‘The seventh (sc. topic), in which we turn to the audience . . .’ Cic. Inv. 1.108)
76 For more instances, see Munro ad Lucr. 1.15. See also Bailey (1949: I.105).
77 For more examples, see TLL s.v. ipse 306.27ff.
514 Relative clauses
attingunt adiungit. (Caes. Gal. 7.4.6); . . . ipse in Haeduos proficisci statuit senatumque
omnem et quos inter controversia esset ad se Decetiam evocavit. (Caes. Gal. 7.33.2—
NB: coordination); Hoc se quisque modo fugit, at quem scilicet, ut fit, / effugere haut
potis est, ingratius haeret et odit / propterea, morbi quia causam non tenet aeger.
(Lucr. 3.1068–70); . . . mediam in toto esse terram, eandemque universo cardine stare
pendentem, librantem per quae pendeat, ita solam inmobilem circa eam volubili uni-
versitate. (Plin. Nat. 2.11); Epileum Graeci vocant qui solus omni tempore apparet.
(Plin. Nat. 10.21)
Subject complement: Quis est quem vides? # Vir / eccum it. (Pl. Cas. 213–14);
Non ego sum qui te dudum conduxi. (Pl. Mer. 758); Quis enim est qui de hac officina,
qui de vasis aureis, qui de istius pallio non audierit? (Cic. Ver. 4.55); Is autem est qui
<consul> cum <L.> Lucullo fuit. (Cic. Att. 13.32.3); Nemo erit, mihi crede, in quo
modo aliquid sit, qui hoc tempus sibi oblatum amicitiae tecum constituendae
praetermittat . . . (Q. Cic. Pet. 27—NB: nemo in quo . . . sit is the subject of the clause);
Ecquis erit mecum, iuvenes, qui primus in hostem? (Verg. A. 9.51); Hispo Romanius
erat natura qui asperiorem dicendi viam sequeretur. (Sen. Con. 9.3.11); Ager est
arcifinius qui nulla mensura continetur. (Fron. agrim. p. 2, l. 8)81
Third argument and other obligatory constituents: Ego illam reddidi qui argen-
tum a te attulit. (Pl. Cur. 581); Etiam qui it lavatum / in balineas, quom ibi sedulo sua
vestimenta servat, / tamen surrupiuntur. (Pl. Rud. 382–4); Nam hoc assimile est quasi
de fluvio qui aquam derivat sibi. (Pl. Truc. 563); Lepus multum somni adfert qui
illum edit. (Cato Fil. 3(J)); De · Bacanalibus · quei · foideratei / esent · ita ·
exdeicendum · censuere ·. (CIL I2.581.2–3 (SC Bac., Tiriolo, 186 bc)); Poena est qui
receperit . . . (Cic. Dom. 51); Ut agerentur gratiae qui e municipiis venissent? (Cic.
Red. Sen. 27); Nam Xerxes . . . praemium proposuit qui invenisset novam voluptatem.
(Cic. Tusc. 5.20); Namque versibus qui honore rerumque gestarum amplitudine cet-
eros Romani populi praestiterunt, exposuit ita, ut . . . (Nep. Att. 18.5); Dies deinde
praestituta capitalisque poena qui non remigrasset Romam . . . (Liv. 6.4.5); Ad haec
respondeo: et qui in summo est calore, opus est calore adiecto, ut summum teneat.
(Sen. Ep. 109.9); L. etiam Cinnae, uxoris fratri, et qui cum eo . . . ad Sertorium con-
fugerant reditum in civitatem rogatione Plotia confecit . . . (Suet. Jul. 5—NB: coordin-
ation); Is saltatorie procurrens malumque bracteis inauratum dextra gerens qui
(<ei>, qui v.; <adulescenti> qui suppl. Castiglioni) Paris videbatur, porrigit quid
mandaret Iuppiter. . . (Apul. Met. 10.30.5)
With a resumptive pronoun: Qui est imperator divom atque hominum Iuppiter, / is
nos per gentis alios alia disparat . . . (Pl. Rud. 9–10); Quem vides, eum ignoras. Illum
nominas, quem non vides. (Pl. Capt. 566); Itaque quibus res erat in controversia, ea
vocabatur lis. (Var. L. 7.93—NB: ea in agreement with lis); . . . et sine dubio quoniam
salubrior pars septemtrionalis est quam meridiana, et quae salubriora, illa fructuo-
siora, dicendum utique Italiam magis e<ti>am fuisse op<p>ortunam ad colendum
quam Asiam . . . (Var. R. 1.2.3); Quae (sc. arma) qui non habuerint, eos inermos fuisse
vinces. (Cic. Caec. 60); Nam qui pro re publica vitam ediderunt—licet me desipere
dicatis—numquam me hercule eos mortem potius quam inmortalitatem adsecutos
putavi. (Cic. Planc. 90); Nam qui semel a veritate deflexit, hic non maiore religione ad
periurium quam ad mendacium perduci consuevit. (Cic. Q. Rosc. 46); Quod ubi
Caesar resciit, quorum per fines ierant, his uti conquirerent et reducerent, si sibi
purgati esse vellent, imperavit. (Caes. Gal. 1.28.1); Quibus autem longae febres sunt,
his aut abscessus aliqui, aut articulorum dolores erunt. (Cels. 2.7.27); Num alias
natura sic est, ut qui melius dixerit, hic ver<ius di>xisse videatur? Non qui verius, is
melius? (Tert. Nat. 2.6.5); Qui disposuit demutationem, iste instituit et diversitatem.
(Tert. Marc. 4.1.9)
Relative phrase:
Without a resumptive expression:
Subject: Quae materies semen non habet, cum glubebit, tum tempestiva est. (Cato
Agr. 17.1); Favete, adeste aequo animo et rem cognoscite, / ut pernoscatis, ecquid spei
sit relicuom, / posthac quas faciet de integro comoedias, / spectandae an exigendae
sint vobis prius. (Ter. An. 24–7); Urbem quam statuo vestra est. (Verg. A. 1.573); Et
in quem primum egressi sunt locum Troia vocatur. (Liv. 1.1.3); Cecidere manu quas
legerat herbas (v.l. herbae) . . . (Ov. Met. 14.350)
Object: Heus foras educite, / quam introduxistis fidicinam. (Pl. Epid. 472–3);
Quae hic monstra fiunt, anno vix possum eloqui. (Pl. Mos. 505); Habeo quas ad
eundem litteras misisti. (Cic. Ver. 1.78); Oblata spe Germani quam nacti erant prae-
dam in occulto relinquunt. (Caes. Gal. 6.35.10); Pallas quas condidit arces / ipsa
colat. (Verg. E. 2.61–2)
Third argument and other obligatory constituents: Quid fecisti scipione aut
quod habuisti pallium? (Pl. Cas. 975); Sinite me prius perspectare, ne uspiam insid-
iae sient / concilium quod habere volumus. (Pl. Mil. 597–8); At quibus bestiis erat is
cibus ut aliis generis escis vescerentur, aut vires natura dedit aut celeritatem. (Cic.
N.D. 2.123)
With a resumptive pronoun:
Subject: Mane quod tu occeperis / negotium agere, id totum procedit diem. (Pl.
Pers. 114–15); Quas enim leges sociis amicisque dat is qui habet imperium a populo
Romano, auctoritatem legum dandarum ab senatu, eae debent et populi Romani et
senatus existimari. (Cic. Ver. 2.121); . . . quae pars civitatis Helvetiae insignem calami-
tatem p. R. intulerat, ea princeps poenas persolvit. (Caes. Gal. 1.12.6); Quae gratia
currum / armorumque fuit vivis, quae cura nitentis / pascere equos, eadem sequitur
tellure repostos. (Verg. A. 6.653–5)
Object: Qui antehac / invicti fuere viri, pater optime Olympi, / hos ego in pugna
vici victusque sum ab isdem. (Enn. Ann. 192–4V=180–2S); Ab arbore abs terra pulli
qui nascentur, eos in terram deprimito . . . (Cato Agr. 51); Quia enim qui eos gubernat
animus, eum infirmum gerunt. (Ter. Hec. 311); Praeterea quae arbores in ordinem
satae sunt, eas aequabiliter ex omnibus partibus sol ac luna coquunt. (Var. R.
1.7.4); . . . si, quod ius in parentis, deos, patriam natura conparavit, id religiose colen-
dum demonstrabimus. (Rhet. Her. 3.4); Sed hoc non concedo ut quibus rebus glo-
riemini in vobis, easdem in aliis reprehendatis. (Cic. Lig. 20); . . . ut, quemcumque
casum fortuna invexerit, hunc apte et quiete ferat. (Cic. Tusc. 4.38); Tamen tanti regis
ac ducis mentio, quibus saepe tacitis cogitationibus volutavi animum, eas evocat in
medium . . . (Liv. 9.17.1)
Other: Quae enim cupiditates a natura proficiscuntur facile explentur sine ulla
iniuria, quae autem inanes sunt, iis parendum non est. (Cic. Fin. 1.53); Qui fit, Maecenas,
Autonomous relative clauses 519
ut nemo, quam sibi sortem / seu ratio dederit seu fors obiecerit, illa / contentus vivat,
laudet diversa sequentis? (Hor. S. 1.1.1–3)
NB: Cuius modo rei nomen reperiri poterat, hoc satis esse ad cogendas pecunias
videbatur. (Caes. Civ. 3.32.2)82
Explicit marking may be absent for non-argument clauses as well, although this is
rare. In (o) the two relative clauses are satellites functioning as disjunct of qualified
truth. The dative is the usual case for this function (the so-called dativus iudicantis—
see § 10.102). In (p), qui . . . cepisset is a beneficiary satellite. In (q) the relative clause is
a modifier of vestigia. There are a few poetic instances of autonomous relative clauses
functioning as address (see the Supplement).
(o) Eugae, litteras minutas. # Qui quidem videat parum. / Verum qui satis videat,
grandes satis sunt.
(‘Goodness, such tiny letters! # Tiny for someone who doesn’t see well enough. But
for someone who does see well enough they’re big enough.’ Pl. Bac. 991–2)
(p) . . . alteram insulae partem . . . adgreditur praemiis magnis propositis qui
primus insulam cepisset.
(‘. . . he launched an attack . . . upon the other side of the island, offering large rewards
to the first man who could capture it.’ B. Alex. 17.3)
(q) . . . nec ad quos pertineat facinus vestigia ulla exstare.
(‘. . . nor were there any traces of those who committed the crime.’ Liv. 31.12.1)
Supplement:
Relative pronoun:
Without a resumptive expression: Ea libertas est, qui pectus purum et firmum
gestitat. (Enn. scen. 302V = 256J); . . . (sc. Xerxes) praemium proposuit qui invenisset
novam voluptatem . . . (Cic. Tusc. 5.20); Pactum est, quod inter quos convenit ita ius-
tum putatur, ut . . . (Cic. Inv. 2.68); Semper in proelio iis (edd. pler. with the majority
of the manuscripts) maxumum est periculum qui maxume timent. (Sal. Cat.
58.17); . . . eiusque · pecuniae · cui (sic!) · volet · petitio · persecutio ex <h>ac
lege · esto. (CIL II2.5.1022.LXXIII.8 (Lex coloniae Genetivae Iuliae, Osuna, c.44
bc));83 Qui domos redire mallent, daturum se operam ne cuius suorum popularium
mutatam secum fortunam esse vellent. (Liv. 21.45.6); Quibus iuvenibus fluxit alvus
plerumque in senectute contrahitur. (Cels. 1.3.33); Noli pigere laudem voce red-
dere / veram qui voluit esse te sanum tibi . . . (Courtney ML 40, 16–17 (Bu
Njem, ad 203))84
NB: Address: Atque illum (sc. Iovem) talis iactantem pectore curas / . . . / adloquitur
Venus: ‘O qui res hominumque deumque / aeternis regis imperiis et fulmine terres, /
quid meus Aeneas in te committere tantum, / quid Troes potuere . . .’ (Verg. A. 1.227–32)
With a resumptive pronoun: Quam ob rem quis hoc non iure miretur summeque
in eo elaborandum esse arbitretur, ut quo uno homines maxime bestiis praestent in hoc
82 For a discussion of this and related examples, see Bodelot (2005: 468–9).
83 For this and other instances instead of normal qui volet, see Boegel (1902: 99–100).
84 For discussion, see Adams (1999b: 125).
520 Relative clauses
hominibus ipsis antecellat? (Cic. de Orat. 1.33); . . . dilectu per omne Samnium habito
nova lege, ut qui iuniorum non convenisset ad imperatorum edictum quique
iniussu abisset, eius caput Iovi sacraretur. (Liv. 10.38.3)
Relative phrase:
Without a resumptive expression:
Vere s[t]ationes quae fiunt terram rudem proscindere oportet . . . (Var. R. 1.27.2);
Nam quem fundum in Tusculano emit hic Varro a M. Pupio Pisone, vidisti ad buci-
nam inflatam certo tempore apros et capreas convenire ad pabulum . . . (Var. R.
3.13.1); . . . insidias equitum conlocavit quo in loco superioribus fere diebus nostri
pabulari consueverant . . . (Caes. Civ. 3.37.5); Ubi prima impedimenta nostri exercitus
ab iis qui in silva abditi latebant visa sunt, quod tempus inter eos committendi proe-
lii convenerat, . . . subito omnibus copiis provolaverunt . . . (Caes. Gal. 2.19.6); Magna
pars forte, in quem quaeque inciderat, raptae. (Liv. 1.9.11)
With a resumptive pronoun: Quam quisque norit artem, in hac se exerceat.
(Cic. Tusc. 1.41); . . . querens tantum se opinionem fefellisse ut a quo genere hominum
victoriam sperasset, ab eo initio fugae facto paene proditus videretur. (Caes. Civ.
3.96.4); Nam quibus difficultatibus locorum Romanos claudere voluerant, his ipsi
tenebantur. (Hirt. Gal. 8.19.6); . . . et qua modo pocula parte / sumpta mihi fuerant,
illa vestigia feci. (Ov. Met. 14.283–4)
When the function of an autonomous relative clause in its superordinate clause is
marked by a preposition, this preposition is almost never simply combined with the
relative clause. Examples are (r) and (s). In (r), Langen proposed to read prae <eo>
quod. Prae marks the clause as a disjunct of qualified truth (see § 10.103); quod is the
object of velis. In (s), editors used to read cum <illis> quos.85 Cum marks the relative
clause as a sociative adjunct in the sentence and quos is in the case form required
by nominavi. The normal strategy is to use a determiner, most often a form of is, in
combination with the relative clause, as in (t)–(v).
(r) Immo res omnis relictas habeo prae quod tu velis.
(‘On the contrary, I regard everything as of no account by comparison with what you
want.’ Pl. St. 362)
(s) . . . ibique Scipio cum quos paulo ante nominavi interiit.
(‘. . . and Scipio together with those I have just named perished aboard them.’ B. Afr.
96.2)
(t) Matronae magis conducibile est istuc, mea Selenium, / unum amare et cum
eo aetatem exigere quoi nupta est semel.
(‘It’s more advisable for a matron, my dear Selenium, to love only one man and to
spend her life with the man she has once been married to.’ Pl. Cist. 78–9)
(u) . . . aut num iam satis pro eo quod fecerit, honos habitus sit.
(‘. . . whether he has already received sufficient honour for what he did.’ Cic. Inv. 2.113)
85 Instances of what he calls ‘Ellipse des Demonstrativums’ are discussed by Baehrens (1912: 324–9);
for instances in Livy, see Pettersson (1930: 30–40).
Autonomous relative clauses 521
(v) Qua re tibi nuntiata, ut constabat inter eos qui una fuerunt, concidisti.
(‘When this was reported to you—as was evident to those with you—you collapsed.’
Cic. Phil. 2.107)
Supplement:
Without is: Nunc redeo ad ea quae (v.l. ad quae) mihi mandas. (Cic. Att. 5.11.6); Si
suppuratio vicerit, neque per quae supra scripta sunt discuti potuerit, omnis mora
vitanda erit . . . (Cels. 8.9.1g); At hic qui se ad quod (edd. ad <id> quod) exigit natura,
composuit non tantum extra sensum est paupertatis, sed extra metum. (Sen. Ep.
119.10)
With is: (see also § 18.15 for further examples) Id volo vos scire, quo modo ad hunc
devenerim / in servitutem ab eo quoi servivi prius. (Pl. Mil. 96–7); Ubi comperi ex
is qui ei fuere conscii, / domum revortor maestus . . . (Ter. Hau. 121–2); Sed in eis qui
fortunati sunt magis id apparet. (Cic. Phil. 13.16); Quantum igitur quaestum puta-
mus factum esse per eum cui quidvis licitum sit . . . (Cic. Ver. 3.150); . . . intellegi
volui, in eo cuius omnes cupidissimi essent quam pauci digni nomine evaderent.
(Cic. Brut. 299); Simplex autem conclusio reprehenditur, si hoc quod sequitur non
videatur necessario cum eo quod antecessit cohaerere. (Cic. Inv. 1.86); Obtrectatio
autem est . . . aegritudo ex eo quod alter quoque potiatur eo quod ipse concupiverit.
(Cic. Tusc. 4.17); Qui sim, ex eo quem ad te misi cognosces. (Sal. Cat. 44.5); . . . prodi-
tus deinde ab eis qui in Insula erant, circumsessus ab universa civitate . . . (Liv.
24.25.3)
There is no overt marking by a determiner for relative clauses functioning as space or
time adjunct if the relative (phrase) itself denotes space or time, as in (w)–(y). In (w),
apud in apud quos marks the clause as a position in space adjunct, in the same way as
ubi ‘where’ would. Note that the other autonomous relative clause qui hanc petessunt
functions as the subject of the sentence. Exx. (x) and (y) have a relative phrase with a
noun indicating time and (figurative) place, respectively (quo tempore in (x) can be
compared with cum ‘when’).
(w) Apud quos autem venandi et equitandi laus viget, qui hanc petessunt, nullum
fugiunt dolorem.
(‘Those among whom honour in hunting and horsemanship is valued shrink from no
pain in their quest for this.’ Cic. Tusc. 2.62)
(x) . . . qui quo tempore primum agere coepit in vadimoniis differendis tempus
omne consumpserit . . .
(‘. . . who, from the moment he began to act fraudulently, wasted all the time in a num-
ber of adjournments . . .’ Cic. Quinct. 46)
(y) Sed cum essent in quibus demonstravi angustiis ac se Libo cum Bibulo
coniunxisset loquuntur ambo ex navibus cum . . .
(‘But when they were in the difficulties which we explained above, and Libo had
joined Bibulus, the two of them aboard ship addressed . . .’ Caes. Civ. 3.15.6)
Different from the cases illustrated above are those (infrequent) instances in which
there is one prepositional phrase where two could be present, as in (z). Here we
522 Relative clauses
understand cadere possunt in eos in quos cadere nolis. In quos is required by under-
stood cadere in the relative clause.
(z) Ergo haec quae cadere possunt in quos nolis, quamvis sint bella, sunt tamen
ipso genere scurrilia.
(‘Such jokes, therefore, which can be applied to the wrong people, neat as they
may be, are still by nature buffoonish.’ Cic. de Orat. 2.245—tr. May and Wisse)
Supplement:
Nunc video illum circumventum, me desertum, a quibus minime conveniebat. (Met.
Cel. Fam. 5.1.1)
Autonomous relative clauses can be used as secondary predicates (see also § 21.15).86
Since the verbs in the superordinate clause are action verbs and the subject of the
relative clause is coreferential with one of the arguments in the superordinate clause,
the actions referred to in the relative clause are often taken as signalling the purpose
of the action in the superordinate clause, as in (aa)–(ad) (such clauses are usually
called ‘final relative clauses’ or ‘relative clauses of purpose’). For the use of the sub-
junctive in these clauses, see § 18.26.
(aa) I, Palaestrio, / aurum, ornamenta, vestem, pretiosa omnia / duc adiutores
tecum ad navim qui ferant.
(‘Go, Palaestrio, and take helpers with you to take the gold, jewellery, clothing, and all
the valuables to the ship.’ Pl. Mil. 1301–3)
(ab) Foribus dat aquam quam bibant.
(‘To the door she gives water to drink.’ Pl. Cur. 161)
(ac) Quae cum omnia facta sint, tamen unam solam scitote esse civitatem
Mamertinam quae publice legatos qui istum laudarent miserit.
(‘When all these things were done, nevertheless let me tell you that there was only
one single city, that of the Mamertines, which sent official envoys to speak in this
man’s support.’ Cic. Ver. 2.13)
(ad) . . . D. Laelium ab Asiatica classe abductum reliquit qui commeatus Byllide
atque Amantia inportari in oppidum prohiberet.
(‘. . . he left behind D. Laelius, whom he had taken from the Asiatic fleet, so that he
could prevent stores from being imported into the town from Byllis and Amantia.’
Caes. Civ. 3.40.4)
Supplement:
Dedi ei meam gnatam quicum <una> aetatem exigat. (Pl. Trin. 15); . . . viatorem ·
unum · legunto · quei · in / ea · decuria · viator · appareat . . . (CIL I2.587.8–9
(Lex Corn., 81 bc)); Venerat ipse qui esset in consilio et primus sententiam diceret.
(Cic. Ver. 1.73—NB: qui is coreferential with the subject of venerat); Neque erat uxor
quae consolari hominem in malis posset. (Cic. Ver. 5.92); His rebus cognitis explora-
tores centurionesque praemittit qui locum castris idoneum deligant. (Caes. Gal.
2.17.2); . . . Caesar duas legiones in citeriore Gallia novas conscripsit et inita aestate
in interiorem Galliam qui deduceret, Q. Pedium legatum misit. (Caes. Gal. 2.2.1—
NB: relative clause precedes); Ea qui conficeret C. Trebonium legatum relinquit.
(Caes. Gal. 7.11.2—NB: relative clause precedes); Itaque missi sunt delecti cum
Leonida, Lacedaemoniorum rege, qui Thermopylas occuparent longiusque barbaros
progredi non paterentur. (Nep. Them. 3.1); Tum ex consilio patrum Romulus
legatos circa vicinas gentes misit qui societatem conubiumque novo populo peterent.
(Liv. 1.9.2)
Also with relative adverbs: Locum in foro destinant quo pretiosissima rerum suarum
congererent. (Liv. 28.22.6)
In (ae) the qui clause is adnominal and restrictive with legati, which itself is a second-
ary predicate (for the subjunctive, see § 18.25).
(ae) Ad D. Brutum liberandum legati missi principes civitatis qui illi hosti ac
parricidae denuntiarent ut a Mutina discederet.
(‘To liberate Decimus Brutus, leaders of the community were sent as envoys
to order that enemy and traitor to withdraw from Mutina.’ Cic. Phil. 14.4)
Autonomous relative clauses also occur at the noun phrase level. Examples are (af)
and (ag). In (af), qui servos est has the same referent as the genitive huius in the pre-
ceding sentence. However, it may also be regarded as an adnominal non-restrictive
relative clause with huius understood from the preceding context. Ex. (ag) is unam-
biguous—note the coordination of the relative clause with the genitive Scipionis. In
(ah), the function of the qui clause is obvious due to the determiner eorum in the
genitive. Obviously, genitive forms of is are also found as resumptive pronouns, as in
(ai) and (aj).
(af) Nam ille quidem, quem tu hunc memoras esse, hodie hinc abiit Alidem / ad
patrem huius. # Quem patrem, qui servos est?
(‘Well, the one who you say this one here is went to Elis today to this one’s father. #
What father? Of this one who’s a slave?’ Pl. Capt. 573–4)
(ag) Ipse interea ex perfugis et incolis cognitis condicionibus Scipionis et qui cum
eo bellum contra se gerebant mirari . . .
(‘Meanwhile when he learned from deserters and the local inhabitants of the terms
entered into by Scipio and his supporters who were engaged in hostilities against him
he was surprised . . .’ B. Afr. 8.5)
(ah) . . . eorum qui absolverunt misericordiam non reprehendo, eorum qui in iudi-
cando superiora iudicia secuti sunt . . . constantiam comprobo . . .
(‘. . . while I find no fault with the clemency of those who voted for acquittal, I approve
the constancy of those who . . . in passing judgement stood by the judgements they
had passed already.’ Cic. Clu. 106)
(ai) Qui gentis omnis mariaque et terras movet, / eius sum civis civitate caelitum.
(‘In the city of the celestials I am a fellow-citizen of him who wields sway over all
peoples, seas, and lands.’ Pl. Rud. 1–2)
524 Relative clauses
(aj) Qui falsas litis falsis testimoniis / petunt quique in iure abiurant pecuniam, /
eorum referimus nomina exscripta ad Iovem.
(‘Of those who bring fraudulent cases to court, supported by fraudulent evidence,
and of those who deny the receipt of money before a magistrate on oath, we write
down the names and bring them back to Jupiter.’ Pl. Rud. 13–15)
Supplement:
Oleam cogito recte omnem arbitratu domini, aut quem custodem fecerit, aut cui olea
venierit. (Cato Agr. 144.1); In hoc libro dicam de vocabulis locorum et quae in his
sunt, in secundo de temporum et quae in his fiunt . . . (Var. L. 5.1.10); . . . gentibus
cognationibusque hominum quique una coierunt . . . (Caes. Gal. 6.22.2); . . . quam invisa
sit singularis potentia et miseranda vita qui se metui quam amari malunt, cuivis facile
intellectu fuit. (Nep. Di. 9.5); Conveniebat enim fruges . . . mittere signum / sanguinis
aut aliquid nostro quae corpore aluntur . . . (Lucr. 1.881–3); En dextra fidesque / quem
secum patrios aiunt portare penates . . . (Verg. A. 4.597–8);87 Hoc in sativis rumix
vocatur, omnium quae seruntur nascunturque fortissimum. (Plin. Nat. 19.184—NB:
textually uncertain); Ut satis testium et qui servi eadem noscerent repperit, aditum
ad principem postulat . . . (Tac. Ann. 2.28.1); . . . libertas hominis recogitata se potius
ream ostendet quod (<eius> quod cj. Engelbrecht) ipsa commisit. (Tert. Marc. 2.6.8)
With a determiner in the genitive: Certe modo / huius quae locuta est quaerere
aibas filiam. (Pl. Cist. 606–7); . . . illorum verbis falsis acceptor fui, / qui omnia se
simulant scire nec quicquam sciunt. (Pl. Trin. 204–5); Servos eius qui hinc a nobis est
mercatus mulierem . . . (Pl. Ps. 617); Non aetas eius qui adoptabat est quaesita . . .
(Cic. Dom. 35); Vult enim magnitudine rei sic occupare animos eorum qui audiunt ut
difficilis aditus veritati relinquatur. (Cic. Font. 20); Est enim quoddam genus eorum
qui se philosophos appellari volunt, quorum dicuntur esse Latini sane multi libri.
(Cic. Tusc. 2.7); Supplicia eorum qui in furto aut latrocinio aut aliqua noxia sint
comprehensi gratiora dis inmortalibus esse arbitrantur. (Caes. Gal. 6.16.5); Constat
fugisse ex castris regem ipsum receptumque in navem multitudine eorum qui ad
proximas naves adnatabant demerso navigio perisse. (B. Alex. 31.6)
Autonomous relative clauses can function in apposition to a noun phrase. Such
relative clauses are often marked as definite by the pronoun is, as in (ak)–(am). The
presence and absence of such marking can be seen together in relation to the same
noun phrase A. Albinus in (am). Such an appositional clause may be modified by a
constituent that specifies the relationship between the head and the apposition, as
videlicet ‘evidently’ in (an). It is not always easy to distinguish autonomous relative
clauses functioning in apposition to a noun phrase from adnominal non-restrictive
relative clauses.88
(ak) Quis te prohibuit? / # Sosia ille, quem iam dudum dico, is qui me contudit.
(‘Who forbade you? # That Sosia I’ve been talking about all this time, the one who
beat me up.’ Pl. Am. 617–18)
87 See Pease ad loc.: ‘with ellipsis of eius’, with parallels from Virgil.
88 See Lavency (1998a: 28–30, 101–3) for discussion.
Autonomous relative clauses 525
(al) Neque vero Asclepiades, is quo nos medico amicoque usi sumus, . . . medici-
nae facultate utebatur . . .
(‘Asclepiades also, he with whom we have been familiar both as physician and as
friend, was not exhibiting the skill of a physician . . .’ Cic. de Orat. 1.62)
(am) Nam et A. Albinus, is qui Graece scripsit historiam, qui consul cum L. Lucullo
fuit, et litteratus et disertus fuit.
(‘Thus Aulus Albanus, the man who wrote a history in Greek and who was consul
with Lucius Lucullus, was both a man of letters and a good speaker.’ Cic. Brut. 81)
(an) Copo autem . . . cum illum alterum, videlicet qui nummos haberet, animum
advertisset, noctu postquam illos artius iam ut ex lassitudine dormire sensit,
accessit . . .
(‘Then the innkeeper . . . who had taken note of one of the travellers, that is the one
with the money, came in the dead of night when he knew that they were sleeping
heavily as people do when tired . . .’ Cic. Inv. 2.14)
Supplement:
L. Opimius eiectus est patria, is qui et praetor et consul maximis rem publicam
periculis liberarat. (Cic. Pis. 95); Ego Q. Maximum, eum qui Tarentum recepit, senem
adulescens ita dilexi ut aequalem. (Cic. Sen. 10); At Diagoras cum Samothracam
venisset, Atheus ille qui dicitur, atque ei quidam amicus ‘Tu . . .’ (Cic. N.D. 3.89); Sed
demus tibi istas duas sumptiones (ea quae viwwl~l appellant dialectici . . .) . . . (Cic.
Div. 2.108—NB: ea in agreement with quae); . . . fateor me communium malorum
consolationem nullam invenire praeter illam, quae tamen, si possis eam suscipere,
maxima est quaque ego cottidie magis utor, conscientiam rectae voluntatis maximam
consolationem esse rerum incommodarum . . . (Cic. Fam. 6.4.2)
In the above examples of apposition the relative expression is formed by a pronoun. It
may also be formed by a relative phrase, as in (ao)–(ar). Such cases are sometimes
difficult to distinguish from connecting relatives.
(ao) Agonis quaedam est Lilybitana, liberta Veneris Erycinae, quae mulier ante
hunc quaestorem copiosa plane et locuples fuit.
(‘There is a certain woman from Lilybaeum, named Agonis, formerly a slave of Venus
of Eryx. This woman, in the days before Caecilius was quaestor, had very considerable
wealth and property.’ Cic. Div. Caec. 55)
(ap) . . . id iure laudabitur ut in astrologia C. Sulpicium audimus, in geometria Sex.
Pompeium ipsi cognovimus, multos in dialecticis plures in iure civili, quae
omnes artes in veri investigatione versantur . . .
(‘. . . that work will be justly praised, as we hear Gaius Sulpicius was praised for his work
in astronomy and as I personally know Sextus Pompey was in the field of geometry;
further, many have received praise for their work in dialectics and even more for civil
law. All these professions are occupied with the search after truth . . .’ Cic. Off. 1.19)
(aq) . . . iter in Santonum fines facere, qui non longe a Tolosatium finibus absunt,
quae civitas est in provincia.
526 Relative clauses
(‘. . . to march into the territory of the Santones, who are not far removed from the
territory of the Tolosates, which is a state in the Province.’ Caes. Gal. 1.10.1)
(ar) Eodem anno a Campanis Cumae, quam Graeci tum urbem tenebant, capiuntur.
(‘In this same year Cumae, a city which the Greeks then held, was captured by the
Campanians.’ Liv. 4.44.12)
Supplement:
Idemque Servium Galbam, quem hominem probe commeminisse se aiebat, pergra-
viter reprehendere solebat, quod . . . (Cic. de Orat. 1.227); Eum tibi unice commendo
eoque magis quod cum ipsum diligo, tum quod negotia procurat L. Egnati Rufi, quo
ego uno equite Romano familiarissime utor et qui cum consuetudine cottidiana tum
officiis plurimis maximisque mihi coniunctus est. (Cic. Fam. 13.43.1—NB: coordin-
ation); Etiam Cingulo, quod oppidum Labienus constituerat suaque pecunia exaedi-
ficaverat, ad eum legati veniunt . . . (Caes. Civ. 1.15.2)
The appositions with a relative phrase above differ from various expressions that bear
some vague resemblance, like (as)–(au). Ex. (as) admits of two analyses: either virum
optimum and the qui clause both modify M. Laenium Flaccum, or—preferably—the
qui clause is a non-restrictive adnominal clause with virum, which itself is an apposition
with M. Laenium Flaccum. In (at), the quod clause is a restrictive adnominal clause
with flumine (maximo), which serves as an apposition with Isara (and is probably
meant to identify it for Cicero). In (au), the cuius clause is a restrictive clause with vir.
Together vir and cuius function as an apposition of Q. Servilius Priscus. Examples like
(au) are not attested before Livy, but that may be the result of chance.
(as) Nos Brundisi apud M. Laenium Flaccum dies XIII fuimus, virum optimum,
qui periculum fortunarum et capitis sui prae mea salute neglexit . . .
(‘I have stayed in Brundisium for thirteen days with M. Laenius Flaccus, a
very worthy gentleman, who has disregarded the danger to his property and
status in his concern for my safety . . .’ Cic. Fam. 14.4.2)
(at) Itaque in Isara, flumine maximo quod in finibus est Allobrogum, ponte uno
die facto exercitum a. d. VII Id. Mai. traduxi.
(‘I therefore constructed in one day a bridge across the Isara, the largest river
on the border of the Allobrogian territory, and led my army across on 9 May.’
Planc. Fam. 10.15.3)
(au) . . . dictator ex senatus consulto dictus Q. Servilius Priscus, vir cuius provi-
dentiam in republica cum multis aliis tempestatibus ante experta civitas
erat tum . . .
(‘. . . Quintus Servilius Priscus was in consequence of a senatorial decree
named dictator—a man whose clear vision in public affairs the state had
proved on many previous occasions . . .’ Liv. 4.46.10)
An autonomous relative clause can also function as the subject of an ablative absolute
construction (see § 16.91, (f)). Examples are (av)–(ax).89
(av) Iam . . . turba . . . refracturosque carcerem minabantur, cum remisso quod erep-
turi erant ex senatus consulto Manlius vinclis liberatur.
(‘By this time the crowd . . . were threatening to break open the prison, when, with
that which they were going to extort by violence having been conceded, Manlius was
released from his bonds by decree of the Senate.’ Liv. 6.17.6—NB: the printed text is
the reading of the OCT; most of the mss. have id quod; other editors read eo quod
with some inferior mss.)
(aw) . . . hoc genus solum, ut ea quae cete appellant, animal parit, excepta quam
ranam vocant.
(‘. . . this kind alone, like the creatures termed cetaceans, is viviparous, with the excep-
tion of the species called the fishing-frog.’ Plin. Nat. 9.78)
(ax) Flaccus interim cognito castrorum obsidio et missis per Gallias qui auxilia
concirent, lectos e legionibus Dillio Voculae . . . tradit . . .
(‘Flaccus, meanwhile, after he had heard that the camp was besieged and had sent
emissaries through the Gallic provinces to call out auxiliary forces, entrusted troops
picked from his legions to Dillius Vocula . . .’ Tac. Hist. 4.24.1)
NB: coordination: Itaque interfectis Novioduni custodibus quique eo negotiandi aut
itineris causa convenerant pecuniam atque equos inter se partiti sunt . . . (Caes. Gal.
7.55.5).
In addition to the regular pattern in which adnominal relative clauses are used (essen-
tially: a noun, with or without a determiner, and a relative pronoun), instances are
found from Early Latin onwards of the repetition of the same noun or a near synonym
in the relative, as in ex. (a). This form of repetition is also possible with autonomous
relative clauses. The various possibilities are shown in Table 18.5. These combinations
are discussed throughout this section.
The effect of repetition is, on the one hand, more clarity and less ambiguity, which
explains why it is relatively common in legal texts, especially of the Republican period
Autonomous relative clauses 529
(see (a)).90 On the other hand, this form of repetition makes sentences longer and more
complex. Another example is (b), with the anaphoric determiner eo + agro.91 In the
Rhetorica ad Herennium it belongs to the text illustrating the middle style (ex. (c)).92
(a) Cos. · quei · nunc · sunt, · iei · ante · K. · Decembreis · primas · de · eis, ·
quei / cives · Romanei · sunt, · viatorem · unum · legunto, · quei ·
in / ea · decuria · viator · appareat, · quam · decuriam · viatorum /
ex · noneis · Decembribus · primeis · quaestoribus · ad · aerarium /
apparere · oportet · oportebit.
(‘The consuls now in office shall, before the first day of December next, choose, from
those who are Roman citizens, one messenger who shall attend as messenger in that
department of messengers which is or shall be required to attend the quaestors at the
treasury on and after the fifth day of December next.’ CIL I2.587.7–11 (Lex Cornelia,
Rome, 81 bc))
(b) Si totus ager itineri aut actui servit, dominus in eo agro nihil facere potest
quo servitus impediatur . . .
(‘If an entire estate is subject to a servitude of iter or actus, the owner of that estate is
not entitled to do anything on the land that would hinder the exercise of servitude . . .’
Javol. dig. 8.3.13.1—tr. Birks)
(c) . . . cum . . . non . . . viderent . . . ullam rem quae res pertinet ad bellum adminis-
trandum? . . . Nedum illi imperium orbis terrae, cui imperio omnes gentes . . .
consenserunt . . ., ad se transferre tantulis viribus conarentur.
(‘. . . when they saw none of the things needful for carrying on the war? . . . It is still less
credible that with such meagre forces they would attempt to usurp that sovereignty
over the whole world which all the peoples have accepted.’ Rhet. Her. 4.13)
Although this repetition has received much scholarly attention, it is, in reality, a minor
phenomenon and one which is more stylistic than syntactic. Relatively frequent are
nouns such as dies ‘day’, lex ‘law’, locus ‘place’, pars ‘part’, and res ‘thing’.
Grammars note that authors vary in the degree to which they use these construc-
tions. They are said to be relatively frequent in Caesar (Parzinger (1910: 83–4) calcu-
lates twenty-six instances, others somewhat fewer), not infrequent in Cicero (about
fifty instances, especially in his early writings, but decreasing afterwards), rare in
Livy, but more common again in Vitruvius, archaizing authors like Fronto, and the
jurists. These constructions are also not uncommon in Late Latin.93 The most fre-
quent types are the adnominal (paras. a. and b. below). The number of illustrations
provided below is overproportionate to the general frequency.
90 For a discussion of such instances, see Pascucci (1968: 12–17), de Meo (2005: 87–90), and Halla-
aho (2018: 161–5).
91 Instances can be found in Kalb (1888: 41–3); Lebreton (1901b: 19–20); Merguet (1905/6: 592B, § II);
Parzinger (1910: 83–4); Eden (1962: 87–9); Odelman (1972: 148–52). For the complexity of relative
clauses in legal inscriptions, see Amacker (2011).
92 See Calboli (2006: 235–6).
93 For a historical survey, see Sz.: 535–6; for the jurists, see also Pascucci (1968: 12–17), Calboli (2006),
and Reggio (2005; 2006).
530 Relative clauses
94 Fifteen instances from Caesar are collected by Odelman (1972: 148–9), alongside four or five of type b.
95 Pace Pompei (2011b: 77), who holds that most clauses of this type are non-restrictive.
Autonomous relative clauses 531
virgulamque, qua virgula egrediens sigillum ostendit horas, columna versando conti-
nenter suis cuiusque mensibus brevitates et crescentias faciat horarum. (Vitr. 9.8.7);
Diem, qui dies ex ista nocte nascetur, aeterna mihi nuncupavit religio . . . (Apul. Met.
11.5.5); Praeter has leges Aemiliam quoque legem invenimus, qua lege non sumptus
cenarum, sed ciborum genus et modus praefinitus est. (Gel. 2.24.12); Lucius
Titius . . . fundum Cornelianum locavit Sempronio, qui Sempronius reliqua traxit.
(Paul. dig. 26.7.46.pr.);96 . . . cepimus ascendere montes singulos, qui montes cum infinito
labore ascenduntur, quoniam . . . (Pereg. 3.1); ‘Dicimus’ inquit ‘iudicium futurum, in quo
iudicio . . .’ et cetera . . . Dixerat ‘iudicium futurum’ sed, homo cautus, timuit solum dicere
‘in quo’ et posuit ‘in quo iudicio’ ne, si non secundo repetisset ‘iudicium’ nos, obliti
superiorum, pro ‘iudicio’ ‘asinum’ putaremus! (Hier. Ruf. 2.6); . . . cervicem illius loro
cinges, quod lorum strictius teneatur super scapulas ab aliquo . . . (Mulom. Chir. 6)
NB: Ubi de eius adventu Helvetii certiores facti sunt, legatos ad eum mittunt nobilis-
simos civitatis, cuius legationis Nammeius et Verucloetius principem locum obtine-
bant . . . (Caes. Gal. 1.7.3)
servi a dominis poenae nomine vincti sunt . . . eiusdem condicionis liberi fiant cuius
condicionis sunt peregrini dediticii. (Gaius Inst. 1.13); Cuperemus profecto, mi
Naucelli carissime, eo nos fato praeditos, ut, si mihi liberi etiam virilis sexus nati
fuissent eorumque aetas hoc potissimum tempore ad munia militiae fungenda ado-
lesceret quo tempore tu provinciam cum exercitu administrares, uti sub te mei liberi
stipendia mererent. (Fro. Amic. 1.5.1)
clauses required by the meaning of the adjective dignus ‘worthy’. In (b), there are
two parallel adjective phrases, one with the ablative noun phrase ceteris praemiis,
one with the relative clause qui . . . donentur. In (c) the entire relative clause is in the
scope of ne . . . quidem. In most instances, the governing adjective is the subject or
object complement in its clause, but it may be an attribute as well, as in (d). There
are no restrictions on the function that the relative word may have in its clause. The
mood is almost always the subjunctive (see also § 18.25). These clauses are often
called ‘consecutive’ relative clauses and regarded as more or less synonymous
with the so-called result ut clauses with which these adjectives are also found,
though less frequently (for details on the constructions found with dignus, see
§§ 17.21; 25; 29; 32; 33). Other adjectives with which autonomous relative clauses
are used are aptus ‘fitted’, ‘able’; idoneus ‘suitable’, ‘able’; and indignus ‘not deserv-
ing’. Autonomous relative clauses with a relative adverb also occur with these
adjectives, as in (e).97
(a) Praesertim quom is me dignum quoi concrederet / habuit . . .
(‘Especially since he has regarded me as worthy for him to trust . . .’ Pl. As. 80–1)
(b) Etenim cum ceteris praemiis digni sunt . . ., tum certe dignissimi sunt qui
civitate ea donentur . . .
(‘In fact, if those . . . are worthy of other rewards, then assuredly are they most worthy
to be presented with that citizenship . . .’ Cic. Balb. 51)
(c) Postea quam illum ne cui satisfacere<t> quidem me dignum habere sensi . . .
(‘When I perceived that he did not think me even worth satisfying . . .’ Cael. Fam.
8.12.2)
(d) Nec digniorem censeo vidisse anum me quemquam / quoi deos atque
homines censeam bene facere magis decere.
(‘I don’t think I’ve ever seen any more deserving old woman, anyone to whom I’d
think gods and men ought to do more good turns.’ Pl. Rud. 406–7)
(e) . . . ut nos dicamur duo / omnium dignissumi esse quo cruciatus confluant.
(‘. . . that we two will be called the worthiest men alive—to be where the torture’s
thickest.’ Pl. As. 313–14)
Supplement:
. . . Catonem induxi senem disputantem, quia nulla videbatur aptior persona quae de
illa aetate loqueretur quam eius, qui et diutissime senex fuisset . . . (Cic. Amic. 4); . . . me
profiteor suscepisse . . . onus . . . dignum in quo omnes nervos aetatis . . . contenderem.
(Cic. Ver. 35); . . . modo illud adtendatur dignane causa videatur ea . . . quare de
magnificentia . . . quiddam derogetur. (Cic. Inv. 2.175); . . . remque commovisti nova
disputatione dignam quam in aliud tempus differamus. (Cic. Brut. 297); Nam et qui
bene imperat, paruerit aliquando necesse est, et qui modeste paret, videtur qui ali-
quando imperet dignus esse. (Cic. Leg. 3.5); Litteras tuas legimus . . . minime dignas
quae a te nobis mitterentur. (Brut. Cas. Fam. 11.3.1); (Lausus) . . . dignus patriis qui
97 For the use of relative clauses at the adjective level, see Mellado (1998).
534 Relative clauses
laetior esset / imperiis . . . (Verg. A. 7.653–4); Video hercle ego te me arbitrari, Euclio,
hominem idoneum / quem . . . ludos facias . . . (Pl. Aul. 252–3); . . . si tutor erit idoneus
a quo servari possit id quod . . . (Pomp. dig. 26.7.61)
Instances like (f) are entirely different. Here, the second argument of digni is obiurga-
tione and the relative clause modifies parentes. The indicative nolunt is not some sort
of violation of the classical rule that dignus requires a subjunctive but is perfectly
understandable.
(f) Quid ergo est? Parentes obiurgatione digni sunt qui nolunt liberos suos
severa lege proficere.
(‘Then what is to be done? Parents deserve criticism who are not willing to
let their children profit by stern discipline.’ Petr. 4.1)
Autonomous relative clauses are also found in combination with adjectives modi-
fied by tam ‘to such a degree’ and with tantus ‘so great’, especially when the main
clause contains a negative word such as nemo ‘no one’, nullus ‘not any’, numquam
‘never’, or nusquam ‘nowhere’ or when the main sentence is interrogative with a
negation implied, as in (m). The mood of the clause is the subjunctive (for the
mood, see also § 18.25). Here too, as with the instances of dignus above, there is an
ut and a quin clause alternative (see § 16.54—both are labelled ‘consecutive’, of the
‘expansion’ type). Tantus and tam + adjective may be the subject complements in
their clauses, as in (g)–(i), or attributes, as in ( j). More exceptional is the substan-
tival use of tanti in (k). Examples with relative adverbs are (l) and (m). In (m),
mordax seems to imply a high degree of inaccessibility. The use of the relative pro-
noun quo can be compared with the use of quo in purpose clauses (see § 16.51 and
§ 16.54).
(g) Ut porro firmissimum hoc adferri videtur cur deos esse credamus, quod
nulla gens tam fera, nemo omnium tam sit inmanis, cuius mentem non
imbuerit deorum opinio . . .
(‘Furthermore, as this seems to be advanced as the surest basis for our belief in the
existence of gods, that there is no race so uncivilized, no one in the world so barbarous
that his mind has no inkling of a belief in gods.’ Cic. Tusc. 1.30)
(h) An ille tam esset stultus qui mi mille nummum crederet / Philippum . . .
(‘Would he be so stupid as to entrust one thousand Philippics to me . . .?’ Pl. Trin.
954–5)
(i) Latent ista omnia, Luculle, crassis occultata et circumfusa tenebris, ut
nulla acies humani ingenii tanta sit quae penetrare in caelum, terram intrare
possit.
(‘All these things are hidden, Lucullus, closely concealed and enfolded in thick clouds
of darkness, so that no human intellect has a sufficiently powerful sight to be able to
penetrate the heaven and get inside the earth.’ Cic. Luc. 122)
( j) Quis homo est tanta confidentia / qui sacerdotem audeat violare?
(‘Who’s the man reckless enough to dare lay hands on the priestess?’ Pl. Rud. 645–6)
Autonomous relative clauses 535
(k) . . . quod decus erit tanti quod adipisci cum dolore corporis velit qui . . .
(‘. . . what glory will be of such value that a man will wish to obtain it at the cost of
bodily pain?’ Cic. Tusc. 2.16)
(l) . . . quoniam non habent roboris tantum unde vitia mentium vincant,
plerumque facinus infirmitate fecerunt.
(‘. . . since they do not have such strength from which they can overcome their mental
defects, they usually commit their crime through weakness.’ [Quint.] Decl. 2.8)
(m) Num tibi nam, amabo, ianua est mordax mea, / quo intro ire metuas, mea
voluptas?
(‘Please, my darling, you don’t think my door will bite you, do you, so that you should
be afraid to go in?’ Pl. Truc. 352–3)
Supplement:
<Nusquam> quisquam est tam opulentus qui mi opsistat in via, / nec strategus nec
tyrannus quisquam nec agoranomus / nec demarchus nec comarchus nec cum tanta
gloria / quin cadat, quin capite sistat in via de semita. (Pl. Cur. 284–7); Nam generi
lenonio / numquam ullus deus tam benignus fuit qui fuerit propitius. (Pl. Per.
582–3); . . . nemo opinor tam insanus esset qui iudicaret meliorem esse Gellium quam
Turium. (Cato orat. 51); Nulla mihi res posthac potest iam intervenire tanta / quae
mi aegritudinem adferat. Tanta haec laetitia oborta’st. (Ter. Hau. 679–80); Num quis
igitur est tam demens qui hoc P. Clodio vivo contingere potuisse arbitretur? (Cic.
Mil. 78); . . . nemo omnium tam sit inmanis cuius mentem non imbuerit deorum
opinio . . . (Cic. Tusc. 1.30)
Similarly, relative clauses are used in combination with talis ‘of such a kind’ and eius-
modi ‘of that kind’. These are also in the subjunctive. This construction also has an ut
clause alternative (see § 16.54). The earliest attestations are in Cicero. Examples are
(n)–(q). The governing expressions are usually the subject or object constituent in
their clause, but sometimes also an attribute, as in (p). Relative adverbs are found as
well, as in (q).
(n) Talem igitur te esse oportet qui primum te ab impiorum civium . . . societate
seiungas . . .
(‘You must be the sort of man who first would separate himself from the alliance of
disloyal citizens . . .’ Cic. Fam. 10.6.3)
(o) Etenim nomen legati eiusmodi esse debet quod . . . incolume versetur.
(‘And indeed the name of legatus ought to be of such a kind that its bearer should be
able to move unharmed.’ Cic. Ver. 1.85)
(p) Nam est innocentia adfectio talis animi quae noceat nemini.
(‘For inoffensiveness is a disposition of the soul to injure no one.’ Cic. Tusc. 3.16)
(q) Cum . . . spes esset ad talem tamen virum iudicem veniendi unde . . . plus opis
auferret . . .
(‘Since . . . he had the hope after all of coming before a judge of such a character that
he would offer more assistance . . .’ Cic. Quinct. 32)
536 Relative clauses
Supplement:
Erat iter tale per quod vix tranquillum ab hostili metu agmen expediri posset. (Liv.
35.30.4); Tales fuerunt ex quibus posset alter tyrannum contemnere, alter occidere.
(Sen. Con. 9.4.3)
In corpore si quid eius modi est quod reliquo corpori noceat id uri secarique
patimur . . . (Cic. Phil. 8.15)
An instance like (r) also probably belongs here. Eo magnitudinis ‘to such a degree of
greatness’ requires the relative clause with ubi.
(r) (sc. homines) . . . eo magnitudinis procederent ubi pro mortalibus gloria
aeterni fierent.
(‘. . . they would advance to that degree of greatness where glory would make
them eternal instead of mortal.’ Sal. Jug. 1.4)
Autonomous relative clauses can furthermore be used after a comparative expression
+ quam. When they are in the subjunctive mood, they resemble quam ut clauses (see
§ 17.25). The latter is the regular expression, with a rare exception in Caesar, (s), with
the relative adverb quo. For a relative pronoun, see (t).
(s) . . . non longius hostes aberant quam quo telum adigi posset . . .
(‘. . . the enemy were not farther from them than the distance to which a dart could be
cast . . .’ Caes. Gal. 2.21.3)
(t) Maior sum quam cui possit Fortuna nocere . . .
(‘I am too great for Fortune to harm . . .’ (Ov. Met. 6.195)
Supplement:
. . . maiora in defectione deliquerant quam quibus ignosci posset. (Liv. 26.12.6);
Nam . . . maiores et magis ramosas arbores caedebant quam quas ferre cum armis
miles posset . . . (Liv. 33.5.6); Distulerant tamquam maiora meritum quam quae sta-
tim exsolverentur. (Tac. Hist. 3.51.1)
NB: When autonomous relative clauses in comparisons are in the indicative, they
refer to facts, as in (u).
(u) Elephantorum maior est vis quam quos in Africa domitant . . .
(‘The strength of its elephants is greater than those which men tame in
Africa. . .’ Curt. 8.9.17)
In general the use of the tenses in relative clauses needs no separate treatment.
However, two details are discussed in the next two sections.
18.21 The use of the tenses in relative clauses with a future indicative
In relative clauses related to a head constituent in a main clause with some sort of
directive expression, the simple future is used to reflect the fact that the execution of
Tenses and moods in relative clauses 537
the states of affairs will be in the future (see also § 7.23). This is common in Cato.
Examples are (a)–(c). In ex. (a) the main clause has a future imperative, (b) has the
verb oportet, and (c) is directive by implication.
(a) Per ver serito in loco ubi terra tenerrima erit (quam ‘pullam’ vocant), ubi
aqua propter siet.
(‘Sow (sc. cypress) in the spring in a place where the soil is very mellow, grey earth as
it is called, where there is water nearby.’ Cato Agr. 151.2—NB: subjunctive in the
second clause)
(b) Qui ager frigidior et macrior erit, ibi oleam Licinianam seri oportet.
(‘As for land which is colder and thinner, there the Licinian olive should be planted.’
Cato Agr. 6.2)
(c) Ager oleto conserundo, qui in ventum Favonium spectabit et soli ostentus
erit.
(‘Land which is suitable for olive planting is that which faces the west and is exposed
to the sun.’ Cato Agr. 6.2)
Supplement:
Adnominal non-restrictive clause: . . . ille populus Romanus, cuius usque ad nos-
tram memoriam nomen invictum in navalibus pugnis permanserit, magna ac multo
maxima parte non modo utilitatis sed dignitatis atque imperi caruit. (Cic. Man. 54)
Descriptive restrictive clause: Nulla domus in Sicilia locuples fuit ubi iste non tex-
trinum instituerit. (Cic. Ver. 4.58)
Autonomous clause: Quin ob eam rem Orcus recipere ad se hunc noluit, / ut esset
hic qui mortuis cenam coquat. (Pl. Ps. 795–6); Nemo . . . oppressus aere alieno fuit
quem non ad hoc incredibile sceleris foedus asciverit. (Cic. Catil. 2.8); Qui igitur
adulescens nondum tanta gloria praeditus nihil umquam nisi severissime et gravis-
sime fecerit, is ea existimatione eaque aetate saltavit? (Cic. Deiot. 27); . . . nec illi com-
mittendum illud negotium sed inponendum putaverunt qui in contione palam
dixerint linguam se evellisse M. Catoni . . . (Cic. Sest. 60); Fuere quos inconsultus
pavor nando etiam capessere fugam inpulerit. (Liv. 22.6.6); Et hercule is fuit
Quintianus quem diligi deceat ipsius exemplo. (Plin. Ep. 9.9.2)
The present is occasionally used in relative clauses instead of a past tense, that is, as a
historic present (see § 7.121), as in (e).
(e) Dedi mercatori quoidam (sc. tabellas) qui ad illum deferat / meum erum qui
Athenis fuerat, qui ha<n>c amaverat, / ut is huc veniret.
(‘I gave them to a certain merchant to bring to that master of mine who’d been
in Athens and who’d loved her, telling him to come here.’ Pl. Mil. 131–3)
The state of affairs in a relative clause can be independently positioned in time in
other ways as well, as illustrated by (f) and (g). In (f), imperfect excelleret in its autono-
mous relative clause is fully justified because the search referred to in the main clause
(in the present tense) is for someone who lived in the past. A remarkable example is
(g), an autonomous relative clause, with apparently deviant secutus esset presented as
anterior to ‘correct’ voluerit, and therefore in the pluperfect.
(f) Qui vero utraque re excelleret, ut et doctrinae studiis et regenda civitate
princeps esset, quis facile praeter hunc inveniri potest?
(‘But who can readily be found except this man, who excelled in both careers, so as to
be foremost both in the pursuit of learning and in the actual government of a state?’
Cic. Leg. 3.14)
(g) Et qui nec . . . tuum . . . consilium secutus esset nec . . . vobis auctoribus uti
voluerit, nunc . . . nostras sententias desideraturum censes fuisse?
(‘And do you suppose that he would feel any need of our opinions, who did not follow
your counsel and then did not want to use you as counsellors?’ Cic. Fam. 4.9.2)
Leaving aside the oblique use of the subjunctive in indirect speech and cases of attrac-
tion of the subjunctive in clauses that are subordinate to another clause in the
Tenses and moods in relative clauses 539
subjunctive, the indicative and subjunctive moods are mostly used in relative clauses
with the same semantic values as in independent declarative sentences: the indicative
is used to present an event as factive, the subjunctive as non-factive, most often to
present something as possible or likely (potential), less often as something that has to
be done (deontic). In most studies more detailed labels are used for the use of the
subjunctive, such as ‘causal subjunctive’, ‘concessive/adversative subjunctive’, ‘consecu-
tive subjunctive’, and ‘final subjunctive’. Most of these cases can easily be understood
as contextual interpretations of the two values (potential and deontic) mentioned
above. In addition to these regular semantically justified uses of the subjunctive, there
are a number of idiomatic expressions.98
The following three sections deal with the use of the moods in the three types
of relative clauses that are distinguished in this Syntax: non-restrictive adnominal
clauses, restrictive adnominal clauses, and autonomous relative clauses that function
at the clause level. For the use of the subjunctive in autonomous relative clauses at the
adjective phrase level (e.g. tantus . . . qui), see § 18.19. For its use in autonomous rela-
tive clauses which function as secondary predicates, see § 21.15.
98 For general discussion, see Vester (1989), Álvarez Huerta (2011), Lavency (2011), and
Panchón (2011). See also Bock (2009) for the interpretation of relative clauses in Latin and other old Indo-
European languages.
540 Relative clauses
abuses himself ’.99 Along the same lines the relative clause in (c) refers to a character-
istic property of Scipio. Exx. (d) and (e) are in the perfect tense, and a paraphrase is
less easy. Ex. (f) has an indicative in the first relative clause, which is restrictive, and
subjunctives in the subsequent non-restrictive clauses.
There is no need to assume a special ‘causal’ value of the subjunctive (which would
also be difficult to integrate into a description of the modal system). Often there
are contextual features that contribute to a causal interpretation, such as words
expressing a subjective judgement (e.g. insanit in (a), probo in (e)), nominative first
and second personal pronouns, the emphasizing particle quidem, and the exclama-
tory sentence type.100
Supplement:
Indicative mood: Quor eiulas, / quem ego avom feci iam ut esses filiai nuptiis? (Pl.
Aul. 796–7); Edepol, Neptune, peccavisti largiter, / qui occasionem hanc amisisti tam
bonam. (Pl. Mos. 438–9); Sed sumne ego stultus, qui rem curo publicam . . .? (Pl. Per.
99 Paraphrasing Bennett: I.292, who presents the relevant instances in Early Latin (137–8; 292–4). See
also Lavency (1996b; 2011: 101) on the difference between so-called causal relative clauses and causal cum
clauses (for which see § 16.29).
100 See Iordache (1977: 265–8).
Tenses and moods in relative clauses 541
75); Ille vir fuit; nos quidem contemnendi, qui auctorem odimus, acta defendimus.
(Cic. Phil. 2.96); Quid ergo? Non omni puero stultiores sumus, qui in luce timemus?
(Sen. Ep. 110.6)101
Subjunctive mood: Ego stultior, / qui isti credam. (Pl. Mer. 920–1); Amant ted omnes
mulieres, neque iniuria, / qui sis tam pulcher. (Pl. Mil. 58–9—NB: v.l. es; cf. l. 63: Ergo
mecastor pulcher est);102 Davos? # Interturbat. # Quam ob rem? # Nescio, / nisi mihi
deos sati’ scio fuisse iratos, qui auscultaverim. (Ter. An. 663–4); ‘O fortunate’, inquit,
‘adulescens, qui tuae virtutis Homerum praeconem inveneris!’ (Cic. Arch. 24—NB:
the older mss. have inveneras); Illi autem, qui omnia de re publica praeclara atque
egregia sentirent, sine recusatione ac sine ulla mora negotium susceperunt . . . (Cic.
Catil. 3.5); . . . Ti. Gracchus—patrem dico, cuius utinam filii ne degenerassent a gravi-
tate patria!—tantam laudem est adeptus . . . (Cic. Prov. 18—NB: unless it is an instance
of relative connexion); Tarquinio vero quid impudentius, qui bellum gereret cum is
qui eius non tulerant superbiam? (Cic. Tusc. 3.27); Hac inpulsi occasione, qui iam
ante se p. R. imperio subiectos dolerent, liberius atque audacius de bello consilia inire
incipiunt. (Caes. Gal. 7.1.3); Inde barbari dissipati, quibus nec certa imperia nec
duces essent, vertunt impetum in suos. (Liv. 7.24.8); Quibus equidem adsenserim; sed
M. Cato quantum differt, qui dicat Capuam ab eisdem Tuscis conditam ac subinde
Nolam. (Vell. 1.7.3)
The causal interpretation of relative clauses can be made more explicit by the particle
quippe ‘as is to be expected’ (which is also found in combination with cum in a causal
interpretation—see § 16.29), as in (g). Ut ‘as is natural’ (from Cicero onwards) and
utpote ‘as is natural’ are also used, as in (h) and (i), respectively.103
(g) Aegre tulisse P. Rupilium fratris repulsam consulatus scriptum apud Fannium
est; sed tamen transisse videtur modum, quippe qui ob eam causam a vita
recesserit: moderatius igitur ferre debuit.
(‘It has been recorded in Fannius that P. Rupilius was distressed at his brother’s
failure to be elected to the consulship. But all the same he seems to have
passed the limit, since he died of chagrin. He ought therefore to have shown
more restraint.’ Cic. Tusc. 4.40)
(h) . . . senatui placere C. Cassium pro consule provinciam Syriam obtinere, ut
qui optimo iure eam provinciam obtinuerit . . .
(‘. . . that it please the Senate that Caius Cassius, proconsul, shall hold the
province of Syria, as one appointed to that province with all due form.’ Cic.
Phil. 11.30)
(i) . . . sati’n nequam sum, utpote qui hodie amare inceperim?
(‘. . . aren’t I naughty, since I’ve fallen in love today?’ Pl. Rud. 462)
101 For more examples of the indicative mood, see K.-St.: II.292–4. Also Lodge, s.v. qui, p. 460 § B.1.
102 Panchón (2011: 133–7) prefers es.
103 For more examples, see OLD s.v. § 2, ut § 21.b, utpote § b. For ut qui, see Gibert (2012). For dia-
chronic and individual variation in the use of the moods and of the particles, see Sz.: 558–61. For the use
of quippe with relative, cum, and other clauses, see Schrickx (2011: 120–6).
542 Relative clauses
Supplement:
Tametsi pro imperio vobis quod dictum foret / scibat facturos, quippe qui intellexerat
/ vereri vos se et metuere, ita ut aequom est Iovem. (Pl. Am. 21–3);104 . . . non possim
dicere me haec quae nunc complector perinde ut dicam discenda esse didicisse,
quippe qui omnium maturrime ad publicas causas accesserim . . . (Cic. de Orat. 3.74);
Est enim quoddam genus eorum qui se philosophos appellari volunt, quorum
dicuntur esse Latini sane multi libri. Quos non contemno equidem, quippe quos
numquam legerim. (Cic. Tusc. 2.7); Adversae pugnae in Hispania nullius in animo
quam meo minus oblitterari possunt, quippe cui pater et patruus . . . interfecti sunt.
(Liv. 26.41.8)
Tum demum Titurius, ut qui nihil ante providisset, trepidare et concursare cohor-
tesque disponere . . . (Caes. Gal. 5.33.1)
The use of the subjunctive spread in the course of time, as in reason adjuncts with
cum (see § 7.143). However, it never reached the point of becoming a meaningless,
purely grammatical phenomenon.
A few examples of adnominal non-restrictive relative clauses in the subjunctive that
are interpreted in an adversative or concessive sense are ( j)–(l). In this case, too, the
same interpretation is possible for relative clauses in the indicative, as in (m).105
( j) Miro equidem, soror, te istaec sic fabulari, / quae tam callida et docta sis
et faceta.
(‘I really am surprised, my sister, that you say that like this, even though you’re so
clever and smart and witty.’ Pl. Poen. 233–4)
(k) Tu’n ted expurges mihi, / qui facinus tantum tamque indignum feceris?
(‘You would try to apologize to me even though you’ve committed such a big and
disgraceful offence?’ Pl. Mil. 497–8)
(l) Namque egomet, qui sero ac leviter Graecas litteras attigissem, tamen cum
pro consule in Ciliciam proficiscens venissem Athenas, complures tum ibi
dies sum propter navigandi difficultatem commoratus.
(‘For although I came into contact with Greek literature late in life and even then only
in a superficial way, nevertheless when on my journey to Cilicia as proconsul I
reached Athens, I stayed there for several days due to the difficulty in putting to sea.’
Cic. de Orat. 1.82)
(m) Quae quidem ego, patres conscripti, qui illa numquam probavi, tamen ita
conservanda concordiae causa arbitratus sum . . .
(‘I, who never approved those acts, Members of the Senate, nevertheless judged that
they should be retained for concord’s sake . . .’ Cic. Phil. 1.23)
104 Qui in the combinations quippe qui and quippe . . . qui in Plautus is usually taken as an indefinite
adverb ‘in some way’, and not as a relative pronoun, but this is one of the instances where qui can be taken
as a relative pronoun. For discussion, see Vallejo (1948) and Schrickx (2011: 131–3).
105 For more examples of the indicative mood, see K.-St.: II.294–5. Also Lodge s.v. qui, p. 463 § C.1. For
subjunctive instances, see Bennett: I.294.
Tenses and moods in relative clauses 543
Supplement:
Hodie qui fuerim liber, / eum nunc potivit pater servitutis. (Pl. Am. 177–8—NB: qui
is coreferential with the speaker); Hercules, qui deus sis, sane discessisti non bene.
(Pl. St. 395); Quis est qui C. Fabrici M’. Curi non cum caritate aliqua benivola memo-
riam usurpet, quos numquam viderit? (Cic. Amic. 28); . . . cum posteritatem ipsam,
cuius sensum habiturus non sit, ad se putet pertinere. (Cic. Tusc. 1.91); At hi miser-
rimo ac patientissimo exercitu Caesaris luxuriem obiciebant, cui semper omnia ad
necessarium usum defuissent. (Caes. Civ. 3.96.2); Tarquinium regem qui non tulerim,
Sicinium feram? (Liv. 2.34.10); Scilicet etiam illum, qui libertatem publicam nollet,
tam proiectae servientium patientiae taedebat. (Tac. Ann. 3.65.3); Nam qui luxuriae
immoderatissimae esset, ter omnino per quattuordecim annos languit . . . (Suet.
Nero 51)
An example of a ‘consecutive’ interpretation is (n):106
(n) Quae te mala crux agitat, qui ad istunc modum / alieno viris tuas extentes
ostio?
(‘What evil torment is driving you to try out your strength on someone else’s
door in this way?’ Pl. Bac. 584–5)
Appendix: A remarkable instance of a ‘final’ relative clause is (o). The clause is used
in a sense similar to that of the ‘voluntas fati’ instances given in § 16.50.
(o) Omnium harum gentium virtute praecipui Batavi non multum ex ripa, sed
insulam Rheni amnis colunt, Chattorum quondam populus et seditione
domestica in eas sedes transgressus, in quibus pars Romani imperii
fierent.
(‘Of all these races, the most manly are the Batavi, who occupy only a short
stretch of the riverbank, but with it the island of the Rhine river in the
stream: they were once a tribe of the Chatti, and on account of an uprising at
home they crossed the river for those lands in which they were to become
part of the Roman Empire.’ Tac. Ger. 29.1)
Finally, the subjunctive is used in instances like (p), where the author (Caesar) does
not commit himself to what was claimed by the persons ( plerique) who are the subject
of the clause (for this use of the subjunctive, see § 7.128). Indeed, in this case we know
from Gal. 5.37 that their recollection of the event is not in accordance with what actu-
ally happened.
(p) Plerique novas sibi ex loco religiones fingunt Cottaeque et Titurii calami-
tatem, qui in eodem occiderint castello, ante oculos ponunt.
(‘The majority pictured to themselves new superstitions because of the place and set
before their eyes the disaster of Cotta and Titurius, who (as they remembered) fell in
the same fort.’ Caes. Gal. 6.37.8)
106 For a few more examples, see Lodge s.v. qui, p. 466, § E.
544 Relative clauses
Ex. (d) is one of the most discussed cases of the subjunctive in Latin. For the inter-
pretation of the words as a quotation of Paetus one may point to the use of the reflex-
ive determiner suus (for the indirect use of the reflexive pronoun and determiner, see
§ 11.127) and possibly also the use of omnis and of the pluperfect. This does not mean
that one has to assume for Latin the existence of a ‘quotative’ subjunctive, as in
German.108
Supplement:
Indicative mood: Adulescenti qui puellam ab eo emerat / ait sese Veneri velle votum
solvere . . . (Pl. Rud. 59–60); Miraculo primo esse Romanis qui proximi steterant, ut
nudari latera sua sociorum digressu senserunt. (Liv. 1.27.7); Nervus ex quo testiculus
dependet plenior fit, simulque indurescit. (Cels. 7.18.11); Oppida Aegae, in quo sepe-
liri mos reges, Beroea et in regione quae Pieria appellatur a nemore, Aeginium. (Plin.
Nat. 4.33)
Subjunctive mood: Velut in Gorgia Socrates, cum esset ex eo quaesitum, Archelaum,
Perdiccae filium qui tum fortunatissimus haberetur, nonne beatum putaret, ‘haud
scio’, inquit. (Cic. Tusc. 5.34)
One type of idiomatic expression in which the subjunctive is normal is illustrated
by (f) and (g). The subjunctive is used here to make the statement more modest
(see § 6.2).
(f) Fuit enim Sulpicius omnium vel maxume, quos quidem ego audiverim,
grandis et, ut ita dicam, tragicus orator.
(‘Sulpicius indeed was of all orators whom I have heard perhaps the most
elevated in style, and, so to speak, the most theatrical.’ Cic. Brut. 203)
(g) Ac si verum quaeritis, quod mihi quidem videatur—nihil enim aliud adfir-
mare possum nisi sententiam et opinionem meam—hoc instrumentum
causarum et generum universorum in forum deferre debemus . . .
(‘And if you want the truth, at any rate as I see it (for I can assert only my
own verdict and belief), we ought to bring this stock of cases and types down
to Court with us . . .’ Cic. de Orat. 2.146)
As for descriptive restrictive clauses, the relationship between the head and the rela-
tive clause is sometimes paraphrased as ‘of such a character that’ or ‘such persons that’.
In English the term ‘relative clause of characteristic’ is used for such clauses. The trad-
itional term for the subjunctive is ‘consecutive’. Examples are (h)–(l). In (k), the rela-
tive clause can be seen as a specification of the preceding adjective non boni. In (l), the
relative clause is coordinated with the adjective leniore. The subjunctive is regular in
this type of coordination (for exceptions, see the note below). Ex. (m) likewise shows
parallelism between an adjective and a relative clause. In comparative expressions of
various types in which the second element is a relative clause, the subjunctive is used
when that clause is descriptive.
(h) Ad eam rem usu’st homine astuto, docto, cauto et callido / qui imperata
effecta reddat, non qui vigilans dormiat.
(‘For this purpose I need a smart, clever, cautious, and tricky man, someone who turns
commands into results and not someone who is asleep while he’s awake.’ Pl. Ps. 385–6)
108 Álvarez Huerta (1996; 2011: 113–14) argues against the explanation given here.
546 Relative clauses
(i) Mea quidem sententia paci quae nihil habitura sit insidiarum semper est
consulendum.
(‘In my opinion, at least, we should always strive to secure a peace that shall not
admit of guile.’ Cic. Off. 1.35)
( j) Octo hominum milia tenebat Hannibal non quos in acie cepisset aut qui
periculo mortis diffugissent sed qui relicti in castris fuissent a Paulo et a
Varrone consulibus.
(‘Hannibal was in control of eight thousand prisoners, not men whom he had taken
in the battle or who had fled in the face of danger but rather those who had been left
behind by the consuls Paulus and Varro.’ Cic. Off. 3.114)
(k) <Erant> enim quidam Romanorum quoque non boni auctores qui spe
cupiditatem eius elicerent.
(‘For there were also certain untrustworthy Roman advisers to stimulate his self-
seeking with hope . . .’ Liv. 45.19.4)
(l) Ille autem superior (sc. Xenophon) leniore quodam sono est usus et qui illum
impetum oratoris non habeat . . .
(‘His predecessor, however, adopted a gentler kind of tone, one that lacked the
characteristic vigour of oratory . . .’ Cic. de Orat. 2.58)
(m) Nec quemquam fideliorem nec quoi plus credat potes / mittere ad eum . . .
(‘You can’t send him anyone more faithful, anyone he could trust more . . .’ Pl. Capt.
346–7)
Supplement:
Si aequom siet / me plus sapere quam vos, dederim vobis consilium catum / quod
laudetis, ut ego opino, uterque— # Ergo ubi id est, Epidice? / # —atque ad eam rem
conducibile. (Pl. Epid. 257–9); Eo fistulam ferream indito quae in columellam con-
veniat et in cupam. (Cato Agr. 21.1); . . . viatorem · unum · legunto · quei · in / ea
· decuria · viator · appareat . . . (CIL I2.587.8–9 (Lex Cornelia, Rome, 81 bc));
Video igitur causas esse permultas quae istum impellerent. (Cic. S. Rosc. 92); . . . nul-
lum erat Italiae municipium . . . quod tum non honorificentissime de mea salute
decrevisset. (Cic. Sest. 32); Cum haec agerem, repente ad me venit Heraclius, is qui
tum magistratum Syracusis habebat, homo nobilis qui sacerdos Iovis fuisset, qui
honos est apud Syracusanos amplissimus. (Cic. Ver. 4.137); Haec est una contentio
quae adhuc permanserit. (Cic. Luc. 78); Hanc enim perfectam philosophiam semper
iudicavi, quae de maximis quaestionibus copiose posset ornateque dicere. (Cic. Tusc.
1.7); Utrisque ad animum occurrit unum esse illud tempus quo maxime contendi
conveniat. (Caes. Gal. 7.85.2); non exercitus neque thesauri praesidia regni sunt,
verum amici quos neque armis cogere neque auro parare queas: officio et fide pariun-
tur. (Sal. Jug. 10.4); Eo quidem res ista culpa docentium reccidit, ut inter praecipuas
quae corrumperent eloquentiam causas licentia atque inscitia declamantium fuerit.
(Quint. Inst. 2.10.3)
With relative adverbs: Ipse parte copiarum parvo circuitu locum maxime secretum
ab tumultu petit unde ex necopinato aversum hostem invadat. (Liv. 4.27.8)
Tenses and moods in relative clauses 547
Coordination with adjectives (and related): Exierant autem cum ipso Crasso
adulescentes et Drusi maxime familiares et in quibus magnam tum spem maiores
natu dignitatis suae conlocarent . . . (Cic. de Orat. 1.25); Cum homine et edaci tibi res
est et qui iam aliquid intellegat. (Cic. Fam. 9.20.2); Sed vitate viros cultum formamque
professos / quique suas ponunt in statione comas. (Ov. Ars 3.433–4); Venerat, ut
fama’st, multo spectabilis auro / quique suo Phrygias corpore ferret opes, / classe
virisque potens . . . (Ov. Ep. 13.57–9); Inde consilia inire cum genero coepit adhibito
L. Sextio, strenuo adulescente et cuius spei nihil praeter genus patricium deesset.
(Liv. 6.34.11); Inter bellorum magnorum aut vixdum finitorum aut imminentium
curas intercessit res parva dictu sed quae studiis in magnum certamen excesserit.
(Liv. 34.1.1); Cibis vero opus est copiosis, variis, boni succi, quique etiam minus
facile corrumpantur, vino austero. (Cels. 3.22.7); Locum autem prius eligi conveniet,
si permittit agri situs, iuxta villam praecipue pinguem quique adveniente rivo vel, si
non sit fluens aqua, fonte puteali possit rigari. (Col. 11.3.8); Fertilissima tritici genera
ramosum ac quod centigranium vocant. (Plin. Nat. 18.95); Forma egregia et cui non
minus auctoritatis inesset quam gratiae . . . (Suet. Tit. 3.1)109
NB: Also when the relative clause is subject or object complement: Non esse servos
peior hoc quisquam potest / nec magis vorsutus nec quo ab caveas aegrius. (Pl. As.
118–19)
Comparative expressions: Maior sum quam cui possit Fortuna nocere . . . (Ov. Met.
6.195); Et primo magis auribus quam animis id acceptum erat ut maius laetiusque
quam quod mente capere . . . possent. (Liv. 27.50.7); Distulerant tamquam maiora
meritum quam quae statim exsolverentur. (Tac. Hist. 3.51.1)
Descriptive relative clauses which are coordinated with an adjective and which are in
the indicative are rare. The earliest instances in poetry and prose are (n) and (o),
respectively.110
(n) Ardua prima via est et qua vix mane recentes / enituntur equi.
(‘The first part of the road is steep, up which my steeds in all their morning
freshness can scarce make their way.’ Ov. Met. 2.63)
(o) Continuoque producta est puella satis bella et quae non plus quam septem
annos habere videbatur . . .
(‘Forthwith was brought in a pretty young girl, that seemed not to be above
seven years of age . . .’ Petr. 25.2)
these clauses in the subjunctive mood, viz. the so-called consecutive and the so-called
final interpretation.
Instances of autonomous relative clauses that are labelled ‘consecutive’ are (a)–(f).
In (a) and (b), the relative clauses are the objects of ducam and audies, respectively. In
(c) multa . . . quae teneant is the subject of existential sunt. Likewise quod gaudeas in
(d) is the subject of existential est. In (e), the qui clause is the subject complement with
the copula es. In (f), the clauses are the subject of passive reperio. With verbs meaning
‘to exist’, ‘to be available’, ‘to possess’, or ‘to find’ numerous instances can be found. In
(g), the clause is the attribute (signalled by genitive eorum) of genus. As for the use of
is in (a) and (e), it is often taken as equivalent to talis ‘such’ (on which see § 18.19), but
see the explanation given in § 18.16 (‘the typical’, not just ‘any’). In (c), the relative
clause is modified by the quantifier multa. The subjunctive in all these examples has
its common non-factive potential (‘possible’, ‘likely’) or deontic (‘must’) meaning. In
all these contexts indicatives can be found as well, of course with a different meaning.
Two examples—(h) and (i)—will suffice.112 Note that there are no instances of the
second type (the head-internal type) of autonomous relative clause with a relative
phrase used in this way.
(a) Verum egone eam ducam domum / quae mihi numquam hoc dicat . . .
(‘But should I bring home a woman who’d never say to me . . .’ Pl. Mil. 686–7)
(b) Sed audies ex me fortasse quod non omnes probent.
(‘. . . but you will perhaps get an answer from me which not everyone would accept.’
Cic. Brut. 183)
(c) In eloquentia autem multa sunt quae teneant.
(‘In eloquence, on the other hand, there are many features to hold the attention.’ Cic.
de Orat. 1.259—tr. May and Wisse)
(d) Tu si animum vicisti potius quam animus te, est quod gaudeas.
(‘If you have conquered your heart rather than your heart you, there is reason for you
to be happy.’ Pl. Trin. 310)
(e) Neque enim tu is es qui quid sis nescias.
(‘For you are not the sort of man to be ignorant of who you are.’ Cic. Fam. 5.12.6)
(f) Qui se ultro morti offerant facilius reperiuntur quam qui dolorem patienter
ferant.
(‘It is easier to find men to offer themselves recklessly to death than men to endure
pain patiently.’ Caes. Gal. 7.77.5)
(g) Rarum est quoddam genus eorum qui se a corpore avocent et . . . rapiantur.
(‘However, there is a certain class of men, though small in number, who withdraw
themselves from their bodies and are . . . possessed.’ Cic. Div. 1.111)
112 For more examples, see K.-St.: II.298, Anm. 7; II.304, Anm. 11. Also Lavency (1998a: 67).
Tenses and moods in relative clauses 549
(‘Nor did this escape the notice of that extremely sagacious monarch Philip, who
summoned this man to be the tutor of his son Alexander, so that he could impart to
him the principles both of conduct and of oratory.’ Cic. de Orat. 3.141)
The explanation of the use of the subjunctive in these clauses is a matter of debate.
The subjunctive is often taken as ‘jussive’ or in the terminology of this Syntax ‘deon-
tic’, that is: it is used in the way the subjunctive is used in imperative sentences. There
is, however, no evidence to decide for or against the imperative nature of the clauses
themselves. For that reason it seems better to attribute the purpose element to the
type of verbs in the superordinate clause.
The autonomous clause with a relative phrase (head-internal) in the subjunctive in
(m) is usually described as expressing purpose, but it is not a secondary predicate like
the examples discussed above.113
(m) Composito factum’st quo modo hanc amans habere posset / sine dote.
(‘It was all arranged in such a way that her lover could have her without a
dowry.’ Ter. Ph. 756–7)
There are a few instances that are described as ‘adversative/concessive’. They are usu-
ally presented together with the non-restrictive adnominal instances above. One
example is (n).
(n) Nam qui per tot annos Hieronem filiumque eius Gelonem nec vestis habitu
nec alio ullo insigni differentes a ceteris civibus vidissent, ei conspexere pur-
puram ac diadema . . .
(‘For, though through so many years they had seen Hiero and his son Gelo not differ-
ing from the rest of the citizens in garb or any other distinction, they beheld purple
and a diadem . . .’ Liv. 24.5.3–4)
Supplement:
Nam qui hastis sagittisque et rara lanceis facta volnera vidissent, . . . postquam . . .
foeditatem aliam volnerum viderunt, adversus quae tela quosque viros pugnandum
foret pavidi volgo cernebant. (Liv. 31.34.4)
A generic autonomous relative clause that precedes the main clause is sometimes
interpreted as ‘conditional’ if the events the clauses refer to are causally related. An
example is (o).
(o) Qui horum quid acerbissime crudelissimeque fecerat, is et vir et civis opti-
mus habebatur.
(‘Among these he who had acted with the greatest harshness and cruelty was
accounted the best of men and the best of citizens.’ Caes. Civ. 3.32.3)
113 See TLL s.v. modus 1293.40ff. (‘sensu finali (vel consecutivo)’).
Relative clauses as clausal appositions 551
114 The Plautine instances can be found in Lodge s.v. qui 473, § N. For id quod clauses, see Merguet
(Reden) s.v. is 762B. For diachronic considerations, see Vonlaufen (1974: 82–4; 163–4). For general dis-
cussion and an indication of the frequency of use, see Panchón (2012).
552 Relative clauses
(f) Habetis ducem memorem vestri, oblitum sui—quae non semper facultas
datur.
(‘You have a leader mindful of you, forgetful of himself—an opportunity which is not
always given to men.’ Cic. Catil. 4.19)
Supplement:
Nam si curent, bene bonis sit, male malis; quod nunc abest. (Enn. scen. 318V=265J);
Sed ego sum insipientior qui rebus curem publicis / potius quam—id quod proxu-
mum est—meo tergo tutelam geram. (Pl. Trin. 1057–8); Nec non si parit humus
mures, minor fit vindemia, nisi totas vineas oppleris muscipulis, quod in insula
Pandateria faciunt. (Var. R. 1.8.5); Clamabat porro ipse Quinctius . . . se (id quod
nunc evenit) de capite suo priore loco causam esse dicturum. (Cic. Quinct. 31);
Homines Rhegium proficiscuntur, Epicratem conveniunt et demonstrant—id quod
ille sciebat—se HS LXXX dedisse. (Cic. Ver. 2.55); Deinde, quod alio loco antea dixi,
quae est ista tandem laudatio . . .? (Cic. Ver. 5.58); Quos tamen idcirco necabat palam
quod homines in conventu—id quod antea dixi—nimium diligenter praedonum
numerum requirebant. (Cic. Ver. 5.157); Haec enim una nos quom ceteras res omnes,
tum—quod est difficillimum—docuit, ut nosmet ipsos nosceremus. (Cic. Leg. 1.58);
Ob easque res ex litteris Caesaris dies quindecim supplicatio decreta est, quod ante id
tempus accidit nulli. (Caes. Gal. 2.35.4); Etenim distantia cum sit / formarum finita,
necesse est quae similes sint / esse infinitas aut summam materiai / finitam constare,
id quod non esse probavi. (Lucr. 2.525–8); Itaque, quod plerumque in atroci negotio
solet, senatus decrevit, darent operam consules, ne quid res publica detrimenti
caperet. (Sal. Cat. 29.2); Praeter virtutem locus quoque superior adiuvit, ut pila omnia
hastaeque non tamquam ex aequo missa vana—quod plerumque fit—caderent, sed
omnia librata ponderibus figerentur. (Liv. 7.23.8); Sive quis, quod accidit plerumque,
sauciatus in opere noxam ceperit, adhibeat fomenta . . . (Col. 11.1.18); (sc. lunae
defectum) . . . quaeque sunt in hoc miraculo maxime mira, cum conveniat umbra
terrae lunam hebetari, nunc ab occasus parte hoc ei accidere, nunc ab exortus . . .
(Plin. Nat. 2.57)
Quin tu tuam rem cura potius quam Seleuci, quae tibi / condicio nova et luculenta
fertur per me interpretem. (Pl. Mil. 951–2); Hi sibi nihil iuris nullam societatem com-
munis utilitatis causa statuunt esse cum civibus, quae sententia omnem societatem
distrahit civitatis. (Cic. Off. 3.28); . . . ex hominum milibus amplius XXX—quem
numerum barbarorum ad castra venisse constabat—plus tertia parte interfecta
reliquos perterritos in fugam coniciunt . . . (Caes. Gal. 3.6.2)
If such a relative pronoun is the subject of a relative clause with the verb sum, it agrees
with the subject complement, as in (g) and (h), where quae is in agreement with
provincia and with vita, respectively (for this type of agreement, see § 13.24).
(g) Ipsi opsonant, quae parasitorum ante erat provincia.
(‘They themselves go shopping, which used to be the hangers-on’s task before.’ Pl.
Capt. 474)
(h) Vixisti nobiscum, periclitatus es, timuisti, quae tunc erat innocentium vita.
(‘You lived, incurred danger, grew afraid with us, which things defined the life of the
innocent at that time.’ Plin. Pan. 44.1)
Relative clauses as clausal appositions 553
Supplement:
Consurgitur in consilium, cum sententias Oppianicus, quae tum erat potestas, palam
ferri velle dixisset, ut Staienus scire posset quid cuique deberetur. (Cic. Clu. 75)
Autonomous relative clauses consisting of a relative pronoun as the subject and a
form of sum ‘to be’ + subject complement are used in a disjunct-like manner, qualify-
ing all or part of the content of the superordinate clause. Examples are (i) and ( j). In
each instance, the subject complement contains a possessive pronoun (or a similar
expression) referring to the subject of the superordinate clause to which it belongs (in
(i): tua . . . te). This type of expression (as well as the next one) is first found in Cicero,
mostly in his letters. For disjuncts of qualification, see also § 16.83.115
(i) Spero enim—quae tua prudentia et temperantia est—<et> hercule, ut me
iubet Acastus, confido te iam ut volumus valere.
(‘For I hope—a hope which is based on your prudence and self-discipline—and
indeed I am confident, as Acastus tells me to be, that you are by now as well as we
wish you.’ Cic. Att. 6.9.1)
( j) Moriar ni, quae tua gloria est, puto te malle a Caesare consuli quam inaurari!
(‘May I die if I don’t believe that such is your vanity that you would rather be con-
sulted by Caesar than gilded by him!’ Cic. Fam. 7.13.1)
Supplement:
Genus orationis, facultatem, copiam sententiarum atque verborum, quae vestra pru-
dentia est, perspexistis. (Cic. Cael. 45); . . . et qui, quae mea neglegentia est, multos
saepe dies ad te cum hic eras non accedebam . . . (Cic. Fam. 8.3.1); Nec dubito quin
sine mea commendatione, quod tuum est iudicium de hominibus, ipsius Lamiae
causa studiose omnia facturus sis. (Cic. Fam. 12.29.2); Quod si qui etiam inferis sen-
sus est qui illius in te amor fuit pietasque in omnis suos, hoc certe illa te facere non
vult. (Serv. Fam. 4.5.6); Velis tantummodo! Quae tua virtus, / expugnabis. (Hor. S.
1.9.54–5); Quaeque tua est pietas, ut te non excolat ipsum, / ius aliquod tecum fratris
amicus habet. (Ov. Pont. 1.7.59–60—NB: tua is related to te(cum)); Plura laudabis,
non nulla ridebis. Quamquam tu vero, quae tua humanitas, nulla ridebis. (Plin. Ep.
8.8.7); Epistulam matri tuae scripsi, quae mea inpudentia est, Graece eamque epistu-
lae ad te scriptae inplicui. (Fro. ad M. Caes. 2.2.8)
Another type of autonomous relative clause functioning in a disjunct-like manner is
illustrated by (k) and (l). The relative expression in these clauses is formed by a rela-
tive determiner and a head noun. This noun phrase is in the ablative (exceptionally
the genitive) and functions as subject complement (the so-called ablativus qualitatis
or genetivus qualitatis). The subject of the relative clause is coreferential with a con-
stituent in the superordinate clause. In (k), the subject of est in the relative clause is
coreferential with the subject of pervenerit.
115 The fullest collection of instances can be found in Howard (1962). The author suggests that these
clauses derive from exclamatory sentences.
554 Relative clauses
(k) . . . utrum admonitus an temptatus an—qua est ipse sagacitate—in his rebus
sine duce ullo, sine indice pervenerit ad hanc improbitatem nescio.
(‘. . . whether he was advised or spurred on, or whether he came to this immoral pro-
ceeding without a guide or information—which is believable for a man of his clever-
ness—? I do not know.’ Cic. Ver. 1.105)
(l) Quae si de uno me cogitasset—qua mollitia sum animi ac lenitate—num-
quam mehercule illius lacrimis ac precibus restitissem.
(‘If he had plotted against me alone, kind and tender-hearted as I am, by Hercules, I
never would have resisted his tears and prayers.’ Cic. Sul. 18)
Supplement:
At Aiax, quo animo traditur, milies oppetere mortem quam illa perpeti maluisset.
(Cic. Off. 1.113); Qua enim prudentia es, nihil te fugiet, si meas litteras diligenter
legeris. (D. Brut. Fam. 11.13.1); Quaecumque de tua dignitate ab imperatore erunt
impetranda, qua est humanitate Caesar, facillimum erit ab eo tibi ipsi impetrare . . .
(Dolab. Fam. 9.9.3); Maximus incumbet, quaque est pietate rogabit, / ne . . . (Ov. Pont.
1.9.27–8); Illud quoque, qua iustitia in omnibus rebus es, necesse est te adiuvet cogi-
tantem non iniuriam tibi factam . . . (Sen. Dial. 11.10.1); Et cuius lenitatis est Galba,
iam fortasse promisit, ut qui nullo exposcente tot milia innocentissimorum militum
trucidaverit. (Tac. Hist. 1.37.2—NB: genitive); Ego . . . neque Paulinum, qua pruden-
tia fuit, sperasse corruptissimo saeculo tantam volgi moderationem reor . . . (Tac.
Hist. 2.37.2); Noster autem, qua est rerum omnium verecunda mediocritate, ne si
Aelii quidem, Cincii et Santrae dicendum ita censuissent, obsecuturum se fuisse ait
contra perpetuam Latinae linguae consuetudinem . . . (Gel. 7.15.5)
NB: related is: Calenus legionibus equitibusque Brundisii in naves inpositis, ut erat
praeceptum a Caesare, quam tum (cj. Faernus; quantum mss.; quantam cj. Vossius—
see below) navium facultatem habebat, naves solvit . . . (Caes. Civ. 3.14.1—NB: the
transmitted text has been changed in various ways)116
Very rare is the use of a form of quantus, as in (m) and (n). See also § 16.83.
(m) Nam et illis—quantum inportunitatis habent—parum est inpune male
fecisse . . .
(‘For—so outrageous are they—they are not satisfied to have done evil with
impunity . . .’ Sal. Jug. 31.22)
(n) Quantaque in Augusto est clementia, siquis ab illo / hoc peteret pro me,
forsitan ille daret.
(‘Such is Augustus’ mercy that if one should ask this of him on my behalf,
perhaps he would grant it.’ Ov. Tr. 4.4a.53–4)
Quod is also used without a clear relationship to a preceding clause, as illustrated
by exx. (o)–(q). Such quod clauses function as disjuncts of restriction and qualifica-
tion, for which see § 16.38 and § 16.83. For the use of quod as a connector, see
§ 24.15 fin.
116 I thank Cynthia Damon for her comments on this passage. I follow her text.
Relative connexion 555
The term relative connexion refers to the use of relative expressions (pronouns,
adjectives, adverbs, or relative phrases) to connect independent sentences. The rela-
tive expression is coreferential with a constituent in the (usually immediately) preced-
ing sentence or—relatively often—with the entire preceding clause, sentence, or even
paragraph. It is not always possible to determine whether an utterance with a relative
expression is an independent sentence or a relative clause that is part of a sentence. It
is especially difficult to make a distinction between relative connexion and the use of
a relative clause at the end of the sentence to indicate something like an afterthought.117
Grammars often describe the relationship between a connective relative sentence
and the preceding sentence as additive (qui = et is), adversative (qui = sed is), causal
(qui = is enim), etc. However, sentences with qui differ from those with is (and those
with hic and ille, and without a pronominal subject) in a number of ways (see also
§ 24.9). The former cannot, for example, contain connectors like et ‘and’, sed ‘but’, nam
‘for’, and igitur ‘therefore’ (unless they belong to another clause). Further, qui cannot
be combined with the emphasizing particle quoque ‘too’ whereas hic can. Within its
sentence the connective relative pronoun functions less often as subject and is more
frequently part of an ablative absolute clause than the other anaphoric and anaphor-
ically used pronouns. These observations are in line with the relative character of
the connexion. In narrative texts the events referred to in sentences with relative
connexion are relatively often in the historical present or perfect and belong to the
story line (that is, they do not contain background information, as ‘normal’ relative
clauses do).118
117 See Longrée (1996a; 1996b; 2005) on criteria to distinguish relative clauses as an afterthought
(‘en rallonge’) from relative connexion, with references.
118 See Bolkestein (1996a) and Pennell Ross (1996) with findings based on Caesar. Also Longrée (2005:
40–1) for Caesar, Sallust, and Tacitus. For a broader perspective and criteria to distinguish relative con-
nexion from ‘normal relatives’, see Rosén (1999: 167). For Tacitus’ use of relative connexion and anaphoric
is, see Longrée (2002b). See also Spevak (2010a: 87–9).
556 Relative clauses
Relative connexion is relatively rare in Early Latin except in Ennius’ poetry (in
Plautus three to four columns out of sixty-three in Lodge’s lexicon)119 and limited in
the range of various uses that can be distinguished.120 However, it is quite popular in
the Classical prose of Cicero and Caesar, where 20 per cent of the sentences are con-
nected in this way.121 This increase is sometimes regarded as a sign of evolution,122 but
in reality it is a stylistic preference. It is rare in Petronius.123 In Table 18.2 on p. 476
Lucretius and Ovid appear as frequent users of this type.124
Not all scholars recognize the existence of relative connexion, and editors vary in
their punctuation. It is sometimes regarded as a problem of translating Latin relative
clauses into modern languages which are more restricted in their use of relative
devices.125
There are two types of relative connexion, one with a relative pronoun, the other
with a relative phrase. Examples of the former are (a)–(c), of the latter (d)–(f). Very
common are expressions like quam ob rem in (e). In (g), the relative determiner
quem links the two-place noun metum to the object of the warning expressed in the
preceding sentence. The determiner quem can be said to be equivalent to the geni-
tive pronoun cuius (a so-called objective genitive). (For the use of the anaphoric
determiner in the same way, see § 11.105.) Ablative absolutes containing a relative
expression at the beginning of a sentence often serve to summarize preceding
events, as in (h). Exx. (b), (c), and (f) resemble the instances of interlacing dis-
cussed in § 18.10. The ordering relative expression > subordinator is obligatory in
Classical Latin prose.126
(a) Quem pol ego hodie ob istaec dicta faciam ferventem flagris.
(‘For those words, by Pollux, I’ll warm you up with whips today.’ Pl. Am. 1030)
(b) Lycurgus quidem, qui Lacedaemoniorum rem publicam temperavit, leges
suas auctoritate Apollinis Delphici confirmavit. Quas cum vellet Lysander
commutare, eadem est prohibitus religione.
(‘Lycurgus himself, who once organized the Spartan state, established his laws by
authority of Apollo’s Delphic oracle. When Lysander wished to change these laws, he
was prevented by the same religious authority.’ Cic. Div. 1.96)
(c) Quam (sc. coronam) quod amor civium et non vis expresserat, nullam habuit
invidiam magnaque fuit gloria.
(‘Because the love of his fellow-citizens, not force, had induced them to give him this
crown, it excited no envy, but brought him great glory.’ Nep. Thr. 4.1)
(d) Quae res bene vortat mi et tibi et ventri meo . . .
(‘May this turn out well for me and you and my belly . . .’ Pl. Per. 329)
(e) Quam ob rem mi magis par est via decedere et concedere.
(‘For this reason it’s more appropriate to get off the street for me and to get out of my
way.’ Pl. Am. 990)
(f) Qui mos cum a posterioribus non esset retentus, Arcesilas eum revocavit . . .
(‘When this practice was not continued by his successors, Arcesilas reinstituted it . . .’
Cic. Fin. 2.2)
(g) Ne in unius imperium res reccidat admonemur. Ad quem metum si deorum
monitis non duceremur, tamen ipsi nostro sensu coniecturaque raperemur.
(‘We are warned to take care that the republic does not fall under the absolute domin-
ion of a single individual. And even if we were not led to this fear by the warnings of
the gods, we should nonetheless be forcibly driven upon it by our own powers of
perception and inference.’ Cic. Har. 54)
(h) . . . subito vi ventorum et aquae magnitudine pons est interruptus et reliqua
multitudo equitum interclusa. Quo cognito a Petreio et Afranio . . . legiones
IIII equitatumque omnem traiecit . . .
(‘. . . the bridge was suddenly broken down by a storm of wind and a great rush of
water, and a large force of cavalry that remained behind was cut off. When Petreius
and Afranius discovered this, . . . (Afranius) immediately sent four legions and all his
cavalry across . . .’ Caes. Civ. 1.40.3–4)
Supplement:
Amat, sapit, recte facit, animo quando opsequitur suo. Quod omnis homines facere
oportet . . . (Pl. Am. 995–6); Nunc hinc parasitum in Cariam misi meum / petitum
argentum a meo sodali mutuom. / Quod si non affert, quo me vortam nescio. (Pl.
Cur. 67–9); Nam hunc nescire sat scio / de illa amica. Quod si sciret, esset alia oratio.
(Pl. Mer. 382–3); Quos quom ferias, tibi plus noceas. (Pl. Ps. 137–8); Quos quidem
quam ad rem dicam in argentariis referre habere, nisi pro tabulis, nescio . . . (Pl. Truc.
70); Alter terribilem minatur vitae cruciatum et necem. / Quae nemo est tam firmo
ingenio et tanta confidentia / quin refugiat timido sanguen atque exalbescat metu.
(Enn. scen. 24–6V=18–20J); Quod qui rescierint, culpent. Illud merito factum omnes
putent. (Ter. Eu. 387); . . . gloria · atque · ingenium quibus sei / in · longa ·
licu<i>set · tibe utier vita / facile · facteis · superases · gloriam / maiorum.
(CIL I2.10.5–8 (Scip. Elog., Rome, c.170 bc?)); Nam illud quidem non dices?—quod
utinam dicas!—ad Apronium non pervenisse tantum. (Cic. Ver. 3.107); Quo quid
miserius, quid acerbius, quid luctuosius vidimus? (Cic. Mil. 90); Quod si ita esset, ut
quisque minimum esse in se arbitraretur, ita ad amicitiam esset aptissimus. Quod
longe secus est. (Cic. Amic. 29); Quem inridebant collegae tui eumque tum Pisidam,
558 Relative clauses
tum Soranum augurem esse dicebant. (Cic. Div. 1.105); Quo quid potest dici absur-
dius? (Cic. Div. 2.98); An eum discere ea mavis quae cum plane perdidicerit nihil
sciat? (Cic. Fin. 5.76); Restant duae perturbationes, laetitia gestiens et libido. Quae si
non cadent in sapientem, semper mens erit tranquilla sapientis. (Cic. Tusc. 4.8); Quo
audito vehementer sum commotus . . . (Cic. Fam. 15.4.4); Reducitur ad eum depren-
sus ex itinere N. Magius Cremona, praefectus fabrum Cn. Pompei. Quem Caesar ad
eum remittit cum mandatis. (Caes. Civ. 1.24.4); Quorum oratione permotus Varus
praesidium quod introduxerat ex oppido educit ac profugit. (Caes. Civ. 1.13.2); Ad
quos cum Caesar nuntios misisset . . . (Caes. Gal. 4.16.3); Quarta quoque his igitur
quaedam natura necesse’st / adtribuatur. Ea’st omnino nominis expers. / Qua neque
mobilius quicquam neque tenuius extat / nec magis e parvis et levibus ex (est cj.
Wakefield) elementis. / Sensiferos motus quae didit prima per artus. (Lucr. 3.241–5);
Quem ut barbari incendium effugisse viderunt, telis eminus missis inter-
fecerunt . . . (Nep. Alc. 10.6); Quibus illi freti non, uti equestri proelio solet, sequi,
dein cedere, sed advorsis equis concurrere . . . (Sal. Jug. 59.3—NB: historic infinitive);
Quod ubi audivit consul, extemplo filium aversatus contionem classico advocari ius-
sit. (Liv. 8.7.14); Quod si factum esset, votum rite solvi non posse. (Liv. 31.9.7); Quae
cum ita sint, ego iam hinc praedico, patres conscripti, me exercitu eo qui nunc est rem
publicam administraturum. (Liv. 40.35.14); Foveam igne repletam terra superiecta
obruit. In quam adulescentibus lapsis et consumptis accusatur rei publicae laesae.
(Sen. Con. 10.1.13—NB: some editors print this as one sentence); E quibus qui a
teneris aetatibus doctrinarum abundantia satiantur optimos habent sapientiae sen-
sus . . . (Vitr. 9. pr. 2); Conduntur hieme et Pontici mures, dumtaxat alvi. Quorum
palatum in gustu sagacissimum auctores quonam modo intellexerint miror. (Plin.
Nat. 8.132); In quo ita loquimur, tamquam omnis sermo habeat figuram . . . (Quint.
Inst. 9.1.12)
Audimus aliquem tabulas numquam confecisse. Quae est opinio hominum de
M. Antonio falsa, nam fecit diligentissime. (Cic. Ver. 1.60); Cui legi cum vestra dig-
nitas vehementer adversetur, istius spes falsa et insignis inpudentia maxime suf-
fragatur. (Cic. Ver. 5.178); Quarum omnium rerum quia vis erat tanta ut sine deo
regi non posset, ipsa res deorum nomen optinuit. (Cic. N.D. 2.61); Tarsum veni a. d.
III Non. Oct. inde ad Amanum contendi, qui Syriam a Cilicia in aquarum divortio
dividit; qui mons erat hostium plenus sempiternorum. (Cic. Att. 5.20.3); Postea
mihi non tam meorum litterae quam sermones eorum qui hac iter faciebant ani-
mum tuum immutatum significabant. Quae res fecit ut tibi litteris obstrepere non
auderem. (Cic. Fam. 5.4.1); Consueverat, si iure non potuerat, iniuria quavis inimico
exitium machinari. Cui rei mors indigna Palamedi testimonium dat. (Rhet. Her.
2.28); Quae res omnium rerum copia complevit exercitum. (Caes. Civ. 2.25.7); Nam
tota fere tum / tempestas concussa tremit fremitusque moventur. / Quo de concussu
sequitur gravis imber et uber . . . (Lucr. 6. 288–90); . . . prope uti locus hic linquatur
inanis. / Cuius ubi e regione loci venere volantis . . . (Lucr. 6.832–3); Cuius victoriae
non alienum videtur quale praemium Miltiadi sit tributum docere . . . (Nep. Milt.
6.1); Qui mos cui potius quam consuli aut quando magis usurpandus colendusque
est . . . (Plin. Pan. 1.2)
Connective relative not immediately following the clause in which its antecedent
is present: . . . signa legionum . . . conspiciuntur, quas C. Fabius . . . miserat, suspicatus
Relative connexion 559
127 Example taken from Bolkestein (1996a: 563–4). 128 See Spevak (2006c).
129 See Évrard (2011: 194–203).
560 Relative clauses
(m) Caesarem . . . facile intercludi posse frumentoque prohiberi. Quod nisi fecerit
(sc. Pompeius), se (sc. Domitium) cohortesque amplius XXX magnumque
numerum senatorum atque equitum Romanorum in periculum esse venturum.
(‘That Caesar . . . could easily be trapped and cut off from his food supply. But if
Pompey did not do this, he (Domitius), more than thirty cohorts, and a large number
of senators and men of equestrian rank would be in danger.’ Caes. Civ. 1.17.1–2)
(n) Is hunc suo testimonio sublevat. Quod recita.
(‘He gives evidence in his favour. Read this evidence.’ Cic. Clu. 168)
(o) (sc. hae translationes) Quarum ego quid vobis aut inveniendi rationem aut
genera ponam?
(‘Why should I specify for you the categories of these or the method of discovering
them?’ Cic. de Orat. 3.156)
Supplement:
Imperative: Apud alium ipsis facti pudet, / ne ineptu’, ne protervo’ videar. Quod
illum facere credito. (Ter. Hau. 576–7); (sc. belua) Quae quoniam in foveam incidit
obruatur. (Cic. Phil. 4.12); Omne igitur caelum sive mundus, sive quo alio vocabulo
gaudet, hoc a nobis nuncupatus sit—de quo id primum consideremus . . . (Cic. Tim.
4—NB: translates Greek: }up.~hzx oŅzåx .p{ā lß~zŪ .{ŷ~zx); Quorum progeniem
vos, patres conscripti, nolite pati me nepotem Masinissae frustra a vobis auxilium
petere. (Sal. Jug. 14.6)
Interrogative: Ai’n tu te illius invenisse filiam? # Inveni, et domi est. / . . . / # Quamne
hodie per urbem uterque sumus defessi quaerere? (Pl. Epid. 717–19); Quae quo
usque tandem patiemini, o fortissumi viri? (Sal. Cat. 20.9)
(c) In campo certe non fuisti cum hora secunda comitiis quaestori<i>s institutis
sella Q. Maximi, quem illi consulem esse dicebant, posita esset. Quo mortuo
nuntiato sella sublata est.
(‘At all events you were not in the Campus Martius when, after the opening of the
Comitia for the election of quaestors, at the second hour, the chair of Q. Maximus,
whom those men declared to be consul, was set; and then, on the announcement of
his death, the chair was put away.’ Cic. Fam. 7.30.1)
(d) Quo percusso exanimatoque hunc scutis protegunt hostes, in illum universi
tela coniciunt neque dant regrediendi facultatem.
(‘When he was struck senseless, the enemy sought to cover him with their shields,
and discharged their spears in a volley at the foeman and gave him no chance to
retire.’ Caes. Gal. 5.44.6)
(e) . . . qua Lysimachi quondam regnum fuerit, quo victo omnia quae illius fuis-
sent iure belli Seleuci facta sint, existimare suae dicionis esse.
(‘. . . (but all the country) which had once been the kingdom of Lysimachus, and all of
which, when he was defeated, passed into the hands of that man Seleucus by right of
conquest, he considered his own.’ Liv. 33.40.3)
Supplement:
Quo mortuo, nec ita multo post, in Galliam proficiscitur Quinctius. (Cic. Quinct.
15); . . . ut iis consulibus praetor esset, quibus si non adiuvantibus, at coniventibus
certe speraret se posse eludere in illis suis cogitatis furoribus. (Cic. Mil. 32); Quibus
hic litteris lectis ad urbem confestim incredibili celeritate advolavit. (Cic. Sest. 11);
Recte videretur, nisi et virtutis et vitiorum sine ulla divina ratione grave ipsius con-
scientiae pondus esset, qua sublata iacent omnia. (Cic. N.D. 3.85); Cui cum tres
optationes Neptunus dedisset optavit, interitum Hippolyti filii, cum is patri suspec-
tus esset de noverca; quo optato impetrato Theseus in maximis fuit luctibus. (Cic.
Off. 3.94); Quibus rebus ego cognitis cunctatus non sum. (Planc. Fam. 10.15.2);
Qua pronuntiatione facta temporis puncto sublatis ancoris omnes Uticam relin-
quunt et quo imperatum est transeunt. (Caes. Civ. 2.25.7); Qua perfecta munitione
animadversum est ab speculatoribus Caesaris cohortes quasdam . . . (Caes. Civ.
3.66.1); Quibus ad sequendum impeditis Caesar quod fore providerat meridiano
fere tempore signo profectionis dato exercitum educit . . . (Caes. Civ. 3.76.4); Qua re
cognita Vercingetorix omnibus interruptis eius fluminis pontibus ab altera fluminis
parte iter facere coepit. (Caes. Gal. 7.34.3); Quibus rebus confectis omnia propere
per nuntios consuli declarantur. (Sal. Cat. 46.1); . . . raptim quibus quisque poterat
elatis cum . . . exirent, iam continens agmen migrantium inpleverat vias . . . (Liv.
1.29.4–5); Quo repulso tum vero indignum facinus esse clamitantes, qui patrum
consulibus aderant, devolant de tribunali, ut lictori auxilio essent. (Liv.
2.29.3); . . . quibus poterat sauciis ductis . . . ad urbem proximis itineribus pergit.
(Liv. 4.39.9); . . . ceciditque miserabilius quam ille quo cadente factus est clamor.
(August. Conf. 6.13)
Ablative absolutes are also common in (non-restrictive) adnominal relative clauses.
Examples are (f)–(h).
562 Relative clauses
130 The examples are taken from K.-St.: II.324. 131 Mentioned by TLL s.v. aut 1565.79ff.
564 Relative clauses
(h) . . . quemque dignum fortuna quam amplissima putant aut cui fidem habent
et Ø (= quem) bene rebus suis consulere arbitrantur aut . . .
(‘. . . who they think is worthy of the most splendid fortune a man can have, or whom
they have confidence in and who they think manages his own affairs well or . . .’
Cic. Off. 2.21)
(i) At quibus longior mora est et ignis fortior motumque caeli sequens aut Ø
(= qui) etiam proprios cursus agunt cometas nostri putant, de quibus dic-
tum est.
(‘But the ones which last a long time, and have a stronger flame, and follow the
motion of the sky or even maintain their own course, our Stoics call comets (which
have already been discussed).’ Sen. Nat. 1.15.4)
(n) Erat stagnum salinarum inter quod et mare angustiae quaedam . . . intererant.
(‘There was a lagoon of salt water, between which and the sea there was a certain
narrow strip of land . . .’ B. Afr. 80.1)
Appendix: From Apuleius (see ex. (o)) onwards, relative clauses are found with a
‘pleonastic’ anaphoric or demonstrative pronoun in the same case as the relative pro-
noun. These combinations appear in larger numbers in ecclesiastical authors and in
Bible translations, as in (p), under the influence of the Greek original (itself influ-
enced by the Hebrew).136 A remarkable example is (s), usually considered the first
instance of the phenomenon, but it is deviant in that the two pronouns are juxta-
posed. There are a few more attestations before Apuleius (Pl. Cist. 691; Var. R. 1.12.3;
Liv. 8.37.8—usually emended; Att. 10.1.1 is different).137 There are also instances
like (t), quoted by Augustine in his comments on odd Latin translations of the
Bible text, where the anaphoric pronoun is in a construction that differs from the
relative pronoun.
(o) De isto quidem, mi erilis, tecum ipsa videris, quem sine meo consilio
pigrum et formidulosum familiarem istum sortita es . . .
(‘You must decide yourself, mistress, what is to be done with this feeble cra-
ven lover you acquired without my advice . . .’ Apul. Met. 9.16.1)
(p) Nam et hoc scire debes me et dominis meis fratribus tuis scripsisse, quas
peto illis eas legere digneris.
(‘This too you should know, that I have written also to my lords, your brethren,
and I beg you to deem it worthy to read these Epistles to them.’ Cypr. Ep. 21.4.2)
(q) Terentiae · Rufillae · v. ·V. / cuius · multi · temporis · bonitatem / et ·
humanitatem · eius · circa · se / in brevi · senserunt.
(‘To Terentia Rufilla, Vestal virgin, whose goodness and humanity towards
themselves many people of her time felt for a short time.’ CIL VI.2135.10
(Rome, c. ad 250)—the interpretation of the text is problematic)
(r) . . . quod divo Iuliano fuit acceptus, cuius memorandis virtutibus eius ambo
fratres principes obtrectabant nec similes eius nec suppares.
(‘. . . because he had been well regarded by the deified Julian, whose noteworthy
merits both the imperial brothers depreciated, without being his equal or
anywhere near it.’ Amm. 26.10.8—NB: eius is absent from some of the mss.)
(s) Inter eosne homines condalium te redipisci postulas? Quorum (coram cj.
Gratwick) eorum unus surrupuit currenti cursori solum.
(‘Do you expect to recover your ring from among these people? One of
them stole the sole of a runner’s shoe from him while he was actually
running.’ Pl. Trin. 1022–3)
(t) . . . et terra quam inhabitasti in ea . . .
(‘…and the land in which you have lived . . .’ Vet. Lat. Gen. 21.23 (= August.
Loc. Hept. 1.68)—NB: Vulg.: . . . terrae in qua versatus es . . .)
(c) Inter omnes (sc. odores) potentissimus odor quisquis novissime additur.
(‘Among all the scents the most powerful is whichever scent is added last.’ Plin.
Nat. 13.19)
140 For Early and Late Latin instances, see Neue-W.: II.493–7.
141 On the relationship between quisquis and quisque, see Calboli (1961b) and Bertocchi et al. (2010:
111–14), with references. For Late Latin, see Bortolussi (2012).
Indefinite relative clauses 569
Supplement:
Ita omnem mihi / rem necesse eloqui est, quicquid egi atque ago. (Pl. Men. 117–18);
Omnia mala ingerebat, quemquem aspexerat. (Pl. Men. 717); At di dabunt— / # Tibi
quidem hercle, quisquis es, magnum malum . . . (Pl. Rud. 107–8); . . . quicquid domi
fuit in navem imposivit? (Pl. Rud. 357); Ita, quicquid est illud, quod sentit quod sapit
quod vivit quod viget, caeleste et divinum ob eamque rem aeternum sit necesse est.
(Cic. Tusc. 1.66); . . . accusare quoquo modo posset quam illo modo emori maluit.
(Cic. Clu. 42); Quisquis est deus, si modo est alius, et quacumque in parte, totus est
sensus, totus visus, totus auditus, totus animae, totus animi, totus sui. (Plin. Nat.
2.14); Igitur longe minus utilis illi / uxor, quisquis erit bonus optandusque maritus.
(Juv. 6.210–11)
Quiquomque ubi sunt, qui fuerunt quique futuri sunt posthac / stulti, stolidi, fatui,
fungi, bardi, blenni, buccones, / solus ego omnis longe antideo / stultitia et moribus
indoctis. (Pl. Bac. 1087–9a); Quodquomque optes, tibi velim contingere. (Pl. Cist.
497—NB: subjunctive); Nam publicae rei causa quiquomque id facit / magis quam
sui quaesti, animus induci potest, / eum esse civem et fidelem et bonum. (Pl. Per.
65–7); Quid male facio aut quoi male dico? # Quoi pol quomque occasio est. (Pl. Per.
210); Cum quibus erat quomque una is sese dedere . . . (Ter. An. 63; . . . ioudicatio
litisque aestumatio quei quomque ioudicium ex h.l. erunt, eorum h.l. esto.
(CIL I2.583.6 (Lex Acilia, 122 bc)); Nam etsi, quocumque in loco quisquis est, idem
est ei sensus et eadem acerbitas ex interitu rerum et publicarum et suarum,
tamen . . . (Cic. Fam. 6.1.1); Licere illis per se incolumibus ex hibernis discedere et
quascumque in partes velint sine metu proficisci. (Caes. Gal. 5.41.6); Nam qui-
cumque tuum violavit vulnere corpus / morte luet merita. (Verg. A. 11.848–9); Qui
testamentum tradet tibi cumque legendum, / abnuere et tabulas a te removere
memento . . . (Hor. S. 2.5.51–2—NB: discontinuity)
Quisque obviam huic occesserit irato, vapulabit. (Pl. As. 404); Quemque a milite
hoc videritis hominem in nostris tegulis, / extra unum Palaestrionem, huc deturba-
tote in viam. (Pl. Mil. 160–1);142 . . . moechum, qui forma est ferox, / qui omnis se
amare credit quaeque aspexerit / mulier. (Pl. Mil. 1390–2); Nam ego arbitror latrones,
quique eorum recte sapiunt, nihil anteferre lucro suo debere . . . (Apul. Met. 7.9.4); . . .
ut quisque (quisquis edd. nonnulli) vim se pati existimaret ‘Vivus ardeat Valens’
licentius clamitaret . . . (Amm. 31.1.2)
Utrum enim horum dixeris, in eo culpa et crimen haerebit. (Cic. Ver. 3.106); Sed
haec aut sanabuntur cum veneris aut ei molesta erunt in utro culpa erit. (Cic. Att.
1.11.1); Nullum enim bellum civile fuit in nostra re publica . . . in quo bello non,
utracumque pars vicisset, tamen aliqua forma esset futura rei publicae. (Cic. ad Brut.
23.10)143
The form quisquis is in Plautus almost limited to the expressions quisquis es or est
(that is, to the function subject complement).144 Emendations of the text of (a) and
(b) above substituting quisque have been suggested, unnecessarily.145 For other uses
of quisque, see § 11.36. For the indefinite use of quisquis and quicumque, see § 11.115
and § 11.154.
Indefinite autonomous relative clauses can sometimes be interpreted in a concessive
sense. Examples are (g) and (h).146
(g) Non recuso; ago etiam gratias, quoquo animo facis.
(‘I do not decline, I even thank you, whatever your motive is for doing it.’
Cic. Phil. 2.33)
(h) . . . quicquid dederis, contentus est.
(‘. . . whatever you give him, he is quite pleased with it.’ Petr. 46.7)
Appendix: Combinations of the conditional subordinator si and the indefinite deter-
miner or pronoun qui/quis are sometimes interchangeable with an indefinite relative
determiner or pronoun. Examples are (i) and ( j), respectively. In ( j) the si quid clause
is coordinated with two other relative clauses; all three are resumed by ea.147 In (k) si
quis is continued by plural homines. In its generalizing use it can also be part of an
ablative absolute clause, as in (l).148
(i) Novi, Neptunus ita solet, quamvis fastidiosus / aedilis est: si quae improbae
sunt merces, iactat omnis.
(‘I know, that’s what Neptune is like, he’s an ever-so-particular market inspector:
if there’s any bad merchandise, he throws the lot overboard.’ Pl. Rud. 372–3)
( j) Qua locus recte ferax erit, quae arida erunt et si quid ventus interfregerit, ea
omnia eximito.
(‘Where the land is very fertile, clear out all dry branches and anything the
wind has broken.’ Cato Agr. 44.1)
(k) Si quis est qui his delectetur, nonne melius tenues homines fruuntur quam
illi qui is abundant?
(‘If there is anyone who would find delight in them, cannot men of narrow
means enjoy them better than those who have plenty?’ Cic. Tusc. 5.102)
(l) . . . dimissisque si qui parum idonei essent . . .
(‘. . . and with those who were unfit having been discharged . . .’ Liv. 42.31.7)
The relative adjectives of quality, quantity or size, and number and the related indef-
inite ones can in principle be used ‘adjectivally’ or ‘substantivally’ in a whole range of
146 See Maraldi (2002a) and Bertocchi and Maraldi (2011: 141; 167–8).
147 For further examples, see OLD s.v. quis2 § 1a. 148 For discussion, see Bortolussi (2010).
Relative adjectives and adverbs 571
constructions. The adjectives involved are qualis ‘of which sort’, ‘such as’; quantus ‘of
what size or amount’; quot ‘whatever number of ’, ‘as many as’;149 and quotus ‘of which
number in a series’ (rare). The range of constructions will be shown for qualis and
quantus; further examples can be found in the Supplement and in the OLD.
With regard to qualis, its very common use as subject complement is shown in (a)
and (b). The latter shows interlacing of the (adnominal) relative with the si clause. In
(c) quale is the attribute of bellum; the same noun is used in the superordinate and the
adnominal relative clause. In (d) the relative clause is adnominal with nardo; quale
functions as the object of laborarint. Ex. (e) shows the substantival use, with qualia
functioning as the object in its clause. Note the resumptive use of talis. Ex. (f) is an
instance of relative connexion. A rare instance of a preceding quale clause that is not
followed by a corresponding demonstrative in the main clause is (g).
(a) Ecastor condignum donum, quale est (= qualis est) qui donum dedit.
(‘Honestly, a worthy gift, matching the one who gave it.’ Pl. Am. 537)
(b) . . . cum senatus populusque Romanus haberet ducem, qualis si qui nunc
esset, tibi idem quod illis accidit contigisset?
(‘. . . when the senate and the Roman people possessed a leader such that, if someone
like him were now here, the same fate would have overtaken you as befell them?’ Cic.
Phil. 2.17)
(c) In hoc autem uno post hominum memoriam maximo crudelissimoque bello,
quale bellum nulla umquam barbaria cum sua gente gessit, quo in bello lex
haec fuit a Lentulo, Gabinio, Cethego, Cassio constituta ut . . .
(‘In this war, however, the most important and the most savage within memory of man,
a war such as no tribe of barbarians ever fought among its own people, a war in which
Lentulus, Gabinius, Cethegus and Cassius laid it down as a law that . . .’ Cic. Catil. 3.25)
(d) . . . / senem, quod omnes rideant, adulterum / latrant Suburanae canes / nardo
perunctum, quale non perfectius / meae laborarint manus.
(‘. . . the dogs of the Subura bark at the old lecher, a sight to make everybody laugh,
plastered as he is with the most exquisite perfume that my own hands could concoct.’
Hor. Epod. 5.57–60)
(e) Qualia quisque habet, talis est.
(‘A person is of the same sort as that which he possesses.’ Sen. Ep. 87.17)
(f) Qualibus ostentis Aristandri apud Graecos volumen scatet . . .
(‘The volume of Aristander teems with portents of this nature in Greece.’ Plin. Nat.
17.243)
(g) Quale tamen potui, de caelite, Brute, recenti / vestra procul positus carmen
in ora dedi.
(‘Yet from my distant abode I sent for your reading such poem as I could, Brutus,
about the new god.’ Ov. Pont. 4.6.17–18)
Of the examples of quantus below, (h) illustrates the attributive use. In (i), quanta is
the subject complement. Exx. ( j)–(m) illustrate the very common substantival use of
quantus in various functions. In ( j), quantum is the object of vis, the whole clause
being an autonomous clause functioning as the object of edas. In (k), quanto is a
degree modifier (ablativus mensurae) with plus. In (l), quanti is a price adjunct. The
use of quantum in the si clause in (m) resembles the examples of relative connexion
discussed in § 18.29. For quantum clauses of qualification, see § 16.83.
(h) Inde (sc. globos) quantos voles facere facito.
(‘Produce from that as many balls as you want.’ Cato Agr. 79.1)
(i) Si auctoritatem quaerimus, etsi id est aetatis ut nondum consecutus sit,
tamen quanta est in adulescente auctoritas, ea propter tantam coniunctio-
nem adfinitatis minor est putanda.
(‘If it is moral weight for which we are looking, though he is not yet of an age to have
gained this, still, however considerable be the authority which that young man pos-
sesses, we should consider it diminished due to the close connexion with Clodius
which his marriage involves.’ Cic. Dom. 118)
( j) An vero non iusta causa est quor curratur celeriter, / ubi bibas, edas de alieno
quantum vis usque ad fatim . . .
(‘Well, isn’t there a just cause for running quickly to a place where you can drink and
eat out of someone else’s pocket as much as you want until you’re full . . .’ Pl. Poen.
533–4)
(k) Quasi ob industriam, quanto ego plus propero, procedit minus.
(‘The more of a hurry I’m in, the less progress is made, as if on purpose.’ Pl. Cas. 805)
(l) Oratio edepol pluris est huius, quam quanti haec empta est.
(‘Her speech is worth more than the price she was bought for.’ Pl. Mer. 514)
(m) . . . gratulor tibi cum tantum vales apud Dolabellam, quantum si ego apud
sororis filium valerem, iam salvi esse possemus.
(‘. . . I congratulate you on having an influence with Dolabella, such as if I had had
with my sister’s son, we might now have been safe.’ Cic. Fam. 9.14.3)
Supplement:
Qualis volo vetulos duo. (Pl. Epid. 187); Qua in sorte sapiens praetor, qualis hic fuit,
offensionem vitat . . . (Cic. Mur. 41); . . . statua . . . inaurata equestris, qualis L. Sullae
primum statu<t>a est. (Cic. Phil. 9.13); . . . est etiam bonorum et fortium civium,
quales vos omnibus rei publicae temporibus extitistis, intercludere omnis seditio-
num vias . . . (Cic. Rab. Perd. 3); . . . meque tum denique sibi esse visum rei publicae
qualis fuissem restitutum . . . (Cic. Fam. 1.9.20); Namque / Plotius et Varius Sinuessae
Vergiliusque / occurrunt, animae qualis neque candidiores / terra tulit neque quis me
sit devinctior alter. (Hor. S. 1.5.39–42)
Nec mehercule me raudusculum movet, sed homines benevolos, qualescumque
sunt, grave est insequi contumelia. (Cic. Att. 14.14.5)
Relative adjectives and adverbs 573
Quantum hic inest? # Quantum sat est, et plus satis. (Pl. Epid. 346); Conveniet
numeru’ quantum debui. (Ter. Ph. 53); . . . quanta est in adulescente auctoritas, ea
propter tantam coniunctionem adfinitatis minor est putanda. (Cic. Dom. 118); . . . ut
ab eo provincias acciperent quas ipsi vellent, exercitum et pecuniam quantam vel-
lent . . . (Cic. Sest. 24); At pater Aeneas . . . horrendumque intonat armis: / quantus
Athos aut quantus Eryx aut ipse coruscis cum fremit ilicibus quantus gaudetque
nivali / vertice se attollens pater Appenninus ad auras. (Verg. A. 12.697–703); . . .
iubet . . . inter ipsam dimicationem quanto maxime posset moto pulvere se ostendere.
(Liv. 10.40.8); Adhibeaturque frictio, quantam is sustinere poterit . . . (Cels. 3.12.5)
. . . quantumcumque itineris equitatu efficere poterat, cotidie progrediebatur . . .
(Caes. Civ. 3.102.1)
. . . dico pluribus milibus medimnum venisse decumas agri Leontini quam quot
milia iugerum sata essent in agro Leontino. (Cic. Ver. 3.113); Navibus circiter octo-
ginta onerariis coactis contractisque quot satis esse ad duas transportandas legiones
existimabat . . . (Caes. Gal. 4.22.3)
‘Mando tibi, Mani, uti illace suovitaurilia fundum agrum terramque meam, quota
ex parte sive circumagi sive circumferenda censeas, uti cures lustrare.’ (Cato Agr.
141.1)
When a clause containing a relative adjective follows a main clause containing a cor-
responding demonstrative adjective, the combination functions as an expression of
comparison (see also § 20.1 and § 20.11). Examples are (n)–(p), with the order t- . . . qu-.
In (n) the disposition of quis is compared to that of all people, to which it ought
to be equivalent. In (o) the factio of nos is compared to that of tu in terms of size. In
(p) the cyathi are equivalent in number to the fingers of tibi. Ex. (q) is an interesting
combination of a relative adjective with an expression of similarity (for which see
§§ 20.16–18).
(n) Ac si quis est talis qualis esse omnis oportebat . . .
(‘But if there is any one of that disposition which all men should have . . .’ Cic.
Catil. 2.3)
(o) Neque nos factione tanta quanta tu sumus . . .
(‘We don’t have as great connexions as you . . .’ Pl. Cist. 493)
(p) Vide quot cyathos bibimus. # Tot quot digiti tibi sunt in manu.
(‘See how many cups we’re drinking. # As many as you have fingers on a hand.’ Pl.
St. 706)
(q) Pariter suades qualis es.
(‘Your advice is of the same quality as you are.’ Pl. Rud. 875)
Supplement: Nec meus servos umquam tale fecit quale tu mihi. (Pl. Men. 1027);
Quid Tarquinius tale qualia innumerabilia et facit et fecit Antonius? (Cic. Phil. 3.9);
Permanent illi soli . . . qui sunt tales qualis pater tuus, M. Scaure, fuit . . . (Cic. Sest.
101); . . . ut et ipsis apud quos ageret talis qualem se esse optaret, videretur. (Cic. de
Orat. 1.87); . . . ut non sit mirum, si in talis disposituras / deciderunt quoque et in talis
574 Relative clauses
venere meatus / qualibus haec rerum geritur nunc summa novando. (Lucr. 5.192–4);
. . . teporque talis est qualis esse sani solet. (Cels. 3.6.7)
Tum meretricum numerus tantus quantum in urbe omni fuit / obviam ornatae
occurrebant suis quaequae amatoribus. (Pl. Epid. 213–14); Malo bene facere tantun-
dem est periculum / quantum bono male facere. (Pl. Poen. 633–4); Auctoritatis tan-
tae quantam vos in me esse voluistis . . . (Cic. Balb. 1); . . . qui ab dis immortalibus tot
et tantas res tacitus auderet optare quot et quantas di immortales ad Cn. Pompeium
detulerunt. (Cic. Man. 48); Cum finis provinciae tantos haberet quantos voluerat,
quantos optarat, quantos pretio mei capitis periculoque emerat, iis se tenere non
potuit. (Cic. Pis. 49)
Talentis magnis totidem quot ego et tu sumus. (Pl. Mos. 644); Nego ullo de opere
publico, de monumento, de templo tot senatus exstare consulta quot de mea
domo . . . Cic. Har.16); Aequa dicitur divisio, quotiens tot tempora habet arsis quot et
thesis. (Pomp. gramm. 123.33K)
The reverse order, in which the relative clause precedes, is far less common though it
seems to be relatively popular in Post-Classical poetry. Examples are (r)–(t). Since
instances of a preceding relative clause without a resumptive element in the main clause
are very rare (see above), some scholars regard the combination of a relative adjective
with a resumptive demonstrative as another instance of ‘correlation’ (see § 18.15).150
(r) Itaque illo interfecto qualem in nos eum esse voluit, talis ipse in ceteros
exstitit.
(‘And so, when he (sc. Caesar) was killed, he himself (sc. Antonius) became such a
man toward the rest of the community as he wanted Caesar to be toward us.’ Cic. Phil.
13.17)
(s) Postidea domum / me rursum quantum potero tantum recipiam.
(‘Afterwards I’ll return home again as quickly as I possibly can.’ Pl. Aul. 118–19)
(t) Quot autem in causa constitutiones . . . erunt, totidem necesse erit quaes-
tiones . . . reperire.
(‘Moreover it will be necessary to find the same number of questions . . . as there are
issues . . . in the case.’ Cic. Inv. 1.19)
Supplement:
. . . qualescumque summi civitatis viri fuerint, talem civitatem fuisse. (Cic. Leg.
3.31); . . . quales in re publica principes essent, talis reliquos solere esse civis. (Cic.
Fam. 1.9.12); Quale solet silvis brumali frigore viscum / fronde virere nova, quod
non sua seminat arbos, / et croceo fetu teretis circumdare truncos, / talis erat species
auri frondentis opaca / ilice, sic leni crepitabat brattea vento. (Verg. A. 6.205–9);
Qualis et Ischomache Lapithae genus heroine, / Centauris medio grata rapina mero;
/ Mercurio <aut> qualis fertur Boebeidos undis / virgineum Brimo composuisse
latus: / talis visa mihi somno dimissa recenti. (Prop. 2.29b.29–33); Quantusque
et qualis ab alta / Iunone excipitur, tantus talisque, rogato, / det tibi conplexus . . .
150 For quanto . . . tanto in proportional comparative constructions, see § 20.29. For the frequency of
qualis . . . talis and related pairs in technical texts, see Viré (2005).
Relative adjectives and adverbs 575
(Ov. Met. 3.284–6); . . . ne, qualis Anci liberum animus adversus Tarquinium fuerat,
talis adversus se Tarquini liberum esset . . . (Liv. 1.42.1); Plane qualis dominus, talis et
servus. (Petr. 58.4 (a freedman speaking))
Tanti quanti poscit, vi’n tanti illam emi? (Pl. Mer. 490); Tantum tibi boni di immor-
tales duint quantum tu tibi optes. / Nam si exoptem quantum dignu’s tantum dent,
minus nihilo sit. (Pl. Ps. 936–7); Quod si aut quantam voluntatem habent ad hunc
opprimendum aut quantam ad male dicendum licentiam, tantum haberent aut <ad>
ementiendum animi aut ad fingendum ingeni . . . (Cic. Font. 40); Viri quantas pecu-
nias ab uxoribus dotis nomine acceperunt, tantas ex suis bonis aestimatione facta
cum dotibus communicant. (Caes. Gal. 6.19.1); Lenta salix quantum pallenti cedit
olivae, / puniceis humilis quantum saliunca rosetis, / iudicio nostro tantum tibi cedit
Amyntas. (Verg. Ecl. 5.16–18); Quantus apud Danaos Podalirius arte medendi, /
Aeacides dextra, pectore Nestor erat, / quantus erat Calchas extis, Telamonius armis,
/ Automedon curru, tantus amator ego. (Ov. Ars 2. 735–8)
Quot genera voles, tot indito. (Cato Agr. 40.3); Quot homines tot sententiae. (Ter.
Ph. 454); . . . ut quot iugera sint sata, totidem medimna decumae debeantur. (Cic. Ver.
3.112); Quot homines tot causae. (Cic. de Orat. 2.140); Sed quot officia oratoris tot
sunt genera dicendi. (Cic. Orat. 69); At primum quot hominum linguae tot nomina
deorum. (Cic. N.D. 1.84); . . . monstrum horrendum, ingens, cui quot sunt corpore
plumae, / tot vigiles oculi subter (mirabile dictu), / tot linguae, totidem ora sonant, tot
subrigit auris. (Verg. A. 4.181–3); Gargara quot segetes, quot habet Methymna race-
mos, / aequore quot pisces, fronde teguntur aves, / quot caelum stellas, tot habet tua
Roma puellas. (Ov. Ars 1.57–9); Quot enim clientes circa singulos fuistis patronos,
tot nunc adversus unum hostem eritis. (Liv. 6.18.6)
Of the relative adverbs mentioned in § 18.1, a number of space adverbs, the time
adverb cum (quom), and the reason adverbs cur and quare are used in adnominal
relative clauses. Autonomous relative clauses containing space and time adverbs that
function as space and time satellites in their sentences are dealt with in Chapter 16 on
satellite clauses. Relative adverbs of space also occur in autonomous relative clauses
functioning in ways other than as space and time satellites. These usages are treated in
§ 18.37 and § 18.38. Reason relative adverbs are discussed in § 18.39. For relative
degree adverbs (quanto and quantopere), see § 20.29. In relative clauses with a relative
adverb the use of the moods is as in ‘normal’ relative clauses (see §§ 18.23–6).151
(a) Namque hanc urbem ei rex donarat, his quidem verbis, quae ei panem prae-
beret (ex qua regione quinquaginta talenta quotannis redibant), Lampsacum
autem, unde vinum sumeret, Myunta, ex qua obsonium haberet.
(‘For the king had given him that city, with the remark that it would furnish him with
bread (the annual revenue of the district was five hundred talents), also Lampsacus,
from which he could get wine, and Myus, from which he could have the rest of his
fare.’ Nep. Them. 10.3)
Relative adverbs of space are used in adnominal relative clauses modifying nouns
indicating space. Examples are (b)–(e).
(b) Nam dudum ante lucem et istunc et te vidi. # Quo in loco? / # Hic in aedibus
ubi tu habitas.
(‘Not long ago, before sunlight, I saw both him and you. # In what place? # Here in
the house where you live.’ Pl. Am. 699–700)
(c) Mamertini tibi et urbem quo furta undique deportares, et navem in qua
exportares praebuerunt.
(‘The Mamertines gave you both a city to which you could carry all the plunder you
amassed from all quarters, and also a ship, in which you could take it away.’ Cic. Ver.
5.59—NB: Note the parallelism with navem in qua)
(d) . . . Romanos neque ullam facultatem habere navium neque eorum locorum
ubi bellum gesturi essent, vada, portus, insulas novisse.
(‘. . . while the Romans had no supply of ships, no knowledge of the shoals, harbours,
or islands of the regions where they were about to wage war.’ Caes. Gal. 3.9.6)
(e) Pontem fecit in Histro flumine qua copias traduceret.
(‘He built a bridge over the river Hister for the transport of his troops.’ Nep.
Milt. 3.1)
Supplement:
Siliginem, triticum in loco aperto celso ubi sol quam diutissime siet, seri oportet.
(Cato Agr. 35.1); A regione, si potius ex his locis ubi nascuntur amplae quam exiles
(sc. sues), pararis. (Var. R. 2.4.4); . . . habent propinquam, fidelem fructuosamque pro-
vinciam, quo facile excurrant, ubi libenter negotium gerant. (Cic. Ver. 2.6); Equidem
vobis, quoniam ita voluistis, fontes unde hauriretis atque itinera ipsa ita putavi esse
demonstranda . . . (Cic. de Orat. 1.203); Omnes enim colles ac loca superiora unde erat
propinquus despectus in mare ab exercitu tenebantur. (Caes. Gal. 3.14.9); Mortuus
Cumis, quo se post fractas opes Latinorum ad Aristodemum tyrannum contulerat.
(Liv. 2.21.5)
Relative adverbs of space are used to refer to a human being instead of prepositional
expressions consisting of a preposition and a pronominal form.153 This use has
received attention from Antiquity onwards. Examples are (f)–(h). As these examples
show, relative adverbs are used in this way both in adnominal and in autonomous
153 Fraenkel (1934), Palmén (1958), and also Pascucci (1968: 17–22).
Relative adjectives and adverbs 577
relative clauses. Similar observations can be made about anaphoric and demonstra-
tive pronouns. Semantically, there is nothing unusual about this phenomenon.
(f) Nescioquem ad portum nactus es ubi cenes.
(‘You’ve found some guy at the harbour to dine with.’ Pl. Capt. 837)
(g) . . . in Thensauro scripsit, causam dicere / prius unde petitur, aurum qua re sit
suom, / quam illic qui petit, unde is sit thensaurus sibi . . .
(‘. . . in the Thesaurus [the Treasure] he has described him from whom the gold is
demanded, as pleading his cause why it should be deemed his own, before the person
who demands it has stated how this treasure belongs to him . . .’ Ter. Eu. 10–12—NB:
Donatus ad loc. explains unde as ‘a quo’)
(h) Nam ego ad Menaechmum hunc eo, quo iam diu / sum iudicatus.
(‘I’m going to Menaechmus here, the bond servant of whose household I’ve been for
a long time already.’ Pl. Men. 96–7)
Supplement:
Quodsi saltatorem avum habuisses neque eum virum unde pudoris pudicitiaeque
exempla peterentur, tamen . . . (Cic. Deiot. 28); Sed tamen, quia consules, ubi summa
rerum esset, ad id locorum prospe<re> rem gererent, minus his cladibus commove-
bantur. (Liv. 25.22.1); . . . sed in tribunos centurionesque ubi pretium caedis erat
[re]verteretur. (Tac. Hist. 3.31.1)
Spatial relative adverbs are also used in a more abstract way. Examples are (i) and ( j).
(i) Velut haec mi evenit servitus, ubi ego omnibus / parvis magnisque miseriis
praefulcior.
(‘For instance, this slavery has come upon me where I’m used as a prop for
all small and big miseries.’ Pl. Ps. 771–2)
( j) Quot res dedere, ubi possem persentiscere, / ni essem lapis!
(‘How many clues there were where I could have detected the truth, if I
hadn’t been such a dolt!’ Ter. Hau. 916–17)
Autonomous relative clauses with a relative adverb of space fulfil all sorts of functions in
their superordinate clauses just like those with qui and related words (see § 18.16). They
may function as subject or object, as in (k) and (l), and as satellites, as in (m) and (n)—in
the latter after a comparative adverb. Note that in (k)–(m) the relative adverbs refer to
human beings. Alternatives would be a quo in (k) and (l), quibus (dative) in (m).
(k) Pr . . . fac<ito eos L viros qu>os is quei petet et unde petetur ex h. l.
legerint . . .
(‘The praetor . . . shall cause the names of the 50 persons whom the plaintiff and the
defendant will have chosen under this law . . . ‘ CIL I2.583.26 (Lex Acilia, 122 bc))
(l) Domi habuit unde disceret.
(‘He had someone to learn from at home.’ Ter. Ad. 413)
(m) Nam quo dedisti nuptum abire nolumus.
(‘We don’t want to leave the men you gave us in marriage to.’ Pl. St. 142)
578 Relative clauses
(n) . . . quod non longius hostes aberant quam quo telum adigi posset . . .
(‘. . . as the enemy were not further from them than the distance to which a dart could
be cast . . .’ Caes. Gal. 2.21.3)
Supplement:
Si quis quid vestrum Epidamnum curari sibi / velit, audacter imperato et dicito. / Sed
ita ut det, unde curari id possit sibi. (Pl. Men. 51–3)
Ita quoquo adveniunt, ubiubi sunt, / duplici damno dominos multant. (Pl. Cas. 722–2a)
The function of the clause may be marked by a determiner and/or a resumptive
expression. Examples are (o)–(q).
(o) Quid, si igitur reddatur illi unde empta est?
(‘Then how about returning her to the man I bought her from?’ Pl. Mer. 418)
(p) Is eum unde petet in ious ed[ucito . . .
(‘Such person shall bring the person whom he shall sue to court . . .’ CIL I2.583.6 (Lex
Acilia, Rome, 122 bc))
(q) . . . illi unde petitur, ei potius credendum esse.
(‘. . . the one from whom the claim is made, that one ought rather to be credited.’ Cato
orat. 51)
Supplement:
. . . ut, qui eum necasset unde ipse natus esset, careret iis rebus omnibus ex quibus omnia
nata esse dicuntur? (Cic. S. Rosc. 71); Is Lilybaei multos iam annos habitat, homo et domi
nobilis et apud eos quo se contulit propter virtutem splendidus et gratiosus. (Cic. Ver.
4.38); ‘Potest fieri’, inquit, ‘Sile, ut is, unde te audisse dicis, iratus dixerit’. (Cic. de Orat.
2.285); Sed qui sunt ex iis nati, eorum habentur liberi, quo primum virgo quaeque
deducta est. (Caes. Gal. 5.14.5); quominus Maximum Batonis quove ea res pertine-
bit habere possidereque recte liceat. (CIL III.936.10–12 (Verespatak, ad 139))
Autonomous adverbial relative clauses may be modified by quantifiers, such as omni-
bus in (r).
(r) Ego omnibus unde petitur hoc consili dederim, ut a singulis interregibus
binas advocationes postulent.
(‘I would give this counsel to all men by whom it is sought: that they demand two
adjournments from each interrex!’ Cic. Fam. 7.11.1)
Spatial relative adverbs are also found at the adjective level, as in (s).
(s) . . . adeo digna res est ubi tu nervos intendas tuos.
(‘. . . the affair is a deserving one for you to exert your energies upon.’ Ter. Eu. 312)
Topographical descriptions are often elliptical. An example is (t) from Pliny the
Elder, where the ubi clause is more or less equivalent to ‘where there used to be a
town called Salduba’. There are a few very late instances of relative ubi in combination
with a form of locus where ubi does not function as a place adverb in its clause. In (u)
it seems to function as the subject (= quae).154
154 See Compernass (1916: 117), Önnerfors (1956: 20–1), Sz.: 210, and Touratier (1980: 513).
Relative adjectives and adverbs 579
(t) Caesaraugusta colonia immunis, amne Hibero adfusa, ubi oppidum antea
vocabatur Salduba, regionis Edetaniae, recipit populos LV.
(‘Caesaraugusta, a colony that pays no taxes, is washed by the river Ebro; its
site was once occupied by a town called Salduba, belonging to the district of
Edetania. It is the centre for 55 peoples.’ Plin. Nat. 3.24)
(u) Dumque venissent in locum ubi Sylvula vocabatur non longe ab urbe Como . . .
(‘Until they had come to a place which was called Sylvula not far from the
city Comus . . .’ Passio Fidelis, Exanti et Carpofori 1)
Supplement:
Quam ob rem . . . nihil est cur alius alio iudice melior aut sapient<i>or existimetur
[his]. (Cic. Font. 22); Idque erat cum aliis cur te, si fieri posset, cuperem videre. (Cic.
Att. 11.15.1); Hoc est cur pueri tangar amore minus. (Ov. Ars 2.684)
Quid est quamobrem putes te tuam culpam non modo derivare in aliquem . . .
posse? (Cic. Ver. 2.49)
Sed quid est quapropter nobis vos malum minitamini? (Pl. Bac. 1144)
. . . quid est qua re quisquam mihi se ipsa populari ratione anteponat? (Cic. Dom.
88); Quid est, quare uxorem dimiseris? (Sen. Con. 2.5.7)
For the use of relative clauses with an adverb of reason as a reason adjunct, see (h).
(h) Quid igitur obstat quor non verae fiant?
(‘What, therefore, prevents this (wedding) from being real?’ Ter. An. 103)
Supplement:
Quid accidit cur tanto opere iste homo occultaretur ut eum ne casu quidem quis-
quam adspicere posset? (Cic. Ver. 5.65); . . . quid habent cur Graeca anteponant iis
quae et splendide dicta sint neque sint conversa de Graecis? (Cic. Fin. 1.6); Nam quid
feci ego quidve sum locutus / cur me tot male perderes poetis. (Catul. 14.4–5); . . . aut
amet aut faciat cur ego semper amem! (Ov. Am. 1.3.2); Quid tamen evenit cur sis
metuentior undae . . . (Ov. Ep. 19.83)
Quid ego feci qua istaec propter dicta dicantur mihi? (Pl. Am. 815)
Quamobrem, quapropter, and quare are regularly used as connective relatives.157 Cur
is not used in this way. Examples are (i)–(k). Note also (l).
(i) Quam ob rem mi magis par est via decedere et concedere.
(‘For this reason it’s more appropriate to get off the street for me and to get out of my
way.’ Pl. Am. 990)
( j) Quapropter te ipsum purgare ipsi coram placabilius est.
(‘So it’s more likely to satisfy her if you explain the situation in person to her face.’
Ter. Ad. 608)
(k) quare · lubens · te · in gremiu, / Scipio, recip<i>t · terra . . .
(‘Wherefore, Scipio, joyfully does Earth take you to her bosom.’ CIL I2.10.7–8 (Scip.
Elog., Rome, c.170 bc))
(l) Quare non est cur eorum qui se studio eloquentiae dediderunt spes
infringatur . . .
(‘Therefore there is no reason why the hopes of those who have devoted themselves
to the study of oratory should be dashed . . .’ Cic. Orat. 6)
Relative adverbs of reason are also found (rarely) on the adjective level, as in (m)
and (n).
157 See Merguet (Phil.) s.v. ob 782–3; quapropter 233; quare 233; (Reden) s.v. ob 409–10; quapropter 38;
res 316–17.
582 Relative clauses
(m) . . . tamen digna causa videretur cur inimicitias hominis improbissimi susci-
perem, ut hospitis salutem fortunasque defenderem.
(‘Nevertheless to defend the safety and fortunes of this kind friend would seem a
worthy cause why I should incur this foul scoundrel’s enmity.’ Cic. Ver. 2.117)
(n) . . . modo illud adtendatur, dignane causa videatur ea, quae ad utilitatem
pertinebit, quare de magnificentia aut de honestate quiddam derogetur.
(‘. . . provided only that some attention is paid to the question whether this cause
which conduces to our advantage is worth a loss in glory and honour.’ Cic. Inv. 2.175)
CHAPTER 19
Coordination
The Oxford Latin Syntax. Harm Pinkster, Oxford University Press (2021). © Harm Pinkster.
DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780199230563.003.0019
Coordination
(‘Furthermore, if you employed force to carry your measure, is it, in spite of this, a
law? Do you think that the result of any operation which might has effected can be
thought to be founded on right?’ Cic. Dom. 53)
In Merguet (Reden) s.v. et, two columns are reserved for sentence connexion (‘am
Anfang des Satzes’), forty-two for coordination (‘im Satz’), thirty-six of which are of
the simply additive type (A et B), six of the correlative type (et A et B). Similar calcu-
lations are less easy to perform in the material for aut ‘or’ or sed ‘but’.
The most common form of coordination is by specific words or phrases that link the
units involved, like et in (a). For such a linking device this Syntax uses the term
coordinator (see § 3.25). The traditional term is ‘conjunction’. The coordinated
units are called conjoins.¹ They belong to various types. Examples of coordinated
clauses are (a) above and (d), repeated from § 2.2. Here the coordinator et ‘and’ com-
bines two simple clauses into a compound clause. The two clauses do not depend on
each other, as is the case with subordinate clauses (see § 2.2 and § 14.1). In (d), the
compound clause as a whole functions as a subordinate clause of reason and answers
the question Quapropter, quaeso? In (e), two coordinated clauses are both in the
accusative and infinitive (see also § 2.2).
(d) Quapropter, quaeso? # Quia ego hanc amo et haec med amat . . .
(‘Why, if I may ask? # Because I love her and she loves me . . .’ Pl. As. 631)
(e) Neque hoc . . . vos . . . non vidistis, <legem> illam esse nullam atque esse potius
flammam temporis . . .
(‘Nor did you . . . fail to see that that was no law at all, and that it was rather the heat of
the times . . .’ Cic. Dom. 69)
Coordination can be used not only for combining entire clauses, as in (a) and (d), but
also for combining constituents at the level of the clause or at a lower level. This is
illustrated by (f) and (g), respectively.
(f) Deinde rogas Fabium ut et patrem et filium vivos comburat, si possit.
(‘You proceed to ask Fabius to burn both father and son alive if he can.’ Cic. Q. fr. 1.2.6)
(g) Sese . . . non arbitratur . . . patrimonium tam amplum et copiosum posse
obtinere . . .
(‘. . . he thinks himself unable to retain possession of an inheritance so large and
rich . . .’ Cic. S. Rosc. 6)
In (f), the nouns patrem and filium, both referring to human beings, are coordinated
by et . . . et ‘both . . . and’. Patrem and filium do not depend on each other, as they would
in a phrase like filium patris ‘the son of the father’, where patris is an attribute that
modifies filium. Together they function as the compound object of the clause. The
combination counts as plural, as is made clear by the form of the secondary predicate
vivos. It is understood that both the father and the son will be burnt. In (g), two
attributive adjectives of a noun phrase are coordinated by et. Both adjectives are
understood as a quality of patrimonium. They belong to the same semantic class
(dimension and size—see § 3.7) and could together be given in answer to the question
quale patrimonium? ‘what kind of estate?’² The compound phrase is modified by the
degree adverb tam.
Subordinate clauses can be coordinated in a similar way, as in (h), where two rea-
son clauses are coordinated.
(h) Chrysalus mihi usque quaque loquitur nec recte, pater, / quia tibi aurum red-
didi et quia non te defrudaverim.
(‘Chrysalus is reviling me all the time, father, because I returned the money to you
and because I didn’t cheat you.’ Pl. Bac. 735–6)
An intermediate form of coordination (neither complete clauses, as in (a) and (d), nor
individual constituents, as in (f)–(h)) is shown in (i). Here, prohibere iniuriis incur-
sionibusque must be understood with the first part of the sentence Cheruscos ab
Suebis. For such instances, in which there is a contrast between two or more argu-
ments that share the same verb, grammars of English use the term ‘gapping’. A trad-
itional term is ‘ellipsis’. It is part of a more general form of coordination of incomplete
clauses that contain several constituents, for which this Syntax uses the term conjunc-
tion reduction (see §§ 19.3–4).
(i) Hanc (sc. silvam) . . . Cheruscos ab Suebis Suebosque a Cheruscis iniuriis
incursionibusque prohibere.
(‘That it (the forest) . . . kept the Cherusci from raids and outrages on the part of the
Suebi, and the Suebi likewise from the Cherusci.’ Caes. Gal. 6.10.5)
The cases mentioned above all make use of an overt coordinator. Coordination by
means of such a coordinator is often called syndetic coordination. However,
coordination is also possible without an overt lexical device, as in (j), an instance of
conjunction reduction, and in (k). This is called asyndetic coordination (or:
zero-coordination). In cases of asyndetic coordination, intonation will have played a
role in marking the sequence as a compound sentence, as it does in contemporary
languages. In (j), the relationship between the two parts may be understood as adver-
sative. An example of asyndetic conjunctive coordination is (k).
(j) Gallos ab Aquitanis Garunna flumen, a Belgis Matrona et Sequana dividit.
(‘The Galli (Gauls) are separated from the Aquitani by the river Garonne, from the
Belgae by the Marne and the Seine.’ Caes. Gal. 1.1.2)
(k) L., frater eius, causam agebat. Aderant amici, propinqui.
(‘His brother Lucius pleaded his case. His friends and relatives were present.’ Cic. Ver.
1.125)
Following the grammatical tradition, three semantic classes of overt coordinators are
distinguished, each with their own properties and each containing a number of
devices with their own specific properties: conjunctive (also called ‘copulative’ or
‘additive’), disjunctive (also called ‘alternative’), and adversative. The coordin-
ators most typically involved are et ‘and’, aut ‘or’, and sed ‘but’, respectively.
Sequences of more than two conjoins are also very common. In this Syntax, this will
be called multiple coordination. If syndetic coordinators are used, they may be the
same, as in (l), or different, as in (m). An example of asyndetic multiple coordination is
(n) (° marks the asyndeton); syndetic and asyndetic coordination may co-occur, as in
(o), where sapienter and docte are linked asyndetically. Mixed coordination of this type
is very common in Early Latin prose, both in legal texts and in Cato’s de Agricultura.³
(l) Ego valeo recte et rem gero et facio lucrum . . .
(‘I am doing well and am busy and am making a profit . . .’ Pl. Per. 503)
(m) Accedam atque hanc appellabo et supparasitabor patri.
(‘I’ll go to them and address her and play my father’s hanger-on.’ Pl. Am. 515)
(n) Aderant unguenta, coronae. ° Incendebantur odores. ° Mensae conquisitis-
simis epulis extruebantur.
(‘There were perfumes, garlands; incense was burnt; the tables were loaded with the
choicest banquet.’ Cic. Tusc. 5.62)
(o) (sc. res) . . . quas tu sapienter, ° docte et cordate et cate / mihi reddidisti opipa-
ras opera tua.
(‘. . . which you have intelligently, cleverly, sensibly, and shrewdly made sumptuous for
me through your efforts.’ Pl. Poen. 131–2)
A further distinction is made between single coordinators such as those just men-
tioned, and pairs of coordinators like conjunctive et . . . et ‘both . . . and’, disjunctive
aut . . . aut ‘either . . . or’, and adversative non solum . . . sed (etiam) ‘not only . . . but also’.
For this form of coordination, in which both conjoins have a coordinating device, the
term correlative coordination will be used. Such paired coordinators emphasize
the identity of one or both of the conjoins involved. An example is (p). Here graviter
et vehementer, themselves coordinated by the single coordinator et, form the ‘more
particular or noteworthy’ part of the pair coordinated by cum . . . tum.⁴
(p) . . . tametsi dici cum vere tum graviter et vehementer potest . . .
(‘. . . although they might be stated not only truly, but also with vehemence and with
indignation . . .’ Cic. Ver. 1.86)
Examples of correlative coordination of more than two conjoins are (q) and (r). In (s) et
is used four times to link four combinations of an infinitive with an adjunct expression
³ For the relationship between asyndetic and syndetic coordination in Early Latin prose, see
Penney (2005).
⁴ Quotation from OLD s.v. cum2 § 14.
Introductory remarks
(the last consisting of two nouns linked by the conjunctive coordinator ac ‘and’).
Sequences of more than two conjoins are common with conjunctive and disjunctive,
but not with adversative, coordinators.
(q) . . . et fugi et tibi surrupui filium et eum vendidi.
(‘. . . I ran away and snatched your son from you and sold him.’ Pl. Capt. 972)
(r) . . . quae res recte vortat mihique tibique tuaeque filiae . . .
(‘. . . may this turn out well for me, you, and your daughter . . .’ Pl. Aul. 218)
(s) . . . tamen esset magnum tantam causam, tam exspectatam, et diligentia con-
sequi et memoria complecti et oratione expromere et voce ac viribus susti-
nere.
(‘. . . still it would be a great undertaking in a case so great, so anticipated, both to fol-
low it up with diligence, and to keep it in one’s memory, and to discuss it properly in
speech, and to support it with voice and stamina.’ Cic. Div. Caec. 39)
The three types of coordination are represented in a formulaic form in Table 19.1.
Conjoins are most often adjacent, as in the examples above and in (t). However, dis-
continuity with an intervening constituent is not uncommon. In that case the coord-
inator and the conjoin are postposed together, as in (u). Further instances can be
found in § 23.101.
(t) Quam ego pecuniam quadruplicem aps te et lenone auferam.
(‘This money I’ll take away from you and the pimp, fourfold.’ Pl. Cur. 619)
(u) Erroris ambo ego illos et dementiae / complebo atque omnem Amphitruonis
familiam . . .
(‘I’ll fill both of them and Amphitruo’s entire household with misunderstandings and
madness . . .’ Pl. Am. 470–1)
Most of the words that are discussed in this chapter occur in other configurations as
well. The most common coordinators et ‘and’ and sed ‘but’, for instance, can be used
as linking devices both between independent sentences and between sections of a
text, that is as ‘connectors’ (see above). Et can also be used in the sense of etiam ‘also’,
‘too’—that is, as an additive emphasizing particle (see § 22.21).
Coordination
Conjunctive coordination of entire clauses as shown in (a) and (b) is not very com-
mon; the correlative type shown in (c) slightly more. Common elements are often not
repeated, as in exx. (i) and (j) in § 19.1 and in (i) and (j) below. With correlative dis-
junctive coordinators and with adversative coordinators coordination of entire clauses
seems relatively more common. Examples are (f)–(h).
(f) Aut pol haec praestigiatrix multo mulier maxuma est / aut pateram hic inesse
oportet.
(‘Either this woman is by far the greatest trickster or the bowl ought to be in here.’
Pl. Am. 782–3)
(g) . . . Claudio utrumvis satis est planum facere, vel se a me ipso vi deiectum esse
vel me consilium inisse ut vi deiceretur.
(‘. . . it is sufficient for Claudius to prove either point—either that he was driven out
with violence by my very self, or that I contrived a plan to have him driven out with
violence.’ Cic. Tul. 29)
(h) Cuius a morte tertius hic et tricesimus annus est sed memoriam illius viri
omnes excipient anni consequentes.
(‘Thirty-three years have passed since that hero’s death, but each succeeding year will
carry on his memory.’ Cic. Sen. 19)
In the case of coordination of clauses that have the same subject it is normal to express
it only once, as in (i): quae is expressed only with the first clause. If two clauses also
have the same verb, this is also normally expressed only once: in (j), deportasse is only
expressed in the first clause. The term used in this Syntax for the phenomenon under
discussion is conjunction reduction.
(i) Ab illa quae digitos despoliat suos et tuos digitos decorat.
(‘From the one who is robbing her fingers and adorning yours.’ Pl. Mil. 1048)
(j) Novi enim moderationem animi tui et aequitatem teque non cognomen
solum Athenis deportasse sed humanitatem et prudentiam intellego.
(‘For I know your self-control and the even temper of your mind, and I am aware that
you brought home from Athens not only a nickname but culture and practical wis-
dom too.’ Cic. Sen. 1)
Very useful is the organization of the lemmata in Merguet (Caesar). For et there are
two and a half columns (338A–339B) for coordinated clauses ‘with different sub-
jects and predicates’ against eight dedicated to other coordinated clauses (334A–338A).
For -que, six vs. fifteen (879B–882A/871B–879A). Atque is much less common in the
Caesarian corpus and is not so subdivided.
Examples of syndetic coordination of constituents at the clause level are (a) and (b).
In (a), there is one subject (fortuna) and one object constituent (humana), both related
Coordination
to two coordinated verbs (fingit, artat). In (b), repeated from § 19.1, et patrem et filium
are together object of the verb comburat.
(a) Fortuna humana fingit artatque ut lubet.
(‘Fortune moulds and pinches human life as she likes.’ Pl. Capt. 304)
(b) Deinde rogas Fabium ut et patrem et filium vivos comburat, si possit.
(‘You proceed to ask Fabius to burn both father and son alive if he can.’ Cic. Q. fr. 1.2.6)
Such cases of coordination of constituents at the clause level, both syndetic and asyn-
detic, are often described as elliptic or brachylogical forms of clausal coordination.⁶
Thus, in order to explain that fortuna and humana are understood with both verbs, (a)
is said to represent the shortened version of (a'). In a similar way, (b) is said to repre-
sent the shortened version of (b'), and likewise (c) of (c').
(a') Fortuna humana fingit & fortuna humana artat ut lubet.
(b') Deinde rogas Fabium ut patrem vivum comburat & filium vivum comburat,
si possit.
(c) Turbant, miscent mores mali.
(‘The bad confuse and mix up our standards.’ Pl. Trin. 285)
(c') Turbant mores mali & miscent mores mali.
Describing these actually attested sentences as derived from more ‘basic’ clauses is
problematic in several respects. In the first place, conjunctively coordinated pairs
such as those in (b) behave as a unit, with a particular property that differs from
those of the underlying pairs: et patrem et filium is plural (see § 19.1). Compare also
the use of ambos in (d). Another problem is that it is sometimes impossible to divide
a coordinated clause into two basic clauses, as is shown in (e) and (e'), since verbs
like pugno require two arguments (see § 4.38 fin.). In (f), senatus populusque
Romanus behaves as one constituent and counts as singular; yet it would be odd to
paraphrase the content as (f ').⁷ For similar considerations concerning prepositional
phrases, see § 19.13.
(d) . . . vos in patriam domum / rediisse video bene gesta re ambos, te et fratrem
tuom.
(‘. . . I see that you’ve both, you and your brother, returned home to our country con-
ducting your business so successfully.’ Pl. St. 506–7)
(e) Nunc, male res iunctae, calor et reverentia pugnant.
(‘Now, passion and regard for men, two things that ill go together, are at odds.’ Ov. Ep.
19.173)
(e') Nunc . . . calor pugnat & reverentia pugnat.
Examples of conjunction reduction with a noun phrase that is expressed as the subject
only once are (a)–(d). In (e), the subject is mentioned in the preceding context.
(a) Quid nunc agam, / quem omnes mortales ignorant et ludificant ut lubet?
(‘What should I do now, I whom all mortals disown and ridicule as they like?’ Pl. Am.
1046–7)
(b) Quod quo studiosius ab istis opprimitur et absconditur eo magis eminet et
apparet.
(‘Which, the greater the efforts made by them to suppress and conceal it, the more
evident and conspicuous it becomes.’ Cic. S. Rosc. 121)
(c) . . . contra vitam fortunasque nostras ab homine profligato ac perdito non
comparari sed geri iam viderem.
(‘. . . I saw (war) being not plotted but actually waged by a profligate and desperate
man against our lives and property.’ Cic. Phil. 3.1)
(d) Quis mihi in re publica potest aut debet esse coniunctior . . .
(‘Who in the Republic can or should be more closely tied to me . . .’ Cic. Mur. 3)
(e) (sc. equites) Foedant et proterunt hostium copias / iure iniustas.
(‘They rightly mangled and crushed the enemy’s unrighteous troops.’ Pl. Am. 246–7)
Supplement:
. . . qui nunc festinat atque ab hac minatur sese abire. (Pl. As. 604); Iuppiter, qui genus
colis alisque hominum . . . (Pl. Poen. 1187)
. . . causa non solum exponenda, sed etiam graviter copioseque agenda est. (Cic. Div.
Caec. 39)
. . . nescio unde auxili, praesidi, perfugi / mi aut opum copiam comparem aut
expetam. (Pl. Cas. 623–4); . . . praesertim cum tribunus plebis vel denuntiare potueris
vel etiam cogere? (Cic. Dom. 117—NB: with a shared secondary predicate); Difficile
Coordination
Examples of simple conjunction reduction with a noun phrase that is expressed only
as the object of the first verb are (a)–(e) (see also § 9.16). Conjunction reduction is
almost obligatory when the first object is a pronoun used anaphorically or a relative
pronoun, as in (b), and when the coordinated verbs have more or less the same mean-
ing, as in (c).⁹ Note that in (d) the secondary predicate perterritos that belongs to the
implied object of egerunt is expressed. An example of a clausal object is (f). For
examples of disjunctive and adversative coordination, see the Supplement.
(a) Pacisce ergo, opsecro, quid tibi lubet, / dum ne manufesto hominem oppri-
mat neve enicet.
(‘Settle the issue, then, please, on any terms you like, so long as he doesn’t surprise the
man in the act and kill him.’ Pl. Bac. 866–7—NB: for the use of neve, see § 8.40)
(b) (sc. parasiti) . . . quos numquam quisquam nec vocat neque invocat.
(‘. . . whom no one ever either calls to or calls on.’ Pl. Capt. 76)
(c) Illud unum vos magnopere oro atque obsecro, iudices . . . ne fictis auditioni-
bus . . . fortunas innocentium subiciiendas putetis.
(‘One thing I do most earnestly beg and pray of you, gentlemen . . . do not consider it right
that the fate of the guiltless should lie at the mercy of fictitious rumours.’ Cic. Planc. 56)
(d) . . . reliquos in fugam coniecerunt atque ita perterritos egerunt ut . . .
(‘. . . they put the rest to rout, and indeed drove them in such a panic that . . .’ Caes. Gal.
4.12.2)
(e) Indignatus puer quod (sc. Trimalchio) Scylacem tam effuse laudaret catellam
in terram deposuit hortatusque <est> ut ad rixam properaret.
(‘The boy, offended because Trimalchio praised Scylax so lavishly, put the puppy on
the ground and encouraged her to attack at once.’ Petr. 64.9)
(f) Quod ego etsi mea sponte ante faciebam . . . nunc tamen et agam studiosius
et contendam ab illo vehementius . . .
(‘What I have been doing already of my own accord . . . I shall now set to work at more
zealously and press him about harder . . .’ Cic. Att. 1.10.2)
Supplement:
Est profecto deus qui quae nos gerimus auditque et videt. (Pl. Capt. 313); Domum
meam maioribus praesidiis munivi atque firmavi . . . (Cic. Catil. 1.10); Caesar . . . crates
ad extremum tumulum contra hostem proferri et adversas locari . . . iussit. (Caes. Civ.
3.46.1—NB: with secondary predicate); Milites . . . praecipites Pompeianos egerunt et
terga vertere coegerunt. (Caes. Civ. 3.46.5—NB: with a secondary predicate)
Quotiens te votui Argyrippum, filium Demaeneti, / compellare aut contrectare,
colloquive aut contui? (Pl. As. 522–3); Eum praeter Marcellos patronum quem suo
iure adire aut appellare posset habere neminem. (Cic. Ver. 2.36); . . . uti . . . quid quisque
eorum de quaque re audierit aut cognoverit quaerant . . . (Caes. Gal. 4.5.2)
Nunc quam ob rem huc sum missa, amabo, vel tu mi aias vel neges. (Pl. Rud.
427); . . . tum hic bonus augur eo se sacerdotio praeditum esse dixit ut comitia aus-
piciis vel impedire vel vitiare posset . . . (Cic. Phil. 2.80)
At placuero huic Erotio, / quae me non excludet ab se sed apud se occludet domi.
(Pl. Men. 670–1); Cum vero ne de venalibus quidem homines electos sed ex ergastulis
emptos nominibus gladiatoriis ornarit . . . (Cic. Sest. 134); Eius rei testimonium
esse . . . quod bellum non intulerit sed defenderit. (Caes. Gal. 1.44.6)
When an object is not expressed with the second verb of a coordinated pair, we find
both the word order ‘object verb & verb’ (OV & V) and ‘verb object & verb’ (VO & V).
The former seems to predominate, as in the examples above, but see (g) and (h) for the
reverse order. When the object is omitted with the first verb, the normal word order
is V & VO, as in (i), and not V & OV, but see (j) for an exception.¹⁰
(g) . . . plura suscepi veritus ne movere hominum studia viderer, retinere non posse.
(‘. . . I embarked upon further undertakings in fear that I would seem to have piqued
human interest, but to be unable to maintain it.’ Cic. Fin. 1.2)
(h) . . . sordidatus cum gentilibus clientibusque in foro prensabat singulos ora-
batque, ne Claudiae genti eam inustam maculam vellent, ut . . .
(‘. . . dressed for mourning, accompanied by his clansmen and clients, he approached
one citizen after another in the Forum and begged that they not allow a stain to
besmirch the Claudian line such that . . .’ Liv. 3.58.1)
(i) Ostentare hoc est, Romani, non gerere bellum.
(‘This, Romans, is making a show of war, not waging it.’ Liv. 3.2.8)
(j) Neque hercle ego uxorem habeo neque ego Erotio / dedi nec pallam surrupui.
(‘I don’t, by God, have a wife and I neither gave the mantle to Erotium, nor did I steal
it.’ Pl. Men. 509)
and dative, respectively) but only the dative is expressed. In (b), the understood object
of the verb educit is coreferential with the indirect object of the coordinated verb dat.
As the examples show, the reduction may concern the object of the earlier verb, as in
(a), or the object of the later verb, as in (b). In (c), ab ea may be understood with eve-
huntur. In this case, the expressed constituent is probably a direction argument. For
examples with two objects expressed with different marking, see (d) and (e).
(a) Qui autem non defendit nec obsistit, si potest, iniuriae, tam est in vitio quam
si parentes . . . deserat.
(‘But he who does not prevent or oppose wrong, if he can, is just as guilty of wrong as
if he deserted his parents . . .’ Cic. Off. 1.23)
(b) Eodem tempore clamore exaudito dat tuba signum suis Vercingetorix atque
ex oppido educit.
(‘At the same moment, hearing the shout, Vercingetorix gave his troops the signal by
trumpet, and led them out of the town.’ Caes. Gal. 7.81.3)
(c) Vilicus . . . appellatus a villa, quod ab eo in eam convehuntur fructus et eve-
huntur, cum veneunt.
(‘The name vilicus . . . is derived from villa, as this is the place into which the crops are
hauled by him and out of which they are hauled when they are sold.’ Var. R. 1.2.14)
(d) Ipse dux hostium Camulogenus suis aderat atque eos cohortabatur.
(‘The leader of the enemy, Camulogenus, was himself there among his men and was
urging them on.’ Caes. Gal. 7.62.6)
(e) In hoc sumus sapientes, quod naturam optumam ducem tamquam deum
sequimur eique paremus.
(‘I am wise because I follow Nature as the best of guides and obey her as a god.’
Cic. Sen. 5)
Supplement:
Verum si augeam / aut etiam adiutor si<e>m eius iracundiae, / insaniam profecto
cum illo. (Ter. Ad. 145–7); Nam quid ego de aedile ipso loquar, qui etiam diem dixit
et accusavit de vi Milonem? (Cic. Sest. 95); . . . tamen apparet atque exstat utrum
simus earum rudes an didicerimus. (Cic. de Orat. 1.73); Quocirca poetae in magna
varietate personarum etiam vitiosis quid conveniat et quid deceat videbunt. (Cic. Off.
1.98); . . . univorsos in contione laudat atque agit gratias . . . (Sal. Jug. 54.1); Odi
odioque sum Romanis. (Liv. 35.19.6)
NB: Accusative me governed by the second verb: Nam postea me ut sibi essem lega-
tus non solum suasit verum etiam rogavit. (Cic. Prov. 42)
. . . hoc voluit clarissimum relinquere indicium latrociniorum suorum, de quo non
audire aliquando sed videre cotidie possemus. (Cic. Ver. 1.130); . . . id me non modo
non hortatur ad disputandum sed etiam deterret. (Cic. de Orat. 2.25); (sc. Scipio) . . . ad
Hannibalem detrahendum ex Italia transferendumque et finiendum in Africa bellum
se transire volgaverat. (Liv. 29.26.6); Extemplo caetrati Achaeorum in castra impe-
tum faciunt et diripiunt. (Liv. 35.30.4—NB: unless et diripiunt is an interpolation; see
Briscoe ad loc.; Gronovius proposed et <ea>)
Syndetic coordination
Instances of coordinated verbs that share a third argument or a satellite are difficult to
find. An example with a third argument is (a); with satellites, (b) and (c). Note the
proposed emendation in (d).
(a) Utrum quae tibi ex societate debeatur an quae ex liberalitate huius promissa
sit et ostentata?
(‘Was it owing to you from the partnership, or had it been promised and offered you
by my client’s generosity?’ Cic. Q. Rosc. 16)
(b) . . . maxumeque reliquiae rerum earum moventur in animis et agitantur de
quibus vigilantes aut cogitavimus aut egimus . . .
(‘. . . and the remnants of those things that we either thought about or accomplished
when awake are especially moved and stirred in our souls . . .’ Cic. Div. 2.140)
(c) Sequitur tertia, quae per omnis partis sapientiae manat et funditur . . .,
disserendi ratio et scientia.
(‘In the third place follows that which seeps into and suffuses all aspects of
wisdom . . ., the art and science of reasoning.’ Cic. Tusc. 5.72)
(d) Ei legi et egi (cum eo add. Wesenberg).
(‘I read it to him and took the matter up.’ Cic. Att. 15.1.2)
Supplement:
. . . cogit quaestorem suum pecuniam quam ex Agonidis bonis redegisset eam mulieri
omnem annumerare et reddere. (Cic. Div. Caec. 57); . . . pro Quinctio cui tu et rem et
famam tuam commendare proficiscens et concredere solebas . . . (Cic. Quinct. 62);
Vos, quaeso, date hoc et concedite pudori meo, ut aliquam partem de istius impu-
dentia reticere possim. (Cic. Ver. 1.32); Est tuum, est ingenii diligentiaeque tuae. Do
hoc tibi et concedo. (Cic. Ver. 3.16)
Atque illi miseri nati in illis agris et educati, glebis subigendis exercitati, quo se subito
conferant non habebunt. (Cic. Agr. 2.84); Habeo autem certam viam atque rationem
qua omnis illorum conatus investigare et consequi possim. (Cic. Ver. 1.48); . . . factum
est senatus consultum quibus de sartis tectis cognitum et iudicatum non esset uti
C. Verres P. Coelius praetores cognoscerent et iudicarent. (Cic. Ver. 1.130)
Clauses with coordinated arguments and satellites that share the same verb are very
common.¹² Compound subjects that consist of two or more conjunctively coordinated
¹² Complete collections can be found in Merguet (Phil. and Reden, also Caesar), s.vv. atque and et, and
in Lodge, s.vv. atque and et.
Coordination
noun phrases, however, deserve special attention, since specific rules of agreement
apply to them (see §§ 13.4–9). Examples of compound subjects are (a)–(e). In (a) the
verb is singular and the coordination is asyndetic. In (b), the verb is plural and the
coordination is partly asyndetic. In (c), the verb is singular; in (d), plural.
(a) Persuasit nox, amor, vinum, adulescentia.
(‘Night, love, wine, and youth persuaded him.’ Ter. Ad. 470)
(b) . . . praesertim cum Romae domus eius, uxor, liberi essent et procurator aeque
utriusque necessarius.
(‘. . . especially as he had at Rome a house, a wife, children, and an agent equally con-
nected to both parties.’ Cic. Quinct. 86)
(c) . . . nihil est . . . quod humilitatem cuiusquam gravitas et virtus iudicis consoletur.
(‘. . . there is nothing which the authority and integrity of a judge can do for anyone’s
abjection.’ Cic. Quinct. 5)
(d) Quid? Auspicia, quibus ego et tu, Crasse, cum magna rei publicae salute
praesumus.
(‘What of augury, over which you and I, Crassus, preside to the great welfare of the
Republic?’ Cic. de Orat. 1.39)
(e) Sestius apud me fuit et Theopompus pridie.
(‘Sestius was with me yesterday, and Theopompus.’ Cic. Att. 13.7.1)
Examples of other compound arguments are the accusative object in (h), the dative
object in (i), the indirect object in (j), and the ablative third argument in (k). Ex. (l)
illustrates a compound subject complement; (m) and (n) illustrate compound satellites.
(h) Noctem tuam et vini cadum velim, si optata fiant.
(‘I’d wish for a night with you and a jar of wine if my wishes came true.’ Pl. As. 624)
(i) . . . si potius vobis ac rei publicae quam sibi et suis commodis opera, sumptu,
labore deserviunt . . .
(‘. . . if, by their toil, expense, and labour, they serve you and your country better than
themselves and their own advantage . . .’ Cic. Ver. 3.228)
Syndetic coordination
Syndetic coordination of constituents below the clause level can occur at the level of
the noun, the adjective, the adverb, and the prepositional phrase.
The category of adjectives consists of several semantic classes (see § 3.7). In principle
only adjectives that belong to the same semantic class can be coordinated (see
§ 11.39). If adjectives that belong to different semantic classes are coordinated the
second adjective is usually explicative. Noteworthy cases where such an interpret-
ation is difficult are (e) and (f).¹³
(e) . . . video . . . illac facere, omnem fere iuventutem, omnem illam urbanam ac
perditam plebem . . .
(‘. . . I see that all the younger people, all the desperate city rabble are on his
side . . .’ Cic. Att. 7.3.5)
(f) Incedebat muliebre et miserabile agmen . . .
(‘There went on its way a pitiable column of women . . .’ Tac. Ann. 1.40.4—tr.
Woodman)
Conversely, compound head nouns with two or more constituents can be modified by
one (or more) modifier(s), as in (g)–(h). In (g), the genitive noun claustrorum modi-
fies both head nouns. In (h) more and modo are modified by the possessive adjective
nostro. Note here the discontinuity of the two coordinated nouns (for further
examples, see § 23.7). Further details, including those concerning the rules of agree-
ment in such cases, are discussed in § 13.21.
(g) . . . sonitum et crepitum claustrorum audio . . .
(‘. . . I can hear the noise and clattering of the bolts . . .’ Pl. Cur. 203)
¹³ See Risselada (1984: 220–2), Spevak (2010a: 229–39), and, for Tacitus, Sánchez Martínez (2000:
194–201).
Syndetic coordination
There are also instances of compound adjective phrases that are modified in some
way. Ex. (c) illustrates a place satellite (example repeated from § 11.92). More com-
mon are instances with the degree adverb tam, as in (d).
(c) Quis Platorem . . ., hominem in illis locis clarum ac nobilem, legatum
Thessalonicam . . . venisse nescit?
(‘Who does not know that Plator . . ., a noble and a celebrity in his own land, came . . . to
Thessalonica as legate?’ Cic. Har. 35)
Coordination
(d) . . . sese hoc incolumi non arbitratur huius innocentis patrimonium tam
amplum et copiosum posse obtinere . . .
(‘. . . he thinks himself unable, while that man is still living, to retain possession of the
inheritance of this innocent man, so large and rich it is . . .’ Cic. S. Rosc. 6)
Supplement:
. . . quod tam infestum scelus et immane . . .? (Cic. Clu. 188); Quae tanta enim potest
exsistere ubertas ingenii . . . quod tam divinum atque incredibile genus ora-
tionis . . . (Cic. Red. Sen. 1); Quae ista tanta crudelitas est, quae tam fera immanisque
natura? (Cic. S. Rosc. 146)
NB: coordinated adverbs: Ita tantum bellum, tam diuturnum, tam longe lateque
dispersum . . . (Cic. Man. 35)
¹⁴ For instances with et, see Lodge: s.v. 524B–525A, 526A, 527A; McGlynn: s.v. 169B–170A. For
instances with atque, see Lodge: s.v. 169B–170A.
Syndetic coordination
iubendum et ad deterrendum idonea. (Cic. Leg. 2.8); Viri, arma, equi ad usum et ad
decus supererant. (Tac. Hist. 1.51.2); Inde in amicitiam insinuavit cum matre et
mecum simul . . . (Pl. Cist. 92—NB: postpositional cum with the pronoun me); At te,
vicine, di deaeque perduint, / cum tua amica cumque amationibus. (Pl. Mer. 793–4); . . .
filiam ut darem in seditionem atque in incertas nuptias . . . (Ter. An. 830—NB: some
mss. lack in before incertas); Apud eum sunt in honore et in pretio. (Cic. S. Rosc. 77);
Ait enim vim divinam in ratione esse positam et in universae naturae animo atque
mente . . . (Cic. N.D. 1.39); Est in Africa consuetudo incolarum ut in agris et in omni-
bus fere villis sub terra specus frumenti condendi gratia clam habeant . . . (B. Afr.
65.1); . . . honores . . . ad quos vos per ludum et per neglegentiam pervenistis. (Cic. Ver.
5.181); Si sine vi et sine bello velint rapta et raptores tradere . . . (Pl. Am. 206); . . .
armatos non fuisse eos qui sine scutis sineque ferro fuerint . . . (Cic. Caec. 64)
Disjunctive coordination: Per epistulam aut per nuntium, quasi regem, adiri eum
aiunt. (Pl. Mil. 1225)
Adversative coordination: . . . ut tota res non solum a me sed etiam a senatu et a
vobis manifesto deprenderetur. (Cic. Catil. 3.4); . . . ut onus huius laboris atque officii
non ex meo sed ex meorum necessariorum tempore mihi suscipiendum putarem.
(Cic. Div. Caec. 5); (sc. qui) . . . non per praestigias sed palam per potestatem uno impe-
rio ostiatim totum oppidum conpilaverit. (Cic. Ver. 4.53)
Preposition not repeated:
Conjunctive coordination: . . . tibi muni viam / qua cibatus commeatusque ad te et
legiones tuas / tuto possit pervenire. (Pl. Mil. 223–5); Mox conversus ad signa et bel-
lorum deos . . . (Tac. Hist. 3.10.4); Sed hic rex cum aceto pransuru’st et sale, sine bono
pulmento. (Pl. Rud. 937); Ego de urbe et his propriis ac vernaculis vitiis loquar . . . (Tac.
Dial. 28.3); . . . ut fueris animatus erga suom gnatum atque se . . . (Pl. Capt. 407); Nam
in mala uxore atque inimico si quid sumas, sumptus est . . . (Pl. Mil. 673); Advorsari
sine dedecore et scelere summo hau possumus . . . (Pl. St. 72)
Disjunctive coordination: . . . si erga parentes aut deos me impiavi. (Pl. Rud. 192);
Potui umor ex hordeo aut frumento, in quandam similitudinem vini corruptus. (Tac.
Ger. 23.1); Nec vero criminibus falsis in odium aut invidiam quemquam voca-
bit . . . (Cic. Off. 1.86); . . . Zenonem, qui nulla in re nisi in virtute aut vitio ([aut vitio]
Davisius, edd.) propensionem ne minimi quidem momenti ad summum bonum
adipiscendum esse diceret . . . (Cic. Fin. 4.47); Eadem de causa sunt quae non possunt
vivere nisi in loco aquoso aut etiam aqua . . . (Var. R. 1.7.7); . . . pluresque in eo loco
sine vulnere quam in proelio aut fuga intereunt . . . (Caes. Civ. 2.35.3); . . . plures per
silentium aut occultum murmur excepere. (Tac. Ann. 2.38.4); . . . illa immensa volu-
mina quae pro M. Tullio aut Aulo Caecina legimus? (Tac. Dial. 20.1)
Adversative coordination: Finis Neronis . . . varios motus animorum non modo in
urbe apud patres aut populum aut urbanum militem, sed omnes legiones ducesque
conciverat . . . (Tac. Hist. 1.4.2); Usque eone te diligis et magnifice circumspicis ut
pecuniam non ex tuis tabulis sed (sed ex cj. Sylvius) adversariis petas? (Cic. Q. Rosc. 5);
Tunc xystici contemplandi, non in gymnasiis sed igne iaculati . . . (Tert. Spect. 30.5); . . .
non solum inter barbaros, sed etiam omnes Graeciae civitates, clam dare operam
coepit . . . (Nep. Con. 5.2); Inde non per Macedoniam modo sed etiam Thraciam
prosequente et praeparante omnia Philippo . . . (Liv. 37.7.16)
NB: poetic (and poeticizing) word order: . . . manibus sine nonnulli pedibusque
manebant / in vita tamen . . . (Lucr. 6.1210–11); Italiam utroque mari duae classes,
Coordination
The preposition inter, which by virtue of its meaning requires two members, should
normally not be repeated, but compare (e) and (f), the latter with repetition.¹⁶
(e) Nunc ita convenit inter me atque hunc, Tyndare / ut . . .
(‘Now the agreement between me and him, Tyndarus, is that . . .’ Pl. Capt. 378)
(f) . . . ut nihil inter te atque inter quadripedem aliquam putes interesse?
(‘. . . that you believe there is no difference between you and some four-footed
animal?’ Cic. Parad. 14)
The preposition seems not to be repeated when the prepositional phrase contains two
or more modifiers of one head, as in (g) and (h).
(g) Nunc volo opsonare, ut, hospes, tua te ex virtute et mea / meae domi
accipiam . . .
(‘Now I want to buy food, my guest, so that I can receive you kindly in my house, as
befits your character and mine . . .’ Pl. Mil. 738–9)
(h) . . . necdum exarui ex amoenis rebus et voluptariis.
(‘. . . and I’m not yet burned-out from all things lovely and enjoyable.’ Pl. Mil. 641)
that prevents a repetition of the preposition. See also § 19.83 on zeugma. In the two
instances cited the version without repetition is preferable from the rhythmical point
of view.¹⁷
(Liv. 45.37.8—NB: text much disputed and altered); Quae interim ductu imperioque
Alexandri vel in Graecis vel Illyriis ac Thraecia gesta sunt . . . (Curt. 5.1.1)
As the examples discussed so far show, it is the second preposition in a sequence that
can be omitted. Instances in which the preposition is missing from the first conjoin
are attested from Plautus onwards, as in (p). This became a ‘pervasive usage in Latin
verse’¹⁸ from Catullus onwards, as in (q), which is known as the figura ἀπὸκοινοῦ.
The first prose example is (r). While it is clear that the figura constituted a stylistic
preference in poetry, attested prose instances should be looked at critically.¹⁹
(p) Solus solitudine ego ted atque ab egestate apstuli.
(‘I was the only one to rescue you from loneliness and poverty.’ Pl. As. 163—NB:
unless Plautus ventures a bare ablative to create the pun sol . . . sol . . .)²⁰
(q) Cur non exilium malasque in oras / itis . . .?
(‘Why don’t you go into banishment on accursed shores . . .?’ Catul. 33.5–6)
(r) Paleas triticeas et hordeaceas, acus fabaginum, vicia (de vicia cj. Keil) vel de
lupino, item de ceteris frugibus omnia condito.
(‘Store wheat and barley straw, husks of beans, of vetch or lupines, and likewise of all
other crops.’ Cato Agr. 54.2)
Supplement:
Poetry: Illa Notos atque atra volans in nubila fugit. (Verg. A. 5.512); Quas ego te ter-
ras et quanta per aequora vectum / accipio! (Verg. A. 6.692–3); Quae nemora aut
quos agor in specus / velox mente nova? (Hor. Carm. 3.25.2–3); . . . foedera regum /
vel Gabiis vel cum rigidis aequata Sabinis . . . (Hor. Ep. 2.1.24–5); Pectore Procris erat,
Procris mihi semper in ore. (Ov. Met. 7.708)
NB: variation of construction: Sed ubi aspera saxa / aut in materiam ligni per-
venit . . . (Lucr. 4.147–8)
Prose: Quod <in> (cj. Augustinus) declinatione voluntaria sit anomalia, in naturali
magis analogia. (Var. L. 8.23); Quam (sc. dignitatem) ego, si mihi per Servium liceat,
pari (parem cj. Bake) atque in eadem (eadem in cj. Lambinus)²¹ laude ponam. (Cic.
Mur. 21); Qua enim <in> (edd. with the deteriores) barbaria quisquam tam taeter,
tam crudelis tyrannus quam in hac urbe armis barbarorum stipatus Antonius? (Cic.
Phil. 13.18); Sed mehercule et tum rem publicam lugebam, quae non solum a suis
<erga> me sed etiam a meis erga se beneficiis erat mihi <vita mea> carior . . . (Cic.
Fam. 7.28.3—following Shackleton Bailey ad loc.); . . . ut <ex> (edd. with V) alienis-
simis sociis amicissimos, ex infidelissimis firmissimos redderem . . . (Cic. Fam.
15.4.14); Atqui et <ad> (add. Gronovius) Alliam cum Gallis et ad Heracleam cum
Pyrrho utraque non tam clade infamis quam pavore et fuga pugna fuit. (Liv. 22.59.8)
Not ἀπὸ κοινοῦ: Illa quaero quae apud te nuper ad omnes columnas, omnibus etiam
intercolumniis (in intercolumniis cj. R. Klotz, but see § 10.4), in silva denique dis-
posita sub divo vidimus. (Cic. Ver. 1.51)
Appendix: Under the label of ಱౝԒϑഢԒഌ use of prepositions, scholars also refer to
different phenomena where no coordination is involved, illustrated by (s) and (t). Of
these, (s) seems to be an isolated instance.²² In (t), the preposition is not repeated in
the relative clause, a common occurrence, for which see § 18.11.
(s) Fugio sicut ab hoste viro (v.l. virum).
(‘I shrink from my mate as away from a foe.’ Ov. Ep. 8.110)
(t) Quicum litigas, Olympio? / # Cum eadem qua tu semper. # Cum uxoren’ mea?
(‘Who are you arguing with, Olympio? # With the same woman you are
always arguing with. # With my wife?’ Pl. Cas. 317–18)
When two prepositional phrases with different prepositions but with the same noun,
noun phrase, or pronoun are coordinated, various possibilities can be distinguished,
as illustrated by (u)–(y). In (u), the paired prepositions govern the same case but have
opposite meanings. The noun is only expressed once (with the second preposition)
and the prepositions themselves are coordinated. In the other examples, we are deal-
ing with prepositional phrases, which are structurally similar to (y). In (v), the pro-
noun is expressed twice, which is necessary since the prepositions govern different
cases, but which can also occur when they govern the same case (see the Supplement).
In (w), the second (asyndetically coordinated) conjoin is an anaphoric pronoun. In
(x), the second conjoin, extra, which can be used as a preposition and as an adverb,
appears on its own.
(u) . . . dum in XV diebus ante et post brumam, ut pleraque, ne facias.
(‘. . . provided you do not do this, or in fact most things, during the fifteen days pre-
ceding and following the solstice.’ Var. R. 1.35.2)
(v) . . . ita et cum his et inter hos vixi . . .
(‘. . . I lived my life in this way both with them and among them . . .’ Cic. Planc. 75)
(w) Semper ille antea cum uxore, tum sine ea.
(‘Before then he was always with his wife; at that time he was without her.’ Cic. Mil. 55)
(x) . . . sed tamen et in corpore et extra esse quaedam bona.
(‘. . . yet still there are certain good things both in the body and without.’ Cic. Fin. 2.68)
(y) . . . eas leges quas M. Antonius tulisse dicitur omnes censeo per vim et contra
auspicia latas . . .
(‘. . . the laws which Marcus Antonius is said to have championed were all championed
through violence and in contravention of the auspices . . .’ Cic. Phil. 5.10)
Supplement:
. . . sacra et uls et cis Tiberim non mediocri ritu fiant. (Var. L. 5.84); . . . ancipitem ter-
rorem intra extraque munitiones . . . (Caes. Civ. 3.72.2); Quod Q. Aelius Tubero
Paulus Fabius Maximus cos. V(erba) F(ecerunt) constitui oportere quo iure intra
extraque urbem ducerent aquas quibus adtributae essent . . . (Fron. Aq. 108.1)
Alfenus cum iis et propter eos periit quos diligebat . . . (Cic. Quinct. 70); . . . in caede
atque ex caede vivunt. (Cic. S. Rosc. 78); . . . pro tabulis et contra tabulas et pro testibus
et contra testis et pro quaestionibus et contra quaestiones . . . (Cic. de Orat.
2.118); . . . amicitiam ipsam sua sponte, vi sua, ex se et propter se expetendam . . . (Cic.
Fin. 2.83); Materiam enim rerum ex qua et in qua omnia sint . . . (Cic. N.D. 3.92); . . . quod
omne orationis officium aut in iudiciis est aut extra iudicia. (Quint. Inst. 3.4.6)
Sub terra et supra virgulta non eodem tempore aeque crescunt. (Var. R. 1.45.2);
Iliacos intra muros peccatur et extra. (Hor. Ep. 1.2.16); . . . intra eam (sc. portam)
extraque latae viae sunt . . . (Liv. 31.24.9); Excidunt autem et in posteriorem partem et
in priorem et supra saeptum transversum et infra. (Cels. 8.14.2); Aliorum fructus in
terra est, aliorum et extra, aliorum non nisi extra. (Plin. Nat. 19.61)
Nam aut in animis aut in corporibus aut extra esse possunt. (Cic. Part. 38)
²³ Ex. (a) is taken from K.-St.: II.155–6. The punctuation follows Hering’s Teubner edition. Ex. (b) is
taken from Draeger (1878: II.197–8). Many examples in the sections on asyndetic coordination are taken
from these authors and from von Nägelsbach and von Müller (1905: 790–804). For (a), see also
Fraenkel (1956: 192). For instances of asyndeton in the jurists, see Kalb (1912: 134–9).
Asyndetic coordination
(‘Dispatches were at once sent by Cicero to Caesar, with promise of great rewards if
the bearers delivered them safe; with all the roads blocked, the messengers were cut
off. During the night about one hundred and twenty towers were erected with incred-
ible speed out of the timber which they had collected for the purpose of the entrench-
ment. The apparent deficiences in the earthworks were rectified. On the next day,
with far greater forces assembled, the enemy assaulted the camp and filled in the
trench. Our troops resisted in the same fashion as on the day before. Exactly the same
was done on the other days following.’ Caes. Gal. 5.40.1–4)
(b) Non tamen adeo virtutum sterile saeculum ut non et bona exempla prodi-
derit. ° Comitatae profugos liberos matres, ° secutae maritos in exilia con-
iuges; ° propinqui audentes, constantes generi, contumax etiam adversus
tormenta servorum fides; ° supremae clarorum virorum necessitates, ipsa
necessitas fortiter tolerata et laudatis antiquorum mortibus pares exitus. °
Praeter multiplices rerum humanarum casus caelo terraque prodigia et ful-
minum monitus et futurorum praesagia, laeta tristia, ambigua manifesta; nec
enim umquam . . .
(‘Yet this age was not so barren of virtue that it did not display noble examples.
Mothers accompanied their children in flight, wives followed their husbands into
exile; relatives were courageous, sons-in-law steadfast, the loyalty of slaves unyielding
even in the face of torture. There were the final straits of famous men—the fate itself
endured bravely and their passings equal to the lauded deaths of the ancients. Besides
the manifold misfortunes of human affairs, there were prodigies in the sky and on the
earth and warnings given by thunderbolts and prophecies of the future, joyful and
gloomy, uncertain and clear. For never was it . . .’ Tac. Hist. 1.3.1)
The term ‘asyndeton’ is also applied to coordinated clauses, as in (c) and (d), and to
constituents at or below the clause level that are not linked by an overt coordinator, as
in (e) (see also § 19.1).
(c) Vixdum dimidium dixeram, ° intellexerat.
(‘I had scarcely said the half of it and he’d grasped the situation.’ Ter. Ph. 594)
(d) (sc. parentes) Adsunt, ° defendunt, ° proclamant, ° fidem tuam, quae nus-
quam erat neque umquam fuerat, inplorant.
(‘They were present, they fronted a defence, they raised an outcry, they appealed to
your sense of justice, which was non-existent, nor had it ever existed.’ Cic. Ver. 5.108)
(e) Et eodem accedit servitus, ° sudor, ° sitis.
(‘And to this is added slavery, sweat, thirst.’ Pl. Mer. 674)
coordination it is possible to supply one of the overt coordinators, this cannot be done
for modifiers that belong to different categories in the hierarchical structure of the
noun phrase. In the same way the co-occurrence of multiple space or time adjuncts in
the same clause (see, for example, § 10.3) has nothing to do with asyndetic coordin-
ation. Asyndetic coordination must also not be confused with simple listing, as illus-
trated by (f)–(h) (although the boundary is not very clear).
(f) Eae partes (sc. orationis) sex esse omnino nobis videntur: exordium, narra-
tio, partitio, confirmatio, reprehensio, conclusio.
(‘These components seem to me to be just six in number: exordium, narra-
tive, partition, confirmation, refutation, peroration.’ Cic. Inv. 1.19)
(g) Communia autem simplicium coniunctorumque sunt haec quinque quasi
lumina, dilucidum, breve, probabile, illustre, suave.
(‘But the following five ornaments belong in common both to single words
and to combinations of words: lucidity, brevity, acceptability, brilliance,
charm.’ Cic. Part. 19)
(h) At vero meam domum P. Lentulus, consul et pontifex, P. Servilius, M. Lucullus,
Q. Metellus, M’. Glabrio, M. Messalla, L. Lentulus, flamen Martialis, P. Galba,
Q. Metellus Scipio, C. Fannius, M. Lepidus, L. Claudius, rex sacrorum,
M. Scaurus, M. Crassus, C. Curio, Sex. Caesar, flamen Quirinalis,
Q. Cornelius, P. Albinovanus, Q. Terentius, pontifices minores . . . omni reli-
gione una mente omnes liberaverunt.
(‘But Publius Lentulus, consul and pontiff, Publius Servilius, Marcus Lucullus,
Quintus Metellus, Manius Glabrio, Marcus Messalla, Lucius Lentulus, the
priest of Mars, Publius Galba, Quintus Metellus Scipio, Gaius Fannius, Marcus
Lepidus, Lucius Claudius, the Priest in charge of Rites, Marcus Scaurus, Marcus
Crassus, Gaius Curio, Sextus Caesar, priest of Quirinus, and the sub-pontiffs
Quintus Cornelius, Publius Albinovanus, and Quintus Terentius . . . have all
unanimously absolved my house from all sanctity.’ Cic. Har. 12)
Manuscripts sometimes vary between syndetic and asyndetic sequences, which
results in variation among editors. Editors are also tempted to emend transmitted
asyndeta. A few examples are given in the Supplement.
Supplement:
dies / noctes (Pl. Trin. 287a–b—v.l. noctesque); precibus lacrimis (v.l. ac / et) (Cic.
Lig. 13); Nihil enim habent quod definitum sit aut certum, nisi me vultu, taciturnitate
(v.l. et taciturnitate, edd. pler.) significasse tibi non esse amicum . . . (Cic. Fam. 3.8.2);
Avaritia . . . semper infinita insatiabilis (et insatiabilis in Gel. 3.1.2) est . . . (Sal. Cat.
11.3); nautarum militum (v.l. militumque) (Liv. 21.28.2); Hannibal . . . inritat etiam de
industria <Romanu>m ducem, si forte accensum tot indignitatibus [cladibus] (del.
Walters; other emendations in the mss. are et cladibus and cladibusque; alii alia)
sociorum detrahere ad aequum certamen possit. (Liv. 22.13.1); Anceps igitur spes
metus (et metus in old emendations) miscebant animos. (Liv. 30.32.5); L. Postumius
Albinus M. Popilius Laenas cum omnium primum de provinciis exercitibus (et exer-
citibus cj. Vahlen)²⁴ ad senatum rettulissent, Ligures utrique decreti sunt. (Liv. 42.1.1)
The frequency with which asyndeton is used by different authors and in different
types of text varies and is a matter of stylistic preference.²⁶
Although asyndetic coordination of two or more clauses occurs from Early Latin
onwards, it is relatively uncommon. Early examples are (a)–(c). Exx. (a) and (b) occur
in reports of battle scenes and relate the details of contemporaneous actions in rapid
succession. In (c), the asyndetic linking of the clauses reflects the pimp’s excitement
about his future acquisition of a new girl. In (d), we see three asyndetically coordin-
ated clauses without a copula (see § 4.96 on nominal sentences). It is not unlikely that
these clauses, or at least some of them, were pronounced in one intonation contour as
²⁵ For further examples, see K.-St.: II.155 and Lindholm (1931: 157–73), especially on Cicero.
²⁶ For a survey of the individual usage, see Sz.: 828–31.
Coordination
a compound sentence. (In the examples, asyndeton is marked by ‘°’. I keep the punc-
tuation of the editors of the texts.)
(a) Pro se quisque id quod quisque <et> potest et valet / edit, ferro ferit, ° tela
frangunt, ° boat / caelum fremitu virum, ° ex spiritu atque anhelitu / nebula
constat, ° cadunt volnerum vi [et] viri.
(‘Each man inflicted for himself what he was well and able, he struck with his sword;
lances broke, the heavens resounded with the uproar of men, a mist arose from their
breathing and gasping, men fell under the force of their wounds.’ Pl. Am. 231–4)
(b) Aes sonit, ° franguntur hastae, ° terra sudat sanguine.
(‘Bronze clatters, spears are snapped, earth sweats with blood.’ Enn. scen. 181V=165J)
(c) Si hanc emeris— / di immortales—nullus leno te alter erit opulentior. /
° Evortes tuo arbitratu homines fundis, familiis; / ° cum optumis viris rem
habebis, ° gratiam cupient tuam: / venient ad te comissatum.
(‘If you buy her—immortal gods!—no pimp will be better off than you. You’ll turn
men out of their estates and households as you please; you’ll have dealings with men
of the highest rank, they’ll be keen on your favour; they’ll come to you for their
drinking parties.’ Pl. Per. 564–8)
(d) Praeclara tamen senatus consulta illo ipso die vespertina, ° provinciarum
religiosa sortitio, ° divina vero opportunitas ut quae cuique apta esset, ea
cuique obveniret.
(‘Yet splendid were the decrees of the Senate made on that very day at nightfall; scru-
pulously exact was the allotment of the provinces; truly Heaven-directed the fitness
whereby what suited each individual fell to the lot of that individual!’ Cic. Phil. 3.24)
Supplement:
In bono praedio . . . libentius et saepius venies, ° fundus melior erit, ° minus peccabi-
tur, ° fructi plus capies. (Cato Agr. 4.1); Vix elocuta’st hoc, ° foras simul omnes
proruont se, / ° abeunt lavatum, ° perstrepunt . . . (Ter. Eu. 599–600); An vero vir
amplissimus, P. Scipio, pontifex maximus, Ti. Gracchum mediocriter labefactantem
statum rei publicae privatus interfecit, ° Catilinam orbem terrae caede atque incen-
diis vastare cupientem nos consules perferemus? (Cic. Catil. 1.3); Peroravit ali-
quando, adsedit; ° surrexi ego. ° Respirare visus est quod non alius potius diceret. °
Coepi dicere. (Cic. S. Rosc. 59–60); . . . iudicium hoc omnium mortalium est, fortu-
nam a deo petendam, ° a se ipso sumendam esse sapientiam. (Cic. N.D. 3.88);
Nondum plane ingemueram, ° ‘salve’ inquit Arrius. (Cic. Att. 2.15.3)
Much more common than coordination of entire clauses are sequences of clauses
with conjunction reduction of one or more constituents. Very common is reduction
of the subject, as in (e) and (f).
(e) Vidi, cognovi, interfui.
(‘I was present, observing, and taking note.’ Cic. Fam. 6.12.1)
(f) Caesar . . . celeriter concilium dimittit, Liscum retinet.
(‘Caesar . . . speedily dismissed the meeting. He kept Liscus back.’ Caes. Gal. 1.18.2)
Asyndetic coordination
More complicated instances of conjunction reduction are shown in (g) and (h). In
(g), repeated from § 19.1, two asyndetically coordinated clauses share both the
object Gallos, which is implied in the second clause, and the verb dividit, which
must be understood with the first clause. The third arguments are different
(although both have the preposition a/ab that is required by the verb). The appos-
ition flumen in the first clause is probably also understood (in plural form) in the
second clause. Another complex example is (h). It shows an opposition between
the subjects (plebs / optumates) and between the modifiers of the object constitu-
ents (publicos canes / domesticos (sc. canes)). From alit in the first conjoin alunt has
to be supplied for the second.²⁷ In practice, almost everything is possible: ‘almost
any type of constituent in one clause may be opposed to its counterpart in the
other clause(s)’.²⁸
(g) Gallos ab Aquitanis Garunna flumen, a Belgis Matrona et Sequana dividit.
(‘The Galli (Gauls) are separated from the Aquitani by the river Garonne, from the
Belgae by the Marne and the Seine.’ Caes. Gal. 1.1.2)
(h) In Hyrcania plebs publicos alit canes, optumates domesticos.
(‘In Hyrcania the populace take care of dogs shared by the community, the nobles
keep privately owned dogs.’ Cic. Tusc. 1.108)
Supplement: Sin autem servire meae laudi et gloriae mavis, egredere cum importuna
sceleratorum manu, ° confer te ad Manlium, ° concita perditos civis, ° secerne te a
bonis, ° infer patriae bellum, ° exsulta impio latrocinio, ut a me non eiectus ad alienos,
sed invitatus ad tuos isse videaris. (Cic. Catil. 1.23); (sc. Caesar dixit) Suam innocen-
tiam perpetua vita, felicitatem Helvetiorum bello esse perspectam. (Caes. Gal. 1.40.13);
Harum alterius principatum tenere Haeduos, alterius Arvernos. (Caes. Gal. 1.31.4);
. . . quibus profecto contra naturam corpus voluptati, anima oneri fuit. (Sal. Cat. 2.8);
Hunc consensum senatus equester ordo est secutus, equestris ordinis plebs. (Liv.
26.36.12); Facilius crediderim Tiberio et Augusta<e>, qui domo non excedebant,
cohibitam, ut par maeror et matris exemplo avia quoque et patruus attineri viderentur.
(Tac. Ann. 3.3.3)²⁹
²⁷ The English term ‘gapping’ is used in a strict sense for instances like: ‘One girl has written a poem, and
the other ° a short story’ (see Quirk et al. 1985: 974). Other scholars define it in a different way, e.g.
Panhuis (1980). See also Grover (1999: 120–2).
²⁸ Panhuis (1980: 234).
²⁹ Some of the examples are taken from Panhuis (1980) or suggested by Manfredini (p.c.). For Tac. Ann.
3.3.3, see Woodman and Martin ad loc.
Coordination
(a) Venio ad macellum, rogito piscis. Indicant / caros; agninam caram, caram
bubulam, / vitulinam, cetum, porcinam: cara omnia.
(‘I went to the market and asked for fish. They told me it’s expensive. Lamb: expen-
sive; beef: expensive; veal, tunny, pork: all expensive.’ Pl. Aul. 373–5)
(b) (sc. Curio) Contionatus est, rediit, fuit ad me sane diu.
(‘He made his speech, returned, and paid me quite a lengthy visit.’ Cic. Att. 10.4.8)
(c) . . . quattuor exercitus Carthaginiensium fudi, fugavi, Hispania expuli . . .
(‘. . . I routed, put to flight, drove out of Spain four armies of the Carthaginians . . .’ Liv.
28.28.9)
(d) Sed non hoc solum, multa alia praetermisi.
(‘But that is only one of many chances I let slip.’ Cic. Q. fr. 1.3.6)
Supplement:
Conjunctive: Salutant, ad cenam vocant, adventum gratulantur. (Ter. Eu. 259);
Necare eandem voluit (sc. Caelius); quaesivit venenum, sollicitavit quos potuit,
potionem paravit, horam locum constituit, clam attulit. (Cic. Cael. 31—NB: textually
uncertain; see Dyck ad loc.); ‘Tria genera bonorum’. Proclivi currit oratio. Venit ad
extremum, haeret in salebra. (Cic. Fin. 5.84); Tum iuvenes . . . veste posita corpora
oleo perunxerunt, ad iugum accesserunt. (Cic. Tusc. 1.113); (sc. Isaeus) Poscit con-
troversias plures. Electionem auditoribus permittit, saepe etiam partis. Surgit, amici-
tur, incipit. (Plin. Ep. 2.3.2); Pontico triumpho inter pompae fercula trium verborum
praetulit titulum VENI · VIDI · VICI, non acta belli significantem sicut ceteris, sed
celeriter confecti notam. (Suet. Jul. 37.2)
Disjunctive: Meliu’ peiu’, prosit obsit, nil vident nisi quod lubet? (Ter. Hau. 643)
Examples of asyndetic coordination of verbs that share the same object are (a) and
(b). A rare example of disjunctive asyndeton, resulting from the opposite meanings of
the two verbs, is (c). In (d), the two verbs are combined with the same manner adjunct.
(a) Falsone an vero laudent, culpent quem velint, / non flocci faciunt.
(‘They don’t care a straw whether it is rightly or wrongly that they praise and find
fault with anyone they wish.’ Pl. Trin. 210–11)
(b) Eum (sc. Clodium) qui regna dedit, ademit, orbem terrarum quibuscum
voluit partitus est.
(‘A man who had bestowed and taken away thrones, and allotted the world to whom-
soever he wished.’ Cic. Mil. 73)
(c) Scias ista, nescias. Fient.
(‘Whether you know these things or not, they will take place.’ Sen. Ep. 88.15)
(d) Celeriter isti, redisti, ut cognosceret te si minus fortem at tamen strenuum.
(‘You made haste to go, haste to return, so that he might recognize that, if you were
weak in courage, you were at least strong in energy.’ Cic. Phil. 2.78)
Supplement:
Velitis iubeatis ut M. Tullio aqua et igni interdicatur? (Cic. Dom. 47); Audita re
Hirtius cum cohortibus XX veteranis redeunti Antonio in sua castra occurrit
copiasque eius omnis delevit, fugavit . . . (Galb. Fam. 10.30.4); Quom tabulas signa
toreumata emunt, nova diruunt, alia aedificant, postremo omnibus modis pecuniam
trahunt, vexant, tamen summa lubidine divitias suas vincere nequeunt. (Sal. Cat.
20.12); Hi ferre agere plebem plebisque res . . . (Liv. 3.37.7); Ripas fluminum publico-
rum reficere munire utilissimum est. (Ulp. dig. 43.15.1)
Ius civile didicit, multum vigilavit, laboravit, praesto multis fuit, multorum stulti-
tiam perpessus est, adrogantiam pertulit, difficultatem exsorbuit. (Cic. Mur. 19)
Disjunctive: . . . ut mihi velim nolim sit certa quaedam tuenda sententia. (Cic. N.D.
1.17); Velit nolit scire difficile est. (Cic. Q. fr. 3.6.4)
Asyndetic coordination of arguments and satellites at the clause level occurs com-
monly from the archaic period onwards, as is demonstrated by fossilized pairs of
nouns like patres conscripti ‘patricians and registered men’,³¹ sarta tecta (sc. aedificia)
‘windproof and water-tight’ buildings (OLD), loca lautia ‘lodging and entertainment’.
For such pairs, Draeger introduced the term ‘asyndeton sollemne’.³² The words are
usually semantically related, sometimes near synonyms, sometimes antonyms; the
effect of coherence is once in a while increased by alliteration, an example of which is
forte fortuna ‘by pure chance’. Asyndetic pairs of conjoins are often found in a prom-
inent position at the end or—less often—at the beginning of a clause or sentence.
Cases of asyndeton that do not conform to these characteristics are sometimes
emended.³³ See also the note below. Disjunctive instances are rare, but see
(l) (disputed).³⁴
Exx. (a)–(k) illustrate pairs of conjoins in various syntactic functions. Note that
editors vary in their punctuation. Exx. (a) and (b) show coordinated subjects; (c),
coordinated subjects of an accusative and infinitive clause; (d), coordinated objects;
(e), coordinated (interrogative) object clauses; (f), coordinated subject complements;
(g), coordinated value arguments; (h)–(j), coordinated adjuncts; (k), coordinated
secondary predicates; (l), coordinated cause arguments with the secondary predicate
corrupta.
(a) Valent mater, pater?
(‘Are my mother and father well?’ Pl. Mer. 948)
(b) L., frater eius, causam agebat. Aderant amici, propinqui.
(‘His brother Lucius pleaded his case. His friends and relatives were present.’ Cic. Ver.
1.125)
(c) Haec si gravia aut acerba videantur, multo illa gravius aestimari debere
liberos coniuges in servitutem abstrahi, ipsos interfici.
(‘If these measures seemed grievous or cruel, they ought to take into account that it
was far more grievous for their children and their wives to be dragged off into slavery,
for their own selves to be slaughtered.’ Caes. Gal. 7.14.10)
(d) . . . munire urbem, frumentum convehere, tela arma parare; instruere naves
ac mittere ad Hipponem adversus Romanam classem.
(‘. . . to fortify the city, to bring in grain, to provide arms offensive and defensive, to
equip ships and send them to Hippo to face the Roman fleet.’ Liv. 29.4.2)
In the Supplement, pairs of conjoins will be given in the traditional way—that is,
according to their lexical category, many of them without their context (and with the
punctuation of the text editions retained). The collection is not restricted to groupings
termed ‘sollemne’.
Supplement:
Noun phrases: leges mores (Enn. var. 134); Vinum, frumentum quod supersit, ven-
dat. (Cato Agr. 2.7); manibu’ pedibu’ (Ter. An. 676); Locu’ tempu’ constitutum’st. (Ter.
Eu. 541); Bassus assiduitate indulgitate victus (Sis. hist. 46=19C); studium diligen-
tiam (Cic. Fam. 12.15.6); vestitu <a>edificiis (Var. L. 8.30); iuventute, armis (Liv.
9.25.5); arma dexterae (Liv. 22.29.11); viris armis (Liv. 28.37.8); Nam verba vultus in
crimen detorquens recondebat. (Tac. Ann. 1.7.7); ibique praetextati sacrificium
· deae Diae ture · vino · fecerunt (CIL VI.2080.30–1 (Comm. Fr. Arv. 69, 30–1,
ad 120)); Quidam enim lege impediuntur ne iudices sint, quidam natura, quidam
moribus. Natura, ut surdus mutus . . . (Paul. dig. 5.1.12.2)
Adjectives functioning as subject/object complement or as secondary predicates:
Pater iam hic me offendet miserum adveniens ebrium . . . (Pl. Mos. 378); . . . precor uti
sies volens propitius mihi . . . (Cato Agr. 134.2); Aut in eo, QVOD MELIUS AEQUIUS,
potest ulla pars inesse fraudis? (Cic. Off. 3.61); acer, bellicosus (Sal. Jug. 20.2); Nec
Coordination
enim secretum putant esse nisi quod certum adprobatum (ac probatum cj. Obrecht)
sit. (Quint. Decl. 254.15);³⁵ . . . adversus superiores tristi adulatione, adrogans minori-
bus, inter pares difficilis . . . (Tac. Ann. 11.21.3)
Prepositional phrases: Decedam ego illi de via, de semita, / de honore populi.
(Pl. Trin. 481–2); . . . ut . . . ostenderet nepotem sub verbere centurionis, inter servo-
rum ictus . . . (Tac. Ann. 6.24.3)³⁶
Adverbs: Dextra sinistra, foramina ubi feceris, lamnis circumplectito. (Cato Agr.
21.2); Hac illac circumcursa. (Ter. Hau. 512); dextra sinistra (Cic. Phil. 13.19); . . . et
tamen ab illo aperte tecte quicquid est datum libenter accepi. (Cic. Att. 1.14.4);³⁷ huc
illuc (Cic. Att. 9.9.2); comminus eminus (Liv. 21.34.6)
Disjunctive interpretation: . . . (sc. castra) quae non longius ab ea caede abesse plus
minus VIII milibus dicebantur . . . Hirt. Gal. 8.20.1); serius ocius (Hor. Carm. 2.3.26)
NB: The following is probably not a case of coordination, but rather of a difference in
hierarchical position (for related cases see §§ 10.53–4): . . . haec incerta . . . inter paucos,
quos tu nosti, palam secreto narrantur. (Cael. Fam. 8.1.4).³⁸
In date expressions of the type X Y consulibus ‘in the consulship of X and Y’, there are
several possibilities for coordination. In public inscriptions until the first century ad,
asyndetic coordination is the rule, as in (o). This is also quite common in Cicero
(especially in his orations), in Caesar, and in the historians. Beginning with Cicero
overt linking by et becomes more common, as in (q). In non-official texts, it was pos-
sible to omit the praenomina, as in (r), an option which is also found in later inscrip-
tions. In these cases, linking by et or -que seems to be the rule.⁴⁰
(o) Quei ager poplicus populi Romanei in terram Italiam P. Muucio
L. Calpur<nio cos. fuit . . .>
(‘In regard to the public land in the country of Italy belonging to the Roman people
in the consulship of Publius Mucius and Lucius Calpurnius . . .’ CIL I2.585.1 (Lex Agr.,
111 bc))
(p) Is (sc. Hortensius) L. Crasso Q. Scaevola consulibus primum in foro dixit . . .
(‘This man began his public career in the consulship of Lucius Crassus and Quintus
Scaevola.’ Cic. Brut. 229)
(q) Atqui hic Livius [qui] primus fabulam C. Claudio Caeci filio et M. Tuditano
consulibus docuit . . .
(‘And yet this Livius produced his first play in the consulship of Gaius Claudius, son
of Caecus, and Marcus Tuditanus . . .’ Cic. Brut. 72)
(r) Quam legem L. Cassius Lepido et Mancino consulibus tulit.
(‘A provision which Lucius Cassius passed in the consulship of Lepidus and Mancinus.’
Cic. Brut. 106)
Supplement:
P. · Rutilio · Cn. · Mallio · cos. (CIL X.. (Pozzuoli, 94 bc)); L. Licinio Q. Mucio
consulibus (Cic. Ver. 2.122); Ea quae secuta est hieme, qui fuit annus Cn.
Pompeio M. Crasso consulibus, Usipetes . . . flumen Rhenum transierunt . . . (Caes. Gal.
4.1.1); L. Genucio et Ser. Servilio consulibus (Liv. 7.1.1); Trinos soles et antiqui
saepius videre, sicut Sp. Postumio Q. Mucio et Q. Marcio M. Porcio et
M. Antonio P. Dolabella et M. Lepido L. Planco cos. (Plin. Nat. 2.99); Condita erat Ti.
Sempronio P. Cornelio consulibus . . . (Tac. Hist. 3.34.1)
Lepido et Tullo consulibus (Cic. Catil. 1.15); . . . etiamsi tripudium solistumum
pulli fecissent L. Iunio et P. Claudio consulibus . . . (Cic. Div. 2.20); Centone
Tuditanoque consulibus (Cic. Sen. 50); Nunc quidem in circo quosdam <CLX> pas-
suum tolerare non ignoramus nuperque Fonteio et Vipstano cos. (Plin. Nat. 7.84);
Nam ut de Cicerone ipso loquar, Hirtio nempe et Pansa consulibus, ut Tiro libertus
eius scribit, septimo Idus <Decembris> occisus est . . . (Tac. Dial. 17.2)
Asyndetic coordination of more than two conjoins is also very common from Early
Latin onwards.⁴¹ Some of these combinations resemble the instances of asyndeton sol-
lemne mentioned at the beginning of this section, though these sequences seem to be
less restricted in terms of the words that can be used. Examples are (s) and (t).
⁴⁰ See TLL s.v. consul 568.26ff.; Pease ad Cic. Div. 2.20. For Cicero’s naming conventions in general, see
Adams (1978).
⁴¹ For the numerous cases of asyndetic coordinaton of three members (‘tricola’) in Plautus, see
Leo (1906). For Cicero, see Lindholm (1931: 157–73).
Coordination
(s) Me a portu praemisit domum ut haec nuntiem uxori suae, / ut gesserit rem
publicam ductu, imperio, auspicio suo.
(‘He’s sent me ahead home from the harbour so that I could report to his wife how he
managed affairs of state through his leadership, command, and authority.’ Pl. Am. 195–6)
(t) Inter ea conregione conspicione cortumione . . .
(‘Between these points, temples, and wild lands . . .’ Var. L. 7.8—NB: part of a quota-
tion of the words of an augur; text very problematic)
Supplement:
Quid isti debes? # Tria. # Quae tria nam? # Unguenta, noctem, savium. (Pl. Truc. 938);
Pernam callum glandium sumen facito in aqua iaceant. (Pl. Ps. 166); Illos accubantis,
potantis, amantis / cum scortis reliqui . . . (Pl. Ps. 1271–2); Sumat consumat perdat,
decretum’st pati . . . (Ter. Hau. 465); Sin autem fuga laboris desidiam, repudiatio sup-
plicum superbiam, amicorum neglectio improbitatem coarguit . . . (Cic. Mur. 9); armis
equis viris (Cic. Phil. 8.21); Caesari ad saucios deponendos, stipendium exercitui dan-
dum, socios confirmandos, praesidium urbibus relinquendum necesse erat adire
Apolloniam. (Caes. Civ. 3.78.1); Natura ferox, vehemens, manu promptus erat . . . (Sal.
Catil. 43.4); . . . quod bonum faustum felix Palaepolitanis populoque Romano esset . . .
(Liv. 8.25.10—NB: in Livy the normal formula is with felixque, see Oakley ad loc.);
Neque aliud Civilis amicitia partum quam vulnera fugas luctus. (Tac. Hist. 5.24.1);
Amisi enim, amisi vitae meae testem rectorem magistrum. (Plin. Ep. 1.12.12)
The following sections deal with asyndetic coordination at the noun and adjective
phrase levels, as well as with asyndetic coordination in prepositional phrases.
⁴² For further examples, see K.-St.: II.153 and Draeger (1878: II.194–5).
Asyndetic coordination
Supplement:
Propagatio pomorum, aliarum arborum. (Cato Agr. 51); Hic tu me abesse urbe
miraris, in qua domus nihil delectare possit, summum sit odium temporum, homi-
num, fori, curiae? (Cic. Fam. 5.15.4); Inde ad Baeculam urbem processum cum
omni exercitu civium, sociorum (sociorumque cj. Walsh), peditum equitumque
quinque et quadraginta milibus. (Liv. 28.13.5); Quod si vatum, annalium ad testimo-
nia vocentur, plures sibi ac locupletiores esse. (Tac. Ann. 4.43.3); Mirum est qua reli-
gione quo studio imagines Brutorum Cassiorum Catonum domi ubi potest habeat.
(Plin. Ep. 1.17.3)
Recordetur id, / qui nihili sunt, quid eis preti / detur ab suis eris, ignavis, improbis
viris. (Pl. Men. 972–3); Illum liquet mihi deierare his mensibus / sex septem pror-
sum non vidisse proxumis . . . (Ter. Eu. 331–2—NB: ‘six or seven’); De bonis vero
rebus et malis, aequis, iniquis, utilibus, inutilibus, honestis, turpibus quam potest
habere orator sine illis maximarum rerum artibus facultatem aut copiam? (Cic. Part.
140); Loca amoena, voluptaria facile in otio ferocis militum animos molliverant.
(Sal. Cat. 11.5); Praeter multiplices rerum humanarum casus caelo terraque prodigia
et fulminum monitus et futurorum praesagia, laeta tristia, ambigua manifesta. (Tac.
Hist. 1.3.2)
NB: Probably not coordination, but rather a difference in hierarchy (see § 11.75):
Siliginem, triticum in loco aperto celso, ubi sol quam diutissime siet, seri oportet.
(Cato Agr. 35.1); cf.: . . . in loco aperto edito . . . (Plin. Nat. 18.164)
Coordination
link two conjoins, it is called simple coordination (§ 19.24). The same coordin-
ators can also be used for combinations of three or more conjoins (§ 19.38). This
is called multiple coordination. The coordinators et and neque, and to some extent
-que, can furthermore be used in such a way that all conjoins are marked by a
coordinator (for ac and atque, see below). This is called correlative syndetic
coordination (§ 19.29).
The conjunctive coordinators ac/atque, et, and -que are used in different contexts in
Early and Classical Latin. Et is the general coordinator that can be used for all types of
coordination, both clauses and constituents, regardless of the semantic relation
between the conjoins. It simply adds another element. The other two coordinators are
less often used to link clauses. Between them, -que is the most neutral; it frequently
links constituents with cognate meanings, suggesting that the conjoins are closely
related. Ac and atque are used with the same type of conjoins as -que, but they form a
stronger link (‘and . . . too’, ‘and what is more’ (OLD)), and are more formal and ele-
vated (see below).⁴⁴ There are diachronic differences as well: et is the only coordinator
that survived in some form in the Romance languages (with the exception of
Romanian), though there are also traces of ac. Atque/ac and -que seem to have fallen
out of use in the uneducated spoken language towards the end of the first century ad,
as attested by their infrequency or complete absence in Vitruvius, the Cena
Trimalchionis, and inscriptions from Pompeii.⁴⁵ There are also differences in the type
of text in which the individual coordinators are used: -que, for example, is the regular
coordinator in legal texts on inscriptions,⁴⁶ while its use, as a clitic, is avoided in most
authors after certain words and at the end of sentences.⁴⁷ Atque is almost absent in
Cato’s de Agricultura; in his historical narrative and speeches it is the other way
around. The disyllabic coordinator atque, when followed by a consonant, can be
employed to create rhythmic patterns, for example, consistently throughout Cicero’s
loftier orations and occasionally in his other speeches,⁴⁸ and in poetry.⁴⁹ In Augustine’s
de Civitate Dei the proportion between et and -que/atque is c.2:1; in the Sermones 20:1.
⁴⁴ For a description of the relation of et, ac/atque, and -que, in ‘structural’ terms, see Coşeriu (1968).
For the differences between the three coordinators and their development in Early Latin prose, see
Penney (2005).
⁴⁵ For discussion and references, see Sz.: 477 and Rosén (2009: 402). Sz. also mentions the Bellum
Hispaniense, but see Gaertner (2010).
⁴⁶ See Elmer (1887), who also refers to the frequent use of -que in Cic. Phil. 14.36–8, a proposal for a
senatus consultum.
⁴⁷ See Kraus (1992: 323) for a survey of prose authors: Sallust, Livy, and Tacitus do not avoid -que at the
end of a sentence. For a survey of poetry, see her p. 328, n. 30.
⁴⁸ For Cicero’s use of atque to build clausulae, see Hutchinson (1995).
⁴⁹ For the use of atque in poetry, see Butterfield (2008). For metrical factors determining the choice
between atque and et in Plautus, see Penney (2005: 44).
Coordination
As a result of these differences the picture of the usage of the individual coordin-
ators in individual authors and in individual texts is quite complicated, as can be seen
in Figure 19.1.
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
-que et atque ac
The data are taken from the Library of Latin texts. Especially in the case of et, the
results are not entirely reliable, since sentence-connecting et, et as etiam, and correla-
tive et . . . et are not distinguished. Similarly, atque is used in ways other than as a
coordinator. Nevertheless, one can still get a good sense of the general differences
between authors and time periods.
To illustrate the variation in the frequency with which the coordinators are used in
the works of Cicero, Table 19.2, extracted from Lindholm (1931: 124), is useful.
Table . The distribution of et, atque/ac, and -que in six works of Cicero
Q. Rosc. Man. Cael. Phil. 2 de Orat. 1.1–148 Tusc. 5
et 96 64 85 88 141 140
atque/ac 6 127 91 18 110 23
-que 11 56 63 43 76 87
§ 16.18 donec and § 16.62 nisi) to express the suddenness or the speed of an incident
that interferes with a particular event. The preceding clause normally refers to an
ongoing event; the following clause usually to a terminative or momentaneous event
(see § 2.9). Examples are (a)–(c).⁵⁰
(a) Vix primos inopina quies laxaverat artus, / et super incumbens cum puppis
parte revolsa / cumque gubernaclo liquidas proiecit in undas . . .
(‘Sudden slumber had scarcely loosened the first of his limbs, and looming over him,
he (sc. deus) flung him into the clear waters together with a cleft part of the keel and
the rudder . . .’ Verg. A. 5.857–9)
(b) Vix ea fatus erat senior subitoque fragore / intonuit laevom . . .
(‘Scarcely had the aged man thus spoken, when with sudden crash there was thunder
on the left . . .’ Verg. A. 2.692–3)
(c) Huc mihi, dum teneras defendo a frigore myrtos, / vir gregis ipse caper deer-
raverat atque ego Daphnim / aspicio.
(‘To this place, while I sheltered my tender myrtles from the frost, my he-goat, the
lord of the flock himself, had strayed; and I catch sight of Daphnis.’ Verg. Ecl. 7.6–8)
Supplement:
Vixdum ad consulem se pervenisse et audisse oppidum expugnatum, principes
securi percussos, sub corona ceteros venisse. (Liv. 43.4.10); Iamque nitidior lux dis-
cussa caligine aciem hostium ostenderat et Macedones sive alacritate sive taedio
expectationis ingentem pugnantium more edidere clamorem. (Curt. 4.12.23);
Nondum quartus a victoria mensis et libertus Vitellii Asiaticus Polyclitos Patrobios et
vetera odiorum nomina aequabat. (Tac. Hist. 2.95.2); Vix consideramus et nox, non
qualis inlunis aut nubila, sed qualis in locis clausis lumine exstincto. (Plin. Ep.
6.20.14); Commodum cubueram et ecce Photis mea, iam domina cubitum reddita,
laeta proximat rosa serta et rosa soluta in sinu tuberante. (Apul. Met. 2.16.1)
Iamque propinquabant portis, rursusque Latini / clamorem tollunt et mollia colla
reflectunt. (Verg. A. 11.621–2); Et a Volscis et Aequis statum iam ac prope sollemne
in singulos annos bellum timebatur propiusque aliud novum malum necopinato
exortum. (Liv. 3.15.4)
Vix ego haec dixeram cunctabundus atque inibi quispiam . . .‘Valerium’, inquit,
‘Probum audivi haec dicere . . .’ (Gel. 3.1.5)
NB: without a temporal adverb: Iusserat et fratris virgo Saturnia iussis / adnuit et
mediae tempora noctis erant. (Ov. Fast. 6.383–4)⁵¹
The (rare) use of et and atque in the main clause following a temporal subordinate
clause—attested from Plautus onwards—may be related to the use of the coordinators
illustrated above. Examples are (d)–(g).⁵²
⁵⁰ Chausserie-Laprée (1969: 646–7) deals with this use of coordination as one of the ‘techniques de
rupture’ (‘breaking off ’) used in historical narrative. For further examples, see TLL s.v. 895.25ff. For
Virgil’s practice, see Hahn (1956: 186–9).
⁵¹ For a few more examples, see TLL s.v. et 895.53ff.
⁵² For ex. (d), see Petersmann (1977: 242–3). For (e), see Callebat (1968: 496). For further instances of
atque in Plautus, see Lodge: 179B, § 15; TLL s.v. atque 1076.6ff. For—mainly Late Latin—instances and the
Romance successors, see Wehr (1984: 153–81; 2008). TLL s.v. et 896.51ff. has further instances of this so-
called abundant use of et in (very) Late Latin.
Coordination
(d) Quom ad portam venio atque ego illam illi video praestolarier . . .
(‘When I came to the gate, I saw her waiting for him . . .’ Pl. Epid. 217)
(e) . . . cum Incuboni pilleum rapuisset et (om. edd. plerique) thesaurum invenit.
(‘. . . when he pulled off Incubo’s cap, and discovered a treasure-trove.’ Petr. 38.8
(Hermeros speaking))
(f) Interim dum puerum illum parentes sui plangoribus fletibusque querebantur
et adveniens ecce rusticus . . . destinatam sectionem meam flagitat.
(‘Meanwhile, the boy’s parents were in the process of mourning him with blows to
their breasts and tears, and that country fellow, appearing suddenly . . . called for my
fated castration.’ Apul. Met. 7.26.4)
(g) Nam posteaquam completo desiderio descenderis inde et de contra illum
vides, quod antequam subeas facere non potest.
(‘After you have seen everything and come down, it can be seen facing you, but this
cannot be done till you start your climb.’ Pereg. 2.7—tr. Wilkinson)
Supplement:
. . . dum circumspecto atque ego lembum conspicor / longum . . . (Pl. Bac. 279–80);
Postquam id quod volui transegi atque ego conspicor / navim ex Rhodo . . . (Pl. Mer.
256–7)
Haec ubi ille dixit et discessit. (Gel. 2.29.8)
⁵³ See the survey in Elmer (1887: 294). See also Sz.: 473–4. For Early Latin prose, see Penney (2005:
41–4) and, for Cato, Adams (2016: 62–4). For -que to coordinate clauses in legal contexts, see Powell (2005:
130–1).
⁵⁴ For which see Courtney (1999: 62–7).
Conjunctive (or: copulative) coordinators
⁵⁵ Vocabula ‘words and phrases’ have more than ten columns vs. less than four columns for clauses in
Lodge.
⁵⁶ In Cicero’s orations, thirty-four columns of -que concern constituents; thirteen, clauses or parts of
clauses (Merguet (Reden)). In Tacitus it is thirty-five to nine (Gerber and Greef). It is particularly infre-
quent in Rhet. Her. and in Cicero’s Inv. (Merten 1893: 24–7).
⁵⁷ For the history of the use by various authors, see Sz.: 475–6.
⁵⁸ For the deletion of -que, see Sjögren (1900: 8).
Coordination
Gal. 5.45.3); Quem (sc. Germanicum) per omnis illos dies noctesque . . . vix cohibuere
amici quo minus eodem mari oppeteret. (Tac. Ann. 2.24.2)
NB: governed by a preposition: Ex summis opibus viribusque usque experire,
nitere . . . (Pl. Mer. 111); Nempe in Antoni congressum conloquiumque veniendum
est. (Cic. Phil. 12.26). See also § 19.13.
Adjectives, adjective phrases, and other attributes: . . . regias copias aureasque
optuli . . . (Pl. Bac. 647); Tun’ ted expurges mihi, / qui facinus tantum tamque indignum
feceris? (Pl. Mil. 497–8); . . . ego omnibus / parvis magnisque miseriis praefulcior. (Pl.
Ps. 771–2); Adparet servom hunc esse domini pauperis / miserique. (Ter. Eu. 486–7);
Atque sic a summis hominibus eruditissimisque accepimus . . . (Cic. Arch. 18); Nullam
esse actionem dicere in re tam insigni tamque atroci neque prudentiae neque auctori-
tatis tuae est. (Cic. Caec. 37); . . . descendi in campum cum firmissimo praesidio fortis-
simorum virorum et cum illa lata insignique lorica . . . (Cic. Mur. 52); Itaque hominem
huic optimae tutissimaeque custodiae non audet committere . . . (Cic. Ver. 5.69); . . . pars
magna a feris barbarisque nationibus incolitur . . . (Caes. Gal. 4.10.4)
Adverbs: . . . illum mater arte contenteque habet . . . (Pl. As. 78); Bene opportuneque
obviam es, Palaestrio. (Pl. Mil. 898); Edepol ne istuc magis magisque metuo, quom
verba audio. (Pl. Ps. 1214); Quam ob rem, dum multorum annorum accusationi
breviter dilucideque respondeo, quaeso ut me, iudices . . . benigne attenteque audiatis.
(Cic. Clu. 8); . . . ibi primum in morbum incidit ac satis vehementer diuque aegrotavit.
(Cic. Clu. 175); . . . ut undique . . . gratiam atque amicitiam publice privatimque pete-
rent. (Caes. Gal. 5.55.4); Inde graves simultates, quas Antonius simplicius, Mucianus
callide eoque implacabilius nutriebat. (Tac. Hist. 3.53.3)
Prepositions: see § 19.13 fin.
Prepositional phrases: . . . ita ted optestor per senectutem tuam / perque illam
quam tu metuis uxorem tuam . . . (Pl. As. 18–19); . . . ego erum expugnabo meum / sine
classe sineque exercitu et tanto numero militum. (Pl. Bac. 929–30); . . . per tuam fidem
perque huiu’ solitudinem / te obtestor . . . (Ter. An. 290–1); . . . multa autem impendere
videntur praeter naturam etiam praeterque fatum . . . (Cic. Phil. 1.10); De bonorum
emptione deque ea societate neminem esse qui verbum facere auderet hoc tempore?
(Cic. S. Rosc. 58). See also § 19.13.
Finite and non-finite verb forms: Iuppiter, qui genus colis alisque hominum . . . (Pl.
Poen. 1187); Totus, Parmeno, / tremo horreoque, postquam aspexi hanc. (Ter. Eu.
83–4); . . . deinde ipsum <M.> Aurium . . . tollendum interficiendumque curavit. (Cic.
Clu. 23); Decidis statuisque tu . . . quid eis ad denarium solveretur. (Cic. Quinct.
17); . . . ad te litteras misit mittendasque curavit. (Cic. Ver. 5.15); . . . qui a parentibus
spe nostri imperii nostraeque aequitatis suscepti educatique sunt . . . (Cic. Ver.
5.123); . . . magno opere a te peto ut operam des efficiasque ne quid mihi fiat iniu-
riae . . . (Cic. Fam. 15.12.2); Huc magno cursu contenderunt, ut quam minimum
spatii ad se colligendos armandosque Romanis daretur . . . (Caes. Gal. 3.19.1); Ad
deos, ad effigiem Augusti, ad genua ipsius manus tendere, cum proferri libellum
recitarique iussit. (Tac. Ann. 1.11.3); Atque illum cupido incessit adeundi visendique
templum Paphiae Veneris . . . (Tac. Hist. 2.2.2)
Adnominal relative clauses: Salve, qui me interfecisti paene vita et lumine / vimque
mihi magni doloris per voluptatem tuam / condidisti in corpus . . . (Pl. Truc. 518–20)⁵⁹
⁵⁹ For relative clauses coordinated by -que in Plautus and Terence, see Sjögren (1900: 117–20).
Conjunctive (or: copulative) coordinators
Autonomous relative clauses: Nimiae voluptati est quod in extis nostris porten-
tum est, soror, / quod[que] haruspex de ambabus dixit. (Pl. Poen. 1205–6)
Result clauses with ut: (sc. sic) . . . ipsus sese ut neget esse eum qui siet / meque ut
esse autumet qui ipsus est. (Pl. Ps. 929–30)⁶⁰
Clauses:
Eugepae, edictiones aedilicias hicquidem habet / mirumque adeo est ni hunc fecere
sibi Aetoli agoranomum. (Pl. Capt. 823–4); At ego aio id fieri in Graecia et
Carthagini, / et hic in nostra terra in <terra> Apulia / maioreque opere ibi serviles
nuptiae / quam liberales etiam curari solent. (Pl. Cas. 71–4); Haec Andria, / si[ve]
ista uxor sive amica’st, gravida e Pamphilo’st. / Audireque <eo>rum’st operae pre-
tium audaciam . . . (Ter. An. 215–17); Quod ego longe secus existimo, iudices, deque
eo pauca disseram. (Cic. Mur. 31); . . . illa insula eorum deorum sacra putatur tan-
taque eius auctoritas religionis et est et semper fuit ut . . . (Cic. Ver. 1.48);
Ille . . . Uticae domi suae vivus exustus est idque ita illi merito accidisse existimatum
est ut laetarentur omnes . . . (Cic. Ver. 1.70); (sc. Ubii) . . . sunt humaniores, prop-
terea quod Rhenum attingunt multumque ad eos mercatores ventitant . . . (Caes.
Gal. 4.3.3); Nam Carnutes . . . veniunt in deditionem, ceteraeque civitates . . .
imperata sine mora faciunt. (Hirt. Gal. 8.31.5);⁶¹ . . . preimario viro pro eius meri-
teis / hoc monumentum constitutum est / eique merenti gratia rellata
est / isque octiens duomvir ter cens(or) colonorum iudicio / apsens
praesensque factus est . . . (CIL VI.29754.5–9 (Ostia, time of Augustus));
Tum . . . Meherdates promissa Parracis paterni clientis secutus dolo eius vincitur
traditurque victori. (Tac. Ann. 12.14.3); Nam postero die quam Curiatius Maternus
Catonem recitaverat, cum offendisse potentium animos diceretur, tamquam in eo
tragoediae argumento sui oblitus tantum Catonem cogitasset, eaque de re per
urbem frequens sermo haberetur, venerunt ad eum Marcus Aper et Iulius
Secundus . . . (Tac. Dial. 2.1); Occupantur plana Umbriae et qua Picenus ager Hadria
adluitur omnisque Italia inter Vespasianum ac Vitellium Appennini iugis divideba-
tur. (Tac. Hist. 3.42.1)
As a rule, -que is attached to the first word of a conjoin that is linked to a preceding
conjoin when the second conjoin starts with, or consists of, a phrase. This can be seen
in (d) above: -que is attached to the first word of the phrase Aleria urbe. However,
when that first word is a monosyllabic preposition, -que is often attached to another
word of the phrase, as is shown by the prepositional phrase ob easque res in (e) above.
Other examples are the adverbs tam and quam in (f) and (g), respectively. It is occa-
sionally postposed with disyllabic prepositions as well, as in (h). -que is never attached
to non. It cannot be combined with words ending in -c (*hicque).⁶² Note that in
(i) -que is attached to the relative quae in the relative clause that precedes its main
clause. (See also § 23.36.)
⁶⁰ Plautus and Terence avoid the sequence utque. See Sjögren (1900: 126). It is also very rare elsewhere.
⁶¹ For a well-organized survey of similar coordinated clauses in the Caesarian corpus, see Merguet
(Caesar) 879B–882A.
⁶² See Bolkestein (2000: 134, n. 7). For Cicero’s usage of monosyllabic words, see Shipley (1913: 43–5).
Coordination
(f) In hoc igitur tanto tam immensoque campo cum liceat oratori vagari libere . . .
(‘Consequently as the orator has the liberty to roam freely in so wide and measureless
a field . . .’ Cic. de Orat. 3.124)
(g) Fac, mi frater, ut valeas quam primumque venias.
(‘Be sure to keep well, my dear brother, and come as soon as you can.’ Cic. Q. fr. 2.6.4)
(h) . . . apud eosque (sc. iudices) me . . . cogas causam de fortunis omnibus dicere?
(‘. . . and do you force me to plead concerning all my fortunes before them?’ Cic.
Planc. 40)
(i) Vela dabant ventis (nec adhuc bene noverat illos / navita) quaeque prius
steterant in montibus altis / fluctibus ignotis exsultavere carinae.
(‘Men now spread sails to the winds, though the sailor as yet scarce knew them; and
the keels of pine, which long had stood upon high mountainsides, now leaped over
unknown waves.’ Ov. Met. 1.132–4)
Supplement:
. . . tam diuque ut obtineat dum M. Brutus C. Cassius consules prove coss. provincias
obtinebunt. (Cic. Phil. 8.27);. . . (sc. morbos) omnis opinabilis esse et voluntarios ea
reque suscipi, quod ita rectum esse videatur. (Cic. Tusc. 4.83)
There are no limitations on the attachment of -que to polysyllabic words, e.g. innu-
merabilitatemque mundorum ‘and the countless number of worlds’ (Cic. N.D. 1.73),
or on its attachment to words ending in a short ĕ, e.g. constituereque ‘and to establish’
(Cic. Fin. 4.25).⁶³
It is also relatively common in Cicero in elevated parts of his orations and letters.⁶⁸
Conversely, ‘It never established itself in colloquial Latin.’⁶⁹ For the use of ac/atque
as a connector of sentences, see (g) and § 24.18. For the use of atque as a compara-
tive particle, see § 20.6.
(a) . . . hic vos / dormitis interea domi atque erus in hara, haud aedibus, habitat.
(‘. . . you servants in the meantime sleep here at home and master has to live in a pig-
sty, not a house.’ Pl. As. 429–30)
(b) . . . ne ex his nationibus auxilia in Galliam mittantur ac tantae nationes con-
iungantur.
(‘. . . in order that auxiliaries not be sent from these nations into Gaul, and that such
great nations not form an alliance.’ Caes. Gal. 3.11.3)
(c) Nam nec se Septentriones quoquam in caelo commovent / nec se Luna quo-
quam mutat atque uti exorta est semel, / nec Iugulae nec Vesperugo nec
Vergiliae occidunt.
(‘For the Great Bear isn’t moving anywhere in the sky, the Moon isn’t going to any
place different from where it was when it first rose, and Orion, the Evening Star, and
the Pleiades aren’t setting either.’ Pl. Am. 273–5)
(d) Eo domum, patrem atque matrem ut meos salutem . . .
(‘I’m going home to greet my father and mother . . .’ Pl. Mer. 659)
(e) . . . cum matronarum ac virginum veniebat in mentem . . .
(‘. . . when the thought of wives and unwed girls came into my mind . . .’ Cic. Sul. 19)
(f) Iamne ostendisti signa nutrici? # Omnia. / # Amabo, quid ait? Cognoscitne?
# Ac memoriter.
(‘Have you already shown the nurse the tokens? # All of them. # What does she say,
darling? Does she recognize them? # Yes, and by memory.’ Ter. Eu. 914–15)
(g) Ac iam ut omnia contra opinionem acciderent, tamen se plurimum navibus
posse, [quam] Romanos neque ullam facultatem habere navium neque
eorum locorum ubi bellum gesturi essent vada, portus, insulas novisse. Ac
longe aliam esse navigationem in concluso mari atque in vastissimo atque
apertissimo Oceano perspiciebant.
(‘(sc. the Veneti felt that,) even though everything was turning out contrary to expect-
ation, they were predominant in sea-power, while the Romans had no supply of
ships, no knowledge of the shoals, harbours, or islands of the regions where they
were about to wage war; and they could perceive that navigation on a land-locked
sea was quite different from navigation on an Ocean very vast and open.’ Caes. Gal.
3.9.6–7)
⁶⁸ For statistical data, see Merten (1893: 2–5). See also TLL s.v. atque 1050.10ff.
⁶⁹ So Courtney (1999: 3).
Coordination
Supplement:
Constituents:
Nouns and noun phrases: . . . eos auspicio meo atque [in]ductu primo coetu vici-
mus. (Pl. Am. 657) . . . tantum erus atque ego flagitio superavimus nuptiis nos-
tris . . . (Pl. Cas. 876); . . . Narbonensis colonia, quae . . . nunc eiusdem miseriis ac
periculis commovetur. (Cic. Font. 46); . . . suorum servorum manibus nuntio atque
imperio tuo violatus esset. (Cic. Quinct. 83); Constat . . . nullum hoc splendore atque
hac dignitate consilium fuisse. (Cic. Ver. 49); . . . si quis quid de re publica a finitimis
rumore ac (v.l. aut) fama acceperit . . . (Caes. Gal. 6.20.1); . . . alius deleto exercitu atque
imperatore victores barbaros venisse contendit. (Caes. Gal. 6.37.7); . . . magnumque
numerum in oppidum telorum atque tormentorum convexerant . . . (B. Alex. 2.1)⁷⁰
NB: governed by a preposition: . . . ex spiritu atque anhelitu / nebula constat . . . (Pl.
Am. 233–4); . . . si quis perdiderit vidulum cum auro atque argento multo, / ad Gripum
ut veniat. (Pl. Rud. 1295–6); . . . quidvis esse perpeti satius quam in tanta vi atque
acerbitate versari. (Cic. Ver. 1.69); . . . qui illum adesse cum magnis copiis dicerent et
de custodia ac defensione urbis hortarentur. (Caes. Civ. 2.36.3); Varius sermo et ad
metum atque iram accommodatus terruit simul audientem et accendit. (Tac. Ann.
14.62.1). (For other prepositional phrases, see below.)
Adjectives, adjective phrases, and other attributes: Quin tu istanc orationem
hinc veterem atque antiquam amoves? (Pl. Mil. 751); . . . dederim vobis consilium
catum, / quod laudetis, ut ego opino, uterque— # Ergo ubi id est, Epidice? / # —atque
ad eam rem conducibile. (Pl. Epid. 258–60—NB: Epidicus is interrupted); (sc. ratio)
Est hercle inepta, ne dicam dolo, atque / absurda. (Ter. Ad. 375–6); Recte hoc repetitur
a vobis ut virum optimum atque innocentissimum plurimisque mortalibus carissi-
mum atque iucundissimum his aliquando calamitatibus liberetis . . . (Cic. Clu.
202); . . . propter hominem perditissimum atque alienissimum de officio ac dignitate
decedis . . . (Cic. Ver. 28); At quo loco! Celeberrimo ac religiosissimo, ante ipsum
Serapim, in primo aditu vestibuloque templi. (Cic. Ver. 2.160); Sperare ab eo de sua
ac militum salute impetrari posse. (Caes. Gal. 5.36.3); . . . sperans barbaros atque
imperitos homines . . . ad iniquam pugnandi condicionem posse deduci. (Caes. Gal.
6.10.2)
Adverbs: Benene usque valuit? # Pancratice atque athletice. (Pl. Bac. 248); Sed ut
astu sum aggressus ad eas. # Lepide hercle atque commode. (Pl. Poen. 1223); . . . id
eum exercitumque eius, municipia, colonias provinciae Galliae recte atque ordine
exque re publica fecisse et facere. (Cic. Phil. 3.38); Planius atque apertius dicam. (Cic.
Q. Rosc. 43)
Prepositions: see § 19.13 fin.
Prepositional phrases: Equidem me iam censebam esse in terra atque in tuto
loco . . . (Pl. Mer. 196); Natas ex Philomela atque ex (ac [ex] cj. Bothe) Procne esse
hirundines. (Pl. Rud. 604); Ut animus in spe atque in timore usque ant(e)hac attentus
fuit . . . (Ter. An. 303); Fures privatorum furtorum in nervo atque in compedibus
aetatem agunt, fures publici in auro atque in purpura. (Cato orat. 224); . . . in caede
atque ex caede vivunt. (Cic. S. Rosc. 78); Ipse Sulla . . . ab se hominem atque ab exer-
citu suo removit. (Cic. Ver. 1.38). See also § 19.13.
⁷⁰ For the use of atque and other conjunctive coordinators in the Bellum Alexandrinum, see Gaertner
and Hausburg (2013: 70–1).
Conjunctive (or: copulative) coordinators
Verbs: . . . id vi et virtute militum victum atque expugnatum oppidum est . . . (Pl. Am.
191); Cogo atque impero: / numquam defugiam auctoritatem. (Ter. Eu. 389–90);
Multorum te etiam oculi et aures non sentientem, sicut adhuc fecerunt, speculabun-
tur atque custodient. (Cic. Catil. 1.6); . . . quod agendum atque faciendum, id non
modo non recusem sed etiam appetam atque deposcam. (Cic. Phil. 3.33); . . . te dicere
atque enumerare causas omnis oportebat . . . (Cic. S. Rosc. 53); Unamque cohortem,
quae temere ante ceteras extra aciem procurrerat, seclusam ab reliquis circumveniunt
atque interficiunt . . . (Caes. Civ. 1.55.2)
Autonomous relative clauses: . . . tamen non defore qui illa restituerent atque qui
ante omnia commutarent quam nos audire possemus. (Cic. Agr. 2.90)
Conditional clauses: Quid si adduco tuom cognatum huc a navi Naucratem, / qui
mecum una vectu’st una navi, atque is si denegat / facta quae tu facta dicis, quid tibi
aequom est fieri? (Pl. Am. 849–51)
Purpose clauses: Ego servi sumpsi Sosiae mi imaginem, / . . . ut praeservire amanti
meo possem patri / atque ut ne qui essem familiares quaererent . . . (Pl. Am. 124–7)
Clauses:
Nam si erus tu mi es atque ego me tuom esse servom assimulo . . . (Pl. Capt. 224); Ergo
iste metus me macerat . . . / ne oculi eius sententiam mutent, ubi viderit me, / atque
eius elegantia meam extemplo speciem spernat. (Pl. Mil. 1233–5); Scio solere ple-
risque hominibus rebus secundis atque prolixis atque prosperis animum excellere
atque superbiam atque ferociam augescere atque crescere. (Cato orat. 163—NB:
atque functioning at different levels); (sc. oro) . . . ut me adiuves in hac re atque ita uti
nuptiae / fuerant futurae, fiant. (Ter. An. 542–3); . . . si ne tuorum quidem quisquam
loco motus erit atque omnes in aedibus adservati ac retenti . . . (Cic. Caec. 37); . . . facile
me atque vos crudelitatis vituperatione prohibebo atque obtinebo eam multo
leniorem fuisse. (Cic. Catil. 4.11); . . . patimini veritate patefacta atque omni errore
sublato eo transire illius turpitudinis infamiam . . . (Cic. Clu. 83); An dies auget eius
desiderium, an magis oblivionem, ac laurea illa magnis periculis parta amittit longo
intervallo viriditatem? (Cic. Prov. 29); At vivis et viges, at in omnium animis atque
ore versaris atque divinus animus mortale nihil habuit neque tuorum quicquam
potuit emori praeter corpus. (Cic. Scaur. 50); Et . . . paucis diebus magna erat rerum
facta commutatio ac se fortuna inclinaverat . . . (Caes. Civ. 1.52.2); Eodemque tempore
pugnatum est ad portum ac longe maximam ea res adtulit dimicationem. (Caes. Civ.
3.111); Qui cum se suaque omnia in oppidum Bratuspantium contulissent atque ab
eo oppido Caesar cum exercitu circiter milia passuum quinque abesset . . . (Caes. Gal.
2.13.2); . . . excipiunt Vitellianos temere effusos atque illi consternantur. (Tac. Hist.
3.17.2); . . . neque aliud externi reges aut qui eadem saevitia usi sunt nisi dedecus sibi
atque illis gloriam peperere. (Tac. Ann. 4.35.5)
The second conjoin of a pair of words or phrases linked by ac/atque often has a
stronger or more precise meaning than the first conjoin. This may result from the
lexical meaning of the words or phrases, as in (h) and (i),⁷¹ and/or from the presence
of certain adverbs or other expressions, like adeo ‘rather’ in (j) and etiam ‘also’, ‘even’
in (k).⁷² This also occurs with paene ‘almost’, potius ‘rather’, quoque ‘also’, and others.
(h) Cum in maximis periculis huius urbis atque imperii, gravissimo atque acer-
bissimo rei publicae casu, socio atque adiutore consiliorum periculorumque
meorum L. Flacco, caedem a vobis . . . depellebam . . .
(‘When in the greatest perils of this city and Empire, in that most grim and bitter
hour of crisis for the Republic, with Lucius Flaccus as my companion and helper in
my deliberations and dangers, I staved off disaster from you.’ Cic. Flac. 1)
(i) . . . si fuerit is qui haec habet iniustus, intemperans, timidus, hebeti ingenio
atque nullo, dubitabisne eum miserum dicere?
(‘. . . if the man who possesses these things is unjust, intemperate, fearful, with an
intelligence sluggish or even non-existent, will you hesitate to pronounce him
wretched?’ Cic. Tusc. 5.45)
(j) Hoc consilio atque adeo hac amentia impulsi . . . eum iugulandum vobis tra-
diderunt.
(‘Driven by this plan, or rather by this folly . . . they have handed him over to you to
murder.’ Cic. S. Rosc. 29)
(k) Qui illum Persam atque omnis Persas atque etiam omnis personas / male di
omnes perdant!
(‘May all the gods ruin that Persian and all Persians and even all stage characters!’ Pl.
Per. 783–4)
Atque also appears commonly in the combination etiam atque etiam ‘more and more’
(more than one hundred instances in Cicero alone, etiam et etiam only once (Cic. Att.
8.15a.2—NB: see the apparatus criticus)), magis atque magis ‘more and more’ (from
Virgil onwards), and alius atque alius ‘first one person then another’.⁷³
⁷² Adeo is also paired with -que in Early Latin and in poetry. The combination with et is very rare (TLL
s.v. adeo 613.42ff.; 614.8ff.). For etiam and quoque, see TLL s.v. atque 1053.39ff.; s.v. etiam 941.12ff; see
there also for (less common) combinations of etiam with et and -que.
⁷³ See TLL s.v. atque 1071.36ff.
⁷⁴ Material taken from Merguet (Reden): ac/atque: Dolabella et Antonius (Phil. 13.26); Pomptini atque
Flacci (Catil. 3.6); unius P. Servili ac (aut cj. Madvig, edd.) M. Luculli responso (Har. 12); -que: Apollinem
Dianamque (Ver. 1.48); Titus Gaiusque Coponii (Cael. 24—NB: praenomina of two brothers).
Conjunctive (or: copulative) coordinators
the best coordinator to link entities that are not closely related in sense, as it simply
adds another conjoin. Conversely, when two nouns are coordinated of which the sec-
ond one has a strong meaning, atque/ac seems to be preferred, though -que is also
used: thus (improbitas) atque/ac nequitia/ae/am (or: nequitiaque) ‘(shamelessness)
and depravity’ and (dedecore) ac turpitudine ‘(discredit) and disgrace’ (see also § 19.26).
Et is less often used than atque/ac and -que to link nouns and pronouns (the preferred
categories of -que), and adjectives and other attributes (the preferred categories of
atque). At least, this is the situation in Cicero’s orations.
Et is used to link clauses, as in (a), and in (b) (repeated from § 19.1), and to link
constituents, as in (c)—two objects—and (d)—two attributes. Coordination of clauses
by et is more common than of constituents.⁷⁵ For the use of et in epitactic coordination,
see (e) and §§ 19.67–8 (for the term and further examples). For the use of et as a con-
nector of sentences, see § 24.19. For the rare use of et in comparisons, see § 20.6. Finally,
for the use of et as an adverb, more or less equivalent to etiam, see § 22.21.
(a) . . . ego illam illi video praestolarier / et cum ea tibicinae ibant quattuor.
(‘. . . I saw her waiting for him, and four flute-girls were walking along with her.’ Pl.
Epid. 217–18)
(b) Haec vincit in consilio sententia et prima luce postridie constituunt proficisci.
(‘This opinion prevailed in the meeting, and they decided to set out the following day
at first light.’ Caes. Civ. 1.67.6)
(c) Em illius servos huc ad me argentum attulit / et opsignatum symbolum.
(‘Well, his slave brought the money here to me, and the sealed token.’ Pl. Ps. 1091–2)
(d) . . . tibi cum homine disertissimo et ad dicendum paratissimo futurum esse
certamen . . .
(‘. . . your contest will be with a man highly eloquent and trained in speaking . . .’ Cic.
Div. Caec. 44)
(e) Is dicebatur esse Myronis, ut opinor, et certe.
(‘This was said to be the work of Myron, I believe—yes, it was so.’ Cic. Ver. 4.5)
Supplement:
Constituents:
Nouns and noun phrases: Nunc hodie Amphitruo veniet huc ab exercitu / et servos
quoius ego hanc fero imaginem. (Pl. Am. 140–1); Ego virtute deum et maiorum nos-
trum dives sum satis. (Pl. Aul. 166); Primo haec pudice vitam parce ac duriter / agebat,
lana et (ac D2, Grammatici Latini, edd.) tela victum quaeritans. (Ter. An. 74–5); . . .
neque aequum est tempore et die memoriam benefici definire. (Cic. Red. Pop. 23);
Tanta enim erat auctoritas et vetustas illius religionis . . . (Cic. Ver. 4.108); . . . illa
summa vis et contentio probatur. (Cic. de Orat. 1.255); Nunc venio ad tua illa brevia,
quae consectaria esse dicebas, et primum illud quo nihil potest brevius. (Cic. Fin. 4.48);
Probat enim legum et libertatis interitum . . . (Cic. Off. 3.83); Ad reliqua transeamus
animalia et primum terrestria. (Plin. Nat. 8.1); . . . sive hostis illos seu Pansam venenum
vulneri adfusum, sui milites Hirtium et machinator doli Caesar abstulerat . . . (Tac.
Ann. 1.10.2—NB: the asyndetically coordinated clauses in the seu sequence are a
good example of ‘gapping’)
NB: governed by a preposition: Em hominem tibi, / qui a matre et sorore venit. (Pl.
Mil. 1312–13); Suspicionem hanc propter fratrem ei(u)s esse et illam psaltriam. (Ter.
Ad. 600); Agitur . . . ut nullum sit posthac in re publica publicum consilium, nulla
bonorum consensio contra improborum furorem et audaciam . . . (Cic. Rab. Per. 4) . . .
non solum ex oratione Caesaris . . . sed etiam ex oculis et vultu, ex multis praeterea
signis . . . hac opinione discessi ut mihi tua salus dubia non esset. (Cic. Fam.
6.14.2); . . . quem tu cum civi acerrimo, patre tuo, in ore et amore semper habuisti. (Cic.
Fam. 10.28.1); Segni Condrusique, ex gente et numero Germanorum . . . legatos ad
Caesarem miserunt . . . (Caes. Gal. 6.32.1); . . . Afranium et Faustum cum coniuge et lib-
eris vivos capit. (B. Afr. 95.3); Missus ilico Stertinius cum equite et armatura levi igne
et caedibus perfidiam ultus est. (Tac. Ann. 2.8.4). See also § 19.13.
Adjectives, adjective phrases, and other attributes: Paucis, Euclio, est quod te volo /
de communi re appellare mea et tua. (Pl. Aul. 199–200); . . . recta porta invadam extem-
plo in oppidum antiquom et vetus. (Pl. Bac. 711); Imitatur nequam bestiam et damnifi-
cam. (Pl. Cist. 728); Mulier commoda et / faceta haec meretrix. (Ter. Hau. 521–2); Qui
tamen ita gravis est accusator et vehemens ut . . . (Cic. Mur. 58); Etiam a Stoicis ista trac-
tata sunt? # Non sane, nisi . . . a magno homine et in primis erudito, Panaetio. (Cic. Leg.
3.14); . . . atque idem Aventinum et Caelium montem adiunxit urbi . . . (Cic. Rep.
2.33); . . . paene iniquo loco et leviter declivi castra fecerant. (Caes. Gal. 7.83.3); . . . insig-
nisque et antiquitus sacras coronas adeptus . . . (Tac. Ann. 15.33.2); . . . quia Vespasianus,
venerabilis senex et patientissimus veri, bene intellegit . . . (Tac. Dial. 8.3)
Adverbs: Bene ego istam eduxi meae domi et pudice. (Pl. Cur. 518); . . . nisi multa aqua
usque et diu macerantur . . . (Pl. Poen. 243); Nam hic Clinia . . . attamen / habet (sc. ami-
cam) bene et pudice eductam, ignaram artis meretriciae. (Ter. Hau. 225–6); . . . cum una
quaque de re a P. Cannutio, homine eloquentissimo, graviter et diu diceretur. (Cic. Clu.
30); . . . aperte iam et perspicue nulla esse iudicia. (Cic. Ver. 20); . . . uterque eorum ex castris
stativis a flumine Apso exercitum educunt, Pompeius clam et noctu, Caesar palam atque
interdiu. (Caes. Civ. 3.30.3); Nam quo sordidius et abiectius nati sunt . . . (Tac. Dial. 8.3)
Prepositions: see § 19.13 fin.
Prepositional phrases: Id solus solum per amicitiam et per fidem / flens me opse-
cravit . . . (Pl. Trin. 153–4); Nunc te per amicitiam et per amorem obsecro . . . (Ter. An.
326); Non fuerunt armati, cum fustibus et cum saxis fuerunt. (Cic. Caec. 64). See also
§ 19.13.
Finite and non-finite verb forms: Novi erum, novi aedis nostras. Sane sapio et sen-
tio. (Pl. Am. 448); Quin collaudo consilium et probo. (Pl. Trin. 1148); Quae si erunt, ut
mea ratio et cogitatio fert, posita et constituta, nullam accusationis partem pertimes-
cam. (Cic. Scaur. 21); . . . solet haec quae rapuit et furatus est non numquam dicere
se emisse . . . (Cic. Ver. 1.60); Homo nobilis, qui a suis amari et diligi vellet . . .
(Cic. Ver. 4.51); Timere Caesarem . . . ne ad eius periculum reservare et retinere eas
(sc. legiones) ad urbem Pompeius videretur. (Caes. Civ. 1.2.3); Dum ea conquiruntur
et conferuntur . . . (Caes. Gal. 1.27.4); At nunc colimus externos et adulamur . . . (Tac.
Ann. 15.21.1); Frustra Cassium amovisti, si gliscere et vigere Brutorum aemulos
passurus es. (Tac. Ann. 16.22.5)
Conjunctive (or: copulative) coordinators
Autonomous relative clauses: Qui utuntur vino vetere sapientis puto / et qui
lubenter veteres spectant fabulas. (Pl. Cas. 5–6)
Conditional clauses: Nunc vos, si vobis placet / et si placuimus neque odio fui-
mus, signum hoc mittite. (Pl. Capt. 1034–5)
Purpose clauses: At vero praeclarum diem illis reposuisti Verria ut agerent et ut
ad eum diem quae sacris epulisque opus essent in compluris annos locarentur. (Cic.
Ver. 2.52)
Indirect questions: . . . cum ex me quidam quaesisset quo die Roma exissem et num
quidnam esset novi. (Cic. Planc. 65 ); Tu tamen de †Tutio† ad me rescribe certius et
num quis in eius locum paretur, et quid de P. Clodio fiat . . . (Cic. Att. 2.5.3)
Clauses:
Decet me facetum esse et hunc irridere / lenonem lubido est, quando dignus est. (Pl.
Per. 807–8); Gratiam habeo et de talento nulla causa est quin feras, / quod isti sum
iuratus. (Pl. Rud. 1397–8); Cum patre altercasti dudum et is nunc propterea tibi /
suscenset . . . (Ter. An. 653–4); Esse autem tertium ac medium inter illos et ita factos
eos pedes esse ut in iis singulis modus insit aut sesquiplex aut duplex aut par. (Cic.
Orat. 193); Vos videte quid aliae faciant isto loco feminae et ne, cum velitis, exire non
liceat. (Cic. Fam. 14.18.2); Cassius . . . onerarias naves <in nostras naves> circiter XL
praeparatas ad incendium immisit et flamma ab utroque cornu comprensa naves
sunt conbustae quinque. (Caes. Civ. 3.101.4); Cum in conloquium ventum esset et, ut
convenerat, manum Commii Volusenus adripuisset . . . (Hirt. Gal. 8.23.5); Aderat iam
annus quo proconsulatum Africae et Asiae sortiretur et occiso Civica nuper nec
Agricolae consilium deerat nec Domitiano exemplum. (Tac. Ag. 42.1); Is (sc. Simo) a
Quintilio Varo obtinente Syriam punitus et gentem coercitam liberi Herodis triper-
tito rexere. (Tac. Hist. 5.9.1)
Appendix: Special attention is given to coordination of clauses by et, where the
first conjoin can be interpreted as the condition for the realization of the second
conjoin. A term used for this is ‘parataxis poetica et vulgaris’. A few examples are
the following.⁷⁶
Dic quibus in terris—et eris mihi magnus Apollo— / tris pateat caeli spatium non
amplius ulnas. (Verg. Ecl. 3.104–5); . . . promissa . . . foedera serva / et comitum prin-
ceps tu mihi . . . eris. (Ov. Fas. 2.159–60); Concupiscite et poenas certe non dabitis.
(Sen. Suas. 6.25)
(g) . . . cum duplici vallo fossaque et muro etiam, qua res postulabat, ex multa
copia passim iacentium lapidum permunisset omnia . . .
(‘. . . when he had strengthened everything with a double wall and ditch and even,
where the situation demanded, with a rampart constructed out of the great quantity
of stones which were scattered all about . . .’ Liv. 36.16.1)
(h) Praeclarum illud est et, si quaeris, rectum quoque et verum ut . . .
(‘It is an excellent thing, if you look into it, a right and just thing, too, that . . .’ Cic.
Tusc. 3.73)
Supplement:
. . . turres, ubi mons iuvisset, in sexagenos pedes, inter devexa in centenos vicenosque
attollebantur . . . (Tac. Hist. 5.11.3)
. . . de duobus milibus ac ducentis. (Cato orat. 86); Caesa ibi milia hominum duo
ferme atque octingenti, capta quattuor milia ducenti septuaginta. (Liv. 10.39.3); In
Thessalia quattuor atque triginta (sc. montes sunt) . . . (Plin. Nat. 4.30)
Disputed are instances of single neque where negation of the first conjoin has to be
inferred (so-called ಱౝԒϑഢԒഌ use of neque), as in (e). The ms. reading is accepted by
Coordination
Löfstedt, but most editors emend the text.⁷⁸ The first case that is not usually emended
is (f), from Valerius Flaccus.
(e) Transierant illuc, [ut] rationem eius habendam qui <neque> exercitum
neque provincias traderet.
(‘They have come around to accept that a person should be allowed to stand
for office without handing over his army and provinces.’ Cael. Fam. 8.13.2—
following Watt’s OCT edition)
(f) . . . immanes quos sternere Bessi / nec Geticae potuere manus aut aequoris
irae.
(‘. . . the men whom neither the huge Bessi nor the Getic armies nor the anger
of the sea could overcome.’ V. Fl. 2.231–2)
The following sections deal with pairs or series of conjoins that are each marked by a
coordinator, so & A & B or & A & B & C. The coordinators involved are et, -que, and
neque. For atque there is only one reliable attestation. These forms of correlative
coordination must not be confused with cases in which the first coordinator actually
links a sequence of conjoins A & B to the preceding context, expressed in the formula
CONTEXT & (A & B) (see § 19.66).
⁷⁸ See Löfstedt (1942/1933: I.342–7) and Cavarzere ad loc., with references. See also K.-St.: II.562–3
and Sz.: 517 for further instances.
⁷⁹ It occurs eleven times in all, rarely in the senarian metre, though twice in prologues. See Sjögren
(1900: 130–1).
⁸⁰ It occurs a total of thirteen times in his Annales.
⁸¹ See Skutsch ad Enn. Ann. 184–4V=170–1S. The most complete study of the use of double -que in
hexameter poetry is Christensen (1908). For Plautus and Ennius—did he create it?—see Fraenkel (1922:
209–11) and Haffter (1934: 119).
⁸² Cic. Fin. 1.51 noctesque diesque is an Ennianism (cf. Cic. Sen. 1 and Powell ad loc.).
⁸³ For a historical survey, see Sz.: 515.
Conjunctive (or: copulative) coordinators
(b) Tibi paterque (que om. A) avosque facilem fecit et planam viam / ad quaerun-
dum honorem.
(‘Both your father and your grandfather gave you an easy and plain way for finding
distinction.’ Pl. Trin. 645–6)
(c) Proletarius publicitus scutisque feroque / ornatur ferro.
(‘The state-supported commoners were armed with shield and savage steel.’ Enn.
Ann. 183–4V=170–1S)
(d) . . . idque ita cecinere vates quique in urbe erant quosque ad eam rem con-
sultandam ex Etruria acciverant.
(‘. . . and such was the interpretation of the soothsayers, both those who were in the
City and those who were called in from Etruria to consider the matter.’ Liv. 1.55.6—
NB: see Weissenborn and Müller ad loc.)
(e) Etiam si bella externa . . . memorarem, meque (me v.l., see Wellesley in his
apparatus) ipsum satias cepisset aliorumque taedium expectarem . . .
(‘Even if I were narrating campaigns abroad . . . a sense of sufficiency would have taken
hold of me myself, and I would expect the tedium of others . . .’ Tac. Ann. 16.16.1)
Supplement:
Constituents:
Nouns and noun phrases: . . . huc opesque spesque vostrum cognoscendum con-
didi. (Pl. Rud. 1145); Educta ita uti teque illaque dignum’st. (Ter. Eu. 748); . . . popu-
lusque patresque / iactare indu foro se omnes . . . (Lucil. 1229–30M=1253–4K);
Quendam municipem meum de tuo volo ponte / ire praecipitem in lutum per
caputque pedesque . . . (Catul. 17.8–9); . . . seque remque publicam curabant. (Sal. Cat.
9.3); . . . et nos aliquod nomenque decusque / gessimus. (Verg. A. 2.89–90); . . . multam
in medio sine nomine plebem, / Fadumque Herbesumque subit Rhoetumque
Abarimque / ignaros. (Verg. A. 9.343–5—NB: a sequence of four); . . . ut et ipsa Iovis
coniunxque sororque / eventus Hecubam meruisse negaverit illos. (Ov. Met. 13.574–5);
Hoc fiduciam in posterum quoque praebuerat, levatos se oneribus[que] (edd.) inpen-
sisque, quibus, alia aliis inperantibus, exhauriebantur. (Liv. 43.17.3); . . . Arsacidarum
vi seque regnumque tutatus est. (Tac. Ann. 2.3.2)
Adjectives, adjectival phrases, and other attributes: Apud aedilis pro eius factis
plurumisque pessumisque / dixi causam . . . (Pl. Men. 590–1); . . . et mores veteresque
novosque †tenentem / multorum veterum leges divomque hominumque . . . (Enn.
Ann. 247–8V=283–4S); . . . dextrumque (dextrum v.l.) sinistrumque cornu, ubi ele-
phanti erant, in conspectu patenti adversariorum constituit. (B. Afr. 41.3);⁸⁴ . . . sed et
haec vilisque vetusque/ vestis erat . . . (Ov. Met. 8.658–9)
Adverbs: Ergo postque magisque viri nunc gloria claret. (Enn. Ann. 372V=365S);
Variae circumque supraque / adsuetae ripis volucres et fluminis alveo / aethera mul-
cebant . . . (Verg. A. 7.32–4)
Verbs: . . . Iam iam stupido Thessala somno / pectora languentque senentque. (Acc.
trag. 611–12); . . . hanc versa in faciem Turni se pestis ob ora / fertque refertque sonans
clipeumque everberat alis. (Verg. A. 12.865–6)
Clauses:
. . . eamque legem qui non servent . . . existumantur indoctique (indocti v.l.) esse dis-
putandique morem atque rationem non tenere. (Gel. 16.2.1)
Appendix: It is unlikely that the expression susque deque ‘both up and down’ (Pl. Am.
886, etc.) belongs here.⁸⁵ See also . . . susque omnia deque fuerunt, / susque et deque
fuere . . . (Lucil. 110–11M=108–9K)
(‘I also love and fear the gods . . .’ Pl. Poen. 282)
(g) Et te utar iniquiore et meus me ordo inrideat . . .
(‘I wouldn’t have you as my equal and the people of my class would laugh at me.’ Pl.
Aul. 232)
Correlatively coordinated nouns and noun phrases, as well as other conjoins, are ‘very
often’⁸⁷ preceded by expressions that emphasize that both conjoins are equally
involved, as utrimque and simul in (h) and (i).⁸⁸ Relatively often the conjoins belong
to different lexical or syntactic categories, as in (j), where a prepositional phrase and
a quod clause are coordinated (see also §§ 19.75–80). The greatest number of repeti-
tions of et on record is twelve.⁸⁹
(h) . . . utrimque est gravida, et ex viro et ex summo Iove.
(‘. . . she’s pregnant from both, from her husband and from great Jupiter.’ Pl. Am. 111)
(i) . . . iudices longius quam potestatem habeant progressuros, si simul et de reo
et de eo quem reus arguat iudicarint.
(‘. . . the judges will go beyond their authority if they pass judgement at the same time
on the defendant and the person whom the defendant accuses.’ Cic. Inv. 2.81)
(j) . . . L. Carpinatius, qui et sui quaestus causa et fortasse quod sociorum inter-
esse arbitrabatur, bene penitus in istius familiaritatem sese dedit.
(‘. . . Lucius Carpinatius, who both for his own profit and possibly also because he
believed it was in the interest of his associates, worked his way very thoroughly into
the intimacy of this man.’ Cic. Ver. 2.169)
Supplement:
Constituents:
Nouns and noun phrases: Deos quaeso ut adimant et patrem et matrem meos.
(Naev. trag. 95); . . . et datores et factores omnis subdam sub solum. (Pl. Cur.
297); . . . eduxi omnem legionem, et maris et feminas. (Pl. Mos. 1047); Putavit me et
aetate et benevolentia / plus scire et providere quam se ipsum sibi. (Ter. Hau.
115–16); . . . tertium (sc. genus) quod habet utrunque et tempora et casus . . . (Var. L.
6.36); Ita is cuius arbitrio et populus Romanus et exterae gentes contentae esse con-
suerunt ipse . . . contentus non fuit. (Cic. Clu. 134); Sin hoc et ratio doctis et necessitas
barbaris et mos gentibus et feris natura ipsa praescripsit . . . (Cic. Mil. 30); Utrumque
opus est, et cura vacare et negotio. (Cic. Leg. 1.8); Qua quidem voluntate <te> esse
erga Atticum saepe praesens et illi ostendisti et vero etiam mihi. (Cic. Att. 16.16b.2)
Adjectives, adjectival phrases, and other attributes: . . . animus induci potest /
eum esse civem et fidelem et bonum. (Pl. Per. 66–7); Quam multi sunt summi hom-
ines et ornatissimi et nostri et equestris ordinis quorum pro salute se hic Sullae obli-
gavit! (Cic. Sul. 72); Omnis et demonstrativa et deliberativa et iudicialis causa . . . (Cic.
⁸⁷ So TLL s.v. et 881.13. The TLL article is for all questions the most reliable source of information. The
number of examples given in this section is for that reason very small.
⁸⁸ In (h), the coordinated noun phrases could be taken as apposition of utrimque (see Spevak 2014a:
323–5).
⁸⁹ See TLL s.v. et 885.64ff.
Coordination
Inv. 2.12); Et ad scorpionis autem et aranei ictum alium cum ruta recte miscen-
tur . . . (Cels. 5.27.6—NB: position of autem)
Adverbs: . . . et bene et benigne facitis . . . (Pl. Poen. 589); . . . confiteareque aliquando
me quod faciam et grate et pie facere. (Cic. Planc. 98); . . . disputas tu quidem et aman-
ter et prudenter . . . (Cic. Att. 1.20.2)
Prepositional phrases: . . . ita et cum his et inter hos vixi . . . (Cic. Planc. 75); Multa
enim et in deos et in homines impie nefarieque commisit . . . (Cic. Ver. 1.6)
Finite and non-finite verb forms: Tum tu igitur sine me ire. # Et iubeo et sino. (Pl.
Per. 189); Ergo propterea te sedulo / et moneo et hortor ne quoiusquam mise-
reat . . . (Ter. Hec. 63–4); . . . magnas copias pulsas esse et vidimus et audivimus . . . (Cic.
Caec. 43); Ut igitur et monere et moneri proprium est verae amicitiae . . . (Cic. Amic.
91); Tu vero ut me et appelles et interpelles et obloquare et colloquare velim. (Cic. Q.
fr. 2.9.1—NB: four times)
Clauses:
Et salve et salvom te advenisse gaudeo. (Pl. Trin. 1097); Ita boves et corpore curatiores
erunt et morbus aberit. (Cato Agr. 103.1); Locus is melior, quem et non coquit sol et
tangit ros. (Var. R. 3.14.2); Ex quo simul utrumque, et huic accusare et illi condemnari,
necesse fuisse intellegetis. (Cic. Clu. 43); Etenim sine controversia et magna est et late
patet et ad multos pertinet et summo in honore semper fuit et clarissimi cives ei stu-
dio etiam hodie praesunt. (Cic. de Orat. 1.235—NB: five times); Quid est cur dubite-
mus dicere et sapientiam propter voluptates expetendam et insipientiam propter
molestias esse fugiendam? (Cic. Fin. 1.46); Nam hic uterque et id posuit quod con-
veniebat et tamen suae causae commodo consuluit. (Cic. Inv. 1.31); Nam et semper
me coluit diligentissimeque observavit et a studiis nostris non abhorret. (Cic. Fam.
13.22.1); ‘Et aequum postulare videtur’, inquit, ‘Hasdrubal, et ego tamen non censeo
quod petit tribuendum.’ (Liv. 21.3.3); Saepe et contemptus hostis cruentum certamen
edidit et incluti populi regesque perlevi momento victi sunt. (Liv. 21.43.11)
(b) Nimis demiror, Sosia, / qui illaec illic me donatum esse aurea patera sciat, /
nisi tu dudum hanc convenisti et narravisti haec omnia. / # Neque edepol ego
dixi neque istam vidi nisi tecum simul.
(‘I’m very surprised, Sosia, how she knows I was presented with a golden bowl there,
unless you met her before and told her about all this. # I haven’t told her, nor have I
seen her except together with you.’ Pl. Am. 765–8)
(c) . . . quorum animis avidis atque insatietatibus / nec lex nec sutor capere est
qui possit modum.
(‘. . . neither law nor cobbler can take the measure for their greedy hearts and grasping
natures.’ Pl. Aul. 487–8)
(d) . . . Publio tuo neque opera neque consilio neque labore neque gratia neque
testimonio defui.
(‘. . . then neither in my time nor in my advice nor in my effort nor in my friendship
nor in my testimony did I fail your son Publius.’ Cic. Fam. 5.17.2)
(e) . . . quibus nihil nec taetrius nec foedius excogitari potest.
(‘. . . nothing either more atrocious or more repulsive than these things can be con-
ceived.’ Cic. Off. 3.36)
(f) Haeduis se obsides redditurum non esse neque his neque eorum sociis iniu-
ria bellum inlaturum . . .
(‘He would not restore their hostages to the Aedui, and he would make war neither
on them nor on their allies without cause . . .’ Caes. Gal. 1.36.5)
Supplement:
Constituents:
Nouns and noun phrases: Nec tu illi nec mihi viro ipsi credis? (Pl. Am. 756); Nec
med umquam deseruisse te nec factis nec fide, / rebus in dubiis egenis. (Pl. Capt.
405–6—NB: an instance of epexegetic negation, see § 8.46); Adeon’ me ignavom
putas / . . . ut neque me consuetudo neque amor neque pudor / commoveat . . . (Ter.
An. 277–80); Nam neque neglegentia tua neque odio id fecit tuo. (Ter. Ph. 1016);
Reliqui fuerunt quos neque terror nec vis, nec spes nec metus, nec promissa nec
minae, nec tela nec faces a vestra auctoritate, a populi Romani dignitate, a mea salute
depellerent. (Cic. Red. Sen. 7)
Adjectives, adjectival phrases, and other attributes: Quid factis (sc. me arbitrare)?
# Nec malis neque improbis. (Pl. Aul. 213); . . . neque boni / neque liberalis functus
officium’st viri. (Ter. Ad. 463–4); . . . victorias . . . quarum nulla neque tam diuturnam
laetitiam attulit nec tantam. (Cic. Mil. 77)
Adverbs: Recte et vera loquere, sed nec vere nec <tu> recte adhuc / fecisti umquam.
(Pl. Capt. 960–1); Em neque domi nunc nos nec militiae sumus. (Enn. scen.
239V=200J); Neque istic neque alibi tibi erit usquam in me mora. (Ter. An. 420);
Verum ego quod invitus ac necessario facio neque diu neque diligenter facere
possum. (Cic. S. Rosc. 123)
Prepositional phrases: Nolo ego cum improbis te viris, gnate mi, / neque in via,
neque in foro necullum sermonem exsequi. (Pl. Trin. 281–2a—NB: an instance of
Coordination
epexegetic negation); Tu enim neque in litteris quas Neroni mittis neque in testimo-
nio causam tanti tumultus ostendis ullam. (Cic. Ver. 1.80)
Finite and non-finite verb forms: . . . nec dependes nec propendes . . . (Pl. As. 305);
Viri non esse neque exorari neque placari. (Cic. Mur. 61); . . . nullo modo nec divelli
nec distrahi possint . . . (Cic. Fin. 1.50)
Clauses:
. . . quae nec sunt facta neque ego in me ammisi arguit. (Pl. Am. 885); Nec tu me qui-
dem umquam subiges redditum ut reddam tibi / nec daturus sum. (Pl. Cur. 540–1);
Verum nec tu illum sati’ noveras / nec te ille. (Ter. Hau. 153–4); Haec igitur lex
in amicitia sanciatur, ut neque rogemus res turpes nec faciamus rogati. (Cic. Amic.
40); Nam nec hostes moverunt arma neque consul in agrum eorum legiones induxit.
(Liv. 43.9.1)
Correlative combinations of -que and et (in that order) are used from Early Latin
onwards, when they are even more common than -que . . . -que.⁹² Examples are (a) and
(b). The combination is not used by Cicero, Caesar, or Nepos. When used in poetry
and prose (especially when poeticizing), it represents an elevated archaism. The
sequences -que . . . -que . . . et and -que . . . et . . . et, etc. are also used (see the Supplement).
(a) . . . maxumas opimitates . . . / suis eris ille una mecum pariet, gnatoque et
patri . . .
(‘. . . along with me he’ll bring forth the greatest prosperity . . . for his masters, both son
and father . . .’ Pl. As. 282–3)
(b) . . . malaque et bona dictu / evomeret . . .
(‘. . . he would blurt out words both good and bad to say . . .’ Enn. Ann. 240–1V=274–5S)
Supplement:
Constituents:
Nouns and noun phrases: Sed optume eccum exit senex, patronus mihique et
vobis. (Pl. Rud. 705); Nimium ipse duru’ st praeter aequomque et bonum . . . (Ter. Ad.
64);⁹³ quamquam annisque et aetate hoc corpus putret (Pac. trag. 340); . . . ubi (sc.
terra) putorem umida nacta’st / intempestivis pluviisque et solibus icta. (Lucr.
6.1101–2); . . . fide accepta seque et sua omnia et oppidum proconsuli tradit. (B. Afr.
93.3); . . . Adherbali suadent uti seque et oppidum Iugurthae tradat . . . (Sal. Jug.
26.1); . . . venti / confligunt, Zephyrusque Notusque et laetus Eois / Eurus equis. (Verg.
A. 2.416–18); Ipsa subit manibusque undantis flectit habenas / cuncta gerens,
vocemque et corpus et arma Metisci. (Verg. A. 12.471–2); Te fontium qui celat
⁹² See Sjögren (1900: 131–2). For a survey of the instances, see TLL s.v. et 887.36ff.
⁹³ This example is discussed by Bagordo (2001: 82).
Conjunctive (or: copulative) coordinators
Clauses:
Illic tegumenque removit / et posuit pennas . . . (Ov. Met. 1.674–5)
The reverse order et . . . -que is less common, and many instances are rejected or
emended.⁹⁵ The first examples date from Cicero’s time. Unlike instances of -que . . . et,
occurrences of et . . . -que with words and phrases are rare (the first attested example of
its use with nouns is (c)) and most are found in prose, as in (d). They are probably
better regarded as a change of construction due to the complexity of the sentence.
(c) . . . debetis dare . . . operam ut quam paratissimi et (del. Cratander, edd.) ab
exercitu reliquisque rebus pro vestra salute . . . confligamus.
(‘. . . you should . . . take care that in military force and all other respects we are as well
equipped as possible to join battle in your defence . . .’ Brut. Planc. Fam. 11.13a.2—
NB: et outside the prepositional phrase and -que inside is very strange)
(d) . . . unusquisque vestrum qui et ipsi incensi sunt studio quod ad agrum colen-
dum attinet vitamque hanc rusticam . . . et honestissimam et suavissimam
esse arbitrantur.
(‘. . . each of you, who of their own accord are inspired by zeal for everything that
pertains to agriculture, and consider this country life . . . to be most honourable and
most agreeable.’ Cic. S. Rosc. 48)
Supplement:
Constituents:
Nouns and noun phrases: Namque temperatissimae ad utramque partem et cor-
porum membris animorumque vigoribus pro fortitudine sunt in Italia gentes. (Vitr.
6.1.11); Interim quae sunt communia et pomis omnibusque sucis saporum genera
XIII reperiuntur. (Plin. Nat. 15.106)
⁹⁴ For this example, usually but unnecessarily regarded as a quotation from Ennius, see Jocelyn (1969:
104–10).
⁹⁵ See TLL s.v. et 888.20ff. For (putative) cases of ‘redundant’ et . . . -que, see Goodyear ad Tac. Ann.
1.65.4.
Coordination
Clauses:
Namque et in Lysandri, qui Lacedaemoniorum clarissimus fuerat, statua quae Delphis
stabat in capite corona subito exstitit . . . stellaeque aureae, quae Delphis erant a
Lacedaemoniis positae post navalem illam victoriam Lysandri . . . stellae aureae, quas
dixi, Delphis positae paulo ante Leuctricam pugnam deciderunt neque repertae sunt.
(Cic. Div. 1.75); Quae quidem omnia et innumerabilia praeterea quis est quin intellegat
et eos qui fecerint dignitatis splendore ductos immemores fuisse utilitatum suarum
nosque, cum ea laudemus, nulla alia re nisi honestate duci? (Cic. Fin. 5.64—NB: Madvig
ad loc. is still worth reading); Igitur et Epaminondas, princeps meo iudicio Graeciae,
fidibus praeclare cecinisse dicitur, Themistoclesque aliquot ante annos cum in epulis
recusaret lyram, est habitus indoctior. (Cic. Tusc. 1.4); . . . quod et illa prima facile in con-
traria vitia convertuntur, ut exsistat ex rege dominus . . . quodque ipsa genera generibus
saepe conmutantur novis . . . (Cic. Rep. 1.69); . . . labore et perseverantia nautarum et (del.
Dinter) vim tempestatis superari posse sperabat praetervectosque Dyrrachium magna
vi venti nihilo setius sequebatur. (Caes. Civ. 3.26.3); Aeneas, quamquam et sociis dare
tempus humandis / praecipitant curae turbataque funere mens est, / vota deum primo
victor solvebat Eoo. (Verg. A. 11.2–4); Sed et hunc innata libido / exstimulat pron-
umque genus regionibus illis / in Venerem est. (Ov. Met. 6.458–60); . . . Nero et iuven-
tutem proximas per provincias quaesitam supplendis Orientis legionibus admovere
legionesque ipsas propius Armeniam conlocari iubet . . . (Tac. Ann. 13.7.1)
The correlative use of -que . . . atque is very rare; it is found from Lucretius (once) and
Virgil onwards. This combination primarily links pairs of constituents, as in (e), but
compare (f).⁹⁶
(e) . . . Bistoniasque plagas atque Ismara propter . . .
(‘. . . near the coasts of the Bistones and Ismara . . .’ Lucr. 5.31)
(f) Saepe exiguus mus / sub terris posuitque domos atque horrea fecit . . .
(‘Often under the ground the tiny mouse sets up a home and builds his storehouses . . .’
Verg. G. 1.181–2)
Supplement:
Nouns and noun phrases: Mortua quin etiam iungebat corpora vivis / componens
manibusque manus atque oribus ora . . . (Verg. A. 8.845–6); Et Acarnanas quos aegre
ferrent Aetoli a corpore suo diremptos restituturum se in antiquam formulam
iurisque ac dicionis eorum. (Liv. 26.24.7); Atque illa . . . seque ac maiores et posteros
municipali adultero foedabat . . . (Tac. Ann. 4.3.4)
Adjectives: . . . esto / liberque ac sapiens praetoribus ac Iove dextro. (Pers. 5.114–15)
Adverbs: . . . quidque furor valeat Penthea caede satisque / ac super ostendit. (Ov.
Met. 4.430–1)
The combination et . . . ac/atque is practically unattested, and most instances are dubi-
ous.⁹⁷ An example is (a).
(a) . . . ibi tum et pabulum multum, quod in campis aret, ac cultura arborum
aptior . . .
(‘. . . because there is abundant forage at that time, whereas it is dry in the plains, and
the cultivation of the trees is more convenient . . .’ Var. R. 1.6.5)
Correlative use of the combination nec/neque . . . -que (in that order) is attested from
Cicero onwards, but it is very rare. An example is (a). Some sequences are dubious, as
in (b).⁹⁸ All examples quoted in the literature concern coordination of clauses.
(a) Ex quo intellegitur nec intemperantiam propter se esse fugiendam tempe-
rantiamque expetendam . . .
(‘This clearly proves that Intemperance need not be shunned for its own sake, and
that Temperance should be coveted . . .’ Cic. Fin. 1.48)
(b) Sed nec illa extincta sunt alunturque potius et augentur cogitatione et memo-
ria mea et, si illis plane orbatus essem, magnum tamen adfert mihi aetas ipsa
solacium.
(‘But those experiences with him are not dead and are rather nourished and made
more vivid by my reflection and memory; and even if I were utterly deprived of them,
yet my age would of itself afford me great relief . . .’ Cic. Amic. 104)
Supplement:
. . . perficiam . . . ut neque bonus quisquam intereat paucorumque poena vos omnes
salvi esse possitis. (Cic. Catil. 2.28); Nec enim in Torquati sermone quicquam impli-
catum aut tortuosum fuit, nostraque, ut mihi videtur, dilucida oratio. (Cic. Fin. 3.3);
Nec enim divinationem quam probatis ullam esse arbitror fatumque illud esse quo
omnia contineri dicitis contemno. (Cic. Luc. 126); . . . si istic adfuissem, neque tibi
defuissem coramque meum dolorem tibi declarassem. (Serv. Fam. 4.5.1)
⁹⁸ It is taken as a combination nec/neque . . . -que by K.-St.: II.48 and by Powell in his (2006) OCT edi-
tion. Further instances can be found in Merguet (Phil.) s.v. nec 679, a.
⁹⁹ See TLL s.v. atque 1055.23ff.
¹⁰⁰ For a survey of the combinations, see TLL s.v. et 888.65ff.
Coordination
can be made explicit by the addition of tamen ‘nevertheless’ or vero ‘indeed’ (see the
Supplement).
(d) Nec munda adaeque es, ut soles (hoc sis vide, ut petivit / suspiritum alte), et
pallida es.
(‘You’re not as neat as usual (just look how she heaved a deep sigh) and you’re pale.’
Pl. Cist. 55–6)
(e) . . . Stloga, iudice hoc nostro, primario viro, qui et rem agnoscit neque homi-
nem ignorat.
(‘. . . Stloga, a juror in this case, an eminent man, and one who realizes what is going
on and is not ignorant.’ Cic. Flac. 46)
(f) C. Canius, eques Romanus, nec infacetus et satis litteratus . . .
(‘Gaius Canius, a Roman knight, a man not lacking wit and sufficiently literate . . .’ Cic.
Off. 3.58)
(g) . . . patebat via et certa neque longa.
(‘. . . a road safe and of no great length lay open before him.’ Cic. Phil. 11.4)
(h) . . . nam cetera neque enumerare et minus serere dignamur . . .
(‘. . . for we do not think it worthwhile to enumerate the rest, and still less to sow
them . . .’ Col. 2.10.24)
Supplement:
nec/neque . . . et:
Constituents:
Nouns and noun phrases: . . . idque neque amoris mediocris et ingeni summi ac
sapientiae iudico. (Cic. Att. 1.20.1); Hoc nec mihi placebat et multo illi minus. (Cic.
Att. 14.8.1)
Adjectives and adverbs: . . . ut ego, qui neque usu satis et ingenio parum possum,
cum patrono disertissimo comparer . . . (Cic. Quinct. 2); . . . M. Buculeius, homo
neque meo iudicio stultus et suo valde sapiens et ab iuris studio non abhor-
rens . . . (Cic. de Orat. 1.179); Ita caesi in medio praedatores, neque ad pugnam
viribus pares et ad fugam saeptis omnibus viis. (Liv. 2.11.10—NB: variation of
construction)
Clauses:
Vide, Parmeno, / quid agas, ne neque illi prosis et tu pereas. (Ter. Eu. 964–5); Ita neque
fumosa erunt et ardebunt bene. (Cato Agr. 130.1); Aberat omnis dolor, qui si adesset, nec
molliter ferret et tamen medicis plus quam philosophis uteretur. (Cic. Fin. 2.64); (sc.
natura animi atque vis) Quae si est una ex omnibus quae se ipse moveat, neque nata certe
est et aeterna est. (Cic. Rep. 6.28); Neque enim naves erant aliae quibus reportari possent
et omnia deerant quae ad reficiendas naves erant usui . . . (Caes. Gal. 4.29.4); . . . neque
regerentur magis quam regerent casus et eo magnitudinis procederent, ubi pro mor-
talibus gloria aeterni fierent. (Sal. Jug. 1.5); . . . super ripas Tiberis effusus lenibus stagnis
nec adiri usquam ad iusti cursum poterat amnis et posse quamvis languida mergi aqua
infantes spem ferentibus dabat. (Liv. 1.4.4); Sed neque cur morerer quicquam mihi
comperit actum, / et minus infestus quam fuit esse potest. (Ov. Pont. 1.2.93–4)
Conjunctive (or: copulative) coordinators
et . . . ne/neque:
Constituents:
Adjectives and adverbs: Neque segnius ad hostes bellum apparatur qui et parti
ante decoris memores neque ignari auctarum virium hostis suas quoque vires augent.
(Liv. 7.7.4); At olim et pauca erant balnea nec ullo cultu exornata. (Sen. Ep. 86.9)
Clauses:
Nam et in recentibus pomariis . . . alii conserunt hortos, alii quid aliud neque cum con-
valuerunt arbores, idem faciunt, ne violent radices. (Var. R. 1.23.6); Itaque intellegitis et
animum ei praesto fuisse nec consilium defuisse. (Cic. Phil. 13.13); . . . et beatus esse
poterit virtute una praeditus carens ceteris, nec tamen illud tibi concedetur, praeter
virtutem nihil in bonis esse ducendum. (Cic. Fin. 4.51); Nam et perturbatis animis
inducuntur—accepimus enim deorum cupiditates aegritudines iracundias—nec vero,
ut fabulae ferunt, bellis proeliisque caruerunt . . . (Cic. N.D. 2.70); . . . ita sunt Stoici
assensi, ut et quicquid honestum esset id utile esse censerent nec utile quicquam, quod
non honestum. (Cic. Off. 3.11); . . . et ego regem nostrum Cluilium causam huiusce esse
belli audisse videor, nec te dubito, Tulle, eadem prae te ferre. (Liv. 1.23.7)
Multiple coordination concerns the coordination of more than two conjoins either by
two or more syndetic devices or by a combination of syndetic and asyndetic devices,
with the first conjoin lacking its own coordinator. Examples of the first type are (a)
and (b), of the second (c) and (d) (asyndeton is marked by °). In (a), the same coord-
inator is repeated; (b) shows variation. In (c), the coordinator et follows two asyndeta;
in (d) the asyndetic batiocis follows two conjoins with an overt coordinator et. The
examples in this section exemplify coordination of nouns and noun phrases. For
other categories, see the following sections.
(a) Omnium primum salutem dicito matri et patri / et cognatis et si quem alium
benevolentem videris.
(‘First of all give my regards to my mother and father and relatives and if you see
anyone else who wishes me well.’ Pl. Capt. 389–90)
(b) . . . id petam id persequarque corde et animo atque auribus.
(‘. . . with heart, and mind, and ears I will look for and strive after what benefits you
most.’ Pl. Capt. 387)
(c) (sc. accipiam te) Lepido victu ° vino ° unguentis et inter pocula pulpamentis.
(‘With lovely food, wine, perfumes, and with titbits between the cups.’ Pl. Ps. 947)
(d) Quibus divitiae domi sunt scaphio et (scaphiis cj. Bothe)¹⁰¹ cantharis / ° bati-
ocis bibunt.
(‘Those who have wealth at home drink from a beaker, tankards, and goblets.’ Pl. St.
693–4)
¹⁰¹ Most editors follow Bothe, but see Sjögren (1900: 32) and TLL s.v. et 878.38f.
Coordination
¹⁰² Collections of instances can easily be found in the TLL s.v. atque and s.v. et, as well as in the lexica
to individual authors. For that reason, the Supplement is relatively brief.
Conjunctive (or: copulative) coordinators
[alia] meminisse, amare odisse, cupere timere, angi laetari, haec et similia eorum in
horum quattuor generum inesse nullo putat. (Cic. Tusc. 1.22); . . . qui a finibus
Allobrogum et lacu Lemanno et flumine Rhodano ad summas Alpes pertinent. (Caes.
Gal. 3.1.1); Iam adulescentulus cum declamaret, apte et convenienter [et decenter]
hoc genere utebatur. (Sen. Con. 7.pr.6); Illi ut segnem et desidem et circo ac theatris
corruptum militem, hi peregrinum et externum increpabant. (Tac. Hist. 2.21.4)
(with variation):
-que: Imbres fluctusque atque procellae <ferri> infensae frangere malum . . . (Pl.
Trin. 836); . . . quos hieme saltem in domos ac tecta reduci oporteat et aliquo tempore
anni parentes liberosque ac coniuges invisere . . . (Liv. 5.2.12)
. . . missis ad eum undique legatis obsidibusque datis et pace facta constituit
cohortes duas in Nantuatibus conlocare . . . (Caes. Gal. 3.1.4); Iunias triumphavit de
Cheruscis Chattisque et Angrivariis quaeque aliae nationes usque ad Albim colunt.
(Tac. Ann. 2.41.2)
ac/atque: Omnis enim calor ac frigus mediique tepores . . . (Lucr. 2.517); Contra
Vitellius ac Veranius ceterique Germanicum comitati tendebant . . . (Tac. Ann. 3.10.1)
Quibus rebus et agris et urbibus et nationibus rem publicam atque hoc imperium
et populi Romani nomen auxerunt. (Cic. S. Rosc. 50); Rura insuper arvis atque vine-
tis et pascuis silvisque varia . . . (Suet. Nero 31.1)
et: At ego te per crura et talos tergumque optestor tuom . . . (Pl. Rud. 635); . . . id eum
recte et ordine exque re publica fecisse . . . (Cic. Phil. 5.36); . . . propter virtutis cae-
lestem quandam et divinam tantamque praestantiam . . . (Cic. Fin. 5.95); . . . navibus
quas ex Pictonibus et Santonis reliquisque pacatis regionibus convenire iusserat . . .
(Caes. Gal. 3.11.5)
Est etiam quiete et pure atque eleganter actae aetatis placida ac lenis senectus. (Cic.
Sen. 13); Quem ego diem si videro et si in vestrum complexum venero ac si et vos et
me ipsum reciperaro, satis magnum mihi fructum videbor percepisse et vestrae pieta-
tis et meae. (Cic. Fam. 14.1.3); Idem hoc L. Lentulo, qui superiore anno consul fuerat,
et P. Lentulo consulari ac nonnullis aliis acciderat Rhodi. (Caes. Civ. 3.102.7)
(c) Apollo, quaeso te, ut des pacem propitius / ° salutem et sanitatem nostrae
familiae . . .
(‘Apollo, I ask you to give us peace in your mercy, health and well-being for our
household . . .’ Pl. Mer. 678–9)
It has been observed that sequences with final et or ac/atque are rare in Cicero and
Caesar; beginning with Madvig’s conjecture on (d) the attested instances have often
been emended in some way, without good reason.¹⁰³ Only cases like (e) were accepted,
where et is taken to mean omnino.¹⁰⁴ Certain cases are explained as belonging to dif-
ferent levels (see § 19.66).
(d) . . . rebus iis quas nos bonas ducimus concessit ut haberentur aptae¹⁰⁵ ° habiles
(aptae et habiles cj. Madvig, aestimabiles cj. Heine) et ad naturam accommo-
datae . . .
(‘. . . he allowed the things that we call goods to be considered “fitting”, “proper” and
“suited to nature” . . .’ Cic. Fin. 4.56)
(e) Vox ° gestus et omnis actio sine lepore (sc. erant).
(‘His voice, his gesture, and his whole delivery were without charm.’ Cic. Brut. 238)
Supplement:
-que: Mars pater, te precor quaesoque uti sies volens propitius mihi ° domo ° famili-
aeque nostrae (Cato Agr. 141.2); . . . eaque res vobis populoque Romano pacem ° tran-
quillitatem ° otium concordiamque adferat. (Cic. Mur. 1—NB: compare: . . . id quod
ego . . . adfero, pacem ° tranquillitatem ° otium. (Cic. Agr. 2.102)); . . . omnia non modo
dicere, verum etiam libenter ° audacter libereque dicere. (Cic. S. Rosc. 31); . . . ut . . . ea
res fauste ° feliciter prospereque eveniret (Cic. Mur. 2); Quae maiores nostri quia
valere censebant, idcirco omnibus rebus agendis ‘QUOD BONUM, ° FAUSTUM, °
FELIX ° FORTUNATUMQUE ESSET’ praefabantur . . . (Cic. Div. 1.102); . . . licet
magnifice ° graviter animoseque vivere . . . (Cic. Off. 1.92); . . . ex ea proficiscuntur
honestae voluntates ° sententiae ° actiones omnisque recta ratio . . . (Cic. Tusc.
4.34); . . . cuncta a Bestia ° Albino Metelloque imperata nave fecerant. (Sal. Jug.
77.4); . . . quod bonum ° fau<stum fe/l>ixque sit sod<alibus> (CIL VIII.
(Medeina))¹⁰⁶
ac/atque: I hac mecum intro, ubi tibi sit lepide victibus ° vino atque unguentis. (Pl.
Bac. 1181); Quid? <te> antepones Veneri iaientaculo? / # Me ° te atque hosce omnis.
(Pl. Cur. 73–4); Sed habet patrem quendam avidum ° miserum atque aridum . . . (Ter.
Hau. 526); . . . non est incredibile putandum istius quoque animum ferum ° crudelem
atque inhumanum cupide ad inimici perniciem profectum. (Rhet. Her. 2.29); . . . te
non tam res gestas quam mores (mores del. Madvig, mores et cj. Shackleton Bailey) °
instituta atque (institutamque cj. Lehmann) vitam imperatorum spectare solere . . .
(Cic. Fam. 15.4.14); . . . omnia removistis: avaritiam ° inperitiam atque superbiam.
(Sal. Jug. 85.45)
¹⁰³ See Merten (1893: 59–60) and Pinkster (1969). ¹⁰⁴ See, for example, TLL s.v. et 877.8ff.
¹⁰⁵ Some editors have apte in their apparatus criticus.
¹⁰⁶ Part of a Punic–Latin bilingual inscription discussed by Adams (2003b: 224–5).
Conjunctive (or: copulative) coordinators
et: . . . breve iam relicuom vitae spatium est: quin ego / voluptate ° vino et amore
delectavero. (Pl. Mer. 547–8); Sumito testam picatam ° eo prunam lenem indito ° suf-
fito serta et schoeno et palma, quam habent unguentarii, ° ponito in dolio et ope-
rito . . . (Cato Agr. 113.1); . . . eam confeci sine molestia / ° sine sumptu et sine dispendio.
(Ter. Eu. 928–9); . . . neget in [cornibus] bovom ° hominum et equorum natura simili-
tudines proportione constare. (Var. L. 9.33); Cum commiserari ° conqueri et ex illius
invidia deonerare aliquid et in te traicere coeperit . . . (Cic. Div. Caec. 46); . . . qui ex bello
(belli cj. Madvig) ° caede et fuga nunc primum audent contra M. Fonteium inermem
consistere. (Cic. Font. 14); In contemptionem adducentur, si eorum inertia ° negle-
gentia ° ignavia ° desidiosum studium et luxuriosum otium proferetur. (Cic. Inv.
1.22); Haec erunt quae . . . dicentur . . . in homines claros ° nobiles et honore usos . . . (Cic.
Inv. 1.103); In picturis alios horrida ° inculta ° abdita et (abdita et del. Madvig) opaca,
contra alios nitida ° laeta ° conlustrata delectant. (Cic. Orat. 36); . . . temperantia °
modestia ° iustitia et omnis honestas perfecte absoluta est. (Cic. Fin. 4.18); Qua de re
cum ad me ita suaviter ° diligenter ° officiose et humaniter (v.l. ° humaniter) scripseris
ut . . . (Cic. Att. 1.20.1); In controversiam autem veniebant Philippopolis ° Tricca °
Phaloria et Eurymenae et cetera circa eas oppida . . . (Liv. 39.25.3); . . . alios tormentis
hastas ° saxa et faces ingerere. (Tac. Ann. 2.81.2)¹⁰⁷
The reverse order—with two or more syndetically linked conjoins followed by one or
more asyndetically linked ones—is less common.¹⁰⁸ Examples are (f)–(h).
(f) Egomet autem quom extemplo arcum [mihi] et pharetram et sagittas sump-
sero ° / cassidem in caput, dormibo placidule in tabernaculo.
(‘But as soon as I have taken a helmet for my head and bow and quiver and
arrows . . . I’ll sleep calmly in the tent.’ Pl. Trin. 725–6)
(g) Itaque illi amanti suo hospiti morem gerit / nosque opera consilioque adhor-
tatur ° iuvat.
(‘And so the old man humours that lovesick guest of his and encourages and supports
us with help and advice.’ Pl. Mil. 136–7)
(h) Concedite atque apscedite omnes ° de via decedite . . .
(‘Get away and get out, all of you, get off the street . . .’ Pl. Am. 984)
¹⁰⁷ For a very complete survey of instances of et used for the last conjoin after a sequence of asyndeti-
cally linked conjoins, see TLL s.v. et 877.1ff. See also Lodge s.v. atque 180 § 17; s.v. et 538 § l.
¹⁰⁸ For et, see TLL s.v. 878.34ff.
Coordination
the Latin idiom than in others.¹⁰⁹ Dictionaries indicate cases in which a conjunctive
coordinator might be replaced by a disjunctive (rare) or an adversative coordinator.
Random examples from the scholarly literature are (a)–(c) and (d)–(f), respective-
ly.¹¹⁰ In reality, Latin authors apparently preferred to use a conjunctive coordinator in
these cases, and it is advisable to take the coordinator as a conjunctive coordinator
with its proper meaning.
(a) . . . sic animus nonnumquam laeditur ipse / laetitiaque viget . . .
(‘. . . so the mind sometimes feels pain by itself or waxes strong with joy . . .’ Lucr.
3.149–50—NB: see Kenney ad loc.)
(b) . . . nec sibi quaeque sine alterius vi posse videtur / corporis atque animi seor-
sum sentire potestas . . .
(‘. . . neither power of either body or mind can feel separately without the power of the
other . . .’ Lucr. 3.333–4—NB: Kenney’s paraphrase ad loc.)
(c) Vineis incensis, multis hostium volneratis et occisis consulum quoque
alterum . . . prope interfecerunt.
(‘Siege shelters were burned, many of their enemies were wounded or slayed, and one
of the consuls . . . they almost killed.’ Liv. 2.17.3)
(d) . . . homines, cum quaedam etiam praeclara cuperent eaque nescirent nec ubi
nec qualia essent . . . .
(‘. . . human beings, since they desire some things that are, indeed, noble but do not
know of these things where or of what nature they are . . .’ Cic. Tusc. 3.4)
(e) Sed ubi is nunc est? # Ubi ego minime atque ipsus se volt maxume.
(‘But where is he now? # Where I want him to be least and where he wants to be most.’
Pl. Capt. 640)
(f) Valeo et valui rectius.
(‘I’m well, but I’ve been better.’ Pl. Trin. 50)
Apart from the disjunctive and adversative interpretations illustrated above, others
may arise from the relationship between the meanings of the conjoins. These are also
mere interpretations and the coordinators retain their proper meaning.¹¹¹ A few
examples with et are (g)–(i).
(g) Perii et tu periisti.
(‘I’m dead, and you’re dead, too.’ Pl. Cas. 633—‘et etiam’)
(h) . . . omnia haec quae putantur in communi vitae consuetudine mala ac
molesta et fugienda . . .
(‘. . . all such things as in everyday life are thought evil and troublesome and
necessary to be shunned . . .’ Cic. de Orat. 1.221—‘et ideo’)
(i) . . . unguor, / ut illi placeam, et placeo, ut videor.
(‘. . . I use the ointment in order to please her. And I do seem to please her.’ Pl.
Cas. 227–8—‘et profecto’)
Other labels for what are in fact interpretations which are used in the literature are
‘epexegetic’,¹¹² as in (j), or ‘explicative’ ‘and so’,¹¹³ as in (k).
(j) . . . ipsa animi vis / . . . posset . . . / tandem in eodem homine atque in eodem
vase manere.
(‘. . . the force of mind itself could . . . at least remain in the same man or the
same vessel.’ Lucr. 3.790–3)
(k) Quod genus in nostris membris et corpore toto / mixta latens animi vis
est . . .
(‘Even as in our limbs and our whole body the force of the mind is secretly
intermingled . . .’ Lucr. 3.276–7)
The semantic relation between conjunctively linked conjoins can be made explicit or
more specific by adverbs of all sorts. Some of the most frequent combinations are item
‘as well’ + -que; atque/ac + adeo ‘and what is more’, etiam ‘and even’, quoque ‘and also’,
potius ‘and rather’, ita ‘and in that way’; et + etiam ‘and even’, quidem ‘and what is more’,
tamen ‘and yet’. See also maxime in (o).
(l) Nam si ita diceres, qui iuris consultus esset, esse eum oratorem, itemque qui
esset orator, iuris eundem esse consultum . . .
(‘For if you were to put it in this way, that the man learned in law is an orator,
and likewise the orator is at the same time one learned in the law . . .’ Cic. de
Orat. 1.236)
(m) Qui illum Persam atque omnis Persas atque etiam omnis personas / male di
omnes perdant!
(‘May all the gods ruin that Persian and all Persians and even all stage characters!’ Pl.
Per. 783–4)
(n) Pompeius N. Magium de pace misit et tamen oppugnatur.
(‘Pompey has sent N. Magius to sue for peace and is besieged just the same.’ Cic. Att.
9.13a.1)
(o) Ceteris de rebus maximeque de pecunia, cum Pansae mortem ignorares,
scripsisti . . .
(‘You write on other points, especially money, since you are unaware of Pansa’s
death . . .’ Cic. Fam. 12.30.6)
In § 4.38, two-place verbs that require an associative second argument are dis-
cussed. An example of this is the verb osculor ‘to kiss’, for which the associative
argument can be marked by cum ‘with’. With these types of verbs, the two entities
involved can also be expressed as a plural subject, with the two noun phrases coord-
inated by a conjunctive coordinator, as in (a), repeated from § 4.38. A mixed form
of expression is shown in (b). Here, the verb is in the plural although the subject
Syrus is singular, as both Syrus and ille voster are naturally involved in the action
consusurrant. The same phenomenon is also found with associative adjuncts (see
§ 10.72 fin.), as in (c), and with non-subject constituents, as in (d), where A. Cottam
cum T. Sabino behaves as a plural constituent with two coordinated members, as
appears from the plural form legatos.
(a) Modo nescioquis inspectavit . . . Philocomasium atque hospitem / osculantis.
(‘Just now someone saw . . . Philocomasium and my guest kissing.’ Pl. Mil. 174–6)
(b) Syru’ cum illo vostro consusurrant, conferunt / consilia ad adulescentes.
(‘Syrus is whispering with that slave of yours, and they’re reporting their plans to the
young men.’ Ter. Hau. 473–4)
(c) Cana Fides et Vesta, Remo cum fratre Quirinus / iura dabunt.
(‘White-haired Faith and Vesta, Quirinus with his brother Remus, shall give laws.’
Verg. A. 1.292–3)
(d) Aurunculeium Cottam cum Titurio Sabino legatos amisimus.
(‘We lost the lieutenant-generals Aurunculeius Cotta and Titurius Sabinus.’ Flor. Epit.
1.45.10)
This use of cum, more or less equivalent to et or ac/atque, resembles the use of comita-
tive coordinators in other languages.¹¹⁴ However, it is not a productive coordinating
device in Latin.¹¹⁵
Supplement:
Scipio interim cum Damasippo et Torquato et Plaetorio Rustiano navibus longis
diu multumque iactati cum Hispaniam peterent . . . (B. Afr. 96.1); . . . Demosthenes
cum ceteris qui bene de re publica meriti existimabantur populi scito in exilium
erant expulsi. (Nep. Phoc. 2.2); Summisere oculos cum duce turba suo. (Ov. Fast.
3.372); Nam et castra expugnata sunt atque ipse dux cum aliquot principibus capi-
untur. (Liv. 21.60.7); Hermeros / cum Phile / tero · et Caphi / so hic · futu /
erunt (CIL IV.2192 (Pompeii)); Apelles Mus cum fratre Dextro / amabiliter ·
futuimus bis / bina(s). (CIL IV.10678 (Pompeii)); Annua nunc maestis ferimus
tibi iusta querellis / . . . cum genero et natis consocer Ausonius (Auson. 189.
11–12S=X.30.11–12 Green)
¹¹⁴ For a survey of languages using the AND and the WITH device, see Stassen (2000).
¹¹⁵ For further examples, see TLL s.v. cum 1377.72ff. ‘de structura q.d. ad sensum’.
Disjunctive (or: alternative) coordinators
Fecit amor . . . volucres cum paelice regem . . . (Ov. Tr. 2.389); tituli heic / ordi-
nantur et / sculpuntur / aedibus sacreis / qum operum / publicorum (CIL
X. (Panormus))¹¹⁶
Latin has four disjunctive coordinators: aut, vel, -ve, and sive (seu). Of these aut is by
far the most common in all periods of Latin and is the one which has left its traces in
the Romance languages (e.g. Fr. ou). Although it can be used to link two mutually
exclusive alternatives from Early Latin onwards (for examples, see § 19.45), which is
considered its original purpose,¹¹⁷ it is more common as a non-exclusive coordinator,
especially in negative contexts (where English may use and/or). In Early and Classical
Latin, vel is the second most frequent disjunctive coordinator, but is all but absent
from certain authors, like Caesar and Livy. Its original meaning ‘or if you wish’¹¹⁸
applies in some cases in Early and Classical Latin (obviously not in legal texts). Often
it is more or less equivalent to non-exclusive aut, but, unlike aut, it is usually used in
positive contexts. The frequency of its use in a given text depends on the authorial
preference. It is relatively frequent in Silver and Late Latin, especially with the
jurists.¹¹⁹ The clitic coordinator -ve is the least frequent. It is used in legal contexts in
Early and Classical Latin. Due to its clitic nature it is common with pronouns and
subordinators (for example sive) and has certain metrical advantages in poetry. Its
meaning is more or less equivalent to vel. It disappeared early on from the spoken
language.¹²⁰ The words sive (in inscriptions also seive) and seu can be used in the same
contexts, though the former is rare in poetry.
All four of these coordinators can be used to link pairs of conjoins (simple coord-
ination, §§ 19.44–9). The coordinators aut, vel, sive, and to some extent -ve can also be
used in such a way that all conjoins are marked by a coordinator (correlative coordin-
ation, §§ 19.50–6). The same coordinators can furthermore be used for combinations
Of the four disjunctive coordinators, vel and sive are not used for simple coordination
as often as for correlative or multiple coordination.
Aut can link various types of constituents, but is also used to link clauses. In addition
to examples above consider (f)–(j). For the use of aut as a connector, see § 24.21.
(f) Ubi ego nunc Libanum requiram aut familiarem filium . . .?
(‘Where should I now look for Libanus or for our young master . . .?’ Pl. As. 267—two
noun phrases)
(g) Non mihi isti placent Parmenones, Syri, / qui duas aut tris minas auferunt
eris.
(‘I don’t like those Parmenos and Syruses, who take two or three minas away from
their masters.’ Pl. Bac. 649–50)
(h) Nisi qui illud tractat aut movet, mutum est, tacet.
(‘Unless someone pulls at it or moves it, it’s silent and quiet.’ Pl. Trin. 1005)
(i) Certen’ vidit? # Tam hercle certe quam ego te aut tu me vides.
(‘Has he seen her for certain? # For as certain as I see you or you me.’ Pl. Mer. 186)
(j) Leno, tu autem amicam mihi des facito aut [auri] mihi reddas minam.
(‘Pimp, you, on the other hand, must make sure to give me a girlfriend or to return
my mina to me.’ Pl. Poen. 1414)
Supplement:
Constituents:
Nouns and noun phrases: . . . quis parentem aut hospitem necasset . . . (Enn. scen.
211–12V=177–8J); Quid tibi hanc curatio est rem, verbero, aut muttitio? (Pl. Am.
519); Atque hoc idem in parentis, in amici re aut periculo fecerit. (Cic. Off. 1.154);
Nec tamen omnes possunt esse Scipiones aut Maximi . . . (Cic. Sen. 13); Neque quis-
quam agri modum certum aut fines habet proprios . . . (Caes. Gal. 6.22.2)
Adjectives, adjectival phrases, and other attributes: . . . si esse salvom vis me aut
vitalem tibi. (Pl. Bac. 998); Em nunc ipsast opus ea aut, siquid potest, / meliore et
callidiore. (Ter. Ph. 227–8); . . . neque homini infanti aut impotenti iniuste facta con-
ducunt . . . (Cic. Fin. 1.52); . . . fractique motus, quales protervorum hominum aut
mollium esse solent, contra naturam sunt . . . (Cic. Fin. 5.35); . . . quod ex omnibus sae-
culis vix tria aut quattuor nominantur paria amicorum. (Cic. Amic. 15); . . . uti inter
novissimum hostium agmen et nostrum primum non amplius quinis aut senis mili-
bus passuum interesset. (Caes. Gal. 1.15.5); . . . noctu dimittunt eos quos aut aetate aut
viribus inferiores aut inermes habebant . . . (Hirt. Gal. 8.14.1)
Adverbs: Quia, si facias recte aut commode, / me sinas curare ancillas, quae mea
est curatio. (Pl. Cas. 260–1); . . . hos ego asotos bene quidem vivere aut beate numquam
dixerim. (Cic. Fin. 2.23); . . . non esse in iis partem maximam positam beate aut secus
vivendi. (Cic. Fin. 4.59); Non haec omnia fortuito aut sine consilio accidere potuisse.
(Caes. Gal. 7.20.2)
Prepositional phrases: Ni pagunt, in comitio aut in foro ante meridiem causam
conicito. (Lex XII 1.7); Hoc genus oleae in XXV aut in XXX pedes conserito. (Cato
Agr. 6.1); . . . omnia exempla cruciatusque edere, si qua res non ad nutum aut ad
voluntatem eius facta sit. (Caes. Gal. 1.31.12)
Verbs: Servin’ uxorem ducent aut poscent sibi? (Pl. Cas. 69—NB: non-exclusive in
question); Nam omnia quae sumenda quaeque legenda aut optanda sunt inesse
debent in summa bonorum . . . (Cic. Fin. 4.46); . . . quom aliquid minutatim et grada-
tim additur aut demitur. (Cic. Luc. 49)
Clauses:
. . . si vos eximat vinculis / aut solutos sinat quos argento emerit. (Pl. Capt. 204–5);
Dabitur malum, / me quidem si attigeris aut si propius ad me accesseris. (Pl. Men.
Coordination
856–7); Quasi vero quicquam sit tam valde quam nihil sapere vulgare aut quasi tibi
ipsi in iudicando placeat multitudo! (Cic. Div. 2.81); Quis, quaeso, inquit, est qui
quid sit voluptas nesciat aut qui, quo magis id intellegat, definitionem aliquam desi-
deret? (Cic. Fin. 2.6)
¹²³ The examples of negative contexts are taken from Orlandini (2001: 119–21).
Disjunctive (or: alternative) coordinators
(f) Neque satis Bruto, qui classi praeerat, vel tribunis militum centurionibusque,
quibus singulae naves erant attributae, constabat quid agerent . . .
(‘Nor did it appear clear to Brutus, who commanded the fleet, or to the military trib-
unes and the centurions, to whom the individual ships were assigned, what to do . . .’
Caes. Gal. 3.14.3)
(g) Si copias armatorum, si causas belli secum expenderent, vincendum illa acie
vel cadendum esse.
(‘If they considered in their own hearts the forces of armed men and the motives of
the war, on that field they must conquer or fall.’ Tac. Ann. 14.35.2)
Supplement:
Constituents:
Nouns and noun phrases: Meam tu amicam vendidisti? # Valide, viginti minis. / #
Viginti minis? # Utrum vis, vel quater quinis minis . . . (Pl. Ps. 344–5); Tantus igitur te
stupor oppressit vel, ut verius dicam, tantus furor ut . . . (Cic. Phil. 2.65); Magno in
dolore, patres conscripti, vel maerore potius . . . inest tamen aliquid quod rei publicae
profuturum putem. (Cic. Phil. 11.1); Cum, ut scitis, hoc triduo vel quadriduo tristis a
Mutina fama manaret . . . (Cic. Phil. 14.15); Ceteros veniae vel saevitiae Vitellii reliquit.
(Tac. Hist. 1.68.2); Quicumque casus temporum illorum nobis vel aliis auctoribus
noscent . . . (Tac. Ann. 14.64.3)
Adjectives, adjectival phrases, and other attributes: <Ins>omnis vel si quis est
seniosus, hac eadem curatione sanum facies. (Cato Agr. 157.8); Ex hoc enim populo
indomito vel potius immani deligitur aliqui plerumque dux . . . (Cic. Rep. 1.68); At
enim eadem Stoici ‘praecipua’ vel ‘producta’ dicunt quae ‘bona’ isti. (Cic. Tusc.
5.47); . . . ut quisque Pannonici vel Germanici exercitus militibus oblatus esset . . . (Tac.
Hist. 1.26.1)
Adverbs: Caruitne febris te heri vel nudiustertius? (Pl. Cur. 17); . . . quando hinc vel
illinc appellere indiscretum et innoxium est. (Tac. Hist. 3.47.3)
Prepositional phrases: Dodrantes horarum, cum minimum, intervalla ea deside-
rant ante solis ortum vel post occasum, ut aspici possint. (Plin. Nat. 18.219)
Verb forms: . . . Carbone et Cassio et Scauro Aurelio et Servilio Caepione
Maximoque Mallio fusis vel captis . . . (Tac. Ger. 37.5)
Conditional clauses: . . . si tum auxilia Pompeio vel si etiam filium misisset, ipse
aetatis excusatione usus esset. (Cic. Deiot. 9)
Clauses:
Servi ne opsideant, liberis ut sit locus, / vel aes pro capite dent. (Pl. Poen. 23–4); Lege
vel tabellas redde. (Pl. Ps. 31); Atque utinam his omnibus abstergere fletum sententiis
nostris consultisque possemus vel aliqua talis eis adhiberi publice posset ora-
tio . . . (Cic. Phil. 14.34); Unum illud extimescebam, ne quid turpiter facerem vel
dicam iam ne fecissem. (Cic. Att. 9.7.1); Ubii autem, qui uni ex Transrhenanis ad
Caesarem legatos miserant, amicitiam fecerant, obsides dederant, magnopere ora-
bant ut sibi auxilium ferret, quod graviter ab Suebis premerentur; vel si id facere
occupationibus rei publicae prohiberetur, exercitum modo Rhenum transportaret.
(Caes. Gal. 4.16.5)
Coordination
¹²⁴ Cicero uses -ve some two hundred times. See also Merguet (Phil.); it is absent from Merguet
(Reden).
Disjunctive (or: alternative) coordinators
assigned or left to any person or has entered or ordered to be entered in the plans and
registers . . .’ CIL I2.585.6–7 (Lex Agr., 111 bc)
(g) Quid mihi scelesto tibi erat auscultatio, / quidve hinc abitio quidve in navem
inscensio?
(‘What induced a wretch like me to listen to you? Or what to go away from here? Or
what to go aboard a ship?’ Pl. Rud. 502–3)
(h) Eho Mysis, puer hic unde’st? Quisve huc attulit?
(‘Hey there, Mysis, where does this baby come from? Or who brought it here?’ Ter.
An. 748—NB: usually printed as two sentences)
Since most of the conjoins linked by -ve in Plautus are not really contrastive alter-
nates, Langen (1880) thought that its original function was not disjunctive but con-
junctive, being more or less equivalent to -que. This idea now has few if any adherents,
but it left its traces in Lodge’s Lexicon.
For its function as a clitic the same observations hold that are made concerning
-que in § 19.25.
Supplement:
Constituents:
Nouns and noun phrases: Uti legassit super [familia] pecunia tutelave suae rei, ita
ius esto. (Lex XII 5.3); <monuit res> / aut occasus ubi tempusve audere, repressit
(Enn. Ann. 294V=254–5S);¹²⁵ . . . quasi magistratum sibi alterive ambiverit. (Pl. Am.
74); Numquid est / aliud mali damnive quod non dixeris / relicuom? (Ter. Eu. 994–6);
Corbes ab eo quod eo spicas aliudve quid corruebant. (Var. L. 5.139); Num, quod
maximum est, leges nostras moresve novit? (Cic. Phil. 5.13); Ut saepe in hilaritatem
risumve (sc. animos) convertat. (Cic. Orat. 138); Cur stella Iovis aut Veneris con-
iuncta cum luna ad ortus puerorum salutaris sit, Saturni Martisve contraria? (Cic.
Div. 1.85); . . . pluris esse contendat dulcedinem corporis ex eave natam laetitiam
quam gravitatem animi atque constantiam. (Cic. Fin. 3.1—NB: position -ve); . . . verba
illa UTI NE PROPTER TE FIDEMVE TUAM CAPTUS FRAUDATUSVE SIM. (Cic.
Off. 3.70); Non illis omnibus arma / nec clipei currusve sonant. (Verg. A. 7.685–6);
Qui aedes acervumve frumenti iuxta domum positum conbusserit, vi<n>ctus ver-
beratus igni necari iubetur . . . (Gaius dig. 47.9.9)
Adjectives, adjectival phrases, and other attributes: Si uno duobusve dubitabit,
sic verba concipito. (Cato Agr. 141.4); Post hanc habitam contionem duabus tribusve
horis optatissimi nuntii et litterae venerunt. (Cic. Phil. 14.16); Quod enim munus rei
publicae adferre maius meliusve possumus . . . (Cic. Div. 2.4); Sic enim res se habet, ut
ad prosperam adversamve fortunam qualis sis aut quem ad modum vixeris nihil
intersit. (Cic. N.D. 3.89)
Adverbs: Quaere obsecro, / nequid plus minusve faxit quod nos post pigeat, Geta.
(Ter. Ph. 553–4); Progredientibus autem aetatibus sensim tardeve potius quasi nos-
met ipsos cognoscimus. (Cic. Fin. 5.41); . . . cavetque ne quid indecore effeminateve
faciat . . . (Cic. Off. 1.14); A te vero bis terve summum et eas (sc. litteras) perbrevis
accepi. (Cic. Fam. 2.1.1)
Prepositional phrases: <Quibusquom ioudicium> fuit fueritve ex lege quam
L. Calpurnius . . . rogavit exve lege quam M. Iunius . . . rogavit . . . (CIL I2.583.74
(Lex Acilia, 122 bc)); . . . ne quis ad concilium sociorum referret agendas apud sena-
tum pro praetoribus prove consulibus grates . . . (Tac. Ann. 15.22.1); . . . edictum per
manipulos ne quis in certamine iurgiove seditionem aut cladem commilitoni obiec-
taret. (Tac. Hist. 4.72.4)
Verb forms: Quotiens te votui Argyrippum filium Demaeneti / compellare aut
contrectare colloquive aut contui? (Pl. As. 522–3); Nam si id facis facturave es . . . (Ter.
Hec. 739); Nec enim satis est iudicare quid faciendum non faciendumve sit . . . (Cic.
Fin. 1.47—NB: position of -ve not after non); (sc. corpus) . . . quod dirimi distrahive
non possit. (Cic. N.D. 3.29); . . . nec veterum memini laetorve malorum. (Verg. A.
11.280); Additur senatus consulto, qui talem operam emptitasset vendidissetve per-
inde poena teneretur . . . (Tac. Ann. 14.41)
Relative clauses: Serviendae servituti ego servos instruxi mihi, / hospes, non qui
mi imperarent quibusve ego essem obnoxius. (Pl. Mil. 745–6)
Subordinate clauses with ne: Blepharo, quaeso ut advocatus mi assis neve abeas. (Pl.
Am. 1037); . . . dum ne manufesto hominem opprimat neve enicet. (Pl. Bac. 867); Dictum
hoc inter nos fuit / . . . ne tu curares meum / neve ego tuom? (Ter. Ad. 796–8); . . . vereor ne
illud graviu’ Phaedria / tulerit neve aliorsum atque ego feci acceperit . . . (Ter. Eu.
81–2); . . . quod habeat rationem ne cui falso adsentiamur neve umquam captiosa proba-
bilitate fallamur . . . (Cic. Fin. 3.72); Isdemque temporibus cavendum est ne assentatori-
bus patefaciamus aures neve adulari nos sinamus, in quo falli facile est. (Cic. Off. 1.91)
Conditional clauses: Verum qui improbu’st si quasi bibit / sive adeo caret temeto,
tamen ab ingenio improbu’st. (Pl. Truc. 832–3); Illa te, si adulterares sive tu adulte-
rarere, digito non auderet contingere neque ius est. (Cato orat. 222); . . . si quis occen-
tavisset sive carmen condidisset quod infamiam faceret flagitiumve alteri. (Cic. Rep.
4.12); Si minus id commodo rei publicae facere posses sive non existimares ex re
publica esse, ut in isdem locis exercitum contineres. (Cic. ad Brut. 13.1(1.5.1));
Praeterea senatus censuit, ut si tutor pupilli pupillaeve suspectus a tutela remotus sit
sive ex iusta causa fuerit excusatus, in locum eius alius tutor detur . . . (Gaius Inst. 1.182)
NB: with reduction of common element(s) (especially the verb) in one of the two
clauses: Tua quidem ille causa potabit minus, / si (cj. Bothe; sive P (deest A)) illic sive
alibi lubebit? (Pl. Men. 792–3); . . . si quis pro se sive pro altero rationem dari volet,
voca[t] inlicium huc ad me. (Var. L. 6.86—NB: quotation from the Censoriae
Tabulae); . . . ut si arborum trunci sive trabes deiciendi operis causa essent a barbaris
missae, his defensoribus earum rerum vis minueretur . . . (Caes. Gal. 4.17.10); Si atro
die faxit insciens, probe factum esto. Si nocte sive luce, si servus sive liber faxit, probe
factum esto. (Liv. 22.10.6—NB: part of a rogatio)
NB: poetic sive . . . si: Sive sacro pavi sedive sub arbore sacra / pabulaque e bustis inscia
carpsit ovis, . . . da veniam culpae. (Ov. Fast. 4.749–55)
Clauses (general):
Si ei fort’ fuisset febris, / censerem emori; cecidissetve ebrius aut de equo uspiam, /
metuerem ne ibi diffregisset crura aut cervices sibi. (Pl. Mil. 720–2); De(h)inc postulo
Disjunctive (or: alternative) coordinators
sive aequom’st te oro, Dave, ut redeat iam in viam. (Ter. An. 190—NB: -ve links the
entire complex clause si . . . viam to the preceding clause); Nam si omnes atomi
declinabunt, nullae umquam cohaerescent, sive aliae declinabunt, aliae suo nutu
recte ferentur, primum erit hoc quasi provincias atomis dare . . . (Cic. Fin. 1.20—NB:
-ve links the entire complex clause si . . . atomis dare to the preceding clause);¹²⁶ Sin
quando aut regi iusto vim populus attulit regnove eum spoliavit aut etiam, id quod
evenit saepius, optimatium sanguinem gustavit . . . (Cic. Rep. 1.65); Non equidem
insector delendave carmina Livi / esse reor. (Hor. Ep. 2.1.69–70)
Direct questions: Quid petam praesidi aut exequar quove nunc / auxilio exili aut
fugae freta sim? (Enn. scen. 86–7V=81–2J); Quid tu’s tristi’ quidve’s alacris? (Ter. Eu.
304—NB: usually printed as two sentences); Quis enim hippocentaurum fuisse aut
Chimaeram putat quaeve anus tam excors inveniri potest quae . . . (Cic. N.D. 2.5)
Indirect questions: . . . ut saltem sciam / quid de hac re dicat quidve sit sententiae.
(Ter. Ph. 443–4); . . . unde omnia orerentur quove reciderent . . . (Cic. Tusc. 5.10); A
quibus cum quaereret Caesar quo loco multitudo esset Bellovacorum quodve esset
consilium eorum . . . (Hirt. Gal. 8.7.3); . . . quae loca, quive habeant homines, ubi moe-
nia gentis / vestigemus . . . (Verg. A. 7.131–2)
NB: Indirect question with si (see § 15.57): De ipsa autem testa si sit optima seu
vitiosa ad structuram statim nemo potest iudicare . . . (Vitr. 2.8.19)
In (b) and (c) and in the Supplement, clauses with sive/seu follow a conditional clause
with si or an indirect question and have the same conditional or interrogative mean-
ing: ‘if . . . or if ’ and ‘(to see) whether . . . or’, respectively. The notation sive suggests
that in the period in which these examples were produced they were understood by
the speakers and writers of Latin as combinations of si and -ve. However, this need
not be the case; in these contexts sive may already have been regarded and used as
one word to indicate an alternative condition (or an alternative indirect question).
Also, the fact that seu can be used in the same contexts as sive suggests that sive was
one word; whatever its etymology, it is unlikely that synchronically seu was regarded
as containing the suffixed clitic -ve.¹²⁷ In the same way, the correlative pair sive . . . sive,
which can carry the same meaning as the si . . . sive cases described above (see § 16.65),
need not—and in fact should not—be described as the pair -ve . . . -ve in combination
with si clauses. The use of -ve . . . -ve in other contexts is rare (see § 19.53).
Sibullae, una seu plures fuere . . . (Tac. Ann. 6.12.3); Plurimum coeptis contulerunt
iactatum exemplar epistulae verae sive falsae defuncti Othonis ad Vespasianum . . .
(Suet. Ves. 6.4)
Prepositional phrases: Titio vina quae in urbe habeo seu in portu do lego. (Paul.
dig. 34.2.30)
Verb forms: Postremo eiecto sive emisso iam ex urbe Catilina ille arma misit . . . (Cic.
Sul. 17); Dixit Pompeius sive voluit. (Cic. Q. fr. 2.3.2); . . . nec timuit . . . rabiem Noti, /
quo non arbiter Hadriae / maior, tollere seu ponere volt freta. (Hor. Carm. 1.3.
12–16); . . . tertium illud, utrocumque est nomine, delectandi sive, ut alii dicunt, con-
ciliandi praestare videatur officium . . . (Quint. Inst. 12.10.59)
Clauses:
Nam dispulsa suo de coetu materiai / copia ferretur magnum per inane soluta / sive
adeo potius numquam concreta creasset / ullam rem . . . (Lucr. 1. 1017–20)
¹²⁸ For discussion and further examples, see Goodyear ad loc. See also Sánchez Martínez (2000: 457).
¹²⁹ For further instances, see TLL s.v. 6.83ff. For Tacitus, see Eriksson (1934: 70ff.). For later develop-
ments, see Norberg (1944: 99–100).
Coordination
(a) Themistocles quidem, cum ei Simonides an quis alius artem memoriae pol-
liceretur, ‘Oblivionis’, inquit, ‘mallem.’
(‘Themistocles at all events, when Simonides or someone else offered to teach him
the art of memory, replied that he would prefer the art of forgetting.’ Cic. Fin. 2.104)
(b) Cum signaretur argentum Apolloniae, non possum dicere eum non praefu-
isse neque possum negare adfuisse, sed non plus duobus an tribus mensibus.
(‘When money was minted at Apollonia, I cannot assert that he was not in charge,
and I cannot deny that he was present, but for no more than two or perhaps three
months.’ Cic. Fam. 13.29.4)
(c) Is dicitur vidisse Quintum an (del. Ernesti) euntem an iam in Asia.
(‘He is said to have seen Quintus on his way or maybe already in Asia.’ Cic. Att. 11.6.7)
Supplement:
Saucius an sanus numquid tua signa reliqui? (Ov. Fast. 4.7); . . . finem vitae sponte an
fato implevit. (Tac. Ann. 2.42.3); (sc. Tiberius) . . . ut solitum per illos dies egit, altitu-
dine animi an compererat modica (sc. bella Germanorum) esse et vulgatis leviora.
(Tac. Ann. 3.44.4); Simul Civilis ausus an ex composito intulit se agmini Tungrorum.
(Tac. Hist. 4.66.2); Horum omnium vix duos anne tres incolumis praestitit . . . (Suet.
Tib. 55.1)
This use of an is a further development of its regular use in multiple questions, with
examples like (d) serving as a bridge between the two usages.¹³⁰
(d) Quo mihi etiam indignius videtur obtrectatum esse adhuc Gabinio dicam
anne Pompeio an utrique, id quod est verius . . .
(‘And this in my opinion makes even more ungracious the opposition which
has hitherto been offered, whether to spite Gabinus or Pompeius, or, as is
nearer the truth, both of them . . .’ Cic. Man. 57)
All four disjunctive coordinators are also used correlatively, aut and vel from Early
Latin onwards, sive from Cicero onwards, and -ve in poetry, with an early example in
Ennius. For details about the constellations in which each can be used, see the indi-
vidual sections that follow. In Late Latin, aut . . . aut and vel . . . vel lose their adversative
meaning and are more or less equivalent to et . . . et.¹³¹
¹³⁰ See TLL s.v. 6.61ff. ¹³¹ See Väänänen (1987: 118).
Disjunctive (or: alternative) coordinators
(Cic. Luc. 95); Nam fortasse . . . calamitatem aut propriam suam aut temporum queri . . .
etiam mediocris est animi. (Caes. Civ. 3.20.3)
Adverbs: . . . ut rem divinam faciat, aut hodie aut heri. (Pl. Rud. 130); si enim inter
visa < * * nihil interesset>, (sc. sapiens adsensionem) aut semper sustineret aut num-
quam. (Cic. Luc. 53)
Prepositional phrases: . . . ibit istac, aliquo, in maxumam malam crucem, / latroci-
natum, aut in Asiam aut in Ciliciam. (Pl. Trin. 598–9); Necesse est quid aut ad natu-
ram aut contra sit a natura ipsa iudicari. (Cic. Fin. 1.30); . . . confideretque se fruiturum
aut in omni aut in magna parte vitae dolore non interveniente . . . (Cic. Tusc. 3.38)
Verb forms: Quotiens te votui Argyrippum filium Demaeneti / compellare aut
contrectare, colloquive aut contui? (Pl. As. 522–3—NB: non-exclusive: interrogative
sentence); Quin tu huic respondes aliquid, / aut facturum aut non facturum? (Pl. Mil.
1067–8—NB: exclusive in an interrogative sentence); . . . si pleraque somnia aut igno-
rantur aut negleguntur . . . (Cic. Div. 2.125); Ita semper angi aut accipiendo aut cogi-
tando malo. (Cic. Tusc. 3.32); Reliquos omnes earum turmarum aut interfecerunt aut
captos ad Domitium deduxerunt. (Caes. Civ. 3.38.4)
Subordinate clauses: An tu existimas aut suppetere nobis posse quod cotidie dica-
mus in tanta varietate rerum, nisi animos nostros doctrina excolamus, aut ferre ani-
mos tantam posse contentionem, nisi eos doctrina eadem relaxemus? (Cic. Arch.
12—NB: non-exclusive)
Clauses:
. . . quin ego illum aut deseram / aut satis faciat mi ille . . . (Pl. Am. 888–9); Ecquis est
igitur . . . qui illud aut fieri noluerit aut factum improbarit? (Cic. Phil. 2.29—NB:
non-exclusive); Nunc reliqua videamus, nisi aut ad haec, Cato, dicere aliquid vis aut
nos iam longiores sumus. (Cic. Fin. 4.44); . . . ubicumque haec aut occurrat aut deficiat,
aut ‘etiam’ aut ‘non’ respondere possit. (Cic. Luc. 104); Ibi perpauci aut viribus confisi
tranare contenderunt aut lintribus inventis sibi salutem reppererunt. (Caes. Gal. 1.53.2)
There are a number of instances in which the author changed the structure of the
sentence he had in mind with the result that there is only one conjoin introduced by
aut. Examples of such anacoluthic structures are (h) and (i).¹³³
(h) Quasi vero aut concedatur in omnibus stultis aeque magna esse vitia . . . et
quasi nihil inter res quoque ipsas in quibus peccatur intersit ut . . .
(‘As though it were admitted that all foolish people possess an equal degree of
vice . . . and as though there were no difference also between the respective cir-
cumstances in which the transgressions are committed, so that . . .’ Cic. Fin. 4.77)
(i) Nec aut (del. Vielhaber) procurrere quisquam ab ordinibus suis . . . audebant
et stantes, quo densiores erant, hoc plura . . . vulnera accipiebant.
(‘No one dared to rush forward from their ranks . . . and, standing fast, the
more closely they were crowded together the more wounds they received.’
Liv. 38.26.7—NB: see Briscoe ad loc.)
Verb forms: Sed hic numquis adest? # Vel adest vel non. (Pl. Mil. 1019); . . . quas (sc.
habenas) vel adducas, cum velis, vel remittas. (Cic. Amic. 45); . . . imagines quae vel
prodesse nobis solent vel nocere . . . (Cic. N.D. 1.120)
Subordinate clauses: Nempe anui illi prodita abs te filia’st planissume, / per te vel
uti quaestum faceret vel uti veniret palam. (Ter. Hau. 639–40); Qui me valde movet,
vel quod amavi hominem sicut ille me vel quod ita iudico . . . (Cic. Luc. 113); . . . quis
umquam dixit . . . vel id solum percipi posse quod esset verum tale quale falsum esse
non posset vel sapientem nihil opinari. (Cic. Luc. 113)
Clauses:
Vel ai vel nega. (Naev. com. 125); Iussit vel nos atriensem vel nos uxorem suam /
defrudare. (Pl. As. 365–6)
In (a) there are several prepositional phrases and purpose clauses at the clause level as
well as attributive adjectives at the noun phrase level. In (b), there are two appositives;
in (c), there are two attributive noun phrases. As (a) shows, a considerable number of
conjoins can be linked by sive.
(a) Nam (sc. oratio) sive de caeli natura loquitur sive de terrae, sive de divina
vi sive de humana, sive ex inferiore loco sive ex aequo sive ex superiore, sive
ut impellat homines sive ut doceat sive ut deterreat sive ut concitet sive
ut reflectat sive ut incendat sive ut leniat, sive ad paucos sive ad multos
sive inter alienos sive cum suis sive secum, rivis est diducta oratio, non
fontibus . . .
(‘Whether its subject is the nature of the heavens or of the earth, the power of gods or
men, whether it speaks from a place lower, equal, or higher, whether its object is to
move men to action or to instruct them or to deter them, to excite them or to curb
them, to fire them or to calm them down, whether it be delivered to few or to many,
among strangers or among friends or by oneself, the flow of language diverges in its
channels, not in its sources . . .’ Cic. de Orat. 3.23)
(b) Annos gnatus sexaginta qui erit, si quem scibimus / seu (P, deest A; si cj. Brix)
maritum sive hercle adeo caelibem scortarier, / cum eo nos hac lege agemus.
(‘If we find out that any sixty-year-old, married or unmarried, whores around, we
shall deal with him according to the following law.’ Pl. Mer. 1017–19)
(c) Quod genus hominum, quem numerum, quem ordinem proferre possum
qui te non oderit, sive civium Romanorum sive Siculorum?
(‘What type or grade or class of men can I mention that does not hate you, whether
they are Romans or Sicilians?’ Cic. Ver. 2.166)
Supplement:
Constituents:
Nouns and noun phrases: Quinque omnino fuerunt qui illum vestrum inno-
centem Oppianicum sive imprudentia sive misericordia sive aliqua suspicione sive
ambitione adducti absolverunt. (Cic. Clu. 76); Sed tamen, si quis est, iudices, qui illam
Postumi sive inanem spem sive inconsultam rationem sive, ut gravissimo verbo utar,
temeritatem vituperandam putet, ego eius opinioni non repugno. (Cic. Rab. Post.
2); . . . si cuiquam ordini sive aratorum sive pecuariorum sive mercatorum probatus
sit . . . (Cic. Ver. 2.17); . . . similiter arbitror in hac sive ratione sive exercitatione
dicendi . . . (Cic. de Orat. 2.70); Ex quo exardescit sive amor sive amicitia. (Cic. Amic.
100); Itaque sive casu accidit sive consilio, percommode factum est quod . . . (Cic.
Tusc. 4.64); Drappes . . . sive indignitate et dolore vinculorum sive timore gravioris
supplicii paucis diebus cibo se abstinuit atque ita interiit. (Hirt. Gal. 8.44.2); Eodem
anno seu motu terrae seu qua vi alia forum medium ferme specu vasto conlapsum in
immensam altitudinem dicitur. (Liv. 7.6.1); Hinc illae quaestiones sive actionis sive
tralationis. (Quint. Inst. 3.6.83); . . . ita haec de quibus loquimur, sive tropi sive figurae
dicentur, idem efficient. (Quint. Inst. 9.1.8)
Adjectives, adjectival phrases, and other attributes: . . . ut quibusdam populis, sive
foederatis sive liberis, permittendum esse videatur ut statuant ipsi non de nostris sed
Coordination
de suis rebus . . . (Cic. Balb. 22); . . . quem voles eorum testium quos produxero, qui ex
Sicilia testes sunt, sive togatum sive Siculum, rogato . . . (Cic. Ver. 2.152); Seu tristis
veniam seu contra laetus amicis, / quicquid ero, dicam ‘Cynthia causa fuit.’ (Prop.
1.11.25–6); Servos seu fugitivos seu bello captos, seu quis liber captus aut transfuga
erit, reddito Romanis sociisque. (Liv. 38.38.8)
Adverbs: Quam qui ignorat, is est iniustus, sive est illa scripta uspiam sive nus-
quam. (Cic. Leg. 1.42)
Prepositional phrases: . . . sum (sc. deiectus) de via, sum certe alicunde, sive de
privato sive de publico. (Cic. Caec. 82)
Verb forms: Nam qui appetitus longius evagantur et tamquam exultantes sive
cupiendo sive fugiendo non satis a ratione retinentur, ii sine dubio finem et modum
transeunt. (Cic. Off. 1.102)
Subordinate clauses: . . . artes nostrae nescio quo modo nunc uberiores fructus
ferre videntur quam olim ferebant, sive quia nulla nunc in re alia acquiescimus sive
quod gravitas morbi facit ut medicinae egeamus . . . (Cic. Fam. 9.3.2); Hunc virgo, sive
ut templis praefigeret arma / Troia captivo sive ut se ferret in auro / venatrix, unum
ex omni certamine pugnae / caeca sequebatur . . . (Verg. A. 11.778–81); Rubrum mare
Graeci sive quia eius coloris est sive quod ibi Erythras regnavit Erythran thalassan
appellant. (Mela 3.72)
Secondary predicates and ablative absolute clauses: At Pharnaces impulsus sive loci
felicitate sive auspiciis et religionibus inductus . . . sive paucitate nostrorum qui in armis
erant comperta . . . sive etiam fiducia veterani exercitus sui . . . simul contemptu exercitus
nostri . . . inito consilio dimicandi descendere praerupta valle coepit. (B. Alex. 74.3)
(‘They were to wage war neither in Africa nor outside of Africa without the consent
of the Roman people.’ Liv. 30.37.4)
(d) Cur autem laudarim, peto a te ut id a me neve in hoc reo neve in aliis requi-
ras . . .
(‘As for why I spoke for his character, I appeal to you not to ask me that question
about this particular defendant or any others . . .’ Cic. Fam. 1.9.19)
Supplement:
Constituents: . . . Petreius manipulos circumit militesque appellat, neu se neu
Pompeium absentem imperatorem suum adversariis ad supplicium tradant obsecrat.
(Caes. Civ. 1.76.1—NB: in this punctuation the first neu seems to link appellat and
obsecrat, which governs the imperative clause (neu = et ne); see Meusel ad loc.; see
also § 8.40 Appendix);¹³⁵ Namque ita discedens praeceperat optimus armis / Aeneas:
Si qua interea fortuna fuisset, / neu struere auderent aciem neu credere campo. (Verg.
A. 9.40–2); Scipiones me ambo dies noctesque curis insomniisque agitant et excitant
saepe somno neu se neu invictos per octo annos in his terris milites suos, commi-
litones vestros, neu rem publicam patiar inultam . . . (Liv. 25.38.6)¹³⁶
Conlocationis est componere et struere verba sic ut neve asper eorum concursus
neve hiulcus sit. (Cic. de Orat. 3.171); Fit gratia Bruti senatus consultum ‘ut neve
Salaminis neve qui eis dedisset fraudi esset’. (Cic. Att. 5.21.12)
. . . eam (sc. terram) ne quis nobis minuat neve vivus neve mortuus. (Cic. Leg.
2.67—NB: compare § 8.46 on epexegetic negation)
NB: difficult to fit in: (sc. Cynthia) Ibat et hinc castae narratum somnia Vestae, / neu
sibi neve mihi quae nocitura forent. (Prop. 2.29.27–8—purpose clause? verb of fear-
ing understood?)
¹³⁵ OLD s.v. neve § 3b seems to take the subordinate clause with appellat, which would be possible, but
for obsecrat.
¹³⁶ For excito ut, see TLL s.v. 1262.78ff. ¹³⁷ Examples taken from TLL s.v. aut 1571.51ff.
Coordination
(c) Deinde sparteis re[s]tibus arborem cludunt, ne aut corvis aut cornicibus ali-
isve avibus pomum laceretur.
(‘Then they cover the tree with nets made of broom, so that the fruit not be torn by
ravens or crows or other birds.’ Col. 12.46.2)
(d) Non ille aut sanguinis haustus, / cetera ceu plebes, aliumve accedit ad
imbrem . . .
(‘He does not approach like the rest of the crowd to drink the blood or other pour-
ings . . .’ Stat. Theb. 4.607–8)
(e) . . . cum abrumpi dissimulationem etiam Silius sive (del. Acidalius) fatali vecor-
dia an imminentium periculorum remedium ipsa pericula ratus urguebat.
(‘. . . when Silius himself, blinded by his fate, or convinced perhaps that the antidote to
impending danger was actual danger, began to press for the mask to be dropped.’ Tac.
Ann. 11.26.1)
Multiple coordination is defined in § 19.1 as the coordination of more than two con-
joins by either two or more syndetic devices or by a combination of syndetic and
asyndetic devices, with the first conjoin lacking its own coordinator.
Supplement:
Constituents:
Nouns and noun phrases: Sed cum de religione agitur, Ti. Coruncanium P. Scipio-
nem P. Scaevolam, pontifices maximos, non Zenonem aut Cleanthen aut Chrysippum
sequor. (Cic. N.D. 3.5); Quorum inbutae mentes pravitatis erroribus quamvis car-
nificinam prius subierint quam ibim aut aspidem aut felem aut canem aut crocodil-
lum violent . . . (Cic. Tusc. 5.78)
Fortitudo est igitur ‘adfectio animi legi summae in perpetiendis rebus obtempe-
rans’ vel ‘conservatio stabilis iudicii in eis rebus quae formidolosae videntur subeundis
et repellendis’ vel ‘scientia rerum formidolosarum contrariarumque aut omnino
neglegendarum conservans earum rerum stabile iudicium’ vel brevius, ut Chrysippus . . .
(Cic. Tusc. 4.53)
Ludere qui nescit campestribus abstinet armis / indoctusque pilae discive trochive
quiescit . . . (Hor. Ars 379–80)
. . . eius / viae partem dimidiam is aed(ilis) quoi ea pars urbis ob venerit
inqua parte ea aedis sacra erit seive aedificium / publicum seive locus
publicus tuemdam locato . . . (CIL I2.593.29–31 (Lex Iulia Munic., Pisticci, 45 bc)
Adjectives, adjectival phrases, and other attributes: Quam vero Graecia colo-
niam misit . . . sine Pythio aut Dodonaeo aut Hammonis oraculo? (Cic. Div. 1.3)
Prepositional phrases: Supplicia eorum qui in furto aut in latrocinio aut aliqua
noxia sint comprehensi gratiora dis immortalibus esse arbitrantur. (Caes. Gal. 6.16.5)
Stercus columbinum spargere oportet in pratum vel in hortum vel in segetem.
(Cato Agr. 36.1)
Verbs: Nemo enim ipsam voluptatem, quia voluptas sit, aspernatur aut odit aut
fugit . . . (Cic. Fin. 1.32)
Subordinate clauses: Habe iudicem / . . . si tuas esse oportet nive eas esse oportet
liberas / neu te in carcerem compingi aequom est . . . (Pl. Rud. 712–15); Si te in germani
fratri’ dilexi loco / sive haec te solum semper fecit maxumi / seu tibi morigera fuit in
rebus omnibus, / te isti virum do . . . (Ter. An. 292–5); . . . nei quem eorum det sciens
d(olo) m(alo) quoiei is . . . <sobrinus siet> . . . queive eiei sodalis siet queive in
eodem conlegio siet quoiave in fide is erit . . . (CIL I2.583.10 (Lex Acilia, 122
bc)); Lege itaque Aelia Sentia cavetur ut qui servi a dominis poenae nomine vincti
sunt quibusve stigmata inscripta sunt, deve quibus ob noxam quaestio tormentis hab-
ita sit et in ea noxa fuisse convicti sunt quive ut ferro aut cum bestiis depugnarent
traditi sint inve ludum custodiamve coniecti fuerint et postea vel ab eodem domino
vel ab alio manumissi eiusdem condicionis liberi fiant cuius condicionis sunt pere-
grini dediticii. (Gaius Inst. 1.13—NB: the last -ve is at a different level)
(d) . . . ne tenues pluviae rapidive potentia solis / acrior aut Boreae penetrabile
frigus adurat.
(‘. . . so that the searching showers not cause harm, or the blazing sun’s fierce tyrrany
cause withering, or the North Wind’s piercing cold cause freezing.’ Verg. G. 1.92–3)
(e) . . . quisquis luxuria tristive superstitione / aut alio mentis morbo calet.
(‘. . . whoever is feverish with extravagance or gloomy superstition, or some other
mental disorder.’ Hor. S. 2.3.79–80)
(f) . . . Fidenas inde aut Gabios aliamve quam urbem quaesituri sumus quo
transmigremus?
(‘. . . are we to seek out Fidenae, or Gabii, or any other town you like to which we can
migrate?’ Liv. 5.54.1)
Supplement:
Non exuvias pulsaeve tropaeum / virginis aut spolia ulla peto . . . (Verg. A. 11.790–1);
Laudabunt alii claram Rhodon aut Mytilenen / aut Epheson bimarisve Corinthi / moe-
nia vel Baccho Thebas vel Apolline Delphos / insignis aut Thessala Tempe. (Hor. Carm.
1.7.1–4); Neque enim est de tigride natus / nec rigidas silices solidumve in pectore fer-
rum / aut adamanta gerit, nec lac bibit ille leaenae. (Ov. Met. 9.613–15—NB: multiple
disjunctive coordination inside one of three conjunctively linked conjoins); Infestissimi
Rhodiis erant qui consules praetoresve aut legati gesserant in Macedonia bellum. (Liv.
45.25.2); Sed ubi sunt saxa quadrata sive silex seu caementum aut coctus later sive cru-
dus, his erit utendum. (Vitr. 1.5.8); . . . maximeque si circa pectus aut cervices aut crura
vel genua vel coxas (sc. insudat). (Cels. 2.2.2); . . . neque (sc. libelli mei) admittunt exces-
sus aut orationes sermonesve au<t> casus mirabiles vel eventus varios, iucunda dictu
aut legentibus blanda sterili materia. (Plin. Nat. praef. 12); Quippe Augustus supremis
sermonibus cum tractaret quinam adipisci principem locum suffecturi abnuerent aut
inpares vellent vel idem possent cuperentque . . . (Tac. Ann. 1.13.2)
¹³⁹ For Cicero’s use of contemporary legal Latin, see Powell (2005: 129).
Disjunctive (or: alternative) coordinators
As was the case for conjunctive coordinators in § 19.41, disjunctive coordinators are
also occasionally used where a conjunctive coordinator could well be imagined.¹⁴⁰
Aut is used in this way especially by Tacitus, as in (a), who sometimes employs the
periphrasis et rursus or et vicissim. The first instances of -ve to which scholars refer
appear in Ennius; poets beginning with Lucretius like it, possibly for metrical reasons,
as in (b). It is also relatively common in poeticizing prose, especially in Tacitus. It is
particularly common after relative and interrogative pronouns. For sive (seu), cases
are noted from the Peregrinatio Egeriae onwards, as in (c).¹⁴¹ More conspicuous
instances of vel are relatively common in (very) Late Latin.¹⁴²
(a) . . . legionariis aut (atque cj. Brotier; ac cj. Hand) cohortibus civium Roma-
norum trecenos nummos viritim dedit.
(‘. . . he gave three hundred sesterces to the legionaries or cohorts of the Roman citi-
zens.’ Tac. Ann. 1.8.2)
(b) Et quoniam docui, cunctarum exordia rerum / qualia sint et quam variis dis-
tantia formis / sponte sua volitent aeterno percita motu, / quove modo pos-
sint res ex his quaeque creari . . .
(‘And since I have shown of what kind are the beginnings of all things, and in how
varying and different shapes they fly of their own accord driven in everlasting motion,
and how all things can be produced from these . . .’ Lucr. 3.31–4)
(c) . . . singula ibi ostendit seu retulit de illas statuas quas dixi . . .
(‘. . . he showed us everything there and told us about the aforesaid statues . . .’
Pereg. 8.5)
The coordinator of the second (or later) conjoin can be combined with various adverbs
that specify the semantic relationship between the conjoins.¹⁴³ The four most prom-
inent adverbs (in decreasing order of the number of attestations) are: etiam ‘even’,
‘also’ (often used with vel ), certe ‘certainly’ (not used with sive), potius ‘rather’ (fre-
quently combined with -ve and vel). Examples are (d)–(g).
(d) Tibi habe, aufer, utere / vel tu vel tua uxor, vel etiam in loculos compingite.
(‘Have it for yourself, take it away, use it, you or your wife, or even shut it away in your
money-box.’ Pl. Men. 690–1)
(e) Itaque necesse est aut damnum aut certe non magnum lucrum fecisse
decumanos.
(‘It must follow that the collectors who paid it have brought about a loss, or at least
made very little profit.’ Cic. Ver. 3.110)
¹⁴⁰ Sz.: 503 uses the term ‘quasi-kopulative Verwendung’ for -ve. For ‘Disjunktion statt Kopulation’ in
general, see Sz.: 500.
¹⁴¹ See Sz.: 504. ¹⁴² See Sz.: 502.
¹⁴³ Surveys of such combinations are easily found in Merguet’s Lexika and in the TLL s.v. aut 1572.74ff.
Coordination
When the first conjoin is positive (or: affirmative), the second supplies correct infor-
mation that is intended to preclude a possible misunderstanding by the addressee of
the content of the first, or to present it from a particular perspective. In both cases the
second conjoin modifies the information contained by the first conjoin. In (d), the
speaker of the prologue informs the audience that the Carthaginian they will see on
¹⁴⁴ For these two types, see already Hand (1829/45: I. 559) in his discussion of the difference between
sed and autem. See also K.-St.: II.73–4. Other terms that are used for these two types are ‘exclusive’ and
‘non-exclusive’. The two types are formally distinct in German (sondern vs. aber) and in Spanish (sino vs.
pero). See among others Ducrot and Vogt (1979: 317–18). For a more detailed discussion of adversative
relations, see Kroon (1995: 210–17). She uses the term ‘substitution’.
Adversative coordination
stage knows all languages, but that they will not be able to observe this. In (e), the
slave explains why he has behaved as though the wrong Menaechmus is his master
even though he knows which one is his true master. The relationship between the two
conjoins approaches a concessive one (see quidem in (e)). In both cases, the two con-
joins are complete clauses. In (f) there is a contrast between two satellite constituents.
Here, too, the second conjoin corrects a possible wrong interpretation of sedatiore
tempore. Ex. (g) is different: more modesto is a manner adjunct which completes the
information of the preceding clause. What (g) has in common with the preceding
examples is that sed more modesto contradicts or corrects a possibly wrong inference
on the part of the addressee about the information presented by the first conjoin. It is
different in that more modesto is not a proper conjoin with syntactic and semantic
properties comparable to what precedes sed. It will be dealt with as epitactic coordin-
ation in § 19.67 and § 19.69.
(d) Et is omnis linguas scit, sed dissimulat sciens / se scire.
(‘He also knows all languages, but he knowingly pretends not to know.’ Pl. Poen.
112–13)
(e) Ego quidem huius servos sum, sed med esse huius credidi.
(‘I am this man’s slave, but I thought I was that man’s.’ Pl. Men. 1071)
(f) Paulo sedatiore tempore est accusatus quam Iunius sed eadem fere lege et
crimine.
(‘He was accused at a somewhat quieter time than was Junius but under much the
same statute and on much the same charge.’ Cic. Clu. 103)
(g) Scio, fui ego illa aetate et feci illa omnia, sed more modesto.
(‘I know, I was of that age too and I did all those things, but in moderation.’ Pl. Bac.
1079)
There are a few cases where the adversative connector at is taken by editors as an
adversative coordinator at the noun phrase level (for its use as a connector, see
§ 24.24). Examples are (h) and (i). In (h), a different punctuation with At opening its
sentence in the usual way is possible. Note also that the ut clause supports the typical
protesting sense of at. In (i), at is Faernus’ generally accepted, but not very convin-
cing, emendation of the reading aut of the mss.¹⁴⁵
(h) Non honestum consilium, at utile, ut aliquis fortasse dixerit . . ..
(‘The trick was not morally right, but someone might perhaps say useful . . .’
Cic. Off. 3.97—NB: ut del. Ernesti)
(i) Erat vallis inter duas acies, ut supra demonstratum est, non ita magna at dif-
ficili et arduo ascensu.
(‘There was a ravine between the two lines, as was indicated above. It was not
particularly large but had a difficult and steep ascent.’ Caes. Civ. 2.34.1)
Autem is mainly used as a connector to link sentences and text segments. However, it
is also used at a lower level, as in (j), where it resembles a coordinator. It cannot be
used in a substitution context.¹⁴⁶ For further examples, see § 24.26.
(j) Est enim finitimus oratori poeta, numeris astrictior paulo, verborum autem
licentia liberior, multis vero ornandi generibus socius ac paene par.
(‘The truth is that the poet is a very near kinsman of the orator, rather more
heavily fettered as regards rhythm, but with ampler freedom in his choice of
words, while in the use of many sorts of ornament he is his ally and almost
his counterpart.’ Cic. de Orat. 1.70)
The adverb magis ‘more’, the source of the Romance adversative coordinator (Fr.
mais), is occasionally used as an adversative adverb in the sense ‘rather’, as in (k).¹⁴⁷
See also § 20.10 fin.
(k) Sed (sc. ambigua) non saepe magnum risum movent. Magis ut belle et (v.l.
ut) litterate dicta laudantur.
(‘They seldom, however, provoke much laughter; rather, they are praised as
neat and erudite sayings.’ Cic. de Orat. 2.253—tr. May and Wisse)
In Petronius, immo is used to link constituents below the clause level and thus resem-
bles a corrective coordinator, as in (l).¹⁴⁸
(l) Recte, videbo te in publicum, mus, immo terrae tuber.
(‘Count on it, I shall meet you in public, you rat or rather fungus.’ Petr. 58.5
(a freedman speaking))
Exx. (a)–(c) in the section above illustrate the use of sed to link a preceding negative
conjoin with one of the negative adverbs haud or non to a subsequent one that replaces
it (substitution). Other forms of negative conjoins are illustrated by (a)–(d) below. In
(a) and (c) the two conjoins are constituents; in (b) and (d), clauses.
(a) Neque hoc in uno fecit Annaeo, sed in omnibus senatoribus . . .
(‘And he did not do this to Annaeus alone, but to all the senators . . .’ Cic. Ver. 3.97)
(b) Qui ne sorti quidem fortunas nostras destin<a>vit, sed libidini cuiusque nos
ita addixit ut . . .
(‘He who has not even put our fortunes into a lottery, but has given us over to every
individual’s desire, so as . . .’ Cic. Phil. 5.33)
¹⁴⁶ See Kroon (1995: 279). See also Orlandini (1999a: 151–2).
¹⁴⁷ For the material, see TLL s.v. 66.22ff. For a discussion of the Latin–Romance development, see
Melander (1916: 24–32), Ducrot and Vogt (1979), Rosén (2009: 396), and Orlandini and Poccetti (2010),
with references.
¹⁴⁸ Discussion in Rosén (2003).
Adversative coordination
(c) Duo praeterea testes nihil de vi, sed de re ipsa atque emptione fundi dixerunt.
(‘Two more witnesses spoke in no way about the use of force, but only about the
original facts and the purchase of the estate.’ Cic. Caec. 27)
(d) Nolo ego mi te tam prospicere qui meam egestatem leves, / sed ut inops
infamis ne sim . . .
(‘I don’t want you to look out so much for something with which to alleviate my pov-
erty, but rather to make sure that I won’t have a bad reputation in my poverty . . .’ Pl.
Trin. 688–9)
Examples of the modifying use of sed, which links a positive conjoin with a subse-
quent one, are (e)–(i). In (e), the second clause corrects the possible wrong inference
that the language used to address a judge would be adequate in the given, non-legal
situation; in (f), the possible wrong inference is the slave need not be careful about
what he buys because he must buy it quickly. The second conjoin can be reduced, as
in (g)–(i).¹⁴⁹
(e) Ad iudicem sic (sc. dices), sed ego apud parentem loquor.
(‘That is the tone to use to a jury, but I plead before a father.’ Cic. Lig. 30)
(f) . . . abi atque opsona, propera, sed lepide volo, / molliculas escas . . .
(‘. . . go and buy food, hurry, but I want it in a lovely way, tender bites . . .’ Pl. Cas.
491–2)
(g) Pacis equidem semper auctor fui sed tum sero.
(‘For my part, I was always a promulgator of peace, but at that point it was too late.’
Cic. Lig. 28)
(h) Cum quo et Antiochum saepe disputantem audiebam sed utrumque leniter.
(‘I often used to hear Antiochus arguing with him, both however in a gentle manner.’
Cic. Luc. 11)
(i) Cura ut omnia sciam, sed maxime ut valeas.
(‘Take care you send me all the news, but take special care of your health.’ Cic. Att.
5.11.7)
The contrast between the two conjoins can be reinforced by the addition of quidem,¹⁵⁰
omnino, or sane in the first conjoin and/or tamen or vero in the second conjoin.
Examples are (j)–(n).
(j) Deinde tui municipes sunt illi quidem splendidissimi homines, sed tamen
pauci . . .
(‘In the second place, your fellow-citizens, highly distinguished men though they
undoubtedly are, are but a mere handful . . .’ Cic. Planc. 21)
¹⁴⁹ For further instances of what he calls ‘abbreviated sentences’, see Merguet (Phil.) s.v. sed 473B, § b.
¹⁵⁰ For quidem . . . sed, see Bertocchi and Maraldi (2011: 173–5): quidem functions as a signal of a ‘more
relevant’ point to come. For sane, which expresses ‘agreement or compliance’ of the speaker/writer with
the content of the first clause, see Risselada (1998a).
Coordination
(k) (sc. libri) Grandiores sunt omnino quam erant illi, sed tamen multa detracta.
(‘They are altogether bigger than the old ones, yet much has been removed.’ Cic. Att.
13.13–14.1)
(l) Ac mihi repetenda est veteris cuiusdam memoriae non sane satis explicata
recordatio sed, ut arbitror, apta ad id quod requiris . . .
(‘And now I must bring back to mind the recollection of an old story, to be sure not
sufficiently detailed, but, to my thinking, suited to what you ask . . .’ Cic. de Orat. 1.4)
(m) Gemebant Syracusani, sed tamen patiebantur.
(‘The Syracusans grumbled, but all the same they abided.’ Cic. Ver. 2.47)
(n) O praeclarum imperatorem nec iam cum M’. Aquilio, fortissimo viro, sed
vero cum Paulis, Scipionibus, Mariis conferendum!
(‘A truly great commander this! Let us compare him no longer with the gallant
Manius Aquilius, but indeed with men like Paulus, Scipio, Marius.’ Cic. Ver. 5.14)
The contrast between the two conjoins can be reinforced by the inclusion of quidem,
omnino, or sane in the first conjoin and/or tamen in the second.
(e) Est istuc quidem honestum, verum hoc expedit.
(‘That is, to be sure, the right course, but this course brings advantage.’ Cic. Off. 3.75)
Supplement:
. . . utrumque (sc. vocem claram et suavem) omnino a natura petundum est verum
alterum exercitatio augebit, alterum imitatio presse loquentium et leniter. (Cic. Off.
1.133); De amore, de tormentis, de rumore loci sane inanes, verum tamen . . . tolera-
biles. (Cic. Brut. 124); Videte maiorum diligentiam, qui nihildum etiam istius modi
suspicabantur, verum tamen ea quae parvis in rebus accidere poterant providebant.
(Cic. Ver. 4.9)
¹⁵¹ See TLL s.v. ceterus 971.9ff. For ceterum = sed re vera, see Orlandini (1999a: 143–4).
Coordination
‘I do not say’¹⁵² (the most common combination), non solum ‘not only’, non tantum
‘not so much’ (rare before Livy), or non tantummodo ‘not so much’—can form some-
thing akin to a correlative pair with sed or verum. This can then be combined with
additive or scalar etiam ‘also’ and ‘even’, which can follow either directly after or later
on;¹⁵³ or—less commonly—additive quoque ‘also’, which does not follow directly. In
these cases, the second conjoin does not so much replace or correct the first, but adds
to it. Examples are (a)–(f). The various pairs can link both independent clauses, as in
(a), and constituents of various types, as in (b)–(f).¹⁵⁴ Dividing non . . . modo becomes
common from Livy onwards.
(a) . . . is non modo ex numero vivorum exturbatur, sed, si fieri potest, infra
etiam mortuos amandatur.
(‘. . . that man is not only banished from the company of the living, but is relegated to
a position lower than the dead, if that is possible.’ Cic. Quinct. 49)
(b) . . . considera non modo in Umbria atque in ea vicinitate, sed in his veteribus
municipiis quae studia a patribus familias maxime laudentur.
(‘. . . consider what pursuits are most esteemed by heads of households, not only in
Umbria and the neighbourhood, but in our old municipal towns.’ Cic. S. Rosc. 48)
(c) Perficiendum est . . . ut homines te non solum audiant, verum etiam libenter
studioseque audiant.
(‘It must be effected . . . that people not just listen to you, but listen willingly and
eagerly.’ Cic. Div. Caec. 39)
(d) . . . non tantum pecora atque iumenta, sed etiam magna hominum multitudo
siti consumebatur.
(‘. . . not only cattle and beasts of burden, but even the great host of the enemy were
being sapped by thirst.’ Hirt. Gal. 8.41.6)
(e) Sati’n habes, si ego advenientem ita patrem faciam tuom / non modo ne intro
eat, verum etiam ut fugiat longe ab aedibus?
(‘Are you content if I make sure that on his arrival your father does not only not go in,
but even runs far away from the house?’ Pl. Mos. 389–90)
(f) . . . ut . . . propinquum suum non modo honeste partis bonis, verum etiam
communi luce privaret.
(‘. . . so that he could deprive his kinsman . . . not only of property honestly acquired,
but even of the light of day that is common to all.’ Cic. Quinct. 74)
Often, the second conjoin contains the more relevant or important information, or a
more extreme alternative to what is presented in the first (we are dealing with replacing
¹⁵² This is the paraphrase of Roby (1882: II.470). See also K.-St.: II.60.
¹⁵³ For the various combinations of etiam, see TLL s.v. 946.35ff. Sz.: 485 refers to Late Latin instances
of adhuc.
¹⁵⁴ For a collection of instances in a number of texts, see Saur (1913: 92–101).
Coordination
focus—see § 22.8). Good examples are (a), (e), and (f), but in (b) this is less evident.
An example of the reverse order is (g).¹⁵⁵
(g) Quae civitas est in Asia quae non modo imperatoris aut legati, sed unius
tribuni militum animos ac spiritus capere possit?
(‘What state in Asia is sufficient to contain the arrogance and insolence of one mili-
tary tribune, not to speak of a general or his lieutenant?’ Cic. Man. 66)¹⁵⁶
Supplement:
Non modo igitur nihil prodest, sed obest etiam Clodi mors Miloni. (Cic. Mil. 34);
Reus igitur Postumus est ea lege qua non modo ipse, sed totus etiam ordo solutus ac
liber est. (Cic. Rab. Post. 12); . . . venit in agrum communem, eo denique ubi non
modo res erat, sed ratio quoque omnis et omnes litterae. (Cic. Quinct. 38); . . . non
pecuniam modo, verum etiam hominis propinqui sanguinem vitamque eripere
conatur? (Cic. Quinct. 39); Omnia perculsa metu non in Asia modo, sed etiam in
Syria esse. (Liv. 37.3.10)
. . . (sc. dixi) non solum re et sententia, sed verbis quoque hoc interdictum ita esse
compositum ut nihil commutandum videretur? (Cic. Caec. 86); Nimirum illi non
ingenio solum his patronis, sed fortuna etiam praestiterunt. (Cic. Ver. 2.191); (sc.
Dumnorigem) Neque solum domi, sed etiam apud finitimas civitates largiter
posse . . . (Caes. Gal. 1.18.6)
. . . cur audet Ulixes / ire per excubias et . . . non tantum moenia Troum, / verum
etiam summas arces intrare . . . (Ov. Met. 13.341–3);. . . quia non tantum terrestria,
sed aquatilia quoque desiderant pabula . . . (Col. 8.13.1); Lichas Tarentinus, homo
verecundissimus et non tantum huius navigii dominus quod regit, sed fundorum
etiam aliquot et familiae negotiantis . . . (Petr. 101.4)
. . . non ad tuendos tantummodo veteres socios conciliandosque novos, sed
etiam ad pellendum Hispania Hasdrubalem. (Liv. 21.32.4); . . . idque non in febri-
bus tantummodo, in quibus frequentissimum est, sed in aliis quoque fit.
(Cels. 3.1.2)
¹⁵⁵ Roby (1882: II.470) citing (g) says: ‘Non modo . . . is applicable in some cases where the others
are not.’
¹⁵⁶ For unus, see § 11.117.
¹⁵⁷ For discussion of instances like (h)–(j), and the differences between them, see Bertocchi (1998).
Hierarchical ordering of sequences of conjoins
¹⁵⁸ Exx. (a) and (b) are taken from TLL s.v. et 878.55ff. See also K.-St. II.30–1.
Coordination
¹⁵⁹ For the hierarchical ordering of conjoins in Tacitus, see Gerber and Greef s.v. que 1272Bff. and
elsewhere.
¹⁶⁰ These four examples, as well as some in the Supplement, are taken from TLL s.v. aut 1570.48ff.
Epitactic coordination
conjoins at the higher level. In (f), multiple aut is used at the lower level and vel at the
higher level. In (g), the first aut functions at the lower level, the second at the higher.
In (h), the same pattern is illustrated with -ve.
(e) . . . {si sumus compecti seu consilium umquam iniimus} / aut si de istac re
umquam inter nos convenimus . . .
(‘. . . if we’ve ever made an agreement or hatched a plan, or if we’ve ever come together
concerning this matter . . .’ Pl. Ps. 543–4)
(f) Quis enim nescit maxime vim exsistere oratoris in hominum mentibus vel
{ad iram aut ad odium aut dolorem incitandis}, vel ab hisce isdem permo-
tionibus ad lenitatem misericordiamque revocandis?
(‘Who indeed does not know that the orator’s virtue is pre-eminently manifested
either in rousing men’s hearts to anger, hatred, or indignation, or in recalling them
from these same passions to mildness and mercy?’ Cic. de Orat. 1.53)
(g) Edepol minime miror {si te fugitat aut oculos tuos}, / aut si te odit . . .
(‘Seriously, I’m not surprised at all if he’s avoiding you or eye-contact with you, or if
he hates you . . .’ Pl. Capt. 545–6)
(h) Magistratus nec oboedientem et noxium civem . . . coherceto, ni {par maiorve}
potestas populusve prohibessit.
(‘Upon the disobedient or guilty citizen the magistrate shall use compulsion . . . unless
an equal or higher authority, or the people, forbid it.’ Cic. Leg. 3.6)
Supplement:
Deinde dubitatio, tum distributio, tum correctio vel {ante vel postquam} dixeris, vel
cum aliquid a te ipso reicias. (Cic. de Orat. 3.203); Ubi enim potest illa aetas aut
{calescere vel apricatione melius vel igni} aut {vicissim umbris aquisve} refrigerari
salubrius}? (Cic. Sen. 57); Denique cur animi numquam mens consiliumque / gigni-
tur in capite aut {pedibus manibusve} . . . (Lucr. 3.615–16); Illa tamen {se / non habitu
mutatve loco} peccatve (v.l. peccatque) superne . . . (Hor. S. 2.7.63–4); . . . causas requi-
ris nec aut tibi ipsi aut {huic Secundo vel huic Apro} ignotas . . . (Tac. Dial. 28.1);
Neque enim {domus munimentis saeptae vel templa muris cincta} aut quid aliud
morae interiacebat. (Tac. Ann. 15.38.2)
¹⁶¹ For the origin of the term ‘epitaxis’, see Rosén (1990; 2008: 205; 2011: 143–5). The 2008 article,
elaborating on Rosén (1990) and (2007b), contains the most thorough discussion of the phenomenon.
Coordination
(b), or the preceding clause or noun phrase may be repeated, either by restating one
or more words of the clause or noun phrase, as in (c), or in the form of an anaphoric
expression, as in (d). In (a), merito meo is a cause adjunct. In (b), probas is an attribute
of clavas. In (c), prohibiti is repeated from the preceding clause. In (d), anaphoric eos
is substituted for veteranos. Most epitactic expressions follow at the end of a clause or
a noun phrase, but they can be in the middle as well, as in (e). They contain prag-
matically salient information, usually expanding or replacing focus (see § 22.10).
(a) Pauca effugiam, scio. Nam multa evenient, et merito meo, / quia et fugi . . .
(‘I’ll escape precious little, I know: many things will happen, and I deserve them
because I ran away . . .’ Pl. Capt. 971–2)
(b) I dum Turbalio curriculo, affert<o domo> / duas clavas. # Clavas? # Sed
probas. Propera cito.
(‘Go quickly, Turbalio, bring two cudgels from home. # Cudgels? # But make sure
they’re proper ones. Get going, hurry.’ Pl. Rud. 798–9)
(c) Prohibiti estis in provincia vestra pedem ponere, et prohibiti summa cum
iniuria.
(‘You were debarred from setting foot in your province—debarred too with the deep-
est affront.’ Cic. Lig. 24)
(d) Ego autem veteranos tueri debeo, sed eos quibus sanitas est.
(‘Now I have a duty to look after the veterans, but only those of sound sentiments.’
Cic. Phil. 11.37)
(e) Quaeris igitur—idque iam saepius—quod eloquentiae genus probem
maxume . . .
(‘You ask me then, and have done so repeatedly, what style of oratory I most
approve . . .’ Cic. Orat. 3)
The new element in the epitactic conjoin is usually an optional constituent (a satellite
or modifier—for exceptions, see § 19.68, Supplement). The coordinators involved are
the conjunctive (§ 19.68) and adversative (§ 19.69) ones. There are also asyndetic
instances (§ 19.70). Epitactic conjoins can contain particles and adverbs of various
types, as in (f) and (g). See also § 22.4.¹⁶²
(f) Esurio hercle, atque adeo hau salubriter.
(‘I’m hungry and so much so that I can’t be saved.’ Pl. Cas. 801)
(g) Dicitur quidem istuc . . . a Cotta, et vero saepius . . .
(‘This very thing is said by Cotta, and quite often, at that . . .’ Cic. Div. 1.8)
Epitactic coordination is found in all periods of Latin and in all types of text. Epitactic
conjoins are more commonly related to preceding clauses than to phrases, and they
are more often of the simple type, as illustrated by (a). More extended expressions, as
¹⁶² For further examples, see Rosén (2008: 218–21; 2009: 413–16; 2011: 143–6).
Epitactic coordination
in (c), are uncommon.¹⁶³ Epitactic coordination must not be confused with discon-
tinuous coordination as discussed in § 23.101.
The conjunctive coordinators used for epitactic coordination are ac/atque,¹⁶⁴ et,¹⁶⁵
-que, and nec/neque. Of these, -que is mainly used with resumptive expressions, as in
(e) in § 19.67. Examples of conjunctive epitactic conjoins with clauses are (a)–(c). In
(a) the conjoin is attached by the coordinator alone; in (b), with the addition of
resumptive id; in (c), with repetition of the verb.
(a) Beatum autem esse sine virtute neminem posse: id quoque damus, et libenter
quidem.
(‘But no one can be happy without virtue: this also we grant you, and willingly.’ Cic.
N.D. 1.89)
(b) Iterum iam hic in me inclementer dicit, atque id sine malo.
(‘He’s abusing me a second time already, and without punishment.’ Pl. Am. 742)
(c) Quamdiu quisquam erit qui te defendere audeat vives, et vives ita ut nunc
vivis, multis meis et firmis praesidiis obsessus . . .
(‘So as long as there remains a single man bold enough to defend you, you will live,
and live as you live now, hemmed in by my many steadfast guards . . .’ Cic. Catil. 1.6)
Examples of conjunctive epitactic conjoins related to noun phrases are (d)–(f). In (d),
atque simply adds the attribute meus to servos. In (e), anaphoric ii refers to (substan-
tival) multi; in (f), senatus is repeated. For an example of an epitactically coordinated
degree modifier with a (substantivally used) adjective that itself is a repetition of a
preceding adjective, see (g).
(d) Servos ego? # Atque meus.
(‘I’m a slave? # Yes, mine in fact.’ Pl. Cas. 735)
(e) Non lubet enim mihi deplorare vitam, quod multi, et ii docti, saepe fecerunt . . .
(‘I do not mean to complain of life as many men, and they learned ones, have often
done . . .’ Cic. Sen. 84)
(f) In foro . . . cunctus senatus, atque ille senatus quem etiam vos ipsi . . . <laudare
consuevistis> . . .
(‘While in the Forum . . ., the entire senate (such a senate, moreover, as even you . . . are
wont to praise) . . .’ Cic. Rab. Perd. 20)
(g) Pauci enim, atque admodum pauci . . . vel corrumpere mores civitatis vel
corrigere possunt.
¹⁶³ See Rosén (2008: 225–8). ¹⁶⁴ TLL s.v. atque 1050.36ff. ¹⁶⁵ TLL s.v. et 873.81ff.
Coordination
(‘For a few men—very few, in fact . . . have the power either to corrupt the morals of
the state or to reform them.’ Cic. Leg. 3.32)
Supplement (following the order of the examples above):
Coordinator only: Ego vero, et quidem edepol lubens. (Pl. As. 645); Pol illa (sc. arma)
ad hostis transfugerunt. # Armane? # Atque equidem cito. (Pl. Epid. 30); Eodem
modo anserem alito, nisi prius dato bibere, et bis in die, bis escam. (Cato Agr. 89.1—
NB: continuation with an object constituent); Harum exempla, ut reliquorum loco-
rum, paulo ante posui, et quidem (equidem | edd. pler.) ex iure civili. Sed haec patent
latius. (Cic. Top. 58);¹⁶⁶ At ille non pertimuit saneque fidenter. (Cic. Fin. 2.21); Fuisti
saepe, credo, cum Athenis esses, in scholis philosophorum. # Vero, ac libenter qui-
dem. (Cic. Tusc. 2.25); Aranti quattuor sua iugera in Vaticano . . . Cincinnato viator
attulit dictaturam, et quidem, ut traditur, nudo . . . (Plin. Nat. 18.20); Venit in nostras
manus / tandem Thyestes, venit, et totus quidem. (Sen. Thy. 494–5); Non puto illum
capillos liberos habere nec mehercules sua culpa. (Petr. 38.12 (freedman speaking))
NB: Exceptional epitactic arguments: Nam iam huc adveniet miles. # Et miles qui-
dem? (Pl. Bac. 222); . . . quis facile praeter hunc inveniri potest? # Puto posse, et qui-
dem aliquem de tribus nobis. (Cic. Leg. 3.14); Ego vestros patres . . . viros clarissimos
mihique amicissimos vivere arbitror, et eam quidem vitam quae est sola vita nomi-
nanda. (Cic. Sen. 77—cognate object);¹⁶⁷ Animadvertebas igitur . . . versus ab is
admisceri orationi. # Ac multos quidem a Dionysio Stoico. (Cic. Tusc. 2.26)
With anaphoric id: Duxi, habui scortum, potavi, dedi, donavi, et enim id raro. (Pl.
Bac. 1081—NB: et emended in various ways);¹⁶⁸ Quia pol te unum ex omnibus /
Venus me voluit magnuficare, neque id haud immerito tuo. (Pl. Men. 370–1); Quod
vero dicere ausus es—idque multis verbis—opera mea Pompeium a Caesaris amicitia
esse diiunctum . . . (Cic. Phil. 2.23)
With repetition of the verb: Dixit, et bis quidem dixit. (Cic. Clu. 103); . . . quod et
fecimus et, ut spero, non frustra fecimus . . . (Cic. Lig. 14—NB: correlative coordin-
ation); Erras, et vehementer erras. (Sen. Con. 9.5.3)
Attribute expanding a noun phrase: Numquae advenienti aegritudo obiecta est? #
Atque acerruma. (Pl. Bac. 538); Quadrigentos filios habet, atque equidem omnis lec-
tos sine probro. (Pl. Bac. 974); Liberatu’ sum hodie, Dave, tua opera. # Ac nullus
quidem. (Ter. An. 370); Caput eius recisum cum dextera manu ad regem reportatum
ludibrio fuit, neque indigno. (Flor. Epit. 1.46.10)
Anaphoric pronoun expanding a noun phrase: . . . Callisthenes, comes Alexandri,
scripsit historiam, et is quidem rhetorico paene more. (Cic. de Orat. 2.58); Ex quo
genere ea sunt sidera quae infixa caelo non moventur loco, quae sunt animantia,
eaque divina . . .(Cic. Tim. 36); Ingemescere non numquam viro concessum est, idque
raro, eiulatus ne mulieri quidem. (Cic. Tusc. 2.55); Neque esse crudele, sicut plerique
proponunt, hominum nocentium, et horum quoque paucorum, suppliciis, remedia
populis innocentibus saeculorum omnium quaeri. (Cels. 1. pr. 26); Dicitur ius: ad
assem impendium reddes, nec id modicum. (Plin. Ep. 1.15.1)
With the noun repeated: Nolle hoc accipere reum ab accusatore, et eum reum qui
praetor in Sicilia fuerit, aratores ei statuam sua voluntate statuisse, aratores de eo
¹⁶⁶ See Reinhardt ad loc. ¹⁶⁷ See Rosén (1996: 145–7; 2008: 208–9).
¹⁶⁸ See Rosén (2007b).
Epitactic coordination
bene existimare, amicos esse, salvum esse cupere! (Cic. Ver. 2.151); Uva uva sum, et
uva Falerna. (Annian. poet. 1)
Instead of repeating the verb in the conjoin, facio can be used instead, as in (h).¹⁶⁹
(h) Suscepi causam, Torquate, suscepi, et feci libenter . . .
(‘I have undertaken the case, Torquatus, I have undertaken the case, and done so
gladly . . .’ Cic. Sul. 20)
An epitactic conjoin can contain the emphasizing particle quidem, as in (a) above and
in (i) and (j).¹⁷⁰ There are a few instances of ac/atque + equidem, as in (k). For other
particles, see the Supplement.¹⁷¹
(i) Tun’ me vidisti? # Atque his quidem hercle oculis.
(‘You’ve seen me? # Yes, and with these eyes.’ Pl. Mil. 368)
(j) At erat mecum senatus, et quidem veste mutata . . .
(‘But the senate was with me, even changing its garments . . .’ Cic. Planc. 87)
(k) O lepidum senem, in se si quas memorat virtutis habet, / atque equidem
plane educatum in nutricatu Venerio.
(‘What a lovely semi-old man, if he has the qualities he’s talking about, and clearly
brought up in Venus’ nurture.’ Pl. Mil. 649–50)
Supplement (see also the Supplement above):
Hem / conligavit? # Atque quidem orante ut ne id faceret Thaide. (Ter. Eu. 955–6);¹⁷²
Ego vero (sc. pergam), atque hilare quidem a te acceptus . . . (Cic. de Orat. 2.290); Ego
autem ne irasci quidem possum iis quos valde amo. Tantum doleo, ac mirifice qui-
dem. (Cic. Att. 2.19.1)
Proinde istuc facias ipse quod faciamus nobis suades. / # Ego vero, et quidem ede-
pol lubens. (Pl. As. 644–5); In te, M. Antoni, id decrevit senatus, et quidem incolu-
mis . . . (Cic. Phil. 2.51); Ego lanista? Et quidem non insipiens. (Cic. Phil. 13.40); Nunc
reliquorum oratorum aetates, si placet, et gradus persequamur. # Nobis vero, <inquit>
Atticus, et vehementer quidem . . . (Cic. Brut. 122); . . . Callisthenes, comes Alexandri,
scripsit historiam, et is quidem rhetorico paene more. (Cic. de Orat. 2.58); Cupit
regnum, et quidem scelerate cupit . . . (Liv. 40.11.7)
. . . facile intellectu cuivis fuit qualisnam accusatio futura esset, cuius qui fuerat
professor et machinator idem fieri auctor timeret, ac praesertim Sicinius
Aemilianus . . . (Apul. Apol. 2)
‘Solent’ inquit ‘haec fieri, et praecipue in hac civitate . . .’ (Petr. 129.10); . . . iis
plerumque quae composita domo attulerunt contenti sine adversario dicunt, et scili-
cet multo magis in scholis . . . (Quint. Inst. 5.13.36); . . . maior esse debet eo quem sibi
per adrogationem vel per adoptionem filium facit, et utique plenae pubertatis.
(Mod. dig. 1.7.40.1)
The main coordinator used in adversative epitactic coordination is sed. As one would
expect given its adversative semantic value, sed appears commonly after commands
and other directive expressions, as well as after explicit statements of opinion.
However, its distribution widens over time and it is not always easy to understand
which element in the preceding context contrasts with the sed segment. It develops
into a device used to create emphasis and becomes more or less equivalent to et.¹⁷³
Examples of adversative epitactic conjoins with clauses are (a) and (b). In (a) the
conjoin is attached by the coordinator alone; in (b), with the—rare—addition of ana-
phoric id.¹⁷⁴
(a) Immo vero etiam quid futurum sit perscribe ad me omnia, sed diligentis-
sime, in primisque num quid iudiciorum status aut factorum aut futurorum
etiam laboret.
(‘But I should add “what is going to happen,” give me full and comprehensive reports,
really conscientious ones, and first whether the state of the trials, past or future too,
is unsatisfactory.’ Cic. Att. 5.13.3)
(b) Primo ita me pupugit ut somnum mihi ademerit, sed id cogitatione magis
quam molestia.
(‘It gave me such a shock at first that sleep became impossible, but rather from activ-
ity than distress of mind.’ Cic. Att. 2.16.1)
¹⁷³ Sz.: 487 calls it ‘bloße Hervorhebung’. For the diachronic development, see Väänänen (1987: 118)
and Rosén (2008: 218).
¹⁷⁴ I have not found instances of repetition of the verb in an adversative epitactic conjoin.
¹⁷⁵ For sed, see Rosén (2007b).
Epitactic coordination
(‘. . . whose male progenitor was Jupiter, that is Jupiter number three, since, as I will
now explain, tradition tells us of several Jupiters also.’ Cic. N.D. 3.42)
An exceptional case is (f) wherein the adverb mane is repeated in combination with
the degree-of-truth adverb plane ‘absolutely’.
(f) Rogo mane videas Plinium domi, sed plane mane . . .
(‘Please see Pliny at his home early in the morning—but really quite early in the
morning . . .’ Plin. Ep. 1.5.8)
Supplement (following the order of the examples above):
Coordinator only: Vera dico, sed nequiquam, quoniam non vis credere. (Pl. Am.
835); Aperi, deprome inde auri ad hanc rem quod sat est, / continuo operito denuo,
sed clanculum, / sicut praecepi. (Pl. Trin. 803–5); Magis eum delectabat Neoptolemus
Ennii, qui se ait philosophari velle, sed paucis. Nam omnino haud placere. (Cic. Rep.
1.30); . . . dicamque, si potero, rhetorice, sed hac rhetorica philosophorum, non nos-
tra illa forensi . . . (Cic. Fin. 2.17); . . . et saepe idoneis hominibus indigentibus de re
familiari impertiendum, sed diligenter atque moderate. (Cic. Off. 2.54); Eos dico qui
aiunt manere animos, cum e corpore excesserint, sed non semper. (Cic. Tusc. 1.78 ); . . .
aliquot simul partibus ad vallum ac fossas perventum est, sed cum multis vulneribus
ac militum pernicie. (Liv. 25.14.1); . . . promisit, sed difficulter, sed subductis super-
ciliis, sed malignis et vix exeuntibus verbis? (Sen. Ben. 1.1.6)
Proelium commissum atrox, ceterum longe disparibus animis. (Liv. 10.41.1); . . .
dicebant . . . lege istius impediri. Erat hoc verum. Nam impediebantur, verum ea lege
quam idem iste de Macedonia Syriaque tulerat. (Cic. Dom. 70); Permittente ergo
Gaio revocatus est, verum sub condicione ne quam partem curamve rei publicae
attingeret. (Suet. Tib. 13.2)
Attributes expanding a noun phrase: Tum Scipio: Atqui nactus es (sc. me), sed
mehercule otiosiorem opera quam animo. (Cic. Rep. 1.14—NB: conjoin corrects an
understood object complement otiosum); Quippe <Q>. Pompeius, collega Sullae, ab
exercitu Cn. Pompei proconsulis seditione, sed quam dux <ex>citaverat interfectus
est. (Vell. 2.20.1—NB: adnominal relative clause); . . . scalis habito tribus, sed altis.
(Mart. 1.117.1—NB: ‘et quidem altis’ Citroni ad loc.); Artissime namque complexa
totum me prorsus, sed totum recepit. (Apul. Met. 10.22.3—NB: Scriverius transferred
prorsus to the second totum, which is easier); . . . in medio loco est monticulus non
satis grandis sed factus sicut solent esse tumbae, sed grandes. (Pereg. 13.3)
NB: With the conjoin in the middle of the clause: Timentes rursus aliquid ne simile
accidat, / odore canibus anum, sed multo, replent. (Phaedr. 4.19.18–19); Ostendit
digitum, sed impudicum, / Alconti Dasioque Symmachoque. (Mart. 6.70.5–6); . . .
vindictam tuae parenti, sed plenam, tribue . . . (Apul. Met. 4.31.1)
Anaphoric pronouns expanding a noun phrase: Venit ad nos ex iis quos amamus
etiam absentibus gaudium, sed id leve et evanidum. (Sen. Ep. 35.3); In universum
autem quidquid probandum est erit caput, sed id maius aut minus. (Quint. Inst.
3.11.27)
Super terga gladii et scuta, verum ea Numidica ex coriis . . . (Sal. Jug. 94.1)
With the noun repeated: . . . gentes eloquentiam in civitatibus plurimum valere pas-
sae sunt, sed hanc eloquentiam quae . . . (Cic. Orat. 97)
Coordination
NB: With the conjoin in the middle of the clause: Hic ex Antoni amicis—sed
amicioribus libertatis—contra Antonium confecit exercitum. (Cic. Phil. 5.44)
From a systematic point of view, examples that manifest some of the characteristics of
the previous ‘syndetic’ sections, but that lack an overt coordinator, might be expected.
The proposed instances, however, are subject to doubt. Two of these are (a) and (b).¹⁷⁶
In (a), intempestiva quidem et inprovisa can also be taken as a non-restrictive attribute
or as appositive, the more so because it is explained in a following cum clause; in (b),
graviter quidem can alternatively be taken as a degree modifier with iratus. Another
example is (c), where some editors delete id, others start a new sentence. Noteworthy is
(d), where quidem is inserted in the prepositional phrase, following the preposition.¹⁷⁷
(a) Non enim preces sunt istud sed efflagitatio—intempestiva quidem et inpro-
visa, cum aliis de rebus convenerint patres . . .
(‘For this is no petition, but a demand—an unseasonable and unexpected demand,
when the senators have a session for other purposes . . .’ Tac. Ann. 2.38.2)
(b) Tibi quoque edepol sum iratus, Philumena, / graviter quidem.
(‘In heaven’s name, Philumena, I’m angry with you too, exceedingly so.’ Ter. Hec.
623–4)
(c) Reliquas omnes munitiones ab ea fossa pedes CCCC reduxit, id hoc con-
silio . . . ne de improviso aut noctu ad munitiones multitudo hostium advo-
laret . . ..
(‘He set back the rest of the siege-work four hundred paces from the trench, this with
the intention to provide against any sudden rush of the enemy’s host by night upon
the entrenchments . . .’ Caes. Gal. 7.72.2)
(d) Iam mater rure rediit? Responde mihi. / # Cum quidem salute familiai maxuma.
(‘Has my mother come back from the country? Answer me. # Yes, and she has
brought great well-being to our household.’ Pl. Mer. 810–11)
19.71 Quasi-coordinators
The term quasi-coordinator is used in this Syntax for expressions that behave like
coordinators but that, at least etymologically, do not belong to the class of coordinators
¹⁷⁶ The case for asyndetic epitactic coordination has been made by Rosén (2011: 143–5).
¹⁷⁷ The PHI corpus contains no other instances of quidem following a preposition, it seems. The ms.
has afamilia. Camerarius emended to sua quidem salute ac familiai.
Quasi-coordinators
proper.¹⁷⁸ Latin nedum and the correlative pairs cum . . . tum and ut . . . ita can be said
to belong to this class.
The word nedum ‘let alone’ is used to link clauses, as in (a) and (b) and—much more
often—constituents, such as the two noun phrases in (c) and (d). It can also be used
to link subordinate clauses, such as the two accusative and infinitive clauses in (e), but
this is rare. There are over 200 attestations of its use, mainly in prose (almost a quarter
of which are in Tertullian).¹⁷⁹
(a) Satrapes si siet / amator, numquam sufferre eius sumptus queat, / nedum tu
possis.
(‘If she had a satrap for a lover, he’d never be able to sustain her extravagance, much
less you.’ Ter. Hau. 452–4)¹⁸⁰
(b) (sc. viros) . . . qui vel in pace tranquilla bellum excitare possent, nedum in
bello respirare civitatem forent passuri.
(‘. . . who even in unruffled peace were capable of stirring up war, and were still less
likely in time of war to allow the state a breathing-spell.’ Liv. 26.26.11)
(c) Erat enim multo domicilium huius urbis (sc. Romae) . . . aptius humanitati et
suavitati tuae quam tota Peloponnesus, nedum Patrae.
(‘For a residence in this city . . . was much better suited to your culture and refinement
than all the Peloponnesus put together, to say nothing of Patrae.’ Cic. Fam. 7.28.1)
(d) Vix clamorem eorum, nedum impetum Suessetani tulere.
(‘The Suessetani scarcely waited for them to raise the shout, much less for them to
charge.’ Liv. 34.20.7)
(e) Haud sum ignarus fabulosum visum iri tantum ullis mortalium securitatis
fuisse in civitate omnium gnara et nihil reticente, nedum consulem designa-
tum cum uxore principis . . . convenisse . . .
(‘It will seem, I am aware, incredible that, in a city cognizant of all things and reticent
of none, any human beings could have felt so much security; far more so, that . . . a
consul designate and the emperor’s wife should have met . . .’ Tac. Ann. 11.27)
In these examples, nedum has a scalar function: the content of the second element is
either more or less valid than that of the first. In (a) and (b), nedum is interpreted as
‘much less’; (a) has a negative preceding clause; (b), an affirmative. The situation is
different for nedum when it introduces a constituent: in (c) and (e), nedum is inter-
preted as ‘much more’; in (d), with a preceding negative adverb, as ‘much less’. This is
shown in Table 19.4.¹⁸¹
The categorial status and etymology of nedum are disputed.¹⁸² It is clearly not a sub-
ordinator, given the fact that it can link two clauses which are both accusative and
infinitive constructions, as it does in (e). Although it can be used in the combination
nedum ut (see below), it is not an adverb either. The use of the subjunctive in a nedum
clause is semantically justified. In this Syntax it is regarded as a quasi-coordinator:
the linked constituents are subject to the same constraints as in the case of regular
coordination (see § 19.75).
Supplement:
Nedum + clause: Optimis hercule temporibus . . . tamen nec P. Popilius neque
Q. Metellus . . . vim tribuniciam sustinere potuerunt, nedum his temporibus . . . salvi
esse possimus. (Cic. Clu. 95); Ego vero ne inmortalitatem quidem contra rem publi-
cam accipiendam putarem, nedum emori cum pernicie rei publicae vellem. (Cic.
Planc. 90); . . . vix cancellis et regionibus offici magnis in fortunis et copiis continetur,
nedum isti . . . non statim conquisituri sint aliquid sceleris et flagitii . . . (Cic. Agr. 2.97);
Quis enim mediocri prudentia, nedum Tiberius tantis rebus exercitus, inaudito filio
exitium offerret . . .? (Tac. Ann. 4.11.1—NB: rhetorical question); Fabium illis
Valentem . . . praegravem fuisse, nedum Primus ac Fuscus et specimen partium
Mucianus ullam in Vitellium nisi occidendi licentiam habeant. (Tac. Hist. 3.66.3)
Nedum + constituent: Quinctius, quem armorum etiam pro patria satietas teneret,
nedum adversus patriam . . . (Liv. 7.40.3); . . . puerum vixdum libertatem, nedum
dominationem modice laturum. (Liv. 24.4.1); . . . quorum iudicis (= iudiciis) (sc.
Livia) etiam si non contin/gere[n]t domum eorum merito gloriari posset
nedum tam coniunctis necessitu/dinibus inligata femina. (S.C. de Gn. Pisone
patre, 143–5 (ad )); . . . ornamenta etiam legioni, nedum militi satis multa. (V. Max.
3.2.24); . . . quia regibus aequa, nedum infima insolita sunt, finem vitae sponte an fato
implevit. (Tac. Ann. 2.42.3); . . . iterato beneficio gratus esto, nedum ampliato. (Tert.
Paenit. 7.11); Damnatus . . . in possessionem Satanae iam tunc perierat ecclesiae, cum
tale facinus admiserat, nedum cum et ab ipsa eierabatur. (Tert. Pud. 14.24); . . . etiam
domorum, nedum urbium interna noscentes. (Amm. 31.16.1)
The combination nedum ut is attested about seven times from Livy onwards as an
introduction of clauses with the same meaning as nedum ‘much less’, as in (f). A
strange case of inversion is (g).
(f) (sc. tribuni) . . . refecti quoque in insequentem annum, ne voce quidem incom-
moda, nedum ut ulla vis fieret.
(‘. . . they were even re-elected for the following year, by avoiding so much as an offen-
sive word, to say nothing of any sort of violence.’ Liv. 3.14.6)
(g) Nedum hominum humilium, ut nos sumus, sed etiam amplissimorum viro-
rum consilia ex eventu, non ex voluntate a plerisque probari solent.
(‘Advice, even the advice of great men, let alone of humble folk like us, is generally
judged by the event, not by the intention.’ Balb. Opp. Att. 9.7a.1)
The use of cum . . . tum as a coordinating device for constituents at or below the clause
level is found in all types of text from Cicero’s time onwards. It developed from the use
of these two words in correlative clauses, which is found from Early Latin onwards.
Exx. (a) and (b) illustrate this correlative use. That the cum clause is no longer a sub-
ordinate is clear from the fact that both clauses must have an infinitive in the accusa-
tive and infinitive construction in indirect speech, as in (c). Ex. (d) and the Supplement
illustrate the use of cum . . . tum as a coordinating device with constituents.¹⁸⁵
(a) Quom ego antidhac te amavi et mi amicam esse crevi, / mea Gymnasium, et
matrem tuam, tum id mihi hodie / aperuistis, tu atque haec.
¹⁸³ This instance of ne is much disputed, but correct. See Heubner (1964: 141–3).
¹⁸⁴ Ut iusta is a conjecture of Bugge and Buecheler for incomprehensible readings of A and P. Pl. Cas.
1002 ut ne eam amasso (indicative!) is suspect.
¹⁸⁵ For further examples, see OLD s.v. cum § 14 b. For discussion, see Orlandini and Poccetti (2008:
181–2). Exx. (b) and (c) are taken from their article. See also Orlandini and Poccetti (2009).
Coordination
(‘I’ve always loved you and decided that you were my friend, my dear Gymnasium,
and also your mother, but today you’ve revealed it, you and she.’ Pl. Cist. 1–3)
(b) Nam cum omnis iuventus, omnes etiam gravioris aetatis . . . eo convenerant,
tum navium quod ubique fuerat unum in locum coegerant.
(‘For, on the one hand, all the fighting men, or more so all the older men . . . had there
assembled; on the other, they had collected in one place every single ship they had
anywhere.’ Caes. Gal. 3.16.2)
(c) . . . eas (sc. res) a Stoicis esse perspectas eisdemque de rebus hos cum acutius
disseruisse tum sensisse gravius et fortius . . .
(‘. . . these things were perceived by the Stoics and they had discussed the same sub-
jects with more insight and had arrived at bolder and more profound conclusions . . .’
Cic. Fin. 4.62)
(d) Itaque et alieni sermonis molesti interpellatores et scripti cum odiosi tum
obscuri interpretes sunt.
(‘Accordingly, when someone else speaks, they are his annoying hecklers, and when
he writes, they are his boring and hazy interpreters.’ Rhet. Her. 2.16)
Supplement:
Nam cum omnium sociorum provinciarumque rationem diligenter habere debetis,
tum praecipue Siciliae, iudices . . . (Cic. Ver. 2.2); Te valde amamus nosque a te amari
cum volumus, tum etiam confidimus. (Cic. Fam. 7.14.2); Itaque cum et alii multi,
tum etiam Faberius scriba . . . peristyliis parietes omnes induxit minio . . . (Vitr.
7.9.2); . . . Saleium Bassum, cum optimum virum tum absolutissimum poetam? (Tac.
Dial. 5.2)
The following sections deal with less typical instances of coordination. Coordination
of constitutents which are functionally equivalent but belong to different lexical cat-
egories is dealt with in §§ 19.76–9. Cases of functionally unequivalent coordination
are discussed in § 19.80. Thereafter follow three sections with types of coordination
that have received much attention in the literature.
¹⁸⁷ For Virgil, see Hahn (1930); for Tacitus, see Longrée (1998; 2001) and especially Sánchez
Martínez (2000). See also Helander (1977: 96–8) on ‘inconcinnity’.
Less common types of coordination
(‘For wisdom includes also magnanimity and justice and a sense that everything that
befalls humankind is beneath it.’ Cic. Fin. 3.25)
Supplement:
. . . haec est mea et huius fratris mei germana patria. (Cic. Leg. 2.3); An quisquam in
potiendis voluptatibus gloriando se et praedicatione effert? (Cic. Parad. 15); Phalaris,
cuius in similitudinem dominatus unius proclivi cursu et facile delabitur. (Cic.
Rep. 1.44)
. . . nisi qui colaphos perpeti / potes parasitus frangique aulas in caput, / vel
ire . . . licet. (Pl. Capt. 88–90); Dubitationem autem de Epiro non inconstantia nostra
adferebat sed quod de fratre ubi eum visuri essemus nesciebamus. (Cic. Att. 3.7.3);
Perscribe ad me omnia, sed diligentissime, in primisque num quid iudiciorum status
aut factorum aut futurorum etiam laboret. (Cic. Att. 5.13.3)
NB: understood object and indirect question: De Rutilia quoniam videris dubitare,
scribes Ø ad me cum scies, sed quam primum, et num Clodia D. Bruto consulari, filio
suo, mortuo vixerit. (Cic. Att. 12.22.2—NB: et is absent in most mss)
Supplement:
Eugae, eugae, di me salvom et servatum volunt. (Pl. Aul. 677); Uxor tibi placida et
placata est. (Pl. Mer. 965)
Pro di immortales, mulierem lepidam et pudico ingenio. (Pl. Mos. 206); . . . ad
Caepasios fratres confugit, homines industrios atque eo animo ut quaecumque
dicendi potestas esset data in honore atque in beneficio ponerent. (Cic. Clu. 57); . . . bene-
ficium populi Romani cum vestra atque omnium civium salute tueatur. (Cic. Mur. 2);
Barba demissa, sordidatus, cum criminibus meis ad vos veni. (Sen. Con. 10.1.2)
Incertum’st quid agam, quia praeter spem atque incredibile hoc mi optigit. (Ter. Ph.
239); Honesta oratio, sed ita si bonos et utilis et e re publica civis. (Cic. Phil. 8.13); . . .
T. Iuventius . . . et callidus et in capiendo adversario versutus et praeterea nec indoc-
tus et magna cum iuris civilis intellegentia. (Cic. Brut. 178); Cetera par concors et sine
lite fuit. (Ov. Pont. 3.2.88); . . . ut caelestia dona, / artis opus tantae, rudis et sine pec-
tore miles / indueret? (Ov. Met. 13.289–91); Praecipueque ex his oritur mira sublimi-
tas, quae audaci et proxime periculum translatione tolluntur . . . (Quint. Inst. 8.6.11)
Obiecisti mihi ultimum nefas et quod qui tantum suspicatus est noluit vivere. (Sen.
Con. 8.3.fin.)
In primis autem miraculo sunt atque frequentes (frequentia/frequenter codd.)
mortes repentinae—hoc est summa vitae felicitas—quas esse naturales docebimus.
(Plin. Nat. 7.180—NB: text as emended by Rackham)
Coordination of two or more conjoins that have different syntactic and/or semantic
functions is less common than the type of coordination discussed in the preceding
sections. Particularly rare is the coordination of two or more arguments with different
functions, as occurs in (a), a passive clause in which the subject/patient and the agent
are coordinated. (Note that multo goes both with plura and with pluribus.) More
frequent are instances of coordination of arguments and adjuncts, as in (b).¹⁸⁸
Coordination of adjuncts with different semantic functions is not uncommon, but
instances like (c) are rare. These forms of coordination seem to be more acceptable in
interrogative sentences and clauses, as in (d).
(a) Intellego, iudices, in causa aperta minimeque dubia multo et plura et a pluri-
bus peritissimis esse dicta quam res postularet.
(‘I am aware, gentlemen, that in a case which is so clear and admits of such little
doubt far more matters have been discussed and by far more learned counsel than the
case required.’ Cic. Balb. 56)
(b) Recte et vera loquere, sed nec vere nec tu recte adhuc / fecisti umquam.
(‘Tell me the honest truth; but so far you’ve never behaved truthfully or honestly.’ Pl.
Capt. 960–1)
(c) Declamavit non quidem populo, sed egregie.
(‘He was an outstanding declaimer, though not one who performed in public.’ Sen.
Con. 10 pr. 4)
(d) Quo tempore aut qua in re non modo ceteris specimen aliquod dedisti, sed
tute tui periculum fecisti?
(‘When or where have you given any proof to others, or even tested yourself on your
own account?’ Cic. Div. Caec. 27)
Supplement:
Subject + adjunct: Nec, si hoc Crassus non committit, ideo non multi et saepe com-
mittunt. (Cic. de Orat. 2.302); Ceteris virtutum generibus varie et multi fuere
praestantes. (Plin. Nat. 7.100); . . . plerosque qui aut ubi essent prae poculis nescientes
Appius Pulcher invadit. (Flor. Epit. 1.26.2); De quibus breviter et pauca dicenda sunt.
(Hist. Aug. Gall. 21.1)
Cf.: . . . nemo ex iis qui contra eum arma tulerant ab eo iussuve eius interemptus. (Vell.
2.87.2)
Object + adjunct: Verum edepol ne etiam tua quoque malefacta iterari multa / et vero
possunt (Pl. As. 567–8); Et recte et verum dici. (Ter. Ad. 609); Sed iam satis est philo-
sophatum: nimis diu et longum loquor. (Pl. Ps. 687); Reliquum est ut de felicitate . . .
¹⁸⁸ For this particular case, see Fugier (1983a). For instances of coordination of adjectives and adverbs,
as in (b), see Lundström (1982: 28) and Vester (1987: 349–57).
Coordination
timide et pauca dicamus. (Cic. Man. 47); Ego et saepius ad te et plura scriberem nisi
mihi dolor meus cum omnis partis mentis tum maxime huius generis facultatem
ademisset. (Cic. Att. 3.7.3); De urbanis rebus scilicet plura tu scis, saepius et certiora
audis; equidem doleo non me tuis litteris certiorem fieri. (Cic. Att. 6.3.4); Sic moneo
ut filium, sic faveo ut mihi, sic hortor ut et pro patria et amicissimum. (Cic. Fam.
10.5.3); Nam nisi ego tantam pecuniam tantaque praesidia et tam celeriter Cassio
dedissem . . . (Lent. Fam. 12.14.6); . . . Iuniam familiam a stirpe ad hanc aetatem ordine
enumeraverit notans qui a quo ortus quos honores quibusque temporibus cepisset.
(Nep. Att. 18.3); Dictator de se pauca ac [de] modice locutus . . . (Liv. 23.24.3);
Respondent illis et quae volunt et cum volunt. (Sen. Con. 9 pr. 2); Et cum multa
Tetricus feliciterque gessi<sse>t . . . (Hist. Aug. trig. tyr. 24.2)
Various adjuncts: Eum etiam hominem in senatu dare operam aut cluentibus (Pl.
As. 871—NB: text emended in various ways, e.g. <aut> in senatu Camerarius; this
does not change the coordination); Praesertim in re populi placida atque interfec-
tis hostibus / non decet tumultuari. (Pl. Poen. 524–5); Sero atque stulte . . . rationem
putat. (Pl. Trin. 416); Hodie sero ac nequiquam voles. (Ter. Hau. 344—NB: a neg-
ation adverb); Quos quidem tu quam ob rem temere prosiluisse dicas atque ante
tempus non reperio. (Cic. Cael. 64); Verum ego quod invitus ac necessario facio,
neque diu neque diligenter facere possum. (Cic. S. Rosc. 123); Haec diu multumque
et multo labore quaesita una eripuit hora. (Cic. Sul. 73); Nihil aut sero aut exigue a
patria civi tributum potest videri. (Planc. Fam. 10.9.2); Quod iussus sum eo tem-
pore atque ita feci ut appareret invito imperatum esse. (Pol. Fam. 10.31.3); Ac
nescio an nimis undique eam minimisque rebus muniendo modum excesserint.
(Liv. 2.2.2); Qua in re observatum a meridianis partibus ad occasum solis pestilen-
tiam semper ire nec umquam aliter fere, non hieme, nec ut ternos excedat menses.
(Plin. Nat. 7.170)
Adjunct clauses: . . . sibi ambo consilia capiunt: Caesar, ut quam primum se cum
Antonio coniungeret, Pompeius, ut venientibus in itinere se opponeret et si impru-
dentes ex insidiis adoriri posset. (Caes. Civ. 3.30.2—NB: [et] Davisius)
¹⁸⁹ Many examples can be found in Lundström (1982: 28–30; 50–3). See also K.-St.: I.236–8.
Less common types of coordination
Supplement:
Secondary predicate + adjunct:
Manner adjunct: . . . villam conversam mundeque habeat . . . (Cato Agr. 143.2); Haud
impigre neque inultus occiditur. (Sal. Hist. 4.41); Multitudine aliquantum Volsci
superabant. Itaque effusi et contemptim pugnam iniere. (Liv. 2.30.12); Hoc primis
diebus, dum integrae vires erant, et frequentes et impigre fecerunt; in dies deinde
pauciores et segnius. (Liv. 36.23.4); Ut raro, invitus et cum magna cunctatione, ita
aliquando scribas necesse est istud . . . (Sen. Cl. 2.2.3); (sc. leo) Quamlibet magna
canum et venantium urguente vi contemptim restitansque cedit in campis et ubi
spectari potest. (Plin. Nat. 8.50)
Time adjunct: Quae (sc. virtus) et semper et sola libera est . . . (Cic. de Orat.
1.226); . . . ad hoc genus castigandi raro invitique veniemus nec unquam nisi necessa-
rio . . . (Cic. Off. 1.136); . . . ut nos et saepe alias et adulescentes contra L. Sullae domi-
nantis opes pro Sex. Roscio Amerino fecimus quae ut scis extat oratio. (Cic. Off.
2.51); . . . etsi domum bene potus seroque redieram . . . (Cic. Fam. 7.22); . . . e quibus (sc.
nominationibus) prima et antiquitus Dorica est nata. (Vitr. 4.1.3); Spirant autem et a
bruma, cum vocantur ornithiae, sed leniores et paucis diebus. (Plin. Nat. 2.127)
Cause adjunct: Verum ego quod invitus ac necessario facio, neque diu neque dili-
genter facere possum. (Cic. S. Rosc. 123); His quidam signis atque haec exempla secuti /
esse apibus partem divinae mentis et haustus / aetherios dixere. (Verg. G. 4.219–21)
Purpose adjunct: . . . qui et privati et privatum ad negotium exierunt . . . (Cic. Agr.
1.8); Ibi cum Boccho Numida quidam Aspar nomine multum et familiariter agebat,
praemissus ab Iugurtha, postquam Sullam adcitum audierat, orator et subdole specu-
latum Bocchi consilia. (Sal. Jug. 108.1)
Other: Cecidissetve ebrius aut de equo uspiam, / metuerem ne ibi diffregisset crura
aut cervices sibi. (Pl. Mil. 721–2); De dignitate M. Caelius notis ac maioribus natu et
sine mea oratione et tacitus facile ipse respondet. (Cic. Cael. 3); Sed is quasi dictata,
nullo dilectu, nulla elegantia, Philo ut propria noster et lecta poemata et loco
adiungebat. (Cic. Tusc. 2.26—NB: following (Lundström 1982)); . . . quamquam tibi
inmaturo et unde minume decuit vita erepta est . . . (Sal. Jug. 14.22); Uni tibi et cum
singulis res erit. (Liv. 2.12.11); . . . subito ex insidiis consurgitur, et adversi et undique
hostes erant. (Liv. 2.50.6); . . . subitoque et inopinatus ait Simpliciano, ut ipse narrabat,
‘eamus in ecclesiam: Christianus volo fieri’. (August. Conf. 8.4)
NB: . . . tibi nos, ut antea magna ex parte, sic nunc penitus totosque tradimus. (Cic.
Tusc. 5.5)
Rare is the coordination of constituents that belong to different levels of the clause, as
in (g), where the frequency adjunct saepe is coordinated with the adjective maximas,
which functions as a modifier of the noun gratias. Equally uncommon is the occur-
rence of this form of coordination at a lower level, as in (h), where the determiner his
is coordinated with the noun phrase huius modi (a genitive of description—see
§ 11.48) instead of appearing at a hierarchically higher level (see § 11.75).
(g) Terentia tibi et saepe et maximas agit gratias.
(‘Terentia tells me continually how very grateful she is to you.’ Cic. Att. 3.5.1)
Coordination
(h) Idemque tu cum his atque huius modi consiliis ac facinoribus . . . M. Bibulum
foro, curia, templis, locis publicis omnibus expulisses . . .
(‘Further, when by these and the like designs and atrocities . . . you had driven Marcus
Bibulus from the Forum, the Senate House, the temples and all the public places . . .’
Cic. Vat. 22)
Supplement:
Assunt / quas me iussisti adducere et quo ornatu. (Pl. Mil. 898–9)
¹⁹⁰ For the following sections, see Pinkster (1972: 114–20), with references. For Virgil, Hahn (1930) is
essential.
¹⁹¹ For a discussion of the phenomenon as such, see Nutting (1916). For the Virgilian examples, see
McDevitt (1967). Ancient sources can be found in TLL s.v. hysteronproteron and hysterologia.
¹⁹² See Horsfall ad loc.
¹⁹³ See Norden’s Anhang II.2 in his commentary on Book VI. See also Sz.: 698–9 and Görler
(1985: 274).
Less common types of coordination
(‘ “Let us die and rush into the thick of the fray” is certainly an example of hysteron
proteron; for the first thing to do is to rush into the midst of the weapons, and then
to die.’ Serv. ad Verg. A. 2.353)
(b) At pius exequiis Aeneas rite solutis, / aggere composito tumuli, postquam
alta quierunt / aequora, tendit iter velis portumque relinquit.
(‘Now good Aeneas, when the last rites were duly paid and the funeral mound was
raised, as soon as the high seas were stilled, sails forth on his way and leaves the
harbour.’ Verg. A. 7.5–7)
(c) Sit Scipio clarus ille, cuius consilio atque virtute Hannibal in Africam redire
atque Italia decedere coactus est.
(‘I acknowledge the renown of that Scipio whose skill and valour compelled Hannibal
to return to Africa and quit Italy.’ Cic. Catil. 4.21)
(d) Caesar . . . milites cohortatus est ut beneficio fortunae uterentur castraque
oppugnarent.
(‘Caesar exhorted his troops that they . . . use the gift of fortune and attack the camp.’
Caes. Civ. 3.95.1)
Supplement:
. . . iste certe statuerat ac deliberaverat non adesse . . . (Cic. Ver. 1.1); Qualis mugitus,
fugit cum saucius aram / taurus et incertam excussit cervice securim. (Verg. A. 2.223–4);
Quin, ut te supplex peterem et tua limina adirem / idem orans mandata dabat. (Verg.
A. 6.115–16)
. Zeugma
The term zeugma is used inconsistently from Antiquity onwards, and modern
attempts to formulate a more accurate definition have not been very succesful.¹⁹⁴
Often cited instances to which the term is applied are (a) and (b), where the verbs
govern two coordinated noun phrases. In (a), bellum gerens is perfectly idiomatic, but
instead of pacem gerens a Roman would say pacem agens, which the coordinated
utterance requires the reader to recognize. In (b), by contrast, both in urbe permanent
and in eadem mente permanent are idiomatic utterances. However, the semantic rela-
tionship between the two prepositional phrases and the verb are different, which
makes the coordination striking. In this case, the parallelism is strengthened by the
use of correlative coordinators, but this is not essential. The latter type in particular
lends itself to being used for humorous effect, as in (c).¹⁹⁵
(a) . . . ut . . . (sc. Iugurtha) pacem an bellum gerens perniciosior esset, in incerto
haberetur.
(‘. . . it was not certain whether he was more destructive . . . when offering peace or
war.’ Sal. Jug. 46.8)
Scholars vary in the extent to which they use the term zeugma for describing instances
of coordination, especially those of the type illustrated by (a), and some scholars even
use expressions like ‘a slight zeugma’.¹⁹⁶
Supplement:
Verb to be inferred: Tace. Occultemus lumen et vocem. (Pl. Cur. 95); Namque hoc
tempu’ praecavere mihi me, haud te ulcisci sinit. (Ter. An. 624—from sinit infer iubet
or cogit for the first infinitive); Omnis hic locus acervis corporum et civium san-
guine redundavit. (Cic. Catil. 3.24); Itaque sive casu accidit sive consilio, percom-
mode factum est quod . . . (Cic. Tusc. 4.64—with consilio infer factum est); Meque
vosque in omnibus rebus iuxta geram. (Sal. Jug. 85.47); Iuturnam misero (fateor)
succurrere fratri / suasi et pro vita maiora audere probavi, / non ut tela tamen, non ut
contenderet arcum. (Verg. A. 12.813–15); Nam si legatus officii terminos, obse-
quium erga imperatorem exuit . . . (Tac. Ann. 3.12.2)
Different semantic relations: Erigite mentes auresque vestras . . . (Cic. Sul. 33); Vadit
enim in eundem carcerem atque in eundem paucis post annis scyphum Socrates . . .
(Cic. Tusc. 1.97); . . . Pergama cum peteret inconcessosque Hymenaeos . . . (Verg. A.
1.651); . . . pariterque oculos telumque tetendit. (Verg. A. 5.508); . . . demisere metu
vultumque animumque Pelasgi. (Ov. Met. 7.133); Cecidere illis animique manusque.
(Ov. Met. 7.347); Ille humilis supplex oculos dextramque precantem protendens . . .
(Verg. A. 12.930–1); . . . manus ac supplices voces ad Tiberium tendens immoto eius
vultu excipitur. (Tac. Ann. 2.29.2)
The same phenomenon also occurs at the noun phrase level, as in (d), where praeto-
rium has to be interpreted in two different ways with imperium and nomen.¹⁹⁷
(d) . . . cum penes te praetorium imperium ac nomen esset . . .
(‘. . . as the authority and rank of praetor was in your hands . . .’ Cic. Ver. 5.40)
Sz.: 833 draws attention to (e), where the same noun has to be interpreted in different
ways with two coordinated verbs. Something similar has been suggested for (f),
though less convincingly.¹⁹⁸
(e) . . . neque se aliter · consilium ·habiturum · neq(ue) aliter / daturum . . .
(‘. . . and otherwise he will neither hold an assembly nor give advice . . .’ CIL
II.1963.II.6–7 (Lex Salpensana, Utrera c.ad 82–4))
(f) Itaque et illos septem, qui a Graecis σοφοί, sapientes a nostris et habebantur
et nominabantur . . .
(‘And so the famous seven (who were called σοφοί by the Greeks) were both
considered and called wise men by our countrymen.’ Cic. Tusc. 5.7)
The term double zeugma is used for highly literary cases like (g), where spem and
metum go with strenuis and ignavis, respectively.¹⁹⁹
(g) . . . ut si adesset imperator et strenuis vel ignavis spem metumve adderet.
(‘. . . so that they inspired hope in the energetic or fear in the indolent, exactly
as if the commander-in-chief were there in person.’ Tac. Hist. 1.62.2)
. Hendiadys
The phenomena that fall under the label hendiadys (Greek: ἓν διὰ δυοῖν ‘one by
two’) are commented on from Antiquity onwards: Servius (end of the fourth century
ad) ad Verg. A. 1.61 (example (a) below) defines it as a figure of speech in which one
thing is divided into two by the insertion of a coordinator, and this for metrical
reasons (metri causa). In (a) and (b), the content of the conjoins could also be
expressed by a noun phrase in which one of the conjoins functions as modifier of the
other, either in the form of a noun phrase in the genitive, as in (a): montium alto-
rum—where ‘et . . . altos explains the moles’ (Austin ad loc.)—or in the form of an
adjective, as in (b): ferreis.
(a) Sed pater omnipotens speluncis abdidit (sc. ventos) atris / . . . molemque et
montis insuper altos / imposuit . . .
(‘But the father omnipotent hid them in gloomy caverns, and over them piled high
mountain masses . . .’ Verg. A. 1.60–2)
(b) Dirae ferro et compagibus artis / claudentur Belli portae.
(‘The gates of war, grim with iron and close-fitting bars, shall be closed.’ Verg. A.
1.293–4)
However, the term was also used by Porphyrio (early third century ad) to describe the
wording oppida . . . et deorum templa in (c) ‘instead of oppidorum templa’. In this case,
the paraphrase is less evident and indeed has been rejected by recent commentators.²⁰⁰
The term has also been applied to instances of coordination of (near-)synonyms, as in
(d) and (e).²⁰¹ As with zeugma, some scholars are more generous in their use of the
term than others. The supplement contains examples of coordination that can be
paraphrased in a way similar to that in which (a) and (b) were.
¹⁹⁹ See Sz.: 834 and Brink (1944), with instances from Virgil onwards (Tacitus in particular).
²⁰⁰ E.g. Nisbet and Hubbard ad loc.
²⁰¹ For a survey of the various uses of the term hendiadys, see Panagl (2005). See also Sz.: 782–3. For a
very critical discussion of the usefulness of the term hendiadys, with reference to Virgil, see Hahn (1922).
Malchukov (2000: 37) describes hendiadys as a form of upgrading of the attribute.
Coordination
(c) . . . leges . . . oppida publico / sumptu iubentes et deorum / templa novo deco-
rare saxo.
(‘. . . the law . . . insisted that towns and the temples of the gods should be beautified at
public expense with fresh-cut stone.’ Hor. Carm. 2.15.18–20)
(d) . . . ut arare, ut pascere, ut negotiari libeat, ut denique sedes ac domicilium
conlocare.
(‘. . . in order, according to their preference, to farm or raise livestock or conduct busi-
ness, in short, in order to settle and make a home there.’ Cic. Ver. 2.6—NB: the
German scholar Fuhrmann translates ‘seinen bleibenden Wohnsitz’)
(e) . . . in eis (sc. clausulis) maxime perfectio atque absolutio iudicatur.
(‘. . . it is here that perfection and finish is chiefly evaluated.’ Cic. de Orat. 3.192—NB:
cf. quibus praetermissis caeli absolutio perfecta non erit. (Cic. Tim. 41))
Supplement:
. . . ex his studiis haec quoque crescit oratio et facultas . . . (Cic. Arch. 13); . . . ut incon-
ditam antiquorum dicendi consuetudinem delectationis atque aurium causa, quem
ad modum scribit discipulus eius Naucrates, numeris astringeret. (Cic. de Orat.
3.173); Est enim tarda illa quidem medicina, sed tamen magna, quam adfert longin-
quitas et dies. (Cic. Tusc. 3.35); Pro multitudine autem hominum et pro gloria belli
atque fortitudinis angustos se fines habere arbitrabantur . . . (Caes. Gal. 1.2.5); Arma
virumque cano . . . (Verg. A. 1.1—NB: disputed); . . . hic laticis, qualem pateris libamus
et auro (Verg. G. 2.192); . . . loricam consertam hamis auroque trilicem . . . (Verg. A.
3.467); Interea socios inhumataque corpora terrae / mandemus . . . (Verg. A. 11.22–3);
In huius sinu indulgentiaque educatus per omnem honestarum artium cultum pue-
ritiam adulescentiamque transegit. (Tac. Agr. 4.2—NB: so according to Woodman
and Kraus ad loc.; zeugma according to Sz.: 833); . . . alam equitum quae conscripta
e Treveris militia disciplinaque nostra habebatur . . . (Tac. Ann. 3.42.1); Sed
Agrippina, . . . in oppidum Ubiorum, in quo genita erat, veteranos coloniamque
deduci impetrat . . . (Tac. Ann. 12.27.1)²⁰²
²⁰² The examples from Cicero and Caesar are taken from K.-St.: II.26–7. For hendiadys in Cicero, see
Hatz (1886); for Virgil, see Görler (1985: 274–5), with references, and Muñoz (1976); for Tacitus’ minor
works, see Ulbricht (1875).
CHAPTER 20
Comparison
20.1 Introduction
This chapter deals with a number of expressions that are syntactically quite diverse,
but have in common one of the two following properties: either entities are compared
with respect to the way in or degree to which they possess a certain property, or prop-
erties are compared that pertain to certain entities. In this Syntax the term ‘term’ is
used for entities that are involved in some form of comparison. The term ‘property’ is
used in a broad sense to refer to qualities, events, situations, etc. The following types
of comparison can be distinguished:
(i) expressions in which two terms are compared with respect to a certain stand-
ard, as in (a), with respect to ‘easiness’ (§§ 20.2–11);
(ii) expressions in which two properties, usually of one and the same term, are
compared, as in (b), where the length and width of the acies are compared
(§§ 20.12–14);
(iii) expressions in which the (dis)similarity between two terms is expressed
lexically, as in (c) by simili (§§ 20.15–23);
(iv) expressions that characterize the manner in which a certain event takes place
or the quality of a certain entity, as in (d) with ut (§ 20.24–7);
(v) finally, relative adjectives of amount in combination with demonstrative
adjectives of amount function de facto as a means of comparison, as in (e),
where teams of animals and carts are compared in terms of number. This
type is discussed in § 18.35 fin.
(a) Tam hoc quidem tibi in proclivi (sc. est) quam imber est quando pluit.
(‘This (sc. ransoming someone) will be just as easy for you as rain when it’s raining.’
Pl. Capt. 336)
(b) Sed longior quam latior acies erat.
(‘But the battle-line was deep rather than widely extended.’ Liv. 27.48.7)
(c) Date operam, adeste aequo animo per silentium, / ne simili utamur fortuna
atque usi sumus . . .
(‘Pay attention, and listen in silence with open minds, so that we do not suffer the
same fate as we suffered . . .’ Ter. Ph. 30–1)
The Oxford Latin Syntax. Harm Pinkster, Oxford University Press (2021). © Harm Pinkster.
DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780199230563.003.0020
716 Comparison
(d) . . . venit vel rogatus ut amicus, vel accersitus ut socius, vel evocatus ut is qui
senatui parere didicisset . . .
(‘. . . he came either requested as a friend, or summoned as an ally, or called forth as
one who had learned to obey the Senate . . .’ Cic. Deiot. 13)
(e) Quot iuga boverum, mulorum, asinorum habebis, totidem plostra esse
oportet.
(‘You should have as many carts as you have teams of oxen, mules, or donkeys.’ Cato
Agr. 62.1)
Some scholars include verbs that express more or less explicitly superiority or infer-
iority of one entity with respect to another, such as supero and antecello ‘to surpass’. In
this Syntax these verbs are dealt with in a different way. See § 4.53.1 Many scholars use
comparison in a wider sense than is done in this Chapter. See § 14.1 (iii).
1 For a different approach, see Cuzzolin (2011: 628–33) and Tarriño (2011: 373–4; 391–2), with
references.
2 I follow the terminology of Quirk et al. (1985: 1127ff.). This differs considerably from the terminology
used by Cuzzolin (2011: 555) and Tarriño (2011: 376–8).
Comparison between two terms against a certain standard 717
(ii) devices that express the non-equivalence (or: inequality) of two terms
under comparison with respect to a certain standard, as in (b).
(a) Tam ego fui ante liber quam gnatus tuos. / Tam mihi quam illi libertatem
hostilis eripuit manus. / Tam ille apud nos servit quam ego nunc hic apud te
servio.
(‘Once I was just as free as your son. The enemy’s armed force has taken freedom
away from me just as it did from him; and he’s a slave at our place just as I’m now a
slave at yours.’ Pl. Capt. 310–12)
(b) . . . multo tamen pauciores oratores quam poetae boni reperientur.
(‘. . . far fewer good orators will be found even than good poets.’ Cic. de Orat. 1.11)
In both types two terms are involved, which will normally be expressed explicitly but
which may be understood from the context or from general knowledge, as is shown
in (c), where Hercules is implicitly compared with the speaker (ego).
(c) Nimio ego hanc periculo / surrupui hodie. Meo quidem animo ab Hippolyta
succingulum / Hercules haud aeque magno umquam apstulit periculo.
(‘I risked great danger in stealing this today. In my opinion Hercules didn’t steal
Hippolyta’s undergirdle in such great danger.’ Pl. Men. 199–201)
For the description of the various comparative expressions the following terminology
is used: in the first sentence of (a) above the terms that are compared with each other
are ego and gnatus tuos and the comparison expresses that the degree of freedom of
ego is the same as that of gnatus tuos. The standard of comparison is the freedom,
the basis of comparison is the noun phrase gnatus tuos. In (b), in turn, the standard
is the number, the basis is poetae boni; what the comparison indicates is that the num-
ber of good orators will turn out to be lower than the number of good poets.
Comparison is indicated by the presence of a comparative element. In the case of
(a), this consists of the correlative adverbs tam and quam; in (b), of the comparative
degree pauciores of the adjective paucus and quam (on which see § 20.5). In (c), the
comparative element consists of aeque, with atque understood.
Graphically, the comparison expressed in (b) can be represented as in Table 20.1.
Many grammars use the term ‘comparative clause’ or ‘clause of comparison’ for the
part quam poetae boni reperientur in ex. (b) above. These clauses are described as
‘adverbial’, that is—in the terminology of this Syntax—as satellites.3 However, ‘com-
parative clauses’ are obligatory constituents that are required by the comparative
element in the expression (for comparative forms of adjectives, see § 11.92), and are
therefore essentially different from satellites.4 Also, ‘comparative clauses’ are not sub-
ordinate clauses in the sense that they are part of another clause (see § 14.1). Therefore,
when comparative expressions in which clauses are involved depend on a verb of
perception, cognition, or communication, both terms can be in the accusative and
infinitive, as is shown in (d) (see § 15.108). In this respect, comparison resembles
coordination (see § 2.2 and § 14.1).5
(d) Censes ante coronam herbae exstitisse quam conceptum esse semen?
(‘Do you think the crown of herbs appeared before their seeds were formed?’
Cic. Div. 2.68)
Supplement:
Ego periurare me mavellem miliens / quam mi illum verba per ridiculum dare.
(Pl. Ps. 1057–8); . . . ego me ruri amplexari mavelim patulam bovem / . . . / quam tuas
centum cenatas noctes mihi dono dari. (Pl. Truc. 277–9)
In the examples (a)–(c) above, the comparative construction contains an explicit element
of comparison (tam, pauciores, and aeque). However, from Early Latin onwards there
are instances in which this has to be deduced from the context. Examples of equiva-
lence and non-equivalence, respectively, are (e) and (f)—for further details, see § 20.5.
(e) Non edepol piscis expeto / quam tui sermonis sum indigens.
(‘I’m not looking for fish as much as I’m in need of a conversation with you.’ Pl. Rud.
943–3a)
(f) . . . vidua vivam quam tuos mores perferam.
(‘. . . I’ll live as a divorcee rather than tolerate your habits.’ Pl. Men. 726)
The terms of comparison can be found at various levels in the clause and in various
functions. In (g) (already cited) two subjects at the clause level are compared with
each other. In (h) and (i) the comparison is between two object constituents, in ( j)
between two indirect objects. In (k) and (l) the comparison is between two satellites
(in the latter example the first term must be inferred from modo). In (m) it is between
two attributes at the noun phrase level.
(g) . . . multo tamen pauciores oratores quam poetae boni reperientur.
(‘. . . far fewer good orators will be found even than good poets.’ Cic. de Orat. 1.11)
3 For example, in K.-St.: II.457: ‘Vergleichende Adverbialsätze der Quantität oder Intensität’ (‘com-
parative clauses of quantity or degree’).
4 It must be said that a corpus study shows that most comparative forms are not combined with a
second term (the basis of comparison). See Bauer (2016: 319–24).
5 For a discussion of the status of comparative clauses of degree, see Tarriño (2011: 395–9). See also
Suárez (2002).
Comparison between two terms against a certain standard 719
Comparison may also be between terms of a higher level, for example between
combinations of predicates and one or more of their arguments or satellites, as in (t)
and (u).
(t) . . . tamen est eius modi cupiditatis ut magis insectari alterius innocentiam
quam de se timide cogitare videatur.
(‘. . . yet his ambition is such that he seems rather to be attacking the innocence of
another than to be apprehensive about himself.’ Cic. Cael. 16)
(u) Magis istuc percipimus lingua dici quam factis fore.
(‘We are aware that you say this with your tongue rather than that you’ll do it with
your actions.’ Pl. As. 162)
Normally the elements under comparison have the same syntactic and semantic
function(s), as in the first set of examples above, but in the second set this is less obvi-
ous. When the terms of comparison have the same function they may belong to dif-
ferent categories (as in the case of coordination).6 The following examples will serve
as an illustration of the variety that is possible. In (v), the terms of comparison are the
purpose clause ut . . . servem and the reason clause quod . . . faciatis. In (w), a noun
phrase is compared with an autonomous relative clause. In (x) a prepositional phrase
is compared with a bare dative noun phrase; the comparison is at the level of the
adjective phrase gratiorem. More complex are (y) and (z). In (y), two events are com-
pared in respect of speed. The first term is an accusative and infinitive clause func-
tioning as object, the second a main clause. In (z), the quality of two horses is
compared. The first term is a noun phrase functioning as object, the second term is a
main clause (quam tuus (equus) est (bonus) instead of quam tu (habes)). A noteworthy
instance of a second term of comparison that is embedded in an accusative and infini-
tive clause is (aa).
(v) Hic ego magis ut consuetudinem servem quam quod vos non vestra hoc
sponte faciatis, petam a vobis ut me . . . attente audiatis.
(‘It’s more to preserve custom than because you are not likely to do so on your own
that I ask you, at this point, to give me . . . your careful attention . . .’ Cic. Clu. 89)
(w) Tamen haec belua dignior vobis tanto honore videbitur quam qui vos urbe
agrisque donatos in colonias mittunt . . .?
(‘Shall this wild beast seem to you, notwithstanding, more deserving of so great an
office than those who, after giving you a city and lands, send you out to colonies . . . ?’
Liv. 4.49.14)
(x) . . . actionem susceperat . . . nec in vulgus quam optimo cuique gratiorem.
(‘. . . commenced an action . . . no more welcome to the common people than to the
aristocrat.’ Liv. 9.33.5)
6 See Hernández Cabrera about the functional equivalence of the terms of comparison and about
categorial differences (2002: 107–12; 113–21 respectively), with a number of illustrations from Livy.
Comparison between two terms against a certain standard 721
(y) Soleo saepe ante oculos ponere . . . nec vero disiunctissimas terras citius
passibus cuiusquam potuisse peragrari quam tuis non dicam cursibus, sed
victoriis lustratae sunt.
(‘It is my practice to let my vision dwell upon the fact . . . that lands the most widely
severed could have been traversed by the footsteps of none in shorter time than
they have been traversed I will not say by your marches but by your victories.’
Cic. Marc. 5)
(z) . . . si vicinus tuus equum meliorem habeat quam tuus est, tuumne equum
malis an illius?
(‘. . . if your neighbour had a better horse than yours, would you prefer your horse or
his?’ Cic. Inv. 1.52)
(aa) . . . tam gratum est mihi quam ferunt puellae / pernici aureolum fuisse
malum . . .
(‘. . . this is as welcome to me as they say the golden apple was to the swift maiden. . .’
Catul. 2b.1–2)
When the two terms of a comparison have more or less the same structure and would
contain more or less the same words, shared elements are often not repeated. This is a
form of reduction (or ‘ellipsis’) that is also common in the case of coordination (‘con-
junction reduction’, see §§ 19.3–4).7 In (ab), the speaker compares his mental distress
at the time when he had heard about the addressee’s anger with his mental state at all
other moments in his life. In the second term the verb of the main clause fuit is unex-
pressed and the whole term is reduced to the temporal clause postquam, which is the
correlate of numquam in the first term. In (ac), the relative clause quantam hic dedisset
is sufficient without the repetition of pecuniam. In (ad), aures Ser. Sulpici ferre didicis-
sent can be explained as being short for cohortatio quam aures . . . Note that the com-
parison is at the adjective phrase level. Ex. (ae) is rather complex.
(ab) Nam numquam quicquam meo animo fuit aegrius / quam postquam audivi
ted esse iratam mihi.
(‘Well, never have I been more upset about anything than after hearing that you’re
angry with me.’ Pl. Am. 910–11)
(ac) Ait accusatores eius multo maiorem pecuniam praetori polliceri quam
quantam hic dedisset.
(‘He told him that his accusers had offered the praetor a much larger sum than he had
himself paid.’ Cic. Ver. 2.70)
(ad) Ut vero Pansae consulis accessit cohortatio gravior quam aures Ser. Sulpici
ferre didicissent . . .
(‘But when there was added by the consul Pansa an exhortation in terms more
pressing than Servius Sulpicius’ ears had learned to tolerate . . .’ Cic. Phil. 9.9)
7 For a discussion of the various forms of reduction in comparative expressions, see Manfredini
(2015a; 2016).
722 Comparison
(ae) Sed tonitrum fit uti post auribus accipiamus, / fulgere quam cernant oculi,
quia semper ad auris / tardius adveniunt quam visum quae moveant res.
(‘But it comes to pass that we receive the thunder in our ears after our eyes perceive
the lightning, because things always move more slowly to the ears than things which
stir the eyes.’ Lucr. 6.164–6—tr. Bailey)
Supplement:
Peiore res loco non potis est esse quam in quo nunc sita’st. (Ter. Ad. 344); Ad quos
celerius quam ipsi opinati sunt appropinquavit . . . (B. Hisp. 2.3); Pulverem maiorem
quam pro numero excitabant. (Liv. 10.41.6); Erat <in> exercitu L. Marcius, Septimi
filius, eques Romanus, impiger iuvenis animique et ingenii aliquanto quam pro
fortuna in qua erat natus maioris. (Liv. 25.37.2); Atque utinam ego potius filio iuveni
quam ille patri seni cessisset. (Tac. Ann. 3.16.3);8 (sc. Antonius) Litteras ad
Vespasianum composuit iactantius quam ad principem . . . (Tac. Hist. 3.53.1); . . .
Minicius Iustus . . . quia adductius quam civili bello imperitabat, subtractus militum
irae ad Vespasianum missus est. (Tac. Hist. 3.7.1); Sed multo prius gaudium victoriae
populus Romanus quam epistolis victoris praeceperat. (Flor. Epit. 1.28.14)
Examples of reduction of constituents related to auxiliary verbs are (af) and (ag).9
With potuerit in (af) something must be supplied like quanti is unius agri decumas
vendidisse; with debemus in (ag) something like quantum nos facere.
(af) Non potest hoc dicere is qui negare non potest se unius agri decumas XXX
milibus modium minoris quam potuerit vendidisse.
(‘That cannot be said by a man who cannot deny that he sold the tithe of a single
district for 30,000 pecks less than he could have.’ Cic. Ver. 3.151)
(ag) . . . ceteraque quae ad te pertinebunt cum etiam plus contenderimus quam
possumus, minus tamen faciemus quam debemus.
(‘. . . and in everything else which will concern you, though I shall strive for more than
I can achieve, I shall yet do less than I ought.’ Cic. Fam. 1.8.7)
Occasionally the same (group of) lexemes are found in both clauses, but in that case
there is normally a pragmatic and/or semantic justification for this. Examples of
repeated verbal lexemes are (ah) and (ai). In (ah) the two verbs differ in voice; in (ai)
the second verb depends on another governing verb. However, in the latter case an
expression like (aj) is more common. A rare exception with strict repetition is (ak).
(ah) . . . neque (sc. homines) regerentur magis quam regerent casus . . .
(‘. . . and they would not be governed by chance so much as govern it themselves.’ Sal.
Jug. 1.5)
(ai) Scio ego plus quam tu arbitrare scire me.
(‘I know more than you think I know.’ Pl. Truc. 296)
8 Reduction of the verb in such contexts is common in Tacitus. See Woodman and Martin ad loc.
9 For discussion, see Manfredini (2016), from whom the examples are taken.
Comparison between two terms against a certain standard 723
In the case of non-equivalence the comparative element usually consists of two not
necessarily adjacent elements: a lexeme or a combination of lexemes with a compara-
tive meaning and a particle (for the term, see below) or a case form. The lexemes can
be divided into three classes:
(i) Comparative forms of adjectives and adjectives modified by an adverb with a
comparative meaning like magis ‘more’ and minus ‘less’; similarly compara-
tive forms of adverbs and adverbs modified by a comparative adverb.
(ii) Comparative forms related to adverbs/prepositions with a local or temporal
meaning like posterior ‘later’ and propior ‘closer’, ‘nearer’.
(iii) Lexical items with a comparative meaning, including:
— adverbs and prepositions that indicate relative position (in space or
time) like ante ‘before’, post ‘after(wards)’, infra ‘below’, and pridie ‘the
day before’ (see also § 10.30);
— verbs expressing preference, such as malo ‘to prefer’ and praesto ‘to be
preferable’.11
The following examples, four with the particle quam, one with an ablative, serve as an
illustration: (a) has a comparative adjective; (b), repeated from § 20.2, the adverb post
10 See Fontana (1997: 25). 11 Three-place praesto ‘to surpass’ is different. See § 4.53.
Comparison of non-equivalence 725
and the comparative adverb tardius ‘more slowly’; (c), the adverb saepe ‘often’ modi-
fied by the comparative adverb magis; (d) shows the comparative adjective propior;
(e), the verb praesto.
(a) Hominem ego iracundiorem quam te novi neminem.
(‘I don’t know anyone more prone to anger than you.’ Pl. Mer. 141)
(b) Sed tonitrum fit uti post auribus accipiamus, / fulgere quam cernant oculi,
quia semper ad auris / tardius adveniunt quam visum quae moveant res.
(‘But it comes to pass that we receive the thunder in our ears after our eyes perceive
the lightning, because things always move more slowly to the ears than things which
stir the eyes.’ Lucr. 6.164–6—tr. Bailey)
(c) Insperata accidunt magis saepe quam quae speres.
(‘Things that are not hoped for happen more often than things you do hope for.’ Pl.
Mos. 197)
(d) Tunica propior pallio est.
(‘The shirt is closer than the overcoat.’ Pl. Trin. 1154)
(e) . . . profecto damnum praestet facere quam lucrum.
(‘. . . it is certainly better to make a loss than a profit.’ Pl. Capt. 327)
For the second part of the comparative element, for example quam, the term ‘particle’
will be used. This is a rather vague term (see § 3.22). In this combination with a com-
parative expression, quam is neither an adverb nor a coordinator, and certainly not a
subordinator.12 The same goes for atque and et as part of a comparative element in
§ 20.6 and in § 20.11.
Comparative forms of adjectives and adverbs can also be used in an ‘absolute’ sense
(see § 3.7 and § 20.31). Obviously, in this sense they cannot be combined with another
term. An example of absolute use is (f).
(f) Tu puere, abi hinc intro ocius.
(‘You, boy, go inside quickly.’ Pl. Mer. 930)
A negated expression of non-equivalence sometimes comes close to an expression of
equivalence. This is especially the case with non minus quam ‘no less than’ and non
magis/plus quam ‘no more than’. Examples are (g)–(i).13
(g) Et si non minus nobis iucundi atque inlustres sunt ii dies quibus conserva-
mur quam illi quibus nascimur . . .
(‘And if the days on which we are saved are no less bright and joyous than those on
which we are born . . .’ Cic. Catil. 3.2)
12 For similar problems with English than, see Quirk et al. (1985: 661–2).
13 For further examples, see TLL s.v. magis 66.30ff.; parvus 578.33ff. For subtle differences between
these expressions, see K.-St.: II.481–3. Lundström (1993) discusses instances of non minus quam in the
two Senecas.
726 Comparison
(h) Qui est enim animus in aliquo morbo . . . non magis est sanus quam id corpus
quod in morbo est.
(‘For the soul which is suffering from some disease . . . is no more in a sound condi-
tion than the body which is diseased.’ Cic. Tusc. 3.10)
(i) Domus erat non domino magis ornamento quam civitati.
(‘The house served as an adornment not more for the owner than for the whole town.’
Cic. Ver. 4.5)
Supplement:
Ea nobis erepta esse quae hominibus non minus quam liberi cara esse debent . . .
(Sulp. Ruf. Fam. 4.5.2); . . . cum . . . ad extremam senectutem non minus dignitate
quam gratia fortunaque crevisset . . . (Nep. Att. 21.1)
. . . credas mihi adfirmanti velim me hoc non pro Lysone magis quam pro omnibus
scribere . . . (Cic. Fam. 13.24.2); Debitor non est sine creditore, non magis quam
maritus sine uxore aut sine filio pater. (Sen. Ben. 5.8.1)
Nec nunc quidem vires desidero adulescentis . . . non plus quam adulescens tauri
aut elephanti desiderabam. (Cic. Sen. 27)
(sc. Fabius fuit) Nec vero in armis praestantior quam in toga. (Cic. Sen. 11)
The use of magis + a positive form of an adjective or adverb instead of a comparative
form is attested from Early Latin onwards and is regular with classes of adjectives and
adverbs for which there are formal or semantic constraints on the formation of com-
parative forms (see § 3.7).14 These constraints concern e.g. the stem of the adjective/
adverb (e.g. vowel stems like idoneus—for exceptional innoxiior, see § 20.13
Supplement), polysyllabic adjectives like manufestus, verbal adjectives like amicus,
and adjectives with a prefix in-. Outside these classes the use of magis is uncommon;
sometimes it is justified by metrical or other considerations. It is therefore not entirely
correct to call magis an ‘analytic’ alternative for the ‘synthetic’ comparative.15
Plus + a positive instead of a comparative is rare until very Late Latin. An early
example is ( j).
( j) Homo nullu’st . . . / . . . quoi ego de industria amplius male plus lubens faxim.
(‘There is no man whom I’d be more willing to hurt intentionally.’ Pl. Aul.
419–20)
Supplement:
Plus miser sim si scelestum faxim quod dicam fore. (Enn. scen. 308V=261J); Nimio
plus quam velim nostrorum ingenia sunt mobilia. (Liv. 2.37.5)
14 See TLL s.v. magis 61.5ff. and K.-H.: 565–75. Discussion in Maltby (2016: 342–3) and Pultrová
(2018).
15 As in Cuzzolin (2011: 576–7).
Comparison of non-equivalence 727
The second term of a comparative expression with quam is often negative by implica-
tion. In (a) impetrare is not easy. This negative pragmatic implication explains the
unavoidable with constituents that cannot be expressed in the ablative, for instance
with satis ‘enough’, as in (h).
(g) . . . L. fratrem exspectat, quo neminem reperire potest sui similiorem.
(‘. . . he is waiting for his brother Lucius—no one more like himself could he
find.’ Cic. Phil. 3.31)
(h) Vide sis, ne forte ad merendam quopiam devorteris / atque ibi ampliuscule
quam satis fuerit biberis.
(‘I suspect that you called in somewhere for a snack and that you drank a
little more there than was good for you.’ Pl. Mos. 966–7)
The use of ac/atque with comparative forms of adjectives and adverbs is rare.21 In the
examples before Horace there is a negation element present, like nullus in (a). This use
is not found with verbs that express preference. Even more rare is et, as in (b).
(a) Amicior mi nullus vivit atque is est / qui illam habet.
(‘No one’s a closer friend to me than the one who has her.’ Pl. Mer. 897–8)
(b) . . . nec minus ille diu iam non erit, ex hodierno / lumine qui finem vitai fecit,
et ille / mensibus atque annis qui multis occidit ante.
(‘. . . and no less long a time will he be no more, who has made an end of life with
today’s sun, than he who fell many a month and year before.’ Lucr. 3.1092–4)
The use of ac/atque in comparisons with magis and minus is equally rare. Examples
are (c) and (d).22
(c) Illi non minus ac tibi / pectore uritur intimo / flamma . . .
(‘In his inmost heart no less than in yours glows the flame . . .’ Catul. 61.169–71)
(d) Non Apollinis mage verum atque hoc responsum’st.
(‘Apollo’s oracle doesn’t speak more truthfully than this.’ Ter. An. 698—tr. Brown)
Supplement:
Nec fallaciam astutiorem ullus fecit / poeta atque ut haec est fabre facta ab nobis. (Pl.
Cas. 860–1); Quod posse videmus / nec minus atque homines inter se nota cluere.
(Lucr. 2.350–1); Haud minus ac iussi faciunt . . . (Verg. A. 3.561); Inachia langues
minus ac me. (Hor. Epod. 12.14); . . . (sc. sententiam) velut gravius atque ipse sensisset
exceptam. (Suet. Jul. 14.1)
23 A diachronic description can be found in Sz.: 107–10, with references. See also van der Heyde (1930),
Löfstedt (1942/1933: I.326ff.), and Cuzzolin (2011: 608–11). See Neville (1901), for the Early and Classical
Latin material; Bennett: II.292–7, for Early Latin; and Wölfflin (1889), for Silver Latin.
24 Formal restrictions on the use of the ablative are discussed in Traglia (1947: 12–16), Pasoli (1966:
76–87), and Torrego (2002: 259ff.). Bertocchi and Orlandini (1996: 199) observe that the ablative forms
quoquam and ullo are excluded.
Comparison of non-equivalence 731
Supplement:
With comparative forms: Neque ego hac nocte longiorem me vidisse censeo . . . (Pl.
Am. 279); Iam istoc es melior. (Pl. As. 717); Quis me est ditior? (Pl. Aul. 809); Nihil
hoc homine audacius. (Pl. Men. 631); . . . tu es lapide silice stultior . . . (Pl. Poen. 291);
Nullus me est hodie Poenus Poenior. (Pl. Poen. 991); Minus hercle in istis rebus
sumptum est sex minis. (Pl. Trin. 411); . . . dum · ne · minus · senator<i>bus · C ·
adesent . . . (CIL I2.581.6 (SCBac., Tiriolo, 186 bc)); . . . Annos sexaginta natus es / aut
plus eo, ut conicio. (Ter. Hau. 62–3); Habeo etiam dicere quem contra morem maiorum
minorem annis LX de ponte in Tiberim deiecerit. (Cic. S. Rosc. 100); ‘Hoc plus’, inquit,
‘ne facito.’ (Cic. Leg. 2.59 = Lex XII 10.2); . . . quid philosophia magis colendum aut quid
est virtute divinius? (Cic. Fin. 3.76—NB: parallelism); Atqui pares esse virtutes nec bono
viro meliorem nec temperante temperantiorem nec forti fortiorem nec sapiente sapien-
tiorem posse fieri facillume potest perspici. (Cic. Parad. 21); . . . itaque nihil mathematicis
inlustrius. (Cic. Tusc. 1.5); Hoc mihi gratius facere nihil potes. (Cic. Fam. 6.9.2); . . . uti inter
novissimum hostium agmen et nostrum primum non amplius quinis aut senis milibus
passuum interesset. (Caes. Gal. 1.15.5); . . . nisi eorum vitam sua salute habeat cariorem.
(Caes. Gal. 7.19.5); . . . fossas duas . . . in eum locum deduxit quo longius constituerat suam
non producere aciem. (B. Alex. 38.3); Sed nec reverentior captae maiestatis alius Paulo
fuit. (Flor. Epit. 1.28.10); Qua re maiorem in modum te rogo ut rem potiorem oratione
ducas . . . (Mat. Fam. 11.28.5); Amico firmo nihil emi melius potest. (Pub. Sent. A 53)
Ei mihi, credibili fortior illa (sc. Dido) fuit. (Ov. Fast. 3.618); Ea res aliquanto
expectatione omnium tranquillior fuit. (Liv. 4.24.1); Ille est oneratus recte et plus
iusto vehit. (Pl. Bac. 349); Prius tua opinione hic adero. (Pl. Am. 545); Latius
opinione disseminatum est hoc malum. (Cic. Catil. 4.6); Illi tertio mense pervenere
in Pontum multo celerius spe Mithridatis. (Sal. Hist. 2.79)
With magis:25 . . . nec te equo magis est equos ullus sapiens. (Pl. As. 704); Quem cum
mihi conspectum morte magis vitandum fugiendumque esse videatis, nolite . . . (Cic.
Dom. 146); . . . sed tamen est species alia (sc. virtus) magis alia formosa et inlustris . . .
(Cic. de Orat. 3.55); . . . nil tamen hoc habuisse viro praeclarius in se / nec sanctum
magis et mirum carumque videtur. (Lucr. 1.729–30); . . . nunc ab secundis rebus magis
etiam solito incauti. (Liv. 5.44.6)
With minus:26 Nemo me minus timidus, nemo tamen cautior. (Cic. Phil. 12.24); . . .
nemo illo minus fuit emax . . . (Nep. Att. 13.1)
Relative pronouns as the basis of comparison: . . . conspicatus sum interim / cercu-
rum, quo ego me maiorem non vidisse censeo. (Pl. St. 367–8); Vos obsecro, iudices,
ut huic optimo viro, quo nemo melior umquam fuit, nomen equitis Romani . . . ne
eripiatis. (Cic. Rab. Post. 48); Itaque et Phidiae simulacris quibus nihil in illo genere
perfectius videmus et iis picturis quas nominavi cogitare tamen possumus pulchriora.
(Cic. Orat. 8); Profecto id, quo ne in deo quidem quicquam maius intellegi potest.
(Cic. Tusc. 1.65); Punici tamen belli perpetrati, quo nullum <neque> maius neque
periculosius Romani gessere, unus praecipuam gloriam tulit. (Liv. 38.53.11)
More exceptional uses of the ablative as the basis of comparison:
With a verb: Nullos his mallem ludos spectasse. (Hor. S. 2.8.79); . . . in agresti negotio
dici vix potest, quid navus operarius ignavo et cessatore (cessatori cj. Rodgers)
praestet. (Col. 11.1.16)
Consimili ratione necessest ventus et aër / et calor inter se vigeant commixta per
artus / atque aliis aliud subsit magis emineatque . . . (Lucr. 3.282–4)
Comparative is attribute of a non-accusative second argument: Pane egeo iam
mellitis potiore placentis. (Hor. Ep. 1.10.11); . . . qui pauperiem veritus potiore metal-
lis / libertate caret . . . (Hor. Ep. 1.10.39–40)
Comparative is attribute in the genitive: Me pedibus delectat claudere verba / Lucili
ritu, nostrum melioris utroque. (Hor. S. 2.1.28–9)
Participial clause as the basis of comparison: Quid impudentius publicanis renun-
tiantibus? (Cic. Att. 2.1.8)27
Gerundial clause as the basis of comparison: Nullum enim officium referenda gra-
tia magis necessarium est. (Cic. Off. 1.47)
Comparative modified by an ablative of measure: Praestatur laus virtuti, sed multo
ocius / verno gelu tabescit. (Andr. trag. 16–17)
In the proverbial examples like melle dulcior, mel constitutes the conventional proto-
type of sweetness and one might just as well consider it an expression of equivalence
‘as sweet as honey’. In Early Latin the use of quam—an explicit marker of non-
equivalence—in a similar context is very rare, as in (f), which may be compared with
(d) above. Initially, there must have been a semantic difference between the two
expressions. Substituting prius opinione veni by prius veni quam opinio results in
nonsense.28
(f) Quid ais, homo / levior quam pluma . . .?
(‘What do you say, you man lighter than a feather . . .’ Pl. Men. 487–8)
Quam is used when the head noun of a noun phrase is not expressed, in instances like
(g) and (h), where the comparison is between attributes:
(g) Novella (capra) enim quam vetus utilior.
(‘The young goat is more profitable than the old.’ Var. R. 2.3.1)
(h) Ex quo iudicari potest virtu<ti>s esse quam aetatis cursum celeriorem.
(‘From this it can be concluded that the course of ability is swifter than that
of age.’ Cic. Phil. 5.48)
In the literature two instances are discussed of an ablative in combination with a
positive form of the adjective, one of which is (i). The other example is tan · durum
saxso in CIL IV.1895 (cf. Ov. Ars 1.474).29
(i) (sc. aedes) Speculo claras, candorem merum.
(‘One bright as a mirror, pure candor.’ Pl. Mos. 642)
Cicero has a number of instances of ‘double comparison’31 with an ablative (either the
connecting relative quo or the preparative demonstrative hōc) and quam followed by
an accusative and infinitive, as in (k), or a finite clause, as in ( j) and (l).
( j) Quo quidem mihi turpius videri nihil solet quam cum (L, quod M) ex orato-
ris dicto aliquo aut responso aut rogato sermo ille sequitur: ‘occidit. # . . .’
(‘Actually, I always think that nothing is more disgraceful than when an utterance or
response or question from an orator gives rise to an exchange like this: “That’s really
the end of it!” # . . .’ Cic. de Orat. 2.302—tr. May and Wisse)
(k) Quid ergo hoc fieri turpius aut dici potest quam eum . . . labi . . .
(‘And so what more unseemly can be done or said than this, that the very man . . .
should blunder . . .’ Cic. de Orat. 1.169)
(l) . . . tamen hoc certius esse nihil potest quam quod omnes artes aliae sine
eloquentia suum munus praestare possunt . . .
(‘. . . nevertheless, there can be nothing more certain than this, that while all other arts
are able to discharge their functions unaided by eloquence . . .’ Cic. de Orat. 2.38)
(i) Sallust is the first author to use the dative for the basis of comparison with inferior
‘inferior’, as in (a), and there are a few later instances. It is better to relate this use of
the dative to its use with words like impar ‘not the equal (of)’ (see § 4.100) and to
regard other instances of the dative in the literature (see the Supplement) as analogical
extensions.32
(a) Vir gravis et nulla arte cuiquam inferior.
(‘An impressive man and inferior to none in any type of activity.’ Sal. Hist. 2.37)
Supplement:
Nulli tua forma secunda est (Ov. Am. 1.8.25); Adiuro per du<l>cem istum capilli tui
nodulum, quo meum vinxisti spiritum, me nullam aliam meae Fotidi malle. (Apul.
Met. 3.23.2)
(ii) The use of the genitive for the basis of comparison is slightly better attested
from Vitruvius onwards. Examples are (b) and (c). Its relatively frequent use in
ecclesiastical texts (including early Latin translations of the Bible) is due to Greek
influence.33
(b) Intervalla autem turrium ita sunt facienda, ut ne longius sit alia ab alia sagit-
tae missionis . . .
(‘The distances between the towers are so to be made that one is not further from
another than a bowshot.’ Vitr. 1.5.4)
(iii) The use of a prepositional phrase with ab + ablative for the basis of comparison
is very rare and is almost restricted to Christian texts, starting with the early Latin
versions of the Bible. Many of the instances are in combination with suppletive
comparative forms, such as magis ‘more’ and plus ‘more’. An example is (d). However,
this use originates from the use of ab with words like alter and secundus meaning
‘after’, as in (e), and in its poetic extension, as in (f). It is also found with alius (see
§ 20.20). Even rarer than the use of ab is the use of de and ex in this context.34
(d) Quanto magis melior est homo ab ove.
(‘How much more valuable is a man than a sheep!’ Vet. Lat. Mat. 12.12—NB: for
magis, see § 20.10 fin.)35
Deroux (1973) discusses the origin of the expression (following earlier scholars who
suggest influence from Hebrew)36 and a few expressions that may have favoured the
33 For the history of the construction and references, see Sz.: 112–13 and Cuzzolin (2011: 611–15), also
about possible Greek influence on the early instances. A few more instances are cited in TLL s.v. parvus
579.6ff. See also § 20.9 fin.
34 See TLL s.v. de 64.34ff.; Sz.: 112. 35 The Vulgate has melior ove.
36 Hebrew has no comparative form and uses a prepositional expression for the basis of comparison
(Roland Hoffmann, p.c.).
Comparison of non-equivalence 735
use of the preposition ab, such as longe ab ‘far away from’ and ab meaning ‘next to’, as
in (e). Compare: Dulcissimum ab hominis (sc. lacte) camelinum, efficacissimum ex asi-
nis. (Plin. Nat. 28.123).37
(iv) Prepositional phrases with prae meaning ‘in comparison with’ are found from
Early Latin onwards, in combination with a comparative expression, as in (g), but also
with all sorts of expressions, as in (h).38 It is not really the (obligatory) basis of com-
parison in a comparative expression, but a satellite.
(g) Ac me minoris facio prae illo . . .
(‘And I think my case is not as bad as that man’s . . .’ Pl. Epid. 522)
(h) Quid est? / # Quia enim non sum dignus prae te palum ut figam in parietem.
(‘What is it? / # Because compared with you I’m not worthy to pound a peg into a
wall.’ Pl. Mil. 1139–40)
37 Material can be found in TLL, s.v. ab 39.40ff. Add Deroux’s (1973) comments. He also notes the
occasional use of ab with inferior (Var. R. 1.2.16) and citerior (Val. Max. 9.12.6). The ab expression is found
in texts of both educated and uneducated writers (Adams 2013: 363–70).
38 The material can be found in the TLL s.v. 374.46ff. See also Torrego (2002: 272).
39 For thoughts about the origin of the construction, see Sz.: 110, with references, Calboli (1961a), and
Pasoli (1966: 84–7). The two constituents are sometimes called ‘appositives’.
736 Comparison
Examples that conform to the regular patterns described in §§ 20.5 and 20.7 are
(d)—with quam—and (e)—with an ablative of comparison.
(d) Nam partim quinque eius partes esse dixerunt, partim non plus quam in tres
partes posse distribui putaverunt.
(‘For some have said that it has five parts and others have thought that it could be
divided into not more than three parts.’ Cic. Inv. 1.57)
40 Most of the examples are taken from K.-St.: II.471–2. 41 See TLL s.v. prope 1962.4ff.
Comparison of non-equivalence 737
In age expressions with the adjective natus ‘old’, the number of years, months, or days
is regularly a noun phrase in the accusative, as with other dimensional adjectives (see
§ 4.104). An example is (f).
(f) Ovem tibi eccillam dabo, natam annos sexaginta, / peculiarem.
(‘Look, I’ll give you that sheep, sixty years of age, as your very own.’ Pl. Mer. 524–5)
Natus has no comparative form. For expressing a higher or a lower number of years,
months, or days there are a few other possibilities illustrated by (g)–(i).42 In (g), annos
is in the accusative case, as in ex. (f) with natam alone; in (h), annis is in the ablative
case, with the comparative minor, as in (e).
(g) Annos natus maior quadraginta.
(‘He is more than forty years old.’ Cic. S. Rosc. 39)
(h) . . . leges Halaesinis dedit, in quibus multa sanxit de aetate hominum, nequi
minor XXX annis natus . . .
(‘. . . he gave laws to the men of Halaesa in which he laid down many rules about the
age of the men who might be elected; that no one might be under thirty years of
age . . .’ Cic. Ver. 2.122)
Supplement:
. . . queive minor anneis XXX maiorve annos LX gnatus siet . . . (CIL I2.583.13
(Lex Acilia, Rome, 122 bc))
Maior enim annos sexaginta natus decessit florente regno. (Nep. Reg. 2.3); . . . ne
quis minor quinquaginta annos natus hospitio matris familias uteretur. (Fron. Str.
4.1.10)
Sic Hannibal minor quinque et viginti annis natus imperator factus . . . (Nep.
Han. 3.2)
There are also various expressions with the number of years in the genitive, most
probably derived from the genitive of description (see § 11.48). They are relatively
common in inscriptions and in juridical texts. Examples are (i)–(k), (i) with gnatus
alone, ( j) with minor and maior and natus, and (k) with minor alone.
(i) <Co>rnelius · L. · f. · L. · n. / <Sci>pio Asiagenus / Comatus annoru /
gnatus · XVI
(‘Cornelius Scipio Asiagenus Nevershorn, son of Lucius, grandson of Lucius, sixteen
years of age.’ CIL I2.13 (Scip. Elog., Rome, c. 150 bc))
( j) . . . dum ne in/vito eius opera exigatur qui minor annor(um) XIIII /
aut maior annor(um) LX natus erit . . .
(‘. . . as long as no labour is exacted unwillingly from any person less than four-
teen or more than sixty years of age.’ CIL II.5.1022.XCVIII.8–10 (Lex coloniae
Genetivae Iuliae, Flavian copy of a law adopted soon after Julius Caesar’s death,
44 bc))
(k) . . . dumne · cuiius comi/tis · rationem · habeat · qui · IIviratum · pe/tet
· et qui minor · annorum · XXV erit . . . item qui aedilitatem · quaes-
turam/ve · petet · qui minor · quam annor(um) XXV erit . . .
(‘. . . provided that he does not accept in the election the eligibility of anyone seek-
ing the duumvirate who is under 25 . . . likewise of anyone seeking the aedileship
or the quaestorship who is under 25 . . .’ CIL II.1964.54.10–15 (Lex Irnitana,
Malaga, 1st cent. ad (late)—NB: note quam in the second age expression—tr.
González))
Supplement:
Obsides Romanis viginti dato et triennio mutato, ne minores octonum denum anno-
rum neu maiores quinum quadragenum. (Liv. 38.38.15); Cautum est, domine,
Pompeia lege quae Bithynis data est ne quis capiat magistratum neve sit in senatu
minor annorum triginta. (Plin. Ep. 10.79.1)43
Cf.: Cautumque in posterum senatus consulto ne quis gladiatorium munus ederet
cui minor quadringentorum milium res . . . (Tac. Ann. 4.63.1)
In a way that resembles the examples above, plus quam and minus quam can be used
to modify nouns functioning as subject complement and adjectives functioning as
attribute to indicate an extreme degree. Examples are (l) and (m), respectively.
(l) Confiteor eos . . . plus quam sicarios, plus quam homicidas, plus etiam quam
parricidas esse . . .
(‘I confess them to be worse than assassins, worse than murderers, worse even than
parricides.’ Cic. Phil. 2.31)
(m) Odisse plebem plus quam paterno odio.
(‘That he hated the plebs with a hatred greater than his father’s.’ Liv. 2.58.5)
Supplement:
. . . primaque eorum proelia plus quam virorum, postrema minus quam feminarum
esse. (Liv. 10.28.4)
Has tantas viri virtutes ingentia vitia aequabant, inhumana crudelitas, perfidia
plus quam Punica, nihil veri . . . (Liv. 21.4.9)
44 For further examples, see TLL s.v. pars 453.22ff., OLD s.v. pars § 4e.
740 Comparison
Supplement:
With comparative forms of adjectives and adverbs: Nempe octoginta debentur
huic minae? # Hau nummo amplius. (Pl. Mos. 919); Immo edepol una littera plus
sum quam medicus (sc. mendicus). (Pl. Rud. 1305); Uno Gelasimo minus est quam
dudum fuit. (Pl. St. 498); Quasi volturii triduo / prius praedivinant quo die esuri
sient. (Pl. Truc. 337–8); . . . cum maximas animo voluptates percipiat omnibusque
partibus maiores quam corpore . . . (Cic. Fin. 2.108); Quam molestum est uno digito
plus habere. (Cic. N.D. 1.99); (sc. honestas) . . . certe omni pondere gravior habenda
quam reliqua omnia . . . (Cic. Off. 3.35); Uno plus Tuscorum cecidisse in acie. (Liv.
2.7.2); Non die, non hora citius quam necesse est magistratu abieris . . . (Liv. 9.34.15)
NB: Assunt quae imperavisti omnia: / uxor, sortes, situla atque egomet. # Te uno
adest plus quam ego volo. (Pl. Cas. 358–9)
With malo and praesto: Nam decem partibus tuas litteras legere malim quam omnes
Massicos aut Gauranos palmites. (Fro. Ep. ad M. Caes. 4.4.2vdH); . . . quattuor et
triginta tum habebat annos totidemque annis mihi aetate praestabat. (Cic. Brut. 161)
With adverbs and related prepositional phrases: Eam (sc. vitem) anno post prae-
cidito seritoque cum qualo. (Cato Agr. 52.2); Ergo his fundamentis positis consulatus
tui triduo post . . . Lex Aelia et Fufia eversa est. (Cic. Pis. 9); . . . exposuit nobis sermo-
nem Laeli de amicitia habitum . . . paucis diebus post mortem Africani. (Cic. Amic. 3);
. . . qui annis ante permultis fuit quam ipse Pythagoras. (Cic. de Orat. 2.154); . . . pau-
cis ante annis ex praetura eam provinciam obtinuerat. (Caes. Civ. 1.31.3); . . . milibus
passuum duobus ultra eum (sc. Caesarem) castra fecit . . . (Caes. Gal. 1.48.2); Paucis
citra milibus lignatores ei cum praesidio occurrunt. (Liv. 10.25.5)
tunc haut parvo iunior proficiscens in Asiam . . . devertit ad Pacuvium . . . (Gel. 13.2.2);
Sed ea quae demissurus eris sumito paulo acerbiora. (Cato Agr. 101.1); Caesar . . . matu-
rius paulo quam tempus anni postulabat in hiberna in Sequanos exercitum deduxit.
(Caes. Gal. 1.54.2—NB: paulo follows); Illa autem (sc. via) qua omnes commeabant
altero tanto longiorem habebat anfractum . . . (Nep. Eum. 8.5)
With malo and praesto: . . . quicquid in Creta nascatur infinito praestare ceteris eius-
dem generis alibi genitis . . . (Plin. Nat. 25.94); Ne me quidem contemno meoque iudi-
cio multo stare malo quam omnium reliquorum. (Cic. Att. 12.21.5); . . . multo mihi,
multo, inquam, iudices, praestat in eandem illam recidere fortunam quam tantam
inportare meis defensoribus et conservatoribus calamitatem. (Cic. Sest. 146); Nunc
illud est, quom me fuisse quam esse nimio mavelim. (Pl. Capt. 516)
With adverbs and related prepositional phrases: . . . epulamur una non modo non
contra legem, si ulla nunc lex est, sed etiam intra legem, et quidem aliquanto. (Cic.
Fam. 9.26.4);. . . quorum furibunda mens videt ante multo quae sint futura. (Cic. Div.
1.114—NB: multo follows); Cucumin silvestrem esse diximus, multo infra magni-
tudinem sativi. (Plin. Nat. 20.3); Aut in qua<m> inserunt (sc. vitem), in ea paulo
infra quam insitum est incidunt . . . (Var. R. 1.41.3); . . . propter ea vitia maritimarum
urbium quae ante paulo perbreviter adtigi. (Cic. Rep. 2.9—NB: paulo follows); . . .
legati eorum paulo ante a Caesare discesserant . . . (Caes. Gal. 4.12.1)
Appendix: Difficult to explain are instances of tantā in similar contexts, transmitted
several times in the manuscripts of Plautus and Apuleius, and also transmitted in the
palimpsest at Cic. Ver. 3.225. Two examples are ( j) and (k). Many editors prefer read-
ing tanto.46
( j) Ego multo tanta miserior quam tu, Labrax.
(‘I am much more wretched than you, Labrax.’ Pl. Rud. 521—NB: also multo)
(k) Ego tibi redimam bis tanta pluris pallam quam voles.
(‘I’ll buy you another mantle instead, twice as expensive, of your own
choice.’ Pl. Men. 680)
Instead of ablative neuter forms of adjectives of amount, accusative forms are used.
The first undisputed attestations are from Livy, as in (l) and (m). Such accusative
forms are well attested as extent of space adjuncts (see § 10.18), quantity adjuncts (see
§ 10.63), and as degree modifiers of adjectives and adverbs (see § 11.94) from Early
Latin onwards. It is therefore not impossible that the earlier instances that are trans-
mitted are correct, though they are sometimes emended (see the Supplement).47
(l) . . . formamque viri aliquantum ampliorem augustioremque humana intuens
rogitat qui vir esset.
(‘. . . looking at the man’s figure, which was somewhat ampler and more august than a
mortal’s, he inquired who he was.’ Liv. 1.7.9)
46 For discussion, see K.-St.: I.403, Sz.: 136, and Petersmann ad Pl. St. 339, with references. Also TLL
s.v. multus 1616.40ff.
47 See Lundström (1961: 73–5) and Leeman et al. ad Cic. de Orat. 3.92. There seems to be only one Late
Latin attestation of multum with malo (see TLL s.v. multus 203.60).
742 Comparison
(m) . . . flumen Allia . . . haud multum infra viam Tiberino amni miscetur.
(‘. . . the river Allia . . . mingles, not far south of the highway, with the waters of the
Tiber.’ Liv. 5.37.7)
Supplement:
With comparative forms of adjectives and adverbs: Hercle, qui multum (P, multo
ς) improbiores sunt quam a primo credidi. (Pl. Mos. 824); Eiu’ frater aliquantum ad
rem’st avidior. (Ter. Eu. 131); Illud rursus ipsum quod tradunt isti . . . non multum
(multo cj. Manutius) est maius quam illud vulgare et forense. (Cic. de Orat. 3.92); . . .
meliore aliquantum militum genere urgebantur . . . (Liv. 40.40.1); Est et beta silvestris
quam limonium vocant . . . multum minoribus foliis tenuioribusque ac densioribus.
(Plin. Nat. 20.72); Itaque verba posui Varronis e libro . . . cuius principium hoc est:
‘Praxiteles, qui propter artificium egregium nemini est paulum modo humaniori
ignotus.’ (Gel. 13.17.3); Sesquipede quiddam est quam tu longior. (Pl. Trin. 903—NB:
in combination with an ablative of comparison)48
With adverbs and prepositional phrases: De qua etsi permultum (permulto cj.
Lambinus) a<n>te certior factus eram litteris . . . (Cic. Fam. 3.11.1); Uvae paulum
ante maturitatem decerptae siccantur acri sole . . . (Plin. Nat. 14.77); Multum infra
hunc sucum est qui in Gallia fit . . . (Plin. Nat. 25.79); . . . cuius sane decora et procax
soror, Iunia Calvina, haud multum ante Vitellii nurus fuerat. (Tac. Ann. 12.4.1)
NB: Exceptional noun phrases in the accusative: Is locus est citra Leucadem stadia
CXX. (Cic. Fam. 16.2.1); Nacti portum, qui appellatur Nymphaeum, ultra Lissum
milia passuum III, eo naves introduxerunt . . . (Caes. Civ. 3.26.4)
The adverb longe ‘by far’ is also used as a modifier of comparative expressions, as in
(n) and (o).49 The use of adverbs becomes more common in Late Latin.50
(n) . . . longe superiores virtute rem feliciter gerebant.
(‘. . . being far superior in courage, they fought successfully.’ B. Alex. 46.4)
(o) Utra societas sit utilior, eam longe minorem ac levioris momenti consultatio-
nem esse.
(‘Which alliance was the more advantageous was a far less significant question and
one of far less weight.’ Liv. 24.28.5)
Supplement:
Gnate mihi longe (cj. Hoeufft, longa V) iucundior unice vita . . . (Catul. 64.215); . . .
inimicitiis . . . quas longe acrius arsuras si matrimonium Liviae velut in partis domum
Caesarum distraxisset. (Tac. Ann. 4.40.3)
. . . longe ante omnes mihi quae me carior ipso est . . . (Catul. 68B.159); . . . fuere longe
quidem infra praedictos, probati tamen, Antaeus, Callistratus . . . (Plin. Nat. 34.52)
Ianua vel domina penitus crudelior ipsa, / quid mihi tam duris clausa taces fori-
bus? (Prop. 1.16.17–18); Item munitiones muri turriumque aggeribus coniunctae
maxime sunt tutiores . . . (Vitr. 1.5.5); . . . bonus Deus atque his validissime longissi-
meque praestantior. (August. Conf. 7.7)
48 For the use of quidam, see § 11.114. 49 For further examples, see TLL s.v. longus 1648.41ff.
50 For instances and references, see Sz.: 167.
Comparison of non-equivalence 743
From Plautus onwards instances are found of clauses that contain both a comparative
form of an adjective or adverbs and magis. In some cases magis is used in its ‘correc-
tive’ sense (like potius, see § 19.61 fin. and § 20.13),51 but most of the eleven instances
in Plautus seem to be pleonastic, as in (p). This also holds for (q) and (r). The phe-
nomenon is slightly more frequent in the Latin Bible translations.52
(p) Ego faxo posthac di deaeque ceteri / contentiores mage erunt atque avidi
minus, / quom scibunt, Veneri ut adierit leno manum.
(‘I’ll make sure that from now on the other gods and goddesses will be more con-
tented and less avaricious when they know how the pimp tricked Venus.’ Pl. Poen.
460–2)
(q) . . . exercitus eius magis suspensiore animo ante adventum Iubae commovebatur.
(‘. . . his army was moved by a greater feeling of suspense before the arrival of Juba.’
B. Afr. 48.3)
(r) . . . quae (sc. manus sinistra) . . . videbatur aequitati magis aptior quam
dextera.
(‘ . . . a left hand which seemed more appropriate for justice than a right hand.’ Apul.
Met. 11.10.5)
Appendix: A number of particles can be used with comparatives (and related expres-
sions) with a scalar meaning (see also § 22.22). Common in all periods of Latin are
iam ‘even’, as in (s)53 and etiam ‘even’, ‘still’, as in (t);54 vel ‘even’ is used from the
Classical period onwards, as in (u); adhuc ‘even’, ‘still’ is used in this way from Seneca
onwards, as in (v).55
(s) . . . certe de istoc Amphitruone iam alterum mirum est magis.
(‘. . . the other business with that Amphitruo is certainly even odder.’ Pl.
Am. 829)
(t) . . . Hegionem, cui boni / tantum affero quantum ipsus a dis optat, atque
etiam amplius.
(‘. . . Hegio, to whom I’m bringing as much good as he himself wishes from
the gods, and even more.’ Pl. Capt. 776–7)
(u) Si autem fieri posset, vel pluris te animos habere vellem . . .
(‘But if it were possible, I should wish you had even more than one mind . . .’
Cic. Phil. 11.22)
(v) Magis adhuc proderunt summissi et humani et dulces . . .
(‘Still more helpful will be those who are yielding and kindly and suave . . .’
Sen. Dial. 5.8.5)
Supplement:
Adhuc difficilior observatio est per tenores . . . (Quint. Inst. 1.5.22); Melius quidem
adhuc eae civitates in quibus tantum virgines nubunt . . . (Tac. Ger. 19.2)
Maioreque opere ibi serviles nuptiae / quam liberales etiam curari solent. (Pl. Cas.
74–5); Scelus est accipere ab reo: quanto magis ab accusatore, quanto etiam scelera-
tius ab utroque! (Cic. Ver. 2.78); Ego vero, et quidem fecit etiam iste me epilogus fir-
miorem. (Cic. Tusc. 1.119); Maxime tamen doleo adeo et longo et infesto itinere ad
me veniri ut die quadragensimo post aut ultra etiam quam facta sunt omnia nuntien-
tur. (Pol. Fam. 10.33.5); Ibi minus etiam quod alienis cladibus ceciderant animi cer-
taminis fuit. (Liv. 1.11.3)
Quippe qui certo scio / ibi plus scortorum esse iam quam ponderum. (Pl. Truc.
68–9); Quasi quicquam in hunc iam graviu’ dici possiet. (Ter. An. 874); . . . neque in
uno aut altero animadversum est sed iam in pluribus . . . (Cic. Mur. 43); Sed me minus
iam movent, ut vides. (Cic. Fam. 13.15.2); Ab ignis iam maiore vi ac violentia
Volcanus dictus. (Var. L. 5.70); Trans Lugios Gotones regnantur, paulo iam adductius
quam ceterae Germanorum gentes . . . (Tac. Ger. 43.6)
Sed Campans genus / multo Surorum iam antidit patientia. (Pl. Trin. 546–7); Sin
vera sunt quae dicuntur . . . id multo iam beatius est.
. . . quod etiam vel maior est in quibus similitudines reperiuntur . . . (Var. L. 9.114);
Quintus <filius> fuit mecum dies compluris et, si ego cuperem, ille vel pluris fuisset.
(Cic. Att. 16.5.2); Haec vel melior est vitibus satio. (Col. 3.4); Sunt etiam qui decem
genera fecerint sed eo modo quo fieri vel plura possunt. (Quint. Inst. 8.5.5)
These adverbs are also used with verbs and expressions that denote a gradual change.
An example is etiam in (w). Adhuc is attested from Seneca onwards, as in (x).56
(w) Inde in totam urbem discursum est, aucto etiam tumultu quod circa forum
ignis tectis iniectus erat.
(‘They now ran amok throughout the city, the chaos becoming further
intensified because the buildings around the forum were put to the torch.’
Liv. 31.23.7)
(x) Tu ista credis excelsa quia longe ab illis iaces. Ei vero qui ad illa pervenit
humilia sunt. Mentior nisi adhuc quaerit escendere. Istud quod tu summum
putas gradus est.
(‘You deem lofty the objects you seek, because you are on a low level and
hence far away from them. But they are mean in the sight of him who has
reached them. And I am very much mistaken if he does not desire to climb
still higher. That which you regard as the top is merely a rung of the ladder.’
Sen. Ep. 118.6)
The most common way from Early Latin onwards to indicate that two terms are
equivalent with respect to a certain standard is with the correlative adverbs
tam . . . quam. These adverbs can be used with adjectives, adverbs, prepositional
phrases, and with verbs, as in (a)–(c), but also with entire clauses, as in (d). The stand-
ard may be indicated with both terms but is usually indicated only with one. An
example of indication of the standard in both terms is (e). Conditional clauses with si
are relatively frequent as the second term in this type of comparison, as in (d). For
other correlative pairs, see §§ 20.28–30.
(a) Neque opes nostrae tam sunt validae quam tuae.
(‘And our wealth is not as great as yours.’ Pl. Cist. 494)
(b) Quis umquam nepos tam libere est cum scortis quam hic cum sororibus
volutatus?
(‘What debauchee ever wallowed so dissolutely with prostitutes as he has with his
sisters?’ Cic. Har. 59)
(c) . . . intellegatis nihil esse homini tam timendum quam invidiam . . .
(‘. . . you know that nothing should be feared by a man so much as prejudice.’ Cic. Clu. 7)
(d) Qui autem non defendit nec obsistit, si potest, iniuriae . . . tam est in vitio
quam si parentes aut amicos aut patriam deserat.
(‘But he who does not prevent or oppose wrong, if he can, is just as guilty of wrong as
if he deserted his parents or his friends or his country.’ Cic. Off. 1.23)
(e) Tam frictum ego illum reddam quam frictum est cicer.
(‘I’ll make sure he’s as roasted as a roasted pea.’ Pl. Bac. 767)
Supplement:
Tam ego homo sum quam tu. (Pl. As. 490); Tam ego fui ante liber quam gnatus tuos, /
tam mihi quam illi libertatem hostilis eripuit manus, / tam ille apud nos servit quam
ego nunc hic apud te servio. (Pl. Capt. 310–12); Tam propitiam reddam quam quom
propitia est Iuno Iovi. (Pl. Mer. 956); Nihil esse in civitate tam diligenter quam ius
civile retinendum. (Cic. Caec. 70); . . . tamque omnibus Caesarianis quam Pompeianis
Longinum esse in odio . . . (B. Alex. 59.1); Non tam creber agens hiemem ruit aequore
turbo / quam multae pecudum pestes. (Verg. G. 3.470–1); . . . aliamque orationem
non tam honorificam audientibus quam sibi deformem habuisse. (Liv. 45.44.20)
NB: Magis quam id reputo, tam magis uror / quae meus filius turbavit. (Pl. Bac.
1091–91a—NB: magis repeated); Quam magis aspecto, tam magis est nimbata et
nugae merae. (Pl. Poen. 348)
The relatedness of tam . . . quam and tantus . . . quantus expressions appears from com-
binations like (f). In (f) the amount of terror and the joy are equivalent. More mixed
are (g) and (h).57
(f) Profectio Q. Fabi trans Ciminiam silvam quantum Romae terrorem fecerat,
tam laetam famam in Samnium ad hostes tulerat interclusum Romanum
exercitum obsideri . . .
(‘As much terror as Quintus Fabius’ march through the Ciminian Forest had
created at Rome, just so happy had the report arrived in Samnium among
the enemy that the Roman army was intercepted and besieged.’ Liv. 9.38.4)
(g) Quid est enim in vita tantopere quaerendum quam cum omnia in philoso-
phia, tum id, quod his libris quaeritur, qui sit finis . . .?
(‘For what problem in life should be inquired into so much as all the topics
of philosophy, and especially the question raised in these volumes—What is
the End . . . ?’ Cic. Fin. 1.11)
(h) Iam non tantum mihi videntur iniuriam facere ii qui haec disputant quam si
cuius aures ad hanc disputationem patent.
(‘At this point those who so contend don’t seem to do me so much wrong as
those whose ears are open to such a contention.’ Cic. Fam. 3.8.3)
The demonstrative elements of these pairs are rarely combined with a comparative
particle, as in (i) and ( j). TLL s.v. atque 1083.53 quotes two late instances of
tam . . . atque.
(i) Faxo tali sum (= eum) mactatum atque hic est infortunio.
(‘I’ll have the same misfortunes inflicted on him as on our friend here.’ Ter.
Ph. 1028)
( j) . . . cum totidem navibus atque erat profectus Athenas magna cum offensione
civium suorum rediret.
(‘. . . and returned to Athens with the same number of ships as he had set out
with, to the great vexation of his fellow citizens.’ Nep. Milt. 7.4)
(‘As for ourselves, who are not such grand people as he is, not able to afford such
luxuries, if any one of us is ever disposed to have a look at something of this sort, let
us go off to the temple of Good Fortune . . .’ Cic. Ver. 4.126)
(o) Id adeo non tam ex re quam ex istius factis decretisque cognosco.
(‘I am led to this conclusion not so much by direct evidence as by observing what
Verres did or ordered to be done.’ Cic. Ver. 5.9)
(p) (sc. Apollonius) . . . multaque non tam graviter dixit quam facete.
(‘. . . and many of his remarks, rather than being serious, were made in a spirit of jest.’
Cic. de Orat. 1.75)
For a similar situation with comparison of non-equivalence, see § 20.3 fin. The choice
between a positive and a negative expression can be made for pragmatic reasons.58
See also § 8.8 and § 8.50 for pragmatic aspects of negation.
Latin has two devices for indicating that of two properties which an entity possesses
one is present in a higher (or lower) degree than the other. One device is magis (or
minus) quam. It can be used to compare two verbs, as in (a): Pompeius showed both
caution and fear, but his degree of caution was higher.59 In a similar way it is used to
compare two adjectives (with the copula expressed or not), as in (b), but it can also be
58 For statistical data on the use of positive and negative expressions of comparison, see Baños (1998: 32).
59 Such utterances are analysed by Baños (2002: 50–6). See also Orlandini and Poccetti (2018), who use
the term ‘epistemic comparison’. For comparison of reason adjunct clauses, see Baños (2019).
748 Comparison
used to compare two adverbs, as in (c) (with the adverbs functioning as disjuncts). Ex.
(d), already cited in § 20.2, shows two clauses that do not share a common entity; the
standard of comparison is the degree of similarity.
(a) Verum ut intellego, cavebat magis Pompeius quam timebat . . .
(‘But, as I understand, Pompeius was more cautious than fearful.’ Cic. Mil. 66)
(b) Celer tuus disertus magis est quam sapiens.
(‘Your relation Celer is more eloquent than wise.’ Cic. Att. 10.1a.4)
(c) . . . per hanc consensionem quae magis honeste quam vere sodalitas nomina-
retur . . .
(‘. . . by means of that form of combination which, in compliment rather than accuracy,
is known as an association . . .’ Cic. Planc. 37)
(d) Nec lact’ lactis magis est simile quam ille ego simil’est mei.
(‘Milk doesn’t resemble milk more than that me resembles this me.’ Pl. Am. 601)
Supplement:
. . . perfectam artem iuris civilis habebitis, magis magnam atque uberem quam diffi-
cilem et obscuram. (Cic. de Orat. 1.191); Si vero aut numerus quidam sit animus,
quod subtiliter magis quam dilucide dicitur, aut quinta illa non nominata magis
quam non intellecta natura . . . (Cic. Tusc. 1.41); Credulitas enim error est magis quam
culpa . . . (Planc. Fam. 10.23.1); . . . dum se temere magis quam satis caute in mediam
dimicationem infert . . . (Liv. 3.5.7); Ad ea consul respondit magis saepe quam vere
unquam Aetolos pacem petere . . . (Liv. 38.8.7); Ludicro Iuven<ali>um sub Nerone
velut ex necessitate, mox sponte mimos actitavit, scite magis quam probe. (Tac. Hist.
3.62.2); Adversus quos Lupicinus . . . temere magis quam consulte progressus in nono
ab urbe miliario stetit paratus ad decernendum. (Amm. 31.5.9)
The other device to indicate the non-equivalence of two properties consists of two
comparative forms of adjectives (both when functioning as subject or object comple-
ment and as attribute) or adverbs in combination with quam, as in (e) and (f). This
device is attested from Cato onwards, while the use of magis in such comparisons
can be found from Cicero onwards. The former becomes more frequent from Livy
onwards.
(e) Id non est in oratoribus aut, etiam si est ut alius gravitatem sequens subtili-
tatem fugiat, contra alius acutiorem se quam ornatiorem velit . . .
(‘But the same is not true of orators, or, even if one in pursuit of weight and dignity
avoids simplicity, and on the other hand, another prefers to be plain and to the point
rather than ornate . . .’ Cic. Opt. Gen. 6)
(f) Non timeo, iudices, ne odio mearum inimicitiarum inflammatus lubentius
haec in illum evomere videar quam verius.
(‘I have no fear, gentlemen, lest I should be thought, in the heat of personal animosity,
to give vent to this attack upon Clodius with greater relish than respect for truth.’ Cic.
Mil. 78)
Comparison between two properties 749
Supplement:
Quantoque suam vitam superiorem atque ampliorem atque antiquiorem animum
inducent esse quam innoxiiorem. (Cato orat. 178); Haec diligentius quam apertius
dicta esse arbitror . . . (Var. L. 10.75); Collegae eius Pauli una . . . contio fuit, verior
quam gratior populo . . . (Liv. 22.38.8); Nam Asia . . . ditiores quam fortiores exercitus
faciebat. (Liv. 39.1.3); . . . repentinus et tumultuarius exercitus acrius primo impetu
quam perseverantius pugnavit. (Liv. 41.10.3); . . . praecepto compositius cuncta quam
festinantius agerent. (Tac. Ann. 15.3.1); . . . reciperare gloriam avidius quam consultius
properabat. (Tac. Hist. 2.24.1)
Tacitus has two instances of the combination of a comparative form of an adverb +
quam + a positive form, as in (g) (also once in Ammianus 21.16.9).
(g) Nimia pietas vestra acrius quam considerat<e> excitavit.
(‘It was your excessive loyalty that spurred you to an action more violent
than cautious.’ Tac. Hist. 1.83.2)
In (a) above and in some of the other examples in the Supplement another interpret-
ation is possible as well: according to the speaker the expression caveo is more appro-
priate than timeo (the ‘corrective’ use of magis). Other examples are (h) and (i).60
(h) At is quem petebat quietus . . . metuens magis quam metuendus.
(‘While his intended victim was quiet . . . more given to fear than inspiring it.’ Sal.
Jug. 20.2)
(i) Interfecto Vitellio bellum magis desierat quam pax coeperat.
(‘At the death of Vitellius it was rather that war had stopped than peace had begun.’
Tac. Hist. 4.1.1)
Appendix: In a way resembling the corrective use of magis mentioned above, potius
‘rather, preferably’ quam, and to a lesser extent citius ‘sooner’ quam and prius ‘earlier’
quam, can be used to correct a term or to replace it by another term. Examples
are ( j)–(m). These expressions convey a subjective evaluation (TLL uses the term
aestimatio).61
( j) . . . dem potius aurum quam illum corrumpi sinam.
(‘. . . I’d give him the gold rather than let him be ruined.’ Pl. Bac. 1040)
(k) . . . facite hic lege potius liceat quam vi victo vivere.
(‘. . . make sure that one can live here by law rather than coerced by brute
force!’ Pl. Rud. 621)
(l) . . . dies me citius defecerit quam nomina.
(‘. . . daylight will run out before the names do.’ Cic. Ver. 4.59)
(m) Qui scis, an tibi istuc eveniat prius quam mihi? / # Quia numquam merui, tu
meruisti et nunc meres.
60 For further examples, see TLL s.v. magis (‘correctivum’) 58.22ff. For discussion, see Bertocchi and
Orlandini (1996: 219), Tarriño (2011: 377–8), Whitton (2011), and Manfredini (2015b).
61 For these expressions, sometimes called ‘pseudo-comparatives’, see Bertocchi and Orlandini (1996:
223); Baños (2002: 56–9); Tarriño (2007; 2011: 392–5), and Manfredini (2015b). For further instances, see
TLL s.v. citus 1212.31ff.; s.v. potis 347.59ff; s.v. prior 1341.30ff. See also OLD s.v. potius.
750 Comparison
(‘How do you know that won’t happen to you rather than me? # Because I’ve
never deserved it; you have deserved it and still do now.’ Pl. Mos. 58–9)
Supplement:
Etenim semper magno ingenio adulescentes refrenandi potius a gloria quam
incitandi fuerunt. (Cic. Cael. 76)
From Livy onwards potius quam and citius quam can also be used to link a subordin-
ate clause with ut to a preceding or following main clause. Examples are (n) and (o).62
(n) . . . multi ex plebe spe amissa potius quam ut cruciarentur trahendo animam
capitibus obvolutis se in Tiberim praecipitaverunt.
(‘. . . with hope lost, many of the plebeians, sooner than suffer torment by
prolonging their existence, covered up their heads and threw themselves
into the Tiber.’ Liv. 4.12.9)
(o) . . . in corpora sua citius per furorem saevituros quam ut Romanam amici-
tiam violarent.
(‘. . . intending rather to rage madness against their own persons than violate
the Roman friendship.’ Liv. 35.31.16)
Properties that are presented as equivalent may have various forms and may occur at
various levels. In (a), two mutually independent clauses are presented as equivalent.
The reverse order of the clauses is shown in (b), where the two clauses share the same
verb. In (c), the relevant properties felix and pia are subject complements in their
clause, both related to the subject haec mens nostra. In the case of negation of the part
containing tam, the comparison is one of non-equivalence rather than of equivalence,
as in (d) and (e): in (d), Gracchus ought to have shown more pietas towards his coun-
try than to his brother; patriae has the pragmatic function of ‘replacing focus’ (on
which see § 22.8).63 Another example, with two contrastive clauses, is (f).
(a) . . . quoi tam credo datum voluisse quam me video vivere.
(‘. . . to whom I believe he wanted it to be given as much as I can see that I’m alive.’ Pl.
Men. 461)
(b) Quam tu filium tuom, tam pater me meus desiderat.
(‘Just as you long for your son, so does my father long for me.’ Pl. Capt. 316)
(c) Haec mens nostra est (sit cj. Karsten)—di immortales faciant—tam felix
quam pia.
(‘Such is our resolution. May the gods make it as fortunate as it is loyal.’ Liv. 6.26.6)
62 For a discussion of seemingly similar instances of potius ut in Cicero, see Roveri (1959).
63 For such instances of ‘replacing focus’, see Manfredini (2015b: 484–5).
Comparison between two properties 751
(d) Utinam (sc. C. Gracchus) non tam fratri pietatem quam patriae praestare
voluisset.
(‘If only C. Gracchus had been willing to prefer loyalty not to his brother but to his
country.’ Cic. Brut. 126)
(e) Cum autem ego te non tam vitandi laboris mei causa quam quia tua id inter-
esse arbitrarer . . . hortatus essem . . .
(‘When, however, not so much to avoid my labour as because I thought it would be
for your good I had urged you to . . .’ Cic. Top. 2)
(f) Sed tanta est in plerisque levitas ut eos non tam constantia in re publica nos-
tra delectet quam splendor offendat.
(‘But so great is the pettiness in most men that my steadfastness in public affairs does
not please them so much as my distinction irritates them.’ Cic. Fam. 1.7.7)
Supplement:
Cupam facito p. X, tam crassam quam modioli postulabunt, media inter orbis quae
convenia[n]t crassam quam columella ferrea erit. (Cato Agr. 21.1—NB: text is prob-
lematic); Quis enim umquam . . . tam brevi tempore tot loca adire, tantos cursus con-
ficere potuit, quam celeriter Cn. Pompeio duce tanti belli impetus navigavit? (Cic.
Man. 34); (sc. Fama) . . . magnas territat urbes, / tam ficti pravique tenax quam nuntia
veri. (Verg. A. 4.187–8)
Quamquam non tam dicendi ratio mihi habenda fuit quam audiendi. (Cic. N.D.
1.56); . . . redeoque ad illud quod initio scripsi, totius facti tui iudicium non tam ex
consilio tuo quam ex eventu homines esse facturos. (Cic. Fam. 1.7.5); . . . non tam
pugnandi quam diffugiendi fuit utrorumque consilium. (Hirt. Gal. 8.23.6)
Instead of non tam . . . quam (or other negated expressions) occasionally quam is used
alone, as in (g) and (h), with non alone. Positive instances without a negation, as in
(i), are even less frequent and the earlier attestations are disputed (Sen. Dial. 6.15.2;
Fron. Aq. 128.1).64
(g) Non edepol piscis expeto / quam tui sermonis sum indigens.
(‘I’m not looking for fish as much as I’m in need of a conversation with you.’
Pl. Rud. 943–3a)
(h) . . . non militum, quos perpaucos habebat, fiducia, quam iuventutis
Thurinae.
(‘. . . from his confidence not so much in his soldiers, of whom he had very
few, as in the young men of Thurii.’ Liv. 25.15.9)
(i) educatus · litter(is) / Graecis · quam ·et · Latinis
(‘Educated in both Greek and Latin literature.’ CIL VI.28138.10–11 (Rome))
64 Examples in OLD s.v. quam § 6. Baehrens (1912: 308–9) is the most generous defender of the trans-
mitted texts. For discussion of this example and a few others, see Löfstedt (1936: 24–5). See also Orlandini
and Poccetti (2009).
752 Comparison
(‘Firstly, I am bound to hope that all the gods . . . will recompense me as I deserve.’ Cic.
Catil. 4.3)
(g) Eundem animum oportet nunc mihi esse, gratum ut impetravi, / atque
olim . . .
(‘I ought to have the same attitude now that I’ve got what I wanted as I used to have
back then . . .’ Pl. Mos. 220–1)
Supplement:
Num alia res, alia ratio illius iudicii, alia natura totius negotii nunc est ac tum fuit?
(Cic. Clu. 92); Iam vero virtus eadem in homine ac deo est neque alio ullo in genere
praeterea. (Cic. Leg. 1.25); Aliae enim sunt legati partes atque imperatoris. (Caes.
Civ. 3.51.4); . . . quamquam aliud dicit ac sentit, non aliud tamen simulat. (Quint.
Inst. 9.2.45); Hic loquebatur aliter atque omnes, sentiebat idem quod ceteri. (Cic.
Fin. 4.57)
. . . pariter hoc fit atque ut alia facta sunt. (Pl. Am. 1019); Si amavit umquam aut
si parem sapientiam [hic] habet ac formam / . . . (Pl. Mil. 1251); Neque vero illum
similiter atque ipse eram commotum esse vidi. (Cic. Phil. 1.9); In rebus minoribus
socium fallere turpissimum est aequeque turpe atque illud de quo ante dixi. (Cic.
S. Rosc. 116)
At te ego faciam / hodie proinde ac meritus es, / ut minus valeas . . . (Pl. Am. 583–5);
Nec despero tamen, quamquam languet iuventus, nec perinde atque debebat, in
laudis et gloriae cupiditate versatur . . . (Cic. Pis. 82); . . .non dixi secus ac sentiebam.
(Cic. de Orat. 2.24); Sed quoniam coepi secus agere atque initio dixeram . . . (Cic. N.D.
2.23); Haud secus ac iussi faciunt . . . (Verg. A. 3.236); . . . ita vindicandum atque in
propriis servis senatus censuit. (Ulp. dig. 29.5.1.15)
Contrarium est, quod contra dicitur atque ii, qui audiunt, fecerunt. (Cic. Inv. 1.93);
E quis feminas Q. Modius Equiculus, vir fortissimus, etiam patre militari, iuxta ac
mares habere solebat. (Var. R. 2.7.1); Tricipitinus . . . non ultra quam in Hernicos pro-
cedit. (Liv. 3.8.4); De iis, quae passi erant, questi non sunt, ne quid ultra ac mandatum
esset loquerentur . . . (V. Max. 2.2.5)
. . . sane quam pro eo ac debui graviter molesteque tuli . . . (Serv. Fam. 4.5.1)
The comparative element with expressions of similarity and dissimilarity can be (i)
ac/atque, as in the above examples, and et, (ii) quam, (iii) rarely the ablative of com-
parison, (iv) a preposition such as ab ‘from’, or (v)—especially with alius—nisi ‘except’.
Relative adverbs of manner such as ut and conditional comparative subordinators
such as quasi can be used as well.
The term introduced by a particle follows (not necessarily immediately) the word
or phrase that denotes similarity or dissimilarity. The terms presented as similar or
dissimilar belong to various lexical categories, but the (dis)similarity may also con-
cern a difference in tense form, as in (h) (already used above as (c)). The second term
may be a full main clause, but it may also be a subordinate clause. Potential or coun-
terfactual si clauses are relatively frequent, as in (i). When the content of the first and
the second terms overlap the second term is usually reduced. Often the two terms
have the same syntactic function, but this need not be the case.
754 Comparison
(h) Date operam, adeste aequo animo per silentium, / ne simili utamur fortuna
atque usi sumus / quom per tumultum noster grex motus loco’st.
(‘Pay attention, and listen in silence with open minds, so that we do not suffer the
same fate as we suffered when our company was driven from the stage by an uproar.’
Ter. Ph. 30–2)
(i) Qui me cum omnibus rebus quibus tribunus plebis potuit defendit, tum reli-
quis officiis iuxta ac si meus frater esset sustentavit.
(‘He not only defended me by every means he could as tribune of the plebs but even
supported me by performing other friendly services almost as if he were my own
brother.’ Cic. Red. Sen. 20)
Ac/atque and rarely et are used to introduce the second term in expressions of (dis)
similarity. In certain situations the utterances containing them may be ambiguous
(allowing two interpretations) or be liable to misunderstanding. This is the case in
(a)–(c). In (a) the adverb aeque can be omitted without making the remainder of the
sentence ungrammatical, which proves that aeque . . . et need not be taken together as
an expression of similarity, as the words are in the Loeb translation. For et can also be
taken as a coordinator on its own and aeque as an adverb: ‘unless we love our friends
and ourselves equally’. The situation in (c) with the adverb iuxta is similar, but here
the translator does not take iuxta . . . et as an expression of similarity.67 The same
applies to the adjective aequo in (b). There can be no doubt in cases with multiple et.68
(a) . . . nisi aeque amicos et nosmet ipsos diligamus . . .
(‘. . . unless we love our friends as much as ourselves . . .’ Cic. Fin. 1.67)
(b) Aequo mendicus atque ille opulentissumus / censetur censu ad Accheruntem
mortuos.
(‘The beggar and the richest man in the world are rated with an equal rating in the
Underworld.’ Pl. Trin. 493–4)
(c) Post ubi paulatim licentia crevit, iuxta bonos et malos lubidinose interficere,
ceteros metu terrere.
(‘But afterwards, when their licence gradually increased, the tyrants slew good and
bad alike at their pleasure and intimidated the rest.’ Sal. Cat. 51.30)
(d) Aeque enim perfidiosum et nefarium est fidem frangere quae continet vitam
et pupillum fraudare qui in tutelam pervenit et socium fallere qui se in nego-
tio coniunxit.
(‘For it is equally perfidious and wicked to break faith, which is the bond of life, as it
is to defraud a ward who has come under one’s guardianship, and to deceive someone
who is a business partner.’ Cic. Q. Rosc. 16)
Supplement:
. . . nec se Luna quoquam mutat atque uti exorta est semel . . . (Pl. Am. 274)
69 For a detailed list of the combinations with atque, see TLL s.v. atque 1080.10ff. For historical obser-
vations on the individual words, see Sz.: 478.
70 For instances of et in combination with aeque, see TLL s.v. aequus 1042.81ff. See also s.v. et 895.4ff.
756 Comparison
(a) . . . nec si ille sapiens ad tortoris eculeum a tyranno iure cogatur, similem
habeat vultum et si ampullam perdidisset . . .
(‘. . . and if the Wise Man were to be forced by a tyrant to go to the rack, he would not
wear the same look as if he had lost his oil-flask.’ Cic. Fin. 4.31)
(b) Et quoniam catuli qui iam dispecturi sunt caeci aeque et ii qui modo nati,
Platonem quoque necesse est, quoniam nondum videbat sapientiam, aeque
caecum animo ac (v.l. et) Phalarim fuisse.
(‘Again, since puppies on the point of opening their eyes are as blind as those only just
born, it follows that Plato, not having yet attained to the vision of wisdom, was just as
blind mentally as Phalaris.’ Cic. Fin. 4.64)
Supplement:
Quod de puero al<i>ter ad te scripsit et ad matrem de filio, non reprehendo. (Cic.
Att. 10.11.1); Non enim alia causa est aequitatis in uno servo et in pluribus . . . (Cic.
Caec. 57); Idque si ita dicit . . . dicit absurde, similiter et (ut cj. Lambinus) si dicat
non reprehendendos parricidas . . . (Cic. Fin. 2.21); . . . solet enim aliud sentire et
loqui . . . (Cael. Fam. 8.1.3); Isdem sua (sc. vox) maribus, aliis eadem et feminis, ut
lusciniarum generi. (Plin. Nat. 11.268); Conchylia et purpuras omnis hora atterit,
quibus eadem mater luxuria paria paene et margaritis pretia fecit. (Plin. Nat. 9.124);
Servitia perinde et ingenua plebes raptim exstingui . . . (Tac. Ann. 16.13.2)
The use of quam in expressions of (dis)similarity is rare in Early Latin, except with
aeque and aliter. These instances are usually negated or negative by implication.
Examples are (a)–(c). The first instance of quam with aeque in a positive context is (d).
The use of quam spreads after Cicero and Caesar, especially with expressions of dis-
similarity. This spread is illustrated for a few lexical items in Table 20.2. Note that with
perinde atque remains the norm.
q = quam; a = ac/atque
The table is based on Fontana (1997: 154–9), where details concerning the corpus used for the individual authors can be found. See Sz.: 593–4 for diachronic data.
758 Comparison
(a) Neque eques nec pedes profecto est quisquam tanta audacia, / qui aeque
faciat confidenter quicquam quam mulier facit.
(‘No soldier on foot or on horseback is indeed so bold as to do anything as self-
confidently as a woman.’ Pl. Mil. 464–5)
(b) Quid si sors aliter quam voles evenerit?
(‘What if the lot settles it differently from how you want it?’ Pl. Cas. 345)
(c) . . . nec mi secus erat quam si essem familiaris filius.
(‘. . . and I wasn’t in a different situation from being a son of the house.’ Pl. Capt. 273)
(d) Expalluit aeque / quam puer ipse deus . . .
(‘The god grew deadly pale even as the boy . . .’ Ov. Met. 10.185–6)
Supplement (in alphabetical order by (dis)similarity expression):
Qui tamen nequaquam adeo est intempestivus quam vestrae istae absurdae atque
abhorrentes lacrimae sunt. (Liv. 30.44.6); . . . nec quemquam interea alium ammit-
tat prorsus quam me ad se virum. (Pl. As. 236); Nunc mihi certum est alio pacto
Pseudolo insidias dare / quam in aliis comoediis fit . . . (Pl. Ps. 1239–40—NB:
positive context); Aliud enim quam cogebatur inlatum est. (Cic. Inv. 1.87—NB:
positive context); Praeterea bybliothecas, pinacothecas, basilicas non dissimili
modo quam publicorum operum magnificentia <habeant> comparatas . . . (Vitr.
6.5.2); Eruca praecipue frigorum contemptrix diversae est quam lactuca naturae
concitatrixque Veneris. (Plin. Nat. 19.154); . . . non eadem neglegentia in extermin-
ium discretis (sc. iniuriis) quam acciderat in casibus matris. (Tert. Val. 16.2);
Studia exercitus raro cuiquam bonis artibus quaesita perinde adfuere quam huic
per ignaviam. (Tac. Hist. 3.86.1); Si proinde amentur, mulieres diu quam lavant, /
omnes amantes balneatores sient. (Pl. Truc. 324–5); Haud proinde id damnum
Vitellianos in metum compulit quam ad modestiam composuit . . . (Tac. Hist. 2.27.1)
Appendix: Several of the adverbial expressions of similarity mentioned in the previ-
ous sections are also found in combination with clauses and phrases introduced by
ut(i) (also sicut(i), quemadmodum, and quomodo). An example is (e). These combin-
ations are sometimes presented as equivalent to the ac/atque expressions. However,
whereas in the previous sections the terms introduced by ac/atque (and quam) must
be regarded as obligatory constituents required by their governing two-place similar-
ity expressions, in their co-occurrence with ut clauses many similarity expressions
can better be regarded as (optional) modifiers of the ut clauses as a whole. In (f) and
(g), for instance, the entire proinde/perinde ut clauses correspond with sic/ita in the
main clauses. There is also another difference: in (h) the ut clause precedes simillime,
which is impossible with the similis ac/atque combination. This is also the case in (i)
with exinde (exim) (which does not occur with ac/atque). In (e) the ut soles clause is
a set phrase (ac/atque soles does not occur). Adaeque is therefore best regarded as an
autonomous degree expression. For further details about ut and related expressions
see §§ 20.24–7.
(e) Nec munda adaeque es ut soles . . .
(‘You are not as neat as usual . . .’ Pl. Cist. 55)
Similarity and dissimilarity 759
(f) Numquam edepol quemquam mortalem credo ego uxorem suam / sic efflic-
tim amare, proinde ut hic te efflictim deperit.
(‘By god, I don’t believe there’s a mortal man alive who loves his own wife so
madly as the mad way he dotes on you.’ Pl. Am. 516–17)
(g) Omnia ista, perinde ut cuique data sunt pro rata parte, ita aut longa aut
brevia dicuntur.
(‘All such things are spoken of as long or short according to the proportion
in which they are in each case allotted.’ Cic. Tusc. 1.94)
(h) Ut onera contentis corporibus facilius feruntur, remissis opprimunt, simil-
lime animus intentione sua depellit pressum omnem ponderum . . .
(‘As weights are more easily carried by straining every nerve of the body but
become too heavy when the nerves are relaxed, quite similarly the soul by its
intense effort throws off all pressure of burdens . . .’ Cic. Tusc. 2.54)
(i) Utquomque in alto ventu’st, Epidice, exim velum vortitur.
(‘One turns the sail according to how the wind is on the sea, Epidicus.’ Pl.
Epid. 49)
Supplement:
Quis enim cuiquam inimicior quam Deiotaro Caesar? Aeque atque huic ordini, ut
equestri, ut Massiliensibus, ut omnibus quibus rem publicam populi Romani caram
esse sentiebat. (Cic. Phil. 2.94—NB: the ut phrases add another point of similarity and
they are not continuations of atque); . . . cui nihil aeque in causis agendis ut brevitas
placet. (Plin. Ep. 1.20.1); Eo fit, quia mihi / plurumum credo et scio istaec facta
proinde ut proloquor. (Pl. Am. 756–7); Atque hoc verum est: proinde ut quisque fortuna
utitur, / ita praecellet atque exinde sapere eum omnes dicimus. (Pl. Ps. 679–80)
The use of the ablative for the second term in expressions of similarity and dissimilar-
ity (ablativus comparationis) is very rare. An example with alius is (a); with (ad )aeque,
(b). The instances with (ad )aeque have pronouns in the ablative. An even more note-
worthy later instance is (c), where aeque modifies the verb miror. An example of a
mixed construction (contamination) is (d), where aeque modifies the comparative
miserior.73
(a) . . . est aliut melle <et> propoli.
(‘It is a different substance from either honey or propolis.’ Var. R. 3.16.23)
(b) Qui me in terra aeque fortuna- / tus erit, si illa ad me bitet, / Palinure?
(‘Who on earth will be as fortunate as me, if she comes to me, Palinurus?’ Pl. Cur.
141–2)
73 See Sz.: 110; TLL s.v. aequus 1044.35ff; Traglia (1947: 16–18); Pasoli (1966: 81ff.); Timpanaro (1970:
474=1978: 39); Núñez (2002: 161–2).
760 Comparison
(c) Exstant certe hodieque antiquiores urbe picturae Ardeae . . ., quibus equidem
nullas aeque miror . . .
(‘At all events there survive even today in Ardea paintings that are older than the city
of Rome, and I don’t marvel at any paintings in the same way as I do at them . . .’ Plin.
Nat. 35.17)
(d) Homo me miserior nullu’st aeque . . .
(‘Nobody is more wretched than me . . .’ Pl. Mer. 335)
Supplement:
With alius: Nos ab initio spectasse otium nec quicquam aliud libertate communi
quaesisse exitus declarat. (Brut. Cas. Fam. 11.2.2); . . . neve putes alium sapiente
bonoque beatum . . . (Hor. Ep. 1.16.20)74
With (ad )aeque: Nullu’st hoc metuculosus aeque. (Pl. Am. 293); Neque est neque fuit
me senex quisquam amator / adaeque miser. (Pl. Cas. 684–5); Quo nemo adaeque
iuventute ex omni Attica / antehac est habitus parcus nec magis continens . . . (Pl. Mos.
30–1—NB: here magis continens may have contributed to the use of the ablative)
74 See TLL s.v. alius 1636.58ff., where a few Late instances of alius ab can be found as well.
Similarity and dissimilarity 761
The preposition ab is rarely used with alius from Tertullian onward, but see the earlier
use with aliter in the Supplement. An example is (a). Similarly with dissimilis.75
(a) . . . nisi eum longe alium demonstraveritis a Christo Creatoris . . .
(‘. . . unless you show that he is altogether different from the Christ of the Creator.’
Tert. Marc. 3.16.7)
Supplement:
Cultores regionum multo aliter a ceteris agunt. (Mela 1.57)
In clauses containing alius prepositional phrases meaning ‘but’, ‘save’, ‘except’ (e.g.
praeter, praeterquam, and citra) are quite common, in all periods of Latin. An example
is (b).76
(b) Numquis est hic alius praeter me atque te?
(‘There isn’t anyone here apart from me and you, is there?’ Pl. Trin. 69)
The use of nisi ‘other than’, ‘except’ in interrogative or negative clauses with alius is
very common from Early Latin onwards, as in (c) and (d), respectively (see also
§ 16.67).
(c) Quid ego aliud exoptem amplius nisi illud quoius inopia est . . .?
‘What other thing should I wish for more than that which I lack . . .?’ Pl. As. 724)
(d) Negat ponere alio modo ullo profecto / nisi se sciat vilico non datum iri.
(‘She says she won’t put them down unless she knows she won’t be given to the
overseer.’ Pl. Cas. 698–9)
Examples of ut clauses that characterize the quality of a constituent in the main clause
are (a)–(d). These clauses contain a form of the verb sum (as copula or auxiliary),
which usually follows ut immediately. For another order, see (e). Sometimes the ut
78 The label ‘quality’ is taken from Dik (1997: I.231), where the expressions discussed in the text are
regarded as satellites. See also Revuelta (2002: 195–7).
Comparative expressions of quality 763
clause can be interpreted in a causal sense, as in (e). There may be a corresponding ita,
as in (a) and (b).
(a) Oleum si in metretam novam inditurus eris, amurca, ita uti est cruda, prius
colluito . . .
(‘If you are to put oil in a new jar, rinse it first with amurca just as it comes, raw . . .’
Cato Agr. 100—tr. Dalby)
(b) . . . ut erat laena amictus ita venit in contionem seditionemque cum auctori-
tate tum oratione sedavit.
(‘. . . clad in his priestly robe, just as he was, he hurried to the assembly, and by the
authority of his presence as well as by his words allayed the tumult.’ Cic. Brut. 56)
(c) Deinde . . . litterasque nondum perlectas, sicut erant signatae, dat homini
certo ad Scipionem perferendas.
(‘He then . . . gave the letter—still unread and with its seals intact—to a reliable mes-
senger to take to Scipio.’ B. Afr. 4.4)
(d) His, sicut erant nuntiata, expositis auctoribusque in curiam introductis
consul de religione patres consuluit.
(‘When the consul had laid these reports before the senate exactly as they had come
to him and had introduced into the House the men who had vouched for their truth,
he consulted the Fathers regarding their religious import.’ Liv. 22.1.14)
(e) Ab hoc abaci vasa omnia ut exposita fuerunt abstulit.
(‘He (sc.Verres) swept his sideboard clean of all its vessels, just as they stood there.’
Cic. Ver. 4.35)
Supplement:
Quae cum iam accubanti in convivio esset data, sicut erat signata, sub pulvinum
subiciens . . . inquit . . . (Nep. Pel. 3.2–3); Lotis in herbosa sub acernis ultima ramis, /
sicut erat lusu fessa, quievit humo. (Ov. Fast. 1.423–4); Haec, sicut audita erant, rex
M. Aemilio praetori, cuius Sicilia provincia erat, perscribit . . . (Liv. 21.49.6)
NB: Cum iis litteris sicut erant signatis L. Verginio tribuno militum ducendi ad
Claudium consulem traduntur. (Liv. 27.43.4).
Not unlike the way in which the ut clauses in the preceding section characterize the
quality of a constituent of the main clause, phrases consisting of ut and a noun
(phrase), an adjective, or a participle may characterize the quality of an entity. The
nominal parts of the phrase agree with the constituent to which they are related in
case, gender, and number. They are in fact secondary predicates, as described in
Chapter 21. It is not always easy to distinguish such phrases from condensed manner
clauses (see § 16.34 fin.). Examples are (a)–(c). We also find sicut, quasi, and tamquam
used in this way. Examples are (d)–(f).79
(a) In ea est crebra ista vocum concursio, quam magna ex parte ut vitiosam fugit
Demosthenes.
(‘In this there is frequent clash of vowels, which Demosthenes generally avoided as
vicious.’ Cic. Orat. 151)
(b) . . . nec . . . te consoler ut adflictum et iam omni spe salutis orbatum sed ut
eum de cuius incolumitate non plus dubitem quam te memini dubitare
de mea.
(‘I shall not console you as a man undone beyond all hope of recovery, but as one of
whose rehabilitation I feel no more doubt than I remember you used to feel of mine.’
Cic. Fam. 6.6.2)
(c) . . . cum vos me ut carissimum filium desiderabatis . . .
(‘. . . at a time when you regretted my absence as if I were a beloved son . . .’ Cic. Prov. 43)
(d) . . . Graeci (sc. mihi) quasi Ephesio praetori se alacres obtulerunt.
(‘. . . the Greeks, as though I were governor in Ephesus, presented themselves to me
with eagerness.’ Cic. Att. 5.13.1)
(e) Quam tu totam insulam cuidam tuorum sodalium sicut aliquod munuscu-
lum condonaras . . .
(‘This island that you presented complete, as though it were some trifling gratuity, to
one of your associates . . .’ Cic. Ver. 3.85)
(f) Hi dum aedificant tamquam beati . . . in tantum aes alienum inciderunt, ut . . .
(‘Putting up buildings as men of wealth . . . they have run so deeply into debt that . . .’
Cic. Catil. 2.20)
Supplement:
Iacet enim corpus dormientis ut mortui . . . (Cic. Div. 1.63); . . . superante multitudine
hostes carpere multifariam viris Romanas, ut non suffecturas ad omnia, adgressi
sunt. (Liv. 3.5.1); Quid te ut regium iuvenem conspici sinis? (Liv. 1.47.5); Nam cum
Speusippum sororis filium Plato philosophiae quasi heredem reliquisset . . . (Cic. Ac.
1.17); . . . sermone, qui ore (ex ore cj. Novak) eius quasi e beato quodam eloquentiae
fonte manabat . . . (V. Max. 2.6.8—NB: variation); An quicquam stultius quam, quos
singulos sicut operarios barbarosque contemnas, eos aliquid putare esse universos?
(Cic. Tusc. 5.104); ‘Mihi vos nunc’, inquit Crassus, ‘tamquam alicui Graeculo
otioso . . . quaestiunculam de qua meo arbitratu loquar ponitis?’ (Cic. de Orat.
1.102); . . . cum eum cives sui missis legatis tamquam seditiones apud eos moventem
accusarent. (V. Max. 4.1.6); Postremo sociis nostris veluti hostibus, hostibus pro
sociis utuntur. (Sal. Jug. 31.23—NB: parallelism); . . . si, ut poetis, nobis quoque mos
esset . . . (Liv. praef. 12); . . . velut adsueti malis abalienaverant ab sensu rerum suarum
animos, arma tantum ferrumque in dextris velut solas reliquias spei suae intuentes.
(Liv. 5.42.8); . . . ne se quoque, ut patrem Hamilcarem, deinde Hasdrubalem,
cunctantem casus aliquis opprimeret . . . (Liv. 21.5.1); . . . numquam more aliarum,
quibus omnis commendatio ex forma petitur, tumescentem uterum abscondisti
quasi indecens onus . . . (Sen. Dial. 12.16.3); Mihi [in] anima in naso esse, stabam
tamquam mortuus. (Petr. 62.5); Cassius quidem Parmensis quadam epistula non
Comparative expressions of quality 765
tantum ut pistoris, sed etiam ut nummulari nepotem sic taxat Augustum: . . . (Suet.
Aug. 4.2); . . . Onesimus quo velut fratre minusculo fruebatur . . . (Hier. Ep. 3.4.2)
Ut (rarely sicut) is used with phrases to indicate from which perspective the statement
being made about the entity to which it is attached must be understood. The qualify-
ing function of such ut phrases resembles the use of ut clauses that function as attitu-
dinal disjuncts (see § 16.35 and, for the adjective phrase level, § 11.92). Examples are
(a)–(d).80 In (a) Epicharmus’ qualities acuti and nec insulsi are said to be typical for a
Sicilian. In (d), conversely, Meneclides’ quality satis exercitatum is said to be unusual
for a Theban.
(a) Sed tu mihi videris Epicharmi, acuti nec insulsi hominis ut Siculi, senten-
tiam sequi.
(‘But you seem to me to agree with the aphorism of Epicharmus, who was, as one
expects in a Sicilian, a man of keen insight and not without taste.’ Cic. Tusc. 1.15)
(b) . . . Pythius qui esset ut argentarius apud omnes ordines gratiosus piscatores
ad se convocavit . . .
(‘. . . Pythius, who, as might be expected of a moneylender, could command favours of
all classes, called the fishermen together . . .’ Cic. Off. 3.58)
(c) Tum ab Staieno, sicut ab homine ad excogitandum acutissimo ad auden-
dum impudentissimo ad efficiendum acerrimo . . ., auxilium capiti ac fortu-
nis suis petere coepit.
(‘And so from Staienus, seeing as he was a man subtle in scheming, brazen in contriv-
ance, and swift in execution, he began to seek aid for his fortunes and for his very
life . . .’ Cic. Clu. 67)
(d) Habuit obtrectatorem Menecliden quendam . . ., satis exercitatum in dicendo,
ut Thebanum scilicet. Namque illi genti plus inest virium quam ingenii.
(‘He had a detractor in the person of one Meneclides . . ., who too was a practised
speaker, at least for a Theban; for that people possesses more bodily strength than
mental ability.’ Nep. Epam. 5.2)
Supplement:
Quos tum ut pueri refutare domesticis testibus patre et C. Aculeone propinquo nostro
et L. Cicerone patruo solebamus . . . (Cic. de Orat. 2.2); Ne tu, inquam, Cato, ista expo-
suisti, ut tam multa memoriter, ut tam obscura, dilucide. (Cic. Fin. 4.1); . . . (sc.
Clitomachus) homo et acutus ut Poenus et valde studiosus ac diligens. (Cic. Luc. 98);
Durior Diogenes, et is quidem eadem sentiens, sed ut Cynicus asperius. (Cic. Tusc.
1.104); . . . non nihil ut in tantis malis est profectum. (Cic. Fam. 12.2.2); Fuerunt quibus
haec eius oratio ut sera et intempestiva et praepostera displiceret . . . (Plin. Ep. 6.5.3)
80 For further examples, see OLD s.v. ut § 22. For discussion, see Van Laer (2010: 353–4).
766 Comparison
81 K.-St.: II.483ff. deal with this expression type in the chapter on ‘Vergleichende Adverbialsätze der
Quantität oder Intensität’.
82 It is also called ‘comparative conditional’ and ‘comparative correlative’. For recent discussion, see
Bertocchi and Maraldi (2008; 2009); Michaelis (1992; 1994). For the use of the proportional comparative
pattern in technical texts, see Viré (2005).
Proportional comparison 767
clauses—the qu-clause being subordinate to the other. However, it can also function
at a lower level, as in (f), where two attributes are connected.
Supplement:
Full correlative pattern: Quanto in pectore hanc rem meo magis voluto, / tanto mi
aegritudo auctior est in animo. (Pl. Capt. 781–2); . . . quanto diutius / abest, mage
cupio tanto et mage desidero. (Ter. Hau. 424–5—NB: tanto follows mage cupio); . . .
recte praecipere videantur qui monent ut quanto superiores simus tanto nos gera-
mus summissius. (Cic. Off. 1.90); Quanto vos adtentius ea agetis, tanto illis animus
infirmior erit. (Sal. Cat. 52.18); Quanto quaeque magis sint terram sidera propter, /
tanto posse minus cum caeli turbine ferri. (Lucr. 5.623–4); Quod quanto plura
parasti, / tanto plura cupis, nulline faterier audes? (Hor. Ep. 2.2.147–8); . . . ceraeque
renovabuntur, quae tanto deteriores sunt quanto vetustiores. (Col. 9.15.11); Ea sic
conficitur, ut dura sit, et quanto facta est vetustior, eo melior in usu est. (Col.
12.23.1—NB: unequal correlatives); Procellae, quanto plus habent virium, tanto
minus temporis. (Sen. Nat. 7.9.3)
Arationes absolvi, quae eo fructuosiores fiunt, quo caldiore terra aratur. (Var. R.
1.32.1); An id agendum ut eo celerius de isto transigamus, quo maturius ad Apronium
possimus . . . (Cic. Ver. 3.60); . . . solet idem Roscius dicere se, quo plus sibi aetatis
accederet, eo tardiores tibicinis modos et cantus remissiores esse facturum. (Cic. de
Orat. 1.254); Eiusdem collis occupandi [gratia] Labienus consilium ceperat et quo
propiore loco fuerat eo celerius occurrerat. (B. Afr. 49.2); . . . sed quo inpunitior sit, eo
effrenatiorem fore. (Liv. 3.50.7); Passum, quo ex sicciore uva est, eo valentius est.
(Cels. 2.18.12); Eo enim crassior est aër quo terris propior. (Sen. Nat. 7.22.2)
Iam quo quisque est sollertior et ingeniosior, hoc docet iracundius et laboriosius.
(Cic. Q. Rosc. 31); Quo magis exhaustae fuerint, hoc acrius omnes / incumbent
generis lapsi sarcire ruinas . . . (Verg. G. 4.248–9); Hanc tibi commendo, quae, quo
magis orba parente est, / hoc tibi tutori sarcina maior erit. (Ov. Tr. 3.14.15–16); Et
quo longius moles agebatur a litore, hoc magis quicquid ingerebatur praealtum
absorbebat mare. (Curt. 4.2.22); Quo quisque honestior genere, fama, patrimonio
est, hoc se fortius gerat, memor in prima acie altos ordines stare. (Sen. Dial. 2.19.3)
768 Comparison
Only relative element present: Ita quanto (cj. Pius; quanti mss.) magis extergeo,
rutilum atque tenuius fit. (Pl. Rud. 1301—NB: positive form rutilum);83 Nam quanto
propius truncum ridica statuitur, etiam leviter defixa stabilior est . . . (Col. 4.16.3); At
ille, quanto acriora in eum studia militum et aversa patrui voluntas, celerandae vic-
toriae intentior, tractare proeliorum vias . . . (Tac. Ann. 2.5.2—NB: positive form
aversa); Crebriores apud ipsum sermones, quanto sperantibus plura dicuntur. (Tac.
Hist. 2.78.4)
Quoque suo propior sceleri est, magis horret. (Ov. Met. 10.460); Venit amor gravius,
quo serius. (Ov. Ep. 4.19); Quo plures erant, maior caedes fuit. (Liv. 2.51.6); . . . procul
dubio apparere, quo quid humilius sit, propius a centro esse terrae . . . (Plin. Nat. 2.165);
Et hercule ut aliae bonae res, ita bonus liber melior est quisque, quo maior. (Plin. Ep.
1.20.4); . . . quo sublimior gloria est, maior et cura est. (Cypr. Hab. Virg. 3)
Very remarkable instances of the proportional pattern are (g)–(i). In (g)—if the text
is correct—there are two measure constituents with melior, of which quo lacks its
corresponding eo. In (h) and (i) the bases of comparison are expressed as well (quam
quos vicisti and Aristarcho, respectively).84
(g) Nam tibi eos certo scio, / quo vir melior multo es quam ego, obtemperaturos
magis.
(‘They’re more likely to take notice of you, I’m quite sure, insofar as you are
a much better man than I am.’ Ter. Ad. 704–5)
(h) Quod tu non esses, iure vir illa fuit. / Qua tanto minor es, quanto te, maxime
rerum, / quam quos vicisti, vincere maius erat.
(‘She was by full right what you were not: a man. You are as much less than
she, O greatest of men, as it was greater to vanquish you than those you
vanquished.’ Ov. Ep. 9.106–8)
(i) Corrigere ut res est tanto minus ardua, quanto / magnus Aristarcho maior
Homerus erat . . .
(‘But while to emend is as much easier as great Homer was greater than
Aristarchus . . .’ Ov. Pont. 3.9.23–4)
In deviation from the proportional pattern with two comparative expressions some
authors exhibit patterns with only one comparative, with either a comparative expres-
sion in the qu-part of the pattern, as in ( j) and (k), or, the other way around, with a
comparative expression in the eo or tanto part. Sometimes the meaning of the verb
implies a gradual change, like crescit in ( j). These patterns are favoured by Livy and
especially Tacitus.85 These authors also use a proportional pattern with a positive
adjective or adverb in one part and a comparative in the other, as in (l) and (m).86
( j) Ita dimissis, quo minus consules velle credunt, crescit ardor pugnandi.
(‘Dismissed with these words, the soldiers’ eagerness to fight grew greater
the less they believed the consuls wanted to fight.’ Liv. 2.45.9)
In Early Latin and in poetry, instead of the measure expressions dealt with above, the
degree adverbs quam . . . tam are found with comparatives as well, especially with
magis ‘more’.87 An example is (n). Sometimes the relative adverb is used alone, as in
(o). Sometimes one of the comparatives is absent, as in (p). And there are also occa-
sionally mixed expressions, as in (q). An instance without an explicit degree expres-
sion is (r).
(n) Magis quam id reputo, tam magis uror / quae meus filius turbavit.
(‘The more I think it over, the more I burn with anger because of the trouble my son’s
stirred up.’ Pl. Bac. 1091–1a)
87 The whole range of measure expressions with magis can be found in TLL s.v. 65.54ff.
770 Comparison
(o) Quam magis in pectore meo foveo, quas meus filius turbas turbet, / . . . / magis
curae est magisque afformido ne is pereat neu corrumpatur.
(‘The more I ponder in my heart what trouble my son’s stirring up . . . the more it’s a
source of anxiety for me and the more I fear that he might perish or go astray.’ Pl. Bac.
1076–8)
(p) Quam magis te in altum capessis, tam aestus te in portum refert.
(‘The more you put out to sea, the more the tide brings you back to the harbour.’ Pl.
As. 158)
(q) Quam magis extendas tanto astringunt artius.
(‘The more you stretch them, the more tightly they tie.’ Pl. Men. 95)
(r) Immo, hospes, magis quom periclum facies, magis nosces meam / comitatem
erga te amantem.
(‘Indeed, my dear guest, when you test me more, you’ll get to know more of my
friendliness toward you in your love.’ Pl. Mil. 635–6)
Supplement:
Quam magis aspecto, tam magis est nimbata et nugae merae. (Pl. Poen. 348); Tam
magis illa fremens et tristibus effera flammis, / quam magis effuso crudescunt san-
guine pugnae. (Verg. A. 7.787–8); Quam magis specto, minus placet mi haec hominis
facies. (Pl. Trin. 861); Quam magis exhausto spumaverit ubere mulctra, / laeta magis
pressis manabunt flumina mammis. (Verg. G. 3.309–10); Quae quanto magis inter se
perplexa coibant, / tam magis expressere ea quae mare sidera solem / lunamque
efficerent . . . (Lucr. 5.452–4); Et, quanto ad gelidas propius quis venerit Arctos, / tam
magis effugiunt oculos brumalia signa, / vixque ortis occasus erit. (Man. 3.344–6)
Exceptional and Late are instances like (s) and (t). Ex. (s) has a correspondence
between a superlative and a comparative, but must be intended as a proportional
expression. Ex. (t) has what was originally a proportional measure expression in
combination with a positive adverb, but must be understood as a variant of the
coordinator cum . . . tum (see § 19.73).
(s) Quo enim quemquam maxime diligimus, eo minus ei debemus in quibus
magno periculo peccatur committere.
(‘For the more we love anyone, the more are we bound to avoid entrusting to
him things which are the occasion of very dangerous faults.’ August. Ep.
104.7—tr. Cunningham)
(t) Haec testimonia animae quanto vera tanto simplicia . . . quanto naturalia
tanto divina.
(‘These testimonies of the soul are as true as they are simple, . . . as natural as
they are divine.’ Tert. Test. 5.1—tr. Arbesmann)
equivalent and that to each of them the highest degree indicated by the relevant
superlatives applies.88
Instances of the use of quam . . . tam with superlatives are almost confined to Early
Latin. Examples are (a) and (b). In (b) the second superlative is absent.
(a) Quam ad probos propinquitate proxume te adiunxeris, / tam optumum est.
(‘The more closely you connect yourself with honourable men through family ties,
the better it is.’ Pl. Aul. 236–7)
(b) Quam citissume potest, tam hoc cedere ad factum volo.
(‘I want this matter to come to pass as quickly as possible.’ Pl. Capt. 352)
Supplement:
Quam potis tam verba confer maxume ad compendium. (Pl. Mil. 781); Quam citis-
sime conficies, tam maxime expediet . . . (Cato Agr. 64.2); Nam quam maxume huic
visa haec suspitio / erit vera . . . / . . . tam facillume patri’ pacem in leges conficiet suas.
(Ter. Hau. 997–8); Quam paucissimos (sc. canes) reliqueris, tam optimi in alendo
fiunt propter copiam lactis. (Var. R. 2.9.12); Ita quam quisque pessume fecit, tam
maxume tutus est. (Sal. Jug. 31.14)
Instances of the use of ut . . . ita with superlative adjectives and adverbs and verbs of a
gradable meaning are common in Cicero and later authors. The ut clause contains a
form of the pronoun quisque ‘each’ (see § 11.158). Examples are (c)–(e).
(c) Profecto ut quisque minimo contentus fuit, / ita fortunatam vitam vixit
maxime . . .
(‘Truly as each man was content with the least, so he lived a happy life to the highest
degree. . .’ Turp. com. 142–3)
(d) Ut quisque te maxime cognatione . . . attingebat, ita maxime manus tua putabatur.
(‘The more closely a man was connected with you by any tie of blood . . ., the more he
was reckoned one of your hands.’ Cic. Ver. 2.27)
(e) . . . ut quisque aetate et honore antecedit, ita primus solet sua sponte dicere,
itaque a ceteris ei conceditur.
(‘. . . according as a person is senior in age or official position, he is accustomed to
speak first of his own accord, and that precedence is yielded to him by the rest.’ Cic.
Ver. 4.142)
Supplement:
Cuius quidem rei cum causam quaererem, quidnam esset cur, ut in quoque oratore
plurimum esset, ita maxime is pertimesceret, has causas inveniebam duas. (Cic. de
Orat. 1.123); Ut enim quisque sordidissimus videbitur, ita libentissime severitate
iudicandi sordis suas eluet . . . (Cic. Phil. 1.20); . . . colendum autem esse ita quemque
maxime ut quisque maxime virtutibus his lenioribus erit ornatus . . . (Cic. Off. 1.46);
Et ut quisque contemptissimus et vel ludibrium est, ita solutissimae linguae est. (Sen.
Dial. 2.11.3)
Supplement:
Ex quavis olea oleum viridius et bonum fieri potest, si temperi facies. (Cato Agr. 3.4);
Si demptus erit odor deterior, id optime. Si non, saepius facito, usque dum odorem
malum dempseris. (Cato Agr. 110.1); (sc. Antonius Iulianus) Doctrina quoque ista
utiliore ac delectabili veterumque elegantiarum cura et memoria multa fuit. (Gel.
1.4.1); Pares enim quodam modo coiere cum paribus, Alamanni robusti et celsiores,
milites usu nimio dociles. (Amm. 16.12.47)
90 Latin has also two prefixes of adjectives and adverbs that indicate high intensity: per- and prae-. See
André (1951) and Cuzzolin (2011: 643–6).
91 See TLL s.v. magis 73.47ff. Cic. Att. 12.38a.1 is usually emended.
92 See TLL s.v. magis 72.43ff.
774 Comparison
The entity or entities in comparison with which an entity possesses the highest degree
of a certain property is regularly expressed by the partitive genitive (see § 11.54) or the
preposition ex (see § 11.68). Examples are (d) and (e)–(f), respectively.93
(d) . . . propterea quod Ariovistus . . . tertiam . . . partem agri Sequani, qui esset
optimus totius Galliae, occupavisset . . .
(‘. . . because Ariovistus has seized a third of the territory of the Sequani, which is the
best in all Gaul . . .’ Caes. Gal. 1.31.10)
(e) Acerrimum autem ex omnibus nostris sensibus esse sensum videndi.
(‘That the keenest of all our senses is the sense of sight . . .’ Cic. de Orat. 2.357)
(f) Ex tempestatibus vero optimae aequales sunt, sive frigidae sive calidae.
(‘But of weather conditions the best are those which are settled, whether cold or
hot . . .’ Cels. 2.1.2)
Superlative forms can be combined with various expressions, such as the scalar par-
ticles etiam ‘even’, vel ‘quite’, ‘altogether’, and ne . . . quidem, as in (g)–(i),94 the adverbs
of degree quam ( potest) in ( j) and longe in (k), and the ablative of measure multo
(see § 20.10) in (l). Another combination is shown in (m), where the numeral unus,
functioning as a secondary predicate, indicates the uniqueness of the high degree
of intensity.95
(g) Omnes enim ad pericula propulsanda concurrimus et qui non aperte inimici
sumus etiam alienissimis in capitis periculis amicissimorum officia et studia
praestamus.
(‘We all rush to repel danger and those of us who are not open enemies fulfil the
obligations and good offices of the closest friendship even in the case of total strangers
when their civil rights are in danger.’ Cic. Mur. 45)
(h) Huius domus est vel optuma Messanae . . .
(‘His house is perhaps the finest in Messana . . .’ Cic. Ver. 4.3)
(i) . . . ne minimam quidem moram interposuisti quin quam primum maximo
gaudio et gratulatione frueremur.
(‘. . . you did not let even the slightest of intervals delay our enjoyment of so great a
cause for happiness and congratulation.’ Cic. Phil. 10.1)
( j) Pabulum aridum, quod condideris in hieme<m>, quam maxime
conservato . . .
(‘Save as carefully as possible the dry fodder that you have stored against winter . . .’
Cato Agr. 30)
93 For other prepositions that can be used in the context of superlatives, see Torrego (1998) on praeter
and Cuzzolin (2011: 649–51).
94 For the use of scalar particles with superlatives, see Bertocchi and Maraldi (2012: 12–15), from
whom some of the examples are taken.
95 For further expressions with quam, see TLL s.v. magis 75.15ff.; 76.20ff.
The superlative and related expressions 775
Instead of quam alone, illustrated by ( j) above, and which is possibly the origin of that
usage, quam is also used as a relative adverb ‘to which extent’ in ‘qualifying’ clauses
(see § 16.83 and § 18.27) with the verb possum, as in (n)—modifying an adverb in the
superordinate clause—and (o), modifying the adjective of a noun phrase. The use of
quam in (n) can be compared with the relative manner adverb ut in (p).96
(n) . . . teque ut quam primum possim videam emortuam.
(‘. . . and that I may see you dead as quickly as possible.’ Pl. Trin. 42)
(o) Locum quam optimum et apertissimum et stercorosissimum poteris . . . eum
locum bipalio vertito . . .
(‘The best, most open and most highly fertilized land you can (sc. find for this pur-
pose), turn this with a trench spade . . .’ Cato Agr. 46.1)
96 For a discussion of quam, see Manfredini (2018). For further examples of quam, see OLD s.v. § 7; for
ut, see OLD s.v. § 15b.
776 Comparison
Supplement:
Concede huc, mea nata, ab istoc quam potest longissime. (Pl. Men. 834—NB: imper-
sonal potest); . . . quam potui maximis itineribus ad Amanum exercitum duxi. (Cic.
Fam. 15.4.7)
. . . ut potui accuratissime te tuamque causam tutatus sum . . . (Cic. Fam. 5.17.2)
CHAPTER 21
Secondary predicates
¹ In LSS, Chapter 8 these constituents are called ‘praedicativa’. Secondary predicates have received consid-
erable attention in the last few decades, both in Latin linguistics (see LSS, ch. 8, with references, Longrée (1989),
Müller (1990), a collection of articles and discussion in Touratier (ed.) (1991), Pinkster (1991a; 1992—on
Celsus), Heberlein (1996), Hoffmann (1999)) and in general linguistics. For a survey of the construction in
the world’s languages and the variety of terminology, see Himmelmann (1986) and Himmelmann and
Schultze-Berndt (2005). A common term in general linguistics is ‘converb’ (see Hoffmann 1999, also in:
2018a: 71–86). These expressions are called ‘supplementive (adjective and participle) clauses’ in Quirk et al.
(1985: 424–6; 1124–7). They are part of ‘nonfinite and verbless adverbial clauses’ (ibid.: 1120).
² An entirely different analysis of the sequence, in which maesti is taken as a substantival head and ii
qui ab Alesia processerant as the attribute, is extremely unattractive from a semantic point of view.
The Oxford Latin Syntax. Harm Pinkster, Oxford University Press (2021). © Harm Pinkster.
DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780199230563.003.0021
Secondary predicates
In (b), omnes is optional, just as maesti in (a): it is related to the object quos, with
which it agrees in number, gender, and case, but is not an attribute of quos. It indicates
the number of people Agesilaus defeated. (Here, too, taking quos as the attribute of
substantival omnes is very unattractive.) In (c), flens is also an optional constituent: it
agrees with the relative pronoun quae, which is the subject of the clause. It cannot be
taken as the attribute of the pronoun.
Since maesti in (a) resembles a satellite in that it is an optional constituent of the
sentence, it is usually taken as an adverbial constituent (often described as an adjec-
tive used instead of a manner adverb). Unlike the morphologically related adverbs
maeste and maestiter, however, it does not specify the action of the verb se receperunt:
the people did not retreat in a sad manner, they were sad while retreating. In some
grammatical traditions, notably the Dutch, maesti is regarded as ‘double-connected’,
with both the subject and the verb; but, as was said above, there is no confirmation of
the latter connexion. The adverb-like approach does not at all work for omnes in (b):
how could it be adverbially related to vicit? Similarly, the woman in (c) is not leaving
in a crying manner. A more detailed discussion of the relationship between adjectives
and adverbs is given in § 21.20.
The secondary predicates in (a) are valid at the time referred to by the verb of the
clause to which they belong. In (a) maesti is simultaneous with se receperunt, which
refers to a time before the time of speaking (it is part of a speech given by Minucius).
In (c), the action of the present participle flens is simultaneous with abiit, the depart-
ure of the muliercula, which itself occurs before the time of speaking. Another example
of simultaneity is (d), wherein consul and quaestorem indicate the social position of
ego and quem, respectively, at the time of the action marked by the pluperfect ornaram.
When the secondary predicate is a perfect participle, as in (e), the reference point of
the action is simultaneous with the time of the main verb considunt, but the action
itself is anterior to the time marked by the main verb (for ‘reference point’, see § 7.2
and § 7.4). Note that these temporal notions are not relevant for quantifiers, such as
omnes in (b) (for further discussion, see § 21.23).
(d) . . . is tribunus plebis quem ego maximis beneficiis quaestorem consul ornaram . . .
(‘. . . that tribune of the people whom, when I was consul and he quaestor, I honoured
with extraordinary kindness . . .’ Cic. Red. Pop. 12)
(e) Ipsi profecti a palude in ripa Sequanae e regione Lutetiae contra Labieni cas-
tra considunt.
(‘After they themselves had set out from the marsh, they halted on the bank of the
Seine opposite Lutetia over against the camp of Labienus.’ Caes. Gal. 7.58.6)
much less frequent until the Augustan period. Certain adjectives and nouns can also
be used as secondary predicate. Constituents from these categories agree with the
entity that they expand in case, number, and gender. They cannot always be distin-
guished easily from other optional and obligatory agreeing constituents, such as
attributes and subject or object complements. However, there are also non-agreeing
secondary predicates. An example is the ablative constituent defaecato . . . animo in (f)
(usually called an ‘ablative of description’, see § 11.63, also § 21.12). An example of a
relative clause functioning as secondary predicate is (g), repeated from § 18.16 (see
§ 21.15).
(f) Nunc defaecato demum animo egredior domo . . .
(‘Now that I’ve regained a clear mind at last I’m leaving the house . . .’ Pl. Aul. 79)
(g) I, Palaestrio, / aurum, ornamenta, vestem, pretiosa omnia / duc adiutores
tecum ad navim qui ferant.
(‘Go, Palaestrio, and take helpers with you to take the gold, jewellery, clothing, and all
the valuables to the ship.’ Pl. Mil. 1301–3)
³ For this entire note, see Cabrillana (2010b), where some statistics can be found as well. For the diffi-
culty of distinguishing secondary predicates from subject and object complements, see Cabrillana
(2019b).
Secondary predicates
The most common subclass of adjectives that can be used as secondary predicate
describes a non-permanent or transient mental or physical condition of the entity to
which they are related (see § 3.7).⁴ Examples are (a)–(d). In (a)–(c), the secondary
predicate is related to the subject; in (d), to the object. Ex. (c) shows an inanimate
subject. When the adjectival secondary predicate is related to the subject of the clause,
it can often be replaced by the corresponding adverb, but with a difference in meaning
(see § 21.1 and § 21.20). Replacement is obviously out of the question if the adjective
is related to a non-subject constituent, as in (d).
(a) Primumdum, quom tu es aucta liberis / quomque bene provenisti salva,
gaudeo.
(‘First of all, I’m happy that you’ve been blessed with a child and that you’ve pulled
through safe and sound.’ Pl. Truc. 384–5)
(b) . . . Neptuno / laetus lubens laudes ago . . .
(‘. . . to Neptune . . . I joyfully and happily offer praise . . .’ Pl. Trin. 819–20)
⁴ For collections of examples, see K.-St.: I.234ff. and Lundström (1982: 50–2). For dactylic poets, see
Priess (1909).
Constituents functioning as secondary predicate
(c) Anio Novus . . . excipitur ex flumine quod . . . etiam sine pluviarum iniuria
limosum et turbulentum fluit.
(‘The New Anio . . . takes its water from the river, which . . . even without the effect of
rainstorms, is muddy and turbid.’ Fron. Aq. 15.1)
(d) Sed laetum eum atque fidentem et subole et disciplina domus Fortuna destituit.
(‘But in the midst of all his joy and hopes in his numerous and well-regulated family,
his fortune failed him.’ Suet. Aug. 65.1—tr. Thomson)
Supplement (in alphabetical order by adjective)
With the subject: Non ita ut sperarunt mali . . . alacris exsultat improbitas in victoria.
(Cic. Att. 1.16.7); Tum tu insiste audax hostium muris . . . (Liv. 5.16.10); . . . omnes
avidi spectant ad carceris oras . . . (Enn. Ann. 85V=80S); Ergo avidus muros optatae
molior urbis . . . (Verg. A. 3.132); (sc. puer) . . . citus e cunis exsilit . . . (Pl. Am. 1115);
Iamque mari magno classis cita / texitur . . . (Enn. scen. 65–6V=43–4J); . . . ne crudus
sumat medicamentum. (Larg. 122); Vexasti negotiatores. Inviti enim Romam raroque
decedunt. (Cic. Ver. 3.96—NB: coordination with adverb); Invita in hoc loco versa-
tur oratio. (Cic. N.D. 3.85); Ille laetus in castra Iugurthae proficiscitur. (Sal. Jug.
112.2); Lepidus vivis.⁵ (Pl. Trin. 390); . . . cum totius Italiae concursus, quem mea
salus concitarat, facti illius gloriam lubens agnovisset . . . (Cic. Mil. 38); Ego, qui tuo
maerore maceror, / macesco, consenesco et tabesco miser. (Pl. Capt. 133–4); (sc.
Marius) . . . tum vero multus (‘assiduous’—OLD s.v. § 6) atque ferox instare. (Sal. Jug.
84.1); (sc. Cupido) . . . qui plurimus urget et urit pectora nostra . . . (Ov. Met. 9.624–5—
NB: adverb does not fit within the metre); . . . inopiam quaeque ipsi inter se fremere
occulti (v.l. occulte) soliti erant conquesti . . . (Liv. 25.28.6); Et cum audissent, turbae
secutae sunt eum pedestres de civitatibus. (Vulg. Mat. 14:13—NB: some of the Greek
manuscripts read .pqzj instead of the accepted reading .pqŎ); . . . campos quos rapi-
dus amnis ex praecipitio vel, cum per plana infusus est, placidus interfluit. (Sen. Con.
2.1.13); Nemo enim fere saltat sobrius, nisi forte insanit . . . (Cic. Mur. 13); Maxumum
vero argumentum est naturam ipsam de inmortalitate animorum tacitam iudi-
care . . . (Cic. Tusc. 1.31); . . . errare videbar / tardaque vestigare et quaerere te neque
posse / corde capessere. (Enn. Ann. 41–3V=40–2S); . . . qui Styga tristem non tristis
videt . . . (Sen. Ag. 607); Sic quoque, quotiens imbres superveniunt, (sc. aqua) turbida
pervenit in urbem. (Fron. Aq. 15.3); (sc. Iugurtha) . . . varius incertusque agitabat.
(Sal. Jug. 74.1); . . . hoc · monumentum / cum · aedificio / me · vivus⁶ · feci · mihi
· et / Calviae / Asclepiadi / coniugi (CIL VI.8455.9–14 (Rome, ad 290?))
With the object (passive subject): Villam aedificandam si locabis novam ab solo,
faber haec faciat oportet: . . . . (Cato Agr. 14.1); . . . ipsaque sibi imbecillitas indulget in
altumque provehitur imprudens . . . (Cic. Tusc. 4.42); (sc. fructus) Qui tamen nisi
primo quoque tempore maturi legantur, ad terram decidunt. (Col. 3.2.22); Quis te
illis diebus sobrium . . . vidit? (Cic. Pis. 22); Nam quia vos tranquillos video, gaudeo
et volup est mihi. (Pl. Am. 958); Quos (sc. legatos) cum tristioris vidisset, triginta
minas accepit . . . (Cic. Tusc. 5.91); . . . te vegetum nobis in Graecia siste . . . (Cic. Att. 10.16.6);
⁵ Instances of secondary predicates with the verb vivo are quite frequent in comedy and in (Augustan)
poetry. See Heerdegen (1913) and Hofmann (1924: 81). See also § 4.97 on copular verbs.
⁶ For me vivo in a similar context, see § 16.117.
Secondary predicates
(sc. columbae) Eligendae vero sunt ad educationem neque vetulae nec nimium
novellae sed corporis maximi . . . (Col. 8.8.7—NB: coordination); Quos Caesaris
equites consecuti partim interfecerunt, partim vivorum sunt potiti. (B. Afr. 50—NB:
parallelism)
⁷ For exceptional caece, see TLL s.v. caecus 47.47. Tert. Cult. fem. 2.11.3 has the comparative form
pauperius incedit (sc. mulier quaedam). Vitae pauperis is attested at Luc. 5.527–8.
Constituents functioning as secondary predicate
( j) Nam cum hic Sex. Roscius esset Ameriae, T. autem iste Roscius Romae, cum
hic filius assiduus in praediis esset . . ., iste (ipse cj. Eberhard) autem frequens
Romae esset, occiditur . . . Sex. Roscius.
(‘For when this man Sextus Roscius was at Ameria, but that Titus Roscius at Rome;
while the former—the son—was diligently attending to the farm . . ., but the other was
constantly at Rome, Sextus Roscius . . . was slain.’ Cic. S. Rosc. 18)
(k) . . . quem Vergobretum appellant Haedui, qui creatur annuus et vitae necisque
in suos habet potestatem . . .
(‘. . . whom the Haedui call Vergobret, who is elected for a period of one year and
holds the power of life and death over his fellow-countrymen.’ Caes. Gal. 1.16.5)
Supplement (in alphabetical order by adjective):
Position in space expressions: Stratippoclem aiunt, Periphanei filium, / apsentem
curavisse ut fieret libera. (Pl. Epid. 508–9); Statim conplures cum telis in hunc faciunt
de loco superiore impetum; adversi raedarium occidunt. (Cic. Mil. 29); Quos omnes
dextra Dryantis / perculit adversos. (Ov. Met. 12.311–12); Trabes earum liminares ita
altae ponantur ut altitudines latitudinibus sint aequales. (Vitr. 6.3.4); Hannibal pau-
cis propugnatoribus in vallo portisque positis ceteros confertos in media castra
recepit . . . (Liv. 21.59.4); Quemquem visco offenderant, / tam crebri ad terram recci-
debant quam pira. (Pl. Poen. 483–5); . . . diversae duae legiones . . . in ipsis fluminis
ripis proeliabantur. (Caes. Gal. 2.23.3); Nam ut quis misericordia in Germanicum et
praesumpta suspicione aut favore in Pisonem pronior diversi interpreta<ba>ntur (sc.
the facts). (Tac. Ann. 2.73.4); Tamen obvias mihi litteras . . . mittas. (Cic. Att. 6.5.1);
Utinam mi[hi] esset aliquid hic quo nunc me praecipitem darem! (Ter. An. 606); Rex
Antiochus . . . praeceps e provincia populi Romani exturbatus est. (Cic. Ver. 4.67);
Egone quid velim? / Cum milite istoc praesens absens ut sies. (Ter. Eu. 191–2);
Miraculo primo esse Romanis qui proximi steterant, ut nudari latera sua sociorum
digressu senserunt. (Liv. 1.27.7); Genus erat pugnae militum illorum ut . . . rari dis-
persique pugnarent . . . (Caes. Civ. 1.44.1); . . . cumque / rara per ignaros errent anima-
lia montis. (Verg. Ecl. 6.39–40); Ipsa Paphum sublimis abit sedesque revisit / laeta
suas . . . (Verg. A. 1.415–16); Terrebat eum natura mortalium avida imperi . . . prae-
terea opportunitas suae liberorumque aetatis, quae etiam mediocris viros spe prae-
dae transvorsos agit. (Sal. Jug. 6.3)
Time expressions: Cum complicarem hanc epistulam noctuabundus, ad me venit
cum epistula tua tabellarius. (Cic. Att. 12.1.2—NB: if noctuabundus is correct; see
Shackleton Bailey ad loc.⁸); Stare solitus Socrates dicitur pertinaci statu perdius atque
pernox . . . (Gel. 2.1.2—NB: disputable, see TLL s.v. perdius)
A fourth subclass encompasses adjectives that indicate relative position (in space or
in time), such as inferior ‘lower’, and ordinal numerals like primus ‘first’. Examples are
(l) and (m).⁹ These cannot be replaced by corresponding adverbs.
⁸ See also Watt (1962), who proposes to read noctu cunctabundus and takes it with the cum clause, as
I print it.
⁹ For the partitive use of some of these adjectives, e.g. medius, see § 11.77.
Secondary predicates
(l) (sc. P. Quinctius) At si in causa pari discedere inferior videretur, tamen esset
non mediocriter conquerendum.
(‘But if, in a cause where the merits were equal, he seemed to come off the worse, that
would be something to complain of in no small degree.’ Cic. Quinct. 59)
(m) Primus cubitu surgat, postremus cubitum eat.
(‘He must be the first out of bed, the last to go to bed.’ Cato Agr. 5.5)
Supplement (in alphabetical order by adjective or numeral):
. . . alvos, quas ideo videntur medias facere angustissimas, ut figuram imitentur
earum. (Var. R. 3.16.15); Iacet inter eos satis patens clausus in medio campus herbi-
dus aquosusque, per quem medium iter est. (Liv. 9.2.7); . . . etiam sapientibus cupido
gloriae novissima exuitur. (Tac. Hist. 4.6.1); . . . princepsque decima legio per tribu-
nos militum ei gratias egit . . . (Caes. Gal. 1.41.2); (sc. Hannibal) Princeps in proelium
ibat, ultimus conserto proelio excedebat. (Liv. 21.4.8); . . . multo illo adveni prior . . . (Pl.
Aul. 705); Abi tu sane superior . . . (Pl. St. 696); Tertius ad hos Favonius accessit.
(Cael. Fam. 8.11.2)
Other adjectives can be used as well, especially by poets (see § 21.4). Examples of
evaluative adjectives from Cicero can be seen in (n) and (o). These cannot be replaced
by their corresponding adverbs.
(n) Carus omnibus exspectatusque venies.
(‘Your arrival is eagerly expected, and you will find an affectionate welcome from
everyone.’ Cic. Fam. 16.7)
(o) Fac bellus revertare . . .
(‘Mind you come back in good shape . . .’ Cic. Fam. 16.18.1)
¹⁰ For the use of adverbs by dactylic poets, see Priess (1909: 10–38, especially 36–8); in general, Axelson
(1945: 62–3), Maurach (1983: 103–5). Håkanson (1986) has detailed statistics about the use of adverbs in
a large number of poetical texts and in prose (Cicero, Livy, and Seneca the Younger). Ovid has recte twice;
Horace, often (c.35 times).
Constituents functioning as secondary predicate
expression using a noun in the ablative could also replace an adverb such as astu
instead of astute in (a), and dolo instead of dolose in (b) (for these ablatives, see
§ 10.44).¹¹ Another alternative is the use of adjectives as secondary predicates, as with
citus instead of cito in (c)—avoided in epic poetry from Ennius onwards¹²—and lenta
instead of lente in (d).
(a) Inde Mago procul infensam (sc. Aeneas) contenderat hastam: / ille astu
subit . . .
(‘Next at Magus from a distance he had aimed the hostile lance. Deftly he cowers . . .’
Verg. A. 10.521–2)
(b) Tu faciem illius noctem non amplius unam / falle dolo et notos pueri puer
indue vultus . . .
(‘For but a single night, feign by craft his form and, boy that you are, don the boy’s
familiar face . . .’ Verg. A. 1.683–4)
(c) Volat ille per aëra magnum / remigio alarum ac Libyae citus astitit oris.
(‘Through the wide air he flies with the stroke of his wings, and speedily alights on
the Libyan coasts.’ Verg. A. 1.300–1)
(d) Lenta bibis.
(‘Unmoved, you drink.’ Prop. 2.33b.25)
In (c) and (d), were the adverbs cito and lente used, we would be dealing with subject-
oriented manner adjuncts (see § 10.43). One might, therefore, say that the authors
chose to emphasize a different perspective when assigning the properties ‘fast’ and
‘slow’: they attached them to the persons that act as the subjects of the clauses and not
to the verbs.¹³
(ii) Among the adjectives that poets use as secondary predicates there are quite a few
for which a corresponding adverb did not exist, or did not exist at their time. Examples
are amens in (e), fervidus in (f),¹⁴ and insontes in (g).¹⁵ It is not surprising to find these
as secondary predicate, since they are semantically close to the subclasses of adjectives
discussed above.
(e) Arma amens capio.
(‘Frantic, I seize arms.’ Verg. A. 2.314)
(f) Ocius¹⁶ ensem / Aeneas viso Tyrrheni sanguine laetus / eripit a femine et
trepidanti fervidus instat.
(‘Quickly Aeneas, gladdened by the sight of the Tuscan’s blood, snatches his sword
from the thigh and presses eagerly on his confused foe.’ Verg. A. 10.786–8)
(g) Proxima deinde tenent maesti loca qui sibi letum / insontes peperere manu . . .
(‘The region thereafter is held by those sad souls who in innocence wrought their
own death . . .’ Verg. A. 6.434–5—NB: maesti is also a secondary predicate, but not
translated as such)
There are also adjectives for which a corresponding adverb does exist, but one that
does not fit within the dactylic metre, such as turbidus in (h) and memor in (i). In
these examples, too, the use of the adjectives as a secondary predicate is not surpris-
ing, even though from the semantic point of view turbide and memoriter are not
impossible. This holds for most of the adjectives in this category, as listed by Priess.¹⁷
They are used not because the adverb was unavailable, but because they belong to the
semantic classes that are readily used as secondary predicate.
(h) At vero ingentem quatiens Mezentius hastam / turbidus ingreditur campo.
(‘But now Mezentius, brandishing his mighty spear, advances like a whirlwind on the
plain.’ Verg. A. 10.762–3)
(i) ‘Arcades, haec’, inquit, ‘memores mea dicta referte / Euandro.’
(‘Arcadians, give heed, and bear these words of mine back to Evander.’ Verg. A.
10.491–2)
(iii) There are two ways in which poets assign a property to their characters. One way
is to use attributes; the other is to use secondary predicates. Many descriptive adjec-
tives can be used both as an attribute and as a secondary predicate. This is shown by
( j) and (k).¹⁸ There can be no doubt that acer is an attribute in ( j),¹⁹ whereas in (k) it
can only be a secondary predicate: there is no head noun. Furthermore, the use of the
adverb acriter with insto is attested from Plautus onwards.²⁰ There are also ambiguous
situations in which the analyses of scholars may vary, as in (l). I take acer as an attribute
of Eryx²¹ and not, as others do, as a secondary predicate.
( j) Instat Mnestheus acerque Serestus . . .
(‘Mnestheus and valiant Serestus urge on the work . . .’ Verg. A. 9.171)
(k) Dum (sc. Aeneas) nititur acer et instat . . .
(‘While fiercely he tugs and strains . . .’ Verg. A. 12.783)
(l) . . . caestus / proiecit quibus acer Eryx in proelia suetus / ferre . . .
(‘. . . he threw the gauntlets in which fierce Eryx had so often raised his hands for
battle . . .’ Verg. A. 5.401–3—tr. Williams)
¹⁷ Twenty-eight adjectives in total in Priess (1909: 56–8). ¹⁸ See Priess (1909: 41).
¹⁹ Acerque Serestus also at A. 9.779 and 12.549. Virgil uses it as an epitheton ornans.
²⁰ For example, Pl. Cas. 340. See TLL s.v. acer 363.44ff.
²¹ I use the translation by Williams. But Priess (1909: 41) states that this is sine dubio ‘beyond doubt’ an
instance of a secondary predicate.
Constituents functioning as secondary predicate
²² It is taken as a secondary predicate, more or less equivalent to the manner adverb ferociter, by
Heberlein (1996: 355–7). (He quotes the passage incompletely: Itali feroces pugnabant.) Ferox pugna is
attested from Livy 22.29.4 onwards.
²³ So Eden ad Verg. A. 8.30. Contrast this with (s) below.
²⁴ So, among others, Löfstedt (1942/1933: II.368–72). Scholars observe that the sound is produced by
the cardo, and not by the postes. Therefore Hutchinson ad loc. proposes to read rauco (and also, following
Heinsius, subiti).
Secondary predicates
(r) Haec quia dulce canit flectitque facillima vocem, / oscula cantanti rapta
dedisse velim.
(‘Because this girl sings sweetly and modulates her voice most deftly, I would give
stolen kisses to her as she sings.’ Ov. Am. 2.4.25–6)
Supplement (in alphabetical order by adjective):
Non amet hanc vitam quisquis me non amat, opto. / Vivat et urbanis albus in officiis.
(Mart. 1.55.13–14); Vidisti quo Turnus equo, quibus ibat in armis / aureus. (Verg. A.
9.269–70); (sc. Entellus) . . . atque ingens media consistit harena. (Verg. A. 5.423);
Haec ubi dicta dedit, portis sese extulit ingens / telum immane manu quatiens. (Verg.
A. 12. 441–2)
Generally speaking, when the choice is available between an adjective and an adverb
poets and prose writers who follow their example prefer to use the adjective. In addition,
they use adjectives to replace adverbs outside of the main classes that have been
discussed in § 21.3, especially in place of those adverbs with functions other than that
of manner adjunct. The most striking examples are those in which adjectives are used
to express a semantic relation of time or place, as in (s) and (t), a phenomenon either
imitating or inspired by Greek practice.²⁵ In these cases the adjectives correspond to
adjuncts that situate the event in time or place, respectively. Note in (s) the parallelism
with the adverb mane (navus is a ‘normal’ secondary predicate). In (u), opportunus
corresponds to opportune, a subjective evaluation disjunct, already used by Plautus
(see § 10.104).²⁶
(s) Navus mane forum et vespertinus pete tectum . . .
(‘In your diligence get you to the Forum in the morning, to your home in the even-
ing . . .’ Hor. Ep. 1.6.20)
(t) Pransus non avide, quantum interpellet inani / ventre diem durare, domesti-
cus otior.
(‘After a slight luncheon, just enough to save me from an all-day fast, I idle away time
at home.’ Hor. S. 1.6.127–8)
(u) Numquam potuisti mihi / magis opportunus adven<ire quam> advenis.
(‘You could never have come to me at a better time than this.’ Pl. Mos. 573–4)
Supplement:
Time expressions: ‘Sollemnis’, inquit, ‘dies a primis cunabulis huius urbis conditus
crastinus advenit . . . (Apul. Met. 2.31.2); . . . alii viam inter Mosellamque flumen tam
improvisi adsiluere ut . . . (Tac. Hist. 4.77.1); Nec minus Aeneas se matutinus agebat.
(Verg. A. 8.465); Non lupus insidias explorat ovilia circum / nec gregibus nocturnus
obambulat. (Verg. G. 3.537–8); Ultro acies inferre parant, armisque coruscas /
nocturni texere faces, audaxque iuventus / erupit. (Luc. 3.498–500); (sc. consules)
Frumentatum exeunti Hannibali diversis locis opportuni aderant . . . (Liv. 22.32.2);
²⁵ See K.-G.: I.273–6. ²⁶ For further examples, see TLL s.v. opportunus 775.74ff.
Constituents functioning as secondary predicate
Nunc sera querelis / haud iustis adsurgis et inrita iurgia iactas. (Verg. A. 10.94–5); . . .
serae avaritia luxuriaque immigraverint . . . (Liv. 1.pr.11)
Finally, there are also instances of adjectives that are used as secondary predicate for
which a derivationally related adverb does exist but cannot be used as a manner
adverb with the verb of the clause. An example is (v).²⁷
(v) (sc. Turnus) . . . saltuque superbus / emicat in currum . . .
(‘. . . and with a bound he leaps proudly into his chariot . . .’ Verg. A. 12.326–7)
Nouns (and noun phrases) that indicate age or social position are regularly used as
secondary predicate. Examples of age expressions are (a) and (b); (c) and (d) are examples
of expressions pertaining to social position. Another type of noun (phrase) is shown in
(e), a humorous extension of the possibilities by Cicero. Note in (f) the parallelism of
the secondary predicate puerum and the position in time adjunct in senecta.
²⁷ It is called ‘adj. with adverbial force’ by Tarrant ad loc. (see Pinkster 2015: 177).
²⁸ For a discussion of these adjective phrases, see Heberlein (1996: 360–2), from whom three examples
in the Supplement are taken.
Secondary predicates
adjunct); Ast ego, quae divum incedo regina Iovisque / et soror et coniunx . . . (Verg.
A. 1.46–7); Huic et paternum hospitium cum Pompeio et simultas cum Curione
intercedebat, quod tribunus plebis legem promulgaverat . . . (Caes. Civ. 2.25.4); Foris
victores domi trucidamur . . . (Sen. Suas. 6.5—NB: foris is attribute with victor; see
§ 11.69 fin.); Sin autem emimus quem vilicum imponeremus . . . (Cic. Planc. 62)
Other: . . . nec te magis in culpa defensorem mihi paravi quam praedicatorem meri-
torum meorum esse volui. (Planc. Fam. 10.7.1); Fuit · Atistia · uxor · mihei /
femina · opituma · veixsit (CIL I2.1206.1–2 (Rome, c. 50–20 bc)); Et Crassus ‘nox
te’, inquit, ‘nobis, Antoni, expolivit hominemque reddidit.’ Cic. de Orat. 2.40); Terrai
<iam> odium ambulat . . . (Pl. Bac. 820); Non te Penelopen difficilem procis /
Tyrrhenus genuit parens. (Hor. Carm. 3.10.11–12); . . . ipse novas adsignationes insti-
tuit et repentinus Sulla nobis exoritur. (Cic. Agr. 3.10—NB: unless exoritur is taken
as a copular verb; see § 4.97)
³⁰ Laughton (1964: 4) gives percentages of the case forms of perfect participles in a sample of Cicero:
nominative and subject-accusative 75%, accusative 22%, dative 1.5%, ablative 1.5%, genitive negligible.
³¹ A survey of arguments and satellites accompanying participles in Tac. Ann. 1 can be found in
Riquelme (2005).
³² For the participium coniunctum, see Vester (1977).
Secondary predicates
with the action conveyed by the main verb (occiditur—a historic present). In the
examples, arguments and satellites of the participles are shown in italics.³³
(a) Salvere me iubes, quoi tu abiens offers morbum?
(‘You’re telling me to be well? By going away you make me ill.’ Pl. As. 593)
(b) (sc. Dionysius) . . . qui cultros metuens tonsorios candente carbone sibi adure-
bat capillum.
(‘. . . who in fear of the barber’s razor used to have his hair singed off with a glowing
coal.’ Cic. Off. 2.25)
(c) . . . Lucius Petrosidius aquilifer . . . pro castris fortissime pugnans occiditur.
(‘. . . Lucius Petrosidius, the standard-bearer . . . was killed in front of the camp while
he was fighting most courageously.’ Caes. Gal. 5.37.5)
(d) At Homerus . . . Laerten . . . colentem agrum et eum stercorantem facit.
(‘But Homer . . . represents Laërtes as . . . cultivating his farm and manuring it.’ Cic.
Sen. 54)
The perfect participle is commonly used to express either anteriority or the state
resulting from a prior action or process. This is illustrated by (e)–(g). The future parti-
ciple, expressing posteriority, is used much less frequently. Examples are (h), the first
attested one, and (i).³⁴ It becomes more common in the Augustan period, often to
express an intention.
(e) Acceptae bene et commode eximus intus . . .
(‘After we’ve been entertained well and pleasurably we’re going outside . . .’ Pl. Cas. 855)
(f) . . . hanc adepti victoriam in perpetuum se fore victores confidebant.
(‘. . . having obtained this victory, they thought they would be victorious forever.’ Caes.
Gal. 5.39.4)
(g) Persae etiam (sc. mortuos) cera circumlitos condunt . . .
(‘The Persians even bury their dead covered with wax . . .’ Cic. Tusc. 1.108)
(h) Qui prodeunt dissuasuri ne hanc legem accipiatis . . .
(‘Those who come forward to persuade you not to accept this law . . .’ Gracch. orat. 44)
(i) P. Servilius . . . adest de te sententiam laturus.
(‘Publius Servilius is here to pass judgement on you.’ Cic. Ver. 1.56)
There are no lexical restrictions on the type of verbs that can be used as secondary
predicate. One lexical group on which Cicero draws frequently in his use of the
³³ For verbs of presenting like facio in (d), fingo, induco, pingo, etc. + object and secondary predicate,
see TLL s.v. fingo 117.40ff., Laughton (1964: 51), and Szantyr (1970: 31–2). Lambertz (1982: 375), by con-
trast, regards such cases as causative constructions. This is also the position of Hoffmann (2016a: 47–8).
³⁴ For a discussion of the earliest examples of future participles, see Laughton (1964: 118–21); for
Seneca, see Westman (1961: 90–134). For the old Latin gospels, see Burton (2000: 184–5); for the Passio
Perp., see Adams (2016: 330–1); for further examples, see K.-St.: I.760–2.
Constituents functioning as secondary predicate
present participle (about one-third of all instances) encompasses physical and mental
activities or states, e.g. flens ‘crying’, lacrimans ‘weeping’, maerens ‘mourning’,
exspectans ‘full of expectation’, and the like. In Cicero, perfect participles predomin-
antly express either the motive, urge, or mental state involved in realizing the state of
affairs of the main predication, or a possible obstacle in realizing this state of affairs,
e.g. hoc commoti dolore ‘moved by this sadness’, benignitate aut ambitione adductus
‘induced to do so by beneficence or ambition’, metu coacti ‘forced by fear’, voluptate
victi ‘conquered by desire’.³⁵ In Caesar’s Commentarii there is a marked increase of the
use of participles instead of finite subordinate clauses and this remained a feature of
historiography in general.³⁶
Supplement:
Present participles: Quia tui amans abeuntis egeo. (Pl. As. 591); Nihil est lucri quod
me hodie facere mavelim, / quam illum cubantem cum illa opprimere . . . (Pl. Bac.
859–60); . . . duae mulierculae / hic in fano Veneris signum flentes amplexae
tenent . . . (Pl. Rud. 559–60); Et magis par fuerat me vobis dare cenam advenienti-
bus . . . (Pl. St. 512); Stantem stanti savium / dare amicum amicae? (Pl. St. 765–6);
Aspectabat virtutem legionis suai / expectans si mussaret [dubitaret] quae denique
pausa / pugnandi fieret aut duri <finis> laboris. (Enn. Ann. 343–5V=326–8S);
Rex . . . in foro, inquam, Syracusis flens ac deos hominesque contestans clamare
coepit . . . (Cic. Ver. 4.67); Quam vero utilitatem aut quem fructum petentes scire cupi-
mus illa, quae occulta nobis sunt, quo modo moveantur quibusque de causis ea
<quae> versantur in caelo? (Cic. Fin. 3.37—NB: the secondary predicate contains a
question);³⁷ Age, finge me quamvis εὐστομάχως haec ferentem. (Cic. Att. 9.5.2); . . . ut
gaudet insitiva decerpens pira . . . (Hor. Epod. 2.19); Mihi cumba volenti / solvitur . . .
(Prop. 4.11.69–70);³⁸ Ipsis patribus id volentibus laetisque contigerit . . . (Sen. Ben.
3.36.1—NB: coordination)
Perfect participles: . . . damnatus demum, vi coactus reddidit / mille et ducentos
Philippum. (Pl. Bac. 271–2); Filius meus illic apud vos servit captus Alide. (Pl. Capt.
330); Quippe forma inpulsi nostra nos amatores colunt. (Ter. Hau. 389) . . . nequid
propter t<ua>m fidem decepta poteretur mali. (Ter. Ph. 469); Conclusam hic habeo
uxorem saevam. (Ter. Ph. 744); . . . id me neque metu neque calamitatis necessitudine
inductum facere. (Sis. hist. 98=104C); Vos eum regem inultum esse patiemini qui
legatum populi Romani, consularem, vinculis ac verberibus atque omni supplicio
excruciatum necavit? (Cic. Man. 11); Huic enim adsensi VII virum acta sustulimus.
(Cic. Phil. 6.14); . . . genus hominum . . . non prudentium consiliis compulsum potius
quam disertorum oratione delenitum se oppidis moenibusque saepsisse? (Cic. de
Orat. 1.36); Quae est igitur eius oratio qua facit eum Plato usum apud iudices iam
morte multatum? (Cic. Tusc. 1.97); Laudationem Porciae tibi misi correctam.
³⁵ For a list of participles used by historians, arranged by meaning, see Chausserie-Laprée (1969: 307).
³⁶ For the development of Caesar’s style and his position in the development of the style of
historiography, see Schlicher (1933; 1936).
³⁷ Laughton (1964: 43–4) cites eight examples from Cicero’s later works, suggesting that Cicero may
have tried to introduce a common Greek usage into the Latin language.
³⁸ This use of dative volenti is different from the use of the dative in (q) and the Supplement below it.
The same goes for the next example.
Secondary predicates
(Cic. Att. 13.48.2); . . . homines locupletes . . . conductos aut emptos habent saltus.
(Var. R. 3.1.8); . . . matris, / quae misera in gnata deperdita laeta<batur> . . . (Catul.
64.118–19); Aventino fulmine ipse (sc. Romulus) ictus regnum per manus tradidit.
(Liv. 1.3.9); Hunc statum rerum Hannibal Tarenti relinquit regressus ipse in hiberna.
(Liv. 25.11.20—NB: for the non-anterior sense of the participle, see § 7.81);
Sermones . . . non nisi scriptos et e libello habebat . . . (Suet. Aug. 84.2); Quanti velis,
quanti aequum putaveris, quanti aestimaveris habebis emptum. (Gaius dig. 18.1.35.1)
Future participles: . . . si quidem etiam vos duo tales ad quintum miliarium, quo
nunc ipsum unde se recipienti, quid agenti, quid acturo? (Cic. Att. 8.9.2); . . . capit
consilium satius esse sibi suoque regno subsidio ire quam, dum alios adiuturus pro-
ficisceretur, ipse suo regno expulsus forsitan utraque re expelleretur. (B. Afr. 25.4);
Ubi inluxit, egreditur castris Romanus vallum invasurus ni copia pugnae fieret. (Liv.
3.60.8); Duae classes infestae circa promunturium Pachynum stabant, ubi prima
tranquillitas maris in altum evexisset concursurae. (Liv. 25.27.10); Cogniturus de
filio Tarius advocavit in consilium Caesarem Augustum. (Sen. Cl. 1.15.3); Cui
umquam morituro non est relictum qua gemeret? (Sen. Dial. 5.19.3); Quis umquam
res suas quasi periturus aspexit? (Sen. Dial. 6.9.4); Rogo / libenter facias ut
venias / ad nos, iucundiorem mihi / <diem> interventu tuo factura, si /
<venia>s . . . (CEL appendix Vindol. γ (Vindolanda, c. ad 103);³⁹ . . . domum clam
refugit pro condicione temporum quieturus. (Suet. Jul. 16.1)
As the examples above show, both arguments and satellites can be used with participles
functioning as secondary predicate. When these participial constituents are heavy, the
sentence as a whole becomes more complex, requiring the speaker/writer to use means
which guarantee that the addressee will understand the message. Here we are faced
with the problem of not knowing the original intonation contour that structured the
pronunciation and interpretation of the sequences that we read. Nevertheless, certain
strategies to facilitate comprehension can be noted. In ( j), the secondary predicate is
placed at the beginning of the sentence because of the anaphoric phrases with hoc and
hac. The whole expression functions as a ‘setting’ (see § 22.15) for the remainder of the
sentence. In (k), the secondary predicates with perpurgatus and retractandus are placed
at the end of the sentence and they serve as more of an afterthought, resembling ‘tail’
constituents (see § 22.16). This placement is very common in historiography, especially
in the narrative parts.⁴⁰ A third strategy is shown in (l). Here, the two secondary
predicates are clearly marked by the correlative coordinators et . . . et. Individual authors
make their own stylistic choices when it comes to such strategies.
( j) Hoc consilio atque adeo hac amentia impulsi . . . eum iugulandum vobis tra-
diderunt.
(‘Urged on to such a degree by this plan and by this madness . . . they have handed the
man over to you to be put to death.’ Cic. S. Rosc. 29)
(k) Nunc mihi tertius ille locus est relictus orationis, de ambitus criminibus, per-
purgatus ab eis qui ante me dixerunt, a me, quoniam ita Murena voluit,
retractandus.
(‘It now remains for me to deal with the third topic of my speech—the charges of
bribery. It has already been entirely refuted by those who have spoken before me, but
it must still be discussed by me, since such is the will of Murena.’ Cic. Mur. 54)
(l) Postea polliceri et confirmare se et hoc peccato doctum et beneficio eorum qui
sibi ignoverint confirmatum omni tempore a tali ratione afuturum.
(‘After that he should promise and affirm that, taught by this error and strengthened
by the kindness of those who have pardoned him, he will forever after refrain from
such a course of conduct.’ Cic. Inv. 2.106)
The use of participles allows authors to condense information by reducing or avoiding
repetition of entities that are known from the context. Examples are (m)–(p). In (m),
the tragula ‘spear’ is maintained as the subject of the first sentence. In the following
sentence, the epistula to which perlectam refers was mentioned in the preceding con-
text as attached to the tragula and is therefore not explicitly restated. The implication
is that ille (sc. Cicero), the subject of recitat, had read this letter and then recited it. In
(n), the agent of accensos is the subject of the preceding adlocutus and the following
dimisit. In (o), it is irrelevant who the agents of coniecta and posita are. Ex. (p) shows
how Apuleius avoids repetition of the persons involved in the fight. In this way, parti-
ciples are an essential building-block for the periodical style.
(m) Haec (sc. tragula) casu ad turrim adhaesit neque a nostris biduo animad-
versa tertio die a quodam milite conspicitur, dempta ad Ciceronem defertur.
Ille perlectam (sc. epistulam) in conventu militum recitat maximaque omnes
laetitia adficit.
(‘By chance it stuck fast in the tower, and for two days was not noticed by our troops;
on the third day it was sighted by a soldier, taken down, and delivered to Cicero. After
he had read it through, he recited it at a parade of the troops, bringing the greatest
delight to all.’ Caes. Gal. 5.48.8–9)
(n) Quos (sc. ad duo milia peditum et ducentos equites) Poenus benigne adlocu-
tus (sc. est)⁴¹ et spe ingentium donorum accensos in civitates quemque suas
ad sollicitandos popularium animos dimisit.
(‘Hannibal addressed them (sc. some two thousand foot-soldiers and two hundred
horsemen) with fair words, and after encouraging them to hope for great rewards, sent
them off to their several states to solicit the support of their countrymen.’ Liv. 21.48.2)
(o) Item si legumina in vas cum ea aqua coniecta ad ignem posita celeriter per-
cocta fuerint, indicabunt aquam esse bonam et salubrem.
(‘Again, if vegetables, after they have been put in a vessel with water and boiled, are
soon cooked, they will show that the water is good and wholesome.’ Vitr. 8.4.2)
⁴¹ For ellipsis of forms of sum in Livy, see Briscoe (1981: 12–13). See also § 4.93.
Secondary predicates
(p) Ipse denique dux et signifer ceterorum validis me viribus adgressus ilico
manibus ambabus capillo adreptum ac retro reflexum effligere lapide gestit.
Quem dum sibi porrigi flagitat, certa manu percussum feliciter prosterno.
Ac mox alium pedibus meis mordicus inhaerentem per scapulas ictu tem-
perato tertiumque inprovide occurrentem pectore offenso peremo.
(‘Their general and standard-bearer himself attacked me on the spot with might and
main, snatched me by the hair with both hands, bent me backwards, and was prepar-
ing to slay me with a stone. While he was shouting for someone to hand him the
stone, I struck him with unerring hand and luckily laid him low. The second had
fastened his teeth into my legs, but I felled him with a nice blow between the shoulder-
blades, while the third I killed with a stroke straight through the chest as he ran
carelessly toward me.’ Apul. Met. 3.6.1–2)
Greek influence (notably by Thucydides) explains the use of the participles in
instances like (q).⁴²
(q) . . . vigilias ipse circumire . . . uti militibus exaequatus cum imperatore labor
volentibus esset.
(‘. . . he personally inspected the sentries . . . to make the soldiers willing to
endure labour shared equally by their commander he did his full share.’ Sal.
Jug. 100.4)
Supplement:
. . . quia neque plebi militia volenti putabatur et Marius aut belli usum aut studia volgi
amissurus. (Sal. Jug. 84.3); Grande periculum Lilybaeo maritimisque civitatibus esse
et quibusdam volentibus novas res fore. (Liv. 21.50.10); Et quibus bellum volentibus
erat probare exemplum ac recentis legati animum opperiri, cum Agricola . . . ire
obviam discrimini statuit. (Tac. Ag. 18.2); . . . ut quibusque bellum invitis aut cupien-
tibus erat . . . (Tac. Ann. 1.59.1—NB: coordination); Nunc quoque, si tibi fabulam
brevem libenti est audire, audi. (Fro. Fer. Als. 3.8); Nam et missis in hoc referre volen-
tibus erat mores Abios . . . (Itin. Alex. 95)
(b) . . . eo ipso die puer, cum hora undecima in publico valens visus esset, ante
noctem mortuus . . . est.
(‘. . . and on that very day the boy, though at the eleventh hour he had been seen in
public in good health, died before night.’ Cic. Clu. 27)
(c) Audi Paulum dicentem: ‘Ideo misericordiam consecutus sum . . .’
(‘Listen to Paul when he says: “Thus I attained mercy . . .”’ August. Serm. Nov. 14D.8)
Supplement (in alphabetical order by governing verb):
Active main verbs: Hic, exeuntem me unde aspexisti modo. (Pl. Bac. 204); Cum et
quo Antiochum saepe disputantem audiebam . . . (Cic. Luc. 11); . . . cum se mari ter-
raque simul cernerent circumventos. (Liv. 37.11.9); . . . M. Valerius, Publicolae frater,
conspicatus ferocem iuvenem Tarquinium ostentantem se in prima exsulum
acie . . . (Liv. 2.20.1); (sc. canes) . . . satisque pulchre funguntur officio, si et adve-
nientem sagaciter odorantur et latratu conterrent nec patiuntur propius accedere vel
constantius adpropinquantem violenter invadunt. (Col. 7.12.7); . . . cum sensit (sc.
perdix) feminam aucupis accedentem ad marem . . . (Plin. Nat. 10.102); . . . qui illam
hic vidit osculantem . . . (Pl. Mil. 199); Ecce autem video rure redeuntem senem. (Ter.
Eu. 967); . . . ipsum (sc. Varronem) ad nos venientem vidimus. (Cic. Ac. 1.1); Atque
eos omnes quos commemoravi his studiis flagrantes senes vidimus. (Cic. Sen.
50); . . . quae (sc. mala) venientia longe ante videris. (Cic. Tusc. 3.29); . . . puerum . . . in
aggeris medio vidimus heiulantem . . . (Amm. 18.6.10)
Passive main verbs: Saepe auditus est . . . seque ire ad illam . . . dictitans . . . (Tac. Ann.
13.46.1); . . . murmurans querulis vocibus saepe audiebatur . . . (Amm. 15.8.20); . . .
M. Antonius . . . cum cohortibus XII descendens ex loco superiore cernebatur. (Caes.
Civ. 3.65.1)
The gerundive is frequently used as secondary predicate associated with the object
(subject in the passive) in a range of dynamic (mostly terminative) states of affairs
with verbs like do ‘to give’, mitto ‘to send’, rogo ‘to ask’ suscipio ‘to take upon oneself ’.
Illustrations of this usage are (a) (active) and (b) (passive), respectively.
(a) Nam ego quidem meos oculos habeo nec rogo utendos foris.
(‘Well, I for one have my own eyes and needn’t borrow them from outside.’ Pl. Mil. 347)
(b) . . . is cui res publica a me . . . traditur sustinenda . . .
(‘. . . the man to whom I am handing over the republic for him to preserve . . .’ Cic. Mur. 3)
The gerundive in such contexts is often described as ‘final’, in that it indicates the
ultimate purpose of the action. In many cases the combination of object + secondary
predicate could be replaced by the object and one of the gerundial purpose adjunct
expressions dealt with in § 16.100. So (b) might be replaced by something like (c) and
refer to more or less the same event.
(c) is cui res publica a me traditur ad sustinendum
Secondary predicates
The basis for this use is obviously the non-factive meaning of the gerundive (see
§ 7.84).
Supplement:
Spectandum ne quoi anulum det neque roget. (Pl. As. 778); T<uo>m filium dedisti
adoptandum mihi . . . (Ter. Ad. 114); . . . attribuit nos trucidandos Cethego et ceteros
civis interficiendos Gabinio, urbem inflammandam Cassio, totam Italiam vastan-
dam diripiendamque Catilinae. (Cic. Catil. 4.13); Quodsi ea quae utenda acceperis
maiore mensura si modo possis iubet reddere Hesiodus quidnam beneficio provocati
facere debemus? (Cic. Off. 1.48); <Nam> Iphigenia Aulide duci se immolandam
iubet, ut hostium eliciatur suo. (Cic. Tusc. 1.116); Epistulam quam Balbo, cum etiam
nunc in provincia esset, scripsi, legendam tibi misi. (Pol. Fam. 10.32.5); . . . si umquam
regnandam acceperit Albam. (Verg. A. 6.770); . . . omnis cetera praeda diripienda
data est. (Liv. 22.52.5); . . . equorumque domandi greges peditibus distributi sunt . . .
(Curt. 4.9.4); Coctas (sc. cepas) dysintericis vescendas dedere . . . (Plin. Nat. 20.41);
Ergo igitur evocato statim armentario equisone magna cum praefatione deducendus
adsignor. (Apul. Met. 7.15); Lucius Titius miles notario suo testamentum scriben-
dum notis dictavit . . . (Paul. dig. 29.1.40 praef.)
A very remarkable case with the one-place verb pateo is: Detractum culmen templo,
nudatum tectum patere imbribus putrefaciendum. (Liv. 42.3.7)—a non-dynamic,
non-controllable state of affairs. Another remarkable case with one-place venio is:
Ergo istuc metuo quom venit vobis faciundum utrumque. (Pl. Mil. 891)—a dynamic,
non-controllable state of affairs⁴⁴ (see also below on Late Latin).
The verb habeo ‘to have’, obviously not a candidate for dynamic (terminative) states of
affairs, is also used with an object noun phrase (sometimes understood) and a sec-
ondary predicate as its expansion. An example is (d). Here colendum clearly has to be
understood as the purpose of agrum habere, as in the instances quoted above.
(d) Ibi agrum de nostro patre / colendum habebat.
(‘There he had some land to farm from my father.’ Ter. Ph. 364–5)
Supplement:
Queiquomque id publicum fruendum redemptum comductumve habebit
(CIL I2.585.25 (Lex Agr., c.111 bc—NB: coordination with a perfect passive participle));
Aedem Castoris, iudices, P. Iunius habuit tuendam de L. Sulla Q. Metello consulibus.
(Cic. Ver. 1.130)
This use of habeo must be distinguished from its use in a formally similar context,
where it means ‘to have to’, as in (e), but where no object is understood (for the deontic
meaning of the gerundive, see § 5.41):
(e) De omnibus meis habeo dicendum: ‘habui.’
(‘Of all my family I have to say: “I had.”’ Cestius Pius ap. Sen. Con. 9.5.1)
The verbs curo, do, and loco are also used with a combination of a noun phrase in the
accusative and a gerundive that agrees with the noun phrase in case, number, and
gender. An example is (f). These expressions are structurally different from the cases
discussed above (for discussion, see § 15.141).
(f) . . . suspiciones . . . quod obsides inter eos dandos curasset . . .
(‘. . . suspicions . . . that he had caused hostages to be given between them . . .’
Caes. Gal. 1.19.1)
In Late Latin, the gerundive is also used as a secondary predicate with the subject,
both in passive and in non-passive sentences. An example of a gerundive as secondary
predicate with the subject in a passive sentence is (g).
(g) . . . Hymetius ad oppidum ductus Ocriculum audiendus ab Ampelio . . .
(‘. . . Hymetius was taken to the town of Ocriculum to be heard by Ampelius . . .’ Amm.
28.1.22)
Supplement:
Quot adhuc vobis repurgandae latent leges! (Tert. Apol. 4.10); Per eadem tempora,
cum tantis honoribus occuparetur et cum formandus ad regendum statum rei
publicae patris actibus interesset, studia cupidissime frequentavit. (Hist. Aug. Aur.
6.5); . . . ibi statuit immorari alimentis destituendos forsitan cedere existimans Persas.
(Amm. 20.11.24);⁴⁵ Post hanc gestorum seriem Hymetius ad oppidum ductus
Ocriculum audiendus ab Ampelio, urbi praefecto, et Maximino vicario confestimque
perdendus, ut apparebat, data sibi copia tectius imperatoris praesidium appellavit
nominisque eius perfugio tectus servabatur incolumis. (Amm. 28.1.22); Qui redivivus
ait se iudicis ante tribunal / ductum damnandum . . . (Ven. Fort. Mart. 1.177–8)
Noun phrases in the genitive of description or of quality (see § 11.48) can be used as
secondary predicate both with the subject, as in (a), and with the object, as in (b). This
resembles the use of such noun phrases as subject or object complement (see § 9.31
and § 9.42 on the genitive of description for the internal properties of the phrase).
(a) Quod ei usu venit, cum annorum octoginta subsidio Tacho in Aegyptum
iisset . . .
(‘Such fortune attended him when, at the age of eighty, he went into Egypt to the aid
of Tachos . . .’ Nep. Ag. 8.2)
(b) . . . in funere matris suae, quam extulit annorum nonaginta . . .
(‘. . . at the funeral of his mother, whom he buried at the age of ninety . . .’ Nep. Att. 17.1)
Supplement:
. . . redis mutatae frontis . . . (Hor. S. 2.8.84); . . .‘novem’, inquit, ‘annorum a vobis pro-
fectus post sextum et tricensimum annum redii.’ (Liv. 30.37.9); Incertae enim sortis
vivimus. (Sen. Suas. 4.3); Adversus utrumque statum invictum animum tenet
exploratae iam firmitatis . . . (Sen. Dial. 12.5.5); . . . quod summissa animi, nulla gravis
hospita turba, / stantis adhuc fati vixit quasi coniuge victo. (Luc. 8.157–8—NB: see
Mayer ad loc.); (sc. Nero) . . . blandiente profectu, quamquam exiguae vocis et fuscae,
prodire in scaenam concupiit . . . (Suet. Nero 20.1); Is qui in reatu decedit integri sta-
tus decedit. (Ulp. dig. 48.4.11)
An optional dative noun that indicates the function of the subject or the object in the
event described can be added to a clause, especially with verbs of giving/taking and of
going/sending. Examples are auxilio in (a), related to the subject, and dono in (b),
related to the object, respectively.
(a) . . . Assum auxilio, Amphitruo, tibi et tuis.
(‘ . . . I am here with help for you and your family.’ Pl. Am. 1131)
(b) Periisti. Quod promiseram tibi dono perdidisti.
(‘You’re done for: you’ve lost what I promised you as a gift.’ Pl. Mos. 185)
Such clauses often contain another dative constituent, as with tibi et tuis in (a) and tibi
in (b) (hence the term ‘double dative construction’). These dative constituents fulfil
various functions. In (a), tibi et tuis can be taken as the argument of the noun auxilio,
as also in (c) below (see § 11.71). In (b), tibi is the recipient argument with the verb
promiseram. In (d) and (e), bubus and semper sitientibus hortis are beneficiary
adjuncts. Sometimes more than one analysis is possible. Note in (f) the co-occurrence
of the secondary predicate auxilio and the purpose adjunct ad coercendos ignes.
(c) Ariobarzani simul cum Agesilao auxilio profectus est . . .
(‘He went with Agesilaus to the assistance of Ariobarzanes . . .’ Nep. Tim. 1.3)
(d) Rus mane dudum hinc ire me iussit pater, / ut bubus glandem prandio
depromerem.
(‘A while ago in the morning my father told me to go to the farm to fetch acorns for
the cattle for their fodder.’ Pl. Truc. 645–6)
(e) Vicini quoque sint amnes, quos incola durus / adtrahat auxilio semper sitien-
tibus hortis . . .
(‘Let rivers flow adjacent to your plot, whose streams the hardy gardener may divert
as aid to quench the garden’s ceaseless thirst . . .’ Col. 10.23–4)
(f) Satius itaque est comparari ea quae ad coercendos ignes auxilio esse
possint . . .
(‘It is better, then, to procure what may be of assistance in restraining fires . . .’ Tra.
Plin. Ep. 10.34.2)
Constituents functioning as secondary predicate
Supplement:
Two datives: . . . pateram, quae dono mi illi ob virtutem data est . . . . (Pl. Am. 534); . . . sym-
phoniacos homines sex quoidam amico suo Romam muneri misit. (Cic. Ver. 5.64); Eo
biduo Caesar cum equitibus DCCCC quos sibi praesidio reliquerat in castra pervenit.
(Caes. Civ. 1.41.1); Atque interim Marius fugatis equitibus adcurrit auxilio suis, quos
pelli iam acceperat. (Sal. Jug. 101.10); Volux adveniens quaestorem appellat dicitque se
a patre Boccho obviam illis simul et praesidio missum. (Sal. Jug. 106.1); Sunt etiam de
nostris quidam qui ne in acie quidem fuerunt, sed praesidio castris relicti, cum castra
traderentur, in potestatem hostium venerunt. (Liv. 22.59.9); Mille praesidio urbis relic-
tis proximos vicos depopulatur atque urit. (Curt. 7.6.10—NB: genitive attribute); Nam
petisse eum a me aliquid tersui dentibus versus testantur. (Apul. Apol. 6.2)
One dative: Mancupio nec promittet nec quisquam dabit. (Pl. Per. 525); . . . quae de
eo genere est quo indutui mulieres ut uterentur est institutum. (Var. L. 10.27); . . .
Germanosque qui auxilio a Gallis arcessiti dicebantur . . . prohibeat. (Caes. Gal.
3.11.2); Ea (sc. virtus) sola neque datur dono neque accipitur. (Sal. Jug. 85.38); Post
ipsum auxilio subeuntem ac tela ferentem / corripiunt spirisque ligant ingenti-
bus . . . (Verg. A. 2.216–17); . . . ni K. Fabius in tempore subsidio venisset. (Liv.
2.48.5); . . . nec ante in campos degressi sunt quam legiones Faliscorum auxilio
venerunt. (Liv. 4.17.11); Illud scire oportet, omne eiusmodi medicamentum quod
potui datur non semper aegris prodesse, semper sanis nocere. (Cels. 2.13)
The instances in this section are often labelled ‘dative of purpose’ (dativus finalis).
Others call them ‘predicative datives’. In this Syntax the dative nouns (and noun
phrases) involved are divided into obligatory and optional constituents. Table 21.1
shows how various dative expressions are dealt with in this syntax.
Table . Treatment of the dativus finalis (or: predicative dative) in this Syntax
obligatory dative constituent optional dative constituent
functioning as subject complement and functioning as functioning as
object complement, respectively secondary predicate beneficiary adjunct
id tibi laudi est § 9.34 tibi auxilio venio librum lego meae
§ 21.11 (with the voluptati
subject) § 10.70
id tibi laudi duco § 9.43 me tibi auxilio misit
§ 21.11 (with the
object)
Noun phrases in the ablative (often called ablative ‘of description’ or ‘of quality’—
ablativus qualitatis—see §§ 9.35, 9.44, and 11.63) can be used as secondary predicate
to expand the subject or object constituents of the clause. The nouns involved denote
mental or physical properties such as animus ‘mind’, mens ‘mind’, pectus ‘breast’, or
Secondary predicates
caput ‘head’, or personal attributes like clothing. The modifier is usually a descriptive
adjective. Examples are (a), repeated from § 21.1 (f), and (b)–(d). For an instance of a
non-human subject, see (e). Ex. (f) is interesting because it shows an ablative phrase
coordinated with an adjective and a prepositional phrase. If the modifier of the noun
is a perfect passive participle, as demisso in (g), one can question whether it is an
ablative absolute clause or a secondary predicate.⁴⁶
(a) Nunc defaecato demum animo egredior domo . . .
(‘Now that I’ve regained a clear mind at last I’m leaving the house . . .’ Pl. Aul. 79)
(b) . . . quod eos infenso animo atque inimico venisse dicatis . . .
(‘. . . that you declare that they had come with angry and hostile intentions . . .’ Cic. Ver.
2.149)⁴⁷
(c) Interea ad templum non aequae Palladis ibant / crinibus Iliades passis . . .
(‘Meanwhile, to the temple of unfriendly Pallas the Trojan women passed along with
streaming tresses . . .’ Verg. A. 1.479–80)
(d) . . . Codrum, qui se in medios inmisit hostis veste famulari . . .
(‘. . . Codrus, who flung himself into the midst of the enemy in the costume of a
slave . . .’ Cic. Tusc. 1.116)
(e) . . . pingui flumine Nilus / cum refluit campis et iam se condidit alveo.
(‘. . . when the Nile with its rich flood ebbs from the fields and at length sinks into its
channel.’ Verg. A. 9.31–2)
(f) Cum antehac videbam stare tristis, turbido / vultu, subductis cum superciliis
senes . . .
(‘When formerly I used to see sorry old men standing around with furrowed brows,
their expression troubled.’ Turp. com. 167–8)
(g) At C. Fabricius a subselliis demisso capite discesserat.
(‘But C. Fabricius had left his seat with hanging head.’ Cic. Clu. 58)
Supplement:
With the subject: Paelex aedem Iunonis ne tangito; si tangit, Iunoni crinibus demis-
sis agnum feminam caedito. (Law cited at Gel. 4.3.3); Ille traversa mente mi hodie
tradidit repagula . . . (Enn. scen. 270V=229J);⁴⁸ Sed satine ego animum mente sincera
gero . . .? (Pl. Bac. 509); Continuo occurrit ad me, quam longe quidem, / incurvo’,
tremulu’, labiis demissis, gemens . . . (Ter. Eu. 335–6); . . . pura mente atque integra
Milonem, nullo scelere imbutum . . . Romam revertisse . . . (Cic. Mil. 61); Satis est si
sana mente feci. (Sen. Con. 7.6.13); . . . ut scripturas sanctas mente purissima cogno-
scere mereamur . . . (Cass. Inst. 32.7); . . . totoque libens mihi pectore grator . . . (Ov.
Met. 9.244); . . . te prodire involuto capite, soleatum . . . (Cic. Pis. 13); Sin (sc.
⁴⁶ For a discussion of potential ambiguity in the case of participles of terminative verbs (ablative abso-
lute clause or secondary predicate?), see Longrée (2014). Bennett: I.368–9 deals with several of the
examples cited here as ablative absolutes.
⁴⁷ For this example, see Fugier (1978: 130).
⁴⁸ Rosén (1999: 57–8) takes this as the first instance of periphrastic mente adverbs. See also § 10.48.
Constituents functioning as secondary predicate
luna) . . . pura neque obtunsis per caelum cornibus ibit . . . (Verg. G. 1.432–3); . . . cum
plebs in foro erecta exspectatione staret . . . (Liv. 2.54.8); Incedere magno comitatu,
splendido cultu non est fortunae meae. (Sen. Con. 10.1.3); . . . et iubet caelo superos
relicto / vultibus falsis habitare terras. (Sen. Phaed. 294–5)
With the object (subject in the passive): Nam hoc istum vestitu Siculi . . . saepe
viderunt. (Cic. Ver. 5.86); Vigilans ictus coniventibus oculis, dormiens patentibus
reperitur. (Plin. Nat. 2.145); Sed nihil barbaris atrocius visum est quam quod abscisis
manibus relicti vivere superstites poenae suae iubebantur. (Flor. Epit. 1.39.7—NB: a
secondary predicate within a secondary predicate)
Appendix: Some Late Latin authors show a preference for abstract nouns to express
the quality of a noun instead of using an attributive adjective, which results in excep-
tional instances like (h), with magnitudine fluenti instead of magno fluento.⁴⁹
(h) Abundans aquarum Hister advenarum magnitudine fluenti Sauromatas
praetermeat . . .
(‘The Hister, overflowing with tributaries, flows past the Sauromatians with
its mighty stream . . .’ Amm. 31.2.13)
⁴⁹ See den Boeft et al. ad loc., Svennung (1936: 519), and Sz.: 152.
⁵⁰ For further examples, see Bulhart (1955), Väänänen (1951); for in and pro, Happ (1976: 302, n. 590);
for cum and in, TLL s.v. cum 1351.20ff., s.v. in 768.3ff., 788.46ff.; for sine, Merguet (Reden) s.v. sine.
⁵¹ For these two examples from Plautus, see Fraenkel (1968: 67).
Secondary predicates
The prepositional phrase pro consule was gradually replaced by proconsul in the
course of the first century bc. While the prepositional phrase was mainly used as a
secondary predicate, proconsul functioned as an apposition (or as subject, etc.).⁵²
Throughout the history of the Latin language, but increasingly so in later periods, one
finds gerunds in the ablative that cannot be easily interpreted as means/instrument or
manner adjuncts in the context of their sentences. Sometimes they seem to express
only the concomitance of the event of the gerundial clause with that of the main
clause. In such instances, the gerund is often considered equivalent to a present parti-
ciple and is seen as a forerunner of the use of the gerund in Romance languages (see
also § 16.101). An early example cited in the literature is (a) from Terence. In some
cases, editors prefer to amend the text, as with (b). However, sometimes replacing the
gerund by a present participle leads to an equally odd result, as in (c). More instances
of this use of the gerund are reported from Livy onwards. Convincing examples date
from a later period. A good illustration is (d).⁵³
(a) Ita miserrimus / fui fugitando, ne quis me cognosceret.
(‘All the time I was running away I was terrified someone would recognize me.’ Ter.
Eu. 846–7—tr. Brown)
(b) Videbatur enim reconciliata nobis voluntas esse senatus, quod cum <in add.
Madvig> dicendo tum singulis appellandis rogandisque perspexeram.
(‘For it seemed that we had regained the Senate’s good will—I had clear evidence of
that both during my address and in approaches and appeals to individuals.’ Cic. Fam.
1.2.1—NB: it is not difficult to interpret the coordinated gerund as instrumental)
⁵² The inscriptional evidence and the development of pro consule and similar phrases can be found in
Hajdú (1999).
⁵³ See Hoffmann (1999), Maltby (2006), and Adams (2013: Ch. 27), with references. For technical Latin
texts, see Galdi and Vangaever (2019).
Constituents functioning as secondary predicate
Instances of the ablative form of the gerund functioning as a secondary predicate with
constituents of the sentence other than the subject have been noted in Late Latin, as
in (e).⁵⁶
⁵⁴ Exiendo was taken as equivalent to the dative of the present participle exienti in earlier studies, but
see Adams (2013: 734).
⁵⁵ Note that the gerund is part of a secondary predicate.
⁵⁶ More examples from Ven. Fort. in Odelstierna (1926: 58–60), for example (Carm. 4.15.7): Dic, tibi quid
prodest scelus hoc peragendo, nefande. (= peragenti), but Leo, in his edition, takes it as equivalent to an infinitive.
Secondary predicates
⁵⁷ For the use of relative clauses as secondary predicate, see Vester (1989), Maurel (1995: 194–5), and
Lavency (1998a: 24–6) (with varying terminology).
The distribution of secondary predicates
Supplement:
. . . dedi ei meam gnatam quicum <una> aetatem exigat. (Pl. Trin. 15); Hoc homini
amplius, quod addidit rationem, qua regerentur animi adpetitus, qui tum remitteren-
tur tum continerentur. (Cic. N.D. 2.34); Homines enim sunt hac lege generati qui
tuerentur illum globum quem in hoc templo medium vides, quae terra dicitur. (Cic.
Rep. 6.15); (sc. Helvetii) . . . legatos ad eum mittunt nobilissimos civitatis . . . qui dicerent
sibi esse in animo sine ullo maleficio iter per provinciam facere . . . (Caes. Gal. 1.7.3);
(sc. Clusini) . . . legatos Romam qui auxilium ab senatu peterent misere. (Liv. 5.35.5)
Non oris caussa modo homines aequom fuit / sibi habere speculum ubi os contem-
plarent suom . . . (Pl. Epid. 382–3)
Appendix: Cum clauses can be used in a similar way, not so much to locate the event
of the main clause in time (for which see § 16.10), but to describe the situation in
which one of the arguments of the clause is involved when the event of the main
clause takes place. In this way they resemble present participles and relative clauses
in their function as secondary predicate.⁵⁸ An example is (f).
(f) Saepe enim soleo audire Roscium cum ita dicat . . .
(‘For again and again do I hear Roscius declaring this . . .’ Cic. de Orat. 1.129)
Supplement:
Olympiae per stadium ingressus esse Milo dicitur cum humeris sustineret bovem.
(Cic. Sen. 33); . . . audivi . . . Metrodorum cum de his ipsis rebus disputaret. (Cic. de
Orat. 2.365)
(a) . . . qui illum (sc. Carneadem) a se adulescente Athenis iam adfectum senec-
tute multos dies auditum esse dicebat.
(‘. . . who used to say that as a young man he heard him (sc. Carneades) on many occa-
sions at Athens when he was already showing signs of age.’ Cic. de Orat. 3.68)
(b) . . . quin sciat has Timarchidi pactiones sepulturae cum vivis etiam illis esse
factas?
(‘. . . who doesn’t know that these burial bargains were struck with Timarchides even
by the victims themselves before they died?’ Cic. Ver. 5.120)
(c) Quin exta inspicere in sole ei vivo licet.
(‘In fact, you can inspect its innards in the sunlight while it’s still alive.’ Pl. Aul. 565)
(d) Quem hominem absentem . . . condemnasti? Cuius absentis nomen recepisti?
(‘Who is this whom, absent . . . you have pronounced guilty? Who is this whom you
have allowed, in his absence, to be prosecuted?’ Cic. Ver. 2.110)
(e) . . . Q. Fabium . . . Tuscus incautum inter multas versantem hostium manus . . .
gladio per pectus transfigit.
(‘. . . a Tuscan . . . caught Quintus Fabius unawares in the midst of a crowd of his
enemies and drove his sword through his breast.’ Liv. 2.46.4)
Supplement:
Object: (sc. mulier) . . . hospitique oppresso iam desperatoque ab omnibus opitulata
est. (Cic. S. Rosc. 27); Sagittaveras tu cor nostrum caritate tua et gestabamus verba tua
transfixa visceribus . . . (August. Conf. 9.2.3)
Indirect object: Athenienses, quibus primis post regiam legationem dicendi quae
vellent potestas facta est . . . (Liv. 35.32.12); <Dic>ta<tura>m et apsent<i e>t
praesent<i mihi delatam et a popu>lo et a senatu <M. Marce>llo e<t>
L. Arruntio <cos.> non rec<epi>. (Aug. Anc. 5.1); Corpora animadversorum qui-
buslibet petentibus ad sepulturam danda sunt. (Paul. dig. 48.24.3)
Agent/Cause in a passive clause: Nam ita diligenter constituta sunt iura decumano
ut tamen ab invito aratore plus decuma non posset auferri. (Cic. Ver. 3.20); Quod
enim semel testamento alicui datum est, id ab eo invito cui datum est auferri non
potest. (Cic. Top. 21); . . . nec eos a quibus vita hominum instructa primis sit, fuisse
philosophos arbitrantur. (Cic. Tusc. 5.6); Quo (sc. morbo) cum gravi conflictaretur
(sc. Dionysius), quaesivit a medicis Dion quem ad modum se haberet . . . (Nep. Di.
2.4); Historiarum auctor iam tum Sisenna erat iuvenis, sed opus belli civilis Sullanique
post aliquot annos ab eo seniore editum est. (Vell. 2.9.5); . . . eaedem poenae in
Laelium Balbum decernuntur, id quidem a laetantibus, quia Balbus truci eloquentia
habebatur, promptus adversum insontes. (Tac. Ann. 6.48.4)
Associative adjunct: Nec diu moratus rusticus quidam familiaris oculis meis cum muli-
ercula comite propius accessit ac diligentius considerare pallium coepit. (Petr. 12.3)
Source adjunct: . . . qui cum sciret me ex Mustio vivo audisse . . . (Cic. Ver. 1.139);
Igitur a quo vivo nec praesens nec absens rex Deiotarus quicquam aequi boni
impe<t>ravit, apud mortuum factus est grat<ios>us. (Cic. Phil. 2.94)
The distribution of secondary predicates
Beneficiary adjunct: Vivo fit quod numquam quisquam mortuo faciet mihi. (Pl.
Am. 459); Credebas dormienti haec tibi confecturos deos? (Ter. Ad. 693); . . . Silvius . . . /
quem tibi longaevo serum Lavinia coniunx / educet silvis regem regumque
parentem . . . (Verg. A. 6.763–5)
Other type of adjunct: . . . semper is fui qui de te oratore sic praedicarem . . . (Cic. de
Orat. 2.296); . . . posse ex is (sc. formis litterarum) in terram excussis annales Enni ut
deinceps legi possint effici. (Cic. N.D. 2.93); L. quidem Caesar, cum ad eum aegro-
tum Neapolim venissem . . . (Cic. Fam. 9.14.3)
Sympathetic dative: . . . non condimentis condiunt sed strigibus, / vivis convivis
intestina quae exedint. (Pl. Ps. 820–1); Pamphile, haud invito ad auris sermo mi
accessit tuos . . . (Ter. Hec. 482); . . . nisi (serpentibus) viventibus absciso capite non
gemmescit invidia animalis mori se sentientis. (Plin. Nat. 37.158)
Genitive attribute: Tamen huius cuius iniurati nutu prope terrarum orbis regebatur
iurati testimonio neque in C. Fimbriam neque in C. Memmium creditum est. (Cic.
Font. 24); . . . eaque sacra quae viri oculis ne imprudentis quidem aspici fas est non
solum aspectu virili sed flagitio stuproque violarit . . . (Cic. Har. 8); Quorum omnium
testimoniis de hac Dionis pecunia confirmatum est. (Cic. Ver. 2.23); At earum rerum
est absentium metus, quarum praesentium est aegritudo. (Cic. Tusc. 4.8); Cuius et
infelicitas vivi et subita mors in magnam spem Octavium adduxit provinciae potiun-
dae. (B. Alex. 43.4); (sc. Pausanias) Cuius mortui corpus cum eodem nonnulli
dicerent inferri oportere quo . . . (Nep. Paus. 5.5); . . . sacerdotibus maxime, qui quos
ad mortem devovissent, eorum deditionem vivorum hosti fecissent . . . (Liv. 31.18.6);
Ergo protinus insania timenda est, ubi expeditior alicuius quam sani fuit sermo est
subitaque loquacitas orta est . . . (Cels. 2.7.24); Et huius quidem recentis usus est.
(Cels. 5.18.3); Cuius intestati filius tuus heres futurus est, quem dementem alligatu-
rus est. (Sen. Con. 9.5.7)
NB: with a possessive adjective: . . . cui nomen meum absentis honori fuisset, ei
meas praesentis preces non putas profuisse? (Cic. Planc. 26); . . . sed moleste fero me
consulem tuum studium adulescentis perspexisse, te meum, cum id aetatis sim, per-
spicere non posse. (Cic. Fam. 15.13.1); . . . cum mea nemo / scripta legat, volgo reci-
tare timentis ob hanc rem . . . (Hor. S. 1.4.22–3); . . . saepe mihi dices vivae bene, saepe
rogabis, / ut mea defunctae molliter ossa cubent. (Ov. Am. 1.8.107–8); Et flesti et
nostros vidisti flentis ocellos. (Ov. Ep. 5.45)
Sed audeat Canuleius in senatu proloqui se nisi suas leges tamquam victoris patres
accipi sinant dilectum haberi prohibiturum? (Liv. 4.2.13—see also § 21.18)
NB: . . . tum muliebris fletus et concursatio incerta nunc hos, nunc illos sequentium
rogitantiumque viros natosque cui se fato darent . . . (Liv. 5.40.3)
Secondary predicates within a participial ablative absolute clause: . . . illo absente
auctore laudato . . . (Cic. Flac. 93); . . . obsidibus acceptis primis civitatis . . . (Caes. Gal.
2.13.1); Dictatore habente comitia Caesare consules creantur Iulius Caesar et
P. Servilius. (Caes. Civ. 3.1.1); . . . paucis . . . resistentibus interfectis . . . (Hirt. Gal.
8.13.2); Temperandum acre ingenium eius moderato et prudenti viro adiuncto col-
lega censebant. (Liv. 27.34.3); . . . contemptim inmobili iacente eo (sc. cane) . . . (Plin.
Nat. 8.149); . . . Mariade vivo exusto. (Amm. 23.5.3)
Secondary predicates
NB: the following instances are different. Quo mortuo seems to be a dominant parti-
ciple: his death was reported. Quo mortuo nuntiato sella sublata est. (Cic. Fam.
7.30.1); Quo optato impetrato Theseus in maximis fuit luctibus. (Cic. Off. 3.94)⁶¹
Secondary predicates within a secondary predicate construction: Quo cum venis-
sem, M. Catonem, quem ibi esse nescieram, vidi in bibliotheca sedentem multis cir-
cumfusum Stoicorum libris. (Cic. Fin. 3.7); ⁶² Inde ubi prima fides pelago, placataque
venti / dant maria et lenis crepitans vocat auster in altum . . . (Verg. A. 3.69–70); (sc.
serpens) . . . sibilat ore / arduus insurgens . . . (Verg. A. 11.754–5);⁶³ . . . gravis incum-
bens scopulis arentibus aestas . . . (Verg. G. 2.377); Marcia . . . icta gravida partu exani-
mato ipsa citra ullum aliud incommodum vixit (Plin. Nat. 2.137); Vigilans ictus
coniventibus oculis, dormiens patentibus reperitur. (Plin. Nat. 2.145)
Secondary predicates within a gerund construction: Non dissimilem offensionem
et Aemiliani subiit L. Hostilius Mancinus, qui primus Carthaginem inruperat, situm
eius oppugnationesque depictas proponendo in foro et ipse adsistens populo
spectanti singula enarrando, qua comitate proximis comitiis consulatum adeptus est.
(Plin. Nat. 35.23); . . . Rhenum pervium feci . . . stando immobilis virtutis vestrae
nimirum firmamento confisus. (Amm. 21.5.3); . . . ad sancta pignora . . . venerunt
osculando flentes beatas reliquias . . . (Greg. Tur. Mart. 1.11)⁶⁴
Secondary predicate within an attributive participle: Vitis albae viridis tusae suco
inpetigines tolluntur. (Plin. Nat. 23.4)
Secondary predicate with an argument of an adjective: Quamdiu mater vixit, pater
me fuit procuratore contentus. (Sen. Con. 7.5.1)
⁶¹ For further examples (to be sorted), see K.-St.: I.17; 772. The cases in the Supplement have to be dis-
tinguished from ablative absolute clauses with a three-place predicate governing an object and an object
complement, as in: Treboni (sc. mortem) satis persecuti sumus hoste iudicato Dolabella. (Cic. Phil. 13.39).
⁶² For a few instances in Cicero, see Laughton (1964: 126–8).
⁶³ For parallels of arduus used in this way, see Williams ad Verg. A. 5.278. The often cited line Apparent
rari nantes in gurgite vasto . . . (Verg. A. 1.118) does not belong here: nantes is subject.
⁶⁴ In Cic. Dom. 140 the manuscripts have revocando, for which Madvig conjectured revocans.
The relationship between secondary predicate and clause
(b) Neque enim Pompeius me sua causa quicquam facere voluisset invitum . . .
(‘For Pompeius would not have wished me to do anything contrary to my inclination
for his sake . . .’ Cic. Rab. Post. 33)
(c) Ea re impetrata sese omnes flentes Caesari ad pedes proiecerunt.
(‘This was granted, and they all threw themselves in tears at Caesar’s feet.’ Caes. Gal.
1.31.2)
(d) Siquidem ego tibi vivus non prosum, qui fortasse mortuus profuissem.
(‘If I, now that I am alive, am unable to be of any service to you, though perhaps
I might have been of some if I had been dead.’ Cic. Planc. 101)
(e) Advocat contionem, habet orationem talem consul qualem numquam
Catilina victor habuisset.
(‘He convenes an assembly. He, the consul, addresses them in such a speech as even
Catiline himself, if he had been victorious, would never have delivered.’ Cic. Sest. 28)
(f) Fortissimi milites non tamen nec vivi nec post mortem inulti fuere.
(‘But the heroic soldiers were not unavenged, living or dead.’ Liv. 4.58.5)
In the case of perfect participles, the semantic relationship is often one of temporal
anteriority; in the case of future participles one of temporal posteriority. For more on
these temporal relations, see § 21.7. It is clear, though, that in the cases discussed in
§ 21.4, including (g) below, these temporal notions do not make much sense.
(g) Navus mane Forum et vespertinus pete tectum . . .
(‘In your diligence get you to the Forum in the morning, to your home in the even-
ing . . .’ Hor. Ep. 1.6.20)
Grammars also take note of the proleptic (or: anticipatory) use of adjectives in
poetry, as illustrated by (h) and (i).⁶⁵ In (h), submersas and diversos indicate the result-
ing state of the object constituents of obrue and age, respectively. Likewise, in (i) the
agros become sterilis, as the result of Sirius’ action. This usage is rare in prose, but see
( j) for an instance related to the subject and (k) for one related to the object. This
resembles the use of dynamic three-place verbs with an object and a complement (see
§ 4.87).⁶⁶
(h) Incute vim ventis submersasque obrue puppis / aut age (sc. Troas) diversos
et dissice corpora ponto.
(‘Hurl fury into your winds, obscure the ships submerged beneath the sea, or drive
the men asunder and scatter their bodies on the deep.’ Verg. A. 1.69–70)
(i) Tum sterilis exurere Sirius agros . . .
(‘Then Sirius burnt the fields so that they became barren . . .’ Verg. A. 3.141—tr.
Williams ad loc.)
In addition to the temporal relation already discussed, the content conveyed by the
secondary predicate can be interpreted in a way that resembles how satellites are
treated in their sentence or clause. This is very common with participles (see below),
but there are instances with adjectives and nouns as well. A clear case is (l), where the
secondary predicate avidus is coordinated with a quia reason clause. Other examples,
with a conditional interpretation, are the noun victor in (e) and invitum in (b) above.⁶⁷
Such interpretations are common in the case of adjective phrases, as in (m) (note also
the position of the phrase).⁶⁸
(l) Nam si quis poenam exigit non ipsius poenae avidus sed quia oportet, non
est adnumerandus iratis.
(‘For the man who exacts punishment, not because he desires punishment for its own
sake, but because it is right to inflict it, ought not to be counted as an angry man.’ Sen.
Dial. 1.9.4)
(m) Huius coniugii cupidus Callias quidam . . . egit cum Cimone ut . . .
(‘A certain Callias . . . being desirous of having her for a wife, tried to prevail on Cimon
to . . .’ Nep. Cim. 1.3)
Supplement:
Saluberrimus autem omnium aquilo, noxius auster et magis siccus, fortassis quia
umidus frigidior est. (Plin. Nat. 2.127)
⁶⁷ For ‘condensed conditionals’ like (m), see Bertocchi and Maraldi (2011: 99–100).
⁶⁸ See Heberlein (1996: 360–2), who calls such phrases ‘least integrated’ in their clause in comparison
with other types of secondary predicate. See also the examples in § 21.5.
⁶⁹ Sο K.-St.: I.239.
The relationship between secondary predicate and clause
(‘For riches, names, and power, when they lack wisdom and the knowledge
of how to live and to rule over others, are full of dishonour . . .’ Cic. Rep. 1.51)
(o) Nec enim cuiquam bono mali quicquam evenire potest nec vivo nec
mortuo . . .
(‘For no evil can befall any good man either in life or in death . . .’ Cic. Tusc. 1.99)
Participles in their function as secondary predicate allow a broad range of interpret-
ations, such as cause in (p) (repeated from § 21.7), reason in (q), condition in (r),
concession in (s), or purpose in (t).⁷⁰ An interesting instance of coordination between
a present participle and a prepositional phrase that indicates purpose is (u).
(p) (sc. Dionysius) . . . qui cultros metuens tonsorios candente carbone sibi
adurebat capillum.
(‘. . . who through fear of the barber’s razor used to have his hair singed off with a
glowing coal.’ Cic. Off. 2.25)
(q) C. Servilius Ahala Sp. Maelium regnum adpetentem occupatum interemit.
(‘Gaius Servilius Ahala put Spurius Maelius to death for attempting to secure regal
power.’ Cic. Sen. 56)
(r) Nemo ei neganti non credidisset quem esse omnes salvum etiam confitentem
volunt.
(‘No one would have refused to believe him if he denied it, when now all men wish to
save him even when he confesses it.’ Cic. Mil. 50)
(s) Hem / repudiatu’ repetor.
(‘Here I am, the reject recalled.’ Ter. An. 248–9)
(t) . . . Senones Galli multitudine ingenti ad Clusium venerunt legionem
Romanam castraque oppugnaturi.
(‘. . . the Senonian Gauls came with a great multitude to Clusium to besiege the Roman
legion in camp there.’ Liv. 10.26.7)
(u) ‘Atqui, Catule,’ inquit Antonius, ‘non ego utilitatem aliquam ad dicendum
aucupans horum libros et nonnullos alios sed delectationis causa, cum est
otium, legere soleo.’
(‘ “And yet, Catulus”, rejoined Antonius, “it is not because I am on the look-out for
aids to oratory, but just for pleasure, that I make a habit, when I have time, of reading
the works of these authors and a few more.”’ Cic. de Orat. 2.59)
⁷⁰ The examples are taken from K.-St.: I.774–7. See also Sz.: 384 and Laughton (1964: passim) for Cicero.
Secondary predicates
neganti. In (s), repudiatus and repetor are lexical opposites. In (t), the future participle
in combination with the verb venerunt prompts the purpose interpretation. But the
actual interpretation of a secondary predicate is more flexible and less predictable
than these explanations might suggest. In this respect, these participles differ from
finite subordinate clauses, where the subordinator signals the semantic relationship
between its clause and the main clause to which it belongs.
Supplement:
Cause: . . . duae mulierculae / hic in fano Veneris signum flentes amplexae tenent /
nescioquem metuentes miserae? (Pl. Rud. 559–61); Quod ubi Hannibali nuntiatum
est, moram magis quam bellum metuens oratores ad regulos eorum misit . . . (Liv.
21.24.3)
Reason: (sc. Athenienses Alcibiadem) . . . corruptum a rege capere Cymen noluisse
arguebant. (Nep. Alc. 7.3)
Condition: . . . idem (sc. Stoici) traducti a disputando ad dicendum inopes reperian-
tur. (Cic. Brut. 118); . . . cum mendaci homini ne verum quidem dicenti credere solea-
mus . . . (Cic. Div. 2.146); . . . epistulae offendunt non loco redditae. (Cic. Fam. 11.16.1)
Concession: . . . ut eum (sc. risum) cupientes tenere nequeamus . . . (Cic. de Orat.
2.235)
Purpose: Quam perverse fugiens Hegesias . . . saltat incidens particulas. (Cic. Orat.
226); Capta Phaloria legati a Metropoli et a Cierio dedentes urbes venerunt. (Liv.
32.15.3); Consul Larisam est profectus ibi de summa belli consultaturus. (Liv.
36.14.6)
The semantic relationship between a secondary predicate and the clause to which it
belongs can be made explicit by particles or other constituents that are related directly
to the secondary predicate and/or by their more general use in the clause. Examples
are statim, utpote, and tamen, in (a)–(c), respectively.⁷¹ This phenomenon becomes
more widespread after Cicero’s time. For the use of these words with ablative absolute
clauses, see § 16.89.
(a) M. autem Calidius statim designatus sententia sua quam esset cara sibi mea
salus declaravit.
(‘Marcus Calidius, too, was no sooner elected praetor than he intimated by a clear
declaration how high a value he set upon my restitution.’ Cic. Red. Sen. 22)
(b) Has litteras Sisines utpote innoxius ad Alexandrum saepe deferre temptavit . . .
(‘This letter Sisines, since he was innocent of any evil intention, often tried to turn
over to Alexander . . .’ Curt. 3.7.13)
⁷¹ Example (b) is taken from Heberlein (1996: 360). For time specifications, see K.-St.: I.789; for rea-
son, I.791–2; for concession, I.444–6. For the diachronic development, see Sz.: 385.
Secondary predicates and related constructions
Due to the range of semantic relations that are possible between secondary predicates
and the remainder of the sentence in which they are used, it is no surprise to see sec-
ondary predicates coordinated with constituents of various types with which they are
semantically compatible. For examples of coordination, see § 19.80.
Adjectives that function as secondary predicate are usually said to be used ‘instead of ’
adverbs, especially adverbs of manner. Scholars are often also quite explicit about the
difference between the two expressions, noting first, that the secondary predicate rep-
resents a property of the entity involved instead of a property of the event (cf. § 21.1
and § 21.4 fin.); secondly, that often, at least in prose, either the secondary predicate
or the adverb must be used depending on the expression; and thirdly, that there may
be a difference in meaning between the two expressions.
These are the relevant statements by K.-St.: (i) ‘In such cases’ (that is, when the adjec-
tive is used) ‘the Latin construction is undoubtedly more lively, more energetic and
more expressive, because the specific circumstances in which an action occurs are at
the same time included in the character of the entity that performs the action, e.g.
Socrates venenum laetus et libens hausit (“S. gladly and willingly drank the poison”)’.⁷²
(ii) ‘In most cases, at least in prose, only either the adjective or the adverb can be used:
suaviter (not suavis) cantas “you play something sweet”; sobrius (not sobrie) saltat “he
dances sober”.’⁷³ (iii) ‘Or the meaning is different: prudens et sciens ad interitum rue-
rem (voluntarium) “(I rushed) deliberately and with open eyes (upon a self-chosen
doom)” (Cic. Marc. 14), but: prudenter et scienter “in a clever and skilful manner”.’⁷⁴
There are various reasons why adjectives and manner adverbs derived from the same
stem are not interchangeable in the same context. The reason why we do not find
K.-St.’s suavis cantas is not because the idiom requires suaviter, but because suavis
indicates a value judgement of a permanent quality; as a rule, only adjectives indicat-
ing a non-permanent, transient quality can be used as secondary predicate. This
restriction does not hold for adverbs derived from the same stem. The reason is there-
fore a semantic one. By contrast, the fact that there is only one attestation in the OLD
of the adverb sobrie to mean ‘in a state of non-intoxication’⁷⁵ is due to chance (it nor-
mally means ‘temperately’). The adjective sobrius indicates a non-permanent quality
and can therefore be used, and is used, as a secondary predicate.
Another possible reason why adjectives and manner adverbs derived from the
same stem are not interchangeable in the same context is that they have different
meanings. This is the case for prudens and sciens vs. prudenter and scienter. Another
illustration, alongside the one cited from K.-St. in the note above, is (a), where scienter
could be replaced by scientem, but would produce a completely different meaning.
⁷² ‘Die lateinische Ausdrucksweise ist in solchen Fällen ohne Frage lebendiger, energischer und
anschaulicher, indem der nähere Umstand einer Handlung zugleich in die Persönlichkeit des Handelnden
aufgenommen wird’ (K.-St.: I.235).
⁷³ ‘Aber in den meisten Fällen ist in Prosa wenigstens nur entweder das Adjektiv oder das Adverb
zulässig.’ (K.-St.: I.238). For the examples, compare Pl. St. 767 and Cic. Mur. 13, respectively.
⁷⁴ ‘Oder die Bedeutung ist verschieden: Cic. Marc. 14 . . .“wissentlich und mit Vorbedacht” . . .“in
kluger und geschickter Weise”’ (K.-St.: I: 238).
⁷⁵ Apul. Apol. 59.
Secondary predicates and related constructions
An entirely different situation is shown in (b), where an adjective and an adverb are
derived from the same stem, but where the adverb is not an adverb of manner. Here,
rari ‘scattered’ cannot be replaced by raro ‘seldom’, an adverb of time comparable with
numquam ‘never’, without a change of meaning.⁷⁶
(b) (sc. Britanni) Ipsi ex silvis rari propugnabant . . .
(‘They themselves came out of the woods to fight in small groups . . .’ Caes. Gal. 5.9.6)
There are contexts in which an adjective can be used but an adverb derived from the
same stem is excluded. This is the case, for example, when the secondary predicate is
not associated with the subject of a clause, as in (c), where it is associated with the
object me. Here imprudentem cannot be replaced by imprudenter without incurring a
change of meaning. (See § 21.16 for further secondary predicates that are not related
to the subject.)
(c) Namque enim tu, credo, me imprudentem obrepseris.
(‘Yes, for you will have taken me by surprise, I suppose.’ Pl. Trin. 61)
⁷⁶ The adverb rare is used for ‘thinly’ sowing wheat at Col. 2.9.3 (for Varro’s reservations about the use
of rare, see the citation at Gel. 2.25.8).
Secondary predicates
The conclusion of all this is that derivationally related adjectives and adverbs can be
used in the same context as secondary predicates or manner adverbs, respectively, to
describe more or less the same situation, but only if the secondary predicate is associ-
ated with the subject, if the adjective indicates a non-permanent quality, and if there
is not a difference in meaning between the adjective and the adverb. Nevertheless,
they describe the situation from a different perspective, either that of the entity or of
the state of affairs expressed by the verb, respectively.
There are a few instances of adjectives that function as secondary predicate in coord-
inate or parallel structures with manner adverbs, which seem to contradict the con-
clusion above. An example of coordination is (i); of parallelism, ( j).⁷⁷
(i) Quaeso ignoscas si quid stulte dixi atque imprudens tibi.
(‘Please forgive me if I said anything stupid to you without being aware of it.’
Pl. Men. 1074)
( j) Dum alii trepidi (trepide Sp) cedunt, alii segniter subeunt, turbata tota acies
est . . .
(‘While the one part in disorder was yielding ground, and the other was slow
in coming up, the whole line was confused . . .’ Liv. 27.12.15)
Appendix: At Cic. Att. 8.3.4 the corrupt text invite cepit Capuam is traditionally cor-
rected as invite cepi Capuam, which is rejected as ‘bad Latin. Cicero would have writ-
ten invitus.’ by Shackleton Bailey ad loc. + Appendix II, p. 439. The correction is
defended by Wistrand (1979: 206–11).
Adjectives and nouns in agreement with a nominal constituent in a clause can some-
times be interpreted in various ways. For adjectives that can or must be taken as
attribute, see § 21.4. Another possible interpretation for adjectives and noun phrases
is as an apposition or as a tail constituent. An example of an adjective that might
be taken as an apposition is ineptus in (a). An example of a noun phrase that might be
taken as a tail is decrepitus senex in (b).⁷⁸ For heavy adjective phrases, see the
Supplement.
(a) Quid ego ineptus, dum sermonem vereor interrumpere, / solus sto . . .?
(‘Silly me, why am I standing here alone, while being afraid to interrupt the conversa-
tion . . .?’ Pl. Trin. 1149–50)
⁷⁷ For instances of coordination of secondary predicates, also with other types of constituent, see § 19.80.
⁷⁸ For the interpretation as an apposition, see Hofmann (1924: 80): ‘One might say that this apposition-
like postposition is almost the rule in popular speech for words of such an emotional content.’
Quantifiers and related expressions
(b) . . . qui quidem cum filio / potet una atque una amicam ductet decrepitus senex.
(‘. . . drinking together with his son and hiring a mistress together with him, that old
fart.’ Pl. As. 862–3)
Supplement:
. . . quae in occipitio quoque habet oculos pessuma. (Pl. Aul. 64); Ferox rapidusque
consiliis ac lingua immodicus primo inter paucos, dein propalam in volgus, pro
cunctatore segnem, pro cauto timidum, adfingens vicina virtutibus vitia, compella-
bat, premendoque superiorem . . . sese extollebat. (Liv. 22.12.11–12); Tragoedias pri-
mus in lucem Aeschylus protulit sublimis et gravis et grandilocus saepe usque ad
vitium, sed rudis in plerisque et incompositus. (Quint. Inst. 10.1.66)
⁷⁹ See K.-St.: I.234: ‘Such expressions convey the essential message of the sentence.’ See also Scherer
(1975: 191, n. 13).
Secondary predicates
at the noun phrase level, as is discussed in §§ 11.33–4 and 36–7. Unlike most ‘normal’
adjectives, these quantifiers cannot be used as subject or object complement, and
attestations for the adjectives of amount in a quantitive sense are rare (see below).
They can, however, all be used in a similar way to the use of the secondary predicates
which are discussed in §§ 21.2–16. Examples are (a) and (b). In (a), omnes is related
to the subject homines, but in view of its position it is very unlikely that it is an attri-
bute that forms a noun phrase with homines. In (b), the distributive quantifier quisque
is related to the (implicit) subject of faciebant; obviously it cannot be an attribute at
all.⁸⁰ Both omnes and quisque can be omitted without producing an ungrammatical
sentence, making them comparable to satellites.
(a) Homines qui gestant quique auscultant crimina, / si meo arbitratu liceat,
omnes pendeant . . .
(‘People who spread and listen to accusations would all be hanged, if I could have my
way . . .’ Pl. Ps. 427–8)
(b) Pro se quisque sedulo / faciebant quo illam mihi lenirent miseriam.
(‘Every one of them was doing his very best to soothe my grief.’ Ter. Hau. 126–7)
In this Syntax, adjectives of amount and other quantifiers used in this way are called
floating quantifiers, borrowing a term that was developed in the theory of gen-
erative grammar.⁸¹
The term ‘floating’ was introduced to describe the difference between sentences like
(i) and (ii).
(i) All the men have found their way home.
(ii) The men have all found their way home.
In the generative approach, (ii) is regarded as transformationally derived from (i)
by a rule called Quantifier-Floating which displaces the attribute all from its
position in (i) to its position in (ii). The term ‘floating’ is not very apt for a language
like Latin, in which word order is mainly determined by pragmatic factors and in
which attributive quantifiers can also be separated from their heads (see the end of
this section).
Adjectives of amount and quantifiers can also be used in the same range of relations
that secondary predicates are shown to cover in § 21.16. This is illustrated in (c)–(h)
with omnis. For omnis related to a subject, see (a) above. In (c), it is related to the
object ea; in (d), to the indirect object nobis; in (e), to the agent ab . . . vobis; in (f), to
the beneficiary adjunct nobis; in (g), to the attribute quorum; in (h), to nobis, which is
governed by iratior, itself a secondary predicate.
(c) At ea subterfugere potis es pauca, si non omnia.
(‘But you can escape a little of it, if not all.’ Pl. Capt. 970)
⁸⁰ For the use of quisque and related words as floating quantifiers, see Bertocchi and Maraldi (2010b).
⁸¹ See Pinkster (1983: 206).
Quantifiers and related expressions
(d) . . . quas ille leges . . . fuerit impositurus nobis omnibus atque inusturus?
(‘. . . what laws was that man intending to impose upon all of us, to brand on our fore-
heads?’ Cic. Mil. 33)
(e) Sic enim existimare debetis . . . rem nullam maiorem . . . magis ab omnibus
vobis providendam neque a tribuno pl. susceptam . . .
(‘For you should realize . . . that never has any project more important, . . . more in
need that all of you should guard against it, been undertaken by a tribune of the
people . . .’ Cic. Rab. Perd. 4)
(f) Deos volo bene vortere / istam rem vobis. # Et ego nobis omnibus.
(‘I wish that the gods may bless you in this. # And I wish they may bless us all.’ Pl. Cur.
658–9)
(g) Quorum omnium testimoniis de hac Dionis pecunia confirmatum est.
(‘By all of whose evidence this case about Dio’s money was fully established.’ Cic.
Ver. 2.23)
(h) . . . cum multo nobis (cj. Christ; bonis mss.) omnibus veniret iratior quam illis
fuerat quos trucidarat . . .
(‘. . . especially as he was coming hither much more angry with all of us than he had
been with those whom he had massacred there . . .’ Cic. Phil. 3.4)
Supplement:
Adjectives of amount (in alphabetical order): Audi viros bonos, quibus multis uteris.
(Cic. Phil. 10.6); . . . omnibus maioribus natu quorum ego multorum cognovi senectutem
sine querela . . . (Cic. Sen. 7); Maiores nos res scribere ingressos, C. Trebati, et his libris
quos brevi tempore satis multos edidimus digniores e cursu ipso revocavit voluntas tua.
(Cic. Top. 1); . . . quae non prosunt singula, multa iuvant. (Ov. Rem. 420); . . . ill’ qui vocavit
nullus venit? (Pl. Rud. 143);⁸² Huc pauci vestris adnavimus oris. (Verg. A. 1.538); Neque
esse crudele . . . hominum nocentium et horum quoque paucorum suppliciis remedia
populis innocentibus . . . quaeri. (Cels. 1.pr.26); Pleraeque eae (sc. meretrices) sub vesti-
mentis secum habebant retia. (Pl. Epid. 216); . . . respondebo ad ea quae dixisti, quae ple-
raque de ipso me fuerunt. (Cic. Planc. 58); (sc. insidiae) Quas ille plerasque vitavit. (Nep.
Dat. 9.2); Ipsum animal non, ut remur plerique, vitae hominum supervacuum est . . . (Plin.
Nat. 8.135);⁸³ . . . periculis etiam quae plurima adii . . . (Cic. Phil. 12.21); . . . nedum ii qui-
bus saluti fuisti, quos tu habes plurimos, non intellegant . . . (Q. Cic. Pet. 21); . . . ut iam a
laqueis Stoicorum, quibus usum me pluribus quam soleo intellego, recedamus . . . (Cic.
Tusc. 5.76); Qui mihi unus uni, privato amico, eadem omnia dedit quae universae rei
publicae, salutem, otium, dignitatem. (Cic. Red. Pop. 16); Est enim illius a quo uno
maxime P. Sestius se oppugnari videt . . . (Cic. Sest. 132); . . . re publica restituta super
omnes mortales gloriam agitabis tuaque unius mors vita clarior erit. (Sal. Rep.
2.13.6–7);⁸⁴ Quas cum solus pertulisset, ut sua unius in his gratia esset . . . (Liv. 2.8.3)⁸⁵
The use of exiguam in (i) can be regarded as an extension of the uses illustrated so far.
Cicero follows Epicurusච words m{lhl }zŸ ~r .l{pw.j.~pt.⁸⁶
(i) Ita fit beatae vitae domina fortuna, quam Epicurus ait exiguam intervenire
sapienti.
(‘Consequently happiness becomes the slave of fortune; yet Epicurus says
that fortune interferes with the Wise Man but little.’ Cic. Fin. 2.89)
Appendix: Solus ‘alone’ can be used in the same way as adjectives of amount and
quantifiers, as in ( j) and (k), and resembles unus, as is shown in (l).⁸⁷
( j) Eripit etiam spem quae sola homines in miseriis consolari solet.
(‘He takes away even hope, which alone can comfort men in their miseries.’
Cic. Catil. 4.8)
(k) . . . qui ordo a vobis adhuc solis contemptus est.
(‘. . . the order that you, and thus far only you, have treated with contempt.’
Cic. Ver. 4.26)
(l) Solius enim meum peccatum corrigi non potest et fortasse Laeli.
(‘For I am the only one whose error cannot be repaired, except perhaps
Laelius.’ Cic. Att. 11.15.2)
Universal quantifiers: Advortite animum cunctae. (Pl. Ps. 187); . . . quae amica es
frumentariis, / quibus cunctis montes maxumi frumenti [acervi] sunt <structi>
domi. (Pl. Ps. 188–9); Nec tamen haec sat sunt ad sensum cuncta creandum . . . (Lucr.
3.238); Ergo agite et laetum cuncti celebremus honorem. (Verg. A. 5.58); Sic erimus
cuncti, postquam nos auferet Orcus. (Petr. 34.10—NB: part of a verse text quoted by
Trimalchio)⁸⁸
Nam res plurumas pessumas, quom advenit, fert, quas si autumem omnis, nimis
longus sermo est. (Pl. Men. 759–60); Nunc adeo hanc edictionem nisi animum
advortetis omnes . . . (Pl. Ps. 143); . . . nonne id agendum nobis omnibus fuit ut
materiem subtraheremus furori tuo? (Cic. Dom. 11); . . . cur omnium horum magis-
ter, Orata, non iucundissime vixerit? (Cic. Fin. 2.70); . . . quorum omnium gratiam
atque amicitiam eius morte redimere posset. (Caes. Gal. 1.44.12); Non omnis moriar
multaque pars mei / vitabit Libitinam. (Hor. Carm. 3.30.6–7)
Binary quantifiers:⁸⁹ Loquere, uter meruistis culpam . . . (Pl. Men. 779)
. . . cum amica sua uterque accubitum eatis . . . (Pl. Bac. 755); Pariter hos perire
amando video, uterque insaniunt. (Pl. Cur. 187); Sed nunc agite uterque id quod
rogabo dicite. (Pl. Men. 1105); . . . ut (sc. naves) vehementissime utraque ex concursu
laborarent (laboraret N2) . . . (Caes. Civ. 2.6.5); Nam uterque cum illo gravis inimici-
tias exercebat (v.l. exercebant). (Sal. Cat. 49.2); Perinde legati provinciaeque cuncta-
bantur, Hordeonius Flaccus . . .Vettius Bolanus . . . et uterque ambigui. (Tac. Hist.
2.97.1)
NB: plural: Sed tamen nostra legens non multum a Peripateticis dissidentia, quoniam
utrique Socratici et Platonici volumus esse, de rebus ipsis utere tuo iudicio . . .
(Cic. Off. 1.2)
Quotiens tandem edixi tibi / ut caveres neuter ad me iretis cum querimonia?
(Pl. Men. 784–5)
Distributive quantifiers:⁹⁰ . . . sibi quisque habeant quod suom est. (Pl. Cur. 180);
Ubi vos separatim sibi quisque consilium capitis . . . (Sal. Cat. 52.23); Suam quisque
culpam auctores ad negotia transferunt. (Sal. Jug. 1.5); . . . ambo exercitus, Veiens
Tarquiniensisque, suas quisque abirent domos. (Liv. 2.7.1); Dimisso conventu decem
legati . . . ad liberandas suae quisque regionis civitates discesserunt . . . (Liv. 33.35.1);
Sic unus quisque proximi periculi confinio territus suppetiatum decurrunt anxii.
(Apul. Met. 4.10.4); . . . nos non facimus Dei voluntatem . . . unusquisque sibi placentes
et omnibus displicentes. (Cypr. Ep. 11.1)
NB: verb agrees with quisque: Ut enim pictores et ii qui signa fabricantur et vero
etiam poetae suum quisque opus a vulgo considerari vult . . . (Cic. Off. 1.147); Deinde
multi . . . sibi quisque, si in armis foret, ex victoria talia sperabat. (Sal. Cat. 37.6)
. . . binae singulis quae datae ancillae nobis . . . (Pl. Poen. 222); . . . non facile est dicere
(sc. casus) similis esse, si eorum singulorum solum animadvertas voces . . . (Var. L.
10.29); Tria sunt omnino genera dicendi quibus in singulis quidam floruerunt . . . (Cic.
Orat. 20); Vobis vero, patres conscripti, singulis et egi et agam gratias. (Cic. Red. Sen.
30); . . . et pastilli fiunt, qui singuli habeant P. ܼ =, hique singuli quotidie mane ieiuno
dantur. (Cels. 5.20.6); Evenit etiam ut oculi vel ambo vel singuli minores fiant quam
esse naturaliter debeant. (Cels. 6.6.14); Non potest pro omnibus agi pro quibus sin-
gulis non potest. (Sen. Con. 10.4.13)
A difficult passage, not just in terms of its meaning,⁹¹ is (m). This seems to be a rare
instance of omnis as a subject complement.
(m) Ex hac nostra paucitate quarta pars militum praesidio inpedimentis relicta
erat. Nec ignavissimum quemque relinqui ad custodiam sarcinarum scitis.
Sed fuerimus omnes.
(‘Out of this small force of ours, one-quarter of the men were left to guard the
baggage; and you know that the guarding of the packs is not put in the hands
of the most cowardly. But suppose we had been united.’ Liv. 44.38.6–7)
Appendix: Ambo (see § 11.35) can be used in the same way as the quantifiers already
discussed, as in (n). The totality expression totus (see § 11.38) can also be used in this
way, as in (o).⁹²
(n) A quo missi Dioscorides et Serapion, qui ambo legati Romae fuerant . . ., ad
Achillan pervenerunt.
(‘Dioscorides and Serapion, who had both been envoys at Rome, were com-
missioned by him (sc. the king) and came to Achillas.’ Caes. Civ. 3.109.4)
⁹⁰ See Bortolussi (2013). ⁹¹ See Briscoe ad loc. He translates: ‘suppose there were all of us’.
⁹² For the instances in Plautus, see Lodge s.v. totus § II.2.
Secondary predicates
When a quantifier is related to an explicit noun or noun phrase in its clause, it can be
difficult to decide whether it is part of the noun phrase (in which case it is an attri-
bute) or a floating quantifier. This is best illustrated by (p), which is often cited in
grammars to explain the ‘predicative’ use of omnis and is much discussed in the lit-
erature.⁹³ In reality, it is a discontinuous attribute, as in (q), where omnis modifies
natio Gallorum. Gallia is the topic of its clause. It is the very first word in Caesar’s
account and in fact is the most suitable word with which to begin, since every reader
knew the name Gallia. Est tends to be placed after a pragmatically prominent word
(see § 23.33) and so omnis ends up in third position.⁹⁴ In (q), natio is the topic as well.
Attributive omnis is difficult to translate with an attributive equivalent in a number of
modern languages, but in Latin the use of omnis to describe an entity that is split up
into parts is idiomatic, as is shown by (r).⁹⁵ (See also § 21.3 fin. for similar interpretive
problems with other secondary predicates.)
(p) Gallia est omnis divisa in partes tres, quarum unam incolunt Belgae . . .
(‘The whole of Gaul is divided into three parts, one of which is inhabited by the
Belgae . . .’ Caes. Gal. 1.1.1)
(q) Natio est omnis Gallorum admodum dedita religionibus . . .
(‘The whole nation of the Gauls is greatly devoted to ritual observances . . .’ Caes.
Gal. 6.16.1)
(r) Is pagus appellabatur Tigurinus. Nam omnis civitas Helvetia in quattuor
pagos divisa est.
(‘The name of that district was the Tigurine; for the whole state of Helvetia is divided
into four districts.’ Caes. Gal. 1.12.4)
⁹³ Inter alios by Müller (1990). ⁹⁴ On this example, see also Adams (1994b: 64).
⁹⁵ See TLL s.v. omnis 612.49ff. ‘per abundantiam quandam in describendis terris vel mundo’. For the
use of omnis as distinct from totus in (p) and with geographical names in general, see Nuti (2019). For the
word order possibilities of omnis, see Devine and Stephens (2006: 507–11).
Co-occurrence of secondary predicates and related expressions
(c) Omitto igitur quae de his ipsis (sc. Crasso et Antonio), quae de Cotta, quae
de Sulpicio, quae modo de Caelio dixeris.
(‘I pass over therefore what you said of them, what you said of Cotta, of Sulpicius, and
what you have just said of Caelius.’ Cic. Brut. 297)
A number of the uses of idem that are discussed in § 11.142 fin. resemble that of ipse
above. An additional example is (d).
(d) . . . in illas tibi maiores plagas incidendum est in quibus te ab eodem me . . .
confici et concidi necesse est.
(‘. . . it will only be to fall into a much more formidable snare, entangling you wherein
I cannot fail . . . to dispatch you and do away with you.’ Cic. Ver. 5.151)
This chapter deals with quite diverse topics, all of which, however, have in common
that they concern the role of the speaker/writer and the addressee in the formulation
of a message and its expression in terms of clauses, sentences, and units of discourse.
The way a speaker/writer structures the information in sentences depends, among
other things, on the knowledge the speaker/writer and addressee have of the com-
municative situation and of the matter that is communicated, including their know-
ledge of each other’s knowledge. This is illustrated in Figure 22.1, where P stands for
(pragmatic) knowledge, S for speaker, A for addressee, and (PA)S and (PS)A for the
knowledge the speaker and addressee have of their knowledge of each other.
Speaker Addressee
PS (PA)S (PS)A PA
The Oxford Latin Syntax. Harm Pinkster, Oxford University Press (2021). © Harm Pinkster.
DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780199230563.003.0022
The information structure of clauses 827
with two participants the speaker (S) may tell the addressee (A) something he thinks
A will find useful or interesting because he does not know it or expects something
else, or S may simply want to tell A something he himself finds noteworthy. Conversely,
S may try to obtain from A information he is missing or is not certain about. Thus, in
(a), Lydus’ answers to a number of (constituent) questions by Mnesilochus adequately
fill the gap of information of the latter (for this example and more responses of this
type, see § 6.38). A more elaborate answer can be seen in (b), also repeated from
§ 6.38. Here the relevant information is eri concubina.
(a) Ubi ea mulier habitat? # Hic. # Unde eam esse aiunt? # Ex Samo. / # Quae
vocatur? # Bacchis.
(‘Where does this woman live? # Here. ( points to Bacchis’ house) # Where do people
say she’s from? # From Samos. # What’s she called? # Bacchis.’ Pl. Bac. 472–3)
(b) Quis illaec est mulier? # Pro di immortales, / eri concubina est haec quidem.
(‘Who is that girl? # Immortal gods, this is master’s concubine.’ Pl. Mil. 361–2)
For the part of a clause that conveys the information that the speaker presents as most
relevant for the addressee, this Syntax uses the term focus; in other words, that part
fulfils the pragmatic function of focus. In a clause there is (usually only) one part that
has the focus function. In cases like (a) and (b), where the focus constituents fill a gap
in the information held by the addressee, the term completive focus will be used.
Just as in English and other modern languages, it is usually not difficult to determine
the focus in answers to constituent questions. It is also sometimes easy to recognize
the focus element in answers to sentence questions. In (c), sum is the first focus. In the
following coordinated clause noster . . . Leonida is the focus.
(c) Tune es adiutor nunc amanti filio? / # Sum vero, et alter noster est Leonida.
(‘Are you now an accomplice of my son in his affair? # I am indeed, and the other is
our Leonida.’ Pl. As. 57–8)
For a communicative act to be successful the speaker/writer should take into account
the expectations, both intellectual and social, of his addressee, as well as the linguistic
and extralinguistic context in which this act is performed.1 The speaker/writer will
therefore, if possible, start with something he assumes to be known to or in some way
accessible for the addressee. This is illustrated by (d)—repeated from § 2.12 and
§ 5.3—and (e). In (d), Terentia, Cicero’s wife, is known to Cicero’s addressee, his dear
friend Atticus, and therefore an ideal starting point for the message conveyed by the
clause. The newsworthy information for Atticus is that Terentia has an attack of
rheumatism. For the function of Terentia in the information structure of the clause
the term topic will be used, whereas magnos articulorum dolores (habet) is the focus
of the clause. In (e), Messalla consul is the most likely candidate to be presented as the
1 For the important role of the addressee in the formulation of the speaker/writer’s message, see Chafe
(1994: 54–5), Dik (1997: I.8–9), and already Ammann (1911: 3–4). See also § 11.101 on the referring use
of nouns and noun phrases.
828 Information structure and extraclausal expressions
entity about whom further information is provided. It can be assumed that Atticus
knew him and, as a consequence, he can serve as topic of the clause. It is also likely
that Autronius’ house was known to both Cicero and Atticus, but as an inanimate
entity it is a less attractive candidate for the function of topic than animate Messalla.
The price is the most surprising element in the message, as appears from the following
context—in fact, it is the focus of the clause.
(d) Terentia magnos articulorum dolores habet.
(‘Terentia has a bad attack of rheumatism.’ Cic. Att. 1.5.8)
(e) Messalla consul Autronianam domum emit HS |CXXXIIII|.
(‘Consul Messalla has bought Autronius’ house for 13,400,000 sesterces.’ Cic. Att.
1.13.6)
Whereas in (a)–(c) and in (e) individual constituents function as focus, in (d) the
focus is more complex. The sentence can be thought of as an answer to a question like
‘How is it going with Terentia?’ In this context, neither magnos articulorum dolores
nor habet alone is focus, but rather it is the combination that is newsworthy. For this
type of focus this Syntax uses the term complex focus. Further details are discussed
in § 22.9.
The terms ‘focus’ and ‘topic’ are taken from Dik’s Functional Grammar. As for the
term ‘focus’, some linguists make a distinction between ‘information focus’ on the
one hand and ‘intonation focus’ or ‘emphasis’ on the other. This corresponds more or
less with ‘focus’ and ‘emphasis’ in this Syntax. (See also § 22.19.) The term ‘topic’ is
also used in other linguistic frameworks, among other things in the sense of ‘known’
or ‘given information’. Although the constituent that functions as topic in the sense of
this Syntax is often ‘known’, it need not be so, nor is a ‘known’ entity necessarily the
topic of the clause. The terms ‘topic’ and ‘focus’ correspond roughly with the terms
‘theme’ and ‘rheme’ of the Prague school of linguistics.2
While some clauses demonstrate a clear split between a topical and a focal part, there
are also clauses without such a split. Such clauses are sometimes called ‘thetic’ or ‘all-
new’.3 An example is (f), a presentative sentence, in which a completely new situation
is presented (for further discussion, see § 22.11). In (g), the sentence marks a break in
the storyline. Although res refers to the preceding situation and istius is known to the
audience, the sentence is not presented as being ‘about them’; it is ‘the event as such
which is the main message’.4 (For the position of the verb, typical of this type of sen-
tence, see § 23.45.) Another type is the first sentence in (h), an entirely new fact, used
by Cicero to support the philosophical point he is making. Ex. (i) illustrates a familiar
2 For a Prague school approach to Latin word order, see Panhuis (1982).
3 For the term ‘thetic’, see Ulrich (1985), Sasse (1987), Devine and Stephens (2006), Goria (2013).
4 For ‘all-new’ sentences, see Spevak (2010a: 43–4), from which ex. (h) is taken. The other quotation is
a paraphrase of K.-St.: II.599, from which (g) is taken.
Topic 829
technique in historical prose. Here the main clause starts with repente to mark the
unexpectedness of the event.5
(f) Erant omnino itinera duo quibus itineribus domo exire possent.
(‘There were two routes, and no more, by which they could leave their homeland.’
Caes. Gal. 1.6.1)
(g) Pervenit res ad istius (sc. Verris) auris nescio quo modo.
(‘These facts somehow or other came to the knowledge of Verres.’ Cic. Ver. 4.64)
(h) Karthaginienses multi Romae servierunt, Macedones rege Perse capto. Vidi
etiam in Peloponneso, cum essem adulescens, quosdam Corinthios . . .
(‘Many Carthaginians served as slaves at Rome, many Macedonians after the capture
of King Perses. I have seen too in the Peloponnese some Corinthians, when I was
young . . .’ Cic. Tusc. 3.53)
(i) Volux adveniens quaestorem (sc. Sullam) appellat dicitque se a patre Boccho
obviam illis simul et praesidio missum. Deinde eum et proxumum diem
sine metu coniuncti eunt. Post ubi castra locata et diei vesper erat, repente
Maurus (sc. Volux) incerto voltu pavens ad Sullam adcurrit dicitque . . .
(‘Upon arriving, Volux addressed the quaestor, saying that he had been sent by his
father Bocchus to meet them and serve as protection at the same time. Then they
journeyed in union that day and the next without any alarm. Afterward, when the
camp was pitched and it was evening, the Moor suddenly with a troubled expression
ran in terror to Sulla and said that . . .’ Sal. Jug. 106.1–2)
A clause normally contains one topic and one focus constituent. In the case of
sentences (in fact, also of clauses) that consist of more than one clause, for example
a main and a subordinate clause, each clause can have a topic and a focus. Also,
a subordinate clause can be the topic or focus constituent of the main clause (see
§ 23.64).
22.2 Topic
Topic is the element of a clause about which the speaker chooses to present fur-
ther information to the addressee. In the sections below, the following aspects
are discussed:
(i) What is the relationship between the topic and the subject of a clause?
(ii) What makes an element of a clause eligible for the function of topic?
(iii) What kind of constituents can function as topic?
(iv) What are the formal properties of a topic?
5 For this use of repente (and subito), see Chausserie-Laprée (1969: 549–59) and Torrego (2005).
830 Information structure and extraclausal expressions
6 The words are Roby’s (1882: II.6). K.-St.: I.1–2 and Ernout and Thomas (1953:2) are comparable.
‘Thus the subject is often described as the constituent defining the topic of the sentence—that which the
sentence is “about” and which it presupposes as its point of departure’ (Quirk et al. 1985: 78–9—their own
approach is different).
7 For the following sections I am much indebted to Spevak (2010a: Ch. 2).
Topic 831
(a): everybody is familiar with the Sun and there is no need for an introduction.
Certain regions and peoples also constitute encyclopedic knowledge and can be used
as topic without further introduction, for example the various regions of Italy in (b).
In (c), Caesar uses Helvetii without explicitly introducing them either because he
counted on the knowledge of his readers or because he expected that the readers were
able to infer that this must be another people after the three already mentioned (see
the discussion of ex. (n) below).
(a) Male facis properantem qui me commorare. Sol abit.
(‘It isn’t right of you to delay me in my hurry. The sun is setting.’ Pl. Mer. 873)
(b) Campania plerumque boves progenerat albos . . . Umbria vastos et albos . . .
Etruria et Latium conpactos . . . Appenninus durissimos . . .
(‘Campania generally produces white oxen . . . Umbria breeds huge white oxen . . .
Etruria and Latium breed oxen which are thick-set . . ., the oxen bred in the Apennines
are very tough . . .’ Col. 6.1.1)
(c) Qua de causa Helvetii quoque reliquos Gallos virtute praecedunt . . .
(‘For this cause the Helvetii also excel the rest of the Gauls in valour . . .’ Caes. Gal. 1.1.4)
Certain entities that are not identifiable on the basis of general knowledge can be
uniquely identified on the basis of the situation in which the speech participants are
involved. In (d) and (e), the identity of the persons to whom the relational nouns (see
§ 3.6) dominus and pater refer is determined by the identity of the speakers. In Cato’s
de Agri Cultura, there can be no doubt who is meant by vilicus and dominus in (f). In
(g), there can be no doubt which door is meant by fores: it is the door of the procuress
Cleareta’s house. In English the identifiability of the common nouns in these examples
appears from the use of a definite article or a possessive adjective, whereas in Latin
there is no such device.
(d) Dominus me boves mercatum Eretriam misit.
(‘My master has sent me to Eretria to buy oxen.’ Pl. Per. 322)
(e) Pater nunc intus suo animo morem gerit.
(‘My father’s now enjoying himself inside.’ Pl. Am. 131)
(f) Vilicus, si nolet male facere, (sc. familia) non faciet. Si passus erit, dominus
impune ne sinat esse.
(‘If the overseer sets his face against wrongdoing, they will not do it. If he allows it,
the master must not let him go unpunished.’ Cato Agr. 5.2)
(g) Alienum hominem intro mittat neminem. / Quod illa aut amicum aut patro-
num nominet, / aut quod illa amicai <eum> amatorem praedicet, / fores
occlusae omnibus sint nisi tibi.
(‘She shall not let any male outsider in. Even if she describes him as a friend or patron,
or if she says that he is the lover of a female friend of hers, the door shall be shut for
everyone except you.’ Pl. As. 756–9)
832 Information structure and extraclausal expressions
Within a speech situation the personal pronouns ego, tu, nos, and vos have naturally
identifiable referents. Demonstrative pronouns and determiners are explicit means to
make entities in the speech situation identifiable. In other communicative situations
there are also specific means to present an entity as identifiable for the addressee and
thereby to make it eligible as topic of its clause, such as anaphoric determiners,
possessive adjectives, and nouns in the genitive, as discussed in § 11.103. By contrast,
quidam can be used to explicitly mark an entity as not identifiable for the addressee
(see § 11.114). Anaphoric pronouns and demonstrative pronouns used anaphorically
often function as topic of their clause, as in (h). These sentences are the beginning of
the final part of a lengthy belated prologue spoken by the god Auxilium, which con-
tains information that the audience has already learned by this point in the play. They
know that there is a problematic relation between a young man Alcesimarchus and a
young woman Selenium caused by the young man’s father. Although the audience
already knows which adulescens is meant, Auxilium introduces him as if he were
unknown (hence, the use of the indefinite article in the translation ‘a young man’),
with adulescens occupying the first position in its clause. The first position is typical
for topics (see also below), but focus constituents are not excluded from the first pos-
ition, especially when there is contrast with another entity (as pater in line 195).8 In
the next clause adulescens is continued by the anaphoric pronoun ei, an experiencer
satellite (dativus sympatheticus—see § 10.96). It is then continued by is, the subject of
its clause. In the following coordinated clause illa is the subject and hunc the topic.
Although the girl has been mentioned just before, illa is used instead of ea in order to
mark the contrast with hunc.
(h) Adulescens hic est Sicyoni. Ei vivit pater. / Is amore proiecticiam illam
deperit / quae dudum flens hinc abiit ad matrem suam, / et illa hunc contra,
qui est amor suavissimus.
(‘There’s a young man here in Sicyon. His father is alive. He is crazy about that
abandoned girl who went off to her mother a moment ago, crying, and she in turn is
crazy about him, which is the sweetest kind of love.’ Pl. Cist. 190–3)
Entities that have not been introduced into the discourse nor constitute general or
encyclopedic knowledge can still be treated as topic if they can easily be inferred from
another entity that is identifiable for the addressee. A term used for this phenomenon
is associative anaphora or subtopic.9 An illustration is Vitruvius’ discussion of
the construction of baths in (i), where after the mention of balinearum dispositionum
he successively presents the constituent parts. Note that the noun phrase magnitudines
balneorum in 5.10.4 can also be treated as topic.
8 Interestingly, almost the same text is transmitted earlier in the play (lines 125 and 130–2), with the
expected expression adulescens quidam. Editors deal with the passage in various ways, often deleting it
completely.
9 For the term ‘associative anaphora’, see Hawkins (1978); for ‘subtopic’, see Dik (1997: I.323–5). Exx.
(i) and (j) are repeated from LSS § 12.2.1.
Topic 833
(i) Quoniam haec nobis satis videntur esse exposita, nunc insequentur baline-
arum dispositionum demonstrationes. Primum eligendus locus est quam
calidissimus, id est aversus ab septentrione et aquilone. Ipsa autem caldaria
tepidariaque lumen habeant ab occidente hiberno . . . Suspensurae caldario-
rum ita sunt faciendae ut . . . Concamarationes vero si ex structura factae
fuerint, erunt utiliores . . . Magnitudines autem balneorum videntur fieri pro
copia hominum . . . Laconicum sudationesque sunt coniungendae tepidario . . .
(‘As it appears that we have given an adequate account of them, next will follow
descriptions of the arrangements of baths. In the first place, the warmest possible
situation must be selected; that is, one which faces away from the north and north-
east. The rooms for the hot and tepid baths should be lighted from the south-
west . . . The hanging floors of the hot bath rooms are to be constructed as follows . . . The
vaulted ceilings will be more serviceable if built of masonry . . . The size of the baths
must depend upon the number of the population . . . The Laconicum and other sweat-
ing baths must adjoin the tepid room . . .’ Vitr. 5.9.9–10.5)
In the situation in which the dialogue in ( j) takes place, two pairs are being spied
upon, each consisting of a man and woman. Hominem can be inferred from the situ-
ation. (It is not at the beginning of the sentence, because novistine is an emphatic
focus with the question particle-ne—see § 6.11.) Note that in the last sentence the
topic hominem is not expressed (marked ‘Ø’), a case of zero-anaphora (for unex-
pressed objects, see § 9.16).
( j) Vide’n convivium? / # Video exadvorsum Pistoclerum et Bacchidem. / # Qui
sunt in lecto illo altero? # Interii miser. / # Novistine hominem? # Ø Novi.
(‘Can you see the party? # I can see Pistoclerus and Bacchis right opposite. # Who are
the ones on that other couch? # Dear me, I’m dead. # Do you know the man? # I do.’
Pl. Bac. 834–7)
Especially in so-called technical texts, like those of Celsus and Pliny the Elder,10
different aspects of the subject matter can be easily used as topics of the clauses and
sentences devoted to it, such as, in the case of Celsus, ‘disease’, ‘period of the year’, or
‘treatment’, as in (k) and (l).
(k) Stomachum autem infirmum indicant pallor, macies, praecordiorum dolor,
nausea, et nolentium vomitus, in ieiuno dolor capitis.
(‘Weakness of the stomach is indicated by pallor, wasting, pain over the heart, nausea,
and involuntary vomiting, headache when the stomach is empty.’ Cels. 1.8.2)
(l) Vere autem maxime quaecumque humoris motu novantur in metu esse
consuerunt.
(‘In spring those diseases are usually to be apprehended which are stirred up anew by
movement of humour.’ Cels 2.1.6)
10 For an illustration from Pliny the Elder, see Pinkster (2005: 254–6).
834 Information structure and extraclausal expressions
Something related can be observed in lists of activities that can be expected to take
place in a certain situation, as in (m). Here Varro, one of Caesar’s opponents, organ-
izes a number of actions to prepare for military operation. Entities that have not been
mentioned before may occupy the first position in its clause, as Gaium Gallonium in
sentence (v).11
(m) (sc. Varro) . . . se quoque ad motus fortunae movere coepit.
(i) Dilectum habuit tota provincia, legionibus conpletis duabus cohortes
circiter XXX alarias addidit.
(ii) Frumenti magnum numerum coegit, quod Massiliensibus, item
quod Afranio Petreioque mitteret.
(iii) Naves longas X Gaditanis ut facerent imperavit, conplures praeterea
[in] Hispali faciendas curavit.
(iv) Pecuniam omnem omniaque ornamenta ex fano Herculis in oppi-
dum Gadis contulit.
(v) Eo sex cohortes praesidii causa ex provincia misit Gaiumque
Gallonium, equitem Romanum familiarem Domiti, qui eo pro-
curandae hereditatis causa venerat missus a Domitio, oppido
Gadibus praefecit.
(vi) Arma omnia privata ac publica in domum Galloni contulit.
Ipse habuit graves in Caesarem contiones.
(‘. . . Then Varro’s movements began to mirror those of Fortune. (i) He recruited
troops throughout his province, bringing his two legions up to strength and
supplementing them with about thirty cohorts of allies. (ii) He collected a
large quantity of grain to send to Marseilles and also to Afranius and Pompey.
(iii) He ordered Cadiz to make ten warships and arranged for the construction
of several more in Hispalis. (iv) He moved all of the money and treasures from
the temple of Hercules into the town of Cadiz. (v) To guard the town he sent
six cohorts from the province. He also put Gaius Gallonius, a Roman of eques-
trian rank and a friend of Domitius, in charge of Cadiz; Gallonius was already
there, having been sent by Domitius as his agent for an inheritance. (vi) Varro
moved all weapons, privately owned and public, into Gallonius’ house. He
made speeches critical of Caesar.’ Caes. Civ. 2.17.4–18.3)
For entities that are not known or accessible in one of the ways mentioned, the
speaker/writer must use a certain strategy to introduce them into the discourse and
make them eligible for topic function. In (n), at the beginning of his Commentarii,
Caesar introduces the three peoples that inhabit Gallia. These peoples were probably
unfamiliar to most readers and are for that reason introduced at the end of their
clauses. A late or final position in the clause for such entities that will function as topic
further on in the discourse is common in many languages.12 At their first introduc-
tion they function as focus. Once introduced they can head passages that contain
11 Spevak (2010a: 41) takes it as an instance of ‘focus first’. For the use of unintroduced topics in a list,
see Jones (1991: 85–6); he uses the term ‘extension’.
12 See Dik (1997: I.315–18).
Topic 835
geographical or other details, as in (o).13 In other words, they have become given
topics. Other examples of the introduction of non-accessible entities are (p) and (q),
which are both presentative sentences (on which see § 22.11).
(n) Gallia est omnis divisa in partes tres, quarum unam incolunt Belgae, aliam
Aquitani, tertiam qui ipsorum lingua Celtae, nostra Galli appellantur.
(‘Gaul as a whole is divided into three parts, one of which is inhabited by the Belgae,
another by the Aquitani, and a third by a people called in their own tongue Celtae, in
the Latin Galli.’ Caes. Gal. 1.1.1)
(o) Belgae ab extremis Galliae finibus oriuntur . . .
(‘The Belgae begin from the edge of the Gallic territory . . .’ Caes. Gal. 1.1.6)
(p) Erat cum eo Mithrobarzanes, socer eius, praefectus equitum.
(‘He had with him Mithrobarzanes, his father-in-law, as commander of his cavalry.’
Nep. Dat. 6.3)
(q) Erant in quadam civitate rex et regina.
(‘In a certain city there were a king and queen.’ Apul. Met. 4.28.1)
The identifiability of an entity in one of the ways discussed above is a necessary condi-
tion for its being eligible for the function of topic of its clause. However, the identifi-
ability of an entity does not entail its being chosen as the topic, as is shown by (r).
Belgae is mentioned here for the third time and so is well known by this point.
However, it fulfils the function of focus, being the answer to the underlying question
‘who are the bravest of these three peoples?’
(r) Horum omnium fortissimi sunt Belgae . . .
(‘Of all these peoples the Belgae are the most courageous . . .’ Caes. Gal. 1.1.3)
An entity can continue to function as topic over a longer or shorter stretch of dis-
course. If an entity is maintained over a longer stretch it is usually not repeated as a
full lexical item; instead, anaphoric expressions, zero-anaphora, and connecting rela-
tives are used (see also § 11.136, and § 24.5 on ‘anaphoric reference’). This is illus-
trated by (s). After it is introduced as a full lexical item, Orgetorix returns first as an
anaphoric pronoun and then in the form of zero-anaphora.14
(s) Apud Helvetios longe nobilissimus fuit et ditissimus Orgetorix. Is . . . coniu-
rationem nobilitatis fecit et civitati persuasit ut de finibus suis cum omnibus
copiis exirent. . . . Id hoc facilius iis Ø persuasit, quod undique loci natura
Helvetii continentur.
(‘Among the Helvetii the noblest man by far and the most wealthy was Orgetorix.
He . . . formed a conspiracy of the nobility, and he persuaded the community to march
13 Caesar’s introduction is slightly chaotic, and earlier editors have proposed various ways to eliminate
difficulties. See, for example, Meusel ad 1.1.5–7.
14 For strategies to continue once-introduced topics, see Tóth (1994: 178–83). Ex. (t) is discussed by
Kroon (2009a: 117–18). For the conditions under which zero-anaphora is possible, see also Longrée (2012).
836 Information structure and extraclausal expressions
out of their territory in full force. . . . In this he persuaded them the more easily,
because the Helvetii are closely confined by the nature of their territory.’ Caes.
Gal. 1.2.1)
When an entity ceases to be a topic and is replaced by one or more other entities but
is then reintroduced after a while as a resumed topic, it usually needs the same kind
of introduction as discussed above. An example is (t).15 As the author explicitly states,
this Varus had been introduced before (in Civ. 1.23.2).
(t) Erat in exercitu Vari Sextus Quintilius Varus, quem fuisse Corfinii supra
demonstratum est. Hic dimissus a Caesare in Africam venerat . . .
(‘Sextus Quintilius Varus, whose presence at Corfinium was mentioned above, was in
Attius Varus’ army. He had come to Africa after his release by Caesar.’ Caes. Civ.
2.28.1)
However, reintroduction is not necessary if an entity has become familiar enough in the
preceding discourse. Thus, in his Commentarii, Caesar does not need what we might
call the normal treatment, nor does Jugurtha in Sallust’s Bellum Iugurthinum. Such
entities function as discourse topic.16 An illustration is (u). In (u)(i), the beginning of
this section, which follows an account of the present situation by the Gaul Liscus, there
is a change of topic, from Liscus to Caesar. For that reason Caesar is in first position.
Note that anaphoric hac oratione, which summarizes Liscus’ speech, is not in its usual
first position.17 In (ii), Caesar is continued by zero-anaphora, as is Liscus. In (iii), there
is a change of topic, but Liscus has been introduced well enough and the situation as a
whole is sufficiently transparent, so explicit mention is not necessary. In the same way,
the switch back to Caesar in (iv) without explicit mention is unproblematic, as is its
continuation in (v). After the rather lengthy report on Dumnorix Caesar is continued as
topic, but due to the distance between (v) and (vi) some form of explicit mention is
required: anaphoric expressions cannot be used, so the proper name is required. Since a
clause-initial position of Caesar would suggest a change of topic, it is placed later in the
clause. Another example is (v).18 Here a sequence of three actions by Caesar is inter-
rupted in (iii) by Crassus’ reaction to Caesar’s order (Crassus is already mentioned as the
recipient of the order in (i) and (ii)). Note that in (iii) Crassus is in final position, so as
to prevent the reader from assuming a complete change of topic, while at the same time
avoiding assigning the action of exiting to Caesar.
(u) (i) Caesar hac oratione Lisci Dumnorigem, Diviciaci fratrem, designari
sentiebat . . . concilium dimittit, Liscum retinet.
(ii) Quaerit (sc. Caesar) ex solo (sc. Lisco) ea quae in conventu dixerat.
(iii) Dicit (sc. Liscus) liberius atque audacius.
(v) (i) Caesar acceptis litteris hora circiter undecima diei statim nuntium in
Bellovacos ad M. Crassum quaestorem mittit, cuius hiberna aberant ab eo
milia passuum XXV.
(ii) Iubet (sc. Caesar) media nocte legionem proficisci celeriterque ad se
venire.
(iii) Exit cum nuntio Crassus.
(iv) Alterum ad C. Fabium legatum (sc. Caesar) mittit, ut in Atrebatium fines
legionem adducat, qua sibi iter faciendum sciebat.
(v) Scribit (sc. Caesar) Labieno . . .
((i) ‘Caesar received the dispatch about the eleventh hour of the day, and at once sent
a messenger into the country of the Bellovaci to Marcus Crassus, the quartermaster-
general, whose winter quarters were 25 miles away from him. (ii) He bade the legion
start at midnight and come speedily to him. (iii) Crassus marched out on receipt of
the message. (iv) Another envoy was sent to Gaius Fabius, the lieutenant-general, bid-
ding him bring his legion into the borders of the Atrebates, through which Caesar
knew he himself would have to march. (v) He wrote instructions to Labienus . . .’ Caes.
Gal. 5.46.1–3)
Discourse topics differ from regular (or: clause) topics in their relative freedom of
position. They may be preceded by clause topics and setting constituents. Examples
are (w) and (x), respectively. In (w), partly repeated from § 22.3, Caesar follows the
topic constituent ad ea; in (x), the summarizing ablative absolute clause (a setting
constituent—see § 22.15) his rebus confectis.
(w) Ad ea Caesar respondit nulli omnium has partis vel querimoniae vel misera-
tionis minus convenisse.
(‘To this Caesar replied: “Anyone would be more suitable than you to deliver either
reproaches or appeals for pity.” ’ Caes. Civ. 1.85.1)
(x) His rebus confectis Caesar, ut reliquum tempus a labore intermitteretur,
milites in proxima municipia deducit. Ipse ad urbem proficiscitur.
(‘After finishing this business Caesar withdrew his men to towns in the immediate
vicinity to give them a temporary break from exertion. He himself set out for Rome.’
Caes. Civ. 1.32.1)
838 Information structure and extraclausal expressions
In certain contexts readers probably had no problem in recognizing persons that are
introduced at the very beginning of the text as topic of the clause to which they
belong. In his letters of recommendation Cicero often starts without a proper intro-
duction, as in (y).
19 For a discussion of what she calls an ‘extended Topic unit’, see (Helma) Dik (1995: 64–70). Ex. (d) is
taken from K.-St.: II.591 from their section on emphatic anteposition (‘betonte Voranstellung’).
Focus 839
(‘If to rob a father of life is in itself a crime, the people of Saguntum who chose that
their own parents should all die free men rather than live as slaves were guilty of
parricide.’ Cic. Parad. 24)
22.7 Focus
The focus part of a clause provides information about the topic of that clause which
the speaker considers in some way noteworthy for the addressee. This is illustrated by
the question–answer pairs in § 22.1, one of which is repeated here as (a).
(a) Quis illaec est mulier? # Pro di immortales, / eri concubina est haec quidem.
(‘Who is that girl? # Immortal gods, this is master’s concubine.’ Pl. Mil. 361–2)
In instances like (a), determining which part of the clause constitutes the focus is
relatively easy, because these clauses are a response to an explicit request for informa-
tion by one of the speech participants, and they are also relatively short. However,
question–answer pairs are only a minority among the communicative acts, and the
question is how one can decide what constitutes the focus of a clause in other situ-
ations. Even when it comes to questions, the decision is more difficult when the
answer is more complex than the one in (a). This is illustrated by (b) and (c). In (b), a
sequence of accusative and infinitive sentences forms the answer that corresponds to
quid in the preceding question and each sentence has its own internal pragmatic
structure. In (i), me is the topic (a discourse topic), in contrast with te (another dis-
course topic) in (ii). In the absence of data concerning intonational prominence
(stress, for example), it is not immediately clear which element in the remainder of
(i) is the most informative: tibi, the entire action facinora puerilia obicere, or facinora
puerilia alone. Although tibi has an apposition with it (istuc aetatis homini), before
and after which there probably was a pause, it is given information and therefore
not a likely candidate to be regarded as focus. In terms of newsworthiness for the
20 See de Jong (1989: 527): ‘There is no straightforward relation between Topic function and first
position in the clause.’
840 Information structure and extraclausal expressions
addressee, facinora puerilia seems the best candidate. This interpretation is also sup-
ported by the appositionlike continuation of facinora puerilia after the verb and the
anaphoric pronoun ea in the next sentence. Note that in (i) there is also a clause-
internal contrast between me and tibi, as there is in (ii), but in a different way. The
focus functions in the two coordinated clauses in (ii) are fulfilled by expetere (ex opi-
bus summis) and ire opitulatum, respectively.
(b) At hoc me facinus miserum macerat / meumque cor corpusque cruciat. #
Quid id est quod cruciat? Cedo. / # (i) Me tibi, istuc aetatis homini, facinora
puerilia / obicere, nec te decora nec tuis virtutibus. / (ii) Ea te expetere ex
opibus summis mei honoris gratia / mihique amanti ire opitulatum . . .
(‘But this fact vexes me and tortures my heart and body. # What is it that tortures
you? Tell me. # (i) That I’m imposing on you, a man of your age, juvenile concerns
appropriate neither for yourself nor for your character. (ii) That you seek these with
all your might for my sake and come to help me in my love . . .’ Pl. Mil. 616–21)
In (c), the slave Chrysalus wants to instruct his young master Mnesilochus to write in
his own name the usual greeting formula to his father. Next he will dictate the main
message of the letter (from line 735 onwards). However, Mnesilochus interrupts him.
It is not immediately clear which of the three constituents in Chrysalus’ continuation
of his instruction (salutem, tuo patri, and verbis tuis) is focus. That the letter is intended
for Mnesilochus’ father has been said before. That the letter will start with a salutem
formula is to be expected in such a situation. So verbis tuis is the least expected elem-
ent and for that reason a good candidate for the function of focus. However, Pistoclerus,
Mnesilochus’ friend, sarcastically reinterprets the sentence in the next line, replacing
salutem by morbum mortem and so changing the focus to salutem: the first thing to
write is a salutation.
(c) Quod iubebo scribito istic. Nam propterea <te> volo / scribere, ut pater
cognoscat litteras quando legat. / Scribe— # Quid scribam? # Salutem
tuo patri verbis tuis. / # Quid si potius morbum mortem scribat? Id
erit rectius.
(‘Write there what I tell you. For I want you to write for the simple reason that your
father may recognize your handwriting when he’s reading it. Write— # What should
I write? # A hearty greeting to your father in your name. / What if he’s writing a greeting
of illness and death to him? That’ll be more to the point.’ Pl. Bac. 729–32)
It is also possible to take tuo patri as the attibute of salutem. This may be the intention
of the Loeb translation. Of course, one can also assume a pause after patri and inter-
pret verbis tuis as a second focus. NB: Verbis tuis does not mean ‘in your own words’,
as the Loeb has it. It must mean a ‘personal’ address from Mnesilochus to his father
(as it is indeed further on: Mnesilochus salutem dicit suo patri. (line 734)). See Barsby
ad loc. and OLD s.v. verbum § 14.
In order to be able to use the term ‘focus’ in a way that can be verified by the users of
this Syntax, three sections will be devoted to the following questions:
Focus 841
Apart from this ‘completive’ type, there are other types of focuses where the informa-
tion transmitted to an addressee is not ‘new’ as in the above cases, but constitutes a
modification of the previous knowledge of the addressee or of his expectations. This
is illustrated by three question/answer pairs in (c)–(e). In (c), the answer confirms
that Philocomasium iam left while adding dudum. In (d), the time of the friendship is
specified more precisely by the addition of present tense est. Both (c) and (d) are
examples of expanding focus. In (e), the information of the person who asks the
question is incorrect. Eius frater functions as replacing focus.
(c) Philocomasium iam profecta est? Dic mihi. # Iam dudum.
(‘Has Philocomasium left already? Tell me. # Already long ago.’ Pl. Mil. 1428–9)
(d) Fuitne hic tibi amicus Charmides? # Est et fuit.
(‘Didn’t you have Charmides here as a friend? # I do and I did.’ Pl. Trin. 106)
21 For the various types of focus discussed in this section, see Dik (1997: I.330–5). Also Revuelta (1999:
698–702).
842 Information structure and extraclausal expressions
(e) Rogitabant: ‘hicine Achilles est?’ inquit mihi. ‘Immo eius frater,’ inquam, ‘est.’
(‘They kept asking. “Is this Achilles?” says one to me. “No,” I say, “it’s his brother” .’
Pl. Mil. 62)
A fourth type of focus is shown in (f). In Rome two activities were connected with the
observation of signs from heaven: spectio and nuntiatio. Augurs had only the right of
nuntiatio. Nuntiationem in (f) is a restricting focus, as becomes clear also through
the presence of the restrictive particle solum (and the continuation with etiam).22
(f) Nos (sc. augures) enim nuntiationem solum habemus, consules et reliqui
magistratus etiam spectionem.
(‘For we augurs only possess the right to report an unfavourable omen, whereas
consuls and the rest of the magistrates also have the right to look for omens.’ Cic.
Phil. 2.81)
Ex. (g) is an interesting instance of a change of topic and focus in dialogue. Here the
slave Acanthio has announced bad news to his young master Charinus, who in his
impatience interrupts him. Whereas tuam amicam vidit (a completive focus) is the
planned focus in Acanthio’s message about the topic tuos pater, the interruption
causes a shift due to which tuam amicam becomes topic (eam) and vidit becomes the
(completive) focus of the message—indeed for Charinus the most unexpected and
unwelcome part of the message (as the text that follows shows).
(g) Tuos pater — # Quid meus pater? / # Tuam amicam — # Quid eam? # Vidit.
# Vidit? Vae misero mihi!
(‘Your father— # What about my father? # Your girlfriend— # What about her? # He’s
seen her. # He’s seen her? Poor wretched me!’ Pl. Mer. 180–1)
22 There is one more type of focus recognized by Functional Grammar, viz. selecting focus. See Dik
(1997: I.331–5).
23 See Spevak (2010a: 38).
24 For the term ‘complex focus’, see Dik (1995: 71–3). Compare Spevak (2010a: 44), who prefers the
term ‘complex information’. Ex. (b) is taken from Spevak (2010a: 44–5). See also Wachter (2004).
Focus 843
questions, we can make a distinction in the scope of focus. Given the diversity of
linguistic constituents that function as focus, it is in such cases better to speak of
‘focus units’ than of ‘focus constituents’.
(a) Qua opinione adductus Varus postero die mane legiones ex castris educit.
Facit idem Curio . . .
(‘Induced by this view of things Varus led his troops out of camp the following day.
Curio did the same.’ Caes. Civ. 2.27.3)
(b) Qui omnes discessu Curionis multique praeterea per simulationem vulnerum
ex castris in oppidum propter timorem sese recipiunt. Qua re animadversa . . .
(‘After Curio’s departure all of the wounded men (and many, too, pretending to be
wounded) withdrew from the camp into the city because of their fear. Observing
this . . .’ Caes. Civ. 2.35.5–6)
(c) Quoniam videmus auro insidias fieri, / capimus consilium continuo.
(‘Since we saw that a trap was being set for the gold, we made a plan at once.’ Pl. Bac.
299–300)
25 See Spevak (2010a: 39–56). For the methodology of establishing focus in ancient texts (in casu
Hittite), see Goedegebuure (2009).
26 For this use of quidam, see Rosén (1998: 728–31).
27 Taken from Spevak (2010a: 39–40).
28 Forms of inquam often follow an emphatic or focal constituent, but they cannot be taken as a sys-
tematic signal of emphasis of focality. See Spevak (2010a: 163–4).
844 Information structure and extraclausal expressions
(b) Frumenti vim maximam ex Thessalia, Asia, Aegypto, Creta, Cyrenis reli-
quisque regionibus comparaverat.
(‘Pompey had procured a very large quantity of provisions from Thessaly, Asia,
Egypt, Crete, Cyrene, and the other regions.’ Caes. Civ. 3.5.1)
(c) . . . reddat misero patri filiam. Membra quae debilitavit lapidibus . . . restituere
non potest. Filiam, filiam inquam, aerumnoso patri, Deciane, redde.
(‘. . . let him restore the daughter to her miserable father: for the limbs which he has
weakened with stones . . . those he cannot restore. The daughter—restore the daugh-
ter, I say, O Decianus, to her unhappy father.’ Cic. Flac. 73)
There are various other means to give prominence to one or more constituents of a
sentence. Correlative coordinate constructions may either mark constituents as
equally important (for example by et . . . et) or indicate that one constituent is more
important than the other (for example by non solum . . . sed etiam—see § 19.65). These
two forms of coordination can be described as devices that signal expanding focus.
Epitactic conjoins usually contain an element with expanding focus (see § 19.67).
Prepositional phrases with pro in its meaning ‘instead of ’ can be used to replace one
entity by another, as in (d) (replacing focus).29 The preposition praeter ‘besides’,
‘except’ has been described in a similar way.30
(d) . . . ei pro scorto supponetur hircus unctus nautea.
(‘. . . for him a goat, perfumed with bilge water, will be substituted in place of a prosti-
tute.’ Pl. Cas. 1018)
Latin has a number of ‘emphasizing particles’, which are, however, not limited to focus
constituents. They are discussed in §§ 22.20–40. Two particular sentence structures
are discussed in the following sections.
29 For ‘replacive’ pro phrases, see Revuelta (1999). For further examples, see TLL s.v. pro 1425.41ff.
30 See Torrego (1998) and Revuelta (1999).
31 On presentative sentences, see Bolkestein (1995), Rosén (1998), Spevak (2004; 2010a: 187–93), and
Cabrillana (2010a). For examples, see also Devine and Stephens (2006: 208–13), who note that Cato has
the verb sum mostly in final position.
Focus 845
(a) Est Euboicus miles locuples, multo auro potens, / qui ubi tibi istam emptam
esse scibit atque hanc adductam alteram, / continuo te orabit ultro ut illam
tramittas sibi.
(‘There’s a wealthy soldier from Euboea who owns a lot of gold. As soon as he knows
that the first girl has been bought by you and that this second has been brought here,
he’ll ask you of his own accord to send the first over to him.’ Pl. Epid. 153–5—NB:
continuation in a relative clause)
(b) In eo flumine (sc. Axona) pons erat. Ibi praesidium ponit . . .
(‘There was a bridge over the river. He set a guard there . . .’ Caes. Gal. 2.5.6)
(c) Erat vallis inter duas acies, ut supra demonstratum est, non ita magna, at
difficili et arduo ascensu. Hanc uterque si adversariorum copiae transire
conarentur . . .
(‘There was a ravine between the two lines, as was indicated above. It was not particu-
larly large but had a difficult and steep ascent. Each side waited to see whether the
adversary’s forces would attempt to cross it . . .’ Caes. Civ. 2.34.1)
(d) Palus erat non magna inter nostrum atque hostium exercitum. Hanc si nostri
transirent, hostes exspectabant.
(‘Between our own and the enemy’s army was a marsh of no great size. The enemy
waited to see whether our men would cross it.’ Caes. Gal. 2.9.1)
(e) Sed cum esset inter bina castra campus circiter milium passuum VI,
Domitius castris Scipionis aciem suam subiecit . . .
(‘Moreover, although there was level ground between the two camps for about six
miles, Domitius positioned his line close to Scipio’s camp . . .’ Caes. Civ. 3.37.2)
(f) Erant omnino itinera duo quibus itineribus domo exire possent: unum per
Sequanos . . . Relinquebatur una per Sequanos via, qua Sequanis invitis prop-
ter angustias ire non poterant.
(‘There were two routes, and no more, by which they could leave their homeland.
One through the territory of the Sequani . . . There remained only the route via the
territory of the Sequani, by which they could not march without the consent of the
Sequani, on account of its narrowness.’ Caes. Gal. 1.6.1–9.1)
Supplement:
Verb-initial: Fuit olim quidam senex / mercator. Navim is fregit apud Andrum insu-
lam. (Ter. An. 221–2); Fuit apud Segestanos ex aere Dianae simulacrum cum summa
atque antiquissima praeditum religione tum singulari opere artificioque perfectum.
Hoc . . . (Cic. Ver. 4.72); Quin etiam, si quis est paulo ad voluptates propensior, modo
ne sit ex pecudum genere, sunt enim quidam homines non re sed nomine, sed si quis
est paulo erectior . . . (Cic. Off. 1.105); Erat eo loco fossa pedum XV et vallum con-
tra hostem in altitudinem pedum X . . . (Caes. Civ. 3.63.1); Erat una cum ceteris
Dumnorix Haeduus, de quo a nobis antea dictum est. (Caes. Gal. 5.6.1); Erat unus intus
Nervius nomine Vertico, loco natus honesto, qui a prima obsidione ad Ciceronem
perfugerat suamque ei fidem praestiterat. Hic servo spe libertatis magnisque persuadet
praemiis ut litteras ad Caesarem deferat. (Caes. Gal. 5.45.2–4); Erat idem temporis
846 Information structure and extraclausal expressions
Sex. Pompeius frater qui cum praesidio Cordubam tenebat, quod eius provinciae caput
esse existimabatur. (B. Hisp. 3.1);32 Accedebant muliebres offensiones novercalibus
Liviae in Agrippinam stimulis . . . (Tac. Ann. 1.33.3); Fuit in senatu Iunius Rusticus,
componendis patrum actis delectus a Caesare eoque meditationes eius introspicere
creditus. Is . . . (Tac. Ann. 5.4.1); Erat <na>uarchus in ea classe Volusius Proculus,
occidendae matris Neroni inter ministros, non ex magnitudine sceleris provectus, ut
rebatur. Is . . . (Tac. Ann. 15.51.2); . . . incipit: ‘Erant in quadam civitate rex et regina.’
(Apul. Met. 4.27.8–28.1); Et trans vallem apparebat mons sanctus Dei Syna. (Pereg. 1.1)
Verb non-initial: Haec urbs est Thebae. In illisce habitat aedibus Amphitruo. (Pl.
Am. 97–8); Mercator quidam fuit Syracusis senex. / Ei sunt nati filii gemini duo . . . (Pl.
Men. 17–18); Adulescens quidam est qui in hisce habitat aedibus. / Is rem paternam
me adiutrice perdidit. (Pl. Trin. 12–13); Collis erat leniter ab infimo acclivis.
Hunc . . . (Caes. Gal. 7.19.1); Seneca fuit, cuius nomen ad vos potuit pervenisse, inge-
nii confusi ac turbulenti, qui cupiebat grandia . . . (Sen. Suas. 2.17)
Latin has a special construction to mark a constituent as the focus of the message.33 It
looks similar to what is called a ‘cleft sentence’ in English grammar, exemplified by (a),
which can be compared with (b). Whereas in (b) the salience of his callousness is
expressed by word order, the information is divided into two clauses in (a) and his
callousness has a clause of its own.34
(a) It is his callousness that I shall ignore.
(b) His callousness I shall ignore.
Latin examples are (c) and (d). They consist of a subject constituent, a form of the
copula sum ‘to be’, and an autonomous relative clause that functions as subject com-
plement. The subject of the copula is often in some way in contrast with another
entity, explicit or implicit. In (c), there is a dispute about the identity of the person
who hired the addressee, as is shown by the reaction. This explains the use of the cleft
construction for ego, which is already by itself pragmatically marked (see § 9.2). In
(d), Charilaus has been introduced into the discourse together with his colleague. He
(and not his colleague) is selected as the focus for further information. An example of
an interrogative cleft sentence is (e) (see also § 6.21 fin.).35 An example of ‘parallel
focus’ (see § 22.18) is (f).
(c) Non ego sum qui te dudum conduxi. # Quid est? / Immo hercle tu istic ipsu’s.
(‘I’m not the one who hired you a while ago. # What’s that? No, you yourself are the
one.’ Pl. Mer. 758–9)
32 This example is disputed. Some take it as an instance of the cleft construction. For discussion, see
Löfstedt (1966: 265–6) and Hoffmann (2016b: 204).
33 See Löfstedt (1966; 2000: 99–100), Goria (2013), and Hoffmann (2016b).
34 The examples and part of the formulation are taken from Quirk et al. (1985: 1383–7). See also
Lehmann (1984: 358–63).
35 For the instances in Plautus, see Lodge: II.454B.
Focus 847
36 Quoted as a cleft construction by Löfstedt (1966: 81), but rejected as such by Goria (2013: 155–6).
848 Information structure and extraclausal expressions
Here the sentence starting with temperantia can either be regarded as a normal def-
inition of what temperantia means, or, preferably, as a cleft sentence, in which tempe-
rantia is implicitly contrasted with the other cardinal virtues.
(g) Eademque ratione ne temperantiam quidem propter se expetendam esse
dicemus, sed quia pacem animis afferat et eos quasi concordia quadam
placet ac leniat. Temperantia est enim quae in rebus aut expetendis aut
fugiendis ut rationem sequamur monet.
(‘The same principle will lead us to pronounce that temperance also is not
desirable for its own sake, but because it bestows peace of mind, and soothes
the heart with a tranquillizing sense of harmony. For it is temperance that
warns us to be guided by reason in what we desire and avoid.’ Cic. Fin. 1.47)
The copula usually follows the subject and precedes the relative pronoun, as in the
examples above.37
Also cited in this context are instances like (h) and (i), which have a determiner.38
However, they are not cleft sentences, but ‘identity statements’ (see § 4.92): ea . . . quam
vis ducere uxorem and ii qui rem publicam occupavere are autonomous relative clauses
which function as subject complements.
(h) Dic mihi, si audes, quis ea est quam vis ducere uxorem?
(‘Tell me, please, who is this woman you want to marry?’ Pl. Aul. 170)
(i) At qui sunt ii qui rem publicam occupavere?
(‘But who are they who have seized upon our country?’ Sal. Jug. 31.12)
Other types of adjunct that are used with a quod clause are expressions of extent
of time and other temporal expressions, as in (k) and (l). In such cases cum (quom)
is more common, certainly in Early Latin, as in (m). For the use of quod with statim,
see (n).40 (For statim see also § 16.25.)
37 For the position of the verb sum in this type of clause, see Adams (1994b: 65). Hoffmann has only a
couple of exceptions in his sample of 131 instances (2016b: 203–4).
38 See Löfstedt (1966: 85–6).
39 See Rosén (1989a: 208–11) on what she calls ‘rhematizing of adverbials’. Goria (2013: 159–61) uses
the term ‘adjunct cleft’.
40 For later developments of ‘temporal’ quod, see Sz.: 580–1 and Adams (2016: 329), on a possible
instance in Passio Perp. 3.4.
Theme, setting, and tail 849
(k) Agite, pugni. Iam diu est quod (quom edd.) ventri victum non datis.
(‘Go on, fists. It has long been the case that you have not provided food for my stom-
ach.’ Pl. Am. 302)
(l) Tertius dies est quod audivi recitantem Sentium Augurinum cum summa
mea voluptate, immo etiam admiratione.
(‘It has been three days that I have been listening to Sentius Augurinus reciting his
work, which has given me the greatest pleasure, indeed even filled me with admir-
ation.’ Plin. Ep. 4.27.1)
(m) Hanc domum / iam multos annos est quom possideo et colo . . .
(‘It has been many years that I’ve been occupying this house and protecting it . . .’ Pl.
Aul. 3–4)
(n) Litteras ad te parum fraterne scripseram, quas . . . de pactione statim quod
audieram iracundius scripseram et revocare cupiebam.
(‘I had written you a not very brotherly letter which . . . I wrote in some irritation
immediately after hearing about the agreement and wanted to recall.’ Cic. Q. fr. 1.2.12)
Supplement:
Iam pridem videtur factum heri quod homines quattuor / in soporem collocastis
nudos. (Pl. Am. 303–4); Melius anno hoc mihi non fuit domi / nec (sc. fuit hoc anno)
quod una esca me iuverit magis. (Pl. Mos. 690–1); Inde adeo quod agrum in proxumo
hic mercatus es. (Ter. Hau. 54); . . . diuque est quod invicem diligimus ex aequo.
(Sidon. Ep. 7.6.1)
Quarto die navigationis quod imparati a Carteia profecti sine aqua fuissent ad ter-
ram adplicant. (B. Hisp. 37.3); . . . filii Israhel commorati sunt his diebus quod sanctus
Moyses ascendit in montem . . . (Pereg. 2.2)
Nam illi quidem hau sane diu est quom dentes exciderunt. (Pl. Mer. 541); Sic ut
istic leno non sex menses Megaribus / huc est quom commigravit. (Pl. Per. 137–8)
Iam diu factum est, postquam bibimus. Nimis diu sicci sumus. (Pl. Per. 822)
Alongside the two intra-clausal pragmatic functions topic and focus, which concern
the information structure of the clause, two other pragmatic functions are distinguished,
namely theme and tail. These two do not form part of the clause itself, but precede
850 Information structure and extraclausal expressions
or follow it, respectively (they do belong to the sentence to which the clause belongs).41
In (a), the theme cancer ater indicates an entity about which the following clause pre-
sents relevant information. In that clause the anaphoric pronoun is is the topic; it is
coreferential with cancer ater. Another type of ante-clausal constituent is shown in
(b). Here, de forma signals a new domain of attention in the discourse which is devel-
oped in the following clause(s). There is no grammatical relation between de forma
and what follows. In (c), the tail omnes scilicet Lanuvini functions as a specification of
the topic permulti alii in the preceding clause.
(a) Cancer ater, is olet et saniem spurcam mittit. Albus purulentus est . . .
(‘As for the black ulcer, it has a foul odour and exudes putrid pus. The white is puru-
lent . . .’ Cato Agr. 157.3)
(b) De forma, ovem esse oportet corpore amplo . . .
(‘As for the form, a sheep ought to have a large body . . .’ Var. R. 2.2.3)
(c) Sed erant permulti alii ex quibus id facillime scire posset, omnes scilicet
Lanuvini.
(‘But there were many others from whom he might very easily have ascertained the
fact—any Lanuvian, for instance.’ Cic. Mil. 46)
Apart from the functions theme and tail, another extraclausal function ‘setting’, which
is introduced in § 22.15, is distinguished. The clausal and extraclausal functions are
shown schematically in Table 22.1.
41 For the distinction made in this Syntax between clause and sentence, see § 2.3.
42 The definition of ‘theme’ is a paraphrase of Dik (1997: II.391). There too some considerations can
be found why the term ‘left-dislocation’ is misleading. ‘Theme’ has nothing to do with ‘thema’ in other
pragmatic approaches. The term ‘topicalization’ is used as well. The most detailed discussion of theme
constituents, which she calls ‘left-dislocations’, is Halla-aho (2018).
Theme, setting, and tail 851
(i) One type of theme constituents concerns entities which are also explicitly or
implicitly present in the clause that follows. Such theme constituents are attested
from Early Latin onwards, but they are rare. They are avoided in, but not absent from,
literary classical prose. The example already given in § 22.13 is repeated here and
discussed in more detail.
(a) Cancer ater, is olet et saniem spurcam mittit. Albus purulentus est . . .
(‘As for the black ulcer, it has a foul odour and exudes putrid pus. The white is
purulent . . .’ Cato Agr. 157.3)
The two sentences in (a) are part of Cato’s ‘Canticle of the Cabbage’ and deal with a
certain type of brassica ‘cabbage’.43 In the preceding context Cato has already said that
cabbage is a good medicine for wounds and tumours. He now turns to the discussion
of the tumours, of which he distinguishes two types. The first one (black) is presented
in the form of a theme constituent and continued by is, which is the subject and topic
of the clause. The other one (white) is presented directly as subject and (contrastive)
topic in its clause. Thereafter comes the statement that cabbage, if macerated, will cure
such sores. The theme fulfils a discourse-structuring function.44 Another much
discussed instance is (b).
(b) (After talking of poor people in general) Sed urbana plebes, ea vero praeceps
erat de multis causis.
(‘But the city populace, it was truly reckless for many reasons.’ Sal. Cat. 37.4)
In the preceding context Sallust says that cuncta plebes ‘all the common people’ sup-
ported Catiline more suo ‘as is their custom’, which he then expands. Now he switches
to the urbana plebes and sets out to expound the many reasons why they sympathized
with Catiline. The choice of the theme construction is intended to mark this shift.
Note also the use of the adversative connector sed to mark the contrast.45
In (a) and (b) the theme constituents are in the nominative (see § 12.17), and this
is the regular situation. But the accusative is attested as well, as in (c),46 which appears
in a series of duties of the vilicus ‘overseer’, and, possibly, (d).
(c) Amicos domini, eos habeat sibi amicos.
(‘As for this master’s friends, he must consider these his own friends.’ Cato Agr. 5.3)
(d) (Lucretia speaking) ‘Nec ulla deinde impudica Lucretiae exemplo vivet.’
Cultrum, quem sub veste abditum habebat, eum in corde defigit, prolap-
saque in volnus moribunda cecidit.
(‘ “Nor in time to come shall ever unchaste woman live through the example of
Lucretia.” Taking a knife which she had concealed beneath her dress, she plunged it
into her heart, and sinking forward upon the wound, died as she fell.’ Liv. 1.58.10)
Instances like (d) have received much attention because they allow various alternative
analyses. In addition to the description given in the text, cultrum quem might be taken
together as a relative phrase with the relative determiner postposed (see § 18.15, ex.
(n)). It seems better to take quem . . . habebat as a non-restrictive relative clause.
What (a)–(b) and (c)–(d) have in common is that the case form of the theme con-
stituent is the same as it would have been if it were part of the clause. Their case form
can be explained as due to ‘anticipation’ of the construction required by the main
verb. This is not the case in (e) and (f). The use of the nominative in such contexts is
often called nominativus pendens ‘hanging nominative’, because it is not related to the
verb or a comparable constituent.47
(e) Pater tuos, is erat frater patruelis meus, / et is me heredem fecit . . .
(‘Your father, he was my first cousin, and he made me his heir . . .’ Pl. Poen. 1069–70)
(f) Tum Anci filii duo . . . tum inpensius iis indignitas crescere, si . . .
(‘Now the two sons of Ancus . . . their indignation was vastly increased by the pros-
pect that if . . .’ Liv. 1.40.2)
Supplement:
Nominative: Aurum, id fortuna invenitur, natura ingenium bonum. (Pl. Poen. 302);
Thebae, quae ante cataclysmon Ogygi conditae dicuntur, eae tamen circiter duo milia
annorum et centum sunt. (Var. R. 3.1.3); IIII · vir(ei) · aidilesque · quei · h(ac)·
l(ege) · primei · erunt·, quei · eorum · Tarentum venerit ·, / is · in diebus · XX ·
proxumeis . . . / facito . . . (CIL I2.590.7–9 (Lex municipii Tarentini, Taranto, 1st cent.
bc (early))
Sed tu, / quid tibi est? (Pl. Bac. 1108–9); Tum piscatores, qui praebent populo
pisces foetidos, / qui . . . / quorum . . . / eis ego ora verberabo surpiculis piscariis . . . (Pl.
Capt. 813–16); Epidamniensis ill’ quem dudum dixeram / . . . / ei liberorum nisi divi-
tiae nihil erat. (Pl. Men. 57–9); Eius servos, qui hunc ferebat cum quinque argenti
minis, / tuam qui amicam hinc arcessebat, ei os sublevi modo. (Pl. Ps. 718–19);
Leonides Laco, qui simile apud Thermopylas fecit, propter eius virtutes omnis
Graecia gloriam atque gratiam praecipuam claritudinis inclitissimae decoravere
monumentis . . . (Cato hist. 83=76C);48 Ceterae philosophorum disciplinae, omnino
alia magis alia, sed tamen omnes quae rem ullam virtutis expertem aut in bonis aut
in malis numerent, eas non modo nihil adiuvare arbitror . . . (Cic. Fin. 3.11); Arma
quae ad me missuri eratis, iis censeo armetis milites quos vobiscum habetis. (Pomp.
47 Löfstedt (1985: 78–9) discusses instances in the Vulgate, also in the genitive and in the dative. For
Semitic influence, see Rubio (2009: 205–6).
48 For discussion of this instance, see Cornell ad loc., with references.
Theme, setting, and tail 853
Whereas in the examples shown so far the theme constituent is picked up by another
explicit constituent, there are also instances of nominative constituents where this is
not the case. In (g), a dative constituent is unexpressed with est visum.54 In (h), the
theme constituents return as nemini further on; in (i), as decumam partem. Such
instances can better be regarded as anacoluthons.
(g) Dum haec ita fierent rex Iuba . . . non est visum dari spatium convalescendi . . .
(‘While these events were taking place, king Juba . . . thought it advisable not to give
him any respite for recovering his strength . . .’ B. Afr. 25.1)
(h) Homines maritimi Syracusis . . . cum eius cruciatu atque supplicio pascere
oculos . . . vellent, potestas aspiciendi nemini facta est.
(‘The seafaring folk of Syracuse . . . longed to feast their eyes . . . with the spectacle of
his torture and execution, and none of them was allowed even to look at him.’ Cic.
Ver. 5.65)
(i) Familia vero babae babae, non mehercules puto decumam partem esse quae
dominum suum noverit.
(‘And his slaves! My word! I really don’t believe that one out of ten of them knows his
master by sight.’ Petr. 37.9)
49 This instance is taken as attractio inversa by K.-St.: II.290 and by Shackleton Bailey ad loc.
50 For theme constituents in Lucretius, see Halla-aho (2018: 145–52).
51 For this interpretation, see Rochette (2007: 285).
52 For discussion, see Halla-aho (2018: 218).
53 For discussion, see Halla-aho (2018: 8–10); for quantitative data, ibid. 10–15.
54 For discussion of this instance, see Adams (2005b: 92–3) and Halla-aho (2018: 219).
854 Information structure and extraclausal expressions
Supplement:
Homines plous V oinvorsei virei atque mulieres sacra ne quisquam /
fecise velet . . . (CIL I2.581.19–20 (SCBac., Tiriolo, 186 bc)55
More explicit forms of announcing an entity are shown in ( j) and (k). The quod clauses
in these examples not only have a thematic function, but also indicate the status of the
information in the interaction between speaker and addressee. In this sense they
resemble the illocutionary disjunct purpose clauses discussed in § 16.50. Compare
also § 16.38 on respect clauses.
(j) Quod ad me attinet, iam pannos meos comedi, et si perseverat haec annona,
casulas meas vendam.
(‘As for me, I have already eaten my rags, and if food-prices keep up, I shall have to
sell my cottages.’ Petr. 44.15 (Ganymedes speaking))
(k) De Parthis quod quaeris, fuisse nullos puto.
(‘As for your question about the Parthians, I do not think there were any Parthians.’
Cic. Fam. 3.8.10)
(ii) The second type of theme constituents are prepositional phrases, especially those
with the preposition de ‘about’. Examples are (l), repeated from § 22.13, and (m).56
(l) De forma, ovem esse oportet corpore amplo . . .
(‘As for the form, a sheep ought to have a large body . . .’ Var. R. 2.2.3)
(m) De Pompeio, et facio diligenter et faciam quod mones.
(‘As for Pompey, I am doing my best and will do what you advise me to do.’ Cic. Q.
fr. 3.1.9)
Ex. (l) is part of a discussion about buying sheep. The first important thing mentioned
by the speaker, Atticus, is that a sheep must be good ab aetate ‘with respect to age’.
After a discussion of the importance of age, he proceeds to another aspect, de forma
‘with respect to its physical features’, the manifestations of which are explained. He
continues that it is of foremost importance that the sheep are boni seminis ‘from good
stock’. With de forma in initial position Cato marks the shift to a new stage of his
exposition. Its lack of integration in the clause makes it difficult to consider it an
adjunct of respect (see § 10.94). In the same way de Pompeio in (m) marks the shift to
a new stage in Cicero’s account, in which he has written about Caesar and will proceed
to discuss other matters after Pompey. Thus it is difficult to describe it as an adjunct
of respect.
Prepositional phrases with in are used in a similar way, as in (n).57 Here, Pliny shifts
from a discussion of miracles involving water to ones that occur in the mountains.
The shift is marked by the adversative connector verum in combination with the in
phrase, which is not part of the clause that follows, and which in fact pertains to add-
itional types of miracles mentioned later on.
(n) Namque et ignium, quod est naturae quartum elementum, reddamus aliqua
miracula, sed primum ex aquis. . . . Verum in montium miraculis, ardet
Aetna noctibus semper…
(‘For we must also report some marvels connected with fire, the fourth element of
nature, but first those arising from water. . . . But among mountain marvels, Etna
always glows at night . . .’ Plin. Nat. 2.235–6)
Supplement:
Nam de redducenda (sc. uxore), id vero ne utiquam honestum esse arbitror / nec
faciam . . . Ter. Hec. 403–4); De numero, in centum sues decem verres satis esse
putant. (Var. R. 2.4.22); De litterarum missione, sine causa abs te accusor. (Cic. Att.
1.5.3); De Tadiana re, mecum Tadius locutus est te ita scripsisse, nihil esse iam quod
laboraretur, quoniam hereditas usu capta esset. (Cic. Att. 1.5.6); De domo et Curionis
oratione, ut scribis ita est. (Cic. Att. 3.20.2); De Tirone, mihi curae est. (Cic. Att.
12.49.3)
Quod ad pastiones attinet haec fere sunt. In nutricatu, cum parere coeperunt, ini-
gunt in stabula. (Var. R. 2.2.13–15); Itaque in probris . . . Contraque in laudibus, quae
magno animo et fortiter excellenterque gesta sunt, ea nescio quomodo quasi pleniore
ore laudamus. (Cic. Off. 1.61)58
Circa Felicitatem vero, et illi gratia Domini eiusmodi contigit. (Passio Perp. 15.1)
In (o) and (p), sometimes considered instances of theme constituents,59 the de phrases
are in fact respect adjuncts that are part of the clause (see § 10.94). In both cases the
persons referred to by hoc (homine) have been introduced in the immediately preced-
ing context and therefore they can function as topics. It is noteworthy that the de
constituents return in some form in the following accusative and infinitive clauses, as
subject in (o), as attribute in (p).
(o) Melitensis Diodorus est, qui apud vos antea testimonium dixit. Is . . . De hoc
Verri dicitur habere eum perbona toreumata . . .
(‘There is a man of Melita named Diodorus, whose evidence you have already heard.
He . . . It was reported to Verres about him that he owned some really good chased
silver . . .’ Cic. Ver. 4.38)
(p) Duodequadraginta annos tyrannus Syracusanorum fuit Dionysius . . . Atqui
de hoc homine a bonis auctoribus sic scriptum accepimus summam fuisse
eius in victu temperantiam . . .
(‘For thirty-eight years Dionysius was tyrant of Syracuse . . . And yet about this man
we are told on the authority of trustworthy writers that while he was exceedingly
temperate in his way of life . . .’ Cic. Tusc. 5.57)
58 For discussion of this instance, see Weische (2005). 59 Inter alios, in LSS § 4.2.
856 Information structure and extraclausal expressions
60 Cited by Dougan in his comment on ex. (p). 61 See Dik (1997: I.396–8).
62 See de Jong (1989: 529–31) and Spevak (2010a: 68–72).
Theme, setting, and tail 857
63 See Dik (1997: I.401–3), who, in addition, also recognizes parenthetical tails that ‘pertain to some
constituent within the clause’. For discussion, see Spevak (2014a: 326–9), with references, and Cabrillana
(2019a).
64 Most of the examples are taken from Hofmann (1951: 120).
65 For the clarifying function of dico with tails and other extraclausal constituents, see Cabrillana
(2019a).
66 Discussed by Tóth (1994: 190).
858 Information structure and extraclausal expressions
Tail constituents resemble clausal appositions with respect to their postclausal pos-
ition, but they are different in other respects (see § 11.90).67 They also differ from
various expression types at the end of sentences which function as some form of after-
thought, such as the ablative absolute clause in (f) (see also § 16.89) and the parti-
cipial secondary predicate in (g) (see also § 21.7).68 Another type is shown in (h) and
(i). Unlike the tails discussed above, the expressions in these examples do not func-
tion as a specification of a constituent in the preceding clause; rather, they are loosely
attached constituents of the sentence, presenting in a disjunct-like manner a com-
ment of the author on the content of the preceding clause.
(f) In his rebus circiter dies X consumit, ne nocturnis quidem temporibus ad
laborem militum intermissis.
(‘Upon this business he spent about ten days, allowing no interruption even at night-
time in the work of the troops.’ Caes. Gal. 5.11.6)
(g) Et ipse paucis diebus eodem profectus est, iussus a senatu Italia decedere.
(‘A few days later he himself set out for the same destination, having been ordered by
the senate to leave Italy.’ Sal. Jug. 35.9)
(h) Sed Tiberius pro confecto interpretatus id quoque Blaeso tribuit ut imperator
a legionibus salutaretur, prisco erga duces honore qui bene gesta re publica
gaudio et impetu victoris exercitus conclamabantur.
(‘Tiberius, however, chose to treat it as ended, and even conferred on Blaesus the
privilege of being saluted Imperator by his legions, a time-honoured tribute to gen-
erals who, after a successful campaign, were acclaimed by the joyful and spontaneous
voice of a conquering army.’ Tac. Ann. 3.74.4)
(i) Catilina longe a suis inter hostium cadavera repertus est, pulcherrima morte,
si pro patria sic concidisset.
(‘Catiline was discovered far in front of his fellows amid the dead bodies of his foes,
a most glorious death, if he had thus fallen fighting for his country.’ Flor. Epit. 2.12.12)
pragmatic prominence to certain elements of that clause. contrast involves ‘the con-
frontation between two elements’ that ‘either share some property or differ in some
property’.69 Emphasis ‘is a means that serves the speaker or writer to express his per-
sonal evaluation of information.’70 Contrastive elements are usually also emphatic,
but there is also non-contrastive emphasis. In modern spoken languages these two
means of giving prominence are often marked by intonation alongside, among other
things, emphasizing particles and word order. For our Latin texts, once again, inton-
ation is not available. The next sections deal with ways of expressing contrast and
emphasis in Latin.
22.18 Contrast
Contrast between two elements can be expressed explicitly, but often it must be
inferred in some other way. In (a), both entities of a contrastive pair are present in the
same clause, one of which is replaced by means of the combination non + adversative
coordinator sed. In (b), there is a contrast between multiple elements that belong
to two adversatively coordinated clauses: video vs. vidi and nunc vs. modo. In (c),
Amphitryon appeals to his slave Sosia to confirm his identity and his whereabouts the
night before and so, by implication, to act as his witness. Alcmena, his wife, who is
convinced that he has been with her (in reality it was Jupiter), says that she too has her
witnesses. Mihi is contrastive, which also appears from the emphasizing particle
quoque. Note that tu in the first sentence is also contrastive (with Alcmena), as is indi-
cated by the emphasizing particle saltem.71
(a) Illuc sis vide, / non ‘paedagogum’ iam me sed ‘Lydum’ vocat.
(‘Just look at that! He isn’t calling me “tutor” any longer, but “Lydus”.’ Pl. Bac. 137–8)
(b) Quin [ergo] commonstras, si vides (sc. amicam)? / # Non video hercle nunc,
sed vidi modo.
(‘Why don’t you show me if you can see her? # I can’t see her now, but I just did.’ Pl.
Mer. 894–5)
(c) Pro di immortales, cognosci’n tu me saltem, Sosia? / # Propemodum. #
Cenavin’ ego heri in navi in portu Persico? / # Mihi quoque assunt testes qui
illud quod ego dicam assentiant.
(‘Immortal gods, can you at least recognize me, Sosia? # Just about. # Didn’t I have
dinner on the ship yesterday, in Port Persicus? # I also have witnesses to corroborate
what I’m saying.’ Pl. Am. 822–4)
69 Quoted from Spevak (2010a: 45), who refers to de Jong (1983: 132). For the distinction between
contrast (he uses the term ‘antithesis’) and emphasis, see also (Adams 1976a: 78–80).
70 Quoted from de Jong (1989: 528) and Spevak (2010a: 47).
71 For the contrastive use of personal pronouns and possessive adjectives, see Fruyt (2008) and Spevak
(2010a: 46; 92–3). Exx. (f), (j), and (m) are taken from Spevak.
860 Information structure and extraclausal expressions
Examples of contrast between two elements, which are asyndetically coordinated and
so lack an overt marker, are (d)–(f). The contrast results from the semantic relations
between the two elements and is supported by the parallel structure.
(d) Nam crudelitatis mater avaritia’st, pater furor.
(‘For avarice is the mother of cruelty, fury the father.’ Rut. Lup. 2.6)
(e) O tenebrae, o lutum, o sordes, o paterni generis oblite, materni vix memor!
(‘O darkened eyes! O bemired and dingy soul! O forgetful of your father’s line, with
scarce a memory even of your mother’s!’ Cic. Pis. 62)
(f) . . . cum ab ista parte iudici pecuniam ante iudicium datam, post iudicium
ereptam esse fateamini?
(‘. . . when you confess that it was by your side that money was given to one of the
jurors before the trial, and wrested from him after it?’ Cic. Clu. 65)
Both topic and focus constituents can be contrastive. Examples of contrastive topic
constituents are (i)–(l), the first three being typical examples of ‘topic shift’.
(i) Hostes crebri cadunt, nostri contra ingruont.
(‘The enemy was falling in heaps, our men were advancing against them.’ Pl. Am. 236)
( j) Oleum dato in menses unicuique sextarium I. Salis unicuique in anno
modium satis est.
(‘Issue a pint of oil a month per person. A modius of salt a year per person is suffi-
cient.’ Cato Agr. 58.1)
(k) Partito exercitu T. Labienum cum legionibus tribus ad Oceanum versus in
eas partes quae Menapios attingunt proficisci iubet, C. Trebonium cum pari
legionum numero ad eam regionem quae Atuatucis adiacet depopulandam
mittit, ipse cum reliquis tribus ad flumen Scaldim, quod influit in Mosam,
extremasque Arduennae partes ire constituit . . .
72 On the additive and scalar uses of ipse, see Bertocchi and Maraldi (2012: 19–21).
Contrast and emphasis 861
(‘Having divided the army, he ordered Titus Labienus to proceed with three legions
towards the districts which touch the Menapii; Gaius Trebonius with an equal num-
ber of legions to devastate the region which adjoins the Aduatuci; and he determined
to march himself with the remaining three to the river Scheldt, which flows into the
Meuse, and to the uttermost parts of the Ardennes . . .’ Caes. Gal. 6.33.1–3)
(l) Quid autem si filium post testamentum natum ex besse, filiam autem post
testamentum natam ex triente scripsit heredem nec ullum coheredem dedit
nec substituit invicem alium? Unus natus solus ex testamento fit heres.
(‘But what if he appointed a son born after the will as heir to two-thirds, but a daughter
born after the will to a third and he did not either name a co-heir or substitute anyone
else in turn? If only one is born, he will become heir under the will.’ Tryph. dig. 28.2.28.4)
Instances of parallel focus,73 where topic and focus constituents are both con-
trasted, are quite common, as in some of the examples above and in (p) and (q).
(p) Ex quibus (sc. legionibus) unam in Morinos ducendam C. Fabio legato dedit,
alteram in Nervios Q. Ciceroni, tertiam in Essuvios L. Roscio. Quartam in
Remis cum T. Labieno in confinio Treverorum hiemare iussit.
(‘One of the legions he gave to Gaius Fabius, the lieutenant-general, to be led into the
country of the Morini, a second to Quintus Cicero for the Nervii, a third to Lucius
Roscius for the Esubii; a fourth, with Titus Labienus in command, he ordered to
winter among the Remi on the border of the Treveri.’ Caes. Gal. 5.24.2)
(q) Eodemque die . . . exercitum educunt, Pompeius clam et noctu, Caesar palam
atque interdiu.
(‘On the same day . . . they led the troops out, Pompey secretly and by night, Caesar
openly and by day.’ Caes. Civ. 3.30.3)
As the examples used in this section show, the entities that are contrasted belong to
various lexical categories and function at various levels of their clause or sentence.
Contrastive elements are often in the initial or second position in their clause or sen-
tence, as mihi in (c), filium in (l), and C. Trebonium legatum in (n), as well as mulier in
(r) and nocte in (s). The early placement of a contrastive member of a phrase may lead
to discontinuity, as with salis separated from its head modum in ( j). Further details
can be found in § 23.87.
(r) Mulier quicquid dixerat, / idem ego dicebam.
(‘Whatever the woman said, I’d say the same.’ Pl. Men. 483–4)
(s) Et haec quidem interdiu. Nocte vero, quo commodior quies veniat, non
alienum est superinponere candidi panis interiorem partem ex vino
subactam.
(‘These applications are made by day. At night, in order better to assure sleep, it is not
inappropriate to apply above the eye, the crumb of white bread soaked in wine.’ Cels.
6.6.1.K)
22.19 Emphasis
The term ‘emphasis’ is defined in § 22.17 as ‘a means that serves the speaker or writer
to express his personal evaluation of information’. Some scholars use the term in a
wider sense, to cover also what is called ‘focus’ in this Syntax, that is, the part of a
clause that is ‘informationally prominent’, ‘the most relevant part of the message’, or
‘information focus’.74 Whereas ‘focus’ in the sense of this Syntax concerns the speak-
er’s assessment of the newsworthiness of a piece of information for the addressee,
emphasis reflects the importance the speaker himself attaches to a piece of informa-
tion: the orientation of ‘focus’ and ‘emphasis’ is opposite. Both topic and focus con-
stituents may be emphasized, but other constituents may be as well. In contemporary
spoken languages intonation plays an important role in marking emphasis, but what-
ever its role in Latin was, it is inaccessible to us. However, Latin has several other
devices, which are briefly discussed here and which receive a more systematic treat-
ment in later sections.
(i) The most explicit way to mark a constituent as emphatic is by using an empha-
sizing particle, for instance quidem, as in (a) and (b).75 In (a), the preparative pronoun
illud, focus in its clause, is placed in the first position of the sentence, separated by
three words from the clause it announces. Its prominent role in the sentence is rein-
forced by the addition of the emphasizer quidem. In (b), quidem separates the posses-
sive adjective meam from its head noun spem. Meam is in opposition to vestram, and
74 ‘Information focus’ is distinguished from ‘purely emotive emphasis’ by Quirk et al. (1985: 1414–16).
75 Exx. (b) and (d) are discussed as non-contrastive emphatic instances of quidem by Solodow
(1978: 98).
Contrast and emphasis 863
quidem indicates that, even if the assumption credo item vestram is wrong, Cicero
insists on his personal feelings. For details on emphasizing particles, see §§ 22.20–40.
(a) Illud quidem fatebitur Scaptius, me ius dicente sibi omnem pecuniam ex
edicto meo auferendi potestatem fuisse.
(‘Scaptius will at least admit this: that under my ruling he had the chance of taking
the whole of the money on the terms laid down in my edict.’ Cic. Att. 6.1.7)
(b) Auxerat autem meam quidem spem, credo item vestram, quod domum
Antoni adflictam maestitia audiebam . . .
(‘My hopes rose, as I expect yours did as well, from the report that gloom reigned in
Antonius’ house . . .’ Cic. Phil. 12.2)
(ii) Word order alone is an important device in Latin to make a sentence or part of a
sentence informationally or emphatically appropriate.76 Discontinuity of constituents
that belong to the same phrase is one of the means, as is shown in (c) and (d). In (c),
mea is placed in first position of the main clause and separated by three words from
its head fide to emphasize that the speaker assumes personal responsibility. The
combination of discontinuity and placement in first position in the clause is in itself
sufficient to emphasize mea, but this can be reinforced lexically by adding quidem
immediately after mea, as in (d), with four constituents between mea and vita.
(c) Quin ea te causa duco, . . . / illum ut sanum facias. # Perfacile id quidem est. /
Sanum futurum, mea ego id promitto fide.
(‘Well I’m hiring you to heal him. # That’s very easy. He shall be well, I promise you
that on my honour.’ Pl. Men. 892–4)
(d) Mea quidem hercle certe in dubio vita’st.
(‘My life’s at risk for sure.’ Ter. An. 347)
Another way to produce discontinuity is shown in (e) and (f).77 In (e), nulla is separ-
ated from cupiditas for reasons of emphasis. This discontinuity is created by the inser-
tion of the personal pronoun me. In instances like this, when personal pronouns do
not themselves have an important role in the information structure of their clause,
they are often placed immediately after an emphatic constituent. In (f), huius civitatis,
the topic of the clause, is split up by the verb form est, which like other forms of the
verb sum often follows an emphatic word, in this case huius; the emphasis signals that
other states have less authority. However, when a form of sum is informationally
important, it can be placed in first position, as in (g), where it precedes both the topic
is and the focus maxime et opacus et frigidus. The initial position serves to emphasize
the assertion as a whole: ‘it really is’.78
76 For the expression ‘informationally appropriate’, see Quirk et al. (1985: 1365).
77 The examples are taken from Adams (1994b: 1; 25).
78 For discussion of this example, see Adams (1994b: 73). For the placement of est and personal
pronouns, see Spevak (2006a: 261–72).
864 Information structure and extraclausal expressions
(e) De triumpho autem nulla me cupiditas umquam tenuit ante Bibuli impuden-
tissimas litteras . . .
(‘With regard to the Triumph, I was never in the least eager until Bibulus sent that
quite shameless letter . . .’ Cic. Att. 7.2.6)
(f) Huius est civitatis longe amplissima auctoritas . . .
(‘This state has by far the most extensive authority . . .’ Caes. Gal. 3.8.1)
(g) Est enim is (sc. locus) maxime et opacus et frigidus.
(‘For it is very shady and very cool.’ Cic. de Orat. 3.18)
Another way to emphasize a particular constituent is to put an extraclausal element
after the word to be emphasized, such as sis ‘please’ in (h).79
(h) Age aspice huc, sis, nunciam / tu qui quae facta infitiare.
(‘Go on, look here now, will you, you who denies what’s happened.’ Pl. Am. 778–9)
In addition to discontinuity and position, there is a third way in which word order can
have an emphasizing function, viz. the relative order of constituents of a phrase. In the
expression meā sententiā (ablative, serving as an attitudinal disjunct: ‘in MỲ opinion’)
mea precedes; the reverse order is not attested in the PHI corpus for this meaning:
sententia mea means ‘my oPÌNion’.80 There is further discussion of this aspect of word
order in Chapter 23.
(iii) The clitic -ne is usually attached to the first word of an interrogative sentence (see
§ 6.11 and § 23.37), which in this way is emphasized. Examples are (i) and ( j). In (i),
an indignant Mercurius, alias Sosia, wants to verify whether (the real) Sosia really
dares to say that he is Sosia. In ( j), a furious Megaronides wants to verify whether his
friend Callicles did indeed buy the house in front of which they are standing from the
young man mentioned a few lines before. The particle is attached to emisti, which is
focus of the clause and in the first position, to lend it further emphasis.81 However, the
constituent emphasized by -ne may also be placed later in the sentence, for example,
when it is preceded by a topic constituent, as in (k). See also § 23.37.
(i) Tun’ te audes Sosiam esse dicere, / qui ego sum?
(‘You dare to say that you are Sosia, the one I am?’ Pl. Am. 373–4)
( j) Emistin’ de adulescente has aedis—quid taces?— / ubi nunc tute habitas? #
Emi atque argentum dedi, / minas quadraginta, adulescenti ipsi in manum. /
# Dedistin’ argentum?
(‘Did you buy this house from the young man—why are you quiet?—where you
yourself live now? # I did buy it and I paid the young man himself cash down, forty
minas. # You paid him?’ Pl. Trin. 124–7)
(iv) For accusative and ablative forms of the personal pronouns me, te, se there are
reduplicated forms, such as sese, which are sometimes regarded as emphasizing
devices. Latin has also a number of suffixes which are attached to personal pronouns
and/or possessive adjectives, such as -pte in the expression suapte natura in (l). They
usually emphasize the word they are attached to. For details, see § 22.41.
(l) Atque esse tamen multos videmus qui neminem imitentur et suapte natura
quod velint sine cuiusquam similitudine consequantur.
(‘Nevertheless we see that there are many who imitate no one, but accomplish what
they want on the strength of their own natural abilities, without resembling anyone.’
Cic. de Orat. 2.98—tr. adapted from May and Wisse)
Whereas quoque is only used as an emphasizing particle (but see § 22.22), there are
other words that are occasionally, and often only in a specific context, used in a
similar way. An example is the adverb imprimis (or in primis) ‘above all’. In (b), in
primis has haec civitas in its scope; it singles out this specific city and emphasizes
its exceptional status relative to the rest of Sicily. It is part of an epitactic conjoin
(see § 19.67), a typical context for this interpretation. In (c), by contrast, in primis
does not emphasize a particular word, but relates to the clause as a whole (it is a
degree adjunct—see § 10.68), which is one of its regular usages (for details, see
§ 22.36).
(b) Sunt omnes Siculi non contemnendi . . . sed homines et satis fortes et plane
frugi ac sobrii, et in primis haec civitas de qua loquor . . .
(‘The Sicilians are, all of them, a far from contemptible race . . . they are really quite
fine fellows, thoroughly honest and well-behaved; and this is notably true of the
community of which I am speaking . . .’ Cic. Ver. 3.67)
866 Information structure and extraclausal expressions
(c) Quod cum ita sit resque eius modi sit ut in primis a magistratibus animad-
vertenda videatur, iterum quaero sitne eius rei aliqua actio an nulla.
(‘This being so and the case being such that the magistrates seem to need to pay spe-
cial attention to it, I ask again whether there is a legal process in my case or not.’ Cic.
Caec. 33)
Emphasizing particles like quoque, which are typically used with a constituent in their
scope, have different characteristics from words and expressions like in primis. The
former cannot be coordinated (by et, atque, -que, sed) with similar words, cannot be
followed by quidem, and are excluded from sentence-initial position. By contrast,
such restrictions do not apply to adverbs and adverbial expressions like in primis.
In the case of the only attested sequence et quoque in the PHI corpus, quoted in (d),
et does not coordinate quoque, but the whole clause, with quoque meaning ‘even’ (see
§ 22.22).
(d) Volt placere sese amicae, volt mihi, volt pedisequae, / volt famulis, volt etiam
ancillis; et quoque catulo meo / subblanditur novos amator, se ut quom
videat gaudeat.
(‘He wants to please his girlfriend, he wants to please me, he wants to please
the waiting-woman, he wants to please the servants, he even wants to please the
maids; and a new lover even tries to make friends with my little dog so that
he’s happy when it sees him.’ Pl. As. 183–5)
Instead of ‘emphasizing particle’ many linguists use the term ‘focus particle’. In Vol. I
I have used the term ‘focusing particle’ and ‘focusing subjunct’. The term ‘particle’ is
also used in a more general way for any uninflected word (see also §§ 3.26–7).
Scholars vary in their use of the labels ‘particle’ and ‘adverb’. In fact, the OLD calls
quoque an adverb and quidem a particle.82 Obviously, both ‘emphasizing’ and ‘focus’
in this combination with ‘particle’ are only indirectly related to the way ‘focus’ is
defined in this Syntax. Sometimes I shall use the term ‘emphasizing particle’ in a
general sense for ‘expressions that function as an emphasizing particle’. Etiam is a
good example. In this Chapter I call it a particle, but in its use with comparative
expressions (see § 20.10, Appendix) I take it as an adverb.
There are languages that have an ‘empty’ emphasizing particle, without a lexical
meaning of its own. The Latin particle that comes closest is quidem.83
82 For recent discussion, see Rosén (2009: 327 and passim) and Kroon (2011: 176–7), with references.
Quirk et al. (1985: 604–5) use the term ‘emphasizing subjunct’ to describe the relationship of these words
with their host constituents (they also recognize other types of ‘subjunct’). The OLD s.v. adeo2 § 8 uses the
term ‘ancillary particle’.
83 For a discussion of ‘empty focus markers’, see König (1991: 29).
84 Following the terminology of Quirk et al. (1985: 604). See also Rosén (2009: 323 and 361), who
distinguishes the same three types, albeit with a different terminology. The distinction is mainly on broad
semantic grounds.
Emphasizing particles 867
supplementary ballot had been used in other cases. By using the exclusive particle
solum in (f), Cicero says that the other cities were exclusively bothered by their own
troubles and not by those of other cities (as the continuation of the sentence shows).
By using the particularizing particle quidem in (g), Cicero indicates that his statement
concerns predominantly the minds of the judges.
(e) Eiusmodi subsortitionem homo amentissimus suorum quoque iudicum fore
putavit per sodalem suum Q. Curtium . . .
(‘The insane scoundrel thought that he could manage a supplementary ballot of the
same kind for the judges who were to try himself by the help of his comrade Quintus
Curtius. . .’ Cic. Ver. 1.158)
(f) . . . ceterae civitates suis solum incommodis commoventur, Centuripini . . .
etiam ceterarum civitatum damna ac detrimenta senserunt.
(‘. . . the other places were roused by their own troubles only, whereas the Centuripans
have also been sensitive to the losses and injuries sustained by all those others.’ Cic.
Ver. 3.108)
(g) Sed si certorum hominum mentis nulla ratione, iudices, placare possumus,
vestros quidem animos certe confidimus non oratione nostra, sed humani-
tate vestra esse placatos.
(‘But if, gentlemen, there are no means by which we can appease the feelings of cer-
tain men, I am fully confident that your minds have been appeased, not by words of
mine but by your own human feelings.’ Cic. Balb. 62)
In (e) and (f) the particles immediately follow the word in their scope (they are ‘post-
positive’—exceptions can be found in §§ 22.21, 24, 26). Quidem in (g) emphasizes the
noun phrase vestros . . . animos as a whole, but follows the first word of that phrase (see
§ 23.34). The particles fulfil no function at the clause level, unlike adjuncts. They can
have all sorts of content words and phrases in their scope. This is illustrated in (h)–(o)
for quoque: (h), with a verb (rare); (i), with a noun; ( j), with a personal pronoun; (k),
with an anaphoric pronoun; (l), with an adjective; (m), with a possessive adjective;
(n), with a determiner; (o), with an adverb.85 For an accumulation of contrastive
elements, see (p).
(h) . . . sentio, suspicio / quae te sollicitet: eum esse cum illa muliere. / # Immo est
quoque.
(‘I’ve been feeling what suspicion is troubling you: that he is with that woman. # Yes,
he is with her.’ Pl. Bac. 890–2)
(i) Servos ancillas amove. Atque audi’n? # Quid est? / # Uxorem quoque eampse
hanc rem uti celes face.
(‘Send away your male and female slaves. And can you hear me? # What is it? # Make
sure that you conceal this business also from your wife herself.’ Pl. Trin. 799–800)
( j) Hic hodie cenato, leno. # Fiat, condicio placet. / # Sequimini intro. Spectatores,
vos quoque ad cenam vocem, / ni daturus nil sim . . .
(‘Have dinner here today, pimp. # Yes, I like the invitation. # Follow me in, you two.
Spectators, I’d also invite you to dinner, were it not for the fact that I’m not going to
give any . . .’ Pl. Rud. 1417–19)
(k) . . . ‘quoi sit uxor’, id quoque illuc ponito ad compendium.
(‘. . . “you who have a wife”, stow that away as well.’ Pl. Cas. 519)
(l) Eundemque te memini censorias quoque leges in sartis tectis exigendis
tollere . . .
(‘I remember that it was you too who also changed or annulled the censor’s regula-
tions that govern contracts for the upkeep of public buildings . . .’ Cic. Ver. 3.16)
(m) Sapienti ornatus quid velim indicium facit. / # Meus quoque hic sapienti
ornatus quid velim indicium facit.
(‘My getup shows a sensible person what I want. # This getup of mine also shows a
sensible person what I want.’ Pl. Rud. 428–9)
(n) Ad eam sententiam cum reliquis causis haec quoque ratio eos deduxit quod . . .
(‘To this opinion they were brought, among the other reasons, by this particular
consideration also, that . . .’ Caes. Gal. 2.10.5)
(o) Non modo ipsa lepida’st, commode quoque hercle fabulatur.
(‘Not only is she herself pretty, my god, she also speaks in a pleasant way.’ Pl. Cist. 315)
(p) Ego pol te faciam, scelus, / te quoque etiam ipsum ut lamenteris.
(‘I’ll make sure that even you yourself lament also, you criminal.’ Pl. Per. 743–4)
The situation is different in the case of in primis and saltem. When they have a con-
stituent in their scope they can follow it immediately, as in (q) and (r), but this order
is optional—see ex. (c) above.86
(q) Quare pudor in primis est ad eam rem inpedimento . . .
(‘Hence it is in the first place a sense of shame which keeps us from following this
practice . . .’ Rhet. Her. 4.2)
(r) Civilis enim dissensionis . . . non est iste molestus exitus, in quo reliquos
saltem civis incolumis licet conservare.
(‘Of civil dissensions . . . that end is not so grievous in which we are at least allowed to
preserve the rest of our citizens unharmed.’ Cic. Ver. 5.152)
Instances of the additive particle quoque are discussed in the preceding section.87
Other words that can function more or less in the same way as additive quoque are et
‘also’, ‘too’ (‘usually related to a single word or phrase’) and etiam ‘also’, ‘as well’, ‘too’.88
Examples are (a)–(d).89 In these examples the particles indicate the simple addition of
one entity or property to another. They precede the word in their scope. This simple
use must be distinguished from the use of these particles in the sense ‘even’, which is
discussed in § 22.22.
(a) Et enim vero quoniam formam cepi huius in med et statum, / decet et facta
moresque huius habere me similes item.
(‘And since I took on his looks and dress, I also ought to have similar ways and habits.’
Pl. Am. 266–7)
(b) Nisi vero illud dicet, quod et in Tetti testimonio priore actione interpellavit
Hortensius . . .
(‘Perhaps, however, he will argue as Hortensius did as well when cross-examining
Tettius during the first part of the trial . . .’ Cic. Ver. 1.71)
(c) Fuge, opsecro hercle. # Quo fugiam? Etiam tu fuge.
(‘Run, I entreat you. # Where should I run? You run as well.’ Pl. Mos. 513)
(d) Non enim, si tibi ea res grata fuisset, esset etiam approbata.
(‘For welcome though it might have been, it would not have also been approved by
you.’ Cic. Lig. 23)
Supplement:
. . . mea Philematium, potare tecum collubitum est mihi. / # Et edepol mihi tecum . . .
(Pl. Mos. 295–6); Ubi occisus est Sex. Roscius? # Romae. # Quid? Tu, T. Rosci, ubi
tunc eras? # Romae. Verum quid ad rem? Et alii multi. (Cic. S. Rosc. 92); Idemque
mittit et signa nobis eius generis . . . (Cic. Div. 1.121); Quibus enim ratio a natura data
est, eisdem etiam recta ratio data est. Ergo et lex, quae est recta ratio in iubendo et
vetando. Si lex, ius quoque. (Cic. Leg. 1.33); At Iugurtha, postquam oppidum Capsam
aliosque locos munitos et sibi utilis simul et magnam pecuniam amiserat . . . (Sal. Jug.
97.1); Mox cornua extendendo clausere et ab tergo hostes. (Liv. 22.47.8); Fuerunt et
qui in novercam inveherentur. (Sen. Con. 7.1.20); Et haec enim philosophia prae-
scribit. (Vitr. 1.1.7); Emicant et faces, non nisi cum decidunt visae, qualis Germanico
Caesare gladiatorum spectaculum edente praeter ora populi meridiano transcucur-
rit. (Plin. Nat. 2.96); (sc. Caesar) Neque tamen ob ea parentis patriae delatum et antea
vocabulum adsumpsit . . . (Tac. Ann. 2.87)
NB: conjunctive coordinator and additive et in the same context: Iidem (sc. sativi)
et contra venena prosunt . . . salutares et contra fungorum aut hyoscyami venena
atque, ut Nicander tradit, et contra sanguinem tauri. (Plin. Nat. 20.25); . . . Clesippus
fullo gibber et praeterea et alio foedus aspectu . . . (Plin. Nat. 34.11)90
Atque ego censui aps te posse hoc me impetrare, uxor mea, / Casina ut uxor mihi
daretur; et nunc etiam censeo. (Pl. Cas. 364–5); Ducas easque in maxumam malam
crucem / cum hac cum istac, cumque amica etiam tua. (Pl. Cas. 611–12); Eho an
88 See OLD s.v. et § 5, s.v. etiam § 3. For additive ‘operators’, including scalar ones, see Gast and Van der
Auwera (2011); see p. 24 on et.
89 For expressions like non modo . . . sed etiam, see § 19.65. 90 See TLL s.v. et 910.52ff.; 77ff.
870 Information structure and extraclausal expressions
etiam in caelum escendisti? (Pl. Trin. 942); Si utile rei publicae fuit haurire me unum
pro omnibus illam indignissimam calamitatem, etiam hoc utile est, quorum id
scelere conflatum sit, me occultare et tacere. (Cic. Dom. 30); Nos autem praeceptis
dialecticorum et oratorum etiam . . . parentes . . . verbis quoque novis cogimur
uti . . . (Cic. Ac. 1.5); Auctoritate tua nobis opus est et consilio et etiam gratia. (Cic.
Fam. 9.25.3); Sed ante omnia obsidionis bellique mala fames utrimque exercitum
urgebat, Gallos pestilentia etiam . . . (Liv. 5.48.1); Aqua vero frigida infusa, praeter-
quam capiti, etiam stomacho prodest, etiam articulis doloribusque . . . (Cels. 1.9.5);
Ita proelium atque arma, quae fortibus honesta, eadem etiam ignavis tutissima sunt.
(Tac. Ag. 30.1)
Verum edepol ne etiam tua quoque malefacta iterari multa / et vero possunt (Pl.
As. 567–8); Me quoque iuvat, velut ipse in parte laboris ac periculi fuerim, ad finem
belli Punici pervenisse. (Liv. 31.1.1—NB: at the beginning of the book: ‘just as you,
readers, probably are pleased’);91 (sc. Agrippina) Abeunte dehinc ancilla ‘tu quoque
me deseris’ prolocuta respicit Anicetum . . . (Tac. Ann. 14.8.3)92
Whereas quoque has only constituents in its scope (but see below), etiam can also
have larger parts of a clause in its scope (or perhaps one should say, it can function on
its own at the clause level). This may explain the use of both words in the same clause,
as in (e) and (f).93 Most instances occur in Early Latin comedy.94 This usage is some-
times called ‘pleonastic’. One can compare quoque + item in Cicero Fam. 5.1.2 and
Lucretius 5.245 cj. (For additive quoque + scalar etiam, see § 22.22.)
(e) Atque ego quoque etiam, qui Iovis sum filius, / contagione mei patris metuo
malum.
(‘And I too, who am Jupiter’s son, have also caught the fear of a thrashing
from my father.’ Pl. Am. 30–1)
(f) Nunc vero, Crasse, mea quoque etiam (te iam cj. Kiessling) causa rogo ut . . .
(‘But now, Crassus, it is actually also for my own sake that I am asking you.’
Cic. de Orat. 1.164—tr. May and Wisse)
The OLD has a small section (§ 2.c) where quoque ‘attaches to the whole rather than
any individual word’. One of the examples is (g), where it is indeed difficult to attach
quoque to neutra (unless it relates to quare, as it does to ideo on a few occasions). See
also (h).95 The interpretation of the instances cited in the literature varies. Note that
quoque causes discontinuity.
(g) Hic et propositio et assumptio perspicua est. Quare neutra quoque indiget
approbatione.
(‘Here both the major and the minor premise are clear. Therefore neither
needs proof.’ Cic. Inv. 1.66)
91 For a few more instances of what he calls ‘inceptive’ quoque, see Frischer (1983).
92 Bertocchi and Maraldi (2012: 16) interpret quoque here in a scalar sense, but this seems unnecessary.
93 So already K.-St.: II.53.
94 See TLL s.v. etiam 945.52ff. and Sz.: 523. For Lucretius, see Reinhardt (2010: 220–1).
95 Quoted by Shackleton Bailey (1956: 175–6) as an example of ‘the common [SIC!] usage whereby
quoque belongs to the whole sentence and not to any particular word.’
Emphasizing particles 871
(h) Non rastros patietur humus, non vinea falcem. / Robustus quoque iam tau-
ris iuga solvet arator.
(‘Earth will not suffer the harrow, nor the vine the pruning hook. The sturdy
ploughman, too, will now loose his oxen from the yoke.’ Verg. Ecl. 4.40–1)
Instances of quoque preceding the constituent it relates to are attested from Varro and
Livy onwards in prose (though not in Cicero and Caesar) and from Lucretius onwards
in poetry. Examples are (i)–(l).96 There is not a scholarly consensus on how to analyse
all the cases cited in the literature.
(i) Itaque ne ab se imperatoria consilia neu consulares artes exquirerent, quae
pensitanda quoque magnis (magnis quoque cj. Mueller) animis atque inge-
niis essent.
(‘It was not, therefore, to him that they must address inquiries concerning
the strategy of commanders and the qualifications of consuls; the weighing
of such abilities demanded also great mental and intellectual powers.’
Liv. 4.41.3)
( j) . . . scilicet expletis (sc. faucibus) quoque ianua raditur oris.
(‘. . . and then, in truth, the door to the mouth too is scraped when the throat
is choked.’ Lucr. 4.532—tr. Bailey)
(k) . . . et amarunt me quoque nymphae.
(‘. . . and the nymphs too have loved me.’ Ov. Met. 3.456)
(l) Nam quoque (namque cj. Rodgers) eius modi laetatur alimentis et holus
et arbor.
(‘For both vegetables and trees thrive on nutriment of this sort too.’ Col.
1.6.24)
The coordinator -que is used in the sense of quoque in the expression hodieque ‘even
nowadays’ from Velleius onwards, as in (m). Also nuperque ‘even recently’ (Plin. Nat.
5.4). There are a few more much-discussed instances of -que in poetry where scholars
have suggested an additive reading, as in (n). (Also meque Catul. 102.3; meque Prop.
3.1.35 al.)97
(m) Vires autem veteres earum urbium hodieque magnitudo ostentat moenium.
(‘The extent of their walls even at the present day serves to reveal the great-
ness of these cities in the past.’ Vell. 1.4.2)
(n) . . . gaudete vosque, o Lydiae lacus undae . . .
(‘. . . rejoice you too, ye waters of the Lydian lake . . .’ Catul. 31.13)
From Quintilian onwards quoque and etiam are used in combination with adhuc,
as in (o).98
96 See Bömer ad Ov. Met. 6.27, K.-St.: II.54, Sz.: 485–6, Shackleton Bailey (1956: 175–6) and, for discus-
sion and parallels in poetry, Ramírez de Verger (2011). In (k), Barchiesi and Rosati ad loc. take quoque
with me, referring to Labate (1983).
97 For discussion and emendations of the Catullan instances, see Trappes-Lomax (2007: 95, 282). For
an instance in the Vindolanda Tablets, see Adams (2019: 255). In general, Sz.: 475.
98 See TLL s.v. adhuc 662.52ff.
872 Information structure and extraclausal expressions
(o) At si erit tardus ad hoc, eo quoque adhuc remedio utatur, ut ipsae notae . . .
aptentur ad eos qui excidunt sensus . . .
(‘But if a student is slow at this, let him use the further device of suiting his
marks to the ideas which he is liable to forget . . .’ Quint. Inst. 11.2.29)
99 Quoted from OLD s.v. etiam. Rosén (2009) uses the term ‘escalating’. TLL s.v. et 908.22ff. calls this
use cumulative; s.v. etiam 947.63ff. elativum. In Vol. I (§ 11.145) the term ‘focusing restrictive subjunct’ is
used instead of ‘emphasizing scalar additive particle’. For the use of the term ‘scalarity’, see Bertocchi and
Maraldi (2012) and Risselada (2016: 192–3).
100 See Iordache (2010).
Emphasizing particles 873
101 See Orlandini and Poccetti (2007: 38–45). 102 See Bertocchi and Maraldi (2012: 13).
874 Information structure and extraclausal expressions
(g) Neque patiar Sibyllam non solum cecinisse quae, dum viveret, prodessent
hominibus, sed etiam quae cum perisset ipsa, et id etiam ignotissimis
quoque hominibus.
(‘And I cannot allow the Sibyl to have uttered prophecies which benefited
mankind not only while she lived, but even after she had passed away, and
this even benefited people whom she never knew as well.’ Var. R. 1.1.3)
Adeo ‘indeed’, ‘just’ is used as a scalar particle from Plautus onwards, although it is not
always easy to determine whether it has a particular constituent in its scope or whether
it belongs to the entire clause. There are instances where it is related to the verb, as
in (h); to a noun (phrase), as in (i); to a pronoun, as in ( j); to an adjective, as in (k),
causing discontinuity of the noun phrase; to an adverb, as in (l).103 It follows the
constituent it has in its scope. This usage is rare in Cicero and in prose in general,
except when related to the second conjoin of a coordinate structure, especially after
atque, as in (m); in that case, adeo precedes.104
(h) Abnuere, negitare adeo me natum suom.
(‘He’d disown me and even deny that I am his son.’ Pl. Mer. 50)
(i) Ibi voster cenat cum uxore adeo et Antipho . . .
(‘There your master is dining, with his wife actually, and Antipho . . .’ Pl. St. 664)
( j) Ille adeo illum mentiri sibi / credet . . .
(‘He indeed (sc. Amphitruo) will believe that he’s (sc. Sosia) telling lies to him . . . ’ Pl.
Am. 468–9)
(k) Verum illuc est. Maxuma adeo pars vostrorum intellegit . . .
(‘That’s true; and most of you know it . . .’ Pl. Mos. 280)
(l) Nimium ego te habui delicatam. Nunc adeo ut facturus dicam.
(‘I’ve spoiled you far too much. Now indeed I’ll tell you what I’m going to do.’ Pl.
Men. 119)
(m) Hoc consilio atque adeo hac amentia impulsi . . . eum iugulandum vobis
tradiderunt.
(‘In pursuance of this plan and indeed this folly, they have handed over to you to
murder the man . . .’ Cic. S. Rosc. 29)
Vel ‘even’ is used as a scalar particle from Early Latin onwards. Plautus has it several
times with numerals, as in (n), where one might consider taking it as a discontinuous
disjunctive coordinator, but it is also used with other types of constituents, for example
the noun mendico in (o).105
(n) Sequere hac me, faxo iam scies. # Quo gentium? / # Tris unos passus. # Vel
decem.
103 See TLL s.v. adeo 614.43ff. 104 See TLL s.v. adeo 612.41ff.
105 See OLD s.v. vel §§ 5 and 6; Lodge s.v. § A.3; Merguet (Phil.) s.v. vel 738Aff.; (Reden) s.v. vel 836Bf.
Emphasizing particles 875
(‘Follow me this way. I’ll make sure that you’ll know. # Where on earth? # Only three
steps. # Even if it were ten.’ Pl. Bac. 831–2)
(o) Cum hac dote poteris vel mendico nubere.
(‘With this dowry you’ll be able to marry even a beggar.’ Pl. Per. 396)
Supplement:
Iam hercle vel ducentae fieri possunt praesentes minae. (Pl. Ps. 302); Si arte poteris
accubare. # Vel inter cuneos ferreos. (Pl. St. 619); Huic ducendi interea apscesserit /
lubido. Atque ea condicio huic vel primaria est. (Pl. Trin. 745–6); . . . homo cum gravi-
tate et prudentia praestans, tum vel nimium parcus in largienda civitate? (Cic. Balb.
50); . . . cum viderem ex ea parte homines, cuius partis nos vel principes numera-
bamur . . . (Cic. Red. Pop. 13); . . . in quibus neque manu factum quicquam neque pul-
chritudo erat ulla, sed tantum magnitudo incredibilis de qua vel audire satis esset,
nimium videre plus quam semel . . . (Cic. Ver. 4.125); . . . neque enim falsum percipi
posse neque verum si esset tale quale vel falsum. (Cic. Luc. 77); . . . qui ea possideat
quae secum, ut aiunt, vel e naufragio possit ecferre? (Cic. Rep. 1.28); Tu, quaeso, cre-
bro ad me scribe vel quod in buccam venerit. (Cic. Att. 7.10.1); Tum egregiae muni-
tiones . . . vel sine defensoribus aditum adversariis prohibebant. (B. Afr. 31.7); Arma
vel tribus tantis exercitibus in armamentaria congessisse. (Liv. 42.12.10); Nefas
nocere vel malo fratri puta. (Sen. Thy. 219)
For the use of a number of scalar particles with comparative forms, see § 20.10
Appendix; with the superlative, see § 20.32.
The most common words that can be used as an exclusive emphasizing particle are
modo ‘just’, ‘only’ ‘no more than’, as in (a), and solum ‘only’, ‘merely’, as in (b). They are
usually placed after the word or phrase they have in their scope.106 There is a differ-
ence in meaning between the two: whereas both share the feature ‘exclusion’, modo
excludes ‘worse alternatives’,107 that is, it has a scalar meaning, as is shown in (e):
much more might have disappeared. Tantum, as in (c), and tantummodo (also: tan-
tum modo), as in (d), have more or less the same meaning as solum, but they have,
rarely, individual words or phrases in their scope and are less restricted in their pos-
ition in the clause. Instances of wider scope with modo and tantum are (f) and (g).
Modo is attested from Early Latin onwards; solum and tantum from Cicero’s time
onwards. (For dumtaxat, see § 22.32.)
(a) Cadum modo hinc a me huc cum vino transferam, / postidea accumbam.
(‘I’ll just bring the jar of wine over from my place, then I’ll recline.’ Pl. St. 647–8)
106 For a few non-postpositive instances of modo, see TLL s.v. modus 1298.3f. For solum, see OLD s.v.
solum § 1 fin.
107 The quotation is from Risselada (1994). See also Bertocchi (2001b: 96–8), who describes modo as
‘restrictive’ (109).
876 Information structure and extraclausal expressions
privata amicitia Iugurthae parum cognita transvorsos agat. (Sal. Jug. 14.20); Excepit
unum tantum, scire se nihil se scire, nihil amplius. (Cic. Luc. 74)
Itaque illi de quibus ante dixi tantummodo commoditatis habuerunt rationem,
nullam dignitatis. (Cic. Orat. 193); In coniunctis autem verbis triplex adhiberi com-
mutatio potest, non verborum sed tantum modo ordinis. (Cic. Part. 24); Oscula luc-
tanti tantummodo pauca protervus / abstulit . . . (Ov. Ep. 17.27–8); . . . animus belli
ingens domi modicus, lubidinis et divitiarum victor, tantummodo gloriae avidus.
(Sal. Jug. 63.2); Quos tamen Homerus non in pestilentia neque in variis generibus
morborum aliquid adtulisse auxilii sed vulneribus tantummodo ferro et medica-
mentis mederi solitos esse proposuit. (Cels. 1.pr.3)
Modo in this meaning can also be used in imperative sentences, as in (h) (see § 6.29).
Its use in a relative clause is shown by (i). For the use of modo and tantum in stipula-
tive clauses, see § 16.53; for modo in conditional si clauses, see § 16.63.
(h) Tum Crassus ‘perge modo,’ inquit, ‘Antoni.’
(‘ “Just go on, Antonius”, said Crassus.’ Cic. de Orat. 1.209)
(i) Cui porro qui modo populi Romani nomen audivit, Deiotari integritas,
gravitas, virtus, fides non audita est?
(‘Nay, who indeed, who has but heard the name of the Roman people, has
not heard of the incorruptibility, the dignity, the courage, the loyalty, of
Deiotarus?’ Cic. Deiot. 16)
Another expression of exclusivity that can be used with words or phrases in its scope
is non nisi ‘not unless’, as in ( j).108
( j) Ego autem medicamentorum dari potiones et alvum duci non nisi raro
debere concedo.
(‘Now in my opinion medicinal draughts and clysters should only be admin-
istered occasionally.’ Cels. 3.4.3)
Particularizing particles indicate that the content of the clause is predominantly rele-
vant for the word or phrase in its scope. The particles discussed in §§ 22.25–40 are
very diverse. Five sections are distinguished on the basis of the meanings of words,
most of them with subsections. Several of the words discussed in these sections can
also be used as adverbs at the clause level.
and semantic points of view they are very different, as can be seen in (a), where they
co-occur in the same clause. Quidem can never be in first position since it has a word
or a phrase in its scope which it emphasizes (the punctuation of (a) probably visual-
izes this close relation). By contrast, equidem has the first position, and this is the case
in roughly half of its occurrences. It adds something to the meaning of the entire
clause, resembling degree-of-truth disjuncts (see § 10.100): the speaker ‘seriously’
regards Epicurus as a pupil of Democritus. Another important distinction between
the two words is that equidem is almost only used in clauses with a first person singu-
lar subject, while for quidem the type of subject makes no difference. For further com-
plications, see below.
(a) Equidem etiam Epicurum, in physicis quidem, Democriteum puto.
(‘For my own part I consider Epicurus also, at all events in natural philosophy, simply
a pupil of Democritus.’ Cic. Fin. 4.13)
22.26 Quidem
The particle quidem (NB: ne . . . quidem is discussed in § 8.14) is used from Early Latin
onwards in all sorts of texts and with great frequency. There is continuous discussion
about what lexical category it belongs to and how one particle can be used in a fairly
broad range of contexts. Thus it also proves to be difficult to translate straightfor-
wardly into modern languages. The position taken in this Syntax is that its function is
to emphasize constituents at the clause level or, less frequently, at the constituent level.
Examples are (a) and (b), respectively.109 For its use as an emphasizer of subordinate
clauses, see below.
(a) Quattuor quadraginta illi debentur minae, / et sors et faenus. # Tantum est,
nihilo plus peto. / # Velim quidem hercle ut uno nummo plus petas.
(‘He’s owed forty-four minas, both principal and interest. # That’s the sum. I don’t ask
for more. # I’d like you to ask for one single coin more.’ Pl. Mos. 630–2)
(b) Eho, an invenisti Bacchidem? # Samiam quidem.
(‘Tell me, have you found Bacchis? # Yes, the one from Samos.’ Pl. Bac. 200)
109 The recent publications that I found most helpful are Solodow (1978), Orlandini (2005: 161–9), and
Kroon (2004a; 2005; 2009b). For a different approach, see Danckaert (2014; 2015).
110 This is essentially the description of K.-St.: I.802. But see also Solodow (1978: 13) and Kroon
(2009b).
111 See Lodge s.v. quidem § III.C.5 and § III.A.2, respectively.
Emphasizing particles 879
K.–St.: I.803 (note that quidem is in the clause that follows);112 in (d), ‘concessive’
(note that quidem precedes while sed is in the clause that follows; quidem is very com-
monly combined in this way with an adversative, especially sed but also autem, tamen,
and verum).
(c) Cum vero sontes ferro depugnabant, auribus fortasse multae, oculis quidem
nulla poterat esse fortior contra dolorem et mortem disciplina.
(‘But when criminals fought to the death with the sword, for the ears there could
perhaps be many more effective forms of training in facing pain and death, but for
the eyes none.’ Cic. Tusc. 2.41—tr. Douglas)
(d) Nam quod me hortaris . . . facis amice tu quidem . . . sed mihi videris aliud tu
honestum meque dignum . . . iudicare atque ego existimem.
(‘As for urging me . . . that is very friendly of you . . . but you seem to have a different
idea of what is honourable and fitting for me . . . from that which I hold myself.’ Cic.
Att. 8.2.2)
In Sz: 486 quidem is classified as an adversative coordinating particle alongside sed,
at, and autem. In K.-St.: I.802 it is (together with equidem) one of the affirmative
‘Modalitätsadverbien’ (more or less equivalent to ‘sentence adverbs’) alongside nē,
profecto, certe, and scilicet. Solodow (1978) recognizes two major usages, as a ‘focus
particle’ and as a ‘sentence adverb, insisting on the truth of the whole statement’ (98)
(see the discussion of ex. (q) below).113 Orlandini (2005) and Kroon (2005; 2009b)
argue for a discourse-marking function of quidem (Kroon states that it also functions
as a focus particle). Adams (1994b: 3–5) calls it an ‘emphasizing particle’, that is an
‘emphasizer’ in the terminology of this Syntax.
Quidem can follow words of various types, with pronouns of all sorts being the most
prominent. It often behaves as a clitic and forms a prosodic unit with the word it fol-
lows, which may result in a shift of accent of the leading word, as in (e). Occasionally
quidem emphasizes a whole phrase and not necessarily the word it follows. Examples
are the first quidem in (f), a noun phrase, in which quidem is in the middle, and (g), a
prepositional phrase followed by quidem.
(e) Hercle, illéquidem certo adulescens docte vorsutus fuit . . .114
(‘Really, he was certainly a cunningly clever young man . . .’ Pl. St. 561)
(f) Sed quid ego video? # Quid vides? # Nescio quis eccum incedit / ornatu
quidem thalassico. # It ad nos, volt te profecto. / Nauclerus hic quidem est.
112 Dougan ad loc. comments: ‘quidem only lends emphasis. The adversative idea (“but”) is as usual
implied by the contrast of the clauses.’
113 So also Müller (1997: 67–8): ‘Modaladverb’. Working in a different framework Danckaert (2014)
holds that quidem is a marker of ‘emphatic polarity’, which has the whole clause in its scope.
114 See Petersmann ad loc.: ‘illéquidem; so betont . . . weil das quidem enklitisch ist. Vgl. Radford TAPA
35 (1904), 40.’ See also Adams (1994b: 3–4), Questa (2007: 154–61), and Fortson (2008: 51–2).
880 Information structure and extraclausal expressions
(‘But what do I see? # What do you see? # Look, someone’s strutting along in a mari-
time outfit. # He’s coming to us, he actually wants to speak to you. This is the captain.’
Pl. Mil. 1281–3)
(g) Inter tot dies quidem hercle iam aliquid actum oportuit.
(‘Within so many days he ought to have performed some deed already.’ Pl. Truc. 510)
Very common is the use of quidem with subordinate clauses of various types, both
relative clauses, as in (h) (connecting), (i) (autonomous) and ( j) (non-restrictive
adnominal), and adjunct and disjunct subordinate clauses, as in (k) and (l).115 Quidem
directly follows the relative pronoun/determiner or the subordinator; sometimes it
forms a prosodic unit with them (notably siquidem and quandoquidem). In cases like
(k) and (l), quidem emphasizes the semantic relation between the subordinate clause
and the main clause, as expressed by the subordinator. Quidem is also common in
epitactic conjoins, where it emphasizes the fact that another piece of information is
added, as in (m) (see § 19.68). In relative clauses quidem emphasizes the semantic
relationship of the clause in its context. In (i), repeated from § 18.16, for example, the
autonomous relative clause qui videat parum functions as a disjunct of qualified truth
with respect to the preceding sentence, comparable with a dativus iudicantis (see
§§ 10.101–2); quidem emphasizes this semantic relation.
(h) Etiam agnum misi. # Quo quidem agno sat scio / magis curiosam nusquam
esse ullam beluam.
(‘I’ve even sent you a lamb. # I know for sure that I haven’t anywhere seen a beast that
it takes more care to find out what’s going on than this lamb.’ Pl. Aul. 561–2)
(i) Eugae, litteras minutas. # Qui quidem videat parum. / Verum qui satis videat,
grandes satis sunt.
(‘Goodness, such tiny letters! # Tiny for someone who doesn’t see well enough. But
for someone who does see well enough they’re big enough.’ Pl. Bac. 991–2)
( j) . . . commendo tibi . . . maxime C. Avianium Hammonium, libertum eius,
quem quidem tibi etiam suo nomine commendo.
(‘. . . I recommend to you especially C. Avianius Hammonius, his freedman, whom I
also recommend to you in his own right.’ Cic. Fam. 13.21.2)
(k) Habeti’n aurum? . . . / # Postquam quidem praetor recuperatores dedit, /
damnatus demum, vi coactus reddidit / mille et ducentos Philippum.
(‘Do you have the gold? . . . # Well, after the praetor appointed arbitrators, he was
finally convicted and forced to return the one thousand two hundred Philippics.’ Pl.
Bac. 269–72)
(l) Eloquar, quandoquidem me oras.
(‘I’ll tell you, since you ask me.’ Pl. Mer. 180)
115 For the use of quidem in disjuncts, see Kroon (2009b: 154). For further examples, see § 16.35,
§ 16.42, and § 16.83. For non-restrictive relative clauses, see § 18.6.
Emphasizing particles 881
(m) Proinde istuc facias ipse quod faciamus nobis suades. / # Ego vero, et quidem
edepol lubens.
(‘So you should practise yourself what you’re preaching to us. # I will indeed, and
with pleasure.’ Pl. As. 644–5)
In (n), quidem serves to contrast the first accusative and infinitive (argument) clause
with the second, which contains the adversative coordinator sed.116
(n) . . . iudicare sena/tum referendum quidem esse acceptum maxume
discipulinae avi <e>orum et / patrui et Iuliae Aug(ustae) sed tamen
ipsorum quoque nomin<e> laudandum existumare[t].
(‘. . . the Senate judged that this should be ascribed especially to the discipline of their
grandfather and paternal uncle and of Julia Augusta, but that nonetheless on their
account also the Senate considered that it was praiseworthy.’ S.C. de Gn. Pisone patre
148–51, ad 20)
Quidem cannot be used to emphasize prepositions117 and connectors (there are only
a few scattered attestations of nam quidem (most of them emended) and of at quidem
(four in Plautus)). However, it can be used to emphasize utinam (see § 7.58). It is only
attested once with the negator haud ‘not’ in Terence (checked in LLT), four times with
vix ‘hardly’ (once in Plautus), and, given its frequency, rarely with non ‘not’ (some 100
times in PHI corpus), the first two attestations being in Hirtius.118 By contrast, com-
binations of these three words with equidem are more evenly spread. As for personal
pronouns, Cicero does not use the combination ego quidem outside his letters.119
In some instances where quidem follows a pronoun, it is difficult to understand
why the pronoun should be emphasized.120 Among the instances that are discussed in
the literature are (o)–(q). In (o) quidem is said to emphasize carissimum; in (p), to
emphasize paucos. However, it seems preferable to say that in such cases quidem does
not function at the level of constituents, but at the clause level. Thus, in (o), quidem,
together with following sed, underlines the contrast between the two accusative and
infinitive clauses (as in (n)); in (p), quidem underlines the corrective function of the
clause introduced by the alternative coordinator vel. The pronouns function as ‘host’
of the ‘clausal emphasis’. This is also more or less the explanation given by Solodow of
(q): ‘the sense is not so much “boy, you are dumb” as “boy, you really are dumb.” ’
Here, however, there is no balancing clause as in (o) and (p), and in (q) ‘clausal
emphasis’ is difficult to prove. The speaker, a meretrix, has already called the young
lady stulta three times in the same scene, and so maybe tu quidem ‘in comparison
with other girls’ reflects her frustration.
(o) Vale igitur, mi Cicero, tibique persuade esse te quidem mihi carissimum sed
multo fore cariorem, si talibus monitis praeceptisque laetabere.
(‘Farewell, my dear Cicero, and be assured that, while you are the object of my
deepest affection, you will be dearer to me still, if you find pleasure in such counsel
and instruction.’ Cic. Off. 3.121)
(p) Tiberius Gracchus regnum occupare conatus est vel regnavit is quidem
paucos menses.
(‘Tiberius Gracchus tried to obtain regal power—or rather, he actually did reign for a
few months.’ Cic. Amic. 41)
(q) Inscita ecastor tu quidem es.
(‘You really are silly.’ Pl. Mos. 208)
The reason for the use of emphasis is more or less explicitly traceable in the surround-
ing context. This is shown by (r)–(u). In (r), emphatic tum evokes the expectation of
(an)other occasion(s) at which something else was the case; this expectation is ful-
filled in the next sentence and reinforced by verum. In (s), emphatic tum also evokes
an expectation, but here paucis interiectis diebus must be interpreted as the signal for
the expected other occasion.121 In (t), emphatic ceteri creates the expectation of an
exception, which turns out to be Marius in the next sentence. Ex. (u) is part of an
episode about an adventure in which three friends are involved: Ascyltos, Encolpius,
and Giton. The first sentence deals only with two of them, which creates an opening
for emphatic Giton in the following sentence. Noteworthy is Pliny the Elder’s use of
quidem in (v): it marks the change from one example of marvels (animals) to another
(trees).122
(r) Nam tum quidem omnes mortales implorare posses, quod homines in tuo
negotio Latine obliviscerentur, [quod] inermi armati iudicarentur, quod,
cum interdictum esset de pluribus, commissa res esset ab uno, unus homo
plures esse homines iudicaretur. Verum in his causis . . .
(‘For in the imaginary case you might have appealed for pity to all the world because,
in dealing with your suit, the court was forgetting its Latin and holding unarmed
men to be armed men, and because, while the injunction specified more than one
man, and the deed was done by one only, the court was holding one man to be more
than one. But in the present case . . .’ Cic. Caec. 62–3)
(s) Ibi Sex. Tarquinium mala libido Lucretiae per vim stuprandae capit. Cum
forma tum spectata castitas incitat. Et tum quidem ab nocturno iuvenali ludo
in castra redeunt. Paucis interiectis diebus Sex. Tarquinius inscio Collatino
cum comite uno Collatiam venit.
(‘It was there that Sextus Tarquinius was seized with a wicked desire to debauch
Lucretia by force; not only her beauty, but her proved chastity as well, provoked him.
121 Examples (s) and (u) are discussed by Kroon (2009b: 155–6). See also Kroon (2011: 185–6).
122 For Pliny’s usage, see Ludewig (1891: 18–24).
Emphasizing particles 883
However, for the present they ended the boyish prank of the night and returned to
the camp. When a few days had gone by, Sextus Tarquinius, without letting Collatinus
know, took a single attendant and went to Collatia.’ Liv. 1.57.10–58.1)
(t) Et ceteri quidem alius alio. Marius ab subselliis in rostra recta idque, quod
communiter compositum fuerat, solus edixit.
(‘And while all the rest withdrew, some in one direction, some in another, Marius
went straight from the council-chamber to the rostra and published individually
what had been drawn up by all together.’ Cic. Off. 3.80)
(u) Servavit nos (sc. Ascyltos and Encolpius) tamen atriensis, qui interventu suo
et canem placavit et nos trementes extraxit in siccum. Et Giton quidem iam
dudum se ratione acutissima redemerat a cane.
(‘But the porter by his intervention pacified the dog and saved us, and pulled us
shivering onto dry land. Giton had ransomed himself from the dog some time before
by a very cunning plan.’ Petr. 72.8–9)
(v) Praecipue India Aethiopumque tractus miraculis scatent. Maxima in India
gignuntur animalia. Indicio sunt canes grandiores ceteris. Arbores quidem
tantae proceritatis traduntur, ut sagittis superiaci nequeant . . .
(‘India and the regions of the Ethiopians bubble with marvels. The biggest animals
grow in India; for instance, Indian dogs are bigger than any others. Indeed the
trees are said to be so lofty that it is not possible to shoot an arrow over them . . .’ Plin.
Nat. 7.21)
Translating emphasizing quidem in a modern language is sometimes difficult. Often
a specific word is not necessary, because intonation will suffice. Relative clauses are a good
example of such difficulty, as in (w), where the entire relative clause is emphasized to
restrict the number of orators to those who live now (the so-called restrictive use of
quidem). It is difficult to translate this into English by just emphasizing the relative.
(w) Catonem vero quis nostrorum oratorum, qui quidem nunc sunt, legit?
(‘As for Cato, who of our orators living today reads him?’ Cic. Brut. 65)
The supplement has a selection of examples where specific translations may be useful
for the semantic relation between units containing quidem and the units to which
they are related.123
Supplement:
Restrictive: Mequidem praesente numquam factum est, quod sciam. (Pl. Am. 749);
Stultitia magna est, mea quidem sententia, / hominem amatorem ullum ad forum
procedere / . . . (Pl. Cas. 563–4); Caesar Alexandria se recepit, felix, ut sibi quidem
videbatur, mea autem sententia, qui rei publicae sit hostis, felix esse nemo potest.
(Cic. Phil. 2.64); Sed mehercule, ut quidem nunc se causa habet, etsi hesterno ser-
mone labefacta est, mihi tamen videtur esse verissima. (Cic. Luc. 10); Si enim, ut mihi
quidem videtur, non explet bona naturae voluptas, iure praetermissa est. (Cic. Fin.
5.45); Successus textor amat coponiaes ancilla / nomine Hiredem, quae
123 The organization follows K.-St.: I.803–5, including my version of their labels.
884 Information structure and extraclausal expressions
quidem illum / non curat, sed ille rogat, illa comiseretur. (CIL IV.8259.1–3
(Pompeii)); Cui similia sunt illa meo quidem iudicio, in quibus verba decenter pudo-
ris gratia subtrahuntur. (Quint. Inst. 9.3.59); Sed nec ipse ignorasse aut dissimulasse
ultima vitae suae tempora videtur, aliquot quidem argumentis. (Suet. Cl. 46.1)
Adversative: At publice commodasti. Non sine magno quidem rei publicae provin-
ciaeque Siciliae detrimento. (Cic. Ver. 4.20); Id nos fortasse non perfecimus, conati
quidem saepissime sumus. (Cic. Orat. 210); Haec quae dico cogitatione inter se dif-
ferunt, re quidem copulata sunt . . . (Cic. Tusc. 4.24)
Concessive: . . . multi iam esse libri Latini dicuntur scripti inconsiderate ab optimis illis
quidem viris, sed non satis eruditis. (Cic. Tusc. 1.6); . . . filiae duae nuptae, Sulpicio maior,
minor C. Licinio Stoloni erat, illustri quidem viro tamen plebeio. (Liv. 6.34.5); Sunt
qui equo non quidem in iecore esse, sed in alvo putent . . . (Plin. Nat. 11.192); Et veneno
quidem occisum convenit. Ubi autem et per quem dato, discrepat. (Suet. Cl. 44)
Explanatory: In his autem ipsis mediocritatis regula optima est. L. quidem
Philippus . . . gloriari solebat se sine ullo munere adeptum esse omnia quae haberentur
amplissima. (Cic. Off. 2.59); Nam cum apud Graecos antiquissimum e doctis genus sit
poetarum, si quidem Homerus fuit et Hesiodus ante Romam conditam, Archilochus reg-
nante Romulo, serius poeticam nos accepimus. (Cic. Tusc. 1.3); . . . certe et deum ipsum et
divinum animum corpore liberatum cogitatione complecti possumus. Dicaearchus qui-
dem et Aristoxenus . . . nullum omnino animum esse dixerunt. (Cic. Tusc. 1.51)
In reactions: Di te perdant. # Vos quidem hercle. (Pl. Poen. 588); Nempe ergo aperte
vis quae restant me loqui? # Sane quidem. (Ter. An. 195); Syre, processisti hodie pul-
chre. # Siquidem porro, Micio, / tu tuom officium facies . . . (Ter. Ad. 979–80)
22.27 Equidem
As stated in § 22.25, equidem is typically used in clauses with a first person singular
subject and is often the first word of its clause. The speaker regularly uses equidem when
expressing his opinion, as in (a), or his source of information, as in (b), or when interact-
ing with another person or himself, as in (c) and (d), respectively. Equidem is therefore
common in dialogical texts and in speeches, or in authorial interventions in other text
types.124 It resembles adverbs that function as degree-of-truth disjuncts (see § 10.100).
(a) Non equidem ullam in publico esse maiorem hac existumo.
(‘I don’t think there’s any bigger than this one on the public street.’ Pl. Mos. 909)
(b) Iam pridem equidem istuc ex te audivi.
(‘I heard that from you long ago.’ Pl. Poen. 156)
(c) Quid stamus? Quin ergo imus atque obsonium / curamus, pulchre ut simus?
# Equidem te sequor.
(‘Why are we standing around? Why don’t we go then and sort out the food in order
to have a lovely time? # I’m following you.’ Pl. Mer. 582–3)
124 Jordan (1879) observes that Cicero’s de Officiis, a non-dialogical treatise, has only two instances of
equidem, whereas they are common in his philosophical dialogues. For the frequency with which authors
use equidem, see TLL s.v. equidem 720.16ff. For the use of ego and equidem in parenthetical clauses, see
Bolkestein (1998a: 27–8).
Emphasizing particles 885
(d) Quid cogitem? Equidem hercle opus hoc facto existumo / ut illo intro eam.
(‘What should I think about? I believe that what needs to be done is for me to enter
there.’ Pl. Mer. 566–7)
Supplement:
Nam scio equidem nullo pacto iam esse posse haec clam senem. (Pl. Mos. 1054–5);
Equidem, quod ad me attinet, quo me vertam nescio. (Cic. Clu. 4); Haud mediocris
hic, ut equidem (ego quidem P corr.) intellego, vir fuit, qui modica libertate populo
data facilius tenuit auctoritatem principum. (Cic. Rep. 2.55);125 Equidem credo, mea
vulnera restant / et tua progenies mortalia demoror arma. (Verg. A. 10.29–30); Alpes
inde oppositae erant. Quas inexsuperabiles visas haud equidem miror, nulladum
via . . . superatas. (Liv. 5.34.6); Sed prius <mi>rari succurrit . . . (sc. arbores) in tanta
deliciarum pretia venisse, clarissimo, ut equidem arbitror, exemplo L. Crassi atque
Cn. Domiti Ahenobarbi. (Plin. Nat. 17.1)
Alii, Lyde, nunc sunt mores. # Id equidem ego certo scio. (Pl. Bac. 437); Egon’,
quom haec cum illo accubet, inspectem? # Immo equidem pol tecum accumbam . . .
(Pl. Bac. 1192); At ego hanc vicinam dico . . . / # Iam pridem equidem istuc ex te
audivi. (Pl. Poen. 154–6); Sanum te credis esse? # Equidem arbitror. (Ter. Ad. 748);
‘Sed existimo’, inquit, ‘gratum te his, Crasse, facturum . . .’ # ‘Dicam equidem, quoniam
institui, petamque a vobis’, inquit, ‘ne has meas ineptias efferatis’. (Cic. de Orat. 1.110–11)
The fact that ego can co-occur with equidem makes it unattractive to describe its
meaning as de facto equivalent to ego quidem;126 another issue is the fact that equidem
is not restricted to first person singular clauses (see below).
From Antiquity onwards equidem is discussed in relation with ego quidem, as in
Servius’ comment ad Verg. A. 1.576 in (i). This explanation is still current and is
reflected in translations such as ‘I for my part’ and ‘I for one’. Another approach is to
compare the e- with ē-castor and ě-de-pol (so TLL).127 As far as I know, there are no
proposals to derive quidem from equidem, which seems more plausible.
(i) EQVIDEM in omni Vergilio ‘ego quidem’ significat, sed in aliis et pro ‘qui-
dem’ tantum ponitur, ut Tullius ‘equidem ego ceteras tempestates’.
(‘Equidem everywhere in Virgil means ego quidem, but in others it is also
used instead of quidem only, as for instance Cicero’s “I, for one (considered)
all other storms…” ’ Serv. A. 1.576—tr. Bal; NB: the mss. of Cic. Mil. 5, where
the fragment stems from, have only equidem)
In order to prove that equidem is some sort of emphatic ego, some scholars refer to a
number of instances in which a clause with equidem is parallel with a clause with an
explicit second person, as ( j) and (k).128 However, the continuation of the supposedly
contrastive words, here added between curly brackets, makes such an interpretation
very unlikely.
( j) Equidem tam sum servos quam tu {, etsi ego domi liber fui, / tu usque a
puero servitutem servivisti in Alide.}
(‘Yes, I am a slave like you, even if I was free at home and you were a slave in
Elis from childhood.’ Pl. Capt. 543–4)
(k) ‘Equidem probo ista,’ Crassus inquit, ‘quae vos facere soletis {, ut, causa ali-
qua posita consimili causarum earum, quae in forum deferuntur, dicatis
quam maxime ad veritatem accommodate. Sed plerique in hoc vocem
modo, neque eam scienter, et viris exercent suas . . .’}
(‘ “I certainly approve,” replied Crassus, “of what you yourselves are in the
habit of doing, when you propound some case, closely resembling such as are
brought into Court, and argue it in a fashion adapted as nearly as possible to
real life. Most students, however, in so doing, merely exercise their voices (and
that in the wrong way), and their physical strength . . .” ’ Cic. de Orat. 1.149)
In the clauses with a first person singular subject under discussion, equidem is rarely,
if ever, used at the noun phrase level, unlike quidem. Suggested examples are (l) and
(m), both of which are cases of discontinuity and are thus difficult to judge.129
(l) Hac igitur conscientia comite proficiscar, magno equidem cum dolore, nec
tam id propter me . . .
(‘So I shall go with this conscience to keep me company, though not without deep
sorrow, not so much for myself . . .’ Cic. Att. 10.4.5)
(m) Tuas litteras hodie exspectabam, nihil equidem ut ex iis novi; quid enim?
Verum tamen.
(‘I am expecting a letter from you today, not to learn any news (what should there
be?), but all the same.’ Cic. Att. 13.2.1)
In light of all these considerations, it is best to conclude that, in the clauses with a first
person singular subject discussed so far, equidem is an adverb that expresses in some
way the personal involvement of the speaker, something like ‘seriously’. It seems to
function as an attitudinal disjunct, but differs from the attitudinal disjuncts profecto
and scilicet, since it co-occurs with them in the same clause in (n) and (o), respectively.
(n) Iam vides? # Profecto nullam equidem illic cornicem intuor.
(‘Do you see it now? # I really can’t spot any crow there.’ Pl. Mos. 836)
(o) Nunc hoc te obsecro . . . / # Scilicet equidem istuc factum ignoscam. Verum,
Sostrata, / male docet te mea facilitas multa.
(‘But now I beseech you . . . I’ll certainly forgive you what you have done. But, Sostrata,
my generosity in many ways sends you the wrong message.’ Ter. Hau. 644–8)
The use of equidem with subjects other than ego is very rare until Apuleius, who, in his
Met., has nine out of eleven instances of equidem with a non-first person singular
subject (the balance is different in his other works). There is variation among authors:
Plautus has 160 first, 9 non-first; Cicero 320 / 1; Sallust 8 / 3.130 Examples are (p)–(s).
Of these examples, the first three are not different from the ones discussed before. In
(p), the second speaker reacts to the preceding statement. Me quidem would also be
possible, but it would mean something different. Ex. (q) is the expression of a personal
opinion and also in (r), in a speech, equidem is perfectly all right. Ex. (s) is simply
bizarre: it is in a question, and seems to relate to the secondary predicate exoptatus.131
(p) Nimis doctus ille <est> ad male faciendum. # Me equidem certo / servavit
consiliis suis.
(‘He’s very clever when it comes to making mischief. # He certainly saved me with his
strategies.’ Pl. Epid. 378–9)
(q) Equidem credibile non est quantum scribam, quin etiam noctibus.
(‘You would not believe how much I am writing, even at night.’ Cic. Att. 13.26.2)
(r) ‘Iam pridem equidem nos vera vocabula rerum amisimus.’
(‘But in very truth we have long since lost the true names for things.’ Sal. Cat. 52.11)
(s) . . . infit ad eum ‘Quam olim equidem exoptatus nobis advenis?’
(‘. . . he said to him: “How long ago did you, who I’ve hoped would come, get here?” ’
Apul. Met. 2.13.6)
130 See TLL s.v. equidem 720.25ff. 131 The example is quoted in OLD s.v. equidem § 2.
888 Information structure and extraclausal expressions
The use of equidem is also odd in (t), where ego is the subject of the sentence. Here,
equidem is part of the noun phrase salutares . . . aquas, and it seems to be intended to
emphasize vere. Apuleius is here exploiting for artistic purposes the gradual develop-
ment of using equidem instead of quidem, which can already be detected in Pliny the
Elder’s use of it in quod clauses of qualification, as in (u) (see § 16.83).132
(t) At ego sine ulla mora progressus etiam obvio gradu satis sitienter pronus et
totum caput immergens salutares vere equidem illas aquas hauriebam.
(‘I did not delay at all, but started forward to meet them, leaned down quite thirstily,
immersed my entire head, and gulped down those truly life-giving waters.’ Apul.
Met. 9.4.1)
(u) Aristoteles tradit et simul plures cerni, nemini conpertum alteri, quod equi-
dem sciam, ventos autem ab iis graves aestusve significari.
(‘Aristotle also records that several may be seen at the same time—a fact not observed
by anyone else, as far as I am aware—and that this signifies severe winds or heat.’ Plin.
Nat. 2.91)
There is in principle no reason to assume for clauses with a non-first person subject
another contribution of equidem to the content of the clause simply because it is a
non-first person subject.
22.29 Saltem
From Plautus onwards the emphasizing particle saltem ‘at least’ is used to indicate that
the word or phrase in its scope ‘has a lower value than one or more alternatives that
may be “preferable” but “not practicable” ’.133 The alternative(s) can be explicit, as in
(a), (c), and (d), or implicit, as in (b). Saltem is common in the apodosis of a condi-
tional clause, as in (b), sometimes in combination with the adversative connector at
‘but’. It need not stand immediately next to the word(s) in its scope but may precede
or follow it. Saltem can also be used below the clause level, as in the adjective phrase
in (d). Occasionally the whole clause seems to be in its scope, as in (e), where saltem
comes close to being a subjective evaluation disjunct (see § 10.104). For its use with a
conditional clause in its scope, see the Supplement. In a negative context it corresponds
132 For equidem = quidem in Apuleius, see Callebat (1968: 493–4). For later instances, see TLL s.v.
equidem 722.72ff.
133 Combining the description in OLD s.v. saltem and that by Risselada (2016: 193). So already K.-St.:
I.801. See also Bortolussi and Sznajder (2001).
Emphasizing particles 889
to English ‘even’, as in (f). In later Latin the combination ne/nec . . . saltem is used in the
sense of ne . . . quidem.134
(a) . . . id optumum esse, tute uti sis optumus. / Si id nequeas, saltem ut optumis
sis proxumus.
(‘. . . that it is the best to be the best yourself; if you can’t be that, at least that you
should be next to the best.’ Pl. Trin. 486–7)
(b) In quibus si moderatio illa quae in nostris solet esse consulibus non fuit, at
fuit pompa, fuit species, fuit incessus saltem Seplasia dignus et Capua.
(‘And if those men were not marked by all that self-restraint which ordinarily charac-
terizes our consuls, there was a presence about them, a magnificence, a lordly gait
that was at least worthy of the Seplasia and of Capua.’ Cic. Pis. 24)
(c) Quam ob rem obsecro te, mi Tite, eripe hunc mihi dolorem aut minue
saltem . . .
(‘So, my dear Titus, I implore you, rid me of this pain or at any rate relieve it . . .’ Cic.
Att. 9.6.5)
(d) Atque utinam quietis temporibus atque aliquo, si non bono, at saltem certo
statu civitatis haec inter nos studia exercere possemus!
(‘If only we could pursue these studies together in peaceful times and at least a settled,
if not satisfactory, state of the community!’ Cic. Fam. 9.8.2)
(e) Saltem aliquid de pondere detraxisset et paulo minoris aestimavisset ea
quam Peripatetici, ut sentire quoque aliud, non solum dicere videretur.
(‘He ought at least to have diminished their importance and to have set a slightly
lower value on them than the Peripatetics, so as to make the difference appear to be
one of meaning and not merely of language.’ Cic. Fin. 4.57)
(f) Tubera haec vocantur undique terra circumdata nullisque fibris nixa aut
saltem capillamentis . . .
(‘The growths referred to are called truffles; they are enveloped all round with earth
and are not strengthened by any fibres or even any filaments . . .’ Plin. Nat. 19.33)
Supplement:
Quis ego sum saltem, si non sum Sosia? (Pl. Am. 438); Istuc sapienter saltem fecit
filius, / quom diviti homini id aurum servandum dedit. (Pl. Bac. 337–8); Ego impe-
trare nequeo hoc abs te, biduom / saltem ut concedas solum. # Siquidem biduom. /
Verum ne fiant isti viginti dies. (Ter. Eu. 181–3); . . . obsecrabo obtestaborque vos,
iudices, si cetera amisimus, hoc nobis saltem ut relinquatur . . . (Cic. Mil. 6); Ac de his
tamen legibus quae promulgatae sunt saltem queri possumus: de eis quae iam latae
dicuntur ne illud quidem licuit. (Cic. Phil. 1.25); . . . saltem populi Romani commoda
respicite si sociis fidelissimis prospicere non laboratis. (Cic. Ver. 3.127); Saltem si qua
mihi de te suscepta fuisset / ante fugam suboles, si quis mihi parvulus aula / luderet
Aeneas qui te tamen ore referret, / non equidem omnino capta ac deserta viderer.
134 For ne/nec . . . saltem = ne . . . quidem in Apuleius and later Latin, see Callebat (1968: 334–5).
890 Information structure and extraclausal expressions
22.30 Certe
The adverb certe ‘surely’ is normally used as a degree-of-truth disjunct (see § 10.100),
but in explicitly or implicitly contrastive contexts it can be interpreted as indicating a
minimal degree ‘(perhaps more, but) at least’. The contrast can hold between subor-
dinate and main clauses, between sentences, or between words or phrases. When
indicating a minimal degree, certe resembles the emphasizing particle saltem (although
its meaning is different).135 Contrastive clauses are shown in (a) and (b). In (c) and (d)
the contrast is implicit. Note that the contrastive words are in the first position in their
clause, which in (d) results in discontinuity of the noun phrase.
(a) Nam, utut erant alia, illi certe quae nunc tibi domi’st consuleres . . .
(‘If nothing else, you should have at least taken some thought for the girl you have at
home . . .’ Ter. Ph. 468)
(b) Ac si princeps eam sententiam dicerem, laudaretis profecto. Si solus, certe
ignosceretis.
(‘And if I were the first to put forward this opinion, you would assuredly praise me. If
I were the only one to do so, you would no doubt excuse me.’ Cic. Prov. 1)
(c) Quo quid sit beatius, mihi certe in mentem venire non potest.
(‘And what can be happier than this I certainly cannot conceive.’ Cic. Tusc. 5.81)
(d) Ergo id volumus populum Romanum . . . existimare, si senatores iudicent, hoc
certe unum genus infinitae pecuniae per summam iniuriam cogendae nullo
modo posse reprehendi?
(‘Do we then wish the Roman people . . . to think that, if senators are the judges, this
particular manner of extorting immense sums of money with the greatest injustice
will never be in any way chastised?’ Cic. Ver. 3.223)
Supplement:
Atque is tamen aliquis Ligarius non fuit: Varus imperium se habere dicebat. Fasces
certe habebat. (Cic. Lig. 22–3); . . . in causa populari si non moderate at certe popula-
riter apstinenterque versato. (Cic. Sest. 37); . . . ut homines mortem vel optare incipiant
vel certe timere desistant? (Cic. Tusc. 1.117); Redeo e<r>go ad unum illud, me tuum
esse. Fore cum tuis, si modo erunt tui. Si minus, me certe in omnibus rebus satis
nostrae coniunctioni amorique facturum. (Cic. Fam. 4.8.2); In quo si praesens
135 See Risselada (2016: 193–4), with references. For further examples, see TLL s.v. 932.76ff.
Emphasizing particles 891
periculum non, at certe longinqua obsidione fames esset timenda. (Caes. Gal. 5.29.7);
Numen confessis aliquod patet. Ultima certe / vota suos habuere deos. (Ov. Met.
10.488–9); Eandem multis naturam aut certe similem habere berulli videntur. (Plin.
Nat. 37.76); . . . nec rerum nimiam tenuitatem, ut non dicam pinguioribus, fortioribus
certe verbis miscebimus . . . (Quint. Inst. 12.10.35); Quam ob rem duo quodam modo
sunt testamenta, a<l>iud patris, aliud fili<i>, tamquam si ipse filius sibi heredem
instituisset. Aut certe unum est testamentum duarum hereditatum. (Gaius Inst. 2.180)
22.31 Utique
The adverb utique ‘absolutely’, ‘at any rate’ is mostly used as a degree-of-truth disjunct
(see § 10.100). Cicero has about twenty instances of this usage in his Letters to Atticus,
one of which is (a), and a few in his other works. Livy has more than eighty instances
of utique and he is the first to relate it to a subordinate clause, as in (b), more or less in
the manner of an emphasizing particle. Word order in (c) suggests that utique relates
to ipso . . . Scipione.136 Ex. (d) shows utique in the second conjoin of a coordination
pair. Apuleius is the first to use it with a question word, as in (e). It is almost absent
from verse (only Maur. 592),137 but common in prose authors such as Celsus,
Columella, Pliny the Elder, Seneca, Quintilian, and Tertullian;138 it is avoided by
Tacitus (except in the Dialogus).
(a) Velim ante possis, si minus, utique simul simus cum Brutus veniet in
Tusculanum.
(‘I wish you could manage it before, but if not, let us at any rate be together when
Brutus comes to Tusculum.’ Cic. Att. 13.4.2)
(b) Superbiam, verborum praesertim, iracundi oderunt, prudentes inrident,
utique si inferioris adversus superiorem est.
(‘Arrogance, especially of speech, is hated by the hot-tempered, but laughed at by the
wise, especially if directed by an inferior against his superior.’ Liv. 45.23.18)
(c) . . . quod Numida cum ipso utique congredi Scipione volebat atque eius dextra
fidem sancire.
(‘. . . because the Numidian desired in any case to meet Scipio in person and to ratify
the agreement by clasping his hand.’ Liv. 28.35.1)
(d) In senatu et utique in contionibus eadem ratio quae apud iudices adquiren-
dae sibi plerumque eorum apud quos dicendum sit benivolentiae.
(‘Among the senate and certainly among the people the same methods apply as in the
law courts, and we must aim as a rule at acquiring the goodwill of our audience.’
Quint. Inst. 3.8.7)
136 The OLD s.v. utique § 7a translates ‘expressly’. Sz.: 493 states that it is equivalent to cur + ergo or
igitur. The translation ‘precisely’ in (e) is also from the OLD, § 7b. For utique in Late Latin, see
Langslow (2005).
137 See Axelson (1945: 96). 138 For Apuleius’ usage, see Callebat (1968: 322–3).
892 Information structure and extraclausal expressions
(e) (sc. uxor) . . . percontatur de marito cur utique contubernalis artissimi deserta
cenula praematurus adforet.
(‘. . . she inquired of her husband why precisely he had left supper at his best friend’s
house and returned so early.’ Apul. Met. 9.23.3)
Supplement:
Faba quidem Pythagorei utique abstinere, quasi vero eo cibo mens, non venter infle-
tur. (Cic. Div. 2.119); . . . et velim M. Varronis et Olli mittas laudationem, Olli utique.
(Cic. Att. 13.48.2); Rursus Vergini Larcique exemplo haud salubres, utique Larci
putabant sententiam <eam esse> quae totam fidem tolleret. (Liv. 2.30.1); . . . tribuni
rem contra consules saepe temptatam adiutore utique consule obtineri posse rati
suscipiunt . . . (Liv. 3.1.2); Ceterum minime exorabilem alterum utique consulem
M. Porcium Catonem habebant (Liv. 34.1.7); Gangrenam vero, si nondum plane
tenet, sed adhuc incipit, curare non difficillimum est, utique in corpore iuvenili.
(Cels. 5.26.34A); Huic (sc. sapienti) enim propositum est in vita agenda non utique
quod temptat efficere, sed omnia recte facere. Gubernatori propositum est utique
navem in portum perducere. (Sen. Ep. 85.32); Latus cellae vinariae aut certe fenestras
obverti in aquilonem oportere vel utique in exortum aequinoctialem. (Plin. Nat.
14.133); (sc. Cicero) . . . quasdam sententias invenit, utique in iis orationibus quas
senior iam et iuxta finem vitae composuit . . . (Tac. Dial. 22.2); . . . quod enim rebar . . . me
ad alium quempiam utique leviorem laborem legatum iri . . . (Apul. Met. 9.11.5); . . . cum
pater filio posuerit inimicos sub pedes, utique operarios mali. (Tert. Hermog. 11.3)
NB: probably not an instance of utique (one word), but of utei + -que: . . . eademque
omnia quae uteique in tabulas / rettulerit <i>ta in tabulam in album
referundam (sc. curato) . . . (CIL I2.593.14–15 (Lex Iul. Munic., Pisticci, 80–43 bc))139
Appendix: In ex. (c), the placement of utique (and congredi) causes discontinuity of
ipso Scipione and makes ipso emphatic. See also the examples in the Supplement. Livy
uses profecto in a similar way, as in (f) and (g). See also (h). This suggests that profecto
functions as an emphasizing particle.140
(f) Nulla profecto alia gens tanta mole cladis non obruta esset.
(‘Surely there was no other people that would not have been overwhelmed
by a disaster of such vast proportions.’ Liv. 22.54.10)
(g) (sc. Hasdrubal) . . . gener inde ob aliam indolem profecto animi adscitus . . . in
imperio positus.
(‘(Hasdrubal) . . . subsequently selected him as his son-in-law because of
another talent, one of the mind . . . and he was given the command.’ Liv. 21.2.4)
(h) . . . montem perfossum ad lacum Fucinum emittendum inenarrabili pro-
fecto impendio et operarum multitudine per tot annos . . .
(‘. . . the channel that he dug through a mountain to drain the Fucine Lake.
This, I need hardly say, entailed the expenditure of an indescribably large
sum of money and the employment for many years of a horde of workers . . .’
Plin. Nat. 36.124)
22.32 Dumtaxat
The emphasizing particle dumtaxat ‘only’ has, with few exceptions where it functions
as an adverb,141 a word or phrase in its scope, which it may precede or follow, or, in
the case of noun phrases, may be inserted in between. Dictionaries give two opposite
meanings: non plus (TLL) ‘at most’ (OLD) and non minus (TLL) ‘at least’ (OLD). The
earliest attestation, ex. (a), is interpreted in both ways: ‘at most’ in the TLL and the OLD,
‘at least’ by Enk ad loc. and by de Melo in his Loeb translation. Unlike the three words
discussed above, dumtaxat is used with numbers and measures, in which case it
clearly means ‘no more’, ‘only’, as in (b). See also (c) for a legal context (note the paral-
lelism with tantum). In (d), classified as non minus by the TLL, there is a contrast
between animo and re familiari, a context in which quidem would be appropriate.
‘Only’ would do as well.142 In (e), however, the context is one in which utique might
be expected. Unlike the exclusive particles modo and solum, the combination non
dumtaxat . . . sed etiam is attested only twice (in the Digesta), which is the reason why
dumtaxat is not classified as an exclusive particle in this Syntax. The fact that dumtaxat
can be used in two different senses can be understood from the common feature of
‘limitation’ or ‘restriction’.143 Although very rare in verse,144 it is relatively frequent in
Pliny the Elder and in Christian authors, but most frequent in the jurists.
(a) . . . iubebo ad istam quinque deferri minas, / praeterea opsonari <una> (add.
Bergk) dumtaxat mina.
(‘. . . I’ll have five minae brought over to her, and in addition I’ll have food bought for
at least one mina.’ Pl. Truc. 444–5)
(b) In quo impune progredi licet duo dumtaxat pedes aut paulo plus, ne plane in
versum aut similitudinem versus incidamus.
(‘In this rhythm we may safely continue, but only for two feet or a little more, to avoid
clearly lapsing into verse or something resembling verse.’ Cic. de Orat. 3.182—tr. May
and Wisse)
(c) In conducto et locato . . . et dolum et culpam praestabunt qui servum recepe-
runt. At si cibaria tantum, dolum dumtaxat.
(‘In hire . . . they who receive the slave will be liable for both fraud and fault. But if
they supplied food alone, liability is only for fraud.’ Ulp. dig. 16.3.1.10)
(d) Nos animo dumtaxat vigemus, etiam magis quam cum florebamus. Re familiari
comminuti sumus.
(‘My heart is high, higher even than in my palmy days, but my purse is low.’ Cic. Att.
4.3.6—tr. Shackleton Bailey)
141 Sz.: 618, following TLL s.v. dumtaxat 2240.63, mentions as only exception Lucr. 2.123–4: Dumtaxat
rerum magnarum parva potest res / exemplare dare et vestigia notitiai. Editors deal with it in various
ways. There are, however, more, e.g. Plin. Nat. 3.57 (see the Supplement).
142 See Risselada (2016: 194–6) for discussion. Rosén (2009: 361; 404) has dumtaxat in the group of
what are here called ‘particularizing’ particles.
143 See Bertocchi and Maraldi (2017).
144 See Axelson (1945: 96). The PHI corpus has 586 passages with one or more instances of dumtaxat,
of which 376 are from the Digesta.
894 Information structure and extraclausal expressions
22.34 Praesertim
The particle praesertim ‘especially’ is used in all periods of Latin with words and
phrases to indicate that the constituent in its scope is particularly relevant in its con-
text in comparison with others (which are usually not expressed). It normally pre-
cedes its scope. Its distribution is very uneven. The main user is Cicero with more
Emphasizing particles 895
than 500 instances.145 TLL mentions no instances of the independent use of praeser-
tim at the clause level, unlike praecipue. Its use with constituents in its scope is shown
in (a)–(e). In (a), it has a beneficiary adjunct in its scope; in (b), an object; in (c), an
ablative absolute functioning as an adjunct of position in time or of circumstances
(see § 16.89); in (d), a temporal/causal cum clause. The last-mentioned combination
is very common. Ex. (e) has a participle functioning as secondary predicate.
(a) Egone istuc ausim facere, praesertim tibi?
(‘Would I dare to do this, especially to you?’ Pl. Poen. 149)
(b) Tum Crassus ‘an me tam impudentem esse existimatis, ut vobis hoc praeser-
tim munus putem diutius posse debere?’
(‘ “Do you really suppose,” Crassus then replied, “that I am so shameless that I think
I can be in your debt any longer, especially concerning this obligation?” ’ Cic. de Orat.
3.18—tr. May and Wisse)
(c) Edepol me uxori exoptatum credo adventurum domum, / . . . praesertim re
gesta bene, / victis hostibus.
(‘I really believe my wife will be waiting eagerly for my arrival. Especially after this
success, after our victory over the enemy.’ Pl. Am. 654–6)
(d) Praesertim quom is me dignum quoi concrederet / habuit, me habere
honorem eius ingenio decet.
(‘It’s only fair that I should respect his inclinations, especially since he felt that I
deserved his confidence.’ Pl. As. 80–1)
(e) . . . longum est dicere mihi, praesertim ad alia properanti.
(‘. . . it would be tedious to relate, especially as I am anxious to pass on to other topics.’
Cic. Clu. 36)
Supplement:
. . . quae forsitan vobis parvae esse videantur, sed magnum et acerbum dolorem com-
movent, mulierculis praesertim . . . (Cic. Ver. 4.47); Deforme etiam est de se ipsum
praedicare, falsa praesertim . . . (Cic. Off. 1.137); . . . nihil est in re praesertim aperta ac
simplici quod excellens ingenium requiratur. (Cic. Caec. 4); . . . ut condiciones ferret,
leges imponeret, reserare nos exteris gentibus Italiam iuberet se praesertim inco-
lumi . . . (Cic. Phil. 7.2); Profecto enim negare non potes te ex lege Rupilia sortiri
iudices debuisse, cum praesertim Heraclius id postularet. (Cic. Ver. 2.44); Si ea
seposita, ut dicis, essent tuque valde spectandi cupidus esses, non dubitares rogare
dominum, ut proferri iuberet, praesertim si esset familiaris. (Cic. de Orat. 1.162); . . .
vos id statuere in gravissima causa, praesertim aliorum auctoritate iam confirmatum,
dubitabitis? (Cic. Ver. 2.109)
145 For frequency data, see TLL s.v. praesertim 864.72ff. and s.v. praecipue 478.56ff. for a comparison
of its frequency with that of praesertim. The article on praesertim gives a detailed classification of its uses.
Hand (1829/45: IV) s.v. praesertim is still worth reading.
896 Information structure and extraclausal expressions
Examples of the use of praesertim at the noun phrase level are (f)–(h), an adjective
of amount, a prepositional phrase, and a relative clause, respectively, with all three
functioning as attribute.
(f) Illa, Caecili, contemnendane tibi videntur esse, sine quibus causa sustineri,
praesertim tanta, nullo modo potest?
(‘Do these things appear contemptible to you, without which no cause, especially no
cause of such importance, can by any means be supported?’ Cic. Div. Caec. 35)
(g) . . . haec (sc. castra) etsi erant exigua per se, vix hominum milium septem,
praesertim nullis cum impedimentis, tamen . . .
(‘. . . and small as was the camp itself, as it was for scarce seven thousand men, and
those, too, without baggage, nevertheless . . .’ Caes. Gal. 5.49.7)
(h) . . . qui pauperes sunt homines miseri vivont, / praesertim quibus nec quaes-
tus est . . .
(‘. . . people who are poor live wretchedly, especially those who have no trade . . .’ Pl.
Rud. 290–1)
Supplement:
. . . comitiis, praesertim aediliciis, studium esse populi, non iudicium. (Cic. Planc. 10);
Petitorem ego, praesertim consulatus, magna spe, magno animo, magnis copiis et in
forum et in campum deduci volo. (Cic. Mur. 44); Ei me tot tam acerba facere in
corde— # Frugi nunquam eris. / # praesertim quae coniurasset mecum et firmasset
fidem (Pl. Cist. 240–1); . . . ut tantis copiis tam exiguam manum, praesertim fugientem
atque impeditam, adoriri non audeant. (Caes. Gal. 6.8.1)
22.35 Praecipue
The adverb praecipue ‘in an outstanding manner’, ‘to an outstanding degree’ can be
used as a degree adjunct at the clause level, as in the first attestation (a), and as a
degree modifier with adjectives, as in (b); in the latter function the resulting phrase is
sometimes equivalent to a superlative form or serves as a substitute for an uncommon
or non-existing superlative form. In these functions it can be combined with the sca-
lar particle vel (see § 22.22), as in (c).146 As a degree adjunct it can also be used in an
elliptical way, as in (d).
(a) Tu ecastor erras, quae quidem illum expectes unum atque illi / morem prae-
cipue sic geras atque alios asperneris.
(‘You’re indeed making a mistake by waiting on him alone, showing him your special
favour like this, and despising others.’ Pl. Mos. 188–9)
(b) Color autem albus praecipue decorus deo est . . .
(‘However, the colour white is especially suitable for a god.’ Cic. Leg. 2.45)
(c) Haec (sc. aqua) enim vel praecipue lienem coercet.
(‘For this water most pre-eminently reduces the spleen.’ Cels. 4.16.2)
(d) Omnes, inquam, vincere volebamus. Tu certe praecipue (om. l) (sc. vincere
volebas), qui in eum locum venisses ubi tibi esset pereundum, nisi vicisses.
(‘We all, I say, wished for success, you assuredly above all, for you had come into a
place where you must perish unless you succeeded.’ Cic. Lig. 28)
When used with cases of epitactic coordination (both asyndetic, as in (e), and with et,
-que or sed, as in (f)) and of correlative coordination with cum . . . tum, as in (g), prae-
cipue seems to emphasize the constituent which it precedes or follows, resembling the
use of the emphasizing particle praesertim. However, the emphasis is a side effect of
the use of these coordinators and not due to the presence of praecipue (see § 19.67).
Praecipue can also be combined with the adversative connectors vero and autem. By
contrast, praesertim does not occur in these contexts or at least this use is extremely
rare. Another specific feature of praecipue is that it is often used to signal an individual
that ranks higher than others mentioned in the context in some respect, as in (e)
(omnes vs. pius Aeneas) and (g).147
(e) Ergo omnes magno circum clamore fremebant, / praecipue pius Aeneas.
(‘So, with loud lament, all were mourning round him, good Aeneas foremost.’ Verg.
A. 6.175–6)
(f) Tu si nos omnis amas, et praecipue me, magistrum tuum, confirma te.
(‘If you love us all, and especially me, your schoolmaster, get back your strength.’ Cic.
Fam. 16.3.1)
(g) Quod (sc. otium) cum omnibus bonis utile esset, tum praecipue mihi.
(‘Peace is advantageous for all decent men, but particularly for me.’ Cic. Phil. 8.11)
NB: parallelism with maxime and imprimis: Haec una res in omni libero populo
maximeque in pacatis tranquillisque civitatibus praecipue semper floruit semperque
dominata est. (Cic. de Orat. 1.30); . . . fere subeunt lippitudines, tormina, febres,
maximeque in mollioribus corporibus, ideoque praecipue in muliebribus. (Cels.
2.1.14); Quapropter in primis evitandus, et in pueris praecipue, magister aridus . . .
(Quint. Inst. 2.4.8)
NB: coordination: . . . omnium maxime atque praecipue fidem coluit . . . (Plin. Ep.
20.1.39)
Alongside these instances of coordination there are other instances in which prae-
cipue seems to have a particular constituent in its scope. Exx. (h)–( j) illustrate con-
stituents at the clause level: in (h), a subject constituent; in (i), a quod reason clause; in
( j), a secondary predicate.
(h) Illud cuivis facile est docere, cur praecipue tu dolere nihil debeas.
(‘But anyone may easily show why you ought not specially to distress yourself.’ Cic.
Fam. 6.4.2)
147 See TLL s.v. 478.83ff. The co-occurrence data were checked for the PHI and the LLT ‘patrum’
corpus. Gregory of Tours has twenty-four instances of et praesertim.
898 Information structure and extraclausal expressions
(i) Est aliqua mea pars virilis, quod eius civitatis sum quam ille amplam inlus-
trem claramque reddidit, praecipue quod in his rebus pro mea parte versor
quarum ille princeps fuit . . .
(‘In this right I myself have a share, as a citizen of the empire whose proud and glori-
ous fame is due to him; the more so because I do my best to follow him in the path
where he leads the way for us all . . .’ Cic. Ver. 4.81)
( j) Quo turpior homini inscitia est fatenti praecipue iumentorum quorundam
in oculis morbos cum luna increscere ac minui.
(‘This makes ignorance all the more disgraceful to man, especially as he admits that
with some cattle diseases of the eyes increase and diminish with the moon.’ Plin. Nat.
2.110)
Supplement:
Quod cum pertimuisset Dolabella, vastata provincia, correptis vectigalibus, prae-
cipue civibus Romanis omnibus crudelissime denudatis ac divenditis, celeriusque Asia
excessisset quam . . . diutius morari aut exspectare praesidium non necesse habui . . .
(Lent. Fam. 12.15.1—NB: praecipuis cj. Rubenius, followed by other editors); Fiunt et
solis lunaeque defectu, quoniam tempestates tunc sopiuntur, praecipue vero cum
sequitur imbres aestus imbresve aestum. (Plin. Nat. 2.195)
Examples of praecipue with a constituent of a noun phrase in its scope are (k)
and (l).
(k) Nam quid foedius nostra vita, praecipue mea?
(‘After all what could be more ignominious than the life we lead, I especially?’ Cic.
Att. 4.6.1)
(l) . . . vocesque etiam miserabiles exaudiebantur, mulierum praecipue . . .
(‘. . . plaintive cries too began to be heard, proceeding chiefly from the women . . .’ Liv.
1.29.5)
Supplement:
Non ullo gravius temptatur Cynthia damno / quam sibi cum rapto cessat amore
decus, / praecipue nostro. (Prop. 1.4.25–7—NB: the mss. have nostri);148 Asclepiades
etiam in recenti vehementique praecipueque ardente febre ad discutiendam eam ges-
tatione dixit utendum. (Cels. 2.15.1); Huic pecudi nocet aestus, sed magis frigus, et
praecipue fetae, quia gelidior hiemps conceptum vitiat. (Col. 7.6.5); . . . inter insulas
Rubri praecipue maris his navigent cumbis. (Plin. Nat. 9.35)
Cicero and his correspondents use praecipue in total about fifty times, Pliny the Elder
almost four times as much. Celsus, Columella, and Quintilian fall somewhere in
between.149
148 For discussion, see Heyworth (2007: 22). 149 See TLL s.v. praecipue 478.56ff.
Emphasizing particles 899
22.36 Imprimis
The adverb imprimis (or inprimis), also in two words in primis, in its meaning ‘above
all’ resembles praecipue in that it can be used as a degree adjunct and as a degree
modifier, as in (a) and (b), respectively. Just like praecipue, it can be combined with
the scalar particle vel, as in (c).
(a) (sc. civitatem) . . . quam meus frater in primis colit atque diligit.
(‘(that state) . . . which my brother has shown the greatest attachment to and fondness
for.’ Cic. Flac. 52)
(b) L. quidem Philippus, Q. f., magno vir ingenio inprimisque clarus, gloriari
solebat . . .
(‘To be sure, Lucius Philippus, the son of Quintus, a man of great ability and unusual
renown, used to make it his boast . . .’ Cic. Off. 2.59)
(c) . . . Crantor ille, qui in nostra Academia vel in primis fuit nobilis . . .
(‘. . . The famous Crantor, who held the foremost place of distinction in our Academy . . .’
Cic. Tusc. 3.12)
Just like praecipue, in primis can be part of an epitactic conjoin, as in (d), or of other
forms of coordination, as in (e). In such cases it has a particular word or phrase in its
scope.
(d) Quis ergo intererat vestris consiliis? Omnes hi quos vides huic adesse et in
primis Q. Hortensius.
(‘Who, then, was present at your counsels? All these men whom you see here, giving
Sulla the countenance of their presence; and among the first was Quintus Hortensius.’
Cic. Sul. 12)
(e) Verba ponenda sunt quae vim habeant illustrandi nec ab usu sint abhorren-
tia, gravia . . . non vulgata, superlata, in primisque translata.
(‘Words must be employed that are powerfully illuminating without being inconsist-
ent with ordinary usage, weighty, . . . unhackneyed, exaggerated, and above all used
metaphorically.’ Cic. Part. 53)
Other examples in which in primis seems to have a particular constituent in its scope
are (f)–(h).150 In (f) and (g), the phrase has subject constituents in its scope; in (h), a
ne purpose clause.
(f) . . . in hoc elaborandum est ut rem publicam constituas, eaque tu in primis
summa tranquillitate et otio perfruare.
(‘. . . to this must you summon all your powers to plant the constitution firmly, and
you especially to reap the chiefest fruits thereof in peace and tranquillity.’ Cic.
Marc. 27)
150 The TLL article s.v. imprimis has a detailed classification of its use with nouns and pronouns, adjec-
tives, adverbs, and verbs, and clauses, using the term ‘acuuntur’. I think that in many instances we are
dealing with degree adjuncts and modifiers. See also the classification in Merguet (Phil.) s.v. in 283.
900 Information structure and extraclausal expressions
(g) Et cupidi omnes et maligni omnes et timidi omnes, illi in primis qui videntur
audaces.
(‘They are all also covetous and spiteful and cowardly especially those who appear to
be bold.’ Sen. Ben. 5.17.3)
(h) Sed tamen multa Caesarem ad id bellum incitabant: iniuria retentorum equi-
tum Romanorum . . . tot civitatum coniuratio, in primis ne hac parte neglecta
reliquae nationes sibi idem licere arbitrarentur.
(‘. . . nevertheless, many considerations moved Caesar to undertake this campaign.
Such were the outrageous detention of Roman knights . . . the conspiracy of so many
states and, above all, the fear that if this district were not dealt with the other nations
might suppose they had the same liberty.’ Caes. Gal. 3.10.1)
Examples of in primis with a constituent at the noun phrase level are (i) and ( j).
(i) . . . ea esse eum opinione et tua et ipsius et in primis mea causa gaudeo.
(‘. . . I am delighted both for your sake and his, and above all for my own, that he
should be so well thought of.’ Lent. Fam. 12.14.8)
( j) . . . nec aetas impedit quominus et ceterarum rerum et in primis agri colendi
studia teneamus usque ad ultimum tempus senectutis.
(‘. . . nor does age offer any hindrance to our pursuit of other activities, and especially
the cultivation of the soil, even to the very end of old age.’ Cic. Sen. 60)
Cicero and his correspondents have more than 200 instances, which is more than a
third of all the instances recorded in the PHI corpus.
22.37 Maxime
The adverb maxime in its meaning ‘most’ resembles praecipue and in primis in the
features mentioned at the beginning of §§ 22.35–6, as is shown in (a)–(c). In (a), it
functions as a degree adjunct; in (b), as a degree modifier (see § 20.32); in (c), it is
used with the scalar particle vel. It is attested abundantly from Early Latin onwards.
(a) Foris aperit, eccere autem / quem convenire maxime cupiebam egreditur
intus.
(‘The door is opening, and look, the man I wanted to meet most is coming out.’ Pl.
Per. 300–1)
(b) Nunc hic occepit quaestum hunc fili gratia / inhonestum et maxume alienum
ingenio suo.
(‘Now for his son’s sake he began this degrading business here, which is completely
out of keeping with his character.’ Pl. Capt. 98–9)
(c) Hoc enim uno praestamus vel maxime feris quod conloquimur inter nos . . .
(‘For the one point in which we have our very greatest advantage over the brute cre-
ation is that we hold converse one with another . . .’ Cic. de Orat. 1.32)
In (d), we are dealing with an instance of epitactic coordination, where maxume has
Homerum in its scope.
Emphasizing particles 901
22.38 Potissimum
The adverb potissimum ‘preferably’ can be used as a subjective evaluation disjunct (see
§ 10.104), as in (a). However, it is also used from Early Latin onwards and especially
by Cicero with a particular constituent in its scope, both as part of an epitactic con-
join, as in (b)–(d), and otherwise, as in (e)–(g). It then resembles praecipue, in primis,
151 The examples are taken from Hand (1829/45: III) s.v. minime.
902 Information structure and extraclausal expressions
and maxime and can be translated as ‘especially’, ‘above all’.152 Unlike these degree
expressions, potissimum does not function as a degree modifier with adjectives and
cannot be combined with the scalar particle vel.
(a) (Artemona is here angrily responding after overhearing her husband’s complaints
about her bad breath.) Nam si domum / redierit hodie, osculando ego ulciscar
potissumum.
(‘For if he returns home today, I will take revenge by kissing him, preferably.’ Pl. As.
902–3)
(b) Decet innocentem qui sit atque innoxium / servom superbum esse, apud
erum potissumum.
(‘A slave who is without guilt and without fault ought to be proud, especially in front
of his master.’ Pl. Ps. 460–1)
(c) Existat igitur ex hac ipsa familia aliquis, ac potissimum Caecus ille.
(‘Let therefore rise up from the dead some member of this very family, above all
Appius Claudius the Blind.’ Cic. Cael. 33)
(d) (sc. Natura) . . . avidam sanguinis et potissimum humani sitim accendit!
(‘(Nature) . . . kindled a greedy thirst for blood and especially human blood!’ Plin.
Nat. 11.3)
(e) . . . multos fore qui vitilitigent, sed ii potissimum qui verae laudis expertes
sunt.
(‘. . . there will be plenty of people to quibble and quarrel, but mostly people quite
devoid of true distinction.’ Cato Mil. 1(J))
(f) Quemquam denique ego iuvarem, a quo et tam crudelis insidias rei publicae
factas, et me potissimum consule constitutas putarem?
(‘Or do you suppose that I would assist anyone by whom I thought that a cruel plot
had been laid against the republic, and most especially against me the consul?’ Cic.
Sul. 45)
(g) Atque ut Homerum potissimum attingam . . .
(‘And to give instances out of Homer, by preference . . .’ Plin. Ep. 9.26.6)
22.39 Demum
The emphasizing particle demum ‘at last’, ‘only’ is particularly common with temporal
expressions, as in (a), where it signals that more time has elapsed before now than
expected (note the contrast with iam dudum).153 With other constituents in its scope
it means that only that specific entity can reach or has reached an adequate level, as in
(b) and (c); here demum functions at the noun phrase level, with a determiner and an
152 So the OLD s.v. potissimum § 1. TLL s.v. potis 355.62ff. paraphrases: ‘i.q. praecipue, imprimis sim.’
153 Kroon and Risselada (2002: 66) use the term ‘evaluative phasal particle’.
Emphasizing particles 903
attributive noun phrase in its scope, respectively. For other types of scope, see the
Supplement.154
(a) I nunciam ad erum, quo vocas, iam dudum quo volebas. / # Nunc demum?
(‘Go to our master now, which is where you are calling us and where you’ve wanted
to go for some time now. # Now at last?’ Pl. As. 486–7)
(b) Ill’ demum antiquis est adulescens moribus, / quoius numquam voltum tran-
quillavi gratiis.
(‘Only that young man belongs to the old school: I’ve never lightened his counten-
ance without some tangible reward.’ Pl. Capt. 105–6)
(c) Hoc animi demum ratio discernere debet, / nec possunt oculi naturam
noscere rerum.
(‘The reasoning power of the mind alone must decide this, and eyes cannot recognize
the nature of things.’ Lucr. 4.384–5)
Supplement:
Nam id demum lepidum est, triparcos homines, vetulos, avidos, aridos / bene admor-
dere . . . (Pl. Per. 266–7); Hem, modone id demum sensti, Pamphile? (Ter. An. 882); Is
enim demum est mea quidem sententia iustus triumphus ac verus, cum bene de re
publica meritis testimonium a consensu civitatis datur. (Cic. Phil. 14.13); Sic enim
sentio, id demum aut potius id solum esse miserum quod turpe sit. (Cic. Att. 8.8.1—
NB: parallelisms); Postquam quidem praetor recuperatores dedit, / damnatus
demum, vi coactus reddidit / mille et ducentos Philippum. (Pl. Bac. 270–2); Quarta
vix demum exponimur hora. (Hor. S. 1.5.23); M. Cicero demum stabilivit equestre
nomen in consulatu suo Catilinianis rebus . . . (Plin. Nat. 33.34); . . . pontificatum
maximum, quem numquam vivo Lepido auferre sustinuerat, mortuo demum
suscepit . . . (Suet. Aug. 31.1)
As in the examples above, demum usually follows its scope immediately. In (d), the
connector autem follows ita demum in its frequent combination with a conditional
clause; here demum follows its scope ita, which correlates with the si clause. See also
(e), sometimes taken as an instance of independent (that is, adverbial) use of demum;
here demum precedes its scope.155
(d) Ita demum autem committetur stipulatio, cum adversus eam quid fit, si sine
dolo malo stipulantis factum est.
(‘Moreover, the stipulation is infringed only where the act which contravenes it is
done without fraud or malice on the part of the promise.’ Ulp. dig. 4.8.31.1)
(e) Servata res est demum, si illam videro.
(‘Things are safe at last if I see her.’ Pl. Mer. 909)
154 For further instances, see the classification in TLL s.v. demum 515.41ff.
155 See TLL s.v. demum 518.30ff. For a discussion of demum, see Rosén (1993; 2009: 405–6).
904 Information structure and extraclausal expressions
In Silver and later Latin demum is also used more or less in the sense of solum, as
in (f).156
(f) Apud nos tria genera eius faciunt et id demum probant cuius radix tus
redoleat.
(‘We Romans distinguish three kinds of it, and the only one esteemed is that of which
the root smells like frankincense.’ Plin. Nat. 25.102)
Appendix: Denique, when used as an adverb (see § 24.46), resembles demum when it
follows a temporal adverb or a cataphoric or anaphoric pronoun or determiner, as in
(g) and (h).157 Conversely, in some instances demum resembles denique, as in (i).158
(g) (sc. ratio) . . . quae non tum denique incipit lex esse quom scripta est, sed tum
quom orta est.
(‘(reason) . . . which did not first become Law when it was written down, but
only then when it first came into existence.’ Cic. Leg. 2.10)
(h) Is enim denique honos mihi videri solet qui non propter spem futuri benefici
sed propter magna merita claris viris defertur et datur.
(‘For this alone seems to me to really be an honour, one which is offered and
given, not in the expectation of future benefit, but to persons whose great
services have made them illustrious.’ Cic. Fam. 10.10.1)
(i) (After a discussion of the rare use of marble with markings) Columnis
demum utebantur in templis, nec lauti<t>iae causa—nondum enim ista
intellegebantur—sed quia firmiores aliter statui non poterant.
(‘Finally, marble columns were used in temples, not however, as an embel-
lishment, since embellishments as such were not yet appreciated, but merely
because there was no way of erecting stronger columns.’ Plin. Nat. 36.45)
22.40 Iam
The adverb iam in its meaning ‘already’ can be used as an adjunct ‘denoting the rela-
tionship between one time and another’ (see § 10.41). Thus, in (a), iam indicates that
at the moment of speaking the audience has a certain knowledge which it did not
possess at an earlier stage; quidem shows that in contrast to vos, unnamed others have
not yet reached that stage. In (b), iam indicates that, in the series of events Alcumena
is going to report, her first mention of kissing already disturbs Amphitruo. In (c)–(e),
iam is not an adjunct at the clause level. In (c), it relates to the secondary predicate
puer and indicates that, on his way from infans to senex, Mnesilochus became a friend
of Pistoclerus at an early age, possibly earlier than one would expect. In (d), iam has
obsoleta in its scope and indicates that the habits referred to had possibly passed the
limit of being fashionable. In (e), iam has tum in its scope, indicating that tum was
unexpectedly early. As a side effect of iam’s relating two positions in time and impli-
citly contrasting them, the constituent in its scope is emphasized.159
(a) Nam vos quidem id iam scitis concessum et datum / mi esse ab dis aliis,
nuntiis praesim et lucro.
(‘For you already know that I was put in charge of messages and profit by the other
gods.’ Pl. Am. 11–12)
(b) Aio, adveniensque ilico / me salutavisti, et ego te, et osculum tetuli tibi. / #
Iam illud non placet principium de osculo. Perge exsequi.
(‘I do claim that, and on your arrival you immediately greeted me, and I you, and I
gave you a kiss. # I already dislike that first point about the kiss. Continue your story.’
Pl. Am. 799–801)
(c) Hic sodalis Pistoclero iam puer puero fuit.
(‘He was Pistoclerus’ friend already when the two were boys.’ Pl. Bac. 460)
(d) Vereor ne haec forte cuipiam nimis antiqua et iam obsoleta videantur.
(‘But there are some, I fear, to whom these instances may seem oldfashioned and
already out of date.’ Cic. Ver. 1.56)
(e) Iam tum erat suspicio / dolo malo haec fieri omnia.
(‘Even at that stage I had a suspicion that everything was being done with malice
aforethought.’ Ter. Eu. 514–15—tr. Bal)
Whereas in (c) and (d) iam concerns properties that are changeable over time and in
a sense gradable—that is we are dealing with a temporal scale—,160 this is not the case
in (f)–(i). In (f), the scale is that of acceptable and reasonable behaviour, so a temporal
translation ‘already’ is inappropriate: iam is here an emphasizing particle.161 In (g),
the three solutions differ in their degree of vagueness, the last being the most vague.
In (h), the scale is one of enemies. Ex. (i) shows a subordinate clause in the scope of
iam. In ( j), iam might at first sight be taken as a connector, more or less equivalent to
deinde, but there is already another connector porro, and iam is best taken as an
emphasizing particle.162
(f) . . . hunc ego / cupio excruciari. # Iam istaec insipientia est, / iram in propromptu
gerere. Quanto satius est . . .
(‘. . . him I wish to be tortured. # That now is stupidity, to carry your anger on your
sleeve. How much better it is . . .’ Pl. Ps. 447–9)
159 For a classification of constituents that can be used in the scope of iam when meaning ‘already’, see
TLL s.v. iam 88.17ff.
160 See Kroon and Risselada (2002: 66, 71).
161 For the use of iam as emphasizing particle, see Kroon and Risselada (1998: 438–44; 2002: 73–5).
Rosén (2009: 360), by contrast, regards iam in such instances as a ‘modalizer’, that is, as an adverb func-
tioning as a disjunct, in the terminology of this Syntax. Calaresu and Pieroni (2019) regard the emphasiz-
ing function of iam as due to context. Most of the examples given in the section ‘de elatione et gradu’ of
the TLL s.v. 124.12ff. belong here.
162 For ‘connecting’ iam, see TLL s.v. iam 120.72ff.
906 Information structure and extraclausal expressions
(g) Unde erit argentum quod des, quom poscet pater? / # Invenietur, exquiretur,
aliquid fiet. Enicas. / # Iam istuc ‘aliquid fiet’ metuo.
(‘Where will the money you give come from when your father asks for it? # It will be
found, it will be sought, something will happen. You’re killing me. # It’s precisely that
“something will happen” that I’m afraid of.’ Pl. Mer. 492–4—last sentence translated
following Kroon and Risselada (1998: 441))
(h) Non cum senatu modo sed iam cum dis immortalibus C. Flaminium bellum
gerere.
(‘That Gaius Flaminius was waging war not only with the senate but even with the
immortal gods.’ Liv. 21.63.6—tr. Kroon and Risselada (2002: 71))
(i) Id tu, Brute, iam intelleges, cum in Galliam veneris.
(‘This you will, Brutus, understand right then when you come to Gaul.’ Cic. Brut.
171—tr. Kroon and Risselada (2002: 74))
( j) Iam id porro utrum libentes an inviti dabant?
(‘As to this, furthermore, did they pay that willingly or reluctantly?’ Cic. Ver. 3.118—
tr. Kroon and Risselada (2002: 73))
Supplement:
Vel amare possum vel iam scortum ducere. (Pl. Truc. 678); Id ita esse vos iam iudicare
poteritis. (Ter. Eu. 29); . . . villam aedificare in oculis omnium tantam tugurium ut iam
videatur esse illa villa quam ipse tribunus plebis pictam olim in contionibus expli-
cabat . . . (Cic. Sest. 93); Accipite, si vultis, iudices, rem eius modi ut amentiam singu-
larem et furorem iam, non cupiditatem eius perspicere possitis. (Cic. Ver. 4.38); Sed
quod ex utroque (sc. vis and materia), id iam corpus et quasi qualitatem quandam
nominabant. (Cic. Ac. 1.24); . . . si singulos numeremus in singulas, quanta iam repe-
riatur virorum excellentium multitudo! (Cic. Rep. 3.7); C. Arrius proximus est vici-
nus, immo ille quidem iam contubernalis . . . (Cic. Att. 2.14.2); Primum in statua
quam posuit in rostris inscripsit ‘parenti optime merito’, ut non modo sicarii sed iam
etiam parricidae iudicemini. (Cic. Fam. 12.3.1); Multi mortales convenere, studio
etiam videndae novae urbis, maxime proximi quique, Caeninenses, Crustumini,
Antemnates. Iam Sabinorum omnis multitudo cum liberis ac coniugibus venit. (Liv.
1.9.8–9); Sed quamvis egregia illis vita fuerit et carens fraude, non fuere sapientes,
quando hoc iam in opere maximo nomen est. (Sen. Ep. 90.44)
163 For surveys of examples, see K.-H.: 581 and especially Neue-W.: II.354–9, who also have a detailed
classification of the use of sese in Cicero.
Emphasizing particles 907
in (a), and/or in clauses which also contain ipse ‘self ’, as in (b)), there are also cases like
(c) and (d), where such an explanation is excluded. Consequently, it is difficult to
describe these geminate forms as such as a device used to create emphasis.
(a) . . . in reliquis rebus ita dissimiles erant inter sese, statuere ut tamen non
posses utrius te malles similiorem.
(‘. . . their differences in other respects were such that you could hardly choose which
one you would rather be like.’ Cic. Brut. 148)
(b) . . . ad tribunatum, qui ipse ad sese iam dudum vocat . . . veniamus.
(‘. . . let us come to that tribunate which itself has this long while been calling us to
itself . . .’ Cic. Sest. 13)
(c) Verum utut res sese habet, / pergam turbare porro.
(‘But no matter what he’s up to, I’ll carry on causing trouble.’ Pl. Mos. 545–6)
(d) (sc. Roscius) . . . Romam confugit et sese ad Caeciliam, Nepotis <sororem,
Baliarici> filiam, quam honoris causa nomino, contulit . . .
(‘(sc. Roscius) . . . took refuge in Rome, and betook himself to Caecilia, the sister of
Nepos, the daughter of Balearicus (whose name I mention with respect) . . .’ Cic.
S. Rosc. 27)
The suffix -met can be attached to most forms of the personal pronouns and to
possessive adjectives. The best attested form in Plautus is egomet, but the total number
is very low. There are, for example, eight instances in his Amphitryon (against c.125
instances of ego).164 In Cicero’s orations there are only about fifteen instances, in his
philosophical works only one (in a quotation from Terence). The other forms are all
very infrequent and tu-met is not attested.165 In exx. (e)–(g), it is plausible that the
-met forms are emphatic, but even in Plautus not all the instances are convincing.166
In Cicero’s philosophical works nosmet, nobismet, etc. are in all but one case combined
with a form of ipse (nosmet ipsi, etc.—thirty-three instances).
(e) Tu negas med esse? # Quid ego ni negem, qui egomet siem?
(‘You deny that I am Sosia ? # Why shouldn’t I deny it? I myself am him.’ Pl. Am. 434)
(f) Quis te verberavit? # Egomet memet, qui nunc sum domi.
(‘Who hit you? # I hit myself, the I that is at home now.’ Pl. Am. 607)
(g) Nunc mihi cautio est / ne meamet culpa meo amori obiexim moram.
(‘Now I need to be on my guard so that I won’t delay my love through my own fault.’
Pl. Poen. 445–6)
In conclusion, the forms with -met may have been preferred in certain contexts, but
-met is not a prominent device used to emphasize the words to which it is attached.167
The suffix -te is used in combination with tu (tute) in Early Latin and in Cicero in
contrastive contexts, as in (h)–( j). In about 10 per cent of its occurrences it is followed
by ipse. Even in these texts it is rare in comparison with tu, and elsewhere it is almost
non-existent.168
(h) O Tite, tute, Tati, tibi tanta, tyranne, tulisti.
(‘Thyself to thyself, Titus Tatius the tyrant, thou tookest those terrible troubles!’ Enn.
Ann. 109V=104S)
(i) Egone istuc dixi? # Tute istic, etiam adstante hoc Sosia.
(‘Did I tell you about this? # Yes, you there, and Sosia was standing here right next to
you.’ Pl. Am. 747)
( j) Verum ut modo tute dixisti, te esse malo tuum.
(‘I certainly prefer that you be independent, as you have just said.’ Cic. Leg. 2.17)
The suffix -pte can be attached to the ablative singular of the possessive adjectives, as
in (k) (and to a few other forms).169 These forms are clearly understood as emphatic.
It survives throughout Latinity in a few phrases such as suapte natura (see ex. (l) in
§ 22.19) and tuopte ingenio.170
(k) Tute tibi [ea] tuopte ingenio prodes plurumum, / quom servitutem ita fers ut
<eam> ferri decet.
(‘You benefit greatly from your own character since you’re bearing your slavery as
one ought to bear it.’ Pl. Capt. 371–2)
167 For the etymologies of -met and -te, see Dunkel (2006), who proposes to derive egomet from egom
et, as already Sihler (1995: 370).
168 See Neue-W.: II.363–4. 169 See OLD s.v. -pte.
170 See Neue-W.: II.373–5; TLL s.v. meuspte. Exceptional is mepte in Pl. Men. 1058–9.
Parenthetical clauses and other extraclausal constituents 909
Parenthetical constituents belong to various types. Apart from entire sentences and
clauses as illustrated by (a), there are ‘modalizing mental state verbs’172 like opinor ‘I
think’, as in (b), swear words like di immortales, as in (c), and others. These constitu-
ents can also be used in ante- and postclausal positions; these uses are discussed in
separate sections (§§ 22.46–7). See also § 18.27 for autonomous relative clauses func-
tioning as clausal appositions.
(b) Si quidem omnes coniurati cruciamenta conferant, / habeo (opinor) fami-
liarem . . . tergum, ne quaeram foris.
(‘Even if all people formed an alliance and gathered torments, I have a comrade,
I think: my back, no need to look for one outside.’ Pl. As. 318–19)
171 For the following sections I have profited greatly from comments and suggestions by Luis Unceta
(p.c.).
172 The term is Bolkestein’s (1998c: 11–14).
910 Information structure and extraclausal expressions
(c) Si hanc emeris, / (di immortales), nullus leno te alter erit opulentior.
(‘If you buy her—immortal gods!—no pimp will be better off than you.’ Pl. Per. 565–6)
Different are illocution converters like amabo, as in (d), which have a verbal origin
but probably were no longer felt as parenthetical by Latin speakers (see § 6.2).
(d) Dic (amabo) an foetet anima uxoris tuae?
(‘Tell me, please, does your wife’s breath smell?’ Pl. As. 894)
173 For the terms ‘multiple’, ‘complex’, and ‘compound’, see § 2.2 fin.
174 Quotation from Bolkestein (1998c: 1).
Parenthetical clauses and other extraclausal constituents 911
175 See also Müller (1997: 182–6). Roschatt (1885: 217–18) discusses a number of putative parenthet-
ical relative clauses which he regards as normal relative clauses.
176 For further examples, see TLL s.v. autem 1592.58ff.; s.v. et 891.80ff.; s.v. nam 12.43ff. See also Sz.:
472–3 for a historical survey of the use of connectors in parenthetical clauses.
177 Several examples are taken from K.-St.: Index.
912 Information structure and extraclausal expressions
(Trimalchio speaking)); Est enim quiddam (idque intellegitur in omni virtute) quod
deceat. (Cic. Off. 1.95); Et ego ipse, quem tu per iocum (sic enim accipio) divitias
orationis habere dicis, me non esse verborum admodum inopem agnosco
(pÃ{xpp}slt enim non necesse est), sed tamen idem (nec hoc pÃ{xpwpxz|) facile
cedo tuorum scriptorum subtilitati et elegantiae. (Cic. Fam. 4.4.1); O socii (neque
enim ignari sumus ante malorum), / o passi graviora, dabit deus his quoque finem.
(Verg. A. 1.198–9)
Praeclare exigis, Quinte (at ego effugisse arbitrabar), et tibi horum nihil deberi
potest. (Cic. Leg. 2.7); In ripa elephantos (quadraginta autem erant) disponit. (Liv.
21.5.10)
Hunc igitur ut sequerer properavi quem praesentes non sunt secuti, non ut pro-
ficerem aliquid (nec enim sperabam id nec praestare poteram) sed ut, si quid mihi
humanitus accidisset (multa autem impendere videntur praeter naturam etiam
praeterque fatum) huius tamen diei vocem testem rei publicae relinquerem meae
perpetuae erga se voluntatis. (Cic. Phil. 1.10); Quo ex genere si quem forte tui cogno-
sti amantiorem (fieri enim potuit) quam temporis, hunc vero ad tuum numerum
libenter adscribito. (Cic. Q. fr. 1.1.15); Isset ad Iliacas (quid enim deterret amantes?)
/ Penelope gavisa domos, si passus Ulixes. (Stat. Silv. 3.5.46–7); Cum adhuc capillatus
essem (nam a puero vitam Chiam gessi) ipsimi nostri delicatus decessit . . . (Petr. 63.3
(Trimalchio speaking)); Gnatique patrisque, / alma, precor, miserere (potes namque
omnia, nec te / nequiquam lucis Hecate praefecit Avernis), / si potuit manis accersere
coniugis Orpheus . . . (Verg. A. 6.116–19)
178 For the semantic relation between parenthetical clauses and their host, see Roschatt (1885: 229–44)
on Cicero’s orations and rhetorical works, Bolkestein (1998c) on Cicero’s letters—very detailed—
Häusler (2000) on Pliny’s letters, and Damon (in press) on Caesar. For Terence, see Müller (1997: 177–86);
for Petronius, Rochette (2007: 273–6). For the functions of parentheses in poetry, see above all von
Albrecht (1964) on Ovid, Tarrant (1998) on Virgil and other poets, and Coleman (2010) on Statius. For
the use of parentheses as ‘stage directions’ in Roman epic, see Kohn (2012). For the treatment of paren-
thesis by Roman grammarians, see Panico (2001: 491–6).
Parenthetical clauses and other extraclausal constituents 913
( j) Nimium inter vos, Demea, ac / (non quia ades praesens dico hoc) perni-
mium interest.
(‘There’s a big difference between you two, Demea, in fact—and I don’t say that just
because you are present—a very big one.’ Ter. Ad. 392–3)
(k) Ut Quinctius (nihil enim dicam de ceteris) si fuisset homo nobilis, quis eum
cum illa superbia atque intolerantia ferre potuisset?
(‘Suppose that Quinctus (to take no other example) had been of noble birth, who
could have put up with his haughtiness, his unbearable presumption?’ Cic. Clu. 112)
The content of a parenthesis may be relevant to what precedes, as in most of the
examples presented so far, or—less often—to what follows, as in (h) above and in (l)
below. What precedes may be the content of a clause, as in (h) above, but it may
also be a single word, as Quinctius in (k) and divini and Misenum in (m) and (n),
respectively.
(l) Neque enim (sed bonam in partem accipies) si ulla spes salutis nostrae
subesset, tu pro tuo amore in me hoc tempore discessisses.
(‘And indeed—you won’t take this amiss—if there were any lingering hope of my
restoration, caring for me as you do you would not have left Rome at this time.’ Cic.
Att. 3.25.1)
(m) Alterius tribuni plebis, divini hominis (dicam enim quod sentio et quod
mecum sentiunt omnes) divini, insigni quadam inaudita nova magnitudine
animi, gravitate, fide praediti domus est oppugnata ferro, facibus, exercitu
Clodiano.
(‘The house of another tribune of the commons, a divine man—for I am going to say
what I feel and what everyone feels with me—divine, extraordinary for a sort of
greatness of spirit previously unheard, endowed with authority and loyalty, was
attacked with fire and sword by the army of Clodius.’ Cic. Sest. 85)
(n) . . . cum istos libros ad Misenum (nam Romae vix licet) studiosius legerim . . .
(‘. . . after perusing those books rather closely at Misenum (for there was little chance
to do so in Rome) . . .’ Cic. de Orat. 2.60)
The parenthesis may be complex, as in (m) above and in (o) below, or elliptical, as in
(h) above and in (p) below. It may be short, as in (q),179 or long—especially in Cicero’s
letters, as in (o).180 There may also be more than one parenthesis in the same sentence,
as in (r). For a rare parenthesis within a parenthesis, see (s).181
(o) Nunc, quoniam et tu ita sentis (scribis enim quae <de> nostris officiis ego ad
te scripseram, etsi tibi iucunda fuerint, tamen, quoniam ex alto repetita sint,
179 For parentheses with pudet and nefas in poetry, see Coleman (2010: 297–8).
180 Comber (1976) suggests that a number of seeming digressions consisting of more than one sen-
tence in Tacitus are in fact parentheses, for example Tac. Ann. 1.53.3–4: Nec is libidini finis (traditam . . .
credebantur). Igitur amotus Cercinam . . .
181 For a different punctuation without a parenthesis, see Bömer ad loc. The text is disputed.
914 Information structure and extraclausal expressions
(‘How often, gentlemen, have I seen my friend Archias—I shall presume upon your
kindness, since I see you give so careful a hearing to my unconventional digression—
how often, I say, have I seen him, without writing a single letter . . .’ Cic. Arch. 18)
(ac) Hasta posita pro aede Iovis Statoris bona subiecta Cn. Pompei (miserum me!
consumptis enim lacrimis tamen infixus animo haeret dolor) bona, inquam,
Cn. Pompei Magni voci acerbissimae subiecta praeconis.
(‘A lance was planted in front of the Temple of Jupiter Stator, and the property of
Gnaeus Pompeius—dear me! tears may have run dry, but the pain clings deep in my
heart—the property, I say, of Gnaeus Pompeius Magnus was subjected to the harsh
voice of an auctioneer.’ Cic. Phil. 2.64)
(ad) . . . sic recta effectio (ul~{s}tx enim ita appello, quoniam rectum factum
ul~{swl) recta igitur effectio . . . crescendi accessionem nullam habet.
(‘. . . so right conduct (for thus I translate katorthōsis, since katorthōma is a single
right action), right conduct, I say . . . is not capable of increase or addition.’ Cic.
Fin. 3.45)
Sometimes after a parenthesis some form of repair of the interrupted host unit
may be required, which then may result in a change of the wording of the host, as
in (ae).187
(ae) Quin etiam, si quis est paulo ad voluptates propensior, modo ne sit ex pecu-
dum genere (sunt enim quidam homines non re sed nomine) sed si quis est
paulo erectior, quamvis voluptate capiatur, occultat et dissimulat appetitum
voluptatis propter verecundiam.
(‘Nay, even if a man is more than ordinarily inclined to sensual pleasures, provided,
of course, that he be not quite on a level with the beasts of the field (for some people
are men only in name, not in fact)—if, I say, he is a little too susceptible to the attrac-
tions of pleasure, he hides the fact, however much he may be caught in its toils, and
for very shame conceals his appetite.’ Cic. Off. 1.105)
As for the position of the parenthetical clauses within their host unit, they precede the
most important focal information of the sentence, at least in the letters of Cicero, and
in this way contribute to the information structure of their host.188
The use of parenthetical clauses is not confined to a particular kind of text, but it
seems to be more frequent in texts of an interactional character. In Petronius, paren-
thetical expressions are relatively frequent in the Cena Timalchionis,189 but that is not
a proof that they were felt to be substandard, only that they were a normal feature of
conversation. They are also quite frequent in Virgil’s Eclogues and in the speeches of
the Aeneid.190
187 Example taken from K.-St.: II.76. 188 See Bolkestein (1998c: 7–11).
189 For Petronius, see Rochette (2007).
190 For the functions of parenthesis in Virgil and in poetry in general, see Tarrant (2002).
Parenthetical clauses and other extraclausal constituents 917
191 See Bolkestein (1998a; 1998c) on Cicero’s and Seneca’s letters and Apuleius’ Met., Risselada (1989),
Müller (1997: 178–82) on Terence, Longrée (2002a) on Latin historians, Adams (2003a: 19),
Cabrillana (2004) on Terence, Reinhardt (2010: 224–5) on Lucretius, Barrios-Lech (2016: 144–54) on
Latin comedy.
918 Information structure and extraclausal expressions
These expressions can also be used at the boundary of clauses, as in (h) and (i). In that
case they have scope over the clause that follows.192
(h) Sed avunculo eius certe probabitur, praesertim cum senatus consultum
modo factum sit, (puto) postquam tu es profectus, in creditorum causa ut
centesimae perpetuo faenore ducerentur.
(‘But his uncle will certainly accept it, especially as the Senate recently passed a decree
for creditors, after you left Rome, I think, fixing 1 per cent simple interest as the legal
rate.’ Cic. Att. 5.21.13)
(i) In quo ipso multa occultant tuae litterae, (credo) ne vehementius despera-
tione perturber.
(‘In that very regard your letters leave many things obscure, I suppose because you
are afraid of despair throwing me quite off my balance.’ Cic. Att. 3.15.6)
Verbs of cognition vary in the types of expression they can be used in.193 Whereas, for
example, arbitror ‘to judge’, ‘to think’ is, with one exception, not used as a parenthesis
(but regularly in an ut attitudinal disjunct clause), credo ‘to suppose’ is commonly
used as a parenthesis. It seems to have a more ‘particle-like’ status.194
Supplement (in alphabetical order by verb):
Inside a clause: . . . spiritus meus ex te pependit, sed nunc vere (arbitror) sacro et
venerabili ore trahitur. (Curt. 3.6.10); Pol ea ipsa (credo) ne intro mittatur cavet . . . (Pl.
Aul. 101); Sed (opinor) excipiamus et exspectemus. (Cic. Att. 2.5.1); Tu (puto) hoc
credis. (Cic. Att. 8.9a.2); Si mihi secundae res de amore meo essent, iam dudum
(scio) / venissent. (Ter. Hau. 230–1); Ubi illinc (spero) redieris tamen, hoc ages. (Ter.
Ad. 226); Noster socer (video) venit: puero nutricem adducit. (Ter. Hec. 770)
At the boundary of clauses or sentences: Recte dicit, (censeo). (Ter. Hau. 588); His
tantis malis haec subsidia succurrebant quominus omnis deleretur exercitus, quod
Pompeius insidias timens, (credo) quod haec praeter spem acciderant eius qui paulo
ante ex castris fugientis suos conspexerat, munitionibus adpropinquare aliquamdiu
non audebat equitesque eius . . . ad insequendum tardabantur. (Caes. Civ. 3.70.1);
Quod si luce quoque canes latrent cum deos salutatum aliqui venerint, (opinor) iis
crura suffringantur, quod acres sint etiam tum cum suspicio nulla sit. (Cic. S. Rosc.
56); Si sit aliquis malus, (puto) inprobabitur; si bonus, (puto) probabitur. (Sen. Ep.
76.11)
Inside a phrase: Aut etiam, ut media nocte proficiscamur, addunt, quo maiorem
(credo) licentiam habeant qui peccare conentur. (Caes. Civ. 2.31.7); Cicero tuus nos-
terque summo studio est Paeoni sui rhetoris, hominis (opinor) valde exercitati et
boni. (Cic. Q. fr. 3.3.4); . . . intra (puto) septimas Kalendas mortes hoc tibi quattuor
dederunt. (Mart. 1.99.6–7—NB: inside a prepositional phrase)
192 For the use of credo at clause boundaries, see Bolkestein (1998a: 28–9).
193 For cognition verbs this has been shown by Bolkestein (1998a). For further instances, see Hofmann
(1951: 106–8). For Terence, see Müller (1997: 178–82). See also Barrios-Lech (2016: 142–54) on the use of
these verbs in comedy in the wider context of ‘hedges’ (that is: attitudinal comments); also Rochette (2007:
287–9) on Petronius.
194 For the parenthetic use of credo, see TLL s.v. 1137.19ff.; of opinor, TLL s.v. 723.63ff.; of puto, TLL
s.v. 2769.36ff.
Curses and swear words 919
Verbs of cognition can also be used in a similar way in questions, as in ( j) and (k).
Putasne is relatively common in ecclesiastical writings, where it sometimes corres-
ponds to Gr. {l.195
( j) Cense’n hodie despondebit eam mihi, quaeso?
(‘Do you reckon he’ll betroth her to me today, please?’ Pl. Rud. 1269)
(k) Putasne / perduci poterit tam frugi tamque pudica, / quam nequiere proci
recto depellere cursu?
(‘You think she can be tempted—she so good, so pure, whom the suitors could not
turn from the straight course?’ Hor. S. 2.5.76–8)
Supplement:
Sed (cense’n) plorabit, Dave, relicta? (Pers. 5.168); Adcurrens autem Philippus audi-
vit illum legentem Esaiam prophetam et dixit (putasne) intellegis quae legis? (Vulg.
Act. 8.30); (Putasne) sine istis poteris? (August. Conf. 8.26); (Putamus) non istae sunt
excusationes quae impediunt omnes homines . . . (August. Serm. 112.2)
Curses and swear words are often regarded as belonging to the lexical category of
interjections (see § 22.48), but they have certain characteristics of their own and are
therefore treated separately.196 Two types will be distinguished. The first is a typical
feature of Early Latin comedy, especially of Plautus. The expressions are formally
related to the gods Castor, Pollux, and Hercules: ēcastor, mecastor, edepol, pol, hercle,
and mehercle (in later authors hercule and meherculē(s)).197 These curses cannot be
used as one-word sentences and cannot be followed immediately by the emphasizer
quidem, which shows that they are not adverbs.198 Their primary function is to under-
line the personal conviction or involvement of the speaker, but sometimes they
resemble expressive interjections. They are more integrated in their sentences than
the second type, to be discussed below.
An interesting aspect is the division of these words between men and women, already
observed by Gellius (11.6.1).199 In Early texts Roman women do not swear by Hercules,
nor men by Castor. Edepol and pol are used in Plautus and Terence by men and women,
but in Terence pol is almost exclusively used by women (see Table 22.2). Ecastor and
mecastor, edepol and pol practically disappear after Terence. Cicero uses various
Hercules forms (especially mehercule, rarely hercle) (c.140× in the letters; c.110× in the
other works). In later authors the form hercle is also rare and replaced by other
forms.200
Table 22.2 The use of swear words in Plautus and Terence (in absolute numbers)
Plautus Terence
male female male Female
hercle 637 2a 101
mehercle 4 2
ecastor 99 5
mecastor 19 2
pol 159 84 10 45
edepol 338 26 13 10
Source: Ullman (1943: 88). Ullman correctly observes that more plays of Plautus than of Terence have
been preserved, and that men have more lines than women.
a
Pl. Cist. 52; Per. 237. For discussion of these instances, see Stockert (2004), with references.
As for the positions these swear words occupy in their sentences in Plautus and
Terence, some of them are not attested in first position (mehercle, mecastor); the
second position is the most frequent, certainly for hercle, with the swear word
following words of all categories (including coordinators and subordinators),
which are usually emphatic, like the verb perii in (a), for example, or the adverb
numquam in (b), or the subordinator quia in (c). For an exceptionally late
position in the sentence (but second in the line, and after emphatic numquam),
see (d). Plautus is more flexible than Terence.201 When in third position, hercle
often follows a combination of an emphatic word with the emphasizer quidem, as
in (e) (note also the discontinuity mea . . . causa). These swear words are very common
in declarative and exclamatory sentences, but are not excluded from imperative and
interrogative sentences, as can be seen in (f).202
(a) Perii hercle ego, manufesta res [est].
(‘I’m dead! It’s all out.’ Pl. Cas. 893–5)
(b) Numquam edepol erit ille potior / Harpax quam ego.
(‘He’ll never be a better Harpax than me.’ Pl. Ps. 925–5a)
(c) Credo, animo male est / aedibus. # Quid iam? # Quia edepol ipsum lenonem
evomunt.
(‘I believe the house is feeling sick. # How so? # Because it’s vomiting out the pimp
himself.’ Pl. Ps. 952–3)
200 For details on Cicero and other authors, see Gagnér (1920: 31–4; 217–19). For Cicero’s own prefer-
ences, see . . . lubentius dixerim et mehercule quam mehercules. (Cic. Orat. 157).
201 See Gagnér’s conclusions (1920: 195–7).
202 For a discussion of the contexts in which these words are used, see Unceta (2016b: 222–32).
Curses and swear words 921
(d) Peiorem ego hominem magisque vorsute malum / numquam edepol quem-
quam vidi, quam hic est Simia.
(‘I have never seen a worse man and one who is bad in a more wicked way than this
Simia is.’ Pl. Ps. 1017–18)
(e) Mea quidem hercle causa liber esto atque ito quo voles.
(‘As far as I am concerned you can be free and go where you wish.’ Pl. Men. 1029)
(f) Hercle hanc quidem / nil tu amassis.
(‘No, her you mustn’t love.’ Pl. Mil. 1006–7)
The other type of swear words consists of the noun di ‘gods’ in combination with an
adjective, with or without an interjection, either pro or o.203 Examples are (g)–(i). Di
immortales is popular in Plautus and Cicero; di boni, relatively popular in Terence,
Cicero, and Seneca (but not in his tragedies).204 They are sometimes used as inde-
pendent exclamations, and they often come first in the sentence and are then not
always distinguishable from a simple invocation of the gods. They are common in
interrogative and exclamatory sentences. Occasionally di boni is inserted in a phrase
(see the Supplement). Their function is not much different from the former type, with
which they share their resemblance to expressive interjections, but they look more
like parenthetical expressions.
203 Statistical data in TLL s.v. deus 892.34ff. For a discussion of Plautus’ and Terence’s use of these
expressions, see Müller (1997: 144–8). See also Ashdowne (2008) and Unceta (2016b).
204 See Unceta (2017a).
922 Information structure and extraclausal expressions
The expression di vostram fidem is used elliptically for di, obsecro vostram fidem.
Whereas Plautus uses both expressions (seven times against five, respectively) in a
way that can, most of the time, be understood as an invocation of the gods, Terence
has only the elliptical one (ten times), and he uses it more as an affirmative expres-
sion, as in ( j). Both expressions are situated at the beginning of the sentence.
( j) Di vostram fidem, / eamus ad ipsam.
(‘Heaven help us! Let’s go and see her.’ Ter. Ph. 808–9)
Wishes like ita me di ament (see § 7.57) are used by Plautus and Terence as a means
to strengthen the assertion (see § 6.2), as in (k).
(k) Ita me di ament, ut illa me amet malim quam di, Milphio.
(‘As truly as the gods may love me, I’d prefer being loved by her to being
loved by the gods, Milphio.’ Pl. Poen. 289)
Invocations of one or more individual gods (see the use of the vocative case in (m))
are sometimes used as swear words, as discussed above for di immortales, and placed
further on in the sentence, preferably after an emphatic word, as in (m).
(l) Sed pro Iuppiter, / num ego disperii?
(‘But good heavens, am I ruined?’ Pl. Aul. 241–2)
(m) Quae enim res umquam, pro sancte Iuppiter! non modo in hac urbe sed in
omnibus terris est gesta maior?
(‘For was any greater deed ever done in Rome, holy Jupiter, or anywhere else in the
world?’ Cic. Phil. 2.32)
Cicero has some thirty-five instances of me dius fidius (also medius fidius and medius-
fidius), with maybe ten instances in other authors. This phrase is rarely placed at the
beginning of the sentence, as in (n), but rather is almost always in second or later
position, as in (o). This is the case even when it appears within a phrase, as in (p). In
this internal position it follows an emphatic word.
(n) Me dius fidius, ne tu emisti vzx praeclarum!
(‘Well, upon my word you have bought a fine troop!’ Cic. Att. 4.4a.2)
(o) Scripsi de te parce me dius fidius et timide, non revocans me ipse sed paene
refugiens.
(‘I have written about yourself, sparingly and gingerly enough upon my word, not
only keeping myself in check but almost running the other way.’ Cic. Fam. 6.7.3)
(p) Melioris me dius fidius civis et viri putabam quovis supplicio adfici quam illi
crudelitati non solum praeesse verum etiam interesse.
(‘Upon my word I thought that as a man and a citizen it was better to suffer any pun-
ishment rather than take part, let alone a leading part, in such atrocity.’ Cic. Att. 9.6.7)
Malum in (q), repeated from § 22.45, and (r) is an exclamation of anger or frustration.205
205 For the use of malum ‘the deuce!, the devil!’ (OLD s.v. § 8), see Hofmann (1951: 32), Lilja (1965: 39),
and Unceta (2016b: 233–5).
Interjections 923
(q) Quo id, malum, pacto potest nam—mecum argumentis puta— / fieri nunc
uti tu <et> hic sis et domi?
(‘Damn it, how is it possible—discuss it with me in a rational way—that
you’re both here and at home?’ Pl. Am. 592–3)
(r) Quid, malum? Isti Pindenissitae qui sunt?
(‘What the deuce? Those Pindenissitae, who are they?’ Cic. Att. 5.20.1)
22.48 Interjections
206 For the Roman grammarians, see Biville (2003) and Moure Casas (2013).
207 For a very complete list of interjections and discussion, see Neue-W.: II.981–99, K.-H.: 942–3, and
Hofmann (1951: 9–39). For a discussion of the grammatical status of interjections, see Biville (1996).
Unceta (2012) uses the term ‘interjection’ in a restricted sense for what are here called ‘expressive interjec-
tions’ only.
208 This fourfold distinction derives from a threefold division in Tesnière (1959: 96–9), via Müller
(1997: 92), with the addition of introductory interjections as a separate category (usually taken as part of
the summonses), following a suggestion by Luis Unceta (p.c.). Similar terms are also used by Hofmann
(1951: 9–39), Dik (1997: II.384–6), Unceta (2012: 352–3), and others. For the functions of interjections in
various text types, illustrated for Virgil, see Biville (2002).
924 Information structure and extraclausal expressions
clear intonational break between the two units, and this was probably also the case in
Latin. Exceptionally, especially in elevated poetry, interjections are inserted in another
sentence, as in (d) and (e). Details will be discussed in the following sections.
(c) Quid faciam tibi? / # Eheu! # Eheu? Id quidem hercle ne parsis. Dabo.
(‘What should I do for you? # Dear me! # “Dear me?” Don’t spare that: I’ll give it to
you.’ Pl. Ps. 78–9)
(d) Quem procul ex alga maestis Minois ocellis, / saxea ut effigies bacchantis,
prospicit, eheu (cj. Bergk), / prospicit et magnis curarum fluctuat undis . . .
(‘At whom afar from the weedy beach with streaming eyes the daughter of Minos, like
a marble figure of a bacchanal, looks forth, alas! looks forth tempest-tost with great
tides of passion . . .’ Catul. 64.60–2)
(e) Quid precer, heu! timeamve prius?
(‘What should I entreat, or alas! what rather fear?’ Stat. Ach. 1.935)
Some interjections can be used in combination with evaluative exclamatory sentences
(see § 6.35), as in (f) (with a so-called accusativus exclamationis). Grammars and
dictionaries sometimes suggest that such an accusative is governed by the interjection,
but this is not the case. Such accusatives can also be used without the interjec-
tion. Different is vae ‘alas’, which is usually combined with a dative personal pronoun
or a noun phrase, as in (g), resembling the use of the dative with adjectives (see
§ 4.100); capiti tuo cannot be used alone.
(f) Heu, me miserum! Misere perii.
(‘O, I’m wretched! I’ve perished wretchedly.’ Pl. Aul. 721)
(g) Vae capiti tuo.
(‘Bad luck to your head!’ Pl. Am. 741)
For understandable reasons, interjections are very unevenly distributed over text
types and authors. They are very rare in narrative texts (there are no interjections in
Caesar, for example) and in didactic texts (including Lucretius), but common in Early
Latin comedy and in Seneca’s tragedies, as well as in poetry in general.209
209 For their distribution in the LASLA corpus, see Denooz (2005). The interjections attat, au, eu, euax,
eugepae, papae are left out of account because they are too infrequent.
210 See Hofmann (1951: 11–12), Müller (1997: 92–3). For a few other sound-reproducing interjections,
see K.-H.: 943.
Interjections 925
22.50 Summonses
Summonses are expressions that are used by a speaker to draw the attention of an
addressee, which may be a person or a group of persons.211 An example is heus ‘hey’.
(For the use of the imperative forms fac and age as summonses, see § 6.29.)
Summonses are often combined with an address, often also with a form of greeting,
and are often in the initial position and followed by a command or a question. They
are best attested in Early Latin comedy. The expressions discussed in this section vary
in their social function (heus is typically used by men) and in the frequency with
which they are used by Plautus and Terence.212 By decreasing order of the number of
attestations, the following interjections are used as a summons: o (oh), heus, eho, and
st. Of these, only o is attested in all periods of Latin.
By using the interjection eho ‘hey’, ‘hi’ the speaker directs the attention of the
addressee to what he is going to say. It is used by men and women. It most often pre-
cedes an indignant or otherwise emotional question or order, as in (a) and (b), and is
regularly combined with a form of address, as in (b) and (c), or with a modulator of
illocution (see § 22.46), as in (d). It is usually not directed to superiors. Outside of
comedy there is one conjectured instance, which is at Rhet. Her. 4.63.213
(a) Quin etiam nunc intus hic in proxumo est. # Eho, an non domi est?
(‘Actually she’s in here next door even now. # Tell me, she’s not at home?’ Pl. Mil. 301)
(b) Eho istum, puere, circumduce hasce aedis et conclavia.
(‘Hey there, boy, take him around the house and rooms.’ Pl. Mos. 843)
(c) Eho tu, eho tu, quin cavisti ne eam videret, verbero?
(‘Hey you, hey you, why didn’t you guard against him seeing her, you thug?’ Pl.
Mer. 189)
(d) Eho, amabo, quid illo nunc properas?
(‘Hey, please, why are you rushing there now?’ Pl. Poen. 263)
The interjection heus ‘hey’ signals an urgent appeal to a person or persons for their
attention. It is mainly attested in Early Latin comedy, especially Plautus, but con-
tinues to be used by later authors in interactive texts (rarely in other text types), for
211 There are also non-linguistic summonses like knocking on the door, which will be ignored here. See
Hoffmann (1983: 225) and Roesch (2008: 210).
212 For discussion of the social aspects, see Müller (1997: 102–10) and Barrios-Lech (2016: 162–8).
213 For details, see TLL s.v. eho 298.12ff., Müller (1997: 105–6), and Barrios-Lech (2016: 166–8).
926 Information structure and extraclausal expressions
example, Cicero in the notable combination (sed) heus tu. It is usually in first pos-
ition and often precedes a form of address. With very few exceptions, it is used by
male speakers. At Rhet. Her. 4.14 it figures in an example of low style (genus adtenu-
atum). It is mainly used by people with a relatively higher social status in the situ-
ation at hand.214 Typical examples are (e)–(h). A few less common ones can be found
in the Supplement.
(e) Heus, Pardalisca! / # Quid est? # Est— # Quid? # Est quod volo exquirere
ex te.
(‘Hey there, Pardalisca! # What is it? # There is— # What? # There is something I want
to ask you.’ Pl. Cas. 688–9)
(f) Aperite hoc. Heus, ecquis hic est?
(‘Open up! Hello, is anyone here?’ Pl. Am. 1020)
(g) Aperite, aperite! Heus, Simoni me adesse aliquis nuntiate!
(‘Open up, open up! Hey, someone announce to Simo that I’m here!’ Pl. Ps. 1284)
(h) Heus, tu, / malo, si sapis, cavebis. / Mea est haec.
(‘Hey, you, watch out for trouble if you’re wise. She belongs to me.’ Pl. Cas. 837–9)
Supplement:
Heus, vos, ecquis haec quae loquor audit? (Pl. Cas. 165–6—Myrrhina speaking);
Filia, heus. # Quid est? Quid agimus? (Pl. Men. 844); Sed heus tu, ecquid vides
Kalendas venire, Antonium non venire? (Cic. Att. 2.2.3); Ac prior ‘heus,’ inquit,
‘iuvenes, monstrate, mearum / vidistis si quam . . . (Verg. A. 1.321–2); M(arcus) ·
Statius / M(arci) · l(ibertus) · Chilo / hic / heus · tu · viator · las/se · qu<i> ·
me · praete/reis . . . (CIL I2.2138.1–6 (Cremona)); Heus tu, peccator, bono animo sis.
(Tert. Paen. 8.3)
The interjection o (also oh, without an observable difference in the context in which it
is used)215 is used both as an expressive interjection (see § 22.52) and as a summons.
In the latter case, it is combined with a form of address. This combination can be used
alone, as in (i), but it can also be combined with a sentence of which the content is to
some extent emotional for the speaker, as in ( j)–(l). In that case, it usually precedes it,
but it can also follow or be inserted. It is used in all periods of Latin but, due to its
function, it is absent from an author like Caesar and is rare in historical and didactic
texts in general. Especially in poetry, the regular order of the combination o + form of
address can be interrupted by other constituents, as in (m), but the order is also
(rarely) inversed, as in (n).216
(i) O mi ocule, o mi anime.
(‘O apple of my eye, o my soulmate.’ Pl. Mil. 1330)
214 For details, see TLL s.v. heus 2675.7ff., Watt (1963), Hoffmann (1983: 222–3), Müller (1997: 102–5),
Berger (2015), Barrios-Lech (2016: 162–3), and Adams (2016: 128).
215 See TLL s.v. o 3.33ff. For Terence’s use of o, see Müller (1997: 123–6).
216 For the variety of word order, see TLL s.v. o 10.1ff.
Interjections 927
( j) O Lyde, es barbarus.
(‘O Lydus, you’re a barbarian.’ Pl. Bac. 121)
(k) Respice, o mi lepos.
(‘Look back at me, my delight.’ Pl. Cas. 235)
(l) Sed, o Palaemon, sancte Neptuni comes, / qui <et> Herculis socius esse
diceris, / quod facinus video!
(‘But, o Palaemon, holy friend of Neptune, you who are also called the companion of
Hercules, what action do I see!’ Pl. Rud. 160–2)
(m) Ut stetit, ‘o’, dixit, ‘non istis digna catenis . . .’
(‘As soon as he had touched down, he said: “Oh! you who do not deserve those
chains . . .” ’ Ov. Met. 4.678—tr. Kline)
(n) ‘Iuppiter o!’, dixi, ‘si te non falsa loquuntur / dicta sub amplexus Aeginae
Asopidos isse . . .’
(‘I said: “O Jupiter, if they do not lie when they say that you were held in Aegina’s
embrace, she, the daughter of Asopus . . .” ’ Ov. Met. 7.615–16—tr. Kline)
The infrequent interjection ohē is used as a signal that the speaker wants to stop what
is going on.
(o) Nolo, inquam, aurum concredi mihi. / Vel da aliquem qui servet me. # Ohe,
odiose facis.
(‘I’m telling you, I don’t want to be entrusted with the gold. Or give me someone to
watch over me. # Hey, you’re getting on my nerves.’ Pl. Bac. 1064–5)
The sound-reproducing interjection st is a signal to the addressee that he should be
silent. In Plautus, who has about twenty instances, it is almost always accompanied
with an imperative of the verb taceo, as in (p). One of the few exceptions, not accepted
by all editors, is (q). After Plautus it is almost non-existent.217
(p) St. / Tace atque abi.
(‘Hush! Be quiet and be off.’ Pl. Cas. 148–9)
(q) St. / Ne pave, restituam iam ego te in gaudio antiquo ut sies.
(‘Hush! Stop being afraid. I’ll restore you to your old joy now.’ Pl. Mer. 884a–5)
217 For Ter. Ph. 743, see Müller (1997: 110). Cicero has one instance at Rep. 6.12.
928 Information structure and extraclausal expressions
C. Gracchus and then is infrequently used by Cicero and continues to be found until
Late Latin. Em practically disappears after Early Latin comedy.
The interjection ecce ‘there’, ‘here is X’ is used in two types of contexts. In one
context, it calls the attention of the addressee to an entity in the situation or to a
visible or perceptible event in that situation—its proper attention-calling or ‘demon-
strative’ use, as in (a) and (b). Alternatively, in a narrative or similar type of text, it
serves to signal that something noteworthy is going to happen, often unexpectedly,
as in (c).218 In (a), the entity to which attention is called is in the accusative, com-
parable with the use of the accusative for an object constituent (see also § 6.35,
Appendix). In (b), ecce is the first element in a sentence in which a particular situ-
ation on stage is described. In (c), it introduces the main clause of a complex sen-
tence which is part of a narrative.
(a) Ubi es? # Ecce me.
(‘Where are you? # Here I am.’ Pl. Rud. 241)
(b) Perii hercle. Ecce autem haec abiit. Vae misero mihi.
(‘I’m done for! (turns back) But look, my wife’s left. Poor, wretched me!’ Pl. Mer. 792)
(c) Discubitum noctu ut imus, ecce ad me advenit / mulier . . .
(‘As we went off to bed that night, lo and behold, a woman came to me . . . ’ Pl. Mer.
100–1)
The use of objectlike constituents as in (a) is further illustrated by (d)–(f), the last
being an indirect question. The combination of ecce in its demonstrative function
with a nominative noun or noun phrase is first used by Virgil, as in (g). From Cicero
onwards, ecce can be combined with an illocutionary disjunct in the dative (tibi or
vobis) (a dativus ethicus, see § 10.107), as in (h). Poets especially place ecce in positions
other than the first of its clause or sentence, as in (i).219
(d) Ecce autem alterum! / Nescioquid de amore loquitur. O infortunatum
senem!
(‘Now look, here’s the other one, muttering something about love! The poor old mas-
ter!’ Ter. Eu. 297–8)
(e) ‘En quattuor aras: / ecce duas tibi, Daphni, duas altaria Phoebo.’
(‘ “Lo, here are four altars, mind you, two for you, Daphnis; two for Phoebus!” ’ Verg.
Ecl. 5.65–6)
(f) ‘Ecce ut doleat tibi, ut postea consideratius loquaris!’
(‘ “Look how sorry you are for yourself; next time take more care before you speak!” ’
Sen. Ben. 4.36.1)
218 For the various functions of ecce, see Cuzzolin (1998) and Adams (2013: 465–80), with references.
The text-structuring function of ecce or, as she calls it, the ‘discourse-marking’ function, is discussed by
Dionisotti (2007), especially for Virgil.
219 For further instances and details, see TLL s.v. ecce 23.73ff. For Terence’s use of ecce, see Müller
(1997: 117–18).
Interjections 929
(g) Ventum erat ad limen, cum virgo ‘poscere fata / tempus,’ ait, ‘deus ecce
deus!’
(‘They had come to the threshold, when the maiden cries: “’Tis time to ask the
oracles; the god, lo! the god!” ’ Verg. A. 6.45–6)
(h) Sed cum ex Dolabellae {t}~pjļ (sic enim tu ad me scripseras) magna
†desperatione adfectus† essem, ecce tibi et Bruti et tuae litterae!
(‘But just when Dolabella’s ‘star performance’, as you put it in your letter to me, had
given me fresh heart (?), down comes Brutus’ letter on the one hand and yours on the
other.’ Cic. Att. 14.19.1)
(i) In somnis, ecce, ante oculos maestissimus Hector / visus adesse mihi . . .
(‘In slumbers, behold, I dreamed that Hector, most sorrowful, stood before my eyes . . .’
Verg. A. 2.270–1)
Supplement:
Ecce Gripi scelera. (Pl. Rud. 1178); Vix haec dixerat, cum ecce iste praesto ‘sedes’,
inquit, ‘audax?’ (Rhet. Her. 4.65); Ecce illa tempestas, caligo bonorum et subita atque
improvisa formido . . . (Cic. Prov. 43); Ecce tibi qui rex populi Romani dominusque
omnium gentium esse concupiverit idque perfecerit. (Cic. Off. 3.83); Hic aliud maius
miseris multoque tremendum / obicitur magis atque improvida pectora turbat. /
Laocoon, ductus Neptuno sorte sacerdos, / sollemnis taurum ingentem mactabat ad
aras. / Ecce autem gemini a Tenedo tranquilla per alta / (horresco referens) immensis
orbibus angues / incumbunt pelago pariterque ad litora tendunt. (Verg. A. 2.199–205);
Multa miser timeo, quia feci multa proterve, / exemplique metu torqueor, ecce,
mei. (Ov. Am. 1.4.45–6); Teneo ecce epistulas, in quibus manifesta proditionis
argumenta sunt, in quibus hostium consilia. (Sen. Con. 10.6.1); ‘Quod si utique’,
proclamabat, ‘facinore opus est, nudo ecce iugulum, convertite huc manus, imprim-
ite mucrones.’ (Petr. 80.4); Et ecce illam misericordiam. (August. Serm. 16A.10); Date
elemosynam, et ecce vobis munda sunt omnia. (August. Serm. 16A.12); Ecce quo
modo salubriter mortificat Deus. (August. Civ. 17.4 (l. 138)); Indolis · hic · iacit ·
heu / ecce · sepultus · / cunctis · karus exosus / non · nisi · malivolis · /
Dextrianus · nomine · / vocita[ta]tus in vita . . . (CIL XII.592.1–6 (Aix-en-
Provence)); Hoc autem schema fit aut in sensu aut in verbis. . . . Ecce hoc schema in
sensu est . . . (Pomp. V.300.2–15K.)220
In Plautus and Terence, alongside ecce there are other forms which are compounds of
ecce and accusative forms of demonstrative pronouns, resulting in forms like eccum,
eccas, and eccillam (and once eccistam). These are, in fact, much more frequent in that
corpus than ecce by itself. They can be used to draw the attention of the addressee to
an entity in the situation or to a visible or perceptible event. They are semi-declinable
words which only agree in number and gender with the person or thing they refer to,
as can also be seen in ( j)–(m). Ex. (n) resembles (a) above in having an objectlike
accusative affinem with it.221
220 For the ‘discourse-marking role’ of ecce in the grammarian Pompeius, see Adams (2013: 473–5).
221 For etymological considerations, see de Vaan (2008: 185). For a detailed treatment of these forms in
Plautus, see Perdicoyanni-Paléologou (2002). See also § 11.103, Appendix.
930 Information structure and extraclausal expressions
222 Following OLD s.v. em. In the manuscripts there is confusion of em and hem and also of em and en.
For Terence’s use of em, see Müller (1997: 115–17). For Plautus’ usage and for general discussion, see
Unceta (2017b). For a comparative discussion of em and hem, see del Vecchio (2008: 115–22).
223 See Unceta (2017b: 74–5).
Interjections 931
The interjection ēn ‘observe’, ‘see’ is used to call attention either to entities visible in
the situation or in other ways perceptible, or to an event in the situation.224 When
presenting an entity, it is combined with a noun or noun phrase in the accusative or,
more often, in the nominative, as in (t) and (u), respectively. As with ecce and em, the
objectlike element can also be a clause, as in (v), the first attestation of en. When en is
used for presenting a situation, it is more often placed in first position, as in (w), but
can also be inserted elsewhere in the clause or sentence, at least in poetry. It is very
rarely combined with an illocutionary disjunct in the dative (tibi or vobis) (a dativus
ethicus, see § 10.107).225
(t) ‘En vobis’, inquit, ‘iuvenem’ . . .
(‘ “Here,” he cried, “here is a young man . . .” ’ Liv. 5.18.5)
(u) En crimen, en causa, cur regem fugitivus, dominum servus accuset.
(‘Here we have the charge, here the ground which has induced a runaway to arraign
his king, a slave his lord.’ Cic. Deiot. 17)
(v) Considerate, Quirites, sinistram eius. En quoius auctoritatem sequimini . . .
(‘Look, Quirites, at his left hand. There is the man whose authority you must fol-
low . . .’ Gracch. orat. 58)
(w) Tum Quintus ‘en’, inquit mihi, ‘haec ego patior cottidie’.
(‘Quintus said to me “There! This is the sort of thing I have to put up with every day.” ’
Cic. Att. 5.1.4)
The relationship between the attention-getting use of ēn, discussed above, and the
interrogative use of ēn, as in (x), is not clear. As the example illustrates, the latter use
is most visible in the combination with umquam (see § 6.15). Instances of its use in
isolation are very rare, but see (y).
(x) Sed tu enumquam cum quiquam viro / consuevisti?
(‘But have you ever been intimate with any man?’ Pl. Cist. 86–7)
(y) En haec promissa fides est?
(‘Is this how he keeps his promise?’ Verg. A. 6.346)
224 The etymology of ēn is not clear. Some scholars assume its use was influenced in some way by the
Greek interjection ·x ‘hey’. See de Vaan (2008: 189).
225 Symmachus has the largest number of instances (six).
226 Unceta (2012: 361–89) presents a systematic treatment of this class according to the emotions they
express.
932 Information structure and extraclausal expressions
The interjection a (ah, rarely aha) is commonly used in Early Latin comedy and in
poetry (including Seneca’s tragedies). There are only two instances (quotations) in
prose (Cicero). In the comedies, it usually precedes an imperative, interrogative,
declarative, or exclamatory sentence (including an occasional accusativus exclama-
tionis), and it is rarely used independently. Poets use it freely where it fits in best in the
metre. Three examples are (a)–(c). A(h) is used in various emotional contexts,227 but
very rarely to express joy, as in (d).
(a) Apage a me, apage. # Ah, nimium ferus es. # Mihi sum. # Malacissandus es. /
Equidem tibi do hanc operam. # Ah, nimium pretiosa es operaria.
(‘Away from me, away! # Ah, you’re too wild. # For my own benefit. # You need
to be softened. I’ll do this work for you. # Oh, you’re too expensive a worker.’ Pl.
Bac. 73–4)
(b) Non est profecto: sine. # At enim istaec in me cudetur faba. # Ah. / # Flagitium
facimus.
(‘It won’t, I’m sure. Let me. # But I’m the one who’ll pay for it. # Oh! # We’re commit-
ting an outrage.’ Ter. Eu. 381)
(c) Miser, a miser, querendum’st / etiam atque etiam, anime.
(‘ “Unhappy , ah unhappy heart, again, again must thou complain.” ’ Catul. 63.61)
(d) Dic isti. / # Ah. # Quid est? Ecquid lubet? # Lubet.
(‘Tell her that. # Ah! # What is it? Do you like it? # I do like it.’ Pl. Cur. 130–1)
The interjection ehem is ‘an exclamation expressing gratified surprise or recollection,’228
as in (e) and (f), respectively. Terence uses it relatively more often than Plautus to
express surprise at the unexpected arrival of someone. After these authors, there are
only two attestations, in the archaist Apuleius.
(e) Ehem, te hercle ego circumspectabam, nimis metuebam male ne abiisses.
(‘Hey, I was looking around for you. I was very much afraid that you might have
given me the slip.’ Pl. Ps. 912)
(f) Quid? Quid aliud volui dicere? / Ehem, curate istam diligenter virginem.
(‘Well, then, what else did I mean to say? You there, look after that girl with the great-
est care.’ Ter. Eu. 504–5)
The interjection ei is used in Early Latin comedy, rarely alone, usually with the dative
of the first personal pronoun mihi, and usually preceding a sentence. The latter usage
continued until Late Latin, but almost exclusively in poetry. In comedy it is, with one
exception, only used by men, mostly those of a higher social position. It is an expres-
sion of ‘anguish or sim.’ (OLD).229 Examples are (g)–(h).
230 For Plautus’ use of (h)eia, see Unceta (2012: 379–82—with discussion of the variation in form); for
Terence’s use, see Müller (1997: 131–2).
231 As in one of the two prose instances (Sal. Jug. 14.9).
934 Information structure and extraclausal expressions
(o) Eheu me miseram, quor non aut istaec mihi / aetas et forma’st aut tibi haec
sententia?
(‘Oh dear, oh dear! If only either I had your youth and beauty or you had my sense!’
Ter. Hec. 74–5)
For the interjection hem, see § 6.25. It is used for a variety of emotions, ranging from
‘surprise, concern, etc.’ to ‘unhappiness’ (OLD).232 It is usually used in reaction to
another person’s words, as in (p). It is very rare outside of comedy, one example being
(q), where it is not used in a reactive context.
(p) Interemere ait velle vitam, / gladium— # Hem? # Gladium— # Quid eum
gladium? / # Habet.
(‘She says she wants to take his life. A sword— # What? # A sword— # What about
this sword? # She has it.’ Pl. Cas. 659–61)
(q) Hem, mea lux, meum desiderium, unde omnes opem petere solebant, te
nunc, mea Terentia, sic vexari, sic iacere in lacrimis et sordibus . . .
(‘Ah, my beloved, my heart’s longing! To think that you, dearest Terentia, once every-
body’s refuge in trouble, should now be so tormented! There you are, plunged in tears
and mourning . . .’ Cic. Fam. 14.2.2)
The interjection heu ‘alas’ is an expression of ‘sorrow, regret, etc.’ (OLD). It is used by
Plautus and Terence to express a strong emotion of the speaker.233 It is used both
alone, as in (r), and preceding (mainly exclamatory) sentences, including those con-
sisting of an accusativus exclamationis, as in (s). It is rare in prose: Pliny the Elder has
seven instances of the type, exemplified by (t), and it is still used as late as the Vulgate.
It was popular in elevated poetry, often as comment of the author, and was sometimes
positioned quite freely, as in (u) and (v).
(r) Heu heu! # Desine. # Doleo.
(‘Dear o dear! # Stop it! # I’m in pain.’ Pl. Ps. 1320)
(s) Heu me miserum! Misere perii . . .
(‘O, I’m wretched! I’ve perished wretchedly . . .’ Pl. Aul. 721)
(t) Heu dementia ab his initiis existimantium ad superbiam se genitos!
(‘Alas the madness of those who think that from these beginnings they were bred to
proud estate!’ Plin. Nat. 7.3)
(u) Heu me, per urbem—nam pudet tanti mali— / fabula quanta fui, convivio-
rum et paenitet . . .
(‘Ah me! (for I am ashamed of so great a misfortune) what a subject of talk was I
throughout the city! I repent too of the entertainments . . .’ Hor. Epod. 11.7–8)
232 See also Müller (1997: 121–3) and del Vecchio (2008: 115–22).
233 For Plautus’ use of heu, see Unceta (2012: 366–7); for Terence’s use, see Müller (1997: 137).
Interjections 935
(v) . . . Eurydicenque suam iam luce sub ipsa / immemor heu! victusque animi
respexit . . .
(‘. . . and on the very verge of light, unmindful, alas, and vanquished in purpose, on
Eurydice, now regained looked back! . . .’ Verg. G. 4.490–1)
The interjection hui is an expression of positive or negative surprise. Outside of the
comedies of Plautus (three instances) and Terence (fifteen), it is only attested eight
times, in Cicero’s correspondence (six by himself).234 It can be used alone, as in (w),
but can also precede a (mostly exclamatory) sentence, as in (x).
(w) Spero, est simili’ maiorum suom. # Hui! / # Syre, praeceptorum plenu’st isto-
rum ille. # Phy!
(‘He gives me hope. He’s similar to his ancestors. # Wow! # Syrus, he’s full of these
maxims. # Phew!’ Ter. Ad. 411–12)
(x) Hui, babae, basilice te intulisti et facete.
(‘Hey, wow! That was a fantastic, fine movement!’ Pl. Per. 806)
In its expressive use (for its use as summons, see § 22.50), the interjection o expresses
‘various emotions: a. pleasure, satisfaction. b. pain, misery, reproach, or sim. c. sur-
prise’ (OLD), the first two being less common. O is common in all periods of Latin,
but is particularly frequent in poetry. Examples of the three types from Plautus are
(y)–(aa), respectively.235 O is usually the first word of the sequence to which it belongs,
as in (y) and (z). Independent instances like (aa) are very rare.236 In poetry, placement
of o is freer, as in (ab).
(y) [Mihi] certum est efficere in me omnia eadem quae tu in te faxis. / # Oh,
melle dulci dulcior [mihi] tu es.
(‘I’ve set my mind on doing to myself everything you do to yourself. # Oh, you’re
sweeter than sweet honey.’ Pl. As. 613–14)
(z) Indigna digna habenda sunt erus quae facit. # Oh! oh! oh! / # Eiulatione haud
opus est, [multa] oculis aciem minuitis.
(‘The wrongs a master does must be deemed right. # No, no, no! # There’s no need for
wailing; you’re merely diminishing your eyes’ sharpness.’ Pl. Capt. 200–1)
(aa) Respice vero, Thesprio. # Oh, / Epidicumne ego conspicor?
(‘But do look back, Thesprio. # Oh, do I see Epidicus?’ Pl. Epid. 3–4)
(ab) Quare agite, o, proprios generatim discite cultus, / agricolae . . .
(‘Up, therefore, O husbandmen, learn the culture proper to each after its kind . . .’
Verg. G. 2.35–6)
237 Pl. As. 481; Catul. 8.15; Sen. Apoc. 4.3. For vae in Plautus, see Unceta (2012: 364–5).
Address 937
(al) Vae misero mihi, / propter meum caput labores homini evenisse optumo.
(‘Oh no, I’m so wretched! Because of me the best of men had to suffer!’ Pl. Capt.
945–6)
(am) Vae illi qui tam indiligenter opservavit ianuam.
(‘Bad luck to the man who watched his door so carelessly.’ Pl. As. 273)
(an) . . . Mantua, vae miserae nimium vicina Cremonae . . .
(‘. . . Mantua, alas! too near ill-fated Cremona . . .’ Verg. Ecl. 9.28)
The interjection vah is almost limited to Plautus and Terence,238 where it is used in
various emotional contexts (pain, dismay, vexation, etc.; contempt; admiration,
surprise (see OLD)). It can precede all four types of sentences. Examples are (ao)–(ar),
respectively. But it can also stand alone, as in (as).
(ao) Poti’n coniecturam facere, si narrem tibi / hac nocte quod ego somniavi
dormiens? / # Vah, solus hic homo est qui sciat divinitus.
(‘Can you interpret if I tell you what I dreamed about in my sleep last night? # Bah!
This man’s the only man who knows through divine inspiration.’ Pl. Cur. 246–8)
(ap) Ita fieri iussi. # Ecquid hallecis? # Vah, rogas?
(‘That’s how I’ve had it done. # Is there any fish sauce? # Bah, you even ask?’ Pl.
Per. 107)
(aq) Sati’n hoc plane, sati’n diserte, / ere, nunc videor tibi locutus / esse? # Vah, /
apage te a me.
(‘Don’t you think now that I’ve said this clearly enough and eloquently enough,
master? # Bah, go away from me.’ Pl. Am. 578–80)
(ar) Tempta qua lubet. / # Vah, scelestus quam benigne, ut ne abstulisse intellegam!
(‘Touch me wherever you wish. # Bah, how obliging the thug is, so I won’t realize he’s
taken it.’ Pl. Aul. 647–8)
(as) Tetigistin’? # Tetigi, inquam, et pultavi. # Vah. # Quid est?
(‘You’ve touched it? # I’m telling you, I’ve touched it and I’ve knocked. # Oh no! #
What is it?’ Pl. Mos. 457)
22.53 Address
common noun or noun phrase that in some way applies to the addressee, either alone,
as in (b), or in combination with a sentence, as in (c)–(e). The term address is used
for the function these three devices fulfil.241
(a) Audire vocem visa sum ante aedis modo / mei Lampadisci servi. # Non surda
es, era: / recte audivisti. # Quid agis hic? # Quod gaudeas.
(‘Just now I seemed to hear the voice of my good slave Lampadio in front of the
house. # You aren’t deaf, mistress: you heard correctly. # What are you doing here? #
Something you’ll be happy about.’ Pl. Cist. 543–5)
(b) Era. # Hem quid est? # Haec est. # Quis <est>? # Quoi haec excidit cistella.
(‘Mistress. # Yes, what is it? # This is her. # Who is it? # The one who dropped the
casket.’ Pl. Cist. 695)
(c) Quid agis, Euclio?
(‘How are you, Euclio?’ Pl. Aul. 536)
(d) Heus tu, / malo, si sapies, cavebis.
(‘Hey, you, watch out for trouble if you’re wise.’ Pl. Cas. 837)
(e) Bonus est hic homo, mea voluptas.
(‘He’s a good man, my darling.’ Pl. Poen. 1214)
Addresses are often accompanied by summonses and/or by greetings and leave-
takings.242
The latter are often conventional, such as salve, vale, and di te ament, as in (f), but
more individualized expressions can be used as well, as in (g).243
(f) Salvos sis, Mnesiloche, salvom te advenire gaudeo. # Di te ament, Philoxene.
(‘Hello, Mnesilochus, I’m glad you’ve arrived safely. # May the gods love you,
Philoxenus.’ Pl. Bac. 456–7)
(g) Cura, mi Tiro, ut valeas. Hoc gratius mihi facere nihil potes.
(‘Look after your health, my dear Tiro. You can do nothing to please me more.’ Cic.
Fam. 16.22.2)
Addresses resemble summonses (see § 22.50) in that they can sollicit the attention of
an addressee, as in (b) above. The difference is that addresses have a lexical meaning
and, in oral communication, usually function as a signal that the speaker wants to
communicate in some way with the addressee; summonses have no lexical meaning.
Summons and address frequently co-occur, especially in comedy, as in (d) above and
in (h).244
241 Janson (2013) distinguishes ‘calls’ as a separate type alongside the traditional four sentence types.
242 For expressions of greeting and farewell, see Forberg (1913), Letessier (2000), Poccetti (2010),
Barrios-Lech (2016: 177–93), Unceta (2016a), and Berger (2017a).
243 For di te ament greeting expressions in Plautus and less conventionalized variants, see Hanson (1959)
and Berger (2017a).
244 For Early Latin, see Bennett: II.268–70; 278.
Address 939
245 Ctibor (2017a: 53) uses the term ‘vocative of sincerity and guarantee’.
246 A monograph on ‘address’ in Latin is Dickey (2002), with discussion of previous literature, espe-
cially from a sociolinguistic point of view. Svennung (1958) remains worth consulting. More recent dis-
cussions can be found in Cabrillana (2008), Bodelot and Verdier (2011), and Ctibor (2017a). For explicit
addresses to the audience in Roman comedy, see Kraus (1934).
247 See Cabrillana (2008). See also § 9.2 on tu ‘you’.
940 Information structure and extraclausal expressions
other person, as in (d), but it may also be used for pragmatic reasons (comforting,
flattering, reproaching, insulting, etc.), especially if the two persons know each other,
as in (e).248 If only one person is involved, the use of an address often has an emotional
function (for example, when addressing the gods, or in combination with exclam-
ations), as in (f).249 In drama, the use of an address may also serve the purpose of
making a character known to the public, as in (g).250
(a) Nomen mulieri’ cedo quid sit, ut quaeratur. # Philterae. / # Ipsa’st. Mirum ni
illa salva’st et ego perii. # Sostrata, / sequere me intro hac.
(‘Tell me the woman’s name, so that we can make enquiries. # Philtera. # It’s her. It
looks as if the girl’s saved and I’m lost. # Sostrata, follow me inside.’ Ter. Hau. 662–4)
(b) Quo usque tandem abutere, Catilina, patientia nostra?
(‘In heaven’s name, Catiline, how long will you take advantage of our forebearance?’
Cic. Catil. 1.1)
(c) Videris mihi, Agamemnon, dicere: ‘Quid iste argutat molestus?’
(‘Now, Agamemnon, you look as if you were saying, “What is this bore chattering
for?” ’ Petr. 46.1 (Echion speaking))
(d) Epidice! # Epidicum quis est qui revocat? # Ego sum, Periphanes. / # Et ego
quidem Apoecides sum. # Et ego quidem sum Epidicus.
(‘Epidicus! # Who is it that’s calling back Epidicus? # It is I, Periphanes. # And I am
Apoecides. # And I am Epidicus.’ Pl. Epid. 201–2)
(e) Unum hoc scio, hanc meritam esse ut memor esses sui. / # Memor essem? O
Mysis, Mysis, etiam nunc mihi / scripta illa dicta sunt in animo Chrysidis /
de Glycerio.
(‘All I know is that she doesn’t deserve to be forgotten. # Forgotten? Oh Mysis, Mysis,
even now Chrysis’ words about Glycerium are engraved on my heart.’ Ter. An. 281–4)
(f) O Fortuna, ut numquam perpetuo’s data!
(‘Oh Fortune, how impermanent a gift you are!’ Ter. Hec. 406)
(g) Aeschine, audi ne te ignarum fuisse dicas meorum morum. / Leno ego sum.
(‘Listen, Aeschines, so you can’t say you’re unaware of my character. I’m a pimp.’ Ter.
Ad. 160–1)
Some of the pragmatic functions mentioned can also be used in types of text other
than (fictive) oral texts, for example in letters. In longer and well-prepared texts,
addresses can moreover fulfil a discourse function. In speeches, for example, they
may contribute to the organization of the text in paragraphs, as in Catiline’s sec-
ond speech to his followers in Sallust (h).251 In dialogues the use of addresses also
248 For this function of addresses, see Bennett: II. 262–78 (with a detailed classification), Cabrillana
(2008), Monserrat Roig (2010), Ctibor (2017a).
249 Exx. (a)–(g) are taken from Cabrillana (2008) and Ctibor (2017a).
250 See Cabrillana (2008). 251 For discussion, see Ctibor (2017a: 51–3).
Address 941
contributes to the structuring and the coherence of the text (they perform a ‘bridging’
function).252
(h) Itaque contione advocata huiusce modi orationem habuit (sc. Catilina).
(1) Conpertum ego habeo, milites, verba virtutem non addere . . .
(2) Scitis equidem, milites, socordia atque ignavia Lentuli quantam ipsi
nobisque cladem adtulerit . . .
(3) Praeterea, milites, non eadem nobis et illis necessitudo inpendet.
(4) Quom vos considero, milites, et quom facta vostra aestumo, magna me
spes victoriae tenet.
(‘Accordingly he assembled his troops and addressed them in a speech of the fol-
lowing purport: (1) “I am well aware, soldiers, that words do not supply
valour . . . (2) You know perfectly well, soldiers, how great is the disaster that the
incapacity and cowardice of Lentulus have brought upon himself and us . . . (3)
Moreover, soldiers, we and our opponents are not facing the same exigency. (4)
When I think of you, my soldiers, and weigh your deeds, I have high hopes of victory.’
Sal. Cat. 57.6–58)
Likewise in Cicero’s speeches the address iudices ‘judges’ helps to structure the speech,
while at the same time ensuring that the judges keep listening and remain aware of
their important role. Address constituents have been shown to contribute to the
structuring of clauses and sentences by being situated at syntactic borderlines,253 as
in (i):
(i) Indiciis expositis atque editis, Quirites, senatum consului . . .
(‘When the evidence had been produced and read out, citizens, I asked the Senate . . .’
Cic. Catil. 3.13)
Here the ablative absolute clause indiciis . . . editis is set apart by the address expression
Quirites (‘fellow-citizens’).254 Another effect aimed at by putting an address constitu-
ent in a specific position in its clause or sentence is marking one or more surrounding
constituents as salient. Examples include ( j)–(l) (the salient elements are in italics):
( j) . . . aliquando, per deos immortalis, patres conscripti, patrium animum vir-
tutemque capiamus . . .
(‘. . . by the immortal gods, Members of the Senate, let us at last take our fathers’ spirit
and courage . . .’ Cic. Phil. 3.29)
(k) Ea erat, iudices, pergrandis pecunia.
(‘This legacy, gentlemen, was a very large sum of money.’ Cic. Ver. 2.20)
(l) Tamen ego hoc quod ferri nego posse, Verri, iudices, concedo et largior.
(‘Nevertheless I will let this thing, which I say is intolerable, be freely allowed, gentle-
men, to Verres.’ Cic. Ver. 3.194)
Supplement:
Ego, Nausistrata, esse in hac re culpam meritum non nego, / sed ea qui sit ignos-
cenda? (Ter. Ph. 1014–15); Dos, Pamphile, est / decem talenta. (Ter. An. 950–1);
Alia civitas nulla, iudices, publico consilio laudat. (Cic. Ver. 2.13); Verum
mehercule hoc, iudices, dicam. Memini Pamphilum . . . (Cic. Ver. 4.32); Ego vero,
iudices, ipse me existimarem nefarium si amico, crudelem si misero, superbum si
consuli defuissem. (Cic. Mur. 10); Quis globus, o cives, caligine volvitur atra?
(Verg. A. 9.36)
Verum hoc saepe, Phormio, / vereor, ne istaec fortitudo in nervom erumpat
denique. (Ter. Ph. 324–5); Cum hoc, patres conscripti, bello, inquam, decertandum
est, idque confestim; legatorum tarditas repudianda[s] est. (Cic. Phil. 5.33); Non ulla
laborum, / o virgo, nova mi facies inopinave surgit. (Verg. A. 6.103–4)255
Finally, an address can also be used at the end of an exchange, in combination with an
expression of leave-taking, as in (m).
(m) Di bene vortant. # Idem ego spero. # Quid me? Num quid vis? # Vale. / # Et
tu, frater.
(‘May the gods bless your plan. # I hope so too. # What about me? Is there anything
else I can do for you? # Be well. # You too, dear brother.’ Pl. Aul. 175–6)
255 The examples are taken from Fraenkel (1965: 60ff.). Some of the examples in which two constitu-
ents on both sides of the address constituent are taken as salient may not convince everybody.
256 I follow more or less the classification used by Dickey (2002). For titles, see her Chapter 2.
Address 943
(‘You almost broke the door out of its frame. What do you want now? # Hello, young
man. # Hello. But whom are you looking for? # Bacchis.’ Pl. Bac. 586–8)
(e) Quid cessas, miles, hanc huic uxorem dare?
(‘Soldier, why are you hesitating to give her to him as his wife?’ Pl. Cur. 672)
Apart from these ‘objective’ expressions a speaker can use more subjective expressions
that describe a quality he considers applicable to the person addressed. The positively
oriented expressions comprise ‘terms of endearment, affection, and esteem’;257 the
negatively oriented, insults. These expressions can consist of an appropriate noun, as
in (f) and (g), a common noun with an appropriate adjective, as in (h) and (i), or an
appropriate substantive adjective, as in ( j) and (k).258 As the examples show, it is espe-
cially the superlative form of the adjective that is used as address. Subjective qualifica-
tions are very common in drama and in poetry.
(f) ‘Da mihi hoc, mel meum, si me amas, si audes.’ / Ibi ille cuculus: ‘Ocelle mi,
fiat . . .’
(‘ “Give me this, my honey, if you love me and if you want to.” Then that cuckoo says:
“Yes, apple of my eye, you’ll get that . . .” ’ Pl. Trin. 245–6)
(g) At etiam, furcifer, / male loqui mi audes?
(‘You good-for-nothing, you even dare abuse me?’ Pl. Capt. 563–4)
(h) Salve, vir lepidissime, / cumulate commoditate, praeter ceteros / duo di
quem curant.
(‘My greetings, most charming man, teeming with timeliness, whom two gods favour
beyond the others.’ Pl. Mil. 1382–4)
(i) Quid nunc, sceleste leno?
(‘Well then, crooked pimp?’ Pl. Poen. 798)
( j) Dicam enim, mea mulsa: de istac Casina huic nostro vilico / gratiam facias.
(‘I’ll tell you, my honey: do our overseer here a favour about that Casina of yours.’ Pl.
Cas. 372–3)
(k) Scelestissume, audes mihi praedicare id, / domi te esse nunc qui hic ades?
(‘You hardened criminal, you dare tell me that you, who are here, are at home now?’
Pl. Am. 561–2)
The use of a proper name as address is complicated by Roman nomenclature,
which gradually developed into a system by which a free Roman man had three
names (a praenomen, e.g. Marcus, a nomen gentilicium, e.g. Tullius, and a cognomen,
e.g. Cicero), and sometimes also an agnomen. That was the situation in the first cen-
tury ad. The use of one name is statistically predominant, but two and three are also
possible, in various combinations. In Cicero, the number of names correlates with the
level of formality: more formal means more names.259 In Cicero the single name is
usually the cognomen, certainly for addressees of high status. The nomenclature for
Roman women was less complicated. In the classical period the name of a woman is
the gentilicium: Terentia (e.g. Cicero’s wife), Tulliola (diminutive of Tullia, used by
Cicero for his daughter).260
The use of abstract nouns as address for human beings is common from Plautus
onwards, as in (e) in § 22.53 (mea voluptas). In later times this results in quite exalted
expressions in letters, such as honorificentia tua.261
The actual form of the address chosen by a speaker to address another person depends
on a number of factors, such as his perception of the character of his interlocutors,
the circumstances under which the exchange takes place (personal or official, formal
or informal, relaxed or in a hurry and under pressure), and social considerations,
such as
(i) do the interlocutors know each other and how well do they know one
another?
(ii) are the interlocutors relatives, spouses, or lovers?
(iii) have the interlocutors the same status in their society?
(iv) is there a difference in authority between the interlocutors?
(v) are the interlocutors of the same age and/or the same sex?
(vi) the communicative goals of the interlocutors: what do they want to achieve
in their exchange?
As a result of all this, the interlocutors will make the form of their address and their
contribution to the exchange in general more or less polite. As an illustration, a few
details follow.262
The standard form of address between acquainted adult men and women ‘without
any special attachment to one another’263 is by name, independent of status and
power. Children (non-relatives) were more often addressed by reference to their age
( puer, puella, virgo). For strangers the use of a name was obviously excluded and
another form of address, for example, miles in (e) above, had to be used. Using an
address was an obligatory part of the greeting procedure in Rome.264
Relatives are usually addressed with a kinship term. In Cicero’s letters to his brother
Quintus, the common address is mi frater, as in (l), and exceptionally mi Quinte. The
combination Quinte frater, as in (m), and Quinte alone is used in his dialogues, which
are intended for outsiders.
259 The fundamental publication is Adams (1978). A more general discussion can be found in Dickey
(2002: 46–73), to which the reader is referred for details.
260 For discussion and details, see Dickey (2002: 73–6).
261 See Zilliacus (1949: 51–7) and Coleman (2012: 194–9).
262 For further details and discussion, see Dickey (2002: Part II, Interactions). For politeness in forms
of address, see also Ferri (2008).
263 I use Dickey’s words (2002: 233–45).
264 See Dickey (2002: 250), with reference to Adams (1978: 163).
Address 945
More intimately known persons such as spouses are addressed by name, by a term of
endearment, as in ( j) above, or by uxor or vir + attribute, as in (n).265
(n) Opsecro, ecastor, quor istuc, mi vir, ex ted audio?
(‘Good heavens, please, why must I hear that from you, my man?’ Pl. Am. 812)
Addresses to groups are mostly plural nouns indicating the social position of the
addressee, such as Quirites ‘(Roman) citizens’, patres conscripti ‘enrolled fathers’, ‘sena-
tors’, iudices ‘members of the jury’, or ethnicity, such as Romani; a commander could
address his soldiers as milites. Collective nouns could be used as well, especially in
poetry, both the inherently collective ones like populus ‘people’, and collectively used
singular nouns like miles ‘soldier’. Examples are (o) and (p), respectively.266 Subjective
qualifications are rare outside of poetry.
(o) I, pete virginea, populus, suffimen ab ara.
(‘Ye people, go and fetch materials for fumigation from the Virgin’s altar . . .’ Ov. Fast.
4.731)
(p) ‘Hunc imitare, miles’, aiebat, ‘et circa iacentem ducem sterne Gallorum
catervas.’
(‘He cried: “Here is your pattern, soldiers! Bring down the Gauls in troops around
their prostrate leader!” ’ Liv. 7.26.7)
265 For Terence’s forms of address for relatives, see Müller (1997: 280–5). In Plautus and Terence,
women use mi more often than men (Adams 1984: 68–73). Trajan uses mi in his letters to Pliny. See
Dickey (2002: 217–20) and Coleman (2012: 198).
266 There is extensive discussion about the (non-existent) vocative form of populus and the inter-
pretation of cases like (p). See Sz.: 24, Svennung (1958: 284–6), Dickey (2002: 295), TLL s.v. populus
2714. 30ff.
946 Information structure and extraclausal expressions
More complex addresses are typical of poetry. In (d) there are two modifiers, and in
(e) the adjective carus governs dative mihi. Parallels are attested from Plautus onwards
but are rare. In (f), the address contains the object complement (subject in the pas-
sive) amice in the vocative. An address built on a passive perfect participle is used in
(g); an autonomous relative clause, (h). In such complex examples the expressive
interjection o (see § 22.52) can be taken as a signal of the address function.269
(d) Amabo, mea dulcis Ipsitilla, / meae deliciae, mei lepores / iube ad te veniam
meridiatum.
(‘I entreat you, my sweet Ipsitilla, my darling, my charmer, bid me come and spend
the afternoon with you.’ Catul. 32.1–3)
(e) Hos tu, care mihi, cumque his genus omne ferarum, / quod non terga fugae,
sed pugnae pectora praebet, / effuge . . .
(‘These beasts, and with them all other savage things which turn not their backs in
flight, but offer their breasts to battle, do you, my dear boy, avoid . . .’ Ov. Met.
10.705–7)
(f) Rufe, mihi frustra ac nequiquam credite amice (amico X) / . . . / sicine surrep-
sti mi . . .?
(‘Rufus, in vain and worthlessly believed by me a friend . . . have you thus stolen upon
me . . .?’ Catul. 77.1–3)
(g) O saepe mecum tempus in ultimum / deducte Bruto militiae duce, / quis te
redonavit Quiritem / dis patriis . . .?
267 See Ashdowne (2002: 145–6). 268 On mi, see Dickey (2002: 214–24).
269 See Dickey (2002: 228–9), from whom the two examples are taken, Goold (1965: 32), Nisbet and
Hubbard ad (g), and Müller (1997: 108–10) on Terence.
Address 947
(‘O you who have so often been carried with me into moments of the utmost peril
when Brutus was in charge of operations, who has restored you as a citizen to your
father’s gods . . .?’ Hor. Carm. 2.7.1–4)
(h) O qui res hominumque deumque / aeternis regis imperiis et fulmine terres, /
quid meus Aeneas in te committere tantum, / quid Troes potuere . . .?
(‘You that with eternal sway rule the world of men and gods, and frighten with your
bolt, what great crime could my Aeneasࡤcould my Trojansࡤhave wrought against
you . . .?’ Verg. A. 1.229–32)
Addresses are syntactically independent linguistic units, as appears from the fact that
they can be used alone. When they are used in combination with a sentence, also
when they are inserted in it, as in (i), they are semantically and pragmatically closely
related to that sentence by the very reason that they are coreferential with the
addressee, whether this is explicit, as in (i), or not. Sometimes the presence of a voca-
tive indirectly contributes to the identification of an agent in agentless sentences of
various types. An example is ( j).270
(i) Nunc, Calidore, te mihi operam dare volo.
(‘Now, Calidorus, I want you to assist me.’ Pl. Ps. 383)
( j) Ehem Demipho, / iam illi datum’st argentum? # Curavi ilico.
(‘Oh Demipho! Have you given him the money yet? # I saw to it at once.’ Ter. Ph.
795–6)
In poetry the vocative is sometimes used to mark a constituent that must be interpreted
as a secondary predicate, as in (k) and (l). Greek examples and metrical convenience
will have contributed to this development.271
(k) Quibus, Hector, ab oris / exspectate venis?
(‘From what shores, Hector, long looked for, do you come?’ Verg. A. 2.282–3)
(l) Tu quoque . . ., miserande, iaceres, / ni fratrum stipata cohors foret obvia . . .
(‘You too . . . would have lain, a piteous sight, had not the serried band of your broth-
ers met the foe . . .’ Verg. A. 10.324–8)
Word order
In English, if someone opens a conversation with ‘You know what happened? John
killed Bill,’ spoken with a neutral intonation, the relative order of John and Bill makes
it clear that John is the subject and Bill the object of the action of killing. The finite
verb form killed has to be in the middle between them. The sequence ‘Bill killed John’
spoken with the same neutral intonation describes another situation in which the
roles of the participants are inversed. In Latin, word order works differently. Sentence
(a) describes a commonly known historical fact, which in its context is presented in
isolation to serve as a case to be analysed: ‘Let’s take this case, a case of killing’:
(a) Interfecit Opimius Gracchum.
(‘Opimius killed Gracchus.’ Cic. de Orat. 2.132)
In this sentence, Opimius is the subject, Gracchum the object of interfecit. This does
not appear from their relative order, nor from their position with respect to the verb.
It is clear because they are marked as nominative and accusative, respectively, and are
required by the two-place verb interfecit. In fact, all six orders of these words are pos-
sible. The order shown in (a) is typical for information that is presented as new (for
the occasion). For the other orders also certain tendencies can be established which
are related to the status of the information in the verbal context and/or non-verbal
situation. Obviously in English, too, some degree of freedom of placement exists,
accompanied by other intonation patterns, but there are many syntactic constraints,
which are, by contrast, rare in Latin. This is not to say that in Latin word order is ‘free’
and that anything goes. In the remainder of this chapter it will become clear that there
are quite a few pragmatic constraints.
At the beginning of this chapter a warning to the reader seems necessary. It is an
illusion to think that we would ever be able to fully explain the actual order of the
words and constituents in our written Latin texts as they have come down to us. Even
if we could know how the sentences and clauses of these texts were articulated, as we
do know to some extent in the case of modern spoken languages, the speaker/writer
must have had considerable freedom in ordering those words and constituents that do
not fulfil a specific syntactic and/or pragmatic function in their clause or sentence. We
must not try to achieve what even linguists working on contemporary languages with
much better data for this type of research have not been able to achieve (so far).
The Oxford Latin Syntax. Harm Pinkster, Oxford University Press (2021). © Harm Pinkster.
DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780199230563.003.0023
Methodological preliminaries
¹ As in the volumes edited by Siewierska (1998) and by Spevak (2010a), and others.
² See Reynolds (1996: 111).
³ For some illustrations of variation in word order in manuscripts, see Devine and Stephens (2006:
31–2). For Caesar, see Damon (2015: 57).
⁴ See, for example, Bortolussi (2016) on Ovid. ⁵ See Panhuis (1981).
⁶ On the Peregrinatio, see Spevak (2005a); on the Peregrinatio and the Mulomedicina Chironis, see
Cabrillana (1999b).
Word order
A special problem is how to deal with metrical texts (drama and poetry) and with
rhythmic prose. It is clear that poets were allowed considerable freedom of word
order. Take the interlaced order of adjectives and nouns in (a), a so-called ‘golden line’.
Was Ovid forced by metrical considerations (metri causa) to distribute the adjectives
and nouns as he did, or was he competent enough to avoid metrical problems and did
he write this line because he liked it and could count on the cooperation of his readers/
listeners? I assume, with most scholars, the latter.⁷
(a) Grandia per multos tenuantur flumina rivos . . .
(‘Great rivers are diminished by much channelling . . .’ Ov. Rem. 445)
Thirdly, the quantitive data that we have is not based on a uniform analysis of the
text(s) under examination. Statements about word order, such as the well-known
claim that in Classical Latin the order is S(ubject), O(bject), V(erb), are rarely based
on a careful description of which types of subjects, objects, and verbs are counted: all
subjects and objects, or only nominal subjects and objects (subject and object clauses
excluded)? If only nouns and noun phrases (pronouns excluded), do they include
noun phrases with an anaphoric determiner or with a relative clause, etc.? If only
unmodified nouns, all nouns, both animate and inanimate? And so on.⁸ What one
would like to have is a sufficient number of ‘minimal pairs’ with more or less the same
semantic and syntactic structure which serve different pragmatic purposes. This is
difficult to achieve in a closed corpus such as our Latin corpus.⁹ I shall try to be as
precise as possible in the following sections.
Fourthly, there is no unified approach to the interpretation of statistical data. For
example, if we see that in Cicero’s de Inventione the final position is occupied by a finite
verb in 50 per cent of main clauses,¹⁰ is that a significant percentage? It looks like it is,
considering that finite verb forms constitute only c.10 per cent of the words in that text.
But there are a few complications. In the first place, there is a large number of words
that cannot stand at the end of a clause (prepositions, coordinators, connectors, subor-
dinators, relative pronouns, etc.), and in finite subordinate clauses the finite verb can-
not stand at the beginning. Thus we must first determine which words actually compete
for the final position before we can use the data. We must also ask ourselves how com-
plex these clauses are in terms of arguments, satellites, and finite verbs. Is the finite verb
in final position in a clause with three constituents as frequent as in one with four? What
is the average complexity of such a clause anyhow? Even if the 50 per cent were a reli-
able figure, could we, on the basis of the statistical predominance of finite verbs in that
⁷ For discussion, see Dik (2007: 1–3). Habinek (1985b), discussing Virgil, shows that by using the
interlaced (he uses the term ‘interlocked’) order a colon boundary inside the hexameter is avoided. For the
role of metre in the placement of possessive adjectives in Plautus, see de Melo (2010: 72–8).
⁸ Exceptions are e.g. Koll (1965) and, more recently, Cabrillana (1996; 1999b), Spevak (2010a), and
Hoffmann (2010b, also in 2018a: 111–32). For the diversity of the approach of earlier studies, see Baños and
Cabrillana (2009: 689); for a discussion of the problematic notion of ‘basic order’, see Siewierska (1988: 8–14).
⁹ Pinkster (1995) deals with minimal pairs in the Late Latin Gesta conventus Carthaginiensis. See also
Spevak (2005a, on the Peregrinatio; 2010a, in general).
¹⁰ So Linde (1923: 155).
Methodological preliminaries
position, conclude that (at least in (this work of) Cicero) there is a rule of grammar of
the type: ‘the “basic” order is finite verb at the end’? Are finite verb forms in final position
because they are finite verb forms, in the same way that in the Germanic languages
finite verb forms are regularly in second position in declarative sentences? Or is there
a deeper, underlying explanation for this statistical outcome? I take it that the statistical
outcome is not an explanation itself, but that the statistical outcome itself needs an
explanation. For further discussion, see § 23.39.
Fifthly, whereas there exists among Latinists a certain uniformity in analysing sen-
tences and clauses syntactically, there is no broadly accepted terminology for prag-
matic properties of words and constituents, even among those Latinists who recognize
that it is impossible to describe Latin word order in (purely) syntactic terms. I shall
use the terminology that is presented in Chapter 22. In summary, the following con-
cepts are used for describing the information structure of Latin clauses and sentences:
(i) Topic: the element of a clause about which the speaker chooses to present
further information to the addressee, as Terentia in (b) (see § 22.1);
(ii) Focus: the part of a clause that provides information about the topic of that
clause which the speaker considers in some way noteworthy for the addressee,
as eri concubina in (c) (see § 22.7);
(iii) Complex focus: two or more constituents of a clause that together answer
the underlying question regarding what the topic does or what happens to
the topic, as magnos articulorum dolores habet in (b) (see § 22.9);
(iv) All-new sentences, including presentative sentences, as in (d) (see § 22.1 and
§ 22.11).
The concepts of contrast (see § 22.18) and emphasis are also used, the latter defined
as ‘a means that serves the speaker or writer to express his personal evaluation of
information’ (see § 22.19). At this point it is important to stress that in this Syntax
‘emphasis’ and ‘focus’ are two different concepts.
Because some word order patterns or tendencies are related to sentence type, special
attention is given to the four sentence types that are described in Chapter 6. In imperative
sentences, for example, verbs are more often in an initial position than in declarative
sentences. In interrogative sentences, the first position is normally taken by a focus
constituent (see § 23.51 and § 23.53). The frequency with which these four sentence
types are used varies, mostly depending on the type of text: questions, for example,
are rare in historical prose, except in speeches. For that reason, generalizations about
Word order
the constituent order in a certain text or in a certain author that do not take into
account sentence type make no sense.¹¹
In addition to what is said in the second paragraph of § 23.1, a few citations from
Latin writers can indicate that the Romans were well aware of the possible effects of
word order on the interpretation of sentences.¹² In his chapter on compositio ‘compos-
ition’, ‘the artistic arrangement of words’ (Inst. 9.4), Quintilian mentions three neces-
sary elements: ordo ‘order’, iunctura ‘linkage’, and numerus ‘rhythm’ (9.4.22). As for
order, he observes that the final position of a sentence is best given to the verb, because
of its high communicative potential: see (a). Apart from rhythmic considerations
which might cause a writer/speaker to deviate from this best order, it may also be the
case that there is a better candidate for this important position: see (b). Quintilian
continues: ‘This is the sharp end of the whole passage, as it were: Antony’s need to
vomit, disgusting in itself, acquires the further hideousness—not expected by the
audience—that he could not keep his food down the day after.’¹³ Note also final
numeris and frequentissime in (a).
(a) Verbo sensum cludere multo, si compositio patiatur, optimum est: in verbis
enim sermonis vis est. Si id asperum erit, cedet haec ratio numeris, ut fit
apud summos Graecos Latinosque oratores frequentissime.
(‘If Composition allows, it is much the best to end with a verb, for the force of lan-
guage is in the verbs. If this proves harsh, the principle will give way to Rhythm, as
very often happens in the greatest orators, both Greek and Latin.’ Quint. Inst. 9.4.26)
(b) Saepe tamen est vehemens aliquis sensus in verbo, quod si in media parte
sententiae latet, transire intentionem et obscurari circumiacentibus solet, in
clausula positum adsignatur auditori et infigitur, quale illud est Ciceronis: ‘ut
tibi necesse esset in conspectu populi Romani vomere <postridie>.’¹⁴
(‘However, there is often a powerful significance in a single word; if this is then con-
cealed in the middle of a sentence, it tends to escape attention and be overshadowed
by its surroundings, whereas if it is placed at the end it is impressed upon the hearer
and fixed in his mind, as in Cicero’s “so that you were obliged to vomit in the sight of
the Roman people the day after.”’ Quint. Inst. 9.4.29 (cf. 9.4.107))
¹¹ A systematic bibliography of the literature on Latin word order until 1953 can be found in
Marouzeau (1953: 129–46). For more recent bibliographical data, see the bibliography in Spevak (2010a;
2014a; 2016a).
¹² For a discussion of ancient ideas about word order, see Scaglione (1972: 74–96). See also de
Jonge (2008: Ch. 5) on Dionysius of Halicarnassus and ancient theories of word order in general. Dionysius
claims a special position for the verb at the end of the sentence in Greek. Furthermore, see Spevak (2016a:
123–8) on Quintilian.
¹³ The translation is taken from Russell’s Loeb edition.
¹⁴ Cic. Phil. 2.63, where the manuscripts read in populi Romani conspectu. The addition of postridie in
Quintilian’s text is certain.
Methodological preliminaries
As an illustration of the misuse of the final position Quintilian quotes Maecenas, (c),
who is also criticized by Seneca (Ep. 114.4–5) for his ostentatious composition. What
(c) shows is an extreme case of discontinuity (or: ‘hyperbaton’) of the noun phrase
exequias meas. Excessive discontinuity is a point of concern of several Roman authors.
(c) Ne exequias quidem unus inter miserrimos viderem meas.
(‘May I never, alone amidst the most miserable of men, behold my own funeral rites.’
Quint. Inst. 9.4.28)
Quintilian rejects the idea ‘that nouns should precede verbs’ (and the corollary claims
that verbs should precede adverbs and nouns should precede adjectives and pro-
nouns), because ‘the contrary order is often excellent’ (9.4.24). That rejected idea is
still sustained by Priscian in (d), although he also indicates that there are many excep-
tions in the literature. This idea of a ‘correct order’ is based on the consideration that
one first has to mention the entity about which one wants to say something and then
say it, a logical approach as opposed to Quintilian’s stylistic and communicative
approach.
(d) Sciendum tamen quod recta ordinatio exigit ut pronomen vel nomen prae-
ponatur verbo, ut ‘ego et tu legimus, Virgilius et Cicero scripserunt’, quippe
cum substantia et persona ipsius agentis vel patientis, quae per pronomen vel
nomen significatur, prior esse debet naturaliter quam ipse actus, qui accidens
est substantiae. Licet tamen et praepostere ea proferre auctorum usurpatione
fretum.
(‘Now it is good to know that the correct ordering requires that the pronoun or noun
is placed before the verb, as in “you and I read”, “Virgil and Cicero have written”,
because the substance and person of the actor or undergoer, which are indicated by
the pronoun or noun, by law of nature must precede the action, which is a contingent
attribute of the substance. However, one may position them in the reverse order, rely-
ing on the actual practice of writers.’ Prisc. 17.105(III.164.16–21K))
The position of a constituent in its sentence may cause ambiguity, as illustrated by
Marcus Aurelius’ self-correction in (e).¹⁵
(e) Loti igitur in torculari cenavimus (non loti in torculari, sed loti cenavimus) et
rusticos cavillantes audivimus libenter.
(‘So after we had bathed in the oil-press room we had supper; I do not mean
bathed in the oil-press room, but after we had bathed we had supper there and
we enjoyed hearing the yokels chaffing one another.’ Fro. Ep. ad M. Caes. 4.6.2)
Roman authors (and their Greek sources) show no awareness of grammatical, seman-
tic, or pragmatic determinants of the sequencing of words, such as the position of the
subject or the best place for topic constituents. Their main concerns were clarity,
euphony, symmetry, and rhythm.¹⁶
The linear order of words and larger constituents is determined by a number of inter-
acting and competing factors.¹⁷ The most important ones are:
sentence type
text type
categorial factors
‘domain integrity’
semantic factors
syntactic factors
pragmatic factors
euphonic and rhythmic factors
complexity
iconicity
artistic factors.
To these some typological considerations can be added.
In the sections that follow attention will be given to constraints on the flexibility of
placement of words and larger units. Later many of these constraints will be shown not
to be respected in poetry and in poeticizing prose.
¹⁷ See Siewierska (1988: 29), Firbas (1992: 117–20), Rosén (1999: 152–3), and Spevak (2010a: 8–11, 13–26).
Methodological preliminaries
Another major factor is the distinction between main and subordinate clauses. In
finite subordinate clauses the first position of the clause is restricted to subordinating
devices (subordinators, question words or particles, relative expressions), unless there
are pragmatically prominent competing expressions, as in (d), where huius, the sup-
posed bride, is present on the stage.
(d) Venus multipotens, bona multa mihi / dedisti, huius quom copiam mihi dedisti.
(‘Mighty Venus, you gave me many good things when you gave me possession of her.’
Pl. Cas. 841–2)
¹⁸ The distinction was introduced by Dover (1960: 12ff.) for Greek word order and applied by
Dik (1995) and (2007).
Word order
words. This is illustrated in (a) and (b) with the connector at. The connector at ‘but’
must be placed in the very first position of the clause or sentence, as in (a), although
there are quite a few exceptions in poetry, as in (b).¹⁹ By contrast, the interactional
particle enim must be placed second in its clause or sentence.²⁰ Further details for
these categories can be found in later sections.
(a) Mentire nunc. / # At iam faciam ut verum dicas dicere.
(‘You’re lying now. # But in a second I’ll make sure that you say I’m telling the truth.’
Pl. Am. 344–5)
(b) Saucius at quadripes nota intra tecta refugit . . .
(‘But the wounded quadruped fled under the familiar roof . . .’ Verg. A. 7.500)
Non-mobile words at the constituent level include the bound clitics -ne, -que, and -ve,
which are attached to a host word, and the emphasizing particle quidem, which must
follow the word in its scope (see § 22.26). Prepositions and postpositions are also
restricted in their position: they must immediately precede or follow their complement.
Another constraint concerns the adjacency of two words. In Latin a preposition
cannot have another prepositional phrase as its complement, unless that phrase is an
idiom, as in (c).
(c) Dixi ego idem in senatu caedem te optimatium contulisse in ante diem V
Kalendas Novembris.
(‘I also said in the Senate that you had postponed the massacre of leading citizens
until the 28th of October.’ Cic. Catil. 1.7)
Further details for the elements that are mentioned here are given in separate sections.
The other side of the coin is that certain words are excluded from the final position
of the clause or sentences. These include prepositions, coordinators, connectors, sub-
ordinators, and relative pronouns. For details, see § 23.20ff.²¹
flexible.²³ For tam this is illustrated by (a), where the second tam precedes the remain-
der of the ex prepositional phrase for reasons of emphasis. For discontinuity of adjec-
tives, see (b). The traditional term for this phenomenon is ‘hyperbaton’ (see the note
below). The relative freedom of position of the constituents of noun and adjective
phrases diminishes in the course of time.²⁴
(a) . . . viri fortes et fideles, sed nequaquam ex tam ampla (sc. civitate) neque tam
ex nobili civitate.
(‘. . . stout and trustworthy folk, though they are not from so large nor so renowned a
community.’ Cic. Ver. 4.96)
(b) Civilis quaedam ratio est, quae multis et magnis ex rebus constat.
(‘There is a scientific system of politics which includes many important departments.’
Cic. Inv. 1.6)
Discontinuity of constituents has been a point of interest from ancient writers on rhet-
oric onwards. Together with the inversion of constituents some writers, inter alios the
Auctor ad Herennium, regarded it as a means to produce smooth periods and other
sequences, which was acceptable in prose if obscurity was avoided (see § 23.2).²⁵ The
two illustrations given by the Auctor of what he calls transiectio are (c) and (d). Both
sentences end with a preferred clausula. In (d), the noun phrase is interrupted twice.
(c) Instabilis in istum plurimum fortuna valuit.
(‘Unstable Fortune has exercised her greatest power on this creature.’ Rhet. Her. 4.44)
(d) Omnes invidiose eripuit bene vivendi casus facultates.
(‘All the means of living well Chance has jealously taken from him.’ Rhet. Her. 4.44)
The above examples have discontinuous noun phrases. Discontinuity is also present
in other types of phrases (see § 23.96).
The usual term for ‘discontinuity’ or, in Latin, transiectio, is ‘hyperbaton’. In the ter-
minology of the Auctor ad Herennium, transiectio (or traiectio), together with perver-
sio, the inversion of constituents, are subtypes of transgressio, which corresponds to
the Greek term à.p{ml~x. At 4.18 the Auctor criticizes Coelius Antipater for using
assiduus ‘constant’ discontinuity, as in (e), where the name Luci Aeli is split by the
verb form misimus (an instance of ‘verbal hyperbaton’), resulting in a sequence that
constitutes the second half of a hexameter.²⁶
(e) In priore libro has res ad te scriptas, Luci, misimus, Aeli.
(‘In the previous book, Lucius Aelius, I dedicated to you the account of these
events.’ Coel. hist. 24B=46C)
²³ In Classical Latin prose on average some 20 per cent (see Spevak 2010a: 275). In the Annals of Ennius
one out of four noun phrases is discontinuous, in Virgil’s Aeneid one out of two (Skutsch 1985: 67).
²⁴ See Herman (1985).
²⁵ For the ‘Asianist’ position of the Auctor ad Herennium concerning the use of discontinuity, see
Calboli ad Rhet. Her. 4.44.
²⁶ For this line, see Briscoe ad loc.
Word order
‘If he had begun with the whole physique, it would have been an anticlimax to come
down to the lungs and the throat.’ (Quint. Inst. 9.4.23).
²⁷ See Siewierska (1988: 30; 1999: 415–16) and Spevak (2010a: 9).
²⁸ See the discussion of ex. (e) in § 22.1.
²⁹ See Spevak (2010a: 118–19; 125). ³⁰ See Spevak (2010a: 117).
Methodological preliminaries
For the three main functions subject, object, and verb, all six possible orders are used
(see § 23.39). Here it is relevant to observe that in 40–50 per cent of clauses there is no
explicit subject, with variation depending on text type and personal style.³²
³¹ Christenson ad loc. notes: ‘the final position is the most emphatic’, with a few parallels from Plautus.
³² Knoth (2006: 165–6) has the following percentages of implicit subjects for her three corpora: biog-
raphy: 54 per cent, speeches (Cicero): 42 per cent, letters: 49 per cent.
Word order
However, the degree to which the actual practice of authors reflects such consider-
ations must not be over-estimated, and there is also much variation among authors.³⁵
Rhythm is another topic that is much discussed in Greek and Roman rhetorical
works. Apart from the clausulae (see § 23.18), it is very difficult to deduce any rules
from the observations. One interesting remark by Quintilian is (c), which is identical
to an observation by Dionysius of Halicarnassus.³⁶
(c) Non enim ad pedes verba dimensa sunt, ideoque ex loco transferuntur in
locum, ut iungantur quo congruunt maxime, sicut in structura saxorum
rudium etiam ipsa enormitas invenit cui adplicari et in quo possit insistere.
(‘The point is that words are not measured according to metrical feet; they are there-
fore moved from one place to another so as to join where they fit best, just as, in
constructions made of unhewn stones, the irregularity itself suggests the right stones
which each piece can fit or rest upon.’ Quint. Inst. 9.4.27)
. Complexity
The relative length and complexity of constituents play a role in their order. Generally
speaking ‘heavier’ constituents follow ‘lighter’ constituents. An example is (a), where
the subject, made heavy by a relative clause and an apposition, follows the verb.³⁷ An
alternative solution is to postpose the relative clause and put it at the end, as in (b).
However, in our texts there are also many cases in which an entire complex constitu-
ent precedes the final verb, as in (c).³⁸
(a) In quis fuit M. Scaurus, de quo supra memoravimus, consularis et tum sena-
tus princeps.
(‘Among them was Marcus Scaurus, of whom I have already spoken, an ex-consul
and at the time the leader of the senate.’ Sal. Jug. 25.4)
(b) Allata est enim epistula Athenis ab Archino uni ex his Archiae, qui tum
maximum magistratum Thebis obtinebat, in qua omnia de profectione
eorum perscripta erant.
(‘For a letter was brought from Athens, written by Archinus to one of their number,
Archias, who at the time was the chief magistrate in Thebes, in which full details of
the expedition were given.’ Nep. Pel. 3.2)
(c) . . . sed filii familiarum, quorum ex nobilitate maxuma pars erat, parentis
interficerent.
(‘. . . the sons of families, most of whom belonged to the nobility, were to slay their
fathers.’ Sal. Cat. 43.2)
As a rule, accusative and infinitive clauses are less heavy than more or less synonym-
ous finite clauses with ut or with quod—a relatively common alternative with verbs of
perception, cognition, and communication in Late Latin (see § 15.113). They are also
less frequent in a postverbal position than the finite clauses. Deverbal nouns are even
less frequently postverbal.³⁹
. Iconicity
Sometimes the ordering of constituents is ‘in line with actual temporal succession’.⁴⁰
For Latin, attention has been drawn to the ordering of arguments with verbs of ‘fol-
lowing’, as in (a).⁴¹ However, in this and other examples the first constituent is topic
and the second focus, so a pragmatic explanation works just as well. A more convin-
cing case is (b), where the plants are ordered after their period of blossoming. Another
example is (c). The reader of Caesar’s work knew that Luceria, Canusium, and
Brundisium were the natural stations along the via Minucia, which Pompeius took to
Brundisium, so the source adjunct precedes the goal adjuncts.
(a) Pacem Punicam bellum Macedonicum excepit . . .
(‘The Punic peace was followed by the Macedonian war . . .’ Liv. 31.1.6)
³⁸ See LSS § 9.2.2. ³⁹ For data from Livy, see Bolkestein (1989a: 23–5).
⁴⁰ The formulation is taken from Siewierska (1999: 416). See also Spevak (2010a: 10), who has ex. (b).
⁴¹ The concept of iconicity is applied to Latin by Hoffmann (1991). The examples of verbs of ‘following’
are taken from her article. See also Cabrillana (2017b) on word order in clauses with the verb fio ‘to occur’.
Word order
(b) In Italia violis succedit rosa, huic intervenit lilium, rosam cyanus excipit,
cyanum amarantus.
(‘In Italy, the violet is succeeded by the rose, the lily comes on while the rose is still in
flower, the rose is followed by the blue cornflower, and the blue cornflower by the
amaranth.’ Plin. Nat. 21.68)
(c) Pompeius . . . Luceria proficiscitur Canusium atque inde Brundisium.
(‘Pompey set out from Luceria for Canusium and from there for Brundisium.’ Caes.
Civ. 1.24.1)
Supplement (in alphabetical order by verb):
Inde me commodum egredientem continatur Pythias . . . (Apul. Met. 1.24.5); . . . re
cognita tantus luctus excepit ut urbs ab hostibus capta eodem vestigio videretur.
(Caes. Civ. 2.7.3); ‘Immo ego vos, cui sola salus genitore reducto,’ / excipit
Ascanius . . . (Verg. A. 9.257–8); Orationem Tulli exceperunt preces multitudinis . . .
(Liv. 7.13.11); Sequitur hunc annum nobilis clade Romana Caudina pax T. Veturio
Calvino Sp. Postumio consulibus. (Liv. 9.1.1)
Quintilian has an interesting remark on this topic: Nec non et illud nimiae supersti-
tionis, uti quaeque sint tempore, ea facere etiam ordine priora, non quin frequenter sit
hoc melius, sed quia interim plus valent ante gesta ideoque levioribus superponenda
sunt. (‘Another piece of gross superstition is the idea that as things come first in time,
so they should also come first in order. It is not that this is not frequently the better
course, but earlier events are sometimes more important and so have to be given a
position of climax over the less significant.’ Quint. Inst. 9.4.25).
⁴² See K.-St.: II.617–18; Sz.: 707–8. For a large collection of instances from all periods of Latin, see
Landgraf (1888); for poetry, Kellermann (1909); for Cicero, Parzinger (1910: 37–57), with statistical data
on Cicero’s use in various text types. Unfortunately, the term ‘parataxis’ is also used in another sense for
the opposite of hypotaxis.
Methodological preliminaries
A second pattern, called parallelism, is illustrated by (d) and (e) (see also § 22.18 on
parallel focus).
(d) Superavi tamen dignitate Catilinam, gratia Galbam.
(‘Yet I defeated Catiline in merit and Galba in popularity.’ Cic. Mur. 17)
(e) . . . quos neque armis cogere neque auro parare queas.
(‘. . . whom you can neither acquire by force of arms nor buy with gold.’ Sal. Jug. 10.4)
Still another pattern is the chiasmus, illustrated by (f)–(h). In (f), the first noun
phrase has the adjective before the noun; in the second the adjective follows. In this
example, the chiasmus concerns two argument constituents in the same clause; in (g),
Word order
two pairs of asyndetically coordinated clauses; in (h), the chiastic ordering concerns
subordinate and main clauses.
(f) Et ut mundum ex quadam parte mortalem ipse deus aeternus, sic fragile
corpus animus sempiternus movet.
(‘And just as the eternal God moves the universe, which is partly mortal, so an
immortal spirit moves the frail body.’ Cic. Rep. 6.26)
(g) (sc. philosophia) Medetur animis, inanes sollicitudines detrahit, cupiditati-
bus liberat, pellit timores.
(‘It (sc. philosophy) heals souls, takes away the load of empty troubles, sets us free
from desires and banishes fears.’ Cic. Tusc. 2.11)
(h) Si hostium fuit ille sanguis, summa militum pietas: nefarium scelus, si civium.
(‘If that blood was the blood of our country’s foes, its shedding by our soldiers was
the highest patriotism, but an abominable crime if it was the blood of fellow citizens.’
Cic. Phil. 14.6)
⁴³ For discussion, see Wilkinson (1963: 215–18), Nisbet (1999: 137–41), and Dainotti (2015: 239–63).
For further instances, see Norden (1927: 393–8). The German term for ‘interlacing’ is ‘Verschränkung’
(Sz.: 691).
Methodological preliminaries
Cases like (i)–(l) have to be distinguished from instances like (m), which has the
same sequence adjective, adjective, noun, noun, but is structurally different: here we
have one noun phrase in which permagnum modifies optimi pondus argenti, where
optimi is placed away from argenti and before pondus for reasons of emphasis.⁴⁴ Also
different are instances like (n), where simulatam is an infinitive (without esse).
(m) Maximus vini numerus fuit, permagnum optimi pondus argenti, pretiosa
vestis, multa et lauta supellex et magnifica multis locis, non illa quidem luxu-
riosi hominis, sed tamen abundantis.
(‘There was a great quantity of wine, a very large weight of the finest silver
plate, costly draperies, much elegant and magnificent furniture, variously
located, the appointments not indeed of a luxurious man, but of an affluent
one.’ Cic. Phil. 2.66)
(n) Dicebatur contra: . . . corruptas consulis legiones, simulatam Pompeianarum
gratiam partium.
(‘On the other side it was argued that . . .“he seduced the legions of a consul,
and affected a leaning to the Pompeian side.”’ Tac. Ann. 1.10.1)
Another type of artistic arrangement is shown in (o), where the ordering of the sub-
ordinate clauses and the superordinate clause results in a sequence of three verbs.⁴⁵
(o) Atque haec non ut vos, qui mihi studio paene praecurritis, excitarem, locutus
sum sed ut mea vox, quae debet esse in re publica princeps, officio functa
consulari videretur.
(‘I have spoken in this way not to stir you, whose energy usually surpasses mine, to
action, but so that my voice, which ought to be first to speak upon affairs of state, is
regarded as having fulfilled my obligations as a consul.’ Cic. Catil. 4.19)
⁴⁴ See Nisbet (1999: 137). ⁴⁵ For discussion of this example, see Courtney (1999: 1).
⁴⁶ For a discussion of the notion ‘basic order’, see Siewierska (1988: 8–14) and Siewierska and Uhlířová
(1998: 107).
Word order
which is the majority order in the Romance languages.⁴⁷ The Latin data shows, so to
speak, a ‘language in transition’.⁴⁸ However, there are other languages in which OV and
PrepN occur together,⁴⁹ and, more importantly, as indicated in § 23.1 and § 23.9, it is
impossible to define for Latin a syntactically determined basic order, so the whole line
of argumentation does not apply. There is no evidence for a SOV status of Latin.⁵⁰ In a
comparative study of the languages of Europe using twelve constituent order variables,
Latin comes out as the most flexible and as one of the least uniform languages.⁵¹
Similarly, scholars have looked for parallels between the order of elements within
compound nouns and the order of clause constituents. From this perspective it has
been observed that in Latin compound nouns built on a nominal and a verbal stem
much more often have the order nominal element–verbal element (NV), e.g. tibi-cen
‘piper’, than the other way around (VN), e.g. Verti-cordia ‘changer of hearts’. However,
the latter order (VN) is much more common and fully productive in the Romance
languages.⁵²
In the oral production of utterances the speaker has various techniques at his disposal
to add information to the grammatical, semantic, and pragmatic information already
contained in the clauses and sentences he is producing. A falling intonation is often a
sign that a sentence is approaching its end. Tempo and specific rhythmic sequences at
the end of a sentence or clause may likewise serve as a signal for the hearer (the use of
clausulae and, in later times, the cursus are good examples). Stress and pitch can be
used to indicate that a particular word in a sequence is of special interest for the
speaker, and therefore for the hearer as well. Variations of tempo may fulfil a similar
role. Pauses (apart from the need to take breath at regular intervals) can also fulfil
various functions, among them the function of indicating major boundaries—which
are not necessarily syntactic—in the flow of words. All these techniques were used as
they are in our modern languages and the ancient authors and theoreticians were well
aware of them and wrote about them (in a manner that is more or less understandable
for modern scholars).
Two of these techniques can be studied on the basis of the written material that has
come down to us, viz. the use of clausulae and cursus and the use of pauses. The other
techniques are not independently accessible for us. It is very likely that the written
material that we have, just as written language in modern times,⁵³ has certain linguis-
tic features of its own that compensate to some extent for the absence of oral produc-
tion. What is left of the forms of punctuation the Romans used is of little use. See § 2.3
and § 23.17.
quia interiectio est ‘fato profugus’ et continuum sermonem, qui faciebat ‘Italiam
Lavinaque’, dividit. Ob eandemque causam quarto ‘profugus’, deinde ‘Lavinaque venit
litora’, ubi iam erit distinctio, quia inde alius incipit sensus. Sed in ipsis etiam distinc-
tionibus tempus alias brevius, alias longius dabimus: interest enim sermonem finiant
an sensum. Itaque illam distinctionem ‘litora’ protinus altero spiritus initio insequar;
cum illuc venero: ‘atque altae moenia Romae’, deponam et morabor et novum rursus
exordium faciam. (‘We must also note where our speech should be held up and as it
were left in the air (the Greeks call this hypodiastolē or hypostigmē), and where it
should be brought to rest. Arma virumque cano (“Arms and the man I sing”) is left in
the air, because virum belongs to what follows, giving us virum Troiae qui primus ab
oris (“the man who first from the shores of Troy”), after which there is another sus-
pension; for, although where he came from and where he arrived are two different
things, yet we do not need punctuation here, because both are covered by the same
verb, venit (“came”). There is a third pause at Italiam, because fato profugus (“exiled
by fate”) is parenthetical and interrupts the continuity of Italiam Lavinaque. For the
same reason, there is a fourth pause at profugus, after which comes Lavinaque venit
litora (“and came to Lavinian shores”), where we do at last need punctuation, because
a new sentence begins from this point. Even when there is punctuation, the time we
give to it may be shorter or longer, according to whether it marks the end of a phrase
or of a thought. Thus I shall take a new breath immediately after the punctuation at
litora, but when I come to atque altae moenia Romae (“and the walls of lofty Rome”),
I shall pause and wait and make a fresh beginning.’ Quint. Inst. 11.3.35–8)
The other relevant passage from Quintilian is (b). He segments the beginning of
Cicero’s speech pro Cluentio until quarum in the way indicated.⁵⁶ Note that the address
iudices forms an intonation unit with animadverti and not one of its own,⁵⁷ and that
the discontinuity of in duas partes is reflected in the intonation.
(b) Animadverti, iudices, | omnem accusatoris orationem | in duas | divisam esse
partes: || quarum altera mihi niti | et magno opere confidere videbatur |
invidia iam inveterata iudicii Iuniani, || altera tantum modo consuetudinis
causa | timide et diffidenter attingere | rationem veneficii criminum, | qua de
re lege est haec quaestio constituta. |||
(‘I noticed, gentlemen, that the prosecutor’s entire speech was divided into two parts,
in one of which he seemed to me to be relying with all confidence upon the now
time-honoured prejudice felt against the trial before Junius; while in the other he
seemed to make his reluctant and diffident approach, for form’s sake only, to the
question of the charge of poisoning, to deal with which this court has been by law
established.’ Cic. Clu. 1)
Quis enim dubitet unum sensum in hoc et unum spiritum esse: ‘animadverti, iudices,
omnem accusatoris orationem in duas divisam esse partis’; tamen et duo prima verba
⁵⁶ For discussion, see Cavarzere (2011: 212–14), from whom I have taken the continuation of the
marking.
⁵⁷ Cf. Etsi vereor, iudices ‘Although I am afraid, gentlemen of the jury’, at the beginning of Cic. Mil. 1
(Cavarzere 2011: 216–20).
Methodological preliminaries
et tria proxima et deinceps duo rursus ac tria suos quasi numeros habent: spiritum
sustinemus sicut rhythmis aestimatur.
(‘Who can doubt that there is only one thought and one breath in animadverti iudices
omnem accusatoris orationem in duas divisam esse partes? Yet the two first words, the
next three, and then again the next two and three, have their own special rhythms;
and we maintain our breathing as determined by the rhythm.’ Quint. Inst. 9.4.68)
Sense units thus distinguished (colon, comma, and periodus) were sometimes marked
in writing by punctuation, as, for example, in the Vindolanda Tablets and other docu-
ments.⁵⁸ Readers or teachers sometimes inserted oblique strokes (virgulae) as a prep-
aration for reading the text aloud. This system of marking the text was adopted from
the Greeks in the second century bc and partly replaced, partly added to the older
punctuation system to mark word boundaries, which ‘seems to have died out by the
end of the first century ad’.⁵⁹
The division of texts into sense units per cola et commata, that is by starting a new sense
unit on a new line, is found in the older Vulgate manuscripts and is attributed to Jerome,
but people have also found traces of it in later manuscripts of, for example, works of
Cicero. The length of the cola varies between thirty and six syllables, with twenty to ten
syllables being the most frequent length, more or less equivalent to the length of a hex-
ameter line, which allows combining a sense unit with breathing space.⁶⁰
⁵⁸ See Parkes (1992: 10–12) and Adams (1996; 2016: 254, 308).
⁵⁹ The Roman grammarians used the term distinctio for ‘punctuation mark’. See TLL s.v. distinctio
1521.28ff. For the marking of texts in the Classical period, see Wingo (1972). The quotation is from
Parkes (1992: 263).
⁶⁰ Müller (1964: 28–33).
⁶¹ For the colon approach, see Fraenkel (1932, 1933, 1965, 1968), Müller (1964: 124–31), Habinek (1985a),
and Nisbet (1990). Also Adams (1994b). For the role of intonation to avoid confusion between the subor-
dinator cum and the preposition cum, see Jones (1990).
⁶² Fraenkel (1933). See also Habinek (1985a: 6–7), from whom (c) and (d) are taken.
Word order
. Clausulae
Rhythm was a pervasive element of high-register prose in general (see § 23.11), but
most important was its use at the end of sentences and other sense units. For these
rhythmic endings the term clausula has been current from Cicero onwards.⁶³
The rhythm is based on the quantity of syllables which may be heavy (marked –), or
light (marked ཱི); in certain circumstances, notably at the end of a rhythmic sequence,
the quantity of the syllable may be indifferent, which is best marked ‘ཱི’ (scholars
often use the sign ‘×’ and the term syllaba anceps).⁶⁴ NB: a distinction must be made
between the quantity (heavy and light) of syllables and the length (long and short) of
vowels.⁶⁵
The endeavour to arrive at certain rhythmic endings entails selecting fitting words,⁶⁶
and for that reason clausulae are relevant for word order. Cicero himself (at Orat.
232–3) gives a number of illustrations, showing the damaging effect of the permuta-
tion of the order of words in a passage from his lost speech pro Cornelio, as seen in (a)
and (b). If in (a) the end is changed to ‘multi superarunt mercatores venālĭcĭ|īquĕ,’ ‘the
whole thing is spoiled’, as it is also in (b), if the text of the speech is changed to ‘vice-
runt eunuchi e Syria Aēg݉p|tōquĕ.’⁶⁷ In (a), the clausula is formed by a cretic (– ཱི –)
(resolved) + spondee (– –), Cicero’s favoured formula (also known as ‘esse videatur’),
which occurs in about one-third of the endings in his speeches. In the permutation
rejected above, this clausula is replaced by a dactylic end (– ×), as in the poetic hex-
ameter (the clausula heroa, which is very rare in Cicero);⁶⁸ in (b), the clausula is cretic
+ spondee as well, replaced by a much less favoured spondee + trochee (– – | – ཱི).
(a) Neque me divitiae movent, quibus omnes Africanos et Laelios multi venalicii
mercatorēsquĕ sŭpĕr|ārūnt . . .
(‘I am not moved by his wealth, in which many traders and slave dealers have sur-
passed all the Africani and Laelii . . .’ Cic. Corn. fr. II.9)
(b) . . . neque vestis aut caelatum aurum et argentum, quo nostros veteres
Marcellos Maximosque multi eunuchi e Syria Aegyptōquĕ vī|cērūnt.
(‘. . . nor by raiment or gold and silver plate in which our ancient heros, Marcelli and
Maximi, were outdone by many eunuchs from Syria and Egypt.’ Cic. Corn. fr. II.9)
The importance of the clausula for Cicero’s practice appears also from the fact that in his
pro Sulla the three most frequent combinations constitute c.90 per cent of all endings:
⁶³ For example: Sed sunt clausulae plures quae numerose et iucunde cadant. (‘There are many clausulae
which have a pleasing rhythmic cadence.’ Cic. Orat. 215) For an overview with statistical data on clausulae,
see Orlandi (1994). For ‘the development of rhythmic prose’ and its introduction in Rome, see
Hutchinson (2018: 5–12).
⁶⁴ For the use of ‘’, see Zgoll (2012: 45–6).
⁶⁵ See Allen (1978: 89–92).
⁶⁶ An example is the use of the coordinator atque by Cicero. See Hutchinson (1995).
⁶⁷ The ‘॥’ sign indicates the boundary between the feet.
⁶⁸ However, Cicero recommends it at Orat. 217. Quintilian at Inst. 9.4.102 condemns it. For discussion,
see Aili (1979: 63–4) and Oberhelman (2003: 27–67).
Methodological preliminaries
Whereas in Classical Latin the clausulae were based on the quantity of syllables, word
accent played an ever more important role from the third and fourth century onwards,
due to the loss of the distinction between heavy and light syllables. This resulted in
three favourite endings, called cursus, viz. the cursus planus, consisting of a sequence
accented / unaccented / unaccented / accented / unaccented (´ u u ´ u), as in (c); the
cursus tardus (´ u u ´ u u), as in (d), and the cursus velox (´ u u u u ´ u), as in (e).
(c) (sc. scio) . . . quas rerum acerbitates iam conclamatas et perditas concordia
vicissim sibi cedentium principum meliorem revocávit in státum . . .
(‘I know . . . what wretched conditions, even when everything seemed already lost and
without remedy, have, by the harmony of rulers yielding in turn to each other, been
brought to a better state . . .’ Amm. 20.8.17)
(d) Impositusque scuto pedestri et sublátius éminens nullo silente Augustus
renuntiatus . . .
(‘And being placed upon an infantryman’s shield and raised on high, he was hailed by
all as Augustus . . .’ Amm. 20.4.17)
(e) . . . receptaque oppida Gallicana ante direpta a barbaris et excisa, quos tribu-
tarios ipse fécit et vectigáles.
(‘. . . and the recovery of the Gallic towns, which before had been destroyed and
plundered by the savages whom he himself had made tributaries and subjects.’
Amm. 20.4.1)
In (c), the use of the indicative in the indirect question instead of a subjunctive may
have been influenced by the cursus, as may have been the use of the comparative in (d)
and the use of the perfect instead of a pluperfect in (e).⁷²
⁶⁹ See Berry in his Commentary (1996: 49–54). This percentage is slightly higher than Zieliński (1904,
1914) found in his studies of Cicero’s speeches. For the importance of clausulae for the word order of
clauses, see also Spevak (2016a: 123–5).
⁷⁰ For a comparison of Cicero, Sallust, Livy, Velleius, and Tacitus, see Aili (1979).
⁷¹ For a discussion of the methodological problems, see Janson (1974), Aili (1979: 17–50),
Orlandi (2005), and Keeline and Kirby (2019: 163–8).
⁷² See den Boeft et al. ad locc.
Word order
⁷³ The fourth simple sentence is De litterarum missione, sine causa abs te accusor. (Cic. Att. 1.5.3). Some
of these sentences are discussed in § 23.46.
Constituents with more or less fixed position
(ii) Additionally, for those verbs for which this is relevant, it makes a difference
whether the sentence or clause is active or passive, that is, whether the state of affairs
is presented from the perspective of the agent or that of the patient (see § 5.10): in
passive sentences the number of arguments is usually reduced.
(iii) First and second person arguments are marked on the finite verb forms. For the
use of explicit first and second person pronouns in the nominative special conditions
hold (see § 9.2).
(iv) Apart from the meaning of the individual constituents, another factor is their
categorial status (e.g. noun phrase, pronoun, or clause). (For non-mobile words, see
§ 23.6 and § 23.20.)
(v) For the position of nouns (and adjectives) it makes a difference whether they are
used by themselves or are accompanied by optional and/or obligatory modifiers.
Then, finally, when all these factors have been taken into account it is necessary to
determine what the communicative contribution is of the individual constituents and
of the sentence as a whole in its wider context and to what extent this is reflected in
the relative order of the constituents.
Although in recent time several studies have more or less proceeded along these
lines, using different samples from different periods,⁷⁴ it is at this stage impossible to
give any absolute rules, in such a way that a clear picture arises of ‘word order in Latin’.
In what follows a number of the factors mentioned above will be explored.
The sections that follow contain details about the words called ‘non-mobile’ in § 23.6,
that is, the categories of words and related elements that are restricted with respect to
their position in the clause or at a lower level. Included is a discussion of bound clitics,
which are not ‘words’ in the technical sense.
⁷⁴ Most extensively Panhuis (1982) on Plautus and Caesar, Devine and Stephens (2006) on data taken
from various prose authors, and Spevak (2010a) on a well-defined prose corpus that consists of Cic. Tusc.
I and III; Dom.; Phil. I and IV; Att. 13.50–16; Caes. Civ. 1–3.30; Sal. Jug. (supplemented with data from
other sources on certain occasions).
Word order
even among a single author’s texts, which may have to do with variations in the
semantic value of the words involved—and diachronic differences.⁷⁵ Igitur and ergo
are a case in point. When Cicero uses them in logical inferences within a line of argu-
mentation they are usually clause-initial, whereas overall they are predominantly in
second position.⁷⁶
Examples of sentence-initial position of the first category of connectors can be
found in §§ 24.22–45. In poetry, from Catullus onwards, these regular sentence-initial
connectors are sometimes found further on in the sentence if another constituent
takes its place for some pragmatic reason. Examples are (a)–(e). This occurs also in
prose from Livy onwards.
(a) Immemor at iuvenis fugiens pellit vada remis . . .
(‘But the heedless youth, flying away, beats the waves with his oars.’ Catul. 64.58—tr.
Smithers)
(b) Lenibus atque utinam scriptis adiuncta foret vis . . .
(‘But would that your soft verses had force as well . . .’ Caes. poet. 1.3)
(c) Prohibent nam cetera Parcae / scire Helenum . . .
(‘For the Fates forbid Helenus to know more . . .’ Verg. A. 3.379–80)
(d) Non me impia namque / Tartara habent tristes umbrae . . .
(‘For impious Tartarus, with its gloomy shades, holds me not . . .’ Verg. A. 5.733–4)
(e) Tertia sed postquam congressi in proelia totas / implicuere inter se acies
legitque virum vir, / tum vero . . .
(‘But when, clashing in the third encounter, the lines stood interlocked along their
whole length, and man marked man, then . . .’ Verg. A. 11.631–3)⁷⁷
Namque is also found postposed in prose and this becomes regular in Late Latin.⁷⁸ In
Lucretius itaque is only found in second position. Livy is the first prose writer with a
considerable proportion of itaque in second position (especially in the first pentad).
Seneca has about half in second position. That position is dominant in Apul. Met., the
Vulgate, and August. Civ. Postposed et (‘and’) is found in poetry from Virgil onwards,
in prose from Arnobius onwards.⁷⁹
⁷⁵ For the differences between the individual connectors, see Spevak (2006a).
⁷⁶ Similar observations could be made about ‘therefore’ in English and ‘dus’ in Dutch. Very detailed
information in TLL s.v. ergo 760.26ff. and s.v. igitur 253.42ff. A still very useful survey is Neue-W.:
II.973–80.
⁷⁷ For more examples of postposition of sed, see OLD s.v. sed, introduction. See also Norden, Anhang
IIIB3 and § 23.101 fin.
⁷⁸ See TLL s.v. nam 38.9ff. and Schrickx (2009: 260–3), also on itaque and etenim.
⁷⁹ TLL s.v. et 898.52ff.
Constituents with more or less fixed position
campo / lanigerae pecudes . . . (Lucr. 2.660–1;⁸⁰ Nec mirum: bene nam valetis
omnes . . . (Catul. 23.7); Sic nam fore bello / egregiam et facilem victu per saecula
gentem. (Verg. A. 1.444–5); . . . (dextra sceptrum nam forte gerebat) . . . (Verg. A. 12.206);
Praesentes namque ante domos invisere castas / heroum . . . (Catul. 64.384–5); . . . pro-
rogatae namque consulibus iam in annum provinciae erant . . . (Liv. 41.6.2); Magnum
reginae sed enim miseratus amorem / Daedalus ipse dolos tecti ambagesque
resolvit . . . (Verg. A. 6.28–9); Amisit verum vetus Albula nomen. (Verg. A. 8.332)
The usual second position of the second category of connectors and of interactional
particles needs some specification. In the first place, the connectors and interactional
particles mentioned are not a homogeneous group. Ergo, for instance, is relatively
often found in first position if compared to igitur, but Sallust and Tacitus show an
idiosyncratic preference for having both of them in first position.⁸¹ Autem and vero,
by contrast, are never found in first position, and enim rarely, in Plautus and Terence,
in its affirmative meaning (see § 24.40).⁸²
Second position usually means ‘after the first word of the sentence or clause’, as in
(f), but it is not rare to find connectors after the first full constituent, as in (g) and (l),
or, rarely, after more than one constituent, as in (h) and (i). Of the instances of enim
in third position a considerable portion is after a form of sum (copula or auxiliary)
and/or a pragmatically prominent word in first position, as in ( j).⁸³ The normal situ-
ation for these words is that in sentences which start with a noun phrase or prepositional
phrase, they split the noun phrase, as in (k).⁸⁴ They are not found after initial prepos-
itions, as is shown by enim in (l).
(f) I sane cum illo, Phrygia. Tu autem, Eleusium, / huc intro abi ad nos.
(‘Go with him now, Phrygia. But you, though, Eleusium, come in here to us.’ Pl. Aul.
333–4)
(g) . . . anno ipso ante quam natus est Ennius, post Romam conditam autem
quarto decumo et quingentesimo . . .
(‘. . . in the very year before the birth of Ennius, five hundred and fourteen years after
the founding of Rome . . .’ Cic. Brut. 72)
(h) Ego ad forum autem hinc ibo, ut solvam militi.
(‘But I’ll go to the market to pay off the soldier.’ Pl. Bac. 1060)
The regular second position of these words is often explained as due to Wackernagel’s
law (see § 23.31). In some of the examples above the word in first position is prag-
matically prominent, for example in (f), where there is a change of topic (tu). However,
most of the time this is not the case. These words behave as clitics in the same way the
emphasizing particle quidem does. The fact that these words are not found after (espe-
cially monosyllabic) prepositions is understandable: prepositions are not autonomous
words themselves.
Supplement (in alphabetical order):
Quae res te sollicitat autem? (Ter. Hau. 251); Non est enim philosophia similis artium
reliquarum. (Cic. de Orat. 3.79); Servisne mulieris? Sic est enim obiectum. (Cic. Cael.
57); Cum in omnibus enim rebus, tum maxime etiam in architectura haec duo insunt:
quod significatur et quod significat. (Vitr. 1.1.3); Ornatissimae sunt igitur orationes
eae quae latissime vagantur . . . (Cic. de Orat. 3.120); Hoc sentire prudentiae est, facere
fortitudinis. Et sentire vero et facere perfectae cumulataeque virtutis. (Cic. Sest. 87)
⁸⁵ Some statistical information about placement of the pronoun is in object position in Classical Latin
prose (within an entirely different framework) can be found in Luraghi (2016: 249).
Constituents with more or less fixed position
juxtaposed with the object eam, after the focus gravidam fecit (she was already preg-
nant by Amphitruo, the spectators have been told, so this was quite surprising).
Another example is (b), with three instances of is functioning as a subject comple-
ment. The second instance is placed after emphatic certe. In (c), interrogative quantae
is separated from curae for the normal pragmatic reason. Tibi is the changed topic of
the interrogative clause. The subject noun phrase ea res with the determiner ea is in
third position.
(a) Is (sc. Iuppiter) amare occepit Alcumenam clam virum / usuramque eius cor-
poris cepit sibi, / et gravidam fecit is eam compressu suo.
(‘He fell in love with Alcumena behind her husband’s back and enjoyed her body, and
he made her pregnant through his embrace.’ Pl. Am. 107–9)
(b) Estne ipsus an non est? Is est, / certe is est, is est profecto.
(‘Is this he himself or not? This is him, this is certainly him, this is him indeed.’ Pl.
Trin. 1071–2)
(c) Expectant omnes quantae tibi ea res curae sit . . .
(‘The public waits eagerly to see how great a concern this matter is to you . . .’ Cic. Ver.
3.137)
The neuter singular form id is often used to refer to the content of the preceding con-
text and for that reason frequently occupies the first position in its clause, as in (d),
where id, the subject in its clause, refers to pendes. However, it may also occupy a later
position in the clause, as in (e), where the first position after the question word is
taken by contrastive mihi.
(d) Faci’n iniuriam mi [an non]? # Fateor, quia non pendes, maxumam. / Atque
id quoque iam fiet, nisi fatere.
(‘Aren’t you doing me an injustice? # Yes, I admit it, an enormous injustice, because
you aren’t hanging. And that too will soon happen unless you admit it.’ Pl. Aul. 643–4)
(e) . . . reppuli, reieci hominem. # Quid mihi id prodest?
(‘. . . I drove and chased him away. # How does that help me?’ Pl. Bac. 633)
Examples of non-nominative forms of the anaphoric pronoun is are (f)–(i). In (f), the
object eum refers to puer ille and it takes the first position. Id in (g), which refers to te
accuso in the preceding clause, is similar. In (h), both id, referring to aurum three lines
before, and eum, referring to filio in the preceding clause, are postposed in their clause
to the third and fourth position, respectively. It is not easy to claim a special pragmatic
prominence for all the constituents that precede them. For an example of postverbal
position later in the clause, see (i).
(f) Sed puer ille quem ego lavi, ut magnu’st et multum valet! / Neque eum quis-
quam colligare quivit incunabulis.
(‘But the boy I washed, how big and strong he is! No one could strap him down in his
cradle.’ Pl. Am. 1103–4)
Word order
. Subordinators
Subordinators are, by their nature, regularly used in the first position of their clause.
However, they may be preceded by one or more words or constituents, both words
that also have a right to the first position (connectors, coordinators, and relative pro-
nouns, for example) and words (or constituents) with a specific pragmatic function in
the clause (see also § 14.20). This holds both for sentence-initial and sentence-internal
clauses. This phenomenon is found in all periods of Latin and in all sorts of texts, with
individual variation from author to author.⁸⁷ This is illustrated by a few examples of
the subordinators ut—with which this phenomenon is quite common—and post-
quam. The subordinate clause in (a) starts with nunc in its non-temporal meaning
serving as a connector (see § 24.46) followed by the focus of the clause internosse. Ex.
(b) has nihil, which is in contrast with the quod clause, in first position. Ex. (c) has
consul as changed topic in first position. Exx. (d) and (e) show (connective) relative
clauses (for more examples, see § 18.28). The phenomenon of constituent(s) preced-
ing subordinators is not restricted to subordinate clauses that precede their main
⁸⁶ See Krumbiegel (1892), Laughton (1960) on Varro; Pennell Ross (1987; 1991) on Classical narrative
prose; Spevak (2010a); Danckaert (2012); Schünke (1906) on poetry. As for the terminology, the following
terms are used in the literature: ‘fronting’, ‘extraction’, ‘displacement’, and ‘left-dislocation’ for the constitu-
ents that precede the subordinating device; ‘postposition’ and ‘anaphora’ for the subordinating device.
⁸⁷ For quantitative data on Caesar, Sallust, and Livy, see Pennell Ross (1987; 1991: 455); for Caesar and
Tacitus, see Longrée et al. (2012; 2013); for Latin poets, see Ambrosini (1992); also for general discussion.
Constituents with more or less fixed position
clauses (or are embedded in it), but is also found in subordinate clauses that follow
their main clauses, as is shown in (f) and (g).
(a) Nunc internosse ut nos possitis facilius, / ego has habebo usque in petaso
pinnulas.
(‘Now in order that you can tell us apart more easily, I’ll have these little wings here
on my hat throughout.’ Pl. Am. 142–3)
(b) Ti. Gracchus convellit statum civitatis, qua gravitate vir, qua eloquentia, qua
dignitate! Nihil ut a patris avique Africani praestabili insignique virtute,
praeterquam quod a senatu desciverat, deflexisset.
(‘The stability of the community was shattered by Tiberius Gracchus, so distin-
guished by strength of character, by eloquence, and by reputation, that he had
swerved not in the least degree from the eminent and remarkable qualities of his
father and his grandfather Africanus, save for his desertion of the senatorial cause.’
Cic. Har. 41)
(c) Consul postquam detractari certamen vidit, postero die in consilium advo-
cavit quid sibi faciendum esset . . .
(‘When the consul saw the enemy refusing to engage, he called a meeting the follow-
ing day to discuss what he should do . . .’ Liv. 37.39.1)
(d) Ad quem ut veni conplexus me senex conlacrimavit . . .
(‘When I came into his presence the aged man embraced me and wept copiously . . .’
Cic. Rep. 6.9)
(e) In quem postquam omnium ora conversa sunt . . .
(‘After all eyes were turned towards him . . .’ Liv. 26.18.8)
(f) Eandem hanc, si voltis, faciam <iam> ex tragoedia / comoedia ut sit omnibus
isdem vorsibus.
(‘If you want, I’ll immediately turn this same play from a tragedy into a comedy with
all the same verses.’ Pl. Am. 54–5)
(g) Fac is homo ut redimatur.
(‘Have this man ransomed.’ Pl. Capt. 337)
Supplement:
. . . senatuosque · sententiam · utei · scientes · esetis · eorum / sententia · ita ·
fuit . . . (CIL I2.581.23–4 (SCBac., Tiriolo, 186 bc)); At te ego faciam hodie proinde
ac meritus es / ut minus valeas et miser sis, salvos domum si rediero iam. (Pl. Am.
583–4); . . . neu persentiscat aurum ubi est apsconditum . . . (Pl. Aul. 63); Nunc hoc ubi
abstrudam cogito solum locum (Pl. Aul. 673); Quod cum scibitur, per urbem irride-
bor. (Pl. Capt. 785); Id huc / missa sum tibi ut dicerem, / ab ea uti caveas tibi. (Pl. Cas.
680–2); Ipsum gestio / dari mi in conspectum, nunc sua culpa ut sciat / lenem patrem
illum factum me esse acerrimum. (Ter. Ph. 260–2); De multitudine quoniam quod
satis esset admonui, de obscuritate pauca dicam (Var. L. 6.40); Nam accersitus ab
aedile, cuius procuratio huius templi est, nondum rediit et nos uti expectaremus se
Word order
reliquit qui rogaret. (Var. R. 1.2.2); Quorum si alterutrum decolat . . . (Var. R. 1.2.8);
Multi autem Gnathonum similes cum sint loco fortuna fama superiores, horum est
adsentatio molesta . . . (Cic. Amic. 94); Cuius etsi incerta sunt tempora, tamen annis
multis fuit ante Romulum. (Cic. Brut. 40); Fatetur enim libellos Alfenum deiecisse,
vadimonium promisisse, iudicium quin acciperet in ea ipsa verba quae Naevius ede-
bat non recusasse . . . (Cic. Quinct. 63); Eos enim sanos quoniam intellegi necesse est,
quorum mens motu quasi morbo perturbata nullo sit, qui contra adfecti sint, hos
insanos appellari necesse est. (Cic. Tusc. 3.11); Ceteros quod purgas, debent mihi
probati esse tibi si sunt. (Cic. Att. 3.15.2); . . . is arma, quae cuique <h>abi[ta]lia atque
apta essent, comparat, prorsus ut quivis intellegeret non eos ad rem rusticam, verum
ad caedem ac pugnam comparari. (Cic. Tul. 18); Itaque exaruerunt, vix iam ut appa-
reant. (Cic. Brut. 82); . . . sed suum illud, nihil ut adfirmet, tenet ad extremum. (Cic.
Tusc. 1.99); Apud quos cum proficere nihil posset, quibusdam solutis ergastulis
Compsam in agro Hirpino oppugnare coepit. (Caes. Civ. 3.22.2); Caesar cum ab
hoste non amplius passuum XII milibus abesset, ut erat constitutum, ad eum legati
revertuntur. (Caes. Gal. 4.11.1); Compluribus navibus fractis reliquae cum essent
funibus ancoris reliquisque armamentis amissis ad navigandum inutiles, magna . . .
totius exercitus perturbatio facta est. (Caes. Gal. 4.29.3); Altero die cum ad oppidum
Senonum Vellaunodunum venisset, ne quem post se hostem relinqueret, quo expedi-
tiore re frumentaria uteretur, oppugnare instituit eoque biduo circumvallavit. (Caes.
Gal. 7.11.1); Cuius in adventum praesidii causa Caesar cum plura castella occupas-
set . . . hic in adventu Pompei incidit ut matutino tempore nebula esset crassissima.
(B. Hisp. 6.3); Qualem si cuncti cuperent decurrere vitam . . . (Prop. 2.15.41); Livius . . .
dicitur, cum saepius revocatus vocem obtudisset, venia petita puerum ad canendum
ante tibicinem cum statuisset, canticum egisse aliquanto magis vigente motu quia
nihil vocis usus impediebat. (Liv. 7.2.9); Quam rem cum laeto animo Romanus
accepisset . . . (Liv. 26.17.6); Romanis etsi quietae res ex Etruria nuntiabantur, tamen
quia omnibus conciliis eam rem agitari adferebatur, ita muniebant ut ancipitia muni-
menta essent. (Liv. 5.1.8); Tres duces discordantes prope ut defecerint alii ab aliis
trifariam exercitus in diversissimas regiones distraxere. (Liv. 26.41.20); Causam
abscessus quamquam secutus plurimos auctorum ad Seiani artes rettuli . . . (Tac. Ann.
4.57.1)
It is not always easy to determine whether some or all of the constituents preced-
ing the subordinator belong to the subordinate clause. In (h), for example, where
does extemplo belong? Nor is it always easy to decide whether we are dealing with
one continuous sentence or a change of construction. An example is (i), where
postquam might have been omitted entirely, still leaving us with a perfect
sequence of clauses. This might be an example of a change of communicative
strategy after the sentence has already begun, an anacoluthon, which is typical
of spoken discourse.
(h) Sese extemplo ex ephebis postquam excesserit, / non, ut ego, amori neque
desidiae in otio / operam dedisse . . .
(‘Immediately after he had passed his teenage years, he had not, like me,
devoted himself to love and laziness in leisure . . .’ Pl. Mer. 61–3)
Constituents with more or less fixed position
(i) Nam erus me postquam rus misit filium ut suom arcesserem, / abii . . .
(‘For after my master sent me to the farm to fetch his son, I went . . .’ Pl. Mos.
1043–4)
In ( j), four constituents that belong to the subordinate clause precede the subordina-
tor. It is difficult to give a pragmatic justification for each of them being anteposed.
( j) . . . Chremes / ultro ad me venit, unicam gnatam suam / cum dote summa filio
uxorem ut daret.
(‘. . . Chremes came to me of his own accord to offer his only daughter in marriage
with a substantial dowry.’ Ter. An.100–1)
Supplement:
Trecentos equites Attalus praesidii causa cum adduxisset, iact<at>ae sunt pacis con-
diciones. (Liv. 38.25.5)
sensit. (Ter. An. 690); Mihi nunc relictis rebus inveniundus est / aliquis, labore inventa
mea quoi dem bona. (Ter. Hau. 840–1); . . . ipsi illi maiorum gentium dii qui habentur
hinc nobis profecti in caelum reperientur. (Cic. Tusc. 1.29); Sanguine quae vero non
rubet, arte rubet. (Ov. Ars 3.200); Item / placere · uti · Cn. · Piso pater · super ·
Portam Fontinalem quam · inaedificasset / . . . ea . . . · dimolienda curarent.
(S.C. de Gn. Pisone patre 106–8 (ad 20)—NB: quam must be understood as quae)
The indefinite determiners qui, quae, quod (see § 11.110) and pronouns quis, qua,
quid (see § 11.149) cannot be placed in the initial position of a clause or sentence. The
same holds for the indefinite adverbs quando ‘at any time’, qui ‘in any way’, ubi ‘anywhere’,
Word order
and unde ‘from any place’. They are relatively rare in main clauses, but see (a), where
quid follows the question particle num. In subordinate clauses they normally follow the
subordinating device immediately, as in (b)–(d). For later placements, see (e) and (f).
(a) Num quid simile populus Romanus audierat aut viderat?
(‘Had the Roman people ever heard of or experienced such a thing before?’ Cic.
Amic. 41)
(b) Verum irae si quae forte eveniunt huius modi / inter eos . . .
(‘But if by chance any argument of this sort arises between them . . .’ Pl. Am. 941–2)
(c) Ubi quid credideris, citius extemplo a foro / fugiunt quam . . .
(‘When you entrust something to them, they immediately run away from the forum
faster than . . .’ Pl. Per. 435–6)
(d) Ponere iubebam de quo quis audire vellet.
(‘I called upon my friends to put forward any subject which any of them wished to
hear discussed.’ Cic. Tusc. 1.7)
(e) Fieri autem potest ut recte quis sentiat . . .
(‘Now it is possible for anyone to hold right views . . .’ Cic. Tusc. 1.6)
(f) Quid enim interest utrum ex homine se convertat quis in beluam an . . .
(‘For what difference does it make whether a man is actually transformed into a beast
or whether . . .’ Cic. Off. 3.82)
Supplement:
. . . —fit enim plerumque ut ei qui boni quid volunt adferre adfingant aliquid . . . (Cic.
Phil. 1.8); Quid autem est non miserius solum, sed foedius etiam et deformius quam
aegritudine quis adflictus debilitatus iacens? (Cic. Tusc. 4.35); Mulieres vero in India,
cum est cuius earum vir mortuus, in certamen iudiciumque veniunt . . . (Cic. Tusc.
5.78); Qui horum quid acerbissime crudelissimeque fecerat, is et vir et civis optimus
habebatur. (Caes. Civ. 3.32.3); Si mala condiderit in quem quis carmina, ius est /
iudiciumque. (Hor. S. 2.1.82–3)
Existit autem hoc loco quaedam quaestio subdifficilis, num quando amici novi,
digni amicitia, veteribus sint anteponendi . . . (Cic. Amic. 67); Ei rei operam dare te
fuerat aliquanto aequius, / si qui probiorem facere posses . . . (Pl. Trin. 119–20); Mi,
sicunde potes, erues qui decem legati Mummio fuerint. (Cic. Att. 13.30.2); . . . dispositis
exploratoribus, necubi effecto ponte Romani copias traducerent . . . (Caes. Gal. 7.35.1)
as well, including forms of the verb sum and indefinite pronouns. The words which
they follow are said to be stressed, while the so-called enclitic words themselves are
unstressed. A difficulty in Wackernagel’s observation is the notion of ‘enclitic words’.
Some of the words mentioned in this framework show all the properties of other ‘nor-
mal’ words. Personal pronouns, for example, can be found in all positions in the
clause, (bound) clitics can be attached to them, and they occur in pragmatic con-
figurations in which they must have been stressed (for example when in contrastive
opposition—see below).⁸⁹
It had been observed before Wackernagel’s article, and was also observed later, that
the tendency of personal pronouns and forms of sum to follow other words is not
restricted to the beginning of clauses, but that they are also found after words and
phrases further on in the sentence.⁹⁰ Fraenkel (see § 23.17) has argued that the ‘enclitic
words’ are regularly placed in the second position of a colon. There are, however, also
many instances of clitics coming later within such units.
In recent studies much attention has been paid to determining which words may
serve as ‘host’ for personal pronouns and forms of the verb sum. It turns out that the
hosts are often pragmatically prominent in their clause or in the constituent to which
they belong. There may be more pragmatically prominent entities in one sentence or
clause, which are usually placed at the beginning of their colon. The personal pro-
nouns and the forms of sum may therefore also occur in another colon than the first,
although this is less common. So, there is no mechanical rule requiring personal pro-
nouns and forms of sum to occur in the second position of their sentence or clause.
Attachment of personal pronouns and forms of the verb sum to pragmatically prom-
inent hosts can be seen from the oldest texts onwards and it is still common in the
letters of Claudius Terentianus.
Recently the term preferential host has been introduced to refer to various
types of constituents that are said to ‘attract’ personal pronouns and forms of the verb
sum, which are as a consequence positioned immediately next to them.⁹¹ The label
‘preferential hosts’ covers at least five types of words and constituents. First of all there
are words which are, on account of their meaning and function, mostly found in the
initial position (for instance relative and interrogative pronouns discussed above,
§ 23.25 and § 23.28) and for that very reason can most of the time only be followed by
other constituents. Then there are words and constituents that derive their pragmatic
prominence from their context (contrastive words or phrases, for example). A third
category are temporal adverbs like iam (‘at this point of time, now (as opposed to
another time)’).⁹² Fourthly, there are words that are intrinsically emphatic on account
The main question to be answered is whether the order that we find (personal pro-
nouns and forms of the verb sum following the items mentioned) has to be regarded
as the outcome of one and the same rule or tendency or as the outcome of two differ-
ent rules or tendencies: one in which these words follow other words that are normally
restricted to an initial position (relative pronouns, for example) and one in which they
are preceded by pragmatically prominent words. The assumption of this second rule
or tendency is attractive since these pragmatically prominent words also precede the
words that are normally restricted to the initial position, such as relative pronouns
and subordinators. We find, for example, combinations with the discontinuous modi-
fier nullus such as (a)–(d).
(a) . . . si tibi ita penitus inhaesisset ista suspicio, nullo ut evelli modo posset . . .
(‘. . . should your suspicion prove to be so deeply engrained in your mind that it can by
no means be eradicated . . .’ Cic. Mil. 68)
(b) ‘Hic nodus’, inquit, ‘nulla quem cepit manus, / mecum per ignes flagret.’
(‘ “Let this club,” he said, “which no hand but mine has wielded, burn in the flames
with me.”’ Sen. Her. O. 1661–2)
(c) Sed, ut supra dixi, nulla me ingenii, sed magna vis animi inflammat ut me
ipse non teneam.
(‘But, as I said before, it is no great intellectual gift, but a vigorous spirit which
inflames me to such an extent that I am beside myself.’ Cic. Orat. 132)
(d) Nullum est in hac urbe collegium . . .
(‘There is no guild in this city . . .’ Cic. Dom. 74)
phrase nulla vis, and (f), where the noun phrase nullus dolor precedes me, as well as a
sequence such as (g), where me separates the noun phrase nulla res, are attested (the
last order is more frequent in Cicero than the other two).⁹⁴
(e) Quod profecto, cum me nulla vis cogeret, facere[t] non auderem . . .
(‘And that, since no force compels me, is something that I obviously should not dare
to do . . .’ Cic. Phil. 5.51)
(f) Nullus dolor me angit unum omnia posse.
(‘It does not give me a pang that one man absorbs all power.’ Cic. Att. 4.18.2)
(g) A curia autem nulla me res divellet . . .
(‘But nothing shall separate me from the House . . .’ Cic. Att. 1.20.3)
⁹⁴ In Cicero the sequences ‘me null* noun’, ‘null* noun me’ and ‘null* me noun’ have three, two, and
nine instances, respectively.
⁹⁵ See Adams (1994a: 141–51; 1999a).
Word order
(d) Nam ut Brundisio profectus es, | nullae mihi abs te sunt redditae litterae.
(‘For since you left Brundisium, not a single letter from you has been delivered to me.’
Cic. Att. 1.15.2)
The actual position of personal pronouns in their clause depends on how many other
constituents are candidates for the first or an early position, as well as the size of these
constituents. When personal pronouns are placed in a later position in the clause, they
are often, but not necessarily, second in their colon. Exx. (e)–(h) have both a thematic or
topical and an emphatic constituent preceding the personal pronouns, as well as connect-
ing words. Nulla in (e) is emphatic. Voluntatem in (f) is in contrast with rem ipsam in the
following clause. Equidem in (g) is another emphatic host. In (h), tibi splits hac epistula
(a case of hyperbaton); hac is in contrast with reliquis. In (i), however, after the topic ipsi
Leontini there is no clear colon boundary that might explain the position of me.
(e) De triumpho autem | nulla me cupiditas umquam tenuit . . .
(‘With regard to the Triumph, no desire ever took hold of me . . .’ Cic. Att. 7.2.6)
(f) Ego autem | voluntatem tibi profecto emetiar, sed rem ipsam nondum posse
videor.
(‘I am prepared to make payment of goodwill in full measure, but the debt itself I do
not now seem able to pay.’ Cic. Brut. 16)
(g) In cotidianis autem commentationibus | equidem mihi adulescentulus pro-
ponere solebam illam exercitationem . . .
(‘As for my daily exercises, in my youth I, for my part, would set myself that task . . .’
Cic. de Orat. 1.154)
(h) Qua re Cuspianorum omnium commendationis causam | hac tibi epistula
exponendam putavi, reliquis epistulis tantum faciam ut . . .
(‘I have therefore deemed it proper in this letter to set before you the general position
as regards my recommendation of Cuspius’ people. In future letters I shall simply . . .’
Cic. Fam. 13.6.2)
(i) Meae diligentiae pensum magis in Leontino agro est exigendum propter
hanc causam quod ipsi Leontini publice non sane me multum (multum me
O) adiuverunt.
(‘In dealing with the land of Leontini, a larger measure of earnest care must be
required of me; for, I must confess, the people of Leontini have not, as a corporate
body, helped me a great deal.’ Cic. Ver. 3.109)
Personal pronouns are also found in final position, when they are the focus of the
sentence or clause, as in ( j) and (k).
( j) Quem aequiu’st nos potiorem habere quam te?
(‘Who would it be right for us to treat better than you?’ Pl. St. 97)
(k) Ne optandum quidem est in amicitia, ut me ille plus quam se, ego illum plus
quam me.
Constituents with more or less fixed position
(‘It is not to be desired in friendship either that my friend should love me more than
himself, or I love him more than myself.’ Cic. Tusc. 3.73)
The fact that a personal pronoun is preceded by an emphatic word or is otherwise pre-
ceded by pragmatically prominent constituents need not imply that the pronoun is not
itself a pragmatically prominent constituent in its clause. This becomes clear from (l)
and (m). In (l), mihi (governed by pergratum and therefore immediately juxtaposed) is
in contrast with Scaevolae (and probably was stressed in pronunciation). A few lines
further on in the text Scaevola reacts to Fannius’ words: ‘Mihi vero erit gratum . . .’ (Cic.
Amic. 16). In (m), the topic of the si clause servi mei is in contrast with omnes cives tui,
and for that reason precedes the subordinator si. Me is in contrast with te.
(l) . . . pergratum mihi feceris, spero item Scaevolae, si . . .
(‘. . . it would be very agreeable to me—and to Scaevola, too, I hope, if . . .’ Cic. Amic. 16)
(m) Servi mehercule mei si me isto pacto metuerent, ut te metuunt omnes cives
tui, domum meam relinquendam putarem.
(‘If, by Hercules, my slaves feared me as much as all your countrymen fear you, I
would think that I should get out of my house.’ Cic. Catil. 1.17)
Personal pronouns are also involved in tmesis, as in (n) (see § 23.102). Per is emphatic.
(n) Per mihi, per, inquam, gratum feceris . . .
(‘You’ll do me a great, a very great pleasure indeed . . .’ Cic. Att. 1.20.7)
The fact that personal pronouns are so often found in second position is sometimes
interpreted as a sign of these pronouns being ‘enclitic’, ‘unstressed’, ‘weak’, ‘ton-
schwach’, etc. Scholars have also tried to relate this observation to the fact that in
Modern French, for example, there is a distinction between me and moi. There is no
reason to interpret the Latin data in this way.⁹⁶ Apart from the flexibility of their pos-
ition, as shown above, one may point to their use in metrical texts, where they occur
in the position of the ‘longa’, as in (o).⁹⁷ The use of punctuation after expressions like
misi tibi in the Wâdi Fawâkhir ostraca and in the Vindolanda Tablets suggests that
they were considered as units.⁹⁸
(o) Sed sine me dum hanc compellare.
(‘But let me address her.’ Pl. Men. 378)
As for the actual position of the oblique personal pronouns (not governed by pre-
positions) in their clause, in a sample from Cicero Tusc. and Att. Spevak (2006a: 270)
gives the following percentages for the positions of me, mihi, te, and tibi (Table 23.1):
⁹⁶ ‘Weak’ or ‘enclitic’ use of the oblique personal pronouns prefiguring the Romance situation is not-
ably proposed by Wanner (1987) and Salvi (2004). A more nuanced approach can be found in
Adams (1994a; b). For a critical discussion, see Spevak (2006a). For the position of nobis and vobis, see
Fraenkel (1966).
⁹⁷ For metrical considerations, see Spevak (2006a: 268–9). The fundamental study on monosyllables
in verse is Hellegouarc’h (1964).
⁹⁸ Adams (1996) draws attention to the use of punctuation in the Wâdi Fawâkhir ostraca and in the
Vindolanda Tablets.
Word order
As for their position with respect to the finite verb, 40 per cent are immediately next
to the finite verb (26 per cent preceding, 14 per cent following), 60 per cent are not
contiguous. There is no reason to assume that in Cicero’s time there was a tendency
for personal pronouns to be attached to the verb, as is the case in Modern French.
In a number of ‘informal’ texts (the Letters of Terentianus and the Passio Perpetuae)
oblique pronouns mostly follow the finite verb in main clauses and are mostly juxta-
posed to it.⁹⁹
The Supplement contains a number of examples of personal pronouns, first those fol-
lowing words which are emphatic on account of their meaning,¹⁰⁰ then those follow-
ing pragmatically prominent ones.
Supplement:
Demonstratives: Huius te cupiditati obsequi, sicuti ego fecissem in collega meo. (Cic.
Pis. 12); Itaque istum ego locum totidem verbis a Dicaearcho transtuli. (Cic. Att. 6.2.3);
Sed, ut coeperam dicere, ad hanc me fortunam frugalitas mea perduxit. (Petr. 75.10)
Relatives: Cognoscite nunc id quod ad vestrum ius iurandum pertinet, quod vestri
iudicii est, quod vobis oneris imposuit ea lex qua coacti huc convenistis . . . (Cic. Clu.
164); Quorum vobis pro vestra sapientia, Quirites, habenda est ratio diligenter. (Cic.
Man. 17)
Adjectives and adverbs of dimension (size and quantity): Iam intelleges multo me
vigilare acrius ad salutem quam te ad perniciem rei publicae. (Cic. Catil. 1.8); Tantane
vobis inopia videor esse amicorum, ut . . . (Cic. Div. Caec. 50); . . . ad quos omnis nobis
aditus, qui paene solis patuit, obstructus est. (Cic. Brut. 16); Summum me eorum
studium tenet . . . (Cic. Att. 1.11.3); Nunc ad rem ut redeam, ‘inhibere’ illud tuum,
quod valde mihi adriserat, vehementer displicet. (Cic. Att. 13.21.3); bis me im
mensem calcio (CEL 142.26 (Karanis, 2nd cent. ad (early)))
Adjectives and adverbs of value: Sane gaudeo quod te interpellavi, quoniam quidem
tam praeclarum mihi dedisti iudicii tui testimonium. (Cic. Leg. 3.1); Mirum me desi-
derium tenet urbis . . . (Cic. Fam. 2.11.1)
Superlatives: Quae dum erit in vestris fixa mentibus, tutissimo me muro saeptum esse
arbitrabor. (Cic. Catil. 4.23); In quo maximum nobis onus imposuit. (Cic. Phil. 11.19)
Negatives: Ephesum ut venerim nosti, qui etiam mihi gratulatus es illius diei celebri-
tatem, qua nihil me umquam delectavit magis. (Cic. Att. 5.20.1); . . . hoc existimans,
neminem te tui amantiorem habere. (Cic. Fam. 5.10b)
Pragmatically prominent pronouns: Te ego ulciscar, te ego ut digna es perdam atque
ut de me meres. (Pl. As. 148); Ut meque teque maxume atque ingenio nostro decuit.
(Pl. As. 577); Numquam hercle iterum defrudabis me quidem post hunc diem.
(Pl. Rud. 1416); In quo ego accusatore, iudices, primum illud deprecabor ne quid
L. Murenae dignitas illius . . . noceat . . . (Cic. Mur. 58—contrast with illius?); Quid fit?
Quamquam non debebam ego abs te has litteras poscere. Me enim tabulas tuas
habere et proferre oportebat. (Cic. Ver. 4.36)
Sz.: 400 discusses instances of ‘clustering’¹⁰¹ of pronouns in the initial part of a clause,
as in (p) and (q), which he regards as a trace of Indo-European. Such cases seem to
be rather a specific pragmatic constellation than a rule-governed form of clustering.
(p) Verum hoc ego te multabo bolo: / sex talenta magna dotis demam . . .
(‘But I’ll punish you with this fine: I’ll deduct six great talents from your
dowry . . .’ Pl. Truc. 844–5)
(q) Sed erile scelus me sollicitat, eius me impietas male habet.
(‘But it’s my master’s crime that’s troubling me, it’s his wickedness that’s dis-
tressing me.’ Pl. Rud. 198)
(d) Catilina, si iudicatum erit meridie non lucere, certus erit competitor.
(‘If Catiline’s jury finds that the sun doesn’t shine at midday, he will certainly be a
candidate.’ Cic. Att. 1.1.1)
(e) Gallia est omnis divisa in partes tres . . .
(‘The whole territory of Gaul is divided into three parts . . .’ Caes. Gal. 1.1.1)
(f) Dici gladiorum ingentem esse numerum ad eum convectum.
(‘It was said that a great quantity of swords had been carried to him.’ Liv. 1.51.6)
(g) . . . patria, quae mihi vita mea multo est carior . . .
(‘. . . my country, which means much more to me than my own life . . .’ Cic. Catil. 1.27)
(h) . . . per fore accommodatum tibi si ad Sidam [maritimam partem provinciae]
navibus accessissem.
(‘. . . that it would therefore be very much to your convenience if I made my approach
by sea and landed at Side.’ Cic. Fam. 3.5.3)
Supplement:
Demonstratives: . . . iam non possum oblivisci meam hanc esse patriam, me horum
esse consulem . . . (Cic. Catil. 2.27); Cum ille is sit orator ut nihil eo possit esse
praestantius, ego autem . . . (Cic. de Orat. 3.32); Populi Romani hanc esse consuetudi-
nem ut . . . (Caes. Gal. 1.43.8)
Relatives: . . . positum caput illud fuit a quo erant multorum civium capita servata.
(Cic. de Orat. 3.10); Ad alteram partem succedunt Ubii, quorum fuit civitas ampla
atque florens, ut est captus Germanorum. (Caes. Gal. 4.3.3)
Adjectives and adverbs of dimension (size and quantity): . . . qui si diutius vixissent,
magnam essent eloquentiae laudem consecuti. (Cic. Brut. 279); Quae si longior fue-
rit oratio cum magnitudine utilitatis comparetur. (Cic. Off. 2.20); Quintus frater
cum . . . Athenas venisset Id. Mai., valde fuit ei properandum . . . (Cic. Att. 3.9.1);
Omnium esse militum paratissimos animos. (Caes. Civ. 1.71.2); Ex his omnibus
longe sunt humanissimi qui Cantium incolunt . . . (Caes. Gal. 5.14.1); Inter quos
magna fuit contentio, utrum moenibus <se> defenderent an . . . (Nep. Milt. 4.4)
Adjectives and adverbs of value: Tanta malorum est multitudo civium (malorum
civium est multitudo H) ut tibi ego hoc confirmem . . . (Cic. de Orat. 2.269)
Superlatives: M. Crassus . . . ab eadem illa peste infestissimus esse meis fortunis praedi-
cabatur. (Cic. Sest. 39); . . . cum saepissime tibi senatus breviter impoliteque dicenti maxi-
mis sit de rebus adsensus. (Cic. de Orat. 1.214); . . . qua optimum esse egressum superiore
aestate cognoverat. (Caes. Gal. 5.8.3); Summo esse in periculo rem . . . (Caes. Gal. 7.32.3)
Negatives: Non est enim consilium in volgo, non ratio . . . (Cic. Planc. 9); Quia nihil est
victoria dulcius, nullum est autem testimonium victoriae certius quam . . . (Cic. Ver.
5.66); Mearum epistularum nulla est }xlnni. (Cic. Att. 16.5.5)
Forms of the verb sum are often regarded as clitic, especially the forms es and est.¹⁰⁴
However, all forms of sum in its three different functions of existential (incl. locative)
verb, copula, and auxiliary are found both in sentence-initial position and in final
¹⁰⁴ Forms of the fu-stem behave differently from those of the es-stem (Adams 1994b: 46f.).
Constituents with more or less fixed position
position. Bound clitics are attached to them. They are followed by connectors like
autem and igitur, as is illustrated by a few periphrastic expressions with auxiliary est
in (i)–(l). They also behave as independent units in verse, as demonstrated by (m).
These are all clear proofs that these forms are not clitic.
(i) Undeviginti annos natus erat eo tempore. Est autem L. Paullo C. Marcello
consulibus mortuus.
(‘He was then only nineteen years of age. His death occurred in the consulship of
Lucius Paullus and Gaius Marcellus.’ Cic. Brut. 229)
( j) Nihil est damni factum novi, sed quod erat inventum est.
(‘No fresh harm has been done, but harm already there has come to light.’ Cic. Att.
1.16.9)
(k) Estque in ea quaedam paulo subtilior observatio adhibenda.
(‘And so a somewhat closer consideration may be given to the matter.’ Cels. 1.3.18)
(l) Quid est autem umquam questus nisi cum a sociis et a se iniuriam propul-
saret?
(‘And when did he ever raise his voice in protest, save to protect himself and his part-
ners from wrong?’ Cic. Planc. 34)
(m) Quidquid id est, timeo Danaos et dona ferentis.
(‘Whatever it be, I fear the Greeks, even when bringing gifts.’ Verg. A. 2.49)
On the other hand, the close attachment of the forms est and es to a preceding word is
apparent from their contraction (or: prodelision) after participles and subject
complements ending in a vowel, -m, or -s—that is, when sum is an auxiliary verb or a
copula—especially at the end of a clause. This is particularly common in poetry but
also frequent in prose. It is also found in inscriptions. Illustrations are (n), following a
vowel, (o), following a final -m, and (p), after a final -s.¹⁰⁵
(n) . . . raptusque · a · fatis · conditus · hoc · tumulo’st
(‘. . . and snatched away by Fate he’s buried in this grave.’ CIL XII.882.6 (Arles, 1st
cent. ad))
(o) . . . et certa ratione probatum’st.
(‘. . . and proved by irrefutable reasoning.’ Lucr. 2.94)
(p) Usus, fructus, victus, cultus iam mihi harunc aedium / interemptu’st,
interfectu’st, alienatu’st. Occidi!
(‘The ability to use, enjoy, live in, and inhabit this house is now taken away from me,
ruined, removed. I’m done for!’ Pl. Mer. 832–3)
¹⁰⁵ The examples are taken from Allen (1973: 148–9). For poetry, see Soubiran (1966); for Caesar,
Vogel (1938: 10). For the clitic characteristics of sum in general, see Adams (1994b: 86–8) and
Spevak (2006a: 261–5). The fullest account of the evidence for contraction can be found in Pezzini (2015:
27–97), where a full discussion of the factors involved can be found as well.
Word order
Emphasizing particles often follow the constituent they have in their scope. Here it
will suffice to give a few illustrations of quidem and quoque, for both of which this
position is the rule. For the other particles, see the relevant sections in Chapter 22.
The particle quidem (see § 22.26) normally follows the constituent it has in its scope,
whatever the position of that constituent, as in (a) and (b). If the constituent in its
scope is a noun phrase, quidem follows the first word of the phrase and so causes
discontinuity, as in (c)—repeated from § 22.20. Here, quidem marks the contrast
between the entire noun phrase vestros . . . animos and oratione nostra and humani-
tate vestra.¹⁰⁶
(a) Loquacitati . . . quae . . . me levat ad te quidem scribentem . . .
(‘Garrulity . . . which relieves me, writing to you . . .’ Cic. Att. 7.13.4)
(b) Venisti Brundisium, in sinum quidem et in complexum tuae mimulae.
(‘You arrived in Brundisium, into the bosom and arms, that is to say, of your little
mime actress.’ Cic. Phil. 2.61)
(c) Sed si certorum hominum mentis nulla ratione, iudices, placare possumus,
vestros quidem animos certe confidimus non oratione nostra, sed humani-
tate vestra esse placatos.
(‘But if, gentlemen, there are no means by which we can appease the feelings of cer-
tain men, I am fully confident that your minds have been appeased, not by words of
mine but by your own human feelings.’ Cic. Balb. 62)
The scalar negator ne . . . quidem usually surrounds the constituent it has in its scope,
but subordinators and relative pronouns are sometimes included as well, as in (e). If
the constituent is a noun phrase only the first word of the phrase is surrounded by
ne . . . quidem, as in (f). See also § 8.3 fin. and § 8.14.¹⁰⁷
(e) In qua curia statua tua stabat et nuda filii, in ea nemo fuit ne quem nudus
quidem filius nudata provincia commoveret.
(‘There in the senate-house stood your statue and the naked figure of your son; and
there was no one in that senate-house who was moved even by your naked son, in
that province that was itself stripped naked.’ Cic. Ver. 4.143)
¹⁰⁶ See Spevak (2010a: 52–3), from which ex. (f) is taken. For the clitic use of quidem, see Questa (2007:
153–61).
¹⁰⁷ For the ordering patterns of ne . . . quidem, see Devine and Stephens (2006: 266–72), Spevak (2010a:
53), and TLL s.v. ne (. . . quidem) 331.67ff.
Constituents with more or less fixed position
Bound clitics form a phonetic unit with the host to which they are attached. The com-
bination functions as one word as far as accentuation is concerned.
¹⁰⁸ For this example and parallels, see Tränkle ad loc. For the ordering patterns of quoque, see Devine
and Stephens (2006: 265–6).
Word order
The coordinating clitics -que and -ve are not attached to connectors, interactional
particles, or interrogative particles, nor to the negator non, but they are found with all
other word classes. They are usually not attached to monosyllabic adverbs like iam,
tam, and quam, but to another word of the constituent to which these monosyllables
belong, as in (g)–(i). Attachment of these clitics to the monosyllabic prepositions is
rare and for some not attested at all (see Table 23.2). Examples are ( j) and (k). Examples
of attachment of -que to other words of a conjoin are (l)–(o). Very rare is (p).¹⁰⁹ For
the position of -que, see also § 19.25 fin.
Table . Use of the coordinators -que and -ve with a number of prepositions
(in the PHI corpus)
a ab ob sub ad in de apud sine contra trans
a b c
-que 9 – – – 4 >300 205 – 5 72 9
-ve – – – 1 – 1 5 – – 1 –
a
Only Virgil (once) and Ovid.
b
Especially in poetry (and often in Ovid).
c
Many in Gellius.
(‘He . . . withdrew, we are told, to Cumae and in that city was brought to the grave by
old age and distress of mind.’ Cic. Tusc. 3.27)
(k) . . . unum illud spectavi, quod Chrysogonus aiebat . . . de bonorum emptione
deque ea societate neminem esse qui verbum facere auderet hoc tempore.
(‘. . . my only consideration has been the assertion of Chrysogonus that . . . no one in
times like these would dare to utter a word about the purchase of the goods and about
this partnership.’ Cic. S. Rosc. 58)
(l) Rerum est silva magna, quam cum Graeci iam non tenerent ob eamque
causam iuventus nostra dedisceret paene discendo, etiam Latini, si diis
placet, hoc biennio magistri exstiterunt.
(‘There is a large stock of ideas, which were no longer kept to themselves by the
Greeks and which, for this reason, our young students virtually unlearned in the
process of learning them, so that in the last two years there actually arose, heaven
help us! Latin professors of rhetoric.’ Cic. de Orat. 3.93)
(m) Scripserat etiam Messalla Q. Salasso P. Curtium . . . interfectum, quod con-
sensisset . . . eum comprehendere ad Caesaremque deducere.
(‘Messalla too has written to Q. Salassus that P. Curtius . . . has been executed, because
he conspired . . . to seize him (sc. Pompey) and hand him over to Caesar.’ Cic. Fam.
6.18.2)
(n) . . . summam fuisse eius in victu temperantiam in rebusque gerundis virum
acrem et industrium . . .
(‘. . . that this man was exceedingly temperate in his way of life and in conducting
affairs showed untiring energy . . .’ Cic. Tusc. 5.57)
(o) . . . si . . . pluris esse contendat dulcedinem corporis ex eave natam laetitiam
quam gravitatem animi atque constantiam.
(‘. . . if she . . . maintained that bodily enjoyment or the mental gratification which
springs from it is of higher value than firmness and dignity of character.’ Cic. Fin. 3.1)
(p) . . . primordia ferri / in vacuum prolapsa cadunt coniuncta, fit utque / anulus
ipse sequatur eatque ita corpore toto.
(‘. . . first-beginnings of the iron start forward and fall into the void, all joined together,
and it comes to pass that the ring itself follows and advances in this way with its
whole body.’ Lucr. 6.1005–7)
Supplement:
Instances of -que immediately following monosyllabic adverbs: Qui facinus tantum
tamque indignum feceris? (Pl. Mil. 498); Neque tu eras tam excors tamque demens
ut . . . (Cic. Dom. 48); Est autem fidei pietatisque nostrae declarare fortissimis militibus
quam memores simus quamque grati. (Cic. Phil. 14.29)
Instances of -que and -ve attached to monosyllabic and polysyllabic prepositions
(in alphabetical order by preposition): . . . aque Chao densos divom numerabat amores.
(Verg. G. 4.347); Marius ostio Liris evehitur adque Aenariam suos continuatur. (Sis.
hist. 125=131C); Sex. Pompeius et Sex. Ap<p>uleius consules primi in verba Tiberii
Word order
Caesaris iuravere, apudque eos Seius Strabo et C. Turranius, ille praetoriarum cohor-
tium praefectus, hic annonae; mox senatus milesque et populus. (Tac. Ann. 1.7.2);
Periphanem, per omnem urbem quem sum defessus quaerere. / . . . per myropolia et
lanienas circumque argentarias. (Pl. Epid. 197–9); Ac si quando erit narrandum, ne
illa, quae suspicionem et crimen efficient contraque nos erunt, acriter persequamur,
et quicquid potuerit, detrahamus. (Cic. de Orat. 2.330); Nam iam Antiphonem con-
veni affinem meum / cumque eo reveni ex inimicitia in gratiam. (Pl. St. 408–9); Si
quam legem de actis Caesaris confirmandis deve dictatura in perpetuum tollenda
deve coloniis in agros deducendis tulisse M. Antonius dicitur, easdem leges de inte-
gro ut populum teneant salvis auspiciis ferri placet. (Cic. Phil. 5.10); . . . inque tanta
libertate canes etiam et equi, aselli denique libere [sint] sic incurrant ut iis de via
decedendum sit. (Cic. Rep. 1.67); ‘Qui ab A. Postumio Q. Fulvio censoribus postve ea
testamentum fecit fecerit.’ (Cic. Ver. 1.106); Multa autem impendere videntur praeter
naturam etiam praeterque fatum. (Cic. Phil. 1.10); Non pedibus termento fuit, praeut
ego erum expugnabo meum / sine classe sineque exercitu et tanto numero militum.
(Pl. Bac. 929–30); . . . castra plena omnis fortunae publicae privataeque relinquit
transque proximos montes laeva pedites instructos condit, dextra equites . . . (Liv.
22.41.6–7)
Instances of -que and -ve attached to another word belonging to a prepositional
phrase (in alphabetical order by preposition): Ac si restituor, etiam minus videbimur
deliquisse abs teque certe, quoniam nullo nostro, tuo ipsius beneficio diligemur. (Cic.
Att. 3.15.4); . . . quod consensisset cum Hispanis quibusdam . . . eum comprehendere ad
Caesaremque deducere. (Cic. Fam. 16.18.2); Deinde effundas repente ut ante conses-
sum meorum iudicum videam quam potuerim qui essent futuri suspicari, apud
eosque me . . . cogas causam de fortunis omnibus dicere? (Cic. Planc. 40); Explorato
cum firmisque praesidiis tuto receptu praedatum ierat . . . (Liv. 23.43.7); Itaque illi
Syracusani statuam postea statuerunt, et is ut primum potuit, istum reliquit de provin-
ciaque decessit. (Cic. Ver. 2.48); . . . eodem sub tegmine caeli / ex unoque sitim sedantes
flumine aquai / dissimili vivont specie . . . (Lucr. 2.632–4); In eodemque omnes mihi
videntur ludo doctae ad malitiam. (Ter. Hec. 203); Post paucosque dies . . . exercitus
Thermopylas reductus . . . (Liv. 36.21.3); Nam cum suspicimus magni caelestia mundi /
templa super stellisque micantibus aethera fixum . . . (Lucr. 5.1204–5)
-Que and -ve are usually attached not to the auxiliary part of a complex verb form, but
to the lexical part. Examples are (q) and (r). Instances with the clitics attached to the
auxiliary are (s)–(v).
(q) Iam vero venae et arteriae micare non desinunt . . . animadversumque saepe
est cum cor animantis alicuius evolsum ita mobiliter palpitaret ut . . .
(‘Again, the veins and arteries never cease throbbing . . . and frequent cases have been
observed when the heart of an animal on being torn out of its body has continued to
beat with a rapid motion . . .’ Cic. N.D. 2.24)
(r) (sc. Caesar) . . . contionem apud milites habuit hortatusque est ne ea quae
accidissent graviter ferrent . . .
(‘Caesar . . . addressed his soldiers and urged them not to be troubled by what had
happened . . .’ Caes. Civ. 3.73.2)
Constituents with more or less fixed position
(s) (sc. Karthaginem) Ad quam tu oppugnandam nunc venis paene miles, hanc
hoc biennio consul evertes, eritque cognomen id tibi per te partum quod
habes adhuc hereditarium a nobis.
(‘Carthage, that city to which you now come to lay siege, with a rank little above that
of a common soldier, within two years you as consul shall overthrow it and you will
win by your own efforts the surname which till now you have as an inheritance from
me.’ Cic. Rep. 6.11)
(t) Estque in ea quaedam paulo subtilior observatio adhibenda.
(‘And so a somewhat closer consideration may be given to the matter.’ Cels. 1.3.18)
(u) Et mihi siquis erat ducendi carminis usus, / deficit, estque minor factus
inerte situ.
(‘For me, too, whatever skill I had in shaping song is failing and is diminished by
inactive sloth.’ Ov. Pont. 1.5.7–8)
(v) Et quidem, si tibi constare vis, omnes quicumque nati sunt eruntve non
solum miseri, sed etiam semper miseri.
(‘And in fact, if you wish to be consistent, everyone who has been born or will be born
is not only wretched but will always be wretched as well.’ Cic. Tusc. 1.9)
The particle -ne is not attached to connectors (understandably) and almost never to
prepositions. It is attached to another word of the prepositional phrase instead, as in
(g) and (h). Ex. (i) is a very rare exception.
(g) Extra ordinemne pecunia est data?
(‘Was any money paid irregularly?’ Cic. Font. 4)
(h) . . . et ignoras Domitius cum fascibusne sit.
(‘. . . and you don’t know whether Domitius has the fasces with him.’ Cic. Att. 8.15.1)
(i) ‘Contrane lucrum nil valere candidum / pauperis ingenium?’ querebar
adplorans tibi . . .
(‘I made my complaints, lamenting to you, “Has the fairest genius of a poor man no
weight against wealthy lucre?”’ Hor. Epod. 11.11–12—tr. Smart)
Supplement:
Quid ego? Sub gemman’ abstrusos habeo tuam matrem et patrem? (Pl. Cur. 606); Sed
ea, quae dixi, ad corpusne refers? (Cic. Fin. 2.107); Primum in nostrane potestate est,
quid meminerimus? (Cic. Fin. 2.104); In meane potestate ut sit spectrum tuum, ut,
simul ac mihi collibitum sit de te cogitare, illud occurrat? (Cic. Fam. 15.16.2); In quo
quaesitum est in totone circumitu illo orationis . . . an in principiis solum an in
extremis an in utraque parte numerus tenendus sit. (Cic. Orat. 204); . . . omnia sub
verbone creat natura paratque? (Lucr. 4.785); Contrane institutum fiebat antiquae
disciplinae tam probabile? (Gel. 1.11.9)
¹¹¹ Data on the position of -ne in Plautus can be found in Lodge s.v. 123B.
Word order in declarative sentences
Studies in which attention is paid to the relative order of arguments, satellites, second-
ary predicates, and verbs within a sentence or clause are relatively recent (and in none
of them are satellites and secondary predicates systematically included). Most older
studies (and also more recent ones) concentrate on the first and last position of sen-
tences and clauses and the type of constituents or words in these positions, with par-
ticular attention to the finite verb (from Roman times onwards, see § 23.2).¹¹³ This
line of approach is taken up later on in this chapter also. At a later stage scholars
looked at the relative order of object constituents and the (finite) verbs that govern
them. One stimulus for this approach was the interest in the difference between the
order of these constituents in Latin and in certain Romance languages.¹¹⁴
Scholars who concentrate on the relative order of arguments and verbs are con-
fronted with a number of methodological problems, some of which are discussed in
§ 23.1.¹¹⁵ In addition, there are two other issues to be solved:
(i) What precisely is meant by ‘sentence or clause’, as it is vaguely described
above? Some studies look at the relative order in sentences that are neither
complex nor compound (for these terms, see § 2.2) and in main clauses of
complex sentences, leaving subordinate clauses and complex sentences out of
account;¹¹⁶ others use any sequences of verbs and their arguments.¹¹⁷
(ii) How much attention is paid to the individual characteristics of the verbs in
these sentences or clauses, in terms of their valency and lexical meaning?
Some studies are very detailed,¹¹⁸ while others limit themselves to two-place
verbs without further specifics or more or less ignore valency.¹¹⁹
Whatever position one takes on these issues, refining the analysis along those lines
results in a decrease of the number of comparable cases due to the fact that the number
of available texts and corpora is limited. Thus, if in a study on the arguments of three-
place verbs one wants to pay attention to the valency and the semantics of the verb
mitto ‘to send’ and one selects sequences containing ad te/tibi, litteras, and misi, there
appear to be only thirty-one of them in Cicero’s Letters to Atticus, with seven different
orderings.¹²⁰ Generalizations based on such small numbers are difficult to make.
As far as issue (i) is concerned, this Syntax will add a slightly different approach in
using the term ‘simple sentence’. Following the distinctions between a ‘sentence’
(‘a complete unit of communication’) and a ‘clause’ (‘a complete grammatical struc-
ture’) (see § 2.3) and between ‘simple clauses’ and ‘combined clauses’ (see § 2.2 and
§ 14.1), the term simple sentence is used for ‘a complete unit of communication
without subordinate clauses of whatever sort’.
Examples of simple sentences, all of which are declarative, are (a)–(f), of which (a)–(c)
follow each other immediately in the text.¹²¹ In the second sentence of (a), two
arguments of imperat are understood from the context (they are given topics); the
order of the explicit constituents is A2 V (or, in syntactic terms, O V); milites is (com-
pletive) focus. Not much of interest can be said about (b) in terms of word order. In (c),
the sentence starts with a setting constituent (interea). The order of the other constitu-
ents is A1 A2 V (or: S O V) (for further discussion of this example, see § 23.42). In (d),
the order of the second sentence is V A1 A2 (or: V S O) ^ (satellite), the latter probably
being focus (in contrast with ex litteris). In (e), the anaphoric adverb sic serves as a
manner ^. The sentence continues with another ^ (three asyndetically coordinated
cause adjuncts—see § 10.79), the A1 plerique, a P (in fact, three coordinated secondary
predicates), the A2 and the V (^ A1 P A2 V, or: ^ S P O V). The passive sentence in (f)
presents all-new information. The order A1 V (or: S V) can be explained as the natural
outcome of starting with a generally known concept. Permiscentur is focus.¹²²
(a) (. . . ad eum legati veniunt quaeque imperaverit se cupidissime facturos polli-
centur.) Milites (sc. A1 Caesar; sc. A3 eis) imperat.
(‘(. . . representatives (from Cingulum) came to him and promised to do his bidding
with great eagerness.) He requisitioned soldiers.’ Caes. Civ. 1.15.2–3)
(b) Mittunt (sc. A1 Cingulani; sc. A2 milites).
(‘They sent them.’ Caes. Civ. 1.15.3)
¹¹⁸ So, for example, Devine and Stephens (2006) and Spevak (2010a).
¹¹⁹ So, for example, LSS § 9.3.2.4 and Hoffmann (2010a).
¹²⁰ See Spevak (2010a: 138–41). For his study of an extended corpus on the relative order of subject,
object, and verb Hoffmann (2010a) could collect only 474 sequences. Panhuis (1982: Ch. 6) studies fifty-
seven occurrences of the verbs mitto and dimitto in Caesar’s de bello Gallico.
¹²¹ A = argument; A1 = first argument; A2 = second argument; A3 = third argument; V = (finite) verb;
^ = satellite; P = secondary predicate; S = subject; O = object.
¹²² I follow the punctuation of Damon’s OCT (on which see the Preface to the edition, p. lxiii).
Word order in declarative sentences
As these examples show, there is great variation in the number of constituents, in both
their explicit presence in the text and in their internal complexity. Table 23.3 contains
some data concerning 100 simple declarative sentences in a number of texts, a tiny
minority in comparison with the other sentential and clausal structures of these texts.
These sentences contain on the average two to two and a half constituents alongside
the finite verb, including one or more satellites, depending on the type of text. In add-
ition, some contain connectors and other elements without a clausal status. In some
texts, the V is absent in a number of sentences. All orders of constituents occur, with
V most often in final position in Caesar (as is his practice in general), but not else-
where. Constituents with an anaphoric element are relatively common in most texts,
almost all of which are in the first position. Note that V includes complex verb forms
with a form of auxiliary sum (see § 4.83) and combinations of infinitives with proper
auxiliaries like possum ‘I can’ (see § 4.98).¹²³
The use of the term ‘last position’ is less problematic. In older studies on the position
of finite verbs in final position, a distinction is sometimes made for complex verb
forms (see § 3.11) between, for example, the orders factus est and est factus. For the
latter order, German scholars use the term ‘gedeckte Endstellung’ (‘covered final pos-
ition’). The same distinction is used for the order of finite auxiliary verb forms and the
infinitive with which they are combined, as in esse videtur and videtur esse ‘seems to
be’. See also §§ 23.97–100.
For the occupation of the first position of a sentence, pragmatic factors are predomin-
ant. In a prose corpus with 1,620 initial positions in all sentence types (and not only
simple sentences as defined above), almost 40 per cent of the constituents in that
position are topic, 38 per cent focus, and 15 per cent setting or theme; 7 per cent are
presentative sentences with a verb in initial position.¹²⁴ Examples of topic, focus, and
setting are (a)–(c), respectively.
(a) Decem dies sunt ante ludos votivos quos Cn. Pompeius facturus est. Hi ludi
dies quindecim auferent.
(‘It is only ten days to the Votive Games that Gnaeus Pompeius is to hold; these games
will occupy fifteen days.’ Cic. Ver. 31)
(b) Quid est in Antonio praeter libidinem, crudelitatem, petulantiam, audaciam?
(‘What is there in Antonius save lust, cruelty, insolence, audacity?’ Cic. Phil. 3.28)
¹²⁴ See Knoth (2006: 212). Using pragmatic and syntactic functions in the sense of Dik’s (1997) Functional
Grammar she analyses constituents in first position in 1,620 periodic sentences, of which 13 per cent have a
subordinate clause as their first constituent. The corpus consists of Nep. Att., Aug. Anc., Suet. Gal. (biography),
Cic. Ver., Cic. Catil. III, Cic. Phil. III (speeches), and selections from Cic. Att., Sen. Ep., Plin. Ep. (letters). The
percentages of the pragmatic functions mentioned in this section naturally depend upon the analysis of the
corpus by the author and are for the purpose of this discussion better taken as tendencies than as hard facts.
Word order
(c) Postero die dixit pro Mario Salvius Liberalis, vir subtilis dispositus acer disertus.
(‘On the next day Salvius Liberalis, a precise and methodical speaker with a forceful
command of words, spoke in defence of Marius.’ Plin. Ep. 2.11.17)
The constituents in first position have various syntactic functions. For a distribution
of the syntactic functions in the same corpus a distinction was made between sen-
tences with and without an explicit subject. Third person first arguments in particular
are often not expressed if they are sufficiently known from the context or the situ-
ation. In sentences with a one-place verb, c.20 per cent of the first arguments are not
expressed. In sentences with two-place verbs, this may be the case in 50 per cent or
more of the first arguments, depending on the type of text.¹²⁵ Obviously, the absence
of arguments has consequences for the pragmatic function and the position of other
arguments and for that of the other constituents of the sentence in general.
As can be seen in Table 23.4, in half of the sentences with an explicit subject, the sub-
ject occupies the first position, but this is only the case in one-quarter of all sentences.
Of the explicit subjects, 60 per cent are topic, 40 per cent focus.¹²⁶ Conversely, 39 per
cent of the topic constituents are subject. Of the objects, 42 per cent are topic, 58 per cent
focus. Of the topic constituents 19 per cent are object. The high percentage of satellites in
first position is largely due to the fact that 45 per cent of them are setting constituents.¹²⁷
¹²⁵ See Spevak (2006d: 368–9; 2010a: 133). ¹²⁶ See Knoth (2006: 251).
¹²⁷ See the graph in Knoth (2006: 293).
¹²⁸ This may be either a ‘simple’ sentence as defined in § 23.39 or a main clause that opens a complex
sentence.
Word order in declarative sentences
other verbs are discussed separately. In declarative sentences the first constituent is
usually an argument with topic function, but satellites are not uncommon, especially
if they contain an anaphoric element or an attribute that is topical.
Examples of arguments with topic function with a monovalent verb are (a)–(c). In
(a), Micipsa is a discourse topic. The sentence is about what happened to him. In (b),
L. Manlius and Rutilius Lupus are mentioned here for the first time as individuals, but
officials are not unexpected in the narrative after Pompey’s general order to concen-
trate troops near him; they function as contrastive topics in their clauses.¹²⁹ In (c),
magna copia pabuli is a subtopic which continues the more general omnium rerum . . .
copia. In (d), huius rei totum consilium is presented as the topic of the sentence through
its anaphoric attribute huius rei; in (e), narium duo foramina is the topic through the
attribute narium which is introduced into the discourse earlier. As the examples show,
the attributes can occupy the actual first position (see also § 23.79).
(a) Micipsa paucis post diebus moritur.
(‘Micipsa died a few days later.’ Sal. Jug. 11.2)
(b) L. Manlius praetor Alba cum cohortibus sex profugit, Rutilius Lupus prae-
tor Tarracina cum tribus.
(‘The praetor Lucius Manlius fled from Alba with six cohorts, the praetor Rutilius
Lupus from Tarracina with three.’ Caes. Civ. 1.24.3)
(c) At exercitus Afrani omnium rerum abundabat copia . . . Magna copia pabuli
suppetebat.
(‘Afranius’ army, however, had an abundance of everything . . . A large supply of fod-
der was available.’ Caes. Civ. 1.49.1)
(d) . . . considera ne in alienissimum tempus cadat adventus tuus. Huius rei
totum consilium tuum est.
(‘. . . take care lest you arrive at the least favourable moment. This matter is entirely for
you to judge.’ Cic. Fam. 15.14.4)
(e) Foramina autem intra caput maxima oculorum sunt, deinde narium, tum
quae in auribus habemus . . . Narium duo foramina osse medio discernuntur.
(‘Now the largest passages leading into the head are those of the eyes, next the nos-
trils, then those of the ears . . . The two nasal passages are separated by an intermediate
bone.’ Cels. 8.1.5)
In the corpus of sentences and clauses with two-place verbs on which Table 23.5 is
based those with an explicit first argument are in the minority.¹³⁰ In these cases, the
first argument usually precedes the other argument, and it is usually a topic of the
same type as in (a) above, as is shown in (f), in which the first argument is a discourse
topic. In (g), is serves to continue a newly introduced topic (see § 22.4, ex. (t)).
> = precedes
As Table 23.5 shows, when both arguments are expressed, the second argument can
precede the first. This is the case in (i)–(l). Here, as well as when the second argument
alone is expressed, as in (m), the second argument usually has topic function. In (n),
though, it is focus.
(i) Erat praeterea in exercitu nostro Numida quidam nomine Gauda . . . Hunc
Marius anxium adgreditur atque hortatur ut . . .
(‘Furthermore, there was in our army a Numidian named Gauda . . .While he was
upset, he was approached by Marius, who urged him to . . .’ Sal. Jug. 65.1–3)
( j) Adherbalem omnisque qui sub imperio Micipsae fuerant metus invadit.
(‘Fear seized Adherbal and all the former subjects of Micipsa.’ Sal. Jug. 13.1)
(k) Tuas iam litteras Brutus exspectabat. Cui quidem ego [non] novum attuleram
de Tereo Acci.
(‘Brutus is now awaiting your letter. I brought him news about Accius’ Tereus.’ Cic.
Att. 16.5.1)
(l) Caput autem spina excipit.
(‘Now the spine is the support of the head.’ Cels. 8.1.11)
(m) . . . Domitium Massiliensisque de suo adventu certiores facit eosque
magnopere hortatur (sc. Caesar) ut . . .
(‘. . . he informed Domitius and the people of Marseilles about his approach and urged
them strongly to . . .’ Caes. Civ. 2.3.3)
(n) Id ubi vident, mutant consilium. Cupas taeda ac pice refertas incendunt
easque de muro in musculum devolvunt.
(‘Seeing this, the enemy changed their plan. They set on fire barrels filled with pine-
wood and pitch and rolled these off the wall onto the gallery.’ Caes. Civ. 2.11.2)
In the corpus mentioned above, the first argument is usually not expressed with three-
place verbs like mitto ‘to send’ and do ‘to give’.¹³² If it is expressed, it need not be in the
initial position, which may be occupied by one of the other arguments, which func-
tions as topic. In (o), Helvetii is in first position because it marks a topic change. In (p),
pecuniam, the second argument, is the topic of the sentence (‘What was the purpose
of the money?’). Oppianicus is a discourse topic and is, as often, placed further on,
followed by the focus constituent. In (q), the third argument, two historically well-
known people, is the topic. Here, too, the discourse topic senatus comes later. In (r),
Q. Ciceronis epistulam is the topic through its attribute Q. Ciceronis.
(o) Helvetii repentino eius adventu commoti, cum . . . intellegerent, legatos ad
eum (sc. Caesarem) mittunt. Cuius legationis Divico princeps fuit . . .
(‘The Helvetii, alarmed at his sudden approach, for they perceived that . . . , sent
deputies to him. The leader of the deputation was Divico . . .’ Caes. Gal. 1.13.2)
(p) At enim pecuniam Staieno dedit Oppianicus non ad corrumpendum iudi-
cium sed ad conciliationem gratiae.
(‘But, you may say, Oppianicus gave Staienus the money not to bribe the court, but to
effect a reconciliation with Cluentius.’ Cic. Clu. 84)
(q) Ad propiora veniamus. C. Mario L. Valerio consulibus senatus rem publicam
defendendam dedit. L. Saturninus tribunus plebis, C. Glaucia praetor est
interfectus.
¹³² Three-place verbs are discussed by Panhuis (1982), Devine and Stephens (2006: 40–54), and
Spevak (2010a: 132–44). See also § 23.39 for the relative order of arguments of three-place verbs.
Word order
(‘Let us come to events closer to our own time. The Senate committed the defence of
the State to Consuls Gaius Marius and Lucius Valerius; Tribune of the plebs Lucius
Saturninus and Praetor Gaius Glaucia were killed.’ Cic. Phil. 8.15)
(r) <Q.> Ciceronis epistulam tibi remisi.
(‘I am sending you back Quintus’ letter.’ Cic. Att. 13.29.3)
If the first argument is not expressed, the second argument or—less often—the third
is placed in the first (or first available) position and is topic, as in (s) and (t), respectively.
In (s), the second argument filium suum, which can be inferred from the context, is
the topic. In (t), Clazomeniis, one of a series of changing topics, is in first position.
(s) (sc. Philodomus) Etiam filium suum, lectissimum adulescentem, foras ad
propinquum suum quendam mittit ad cenam.
(‘Even his son, an extremely nice boy, he sent out to supper with a relative.’ Cic. Ver. 1.65)
(t) (sc. legati) Nominatim praeterea Colophoniis . . . immunitatem concesserunt.
Clazomeniis super immunitatem et Drymussam insulam dono dederunt et
Milesiis quem sacrum appellant agrum restituerunt et Iliensibus Rhoeteum
et Gergithum addiderunt . . .
(‘In addition, they granted freedom from taxation expressly to the Colophonians; to
the Clazomenians, in addition to immunity, they gave the island of Drymussa as a
gift, and to the Milesians they restored what they call the “sacred land,” and to the
people of Ilium they added Rhoeteum and Gergithus . . .’ Liv. 38.39.8–10)
In contextually unrelated sentences, the first place is occupied by the topic (and sub-
ject) of the sentence, if the addressee can be supposed to be able to identify the entity.
This is for example the case in dedications of buildings by the Roman emperors. They
are mentioned first, as in (u).¹³³
(u) Imp(erator) Caesar(is) <D>ivi · f(ilius) · Augu<s>tus · . . . / portas ·
murosq(ue) · col(oniae) · dat.
(‘Emperor Augustus, son of divine Caesar, bestows gates and walls upon the colony.’
CIL XII.3151 (Nîmes, 15 bc))
We now turn to arguments that function as subject or object complement. The copula
sum (see § 4.92) and other copular verbs like maneo ‘to remain’ (see § 4.97) have two
arguments, the first of which need not be expressed in an appropriate context.¹³⁴ The
second argument functions as subject complement; it can belong to various categories
(see Table 9.6 in § 9.21). Here, only adjectives and nouns and noun phrases showing
agreement with the subject are taken into account. Examples are (v) and (w),
respectively. When A1 is expressed, as in (v), six different orders are possible and attested.
¹³³ See Horster (2001: 41). Esperanza Torrego (p.c.) suggests that the building is topic and the donor
focus.
¹³⁴ In the corpus used by Spevak (2010a: 181–2) one-third of the A1’s are not expressed.
Word order in declarative sentences
The most common order is A1 / subject complement / form of sum.¹³⁵ The subject
complement may be contiguous to the verb, as in (v) and (w), or not, as in (x).¹³⁶ The
A1 is usually topic and mostly sentence-initial, the subject complement focus. The verb
can be in first position for one of the reasons mentioned in § 23.45, as in (x). The sub-
ject complement can be sentence-initial for reasons of emphasis, as in (y) and (z).¹³⁷
If the subject complement is complex, discontinuity of its members is possible (see the
Supplement).
(v) Homo hic ebrius est, ut opinor.
(‘This man’s drunk, I think.’ Pl. Am. 574)
(w) Inventio est excogitatio rerum verarum aut veri similium quae . . .
(‘Invention is the discovery of valid or seemingly valid arguments which . . .’ Cic. Inv. 1.9)
(x) Est tuum nomen utraque familia consulare.
(‘Your name is of consular rank both on your father’s and your mother’s side.’ Cic.
Planc. 18)
(y) Homines enim sumus et occupati officiis . . .
(‘For we are but human and beset with duties . . .’ Plin. Nat. pr. 18)
(z) Itaque stulta iam Iduum Martiarum est consolatio.
(‘So there’s no sense any longer in consoling ourselves with the Ides of March.’ Cic.
Att. 15.4.2)
Supplement (subject complements in initial position):
Adjectives: Praeclara tum oratio M. Antoni, egregia etiam voluntas. (Cic. Phil. 1.2—
NB: nominal sentence without the copula); Magnus est in re publica campus, ut sapi-
enter dicere Crassus solebat, multis apertus cursus ad laudem. (Cic. Phil. 14.17);
Misera est ignominia iudiciorum publicorum, misera multatio bonorum, miserum
exsilium. (Cic. Rab. Perd. 16); Credo te negaturum. Turpis enim est et periculosa
confessio. (Cic. Ver. 3.165–6); Ornatissimae sunt igitur orationes eae quae latissime
vagantur . . . (Cic. de Orat. 3.120); Similisque est privatarum possessionum discriptio.
(Cic. Off. 1.21); Plena erant omnia timoris et luctus. (Caes. Civ. 2.41.8); Talis ea tem-
pestate fama de Cassio erat. (Sal. Jug. 32.5); Ingens erat magistratus eius terror. (Liv.
9.26.7); Magna autem debet esse eloquentia quae invitis placeat . . . (Sen. Con. 10.pr.4)
Nouns and noun phrases: Fortis et constans in optima ratione civis P. Popilius sem-
per fuit. (Cic. Dom. 87); Causa fuit ambulatio et monumentum et ista Tanagraea
oppressa libertate Libertas. (Cic. Dom. 116); Princeps enim omnium Pansa proeli
faciendi et cum Antonio confligendi fuit. (Cic. Phil. 14.26); Sed dux atque imperator
vitae mortalium animus est. (Sal. Jug. 1.3)
¹³⁵ Both in the corpus used by Adams (1994b: 14; 82–3) (Cato, Cicero, and Celsus) and in the corpus
used by Spevak (2010a: 180–7). For further statistical details, see these two publications.
¹³⁶ In the corpus used by Spevak (2010a: 181–2) one-third of the sequences are not contiguous.
¹³⁷ Sz.: 409 observes that the A1 normally precedes the subject complement and likewise the A2 the
object complement; the reverse order is used for reasons of emphasis: . . . cur mortalem fecerit mun-
dum . . . (Cic. N.D. 1.20).
Word order
With three-place verbs that require an object complement, like appello ‘to call’ (see
§§ 4.87–8), the object complement is usually focus. It can be put in first position of the
sentence if it is emphatic, as in (aa). For a passive equivalent (subject complement),
see (ab).
(aa) Saltatorem appellat L. Murenam Cato.
(‘Cato calls Murena a dancer.’ Cic. Mur. 13)
(ab) Princeps in senatu tertium lectus P. Scipio Africanus.
(‘Publius Scipio Africanus was for the third time selected to be leader in the senate.’
Liv. 38.28.2)
Supplement:
Sapiens existimari nemo potest in ea prudentia quae neque extra Romam usquam
neque Romae rebus prolatis quicquam valet. (Cic. Mur. 28); Levis hos semper nostri
homines et audaces et malos et perniciosos cives putaverunt. (Cic. Sest. 139); Inimicos
habeo civis Romanos, quod sociorum commoda ac iura defendi. (Cic. Ver. 2.166);
Superiore omni oratione perattentos vestros animos habuimus. (Cic. Ver. 3.10)
¹³⁸ Merguet in his various lexica has a convenient section: ‘zum ganzen Satz gehörige Bestimmungen’.
For a suggestion of the frequency of satellites in first position, see Tables 23.1 on p. 990 and 23.3 on p. 1004.
¹³⁹ For the position of various types of adjuncts, see Devine and Stephens (2006: 64–79; 249–62) and
Hoffmann (2010b: 275–6). Out of 144 satellites in his corpus, 49 are in first position, 86 in an intermediate
position, 9 in final position.
Word order in declarative sentences
(‘I want him to be taken care of with great care. # Yes, I’ll sigh more than six hundred
sighs a day: in this way I’ll take care of him with such great care for you.’ Pl. Men.
895–7)
(c) Proximis diebus habetur extra urbem senatus.
(‘On the following days the Senate met outside the city.’ Caes. Civ. 1.6.1)
Supplement:
Disjunct: Etenim sine dubio, iudices, in hac causa ea res in discrimen adducitur. (Cic.
Ver. 1.6); Sed profecto tanta fuit in eo vis ingenii atque virtutis ut . . . (Cic. Rep. 2.20)
Accompanying circumstances adjuncts: Magno cum dolore parricidarum (sc.
Lentuli et Antonii) elapsus sum iis. Veniebant enim eodem furore in me quo in
patriam incitati . . . (Planc. Fam. 10.23.5)
Associative adjuncts: Cum his ad Domitium Ahenobarbum Corfinium magnis
itineribus pervenit. (Caes. Civ. 1.15.6)
Frequency adjuncts: Numquam enim iste cuiquam est mediocriter minatus. (Cic. Ver.
5.110); Saepe aliquis testis aut non laedit aut minus laedit, nisi lacessatur. (Cic. de
Orat. 2.301); Saepe enim hoc de maioribus natu audivimus et ita intellegimus vulgo
existimari. (Cic. Rep. 2.28); Semper oratorum eloquentiae moderatrix fuit auditorum
prudentia. (Cic. Orat. 24)
Manner adjuncts: Sic triduum disputationibus excusationibusque extrahitur. (Caes.
Civ. 1.33.3); Acriter utrimque usque ad vesperum pugnatum est. (Caes. Gal. 1.50.3);
Celeriter ad omnes Galliae civitates fama perfertur. (Caes. Gal. 7.3.2); Clam cum
Ariobarzane facit amicitiam, manum comparat, urbes munitas suis tuendas tradit.
(Nep. Dat. 5.6)
Means and instrument adjuncts: Non fuga delatos nec inertia relictos hic vos cir-
cumvenit hostis. Virtute cepistis locum, virtute hinc oportet evadatis. (Liv. 7.35.3)
Purpose adjuncts: Proximo die praesidio in castris relicto universas ad aquam copias
educunt. Pabulatum emittitur nemo. (Caes. Civ. 1.81.5)
Space and time adjuncts: Fremebat tota provincia. Nemo id tibi renuntiabat? Romae
querimoniae de tuis iniuriis conventusque habebantur. Ignorabas haec? (Cic. Ver.
3.132); Eadem nocte V legionis pilorum acumina sua sponte arserunt. (B. Afr. 47.6);
Tum ex consilio patrum Romulus legatos circa vicinas gentes misit . . . (Liv. 1.9.2); Nec
in Italia segnius Ligurum bellum crescebat. (Liv. 35.3.1)
Reason adjuncts: His de causis aguntur omnia raptim atque turbate. (Caes.
Civ. 1.5.1)
Multiple adjuncts: Ita consiliis diligentiaque nostra celeriter de manibus audacissi-
morum civium delapsa arma ipsa ceciderunt. (Cic. Off. 1.77)
¹⁴⁰ As far as I know there are no detailed studies about the position of secondary predicates. K.-St.:
II.611 has a very general observation about ‘Prädikative’ (which includes subject and object comple-
ments). For a comparative study of subject complements and secondary predicates with the verbs maneo,
permaneo, remaneo, and sto, see Cabrillana (in prep.).
Word order
predicates: they differ from the argument and satellite constituents of the preceding
sections in that they are not constituents at the clause level themselves, but are related
to another constituent that operates either at the clause level or at a lower level (see
§ 21.1). Secondly, they belong to very heterogeneous categories (see § 21.2). Thirdly, if
they are related to the subject of the clause, that subject can be explicit, as in (a), or
contextually understood or expressed morphologically, as in (b) and (c) respectively. If
related to a non-subject constituent, that constituent is almost always explicit, as in (d).
(a) Civitatem vero nemo umquam ullo populi iussu amittet invitus.
(‘But no one by any decree of the people will ever lose his liberty against his will.’ Cic.
Dom. 78)
(b) Vexasti negotiatores. Inviti enim Romam raroque decedunt.
(‘You have wrought havoc among the businessmen: for only unwillingly and rarely do
they leave for Rome.’ Cic. Ver. 3.96)
(c) Invitus dico, sed dicendum est.
(‘I say it with reluctance, but say it I must.’ Cic. Phil. 8.9)
(d) Quod cum ita sit, mihi crede, neminem invitum invitabis.
(‘In this condition of affairs, believe me, you will not have to call an unwilling pros-
ecutor to his task.’ Cic. Pis. 94)
Secondary predicates are usually focus. Judging from a number of adjectives used as
secondary predicates with subjects and objects in Caesar and Cicero, the intermediate
position is the most common, certainly for those related to objects, but invitus ‘reluc-
tant’ is remarkably often in final position, as in (a). First position, as in (b), is rare and
always emphatic.
Supplement (in alphabetical order by adjective):
Incolumem te cito ut spero, vel potius ut perspicio, videbimus. (Cic. Fam. 6.6.13);
Quae cum libenter commemoro, tum non invitus non nullorum in me nefarie com-
missa praetereo. (Cic. Red. Sen. 23); Primus enim ego leges Antonias fregi, primus
equitatum Dolabellae ad rem publicam traduxi Cassioque tradidi, primus dilectus
habui pro salute omnium contra coniurationem sceleratissimam, solus Cassio et rei
publicae Syriam exercitusque qui ibi erant coniunxi. (Lent. Fam. 12.14.6); Neque
solum vivi atque praesentes studiosos discendi erudiunt atque docent, sed hoc idem
etiam post mortem monumentis litterarum assequuntur. (Cic. Off. 1.156)
(e) Edicunt penes quem quisque sit Caesaris miles ut producat. Productos
palam in praetorio interficiunt.
(‘They issued an edict that anyone who had a Caesarian soldier with him had to
bring him forward. They openly killed those brought forward at headquarters.’ Caes.
Civ. 1.76.4)
Word order in declarative sentences
Supplement:
Romani milites circumveniuntur, circumventi repugnant. Fit proelium diu anceps.
(Cato hist. 83.14–15=76C); Patrem meum, cum proscriptus non esset, iugulastis,
occisum in proscriptorum numerum rettulistis . . . (Cic. S. Rosc. 32); Duasque naves
cum militibus, quae ad moles Caesaris adhaeserant, scaphis lintribusque reprehen-
dunt. Reprehensas excipiunt. (Caes. Civ. 1.28.4)
A second type of context in which an initial verb is common occurs when the factual-
ness or correctness of a certain statement is asserted from someone’s personal point of
view. Examples of this ‘assertive’ or ‘veridical’ use are (b) and (c).¹⁴² The context often
contains elements that fit in with the argumentative character of such sentences, such
as sed ‘but’ and enim ‘for’ (see the Supplement).
¹⁴¹ For presentative and what-happens sentences, see Spevak (2010a: 41–4; 187–93), with references.
¹⁴² For verum focus, see Bolkestein (1995; 1996c: 17), Devine and Stephens (2006: 147), and
Spevak (2010a: 46–7). For the veridical use of forms of the verb sum, see Adams (1994b: 69–76). For inver-
sion of subject and verb in the Late Latin Anonymus Valesianus, see Adams (1976b: 121–9).
Word order
(b) Evolve diligenter eius (sc. Platonis) eum librum qui est de animo. Amplius
quod desideres nihil erit. # Feci mehercule, et quidem saepius.
(‘Turn over with attention the pages of his book upon the soul. You will be conscious
of no further need. # I have done so, be sure, and done so many times.’ Cic. Tusc. 1.24)
(c) Num negare audes (sc. Catilina)? Quid taces? Convincam, si negas. . . . Fuisti
igitur apud Laecam illa nocte, Catilina, distribuisti partis Italiae . . .
(‘You do not have the effrontery to deny it, do you? Why are you silent then? If you
deny it, I shall prove it . . .You were, then, at the house of Laeca on that night, Catiline;
you allocated the regions of Italy . . .’ Cic. Catil. 1.8–9)
Supplement:
Scio, fui ego illa aetate et feci illa omnia, sed more modesto. (Pl. Bac. 1080); Erit lorea
familiae quod bibat. (Cato Agr. 25); Movet me quippe lumen curiae! (Cic. Mil. 33);
Erit, erit illud profecto tempus et illucescet ille aliquando dies cum . . . (Cic. Mil. 69);
Est autem gloria laus recte factorum magnorumque in rem publicam merito-
rum . . . (Cic. Phil. 1.29); T. Flamininum, qui cum Q. Metello consul fuit, pueri vidi-
mus. Existumabatur bene Latine, sed litteras nesciebat. (Cic. Brut. 259); Sed ut homo
neque doctus neque maxime aptus ad dicendum, sicut potuit, dolavit. Vicit tamen, ut
dicis, superiores. (Cic. de Orat. 2.54); Est enim eloquentia una quaedam de summis
virtutibus. (Cic. de Orat. 3.55); Sunt ista, Laeli. Nec enim melior vir fuit Africano
quisquam nec clarior. (Cic. Amic. 6); Est enim hiberna navigatio odiosa . . . (Cic. Att.
15.25.1); Conatus est Caesar reficere pontes, sed nec magnitudo fluminis permitte-
bat . . . (Caes. Civ. 1.50.1); Erat multo inferior numero navium Brutus. Sed elec-
tos . . . Caesar ei classi attribuerat, qui . . . (Caes. Civ. 1.57.1); Incitabant praeterea
corrupti civitatis mores . . . (Sal. Cat. 5.8); . . . victores morantibus victoriam irati tru-
cidarent quos pellere non poterant. Pepulerunt tamen iam paucos superantes et
labore ac volneribus fessos. (Liv. 22.49.4–5); Est equos perpulcer, sed tu vehi
non potes istoc. (CIL I2.2177 (Padua?, 1st cent. bc))
A third type of context for verbs in an initial position is one in which they serve to
create coherence or mark the progress between the preceding context and what fol-
lows, as in (d)–(f).¹⁴³ In (d), one of the interlocutors, Stolo, interrupts the main
speaker; in (e), the sentence with exit contains Crassus’ reaction to Caesar’s order; in
(f), the sentence with augebatur explains why it was supposed that the enemies would
not take the risk of crossing the river: they were waiting for reinforcements. List of
gains and losses in military texts belong here also.¹⁴⁴
(d) (reacting to Varro’s words) Suscipit Stolo, ‘Tu’, inquit, ‘invides tanto scriptori
et obstrigillandi causa figilinas reprehendis . . .’
¹⁴³ See K.-St.: II.599–601, from where most examples are taken. For the use of sentence-initial verb
forms by historians to make the story more ‘dramatic’, see Chausserie-Laprée (1969: 347–68). For sen-
tence-initial verbs in Caesar, see Schneider (1912: 42–62), Luraghi (1995), and Gaertner and
Hausburg (2013: 65–6), with references. For what they call the ‘thetic perspective’ as a factor that pro-
motes initial position of verbs in general, see Devine and Stephens (2006: 149–57).
¹⁴⁴ See Gaertner and Hausburg (2013: 65–6) on the Bellum Alexandrinum.
Word order in declarative sentences
(‘Stolo interrupted: “You are jealous of that great writer and you attack his potteries
carpingly . . .” Var. R. 1.2.24)
(e) (sc. Caesar) Iubet media nocte legionem proficisci celeriterque ad se venire.
Exit cum nuntio Crassus.
(‘He bade the legion start at midnight and come speedily to him. Crassus marched
out on receipt of the message.’ Caes. Gal. 5.46.2)
(f) Hoc (sc. flumen) neque ipse (sc. Labienus) transire habebat in animo neque
hostes transituros existimabat. Augebatur auxiliorum cotidie spes. Loquitur
in consilio palam . . .
(‘He had no intention of crossing this (river) himself, nor did he suppose that the
enemy would cross it. Their hope of auxiliaries was increasing daily. He declared
openly in the council of war that . . .’ Caes. Gal. 6.7.5–6)
Supplement:
Offendi ibi C. Fundanium, socerum meum, et C. Agrium . . . (Var. R. 1.2.1);
Simulatque ego in Siciliam veni, mutatus est. Venerat ad eum illo biduo Laetilius
quidam, homo non alienus a litteris . . . (Cic. Ver. 2.63–4); Iste (sc. Verres) tum petere
ab illis, tum minari, tum spem, tum metum ostendere. Opponebant illi nomen
interdum P. Africani. (Cic. Ver. 4.75); Est enim difficilis cura rerum alienarum. (Cic.
Off. 1.30); Dabant enim hae feriae tibi opportunam sane facultatem ad explicandas
tuas litteras. (Cic. Rep. 1.14); Intercedit M. Antonius Q. Cassius tribuni plebis.
(Caes. Civ. 1.2.7); Tum suo more conclamaverunt, uti aliqui ex nostris ad conlo-
quium prodiret . . . Mittitur ad eos conloquendi causa Gaius Arpinius eques
Romanus, familiaris Quinti Titurii . . . (Caes. Gal. 5.26.4–27.1); Inopinantes nostri
re nova perturbantur, ac vix primum impetum cohors in statione sustinet.
Circumfunduntur hostes ex reliquis partibus, si quem aditum reperire possint.
(Caes. Gal. 6.37.3–4—NB: this is the reading of β. l has ex reliquis hostes partibus);
Conspicati ex oppido caedem et fugam suorum desperata salute copias a munitio-
nibus reducunt. Fit protinus hac re audita ex castris Gallorum fuga. (Caes. Gal.
7.88.5); Quae (sc. quadrigae) tamen celeriter multitudine telorum opprimuntur.
Capitur hoc proelio quinqueremis una et biremis cum defensoribus remigibusque
et deprimuntur tres nostris incolumibus omnibus. (B. Alex. 16.6); Insequitur has
(sc. quadrigas) acies hostium . . . (B. Alex. 75.2–3); Conversa subito fortuna est. (Nep.
Att. 10.1—NB: auxiliary separated); Recipit extemplo animum pedestris acies . . . (Liv.
2.20.11); Sustinebat tamen Appius pertinacia tantam tempestatem . . . (Liv. 2.56.14);
Hic pudor malignitatem vicit triumphumque frequentes decreverunt. Oppressit
deinde mentionem memoriamque omnem contentionis huius maius et cum maiore
et clariore viro certamen ortum. (Liv. 38.50.3–4); Mittam itaque ipsos tibi
libros . . . (Sen. Ep. 6.5); Laudavimus dictum [Trimalchionis] et circumeuntem
puerum sane perbasiamus. (Petr. 41.8); Celebrant carminibus antiquis, quod unum
apud illos memoriae et annalium genus est, Tuistonem deum terra editum. (Tac.
Ger. 2.2); Infecit ea tabes legionum quoque et auxiliorum motas iam mentis post-
quam vulgatum erat labare Germanici exercitus fidem. (Tac. Hist. 1.26.1); Nam
ostenderunt nobis speluncam illam ubi fuit sanctus Moyses . . . (Pereg. 3.7); Functus
est autem sacerdotio annis tribus. (Vict. Vit. 1.27)
Word order
Sentence-initial forms of the verb sum, in its various meanings,¹⁴⁶ have received par-
ticular attention in the literature, among other things because the verb sum is often
regarded as one of the lexical items to which Wackernagel’s law applies (see § 23.31).¹⁴⁷
¹⁴⁵ Marouzeau (1938: 71–2) and Devine and Stephens (2006: 163–6) pay attention to the different
orderings of verbs (e.g. initial capit and final consistit in (i)) in such coordinate clauses.
¹⁴⁶ See § 4.92. Auxiliary sum used in complex forms is different (see § 4.93 and § 23.97).
¹⁴⁷ See Adams (1994b: 69ff.) and Kruschwitz (2004: 61–6). See also Spevak (2010a: 183–4).
Word order in declarative sentences
Apart from the above mentioned factors that are relevant to other initial verb forms,
as in (k) and (l), the initial position of forms of sum may also indicate focus on the
tense or mood of the form of sum, as in (m) and (n).
(k) . . . is erit ex iis qui aut illos non audierit aut iudicare non possit. Nam fuit
uterque . . . studio atque ingenio . . . praestans omnibus . . .
(‘. . . he will belong to the class of people who either never heard these orators or else
lack the capacity to judge them. For in point of fact each of them was . . . superior to
everybody else . . . in devotion to oratory and natural talent . . .’ Cic. de Orat. 3.16)
(l) . . . non video cur esse divinationem negem. Sunt autem ea quae posui.
(‘. . . I do not see any reason for denying the existence of divination. But these prem-
ises are in fact true.’ Cic. Leg. 2.32–3)
(m) Est idem Verres qui fuit semper.
(‘He is the same Verres as he always was.’ Cic. Ver. 1.2)
(n) Sit Ennius sane, ut est certe, perfectior.
(‘Grant that Ennius is more accomplished, as undoubtedly he is.’ Cic. Brut. 76)
Noteworthy is the position of est in the following inscription: Est · hoc · monimen-
tum · Margei · Vergilei · Eurysacis / pistoris · redemptoris · apparet (CIL
I2.1204 (Rome, 1st cent. bc (late)). The huge monument shows ‘various stages of
bread making in a large-scale commercial setting’ and is indeed a fitting monument
to the baker who built it.¹⁴⁸
With two- and three-place verbs that allow passivization, the relative order of the
second argument and the verb may vary. In (o), the active verb mittit, with a first argu-
ment understood, is in first position and is followed by a complex focus unit. Valerius
is mentioned here for the first time. Conversely, with the similarly active form mittit
in (p), the first position is taken by a discourse topic, the first of a series of persons to
receive assignments. In (q), the unknown Decidius is introduced into the discourse.
The passive verb mittitur is in initial position in a way that resembles presentative
sentences.¹⁴⁹ The underlying question is ‘who was sent?’ In (r), by contrast, the under-
lying question is ‘what happened?’; legati is an inferrable topic and therefore a good
candidate for the first position.
(o) Mittit (sc. Caesar) in Sardiniam cum legione una Valerium legatum, in
Siciliam Curionem pro praetore cum legionibus III . . .
(‘He sent to Sardinia his officer Valerius with a single legion, to Sicily Curio as pro-
praetor with three legions . . .’ Caes. Civ. 1.30.2)
(p) Itaque Titum Labienum legatum in Treveros, qui proximi flumini Rheno
sunt, cum equitatu mittit (sc. Caesar).
The last position in the sentence is not reserved for special categories of words, and
certain words are excluded from that position (see § 23.6). Although in certain authors
and in certain texts finite verb forms and infinitives often occupy the last position of
a sentence, there is no syntactic constraint which requires this. It is not reserved for any
specific pragmatic purpose. When the final constituent is an argument or a satellite it
is usually focus, as in (a)–(c). There is, however, no rule that requires such focus con-
stituents to be placed in the last position. See, for example, sine causa in (d). For a final
topic, see (e), repeated from § 22.4, ex. (v). Although verbs in final position are some-
times the focus, as in (g), they usually are not, as is shown by an examination of ex. (f),
where the combination dolores habet is actually a complex focus unit.¹⁵¹ For the
distribution of various types of constituents in final position, see Table 23.3 on p. 1004.
(a) Quintus frater . . . secum habebat hominem {r}~zwlsō, D. Turranium.
(‘My brother Quintus . . . has with him one D. Turranius, a scholarly person.’ Cic. Att.
1.6.2)
(b) Pater nobis decessit a. d. VIII Kal. Dec.
(‘We lost our father on 23 November.’ Cic. Att. 1.6.2)
(c) . . . coliturque ea pars et habitatur frequentissime.
(‘. . . and is also a crowded and thickly inhabited part of the city.’ Cic. Ver. 4.119)
¹⁵⁰ See Linde (1923: 160–1) and, for Apuleius, Möbitz (1923: 120). In the Peregrinatio 40 per cent of the
verbs in such main clauses are in the initial position (Haida 1928: 15). In Augustine it occurs ‘frequently’
(Muldowney 1937: 111–12).
¹⁵¹ See also LSS § 9.3.2.3.
Word order in declarative sentences
Examples of final position of the subject (A1) with two- and three-place verbs with
another argument expressed are (e), where hominum verecundia is focus, and (f),
where Caesar is (discourse) topic. In such cases, the subject is sometimes said to be
added just for the sake of clarity.¹⁵² (In (f), the verb is in sentence initial position
because the sentence describes a new phase in the course of events—see § 23.45.)
¹⁵² This is the reading of l, which is printed by Hering and other editors; Caesar . . . dimittit β. For cor-
rections of the word order in β, see Hering’s edition XII–XIII. It is the only instance of Caesar as subject in
Word order
(e) Hanc naturae tam diligentem fabricam imitata est hominum verecundia.
(‘Man’s modesty has followed this careful contrivance of Nature’s.’ Cic. Off. 1.127)
(f) Dimittit ad finitimas civitates nuntios Caesar.
(‘Caesar sent messengers round to the neighbouring states.’ Caes. Gal. 6.34.8)
Supplement:
Probably focus: Eos quoque vobis eripuit Antonius. (Cic. Phil. 2.55); . . . et hunc locum
satis, ut mihi videtur, in eis libris quos legistis expressit Scipio. (Cic. Leg. 1.27); Nec
enim quicquam ingenuum habere potest officina. (Cic. Off. 1.150); Huic in tua pro-
vincia pecuniam debet P. Cornelius. (Cic. Fam. 13.14.1); Ceterum omnia mutavit
repente consulis adventus. (Liv. 9.27.13); Eorum forti fidelique opera in eo bello usi
sunt saepe Romani. (Liv. 23.46.7); Venientes regio apparatu et accepit et prosecutus
est rex. (Liv. 37.7.15)
Discourse topic: . . . multo tamen vetustior et horridior ille (sc. Laelius) quam Scipio;
et, cum sint in dicendo variae voluntates, delectari mihi magis antiquitate videtur et
lubenter verbis etiam uti paulo magis priscis Laelius. (Cic. Brut. 83)¹⁵³
Rosén (1994: 140–5) discusses clauses with two-place verbs in which the subject fol-
lows a subject complement or an object, as in (g). Augustine uses the determiner ille
remarkably often to mark a noun as definite (or rather, in the terminology of this
chapter, as discourse topic).
(g) (sc. fluctus temptationum) . . . noverat eos iam illa mater . . .
(‘(floods of temptations) . . . that mother of mine knew of them already . . .’
August. Conf. 1.18)
Second arguments can be placed in final position if they are focus. See ex. (a) in
§ 23.46 and (h)–( j) below. In (h), Qßwzv.toŷx .g~{tl must have been entirely unex-
pected for Atticus. In (i), the amicitia between Datames and Ariobarzanes is unex-
pected after the latter’s desertion mentioned at Dat. 2.5. In ( j), the formation of a
battle-line is the predictable thing to do in a war situation, but in the desperate situ-
ation the Samnites are in it is a remarkable feat, hence the unusual order, with aciem
following the verb.
(h) Thyillus te rogat et ego eius rogatu Qßwzv.toŷx.g~{tl.
(‘Thyillus requests you, and so at his request do I, for information about “the rites
ancestral of Eumolpus’ clan”.’ Cic. Att. 1.9.2)
(i) (sc. Datames) Clam cum Ariobarzane facit amicitiam, manum comparat,
urbes munitas suis tuendas tradit.
the final position of a simple sentence in Caesar’s work. For the common postverbal position of Caesar
and other discourse topics in general, see Schneider (1912: 67–9; 74) and K.-St.: II.598.
¹⁵³ K.-St.: II.598 also mention Cic. Mil. 59, where some of the mss. have Proxime deos accessit Clodius.
Most editors follow the other manuscripts in reading Proxime deos Clodius accessit. It has also been pro-
posed to delete Clodius.
Word order in declarative sentences
Second arguments, however, can also be in final position without a clear focus func-
tion, as is hostem in (k), which refers to the Carthaginian opponent of the Romans
whose existence is presupposed: it is a discourse topic.¹⁵⁴
(k) Is demum equitum impetus perculit hostem.
(‘That charge of the cavalry finally worsted the enemy.’ Liv. 30.35.2)
Supplement:
Itaque equestribus proeliis lacessebant hostem. (Liv. 23.46.11)
Third arguments in sentence-final position are rare. An example of one with focus
function is (l).
(l) Completur urbs et †ius† comitium tribunis [plebis], centurionibus, evocatis.
(‘The city and the assembly place itself were full of staff officers, centurions, re-enlisted
men.’ Caes. Civ. 1.3.3)
Supplement:
(sc. cives Romani) . . . laeti gratias agunt Caesari. (B. Afr. 90.3); (sc. Consul) Neque
immemor . . . reconciliandi animos plebis, saucios milites curandos dividit patribus.
(Liv. 2.47.12); (sc. Camillus) Terrorem ingentem incusserat plebi. Ducibus plebis
accendit magis certamine animos quam minuit. (Liv. 6.38.9)
¹⁵⁴ For postverbal (most of them not sentence-final) second arguments which are already present in
the discourse, see Devine and Stephens (2006: 127–36) and Danckaert (2012: 328–30).
¹⁵⁵ Adams (1994b: 75–7) discusses a number of sentence-final subject complements containing a noun
phrase with an emphatic adjective.
Word order
¹⁵⁶ In Hoffmann’s corpus of satellites only nine out of 144 are in final position (2010b: 275–6). On
infinite (an emendation), see Damon (2015: 123). Several examples in the Supplement are taken from
K.-St.: II.613.
Word order in declarative sentences
conficiunt celeritate mirabili. (Cic. Rep. 6.15); Eam (sc. wlxjlx) tamen ipsam distin-
guimus nos melius quam illi. (Cic. Tusc. 3.11); Brutus amicus. In causa versatur
acriter. (Cic. Att. 11.4a.1); Pugnatum est ab utrisque acriter. (Caes. Gal. 4.26.1); (sc.
Hannibal) Navem ascendit clam atque in Syriam ad Antiochum profugit. (Nep. Han.
7.6); Hic manebimus optime. (Liv. 5.55.2)
Means and instrument adjuncts: Victa igitur est causa rei publicae, et victa non aus-
piciis, non intercessione, non suffragiis, sed vi, manu, ferro. (Cic. Sest. 78)
Price adjuncts: Ii emuntur ad Rufri macerias HS CXXC, temperantur HS XXX.
(Cato Agr. 22.3)
Space and time adjuncts: E Pompeiano navi advectus sum in Luculli nostri hospi-
tium VI Id. hora fere tertia. (Cic. Att. 14.20.1); Hac re cognita Caesar mittit com-
plures equitum turmas eodem media nocte. (Caes. Gal. 7.45.1);¹⁵⁷ Et illa quidem
nocte nihil (sc. actum est) praeterquam vigilatum est in urbe. Postero die dicta-
tor . . . (Liv. 3.26.12)
Reason adjuncts: (sc. Favonius) Nunc tamen petit iterum rei publicae causa. (Cic.
Att. 2.1.9); Multi artifices ex Graecia venerunt honoris eius causa. (Liv. 39.22.2)
Respect adjuncts: Tiribazus . . . Cononem evocavit simulans ad regem eum se mittere
velle magna de re. (Nep. Con. 5.3)
pragmatic justification for the position of mittit: all of the information M. Antonium
cum cohortibus V Arretium mittit is new (a complex focus unit), with Arretium prob-
ably being the least predictable and therefore most salient element. For most of the
finite verbs in final position in Caesar a pragmatic justification is difficult to find. At
the same time, in Cicero’s de Officiis, where verbs in final position are in the minority,
it is also often difficult to find a pragmatic justification for this, as for (d), where (in
rationem) utilitatis seems the most salient information, not cadit.
(a) (sc. Roscius) Postulata Caesaris renuntiat (sc. consulibus Pompeioque).
(‘He presented Caesar’s demands.’ Caes. Civ. 1.10.1)
(b) Interea legio XII Caesarem consequitur.
(‘Meanwhile the twelfth legion reached Caesar.’ Caes. Civ. 1.15.3)
(c) (sc. Caesar) Itaque ab Arimino M. Antonium cum cohortibus V Arretium
mittit.
(‘Caesar therefore sent Marcus Antonius from Ariminum to Arretium with five
cohorts.’ Caes. Civ. 1.11.4)
(d) Quae deliberatio omnis in rationem utilitatis cadit.
(‘This whole matter turns upon a question of expediency.’ Cic. Off. 1.9)
It seems then that there is a default rule which holds that if there are no other obvious
salient candidates for the final position of the sentence the finite verb is a suitable
candidate. The reason for this rule need not be ‘stylistic’ in the sense that it is a purely
individual decision of the language user. After all, the verb is the central building
block of the clause, whether it is salient information or not, and may thus serve as a
boundary signal, at least in writing. Some authors show more variation than others.¹⁶⁰
Considerations of clausulae may play a role as well.
¹⁶⁰ Celsus is one of the authors who prefers to put forms of sum at the very end of the clause or sentence
(Adams 1994b: 56).
Word order in interrogative sentences
Obviously, in sentences of three or more constituents, those constituents that are not
in the initial or final position end up in between. For the preference of certain pro-
nouns, forms of sum, and a few others for a position after a pragmatically prominent
constituent, see §§ 23.30–3. Verbs can end up in an intermediate position when they
are used to create discontinuity. In (a), the position of abundabat lends prominence to
the modifier of the noun phrase omnium rerum copia. In (b), attulit is used in com-
bination with the third argument nostris and a satellite ad salutem to lend prominence
to the modifier of the focus constituent magnum momentum. In addition to, or some-
times instead of, pragmatic considerations prosodic considerations may be relevant as
well. For further details, see § 23.87.
(a) At exercitus Afrani omnium rerum abundabat copia.
(‘Afranius’ army, however, had an abundance of everything.’ Caes. Civ. 1.49.1)
(b) Hoc pugnae tempus magnum attulit nostris ad salutem momentum.
(‘The time they spent fighting was of great consequence for the safety of our people.’
Caes. Civ. 1.51.6)
In § 6.8, two types of sentence questions (or ‘yes/no questions’) have been distin-
guished, those with and without a question particle. For an utterance without a ques-
tion particle to be recognized as a sentence question (and not as a declarative sentence),
the order of constituents is often not very helpful (see § 6.9). In the absence of infor-
mation about intonation, we need to rely on our interpretation in the given context.
In sentences without a question particle in which the scope of the question is on the
verb that verb is less often in first position than in sentences with the question particle
¹⁶¹ Exceptions are Devine and Stephens (2006: 235–42) and Spevak (2010a: Ch 4).
Word order
-ne.¹⁶² Examples are (a) and (b). The position of the verbs in these examples resembles
the assertive or veridical use of the first position in declarative sentences (see § 23.45).
Here the responses to the questions also contribute to a correct interpretation.
(a) Periisti iam nisi verum scio. / Prompsisti tu illi vinum? # Non prompsi. #
Negas? / # Nego hercle vero.
(‘You are dead this instant unless I know the truth. Did you draw wine for him? # No,
I didn’t. # You deny it? # I do indeed deny it.’ Pl. Mil. 828–30)
(b) Infirmas igitur tu acta C. Caesaris, viri fortissimi? # Minime.
(‘Do you then invalidate the gallant Caesar’s proceedings? # By no means.’ Cic. Dom. 39)
Supplement:
Ibo igitur intro? # Quippini? Tam audacter quam domum ad te. (Pl. Truc. 205);
Ceterum / placet tibi factum, Micio? # Non, si queam mutare. (Ter. Ad. 736–8); Intueris
illas potentium domos, illa tumultuosa rixa salutantium limina? (Sen. Ep. 84.12)
Of sentence questions with a question particle, those with -ne, nonne, and num
deserve attention from the point of view of word order because they (or in the case
In the large majority of the sentences in Cicero’s orations in which -ne is attached to a
constituent other than the verb the final position is occupied by a verb, as in (i).¹⁶⁴
However, other constituents can be placed in final position as well, as in (h) above and
in ( j) and (k).
(i) Bellumne populo Romano Lampsacena civitas facere conabatur? Deficere ab
imperio ac nomine nostro volebat?
(‘Was the town of Lampsacum aiming at making war upon Rome? Did it mean to
revolt from its allegiance to our rule?’ Cic. Ver. 1.79)
( j) Verresne habebit domi suae candelabrum Iovis e gemmis auroque perfectum?
(‘Shall Verres include in his furniture this lamp-stand, wrought in gold and precious
stones, that belongs to Jupiter himself?’ Cic. Ver. 4.71)
(k) Parumne haec significant incredibiliter consentientem populi Romani uni-
versi voluntatem?
(‘Is not all this enough to signify a truly extraordinary consensus of the entire Roman
people?’ Cic. Phil. 1.36)
¹⁶³ For the decrease in use of -ne, see § 6.8. See also TLL s.v. -ne 261.25ff.
¹⁶⁴ Source: Merguet (Reden) s.v. -ne 255–8. In about one-third of the sentences the first position is
taken by a verb.
Word order
Sentence questions with nonne are relatively often preceded by a connector, as in (l),
or by a topic constituent, as in (m). A rather complex case with more constituents
preceding nonne is (n). There seem to be no instances of nonne preceded by a finite
verb. See also § 23.27 and § 6.12.¹⁶⁵
(l) Sed nonne meministi licere mihi ista probare, quae sunt a te dicta?
(‘But don’t you remember that it is quite open to me to approve the doctrines you
have stated?’ Cic. Fin. 5.76)
(m) Quid? Eundem in septemviratu nonne destituisti?
(‘Well? Did you not also let him down in the matter of the Board of Seven?’ Cic. Phil. 2.99)
(n) Quid? Cn. Pompeius pater rebus Italico bello maximis gestis P. Caesium,
equitem Romanum, virum bonum, qui vivit, Ravennatem foederato ex
populo, nonne civitate donavit?
(‘Again, did not Gnaeus Pompeius (sc. Strabo), the father of Pompeius, after great
exploits in the Italian War, bestow citizenship on Publius Caesius, a Roman Knight, a
worthy man still living, who was a citizen of Ravenna and a member of a federate
state?’ Cic. Balb. 50)
Supplement:
Quaeso, nonne intellegis? (Pl. Am. 625); Ad senatum nostrum me consule nonne
legati Apollonidenses omnia postulata de iniuriis unius Deciani detulerunt? (Cic.
Flac. 79); Idem iste Mithridates nonne ad eundem Cn. Pompeium legatum usque in
Hispaniam misit? (Cic. Man. 46); Bello Punico secundo nonne C. Flaminius consul
iterum neglexit signa rerum futurarum magna cum clade rei publicae? (Cic. Div.
1.77); Quid? Nostros Gracchos, Ti. Gracchi summi viri filios, Africani nepotes,
nonne agrariae contentiones perdiderunt? (Cic. Off. 2.80); Ea plaga nonne ad multos
bonos viros pertinet? (Cic. Att. 2.1.10)
The large majority of simple interrogative sentences containing nonne in Cicero’s ora-
tions have a verb in final position, as in (m) and (n) above. However, other constituents
may be placed there as well, as (o), with a contrastive focus in final position, and (p).
(o) Nonne te mihi testem in hoc crimine eripuit non istius innocentia, sed legis
exceptio?
(‘Did not the exemption the law gives you, and not your client’s innocence, deprive
me of calling you yourself as a witness to the truth of this charge?’ Cic. Ver. 2.24)
(p) (sc. Pompeius) Nonne compensavit cum uno versiculo tot mea volumina
laudum suarum?
(‘Did he not set off against one poor verse all those volumes of mine that sing his
praises?’ Cic. Pis. 75)
Examples of constituents preceding sentence questions with num, as in (q) and (r), are
less common. See § 23.27 and also § 6.13.
The large majority of interrogative sentences in Cicero’s orations containing num have
a verb in final position, as in (s). Different are (t), with the focus in final position, and
(u), with te in final position because the beginning of a new phase of the discussion
favours the initial position of the verb conturbo (for the verb in initial position in
declarative sentences, see § 23.45).
(s) Num etiam de L. Papinio, viro primario, locupleti honestoque equite
Romano, turibulum emisti?
(‘What of the censer belonging to Lucius Papinius, that well-known gentleman, that
wealthy and highly-respected knight? Did you also buy that?’ Cic. Ver. 4.46)
(t) Sed si parum multi sunt qui nobilitatem ament, num ista est nostra culpa?
(‘If, then, those who love nobility are less numerous than you would have them, is
this our fault?’ Cic. Planc. 18)
(u) Quid est? Num conturbo te?
(‘What is it? Can it be that I am confusing you?’ Cic. Phil. 2.32)
Constituent questions (or ‘nominal questions’) contain a question word which either
functions on its own as argument or satellite of the sentence, as in (a) and (b), or func-
tions as modifier of a noun, adjective, or adverb phrase, as in (c) and (d) (see § 6.19).
As the examples show, the regular position of such question words, which are the
focus in their sentence, is at the beginning. Modifiers can be separated from their
heads for reasons of emphasis, as in (c).
(a) Quis enim meum in ista societate gloriosissimi facti nomen audivit?
(‘Who ever heard my name linked with that partnership in a most glorious deed?’
Cic. Phil. 2.25)
(b) Cur autem ea comitia non habuisti?
(‘Why then did you not hold that election?’ Cic. Phil. 2.99)
(c) Qui tum inde reditus aut qualis?
(‘What sort of return did he make at that time, what was its nature?’ Cic. Phil. 2.48)
Word order
¹⁶⁶ This order is quite normal in didactic grammatical treatises with question and answer pairs. See
Flobert (2002).
Word order in imperative sentences
As with simple questions, topic constituents can be put in an initial position of a sen-
tence that contains multiple (or ‘alternative’ or ‘disjunctive’) questions if that constitu-
ent belongs to both parts of the multiple question, as in (a) and (b). Note that (c) is
different: here, Albiana pecunia only belongs to the first part.
(a) Haec utrum tandem lex est an legum omnium dissolutio?
(‘Is this a law or the cancellation of all laws?’ Cic. Phil. 1.21)
(b) In plebem vero Romanam utrum superbiam prius commemorem an
crudelitatem?
(‘As to his behaviour towards ordinary people in Rome, should I speak first of its
snobbery or its cruelty?’ Cic. Ver. 1.122)
(c) Quid? Albiana pecunia vestigiisne nobis odoranda est an ad ipsum cubile
vobis ducibus venire possumus?
(‘What then? Does Albius’ money need to be sniffed out along your tracks or with
your guidance can we come straight to his lair?’ Cic. Clu. 82)
There is little to say with certainty about other aspects of word order in multiple ques-
tions. It seems to be the same as in declarative sentences.¹⁶⁷
an ‘optative’, and a ‘concessive’ illocutionary force made in Chapter 6, the word order
in these three types is dealt with separately.¹⁶⁹
Imperative sentences with a directive illocutionary force include both the prototypical
directives addressed to a second person addressee (where the subject is normally not
expressed) and various expressions with first and third person subjects (see § 6.28).
Second person directives are discussed first.
It is necessary to make a distinction between various types of second person direct-
ives. Alongside ‘regular’ directives like (a) and (b), there are ‘metadirectives’ like fac in
(c) (see § 6.29) and interactional expressions like dic mihi in (d).¹⁷⁰
(a) Sequere me hac intro. # Sequor.
(‘Follow me inside this way. # I’m following you.’ Pl. Cur. 370)
(b) Hoc animum advorte. Pacem ab Aesculapio / petas, ne fort’ tibi eveniat mag-
num malum . . .
(‘Mark my words: seek peace from Aesculapius, so that you won’t by chance end up
with the great disaster . . .’ Pl. Cur. 270–1)
(c) Ipse vero utique fac venias, si potes in his locis adhaerescere, et Piliam adducas.
(‘As for yourself, do come without fail, if you can bear to stick down here for a while,
and bring Pilia.’ Cic. Att. 4.4a.2)
(d) Sed dic mihi, / benene ambulatum est?
(‘But tell me, did you have a good trip?’ Pl. Truc. 368–9)
¹⁶⁹ For a more detailed subclassification of imperative sentences and their word order, see
Cabrillana (2017a: 116–21). Her study concentrates on the verbs sum and fio.
¹⁷⁰ Instead of ‘metadirective’ Spevak (2010a: 208–9) uses the term ‘periphrastic’.
¹⁷¹ The examples are cited by Spevak.
Word order in imperative sentences
sc. Capitonis), placed in initial position for reasons of emphasis (totam). Ex ipsa lega-
tione is an (emphatic: ipsa) topic, which leaves cognoscite at the end.¹⁷²
(e) Tollite hanc: nullam tam pravae sententiae causam reperietis.
(‘Take away this reason: you will find no reason at all for so misguided a proposal.’
Cic. Phil. 14.3)
(f) Hanc (sc. crudelitatem) tollite ex civitate, iudices, hanc pati nolite diutius in
hac re publica versari.
(‘Banish this cruelty from the State, gentlemen; do not allow it to stalk abroad any
longer in this republic.’ Cic. S. Rosc. 154)
(g) P. Servilius . . . signa . . . in tabula publica ad aerarium perscribenda curavit.
Cognoscite ex litteris publicis hominis amplissimi diligentiam. Recita.
(‘P. Servilius . . . took care to enter the statues in full in the official catalogue of the
public Treasury. Learn of the scrupulous care shown by this eminent man from the
national records. Read them, please.’ Cic. Ver. 1.57)
(h) Venit in decem primis legatus in castra Capito. Totam vitam, naturam
moresque hominis ex ipsa legatione cognoscite.
(‘Capito came to the camp as one of the deputies among the ten heads of the decuri-
ons. Now learn thoroughly the manner of life, the nature and character of the man
from his behaviour on the deputation alone.’ Cic. S. Rosc. 109)
The first position of the verb may also be related to emphasis, as in (i) and ( j).
(i) Obsecro, populares, ferte misero atque innocenti auxilium, / subvenite inopi.
(‘I beg you, fellow citizens, come to the rescue of a poor innocent man, help a defence-
less man!’ Ter. Ad. 155–6)
( j) Retinete, retinete hominem in civitate, iudices, parcite et conservate . . .
(‘Save the man, save him for Rome, gentlemen! Spare him and keep him safe!’ Cic.
Ver. 2.76)
Second person directives in the subjunctive (both commands and prohibitions) have not
been investigated from the point of view of word order. For examples, see § 7.53. First
person directives in the ‘adhortative’ subjunctive have not received special attention either.
See § 7.52. Third person directives in the ‘jussive’ subjunctive (see § 7.54) are not relevant
here, because the subject is often expressed or inferrable from the context, as in (k).
(k) Vilicus ne sit ambulator, sobrius siet semper, ad cenam nequo eat.
(‘The overseer must not be a gadabout, he must always be sober, and must not go out
to dine.’ Cato Agr. 5.2)
¹⁷² For a different analysis, see Devine and Stephens (2006: 170–1). In his orations, Cicero addresses
the judges with cognoscite about eighty times, of which about one-third are in sentences with three or
more constituents. In these sentences final position of the verb is more frequent. For the initial placement
of the verb in imperative sentences in Caesar, see Schneider (1912: 47–8). In legal and religious texts the
verb is very often in final position, including in imperative sentences. See Panhuis (1982: Ch. 5).
Word order
With the future imperative the subject can be second or third person. In (l) it is sec-
ond person, as the preceding imperatives show; in the fictitious law in (m) it is third
person.
(l) Stercilinum magnum stude ut habeas. Stercus sedulo conserva. Cum
exportabis, purgato et comminuito. Per autumnum evehito.
(‘See that you have a large dunghill; save the manure carefully, and when you
carry it out, clean it of foreign matter and break it up. Autumn is the time to
haul it out.’ Cato Agr. 5.8)
(m) Meretrix coronam auream ne habeto. Si habuerit, publica esto.
(‘A prostitute shall not wear a crown of gold; if she does, the penalty shall be
confiscation as public property.’ Cic. Inv. 2.118)
In imperative sentences with a concessive illocutionary force, the verb is usually in the
first position of the sentence. This resembles the assertive or veridical use of the first
position in declarative sentences (see § 23.45). For examples, see § 6.34 and § 7.59.
Another illustration is (a). In (b), the connector sed precedes the verb. In (c), the con-
trastive topic haec has the first position.
(a) Esto, concedatur haec quoque acerbitatis et odii magnitudo.
(‘Well, let us even allow that the magnitude of your acrimony and your hatred is jus-
tified.’ Cic. Deiot. 30)
Word order in subordinate clauses
¹⁷³ These observations are based on an examination of cum clauses in Caes. Civ. which open the com-
plex sentence to which they belong. Further research is required.
Word order
than in main clauses. Word order in accusative and infinitive clauses has received
some attention because ambiguity can arise when the subject and object are formally
identical and the relative order is not fixed. In the following sections only a few finite
and non-finite subordinate clauses are discussed separately. Subordinate clauses may
be complex themselves. Cum clauses are a good example, especially those closing the
sentence. In the Ciceronian sample about one-third are complex, in the Caesarian
almost a quarter. The discussion will only concern ‘simple’ clauses. The term ‘simple’
is used in the same way as it is for sentences (see § 23.39).
What most finite subordinate clauses have in common is the presence of a subordin-
ating device (see § 14.6), for example a subordinator, a question particle, or a relative
pronoun, which usually occupies the first position of the clause. Other orders, mainly
for pragmatic reasons, are discussed in §§ 23.23–8.
There is little systematic research on word order in subordinate clauses, neither on the
individual types of clauses, nor on how it may differ from word order in main clauses and
simple sentences.¹⁷⁴ The examination below of two samples of ‘simple’ cum adjunct clauses
in Cic. Phil. and Caes. Civ. will serve as an illustration of the relevant issues. Cum clauses
may precede, be incorporated in, or follow their superordinate clauses, with potentially
different interpretations of the cum relations, which are here ignored. One or more argu-
ments or satellites can precede cum, as in (a), with a connective relative pronoun. A rare
instance of a preceding verb form is (b), with separation of the infinitive and the auxiliary
vellent. Within the cum clause the first position is most often taken by a topical first or
second argument (also in passive clauses), as in (c), but a verb is not uncommon either, as
in (d), a clause expressing a position in space. In clauses with two or more constituents in
addition to the verb, the verb is regularly the last constituent, as in (e), but arguments and
satellites are not excluded, as impunitas in (f), the focus of the clause. Constituents other
than the verb in final position can usually be explained on pragmatic grounds.¹⁷⁵ Proper
names are relatively common in final position when they are discourse topic, as in (g)
(further examples in the Supplement—see also § 23.47 for declarative sentences).
(a) Apud quos cum proficere nihil posset, quibusdam solutis ergastulis Compsam
in agro Hirpino oppugnare coepit.
(‘Since he was unable to make any progress with these, he opened the slave lock-ups
and began to blockade Compsa in the territory of the Hirpini.’ Caes. Civ. 3.22.2)
(b) Hinc se recipere cum vellent, rursus illi ex loco superiore nostros premebant.
(‘When our men wanted to withdraw from this position, the enemy put pressure on
them from above.’ Caes. Civ. 1.45.3)
¹⁷⁴ For the position of the verb in subordinate clauses, often clause-initial, in the Peregrinatio, see
Linde (1923: 168) and Haida (1928: 34). For Augustine, see Muldowney (1937: 115–16), with detailed
statistics. Initial position is particularly common in his less elevated writings, including his Confessions.
¹⁷⁵ This is also the case in the corpus (Caes. Gal. and Tac. Ann.) used by Longrée et al. (2019).
Word order in subordinate clauses
¹⁷⁶ The Ciceronian sample concerns Cic. Phil. 1 and 2.1–80; the Caesarian, Caes. Civ. 1–3.35.
Table . Data concerning 50 ‘simple’ cum clauses in a number of texts
Texts Number of constituents Average number A1 understood + 1 connectors anaphoric elements
per cum clause of constituents and 2 person
per clause
1 2 3 4 5
Cic. Phil. 3 9 21 14 3 3.1 5+3+8 4 9
Caes. Civ. 2 15 26 6 2.6 18 + 1 + 0 2 13
Texts Number of explicit constituents per type and their position
A1 A2 A3 ^ finite V/Aux
before first last before first last before first last before first last before first last
cum cum cum cum cum
Cic. Phil. (27)a 4 14 3 (35) 5 10 4 (4) 2 1 – (29) 4 8 3 (50) – 8 36
Caes. Civ. (20) 3 7 3 (28) 10 7 1 (3) – – – (31) 8 11 1 (50) 1 9 36
a
The numbers between brackets are the totals, in this case the total number of A1 constituents.
Word order in subordinate clauses
Table 23.7 (page 1043) has some data on simple accusative and infinitive clauses in
Cicero and Caesar, which show some common features but also some differences due
to individual preferences and/or the content of the texts (philosophy vs. history).¹⁷⁷ In
both authors c.60 per cent of the infinitives are the final constituent of the accusative
and infinitive clause, whereas initial infinitives are rare—but see (a). When there are
two arguments expressed the order is more often A1/A2, as in (b), but the reverse is
very well possible, as in (c).¹⁷⁸ Satellites are not uncommon in the initial position, as
in (d). Final arguments and satellites are rare—but see (a) and (e). In short, in accusa-
tive and infinitive clauses which contain only one argument and which follow the main
verb, a situation which is quite common in non-literary texts, the subject of the
accusative and infinitive clause often immediately follows the governing verb, as in (f).¹⁷⁹
(a) Sed tantus fuit omnium terror ut alii adesse copias Iubae dicerent, alii cum
legionibus instare Varum iamque se pulverem venientium cernere . . .
(‘But so great was the universal terror that some were saying that Juba’s forces were at
hand, others that Varus and his legions were imminent and that the dust cloud of
their approach was already visible to them. . .’ Caes. Civ. 2.43.2)
¹⁷⁷ Using Merguet’s lexica (s.vv. dico and reperio) fifty clauses were collected in Cic. Off. and N.D. and
Caes. Civ. and Gal. Fifteen clauses in Caesar are not directly governed by a verb of communication but
form part of a sequence of accusative and infinitive clauses.
¹⁷⁸ Rosén (1999: 154) states that in active transitive accusative and infinitive clauses the relative order
of subject and object is ‘rather consistently’ S–O, but that is exaggerated.
¹⁷⁹ See Adams (2005a) and Greco (2018).
Word order
For the initial position of the constituents in (a)–(d) the usual pragmatic explanations
hold: In (a), copias Iubae and Varum are focus; in (b), se is topic; in (c), praeterita is a
change of topic (and contrastive) after the preceding warning by Caesar for the future;
in (d), frustra is emphatic. In (e) initial deum is understandable (contrast with the
preceding context), but final te is puzzling (the result is a good clausula).
From Cicero onwards Ennius’ oracle text in (g) has served as an illustration of ambi-
guity (amphibolia). The two arguments of the accusative and infinitive clause, te and
Romanos, refer to two (groups of) human beings who can fulfil the same role with respect
to the two-place verb vincere and are in a sense interchangeable. Quintilian strongly
advises avoidance of ambiguity in general, but especially the type illustrated by (h).
(g) Quis enim est, qui credat Apollinis ex oraculo Pyrrho esse responsum: ‘Aio
te, Aeacida, Romanos vincere posse.’?
(‘For who could believe that the response of Apollo’s oracle to Pyrrhus was “I say that
you, Aeacus’ descendant, the Romans can defeat.”?’ Cic. Div. 2.116—Enn. Ann.
179V=167S)
(h) Vitanda in primis ambiguitas, non haec solum . . . quae incertum intellectum
facit, ut ‘Chremetem audivi percussisse Demean’ . . .
(‘Above all, ambiguity is to be avoided, not only ambiguity of the kind . . . which makes
understanding uncertain—“I heard that Chremes Demea struck . . .”’ Quint. Inst.
8.2.16)
Ambiguity can be avoided by using the passive, but there is no evidence that for the
authors this was the main reason for choosing the passive in accusative and infini-
tive clauses. Illustrations are (i) and ( j). In (i), illum quem nominavi is a resumed
topic, a good candidate for being the subject of its clause, which involves the use of
the passive; in addition, the focus a Socrate is in final position. In ( j), me aps te is a
separate colon, attached for its pathetic effect, not to avoid a sequence in the active
te me amare.¹⁸¹
(i) Sed et illum quem nominavi (sc. Gorgiam) et ceteros sophistas, ut e Platone
intellegi potest, lusos videmus a Socrate.
(‘But we see that Socrates made fun of the aforesaid Gorgias, and the rest of the
Sophists also, as we can learn from Plato.’ Cic. Fin. 2.2)
( j) Nolo ego metui, amari mavolo, / mi gnate, me aps te.
(‘I don’t want to be feared, I prefer that I be loved by you, my son.’ Pl. As. 835–6)
Within their context morphologically ‘interchangeable’ expressions are not really
ambiguous.¹⁸² The order of such interchangeable constituents is not decisive. Further
examples of interchangeable constituents are given in the Supplement.
Supplement:
. . . aut illud falsumst quod volgo audio / dici, diem adimere aegritudinem hominibus.
(Ter. Hau. 421–2); Etiam illud praeteribo . . . te senatum Panhormitanum adisse sup-
plicem . . . (Cic. Ver. 5.21); Modo enim menti tribuit omnem divinitatem, modo mun-
dum ipsum deum dicit esse, modo alium quendam praeficit mundo . . . (Cic. N.D.
1.33); Omnino meminisse debemus id, quod . . . iam in proverbii consuetudinem
venit, largitionem fundum non habere. (Cic. Off. 2.55); Is mihi dixit se Athenis me
exspectaturum ut mecum decederet. (Cic. Att. 6.3.9); Putares canem leporem perse-
qui. (Petr. 63.4 (Trimalchio speaking)); . . . regem se voluisse ait videre, non mortuos.
(Suet. Aug. 18.1)
Substantival ablative absolute clauses (see § 16.116) and adjectival ones (see § 16.117)
rarely contain another constituent than the subject and subject complement. The two
constituents are usually juxtaposed. Both orders are possible, as can be seen by com-
paring the position of dux in (a) and (b). In Cicero’s orations the order X duce occurs
twenty-seven times, duce X nine times.¹⁸³ In (a), the ablative absolute clause provides
the information ‘who was the leader?’ (an identity statement—see § 4.92), with
Timarchide as focus; in (b), the information provided is ‘what was Pompey’s role?’
(a predicational statement—see § 4.92), with duce as focus. In cases like (b), the
subject is often topic, in this case discourse topic.
¹⁸¹ This example is also used in § 5.3 (g) without paying attention to the intonation break before
me aps te.
¹⁸² For word order and ambiguity in accusative and infinitive clauses, see Bortolussi (2007), with refer-
ences. See also ex. (b) in § 23.64.
¹⁸³ Merguet’s lexica are a good source for substantival ablative absolute clauses. For dux, see Merguet
(Reden) s.v. 754b.
Word order in subordinate clauses
(a) Ad hoc templum, cum esset iste Agrigenti, duce Timarchide repente nocte
intempesta servorum armatorum fit concursus atque impetus.
(‘It was against this temple that, while Verres was at Agrigentum, suddenly in the
dead of night a great attack was made under the leadership of Timarchides.’ Cic.
Ver. 4.94)
(b) Quis enim . . . tantos cursus conficere potuit, quam celeriter Cn. Pompeio
duce tanti belli impetus navigavit?
(‘For who . . . has ever succeeded in visiting so many places . . . at the same speed with
which, under the leadership of Pompeius, that mighty armament swept over the
seas?’ Cic. Man. 34)
Ablative absolute clauses with a present participle (active or deponent) are often short,
but from Cicero’s time onwards the use of arguments and satellites increases (see
§ 16.91).¹⁸⁵ There are not enough attestations to formulate a tendency for the relative
order of these constituents. In the case of the more elaborate ablative absolute clauses
in Livy and others pause and intonation must have played an important role in cor-
rectly processing the information. As for the relative position of subject and parti-
ciple, both orders are possible, but the subjects, being mostly agents, are found more
often in first position.¹⁸⁶ As in (a)–(d) above, preceding subjects are often topic and
the following ones focus, as is shown in (e) and (f). In (e), Crasso is a (contrastive)
discourse topic (me dicentem precedes); in (f), Torquato must have been known to
Atticus, but appears here for the first time and is focus.
¹⁸⁴ See TLL s.v. invitus 234.50ff. The data concerning me invito and invito me are taken from LLT.
¹⁸⁵ For word order within the ablative absolute clause in Caes. Gal. I, see de Jong (1982).
¹⁸⁶ However, in the sample used by de Jong (1982: 100) the order ‘X / present participle’ represents 43
per cent; the reverse order 57 per cent.
Word order
(e) . . . Crasso dicente nemo tam arrogans (sc. fuit) qui similiter se umquam dic-
turum esse confideret.
(‘. . . when Crassus speaks nobody was ever so conceited as to believe that he would
ever speak as well.’ Cic. de Orat. 2.364)
(f) Accedit etiam Gabinius, quem P. Sulla . . . postularat, contra dicente et nihil
obtinente Torquato.
(‘Gabinius now joins them. P. Sulla . . . had brought the charge, Torquatus unsuccess-
fully contesting.’ Cic. Att. 4.18.3)
Interesting is the change of order of the ablative absolute clauses in the parallel sentences
of (g), especially the contrast between ‘who were mourning?’ (lugente senatu) in the first
parallel sentence and ‘what did the senate do?’ (senatu poscente) in the second.¹⁸⁷
(g) An . . . licuit tibi ferre non legem sed nefarium privilegium lugente senatu,
maerentibus bonis omnibus, totius Italiae precibus repudiatis, oppressa cap-
taque re publica? Mihi populo Romano implorante, senatu poscente, tem-
poribus rei publicae flagitantibus non licuit de salute populi Romani
sententiam dicere?
(‘Had you any right to pass, I will not say a law, but an iniquitous piece of party legis-
lation . . . amid the mourning of the senate and the grief of all true patriots, while the
prayers of all Italy were disdained, and while the republic lay crushed and paralysed?
And had I no right, on the supplication of the Roman people, the demand of the sen-
ate, and the urgent appeal of the crisis through which the state was passing, to declare
my policy for the salvation of the Roman people?’ Cic. Dom. 26)
Perfect passive participles are by far the most common in ablative absolute clauses
from Cicero’s time onwards. In Cicero and Caesar these clauses often consist of only a
subject and a participle. The subject is a patient, more often an inanimate entity, hence
more often focus, which may explain its not uncommon position after the participle,
as in (h).¹⁸⁸ Here, the agent of the ablative absolute constituents is the perditorum . . . vis.
In (i), there is no evident agent in the context who is responsible for senatu dimisso.
(h) Cum omnium perditorum et coniuratorum incitata vis duce tribuno plebis,
consulibus auctoribus, adflicto senatu, perterritis equitibus Romanis, sus-
pensa ac sollicita tota civitate non tam in me impetum faceret . . ..
(‘When, under the leadership of a tribune of the plebs and with the support of the
consuls, with the senate humiliated, the Roman knighthood cowed, and the whole
community agitated and distraught, the carefully stimulated lawlessness of des-
peradoes and conspirators was launching an assault not so much upon myself . . .’
Cic. Dom. 96)
¹⁸⁷ There are in Cicero six further instances of the order ‘present participle senatu’ and one of ‘senatu
present participle’.
¹⁸⁸ In the sample of de Jong (1982: 100) the order ‘perfect passive participle / X’ represents 31 per cent;
20 per cent of the subjects are anaphoric and at the beginning of a sentence.
The order of superordinate and subordinate clauses
(i) . . . illum diem clarissimum fuisse, cum senatu dimisso domum reductus ad
vesperum est a patribus conscriptis . . .
(‘. . . the most brilliant was the day before he departed this life, when, after the adjourn-
ment of the Senate, he was escorted home toward evening by the Conscript Fathers . . .’
Cic. Amic. 12)
But sometimes the situation is less obvious, as in ( j) and (k).¹⁸⁹ In both examples
armis are mentioned in the preceding context and are therefore topic; in (k), traditis
is anteposed because it is contrastive, meaning more or less sine.
( j) . . . timore perterriti ne armis traditis supplicio adficerentur . . .
(‘. . . in panic, lest after the surrender of their arms they might be put to the sword . . .’
Caes. Gal. 1.27.4)
(k) Sibi omnes fere finitimos esse inimicos ac suae virtuti invidere, a quibus se
defendere traditis armis non possent.
(‘Almost all their neighbours were at enmity with them and envied their courage; and
from such, if they delivered up their arms, they could not defend themselves.’ Caes.
Gal. 2.31.6)
In a complex sentence, one or more arguments and/or satellites have the form of a clause
(see § 2.2 and § 14.1). This is shown in (a) and (b), which consist of a superordinate and
a subordinate clause in different arrangements. In (a), the quin clause is the second argu-
ment of the verb dubito; it is the object of the sentence. In (b), the postquam clause is a
satellite; it functions as a position in time adjunct in the superordinate clause.
(a) Non dubito quin Gnaeus in fuga sit.
(‘I have no doubt that Gnaeus is a fugitive.’ Cic. Att. 7.24)
(b) (sc. Alcumena) Postquam peperit, pueros lavere iussit nos.
(‘After she gave birth, she told us to wash the boys.’ Pl. Am. 1102)
From the point of view of information structure, the clause quin . . . sit in (a) is the
focus of the sentence; the topic ‘I’ is implied by the verb form dubito. The quin clause
¹⁸⁹ These instances are discussed by de Jong (1982: 97–8). ¹⁹⁰ See Bolkestein (2001: 249–51).
Word order
occupies the typical focus position at the end of the sentence.¹⁹¹ In (b), postquam
peperit represents known information (that Alcumena gave birth to two boys is
already mentioned in line 1088). It functions as setting and has the typical position of
that type of constituent (see § 22.15).
In addition to being the focus of the sentence as a whole, the quin clause in (a) has
an internal information structure. Within the clause, Gnaeus is the topic, mentioned
earlier in the letter, and in fuga is the focus. The topic has the common position for
topics, in this case immediately after the subordinator quin. In the main clause of (b),
after the information contained in the postquam clause, namely that Alcumena gave
birth to the boys, the next step is to know what happened to them. Accordingly, pueros
is placed in first position as the topic of the clause and lavere iussit is the focus. The
discourse topic nos then follows at the end. For the internal order of subordinate
clauses, see § 23.60.
Although most subordinate clauses reflect the tendency of ‘domain integrity’ (see
§ 23.7), in that their constituents are placed closely together, deviations from this ten-
dency are relatively common, a phenomenon for which the term ‘interlacing’ is used
in this Syntax (see § 14.19). The main factors that favour the placement of constituents
or words belonging to subordinate clauses outside of the boundaries of their clause
are discourse coherence and pragmatic prominence. Both factors are illustrated by
(c). Here, hac . . . oratione and tu are placed outside of the quin clause, the former
because it connects the sentence to the preceding context, with hac itself separated
from oratione for reasons of emphasis. The second person pronoun tu is usually
selected for reasons of emphasis and/or contrast (see § 9.2), as it is here: tu is in con-
trast with illum.
(c) Hac tu oratione non dubito quin illum iam ascendentem in currum revocare
possis.
(‘I have not the least doubt that by arguments such as these you will contrive to recall
him even in the act of mounting his triumphal car.’ Cic. Pis. 61)
Details concerning the relative order of superordinate and subordinate are dealt with
in the following sections. Two pairs of questions are discussed:
(i) What is the relative order of superordinate and subordinate clauses in bi-
clausal sentences and what forms of interlacing exist?
(ii) What is the relative order of superordinate and subordinate clauses in multi-
clausal sentences and what forms of interlacing exist?
Three types of subordinate clauses will receive detailed discussion: finite subordinate
clauses, accusative and infinitive clauses, and participial clauses. Adnominal relative
clauses do not function at the level of the sentence. However, interlacing of constitu-
ents belonging to such clauses is quite common and instances can be found in the
¹⁹¹ In Cicero’s orations only two out of sixty-eight quin clauses with dubito are not in final position. See
also TLL s.v. dubito 2100.68ff.
The order of superordinate and subordinate clauses
following sections, as well as in § 18.10. For the relative order of adnominal relative
clauses with respect to their head, see § 18.12.
¹⁹² Still very useful for the order in bi-clausal sentences is Lindskog (1896). For the order in more com-
plex sentences, see Nägelsbach and Müller (1905: 626–48).
¹⁹³ ‘zeitlich oder begrifflich’ (K.-St.: II.626). Some examples are taken from them; others are attested
alternatives for their made-up examples. See also Sz.: 733, with references.
Word order
(‘In the first place it enables us both to learn things we do not know and to teach
things we do know to others.’ Cic. N.D. 2.148)
(b) Nemo dubitat quin multo maius sit novam (sc. columnam) facere.
(‘Nobody can doubt that constructing one new one is by far the bigger thing.’ Cic.
Ver. 1.147)
(c) Sane gaudeo quod te interpellavi, quoniam . . .
(‘I am very glad indeed that I interrupted you, since . . .’ Cic. Leg. 3.1)
(d) Conducta veni ut fidibus cantarem seni . . .
(‘I came because I was hired to play the lyre for an old man . . .’ Pl. Epid. 500)
The inverse order a A is shown in (e)–(g). In (e), the superordinate clause casus effecit
contains the most salient information and is, for that reason, placed at the end. The
same holds for (f). In (g), with the ut purpose clause preceding the main clause, the
latter contains the answer to an underlying question ‘with this purpose in mind, what
did you do?’
(e) Ergo hoc inerat in rebus futuris et causas naturalis habebat an et ut videretur
et ut eveniret casus effecit?
(‘Then do you say that this (sc. Alcibiades’ dream and subsequent death) was deter-
mined in advance and had a natural cause, or did chance cause both the apparition
and the subsequent event?’ Cic. Div. 2.143)
(f) Id ut intellegatis, recuperatores, quaeso ut diligenter attendatis. Profecto quin
ita sit non dubitabitis.
(‘And that you may understand this, O judges, attend, I beg of you, carefully. And, in
truth, you will not doubt that this is the case.’ Cic. Tul. 26)
(g) Ut illa, credo, nefaria senatus consulta fierent, vim adferebam senatui.
(‘I suppose I forced the senate to pass those nefarious decrees under threat of vio-
lence.’ Cic. Phil. 2.16)
Supplement:
Quid negoti est? # Quid negoti sit rogas? (Pl. Aul. 296); Nam factum sit necne vehe-
menter quaeritur. Si factum sit, quin contra legem sit dubitare nemo potest. (Cic.
Mur. 67); Id ne vobis diutius faciendum sit atque ut in perpetua pace esse possitis
providebo, Quirites. (Cic. Catil. 3.29); Alfenus cum eis et propter eos periit quos dili-
gebat, tu, post quam qui tibi erant amici non poterant vincere, ut amici tibi essent qui
vincebant effecisti. (Cic. Quinct. 70); Periculi tandem quantum adeatur quem fallit?
(Liv. 28.41.12); Nam ut XV diebus utrumque sidus quaereretur et nostro aevo accidit
imperatoribus Vespasianis patre III filio consulibus. (Plin. Nat. 2.57)
Among the satellite clauses that usually precede (order a A), Kühner and Stegmann
and Szantyr mention time, conditional,¹⁹⁴ and reason clauses, as in (h)–( j). Within
¹⁹⁴ For the position of si adjunct clauses (they most often precede), see § 16.57. Nisi clauses show more
variation. For the material in Plautus, see Lindskog (1896: 17–19).
The order of superordinate and subordinate clauses
the framework of this Syntax, these subordinate clauses might be taken as settings. At
any rate, the main clauses contain the most salient information. In (h), for example,
the main clause non de Flacco . . . contains the answer to an underlying question ‘what
will be the consequences of your receiving the ballot to vote?’; in (i), ‘what will be the
consequences of losing happiness’, etc.
(h) Cum tabella vobis dabitur, iudices, non de Flacco dabitur solum, dabitur de
ducibus . . .
(‘When the ballot shall be given you, gentlemen, it will not be a ballot to vote on
Flaccus alone, but on the leaders . . .’ Cic. Flac. 99)
(i) Nam si amitti vita beata potest, beata esse non potest.
(‘For if happiness once won can be lost, a happy life is impossible.’ Cic. Fin. 2.86)
( j) Quia (sc. Pisonem) tristem semper . . . videbant, et quod erat eo nomine ut
ingenerata familiae frugalitas videretur, favebant, gaudebant . . .
(‘Because they saw him always grim . . . and because he bore a name which seemed to
have made frugality the hereditary virtue of his family, they favoured him, they
rejoiced . . .’ Cic. Sest. 21)
Subordinators with roughly the same meaning do not necessarily behave in the same
way. Donec clauses, for example, regularly follow their main clause, while dum clauses
more often precede.¹⁹⁵
By contrast, when such clauses follow the main clause (order A a) they function as the
focus of the sentence. Thus, in (k), the cum clause is the answer to the underlying
question ‘when will they be induced to forget the claims of justice?’
(k) Maxime autem adducuntur plerique ut eos iustitiae capiat oblivio, cum in
imperiorum, honorum, gloriae cupiditatem inciderunt.
(‘Most of all, however, a great many are induced to forget justice when they have
fallen prey to the ambition for political power, high position, and distinction.’ Cic.
Off. 1.26)
Supplement:
Maximum autem exemplum est iustitiae in hostem a maioribus nostris constitu-
tum, cum a Pyrrho perfuga senatui est pollicitus se venenum regi daturum et eum
necaturum. (Cic. Off. 1.40); Deserunt enim vitae societatem, quia nihil conferunt in
eam studii, nihil operae, nihil facultatum. (Cic. Off. 1.29); Multa praeterea
commemorarem nefaria in socios, si hoc uno quicquam sol vidisset indignius.
(Cic. Off. 2.28)
We now turn to sentences in which a finite subordinate clause is preceded and fol-
lowed by one or more constituents that belong to the superordinate clause (order A a
A). An intermediate type is illustrated by (l) and (m).¹⁹⁶ Here, Agamemnon in (l) and
eam mutationem in (m), subject and object, respectively, have the same topic function
in both clauses. In the punctuation of (l) (following the OCT), Agamemnon is
assigned to the main clause and is understood as subject of the cum clause; in (m),
eam mutationem is assigned to the subordinate clause, which makes it an instance of
the order discussed in § 23.24 (see also (n)). It is understood as object of the main
clause. What the three examples have in common is that the initial constituents are
the topic in their sentence.
(l) Quid <quod> Agamemnon, cum devovisset Dianae quod in suo regno pul-
cherrimum natum esset illo anno, immolavit Iphigeniam, qua nihil erat eo
quidem anno natum pulchrius?
(‘And once more; Agamemnon, when he had vowed to Diana the most beautiful
creature born that year within his realm, sacrificed Iphigenia, because nothing more
beautiful than her was born that year.’ Cic. Off. 3.95)
(m) Eam mutationem si tempora adiuvabunt, facilius commodiusque faciemus.
(‘If circumstances favour such change, we will make it with greater ease and con-
venience.’ Cic. Off. 1.120)
(n) Caesari cum id nuntiatum esset eos per provinciam nostram iter facere
conari, maturat ab urbe proficisci . . .
(‘When Caesar was informed that they were endeavouring to march through the
Roman Province, he made speed to leave Rome . . .’ Caes. Gal. 1.7.1)
Clear instances of incorporation of a subordinate clause in a superordinate clause are
(o)–(q). The initial constituents are pragmatically prominent: in (o) and (p), praetores
and me (quoque) are contrastive topics; in (q), lacrumas is emphatic focus. The subor-
dinate clauses as a whole do not seem to have a special pragmatic function in the
sentence, although some of their constituents may, like considerate, which is con-
trasted with raro, in (o).¹⁹⁷
(o) Itaque maiores nostri raro id accidere voluerunt. Praetores ut considerate
fieret comparaverunt.
(‘Accordingly our ancestors willed that this should happen only on rare occasions.
The praetors have established that it should be done with circumspection.’ Cic.
Quinct. 51)
(p) ‘Nam hercule,’ inquit Minucius, ‘me quoque Petilius ut sibi in consilio essem
rogavit’ et simul a subselliis abire coepit.
(‘ “Why, the truth is,” said Minucius, “that Petilius has asked me too to be one of his
council”; and with that he left his place to go.’ Cic. Ver. 2.72)
(q) Lacrumas / haec mi quom video eliciunt . . .
(‘When I see this, it makes me want to weep . . .’ Pl. Trin. 289–90)
¹⁹⁷ The order A a A is relatively uncommon. For data on Cic. Phil., see Lindskog (1896: 60).
The order of superordinate and subordinate clauses
Supplement:
Nam scortum in convivio / sibi amator, talos quom iacit, scortum invocat. (Pl. Capt.
72–3); Nam tibi iam ut pereas paratum est dupliciter nisi supprimis / tuom stultilo-
quium. (Pl. Mil. 295–6); Ego quid ille et contra ille quid ego sentirem et spectarem
videbat. (Cic. Phil. 2.38); Iam enim, quoniam criminibus eius satis respondi, de ipso
emendatore et correctore nostro quaedam dicenda sunt. (Cic. Phil. 2.43); Haec te vox
non perculit, non perturbavit, non ut capiti et fortunis tuis prospiceres excitavit?
(Cic. Ver. 3.132); Hac divisione, cum praeterire aliquid maximum vitium in divi-
dendo sit, duo praetermissa sunt. (Cic. Off. 1.10); Ego autem quae dicenda fuerunt de
te non praeterii. (Cic. Att. 1.5.5); Eodem anno Valerius consul cum exercitu in Aequos
profectus, cum hostem ad proelium elicere non posset, castra oppugnare est adortus.
(Liv. 2.62.1); C. Caesar bello civili cum veteranum exercitum haberet, hostium autem
tironem esse sciret, acie semper decertare studuit (Fron. Str. 1.3.2); Hamilcar dux
Poenorum, cum frequenter auxiliares Galli ad Romanos transirent et iam ex consue-
tudine ut socii exciperentur, fidissimos subornavit ad simulandam transitionem.
(Fron. Str. 3.16.2)
Single words of the superordinate clause at the end of the sentence are rare. Three
instances from Plautus are: Metuo miser / ne patrem prehendat ut sit gesta res suspicio.
(Pl. Mer. 212–13); Sescenta tanta reddam, si vivo, tibi. (Pl. Bac. 1034); Vorsabo ego
illum hodie, si vivo, probe. (Pl. Bac. 766). It is not always clear what their pragmatic
function is.¹⁹⁸
In Livy resumed topics that precede a postquam clause are subject of both the post-
quam clause and the following main clause. By contrast, when the resumed topic
follows postquam, it is not the subject of the following main clause.¹⁹⁹ This is shown
by (r) and (s).
(r) Scipio postquam in Siciliam venit, voluntarios milites ordinavit centuriavitque.
(‘Scipio, now that he had reached Sicily, assigned his volunteers to their
ranks and centuries.’ Liv. 29.1.1)
(s) Postquam Manlius dixit . . . pecuniae quoque summa homines movit . . .
(‘After Manlius had spoken . . . people were also moved by the greatness of
the sum required . . .’ Liv. 22.61.1)
(t) Eos (sc. viros) legat, Telobois iubet sententiam ut dicant suam.
(‘He sent them as delegates and ordered them to tell the Teloboians his decision.’
Pl. Am. 205)
(u) Sed unam rem vereor ne non probes.
(‘But there is one item which I fear may not meet with your approval.’ Cic. Phil. 2.34)
(v) Sed plebes incredibile memoratu est quam intenta fuerit quantaque vi roga-
tionem iusserit . . .
(‘But it is amazing to relate how engaged the commons were and with what vehe-
mence they passed the bill . . .’ Sal. Jug. 40.3)
(w) In oratoribus vero, Graecis quidem, admirabile est quantum inter omnis unus
excellat.
(‘Among orators, certainly among Greek orators, it is amazing how one man has pre-
eminence over all.’ Cic. Orat. 6)
Supplement:
Quasi lupus esuriens metui ne in me faceret impetum. (Pl. Capt. 912); I, Palaestrio, /
aurum, ornamenta, vestem, pretiosa omnia / duc adiutores tecum ad navim qui
ferant. (Pl. Mil. 1301–3); Sed ego nunc est quom me commoror. (Pl. Poen.
924); . . . de digito anulum / detraho et eum dico ut una cum puella exponeret. (Ter.
Hau. 650–1); Primum ista nostra assiduitas, Servi, nescis quantum interdum
adferat hominibus fastidii, quantum satietatis. (Cic. Mur. 21); Sed vos squalidius,
illorum vides quam niteat oratio. (Cic. Fin. 4.5); Ad me obsecro te ut omnia certa
perscribas. (Cic. Att. 3.11.2); Eas (sc. epistulas) ego oportet perspiciam, corrigam.
(Cic. Att. 16.5.5); Rationem haberi absentis non tam pugnavi ut liceret quam ut,
quoniam ipso consule pugnante populus iusserat, haberetur. (Cic. Fam. 6.6.5);
Tametsi tu scio quam sis curiosus et quam omnibus peregrinantibus gratum sit
minimarum quoque rerum quae domi gerantur fieri certiores. (Cael. Fam. 8.1.1);
Item aquarum ductiones et cetera quae eiusmodi sunt nota oportet sint architec-
tis . . . (Vitr. 1.1.10)
The a A a order is quite common with a governing verb of the type fac, cave, as in (x).²⁰¹
(x) Sed has tabellas, Paegnium, / ipsi Lemniseleni fac des . . .
(‘But do give these tablets to Lemniselenis in person, Paegnium . . .’ Pl. Per.
195–6)
Supplement:
Anulum gnati tui / facito ut memineris ferre. (Pl. Bac. 327–8); Dolia cum vino bis in
die fac extergeantur . . . (Cato Agr. 26); Principio, si id te mordet . . . quaeso, hoc facito
tecum cogites. (Ter. Ad. 807–8); Tu nos fac ames. (Vat. Fam. 5.9.2)
Verbo cave supplicassis. (Pl. As. 467); Incertus tuom cave ad me rettuleris pedem.
(Pl. Epid. 439)
More complicated forms of interlacing, as in (aa) and (ab), are rare and difficult to
explain from a pragmatic perspective.
(aa) Eius nunc mi anulum ad te ancilla porro ut deferrem dedit.
(‘Now her maid has given me this ring to pass on to you.’ Pl. Mil. 960)
(ab) Ac veteres quidem philosophi in beatorum insulis fingunt qualis futura sit
vita sapientium . . .
(‘And what is more, the old philosophers picture what the life of the Wise will be in
the Islands of the Blest . . .’ Cic. Fin. 5.53)
Supplement:
Nunc, patres conscripti, ego mea video quid intersit. (Cic. Catil. 4.9); Quis autem
meum consulatum praeter te ac P. Clodium qui vituperaret inventus est? (Cic. Phil.
2.11—NB: constituent of a relative clause)
common order is A a, among other things due to the fact that the accusative and
infinitive clause is often relatively heavy.²⁰² However, there is variation among authors.
The order A a is particularly common in non-literary texts and in Late Latin texts,
except in those intended for an educated audience. In Late Latin, accusative and
infinitive clauses are relatively often placed at the beginning of or early in their sen-
tence in comparison with finite alternatives. See § 15.9.
(a) (sc. consules) Perspiciebant enim in Hortensi sententiam multis partibus
pluris ituros . . .
(‘For they perceived that the majority would altogether accede to the judgement of
Hortensius . . .’ Cic. Fam. 1.2.2)
(b) Risi nivem atram teque hilari animo esse et prompto ad iocandum valde me
iuvat.
(‘Your “black snow” made me laugh, and that you are so cheerful and ready for a joke
makes me very glad.’ Cic. Q. fr. 2.12.1)
(c) . . . ego ipse, quem tu per iocum (sic enim accipio) divitias orationis habere
dicis, me non esse verborum admodum inopem agnosco . . .
(‘. . . I myself, whom you jestingly (so I suppose) credit with verbal riches, acknow-
ledge that I am not altogether unprovided with words . . .’ Cic. Fam. 4.4.1)
(d) L. Pisonem quis nescit his temporibus ipsis maximum et sanctissimum
Dianae sacellum in Caeliculo sustulisse?
(‘Take Lucius Piso: Surely there can be none of us who does not know that in these
very days he has destroyed a magnificent and venerable shrine of Diana, situated on
the lesser Caelian?’ Cic. Har. 32)
(e) Nam ut utilitatem nullam esse docuimus, quae honestati esset contraria, sic
omnem voluptatem dicimus honestati esse contrariam.
(‘As I have shown that such expediency as is opposed to moral rectitude is no expedi-
ency, so I maintain that any and all sensual pleasure is opposed to moral rectitude.’
Cic. Off. 3.119)
Supplement:
AcI follows: Quis ignorabat Q. Pompeium fecisse foedus, eadem in causa esse
Mancinum? (Cic. Rep. 3.28); Multo denique die per exploratores Caesar cognovit et
montem ab suis teneri et Helvetios castra movisse et Considium timore perterri-
tum quod non vidisset pro viso sibi renuntiavisse. (Caes. Gal. 1.22.4); . . . et iam
antea expertus sum parum fidei miseris esse. (Sal. Jug. 24.4); Ut scias me recte
valere. (CEL App. l 2 (Vindolanda, c. ad 100))
AcI precedes: Magnam vim esse in fortuna in utramque partem, vel secundas ad
res vel adversas, quis ignorat? (Cic. Off. 2.19); Locum autem actionis opportuni-
tatem temporis esse dicunt. (Cic. Off. 1.142); Tamen in lege nulla esse eius modi
²⁰² For Caesar, see Schneider (1912: 92–7); for Cicero, Bolkestein (1989a); for Sallust, Greco (2019); for
a number of Christian texts, Herman (1989), Adams (2016: 328), and Greco and Ferrari (2019); for non-
literary texts and Petronius, Adams (2005a); for texts from Plautus until Gregory of Tours, Greco (2018).
The order of superordinate and subordinate clauses
caput te non fallit. (Cic. Att. 3.23.4); Accedebat quod suos ab se liberos abstractos
obsidum nomine dolebant . . . (Caes. Gal. 3.2.5); Iam omnes fontes aestate quam
hieme gelidiores esse quem fallit? (Plin. Nat. 2.233); Te / tanto magis venturum /
Coria sicut constituisti/ spero. (Vindol. III.611.2–5 (Vindolanda, c. ad 100))
AcI inserted: (sc. Pompeius) Simul infamia duarum legionum permotus quas ab iti-
nere Asiae Syriaeque ad suam potentiam dominatumque converterat rem ad arma
deduci studebat. (Caes. Civ. 1.4.5); . . . calones, qui ab decumana porta ac summo iugo
collis nostros victores flumen transisse conspexerant, praedandi causa egressi, cum
respexissent et hostes in nostris castris versari vidissent, praecipites fugae sese man-
dabant. (Caes. Gal. 2.24.2)
AcI enclosing main clause: Honc oino · ploirume · cosentiont · R<omane> /
duonoro · optumo · fuise · viro / Luciom · Scipione. (CIL I2.9.1–3 (Scip. Elog.,
Rome, c.200 bc));²⁰³ Mequidem semper scio fecisse sedulo / ut ex illiu’ commodo
meum compararem commodum. (Ter. Hau. 396–7); Omnes sensus veri nuntios
dixit esse. (Cic. N.D. 1.70—NB: sentence-final esse eight times in the sample underlying
Table 23.7 on p. 1043); Orpheum poetam docet Aristoteles numquam fuisse . . .
(Cic. N.D. 1.107); P. Clodium Appi f. credo te audisse cum veste muliebri deprehen-
sum domi C. Caesaris cum sacrificium pro populo fieret . . . (Cic. Att. 1.12.3); Multos
scio sic periisse, dum nolunt sibi verum dicere. (Petr. 47.6 (Trimalchio speaking)); . . .
plerasque vero esse (sc. causas) quis nescit quae totae in sola qualitate consistant?
(Quint. Inst. 12.2.15)
²⁰³ For this example, in the context of a discussion of the origin of the accusative and infinitive clause,
see Rosén (1999: 154–6).
²⁰⁴ For the position of ablative absolute clauses in the Bellum Alexandrinum, see Gaertner and
Hausburg (2013: 63–4). Caesar places the ablative absolute clause before the main clause because of his
‘desire for chronological accuracy’ (Eden 1962: 104–6). For Sallust and Livy, see Kruijer and la
Roi (2018).
²⁰⁵ See Enghofer (1961: 120–6 and, for discontinuous ablative absolute clauses in Tacitus, 76–82).
Word order
Insertion in the ablative absolute clause of one or more constituents of the super-
ordinate clause is rare, except in Caesar and the historians, where it serves as a device
to tighten the relation between clauses (see § 14.19 and § 16.90). An early instance of
this form of interlacing is (e). A more elaborate form is shown in (g).²⁰⁶
(e) Mene ego illaec patiar praesente dici?
(‘Should I tolerate those things being said in my presence?’ Pl. Poen. 368)
(f) Quibus hic litteris lectis ad urbem confestim incredibili celeritate advolavit.
(‘As soon as he had read my letter he hastened to Rome with amazing speed.’ Cic.
Sest. 11)
(g) Hac re statim Caesar per speculatores cognita insidias veritus . . . exerci-
tum . . . castris continuit.
(‘Caesar learnt this at once through his scouts; fearing an ambush . . . he kept the
army . . . in camp.’ Caes. Gal. 2.11.2)
Supplement:
. . . sancte adiurat / non posse apud vos Pamphilo se absente perdurare. (Ter. Hec. 268–9);
Quibus rebus ego cognitis cunctatus non sum. (Planc. Fam. 10.15.2); Recepto Caesar
Orico nulla interposita mora Apolloniam proficiscitur. (Caes. Civ. 3.12.1); Huius
Pausanias voluntate cognita alacrior ad rem gerendam factus in suspicionem cecidit
Lacedaemoniorum. (Nep. Paus. 2.6); Quorum Iugurtha accepta oratione respon-
dit . . . (Sal. Jug. 22.2); Dextra Hercules data accipere se omen inpleturumque fata ara
condita ac dicata ait. (Liv. 1.7.11); Contione adveniens de Manlio et Iunio habita, non
ultra triduum moratus Romae, paludatis lictoribus votisque in Capitolio nuncupatis
in provinciam aeque ac prius praecipiti celeritate abit. (Liv. 41.10.13—NB: secondary
predicate); Quorum paucitate Alexander explorata . . . iussit. (Curt. 4.9.24)
²⁰⁶ For interlacing in ablative absolute clauses (and in participial secondary predicates) within the
framework of Lexical-Functional Grammar in Caesar Gal., see Haug (2017: 130–9).
The order of superordinate and subordinate clauses
The insertion of the intensifier ipse (see §§ 11.144–6) and the distributive quantifier
quisque (see § 21.23) in a participial clause is attested from Livy onwards, as in (h)
and (i).²⁰⁷
(h) . . . causam apud vos, patres conscripti, accusantibus meis ipse legatis dico.
(‘. . . I am pleading my case before you in person, members of the senate, with my own
legates pressing the charges.’ Liv. 38.47.7)
(i) . . . ex omnibus oppidi partibus, relictis suis quisque stationibus, in
eum . . . locum concurrerunt.
(‘. . . they all left their posts in every sector of the town and quickly converged on that
spot . . .’ Liv. 32.24.4)
Supplement:
Romani quoque imperatores . . . iunctis et ipsi exercitibus per agrum Ausetanum . . . ad
sedem hostium pervenere . . . (Liv. 29.2.1–2); C. Popillius . . . dimissis et ipse Attali
navibus ad susceptam legationem peragendam navigare Aegyptum pergit . . . (Liv.
45.10.2); Quid enim aliud nobis quam caedem Crassi amisso et ipse Pacoro infra
Ventidium deiectus Oriens obiecerit? (Tac. Ger. 37.3)
Tum vero omnes, velut diis auctoribus in spem suam quisque acceptis, id morae
quod nondum pugnarent ad potienda sperata rati, proelium uno animo et voce una
poscunt. (Liv. 21.45.9)
Whereas in the examples above ipse and quisque are related to the subject of the super-
ordinate clause, this is not the case in ( j). Also cited in this context is Justin. 29.1.8.
( j) Sed postquam in Hispania Hercules, sicuti Afri putant, interiit, exercitus
eius, conpositus ex variis gentibus, amisso duce ac passim multis sibi quisque
imperium petentibus brevi dilabitur.
(‘After Hercules died in Spain, as the Africans believe, his army (now that
the leader was gone) soon dispersed, made up as it was by diverse nation-
alities, and many were contending, each against the others, to succeed
him.’ Sall. Jug. 18.3)
²⁰⁷ For Livy, see Riemann (1885: 259–61). There are further references in Sz.: 402 and Traenkle (1968:
140–2). For the use of ipse in gerundial clauses, see § 16.101.
Word order
the main clause at the end contains the most salient information. In (c), we see a different
arrangement with a cum adjunct clause (the setting) at the beginning and an accusative
and infinitive object clause at the end as the most salient information (order: a A b).
Constituents can be anteposed for pragmatic reasons, as in (d). Haec, which is the
object of offendam, refers to a number of actions mentioned in the preceding context.
(a) Nunc hoc dicunt, utrumque se nosse. Alterum se cupere defensorem esse for-
tunarum suarum, alterum plane nolle. Cur nolint, etiamsi taceant, satis dicunt.
(‘What they actually are saying is that they know both of us, and that they are eager
to have one of us to champion their interests, and will not have the other at all. Why
they will not have the other they let us know plainly, even if they remain silent.’ Cic.
Div. Caec. 20–1)
(b) . . . et si quem nos interrogare noluimus, quae causa nobis tacendi fuerit exis-
timare debetis.
(‘. . . and if we have shown reluctance to cross-examine someone, it is for you to infer
what the motive for our silence was.’ Cic. Font. 22)
(c) Haec cum dixisset, iuravit se nisi victorem in castra non reversurum reli-
quosque ut idem facerent hortatus est.
(‘After speaking thus, he took an oath that he would not return to camp except as a
victor, and he urged the rest to do the same.’ Caes. Civ. 3.87.5)
(d) Haec, quom ego a foro revortar, facite ut offendam parata . . .
(‘Make sure that when I return from the market I find that all this is ready . . .’ Pl. Ps. 163)
Another type is shown in (e) and (f). Here we have two adjunct clauses (exception-
ally also of the same type and with the same subordinator) which function at differ-
ent levels. In (e), the first ubi clause functions as a position in time adjunct for the
combination of the ubi Larem . . . clause with the fundum . . . circumeat main clause.
This can be symbolized as a (b A). Because the two ubi clauses are hierarchically dif-
ferent they cannot be coordinated. In terms of information structure both clauses
function as settings, which explains the order in which they are arranged.²⁰⁸ In (g),
the disjunct clause with quoniam is in its usual initial position (see § 16.42), followed
by the position in time adjunct with antequam, which is the setting for the main
clause at the end.
(e) Pater familias ubi ad villam venit, ubi Larem familiarem salutavit, fundum
eodem die, si potest, circumeat.
(‘When the master arrives at the farmstead, after paying his respect to the god of the
household, let him go over the whole farm, if possible, on the same day.’ Cato Agr. 2.1)
(f) Deinde si quam opinionem iam vestris mentibus comprehendistis, si eam
ratio convellet . . . ne repugnetis eamque animis vestris aut libentibus aut aequis
remittatis.
²⁰⁸ For instances of two different satellite clauses preceding a common superordinate clause in Plautus,
see Lindskog (1896: 49–50).
The order of superordinate and subordinate clauses
(‘Next, that if you have already formed some opinion, if it be dislodged by rea-
son . . . you dismiss it without resistance from your minds, if not gladly, at least with-
out reluctance.’ Cic. Clu. 6)
(g) Et quoniam in hoc officio studium meae defensionis ab accusatoribus atque
etiam ipsa susceptio causae reprehensa est, antequam pro L. Murena dicere
instituo, pro me ipso pauca dicam . . .
(‘And because in this fulfilment of my obligation I have been attacked by the prosecu-
tion for the vigour of my defence and even for the fact that I have taken on the case
at all, before I begin to speak in Murena’s defence, I shall say a few words on my own
behalf . . .’ Cic. Mur. 2)
Supplement:
Si nox furtum factum sit (faxit cj. Cujacius), si im occisit, iure caesus esto. (Lex XII
8.12); Si prata inrigua habebis, simulac faenum sustuleris, inrigare. (Var. R. 1.31.5);
Nam si tu mihi quamvis eruditum hominem adduxeris . . . si erit idem in consuetu-
dine civitatis . . . hospes, non multum ei loci proderunt illi ex quibus argumenta pro-
muntur. (Cic. de Orat. 2.131)
More complex instances: [cum] Equus matrem salire cum adduci non posset,
<cum> eum capite obvoluto auriga adduxisset et coegisset matrem inire, cum
descendenti dempsisset ab oculis, [et] ille impetum fecit in eum ac mordicus inter-
fecit. (Var. R. 2.7.9); Romam ut ex Sicilia redii, cum iste atque istius amici . . . ser-
mones eiusmodi dissipassent . . . tametsi probabatur nemini . . . tamen usque eo timui
ne . . . (Cic. Ver. 1.17); . . . sin autem is tu sis, qui multam utilitatem rei publicae atque
hominum societati, si in vita remaneas, adferre possis, si quid ob eam causam alteri
detraxeris, non sit reprehendendum. (Cic. Off. 3.30)
A third type is shown in (h). Here, the sentence consists of one superordinate clause
and two subordinate clauses, a first-degree and a second-degree clause. The connect-
ive relative pronoun quod is in its typical initial position. It is the object of efficere in
the second-degree indirect question quem ad modum . . . possit; this clause itself is the
object of the first-degree reason adjunct clause quia . . . non videtis. The main clause is
ut tragici poetae . . . confugitis ad deum. The structure can be symbolized as l a A, its
actual order being l a l a A. The quia clause functions as a setting and precedes the
main clause. (The main clause is interrupted again by a cum clause, here ignored.)²⁰⁹
Artistic factors (see § 23.14) seem relevant as well: note the sequence of three qu-
words, for which one may compare the well-known Ovidian example (i). A more
complicated case is ( j), with three subordinate clauses of different degree. Τhe con-
nective relative clause quorum verborum . . . discordia omnis in consuetudine communi,
heavy as it is,²¹⁰ is in first position. It is the attribute of commutatio in the indirect
question quot modis . . . facta, which itself is the object of the autonomous relative
clause qui animadverterit, the subject of the main clause at the end of the sentence.
(h) Quod quia quem ad modum natura efficere sine aliqua mente possit non
videtis, ut tragici poetae, cum explicare argumenti exitum non potestis, con-
fugitis ad deum.
²⁰⁹ For discussion, see Pease ad loc. ²¹⁰ For similar heavy clauses, see Pennell Ross (1991).
Word order
(‘But because you cannot see how nature can achieve all this without the aid of some
intelligence, you, like the tragic poets, have recourse to a god when you are unable to
bring the plot of your drama to a dénouement.’ Cic. N.D. 1.53)
(i) . . . si quis qui quid agam forte requirat erit / vivere me dices . . .
(‘. . . if there’s one, perhaps, who asks how I am, say I’m alive . . .’ Ov. Tr. 1.1.18–19—tr.
Kline)
( j) Quorum verborum novorum ac veterum discordia omnis in consuetudine
com<m>uni (sc. est) quot modis commutatio sit facta qui animadverterit
facilius scrutari origines patietur verborum.
(‘Now he who has observed in how many ways the changes have taken place in those
words, new and old, in which there is any and every manner of variation in popular
usage, will find the examination of the origin of the words an easier task.’ Var. L. 5.6)²¹¹
Supplement:
Quid autem agatur cum aperuero, facile erit statuere quam sententiam dicatis aut
quam sequamini. (Cic. Phil. 5.6); Quoniam quod iudicium et quo consilio constitu-
tum sit cognostis, nunc rem ipsam, ut gesta sit, dum breviter vobis demonstro, atten-
dite. (Cic. Tul. 13); . . . de reliquo iam nostra culpa fuerit, si te, nisi omnia quae
percontati erimus explicaris, dimiserimus. (Cic. de Orat. 1.100); Mando tibi plane
totum ut videas cuius modi sit. (Cic. Att. 1.12.2); Hoc quod obicio qui in pluribus
fecit occisus est. (Sen. Con. 7.6.11)
More complex instances: Igitur, inquit Agrasius, quae diiungenda essent a cultura cuius-
modi sint quoniam discretum, de iis rebus quae in scientia sit in colendo nos docet<e>
ars id an quid aliud . . . (Var. R. 1.3); Sed cur tam diu de uno hoste loquimur et de eo hoste
qui iam fatetur se esse hostem . . .quem, quia, quod semper volui, murus interest, non
timeo. (Cic. Catil. 2.17); Mercatoribus est aditus magis eo, ut quae bello ceperint quibus
vendant habeant, quam quo ullam rem ad se importari desiderent. (Caes. Gal. 4.2.1)
In the examples discussed so far a superordinate clause occupies the final position. In
reality, complex sentences of this type much more often have a superordinate clause
in initial position.²¹²
²¹¹ This is the reading in Kent’s Loeb edition, defended by Laughton (1960: 5). After modis Fritzsche
deleted litterarum, which de Melo maintains in his text between brackets.
²¹² See Sz.: 732–4, with references. For comparative data of Plautus, Rhet. Her., and Cicero Phil. 14, see
Golla (1935: 39–41). In Plautus, by contrast, sequences of preceding subordinate clauses, each having their
own relation to the main clause, are common (Blänsdorf 1967: 9–27).
²¹³ See Lisón (2001: 161–3), Devine and Stephens (2006: Ch. 5), and Spevak (2014a: Ch. 2), from
whom many of the examples are taken.
Word order at the noun phrase level
²¹⁴ For the order at the noun phrase level, see Ammann (1911), Marouzeau (1922), Adams (1976a), de
Jong (1986), Gettert (1999), Lisón (2001), Devine and Stephens (2006), Baldi and Nuti (2010: 365–73),
Langslow (2012), Giusti and Iovino (2015), and above all Spevak (2014a; 2016b).
²¹⁵ In the corpus used by Devine and Stephens parvus precedes the noun in 85 per cent of cases (2006:
467–71).
Word order
The three examples manifest three different pragmatic constellations but only two dif-
ferent orders. It is very likely that they had different intonation contours, but we do
not know them. Postposition of an attribute is common when the noun phrase has
focus function, as in (c). By contrast, when the referent of the noun is known from the
context and especially if the noun phrase is topic of the clause, anteposition of the
attribute is more common.²¹⁶
(ii) The function of head of a noun phrase can be fulfilled by constituents that belong
to various lexical categories, which are discussed in §§ 11.2–23. This is illustrated by
(d), an example of a common noun, and (e), an indefinite pronoun. It is quite natural
that these constituents have different ordering possibilities.
(d) Numqui minus ea gratia tamen omnium opera utor?
(‘Do I make any less use of the services of you all for that reason?’ Pl. Ps. 160)
(e) Hoc modo aut ego aut tu, Hortensi, aut quisquam omnium rettulit?
(‘Have you or I, Hortensius, has anyone in the world, ever presented them like that?’
Cic. Ver. 1.36)
But even within the class of common nouns differences exist that are related among
other things to the type of entity the nouns refer to (see § 3.6). An animate first-order
noun like miles ‘soldier’ can be combined with different attributes from a second-
order noun like bellum ‘war’. However, they have in common that they can play a
central role in a war narrative like Caesar’s de Bello Gallico, and their attributes are
often pragmatically salient (and then anteposed). By contrast, an inanimate first-
order noun like ager ‘field’ plays a less central role in such a text and its attributes are
rarely salient (and therefore rarely anteposed, see (k) below).²¹⁷ Indirectly, the fre-
quency of ante- and postposition of the attribute can also correlate with the number
of the noun. With the nominative singular vir ‘man’ postposition of the adjective is
predominant, certainly when the noun phrase functions as an apposition, but also
when it functions at the clause level, as in (f). By contrast, the accusative plural viros
is usually part of the object, which often has focus function, and, as a consequence,
anteposition of the adjective is predominant, as in (g).²¹⁸
(f) Si exempli gratia vir bonus Alexandrea Rhodum magnum frumenti numerum
advexerit in Rhodiorum inopia et fame . . .
(‘If for example an honest man has imported a large cargo of grain from Alexandria
to Rhodes at a time of dearth and famine of the Rhodians . . .’ Cic. Off. 3.50)
(g) Complecti vis amplissimos viros ad tuum et Gabini scelus, neque id occulte.
(‘You desire to implicate men of high standing in the crime of yourself and Gabinius,
and that without disguise.’ Cic. Pis. 75)
Valency of the noun is another factor in the ordering of constituents of a noun phrase.
On the whole, (obligatory) arguments of nouns precede their head nouns as often as
they follow, as in (h) and (i). Optional possessive genitives, depending on the head
noun, are more often anteposed, as in ( j), but see (k).²¹⁹
(h) Confines erant hi Senonibus civitatemque patrum memoria coniunxerant . . .
(‘These were next neighbours to the Senones, and in the previous generation had
formed one state with them . . .’ Caes. Gal. 6.3.5)
(i) Quid? Quod usu memoria patrum venit, ut pater familias, qui ex Hispania
Romam venisset . . .
(‘And again, what about the case that occurred in our fathers’ time, of the head of a house-
hold who had come from Spain to Rome . . .’ Cic. de Orat. 1.183—tr. May and Wisse)
( j) In hoc erant numero complures Pompei milites . . .
(‘Among the latter were many of Pompey’s soldiers . . .’ Caes. Civ. 3.103.5)
(k) Caesari renuntiatur Helvetiis esse in animo per agrum Sequanorum et
Haeduorum iter in Santonum fines facere . . .
(‘The news was brought back to Caesar that the Helvetii were minded to march
through the land of the Sequani and the Aedui into the borders of the Santones . . .’
Caes. Gal. 1.10.1)
(iii) The function of attribute of a noun phrase can be fulfilled by constituents that
belong to various lexical categories, which are discussed in §§ 11.24–74. Their position
with respect to the head varies, as grammars note: in Classical prose possessive adjec-
tives, for example, regularly follow their nouns; ‘normal’ adjectives and quantifiers
precede.²²⁰ The problem with observations of this type is that there is considerable
variation between individual words in each of these classes and that there is also much
variation between authors and types of text: in Cato Agr., for example, most ‘normal’
adjectives follow their head. Moreover, most often no explanation is given why in a
specific situation the attribute follows or precedes. Among these attributes, ‘normal’
adjectives can be subdivided into several semantic classes which behave differently as
far as position is concerned, as is shown in §§ 23.71–9. Certain adjectives require
another constituent on the basis of their valency (see §§ 4.99–104). Adjectives can
also be expanded with optional constituents (see § 11.91–9). The use of such adjective
phrases as attribute is not very common, but see (l) and (m), repeated from § 11.92.
The presence of an obligatory or optional constituent favours postponement of the
adjective phrase, as in (l) and (m).
(l) . . . servos ad caedem idoneos emit . . .
(‘. . . (who) has bought slaves ready for murder . . .’ Cic. Sest. 95)
In the preceding section it was shown that the relative order of head and attribute is
determined by various factors, such as properties of the attributes, properties of the
head nouns, the role of the noun phrase as a whole in its clause, and its internal com-
plexity. In the following sections a more traditional presentation will be given of the
position of the various categories of attributes with respect to their head. An import-
ant distinction between the various types of attributes is that between attributes with
and attributes without referential properties, coinciding more or less with, on the one
hand, attributes that show agreement with their head and, on the other, nouns and
noun phrases in various cases and prepositional phrases. For the position of adnom-
inal relative clauses, see § 18.12.
than ‘normal’ adjectives; possessive adjectives slightly more often follow their heads.
The various categories of attributes are discussed separately, in the order of presenta-
tion of Chapter 11.
Determiners most often precede the head noun. Interrogative and relative deter-
miners almost always precede; demonstrative, anaphoric, and indefinite determiners
show more variation. The demonstrative determiner ille, for example, shows the vari-
ation in Table 23.8.²²³
²²³ See Rohde (1884; 1887). Lodge: s.v. ille § II (p. 747A) says that there are sixty instances of postpos-
ition of ille in Plautus.
²²⁴ In the corpus used by Lisón (2001: 115) more than 90 per cent of cases (Cic. de Orat., Liv. XXVI and
XXVIII, and Sen. Ep. I–V). Spevak (2010c: 59) reports for is 98 per cent (Cic. Att. I–IV, Caes. Gal. I–V, Sal.
Cat. and Jug.). For the position of is, see also Fischer (1908: 91–5), TLL s.v. 480.73ff., and Lodge: s.v. is § II
(p. 829B).
Word order
(d) Hi autem erant inimici Agathinus, homo nobilis, et Dorotheus, qui habebat
in matrimonio Callidamam, Agathini eius filiam.
(‘These enemies were a man of some note named Agathinus, and Dorotheus, who
was married to Callidama the daughter of this Agathinus.’ Cic. Ver. 2.89)
(e) Haec illi est pugnata pugna usque a mani ad vesperum / . . . sed proelium id
tandem diremit nox interventu suo.
(‘This fight was fought there without interruption from morning till evening . . . but
finally night settled this battle through its intervention.’ Pl. Am. 253–5)
Supplement (instances of—rare—postposition):
Ne triumphus quidem finem facit belli, per quem lata est urbs ea sine qua numquam
ex Transalpinis gentibus maiores nostri triumphaverunt. (Cic. Phil. 8.18); Quae nisi
qui naturas hominum vimque omnem humanitatis causasque eas quibus mentes aut
incitantur aut reflectuntur penitus perspexerit, dicendo quod volet perficere non
poterit. (Cic. de Orat. 1.53); Itaque cum exercitu per Cappadociae partem eam quae
cum Cilicia continens est iter feci . . . (Cic. Fam. 15.2.2); Maiorem partem aetatis eius
qua civilibus officiis fungantur homines, Romae se quam in vetere patria vixisse.
(Liv. 1.35.4)
. . . Laelius interim freto in Oceanum evectus ad Carteiam classe accessit. Urbs ea
in ora Oceani sita est . . . (Liv. 28.30.3)
The demonstrative determiners hic, ille, and iste are most often anteposed.²²⁵ In their
deictic use (see § 11.26) they regularly precede, as is shown for hic in (f), but in Plautus
the reverse order is not uncommon, as in (g), not only for entities on the stage: along-
side hunc diem ‘this day’, for example, the reverse order diem hunc is also found.²²⁶
Postposition is also common in situations like (h), where Cicero mentions a person as
present whom the audience already knows. When used anaphorically (which is the
most common use), the determiner also most often precedes but, again, postposition
is possible, as in (i). Postposition is rare when the noun is modified by an adnominal
relative clause, but see ( j) and (k), when the determiner modifies a compound phrase,
as in (l), or when the noun is prominent in some way, as in (m), an important person,
and (n), contrast with bellum.²²⁷ Postposition is very common in poetry.
(f) Ego interim hanc aram occupabo.
(‘Meanwhile I’ll occupy this altar.’ Pl. Mos. 1094)
(g) Tange aram hanc Veneris.
(‘Touch this altar of Venus.’ Pl. Rud. 1333)
(h) C. Quinctius fuit P. Quincti huius frater . . .
(‘Gaius Quinctius was the brother of Publius Quinctius, my client here . . .’ Cic. Quinct. 11)
²²⁵ In Lisón’s corpus hic more than 95 per cent; iste more than 80 per cent; ille more than 75 per cent.
See also Fischer (1908: 31–2 (hic), 43 (iste), 65–6 (ille)).
²²⁶ The proportion is thirty-two vs. two (PHI).
²²⁷ For the position of hic, see TLL s.v. hic 2739.32ff. and Devine and Stephens (2006: 511–20).
Word order at the noun phrase level
(i) . . . aegritudo in animo nomen habet non seiunctum a dolore. Doloris huius
igitur origo nobis explicanda est . . .
(‘. . . distress in the soul has a name which in meaning is not distinct from the meaning
of pain. We must therefore trace out the origin of this pain . . .’ Cic. Tusc. 3.23)
( j) Ac negotiis quidem fere res haec quas commemoravimus sunt adtributae.
(‘And the circumstances which we have now mentioned are those which are usually
attributed to things as opposed to persons.’ Cic. Inv. 1.43)
(k) . . . cur non imitamur, Crasse, Socratem illum qui est in Phaedro Platonis?
(‘Say, Crassus, why don’t we follow the example of Socrates as he appears in Plato’s
Phaedrus?’ Cic. de Orat. 1.28—tr. May and Wisse)
(l) Intellegitur, iudices, id quod iam ante dixi, imprudente L. Sulla scelera haec
et flagitia fieri.
(‘It is easy to see, gentlemen, that, as I have said before, all these infamous crimes
were committed without the knowledge of Sulla.’ Cic. S. Rosc. 25)
(m) . . . ut Socratem illum solitum aiunt dicere perfectum sibi opus esse, si qui
satis esset concitatus cohortatione sua . . .
(‘We are told that Socrates always said that his work was done if he had sufficiently
succeeded, by his exhortations, in stirring someone . . .’ Cic. de Orat. 1.204—tr. May
and Wisse)
(n) Nisi aut Hamilcar Hannibali dux est praeferendus aut illud bellum huic, aut
victoria illa maior clariorque quam haec . . . futura est.
(‘Unless Hamilcar is to be rated above Hannibal as a general, or that war above this
one, or unless that victory was greater and more famous than this one . . . is to be . . .’
Liv. 28.41.4)
Supplement (instances of—rare—postposition):
Sed totum genus oppugnationis huius, iudices, et iam prospicitis animis et, cum
inferetur, propulsare debebitis. (Cic. Cael. 20); Sthenius hic Thermitanus cum hoc
capillo atque veste domo sua tota expilata mentionem tuorum furtorum non facit.
(Cic. Ver. 5.128); Cogebat enim me M. Marcellus hic noster, qui nunc aedilis curulis
est et profecto, nisi ludos nunc faceret, huic nostro sermoni interesset. (Cic. de Orat.
1.57); Cossinius hic cui dedi litteras valde mihi bonus homo et non levis et amans tui
visus est . . . (Cic. Att. 1.19.11); Nam ego eo nomine sum Dyrrachii hoc tempore ut
quam celerrime quid agatur audiam, et sum tuto. Civitas enim haec semper a me
defensa est. (Cic. Fam. 14.3.4)
. . . si vidulum illum quem ego in navi perdidi / cum auro atque argento salvom
investigavero . . . (Pl. Rud. 1339–40); . . . ut ex eodem Ponto Medea illa quondam
fugisse dicitur . . . (Cic. Man. 22); . . . veteres illi qui huic scientiae praefuerunt . . . per-
volgari artem suam noluerunt. (Cic. de Orat. 1.186); . . . stilus ille tuus, quem tu vere
dixisti perfectorem dicendi esse ac magistrum, multi sudoris est. (Cic. de Orat.
1.257); Quod si Antipater ille Sidonius, quem tu probe, Catule, meministi, solitus est
versus hexametros . . . fundere ex tempore . . . (Cic. de Orat. 3.104); Itaque multa augu-
ria, multa auspicia, quod Cato ille sapiens queritur, neglegentia collegii amissa plane
et deserta sunt. (Cic. Div. 1.28)
Word order
Quam diu etiam furor iste tuus nos eludet? (Cic. Catil. 1.1); Quid vero habet auctori-
tatis furor iste quem divinum vocatis, ut quae sapiens non videat ea videat insa-
nus . . . (Cic. Div. 2.110); . . . tibi et declinationem istam atomorum et magnitudinem solis
probabo . . . (Cic. Fin. 1.28); Nihil igitur te contra soritas ars ista adiuvat . . . (Cic. Luc. 94)
Anaphoric and demonstrative determiners can modify noun phrases that contain one
or more other modifiers (see § 11.26).²²⁸ The determiner most often precedes the
entire remaining part of the noun phrase, as in (o) and (p), but other orders are pos-
sible as well. These are usually pragmatically motivated. In (q), curam precedes the
two attributes because it is emphatic. In (r), noster precedes hic for the same reason.
(o) Itaque propter hanc dubitationem meam brevior haec ipsa epistula est . . .
(‘Therefore because of this uncertainty of mine my present letter is somewhat
short . . .’ Cic. Att. 1.9.1)
(p) Vereor enim ne re iam desperata legas, ut haec mea diligentia miserabilis
tibi, aliis irridenda videatur.
(‘For I fear that by the time you read this the matter may already have been given up
as a bad job. In that case my solicitude will seem pitiable to you and ludicrous to
others.’ Cic. Att. 3.23.4)
(q) Tanta res videbatur herbam invenire, vitam iuvare, nunc fortassis aliquis
curam hanc nostram frivolam quoque existimaturis.
(‘It was thought a great honour to discover a plant and be of assistance to human life,
although now perhaps some will think that these researches of mine are just idle
trifling.’ Plin. Nat. 25.22)
(r) Tamen, quam diu hic erit noster hic praefectus moribus, parebo auctoritati
tuae.
(‘Despite the foregoing, as long as our new Prefect of Morals remains in Rome, I shall
defer to your advice.’ Cic. Fam. 9.15.5)
In cases like (s) the words is and miles could be analysed either as a discontinuous
noun phrase with is functioning as determiner, or as a sequence of a pronoun and an
appositive noun. Similarly for is and leno in (t), and for eam and mulierem/virginem.²²⁹
It is probably best taken as an extreme form of discontinuity (see § 23.87, (vi)).
(s) Nam is illius filiam / conicit in navem miles clam matrem suam, / eamque
huc invitam mulierem in Ephesum advehit.
(‘For the soldier puts her daughter onto a ship, behind her mother’s back, and brings
her here to Ephesus, against her will.’ Pl. Mil. 111–13)
(t) Is eam huc Cyrenas leno advexit virginem.
(‘This pimp brought that girl here to Cyrene.’ Pl. Rud. 41)
²²⁸ For combinations with hic, see Devine and Stephens (2006: 515–20). For determiners in general, see
Spevak (2010c: 67–74).
²²⁹ For discussion and statistical data, see Rosén (1999: 150–1). She takes such instances as evidence for
the existence of an ‘appositional’ (or: ‘explicitational’) word order in Early Latin.
Word order at the noun phrase level
²³⁰ Lisón (2001: 120–3; 135) includes other indefinite determiners (see § 11.27) in his statistics and also
alius ‘other’, ceterus ‘the remaining’, and others. Spevak (2010c: 60–1) has separate statistics for aliquis and
quidam. In Plautus, aliquis precedes in forty-one out of fifty-three instances; quidam, in nine out of thirty-
one (source: Lodge: s.vv.). He uses quidam only three times with inanimate nouns. By contrast, in Merguet
(Phil.) animate nouns are relatively rare.
²³¹ For ten instances in Plautus, see Lodge: s.v. quis § II (p. 498B).
Word order
Supplement:
In metu belli furandi locus qui potest esse? (Cic. Ver. 5.10); Deinde dolorem quem
maximum (sc. dicis)? (Cic. Fin. 2.93); Ubi enim iudicium emptoris est, ibi fraus ven-
ditoris quae potest esse? (Cic. Off. 3.55)
Possessive adjectives are a special type of modifier, since in certain contexts they are
not used, in particular with relational nouns like pater ‘father’ (see § 3.6) and when
the possessive adjective is coreferential with the subject of the clause, unless there is
a need to emphasize the possessive relation.²³² For other not typically ‘possessive’
uses of these adjectives, see §§ 11.29–30. The frequency of ante- and postposition
differs between authors and between individual possessive adjectives, as is shown in
Table 23.9.²³³
Table . Relative order of head and the possessive adjectives meus and
suus in Cicero’s orations, Caesar, Sallust, and Plautus (absolute numbers)
Cicero’s orations Caesar Sallust Plautus
AH HA AH HA AH HA AH HA
meus 782 642 7 1 20 54 664 557
suus 908 1044 302 127 49 122 189 230
The genitive forms of the anaphoric pronoun eius, earum, and eorum, when referring
to a third person possessor that is not the subject of the clause, behave like possessive
adjectives as far as their position in the noun phrase is concerned (but see also
²³⁶ For a discussion of the order of causa + possessive adjective and the role of metre in Plautus, see de
Melo (2010: 77–8).
Word order
§ 23.83), as in (f) and (g).²³⁷ In (f), eorum has its regular position after its head; in (g),
it precedes because it is in contrast with implied Haeduorum.
(f) . . . legati ab Haeduis et a Treveris veniebant: Haedui questum quod Harudes,
qui nuper in Galliam transportati essent, fines eorum popularentur.
(‘. . . deputies arrived from the Aedui and the Treveri. The Aedui came to complain
that the Harudes, who had lately been brought over into Gaul, were devastating their
borders.’ Caes. Gal. 1.37.2)
(g) Sed peius victoribus Sequanis quam Haeduis victis accidisse, propterea quod
Ariovistus, rex Germanorum, in eorum (sc. Sequanorum) finibus consedisset
tertiamque partem agri Sequani . . . occupavisset . . .
(‘But a worse fate has befallen the victorious Sequani than the conquered Aedui:
Ariovistus, king of the Germans, has settled within their borders and seized a third
part of their territory . . .’ Caes. Gal. 1.31.10)
The identifier idem (see § 11.31) normally precedes its head, although Celsus, Pliny
the Elder, and others show more variation.²³⁸ Examples of the reverse order are
(a)–(c). In (a), the noun is modified by an adnominal relative clause. In (b), fidem
is contrasted with curam; in (c), voltu ‘the outward appearance’ is emphatically
anteposed.
(a) Sosiam . . . / Davo prognatum patre eodem quo ego sum, forma, aetate item /
qua ego sum.
(‘Sosia . . . a son of the same father, Davus, as I am, and he also has the same appear-
ance and age that I have.’ Pl. Am. 612–15)
(b) Quod si fuisset, fidem eandem, curam maiorem adhibuisses . . .
(‘Had that been so you would have brought not better faith indeed but greater solici-
tude to bear . . .’ Cic. Att. 3.15.7)
(c) (sc. dux) Vincere ac vinci voltu eodem nec quemquam aspernari parem qui
se offerret.
(‘He would win or lose without changing countenance, nor did he scorn to match
himself with anyone who challenged him.’ Liv. 7.33.2)
Alius (see § 11.31) is also normally anteposed.²³⁹ Examples of the reverse order are
(d)–(f). In none of these does alius seem to signal primarily a difference of identity
from other constituents, but rather seems to indicate an ‘additional’ entity (see OLD
s.v. § 3). It is not clear whether this semantic feature is reflected in the order.
(d) Nescio quid istuc negoti dicam, nisi si quispiam est / Amphitruo alius, qui
forte ted hinc apsenti tamen / tuam rem curet teque apsente hic munus
fungatur tuom.
(‘I can’t say what’s the matter, unless there’s some other Amphitruo who happens to
look after your business even when you’re away from here and who’s doing your job
here in your absence.’ Pl. Am. 825–7)
(e) . . . ut . . . deinde ita tempus duceretur ut a M’. Glabrione praetore et a magna
parte horum iudicum ad praetorem alium iudicesque alios veniremus.
(‘. . . so that after that the time was to be spun out till we no longer had Manius Glabrio
as praetor, nor the majority of these gentlemen as members of the Court, but had to
appear before a new praetor and new judges.’ Cic. Ver. 1.30)
(f) Sacra dis aliis Albano ritu, Graeco Herculi, ut ab Euandro instituta erant, facit.
(‘To other gods he sacrificed after the Alban custom, but employed the Greek for
Hercules, according to the institution of Euander.’ Liv. 1.7.3)
Quantifiers (see §§ 11.33–4) are more often anteposed, adjectives of amount like mul-
tus and nullus more so (80–90 per cent) than cardinal numerals like tres (65 per cent)
(for ordinal numerals, see § 23.79). Adjectives of amount are also more often separated
from their head, as in (a). This different behaviour is related to the subjective character
of this type of quantification. Examples of postposed adjectives of amount are (b) and
(c). The reason for their postposition is because the head nouns are pragmatically
prominent, in (b) a topic, in (c) an emphatic focus. In (d), the noun phrase as a whole
forms a pragmatic unit (focus). The numeral follows its head because it is not prag-
matically prominent. By contrast, quattuor in (e) is anteposed: the noun pagos is
known from the context and quattuor is contrastive.²⁴⁰
(a) . . . exsistit etiam ex scripti interpretatione saepe contentio, in quo nulla potest
esse nisi ex ambiguo controversia.
(‘. . . a further contest often arises out of the construction of a document, when the
only possible dispute comes from an equivocation.’ Cic. de Orat. 2.110)
(b) Etenim fana multa spoliata et simulacra deorum de locis sanctissimis ablata
videmus a nostris . . ..
(‘(Among these peoples you will find a belief in certain animals more firmly estab-
lished than is reverence for the holiest sanctuaries and images of the gods with us.)
For we have often seen temples robbed and images of gods carried off from the holi-
est shrines by our fellow-countrymen . . .’ Cic. N.D. 1.82)
(c) . . . ut, cum omnes ea quae sunt acta improbent, querantur, doleant, varietas
nulla in re sit aperteque loquantur et iam clare gemant, tamen medicina
nulla adferatur.
²⁴⁰ Examples (d) and (e) are taken from Spevak (2010a: 246–7).
Word order
(‘Disapproval of what has been done and indignant complaint are universal. Opinion
is not divided at any point, there is open grumbling, even to the stage of loud groan-
ing, but nobody comes forward with a remedy.’ Cic. Att. 2.20.3)
(d) Gallia est omnis divisa in partes tres . . .
(‘The whole of Gaul is divided into three parts . . .’ Caes. Gal. 1.1.1)
(e) Is pagus appellabatur Tigurinus; nam omnis civitas Helvetia in quattuor
pagos est divisa.
(‘The name of the canton was the Tigurine; for the whole state of Helvetia is divided
into four cantons.’ Caes. Gal. 1.12.4)
The universal quantifier omnis (see § 11.34) and the totality expression totus (see
§ 11.38) are also most often anteposed. Their position is not always clear, since they
can also be used as floating quantifiers. This is also the case with adjectives of amount.
If one takes adjectives as one indiscriminate whole the conclusion is unavoidable that
all adjectives can be anteposed and postposed, that there is variation between authors
and between types of text, and that overall the order A(ttribute) H(ead) is more
frequent than HA.
The proportions in a certain corpus are 60 : 40 for Cicero and Livy, 73 : 27 for
Seneca.²⁴¹ However, for individual adjectives the proportion anteposition : postposition
varies considerably, as can be seen in Table 23.10.
In noun phrases consisting of the same head noun and the same adjective there
is also considerable variation: in the corpus referred to above Livy has postero die
267 times, the reverse seven times; Cicero iure civili fifty times, the reverse only
once.²⁴²
A number of factors seem to be relevant to the order of the attributive adjective and
its head:
(i) the pragmatic function of the noun phrase as a whole (topic or focus) and the
pragmatic prominence (contrast or emphasis) of either the head or the adjective;
(ii) the meaning of the adjective and its semantic relation with the head;
(iii) expressions with a more or less fixed order;
(iv) attributive adjectives can themselves be modified in various ways, both by
arguments required by the valency and by optional constituents, which has
consequences for their position with respect to their head nouns. This is dis-
cussed in § 23.80.
(i) The importance of the pragmatic function of a noun phrase as a whole and its
constituent parts for the internal ordering of adjective and head is shown by (a) and
(b). In (a), in agris publicis is focus; it functions as a pragmatic unit. In (b), agros can
be inferred from its context; the relative clause, and especially publicos, is contrastive
with respect to decumani and immunes in the following context.²⁴³ Whereas in (a)
publicis plays no role in its context, publicos does in (b). An adjective is anteposed
when it is emphatic or contrastive.
(a) Venit enim mihi in mentem . . . Tiberium et Gaium Gracchos plebem in agris
publicis constituisse, qui agri a privatis antea possidebantur.
(‘For I remember that . . . Tiberius and Gaius Gracchus settled plebeians in public
lands, formerly occupied by private persons.’ Cic. Agr. 2.10)
(b) Qui publicos agros arant certum est quid e lege censoria debeant.
(‘The farmers of state lands were bound to supply the amount fixed by the censors’
regulations.’ Cic. Ver. 5.53)
Supplement (in alphabetical order by adjective):
Tibi App. Claudius augur consuli nuntiavit addubitato salutis augurio bellum domesti-
cum triste ac turbulentum fore. (Cic. Div. 1.105); Omnia sunt externa unius virtute
terra marique pacata: domesticum bellum manet . . . (Cic. Catil. 2.11); Sin te confir-
mare vis, et comites et tempestates et navem idoneam ut habeas diligenter videbis.
(Cic. Fam. 16.1.2); . . . eosque (sc. obsides) in continentem adduci iussit, quod propin-
qua die aequinoctii infirmis navibus hiemi navigationem subiciendam non existima-
bat. (Caes. Gal. 4.36.2); Extemplo igitur consules novi, L. Aemilius Mamercinus et
C. Plautius, eo ipso die, Kalendis Quinctilibus, quo magistratum inierunt, comparare
inter se provincias iussi . . . (Liv. 8.20.3); Novi deinde consules a veteribus exercitu
accepto ingressi hostium fines populando usque ad moenia atque urbem per-
venerunt. (Liv. 8.17.1); Faucibusque portus navem onerariam submersam obiecit et
huic alteram coniunxit. (Caes. Civ. 3.39.2); Tu tibi hoc numquam turpe . . . fore putasti
celeberrimo loco palam tibi aedificari onerariam navem in provincia quam tu cum
imperio obtinebas? (Cic. Ver. 5.46)
(ii) Ante- and postposition of adjectives is in some way related to their lexical mean-
ing. Adjectives of dimension and size like longus ‘long’ and ingens ‘huge’ are more
often anteposed in Classical Latin. The same holds for adjectives of relative position
and ordinal numerals like hesternus ‘yesterday’s’ and quartus ‘fourth’.²⁴⁴ By contrast,
those of substance like aureus ‘golden’ are more often postposed.²⁴⁵ Adjectives derived
from proper names are more or less as often anteposed as postposed, but in Livy
populus Romanus disturbs the picture.²⁴⁶ Adjectives expressing a positive or a nega-
tive judgement, such as bonus ‘good’, malus ‘bad’, and sanctus ‘blessed’, normally pre-
cede. Illustrative examples are (c), with the postposed ‘objective’ adjective quadratario
‘of stonemasonry’, and (d), with the anteposed ‘subjective’ adjective novo ‘freshly pro-
duced’, with the same head noun opere ‘material’.²⁴⁷ Illustrations of the adjectives
mentioned above can be found in the Supplement.
(c) D(is) M(anibus) s(acrum) / Q(uinto) · Gargilio Campano coniugi
dulcissimo mausoleum operae (= opere)/ quadratario secundum
verba testamenti eius . . . Gargila . . . extruxit . . .
(‘Sacred to the spirits of the dead. For Quintus Gargilius Capanus, my sweetest of
husbands, . . . Gargilia has erected this large tomb in masonry according to the
words of his last will and testament . . .’ CIL VIII.9109.1–5 (Sour El-Ghozlane, ad
235—tr. Bal)
(d) . . . aquagium novo opere a so/lo extructum suis possessionibus /
constituerun<t> et dedicaverunt.
(‘. . . they have founded and dedicated this channel, constructed from the ground up
as a new project at their own cost.’ CIL VIII.21671.5–7 (Ain Temouchent)—tr. Bal)
²⁴⁴ For adjectives of relative position and ordinal numerals, see Spevak (2014a: 171–5).
²⁴⁵ For examples of adjectives of substance (or: ‘material’), see Devine and Stephens (2006: 405–13).
²⁴⁶ See Lisón (2001: 79). ²⁴⁷ The examples are taken from Saastamoinen (2010: 181–4).
Word order at the noun phrase level
hesterno die D);²⁴⁸ . . . quis ignorat Achaeos ingentem pecuniam pendere L. Pisoni quo-
tannis . . . (Cic. Prov. 5); Et hercule cum eo nuntio pulvis ingens conspici coeptus est.
(B. Afr. 12.2—NB: pulvis is focus); In eo ergo loco . . . tamen petra ingens est per
girum . . . (Pereg. 4.4—NB: the regular order in this work in its literal sense);²⁴⁹ Rhenus
autem oritur ex Lepontiis . . . et longo spatio per fines . . . Treverorum citatus fer-
tur . . . (Caes. Gal. 4.10.3); Cato in Sicilia naves longas veteres reficiebat, novas civitatibus
imperabat. (Caes. Civ. 1.30.4); Navibus circiter LXXX onerariis coactis contractisque
quot satis esse ad duas transportandas legiones existimabat, quicquid praeterea navium
longarum habebat, id quaestori legatis praefectisque tribuit. Huc accedebant XVIII
onerariae naves, quae ex eo loco a milibus passuum octo vento tenebantur . . . (Caes. Gal.
4.22.3–4—NB: contrast); . . . quod longae naves militum capere non poterant in onera-
rias impositis altero die Oricum pervenit . . . (Liv. 24.40.5—NB: contrast); Ipse de quarta
vigilia eodem itinere quo hostes ierant ad eos contendit . . . (Caes. Gal. 1.21.3); Quo cele-
riter conlato proxima nocte vigilia quarta legionibus omnibus expeditis impedimen-
tisque in castris relictis prima luce neque opinantibus hostibus eum ipsum locum
cepit . . . (B. Alex. 73.2—NB: exceptional order; possibly to avoid ambiguity);²⁵⁰ . . . ibi
erant monasteria plurima sanctorum hominum . . . (Pereg. 4.6); Illud etiam presbyter
sanctus dixit nobis . . . (Pereg. 15.5—NB: presbyter is contrastive)²⁵¹
K.-St.: II.607–8 note that there is no reason to assume that ante- or postposition of an
adjective should correspond with a difference in meaning of that adjective, e.g. that
anteposed urbanus would mean ‘witty’ against postposed ‘of the city’. This idea was
unfortunately revived by Marouzeau (1922: 14) citing urbanus praetor as a case in
point—which in reality is not attested in this sense in the extant literature.²⁵²
Interesting is the observation by Fronto that it does not make sense to put navem
after triremem, because it is self-evident: what else could follow?: Id quoque ne ignores:
pleraque in oratione ordine immutato vel rata verba fiunt vel supervacanea. ‘Navem
triremem’ rite dixerim; ‘triremem navem’ supervacaneo addiderim. Neque enim pericu-
lum est ne quis lecticulam aut redam aut citharam triremem dici arbitretur. (‘Bear this,
too, in mind: it frequently happens that words in a speech, by a change in their order,
become essential or superfluous. I should be right in speaking of a ship with three
decks, but ship would be a superfluous addition to three-decker. For there is no danger
of anyone thinking that by three-decker was meant a litter, a landau, or a lute.’ Fro. Ep.
ad M. Caes. 4.3.7)
(iii) There are a large number of expressions in which one order prevails. Examples
from public life are praetor urbanus, ius civile (but see (e)), patres conscripti, res publica,
and di immortales. Other expressions are aequo animo and aes alienum. The reason
why these expressions have this so-to-speak fixed order is that they refer to a subtype
of the entity referred to by the noun which is not contrasted with other subtypes or
²⁴⁸ For a full discussion of the passage, see Magnaldi (2004: 75–7) In her own edition of 2008 she fol-
lows Kayser (and Halm before him) in deleting hesterno die entirely. TLL s.v. hesternus 2668.15f. has two
Late instances of die hesterno, e.g. August. Serm. 299E.
²⁴⁹ See Haida (1928: 4–5). ²⁵⁰ As suggested by Guus Bal (p.c.).
²⁵¹ See Haida (1928: 8–10) and Väänänen (1987: 108).
²⁵² For the incorrectness of Marouzeau’s idea, see Spevak (2010b: 27) and especially Langslow (2012).
Word order
emphasized for some subjective reason. Since these expressions play an important
role in society and in the type of texts that we have they are frequent and as a conse-
quence their relative order is frequent as well. Inverse orders are attested, and fully
justified, as in (e), with contrastive civili, and (f), with contrastive urbanus.²⁵³
(e) . . . praesertim cum haec non in crimine aliquo, quod ille posset infitiari, sed
in civili iure consisteret?
(‘. . . especially since it turned not on some criminal charge which he could have
denied, but on a point of civil law.’ Cic. de Orat. 1.182—tr. May and Wisse)
(f) An ille plus praestat qui inter peregrinos et cives aut urbanus (ς; urbanos ω)
praetor adeuntibus adsessoris verba pronuntiat quam . . .
(‘Or does he accomplish more who, whether in cases between citizens and foreigners
or as the praetor of the city, delivers to suitors the verdict his assistant has formulated
than . . .’ Sen. Dial. 9.3.5)
In the writings of the jurists the order of fixed legal expressions is often reversed:
publicus locus instead of locus publicus, bona fides instead of fides bona, and bonus vir
instead of vir bonus, as in (g).²⁵⁴
(g) Omnis qui defenditur boni viri arbitratu defendendus est.
(‘Everyone who is defended should be defended in accordance with the dis-
cretion of an honest man.’ Paul. dig. 3.3.77)
(iv) Variability of the order of adjectives remained a common feature of Latin until as
late an author as Gregory of Tours. He has fides catholica alongside catholica fides and
the same pragmatic factors as discussed above seem to explain the variation. The
Romance languages that have the possibility to prepose or postpose adjectives seem
to do so for similar reasons as Latin, which suggests continuity in this respect.
However, not all Romance linguists assume that there is such a continuity.²⁵⁵
²⁵³ TLL s.v. praetor 1063.49f. has a few instances of the inverse order in late inscriptions.
²⁵⁴ See Kalb (1888: 47) and de Meo (2005: 108).
²⁵⁵ For discussion, see Niemeyer and Krenn (1997) and Radatz (2001).
²⁵⁶ Devine and Stephens (2006: 391–400) discuss the relative order of adjectives and the arguments
they govern, mostly not attributive adjectives. A few examples are taken from their discussion.
Word order at the noun phrase level
emphatic. A third (rare) type is shown in (c), where the adjective is emphatic and
precedes the head noun.²⁵⁷
(a) Hoc intermisso spatio duas fossas XV pedes latas eadem altitudine perduxit.
(‘Behind this interval he dug all round two trenches, fifteen feet broad and of equal
depth.’ Caes. Gal. 7.72.3)
(b) . . . nec me angoribus dedidi, quibus essem confectus nisi iis restitissem, nec
rursum indignis homine docto voluptatibus.
(‘. . . I did not resign myself to grief, by which I should have been overwhelmed, had I
not struggled against it; neither, on the other hand, did I surrender myself to a life of
sensual pleasure unbecoming to a philosopher.’ Cic. Off. 2.2)
(c) Equidem . . . Ser. Galbam memoria teneo, divinum hominem in dicendo . . .
(‘I well remember Servius Galba, a man divine when it came to speaking . . .’ Cic. de
Orat. 1.40)
Supplement (in alphabetical order by adjective):
Postposed: Lectiones etiam aptae diei et loco leguntur. (Pereg. 32.1); Ad hunc modum
vasa componito: arbores crassas p. II, altas p. VIIII cum cardinibus. (Cato Agr. 18.1);
Ego Antonium conlegam cupidum provinciae, multa in re publica molientem patien-
tia atque obsequio meo mitigavi. (Cic. Pis. 5); Quid potuit elegantius facere praetor
cupidus existimationis bonae . . . (Cic. Ver. 3.140); Huc homines digni istius amicitia,
digni vita illa conviviisque veniebant. (Cic. Ver. 5.30); . . . cum ita dicunt, accedere ad
rem publicam plerumque homines nulla re bona dignos . . . (Cic. Rep. 1.9); Sed eum
casus in hanc consuetudinem scribendi induxit philosopho valde indignam . . . (Cic.
Pis. 71); Habetis ducem memorem vestri, oblitum sui, quae non semper facultas
datur. (Cic. Catil. 4.19)
Anteposed: Ego me in hac omni causa facile intellegebam pugnandi cupidis homi-
nibus non satis facere. (Cic. Att. 8.11d.7); Furere tibi Empedocles videtur: at mihi
dignissimum rebus is de quibus loquitur sonum fundere. (Cic. Luc. 74); . . . nemo
eorum satis dignum splendore vitae exitum habuit. (Liv. 39.52.8); . . . et in suis mori-
bus simillimas figuras pecudum et ferarum transferetur . . . (Cic. Tim. 45)
Split adjective (and participial) phrases: Si me hercule mihi, non copioso homini ad
dicendum, optio detur . . . (Cic. Caec. 64); Non vidit flagrantem Italiam bello (M, bello
Italiam L), non ardentem invidia senatum, non sceleris nefarii principes civitatis
reos . . . (Cic. de Orat. 3.8); Agerent enim tecum lege primum Pythagorei omnes atque
Democritii ceterique in <iure> suo (cj. Ellendt) physici vindicarent, ornati homines (L,
ornati homines om. M) in dicendo et graves . . . (Cic. de Orat. 1.42); Sapiens videlicet
homo cum primis nostrae civitatis norat hunc gurgitem. (Cic. de Orat. 2.224)
No research has been done on the effect of degree modifiers on the position of attributive
adjectives. Since the adjectives with which these degree modifiers occur are gradable,
and hence subjective and potentially emphatic, one expects the majority of these
modifier adjective combinations to precede their heads, as in (d)–(f). An example
with the reverse order is (g). Also in cases like (h), where tam is followed by an
²⁵⁷ For this type, see Müller (1962). The text of many instances is disputed.
Word order
expanding result clause (see § 16.54), the adjective phrase precedes its head, here
praesidium. Discontinuity of the degree modifier and the adjective is not rare, espe-
cially with tam, as in (i), repeated from § 23.7, and with quam.
(d) . . . si id potius quaeris quam cur parum amplis adfecerit praemiis . . .
(‘. . . if you ask this rather than why he bestowed insufficiently great rewards upon
them . . .’ Cic. Mil. 57)
(e) . . . haec mulier satis firmum accusatorem filio suo fore neminem putavit . . .
(‘. . . But this woman thought that no one would have enough nerve for the prosecu-
tion of her son . . .’ Cic. Clu. 190)
(f) Satis diu fuit in miseriis, iudices, satis multos annos ex invidia laboravit.
(‘Long enough, gentlemen, has he been in misery, long years enough has he laboured
under prejudice.’ Cic. Clu. 202)
(g) Sed in rebus tam severis non est iocandi locus.
(‘But in a discussion as serious as ours joking is out of place.’ Cic. Div. 2.25)
(h) Quis enim toto mari locus per hos annos aut tam firmum habuit praesidium
ut tutus esset, aut tam fuit abditus ut lateret?
(‘For during these last years, what place in any part of the sea had so strong a garrison
as to be safe from him? What place was so much hidden as to escape his notice?’ Cic.
Man. 31)
(i) Hanc virtutem Agrigentinorum imitati sunt Assorini postea, viri fortes et
fideles, sed nequaquam ex tam ampla neque tam ex nobili civitate.
(‘The plucky behaviour of these Agrigentines was subsequently copied by the people
of Assorus; stout and trustworthy folk, though they are not from so large nor so
renowned a community.’ Cic. Ver. 4.96)
Degree and measure expressions usually directly precede the adjective, at least in prose
(for examples, see § 11.96 and § 20.10). Examples of discontinuity are ( j) and (k).²⁵⁸
( j) Iovis iste quidem pronepos. Tamne ergo abiectus tamque fractus?
(‘Yes, he was Jupiter’s great-grandson! Is he then to be so despondent, so broken
down?’ Cic. Tusc. 3.26)
(k) Etsi enim et audio te et video libenter, tamen hoc multo erit si valebis iucundius.
(‘For although I enjoy hearing and seeing you anyhow, this will still be much more
pleasant if you are fit and well.’ Cic. Fam. 16.22.1)
Supplement:
. . . id ad probandum non multo videri debet aequius? (Cic. Div. Caec. 65); . . . multo
tamen pauciores oratores quam poetae boni reperientur. (Cic. de Orat. 1.11); . . . usque
eo, iudices, ut rictum eius ac mentum paulo sit attritius . . . (Cic. Ver. 4.94); . . . quanto
mihi videatur illius voluntas obstinatior et in hac iracundia obfirmatior. (Cic.
²⁵⁸ For discussion and further examples, see Devine and Stephens (2006: 578–83).
Word order at the noun phrase level
Att. 1.11.1); . . . neque tam fuerunt impudentes ut . . . (Cic. Flac. 59); Neque tam vires
pares quae superaverit res facile dictu est . . . (Liv. 7.8.4—NB: Oakley and others read
tam pares vires, see ad loc.); Cui me praeripere desponsam iam et destinatam lau-
dem . . . valde est iniquum. (Cic. Har. 6); Quasi vero quicquam sit tam valde quam
nihil sapere vulgare . . . (Cic. Div. 2.81)
For a postposed measure expression, see (l). Postposition of degree modifiers becomes
more common in Silver and Late Latin.²⁵⁹ In the Bible translations and in Christian
authors postposition was influenced by Greek and Hebrew. A relatively early example
of postposition in prose is (m). Compare (n).
(l) Invectus est copiosius multo in istum et paratius Dolabella quam nunc ego.
(‘Dolabella delivered a much more copious and studied invective against Antonius
than I am delivering now.’ Cic. Phil. 2.79)
(m) Altum et grave solum etiam hieme moveri placet, tenue valde et aridum
paulo ante sationem.
(‘It is the rule to stir a deep heavy soil even in the winter, but a very thin and dry one
a little before sowing.’ Plin. Nat. 18.175)
(n) . . . iter heremi arenosum valde feceramus.
(‘. . . we had travelled along the very sandy way of the desert.’ Pereg. 6.4)
²⁵⁹ For degree adverbs in Christian Latin, see García de la Fuente (1992). For a survey, see Sz.: 410. For
parum, see TLL s.v. parum 572.63ff.
Word order
Some of the attributes in the preceding sections can be modified by the adverbs fere,
ferme, paene, and prope ‘almost’. These adverbs can also function as adjunct at the
clause level. When used as modifiers they regularly follow their hosts and indirectly
function as emphasizers, whatever the position of that host with respect to the head
noun.²⁶⁰ Examples are (a)–(c).
(a) Recitatae sunt tabellae in eandem fere sententiam.
(‘His letter was read out and was in much the same vein.’ Cic. Catil. 3.10)
(b) . . . Graeca leguntur in omnibus fere gentibus, Latina suis finibus exiguis sane
continentur.
(‘…Greek poetry is read among nearly all nations, Latin is confined to its own bor-
ders, which are narrow enough.’ Cic. Arch. 23)
(c) Illud me, mi Attice, in extrema fere parte epistulae commovit.
(‘I was disturbed by a phrase almost at the end of your letter.’ Cic. Att. 6.1.20)
²⁶⁰ See for example TLL s.v. fere 492.77ff (idem), 494.30ff. (omnis), 498.56ff. (superlatives).
Word order at the noun phrase level
Also, little attention will be paid at this point to the internal complexity of attributive
noun phrases, for example the presence of adnominal relative clauses. For such com-
plications, see § 23.85.
As was stated in § 23.70, there is a significant difference between the attributes that
agree with their head noun, which are dealt with in §§ 23.71–81, and attributive nouns
and noun phrases, which will be the subject of the following sections. The crucial dif-
ference is that nouns and noun phrases can refer to entities in the context or in the
outside world and thus they have their own pragmatic potential: they can function as
topic or focus in the clause to which their head belongs. In (a), patris refers to the
father mentioned in the preceding context. It is the topic of the clause; its head noun
amicus is the focus. The position of patris at the beginning of the clause, before its
head amicus, is quite natural. In (b), by contrast, the pseudo-stranger must profess to
speak to the young man in his father’s name, with patris as the focus of the clause at
the end, and so following its head noun verbis.
(a) Vera cantas. # Vana vellem. Patris amicu’s videlicet.
(‘Your tale is true. # I wish it weren’t. You are obviously a friend of the father.’
Pl. Mos. 980)
(b) Is homo . . . salutem ei (sc. adulescenti) nuntiet verbis patris.
(‘That man must greet him in his father’s name.’ Pl. Trin. 767–72)
So whereas with agreeing adjectives the position is mainly determined by the prag-
matic features of contrast and emphasis, the position of attributive nouns and noun
phrases can also be determined by their pragmatic function in the clause. The prag-
matic ‘autonomy’, so to speak, of attributive nouns and noun phrases reflects itself
in a higher mobility in the clause than that of adjectives, which means a higher
frequency of discontinuity. Moreover, instead of nouns, anaphoric pronouns and
anaphorically used demonstrative pronouns can be used, as in (c) and (d).²⁶¹ Also
attributive noun phrases with an anaphoric(ally used) determiner are as a rule in an
initial position in the clause, as in (e). Attributive relative pronouns are naturally
bound to a clause-initial position and therefore precede their head, as in (f) and (g).
(c) Ego sum Iovi dicto audiens. Eius iussu nunc huc me adfero.
(‘But I obey Jupiter, I’m now betaking myself here on his command.’ Pl. Am. 989)
(d) . . . nunc autem insonti mihi / illius (sc. Amphitruonis) ira in hanc et male
dicta expetent.
(‘. . . his anger toward her and his bad words will fall on me now, even though I am
innocent.’ Pl. Am. 895–6)
(e) . . . considera ne in alienissimum tempus cadat adventus tuus. Huius rei
totum consilium tuum est.
²⁶¹ For the genitive of the anaphoric pronoun, see also § 23.76.
Word order
(‘It would be a pity to arrive at the least favourable moment. The matter is entirely for
you to judge.’ Cic. Fam. 15.14.4)
(f) Si aequom facias, adventores meos <non> incuses, quorum / mihi dona
accepta et grata habeo, tuaque ingrata, quae aps te accepi.
(‘If you were behaving appropriately, you wouldn’t criticize those of my visitors whose
gifts I regard as accepted and welcome; the gifts I received from you I regard as
unwelcome.’ Pl. Truc. 616–17)
(g) Qui Philolaches? / # Quoius patrem Theopropidem esse opinor.
(‘Which Philolaches? # The one whose father I believe to be Theopropides.’ Pl. Mos.
961–2)
Other examples of topical attributive nouns and noun phrases in the initial position
are (h)–(k).
(h) <Q.> Ciceronis epistulam tibi remisi.
(‘I am sending you back Quintus’ letter.’ Cic. Att. 13.29.3)
(i) . . . iamque Caesaris in Hispania res secundae in Africam nuntiis ac litteris
perferebantur.
(‘. . . and Caesar’s successes in Spain were already being conveyed to Africa by mes-
sengers and letters.’ Caes. Civ. 2.37.2)
( j) Foramina autem intra caput maxima oculorum sunt, deinde narium, tum
quae in auribus habemus . . . Narium duo foramina osse medio discernuntur.
(‘Now the largest passages leading into the head are those of the eyes, next the nos-
trils, then those of the ears . . . The two nasal passages are separated by an intermediate
bone.’ Cels. 8.1.5)
(k) Namque et Atti Navi statua fuit ante curiam . . . fuit et Hermodori Ephesii in
comitio . . .
(‘For there was also a statue of Attus Navius in front of the senate-house . . . there was
also one of Hermodorus of Ephesus in the Assembly-place.’ Plin. Nat. 34.22)
Supplement:
Eorum Amphitruonis alter est, alter Iovis. (Pl. Am. 483); Dic mihi, / quis tu es? #
Illius sum integumentum corporis. (Pl. Bac. 600–1); Si helviolum vinum facere voles,
dimidium helvioli, dimidium apicii indito, defruti veteris partem tricesimam addito.
Quidquid vini defrutabis, partem tricesimam defruti addito. (Cato Agr. 24—NB: dif-
ferent orders); Nam civium Romanorum omnium sanguis coniunctus existimandus
est . . . (Cic. Ver. 5.172); Caput autem est in omni procuratione negotii et muneris
publici ut avaritiae pellatur etiam minima suspicio. (Cic. Off. 2.75); Etenim iustitiae
non natura nec voluntas, sed inbecillitas mater est. (Cic. Rep. 3.23); Sed quid poetis
irascimur? Virtutis magistri, philosophi, inventi sunt, qui summum malum dolorem
dicerent. (Cic. Tusc. 2.28); Quinti fratris epistulam ad te misi . . . (Cic. Att. 13.47a.2);
Caesaris autem erat in barbaris nomen obscurius. (Caes. Civ. 1.61.3); Populi Romani
hanc esse consuetudinem ut . . . (Caes. Gal. 1.43.8); . . . neque . . . pacis umquam apud
vos mentionem feci. (Liv. 21.13.3); (in pycnostylo . . .) Eustyli autem aedis columnae,
uti systyli, in novem partes altitudo dividatur . . . (Vitr. 3.3.10)
Word order at the noun phrase level
When the head noun is the topic or focus of the clause, the attributive noun or noun
phrase follows, as in (l) and (m), respectively.²⁶²
(l) Crassitudines autem eorum graduum ita finiendas censeo, ut . . .
(‘And the thickness of those steps methinks must be of such dimensions that . . .’ Vitr.
3.4.4—tr. Bal)
(m) . . . quamquam is constantiam potius imitatus patris quam elegantiam austero
maluit genere quam iucundo placere.
(‘. . . although he copied the harmony rather than the elegance of his father, preferring
to win favour in the severely correct more than in the agreeable style.’ Plin. Nat.
34.66)
As for the percentage of attributive noun phrases of which the position is determined
by their pragmatic function in the clause, in Vitruvius and Pliny the Elder this is esti-
mated at 25 per cent.²⁶³
In discussions of the relative position of heads and attributive nouns and noun
phrases and in statistical calculations of the relative orders the potential contextual
function of the individual components of a noun phrase is usually left out of consid-
eration. Statistical data on the relative position of heads and attributive nouns and
noun phrases are furthermore obscured by the presence of head–noun combinations
which manifest only or mainly one order. Some of the G(enitive)–H(ead) combinations
can be regarded as quasi-compounds and are also written as one word. A few of these
more or less fixed combinations are listed in Table 23.11.²⁶⁴ The Supplement presents
some alternative or more complex orderings.
Table . Relative order of head and genitive attribute in a few <standard> expressions
Genitive–Head Head–Genitive
senatus consultum ‘recommendation of the magister equitum ‘Master of the Horse’
Senate’ (S C in inscriptions) (MAG EQ in inscriptions)
iuris (or iure) consultus ‘lawyer’, ‘jurist’ pater familias ‘father of the family’
plebis (or plebi, plebei) scitum ‘resolution of the tribunus plebis ‘plebeian tribune’ (TR PL
comitia tributa’ in inscriptions)
aquae ductus ‘the conveyance of water’, mos maiorum ‘custom of the ancestors’
‘aqueduct’
As with set expressions containing adjectives (see § 23.79 (iii)) the question of how
to judge such frequently attested more or less fixed combinations is a difficult one.
Some of them function as technical terms and titles of which the pragmatic environment
is irrelevant to their internal order (hence the possibility of using abbreviations).
²⁶² For a study from this perspective of the relative order of head and genitival attribute in Vitruvius
and Pliny the Elder, see Spevak (2016b).
²⁶³ See Spevak (2016b: 736). ²⁶⁴ Taken from Lisón (2001: 164–70) and Spevak (2010a: 265–7).
Word order
However, the same combinations can be used in context and can be as it were revived,
as in (n), where the order iuris consultus is the expected one, due to the contrast
between iuris and iustitiae. Likewise in (o), both senatus consulto and plebei scito have
the expected anteposed attribute. Note also the discontinuity caused by etiam in (o).
An interesting instance is (p), where the technical term ex senatus consulto, in its
usual order, is coordinated with scito plebis, with no contrast implied. In (q), huius
aquae refers to the aqua mentioned before and has its expected position with respect
to its head ductum.
(n) Nec enim ille magis iuris consultus quam iustitiae fuit.
(‘For he was an expert in justice no less than in jurisprudence.’ Cic. Phil. 9.10)
(o) Sed his duobus primum senatus consulto, deinde plebei etiam scito permu-
tatae provinciae sunt.
(‘However, the provinces of the last two praetors were changed, first by senatorial
decree and then also by a resolution of the plebs.’ Liv. 35.20.9)
(p) Et L. Volumnio ex senatus consulto et scito plebis prorogatum in annum
imperium est.
(‘And the command of Lucius Volumnius was prolonged for a year by a decree of the
senate and by a resolution of the people.’ Liv. 10.22.9)
(q) (sc. Appius) . . . qui multis tergiversationibus extraxisse censuram traditur,
donec et viam (sc. Appiam) et huius aquae ductum consummaret.
(‘. . . who, by various subterfuges, is reported to have extended the term of his censor-
ship until he could complete both the Appian way and this aqueduct.’ Fron. Aq. 5.3)
Supplement:
Adversus consulta autem senatus et decreta principum vel magistratuum remedium
nullum est . . . (Quint. Inst. 5.2.5—NB: parallelism); Ac primum in vestibulo effigiem
patris Silii consulto senatus abolitam demonstrat . . . (Tac. Ann. 11.35.1); Consultus
iuris et actor / causarum mediocris abest virtute diserti / Messallae . . . (Hor. Ars
369–71—NB: parallelism); . . . auram favoris popularis ex dictatoria invidia petiit sci-
tique plebis unus gratiam tulit. (Liv. 22.26.4)
Cossus, equitum magister, exuere frenos imperavit . . . (Flor. Epit. 1.5.3); Ita sus-
pensa de legibus res ad novos tribunos militum dilata. Nam plebis tribunos eosdem,
duos utique quia legum latores erant, plebes reficiebat. (Liv. 6.38.1—NB: contrast
with militum); Ideoque post reges exactos Liciniana illa septena iugera, quae plebis
(plebi cj. Schneider) tribunus viritim diviserat, maiores quaestus antiquis ret-
tulere . . . (Col. 1.3.10); . . . propria legis et ea quae scripta sunt et ea quae sine litteris
aut gentium iure aut maiorum more retinentur. (Cic. Part. 130—NB: parallelism)
In the context of fixed expressions attention is also given to the postposition of filius,
often abbreviated f., in Roman names, as in (r), and the placement of the postposi-
tions causa and gratia, which developed from ablative nouns with the attribute ante-
posed, as in (s). Anteposition of the attribute Gn. in (r) is quite understandable: the
addition is meant to differentiate this Scipio from others, but its original use has
Word order at the noun phrase level
become a standard formula. Outside of naming contexts other orders of filius are
possible, as in (t). For the use of causa as preposition, see (u).²⁶⁵
(r) L. · Cornelius · Cn. · f. · Cn. · n. · Scipio ·
(‘Lucius Cornelius Scipio, son of Gnaeus, grandson of Gnaeus.’ CIL I2.11.1
(Scip. Elog., Rome, c.160 bc))
(s) . . . hanc tibi noctem honoris causa gratiis dono dabo.
(‘. . . I’ll give you this night with her as a gift, free of charge, on account of our
regard for you.’ Pl. As. 194)
(t) Quotiens te votui Argyrippum, filium Demaeneti, / compellare aut con-
trectare . . .
(‘How often did I forbid you to speak to Argyrippus, the son of Demaenetus . . .’
Pl. As. 522–3)
(u) Quam multa enim quae nostra causa numquam faceremus facimus causa
amicorum.
(‘For how many things we do for our friends that we would never do for
ourselves!’ Cic. Amic. 57)
When we ignore the considerations at the beginning of this section concerning the
role of the constituents of a noun phrase in its surrounding context and when we leave
out of account the more or less fixed expressions discussed above, the orders G(enitive)
H(ead) and HG are roughly equally well attested in Classical prose.²⁶⁶ HG is slightly
more frequent, at least in Cicero and Livy, but there is considerable variation within
authors and between authors, between text types, and also over time. In the Late Latin
Peregrinatio only c.5 per cent of genitive attributes are anteposed.²⁶⁷
The relative order of a head and its attributive noun or noun phrase is essentially
determined by whether the combination functions as one pragmatic unit or not. If it
does, the regular position of the attribute is after its head.²⁶⁸ This is shown by (l) and
(m) for noun phrases of which the head fulfils a pragmatic function in the clause, but
it also operates in general, for noun phrases that do not fulfil a pragmatic function of
their own in their clause. By contrast, anteposition of the attribute is pragmatically
motivated in some way. Illustrations are (v)–(x). In (v) and (w), the noun phrases
provide the information ‘where’, and the goddess of the temple is irrelevant. In (x), by
contrast, the presence of a temple dedicated to Hercules was not self-evident and so
the attribute needed to be emphatically anteposed; however, a temple dedicated to
Jupiter was to be expected at a forum of any town. A few instances of anteposition of
the attribute can be found in the Supplement.²⁶⁹
(v) Sed ubi sunt meae gnatae? Id scire expeto. / # Apud aedem Veneris.
(‘But where are my daughters? That’s what I’m keen to know. # At the temple of
Venus.’ Pl. Poen. 1131–2)
(w) . . . concursus est ad templum Concordiae factus . . .
(‘. . . the mob flocked to the temple of Concord . . .’ Cic. Dom. 11)
(x) De caelo tacta erant via publica Veiis, forum et aedes Iovis Lanuvi, Herculis
aedes Ardeae, Capuae murus et turres et aedes quae Alba dicitur.
(‘A public road had been struck by lightning in Veii, as had the forum and the temple
of Jupiter at Lanuvium, the temple of Hercules at Ardea, and the wall, towers, and the
temple called the “White Temple” in Capua.’ Liv. 32.9.2)
Supplement:
Anteposed genitive attributes: Sic institutam nostram sententiam sequitur orationis
genus . . . (Cic. de Orat. 3.177); . . . Zenoque, eorum princeps, non tam rerum inventor
fuit quam verborum novorum. (Cic. Fin. 3.5); Quin etiam anitum ova gallinis saepe
supponimus. (Cic. N.D. 2.124); Philippum quidem Macedonum regem rebus gestis et
gloria superatum a filio, facilitate et humanitate video superiorem fuisse. (Cic. Off.
1.90); . . . perdidit . . . Sex. Lucilium, T. Gavi Caepionis, locupletis et splendidi hominis,
filium, tribunum militum. (Cic. Att. 5.20.4); Caesar cum Pompei castris adpropin-
quasset . . . (Caes. Civ. 3.88.1); Ipsi profecti a palude in ripa Sequanae e regione Luteciae
contra Labieni castra considunt. (Caes. Gal. 7.58.6); Ad hanc corporis firmitatem
plura etiam animi bona accesserant. (Nep. Ep. 3.1); Miltiades, Cimonis filius,
Atheniensis . . . (Nep. Milt. 1.1); Quanto maior Zenodoro praestantia fuit, tanto magis
deprehenditur aeris obliteratio. (Plin. Nat. 34.47); Praeterea sunt aequalitate celebrati
artifices, sed nullis operum suorum praecipui: Ariston . . . Cantharus Sicyonius,
Diodorus, Critiae discipulus . . . (Plin. Nat. 34.85); . . . in istis locis, excepto si martiro-
rum dies evenerit, semper quarta et sexta feria etiam et a cathecuminis ieiunatur.
(Pereg. 27.5)
NB: Ubi eas praeterieris, / ad sinistram hac recta platea, ubi ad Dianae (sc. aedem—see
§ 11.20) veneris, / ito ad dextram. (Ter. Ad. 581–3)
Anteposed prepositional attributes (see also § 11.67): Quid mihi scelesto tibi erat
auscultatio? / Quidve hinc abitio? Quidve in navem inscensio? (Pl. Rud. 502–3); In
Epirum vero invitatio quam suavis, quam liberalis, quam fraterna! (Cic. Att. 9.12.1—
Cf.: In Epirum quod me non invitas . . . subirascor. (Cic. Att. 9.7.7))
In Chapter 11 several types of attributive noun phrases are distinguished. The following
sections are devoted to only two of these, viz. genitives and ablatives of description (or
quality) (see § 11.48 and § 11.63, respectively) and adnominal arguments (see §§ 11.70–4).
Attributive noun phrases of description can be used both preceding and following
their head, as in (a)–(c). Anteposition can normally be explained as emphatic or con-
trastive. In (a), the position of the attribute can be regarded as emphatic: the words are
Word order at the noun phrase level
part of a series of Clodius’ outrages recalled by Cicero in defence of Milo. In (b) and
(c) the attributes serve to characterize the type of civis Cicero is referring to. Note in
(c) that satis multi modifies the whole of cives . . . animo.
(a) Eum (sc. Clodium) qui . . . singulari virtute et gloria civem (sc. Pompeium)
domum vi et armis compulit.
(‘A man who had by armed violence driven within his own doors a citizen of peerless
valour and renown.’ Cic. Mil. 73)
(b) Cum autem ad talis viros veneris, non audeas civem singulari virtute, fide,
constantia vituperare?
(‘But, when you appear before judges such as these, you will not dare to abuse a citi-
zen distinguished for valour, honour, and steadfastness?’ Cic. Vat. 40)
(c) Si quis antea, iudices, mirabatur quid esset quod . . . nequaquam satis multi
cives forti et magno animo invenirentur qui . . .
(‘If before this, gentlemen of the jury, anyone wondered what was the reason why . . .
no sufficient number of brave and great-hearted men could be found who . . .’ Cic. Sest. 1)
Supplement:
Ibi amare occepi forma eximia mulierem. (Pl. Mer. 13); Virginem forma bona /
memini videri. (Ter. An. 428–9); Nam ego propter eius modi viros vivo miser. (Pl.
Rud. 127); In eius modi re quisquam tam impudens reperietur qui . . . (Cic. Div. Caec.
20); Num argumentis utendum in re eius modi? (Cic. Ver. 4.11); . . . tabernaeque omnes
cum magni pretii mercibus conflagraverunt. (Liv. 35.40.8); Nam meus conservos est
homo haud magni preti . . . (Pl. Mil. 145); (sc. servi P. Fabi) Homines magni preti
servos M. Tulli nec opinantis adoriuntur. (Cic. Tul. 21); Erat inter Labienum atque
hostem difficili transitu flumen ripisque praeruptis. (Caes. Gal. 6.7.5); Erant inter
duas classes vada transitu angusto . . . (B. Alex. 14.5)
Adnominal arguments can accompany one-, two-, and three-place deverbal and
comparable nouns and occasionally there are two or three arguments with the
same noun (see § 11.71). These cases in particular have been examined from the point
of view of the relative position of the arguments with respect to their head and also
their mutual ordering. Two often quoted instances are (a) and (b).²⁷⁰ In (a), the sub-
jective genitive Helvetiorum precedes the head iniuriis; the objective genitive populi
Romani follows. In (b), both genitives follow the head noun, but in the same order,
that is, subjective precedes objective.²⁷¹ This order is the usual one, according to
K.-St.: I.416, who quote (c) for the uncommon reverse order.²⁷² The order shown in
²⁷⁰ See for example K.-St.: I.416, Sz.: 67, Bolkestein (1998b), Devine and Stephens (2006: 316), and
Spevak (2010a: 271).
²⁷¹ For a discussion of the text, including the ‘rather awkward salutis’, see Damon (2015: 135–7).
²⁷² This is also the interpretation of Bennett: II. 81 and probably Sz.: 66–7. Maurach ad loc. and de Melo
in his Loeb translation have other interpretations.
Word order
(a), with the head noun in the middle, is regarded as the preferred one.²⁷³ However, in
this particular example Helvetiorum is placed before the head because it is contrastive.
The number of attested instances is too small to arrive at general conclusions.
(a) . . . tametsi (sc. Caesar) pro veteribus Helvetiorum iniuriis populi Romani ab
his poenas bello repetisset, tamen eam rem non minus ex usu terrae Galliae
quam populi Romani accidisse . . .
(‘. . . although Caesar had by the campaign required satisfaction of the Helvetii for
past outrages suffered by the Roman people at their hands, the result had been as
beneficial to the land of Gaul as to the Roman people . . .’ Caes. Gal. 1.30.2)
(b) Decurritur ad illud extremum atque ultimum senatus consultum quo nisi
paene in ipso urbis incendio atque in desperatione omnium salutis † latorum
† audacia numquam ante descensum est.
(‘Recourse was had to that last and final decree of the senate, to which—unless the
city was all but aflame and everyone despaired of safety in view of the temerity of †
the lawgivers †—the senate had never before descended.’ Caes. Civ. 1.5.3)
(c) Iuppiter . . . / quem penes spes vitae sunt hominum omnium . . .
(‘Jupiter . . . in whom the hopes and lives of all mankind lie . . .’ Pl. Poen. 1187–8)
Supplement:
Head noun in the middle: Iamne vides, belua, iamne sentis quae sit hominum
querela frontis tuae? (Cic. Pis. 1); Cuius cum temptaret scientiam auguratus, dixit ei
cogitare se quiddam. (Cic. Div. 1.32); Tamen tanta universae Galliae consensio fuit
libertatis vindicandae et pristinae belli laudis recuperandae ut . . . (Caes. Gal. 7.76.2—
NB: gerundival clause)
Cf.: Aegre tulisse P. Rupilium fratris repulsam consulatus scriptum apud Fannium
est. (Cic. Tusc. 4.40—NB: consulatus is not an argument; cf. repulsa in consulatus
petitione (Plin. Nat. 7.122))
Other orders: Quod si excusationem Ser. Sulpici, patres conscripti, legationis obeun-
dae recordari volueritis . . . (Cic. Phil. 9.8—NB: gerundival clause); . . . non solum
huius (sc. Planci) dignitatis iactura facienda est sed etiam largitionis recipienda sus-
picio est. (Cic. Planc. 6—NB: huius belongs also to largitionis suspicio); Quare
L. Sullae, C. Caesaris pecuniarum translatio a iustis dominis ad alienos non debet
liberalis videri. (Cic. Off. 1.43—Cf. § 11.71); Consul es designatus, optima aetate,
summa eloquentia, maxima orbitate rei publicae virorum talium. (Cic. Fam. 10.3.3)
The number of one-place nouns with one argument or two-place nouns with only one
argument expressed (either the subjective or the objective genitive) is much higher.
There is considerable variation in the orders attested with different head nouns.²⁷⁴
Some expressions are in reality idioms, in a fixed order which is difficult to explain in
its context, such as post hominum memoriam ‘in human memory’.²⁷⁵ In general, the
position of adnominal arguments and the head nouns involved is determined by
Noun phrases can be complex in various ways. Some forms of complexity are dis-
cussed in earlier sections, for example noun phrases with attributive adjective phrases
(§ 23.80) and noun phrases with more than one adnominal argument (§ 23.85). For
adnominal relative clauses, see § 18.12.
Coordination of the head and/or the modifier creates another form of complexity.
Examples are (a)–(c). In (a), the head consists of two coordinated nouns; it is preceded
by the shared attribute Naevi, a topical element. In (b), one of the head nouns, virtute,
²⁷⁶ So OLD s.v. § 6. Memoria is discussed by Devine and Stephens (2006: 317–20) and Spevak (2014a:
186–8). Memoria can also be used in the sense of ‘facility of remembering’ (OLD § 1), with a possessive
genitive, as in auditoris memoria ‘the memory of the audience’ (Cic. Inv. 1.99).
Word order
precedes the attribute eorum, because it is in contrast with ars. In (c), it is the attribute
that consists of two coordinated nouns. Of these, pacis is in first position for reasons of
emphasis and contrast and as part of a nice chiastic arrangement. It is obvious that
there are a large number of ordering possibilities, which it does not make sense to try
to express in rules. For further instances of discontinuous conjoins, see § 23.101.
(a) . . . ita diligenter Sex. Naevi studio et cupiditati morem gerunt . . .
(‘. . . they support the passionate desires of Naevius as zealously . . .’ Cic. Quinct. 9)
(b) In quibus (sc. magistratibus) si qua praeterea est ars, facile patitur, sin minus,
virtute eorum et innocentia contentus est (sc. populus Romanus).
(‘If, in addition, they are experts in any direction, the people is well pleased; if not,
then uprightness and integrity are quite enough for it.’ Cic. Planc. 62)
(c) . . . quia pacis est insigne et oti toga, contra autem arma tumultus atque belli . . .
(‘. . . since the gown is the symbol of peace and repose, and arms that of unrest and
war . . .’ Cic. Pis. 73)
Whereas in (d) and (e) the attributes belong to different categories (adjectives and noun
phrases in the genitive), they can also belong to the same category, as in (f), two adjec-
tives (further examples in § 11.39),²⁷⁹ and (g), a pronoun and a noun in the genitive.
²⁷⁷ Instances from Cicero, Caesar, and Nepos can be found in Hoff (2003). K.-St.: II.611 discuss the
various word order patterns which they assume are possible for the noun phrase in (d). See also
Spevak (2010a: 272–4).
²⁷⁸ See Hoff (2003: 220), based on texts by Caesar, Cicero, and Nepos.
²⁷⁹ For the position of adjectives in noun phrases with multiple adjectives, see Risselada (1984: 222–6),
de Sutter (1986: 156), and Spevak (2010a: 229–37; 2014a: 57–60; 2015a: 315–16). See also Devine and
Stephens (2006: 476–81) on ‘stacked’ adjectives and Spevak (2010a: 263–5) on ‘multiple’ modifiers.
Word order at the noun phrase level
(f) . . . cum consuleretur (sc. Themistocles) utrum bono viro pauperi an minus
probato diviti filiam collocaret . . .
(‘. . . when someone asked his advice whether he should give his daughter in marriage
to a man who was poor but honest or to one who was rich but less esteemed . . .’ Cic.
Off. 2.71)
(g) . . . quorum tacita gravitas et fides de uno quoque loquitur neque cuiusquam
ornamenta orationis desiderat . . .
(‘. . . whose sense of responsibility and loyalty—though silent—speak out for each one
of them and need no elaboration in anyone’s speech . . .’ Cic. Sul. 82)
In the above examples the so-to-speak external attributes (in italics) precede or follow
the more central attribute–head/head–attribute combinations (in bold). The ordering
reflects the hierarchical structure, which suggests that it is determined by a syntactic
rule.²⁸⁰ However, other orderings are amply attested, as in (h) and (i). In (h), formam
occupies the first position in the noun phrase, before the external genitive Epicuri,
because it is in contrast with verbis (Zenonis). In (i) the emphatic adjective pondero-
sam precedes the determiner aliquam.
Illustrative for the variation one encounters in our sources are the following cases
from Livy.
In a similar way the first words of the noun phrases in (d)–(g) are emphatic and/or
contrastive, which explains the internal order of the entire noun phrase.
In recent studies special attention has been paid to cases like (d) above, with a
genitive noun phrase, and to simpler cases like ( j) below, with a noun in the genitive,
and to the various ordering patterns that are attested for such complex noun phrases.²⁸¹
²⁸⁰ See Fugier (1983b), Risselada (1984: 226), and Spevak (2010a: 233) In 70 per cent of the ninety-
eight noun phrases with multiple adjectives in Risselada’s corpus the relative order of the adjectives is in
accordance with the hierarchical structure; in Spevak’s corpus of 130 noun phrases, 82 per cent.
²⁸¹ See Hoff (1995; 2003) and Spevak (2010a: 268–72).
Word order
All orders are attested, some more than others. Usually there is a pragmatic explanation
available for the specific order used. In poetry and poeticizing prose, however, the
ordering is influenced by various aesthetic considerations. A few examples follow to
show the pragmatic factors at work. In ( j), extremis comes first, as one expects. Galliae
precedes finibus because contrast is implied with Belgae. In (k), magnam is in its
expected first position of the noun phrase; there is no reason for Galliae to be ante-
posed. In (l), Britanniae is the topic; it has the first position of the clause and precedes
its head. It is also understood as attribute with maritima pars, of which the adjective
is anteposed because of contrast.
( j) Belgae ab extremis Galliae finibus oriuntur . . .
(‘The Belgae begin from the edge of the Gallic territory . . .’ Caes. Gal. 1.1.6)
(k) At Caesar . . . magnam partem Galliae in officio tenuit.
(‘But Caesar . . . kept a great part of Gaul in submission.’ Caes. Gal. 5.54.1)
(l) Britanniae pars interior ab iis incolitur quos natos in insula ipsi memoria
proditum dicunt, maritima pars ab iis qui . . . ex Belgio transierant . . .
(‘The inland part of Britain is inhabited by tribes declared in their own tradition to be
indigenous to the island, the maritime part by tribes that migrated . . . from Belgium . . .’
Caes. Gal. 5.12.1)
The order in ( j), with the genitive inserted, is often regarded as the canonical one.²⁸²
In a corpus of 439 instances from Caesar’s de bello Gallico of combinations of
A(ttribute of any type agreeing with the head), H(ead), and G(enitive noun or pronoun)
all six orders are attested: AHG 45.5 per cent, AGH 27.8 per cent, HGA 11.6 per cent,
GAH 7.7 per cent, GHA 4.8 per cent, HAG 2.5 per cent. The most frequent order is
the one exemplified by (k). The two orders with the genitive inserted come next,
together less than 40 per cent. The frequency of some of the orders is determined by the
high number of certain types of expressions. GAH, for example, is dominated by
genitives that function as topic, as in (l) above and in (m). The HGA order is boosted by
the large number of combinations of milia passuum + numeral, as in (n).²⁸³
(m) Quorum magno numero interfecto Crassus ex itinere oppidum Sotiatium
oppugnare coepit.
(‘A large number of them were slain; and then Crassus turned direct from his
march and began to attack the stronghold of the Sotiates.’ Caes. Gal. 3.21.2)
(n) (sc. Ariovistus) . . . milibus passuum duobus ultra eum (sc. Caesarem) castra
fecit . . .
(‘. . . He formed camp two miles beyond him . . .’ Caes. Gal. 1.48.2)
Examples of the ordering possibilities of the more complex type shown in (d) above
are (o)–(t).²⁸⁴ In (o) and (p), the noun phrases in the genitive follow; they have no
²⁸² So, for example, Adams (1976a: 80). ²⁸³ For details, see Panchón (1986) and Hoff (2003).
²⁸⁴ The examples are taken from Hoff (2003) and Spevak (2010a: 272–5).
Word order at the noun phrase level
²⁸⁵ See Adams (1971), Panhuis (1982: 72–80), Herman (1985), de Jong (1986), Gettert (1999),
Bolkestein (2001), Lisón (2001), Devine and Stephens (2006: Ch. 6), de Melo (2010: 72–80), Spevak (2010a:
272–9), and Powell (2010).
Word order
examples given in § 23.7 are repeated here as (a) and (b). They have discontinuous
modifiers that precede their head for reasons of emphasis. Constituents that show
agreement with their head, as in (a) and (b), are not the only ones that can be discon-
tinuous; attributive noun phrases can be as well, as in (c), where nostrorum hominum,
separated from its head aures, is contrastive with respect to eorum. Normally, a geni-
tive modifier like nostrorum hominum (or rather hominum nostrorum) is expected to
follow its head noun.
(a) Instabilis in istum plurimum fortuna valuit.
(‘Unstable Fortune has exercised her greatest power on this creature.’ Rhet. Her. 4.44)
(b) Omnes invidiose eripuit bene vivendi casus facultates.
(‘All the means of living well Chance has jealously taken from him.’ Rhet. Her. 4.44)
(c) Quis enim est qui putet . . . nostrorum hominum ad eorum doctissimas voces
aures clausas fuisse?
(‘For who can imagine that the ears of our countrymen were closed to the echo of
their wisdom?’ Cic. Tusc. 4.3)
The other order, with the modifier following, is also possible, as in (d)–(f), though it
is less frequent.²⁸⁶ In (d), pervehimur separates the noun phrase exitus optatos (a case
of ‘verbal hyperbaton’, see § 23.88), as a result of which the emphatic modifier optatos
ends up in the final position of the clause, a common place for focus constituents.
Normally, on the basis of its meaning, optatus is a good candidate to precede its head.
In (e), the determiner has is postposed to emphatically announce the ne . . . paterer
clause. In (f), cruciatum voluntarium is focus of the clause. The discontinuity lends
emphasis to both parts: that anyone would accept cruciatus is already unexpected,
that he would do so voluntarily even more so.
(d) Nam et cum prospero flatu eius utimur ad exitus pervehimur optatos, et cum
reflavit affligimur.
(‘For when we enjoy her favouring breeze, we are wafted over to the wished-for
haven; when she blows against us, we are dashed to destruction.’ Cic. Off. 2.19)
(e) Sed ego is non sum qui statuere debeam iure quis proficiscatur necne. Partis
mihi Caesar has imposuit ne quem omnino discedere ex Italia paterer.
(‘However it is not my responsibility to decide whether any person is entitled to leave
or not. My instructions from Caesar are to allow nobody whosoever to go out of Italy.’
Cic. Att. 10.10.2—quoting from a letter by Antony)
(f) Quem enim locupletiorem quaerimus quam principem populi Romani
(sc. Regulum), qui retinendi officii causa cruciatum subierit voluntarium?
²⁸⁶ For ‘postmodifier hyperbaton’, see Devine and Stephens (2006: 531–40). In Caesar and Cicero it is
very rare (de Jong 1986; Bolkestein 2001), but in a sample from Pliny the Elder and Petronius the post-
modifier order represents 18 per cent (Bolkestein 2001: 254–6). For possessive adjectives in Plautus the
postmodifier order is 14 per cent, very often at the end of the line and without a pragmatic motivation (de
Melo 2010: 76–8).
Word order at the noun phrase level
(‘For what more competent witness do we ask for than one of the foremost citizens of
Rome, who voluntarily faced torture for the sake of being true to his moral duty?’ Cic.
Off. 3.105)
Generally speaking, the function of discontinuity of the noun phrase is to signal the
pragmatic saliency of the phrase. The phrase as a whole is normally focus of the
clause. A modifier that precedes carries emphasis or contrast, whereas hyperbaton
with a following modifier may signal emphasis or contrast of the head and/or the
modifier.²⁸⁷
As for the type and number of elements that are involved in discontinuity, it is com-
mon to make a distinction between intervening elements that are in some way part of
the discontinuous noun phrase (causing ‘internal’ hyperbaton) and ‘alien’ elements
that do not belong to the discontinuous noun phrase. An example of the first type is
(g), repeated from § 23.86, of the second (c) and (d) above, and (h). In (g), totius cor-
poris is the attribute of firmitate, with gladiatoria modifying the combination. In
(c) and (d), the intervening elements ad eorum doctissimas voces and pervehimur have
no relation with the discontinuous noun phrases and they could have been placed
outside these phrases. This is different for the connector autem in (h), which has limited
mobility (see § 23.21). Obviously, it is not part of the noun phrase it divides.
(g) Tu . . . ista gladiatoria totius corporis firmitate tantum vini in Hippiae nuptiis
exhauseras . . .
(‘You . . . with that gullet of yours, that chest, that robust physique befitting a gladiator,
engulfed such a quantity of wine at Hippias’ wedding . . .’ Cic. Phil. 2.63)
(h) Postremum autem genus est . . . quod proprium Catilinae est . . .
(‘The last group (sc. of the six), however, is Catiline’s very own . . .’ Cic. Catil. 2.22)
‘Alien’ discontinuity of a noun phrase can be due to the insertion of one or more con-
stituents that belong to one or more of seven types (details are given in § 23.88):²⁸⁸
(i) discontinuity caused by connectors like autem and interactional particles like
enim;
(ii) discontinuity caused by particles like quidem, adverbs like deinde, etc.;
(iii) discontinuity caused by subordinators like cum, postquam, quia, si;
(iv) discontinuity caused by ‘nominals’ (nouns, noun phrases, and pronouns);
(v) discontinuity caused by finite verb forms;
(vi) discontinuity caused by non-finite verb forms;
(vii) discontinuity caused by subordinate clauses (‘the rest’ in Figure 23.1).
Figure 23.1 shows the use of seven types of ‘alien’ discontinuity in noun phrases in
four prose authors.
²⁸⁷ Spevak (2015a) has a critical discussion of the idea of Marouzeau and others that, if the discontinu-
ous modifier follows the head, it has a ‘prédicative’ or ‘appositive’ value.
²⁸⁸ For parentheses causing discontinuity, see Bolkestein (1998c).
Word order
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Cicero Caesar Sallust Tacitus
connectors part. & adv. subord. nominals
finite v. infinite v. the rest
Figure 23.1 The frequency of ‘alien’ discontinuity of noun phrases (paras. (i)–(vii)
above) in four prose authors (in percentages)
Four texts are used for Figure 23.1: Cicero Brut. (25,600 words), Caesar Gal. I (8,170),
Sallust Cat. (10,900), Tacitus Ann. I (10,400). The total number of instances of the
types of discontinuity mentioned above in these texts is 350, 58, 32, 83, respective-
ly.²⁸⁹ Only Cicero has (six) instances of discontinuity in which subordinators are
involved. The texts of Caesar, Sallust, and Tacitus belong to a different type from
Cicero’s Brutus. This manifests itself among other things in the frequency of connectors
and interactional particles like autem, enim, vero (288 in the Brutus, 53 in the other
three texts together). Cicero has 102 instances of autem, 11 of which are involved in
discontinuity; Caesar eight, four of which are involved in discontinuity.
Authors vary in the degree to which they use hyperbaton and in the degree to which
they use the various interfering elements, especially the ‘internal’ and ‘alien’ ones.
Sallust uses both types of hyperbaton rarely. Cicero, by contrast, uses hyperbaton
more often, and especially ‘alien’ hyperbaton.²⁹⁰ He has it more often in his dialogue
Brutus than in his Verrine orations, but less often than in his treatise de Officiis.²⁹¹ In
poetry discontinuity is mainly a poetic device, without a pragmatic justification. In
Late Latin, discontinuity of noun phrases and prepositional phrases caused by con-
nectors and other particles (categories (i) and (ii) above) is present in all sorts of texts,
both literary and non-literary. Discontinuity caused by categories (iv)–(vii) is common
and sometimes excessive in authors with literary aspirations such as Ammianus,
²⁸⁹ The figures are based on those given in Gettert (1999: 59, 113, 122, 132).
²⁹⁰ See Spevak (2010a: 275, Table 11). ²⁹¹ See Gettert (1999).
Word order at the noun phrase level
Augustine, Jerome, and, much later, Gregory of Tours. See Table 23.12.²⁹² Discontinuity
did not survive in the Romance languages.
²⁹² The table is taken from Spevak (2012a: 257). For the Peregrinatio, see also Herman (1985) and
Väänänen (1987: 111–13).
Word order
(‘As for Marcus Antonius, whenever there is trouble, will he not be the rallying point
for desperate citizens?’ Cic. Phil. 7.18)
Supplement (a few examples from non-Classical texts, in alphabetical order):
Reliquos autem collibertos eius cave contemnas. (Petr. 38.6 (a freedman speaking));
Caligae autem nucl<e>atae nugae sunt. (CEL 142.1.25–6 (Karanis, 2nd cent.
ad (early))); Fluvius autem quartus ipse est Eufrates. (Vulg. Gen. 2.14); Heroum
autem civitas, quae fuit illo tempore . . . nunc est come, sed grandis, quod nos dicimus
vicus. (Pereg. 7.7); Catholica autem fides credit patrem et filium et spiritum sanctum
unum Deum . . . (August. Serm. 7.4); Servus enim noster lancea collum eius traiecit.
(Petr. 62.11 (Niceros speaking)); Multos enim sanctos monachos videbam inde
venientes in Ierusolimam . . . (Pereg. 13.1); Nullo enim prorsus modo violat corruptio
Deum nostrum . . . (August. Conf. 7.6); Multis enim modis significatur una res. (August.
Serm. 4.25); In eo ergo loco est nunc ecclesia non grandis . . . (Pereg. 3.3); Qua igitur
ratione admittas filium hominis, Marcion, circumspicere non possum. (Tert. Marc.
4.10.8); Generalis igitur fornicatio aperte manifestatur in Psalmo ubi dicitur . . .
(August. Serm. 162.3)
(ii) The group of particles and adverbs represented in Figure 23.1 is a very mixed
bag.²⁹³ In (e), the emphasizing particle quidem divides meo iudicio, but it might just as
well be taken as an ‘internal’ hyperbaton since it forms a unit with meo (see also
§ 23.34). In (f), the adverb iam is a clear ‘alien’ adjunct which divides oratio nostra;
oratio is contrastive. In (g), the role of the adverb deinceps is less obvious. It is regarded
by some as attributive (see the Loeb translation—for this usage, see § 11.69); multae
can also be taken as a secondary predicate. In (h), two members of this group contrib-
ute to the hyperbaton; crebras is contrastive.
(e) . . . eam gloriam quam nemo meo quidem iudicio est postea consecutus.
(‘. . . a renown such as no one after him has in my judgement attained.’ Cic. Brut. 32)
(f) . . . cumque ipsa oratio iam nostra canesceret haberetque suam quandam
maturitatem . . .
(‘. . . and when my oratory too had attained a certain ripeness and maturity of age . . .’
Cic. Brut. 8)
(g) . . . posteaque prosperae res deinceps multae consecutae sunt . . .
(‘. . . and from that time on many successes in turn followed . . .’ Cic. Brut. 12—tr. Bal)
(h) . . . verbis volvebat satis interdum acutas, crebras quidem certe sententias . . .
(‘. . . in words he rolled along thoughts sometimes quite keen but always abundant at
least . . .’ Cic. Brut. 280)
(iv) Various types of ‘nominal’ constituents that cause hyperbaton are shown in ( j)–(p).
The most common intervening constituents are (personal) pronouns, as in ( j) and (k)
(see also § 23.32). Ex. ( j) is noteworthy, since the hyperbaton is caused by ego follow-
ing the relative determiner. The relative determiner itself cannot be pragmatically sali-
ent; ego is contrastive.²⁹⁴ The other examples are different. In (k), praedam is emphatic.
In (l) and (m), with a noun phrase and a proper name, multi and magnam are
emphatic. Forms of address in the vocative can serve a similar purpose, as in (n). In
(o), the position of the prepositional phrase contributes to emphasis on postposed
nullo. In (p), praenomen and nomen are separated by ad me, to draw attention to the
identity of the specific Brutus involved.
( j) Quem ego sermonem cum ad Brutum tuum vel nostrum potius detulissem . . .
(‘When I reported that talk to your—I should say rather, our Brutus . . .’ Cic. Brut. 20)
(k) Est enim ausus dicere hasta posita, cum bona in foro venderet . . . civium,
praedam se suam vendere.
(‘For when selling under the hammer in the forum the property of . . . Roman citizens,
he had the effrontery to announce that he was selling his spoils.’ Cic. Off. 2.27)
(l) . . . vivo Catone minores natu multi uno tempore oratores floruerunt.
(‘. . . in Cato’s lifetime there flourished many younger orators at the same time.’ Cic.
Brut. 80)
(m) Ad haec Ariovistus respondit . . . Magnam Caesarem iniuriam facere, qui suo
adventu vectigalia sibi deteriora faceret.
(‘To this Ariovistus answered: . . . That Caesar was doing a great injustice, because his
arrival was making his revenues less valuable.’ Caes. Gal. 1.36.4)
(n) . . . iambum et trochaeum frequentem segregat ab oratore Aristoteles, Catule,
vester . . .
(‘. . . a frequent use of the iambus and the tribrach is interdicted to the orator by your
Aristotle, Catulus, . . .,’ Cic. de Orat. 3.182)
(o) Loco opportuniore in his malis nullo esse potuisti . . .
(‘You could have found no more convenient place to stay in these distressing circum-
stances . . .’ Cic. Fam. 6.20.2)
(v) Discontinuity of the head and modifier constituents of a noun phrase by (finite or
non-finite) verb forms (called: verbal hyperbaton) is rare in Early Latin prose and
still only sparingly used in Classical Latin, where Cicero and Caesar use it especially
in texts or passages with a higher level of stylistic elaboration. Sallust as well uses it
quite modestly (as does later Tacitus). Nepos uses it as a means for his literary
aspirations. Livy, however, was the first to introduce it on a large scale; it then became
‘monotonously frequent’ in Imperial prose.²⁹⁷ A pragmatic motivation is often no
longer present in authors like Livy. Also, rhythmic considerations play a role (as in
Latin poetry from its very beginning). It is uncommon in less-elevated prose texts. In
Late Latin authors with literary aspirations verbal hyperbaton is a much used instru-
ment to produce a preferred clausula or cursus.
An early indisputable example of verbal hyperbaton in Cato’s prose is (q). Validam
is emphatic. In (r), the adjective gravioribus is contrastive. In (s), the head maculis is
contrastive. Hyperbaton is rare in the early historians (for ancient criticism of Coelius
Antipater, see § 23.7). An instance from Sisenna is (t).²⁹⁸ Here it is difficult to explain
the anteposition of hostium from a pragmatic point of view. In Livy’s (u), aequos is
emphatic (ipsi quoque reges is the contrastive topic of the sentence). The noun phrase
quam lotam glandem in (v) from Petronius shows double discontinuity.
Sed cum pudicitia virtus sit animi . . . (August. Civ. 1.8); Ideo autem hunc tenere ordi-
nem malui . . . (August. Civ. 21.1.1); Cum ergo nescirem quomodo haec subsisteret
imago tua . . . (August. Conf. 6.5)
(vi) More extreme forms of discontinuity of noun phrases by entire clauses and by
combinations of two or more ‘alien’ constituents are well known from Early Latin
comedy and from poetry, as in (w)–(y).
(w) Tuo ego istaec igitur dicam illi periculo. / # Quid ais tu?
(‘I’ll tell him about this, and it will be at your risk. # What do you say?’ Pl. Bac. 599–600)
(x) qua Galli furtim noctu summa arcis adorti / moenia concubia vigilesque
repente cruentant.
(‘at the time for bedding down at night, the Gauls slipped stealthily over the citadel’s
highest walls and suddenly bloodied the guard.’ Enn. Ann. 164–5V=227–8S)
(y) . . . cum sic unanimam adloquitur male sana sororem.
(‘. . . when, much distraught, she thus speaks to her sister, sharer of her heart.’ Verg. A. 4.8)
²⁹⁹ For Caesar, see Schneider (1912: 14–22); for Apuleius, Bernard (1927: 25–7); for the Peregrinatio,
Väänänen (1987: 111–13); for Augustine, Balmuş (1930: 119–23).
Word order at the noun phrase level
tum suis . . . (Cic. Cael. 5); Magna dis immortalibus habenda est atque huic ipsi Iovi
Statori, antiquissimo custodi huius urbis, gratia, quod . . . (Cic. Catil. 1.11); Quis tum
nobis, quis populo Romano obtulit hunc divinum adulescentem deus? (Cic. Phil.
5.43); Quae cum reprehendis, ostendis qualis tu, si ita forte accidisset, fueris illo
tempore consul futurus. (Cic. Pis. 14); Rem publicam illis accepi temporibus eam
quae paene amissa est, a vobis eam reciperavi quam aliquando omnes unius opera
servatam iudicaverunt. (Cic. Red. Pop. 5); Mihi credite iudices—tametsi vosmet
ipsos haec eadem audire certo scio—cum multas acceperint per hosce annos socii
atque exterae nationes calamitates et iniurias, nullas Graeci homines gravius
ferunt ac tulerunt quam huiuscemodi spoliationes fanorum atque oppidorum. (Cic.
Ver. 4.132); Crassus vero mihi noster visus est oratoris facultatem non illius artis
terminis, sed ingenii sui finibus immensis paene describere. (Cic. de Orat. 1.214);
Antonius autem probabiliorem hoc populo orationem fore censebat suam,
si . . . (Cic. de Orat. 2.4); Philo ut propria (cj. Lundström) noster et lecta poëmata et
loco adiungebat. (Cic. Tusc. 2.26);³⁰⁰ . . . Pompeius togulam illam pictam silentio
tuetur suam. (Cic. Att. 1.18.6); (sc. Caesar) . . . duplicem eo loco fecerat val-
lum . . . (Caes. Civ. 3.63.2); Hoc pugnae tempus magnum attulit nostris ad salutem
momentum. (Caes. Civ. 1.51.6); In hoc tantum fuit odium multitudinis ut nemo
ausus sit eum liber sepelire. (Nep. Phoc. 4.4); Sunt qui non ex oppido proficiscentem
bellum gessisse tyrannum tradant, sed castris adversus Romana positis cas-
tra . . . (Liv. 34.41.8); Hunc Ti. Gracchi liberi, P. Scipionis Africani nepotes, viva
adhuc matre Cornelia, Africani filia, viri optimis ingeniis male usi, vitae mortisque
habuere exitum. (Vell. 2.7.1); . . . tardiore semper ad terras omnium quae geruntur
in caelo effectu cadente quam visu, sicuti fulguris et tonitrus et fulminum. (Plin.
Nat. 2.216); Talis ad Oceanum pergentem Venerem comitatur exercitus. (Apul. Met.
4.31.7); Pastores enim mei perditam sibi requirentes vacculam variasque regiones
peragrantes occurrunt nobis fortuito . . . (Apul. Met. 7.25.4); . . . itaque ergo singula,
quemadmodum venimus per ipsam totam vallem, semper nobis sancti illi loca
demonstrabant. (Pereg. 5.1—NB: distant secondary predicate); Cum itaque ignis in
lignis ardeat ut lapides coquat, contrarios habet non in contrariis rebus effectus.
(August. Civ. 21.4); Ita autem toleravit cubilis iniurias ut nullam de hac re cum
marito haberet umquam simultatem. (August. Conf. 9.19)
Nouns and noun phrases: An nescibas quam eius modi homini raro tempus se
daret? (Pl. Bac. 676); Salis unicuique in anno modium satis est. (Cato Agr. 58.1);
‘Peto igitur’, Crassus inquit, ‘a te, quoniam id nobis, Antoni, hominibus id aetatis,
oneris ab horum adulescentium studiis imponitur, ut . . .’ (Cic. de Orat. 1.207); . . . non
tantum ingenioso homini et ei, qui forum, qui curiam, qui causas, qui rem publicam
spectet, opus esse arbitror temporis . . . (Cic. de Orat. 3.86); Quibus . . . tantum
Camillus auditus imperator terroris intulerat ut . . . (Liv. 6.2.9); Quid attinere cum
mortali corpore uno civitatis quam immortalem esse deceat pati consenescere vires?
(Liv. 6.23.7); Nec Caesaris dictatoris quemquam alium recepisse dorso equus tradi-
tur . . . (Plin. Nat. 5.155); Nam et signa ibi parebant castrorum. (Pereg. 12.9)
³⁰⁰ For a detailed discussion of hyperbaton of possessive adjectives in Cicero, see Lundström (1982:
31–8); for Plautus, see de Melo (2010: 72–80).
Word order
NB: . . . te pauper ambit sollicita prece / ruris colonus, te dominam aequoris / qui-
cumque Bithyna lacessit / Carpathium pelagus carina. (Hor. Carm. 1.35.5–8—NB:
parallelism of ruris (sc. dominam) and dominam aequoris)³⁰¹
(vii) Double hyperbaton is rare in Classical prose but common in poetry (see § 23.14),
as in (ac), and in later poeticizing prose. A prose example is (ad). Both attributes are
emphatic.
(ac) . . . amissos longo socios sermone requirunt . . .
(‘. . . in long discourse they yearn for their lost comrades . . .’ Verg. A. 1.217)
(ad) Maximus vini numerus fuit, permagnum optimi pondus argenti . . .
(‘There was a great quantity of wine, a very large weight of the finest silver plate . . .’
Cic. Phil. 2.66)
Supplement:
Post Amafinium autem multi eiusdem aemuli rationis multa cum scripsissent, Italiam
totam occupaverunt . . . (Cic. Tusc. 4.7); (sc. Hermathenae signum) Est ornamentum
Academiae proprium meae . . . (Cic. Att. 1.4.3)
³⁰¹ For this interpretation, see Nisbet and Hubbard ad loc. ³⁰² So Sz.: 691.
Word order in prepositional phrases
constituent it governs by one or more other elements that do not belong to the
prepositional phrase (‘discontinuous’ prepositional phrases: § 23.96).³⁰³
Continuous prepositional phrases can again be divided into phrases which govern a
constituent which is not modified and phrases in which the governed constituent is
complex in itself, for example, because it contains an adjectival or genitival attribute,
e.g. per gratiam bonam ‘in good friendship’.
³⁰³ Some of the relevant articles in the TLL offer useful syntactic information, e.g. s.v. inter 2146.63ff. and
per 1167.9ff. For Plautus, Lodge’s lexicon is useful, as is Gerber and Greef for Tacitus. Collections of examples
can be found in Neue-W.: II.942–52; K.-St.: I.585–8; Marouzeau (1949: 35–65). Bibliography in Sz.: 218.
Word order
Most other monosyllabic prepositions are normally anteposed, as in (e) and (f). In
Early Latin and in poetry, these prepositions are sometimes postposed as well.
However, this is much less common in prose. This phenomenon is relatively frequent
in Early Latin in combination with relative pronouns, as in (g), but rare in combination
with nouns. A unique and textually uncertain Early Latin example is (h). Postposition
is very rare in Late Latin.
(e) Iuppiter . . . per quem vivimus vitalem aevom . . .
(‘O, Jupiter . . . through whom we live and draw the breath of being.’ Pl. Poen. 1187)
(f) Quod volui ut volui impetravi, per amicitiam et gratiam, / a Philocomasio.
(‘I obtained from Philocomasium what I wished just as I wished in all friendliness
and goodwill.’ Pl. Mil. 1200–1)
(g) Exerce vocem quam per vivis . . .
(‘Exercise the voice through which you live . . .’ Pl. Poen. 13)
(h) Gratiam per si petimus, spero ab eo impetrassere.
(‘If we ask it as a favour, I have my hopes he’ll acquiesce.’ Pl. St. 71)³⁰⁴
1.245); Sic annum mensesque suos natura diesque / atque ipsas voluit numerari signa
per horas . . . (Man. 3.520–1); . . . ubi clari mater Iesu / nato cum pariter convivia con-
celebrabat. (Iuvenc. 2.128–9)
Polysyllabic prepositions are much more often postposed, in Early Latin mainly
with personal, relative, and interrogative pronouns, but from Lucretius onwards
also regularly after nouns.³⁰⁵ The postposition of the preposition after the noun is
an artificial phenomenon, used in various degrees by individual authors and
sometimes in the individual works of an author (Tacitus, for example).³⁰⁶ The
phenomenon is rare in Late Latin. Examples of anteposed polysyllabic prepositions
are (i) and ( j); of postposed (k) and (l).³⁰⁷ The Supplement contains further
postposed ones.
(i) Censor enim, penes quem maiores nostri, id quod tu sustulisti, iudicium
senatus de dignitate esse voluerunt . . .
(‘For the censor, to whose power (though you have abolished that) our ancestors
chose to commit the decision respecting the dignity of each member of the senate . . .’
Cic. Dom. 131—tr. Yonge)
( j) . . . Antiphila . . . / propter quam in summa infamia sum . . .
(‘. . . Antiphila . . . it’s for your sake that I’m in the greatest discredit.’ Ter. Hau. 258–9)
(k) Iuppiter . . . / quem penes spes vitae sunt hominum omnium . . .
(‘Jupiter . . . in whom the hopes and lives of all mankind lie . . .’ Pl. Poen. 1187–8)
(l) . . . abduce me hinc ab hac quantum potest, / quam propter tantum damni
feci et flagiti.
(‘. . . drag me away as quickly as possible from here from this woman because of whom
I’ve incurred such great loss and disgrace.’ Pl. Bac. 1031–2)
Supplement (in alphabetical order by preposition):
With pronouns: Mirum quin te advorsus dicat. (Pl. Am. 750); Neque amplius
resisti iam apud eos poterat, quin paulatim decedentibus his, quos adversum
ierant, ad postremum cuncti fugarentur. (Dict. 2.12); Diem statuo satis laxam, quam
ante si solverint, dico me centesimas ducturum, si non solverint, ex pactione.
(Cic. Att. 6.1.16); Quam circa lacus lucique sunt plurimi . . . (Cic. Ver. 4.107); Quod
contra saepius illa / religio peperit scelerosa atque impia facta. (Lucr. 1.82–3);
Quae cum ita sint, non est committendum ut iis paream quos contra me senatus . . .
armavit. (Cic. Att. 10.8.8); (sc. Germani) . . . quos contra pertinax miles . . . perterre-
bat. (Amm. 16.12.36); Mentio si qua / de Capitolini furtis iniecta Petilli / te coram
fuerit, defendas ut tuus est mos. (Hor. S. 1.4.93–5); Decernerent legatos seque
coram mandata darent. (Tac. Ann. 1.19.3); Quin potius auferantur quibus coram
³⁰⁵ Bailey, in the Prolegomena to his commentary, p. 107, ascribes Lucretius’ noteworthy use of
prepositions to metrical considerations. K.-St.: I.586 adduce Greek influence. Bailey also notes that
Lucretius has all his local instances of propter postposed (ten, against six anteposed causal ones).
³⁰⁶ For variation in the works of Tacitus, see Goodyear (1968: 30).
³⁰⁷ It is probably not due to mere chance that I did not find minimal pairs for anteposed penes and
propter with a relative pronoun in Plautus.
Word order
male vivere pudet . . . (Lact. Inst. 5.9.8); Si quid med erga hodie falsum dixeris . . . (Pl.
As. 20); Huius signi caput dicitur ex tribus stellis, quas infra duae clarae, quas
appellant Umeros. (Var. L. 7.50); Etiamne haec illi tibi / iusserunt ferri, quos inter
iudex datu’s? (Pl. Mer. 751–2); Hanc iuxta locum fecerunt sub terra . . . (Nep. Paus.
4.4); Quem iuxta Hiezechiel, per multa iam saecula dormiente David, appellat
servum suum atque pastorem dicens . . . (Hier. Is. 15.55.3); Ethnici, quos penes
nulla est veritatis plenitudo, quia nec doctor veritatis Deus, malum et bonum pro
arbitrio et libidine interpretantur. (Tert. Spect. 21.1); . . . nec iam te praeter in urbe /
formosa est oculis ulla puella meis. ([Tib.] 4.13.3–4); . . . quis fuerit quem propter
corpus suom stupri compleverit. (Pl. Am. 1016); . . . et maestum simul ante aras
adstare parentem / sensit et hunc propter ferrum celare ministros / aspectuque
suo lacrimas effundere civis, / muta metu terram genibus summissa petebat. (Lucr.
1.89–92); Nos secundum ferri nunc per urbem haec omnia . . . (Pl. Mil. 1349); . . . aut
quibus sine omnino confici non potest . . . (Cic. Inv. 2.40); . . . siquis eas subter
iacuit prostratus in herbis. (Lucr. 6.785); Exanimis pueris super exanimata paren-
tum / corpora nonnumquam posses retroque videre . . . (Lucr. 6.1256–7); . . . sed
adhibent modum quendam, quem ultra progredi non oporteat. (Cic. Tusc. 4.38).
With nouns: . . . cur tenebras ante et fremitus et murmura concit? (Lucr.
6.410); . . . iactavit fusa sed caput ante coma. (Tib. 2.5.66); Is locus est Cumas apud . . .
(Lucr. 6.747); . . . terque focum circa laneus orbis eat! (Prop. 4.6.6); Quam ne in
manibus tenui atque accepi hic ante aedis / cistellam, ubi ea sit nescio, nisi, ut
opinor, / loca haec mi circiter excidit. (Pl. Cist. 675–7); . . . atque hanc sine tem-
pora circum / inter victrices hederam tibi serpere laurus. (Verg. Ecl. 8.12–13);
Atque ego cum Graecos facerem, natus mare citra, / versiculos . . . (Hor. S.
1.10.31–2); Nihil intermissa navigatione hiberni maris Agrippina Corcyram
insulam advehitur, litora Calabriae contra sitam. (Tac. Ann. 3.1.1); Quo nihil
mirandum, si et in carcere inviscatas Anyti et Meliti palmas gestiens infringere
ipsa morte coram immortalitatem vindicat animae necessaria praesumptione ad
iniuriae frustrationem. (Tert. An. 1); Si quid amicum erga bene feci aut consului
fideliter, . . . (Pl. Trin. 1128); Ventitabatque illuc Nero, quo solutius urbem extra
lasciviret. (Tac. Ann. 13.47.2); . . . at legionibus cum damno labor, effodere
rivos . . . humum infra moliri. (Tac. Ann. 11.20.3); . . . qui lapides inter sistit per
strata viarum . . . (Lucr. 4.415); . . . quodque litus iuxta, non ventis acta, non saxis
impulsa navis summa sui parte veluti terrestre machinamentum concidis-
set . . . (Tac. Ann. 14.6.1); Translata dehinc castra hostem propter . . . (Tac. Ann.
4.48.1); Ilia subter / caecum vulnus habes . . . (Pers. 4.43–4); Sed tu quid facitasti
mandatis super? (Pl. Bac. 196); (cruorem) humum super spargens . . . (Tac. Ann.
16.35.1); Illis ira modum supra est . . . (Verg. G. 4.236); Si piguit portas ultra pro-
cedere . . . (Prop. 4.7.29)
³⁰⁸ For a discussion of these instances of ‘conjunct hyperbaton’, see Devine and Stephens (2006: 586–7).
Word order
(d) . . . patrem tuom meumque adeo, unice qui unus / civibus ex omnibus probus
perhibetur . . .
(‘. . . your father, yes, and mine, who’s held to be the one outstanding man of high
principles in this whole city . . .’ Pl. St. 12–13)
The orders exemplified by examples (a) and (b) are the most frequent ones and they
can be found in all sorts of texts in all periods.
Supplement (in alphabetical order by preposition):
Preposition—modifier—noun:
Modifiers showing agreement: Adhaesit homini ad infumum ventrem fames. (Pl.
St. 236); . . . adversum Vitellianas partes modeste disseruit . . . (Tac. Hist. 1.90.2);
Pompeius paucis post diebus in Thessaliam pervenit. Contionatusque apud cunctum
exercitum suis agit gratias . . . (Caes. Civ. 3.82.1); Et quidquid dicere de nostris con-
scriptoribus intenderitis . . . (Arn. Nat. 1.57.1)
Genitival and other modifiers: Nam hospes nullus tam in amici hospitium devorti
potest / quin . . . (Pl. Mil. 741–2); Erant antiquitus porticus . . ., in quarum tectum
egressi saxis tegulisque Vitellianos obruebant. (Tac. Hist. 3.71.1); . . . continuo malum
est et in exitiabilis rei opinione ponendum. (Arn. Nat. 1.10.1); . . . ne per linguae
errorem dicat: . . . (August. Conf. 1.29)
Preposition—noun—modifier:
Modifiers showing agreement: Quid hoc hic clamoris audio ante aedis meas? (Pl.
Trin. 1093); Tantum apud homines barbaros valuit esse aliquos repertos principes
belli inferendi . . . (Caes. Gal. 5.54.4); Audieram enim ego adhuc puer de vita
aeterna . . . (August. Conf. 1.17); Vel inter cuneos ferreos . . . (Pl. St. 619)
Genitival and other modifiers: . . . et magis magisque vivere apud fontem vitae et
in lumine eius videre lumen et perfici et inlustrari et beari. (August. Conf. 13.5); Erant
enim circum castra Pompei permulti editi atque asperi colles. (Caes. Civ. 3.43.1);
Erant antiquitus porticus in latere clivi dextrae subeuntibus . . . (Tac. Hist. 3.71.1); . . .
qui de caelo exoritur sub solio Iovis. (Pl. Trin. 940)
The word order patterns illustrated by (c) and (d) require a more detailed account.
Both, especially the latter, are much rarer than the first two, and are also much more
typical of poetry and of poeticizing prose.³⁰⁹ In what follows a distinction is made
between the large and essentially open class of descriptive adjectives and genitival
attributes on the one hand, and the much smaller classes, but each with relatively
frequent members, consisting of anaphoric, demonstrative, interrogative, and relative
determiners and pronouns, possessive adjectives, and quantifiers of all sorts on the
other. The patterns with inserted prepositions with the class of adjectives and genitival
attributes are mostly poetical and artificial, whereas some patterns with the smaller
classes are common in all periods of Latin.
The two other logically possible orders, with the preposition as the last member, are
extremely rare. A few instances are: Lucr. 4.597 . . . haec loca per . . ., an instance of a
monosyllabic preposition, and Pl. Cist. 677 . . . loca haec circiter . . ., an instance of a
polysyllabic one. Postpositive cum is assumed in Studio · pariliqum / <n>ulla · in ·
avaritie / cessit · ab · officio. (CIL I2.1221.12–14 (Rome, c.80 bc)).³¹⁰
Brut. 275); Qua ex opinione hominum illa insula eorum deorum sacra puta-
tur . . . (Cic. Ver. 1.48)
Anaphoric(ally used) determiners: Tum quae hic sunt scriptae litterae, hoc in equo
insunt milites / armati atque animati probe. (Pl. Bac. 941–2); . . . is, qui, qua re homi-
nes bestiis praestent, ea in re hominibus ipsis antecellat. (Cic. Inv. 1.5); . . . et is qui
scripsit hanc ob eam rem noluit / iterum referre, ut iterum posset vendere. (Ter. Hec.
6–7); Eandem ob causam opera ab optimatibus data est ut . . . (Suet. Jul. 19.2)
Genitival attributes: Cuius ad arbitrium quoque copia materiai / cogitur inter-
dum flecti per membra . . . (Lucr. 2.281–2); (sc. Sthenius) . . . cuius de meritis in
rem publicam . . . fuit aenea tabula fixa Thermis in curia . . . (Cic. Ver. 2.112); . . .
quorum de natura moribusque Caesar cum quaereret, sic reperiebat: . . . (Caes.
Gal. 2.15.3); Quorum de numero qui sese in bella sequantur / praestantis virtute
legit. (Verg. A. 8.547–8); . . . ii quorum de ultione quaeritur . . . (Quint. Inst. 7.4.33);
Initium et causa penes Aelium Seianum . . ., cuius de potentia supra memoravi.
(Tac. Ann. 4.1.1); Quippe eorum ex ingenio ingenium horum probant. (Pl. Trin.
1049); Magis quorum in manu sit quam ut incolumis sit quaeri. (Liv. 2.57.3);
Quid enim non ille videret, / cuius in arbitrio Graecia tota fuit? (Ov. Rem. Am.
467–8); Gratulatus sum urbi Romae, cuius ad salutem estis electi, gratulatus senatui,
cuius pro iudicio quod in vos habuit reddidistis pristinam dignitatem . . . (Hist. Aug.
Max. Balb. 17.2)
Quantifiers like quantus, tantus, qualis, talis, the related adverbs quam and tam, as
well as nullus, multus, magnus, and the possessive adjectives behave in the same way
as the determiners dealt with above on account of their inherently salient meaning, as
in (g) and (h).
(g) Namque regnum suppetebat mi, ut scias, quanto e loco, / quantis opibus, qui-
bus de rebus lapsa fortuna accidat.
(‘For I used to have a kingdom, so that you may know from what standing, from what
power, from what riches fortune may lapse and fall down.’ Enn. scen. 355–6V=339–40J)
(h) Sed te uterque tuo pro iure, ego atque hic, oramus.
(‘But we both—he and I—in recognition of your rights, appeal to you.’ Pl. Cas. 371)
Word order in prepositional phrases
Supplement:
. . . quom illum rescisces criminatorem meum / quanto in periclo et quanta in pernicie
siet. (Pl. Bac. 826–7); Magna cum cura ego illum curari volo. (Pl. Men. 895); . . . vestro
sine momine, venti . . . (Enn. Ann. 595V=Spur. 4S); Quantis cum aerumnis illum exan-
clavi diem (Enn. scen. 102V=103J); Ah, stultitia’st istaec, non pudor. Tam ob parvolam /
rem paene e patria! Turpe dictu. (Ter. Ad. 274–5); Nullane in re esse quoiquam homini
fidem! (Ter. An. 425); . . . iter mihi tutum multis minitantibus magno cum suo metu
praestiterunt. (Cic. Planc. 97); Aliquot post menses et homo occisus est et bona venisse
dicuntur. (Cic. S. Rosc. 128); . . . et aut turpe aut inutile demonstrandum tali de homine
supplicium sumere. (Cic. Inv. 2.107); Tales igitur inter viros amicitia tantas oportuni-
tates habet quantas vix queo dicere. (Cic. Amic. 22); . . . se ut (natura) custodiat quam
in optimo sui generis statu. (Cic. Fin. 5.26); . . . Themistoclesque aliquot ante annos cum
in epulis recusaret lyram, est habitus indoctior. (Cic. Tusc. 1.4);³¹³ Ecquis umquam
tam ex amplo statu, tam in bona causa, tantis facultatibus ingeni, consili, gratiae, tantis
praesidiis bonorum omnium concidit? (Cic. Att. 3.10.2); Hac habita oratione nullam
in partem ab exercitu Curionis fit significatio. (Caes. Civ. 2.28.4); Quae etsi magno
cum dolore omnes ferebant, tamen . . . (Caes. Gal. 7.15.2); Quas ego te terras et quanta
per aequora vectum / accipio! (Verg. A. 6.692–3); Volitant alii magno cum murmure
aut mugitu . . . (Plin. Nat. 11.98); Primusque Messala Corvinus eam potestatem et pau-
cos intra dies finem accepit . . . (Tac. Ann. 6.11.3); Nam tam diu dixi magno cum labore,
maiore cum fructu. (Plin. Ep. 4.16.3); . . . verum etiam maiore de parte furiarum com-
pressionibus imminuta. (Arn. Nat. 1.6)
(ii) Instances of descriptive adjectives and genitival attributes which are separated
from their noun by a preposition are rare in Early Latin. Ex. (d) above is one of the few
instances in Plautus. However, examples of adjectives in such a collocation abound in
Ennius, considering the size of what is extant of his work. Ex. (i) will suffice. Other
poets and poeticizing prose authors followed his lead,³¹⁴ but Cicero has instances as
well, as (k) shows. Genitival attributes (the non-pronominal ones) that precede the
preposition, as in ( j), are much less frequent than genitival attributes that follow the
preposition, certainly in prose.³¹⁵ The function of this pattern is essentially to mark
the saliency of the modifier. In poetry this pattern is often exploited even further by
locating the modifier in a prominent position of the verse as well.
(i) Vix aegro cum corde meo me somnus reliquit.
(‘Then did sleep scarcely leave me all sick at heart.’ Enn. Ann. 51V=50S)
( j) Sulpureas posuit spiramina Naris ad undas.
(‘He built blowholes by Nar’s sulphury waters.’ Enn. Ann. 260V=222S)
³¹³ For the order in prepositional phrases with ante, see Lundström (1961: 92–9), and for post ibid.:
113–17.
³¹⁴ See Penney (1999) and Clackson (2004) on the question of how this predilection of poets should be
assessed: archaism or innovation?
³¹⁵ Compare Gettert’s (1999) surveys 3.2.1.4 and 3.2.2.1.3, respectively, in his ‘Anhang’ (Cicero, Caesar,
Sallust, and Tacitus).
Word order
³¹⁶ Rhet. Her. 4.44 gives virtute pro vestra as an instance of ‘perversio’, one of the two types of ‘trans-
gressio’, ‘quae verborum perturbat ordinem’. For a discussion and instances of this pattern, see Bendz (1948).
Word order in prepositional phrases
The normal order of a preposition and a restrictive appositive phrase is with the prep-
osition preceding, as in (a). An Early Latin exception with the preposition in the mid-
dle is (b). For further examples, especially from poetry, see the Supplement. For the
use of prepositions in non-restrictive appositive phrases with toponyms, see § 11.82.
(a) Interea cognovi . . . magnas Parthorum copias <et> Arabum ad oppidum
Antiocheam accessisse . . .
Word order
(‘Meanwhile, I learned . . . that a large Parthian and Arab force had approached the
town of Antioch . . .’ Cic. Fam. 15.4.7)
(b) . . . ut civitas nomen mihi commutet meque ut praedicet / lenone ex Ballione
regem Iasonem.
(‘. . . so that the city changes my name and calls me King Jason instead of pimp Ballio.’
Pl. Ps. 192–3)
Supplement:
Celtiberia in terra, / quod quisque minxit, hoc sibi solet mane / dentem atque russam
defricare gingivam . . . (Catul. 39.17–19); . . . usque ad Hyperboreos et mare ad
Oceanum? (Catul. 115.6); . . . ut duros mille labores / rege sub Eurystheo fatis Iunonis
iniquae pertulerit. (Verg. A. 8.291–3); . . . iudice sub Tmolo certamen venit ad inpar.
(Ov. Met. 11.156); Nunc Iove sub domino caedes et vulnera semper . . . (Tib. 1.3.49);
Andro in insula (vv. ll.) templo Liberi patris fontem Nonis Ianuariis semper vini
saporem fu<nd>ere Mucianus ter consul credit. (Plin. Nat. 2.231); . . . pectines—
maximi et in his nigerrimi aestate laudatissimi, hi autem Mytilenis, Tyndaride,
Salonis, Altini, C<h>ia in insula, Alexandriae in Aegypto—. . . (Plin. Nat. 32.150);
Et Segestani aedem Veneris montem apud Erycum, vetustate dilapsam, restaurari
postulavere . . . (Tac. Ann. 4.43.4)
³¹⁷ See Wilkinson (1963: 213–20) on this development, which is mainly a Roman phenomenon.
Word order in prepositional phrases
(iii) sometimes the prepositional phrase is split up into more components, as in (d);
(iv) an even more complicated instance arises if a complex modifier is distributed
on both sides of the noun governed by the preposition, as in (e.i), taken from
Arnobius, or if the preposition is placed in the middle of a complex modifier
of the phrase it governs, as in (e.ii). Here we are approaching or possibly even
transgressing the boundaries of the rules of Latin syntax.
(a) . . . nec tui me quicquam invenisti penes.
(‘. . . and you didn’t find anything belonging to you on me.’ Pl. Aul. 654)
(b) . . . commonstrabo quo in quemque hominem facile inveniatis loco, /…
(‘I’ll show in which place you can easily find which sort of person.’ Pl. Cur. 467)
(c) Isque Hellesponto pontem contendit in alto.
(‘And he stretched a bridge over deep Hellespont.’ Enn. Ann. 378V=369S)
(d) . . . in tamen humano contigit esse loco.
(‘. . . I have yet had the good fortune to be in a place where men dwell.’ Ov. Pont.
1.3.48)
(e) i. Atque utinam daretur in unius speciem contionis toto orbe contracto ora-
tione hac uti
ii. et humani in generis audientia conlocari.
(‘Would that it might be granted to me here to address the whole world gathered
together as in one assembly and that I might be placed within hearing of the whole
human race.’ Arn. Nat. 1.29)
Supplement:
Simple or compact head constituents: Sine me (per te, ere, opsecro / deos immor-
tales) ire huc intro ad filium. (Pl. Bac. 905–6); Maturo propior desine funeri / inter
ludere virgines (Hor. Carm. 3.15.4–5); Contra quis ferat arma deos? (Tib. 1.6.30)
Uxor virum si clam domo egressa est foras . . . (Pl. Mer. 821); . . . [et] thensaurum
tuom / me esse penes . . . (Pl. Trin. 1145–6); . . . et quasi iam leti portas cunctarier ante.
(Lucr. 3.67); Nam saepe Gigantum / ora volare videntur et umbram ducere late, / inter-
dum magni montes avolsaque saxa / montibus anteire et solem succedere praeter . . .
(Lucr. 4.136–9); . . . solus qui Paridem solitus contendere contra . . . (Verg. A. 5.370);
Eum vasti circum gens umida ponti / exsultans rorem late dispersit amarum. (Verg. G.
4.430–1); . . . miles ne vallum litiget extra / et procul a signis. (Juv. 16.16–17)
Discontinuous head constituents: Subulo quondam marinas propter astabat plagas.
(Enn. Sat. 65V=14FRL); Age, ut rem esse in nostram putas. (Pl. Per. 609); Quam · in ·
quisque / decuriam · ita · viator · lectus · erit ·, is · in · ea . . . (CIL I2.587.I.33–4
etc. (Lex Cornel., Rome, 81 bc)); . . . cum homines humiliores in alienum eiusdem
nominis infunderentur genus. (Cic. Brut. 62); . . . ut nullius oratoris aeque in potestate
fuerit. (Cic. Brut. 274); Deinde, si qua ego in re fratri tuo rei publicae causa restiterim,
ut mihi ignoscas . . . (Cic. Fam. 5.2.6); Omnia quae naturali ratione geruntur, / et qui-
bus e fiant causis apparet origo. (Lucr. 6.760–1); . . . terque novas circum felix eat hos-
tia fruges, . . . (Verg. G. 1.345); Quo ab adultero absolvitur an quo damnatur a viro?
(Sen. Con. 2.7.9)
Word order
. . . vel rapidae flammis urar patienter in Aetnae . . . (Ov. Tr. 5.2b.31); . . . inbecillitatis
auxilia animalibus mutuarentur a mutis . . . (Arn. Nat. 2.40.1)
Multiple discontinuity: Quin etiam finis dum vitae vertitur intra . . . (Lucr. 3.592); . . .
cum saevum cupiens contra contendere monstrum / aut mortem appeteret Theseus . . .
(Catul. 64.101–2); Per tibi ego hunc iuro fortem castumque cruorem, / perque tuos
manes . . . (Ov. Fast. 2.841–2); . . . inque sinu dominae carisque sodalibus inque / securus
patria consenuisse mea. (Ov. Tr. 4.8.11–12)
This section deals with the relative order of complex forms with the auxiliary sum. In
Classical prose, the continuous order of the component parts is definitely more
Relative order in phrases with auxiliaries
frequent than the discontinuous, and the sequence with the auxiliary postposed more
frequent than the inverse order, although there is considerable variation from author
to author and also between different works by the same author, for example in Caesar’s
work. When these forms are placed in first position of the sentence the particles autem
and enim relatively often follow the combination instead of causing discontinuity.³¹⁸
Table 23.13 gives some statistics from a Classical prose corpus, which shows a minor
difference between the passive factus est and deponent usus est types.³¹⁹ In addition to
the four possibilities given in Table 23.13 there is a fifth, namely ellipsis of the sum
form, which is left out of account.³²⁰
Table . The relative order of compound verb forms with the auxiliary sum
Sequence Total Percentage Sequence Total Percentage
factus est 150 56 usus est 70 70
factus . . . est 26 10 usus . . . est 5 5
est factus 55 21 est usus 19 19
est . . . factus 34 13 est . . . usus 6 6
Total 265 100 100 100
The various ordering possibilities are mainly determined by the pragmatic con-
stellation of the context. The continuous sequence factus est is used when the action
is the focus of the clause. Often it is also the final constituent of the clause. Examples
are (a)–(c).
(a) Te multum amamus quod ea abs te diligenter parvoque curata sunt.
(‘I am most grateful to you, because this was administered by you with much care and
for little money.’ Cic. Att. 1.3.2)
(b) Provincias praetores nondum sortiti sunt.
(‘The Praetors have not yet drawn lots for their provinces.’ Cic. Att. 1.13.5)
(c) Cum civitas ob eam rem incitata armis ius suum exsequi conaretur multi-
tudinemque hominum ex agris magistratus cogerent, Orgetorix mortuus est.
(‘The state, being incensed at this, essayed to secure its due rights by force of arms,
and the magistrates were bringing together a number of men from the country parts,
when Orgetorix died.’ Caes. Gal. 1.4.4)
Supplement:
Post autem neque sacrificiis sollemnibus factis neque votis nuncupatis non profectus
est, sed profugit paludatus. (Cic. Phil. 5.24—non has constituent scope, see § 8.3 and
§ 8.7); Ita comitia in a. d. VI Kal. Sext. dilata sunt. (Cic. Att. 1.16.13); . . . multaque a
me de ordinum dignitate et concordia dicta sunt Kal. Dec. et postridie. (Cic. Att.
1.17.9); Valerius absolutus est Hortensio defendente. (Cic. Att. 2.3.1); Eadem enim
elata sunt primum a pluribus. (Cic. de Orat. 1.192); Quibus submotis omnes sagit-
tarii funditoresque destituti inermes sine praesidio interfecti sunt. (Caes. Civ. 3.93.7);
Statim allatae sunt amphorae vitreae diligenter gypsatae . . . (Petr. 34.6); Hora ergo
quarta pervenimus in summitatem illam montis Dei Sancti Syna, ubi data est
lex . . . (Pereg. 3.2); Nonne tibi prolocutus sum adversum me delicta mea, Deus
meus . . .? (August. Conf. 1.6); Quippe ex voluntate perversa facta est libido . . . (August.
Conf. 8.10)
The reverse order est factus applies if another constituent of the clause is more salient.
In that case the phrase may be continuous or discontinuous, depending on the com-
plexity of the clause. Est follows the salient constituent. Examples are (d) and (e). The
auxiliary can be anteposed in strong assertions (see § 23.45), as in (f). The order can
also be used to achieve a preferred clausula or for other aesthetic considerations (see
Augustine in the Supplement).
(d) Sed nunc magis in suo est occupatus, in quo ego ei non desum.
(‘But at present he is more concerned with one of his own, in which I am doing what
I can for him.’ Cic. Att. 1.16.17)
(e) Castra opportunis locis erant posita itemque castella XXIII facta . . .
(‘Camps had been pitched at convenient spots, and twenty-three forts had been con-
structed as well . . .’ Caes. Gal. 7.69.7)
(f) Qua re et illa quae violata expiabuntur et haec nostra, quae sunt sanctissime
conservata, suam religionem obtinebunt.
(‘Therefore trespasses shall be made good while our friendship, which has been
preserved inviolate, shall remain as sacred as ever.’ Cic. Att. 1.17.7)
Supplement:
Continuous: Petitorum haec est informata adhuc cogitatio. (Cic. Att. 1.1.2); Caesar
cum venisset mortuo plausu, Curio filius est insecutus. (Cic. Att. 2.19.3); Pollicem, si
adhuc non est profectus, quam primum fac extrudas. (Cic. Fam. 14.6—non goes with
adhuc); . . . parsque ibi, cum angusto exitu portarum se ipsi premerent, a militibus,
pars iam egressa portis ab equitibus est interfecta. (Caes. Gal. 7.28.3); Laudationem
ferculum est insecutum plane non pro expectatione magnum. (Petr. 35.1); . . . credunt
Arionem . . . cum esset deiēctŭs ē nāvī, exceptum delphini dorso et ad terras ēssĕ
pērvēctŭm. (August. Civ. 1.14—NB: clausula)³²¹
Discontinuous: . . . eos dies qui quasi deorum immortalium festi atque sollemnes
apud omnis sunt adventu meo redituque celebrati? (Cic. Pis. 51); Cenato mihi et iam
dormitanti prid. Kal. Mai. epistula est illa reddita in qua de agro Campano scribis.
(Cic. Att. 2.16.1); Recentissima tua est epistula Kalendis data, in qua optas congres-
sum pacemque non desperas. Sed ego . . . (Cic. Att. 8.15.3); Signaque sunt militaria VI
relata. (Caes. Civ. 3.53.2); Complures erant in castris ex legionibus aegri relicti.
(Caes. Gal. 6.36.1)
Assertive: Es enim ita ingressus ut quae ipse reperias tribuere aliis malis quam . . . (Cic.
Rep. 2.22); Sed est miro quodam modo adfectus. (Cic. Att. 1.5.5); Est enim illud sena-
tus consultum summa pedariorum voluntate, nullius nostrum auctoritate factum.
(Cic. Att. 1.19.9); Est enim per nostrum ministerium non litteris illis quas variarum
servi libidinum liberales vocant, sed Dominico pane nutritus . . . (August. Ep. 101.1)
The discontinuous order factus . . . est may serve to contrast the participial part with
another constituent, as in (g), where erepta is in contrast with donata (there is also
another contrast between vita and mors, both focus constituents). In (h), however, no
contrast is implied: tabula is the focus of the main clause, with a following heavy rela-
tive clause, separated from its head by est. The negator non regularly splits the phrase,
when functioning as a clause negator, as in (i).³²²
(g) Sed ii tamen rem publicam casus secuti sunt ut mihi non erepta L. Crasso a
dis immortalibus vita, sed donata mors esse videatur.
(‘But the national disasters that followed have been such as to make me feel that the
powers above did not rob Lucius Crassus of life but vouchsafed to him the gift of
death.’ Cic. de Orat. 3.8)
(h) At quam caeca avaritia est! Nuper fixa tabula est qua civitates locupletissimae
Cretensium vectigalibus liberantur . . .
(‘But how blind avarice is! An official notice was lately posted exempting the richest
communities in Crete from taxation . . .’ Cic. Phil. 2.97)
(i) . . . quia sumptum quaestor non dedit, profectus non est.
(‘. . . because the Treasurer did not supply funds he did not set out.’ Cic. Inv. 2.124)
Supplement:
. . . ut abs te non emissus ex urbe, sed immissus in urbem esse videatur? (Cic. Catil.
1.27); Acta res est. (Cic. Att. 1.14.5); Adflicta res publica est empto constupratoque
iudicio. (Cic. Att. 1.18.3); Res delata ad senatum est. (Cic. Att. 2.24.2); . . . etsi prope
exacta iam aestas erat, tamen . . . (Caes. Gal. 3.28.1); Quae minime visa pars firma est
huc concurritur. (Caes. Gal. 7.84.3); Admissus ergo Caesarem est cum suo
munere . . . (Petr. 51.2 (Trimalchio speaking)); In eo ergo vico, qui est in media plani-
tie positus in medio loco, est monticulus non satis grandis . . . (Pereg. 13.3)³²³
With a few exceptions in Terence, the regular position of the auxiliary iri is immedi-
ately after the supine form in -um. Examples are (a) and (b). See also § 7.72.
The relevant studies on the order of auxiliary and other verbs and the infinitives they
govern deal both with auxiliaries proper, such as the modal auxiliary possum ‘I can’
and the phasal auxiliary incipio/coepi ‘I begin’/‘I began’ (see § 4.98), and with other
verbs that govern a prolative infinitive (see §§ 15.122, 123, 125, 126). In the remainder
of this section ‘auxiliary’ will be used to cover both groups of verbs.
There is much quantitive information available about the relative order of auxil-
iary and other verbs and the infinitives they govern. Unfortunately, not much
research has been done on the factors that determine the orders recorded. In
Plautus, anteposition of the infinitive is as frequent as postposition. In Cato,
anteposition predominates. In Cicero, the order infinitive + auxiliary is roughly
twice as frequent as the reverse. In Caesar the order infinitive + auxiliary is even
more dominant. In non-literary Latin, as exemplified by Claudius Terentianus, the
Vindolanda Tablets, and the freedmen’s talk in Petronius, the order auxiliary +
infinitive predominates by far. This is also the case in Vitruvius. In Late Latin texts,
auxiliary + infinitive is the dominant order. In the Peregrinatio, for example, this is
the case in two-thirds of instances, and in the speeches it is even more predominant.
In the works of Augustine, however, anteposition and postposition of the auxiliary
are almost equal.³²⁴ Most often the auxiliary and infinitive are contiguous, but
discontinuity is not uncommon, in both orders. The four possibilities are shown in
(a)–(d).
(a) Atque utinam ut culpam, sic etiam suspicionem vitare potuisses!
(‘It is a pity you could not avoid the suspicion, as you avoided the guilt.’ Cic. Phil. 1.33)
(b) Quin etiam corpus libenter optulerim, si repraesentari morte mea libertas
civitatis potest . . .
(‘Yes, and I should be happy to offer my body if my death can bring into reality the
freedom of our state . . .’ Cic. Phil. 2.119)
(c) Sunt quaedam quae honeste non possum dicere.
(‘There are some things of which I cannot decently speak.’ Cic. Phil. 2.47)
³²⁴ Statistical data can be found in Orinsky on Gaius (1923: 91–5), Haida on the Peregrinatio (1928:
39–41), Muldowney on Augustine (1937: 137), Adams (1991; 2013: 825–32; 2016: 331), and Moretti (2017:
488; 492–3). See also Stengaard (1985) and Meyer-Hermann (2019: 509–10).
Relative order in phrases with auxiliaries
(d) Nec vero te umquam neque vigilantem neque in somnis credo posse mente
consistere.
(‘Nor do I believe that you, either waking or sleeping, can ever act with quiet sense.’
Cic. Phil. 2.68)
As for the factors involved in the choice of the four orders shown in these examples I
offer some suggestions based on a limited study of possum in Cicero (see the note
below): in (a), the most common order in Cicero, the infinitive and auxiliary function
as one information unit, simply indicating what happens or is being done. In (b),
discontinuous in the same order, the infinitive is emphatic. The order auxiliary +
infinitive is used when an emphatic constituent precedes, which seems to attract the
auxiliary, as honeste in (c). Discontinuity in this order is used when the auxiliary is
emphatic, as in (d). Another instance of anteposition of the auxiliary is (e), an assertive
statement with poteras in sentence-initial position (see § 23.45). Apart from such
pragmatic factors, artistic considerations may play a role. A good example of chiastic
arrangement is (f). Further research is required.
(e) Poteras autem eo tempore auguratum petere, cum in Italia Curio non esset . . .
(‘Besides, could you stand for the augurate at that time seeing that Curio was out of
Italy . . .’ Cic. Phil. 2.4)
(f) Sed si te laus adlicere ad recte faciendum non potest, ne metus quidem a
foedissimis factis potest avocare?
(‘But if praise cannot entice you into doing right, cannot even fear deter you from the
foulest offences?’ Cic. Phil. 2.115)
In Cic. Phil. 1 and 2 the distribution of the orders in the 96 instances of the modal
auxiliary possum is: Inf. Aux. 58 (13), Inf. . . . Aux. 7 (3), Aux. Inf. 17 (2), Aux. . . . Inf.
14 (1). This includes all forms of possum in all sentence or clause types. The figures
between brackets indicate the number of instances in which the auxiliary is preceded
by non. The frequency of use of one of the components as the last word of the sen-
tence is 26, 3, 4, and 7, respectively.
In Caesar, forms of possum massively follow the infinitive, with the exception of the
infinitive form posse: c.15 per cent are Aux. Inf. An example is (g). Note that this is in
indirect speech.³²⁵
(g) Paratos esse sese, posse et audere ea transire flumen qua traductus esset
equitatus.
(‘That they were ready, able, and willing to cross the river where the cavalry
had crossed.’ Caes. Civ. 1.64.2)
Although there is a clear diachronic trend towards the order auxiliary + infinitive,
which is the standard order in the Romance languages, it is interesting to note that the
³²⁵ See also Adams (2013: 830, n. 4). In the Pereg. negated possum follows the infinitive, whereas in
affirmative sentences it normally precedes (Haida 1928: 40). For the role of negation, see also
Nocentini (1987: 152–3).
Word order
four different orderings illustrated by (a)–(d) continued to be used into Late Latin, as
can be seen for the verb possum in the Supplement.
Supplement:
Inf. Aux.: Et uti eo introeas et circumspicias, uti inde exire possis. (Cato Agr. 1.2);
Neque tamen ulli civitati Germanorum persuaderi potuit ut Rhenum trans-
iret . . . (Caes. Gal. 5.55.2); . . . quas habeant omnes colores in se potestates, ut mihi
succurrere potuit, in hoc libro perscripsi. (Vitr. 7.14.3); Plane etiam hoc servus
tuus indicare potest. (Petr. 41.3 (a freedman speaking)); Nam michi credat
volo affectio vestra, quantum tamen pervidere potui, filios Israhel sic ambu-
lasse . . . (Pereg. 7.3)
Inf. . . . Aux.: His persuaderi ut diutius morarentur neque suis auxilium ferrent
non poterat. (Caes. Gal. 2.10.5); Imperium se a Caesare per proditionem nullum
desiderare quod habere victoria posset, quae iam sit sibi atque omnibus Gallis
explorata. (Caes. Gal. 7.20.7); . . . in umido voragine facta consedit nec progredi
nec egredi postea potuit. (Vitr. 10.16.7); Hoc solum vetare ne Iovis potest. (Petr.
47.4 (Trimalchio speaking)); . . . monachos valde sanctos, qui tamen pro etate aut
inbecillitate occurrere in monte Dei ad oblationem faciendam non poterant.
(Pereg. 5.10)
Aux. Inf.: Si ligna et virgas non poteris vendere neque lapidem habebis unde calcem
coquas . . . (Cato Agr. 38.4); (sc. se) . . . unum consilium totius Galliae effecturum,
cuius consensui ne orbis quidem terrarum possit obsistere. (Caes. Gal. 7.29.6—NB:
in a speech); Eaeque catenae ex ea materia comparentur cui nec caries nec vetustas
nec umor possit nocere . . . (Vitr. 7.3.1); Quia tu, qui potes loquere, non loquis. (Petr.
46.1 (Echion speaking)); Hanc ergo consuetudinem iubente Deo semper tenuimus,
ubicumque ad loca desiderata potuimus pervenire. (Pereg. 10.7)
Aux. . . . Inf.: Ubi erit subactus, areas facito, ut possis dextra sinistraque sarire, run-
care, ne calcetur. (Cato Agr. 161.1); Ita cum explicaretur, volvebat rotas, sed non
poterat ad lineam via recta ducere, sed exibat in unam partem. (Vitr. 10.2.14);
Poterat bovem iratum tollere. (Petr. 63.5 (Trimalchio speaking)); . . . omnis terra
Iordanis, in quantum tamen poterat oculis conspici. (Pereg. 12.5)
For the phasal auxiliary coepi ‘I began’, all four orderings are attested in Cicero, Inf.
Aux. being the most frequent. Examples of the four ordering possibilities are (h)–(k).
Note in (k) the parallelism of the three indirect questions with the finite verbs in
clause-initial position (see § 15.52).³²⁶
(h) Hospes Ianitor . . . hominem summa vi retinere coepit.
(‘His host Ianitor . . . began most urgently to dissuade him from going.’ Cic. Ver. 1.64)
(i) (sc. Apronius) . . . tum maxime cum accubante praetextato praetoris filio sal-
tare in convivio nudus coeperat.
(‘. . . especially then, when he began to dance naked at the feast while the young son of
the praetor was sitting by.’ Cic. Ver. 3.23)
³²⁶ For statistics concerning the position of the infinitive with coepi, see Adams (2013: 826). For the
position of the infinitive with habeo, see § 7.27.
Discontinuity of coordinated constituents
In Cic. Ver. the distribution of the orders in the 63 instances of coepi is: Inf. Aux. 40,
Inf. . . . Aux. 11, Aux. Inf. 7, Aux. . . . Inf. 5. This includes all forms of coepi in all sen-
tence or clause types. For 58 instances in Petronius (1–85.3) the data are: Inf. Aux. 17
(3), Inf. . . . Aux. 13, Aux. Inf. 12 (3), Aux. . . . Inf. 16 (7). The figures between brackets
are in direct speech (mostly freedmen). In the Pereg. there are 22 instances of Aux.
(…) Inf., 2 in the reverse order.³²⁷
Supplement:
Interrogare ergo atriensem coepi quas in medio picturas haberent. (Petr. 29.9);
Homo meus coepit ad stelas facere . . . (Petr. 62.4 (Niceros speaking)); Sed, quod
coeperam dicere, postquam lupus factus est, ululare coepit et in silvas fugit. (Petr.
62.7 (Niceros speaking))
Statim ergo cepimus ire cum eo pedibus totum per vallem amenissimam . . . (Pereg.
15.2); Itaque ergo ire cepimus iter nostrum sicut singulis diebus. (Pereg. 16.4); Ac sic
ergo cum ceperit se hora septima facere, omnes ad Lazarium veniunt. (Pereg. 29.3)
In the Supplement below a few instances are cited from the Pereg. of prolative infini-
tives with some other, not properly auxiliary, verbs. Although the order Aux. Inf. is
predominant, with these verbs too there is considerable flexibility.
Supplement (in alphabetical order by verb):
. . . non cessabam Deo nostro Iesu gratias agere . . . (Pereg. 23.9); Tunc statim illi sancti
dignati sunt singula ostendere. (Pereg. 3.7); Qui tamen sanctus episcopus nobis
Ramessen occurrere dignatus est. (Pereg. 8.4);. . . et iam unusquisque hiens ad
domum suam festinat manducare . . . (Pereg. 35.2); Quod cum dixisset, nos satis avidi
optati sumus ire . . .(Pereg. 10.9)
³²⁷ See Haida (1928: 40). The use of coepi as a phasal auxiliary remains stable over time (Galdi 2016a).
Word order
names are (a) and (b), respectively. In these examples the separating elements are
syntactically related to the separated elements, but this need not be the case (that is,
they may be ‘alien’ elements). See the Supplement.
(a) Nam T. Aufidius . . . volebat esse similis horum eratque et bonus vir et inno-
cens, sed dicebat parum.
(‘For Titus Aufidius . . . strove to be like these, and he was a good and blameless man,
but his reputation as a speaker was slight.’ Cic. Brut. 179)
(b) Si quidem ante Solonis aetatem et Pisistrati de nullo ut diserto memoriae
proditum est.
(‘Since before the age of Solon and Pisistratus there is no record of any notable
speaker.’ Cic. Brut. 39)
This form of discontinuity is especially common when one—most often the last—of
the constituents is a heavy constituent. It may also be pragmatically motivated, to
mark the saliency of one or both conjoins. Paired coordinators, such as et . . . et and
nec . . . nec . . . nec in (a), (c), and (d), are relatively frequent; they mark the saliency of
the individual conjoins. The separation of conjoins is also used to achieve a special
rhythmic effect, as in (e) from Ammianus. It mainly concerns conjunctive coordination,
but note (f).³²⁸ This form of discontinuity is common in all periods of Latin.
(c) . . . propius admovent, ut et usu eius quem diligere coeperunt fruantur et
moribus…
(‘. . . they move closer so that they may enjoy both the company of him whom they
began to love and his character . . .’ Cic. Amic. 32)
(d) . . . qui eas nec disponere nec inlustrare possit nec delectatione aliqua allicere
lectorem . . .
(‘. . . who was neither able to arrange them nor explain them nor attract the reader by
some sort of charm . . .’ Cic. Tusc. 1.6)
(e) Adeo autem ferox erat in suos illis temporibus miles et rapax, ignavus vero in
hostes et fractus, ut . . .
(‘Moreover, the soldiers of those times were so arrogant toward their countrymen
and greedy, but so cowardly and feeble before the enemy, that . . .’ Amm. 22.4.7)
(f) Formae dignitas aut morbo deflorescit aut vetustate.
(‘Excellence of appearance fades either with sickness or with age.’ Rhet. Her. 4.38)³²⁹
Supplement:
Discontinuous clauses: Nec quid dicatis scire nec me quor ludatis possum.
(Pl. As. 730)
³²⁸ Devine and Stephens (2006: 586–91) call this form of discontinuity ‘conjunct hyperbaton’. Some
examples are taken from them.
³²⁹ This sentence is given as an illustration of coniunctio (putting the verb in the middle of a coordinated
pair of constituents), described as a means to achieve brevitas, ‘quare saepius adhibenda est’.
Discontinuity of coordinated constituents
From Catullus onwards coordinators are sometimes placed inside the second (or
later) conjoin instead of preceding it. Examples are (g)–(i). For postponement of
these words when functioning as connectors, see § 23.21.³³¹
(g) Iuppiter omnipotens, utinam ne tempore primo / Cnosia Cecropiae tetigis-
sent litora puppes, / indomito nec dira ferens stipendia tauro / perfidus in
Creta religasset navita funem . . .
³³⁰ The placement of et vitia is ‘cursus causa’, according to den Boeft et al. ad loc.
³³¹ For examples in poetry from Catullus onwards, see Norden, Anhang IIIB3 (incomplete, also
includes connectors). For et, see TLL s.v. 897.52ff. (includes connectors).
Word order
(‘Almighty Jupiter, I would the Attic ships had never touched Cnosian
shores, nor ever the faithless voyager, bearing the dreadful tribute to the
savage bull, had fastened his cable in Crete . . .’ Catul. 64.171–4 )
(h) Quamvis multa meis exiret victima saeptis, / pinguis et ingratae premeretur
caseus urbi . . .
(‘Though many a victim left my stalls, and many a rich cheese was pressed
for the thankless town . . .’ Verg. Ecl. 1.33–4)
(i) . . . solacia luctus / exigua ingentis misero sed debita patri.
(‘. . . scant solace for grief so vast, but owed to a father’s sorrow.’ Verg. A.
11.61–2)
23.102 Tmesis
The term tmesis in a strict sense is used to refer to the separation of the parts of a com-
pound verb by one or more intervening constituents. The phenomenon is highly literary
and clearly inspired by Homer. The first example is from Ennius and then instances are
found with some frequency from Lucretius onwards. In (a), the preverb de- has no
corresponding adverb. Therefore, it can only be understood in combination with horta-
tur, which by itself is a meaningful form without the preverb. Circum- in (b) has a cor-
responding adverb, and dare can also be the infinitive of the simplex do, but on syntactic
and semantic grounds (the presence of the dative collo) circum has to be taken in com-
bination with dare. Sometimes the morphology of the verbal element leaves no doubt,
as in (c) -iecta, which can only be explained from the compound intericio. Sometimes,
there are instances where it is hard to decide. The preverbial element usually precedes,
but see (b). The separating element is often the coordinator -que (see § 23.103), a con-
nector (such as enim in (c)), a pronoun, as me in (a), or an adverb, but Virgil introduces
the use of nouns, such as bracchia in (b). The overall number of instances in the Augustan
poets and before, including the instances discussed in § 23.103, is in the order of fifty.³³²
In Late Latin tmesis is rare (an exceptional instance is (d)).
³³² For further instances, see Marouzeau (1949: 150–2). For the various types of tmesis and for tmesis
in Lucretius and Virgil, see Bernard (1960). For the poetical character of the phenomenon, see: Poetae
quidem etiam verborum divisione faciunt transgressionem: ‘Hyperboreo septem subiecta trioni’ (= Verg. G.
3.381), quod oratio nequaquam recipiet. (Quint. Inst. 8.6.66).
Tmesis
Supplement:
Comedy and poetry: Siquid super illi fuerit, id nobis sat est. (Pl. Cur. 85); . . . quasi
numquam quicquid in eas simulem . . . (Pl. St. 77); Per ecastor scitu’ puer est natu’
Pamphilo. (Ter. An. 486); Cetera de genere hoc inter quaecumque pretantur, / omnia
perversa praepostera sunt ratione . . . (Lucr. 4.832–3); . . . nec loca lux inter quasi rupta
relinquit. (Lucr. 5.299); . . . pingue superque oleum fundens ardentibus extis . . . (Verg.
A. 6.254); . . . Achates / succepitque ignem foliis atque arida circum / nutrimenta
dedit . . . (Verg. A. 1.174–6); Miraris, cum tu argento post omnia ponas, / si . . . (Hor. S.
1.1.86–7); Et iam Dulichios portus Ithacamque Samonque / Neritiasque domus, reg-
num fallacis Ulixis, / praeter erant vecti. (Ov. Met. 13.711–13)
Prose: . . . Atheniensibus exhaustis praeter arma et naves nihil erat super. (Nep. Alc.
8.1—NB: with inversion); At illis vix decumae super portiones erant . . . (Tac. Hist.
1.20.1)
A different type, also called tmesis, is formed by adjectival and adverbial compounds
with the prefix per- ‘very’, as in (e) and (f), and pronominal compounds with -cumque
‘ever’ (and more rarely -libet ‘as you please’, and -vis ‘as you wish’), as in (g).
(e) Per pol saepe peccas.
(‘You’re making a lot of mistakes.’ Pl. Cas. 370)
(f) Per mihi, per, inquam, gratum feceris . . .
(‘You’ll do me a great, a very great pleasure indeed . . .’ Cic. Att. 1.20.7)
(g) Quid male facio aut quoi male dico? # Quoi pol quomque occasio est.
(‘What am I doing badly or who am I talking about badly? # About anyone you get a
chance to.’ Pl. Per. 210)
Supplement:
With per-: Per enim magni aestimo tibi firmitudinem animi nostri et factum nos-
trum probari. (Cic. Att. 10.1.1); . . . et quidem ibi te quam primum per videre velim.
(Cic. Att. 15.4.2—NB: with a verb); . . . per fore accommodatum tibi si . . . (Cic.
Fam. 3.5.3)
With -cumque: In qua harum parte cumque sit † inferendo † et cuius modi viden-
dum. (Var. L. 10.4.72); . . . quam se cumque in partem dedisset, omnium fuit facile
princeps . . . (Cic. de Orat. 3.60); Ut enim heri feci, sic nunc rationem, quo ea me
cumque ducet, sequar. (Cic. Tusc. 2.15); Qua porro cumque tenet se / corpus, ea
vacuum nequaquam constat inane. (Lucr. 1.508–9); . . . semper honos nomenque
tuum laudesque manebunt, / quae me cumque vocant terrae. (Verg. A. 1.609–10);
Qua se cumque furens medio tulit agmine virgo, / hac Arruns subit. (Verg. A.
11.762–3); Quale tamen cumque est, ut tueare, rogo. (Ov. Pont. 3.4.6); . . . quem Fors
Word order
dierum cumque dabit lucro / appone . . . (Hor. Carm. 1.9.14–15); Garrulus hunc
quando consumet cumque: . . . (Hor. S. 1.9.33); . . . movent ut mundum sidera
cumque. (Man. 3.141)
In the case of per- and -cumque one may hold that they are (still) adverbs. In the same
way are explained Early Latin instances of separated quid + ni, at + qui, and facio/fio
compounds such as (h). Catullus exploits the possibilities of tmesis by inserting tibi
between quod and si in (i). For ob vos sacro and sub vos placo, mentioned as instances
of tmesis in certain prayers by Festus (p. 190), and for manum endo iacito (Lex 1.2),
see Bernard (1960: 34–5). Very odd is ( j), falsely ascribed to Ennius, with a non-
compound noun split up by its governing verb.
(h) Consue quoque faciunt ut alligari possint primum levibus vinclis.
(‘They are also accustomed to being tied, at first with slight leashes.’ Var. R.
2.9.13)
(i) Quod tibi si sancti concesserit incola Itoni . . .
(‘But if she who dwells in holy Itonus shall grant thee . . .’ Catul. 64.228)
( j) saxo cere comminuit brum
(‘he crushed his brain with a rock’ Enn. Ann. 609V=Spur. 5S)
An early instance of coordination of a compound verb with the coordinator -que sep-
arating the preverb and the verb is found in Plautus, as in (a). Lucretius exploits its
obvious metrical advantages (seventeen out of twenty-five instances of tmesis), but
Virgil uses it less frequently. An example with the negative prefix in- is (b).
(a) Nam apsque foret te, sat scio in alto / distraxissent disque tulissent satellites
tui me miserum foede . . .
(‘Had it not been for you, I know well enough that your attendants would have torn
me apart and dragged me apart in the sea in a frightening way, wretch that I am . . .’
Pl. Trin. 832–3)
(b) . . . telum quod saepe nocentis / praeterit exanimatque indignos inque merentis?
(‘. . . that bolt which often passes the guilty by and slays the innocent and undeserv-
ing?’ Lucr. 2.1103–4)
Negative prefix: Hanc ego nunc ignaram huius quodcumque pericli / inque salu-
tatam linquo. (Verg. A. 9.287–8); Tela retusa cadunt, manet inperfossus ab omni /
inque cruentatus Caeneus Elateius ictu. (Ov. Met. 12.496–7)
Diachronic developments
³³³ For the original hypothesis, see Adams (1976b). For a more recent discussion, see Adams (2016:
341–6). A thorough critical discussion of the assumed change of word order from OV in Indo-European
to VO in the Romance languages can be found in Meyer-Hermann (2011: 10–22); see also Meyer-
Hermann (2015: 278–85).
³³⁴ For a more detailed discussion, see Pinkster (2020).
Word order
or (subordinate) clauses or in other subordinate clauses. The text with the resolution
starts as in (a).
(a) De Bacanalibus quei foideratei esent (=essent) ita exdeicendum cen-
suere: Nei quis eorum <B>acanal habuise (=habuisse) velet (=vellet).
(‘In the matter of the orgies of Bacchus they passed a resolution that the following
proclamation should be issued to those who are in league with the Romans by trea-
ties: Let none of them be minded to keep a shrine of Bacchus.’ CIL I2.581.2–3 (SCBac.,
Tiriolo, 186 bc))
In (a), the object immediately precedes the governing verb. However, this is not always
the case. A typical example is (b). In the second sentence, the object pecuniam is in the
initial position, just like the subject complement magister in the preceding sentence.
What both constituents have in common is that they are subtopics of the overall topic
of the decree (Bacchanalia). They have a prominent position in their sentence, even
preceding the subjects, and in this way also fulfil a text-structuring function. So, pecu-
niam is not in its specific position because of a syntactic rule that requires it to precede
its verb. More in general, the text can hardly be regarded as a representative text show-
ing the dominant word order of the period in which it was produced.
(b) Magister neque vir neque mulier quisquam eset (=esset). Neve pecu-
niam quisquam eorum comoine<m h>abuise (=habuisse) velet (=vellet).
(‘No one, either man or woman, is to be an officer. Nor is anyone of them to have
charge of a common treasury.’ CIL I2.581.10–11—tr. Weston)
A text that has been put forward as showing clear VO features is the Passio sanctarum
Perpetuae et Felicitatis, dated to the first decennium of the third century ad. It tells the
story of the execution of a number of Christians at Carthage on 7 March 203, one of
them being a young woman, Perpetua, who tells her own story of the days preceding
the execution. Part of her story are two visions in which she is involved. These epi-
sodes are almost without subordination, unlike the surrounding parts. The short sen-
tences and clauses are connected or coordinated by et, immediately followed by the
finite verb. An example is (c).³³⁵
(c) Pridie quam pugnaremus, video in horomate hoc: venisse Pomponium dia-
conum ad ostium carceris et pulsare vehementer. 2. Et exivi ad eum et aperui
ei; qui erat vestitus discincta candida, habens multiplices galliculas. 3. Et dixit
mihi: ‘Perpetua, te expectamus: veni.’ Et tenuit mihi manum et coepimus ire
per aspera loca et flexuosa. 4. Et vix tandem pervenimus anhelantes ad
amphitheatrum, et induxit me in media arena, et dixit mihi: ‘Noli pavere.
Hic sum tecum et conlaboro tecum.’ Et abiit. 5. Et aspicio populum ingentem
adtonitum; et quia sciebam me ad bestias damnatam esse, mirabar quod non
mitterentur mihi bestiae.
³³⁵ For a detailed discussion of the complicated linguistic aspects of this text, see Adams (2016:
317–53). For historical and other aspects of this text, see Heffernan (2012).
Diachronic developments
(‘On the day before we were to fight, I saw this vision: Pomponius, the deacon, had
come to the door of the prison, and was knocking loudly. (2) And I went out and
opened the door for him. He was wearing a white unbelted robe, and multilaced
sandals. (3) And he said to me: ‘Perpetua, we are awaiting you: come.’ And he took me
by the hand and we began to walk through places that were rugged and winding.
(4) And finally, after great difficulty, we arrived at the amphitheatre, all out of breath,
and he led me into the middle of the arena, and said to me ‘Don’t be afraid: I am here
with you and I will struggle with you.’ And he went away. (5) And I saw many people
who were astonished; and, because I knew that I had been condemned to the beasts,
I was puzzled that the beasts were not being turned loose on me.’ Pass. Perp. 10.1–5—tr.
Heffernan)
Obviously, with the verb in the initial position, the arguments and satellites have to
follow. This order fits in with a particular narrative mode in which the actions indi-
cated by the verb are the most important information and are emphasized by the
position in the clause (see also § 7.30 and § 24.3; for verbs in initial position in
declarative sentences, see § 23.45). It is difficult to base a generalization about the
development of word order on such an idiosyncratic text.
A third text that plays an important role in the discussion about Latin/Romance
word order is the Peregrinatio Egeriae, dated to the end of the fourth century ad. Here,
too, VO order seems to be predominant. On closer inspection, a distinction must be
made between the two parts of the work, which have quite different contents. The first
part is about Egeria’s travels, an ideal type of text for a combination of clause-initial
verbs and clause-final focus constituents (see § 22.11 and § 23.45). The other part does
not show a dominant VO order at all.³³⁶
In conclusion, the texts that we possess are so different in form and content that it
is difficult to come up with a clear chronology of when the changes in word order took
place. There is variability from the beginning till the end of the period covered by this
Syntax, most of which can be understood along pragmatic lines.
³³⁶ For details, see Spevak (2005a). Ledgeway (2017) holds that the Peregrinatio has ‘Verb second’ fea-
tures, which are assumed for the medieval stage of the Romance languages by several linguists working in
a generative framework.
CH APTER 24
Discourse
24.1 Introduction
So far, this Syntax has mainly dealt with the internal structure of sentences and their
parts (clauses, phrases, words, and morphosyntactic properties). This chapter, how-
ever, is devoted to discourse, that is to linguistic units which convey a complete
communicative message (see § 2.13). As a rule, they contain more than one sentence.1
Such discourse units also have particular properties of their own which determine to
some extent the content and structure of the sentences they contain.
The study of linguistic properties of units above the sentence level is fairly recent.
A common term used for such suprasentential units, especially in German linguistic
studies, was text.2 The term ‘discourse’ is used in this Chapter to avoid ambiguity,
because ‘text’ is also used in many other ways.
In the Latin material at our disposal it is not as rare as one might think for single sen-
tences, or even single words, to constitute a complete communicative message, but
most instances are outside the standard texts that are normally used for grammatical
analysis. Examples are (a)–(c). In (a), a dedicatory inscription found on a fragment of
a pillar, the object of dedication and probably also its social and cultural significance
will have been clear from its surroundings. In (b), a coin showing the heads of the
Roman kings Numa Pompilius and Ancus Marcius and, on the reverse side, an arch
with a statue of Victoria and a boat under the moon, with the name of Gaius (Marcius)
Censorinus above it and Roma below,3 may have served to commemorate the victory
of Marius and to suggest Censorinus’ royal descent. The Romans were used to this
1 An excellent early introduction to the study of ‘texts’ is de Beaugrande and Dressler (1981). For the
relation between sentence and discourse, see Mithun (2015). For a brief summary of ‘discourse linguistics
and classics’, see van Gils et al. (2018: 5).
2 The term ‘text’ is also used in this sense in works on Textlinguistik (for example, de Beaugrande and
Dressler (1981)) and Textgrammatik (for example, Weinrich (1982)). For an application to Latin, see
Blänsdorf (1978). For the French tradition, see Nølke et al. (2004: 147–52).
3 For a picture, see https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Numa_Pompilio
The Oxford Latin Syntax. Harm Pinkster, Oxford University Press (2021). © Harm Pinkster.
DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780199230563.003.0024
Introduction 1139
form of propaganda.4 In (c), an electoral graffito which must have been fairly familiar,
the text cannot have been a problem for those who saw it.
(a) A. · Cervio · A. · f. · cosol / dedicavit
(‘Aulus Cervius, consul, son of Aulus dedicated (this).’ (CIL I2.395 (Benevento, 3rd
cent. bc))
(b) Numae · Pompili · Anci Marci / C · Censo Roma ·
(‘Numa Pompilius Ancus Marcius / Gaius Censorinus Rome’ CIL I2.App. 268 (Rome,
c.87 bc))
(c) Trebium · et · Gavium // aed(iles) · o(ro) v(os) f(aciatis)
(‘I ask you to elect Trebius and Gavius as aediles.’ CIL IV.118 (Pompeii, ad 71–5))
In these cases the reader uses non-linguistic cues, including his knowledge of the
world, to arrive at a correct understanding of the message. In discourse units of two
or more sentences the hearer or reader is still expected to use his knowledge of the
world and of the situation, but the correct interpretation of a sentence and its relation
with the surrounding context often depends on the information provided by the sen-
tence or sentences that precede or follow.
In the earlier chapters of this Syntax several ways are discussed that assist the
reader in correctly understanding the meaning of a sentence and how it coheres with
its context. They will be discussed again in this chapter, but now from the perspective
of discourse. An example of coherence of discourse is the very common rule of Latin
that third person subjects are not expressed if they can be easily inferred from what
precedes (see §§ 9.9–10). This phenomenon is one of the means to achieve continuity
of participants over a stretch of text. This is illustrated by (d) and (e) (‘°’ indicates
asyndeton—see below).
(d) Odi ego aurum. ° Multa multis saepe suasit perperam.
(‘I hate gold: it has often led many people to act badly on many issues.’ Pl. Capt. 328)
(e) Vicini quo pacto niteant, id animum advertito. ° In bona regione bene nitere
oportebit.
(‘Notice how the neighbours look. In a good district, they ought to look well.’ Cato
Agr. 1.2—tr. Dalby (adapted))
In (d), aurum, the focus and object of the first sentence, is the unexpressed topic and
subject of the second. In (e), vicini, the topic and subject of the first sentence, is also
the topic and subject of the accusative and infinitive clause bene nitere in the second.
(Also, bene corresponds to quo pacto and nitere to niteant.)
Although the relation between the sentences in (d) and (e) should be perfectly clear
for the reader, the semantic relation is not explicitly marked. There is no connecting
device; in other words, the sentences are ‘asyndetic’. It is up to the reader to use his
knowledge of the language and of the world to conceive of a relation between the
sentences. In (d), it is plausible that the second sentence contains the explanation why
the ‘I’ hates gold. That could have been made explicit by using the connector nam
‘for’.5 Connectors are another important device for creating coherence of discourse.
(d') Odi ego aurum. Nam multa multis saepe suasit perperam.
In (e), the relation between the two sentences is also explanatory, but more compli-
cated: by examining the situation at the neighbours’ farm it is possible to infer some-
thing about the quality of the district: if they thrive bene, the district must be bona.
That this is the point of the explanation (its focus) is clear from the position of in bona
regione in the sentence.
The largest part of this chapter is devoted to the way sentences connect to form
discourse units. However, the way these discourse units start and finish needs some
attention as well. Furthermore, a discourse may consist of a number of units consist-
ing of a number of sentences (‘episodes’ and ‘paragraphs’—see § 2.13) which are
connected between each other in their own way. All this is the content of §§ 24.4ff.
‘discourse coherence’.
5 Exx. (d) and (e) are cited by K.-St.: II.158 as instances of asyndeton causale or explicativum.
6 Smith (2003), discussed by Adema (2019b: 22–34), distinguishes five different ‘discourse modes’: ‘nar-
ration’, ‘description’, ‘report’, ‘information’, and ‘argument’.
Introduction 1141
Text types are still an underdeveloped area of research, with the exception of the
narrative text type (see below). Exx. (a)–(c) illustrate the narrative, argumentative,
and expository type, respectively.7 Ex. (a) is a good instance of a narrative period: a
series of events are presented in one complex syntactic structure from the perspective
of the main character (Clodius). In the cum clause the speaker (Cicero) provides
details concerning the circumstances and he finishes with his personal interpretation
of the situation. This is a typical instance of ‘storytelling’ (see § 7.30 fin.).
(a) P. Clodius,
cum statuisset omni scelere in praetura vexare rem publicam
videretque ita tracta esse comitia anno superiore
ut non multos mensis praeturam gerere posset,
qui non honoris gradum spectaret, ut ceteri,
sed et L. Paulum conlegam effugere vellet,
singulari virtute civem,
et annum integrum ad dilacerandam rem
publicam quaereret,
subito reliquit annum suum
seseque in proximum transtulit,
non—ut fit—religione aliqua,
sed ut haberet, quod ipse dicebat,
ad praeturam gerendam—
hoc est ad evertendam rem publicam—
plenum annum atque integrum.
(‘Publius Clodius had determined to harass the state during his praetorship by
every kind of lawless behaviour. He saw that the elections of the previous year had
been so protracted that he would be able to hold his praetorship for no more than
a few months. For that high office, which is what most men desire, he cared noth-
ing; all he wanted was to avoid having Lucius Paulus, a citizen of exceptional
merit, as his colleague, and to have an entire year in which to maul the state. He
therefore suddenly abandoned his proper year, and transferred his name to the
year following—not led thereto, as commonly happens, by any religious scruple,
but in order that, according to his own account, he might enjoy for the exercise of
his praetorship—that is to say, for the subversion of the state—a full and unbroken
year.’ Cic. Mil. 24)
In the argumentative piece of text in (b) Cicero addresses the jury, indirectly with a
rhetorical question (an est quisquam), and then directly (nisi vero existimatis and
iudices). By using the interactional particle enim he ensures their cooperation and
with non sine causa he underlines his argumentation. The entire text is organized to
win the jury over to Cicero’s point of view.
7 They are taken from Blänsdorf ’s seminal article (1978). In (a), I follow his graphical presentation of
the period.
1142 Discourse
(b) An est quisquam qui hoc ignoret, cum de homine occiso quaeratur, aut
negari solere omnino esse factum aut recte et iure factum esse defendi?
Nisi vero existimatis dementem P. Africanum fuisse qui, cum a C. Carbone
tribuno plebis seditiose in contione interrogaretur quid de Ti. Gracchi morte
sentiret, responderit iure caesum videri. Neque enim posset aut Ahala ille
Servilius aut P. Nasica aut L. Opimius aut C. Marius aut me consule senatus
non nefarius haberi, si sceleratos civis interfici nefas esset. Itaque hoc,
iudices, non sine causa etiam fictis fabulis doctissimi homines memoriae
prodiderunt, eum qui patris ulciscendi causa matrem necavisset variatis
hominum sententiis non solum divina sed etiam sapientissimae deae
sententia liberatum.
(‘Or is there anyone who is unaware that when inquiry is held into a murder, the act
is either categorically denied, or that its commission is defended as right and justi-
fied?—unless indeed you hold that Publius Africanus was mad when, on being mali-
ciously asked in a public meeting by Gaius Carbo, tribune of the plebs, what was his
opinion concerning the death of Tiberius Gracchus, he replied that he thought he
had been deservedly slain. Indeed, neither the great Servilius Ahala nor Publius
Nasica nor Lucius Opimius nor Gaius Marius nor the Senate, in my consulship,
could be held other than detestable, were the murder of criminal citizens in itself a
detestable act. And so too, gentlemen, it is not without reason that even in their fic-
tions accomplished poets have narrated how one, who, to avenge a father, had slain
a mother, was, though the human vote was divided, acquitted by a sentence that
proceeded not merely from a divine being, but from the wisest of the goddesses.’ Cic.
Mil. 8–9)
In the expository piece of text (c) the speaker presents a philosophical thesis in an
orderly way, indicating the logical steps and adding an explanation when necessary,
without involving the addressee directly.
(c) Quocirca primum mihi videtur, ut Posidonius facit, a deo, de quo satis dic-
tum est, deinde a fato, deinde a natura, vis omnis divinandi ratioque repe-
tenda. Fieri igitur omnia fato ratio cogit fateri. Fatum autem id appello quod
Graeci pÄwl{whxrx, id est ordinem seriemque causarum, cum causae causa
nexa rem ex se gignat. Ea est ex omni aeternitate fluens veritas sempiterna.
Quod cum ita sit, nihil est factum quod non futurum fuerit, eodemque modo
nihil est futurum cuius non causas id ipsum efficientes natura contineat. Ex
quo intellegitur ut fatum sit non id quod superstitiose, sed id quod physice
dicitur, causa aeterna rerum, cur et ea quae praeterierunt facta sint et quae
instant fiant et quae sequuntur futura sint. Ita fit ut et observatione notari pos-
sit quae res quamque causam plerumque consequatur, etiamsi non semper
(nam id quidem affirmare difficile est), easdemque causas veri simile est
rerum futurarum cerni ab eis qui aut per furorem eas aut in quiete videant.
(‘Wherefore, it seems to me that we must do as Posidonius does and trace the vital
principle of divination in its entirety to three sources: first, to God, whose connexion
with the subject has been sufficiently discussed; secondly to Fate; and lastly, to Nature.
Discourse coherence 1143
Reason compels us to admit that all things happen by Fate. Now by Fate I mean the
same that the Greeks call pÄwl{whxr, that is, an orderly succession of causes wherein
cause is linked to cause and each cause of itself produces an effect. That is an immor-
tal truth having its source in all eternity. Therefore nothing has happened which was
not bound to happen, and, likewise, nothing is going to happen which will not find in
nature every efficient cause of its happening. Consequently, we know that Fate is that
which is called, not ignorantly, but scientifically, “the eternal cause of things, the
wherefore of things past, of things present, and of things to come”. Hence it is that it
may be known by observation what effect will in most instances follow any cause,
even if it is not known in all; for it would be too much to say that it is known in every
case. And it is probable that these causes of coming events are perceived by those who
see them during frenzy or in sleep.’ Cic. Div. 1.125–6)
The text type that has received most scholarly attention is the narrative type (or: nar-
rative mode). In Volume I of this Syntax some attention is given to it in the sections
on the perfect (§ 7.30) and the (historic) present (§ 7.16). In the former, on the perfect,
a distinction was made between ‘storytelling’ and ‘reporting’, in the latter the term
‘mimetic’ should have been used (instead of ‘diegetic’ in the text) to characterize the
historic present as a narrative tense. Further distinctions have been proposed, a dis-
cussion of which would exceed the bounds of this section.8 The linguistic study of
narrative texts is closely related to narratology as developed in literary studies.9
8 For the use of the ancient (Platonic) distinction between ‘mimetic’ and ‘diegetic’, see Bakker (1997)
and Kroon (2002). For discourse modes in general and their application to the tenses in Ovid’s
Metamorphoses, see Kroon (2007); for Virgil’s Aeneid, see Adema (2019b—a revised version of her 2008
dissertation). For the use of the historic present by Livy, see van Gils and Kroon (2018: 204–7; 2019). For
a collection of studies on ‘war narratives’, see van Gils et al. (2018). For the relationship between
historiography and discourse linguistics ibid.: 9–11.
9 A good introduction is de Jong (2014).
1144 Discourse
the relationship between the contents of adjacent sentences and between more
extended units contribute to the coherence of discourse (§§ 24.14–48). (iii) Thirdly,
there are various grammatical means, such as tense and voice, which may play a role
in indicating discourse coherence (§ 24.49). (iv) Finally, the ordering of sentences and
of larger units is an important factor in determining the coherence of the discourse as
a whole (§ 24.50). It is important to realize that these means do not exclude each other.
In (a), for example, the last sentence contains both the connector nam, which signals
why Lesbonicus will give that piece of land as a dowry and not something else, and the
anaphoric pronoun is (referring, like eum before, to ager).
(a) . . . est ager sub urbe hic nobis. Eum dabo / dotem sorori. Nam is de divitiis
meis / solus superfit praeter vitam relicuos.
(‘. . . we still have a plot of land here below the city; this I’ll give to my sister as a dowry:
for this alone is the sole remainder of my wealth, apart from my life.’ Pl. Trin. 508–10)
The way these various devices are used to create coherence varies, depending on the
type of text, the stylistic preferences of the authors, and diachronic developments.10
Variation of a word or phrase to refer to the same entity or event is another form of
creating coherence between sentences.14 Examples are (d)–(f). In (d), the common
noun hominem is used to continue the sequence of proper name and anaphoric pro-
noun.15 In (e), Cicero refers to Antonius, mentioned earlier in the speech, by an evalu-
ative expression. In (f), oppidum is continued by the near-synonym urbi in combination
with the anaphoric determiner ei.
(d) Sed videone ego Pamphilippum cum fratre Epignomo? Atque is est. /
Aggrediar hominem.
(‘But am I seeing Pamphilippus with his brother Epignomus? Yes, it’s him. I’ll
approach the man.’ Pl. St. 582–3)
determiners involved are is, hic (uncommon), and qui. Examples are (a)17 and (c),
with an anaphoric determiner, and (b), with a (connective) relative determiner.18 This
form of repetition is also used in adjacent clauses in complex sentences (see the
Supplement).
(a) Ibi nunc meus pater / memorat legiones hostium ut fugaverit, / quo pacto sit
donis donatus plurumis. / Ea dona quae illic Amphitruoni sunt data / apstu-
limus.
(‘In there my father’s now telling how he put the enemy’s legions to flight and how he
was presented with a great many gifts. We took away the gifts Amphitruo was given
there.’ Pl. Am. 135–9)
(b) Qui cupidius novissimum agmen insecuti alieno loco cum equitatu
Helvetiorum proelium committunt, et pauci de nostris cadunt. Quo proelio
sublati Helvetii . . . proelio nostros lacessere coeperunt.
(‘The cavalry, following up the rearguard too eagerly, engaged in a combat on
unfavourable ground with the cavalry of the Helvetii, and a few of ours fell. Elated by
this engagement the Helvetii . . . began to provoke our men to a fight.’ Caes. Gal.
1.15.2)
(c) Insequens annus Postumum Cominium et T. Larcium consules habuit. Eo
anno Romae, cum per ludos ab Sabinorum iuventute per lasciviam scorta
raperentur, concursu hominum rixa ac prope proelium fuit . . .
(‘The year after had as its consuls Postumus Cominius and Titus Larcius. In this year,
during the celebration of the games at Rome, the Sabine youths, in a spirit of wanton-
ness, forcibly abducted certain harlots. Men gathered hastily and there was a brawl . . .’
Liv. 2.18.1–2)
Supplement:
. . . lotium conservato eius qui brassicam essitarit. . . . Item pueros pusillos si laves eo
lotio, numquam debiles fient. Et quibus oculi parum clari sunt, eo lotio inunguito.
Plus videbunt. Si caput aut cervices dolent, eo lotio caldo lavito. Desinent dolere. Et
si mulier eo lotio locos fovebit, numquam m(e)n(ses) seri fient. (Cato Agr. 157.10–11);
Viam fecei ab Regio ad Capuam et / in ea via ponteis omneis miliarios /
tabelariosque poseivei. (CIL I2.638.1–3 (Polla, 150–132 bc); Q. Marcius censor
signum Concordiae fecerat idque in publico conlocarat. Hoc signum C. Cassius
censor cum in curiam transtulisset . . . (Cic. Dom. 130); Nihil enim debetur ei nisi ex
tertia pensione, quae est Kal. Sext. Ex qua pensione ipsa maior pars est ei soluta
aliquanto ante diem. (Cic. Att. 16.2.1); Extremum oppidum Allobrogum est proxi-
mumque Helvetiorum finibus Genava. Ex eo oppido pons ad Helvetios pertinet.
(Caes. Gal. 1.6.3); Galba . . . constituit . . . cum reliquis eius legionis cohortibus in vico
Veragrorum qui appellatur Octodurus hiemare. Qui vicus positus in valle, non magna
adiecta planitie, altissimis montibus undique continetur. (Caes. Gal. 3.1.4–5);
19 See also Spevak (2010a: 98–9). Implicit subjects are much less common in Late Latin texts. See
Herman (1991). For the development into Old French, see Prévost (2018).
20 For the use of asyndeton in ‘war bulletins’, see Fraenkel (1956: 192).
Discourse coherence 1149
21 For the interpretation of zero objects, see Jones (2000: 24–5). Ex. (e) is taken from that publication.
22 See Mendell (1917: 99).
1150 Discourse
(g) Negare hoc, nisi forte negare omnia constituisti, nullo modo potes. Palam res
gesta est maximo conventu Syracusis. Testis est tota provincia, propterea
quod undique ad emendas decumas solent eo convenire.
(‘Deny this you cannot possibly, unless you have made up your mind to deny every-
thing. The thing was done openly at Syracuse before a large gathering. The whole
province is a witness to the fact, since men come regularly from every part of it to
Syracuse to attend the sales of tithe.’ Cic. Ver. 3.149)
For a demonstration of zero-anaphora, see also the discussion in § 22.4, exx. (v) and
(w). Zero-anaphora is common when a topic constituent is continued (a ‘given topic’),
but is not excluded when one or more other participants interfere, on condition that
the intervening discourse constitutes some form of background information. An example
is (h). The intervening sentence is marked as subsidiary information by enim.23
(h) Equites missi nocte iter conficiunt, imprudentes atque inopinantes hostes
aggrediuntur. Numidae enim quadam barbara consuetudine nullis ordinibus
passim consederant. Ø (sc. equites) Hos oppressos somno et dispersos adorti
magnum eorum numerum interficiunt.
(‘The cavalry [Curio] sent finished their journey during the night; they attacked an
enemy off guard and unsuspecting, for the Numidians in their barbarian fashion had
camped here and there in complete disarray. By attacking while these were fast asleep
and scattered, Curio’s cavalry killed a large number of them.’ Caes. Civ. 2.38.4–5)
23 This example is discussed by Pennell Ross (1996: 519–20) and Bolkestein (2000: 128–30).
Kroon (2010: 589) shows that zero-anaphora is the ‘default option’ in Ovid’s Metamorphoses.
24 For the anaphoric use of adverbs of place in historical texts, see Longrée (2010), with detailed
statistics. For the anaphoric (and cataphoric) use of ibi, see Burkard (2019). It is not used deictically.
Discourse coherence 1151
The pronouns normally agree in number and gender with the constituents to
which they refer (see §§ 13.25–8; 13.33). This reduces the number of potential refe-
rents, certainly in comparison with zero-anaphora. The frequency with which these
pronouns are used varies, depending on the type of text. Table 24.1 shows their fre-
quency in two texts. The most striking difference is that between hic and ille, which is
related to the fact that Caesar’s historical narrative has more topic continuity than
Cicero’s letters.25
The four pronouns differ from each other in three respects: (i) the position of the
pronoun in the sentence, (ii) the distance between the pronoun and the participant it
is referring to, and (iii) the proportion of usage of the pronoun to refer to participants
and to states of affairs and discourse.
(i) The relative pronoun qui naturally occurs in the initial position. The other three
differ from each other in their position; this is also related to the type of text in which
they are used. In Caesar’s narrative, is is less frequent in initial position, whereas this
is the preferred position for hic. Ille is more frequent in initial position.26
(ii) The participants to which the pronouns qui, is, and hic refer are usually to be
found in the immediately preceding sentence. With ille there are regularly more inter-
vening sentences, and more intervening other participants. As is shown for zero-
anaphora in § 24.8, the intervention of other participants is not an obstacle for the use
of qui, if the text segment they belong to constitutes some form of background infor-
mation, such as the indirect discourse in (c).27 This also holds to some extent for is
and hic. By contrast, ille is the normal choice for remote referents as such.
25 The data are based upon Pennell Ross (1996) (Caes. Civ. I and II) and Bolkestein (2000: 113–14)
(Cic. Att. I and II.1–10). Longrée (2003) shows that Sallust and Tacitus use ille much more often than
Caesar.
26 See Pennell Ross (1996: 514) and Spevak (2010a: 75), who has also data on Sallust. In Cicero’s letters,
is and hic are divided between initial and non-initial, whereas ille is most often non-initial (Bolkestein
2000: 118). There are differences between these three words when used as pronoun and as determiner
(Spevak 2010a: 74–5). See also Bolkestein (2001: 249–50). For the position of is in the function of object,
see Luraghi (2016). For repetitive use of is in a number of texts, see Adams (2016: index s.v. is).
27 This example is discussed by Pennell Ross (1996: 517). See also Kroon (2009a: 124–5).
1152 Discourse
(iii) Qui, is, hic, and ille can be used as pronoun and as determiner, each in different
proportions. They also differ in the frequency with which they are used to refer to
participants and to refer to states of affairs and segments of discourse (for short: seg-
ments of discourse). There are probably also differences related to text type. Table 24.2
shows that in Cicero’s letters ille (pronoun and determiner) is almost never used to
refer to states of affairs and segments of discourse, which seems to be the task of pro-
nominal hic.28 The connective relative pronoun mostly refers to a participant in the
immediately preceding sentence. Is as a pronoun mostly refers to recently introduced
participants; as a determiner it can refer to any preceding participant.
As for the difference between hic and ille, in the Classical period their anaphoric
behaviour reflects the differences between them in their deictic use (on which, see
§§ 11.104; 135). Their anaphoric use is discussed in §§ 11.105; 136.29 For the differ-
ence between qui and is, see § 18.28.
The examples presented so far have dealt with continuity of participants. The follow-
ing sections, in turn, deal with reference to preceding states of affairs and segments of
discourse of varying length and structure. The two main forms are nouns (with or
without a determiner) and anaphoric(ally used) pronouns.
30 For resumptive and anticipatory verbal nouns, see Mendell (1917: 39–40), Rosén (1983: 187–9), and
Spevak (2015b: 292–5). See also Fugier (1991: 388–90) on anaphoric reference by ‘grammatical recatego-
rization’.
1154 Discourse
(‘The house was so bright at the time that I thought it was on fire. Then Alcumena
called for me. The previous events were already filling me with terror, but the fear of
my mistress prevailed.’ Pl. Am. 1067–9)
(d) Quod ubi Caesar conspexit, Labienum ab suis copiis longius iam abscessisse,
equitatus sui alam sinistram ad intercludendos hostes immisit. Erat in eo
campo ubi ea res gerebatur, villa permagna turribus IIII exstructa.
(‘But when Caesar saw that Labienus had now withdrawn some distance from his
forces, he launched the left wing of his own cavalry, so as to cut the enemy off. Now
in the area where this action was going on there was a very large farm building, con-
structed with four lofty towers.’ B. Afr. 39.5–40.1)
seize power—Caes. Gal. 1.3.4–8) Ea res est Helvetiis per indicium enuntiata. (Caes.
Gal. 1.4.1); Ibi diversis partibus duo duces Eupolemus et Nicodamus pugnantis hor-
tabantur et prope certa fovebant spe iam Nicandrum ex composito adfore et terga
hostium invasurum. Haec res aliquamdiu animos pugnantium sustinuit. (Liv.
38.6.5–6); Discedentem vero ex contione universi cohortantur magno sit animo neu
dubitet proelium committere et suam fidem virtutemque experiri. Quo facto com-
mutata omnium et voluntate et opinione consensu suorum constituit Curio . . . proe-
lio rem committere. (Caes. Civ. 2.33.1–2); Quo facto cum haud immeritam laudem
gratiamque apud omnes tulisset, dictatore P. Cornelio dicto ipse ab eo magister equi-
tum creatus exemplo fuit collegas eumque intuentibus . . . (Liv. 4.57.6)
Ecce autem aedificat. Columnam mento suffigit suo. / Apage, non placet profecto
mi illaec aedificatio. (Pl. Mil. 209–10); Iam pridem ecastor frigida non lavi magis
lubenter / nec quom me melius, mea Scapha, rear esse deficatam. / # Eventus rebus
omnibus, velut horno messis magna / fuit. # Quid ea messis attinet ad meam lavatio-
nem? (Pl. Mos. 157–60); (Mysis in an aside, reacting to Pamphilus’ monologue which
ends in:) Ea quoniam nemini obtrudi potest, / itur ad me. # Oratio haec me miseram
exanimavit metu. (Ter. An. 250–1); Hic tamen excipit Pompeium—simillime, ut mihi
videtur, atque ut illa lege, qua peregrini Roma eiciuntur, Glaucippus excipitur. Non
enim hac exceptione unus adficitur beneficio, sed unus privatur iniuria. (Cic. Agr.
1.13); Itaque me non extrema tribus suffragiorum, sed primi illi vestri concursus,
neque singulae voces praeconum, sed una vox universi populi Romani consulem
declaravit. Hoc ego tam insigne, tam singulare vestrum beneficium, Quirites, cum ad
animi mei fructum atque laetitiam duco esse permagnum, tum ad curam sollici-
tudinemque multo maius. (Cic. Agr. 2.4–5); Maiores nostri non solum id quod <de>
Campanis ceperant non imminuerunt verum etiam quod ei tenebant quibus adimi
iure non poterat coemerunt. Qua de causa nec duo Gracchi qui de plebis Romanae
commodis plurimum cogitaverunt, nec L. Sulla, qui omnia sine ulla religione quibus
voluit est dilargitus, agrum Campanum attingere ausus est. (Cic. Agr. 2.81); Nemo
erit praeter unum me . . . qui credat te invito provinciam tibi esse decretam. Hanc,
quaeso, pro tua singulari sapientia reprime famam . . . (Cic. Phil. 11.23); Itemque
Dumnorigi Haeduo . . . ut idem conaretur persuadet eique filiam suam in matrimo-
nium dat. Perfacile factu esse illis probat conata perficere . . . (Caes. Gal. 1.3.5–6); Ex
eo proelio circiter hominum milia CXXX superfuerunt eaque tota nocte continenter
ierunt. (Caes. Gal. 1.26.5); . . . legatos ad eum mittunt. Cuius legationis Divico prin-
ceps fuit . . . (Caes. Gal. 1.13.2); Nec ut iniustus in pace rex, ita dux belli pravus fuit.
Quin ea arte aequasset superiores reges . . . (Liv. 1.53.1)
The same determiners (is only rarely) are used in ablative absolute clauses that func-
tion as ‘Tail–Head linking constructions’, which refer to a preceding episode of a nar-
rative.31 This is a very common phenomenon in Caesar and the Caesarian corpus.
31 For the term and the construction, see Bolkestein (2000; 2002; also summarized in 2001: 249–51). It
is part of a technique called ‘ablatif absolu d’enchaînement’ by Chausserie-Laprée (1969: 120–2), which is
also typical of Tacitus (Enghofer 1961: 118). For the use of these clauses, some of them ‘formulaic’, in the
Bellum Alexandrinum, see Gaertner and Hausburg (2013: 63–4). Müller-Lancé (1994: 99) states that 83
out of 403 capita in Caesar’s de Bello Gallico begin with a ‘linking’ ablative absolute clause (of course, they
will have been regarded as signals when our modern capita division was introduced). Holland (1986: 172)
exaggerates when he states that participial ablative absolute clauses are mostly of this linking type.
1156 Discourse
Examples are (g)–(j). The anaphoric determiner hic is more frequent than the relative
determiner qui and the order with the participle in the middle, as in (h), more fre-
quent with hic, which is often emphatic. In cases like (j), the participle is the focus of
the ablative absolute clause. As to the content of such ablative absolute clauses, those
with hic are mainly like (g), the summary of an action, which is then continued by
actions of the same protagonist; those with qui are mainly like (i), some form of com-
munication, with a different protagonist in what follows.32 (For more examples of
ablative absolute clauses with a relative expression, see § 18.29.)
(g) Hoc negotio confecto Labienus revertitur Agedincum . . .
(‘Having finished this business, Labienus returned to Agedincum . . .’ Caes. Gal.
7.62.10)
(h) Hac confirmata opinione timoris idoneum quendam hominem et callidum
delegit Gallum . . .
(‘After having established this suspicion of his cowardice, he selected a certain suitable
and crafty Gaul . . .’ Caes. Gal. 3.18.1—tr. McDevitte and Bohn)
(i) Quibus rebus cognitis Caesar cum undique bellum parari videret . . . matu-
rius sibi de bello cogitandum putavit.
(‘Caesar, on being informed of their acts, since he saw that war was being prepared
on all sides, . . . thought that he ought to take measures for the war earlier [than usual].’
Caes. Gal. 6.2.3—tr. McDevitte and Bohn)
(j) Qua perfecta munitione animadversum est ab speculatoribus Caesaris
cohortes quasdam . . . in vetera castra duci.
(‘After the fortification was complete, Caesar’s scouts noticed that some cohorts . . .
were being taken back to an old camp.’ Caes. Civ. 3.66.1)
Supplement:
Qui: Quibus rebus explicatis tum denique ad hoc horribile et formidolosum frumen-
tarium crimen accedam. (Cic. Scaur. 22); Quibus rebus nuntiatis Afranius (cj.
Kindscher; Afranio mss.) ab instituto opere discedit . . . (Caes. Civ. 1.75.1); Quibus
rebus Varus ex perfugis cognitis occasionem nactus . . . naves onerarias . . . incen-
dit . . . (B. Afr. 62.5)
Is: Cognitis iis rebus quae sunt gestae in citeriore Hispania bellum parabat. (Caes.
Civ. 2.18.6); Eo celeriter confecto negotio rursus in hiberna legiones reduxit. (Caes.
Gal. 6.3.3)
Hic: His rebus confectis in concilio pronuntiat arcessitum se ab Senonibus . . . (Caes.
Gal. 5.56.4); His rebus confectis totum exercitum lustrat. (B. Alex. 56.5); Hoc proelio
trans Rhenum nuntiato Suebi, qui ad ripas Rheni venerant, domum reverti coepe-
runt. (Caes. Gal. 1.54.1); Hac re cognita Caesar mittit conplures equitum turmas
eodem. (Caes. Gal. 7.45.1)
In the historians hic, both as a pronoun and as a determiner, is very commonly used
to close one episode before starting a new one.33 Examples are (k)–(m).
(k) Haec apud Romanos consul. Hannibal rebus prius quam verbis adhortandos
milites ratus . . .
(‘So spoke the consul to the Romans. Hannibal thought it well to encourage his sol-
diers by an object lesson before haranguing them . . .’ Liv. 21.42.1)
(l) Hunc finem exitumque seditio militum coepta apud Sucronem habuit. Per
idem tempus ad Baetim fluvium Hanno . . .
(‘Such was the end and outcome of the mutiny of the soldiers which began at Sucro.
About the same time along the Baetis River Hanno . . .’ Liv. 28.29.12–30.1)
(m) Hoc maxime modo in Italiam perventum est quinto mense a Carthagine
Nova, ut quidam auctores sunt, quinto decimo die Alpibus superatis.
(‘Such were the chief features of the march to Italy, which they accomplished five
months after leaving New Carthage—as certain authorities state—having crossed the
Alps in fifteen days.’ Liv. 21.38.1)
33 See Chausserie-Laprée (1969: 55–60) and Kroon (2017). For Velleius Paterculus, see Ruiz Castellanos
(2005: 935–6).
34 For further instances of quod in Plautus, see Lodge s.v. qui 472 § N 1; for id, s.v. is 841 § B 5; for hoc,
s.v. hic 695 § A 2.l; for illuc (illud), s.v. ille 756 § C 2.r; for istuc (istud), s.v. iste 854 § C 2.
1158 Discourse
(c) Et illud paveo et hoc formido, ita tota sum misera in metu.
(‘I’m afraid of one thing and scared of the other: I’m completely in fear, poor me.’
Pl. Cist. 535)
(d) Quid est negoti? / # Pestis te tenet. # Nam quor istuc / dicis? Equidem valeo . . .
(‘What’s the matter? # You have the plague. # Why are you saying that? I’m perfectly
well . . .’ Pl. Am. 580–2)
Supplement:
Quod: Quem praestantissimus civis, Aquila, Pollentia expulit et quidem crure fracto.
Quod utinam illi ante accidisset, ne huc redire potuisset! (Cic. Phil. 11.14); Quod ubi
Caesar resciit quorum per fines ierant, his uti conquirerent et reducerent, si sibi pur-
gati esse vellent, imperavit. (Caes. Gal. 1.28.1); Quod cum dixisset, nos satis avidi
optati sumus ire . . . (Pereg. 10.9); Saguntum ergo ferociter obsidebat. Quod ubi Romae
auditum est, missi legati ad Hannibalem ut ab eius obsidione discederet. (August.
Civ. 3.20); Quod cum facis, vel attende, et iam noli facere. (August. Serm. 16B.1)
Quae ut aspexi, me continuo contuli protinam in pedes. (Pl. Bac. 374); Quae cum
cogito, iam nunc timeo quidnam . . . dignum eloqui possim. (Cic. Div. Caec. 42); Quae
cum ita sint, quoniam recta vita ducenda est qua perveniendum sit ad beatam, omnes
affectus istos vita recta rectos habet, perversa perversos. (August. Civ. 14.9); Quae
cum ita sint, hinc est quod Dominus Iesus in Spiritu Sancto daemones eicit. (August.
Serm. 71.27)
Id: Quis igitur nisi vos narravit mi illi ut fuerit proelium? / # An etiam id tu scis? #
Quipp’ qui ex te audivi ut urbem maxumam / expugnavisses regemque Pterelam tute
occideris. / # Egone istuc dixi? (Pl. Am. 744–7); Miram in eo pietatem, suavitatem
humanitatemque perspexi. Quo maiorem spem habeo nihil fore aliter ac deceat. Id te
igitur scire volui. (Cic. Att. 6.3.8); Neque fas esse existimant ea litteris mandare, cum
in reliquis fere rebus, publicis privatisque rationibus, Graecis utantur litteris. Id mihi
duabus de causis instituisse videntur . . . (Caes. Gal. 6.14.3–4); Ad hoc enim ducitur
uxor. Nam id etiam tabulae indicant ubi scribitur: Liberorum procreandorum causa.
(August. Serm. 9.18)
Ea tibi omnia enarravi. Nisi te amarem plurumum, / non facerem. (Pl. Am. 525–6);
Eaque populus Romanus non solum plausu sed etiam gemitu suo comprobavit. (Cic.
Sest. 123); Denique quando ea paululum supprimenda iudicavit et aliquanto altius
latuit, dubitavit de illo daemonum princeps . . . (August. Civ. 9.21); Ea legimus, credi-
mus ut salvemur. (August. Serm. 9.4)
Hoc: Postquam hoc mihi narravit, abeo ab illo. (Pl. Cur. 349); Ubi hoc quaestori
Caecilio . . . nuntiatum est, vocari ad se Agonidem iubet. (Cic. Div. Caec. 56); Hoc
autem, antequam perveniremus ad Montem Dei, iam referentibus fratribus cogno-
veram, et postquam ibi perveni, ita esse manifeste cognovi. (Pereg. 2.7); Testantur hoc
martyrum loca et basilicae apostolorum, quae in illa vastatione urbis ad se confu-
gientes suos alienosque receperunt. (August. Civ. 1.1); An forte hoc probare non
potero . . . (August. Serm. 1.2)
Utrum deliras, quaeso, an astans somnias, / qui equom me afferre iubes, loricam
adducere, / multos hastatos, postid multos velites, / multos cum multis? Haec tu per-
vorsario / mihi fabulatu’s. # Dixin’ ego istaec, opsecro? / # Modo quidem hercle haec
dixisti. (Pl. Cist. 291–6); Magium se ipsum interfecisse postea. Se a Marcello ad me
Discourse coherence 1159
missum esse qui haec nuntiaret et rogaret uti medicos ei mitterem. (Sulp. Ruf. Fam.
4.12.2); Statim ergo ut haec audivi, descendimus de animalibus . . . (Pereg. 14.1); Sed
haec Iuno dicebat velut irata mulier, quid loqueretur ignorans. (August. Civ. 1.3); Qui
haec dicit et non it nec applicat cor suum ut faciat mala remedia, utique vincit.
(August. Serm. 4.36)
Illud (illuc): Egone istuc dixi tibi? / # Mihi quidem hercle. # Ita me amabit Iuppiter, /
uxor, ut ego illud numquam dixi. (Pl. Mer. 761–3); Ecquis est igitur . . . qui illud aut
fieri noluerit aut factum improbarit? (Cic. Phil. 2.29); An quia illud factum est indig-
nante Menelao, illud autem concedente Vulcano? (August. Civ. 3.3); Dicendo sibi
illud homines moriuntur. (August. Serm. 5.2)
Egomet mihi non credo, quom illaec autumare illum audio. (Pl. Am. 416); Sed
quid ego illa commemoro? (Cic. Mil. 18); Praenuntiabat illa Hermes dolendo.
Praenuntiabat haec propheta gaudendo. (August. Civ. 8.24); Quare dicta sint illa
omnia, quaeramus. (August. Serm. 4.22)
Istuc (istud ): Qui tibi nunc istuc in mentem est? (Pl. Am. 666); Nimirum tibi istud
lex ipsa renuntiavit. (Cic. Clu. 143); Neque istuc pia fides nimium reformidat . . .
(August. Civ. 1.12); Istud non dicitur . . . (August. Serm. 16A.11)
Nimia mira memoras. Si istaec vera sunt, divinitus / non metuo quin meae uxori
latae suppetiae sient. (Pl. Am. 1105–6); Sed quo die populo Romano tribuni plebi
restituti sunt, omnia ista vobis, si forte nondum intellegitis, adempta atque erepta
sunt. (Cic. Ver. 5.175); Verum ista oportunius alio loco diligenter copioseque trac-
tanda sunt. (August. Civ. 1.3); Sed ne oneremus memoriam sanctitatis vestrae, ista
commemorasse suffecerit. (August. Serm. 1.5)
The adverb ita is regularly used to refer to a preceding state of affairs, as in (e)–(g). In
(e), the speaker uses ita to express that ‘my behaviour will be as you indicated’. In (g),
ita signals a consequence, more or less like itaque. Sic is used in a comparable way, as
in (h) and (i).
(e) Sequere hac, Palinure, me ad fores, fi mi opsequens. / # Ita faciam.
(‘Palinurus, follow me this way to the door, be obedient to me. # I will do so.’ Pl. Cur.
87–8)
(f) . . . cum cognorit ab eis qui tenent quae sint in quaque re, multo oratorem
melius quam ipsos illos quorum eae sunt artes esse dicturum. Ita si de re
militari dicendum huic erit Sulpicio, quaeret a C. Mario adfini nostro et, cum
acceperit, ita pronuntiabit ut ipsi C. Mario paene hic melius quam ipse illa
scire videatur.
(‘. . . after learning the technicalities of each from those who know the same, the orator
will speak about them far better than even the men who are masters of these arts. For
example, should our friend Sulpicius here have to speak upon the art of war, he will
inquire of our relative Gaius Marius, and when he has received his teachings, will
deliver himself in such fashion as to seem even to Gaius Marius to be almost better
informed on the subject than Gaius Marius himself.’ Cic. de Orat. 1.65–6)
(g) Insectatur omnis domi per aedis / nec quemquam prope ad se sinit adire. /
Ita omnes sub arcis, sub lectis latentes / metu mussitant.
1160 Discourse
(‘She’s chasing everybody at home throughout the house and doesn’t let anyone come
near her: everybody’s hiding under chests and couches and keeping quiet out of fear.’
Pl. Cas. 662–5)
(h) Te velle uxorem aiebat tuo nato dare, / ideo aedificare hic velle aiebat in tuis. /
# Hic aedificare volui? # Sic dixit mihi.
(‘He said you wanted to give a wife to your son, and he said that was why you wanted
to enlarge your own house here. # I wanted to enlarge my house? # So he told me.’
Pl. Mos. 1027–9)
(i) Reos autem appello non eos modo qui arguuntur sed omnis quorum de re
disceptatur. Sic enim olim loquebantur.
(‘By “parties” I mean not only persons impeached, but all whose interests are being
determined, for that was how people used the term in the old days.’ Cic. de Orat.
2.183)
Anaphorical adverbs with a more specific meaning than ita and sic include reason
adverbs like eo, ideo ‘therefore’, quo ‘from which fact or circumstance’ (OLD), quare
‘wherefore’, quamobrem (also written as three words quam ob rem) ‘wherefore’, and
unde ‘from which’ (rare), as in (j) and (k), and time adverbs like postea ‘thereafter’,
inde ‘from then on’, as in (l).
(j) Video ego te Amoris valde tactum toxico, / adulescens. Eo te magis volo
monitum.
(‘I can see that you’ve been hit hard by Love’s poisoned shaft, young man. That’s why
I want to warn you all the more.’ Pl. Cist. 299–300)
(k) Arbitrium vostrum, vostra existumatio / valebit. Quare omnis vos oratos
volo, / ne plus iniquom possit quam aequom oratio.
(‘Your judgement and your opinion will prevail. So I want to plead with all of you not
to let the words of the unfair carry more weight than those of the fair.’ Ter. Hau.
25–7—tr. Brown)
(l) Inde ex eo loco / video recipere se senem.
(‘Then I saw the old bloke coming from the place.’ Pl. Aul. 709–10)
Appendix: A number of demonstrative adverbs are used to introduce some form
of confirmation of or argument for a preceding statement, for example ita in (m).
The determiner is can be used in a comparable way, as in (n), as well as the demon-
strative adjectives talis, tantus, and tot. The term used for such statements is
‘epiphonema’.35
(m) Di te deaeque omnes funditus perdant, senex. / Ita mea consilia undique
oppugnas male.
(‘May all the gods and goddesses kill you entirely, old man: you assault my
plans from all sides.’ Pl. Mos. 684–5)
35 See K.-St.: II.158–9, Nägelsbach and Müller (1905: 758–61), TLL s.v. adeo 606.19ff.; s.v. ita 520.70ff.,
Sz.: 470. For the Greek term §.tĈxrwl ‘interjection, exclamation’, see Dickey (2007: 238).
Preparative (cataphoric) reference 1161
(n) . . . sic / ut eum, si convenit, scio fe- / cisse. Eo est ingenio natus.
(‘. . . as I know he has done if he’s found him; that’s his nature.’ Pl. Bac.
1085–6)
36 See TLL s.v. ita 518.79ff. See also § 15.103 for the use of ita and sic as preparative devices with
accusative and infinitive clauses.
37 For further examples of is, see TLL s.v. is 474.6ff.
1162 Discourse
Ille: Illa vero eius cupiditas incredibilis est. Nam . . . (Cic. Ver. 4.58)
Iste: Postero die pastillus iste nocte super cibum dandus est et, si opus fuerit, per
triduum continuum eodem tempore. Recipit autem haec: apii seminis pondo
trientem . . . (Larg. 52)38
Examples of the adverbs ita and sic are (e) and (f).
(e) Ita <ingeni> ingenium meum est: / Inimicos semper osa sum optuerier.
(‘This is the nature of my nature: I’ve always hated looking at my enemies.’ Pl. Am.
899–900)
(f) At ego sic agam: / Coniciam sortis in sitellam et sortiar / tibi et Chalino.
(‘But I’ll act like this: I’ll put lots into an urn and draw them for you and Chalinus.’
Pl. Cas. 341–3)
The preceding sections focused on participants and events within sentences and the
ways to refer to participants and events in contiguous sentences. We now turn to the
38 TLL s.v. iste 507.62ff. cites this as the first instance of preparative use of the determiner.
Cohesive devices linking sentences 1163
Authors like Cicero and Caesar use asyndeton especially in dramatic peaks of
their narratives, which shows that it was an important stylistic device.43 An example
is (c).
39 See K.-St.: II.158. 40 For Plautus’ ‘Armut an Konjunktionen’, see Blänsdorf (1967: 78).
41 Cic. Att. 1.1–5 (178 lines OCT); Liv. 1.48–53 (195 lines OCT); Sen. Ep. 1–5 (181 lines OCT). From
Table 24.3 it can also be deduced that in this sample Seneca has the shortest, Livy the longest sentences.
This figure is taken from LSS § 12.1. For Seneca, see Bolkestein (1986).
42 See Kiss (2005). 43 See Rosén (2011: 136) and von Albrecht (2012: 35, 161).
1164 Discourse
44 For Damon’s punctuation, see the Preface to her OCT edition, pp. lxiii and lxvi, n. 81.
Cohesive devices linking sentences 1165
and contrastive tamen ‘yet’. A number of words can function as adverb and as con-
nector or interactional particle (see § 24.46 on nunc). Furthermore there are devices
that create the expectation for additional information, such as the particle quidem and
the adverb sane, both often followed by some form of contrast.
The terminology used to refer to these words differs from language to language and
between theoretical models, especially for the group of words called ‘connectors’ and
‘interactional particles’ in this Syntax. A common name for the words involved is
‘discourse particles’. Some of these words are also used to mark the relation between
larger units of discourse (paragraphs, for example) and in this way contribute to the
organization of the discourse.45
The difference between connectors and interactional particles (called ‘conversation
management particles’ by Kroon 2011) is best demonstrated by comparing nam and
enim, which are traditionally called ‘causal conjunctions’. Whereas nam ‘for’ indicates
that the sentence in which it occurs contains some form of evidence for the correct-
ness of the preceding sentence, enim ‘you know’ appeals to the cooperation of the
addressee to recognize the correctness of what precedes: it is a ‘consensus’ particle.
Adverbs are also often used to connect sentences. They differ from connectors and
interactional particles in several respects. The main difference is that adverbs are part
of their clause and contribute their lexical meaning to its content, whereas the other
two categories, although positioned in a particular sentence, do not add to its content.
They serve to clarify the relationship between the successive sentences. Adverbs can
have clitics attached to them, the other two cannot. Adverbs are mobile in their sen-
tence, the other two have more or less fixed positions (see § 23.21). Connectors and
interactional particles cannot or can only rarely be used in subordinate clauses that
follow the main clause. Furthermore, connectors and interactional particles can co-
occur with adverbs in the same sentence. For an illustration, see the discussion of
tamen in § 24.22.
The sections in which these words are discussed below are based on semantic con-
siderations. The following semantic relations are distinguished:
(i) conjunctive relation: -que, ac/atque, et, nec/neque
(ii) disjunctive relation: aut
(iii) adversative relation: ast, at, atqui, autem, ceterum, sed, verum, contra, tamen,
nihilominus, vero, etsi, tametsi, quamquam
(iv) explanatory and justificatory relation: nam, namque, etenim, quippe, enim,
nempe
(v) consecutive relation: igitur, itaque, ergo
(vi) sequential relation: e.g. deinde, tum.
The amount of detail about the individual words and clitics in the following sections
varies considerably. This is related to the frequency of the items involved, their
45 See Pinkster (1972: 153–64; 2004b), Risselada (1998b), Rosén (2005: 231–2), Kroon (2011), and
Schrickx (2011: 261–8).
1166 Discourse
The conjunctive (also called: ‘copulative’ or ‘additive’) connectors are the same as
the conjunctive coordinators discussed in §§ 19.24ff.: -que, ac/atque, et, and nec/neque.
These connectors can be used with all sentence types, but are not attested with inter-
rogative sentences introduced by the question particle nonne and rarely with those
with num.46 They are not compatible with other connectors introducing a sentence:
*et nam, *et . . . igitur (for autem, see § 24.26).
46 See Rosén (2011: 139–40). For the use of et in various sentence types, see TLL s.v. et 890.14ff. Et can
be used to coordinate an indirect question with num with another indirect question. See § 19.27,
Supplement. Aut num can be used after a preceding question. See § 24.21.
Conjunctive connexion of sentences 1167
atque imperium pervenire esset necesse: Cinnam ante se et Sullam fuisse. Eundemque
dixisse fatalem hunc annum esse ad interitum huius urbis . . . (Cic. Catil. 3.9); Quaeque
sunt vetera praecepta sapientium, qui iubent ‘tempori parere’ et ‘sequi deum’ et ‘se
noscere’ et ‘nihil nimis,’ haec sine physicis quam vim habeant—et habent maxi-
mam—videre nemo potest. (Cic. Fin. 3.73); Quos ubi Afranius procul visos cum
Petreio conspexit, nova re perterritus locis superioribus constitit. Aciemque instruit.
(Caes. Civ. 1.65.1); Caesar exploratis regionibus albente caelo omnes copias castris
educit. Magnoque circuitu nullo certo itinere exercitum ducit. (Caes. Civ. 1.68.1);
Romaeque legatis eius, postquam errasse regem et Iugurthae scelere lapsum depre-
cati sunt, amicitiam et foedus petentibus hoc modo respondetur. (Sal. Jug. 104.4);
Tantumque sua laude obstitit famae consulis Marcius ut, nisi foedus cum Latinis
<in> columna aenea insculptum monumento esset ab Sp. Cassio uno, quia collega
afuerat, ictum, Postumium Cominium bellum gessisse cum Volscis memoria cessis-
set. (Liv. 2.33.9); (sc. Tacfarinas) ruendo in tela captivitatem haud inulta morte effugit.
Isque finis armis impositus. (Tac. Ann. 4.25.3); Redditur ordini Lurius Varus consula-
ris, avaritiae criminibus olim perculsus. Et Pomponia Graecina insignis femina, <A.>
Plautio, quem ovasse de Britannis rettuli, nupta ac superstitionis externae rea, mariti
iudicio permissa. Isque prisco instituto propinquis coram de capite famaque coniugis
cognovit et insontem nuntiavit. (Tac. Ann. 13.32.2)
47 See TLL s.v. atque 1076.18ff. with a detailed semantic classification and OLD s.v. atque § 2 ‘beginning
an emphatic sentence or clause’. Also Lodge: s.v. atque 178–9 (§ 13), McGlynn s.v. atque 59 (§§ XIII and
XIV), Merguet (Reden) s.v. atque 308 (§II.1); (Phil.) 255 (§ II.1), and Gerber and Greef s.v. atque 109 (§ 2).
1168 Discourse
(c) Flagitium hominis, qui dixit mihi / suam uxorem hanc arcessituram [esse].
Ea se eam negat morarier. / Atque edepol mirum ni subolet iam hoc huic
vicinae meae.
(‘What a disgraceful creature he is! He told me his wife would send for her. But she
says she doesn’t need her. And indeed it would be odd if this neighbour of mine hasn’t
got wind of this already.’ Pl. Cas. 552–4)
(d) Putatisne vos illis rebus frui posse, nisi eos qui vobis fructui sunt conservari-
tis, non solum, ut ante dixi, calamitate, sed etiam calamitatis formidine libe-
ratos? Ac ne illud quidem vobis neglegendum est . . .
(‘Do you imagine that you can enjoy these advantages unless you preserve those from
whom you derive them and keep them free not only, as I said before, from disaster
but from fear of disaster? There is still another point . . .’ Cic. Man. 16–17)
(e) Atque ego istuc, Anthrax, aliovorsum dixeram, / non istuc quod tu insimulas.
(‘Now now, Anthrax! I said this in a different sense, not the one you allege.’ Pl. Aul.
287–8)
Supplement (in alphabetical order by additional particles and adverbs):
Fieri non potest ut . . . eum tu in tua provincia non cognoris. Atque adeo, ne hoc aut
longius aut obscurius esse possit, procedite in medium atque explicate descriptionem
imaginemque tabularum . . . (Cic. Ver. 2.190); At scelesta vide’n ut ne id quidem, me
dignum esse existumat / quem adeat, quem colloquatur, quoique irato supplicet? /
Atque eccam illecebra exit tandem. (Pl. As. 149–51); Is enim est dicendi opifex. Atque
equidem aliquantum iam etiam noctis adsumo. (Cic. Fam. 7.25.2); I, bene ambula. / #
Atque audi’n etiam? # Ecce. (Pl. As. 108–9); Atque ego quidem hercle ut verum tibi
dicam, pater, / ea res me male habet. (Pl. As. 843–4); Ac tamen, ut posset dicere se
emisse, Archagatho imperat ut illis aliquid quorum argentum fuerat nummulorum
dicis causa daret. (Cic. Ver. 4.53); Atque utinam non daretis quis sit peior. (August.
Serm. 9.21)
48 See TLL s.v. et 890.14ff., Lodge s.v. et 534ff. (§§ S and D), Merguet (Reden) s.v. et 212 (§ A); (Phil.)
829 (§ C), Gerber and Greef s.v. et 389 (§ 2). For the use of et in the Passio Perp., see Adams (2016: 323–4).
49 Adverbs of addition like praeterea often imply gradation. See Iordache (2010).
50 For examples, see TLL s.v. et 892.53ff.
Conjunctive connexion of sentences 1169
the use of et in (e). Cases like (d) can sometimes also be regarded as discontinuous
coordination. See also § 19.27 for the use of et as a coordinator and for further details.
(a) . . . certum est hominem eludere. / Et enim vero quoniam formam cepi huius
in med et statum, / decet et facta moresque huius habere me similis item.
(‘. . . I’ll definitely make a fool of him. And since I took on his looks and dress, I also
ought to have similar ways and habits.’ Pl. Am. 265–7)
(b) Tu tamen permanes constantissimus defensor Antoni. Et quidem, quo melior
senator videatur, negat se illi amicum esse debere.
(‘And yet you still remain Antonius’ most resolute defender. And what is more, to
make himself appear a more conscientious senator, he says he has no call to be
Antonius’ friend.’ Cic. Phil. 8.17–18)
(c) Dedi equidem quod mecum egisti. # Et tibi ego misi mulierem.
(‘I gave you what you arranged with me. # And I sent you the girl.’ Pl. As. 171)
(d) Repperit patrem Palaestra suom atque matrem? # Repperit. / # Et popularis
est? # Opino. # Et nuptura est mi? # Suspicor.
(‘Has Palaestra found her father and mother? # She has. # And is she my compatriot?
# I think so. # And is she going to marry me? # I suspect so.’ Pl. Rud. 1267–8)
(e) Tum Scipio: ‘Atqui nactus es, sed mehercule otiosiorem opera quam animo.’
Et ille (sc. Tubero): ‘At vero animum quoque relaxes oportet.’
(Then Scipio said: “Yes, you have found me at leisure, but less so in mind than in
occupation.” And he: “Yet it is your duty to relax your mind also.” ’ Cic. Rep. 1.14)
Supplement:
Istac lege filiam tuam sponde’n mi uxorem dari? / # Spondeo. # Et ego spondeo idem
hoc. (Pl. Trin. 1162–3); Ipsu’ mihi Davo’, qui intumu’st <eo>rum consiliis, dixit. / Et
is mihi persuadet nuptias quantum queam ut maturem. (Ter. An. 576–7); Inpune
optare istuc licet. / Ill’ revivescet iam numquam. Et tamen utrum malis scio. (Ter.
Hec. 464–5); (sc. Gallia) Omnis aequo animo belli patitur iniurias, dum modo repel-
lat periculum servitutis. Et ut omittam reliquas partis Galliae—nam sunt omnes
pares—Patavini alios excluserunt, alios eiecerunt . . . (Cic. Phil. 12.10); A malo autem
vitioque causae ita recedam . . . ut totum bono illo ornando et augendo dissimulatum
obruatur. Et, si causa est in argumentis, firmissima quaeque maxime tueor . . . (Cic.
de Orat. 2.292); Persequi Caesar Pompeium? Quid? Ut interficiat? O me miserum!
Et non omnes nostra corpora opponimus? (Cic. Att. 7.23.1); Verum haec (sc.
Roma) tantum alias inter caput extulit urbes / quantum lenta solent inter viburna
cupressi. / # Et quae tanta fuit Romam tibi causa videndi? (Verg. Ecl. 1.24–6); . . . ad
Cn. Manlium, consulem . . . legationes undique ex omnibus civitatibus . . . convenie-
bant. Et ut clarior nobiliorque victoria Romanis de rege Antiocho fuit quam de
Gallis, ita laetior sociis erat de Gallis quam de Antiocho. (Liv. 38.37.1–2); Passim
silentia et gemitus, nihil compositum in ostentationem. Et quamquam neque
insignibus lugentium abstinerent, altius animis maerebant. (Tac. Ann. 2.82.3); Et
exivi ad eum et aperui ei. (Passio Perp. 10.2); Et dicitis: ‘Christiani sumus’. (August.
Serm. 9.21)
1170 Discourse
trepidavit offerre, quando exigebatur. Nec fuit religio credentis contraria devotioni
obtemperantis. (August. Serm. 2.1)
Of the disjunctive (also called: ‘alternative’) coordinators aut, vel, -ve, and sive (see
§ 19.43) only aut ‘or’ is also used as a connector. It is regularly used to connect inter-
rogative sentences, as in (a) and (b).52 An imperative sentence is shown in (c), where
aut ‘expresses the consequences of non-compliance or error’.53
(a) Non ecastor falsa memoro. # Nam, opsecro, unde haec gentium? / Aut quis
deus obiecit hanc ante ostium nostrum, quasi / dedita opera, in tempore ipso?
(‘Honestly, I’m not telling lies. # Where on earth does it come from, please? Or what
god threw it in front of our door, as if on purpose, right in the nick of time?’ Pl. Cist.
668–70)
(b) Num igitur tot clarissimorum ducum regumque naufragium sustulit artem
gubernandi? Aut num imperatorum scientia nihil est, quia summus
imperator nuper fugit amisso exercitu? Aut num propterea nulla est rei pub-
licae gerendae ratio atque prudentia quia . . .?
(‘Then, did the fact that so many illustrious captains and kings suffered shipwreck
deprive navigation of its right to be called an art? And is military science of no effect
because a general of the highest renown recently lost his army and took to flight?
Again, is statecraft devoid of method or skill because . . .?’ Cic. Div. 1.24)
(c) Duos solos video auctoritate censorum adfinis ei turpitudini iudicari. Aut
illud adferant, aliquid eos quod de his duobus habuerint compertum de
ceteris <non> comperisse.
(‘I observe that two jurors only were held by the official pronouncement of the cen-
sors to be implicated in that scandal. Or else let them allege that they had discovered
against those two something which they had not discovered against the others.’ Cic.
Clu. 127)54
Supplement:
Interrogative sentences: Quid istuc est? Aut ubi istuc est terrarum loci? (Pl. As. 32);
Quid iam? Aut quid negoti est? Fac sciam. (Pl. Mil. 277) Metuo te atque istos expiare
ut possies. / # Quam ob rem? Aut quam subito rem mihi apportas novam? (Pl. Mos.
465–6); De quo quis umquam arator questus est? Aut quis non ad hoc tempus inno-
centissimam omnium diligentissimamque praeturam illius hominis existimat? (Cic.
Ver. 3.216); Persuaderi igitur cuiquam potest ea quae significari dicuntur extis cog-
nita esse ab haruspicibus observatione diuturna? Quam diuturna ista fuit? Aut quam
longinquo tempore observari potuit? Aut quo modo est conlatum inter ipsos, quae
pars inimica, quae pars familiaris esset . . .? (Cic. Div. 2.28)
52 See Lodge s.v. aut 204 (§ D.1). 53 See OLD s.v. aut § 7.
54 Instead of the emendation non (by Graevius) there are several other proposals. See the apparatus in
Rizzo’s edition.
1172 Discourse
Other: Multum providisse suos maiores qui caverint ne cui patricio plebeii magis-
tratus paterent. Aut patricios habendos fuisse tribunos plebi. (Liv. 4.25.11); . . . trans-
gressique extemplo castra oppugnabimus, quae hodie cepissemus, ni fugissent. Aut
si acie decernere volent, eundem pugnae pedestris eventum expectate qui equitum
in certamine fuit. (Liv. 42.61.7–8); Neque enim, ut dixere aliqui, mundus hoc polo
excelsiore se attollit—aut undique cernerentur haec sidera—verum . . . (Plin. Nat.
2.179)
Vel is used to introduce imperative sentences, as in (d), but it does not signal an
alternative (see the translation).
(d) Equidem ioco illa dixeram dudum tibi, ridiculi causa. Vel hunc rogato
Sosiam.
(‘I said those things as a joke to you a while ago, for fun. Ask Sosia here if you like.’
Pl. Am. 916–17)
In addition to the connectors sed, verum, and ceterum ‘but’, which are also used as
adversative coordinators (see § 19.61), an adversative relation between sentences (and
discourse units) can be expressed by the connectors at, atqui, autem, and to some
extent ast, and by the adverbs contra, nihilominus, tamen, and vero.55 The difference
between connectors and adverbs that express an adversative relation appears among
other things from the fact that the connectors and adverbs can co-occur,56 as in (a)
and (b), and from the limited mobility of the connectors (at/near the beginning of the
sentence) in comparison with the adverbs. This is illustrated for tamen in (c)–(e). In
(c), tamen has the final position, in (e), the very first, at the beginning of a letter.57
Tamen can have a clitic attached to it, as -ne in (f). Further details on tamen can be
found in § 24.31.
(a) Abiit intro iratus. Quid ego nunc agam? . . . Sed tamen ibo et persequar.
Amans ne quid faciat cauto opu’st.
(‘He went inside in a rage. What should I do now? . . . But still I’ll go and follow him;
I need to be careful that our lover doesn’t do anything stupid.’ Pl. Cist. 528–31)
(b) Quae hoc tempore sileret omnia atque ea, si oblivione non posset, tamen
taciturnitate sua tecta esse pateretur. Sed vero sic agitur ut prorsus reticere
nullo modo possit.
(‘Not one of these would he now be mentioning—rather would he allow them to be
covered by the veil of silence if not of oblivion: but the issues are indeed such that
silence is an absolute impossibility.’ Cic. Clu. 18)
55 In her Table 4 Rosén (2009: 356–7) makes a distinction between pure ‘contrasting’ particles like
tamen and ‘adjoining + contrastive’ particles like sed. She also has more particles than discussed in the fol-
lowing sections.
56 A table with collocations of adversative connecting devices can be found in Rosén (2009: 340).
57 See Orlandini (1999b: 203) and Spevak (2006c: 245).
Adversative connexion of sentences 1173
58 For discussion and examples, see Otto (1912: 43–57). See also K.-St.: II.321–2 and OLD s.v. quod, § 1.a.
1174 Discourse
in mentem, scribere ista nescio quae, quo verterem me non haberem. (Cic. Att.
13.10.1)
Quod cum esset animadversum coniunctam esse flumini, prorutis munitionibus
defendente nullo transcenderunt. (Caes. Civ. 3.68.3); Quod etsi ingeniis magnis
praediti quidam dicendi copiam sine ratione consequuntur, ars tamen est dux certior
quam natura. (Cic. Fin. 4.10); Quod ne id facere posses, idcirco heri non necessario
loco contra sensus tam multa dixeram. (Cic. Luc. 79); Quod ubi sensi me in posses-
sionem iudici ac defensionis meae constitisse . . . tum admiscere huic generi orationis
vehementi atque atroci genus illud alterum . . . coepi. (Cic. de Orat. 2.200)
NB: with a relative pronoun: Quod qui ab illo abducit exercitum et respectum pul-
cherrimum et praesidium firmissimum adimit rei publicae. (Cic. Phil. 10.9—NB:
various emendations proposed)59
Quod ut o potius formidine falsa / ludar, et in melius tua, qui potes, orsa reflectas!
(Verg. A. 10.631–2); Quod utinam ne Phormioni id suadere in mentem incidis-
set . . . (Ter. Ph. 157); Quod utinam aut Appius Claudius <in hac parte fuisset aut>
in ista parte C. Curio, cuius amicitia me paulatim in hanc per<di>tam causam
imposuit! (Cael. Fam. 8.17.1)
The use of quod as a connector is historically related to its use as connective relative
(see § 18.28). That it functions as a connector appears from the fact that it cannot
co-occur with regular connectors like nam and igitur.
(c) Atque oppido hercle bene velle illi visus sum, / ast non habere quoi commen-
darem capram.
(‘And I seemed very well disposed to the monkey, but not to have anyone who I could
entrust the goat to.’ Pl. Mer. 245–6)
(d) Mars perdere gentem / immanem Lapithum valuit . . . / Ast ego, magna Iovis
coniunx, . . . / vincor ab Aenea.
(‘Mars could destroy the Lapiths’ giant race . . . But I, Jove’s mighty consort, . . . I am
worsted by Aeneas!’ Verg. A. 7.304–10)
Supplement:
Divos et eos qui caelestes semper habiti sunt colunto et ollos quos endo caelo merita
locaverunt, Herculem, Liberum, Aesculapium, Castorem, Pollucem, Quirinum, ast
olla propter quae datur homini ascensus in caelum, Mentem, Virtutem, Pietatem,
Fidem. (Cic. Leg. 2.19); Dicitur Appius . . . ita precatus esse: ‘Bellona, si hodie nobis
victoriam duis, ast ego tibi templum voveo.’ (Liv. 10.19.17–18)
61 For a discussion of at, see Kroon (1995: Ch. 12). 62 See Sz.: 489.
1176 Discourse
Supplement:
Est quidam homo qui illam ait se scire ubi sit. / # At pol ille a quadam muliere, si eam
monstret, gratiam ineat. / # At sibi ille quidam volt dari mercedem. # At pol illa quae-
dam / quae illam cistellam perdidit quoidam negat esse quod det. / # At enim ille
quidam o<peram bonam magis> expetit quam argentum. / # At pol illi quoidam
mulieri nulla opera gratuita est. (Pl. Cist. 735–40); Domus tibi deerat? At habebas.
Pecunia superabat? At egebas. (Cic. Scaur. 45); Sit fur, sit sacrilegus, sit flagitiorum
omnium vitiorumque princeps. At est bonus imperator, at felix et ad dubia rei publi-
cae tempora reservandus. (Cic. Ver. 5.4); Quid hoc levius? At quantus orator! (Cic.
Tusc. 5.103); Ipsi ex silvis rari propugnabant nostrosque intra munitiones ingredi
prohibebant. At milites legionis septimae testudine facta et aggere ad munitiones
adiecto locum ceperunt . . . (Caes. Gal. 5.9.6–7); Confestim et quos binos oneraria in
iumenta imposuerant secuti, et consul cum toto agmine. At Histrorum pauci, qui
modice vino usi erant, memores fuerant fugae, aliis somno mors continuata est. (Liv.
41.4.3–4); Clodius Quirinalis . . . veneno damnationem anteiit. Caninius Rebilus . . . cru-
ciatus aegrae senectae misso per venas sanguine effugit . . . At L. Volusius egregia fama
concessit . . . (Tac. Ann. 13.30.1–2); Ille autem timuit et ait: . . . At illa: Vade, inquit, fili,
audi me. (August. Serm. 4.13)
At co-occurs with enim in its ‘affirmative’ sense ‘in fact’, ‘in truth’ (see § 24.40 and
§ 24.28 on sed enim) from Early Latin onwards, although it is absent from certain
authors, e.g. Caesar and Virgil. Examples are (d) and (e). Cicero especially uses at in
combination with the adverb vero ‘in truth’ (see § 24.33).
(d) Quid est, / fratris mei gnate, gnate quid vis? Expedi. / # At enim hoc volo
agas. # At enim ago istuc.
(‘What is it, nephew, nephew mine, what do you want? Tell me. # Well, I want you to
pay attention. # Well, I am paying attention.’ Pl. Poen. 1196–7)
(e) . . . nostri consulatus beneficio se incolumis fortunas habere arbitrantur. At
enim inter hos ipsos exsistunt graves controversiae . . .
(‘. . . they think they owe the safety of their money to my Consulship. Ah, but they get
into serious disputes among themselves . . .’ Cic. Q. fr. 1.1.7)
63 See TLL s.v. atqui 1085.11ff., Sz: 493–4, and Orlandini (1995).
Adversative connexion of sentences 1177
(‘You’ll never take the gold away from here. # And yet you will give it to me in a
moment. # I will give it to you? # And you’ll beg me of your own accord to take it
away . . .’ Pl. Bac. 824–5)
(b) Quid vero? Modum statuarum haberi nullum placet? Atqui habeatur necesse
est.
(‘What then? Is there to be no limit to statues? But there must be.’ Cic. Ver. 2.144—tr.
Yonge)
(c) Et licet comprimantur exclamationes, ora claudantur, nihil negat, qui hoc
fatetur. Atquin summorum facinorum ipsa inmanitas innocentia est.
(‘And even if he stifles his exclamations and keeps his mouth firmly shut, a man who
admits this, denies nothing. Still, the very outrageousness of the most horrendous
deeds is what proves the innocence of the perpetrators.’ [Quint.] Decl. 19.5.5—tr. Breij)
Supplement:
Non sum apud me. # Atqui opus est nunc quom maxume ut sis, Antipho. (Ter. Ph.
204); . . . in ea urbe in qua, ut ait Antonius, auditus eloquens nemo erat. Atqui si
Antonio Crassus eloquens visus non est aut sibi ipse, nunquam Cotta visus esset,
nunquam Sulpicius, nunquam Hortensius. (Cic. Orat. 105–6); ‘Aliam vero vim volup-
tatis esse, aliam nihil dolendi, nisi valde pertinax fueris, concedas necesse est’. ‘Atqui
reperies’, inquit, ‘in hoc quidem pertinacem.’ (Cic. Fin. 2.9); Quodsi virtutes sunt
pares inter se, paria esse etiam vitia necesse est. Atqui pares esse virtutes, nec bono
viro meliorem nec temperante temperantiorem nec forti fortiorem nec sapienti sapi-
entiorem posse fieri facillime potest perspici. (Cic. Parad. 21); Sideris proprium est
scribere orbem. Atqui hoc an cometae alii fecerint? Nescio. Duo nostra aetate
fecerunt. (Sen. Nat. 7.23); Substantia mihi opus erat. Atquin omnia vendenda sunt et
egentibus dividenda. (Tert. Idol. 12.2)
Cf: At pol qui certa res / hanc est obiurgare, quae me hodie advenientem domum /
noluerit salutare. (Pl. Am. 705–7)
64 See Kroon (2011: 184). See also TLL s.v. autem 1578.27ff. For autem and ceterum, see Orlandini (1999a).
65 See TLL s.v. autem 1585.42ff.
66 For a few more examples, see TLL s.v. autem 1594.79ff. See also Kroon (1995: 246; 273).
67 See TLL s.v. autem 1592.82ff. and Kroon (1995: 273).
1178 Discourse
(b) Quia enim loquitur laute et minime sordide. / # Quicquid istaec de te loqui-
tur, nihil attrectat sordidi. / # Tum autem illa ipsa est nimium lepida nimisque
nitida femina.
(‘Because she speaks in a neat and by no means unpolished way. # She doesn’t touch
any unpolished topic, whatever she speaks about you. # But then her mistress is a
terribly charming and terribly neat woman.’ Pl. Mil. 1001–3)
Autem is used both to indicate that the content of a sentence B is distinct from and in
some form of contrast with that of a preceding sentence A and to indicate the oppos-
ition between a part B of a sentence and a preceding parallel part A. Examples of the
second type of ‘local’ contrast are (c) and (d). In (c), autem is situated in the second
conjoin of two correlative clauses; in (d), in the second of three asyndetic appositions.
Note vero in the third.68
(c) Facile istuc quidem est, si et illa volt et ille autem cupit.
(‘That’s easy, if she wants it and he desires it.’ Pl. Mil. 1149)
(d) Est enim finitimus oratori poeta, numeris astrictior paulo, verborum autem
licentia liberior, multis vero ornandi generibus socius ac paene par.
(‘The truth is that the poet is a very near kinsman of the orator, rather more heavily
fettered as regards rhythm, but with ampler freedom in his choice of words, while in
the use of many sorts of ornament he is really his ally and almost his counterpart.’
Cic. de Orat. 1.70)
Supplement:
Agite, abite tu domum et tu autem domum. (Pl. Truc. 838); Neque enim tu is es qui
quid sis nescias et qui non eos magis qui te non admirentur invidos quam eos qui
laudent adsentatores arbitrere; neque autem ego sum ita demens ut me sempiternae
gloriae per eum commendari velim . . . (Cic. Fam. 5.12.6)
Ait se obligasse crus fractum Aesculapio, / Apollini autem bracchium. (Pl. Men.
885–6); . . . quo . . . te nomine appellemus? Improbum? . . . perfidiosum? (sc. nomina)
Volgaria et obsoleta sunt; res autem nova atque inaudita. (Cic. Quinct. 56); Atque hoc
ipsi utile fuisse facere, inutile autem non facere . . . (Cic. Inv. 2.90); . . . illa quae temp-
tata iam et coepta sunt ab isto, a me autem pervestigata et cognita, moneo ut exstin-
guas et longius progredi ne sinas. (Cic. Ver. 5.174); Quis autem dubitet quin belli
duces ex hac una civitate praestantissimos paene innumerabilis, in dicendo autem
excellentis vix paucos proferre possimus? (Cic. de Orat. 1.7); ‘Ista’, inquit, ‘quae dix-
isti, valere, locupletem esse, non dolere, bona non dico, sed dicam Graece .{zrnwhxl,
Latine autem producta—sed praeposita aut praecipua malo . . .’ (Cic. Fin. 4.72); Si
enim interiora prospectus habuerint elegantes, aditus autem humiles et inhonestos,
non erunt cum decore. (Vitr. 1.2.6)
Examples of the first type—true connectors—are (e)–(g). Here autem signals the tran-
sition to a new piece of information. In (e) and (g) there is a shift of topic, with puerum
and equitatus in first position in the sentence. In (f), autem signals that of the two
objects of desire in the preceding sentence only gloria is elaborated at this point. For
68 For further parallels of (c), see TLL s.v. autem 1593.68ff.; for (d), 1580.36ff.
Adversative connexion of sentences 1179
the initial position of est, see § 23.45. A more complex example, with a change of
speakers, is (h). Here, the young man Agorastocles wants to take the pimp Lycus to
court. Then Hanno, unknown to Lycus, also summons him to court, much to Lycus’
surprise, who therefore asks what Hanno (tibi, in contrast with Agorastocles) has got
against him. Sometimes there is no immediately preceding explicit contrastive coun-
terpart, as in (i). Here, Mercury interrupts a conversation between Jupiter and
Alcumena, although some fifteen lines before Jupiter has warned him. This explains
the use of autem in Jupiter’s reaction. The implicit counterpart is tu.69
(e) Quin taces? / # Dicam. Puerum autem ne (sc. pater) resciscat mi esse ex illa
(sc. Glycerio) cautio’st. / Nam pollicitus sum suscepturum.
(‘Do shut up. # I’ll tell him. But we must make sure he doesn’t find out I’ve a child by
her. I’ve promised to raise it.’ Ter. An. 399–401)
(f) Credo enim vos . . . caritatem civium et gloriam concupivisse. Est autem gloria
laus recte factorum magnorumque in rem publicam fama meritorum . . .
(‘For I suppose that you have set your sights on glory and a place in the hearts of your
countrymen. Glory, moreover, consists in the credit for honourable deeds and the
reputation for great services benefitting the Republic . . .’ Cic. Phil. 1.29)
(g) Submotis sub murum cohortibus . . . facilis est nostris receptus datus.
Equitatus autem noster ab utroque latere . . . summum <in> iugum virtute
conititur . . .
(‘With the cohorts shifted to a position in front of the wall . . . an easy retreat was avail-
able to our men. Moreover, our cavalry valiantly struggled to the top of the ridge . . .’
Caes. Civ. 1.46.2–3)
(h) Leno, eamus in ius. # Opsecro te, Agorastocles, / suspendere ut me liceat. #
(Hanno intervenes) In ius te voco. / # (Lycus) Quid tibi mecum autem?
(‘Pimp, let’s go to court. # I beg you, Agorastocles, to let me hang myself. # I’m sum-
moning you to court. # But what do I have to do with you?’ Pl. Poen. 1342–4)
(i) (Iup.) Nunc tibi hanc pateram . . . / Alcumena, tibi condono. # (Alc.) Facis ut
alias res soles. / Ecastor condignum donum, quale est qui donum dedit. / #
(Mer.) Immo sic: condignum donum, quale est quoi dono datum est. / #
(Iup.) Pergi’n autem? Nonne ego possum, furcifer, te perdere?
(‘Now I’ll give you this bowl as a present, Alcumena. # That’s so like you. Honestly, a
worthy gift, matching the one who gave it. # No: a worthy gift, matching the one it has
been given to. # Are you continuing? Can’t I get rid of you, you good-for-nothing?’
Pl. Am. 534–9)
Supplement:
Siquid est quod doleat, dolet. Si autem non est . . . tamen hoc hic dolet. (Pl. Cist. 67);
Atque ille primo quidem negavit. Post autem aliquanto . . . surrexit, quaesivit a
Gallis . . . (Cic. Catil. 3.11); Cetera autem etsi nec bona nec mala essent tamen alia
secundum naturam dicebat alia naturae esse contraria. His ipsis alia interiecta et
Autem is particularly common in argumentative and didactic texts and passages, for
instance in Cicero’s philosophical and rhetorical works, in Vitruvius, Columella,
Quintilian, Tacitus’ Dialogus, and the jurists. In such texts it is often used to proceed
to a new subject, as in (j) and (k). In narrative and didactic texts it can be used to mark
the shift to a new topic, as in (l). The co-occurrence with ille, as in this example, is
common.70 It remained in use throughout Antiquity and is, for example, frequent in
Augustine’s works, both in his more classical de Civitate Dei and in his less elevated
Sermones. It is also relatively frequent in the Peregrinatio, as in (m). In this and other
Late Latin texts autem does not have its Classical adversative meaning and seems to
serve mainly as a sentence boundary.71 Autem is normally in second position in
its sentence and causes hyperbaton (see § 23.21). It left no trace in the Romance
languages.
(j) Quare hanc oratoriam facultatem in eo genere ponemus, ut eam civilis scien-
tiae partem esse dicamus. Officium autem eius facultatis videtur esse dicere
adposite ad persuasionem, finis persuadere dictione.
(‘Therefore we will classify oratorical ability as a part of political science. The func-
tion of eloquence seems to be to speak in a manner suited to persuade an audience,
the end is to persuade by speech.’ Cic. Inv. 1.6)
70 For the use of autem as a paragraph marker in medical texts, see Langslow (2000: 546).
71 In the Peregrinatio, autem signals an ‘opposition très atténuée en général’ (‘a generally very weak
opposition’) (Väänänen 1987: 117). See also Kiss (2006), Rosén (2009: 397), and Spevak (2012b: 350). For
details about frequency, see TLL s.v. autem 1576.54ff. and Spevak (2012b: 340–2), with graphics. For a
comparison between Rhet. Her. and Cic. Inv. of their use of autem in almost identical passages (Rhet. Her.
has asyndeton), see Golla (1935: 59–60).
Adversative connexion of sentences 1181
(a) Illis merito adcidet quicquid evenerit. Ceterum vos, patres conscripti, quid
in alios statuatis considerate.
(‘Whatever befalls those prisoners will be deserved; but see that you consider,
Members of the Senate, how your decision will affect other criminals.’ Sal. Cat. 51.26)
(b) . . . Romamque is metus manaret, adeo ut . . . duo iusti scriberentur exercitus.
Ceterum Hernicum bellum nequaquam pro praesenti terrore ac vetusta gen-
tis gloria fuit.
(‘Fears for their safety even extended to Rome, where . . . two full armies were enlisted.
But the war with the Hernici by no means answered to the present panic or to the
nation’s old renown.’ Liv. 9.43.4–5)
(c) Quae ne praeterisse viderer, satis habui attingere. Ceterum his nec status
satis ostendi nec omnis contineri locos credo . . .
(‘I touch on these points briefly, so as not to be thought to have left them out. But I do
not myself think either that Issues are sufficiently defined by these headings, or that
all possible Topics are covered by them.’ Quint. Inst. 3.6.28)
Supplement:
Ceterum postquam Neapolim a praefecto Romano teneri accepit—M. Iunius Silanus
erat, ab ipsis Neapolitanis accitus—Neapoli quoque, sicut Nola, omissa petit
Nuceriam. (Liv. 23.15.2); Rhinocerotes quoque, rarum alibi animal, in isdem monti-
bus erant. Ceterum hoc nomen beluis inditum a Graecis sermonis eius ignaris . . .
(Curt. 915); Ceterum si omisso optimo illo et perfectissimo genere eloquentiae eli-
genda sit forma dicendi, malim hercule C. Gracchi impetum . . . (Tac. Dial. 26.1);
Ceterum quis tam obtunso ingenio’st quin intellegat: . . . (Gel. 13.25.21); Ceterum
instrumento fundi mancipia quoque colendi agri causa inducta contineri non ambi-
gitur. (Paul. dig. 33.7.19.pr.); Nam neque sibi illi sumere potuissent divinitatem, quam
non habebant, nec alius praestare eam non habentibus, nisi qui proprie possidebat.
Ceterum si nemo est, qui deos faceret, frustra praesumitis deos factos, auferendo
factorem. (Tert. Apol. 11.2–3)
Examples of the use of ceterum to mark the transition (or the return) to a new stage
in the narrative or the argumentation are (d)–(f).74 In the modern editions the sen-
tences starting with ceterum are indented to mark the start of a new section. Note that
the translators deal with it differently.
(d) Sic forte correcta Mari temeritas gloriam ex culpa invenit. Ceterum dum ea
res geritur, L. Sulla quaestor cum magno equitatu in castra venit . . .
(‘Thus Marius’ rashness was made good by pure chance and found glory out of blame.
While this campaign was in progress, the quaestor Lucius Sulla arrived in camp with
a large force of horsemen . . .’ Sal. Jug. 94.7–95.1)
(e) . . . ut liqueat . . . quo tralationum genere, quibus figuris . . . id quod intendimus
efficere possimus. Ceterum dicturus quibus ornetur oratio prius ea quae sunt
huic laudi contraria attingam.
(‘. . . it should be clear . . . what type of metaphor, what Figures . . . are needed to
effect our purpose. But before I discuss Ornament of speech, I must say some-
thing about the characteristics which are contrary to this excellence.’ Quint. Inst.
8.3.40–1)
(f) Ceterum Augustus subsidia dominationi Claudium Marcellum . . . pontifi-
catu et curuli aedilitate . . . extulit . . .
(‘Meanwhile, to consolidate his power, Augustus raised Claudius Marcellus . . . to the
pontificate and curule aedileship . . .’ Tac. Ann. 1.3.1)75
Appendix: From Plautus onwards ceterum is used as some sort of respect adjunct
(see §§ 10.90–5) in the sense of ‘for the rest’, as in (g). See also a unique instance
from Cicero in (h).76 Note that here ceterum is not in the first position of the sen-
tence. Pliny the Elder uses the ablative cetero more or less in the same way, as in (i).
See also de cetero in (j), as well as de reliquo in (k).
(g) Filium istinc tuom te meliu’st repetere. / Ceterum uxorem quam primum
potest abduce ex aedibus.
(‘You’d better demand your son back from there. As for the rest, take your
wife out of my house as quickly as possible.’ Pl. Truc. 846–7)
(h) Ego me in Cumano et Pompeiano, praeter quam quod sine te, ceterum satis
commode oblectabam . . .
(‘Except that I lack your company I am in other respects having a pleasant
time at Cumae and Pompeii . . .’ Cic. Q. fr. 2.13.1)
(i) Namque eum (sc. aggerem) muris aequavit qua maxime patebat aditu plano.
Cetero (cetera v.l.) munita erat (sc. Roma) praecelsis muris aut abruptis
montibus . . .
(‘For he made it as high as the walls where the approach was flat and the city
lay most open to attack. In other directions it had the protection of lofty
walls or of precipitous hills . . .’ Plin. Nat. 3.67)
(j) De cetero vellem equidem aut ipse doctrinis fuisset instructior . . .
(‘For the rest, I could desire that he himself had been better equipped with
learning . . .’ Cic. Fin. 1.26)
(k) De · reliquo · rogo · / <ab ·> conserveis · ut · me · / apsentem · defen-
dateis. De · reliq(uo) · domi · omnia · / recte ·.
(‘For the rest, I ask from my fellow slaves that you defend me while absent.
For the rest, at home everything is OK.’ CEL 3.4–8 (1st cent. bc (second
half)))
Ceterum is also used in an inferential sense: ‘otherwise’, ‘else’, first attested in Terence,
ex. (l), and then from Pliny the Younger onwards.77
(l) Bene dixti, ac mihi istuc non in mentem venerat. / # Ridiculum. Non enim
cogitaras. Ceterum / idem hoc tute meliu’ quanto invenisses, Thraso!
(‘You’re quite right. That hadn’t occurred to me. # Ridiculous! You just hadn’t
thought about it. Otherwise you’d have come up with the same idea yourself
far more easily, Thraso!’ Ter. Eu. 451–3)
Sed marks various types of contrast relations. A common usage is that of interrupting
a line of thought, as in (a). It can also be used to turn to a new issue, as in (b) or—on
the stage—to draw the attention to someone entering the scene, as in (c). It is common
after a digression, as in (d).79 If the preceding context is negative the adversative aspect
of sed can be more pronounced, especially when the contrast is reinforced by tamen,
as in (e).
(a) Ita ut dicis. Nam si faxis, te in caveam dabo. / Sed satis verborum est. Cura
quae iussi atque abi.
(‘Just as you say: if you do so, I’ll give you a cage to be in. But enough small talk. Do
take care of what I ordered and go away.’ Pl. Capt. 124–5)
(b) Nam contra Epicurum satis superque dictum est. Sed aveo audire tu ipse
Cotta quid sentias.
(‘As for refuting Epicurus, that has been accomplished and more than accomplished
already. But I am eager to hear what you think yourself, Cotta.’ Cic. N.D. 2.2)
(c) Moderare animo, ne sis cupidus. Sed eccam ipsam, egreditur foras.
(‘Control your heart, don’t be too eager. But look, she’s coming out herself.’ Pl. Mil. 1215)
(d) Sed iam ad id unde digressi sumus revertamur. Hortensius igitur . . .
(‘But now let me come back to the point from which we digressed. So then,
Hortensius . . .’ Cic. Brut. 300–1)
78 Based on a count of maximally 100 sentences per text in LLT and following the punctuation by editors.
79 For a very detailed classification of the usages of sed in Plautus, see Lodge s.v.; in Terence, McGlynn
s.v. For some Christian authors, see Gillis (1938).
Adversative connexion of sentences 1185
(e) Non enim tam praeclarum est scire Latine quam turpe nescire, neque tam id
mihi oratoris boni quam civis Romani proprium videtur. Sed tamen Antonius
in verbis . . . eligendis . . . nihil non ad rationem et tamquam ad artem dirigebat.
(‘It isn’t so admirable a thing to know good Latin as it is disgraceful not to know it,
and it is not, I think, so much the mark of a good orator as it is of a true Roman. But
to return: In the matter of choosing words . . . Antonius controlled everything by
purpose and by something like deliberate art.’ Cic. Brut. 140)
Supplement:
Ego abeo, tu iam, scio, patiere. Sed quis hic est? Is est, / ille est ipsus. (Pl. As. 378–9);
Sed quid venis? Quid quaeritas? (Pl. As. 392); Ibi amare occepi forma eximia mulie-
rem. / Sed ea[m] ut sim implicitus dicam, si operae est auribus . . . (Pl. Mer.
13–14); . . . negoti quantum in muliere una est. / Sed vero duae, sat scio, maxumo uni /
populo quoilubet plus satis dare potis sunt . . . (Pl. Poen. 225–7); Deamo te, Syre. / #
Sed pater egreditur. (Ter. Hau. 825–6); Sed quaestiones urgent Milonem quae sunt
habitae nunc in atrio Libertatis. (Cic. Mil. 59); . . . philosophi, qui, ut opinor (sed tu
haec, Catule, melius) nulla dant praecepta dicendi . . . (Cic. de Orat. 2.151); Sed hoc
posterius. Nunc iuris principia videamus. (Cic. Leg. 1.18); Quin etiam, si quis est
paulo ad voluptates propensior, modo ne sit ex pecudum genere (sunt enim quidam
homines non re sed nomine), sed si quis est paulo erectior, quamvis voluptate capia-
tur, occultat et dissimulat appetitum voluptatis propter verecundiam. (Cic. Off.
1.105); Venit ab eo Furnius. Ut quidem scias quos sequamur, Q. Titini filium cum
Caesare esse nuntiat—sed illum (sc. Caesarem) maiores mihi gratias agere quam vel-
lem. (Cic. Att. 9.6.6—NB: Cicero returns to what he wanted to tell); Sed haec hacte-
nus. Reliqua coram. (Cic. Att. 16.7.6); Postea Piso in citeriorem Hispaniam quaestor
pro praetore missus est adnitente Crasso, quod eum infestum inimicum Cn. Pompeio
cognoverat. Neque tamen senatus provinciam invitus dederat, quippe foedum homi-
nem a re publica procul esse volebat, simul quia boni complures praesidium in eo
putabant et iam tum potentia Pompei formidulosa erat. Sed is Piso in provincia ab
equitibus Hispanis quos in exercitu ductabat iter faciens occisus est. (Sal. Cat. 19.
1–3—NB: Sallust returns to the main storyline; note is); Fuere ea tempestate qui dice-
rent . . . Nobis ea res pro magnitudine parum conperta est. Sed in ea coniuratione fuit
Q. Curius . . . (Sal. Cat. 22.1–23.1—NB: as in preceding example); At enim apparet
quidem pollui omnia nec ullis piaculis expiari posse. Sed res ipsa cogit vastam incen-
diis ruinisque relinquere urbem . . . (Liv. 5.53.1); Quo argumento amplior errantium
stellarum quam lunae magnitudo colligitur, quando illae et a septenis interdum par-
tibus emergant. Sed altitudo cogit minores videri . . . (Plin. Nat. 2.58); Sed ne faciam,
quod reprehendo, omnia ista . . . relinquam. (Sen. Ben. 1.4.1); ‘Magnam’, inquit Secundus,
‘et dignam tractatu quaestionem movisti. Sed quis eam iustius explicabit quam tu . . .’
(Tac. Dial. 16.1); Licet iam hinc recognoscere. . . . Qui de pluribus suscipit aliquem
eum quem non suscipit despexit. ‘Sed tot ac tanti ab omnibus coli non possunt.’ (Tert.
Nat. 1.10.11–12); Sed alias, si Deus voluerit, hoc videbimus. (August. Civ. 2.21.4)
Sed is sometimes used in narrative texts or passages to mark ‘the next stage’.80 Examples
are (f) and (g). In (f), following modern editions, sed starts a new section about one
of the women who belongs to the group introduced before. Here, the contrastive
counterpart is less obvious. Kühner and Stegmann suggest that it is equivalent to
atque.81 For its use to connect discourse units, see also § 24.48. In (g), sed ‘introduces
the distinguishing element between communities whose cases have hitherto been
described in identical terms’.82
(f) Per eas (sc. mulieres) se Catilina credebat posse servitia urbana sollicitare,
urbem incendere, viros earum vel adiungere sibi vel interficere.
Sed in iis erat Sempronia, quae multa saepe virilis audaciae facinora con-
miserat.
(‘Through them Catiline believed he could incite the city slaves to an uprising, set fire
to Rome, and as for their husbands, either attach them to his cause or kill them.
Now among those women was Sempronia, who had often perpetrated many deeds
of masculine daring.’ Sal. Cat. 24.4–25.1)
(g) Aphrodisienses posthac et Stratonicenses . . . recens divi Augusti decretum
adtulere, laudati quod Parthorum inruptionem . . . pertulissent. Sed Aphro-
disiensium civitas Veneris, Stratonicensium Iovis et Triviae religionem tue-
bantur.
(‘After this the Aphrodisians and Stratonicensians adduced . . . a recent decree of
Divus Augustus wherein they were praised because they had endured the irruption
of the Parthians. (The only difference was that the Aphrodisians’ community guarded
the religious cult of Venus, the Stratonicensians’ that of Jupiter and Trivia.)’ Tac. Ann.
3.62.2—tr. Woodman)
Supplement:
. . . sed omnino cuncta plebes novarum rerum studio Catilinae incepta proba-
bat. . . . Sed urbana plebes, ea vero praeceps erat de multis causis. (Sal. Cat. 37.1–4);
Ab hoc posteri apud Atticos dicti Medontidae. Sed hic insequentesque archontes
usque ad Charopem, dum viverent, eum honorem usurpabant. (Vell. 1.2.2)
For sed + autem, see § 24.26. The combination sed enim is attested with certainty only
twice before Virgil,83 who used it as a metrically convenient combination, as in (h),
and who was then followed by other poets, Apuleius, the archaists, and other prose
writers. Enim is here usually taken in its ‘affirmative’ sense ‘in fact’, ‘in truth’ (see § 24.40
and § 24.24 on at enim).84 Sed often co-occurs with tamen and vero. See § 24.31.
(h) Progeniem sed enim Troiano a sanguine duci / audierat Tyrias olim quae
verteret arces.
(‘Yet in truth she had heard that a race was springing from Trojan blood, to over-
throw some day the Tyrian towers.’ Verg. A. 1.19–20—NB: note the position)
81 K.-St.: II.77.
82 So Woodman and Martin ad loc., following Koestermann ad loc., who follows Gerber and Greef s.v.
sed 1455 (§ e).
83 Cato hist. 95b=88C, quoted by Gellius 6.3.16, and Cic. Att. 6.1.11 (enim bracketed by edd.).
84 See OLD s.v. sed § 5; TLL s.v. sed 573.80ff. Quint. Inst. 9.3.14 says it is an archaism in Virgil, surpris-
ingly, as Russell notes in his Loeb edition ad loc.
Adversative connexion of sentences 1187
2.236); Verum has atque alias sontium poenas in tempore trademus. (Tac. Ann.
4.71.1); Verum, ut dixi, antiquorum magnitudines corporum inventa plerumque
ossa, quoniam diuturna sunt, etiam multo posterioribus saeculis produnt. (August.
Civ. 15.9)
Co-occurrence of verum with the particles autem and enim is rare. Autem is attested
once at Plautus Cas. 555 and occasionally in other authors (seven times in Augustine’s
Confessions). Verum enim is rare, but there are a few instances in Plautus and Terence,
one of which is (f). Co-occurrence with tamen and vero is common; with enimvero it
is rare, but attested not only in Plautus and Terence but also Cicero, Livy, and others.85
See (g).
(f) Verum enim meretrix fortunati est oppidi similluma. / Non potest suam rem
optinere sola sine multis viris.
(‘But a prostitute closely resembles a flourishing town: she cannot be successful
alone, without many men.’ Pl. Cist. 80–1)
(g) Vidi ego multa saepe picta, quae Accherunti fierent / cruciamenta. Verum
enim vero nulla adaeque est Accheruns / atque ubi ego fui, in lapicidinis.
(‘I’ve often seen many pictures of the tortures taking place in the Underworld, but
truly there’s no Underworld that can match the place where I was, in the quarries.’
Pl. Capt. 998–1000)
basis of the preceding sentence or discourse unit.87 It differs in this respect from the
concessive subordinators which signal a commonly accepted incompatibility.88 The
sentence preceding the tamen sentence often contains the emphasizer quidem,
which indicates that the content of the first sentence is asserted. In this function
tamen is usually placed in first or second position, just as connectors. However, it is
not a connector itself: it can co-occur with conjunctive and adversative connectors
(see § 19.62) and is then often juxtaposed to them. An example of tamen alone is
(a). In (b) and (c), it is juxtaposed to an adversative connector. In (d), a new para-
graph describes the outcome of a discussion in the Senate reported in the preceding
paragraph.
(a) Nil moror nec scire volo. / # Tamen ades.
(‘I don’t care and I don’t want to know. # Still, stay.’ Pl. Bac. 989a–90)
(b) Molestus ne sis. Haec sunt sicut praedico. / # At tamen inspicere volt.
(‘Don’t be a nuisance. It’s the way I tell you. # But he still wants to inspect it.’ Pl. Mos.
772–3)
(c) . . . neque opes nostrae tam sunt validae quam tuae. Verum tamen / hau metuo
ne ius iurandum nostrum quisquam culpitet.
(‘. . . and our influence isn’t as great as yours; but still, I’m not afraid that anyone will
ever find fault with our oath.’ Pl. Cist. 494–5)
(d) (Senatus consulitur . . . Fautores legatorum . . . At contra pauci . . .) Vicit tamen
in senatu pars illa quae vero pretium aut gratiam anteferebat.
(‘(The matter was laid before the Senate . . . The partisans of the envoys . . . But a few, on
the other hand . . .) In spite of all, there prevailed that faction of the senate which rated
money and influence higher than integrity.’ Sal. Jug. 15.2–16.1)
87 In the Classical prose corpus used by Spevak (2006c: 224) 20 out of 150 instances of tamen are
intersentential (‘transphrastique’) connectors. Half of the instances concern its correlative use with a
preceding, most often concessive, subordinate clause (see § 16.68). In a corpus of Late Latin prose, the
percentage of intersentential use is much higher: 42 per cent. See Spevak (2005b: 205).
88 See Maraldi (2001).
89 Spevak (2005b: 221–2), discussing instances in Ammianus, states that in the order nihilominus tamen
the first word has lost its proper meaning and only strengthens the overall concessive meaning.
1190 Discourse
(b) Sed nihilominus quaedam sunt quae etiam sapientes in alio quam in se
diligentius vident.
(‘But nevertheless, there are certain matters where even wise men see the facts more
clearly in the case of others than in their own.’ Sen. Ep. 109.16)
90 For the ‘side-effect’ idea, see Kroon (1995: 326–32; 2011: 191). For the traditional view, see K.-St.:
I.798–9 and II.80. For the co-occurrence of vero with the coordinator sed, see § 19.62.
91 See Langslow (2000: 547–9), Rosén (2009: 374), and Schrickx (2011: 227–30). For the difference
between vero and autem, see Kroon (1995: 329–30). For their use in Cassius Felix, see Langslow (2000: 546).
Adversative connexion of sentences 1191
(‘And yet I have seen all these men whom I have mentioned, ardent in their several
callings after they had grown old. Then too, there was Marcus Cethegus . . . What
enthusiasm I saw him also display in his public speeches, although he was an old
man!’ Cic. Sen. 50)
Supplement:
In dialogical texts: Equidem hercle opus hoc facto existumo, / ut illo intro eam. #
Itane vero, vervex? Intro eas? (Pl. Mer. 566–7); Estne hic meus servos? # Sum hercle
vero, Agorastocles. (Pl. Poen. 797); Ne attigas. # Ostende vero. # Nolo. (Pl. Epid. 723);
Ora me. # Obsecro te vero, Phaedria. (Ter. Eu. 715); Tum Brutus: ‘De isto postea. Sed
tu’, inquit me intuens, ‘orationes nobis veteres explicabis?’ ‘Vero,’ inquam, ‘Brute. Sed
in Cumano aut in Tusculano aliquando . . .’ (Cic. Brut. 300); Fuisti saepe, credo, cum
Athenis esses, in scholis philosophorum. # Vero, ac libenter quidem. (Cic. Tusc.
2.26); Ego vero Quinto epistulam ad sororem misi. (Cic. Att. 13.41.1)
In monological texts: Nam hercle factum’st abs te turpiter. / Etsi tibi causa’st de hac re:
mater te inpulit. / Huic vero nulla’st. (Ter. Hec. 624–6); Illud vero sine ulla dubitatione
maxime nostrum fundavit imperium . . . quod princeps ille creator huius urbis, Romulus, . . .
docuit . . . (Cic. Balb. 31); (Starting a new paragraph) In sartis tectis vero quem ad modum
se gesserit quid ego dicam? (Cic. Ver. 1.128); (sc. Marcellus) Nihil in aedibus, nihil in
hortis posuit, nihil in suburbano. . . . Syracusis autem permulta atque egregia reliquit.
Deum vero nullum violavit, nullum attigit. (Cic. Ver. 4.121); Sed confecto proelio tum
vero cerneres quanta audacia quantaque animi vis fuisset in exercitu Catilinae. (Sal. Cat.
61.1); Huic spei tuae obstat aetas mea, obstat gentium ius, obstat vetustus Macedoniae
mos, obstat vero etiam patris iudicium. (Liv. 40.9.8); Utilius his frequens balineum est,
sed ieiunis, <etiam> usque sudorem. Cibis vero opus est copiosis . . . (Cels. 3.22.7); Sanat
et vulvarum exulcerationes eiusdem animalis sebum inveteratum et in vellere adposi-
tum duritias vulvarum emollit. Per se vero recens vel inveteratum ex aqua inlitum
psilotri vim optinet. (Plin. Nat. 28.250); Cum tamen aliquatenus se confirmavit et velut
iuvenile robur accepit, neglegentiam sustinet. Novella vero dum adolescit, nisi omnia
iusta perceperit, ad ultimam redigitur maciem . . . (Col. 4.3.4–5); Delector iucundum tibi
fuisse Tironis mei adventum. Quod vero scribis oblata occasione proconsulis plurimos
manumissos unice laetor. (Plin. Ep. 7.32.1); Sed in ipso populo Christiano illi primatum
tenent qui pertinent ad Iacob. Qui vero carnaliter vivunt . . . adhuc ad vetus testamentum
pertinent, nondum ad novum. (August. Serm. 4.12)
The earliest instance of connective use of etsi is (a).93 Here, the etsi sentence
functions as a correction of the preceding sentence. The presence of the adversa-
tive connector verum in the following sentence makes it impossible to understand
the etsi unit as a subordinate clause. In (b), connective etsi introduces a complex
sentence consisting of a concessive subordinate clause with quamvis and a main
clause with at.
(a) Sed quid istuc est? Etsi iam ego ipsus quid sit prope scire puto me. / Verum
audire etiam ex te studeo.
(‘But what is it? Well, I think I myself am already close to knowing what it is. But I’m
keen to hear it from you.’ Pl. Bac. 1160–1)
(b) Etsi, quamvis non fueris suasor et impulsor profectionis meae, at probator
certe fuisti . . .
(‘All the same, if you did not recommend or instigate my trip, you certainly did
approve of it . . .’ Cic. Att. 16.7.2)
Supplement:
Ambo accusandi. Etsi illud inceptum tamen animi’st pudenti’ signum et non
instrenui. (Ter. Hau. 119–20—NB: co-occurrence of etsi and tamen); Non tractabo ut
consulem. Ne ille quidem me ut consularem. Etsi ille nullo modo consul . . . (Cic. Phil.
2.10); Quid ergo potissimum scribam? Quod velle te puto, cito me ad te esse ventu-
rum. Etsi vide, quaeso, satisne rectum sit nos hoc tanto incendio civitatis in istis locis
esse. (Cic. Fam. 9.3.1); . . . quo maxime apparuit . . . Seianum quaerenti occasiones
sumministrasse. Etsi commentario quem de vita sua summatim breviterque compo-
suit ausus est scribere . . . (Suet. Tib. 61.1)
The most common contrastive connector is quamquam, as in (e) and (f).94 Ex. (g)
shows the use of quamquam in an accusative and infinitive clause.
(e) . . . pater curavit . . . clandestina ut celetur consuetio. / Quamquam, ut iam
dudum dixi, resciscet tamen / Amphitruo rem omnem.
(‘. . . my father’s taken care that . . . the secret affair would be concealed. Still, as I’ve said
already, Amphitruo will find out the whole thing all the same.’ Pl. Am. 487–92)
(f) . . . cur nostri a nostris non legantur? Quamquam, si plane sic verterem
Platonem aut Aristotelem ut verterunt nostri poëtae fabulas, male, credo,
mererer de meis civibus . . .
(‘. . . why should not Romans be read by Romans? Yet even supposing I gave a direct
translation of Plato or Aristotle, exactly as our poets have done with the plays, would
it not, pray, be a patriotic service to my fellow-countrymen?’ Cic. Fin. 1.6–7)
(g) Quamquam nullam nobilitatem, nullos honores, nulla merita cuiquam ad
dominationem pandere viam.
(‘To be sure, no nobility, no honours, no merits, opened wide the road to tyranny for
any man.’ Liv. 4.15.5)
Supplement:
. . . tu de thesauro sumes. # Satis scite et probe! / Quamquam hoc me aetatis sycophan-
tari pudet. (Pl. Trin. 786–7); Hic, quod cum ceteris animo sentiebat, id magis quam
ceteri et vultu promptum habuit et lingua. Quamquam, iudices—agnosco enim ex
me—permulta in Plancium quae ab eo numquam dicta sunt conferuntur. (Cic. Planc.
34–5); . . . addite Aproni Veneriorumque servorum in agro decumano regna ac rapi-
nas. Quamquam haec omitto, de cella loquor. (Cic. Ver. 3.200); Quam ob rem hoc vos
doceo, Sulpici, . . . ut in dicendo irasci, ut dolere, ut flere possitis. Quamquam te qui-
dem quid hoc doceam . . . (Cic. de Orat. 2.196–7); Quamquam, etsi priore foedere
staretur, satis cautum erat Saguntinis sociis utrorumque exceptis. (Liv. 21.19.4);
Quamquam quod ob meritum nostrum suscensuistis, patres conscripti, nobis aut
suscensetis? (Liv. 25.6.4); Quamquam ne impudicitiam quidem nunc abesse . . . (Tac.
Ann. 12.65.2—NB: accusative and infinitive)
Appendix: Quamvis is only rarely used in a similar way, in poetry from Prop. 2.7.3
onwards; in prose from Cels. 1.pr.54 and Petr. 79.5 onwards.
94 For the syntactic and pragmatic properties of quamquam, see Martín Puente (2001). For criteria to
decide whether a particular instance of quamquam is a subordinator or a connector, see Mellet (2005).
1194 Discourse
of Latin. Table 24.5 contains figures for the frequency of use.95 It shows that nempe is
slightly more frequent in poetry than in prose; namque is relatively more frequent in
poetry than nam; and quippe is not very common in poetry. There are also consider-
able differences between authors and texts. Table 24.6 gives a glimpse of this.96 It is
interesting to see the different proportions of nam and enim in Plautus and Cicero.
With forty-five instances of quippe, Lucretius has one-quarter of all the instances in
poetry until Apuleius.
95 The data concerning nam, namque, quippe, and nempe are taken from Schrickx (2009; 2011).
Included is material collected by the TLL until Apuleius. The data concerning enim and etenim come from
the LLT, period Antiquitas. There is no subdivision available for prose and poetry.
96 Data obtained from LLT.
97 For this description of the function of nam, see Kroon (1995: 144) and TLL s.v. nam 840ff. For nam
in Plautus, see Blänsdorf (1967: 80–90; 191–205).
98 For parallels of (a)–(d), (e), and (g), see TLL s.v. nam 8.71ff., 17.42ff., and 23.20ff., respectively. The
examples are taken from the TLL article. For some later developments, see TLL s.v. 24.29ff. For (f), see
Kroon (1998b: 57–60).
Explanatory and justificatory connexion of sentences 1195
explains: in (a), why there is a need to settle peace; in (b), the implications of Sosia
trying to get access to Alcumena; in (c), the reason why Amphitruo is commanding
the legions; in (d), Jupiter’s motive for bringing help to Alcumena. In (e), the nam
sentence contains the justification for the preceding order. In (f), the nam sentence
justifies the use of the expression magno usui. In (g), Sosia passes from Amphitruo’s
role to that of Jupiter but first justifies why it is superfluous to add information about
Jupiter. For nam in a question, see (h) (see also § 6.21).99
(a) Pacem componi volo / meo patri cum matre. Nam nunc est irata . . . / propter
istanc.
(‘I want peace to be settled between my father and my mother. For now she’s angry
because of that girl.’ Pl. Mer. 953–5)
(b) Hanc nostram (sc. eram) adire non sinam. / Nam si me irritassis, hodie
lumbifragium hinc auferes.
(‘I won’t let you go to ours here. For if you provoke me, you’ll carry away broken hips
from here today.’ Pl. Am. 453–4)
(c) Is nunc Amphitruo praefectu’st legionibus. / Nam cum Telobois bellum est
Thebano poplo.
(‘This Amphitruo is now in command of the legions because the Theban people is at
war with the Teloboians.’ Pl. Am. 100–1)
(d) Simul Alcumenae . . . veni ut auxilium feram. / Nam mea sit culpa, quod
egomet contraxerim, / si id Alcumenae in innocentiam expetat.
(‘At the same time I’ve come to bring help to Alcumena . . . For I’d deserve blame if
what I myself have stirred up should fall on innocent Alcumena.’ Pl. Am. 869–72)
(e) Sequere hac igitur me. Nam mi istuc primum exquisito est opus.
(‘Then follow me this way: I need to get to the bottom of this first.’ Pl. Am. 628)
(f) Quae res magno usui nostris fuit. Nam . . . barbari constiterunt ac paulum
modo pedem rettulerunt.
(‘This movement proved of great service to our troops; for the natives . . . came to a
halt, and retired, but only for a little space.’ Caes. Gal. 4.25.2)
(g) (sc. Amphitruo) . . . gravidam Alcumenam fecit uxorem suam. / Nam ego
vos novisse credo iam ut sit pater meus (sc. Iuppiter) . . . / Is amare occepit
Alcumenam clam virum . . .
(‘. . . he made his wife Alcumena pregnant. Well, I believe you already know what
my father’s like . . . He fell in love with Alcumena behind her husband’s back . . .’
Pl. Am. 103–7)
(h) Pestis te tenet. # Nam quor istuc / dicis? Equidem valeo et salvos / sum recte,
Amphitruo.
(‘You have the plague. # Why are you saying that? I’m perfectly well and healthy,
Amphitruo.’ Pl. Am. 581–3)
Within the class of explanatory and justificatory particles, nam comes second in terms
of frequency, after enim, but there are significant differences between authors (see
Table 24.6 on p. 1194) and types of text: in three different text types of Cicero the
Explanatory and justificatory connexion of sentences 1197
proportion of nam and enim is 20/80 in the philosophical dialogue de Finibus, 25/75
in the letters to Atticus, 35/65 in the Verrine orations.100 These differences in frequency
are related to the semantic and pragmatic differences between the two words. For
discussion, see § 24.40. Nam is almost always in sentence-initial position; in poetry,
however, it is sometimes in a later position. See § 23.21. If the sentence starts with a
subordinate clause, nam precedes, as in (b) above.
Nam co-occurs with swear words like hercle, as in (i), and with invocations of a god
or gods. In such contexts, nam is sometimes described as ‘affirmative’. In reality, nam
has here the same function as described above. Enim is not combined with such
words.101
(i) Tu intus cura quod opus est. / Sume, posce, prome quidvis. Te facio cella-
rium. / # Nam hercle, nisi mantiscinatus probe ero, fusti pectito. / # Aeternum
tibi dapinabo victum, si vera autumas.
(‘You take care inside of what’s needed. Take, demand, help yourself to any-
thing you like. I hereby make you my butler. # Yes, if I don’t tuck in properly,
you can comb me down with a club. # I’ll serve you meals for good if you’re
telling the truth.’ Pl. Capt. 894–7)
100 In Augustine’s work the proportion of nam and enim varies as well: Civ. 25/75, Conf. 20/80, Ep.
20/80, Serm. 15/85. In the Peregrinatio the proportion is 75/25 (source: LLT). For data on the frequency of
nam and enim in didactic prose, see Langslow (2000: 542).
101 See Kroon (1995: 163–8; 187). For ‘affirmative’ nam, see OLD s.v. nam § 1.
1198 Discourse
(d) Eadem nascentium causa terrarum est . . . Nascuntur et alio modo terrae . . .
Namque et hoc modo insulas rerum natura fecit . . .
(‘The cause of the birth of new lands is the same . . . New lands are also formed in
another way . . . For another way also in which nature has made islands is . . .’ Plin.
Nat. 2.201–4)
There are differences of distribution between namque and nam. The former is more
frequent in poetry (see Table 24.5 on p. 1194) and is preferred before words beginning
with a vowel or h, and in some authors (Cicero, Caesar, and Quintilian, for example)
avoided before words beginning with a consonant. In Plautus, namque is preferred
after a change of speaker, and it is regularly used in combination with a swear word, as
in (e). Unlike nam, namque is found in second or later position not only in poetry but
also in prose (rarely later than second) from Livy onwards. In Livy 40 per cent of the
instances of namque are non-initial, as in (f), where it causes hyperbaton.102
(e) Ecquid amare videor? # Damnum, quod Mercurius minime amat. / #
Namque edepol lucrum <ullum> amare nullum amatorem addecet.
(‘Do I seem to be in love at all? # Yes, with loss, which Mercury doesn’t love at all. #
Indeed, no lover ought to love any gain.’ Pl. Poen. 327–8)
(f) . . . decreverunt ut consules magistratus denosque principes Nepete, Sutrio . . .
Interamna—hae namque coloniae in ea causa erant—Romam excirent.
(‘. . . they decreed that the consuls should summon to Rome the magistrates and ten
leading citizens in each case from Nepete, Sutrium . . . Interamna, for these were the
colonies concerned.’ Liv. 29.15.5)
102 For details, see Schrickx (2009); for further instances, see TLL s.v. namque.
103 See TLL s.v. etenim 920.61ff. ‘adnectit aliquid novi’. The first instance cited is Cic. Att. 1.14.4, not
convincingly.
104 For the aetas patrum the LLT gives more than 5,300 instances.
Explanatory and justificatory connexion of sentences 1199
(a) Verum profecto hoc petere me precario / a vobis iussit leniter dictis bonis. /
Etenim ille quoius huc iussu venio, Iuppiter / non minus quam vostrum
quivis formidat malum.
(‘Still, he’s told me to ask you for this by way of entreaty, mildly, with kind words.
Well, that Jupiter on whose command I’m coming here is no less afraid of a thrashing
than any of you.’ Pl. Am. 24–7)
(b) Certum est . . . omnia . . . audacter libereque dicere. Nulla res tanta exsistet,
iudices, ut possit vim mihi maiorem adhibere metus quam fides. Etenim quis
tam dissoluto animo est qui haec cum videat tacere ac neglegere possit?
(‘I have deliberately made up my mind . . . to say all boldly, and freely; no consider-
ation shall arise of such importance, gentlemen, as to make it possible for fear to exert
greater influence over me than honour. For is there a man so indifferent as to keep
silence and take no notice at the sight of such atrocities?’ Cic. S. Rosc. 31–2)
(c) . . . ut etiam (sc. gratia) obesse deberet tu tua sapientia curasti. Etenim rem
totam, iudices, breviter cognoscite.
(‘. . . and your intelligence has taken effective steps to make it actually tell against you.
Let me in a few words, gentlemen, put the whole story before you.’ Cic. Ver. 2.169)
(d) Gentes ei (sc. Indiae) urbesque innumerae, si quis omnes persequi velit.
Etenim patefacta est non modo Alexandri Magni armis . . .
(‘Its races and cities are beyond counting, if one wished to enumerate all of them. For
it has been brought to knowledge not only by the armed forces of Alexander the
Great . . .’ Plin. Nat. 6.58)
Supplement:
Facile equidem facere possum si iubes. / Etenim quo pacto id fieri soleat calleo. (Ter.
Hau. 547–8); Multum etenim refert, duobus simul alternis annis legetur . . . an singu-
lis alternis annis. (Papin. dig. 7.4.2.2); . . . (sc. oportet) ex edicto te bona P. Quincti non
possedisse concedas. Etenim si ex edicto possedisti, quaero cur bona non venie-
rint . . . (Cic. Quinct. 73); Signa nostra . . . velim imponas . . . Etenim ibi sedens haec ad te
scribebam, ut me locus ipse admoneret. (Cic. Att. 1.10.3); Tutus bos etenim rura
perambulat . . . (Hor. Carm. 4.5.17); Cetera exempla fortunae variantis innumera
sunt. Etenim quae facit magna gaudia nisi ex malis aut quae mala inmensa nisi ex
ingentibus gaudiis? (Plin. Nat. 7.134); Inlustrium domuum adversa (etenim haud
multum distanti tempore Calpurnii Pisonem, Aemilii Lepidam amiserant) solacio
adfecit D. Silanus Iuniae familiae redditus. (Tac. Ann. 3.24.1); Tunc etenim meretur,
cum cognoscitur an mereatur. (Tert. Apol. 1.4); Et magis propitius est Deus, quando
superflua et nugatoria petentem non exaudit ut det, sed exaudit ut sanet non dando.
Etenim quare ista quaerant homines quis non videt? (August. Serm. 32.19)
to a new issue (uses (ii) and (iii) in § 24.36).105 Examples of its regular use as a sen-
tence connector are (a) and (b).
(a) Nos tu ne curassis. Scimus rem omnem. Quippe omnes simul didicimus
tecum una, ut respondere possimus tibi.
(‘Don’t bother about us: we know the entire business, since we all learned it together
with you, so that we could answer you.’ Pl. Poen. 553–4)
(b) Sin ille tibi ludus fuit, quid te impurius, qui religiones omnes pollueris aut
ementiundo aut stuprando? ‘Iam fateor’, inquit, ‘me in Gabinio nefarium fui-
sse.’ Quippe vides poenam illam a te in alium institutam in te ipsum esse
conversam.
(‘But if it was a mere farce, what can be more loathsome than your defilement of all
sanctities either by falsehood or by immorality? “I am ready to confess now”, he says,
“that in the case of Gabinius I acted impiously.” Yes, for you realize that the penalty
you enacted against another has recoiled upon your own head.’ Cic. Dom. 125–6)
Supplement:
Qui tibi lubet mihi male loqui? / # Quipp’ tu mi aliquid aliquo modo alicunde ab
aliquibus blatis / quod nusquam est . . . (Pl. Epid. 333–5); Nam expedit bonas esse
vobis. Nos, quibu’cum est res, non sinunt. / Quippe forma inpulsi nostra nos ama-
tores colunt. (Ter. Hau. 388–9); . . . praeclara opera cesset. Quippe ius Laodiceae me
dicere, cum Romae A. Plotius dicat! (Cic. Att. 5.15.1); Nam me quidem ex animi mei
sententia nulla oratio laedere potest. Quippe vera necesse est bene praedicent, falsa
vita moresque mei superant. (Sal. Jug. 85.27); Nomine enim tantum minus invidio-
sum, re ipsa prope atrocius quam regium esse. Quippe duos pro uno dominos accep-
tos immoderata, infinita potestate . . . (Liv. 3.9.3); Factum eius a diis comprobatum
spatio vitae et felicitate imperii apparuit. Quippe vixit annis XC, regnavit LXX. (Vell.
1.1.3); . . . nec quicquam miserius homine aut superbius. Ceteris quippe animantium
sola victus cura est . . . (Plin. Nat. 2.25); Non enim quia dicimus Deum et in caelo esse
et in terra (ipse quippe ait per prophetam: Caelum et terram ego impleo), aliam par-
tem dicturi sumus eum in caelo habere et in terra aliam. (August. Civ. 22.29.3)
There are a few attestations of the collocation of quippe and enim in the same sentence
in Cicero and Lucretius, although in the former many editors punctuate quippe as a
one-word sentence, as in (c). Lucretius has the combination quippe etenim twenty
times and, much later, Apuleius once. The combination of quippe with the adverb
qui ‘in some way’ functions more or less as quippe alone. It is found in Plautus and
Terence and then in Gellius and Apuleius.106
(c) Leve nomen habet utraque res! Quippe; leve enim est totum hoc risum
movere.
105 For the differences between nam and quippe, see Kroon (2014: 77–9).
106 See Schrickx (2011: 130–3 and passim). The function of qui is disputed. For quippe in Velleius
Paterculus, see Sánchez Manzano (2001) and Ruiz Castellanos (2005).
Explanatory and justificatory connexion of sentences 1201
(‘Each of these has a trivial name—of course, for this whole business of provoking
laughter is a trivial matter.’ Cic. de Orat. 2.218—tr. May and Wisse (adapted))
(d) Quare, corpus ubi interiit, periisse necesse’st / confiteare animam distractam
in corpore toto. / Quippe etenim mortale aeterno iungere et una / consentire
putare et fungi mutua posse / desipere’st.
(‘Therefore, when the body has perished, you must confess that the spirit has passed
away, torn to pieces throughout the body. In fact, to yoke mortal with immortal, and
to think that they can be partners in feeling and act upon each other, is folly.’ Lucr.
3.798–802)
(e) Quis igitur nisi vos narravit mi illi ut fuerit proelium? / # An etiam id tu scis?
# Quipp’ qui ex te audivi . . .
(‘Well, then who told me how the battle went there, if not you? # You know about it?
# Of course! I heard from you . . .’ Pl. Am. 744–5)
Quippe in all its uses most often occupies the first position of the sentence or clause
and this is the regular position in Cicero and Sallust, but, unlike nam, it is not restricted
to that position in poetry nor in prose authors (Livy, Pliny the Elder, and Apuleius);
non-initial placement increases over time. Quippe is relatively rare in poetry, with the
exception of Lucretius.107
Supplement:
Non puto, inquam, existimare te ambitione me labi, quippe de mortuis. (Cic. Brut.
244—elliptic reason adjunct?); Sol Democrito magnus videtur, quippe homini eru-
dito in geometriaque perfecto, huic pedalis fortasse; tantum enim esse censet, quan-
tus videtur, vel paulo aut maiorem aut minorem. (Cic. Fin. 1.20—apposition); ‘Quia
animadverti nuper, cum essemus in Formiano, te familiae valde interdicere ut uni
dicto audiens esset.’ # ‘Quippe vilico.’ (Cic. Rep. 1.61—apposition?)
Appendix: Apart from being used as a sentence connector, quippe is also used in
combination with relative clauses (see § 18.24), cum (see § 16.29) and other finite
subordinate clauses, secondary predicates (see § 21.18), as well as various other con-
stituents (see the Supplement). This concerns about 18 per cent of all instances of
quippe, with much variation between individual authors: 82 per cent in Cicero, 46 per
cent in Livy, almost negligible in Tacitus.108
107 On quippe in Lucretius, see Possanza (2008). 108 See Schrickx (2011: 119–25).
109 So Kroon (2011: 192). In her earlier work (1995: 184) she uses the term ‘consensus particle’.
1202 Discourse
The non-connective character of enim is apparent from the fact that it can co-occur
with real connectors like et, infrequently, as in (a), at (see § 24.24), and sed (rarely, see
§ 24.28). The non-causal character of enim explains why it can be used in subordinate
clauses of reason which follow a main clause, as in (b). In none of these situations
would nam be possible. Enim is often used in sentences that contain a truth value
disjunct like certe (see § 10.100), as in (c). Nam is not often combined with such words.
Co-occurrence of nam and enim in the same sentence is not attested, which may be
due to their semantic affinity.110
(a) Sed de Graecis hactenus. Et enim haec ipsa forsitan fuerint non necessaria.
(‘So much then for the Greeks, and even this perchance was superfluous.’ Cic. Brut.
52)111
(b) . . . domi daturus nemo est prandium advenientibus. / # Qui tibi nunc istuc in
mentem est? # Quia enim sero advenimus.
(‘. . . at home no one’s going to give us a lunch on our arrival. # How did that idea
occur to you now? # Well, because we’ve come too late.’ Pl. Am. 665–6)
(c) Oh, melle dulci dulcior [mihi] tu es. # Certe enim tu vita es mi. / Complectere.
(‘Oh, you’re sweeter than sweet honey. # Certainly you are sweeter than my life to me.
Embrace me.’ Pl. As. 614–15)
In Plautus and Terence, enim is often used in a reaction, as in (d); similarly, in a
reported dialogue like (e). In narrative texts, enim is more common in direct speech
than nam.112 The context in which enim is used often contains shared information, as
in (f), a monological narrative, with ut supra demonstratum est.
(d) Quid tute tecum? # Nihil enim.
(‘What are you saying to yourself? # Nothing, of course.’ Pl. Mos. 551)
(e) Bene Pericles, cum . . . casu formosus puer praeteriret dixissetque Sophocles:
‘O puerum pulchrum, Pericle!’ ‘At enim praetorem, Sophocle, decet non
solum manus, sed etiam oculos abstinentes habere.’
(‘Pertinent was Pericles’ reply when . . . a handsome boy chanced to pass and
Sophocles said: “Look, Pericles; what a pretty boy!” “Hush, Sophocles, a general
should keep not only his hands but his eyes under control.” ’ Cic. Off. 1.144)
(f) Quae res magnas difficultates exercitui Caesaris attulit. Castra enim, ut supra
demonstratum est, cum essent inter flumina duo, Sicorim et Cingam—spatio
milium XXX neutrum horum transiri poterat . . .
110 Namque enim is attested at Pl. Trin. 61. For discussion, see Kroon (1995: 209); for collocations of
enim, see Kroon (1995: 172–5; 186–7).
111 Editors also print etenim.
112 In Livy 30 per cent of instances of enim and 12 per cent of nam are in direct speech. See Kroon
(1995: 181).
Explanatory and justificatory connexion of sentences 1203
(‘These developments caused serious difficulties to Caesar’s army, for with his camp,
as was indicated above, being between two rivers, the Sicoris and the Cinca—neither
of these could be crossed for a stretch of thirty miles . . .’ Caes. Civ. 1.48.3)
The majority of the sentences in which enim is used are declarative. However, enim
can also be used in imperative sentences with a low degree of bindingness, such as
pieces of advice and proposals. Enim in a proposal is shown in (g). It can also be used
with metadirectives (see § 6.29, (ii)), as in (h). It is rare in interrogative sentences,
except in those with an assertive illocutionary force (rhetorical and ironic questions),
as in (i).113
(g) Etenim quis erit tandem modus iste? Quaeramus enim modum aegritudinis,
in qua operae plurimum ponitur.
(‘For what, I ask, will the suggested “limit” be? Let us inquire for instance into the
limit of distress to which they devote most attention.’ Cic. Tusc. 4.40)
(h) Facite enim ut non solum mores et adrogantiam eius, sed etiam voltum atque
amictum atque etiam illam usque ad talos demissam purpuram recordemini.
(‘For do but recall his manners and his arrogance, yes, and even his expression and
his clothes, and that purple robe he wore right down to his heels.’ Cic. Clu. 111)
(i) ‘Tu me’, inquis, ‘mones? Iam enim te ipse monuisti, iam correxisti? Ideo
aliorum emendationi vacas?’ Non sum tam inprobus ut curationes aeger
obeam . . .
(‘ “What,” say you, “are you giving me advice? Indeed, have you already advised your-
self, already corrected your own faults? Is this the reason why you have leisure to
reform other men?” No, I am not so shameless as to undertake to cure my fellow-men
when I am ill myself . . .’ Sen. Ep. 27.1)
Supplement:
Accipe argentum hoc, danista. Hic sunt quadraginta minae. / Siquid erit dubium,
immutabo. # Bene fecisti, bene vale. / # Nunc enim tu mea es. # Soror quidem edepol,
ut tu aeque scias. (Pl. Epid. 646–8); Sicine ego te orare iussi? # Quo modo ergo orem?
# Rogas? / Sic enim diceres, sceleste: . . . (Pl. Poen. 386–7); Ad hoc exemplum est— #
An Chares? An Charmides? # Enim Charmides. / Em istic erit. (Pl. Trin. 922–3); Nam
tum cum ex urbe Catilinam eiciebam—non enim iam vereor huius verbi invidiam,
cum illa magis sit timenda, quod vivus exierit—, sed tum cum illum exterminari
volebam . . . (Cic. Catil. 3.3); Non enim pudendo, sed non faciendo id quod non decet
impudentiae nomen effugere debemus. (Cic. de Orat. 1.120); Cave enim putes Attici
nostri Amalthio platanisque illis quicquam esse praeclarius. (Cic. Leg. 2.7); Quando
enim me in hunc locum deduxit oratio, docebo meliora me didicisse . . . (Cic. N.D.
3.43); Accidit etiam repentinum incommodum biduo quo haec gesta sunt. Tanta
enim tempestas cooritur ut numquam illis locis maiores aquas fuisse constaret.
(Caes. Civ. 1.48.1); Navita sed tristis nunc hos nunc accipit illos, / ast alios longe sum-
motos arcet harena. / Aeneas miratus enim motusque tumultu / ‘dic’, ait, ‘o virgo, quid
113 For these examples and further discussion, see Kroon (1995: 189–95). The examples in the
Supplement are also taken from Kroon (1995).
1204 Discourse
Apart from the use illustrated above, which is usually called the ‘causal’ use of enim,
two others are generally distinguished, viz. the ‘affirmative’ and the ‘adversative’ use.
The former is often regarded as the original use, with reference primarily to Plautus
and Terence, and is taken to mean ‘to be sure’, ‘of course’ (OLD), as in (j) and (k). Note
that in (j) enim occupies the first position. The instances of enim in first position
(c. fifteen in Plautus and Terence) are all ‘affirmative’, which is a reason for some
scholars to regard them as adverbs.114 However, such instances often concern reac-
tions that challenge the words of the preceding speaker (see also the examples (d) and
(e) above) and can be interpreted along the lines set out above: enim is there to induce
the other side to accept the speaker’s view or to remind him of what he knew or might
have known already.115
(j) Ergo <ero> quoque (sc. molesta), nisi scio / quo agas te. # Ad vos. # Et pol ego
ad vos. # Quid eo? # Quid id ad te attinet? / # Enim non ibis nunc, vicissim
nisi scio.
(‘And I’ll continue to be a nuisance unless you tell me where you’re going. # To your
place. # And I to your place. # Why there? # Why is this any of your business? # You
won’t go now, unless I know in turn.’ Pl. Per. 234–6)
(k) Cedo nunc porro: Phormio / dotem si accipiet, uxor ducenda’st domum. /
Quid fiet? # Non enim ducet.
(‘And tell me the next step. If Phormio accepts the dowry, he has to marry her: what
happens then? # But he won’t marry her.’ Ter. Ph. 692–4)
Supplement:
Quotiens monstravi tibi viro ut morem geras, / quid ille faciat ne id opserves, quo eat,
quid rerum gerat. / # At enim ille hinc amat meretricem ex proxumo. (Pl. Men.
788–90); Metuo maxume— / # Quid metuis? # Enim ne <nos> nosmet perdiderimus
uspiam. (Pl. Mil. 428–9); Enim istic captio est. / Fac ego ne metuam <mihi atque> ut
tu meam timeas vicem. (Pl. Mos. 1144–5)
Appendix: Another ‘affirmative’ use is assumed in (l) and a few more instances.116
Here enim is commonly supposed to emphasize tibi, as in the Loeb translation, but it
is actually an appeal by the poet to Juno to realize that Aeneas made the sacrifice to
her in spite of her animosity.
(l) . . . viridique in litore conspicitur sus. / Quam pius Aeneas tibi enim, tibi,
maxima Iuno, / mactat sacra ferens . . .
(‘. . . there lay outstretched on the green bank before their eyes a sow; good
Aeneas offers her in sacrifice to you, indeed to you, most mighty Juno . . .’
Verg. A. 8.83–5)
Supplement:
Atque hic Aenean magna ter voce vocavit. / Aeneas agnovit enim laetusque preca-
tur: . . . (Verg. A. 10.873–4)
Instances of enim which are regarded as adversative and said to resemble the use of
autem are (m) and (n).117 The sentence with enim in (m), translated with ‘indeed’, is in
contrast with the preceding sentence, but the contrast is independent of enim, which
means something like ‘as you can imagine’. In (n), there is no need to assume an adversa-
tive relation: the speaker appeals for understanding on the part of the addressee.118
(m) (sc. haedus) . . . coepit irridere me. / Ego enim lugere atque abductam illam (sc.
capram) aegre pati.
(‘. . . he started to laugh at me. I was sad indeed and upset that she’d been taken away
from me.’ Pl. Mer. 250–1)
(n) Adsequere, retine dum ego huc servos evoco. # Enim nequeo solus. Accurre.
(‘After him! Hold him while I call out your slaves. # I can’t by myself. Hurry up!’ Ter.
Ph. 982–3)
Supplement:
. . . propterea multis argumentis deos esse docere voluisti. Mihi enim unum sat erat,
ita nobis maioris nostros tradidisse. Sed tu auctoritates contemnis, ratione pugnas.
(Cic. N.D. 3.9); Respondebo tibi ä}~p{zx .{~p{zx, Úwr{tuŷ|. Ego enim, quam diu
senatus auctoritas mihi defendenda fuit, sic acriter et vehementer proeliatus sum ut . . .
(Cic. Att. 1.16.1);119 Nam mutae bestiae laboriosissimae boves et oves: boves . . .
oves . . . Apes enim ego divinas bestias puto, quae mel vomunt, etiam si dicuntur illud
a Iove afferre. (Petr. 56.4–6 (Trimalchio speaking))
In (o), the end of a discussion of marine trees, enim is said to indicate the transition
to a new issue.120 However, it is not clear why a transition would be appropriate at this
point in a whole series of trees. Probably Pliny expected his readers to know that sea-
vines grow everywhere (‘passim’).
(o) Ea et aliae traduntur praegrandes circa Scione<n>. Vitis enim passim nasci-
tur, sed ficus sine foliis, rubro cortice. Fit et palma fruticum generis.
117 See TLL s.v. enim 589.65ff.; OLD § 6 s.v. enim. 118 Brown translates ‘but’.
119 Called ‘enim inceptivum’ in TLL s.v. enim 588.3ff.
120 See TLL s.v. 590.40ff. OLD s.v. § 6 discusses instances like this under the heading: ‘introducing a
slight contrast’.
1206 Discourse
(‘Also other very large marine trees are reported in the neighbourhood of Sicyon—
for the sea-vine grows everywhere, but there is a sea-fig, which has no leaves and a
red bark, and also the class of marine shrubs includes a sea-palm.’ Plin. Nat. 13.138)
Supplement:
(discussing the astaphis agria ‘wild raisin’) . . . nucleum . . . Flos tritus in vino contra ser-
pentes bibitur. Semen enim abdicaverim propter nimiam vim ardoris. (Plin. Nat.
23.18)
In medical texts enim is used in sentences in which the effect of a treatment men-
tioned in the preceding context is described, as in (p).121 Apparently here too, Celsus
makes an appeal to shared knowledge of the readers or to their empathy.
(p) Si vetustior morbus est, (sc. oportet) ex inferioribus partibus tepidum infun-
dere . . . tisanae cremorem vel . . . vitellos cum aqua in qua rosae floris folia
cocta sint. Levant enim dolorem haec et mitiora ulcera efficiunt . . .
(‘If the distemper is of longer standing, there should be injected into the rectum
either a tepid cream of pearl barley, or . . . yolk of eggs in a decoction of rose-leaves: for
such remedies relieve pain and mitigate ulceration . . .’ Cels. 4.22.3)
Supplement:
(sc. emplastrum) Ad carbunculos et cancer imponendum est. Purgat enim nec pati-
tur latius serpere. (Larg. 206)
In Late Latin enim is used more or less like autem, as some form of sentence bound-
ary. See § 24.26 fin.
121 See Langslow (2000: 550–3). He states that in Celsus (books 4 and 5) nam is much less often used
in this context.
122 This description follows Schrickx (2011: 83). See also K.-St.: I.809. For a comparison of nempe and
enim, see Schrickx (2011: 98–100).
123 For the distribution of nempe, see Schrickx (2011: 269–71). There is only one instance in Cicero’s
letters (Cic. Att. 9.15.3).
124 See Schrickx (2011: 76).
Explanatory and justificatory connexion of sentences 1207
(a) Sed istum quem quaeris Periphanem Plothenium / ego sum, si quid vis. #
Nemp’ quem in adulescentia / memorant apud reges armis, arte duellica /
divitias magnas indeptum? # Immo si audias / meas pugnas, fugias manibus
demissis domum.
(‘But the man you’re looking for, Periphanes of Plothea, it’s me, if you want anything.
# You mean the one who people say acquired great wealth in his youth in the service
of kings for his arms and art of war? # Yes, if you heard about my battles, you’d flee
home with your hands stretched out.’ Pl. Epid. 448–52)
(b) ‘At avus nobilis.’ Tuditanus nempe ille qui cum palla et cothurnis nummos
populo de rostris spargere solebat.
(‘ “But her grandfather was a nobleman.” Of course, that Tuditanus who used to
throw coins from the Rostra among the crowd, dressed in an actor’s robe and buskins.’
Cic. Phil. 3.16)
(c) Quod est, pontifices, ius adoptionis? Nempe ut is adoptet qui neque pro-
creare iam liberos possit et, cum potuerit, sit expertus.
(‘What, gentlemen, is the law relating to adoption? Clearly that the adoption of chil-
dren should be permissible to those who are no longer capable of begetting children,
and who, when they were in their prime, put their capacity for parenthood to the test.’
Cic. Dom. 34)
Supplement:
Audi’n tu? Apud Archibulum ego ero argentarium. / # Nempe in foro? # Ibi, si quid
opus fuerit. (Pl. As. 116–17); Nostin’ hanc quam amat frater? # Novi. Nempe, opinor,
Thaidem. (Ter. Eu. 563); Si dat tantam pecuniam Flacco, nempe idcirco dat ut rata sit
emptio. (Cic. Flac. 91); Nempe negas ad beate vivendum satis posse virtutem? (Cic.
Tusc. 5.12); Tibi nempe, / ne foret aequalis inter conviva, magis quem / diligeret
mulier sua quam te. (Hor. Epod. 12.9.22–4); Ut concedam tibi, nempe hoc facis nullo
pretio inductus, nulla spe. (Sen. Ben. 4.19.4); Externi te nempe patres alienaque tan-
gunt / pignora? (Stat. Theb. 10.709–10); An forte non exiit ad te vocandum pater-
familias? Si non exiit, quid est quod loquimur? Nempe nos servi de familia ipsius
sumus, conducere operarios missi sumus. (August. Serm. 87.9)
Nempe rarely co-occurs with other particles, mainly with the connectors sed (in the
two Senecas and Augustine) and igitur (see the Supplement). It also co-occurs with
the adverb tamen. More noteworthy is its co-occurrence with the interactional par-
ticles enim, rare, from Quintilian onwards, as in (d), and ergo, also rare, as in (e).125
Note that in both cases the translators only translate nempe. In (d), Nempe enim is at
the start of a new section in which Quintilian summarizes the preceding books.
(d) Nempe enim plurimum in hoc laboris exhausimus, ut ostenderemus rhetori-
cen bene dicendi scientiam et utilem et artem et virtutem esse.
125 See Schrickx (2011: 95–6). Enim ergo is used a few times in Early Latin and then also a few times by
Tertullian and Augustine. In Quintilian, three out of ten instances of nempe also have enim. There are not
enough instances to draw a conclusion about their meanings.
1208 Discourse
(‘My main effort to be sure has been expended in showing: That Rhetoric is
the science of speaking well, is useful, and is an art and a virtue.’ Quint. Inst.
8.pr.6)
(e) Em, / istoc dicto <tu> dedisti hodie in cruciatum Chrysalum. / Nam ubi me
aspiciet, ad carnuficem rapiet continuo senex. / # Ego patrem exoravi. #
Nempe ergo hoc ut faceret quod loquor? / # Immo tibi ne noceat neu quid
ob eam rem suscenseat.
(‘There you go, with that word you handed Chrysalus over to crucifixion
today: as soon as he sees me, the old man will drag me to the executioner. #
I persuaded my father. # You mean, to do what I’m talking about? # No, not
to harm you and not to be angry with you for this.’ Pl. Bac. 686–90)
Supplement:
Nempe igitur hinc tum, Pomponi, ductus est sermo, quod erat a me mentio facta
causam Deiotari . . . a Bruto me audisse defensam. (Cic. Brut. 21); Hic qui te expulit,
non ipse per annos decem continuos patria caruit? Propagandi sine dubio imperii
causa. Sed nempe caruit. (Sen. Dial. 12.9.7); Sed tamen esto iam posse haec aeterna
manere. / Nempe tamen debent aut sensum partis habere . . . (Lucr. 2.907–8)
NB: with sed coordinator: Et cum dixisset se praemia in patrem contulisse, dixit:
Vici te, pater, sed nempe vici tibi. (Sen. Con. 10.2.14)
Sentences and larger units of discourse which stand in a relation of consequence, result,
or inference with respect to the preceding sentence or larger unit often contain one of
the particles ergo, igitur, and itaque. Of these, ergo is an interactional particle, whereas
igitur and itaque are connectors (details in the following sections). In addition there are
various adverbs, such as ideo, inde, and propterea ‘therefore’. That we are dealing with
words that belong to three different lexical categories is apparent from the (rare) cases
of co-occurrence, which are usually called ‘pleonastic’.126 Examples are (a)–(c).
(a) Quo pacto ergo igitur clam dos depromi potest?
(‘Then how can the dowry be taken out in secret?’ Pl. Trin. 756)
(b) Tam etsi bona’st natura, reddunt curatura iunceam. / Itaque ergo amantur.
(‘However well endowed she is by nature, by their treatment they (such girls’ mothers)
make her as thin as a reed. Therefore they (these girls) then find lovers.’ Ter. Eu.
316–17)
(c) Itaque propterea institutum diversa de causa ut ex caprino genere ad alii dei
aram hostia adduceretur, ad alii non sacrificaretur . . .
126 So K.-St.: II.145. Sz.: 525 calls it an ‘abundante konjunktionale Verbindung’. For discussion, see
Thomsen (1930) and Pinkster (1972:158–62). Ergo igitur in (a) is also attested at Pl. Mos. 847 (ergo . . . igitur),
then seventeen times in Apuleius’ Metamorphoses. Itaque ergo in (b) is later on five occasions attested in
Livy (on which see Krylová 2003: 81), seventeen times in the Peregrinatio, occasionally elsewhere. For
further combinations, see TLL s.v. ergo 774.78ff., s.v. igitur 271.55ff., s.v. itaque 530.18ff.
Consecutive and sequential connexion of sentences 1209
(‘Accordingly there arose a custom, from opposite reasons, that a victim from the goat
family might be led to the altar of one god, but might not be sacrificed on the altar of
another.’ Var. R. 1.2.19)
The distribution of the three particles varies considerably, as can be seen in Table 24.7.
Most noteworthy is the almost complete absence of igitur (one instance) and ergo
(three instances) from Caesar (all four only in speeches), the low frequency of itaque
in Plautus, in contrast with the high frequency in Caesar and Livy, and the high fre-
quency of igitur in Cicero’s philosophical prose and in Sallust, but its almost complete
absence from Seneca’s Letters.127 Late Latin texts show a decrease in igitur and an
increase in ergo, albeit less pronounced in Augustine’s ‘Classical’ de Civitate Dei.128
Table 24.7 Frequency of consecutive particles
Plautus Cicero Cicero Caesar Sallust Livy Seneca August. August. Pereg.b
orationsa philos.a Ep. Civ. Serm.
igitur 42% 46% 61% 1% 66% 19% 0.3% 24% 2% –
itaque 7% 39% 20% 96% 31% 71% 42% 18% 5% 12%
ergo 51% 15% 19% 3% 3% 10% 58% 58% 93% 88%
Total
number of
instances 377 430 898 84 115 850 578 1157 7002 151
a
Orations: Cic. Agr., Catil., Phil., Ver. Philosophical works: Cic. Div., N.D., Off., Tusc.
b
See note 126.
127 For comparative data on ergo and igitur in the historians, see Krylová (2001: 67). Ammianus uses
ergo and igitur more or less as do the Classical historians (Krylová 2001).
128 For detailed figures about the frequency in individual authors and texts, see TLL s.v. ergo 760.26ff,
where also information about the position in the sentence can be found.
129 This formulation closely follows Kroon (1989b: 236). 130 Paraphrasing K.-St.: II.137.
1210 Discourse
(a) Illa autem in arcem abiit aedem visere / Minervae. Nunc aperta est. I, vise
estne ibi. / # Abeo ad forum igitur.
(‘She has gone to the acropolis to visit the temple of Minerva. It’s open now. Go and
see if she isn’t there. # I’ll go to the market then.’ Pl. Bac. 900–2)
(b) Concedo esse deos. Doce me igitur unde sint, ubi sint, quales sint corpore
animo vita.
(‘I grant the existence of the gods: do you then teach me their origin, their dwelling-
place, their bodily and spiritual nature, their mode of life.’ Cic. N.D. 1.65)
(c) Amphitruo, speravi ego istam tibi parituram filium. / Verum non est puero
gravida. # Quid igitur? # Insania.
(‘Amphitruo, I hoped that woman would bear you a son; but she’s not pregnant with
a son. # Then what is she pregnant with? # With madness.’ Pl. Am. 718–19)
(d) Ligna hic apud nos nulla sunt. # Sunt asseres? / # Sunt pol. # Sunt igitur ligna,
ne quaeras foris.
(‘There’s no firewood here at our place. # Are there rafters? # Yes, of course there are.
# Then there is firewood, no need to look for it outside.’ Pl. Aul. 357–8)
(e) Nunc ad reliqua progrediar meque ad meum munus pensumque revocabo.
Nam . . . Ornatissimae sunt igitur orationes eae quae latissime vagantur . . .
(‘I will now go on to the remaining subjects and will recall myself to the particular
task assigned to me. For . . . Well then, the most ornate speeches are those which take
the widest range . . .’ Cic. de Orat. 3.119–20)
(f) Tu, ut videtur. Nos ad audiendum parati sumus. # Mors igitur ipsa, quae
videtur notissima res esse, quid sit primum est videndum.
(‘Take the course you think best: for our part we are ready to hear. # We must first
then consider what death, which seems to be a thing well known to everyone, is in
itself.’ Cic. Tusc. 1.17–18)
Supplement:
Verum actutum nosces, quom illum nosces servom Sosiam. / # Sequere hac igitur me.
Nam mi istuc primum exquisito est opus. (Pl. Am. 627–8); Quonam igitur haec modo
gesta sunt? Repetam paulo altius, iudices . . . (Cic. Clu. 65); Num quis igitur est tam
demens qui hoc P. Clodio vivo contingere potuisse arbitretur? (Cic. Mil. 78); Nihilne
igitur prodest oratori iuris civilis scientia? (Cic. de Orat. 1.250); Ita fit illa conclusio
non solum vera, sed ita perspicua, ut dialectici ne rationem quidem reddi putent
oportere. Si illud, hoc. Non autem hoc. Igitur ne illud quidem. (Cic. Fin. 4.55);
Principio enim terra sita in media parte mundi circumfusa undique est hac animali
spirabilique natura cui nomen est aer . . . sed ad maiora redeamus. Ex aethere igitur
innumerabiles flammae siderum existunt . . . (Cic. N.D. 2.91–2); Eamque disputatio-
nem tris in partes nostri fere dividunt. Quarum prima pars . . . Secunda est autem
quae . . . Tertius est locus qui ducitur ex admiratione rerum caelestium atque ter-
restrium. Primum igitur aut negandum est esse deos . . . (Cic. N.D. 2.75–6); (in a dis-
cussion of whether obscene language exists) Belle ‘tectoriola’. Dic ergo etiam ‘pavimenta’
Consecutive and sequential connexion of sentences 1211
isto modo. Non potes.131 Vide’n igitur nihil esse nisi ineptias, turpitudinem nec in
verbo esse nec in re, itaque nusquam esse? Igitur in verbis honestis obscena poni-
mus. (Cic. Fam. 9.22.3–4); Corporibus caecis igitur natura gerit res. (Lucr. 1.328);
(sc. Catilina) . . . constituit bellum facere et extrema omnia experiri, quoniam quae
occulte temptaverat aspera foedaque evenerant. Igitur C. Manlium Faesulas . . . dimisit
. . . (Sal. Cat. 26.5–27.1); Metellus infecto negotio, postquam nox aderat, in castra cum
exercitu revortitur. Igitur postero die . . . equitatum omnem . . . pro castris agitare
iubet . . . (Sal. Jug. 58.7–59.1); Licinius contra suspectam et invisam semper eam pecu-
niam fore aiebat causasque criminum ad plebem . . . praebituram. Satius igitur esse
reconciliari eo dono plebis animos . . . (Liv. 5.20.8); Igitur ut ad propositum meum
redeam, rationalem quidem puto medicinam esse debere . . . (Cels. 1.pr.74); Igitur, ut
diximus, iugerum habet quadratorum pedum XXVIII DCCC, qui pedes efficiunt
scripula CCLXXXVIII. (Col. 5.1.8); (after a paragraph on the geographical position of
Lycia) In Lycia igitur a promunturio eius oppidum Simena, mons Chimaera . . . (Plin.
Nat. 5.100); Quonam igitur modo utilissime colentur agri? (Plin. Nat. 18.39); Miserat
duas praetorias cohortis Caesar, addito ut magistratus Calabriae Apulique et Campani
suprema erga memoriam filii sui munera fungerentur. Igitur tribunorum centurio-
numque umeris cineres portabantur. (Tac. Ann. 3.2.1–2); Quisquis igitur es amator
longae vitae, esto potius bonae vitae. (August. Serm. 16.2)
In its function as connector igitur most often occupies the second position of the sen-
tence, but there is individual variation among authors: in Sallust, for example, igitur
occupies the first position except in interrogative sentences, in which second position
is in general the rule, as it is in imperative sentences.132 Third and later positions are
rare and occur mainly in poetry.
Igitur is also used in a main clause following a temporal or conditional subordinate
clause, as in (g). Here it is commonly taken as a temporal adverb ‘then’, which is also
assumed in instances like (h). For a temporal interpretation of igitur, however, the
combination with tum, as in (i), is problematic. This ‘temporal’ use is restricted to
Early Latin.133 There are a few attestations of igitur in a following main clause, where
it seems to have its usual consecutive meaning, as in (j).134
(g) Mox magis quom otium <et> mihi et tibi erit, / igitur tecum loquar. Nunc
vale.
(‘Soon when both you and I have more time I’ll speak to you. Goodbye for now.’
Pl. Cas. 215–16)
(h) Quin ego illi me invenisse dico hanc praedam atque eloquor? / Igitur orabo
ut manu me emittat.
(‘Why don’t I say to him and tell him that I’ve found this booty? Then I’ll ask him to
set me free.’ Pl. Aul. 817–18)
131 The result would be pavimentula. 132 For details, see TLL s.v. igitur 253.42ff.
133 See TLL s.v. igitur 255.51ff. For discussion of these instances, see Kroon (2004b: 73). See also
Rosén (2009: 358, (d)).
134 See TLL s.v. igitur 262.39ff.
1212 Discourse
(i) Unum ubi emeritum est stipendium, / igitur tum specimen cernitur quo
eveniat aedificatio.
(‘When one campaign has been served, then one can see an example of how the
building is to turn out.’ Pl. Mos. 131–2)
(j) Si neque inimicitiae fuerunt nec metus ullus nec spes [ex morte illius] ali-
cuius commodi neque ad amicum huius aliquem mors illius pertinebat,
relinquitur igitur (del. Kayser) ut ab hoc non sit occisus.
(‘If there was no enmity, and no fear, and no hope of any advantages from his death
and his death was of no interest to any friend of the defendant, it therefore follows
that the defendant did not kill him.’ Cic. Inv. 1.45)
135 K.-St.: II.130–1 use for igitur the term ‘Vernunftsschluss’ (rational conclusion). Van Gils (2005: 806–9)
describes itaque as signalling a ‘volitional causal’ relation.
Consecutive and sequential connexion of sentences 1213
Itaque is attested from Plautus onwards (but see the note below). It is rare in poetry
and also in dialogical texts and in interrogative and imperative sentences (see the
Supplement). In Late Latin it is sometimes used more or less in the sense of enim.136
In prose it regularly occupies the first position. However, later positions become more
common from the Rhetorica ad Herennium (once) and Livy onwards in prose and
from Lucretius onwards in poetry.
Supplement:
Sed siquid tibi narrare occepi, continuo dari / tibi verba censes. # Falso! # Itaque
hercle nil iam muttire audeo. (Ter. An. 504–5); Constitutiones itaque, ut ante dixi-
mus, tres sunt. (Rhet. Her. 1.18); Itaque num tibi videor in causa Ligari esse occupa-
tus, num de eius facto dicere? (Cic. Lig. 29); Tu rem publicam reprehendis, quae
domesticos hostis, ne ab eis ipsa necaretur, necavit? Itaque attende, Torquate, quam
ego defugiam auctoritatem consulatus mei! (Cic. Sul. 32–3); Tempus vero colloquio
non dare neque accessurum polliceri magnam pacis desperationem adferebat. Itaque
ab Arimino M. Antonium cum cohortibus V Arretium mittit. (Caes. Civ. 1.11.3–4);
Nec superare queunt motus itaque exitiales / perpetuo . . . (Lucr. 2.569–70); Maior
itaque ex civibus amissis dolor quam laetitia fusis hostibus fuit . . . (Liv. 4.17.8); Pro
ingenti itaque victoria id fuit plebi . . . (Liv. 4.54.6); Ingredi est iis (sc. echinis) in
orbem volvi. Itaque detritis saepe aculeis inveniuntur. (Plin. Nat. 9.100); Itaque her-
cule eius modi libri extant ut ipsi quoque qui egerunt non aliis magis orationibus
censeantur. (Tac. Dial. 39.5); Itaque, fratres, sicut dicere coeperam, non est unde
reprehendamus Deum. (August. Serm. 22.6)
Opinions vary on the early instances of itaque in Plautus, including ex. (a) above.
Some scholars take it as ita + -que ‘and so’, others as itaque = ita, that is as an adverb,
in its consecutive interpretation (see § 24.12),137 sometimes comparing namque for
the -que element.
136 See TLL s.v. itaque 531.52ff. For instances of itaque in a main clause after a subordinate clause, see
ibid. 531.75ff.
137 So TLL s.v. itaque 529.43ff. Kroon (2004b: 72) states that most or all instances can be taken as ‘and
so’. Conversely, Pasoli (1962) rejects the idea that -que has a coordinating function.
138 This formulation follows Kroon (2004b; 2011), from whom most of the examples are taken, and
Krylová (2001; 2003; 2006).
139 Also in Seneca’s letters (Kroon 2004b: 79).
1214 Discourse
after a short digression in which the preceding information was recapitulated. In (f),
ergo signals a conclusion that is based on what happens in the non-verbal situation,
not in a preceding text. Ergo differs from enim among other things in that its appeal
to the addressee is more urgent. An illustration is (g), which also contains the swear
word edepol.140
(a) Perii hercle ego! Manufesta res [est]. # Omnem [in] ordine rem / fateri ergo
aequom est.
(‘I’m dead! It’s all out. # So it’s only fair to confess everything one by one.’ Pl. Cas.
893–6)
(b) Age porro: Iovem et Neptunum deum numeras. Ergo etiam Orcus frater
eorum deus.
(‘Come tell me further: you reckon Jupiter and Neptune gods, therefore their brother
Orcus is also a god.’ Cic. N.D. 3.43)
(c) Philolaches hic habitat, quoius est pater Theopropides. / Qui . . . tibicinam /
liberavit. # Philolachesne ergo? # Ita. Philematium quidem.
(‘Philolaches lives here, whose father is Theopropides. He freed a flute girl. # You
mean Philolaches? # Yes, and she is called Philematium.’ Pl. Mos. 970–2)
(d) ‘Quid ergo? Istos’, inquies, ‘mercede conductos habebimus?’ Quid faciemus si
aliter non possumus?
(‘You’ll say: “Are we then to keep these fellows as mercenaries?” What else, if we can’t
keep them on any other terms?’ Cic. Att. 2.1.8)
(e) Nummos Arpinat<i>um, si L. Fadius aedilis petet, vel omnis reddito. Ego ad
te alia epistula scripsi <de> HS CX quae Statio curarentur. Si ergo petet
Fadius, ei volo reddi, praeter Fadium nemini.
(‘You may hand over the money due to the municipality of Arpinum, the whole of it,
if the Aedile L. Fadius claims it. I have written to you in another letter about the HS
110,000 to be paid to Statius. So then, if Fadius claims it, I want the money made over
to him, but to no one except Fadius.’ Cic. Att. 15.15.1)
(f) Quorum mediam orationem interrumpunt subito undique tela immissa,
quae ille obtectus armis militum vitavit. Vulnerantur tamen complures . . . Tum
Labienus: ‘Desinite ergo de compositione loqui. Nam nobis nisi Caesaris
capite relato pax esse nulla potest.’
(‘Their ongoing talk was suddenly interrupted by a volley of weapons from all sides.
Protected by his soldiers’ shields, Labienus avoided them. But several men were
wounded . . . Then Labienus: “So stop talking about a settlement, for in our view no
peace is possible unless we get Caesar’s head.” ’ Caes. Civ. 3.19.7–8)
(g) Nam apsque te esset, hodie numquam ad solem occasum / viverem. # Ergo
edepol, si recte facias, ere, med emittas manu.
(‘If it hadn’t been for you, I’d never have lived till sunset today. # Then, by Pollux!, if
you were to do the right thing, master, you’d set me free.’ Pl. Men. 122–3)
Supplement:
Dic opsecro hercle serio quod te rogem. / Cave mi mendaci quicquam. # Quin tu
ergo rogas? (Pl. As. 29–30); Quid amas— # Bacchidem? Duas ergo hic intus eccas
Bacchides. / # Quid? duae? (Pl. Bac. 568–9); Dixit illi quicum ipsa ibat— # Quid? #
Tace ergo, ut audias. (Pl. Epid. 241); Eho, quaeso, an tu is es? / # Is enim vero sum. #
Ai’n tu tandem? Is ipsusne es? # Aio. # Ipsus es? / # Ipsus, inquam, Charmides
sum. # Ergo ipsusne es? # Ipsissumus. / Abi’n hinc ab oculis? (Pl. Trin. 986–9);
M. Manlius . . . regnum adpetisse est iudicatus. Ergo eius domum eversam duobus
lucis convestitam videtis. (Cic. Dom. 101); Non placet autem paucis a diis inmortali-
bus esse consultum. Sequitur ergo ut nemini consultum sit. (Cic. N.D. 3.70); Adfectus
autem animi in bono viro laudabilis. Et vita igitur laudabilis boni viri. Et honesta
ergo, quoniam laudabilis. (Cic. Tusc. 5.47); Clodius ergo, ut ais, ad Tigranem! (Cic.
Att. 2.4.2); Epaminondas, Polymnidis filius, Thebanus. De hoc priusquam scribimus,
haec praecipienda videntur lectoribus . . . Natus ergo patre, quo diximus, genere
honesto . . . (Nep. Ep. 1.1–2.1); Numquamne ergo familia nostra quieta erit? (Sal. Jug.
14.9); Itaque ergo erecti suspensique in minime gratum spectaculum animo incen-
duntur. (Liv. 1.25.2); Correpti consules cum quid ergo se facere vellent—nihil enim
segnius molliusve quam patribus placeat acturos—percontarentur, decernunt ut . . .
(Liv. 2.28.5—NB: in an indirect question; the parenthesis contains the interactional
particle enim); Thales primum aquam putavit omnium rerum esse principium; Heracli-
tus . . . Democritus . . . Pythagoreorum vero disciplina . . . Ergo Democritus, etsi non
proprie res nominavit sed tantum individua corpora proposuit, ideo ea ipsa dixisse
videtur, quod. . . (Vitr. 2.2.1); (talking about luxuries) Principium ergo columenque
omnium rerum pretii margaritae tenent. (Plin. Nat. 9.106); ‘Quid ergo? Omnes
servos admovebo mensae meae?’ Non magis quam omnes liberos. (Sen. Ep. 47.15);
Quantum potes ergo, mi Lucili, reduc te ab istis exceptionibus et praescriptionibus
philosophorum: aperta decent et simplicia bonitatem. (Sen. Ep. 48.12); Inter quos
[etiam] pictorum amantium vultus tamquam in solitudine exclamavi: ‘Ergo amor
etiam deos tangit.’ (Petr. 83.4); (sc. Nero) . . . interrogat an Seneca voluntariam mortem
pararet. Tum tribunus nulla pavoris signa, nihil triste in verbis eius aut vultu depren-
sum confirmavit. Ergo regredi et indicere mortem iubetur. (Tac. Ann. 15.61.2); (sc.
Caesar) . . . unum e collegio Pontium Aquilam non assurrexisse adeo indignatus sit ut
proclamaverit: ‘Repete ergo a me, Aquila, rem publicam!’ (Suet. Jul. 78.2); Quid ergo
nos docet Abraham? Ut breviter dicam: ut Deo non praeponamus quod dat Deus.
(August. Serm. 2.4); (after describing the Mons Dei) Nos ergo sabbato sera ingressi
sumus montem . . . (Pereg. 3.1)
Ergo can be used in a main clause following a conditional or a causal clause. This is
mainly attested in Late Latin, but see (h) and (i).141
(h) Quem igitur imitaris? Si aliquem, ceteri ergo Attice non dicebant?
(‘Whom then are you going to imitate? If some particular one, do you mean that all
the others did not speak pure Attic?’ Cic. Brut. 285)
(i) Quodsi Luna dea est, ergo etiam Lucifer ceteraeque errantes numerum deo-
rum obtinebunt.
(‘But if the Moon is a goddess, then Lucifer also and the rest of the planets will have
to be counted gods.’ Cic. N.D. 3.51)
Ergo is used in all periods of Latin. It is common in texts of an interactive character
but rare in purely narrative texts or episodes.142 Its relative frequency in Late Latin, for
example in the Peregrinatio, is related to the increase in the use of cohesive devices in
Late Latin texts in general and to the use of ergo outside its proper context (in other
words, its ‘desemantization’).143
The chronological sequence of events described in sentences and larger units of dis-
course can be clear from the content of the sentences and discourse units itself, as in
the famous asyndetic sequence veni, vidi, vici ‘I came, I saw, I conquered’. The relative
order of events can also be expressed explicitly, for example, by the use of special
tenses. Thus, if a sentence contains a pluperfect tense the event in that sentence will be
understood as anterior with respect to an event in the preceding or following dis-
course (see § 7.31). Time adjuncts are another explicit device to locate an event in
time and so, indirectly, to indicate its position in relation to other events. Examples
are the adverb pridie ‘the day before’ and the ablative noun phrase eo anno ‘in that
year’ (see §§ 10.27–30).144 This section deals with a number of words which serve as
linking devices between sentences and larger units and mark the sequence of the
events, either just the temporal sequence, like deinde, tum, and post in (a), or (also) the
position of an event in a sequence, like primo and postremo in (b).145 Words marking
temporal sequence and position can co-occur, as in (c) with deinde postremo.146
The words under consideration can also be used in enumerations within sentences,
as in (d).
(a) Modo consul quo<t>an<n>is, is deinde primus erat civitatis. Tum proficisci-
tur in Asiam. Deinde hostis et exul est dictus. Post imperator <sep>t<i>mo
factus est consul.
(‘Recently consul every year, next he was first man of the state; then he sets out for
Asia; next he is declared a public enemy and exiled; after that while general-in-chief
he is made consul for the seventh time.’ Rhet. Her. 4.68)
142 For the use of ergo in narrative texts, see Krylová (2003, especially pp. 79–91).
143 For both phenomena, see Kiss (2006; 2007; 2010) and Rosén (2009: 397).
144 For the expressions of continuity used by Caesar, Sallust, and Livy, see Chausserie-Laprée (1969:
28–9); for Velleius Paterculus, Ruiz Castellanos (2005: 935); for Apuleius’ Metamorphoses, Callebat (1998:
131–7).
145 In (a) I print the Budé text of Achard. For the historical background, see Calboli ad loc.
146 ‘abundanter’ TLL s.v. posterus 219.38.
Consecutive and sequential connexion of sentences 1217
(b) Primo incaute se invehentes Masinissa excipiebat. Mox plures simul conferti
porta effusi aequaverant certamen. Postremo iam omnis equitatus proelio
cum adesset, sustineri ultra nequiere.
(‘At first, as they rashly charged, Masinissa would meet their attack. Later larger num-
bers, dashing out of a gate in a mass, had made it an even combat. Finally, when all
their cavalry was engaged, they could no longer be withstood.’ Liv. 29.34.12)
(c) In hac (sc. parte) eae res quaeruntur quae gestum negotium consequuntur.
Primum, quod factum est, quo id nomine appellari conveniat. Deinde . . .
Deinde . . . Deinde . . . Postea . . . Deinde postremo adtendendum est num quae
res . . . consequantur.
(‘Under this category those things are sought which ensue from an action being per-
formed. First, by what name shall the act be designated? . . . Next . . . Next . . . Next . . .
Then . . . Next, finally, it should be noted whether some things ensue . . .’ Cic. Inv. 1.43)
(d) Quare dicemus primum de genere eius, deinde quibus disciplinis et a quibus
sit eruditus, tum de moribus ingeniique facultatibus . . . postremo de rebus
gestis . . .
(‘Therefore I shall speak first of his family, then of the subjects which he studied and
his teachers, next of his character and his natural qualities . . . finally of his exploits . . .’
Nep. Ep. 1.4)
In addition to the words used in the above examples sequential connectors include
tunc ‘then’, nunc ‘now’, interea ‘meanwhile’, denique ‘finally’.147 Apart from their use as
connectors, most of the words involved function also, or primarily, as temporal
adverbs.148 A case in point is nunc.149 In (e), nunc is an adverb functioning as a
position-in-time adjunct which could be used as an answer to the question ‘when?’
(see § 10.30); in (f), it is a connector introducing a new discourse unit. As a connector
it has its position at the beginning of the sentence, whereas in (e) nunc’s position is
free. In (e), nunc is in contrast with hodie, while something similar is inconceivable for
(f). An interesting instance with two cases of nunc in different functions in one
sentence is (g).150
(e) Ita ancilla mea quae fuit hodie, sua nunc est.
(‘The girl who was my slave today belongs to herself now.’ Pl. Per. 472)
(f) Quid quaeris? Permoleste tuli. Nulla enim abs te per hos dies epistula inanis
aliqua re utili et suavi venerat. Nunc, si quid in ea epistula quam a. d. XVI
147 For a more complete list, see Rosén (2009: 355–9). Tandem is sometimes regarded as more or less
synonymous with postremo, but it does not belong here. See Risselada (1998b).
148 For the use of temporal adverbs as discourse organizers, see Hilton (1989; 1997/8) and Kiss (2010).
For nunc and denique, see Rosén (2009: 329–31).
149 For nunc, see Risselada (1998c), especially pp. 110–12, from whom exx. (e)–(g) are taken. For nunc
in Plautus, see Blänsdorf (1967: 96–7). For the use of nunc in past narratives and as a contrastive connec-
tor, see Dalbera (2016; 2019).
150 The Groningen Commentary ad loc. notes ‘the repetition lends urgency’, but this is not correct.
1218 Discourse
Kal. Mai. dedisti fuit historia dignum, scribe quam primum ne ignoremus.
Sin nihil praeter iocationem, redde id ipsum.
(‘As you can imagine I was very much put out. Every one of the letters you have sent
me lately has contained something useful and charming. Now, if the letter you dis-
patched on 15 April had anything in it worth chronicling, write at once so that I am
not left in ignorance. If on the other hand it was all badinage, why, I am entitled to
that too.’ Cic. Att. 2.8.1)
(g) . . . bestiamque aliquam recte dicentibus vobis merito consentio. Meque mag-
nopere semper a suis terret aspectibus malumque grande de vultus curiosi-
tate praeminatur. Nunc si quam salutarem opem periclitanti sorori vestrae
potestis afferre, iam nunc subsistite.
(‘. . . and you must be right when you say he is some beast, I agree. He is always intimi-
dating me from looking at him, and threatening some great punishment for any curi-
osity about his features. Now, if you can bring some salvation to your sister in her
danger, help me right now.’ Apul. Met. 5.19.2–4)
151 For cohesive devices in texts that contain lists, see Conso (2007).
Semantic relation between asyndetic sentences 1219
(b) Ova perdicum in vase aereo decocta cum melle ulceribus oculorum et glau-
comatis medentur. ° Columbarum, palumbium, turturum, perdicum sanguis
oculis cruore suffusis eximie prodest.
(‘Partridge eggs boiled down with honey in a bronze vessel cure ulcers on the eyes
and opaqueness of the lens. The blood of pigeons, doves, turtle doves, or partridges,
makes an excellent application for blood-shot eyes.’ Plin. Nat. 29.126)
In a narrative context, adjacent asyndetically connected sentences can often be inter-
preted as a purely temporal sequence, as in (c). However, asyndeton is also used to
give the impression of a rapid succession of actions or the parallelism of simultaneous
actions. Examples are (d) and (e) (repeated from § 19.14).152 In (e), the sequence of
events appears partly from the time adjuncts in some of the sentences.
(c) A. d. VII Id. Mart. Brundisium veni. ° Ad murum castra posui.
(‘On 9 March I reached Brundisium and encamped before the walls.’ Caes. Att.
9.13a1)
(d) (Gallus quidam) . . . manu significare coepit utrisque quiescerent. ° Pugnae
facta pausa est. ° Extemplo silentio facto cum voce maxima Ø conclamat, si
quis secum depugnare vellet, uti prodiret. ° Nemo audebat propter magni-
tudinem atque inmanitatem facies.
(‘. . . he began to gesture to both armies, telling them to stop fighting. There was a
pause in the battle. Having achieved silence, he immediately shouted at the top of his
voice that, if anyone was willing to fight to the finish with him, he should come for-
ward. Because of his size and his monstrous appearance nobody dared to do so.’
Quad. hist. 10b=6C—tr. Briscoe)
(e) Mittuntur ad Caesarem confestim a Cicerone litterae magnis propositis prae-
miis, si pertulissent. ° Obsessis omnibus viis missi intercipiuntur. ° Noctu ex
materia quam munitionis causa comportaverant turres admodum centum
XX excitantur incredibili celeritate. ° Quae deesse operi videbantur perfici-
untur. ° Hostes postero die multo maioribus coactis copiis castra oppugnant,
fossam complent. ° A nostris eadem ratione qua pridie resistitur. ° Hoc idem
reliquis deinceps fit diebus.
(‘Dispatches were at once sent by Cicero to Caesar, with promise of great rewards if
the bearers carried them safe; with all the roads blocked, the messengers were cut off.
During the night about one hundred and twenty towers were erected with incredible
speed out of the timber which they had collected for the purpose of the entrench-
ment. The apparent deficiencies in the earthworks were rectified. On the next day,
with far greater forces assembled, the enemy assaulted the camp and filled in the
trench. Our troops resisted in the same fashion as on the day before. Exactly the same
was done on the other days following.’ Caes. Gal. 5.40.1–4)
Supplement:
Deinde Romae dies XXX fere Quinctius commoratur. ° Cum ceteris quae habebat
vadimonia differt, ut expeditus in Galliam proficisci posset. ° Proficiscitur. (Cic.
Quinct. 23); (sc. oppidum) Vallo et fossa circumdedi, ° sex castellis castrisque
maximis saepsi, ° aggere, vineis, turribus oppugnavi ususque tormentis multis, multis
sagittariis magno labore meo, sine ulla molestia sumptuve sociorum septimo quin-
quagensimo die rem confeci ut . . . (Cic. Fam. 15.4.10)
In addition to the enumerative and continuative relations discussed so far two types
of asyndetic relation have received special attention, viz. the adversative and explana-
tory/justificatory relations.153 Examples of an adversative relation are (f) and (g). In
(f), the contrast is between two constituents in the consecutive sentences: victumas
and agninis. In (g), the contrast is at a higher level, between the contents of the entire
sentences. The first sentence in the sequence can contain the particle quidem, which
has a preparative function and creates the expectation of contrast, as in (h). The
adverb sane can be used in a similar way.154
(f) Nolo victumas. ° Agninis me extis placari volo.
(‘I don’t want big animals for sacrifice. I want to be placated with lambs’ intestines.’
Pl. Ps. 329)
(g) Videbant Agyrinenses quicquid ad eos recuperatores Apronius attulisset
illum perfacile probaturum. ° Condemnari cum istius invidia infamiaque
malebant quam ad eius condiciones pactionesque accedere.
(‘The men from Agyrium saw that, before a court like this, Apronius would have no
trouble in establishing any charge he might bring. They chose to be found guilty, and
thus to bring odium and disgrace to [Verres], rather than accept the terms and condi-
tions their accuser demanded.’ Cic. Ver. 3.69)
(h) Et haec quidem humanis consiliis providebantur. ° Mox petita dis piacula
aditique Sibyllae libri . . .
(‘Such were the provisions made by human plans; next, expiations for the gods were
sought and the books of the Sibyl were appealed to . . .’ Tac. Ann. 15.44.1—tr.
Woodman)
Supplement:
Nam patrimonium domestici praedones vi ereptum possident, ° fama et vita inno-
centis ab hospitibus amicisque paternis defenditur. (Cic. S. Rosc. 15); Et forsitan in
suscipienda causa temere impulsus adulescentia fecerim. ° Quoniam quidem semel
suscepi, licet hercules undique omnes minae. Terrores periculaque impendeant,
omnia succurram ac subibo. (Cic. S. Rosc. 31); Verum concedo tibi ut ea praetereas
quae, cum taces, nulla esse concedis. ° Illud quidem, voluisse exheredare, certe tu
planum facere debes. (Cic. S. Rosc. 54); Non quaero quanta memoria Simonides
fuisse dicatur, quanta Theodectes, quanta is, qui a Pyrrho legatus ad senatum est mis-
sus, Cineas, quanta nuper Charmadas, quanta, qui modo fuit, Scepsius Metrodorus,
quanta noster Hortensius. ° De communi hominum memoria loquor . . . (Cic. Tusc.
1.59); Non peculatus aerari factus est neque per vim sociis ereptae pecuniae, quae
quamquam gravia sunt tamen consuetudine iam pro nihilo habentur. ° Hosti acer-
rumo prodita senatus auctoritas, proditum imperium vostrum est. ° Domi militi-
aeque res publica venalis fuit. (Sal. Jug. 31.25); Consul ubi ad iniquum locum ventum
est, sistit aciem. ° Miles aegre teneri, clamare et poscere ut perculsis instare liceat. °
Ferocius agunt equites. ° Circumfusi duci vociferantur se ante signa ituros. (Liv.
2.65.2–3)
of Verres’ machinations. In (s), the last sentence could contain ergo, indicating the
decision made by Verres on the basis of his considerations.
(r) Itaque excogitat rem singularem. ° Navis quibus legatus praefuerat Cleomeni
tradit. ° Classi populi Romani Cleomenem Syracusanum praeesse iubet
atque imperare. Hoc eo facit ut . . . secum illam haberet, si (sc. Cleomenem)
non tamquam virum sed tamquam aemulum removisset. ° Accipit navis
sociorum atque amicorum Cleomenes Syracusanus.
(‘He thought of a very original way out of this difficulty, which was to hand over the
fleet, hitherto commanded by a deputy governor, to Cleomenes—to give full power
and command over a Roman fleet to Cleomenes the Syracusan. His purpose was to
be able to enjoy the wife’s society after the removal of a man who was not only her
husband but his rival. The ships of our allies and friends were handed over to
Cleomenes the Syracusan.’ Cic. Ver. 5.82–3)
(s) Etenim si Phylarchus (sc. phaleras) vendidisset, non ei, posteaquam reus fac-
tus es, redditurum te promisisses. Quod quia vidisti plures scire, cogitasti, si
ei reddidisses, te minus habiturum, rem nihilo minus testatam futuram. °
Non reddidisti.
(‘Nor, indeed, if Phylarchus had sold them to you, would you, after this prosecution
was instituted, have promised to give them back to him. Knowing that many people
were aware of the truth, you reflected that if you did give them back you would be so
much the poorer, and the facts would come out in the evidence none the less; and
therefore you did not give them back.’ Cic. Ver. 4.29)
Supplement:
Cum familiariter me in eorum sermonem insinuarem ac darem, celabar, excludebar,
et, cum ostenderem, si lex utilis plebi Romanae mihi videretur, auctorem me atque
adiutorem futurum, tamen aspernabantur hanc liberalitatem meam. ° Negabant me
adduci posse ut ullam largitionem probarem. ° Finem feci offerendi mei, ne forte mea
sedulitas aut insidiosa aut impudens videretur. (Cic. Agr. 2.12); Nam vetus haec
opinio Graeciam opplevit esse exsectum Caelum a filio Saturno, vinctum autem
Saturnum ipsum a filio Iove. ° Physica ratio non inelegans inclusa est in impias fabu-
las. (Cic. N.D. 2.64)
For practical reasons I take the division in paragraphs in modern editions as reflecting
‘discourse units’, informally defined as semantically coherent and self-contained sets
of sentences. Editors vary somewhat in their division of a text into paragraphs.158 As
between sentences, the coherence may be created by various means, such as finite
158 See Ctibor (2017b). For the cohesive devices used by a number of Late Latin historians between text
segments, see Kiss (2019).
1224 Discourse
subordinate clauses, for example with cum ‘when’ or quod ‘as for the fact’; ablative
absolute clauses; noun phrases like postero die ‘the next day’; anaphoric pronouns and
phrases (in Caesar hic is very common); prepositional phrases with de ‘with respect
to’; anaphoric adverbs such as ita ‘so’ and ideo ‘therefore’; and also some of the con-
nectors and interactional particles discussed in the sections above. The choice of any
one of these devices depends on the type of text and the personal preference of the
author. The relationship between Caesar’s narrative de Bello Gallico and Cicero’s philo-
sophical treatise de Officiis will serve as an illustration (see Table 24.8). Of the 344
paragraphs of Caesar only 22 have a connector or interactional particle, whereas in
Cicero more than half of the 372 paragraphs have one; Caesar has the connector
autem once, Cicero sixty times.
Examples of the use of these words to link paragraphs are given below (in the order of
Table 24.8; nec and ceterum added).159
(a) Atque in ea re omnium nostrorum intentis animis alia ex parte oppidi
Adiatuanus, qui summam imperi tenebat . . . uti eadem deditionis condicione
uteretur ab Crasso impetravit.
159 In (a), the Loeb edition does not start a new paragraph. For autem, see also § 24.26, (j) and (k); for
ceterum § 24.27, (d)–(f); for igitur, § 24.43, (e).
Connectors and particles to connect paragraphs 1225
(‘Then, while the attention of all our troops was engaged upon that business,
Adiatuanus, the commander-in-chief . . . obtained from Crassus the same terms of
surrender as at first.’ Caes. Gal. 3.22.1)
(b) Et quod paene praeterii, Bruti tui causa, ut saepe ad te scripsi, feci omnia.
(‘And I nearly forgot to add that, as I have often written to you, I have done every-
thing in my power for your friend Brutus.’ Cic. Att. 6.3.5)
(c) Nec defuit fides, multaque arbitrio senatus constituta sunt.
(‘And confirmation was not lacking, and many things were settled by the senate’s
adjudication.’ Tac. Ann. 13.5.1—tr. Woodman)
(d) At Romae nondum cognito qui fuisset exitus in Illyrico, et legionum
Germanicarum motu audito, trepida civitas incusare Tiberium . . .
(‘But at Rome, where it was not yet known what the outcome in Illyricum had been
and news had been received of the German legions’ disturbance, the trembling com-
munity began to censure Tiberius . . .’ Tac. Ann. 1.46.1)160
(e) Muri autem omnes Gallici hac fere forma sunt. Trabes derectae perpetuae
in longitudinem paribus intervallis distantes inter se binos pedes in solo
collocantur.
(‘All Gallic walls are, as a rule, of the following pattern. Balks are laid on the ground
at equal intervals of two feet throughout the length of the wall and at right angles
thereto.’ Caes. Gal. 7.23.1)
(f) (Cuius partes duae: iustitia . . . et huic coniuncta beneficentia . . .) Sed iustitiae
primum munus est, ut ne cui quis noceat . . .
(‘(Of this there are two divisions, justice and, close akin to this, charity . . .) The first
office of justice is to keep one man from doing harm to another . . .’ Cic. Off. 1.20)
(g) Ceterum ex aliis negotiis quae ingenio exercentur in primis magno usui est
memoria rerum gestarum.
(‘But among sundry intellectual pursuits, the recording of past deeds is especially
serviceable.’ Sal. Jug. 4.1)
(h) Nam ut Id. Mai. in senatum convenimus, rogatus ego sententiam multa dixi
de summa re publica . . .
(‘For when we met in the Senate on the Ides of May and my turn came, I spoke at
length about the political situation on the highest level . . .’ Cic. Att. 1.16.9)
(i) Namque ipsorum naves ad hunc modum factae armataeque erant: carinae
aliquanto planiores quam nostrarum navium . . .
(‘For their own ships were built and equipped in the following fashion. Their keels
were considerably more flat than those of our own ships . . .’ Caes. Gal. 3.13.1)
160 ‘Tacitus makes very frequent, indeed excessive, use of at in transitions . . .’ (Goodyear ad loc.). For
further examples in Tacitus, see Gerber and Greef s.v. at 106 (§ B).
1226 Discourse
(j) Quamvis enim Themistocles iure laudetur et sit eius nomen quam Solonis
inlustrius . . . non minus praeclarum hoc quam illud iudicandum est.
(‘However highly Themistocles, for example, may be extolled—and deservedly—and
however much more illustrious his name may be than Solon’s . . . yet Solon’s achieve-
ment is not to be accounted less illustrious than his.’ Cic. Off. 1.75)
(k) Triplex igitur est, ut Panaetio videtur, consilii capiendi deliberatio.
(‘The consideration necessary to determine conduct, is, therefore, as Panaetius
thinks, a threefold one.’ Cic. Off. 1.9)
(l) Itaque Titum Labienum legatum in Treveros, qui proximi flumini Rheno
sunt, cum equitatu mittit.
(‘Accordingly he dispatched Titus Labienus, lieutenant-general, with the cavalry to
the territory of the Treveri, who live next the river Rhine.’ Caes. Gal. 3.11.1)
(m) Sit ergo hic sermo, in quo Socratici maxime excellunt, lenis minimeque per-
tinax, insit in eo lepos.
(‘Conversation, then, in which the Socratics are the best models, should have these
qualities. It should be easy and not in the least dogmatic; it should have the spice of
wit.’ Cic. Off. 1.134)
There are of course other ways to structure a longer text. Sallust, Livy, and Velleius
Paterculus use ‘digressions to indicate breaks in their narratives between one episode
and another’. Velleius also uses some sort of heading of a paragraph followed by the
explanatory connector quippe, or anaphoric hic or qui.161 Headings were also com-
mon in juridical texts.162
From the second century bc onwards inscriptions, papyri, wax tablets, and texts
on other material show several non-linguistic means to segment longer stretches of
texts into paragraphs, such as the projection of the text into the left margin, the use
of capitals, and red colour, and also larger spaces.163 The same techniques are used in
the older manuscripts. There is however, much variation in the degree to which these
techniques were used.
In this section three grammatical phenomena will be briefly touched upon from the
perspective of discourse coherence: tense, active/passive variation, and word order.
The role of tense in the organization of discourse is mentioned several times in
Chapter 7.164 The clearest example is the imperfect tense. An illustration is (a),
repeated from § 7.20, (h). Here, the imperfect nuntiabantur marks the content of the
sentence as background information, while the surrounding perfects invasit and
161 The quotation is from Woodman (1977: 154). For the ‘headings’ and quippe, see Ruiz Castellanos (2005).
162 See Mantovani (2018: Appendice 1).
163 See Müller (1964: 13–21), Wingo (1972), Cancik (1979), Bischoff (1990), Raible (1993),
Ctibor (2017b), and Mantovani (2018).
164 See now also van Gils and Kroon (2018).
Grammatical devices 1227
consecuti sunt mark successive events. The information in the imperfect serves as
an explanation of the panic that hit Rome and made Lentulus flee, as the
interactional particle enim shows. Another example, without a particle, is (b). The
paragraph that precedes it reports the actions the Helvetians undertook to prepare
their departure. The imperfects in (b) indicate the considerations about the jour-
ney. Then, after a summary in the form of an ablative absolute clause (see also
§ 24.11), the action continues, marked by a historic present, dicunt. The relation
between the considerations in imperfects and the action in a historic present is one
of result or consequence.
(a) . . . tantus repente terror invasit ut, cum Lentulus consul ad aperiendum aera-
rium venisset . . ., protinus . . . profugeret. Caesar enim adventare iam iamque
et adesse eius equites falso nuntiabantur. Hunc Marcellus collega et plerique
magistratus consecuti sunt.
(‘. . . suddenly such a great panic hit them that although the consul Lentulus had come
to open the treasury he immediately fled. For it was falsely being reported that Caesar
was on the very point of arriving and that his cavalry was present. Lentulus was fol-
lowed by his colleague Marcellus and most of the magistrates.’ Caes. Civ. 1.14.1–2)
(b) Erant omnino itinera duo quibus itineribus domo exire possent. . . .
Allobrogibus sese vel persuasuros . . . existimabant vel vi coacturos ut per
suos fines eos ire paterentur. Omnibus rebus ad profectionem comparatis
diem dicunt . . .
(‘There were two routes, and no more, by which they could leave their home-
land. . . . They supposed that either they would persuade the Allobroges . . . or would
compel them perforce to suffer a passage through their borders. Having therefore
provided all things for their departure, they named a day . . .’ Caes. Gal. 1.6.1–4)
Active/passive variation is another grammatical feature that contributes to the
organization of discourse, since it can be related to the selection of topic constituents
in ongoing discourse.165 This is shown by (c), repeated from § 5.10, (a). In the first
two sentences the subject/agents are the Helvetians. In (iii) there is a shift of perspec-
tive to the new topic Orgetorix, who is continued in (iv). Note the use of is (see also
§ 22.4).
(c) (i) Ad eas res conficiendas biennium sibi satis esse duxerunt. (ii) In tertium
annum profectionem lege confirmant. (iii) Ad eas res conficiendas Orgetorix
deligitur. (iv) Is sibi legationem ad civitates suscepit.
(‘(i) For the accomplishment of these objects they considered that two years were
sufficient. (ii) They pledged themselves by an ordinance to take the field in the third
year. (iii) For the accomplishment of these objects Orgetorix was chosen. (iv) He took
upon himself an embassage to the communities.’ Caes. Gal. 1.3.2)
Conversely, the choice of an active or passive form may also serve to continue the
perspective. This was illustrated in ex. (f) of § 5.10, here repeated as (d). Within the
framework of tree-chopping activities trabes and robur are expressed as subject of
their sentence, just like ilex and piceae in the preceding sentences. This requires a pas-
sive form: scinditur. Thereafter the perspective shifts to the men implied in the various
activities, with active advolvunt.
(d) (Itur in antiquam silvam, stabula alta ferarum.) / Procumbunt piceae. Sonat
icta securibus ilex / fraxineaeque trabes cuneis et fissile robur / scinditur.
(Advolvunt ingentis montibus ornos.)
(‘(They pass into the forest primeval, the deep lairs of the beasts.) Down drop the
pitchy pines. The ilex rings to the stroke of the axe; and ashen logs and splintering oak
are cleft with wedges. (From the mountains they roll down huge ash trees.)’ Verg. A.
6.179–82)
Turning now to word order, the fact that the first or second position of the sentence is
usually occupied by a pragmatically prominent constitutent contributes considerably
to the coherence of the discourse. Very often that constituent is the topic of the clause
which serves as an anchor for new information. It can also be a contrastive focus or a
theme constituent, or—in the case of presentative sentences—a verb, which signals a
new or unexpected entity. Chapters 22 and 23 contain enough illustrations, which
need not be repeated here.
non-linguistic factors which are determined by the relation between the speaker and
the addressee and the communicative situation. A few generalizations can be made.
An opening usually contains one or more of the following four components: (i) get-
ting the attention of the addressee, (ii) addressing him or her, (iii) expressing a wish
concerning the addressee’s well-being, and (iv) a question about what the addressee is
doing. The first of these can also be a non-verbal activity. The addressee’s reaction may
contain more or less the same components; the first component often consists of a
reaction of surprise or joy. Examples are (a)–(c).
(a) Heus Phormio, / vale. # Vale, Antipho.
(‘Hey, Phormio! Goodbye! # Goodbye, Antipho!’ Ter. Ph. 882–3)
(b) Oh, / Toxile, quid agitur? # Oh, lutum lenonium . . .
(‘Oh, Toxilus, how are you? # Oh, you pimp dirt . . .’ Pl. Per. 405–6)
(c) Ecquis hic est? # Adest. # Eu, Philolaches, / salve, amicissume mi omnium
hominum. / # Di te ament. Accuba, Callidamates.
(‘Is anyone here? # Yes, there is. # Excellent, Philolaches, greetings, my best friend
among all men. # May the gods love you. Do recline at table, Callidamates.’ Pl. Mos.
339–41)
Conclusions of a conversation usually begin with a signal that it’s time to stop, and
end with some form of farewell. Examples are (e), with the signal num quid vis, and
(f). The addressee can, for comic or other purposes, ignore the signal to stop, as in (g),
where Agorastocles ignores Adelphasium’s words ‘Follow me, my sister’.
1230 Discourse
168 The addressee alone is a further possibility. See Cugusi (1983: 64–7), who also discusses the relative
order of sender and addressee.
Opening and concluding a conversation or letter 1231
1 See Pultrová (2018). 2 The actual document is of Flavian date (see Crawford (1996: 395)).
1234 Addenda and corrigenda to Volume I
p. 508, l. –19 Add: Nam quod idem Segulius veteranos queri quod tu et Caesar in decem viris
non essetis, utinam ne ego quidem essem! (Cic. Fam. 11.21.2).
p. 508, footnote 186 Read: . . . he is aware of. Ov. Ep. 8.34 is textually uncertain.
p. 517, footnote 198 Add: For the use of the third person in legal texts and of the second person
in metadirective expressions, see Decorte (2016). For the conditions of use of -to forms in
Plautus and Terence, see Barrios-Lech (2017).
p. 541, footnote 227 Add: For a detailed treatment of the future participle in Seneca, see
Westman (1961).
p. 543, footnote 229 After the first sentence add: For the non-simultaneous use of the present
participle from the second century ad onwards, see Lorenzo (1998). For the anterior use of
present participles that function as secondary predicate with subject constituents and the types
of verbs involved in Late Latin, see Galdi (2015; 2016). For Jerome’s practice of translating
Greek aorist participles, see Haug (2012: 318–20).
At the end of the note add: However, in the late historians discussed in Galdi (2016) parti-
cipial clauses are very often at the end (see also § 21.7).
p. 546, footnote 235 Add: Lorenzo (1998).
p. 565, footnote 248 Read: 2014.
p. 581, l. –5 Read: Areopagites.
p. 599, l. 9 Read: Sperare se pro.
p. 622, l. 6 Read: K.-St.: II.236–7.
p. 627, at the end of § 7.131 Add to the note: For the Late Latin use of the subjunctive in a quod
clause with miror, see Sz.: 575 and Adams (2016: 328–9).
p. 633, footnote 291 Add: A monograph on the difference between indirect questions and rela-
tive clauses is Eckert (1992). See also § 15.61.
p. 643, l. –8 After footnote cue 304 insert: The difference in mood may reflect the fact that in (i)
the actions of the main and cum clauses are simultaneous, whereas in (j) the actual operation
has not yet started. See also (e) above.5
p. 647, l. –1 Read: generally (see § 7.131).
p. 647, footnote 309 Add: For discussion, see Orlandini (2001: 347–55).
p. 649, footnote 312 Read: 2014b.
p. 652, l. 2 Read: § 7.130, section (i).
p. 653, l. 4 Read: § 7.130, section (v).
p. 653, footnote 314 Add: For ex. (e), see Adams (2016: 298).
p. 661, l. 2 above ex. (y) After (y)–(ab) insert: Here the perfect forms of the apodoses of the
conditional clauses are determined by the present tense of the governing clauses.
p. 668, l. –13 Read: § 7.111.
p. 685, ex. (b) Read: praetor.
p. 686, footnote 18 Add: For the use of haud in litotes, see Magni et al. (2017: 22–4).
p. 691, § 8.11 Add a footnote: for haud see Magni et al. (2017: 24): ‘haud couvre le domaine de
la négation scalaire’.
p. 691 Table 8.1 in the column Verg. instead of 10 read: 110.
p. 694, l. –2 Read: focusing subjunct.
p. 695, l. –2 Read: focusing subjunct.
p. 715, after (m) Insert note: A noteworthy instance of nec in Ovid is (15a). Here the negation
belongs to the quotation with the words of the nymph Cyane.6
(15a) (sc. Cyane) . . . adgnovitque deam ‘Nec longius ibitis!,’ inquit, / ‘Non potes . . . (‘. . . and she
recognized the goddess and said: ‘No further shall you go! Thou canst . . .’ Ovid. Met. 5.414–15)
p. 719, ex. (j) Read: . . . they sent.
p. 720, ex. (f) Replace by:
(f) . . . vos interdicitis patribus commercio plebis, ne nos comitate ac munificentia nostra
provocemus plebem nec plebs nobis dicto audiens atque oboediens sit.
(‘. . . you deny the Fathers intercourse with the commons, lest we by our friendliness and
liberality encourage them, or they become dutiful and obedient to us.’ Liv. 5.3.8)
p. 739, footnote 5 Add: For the use of ego to make oneself known, as in ex. (p), see Müller (2019).
p. 759, footnote 25 Read: Halla-aho (2012; 2019), with references.
p. 759, footnote 26 Add: For the proleptic accusative with facio, see Bortolussi (2014).
p. 768, footnote 32 Read: Pieroni (2015).
p. 776, ex. (e) Read: to lie down at table.
p. 820, ex. (d) Read: think that then I.
p. 821, ex. (n) Read: Ariminum.
p. 822, ex. (q) Instead of ‘parasite’ read: hanger-on.
p. 856, example (d) Add footnote: Kroon and Risselada (2002: 71) take iam with unus, fortasse
recte.
p. 858, l. –12 Instead of ‘subject complement’ read: secondary predicate.
p. 869, ex. (c) Read: violent day by day . . .
p. 877, Appendix l. 4 Read: § 4.60.
p. 878, l. 13 Read: § 10.86.
p. 882 Above 10.57 read: 4.65.
p. 891, l. 2 Add footnote: For ita and sic as intensifiers, see Panchón (1998).
p. 891, footnote 105 Add: For paene, vix and other ‘scalar approximators’, see Bertocchi and
Maraldi (2015).
p. 903, ex. (b) Read: Pac. trag. 340.
p. 912, footnote 132 Read: 2014b.
p. 919, footnote 141 Add: Baldi and Nuti (2010: 350–5) discuss the phenomenon under the
term ‘external possession’.
6 See Bömer ad loc. I was referred to this instance by Stephen van Beek.
1238 Addenda and corrigenda to Volume I
p. 1068, footnote 178 Add: For the use of proper names in this context and a discussion of their
syntactic function, see Pieroni (2019).
p. 1076, footnote 190 Add: For a discussion of Varro’s use of satellites at the adjective phrase
level, see Bodelot (2015).
p. 1086, ex. (b) Read: great-grandfather and grandfather.
p. 1092, Table 11.9, line Apuleius Read: hic 148 180, ille 334 193, iste 193 44, is 16 411.
p. 1119, ex. (b) Replace the translation by: We shall leave this question open.
p. 1123, l. –17 After ‘expressions’ insert footnote: See Bertocchi (1989).
p. 1129 Add footnote: For developments in the ‘irregular’ use of suus, see Mari (2016: 47–63).
p. 1130, ex. (d) Read: Fabius (2 x).
p. 1133, footnote 253 Read: Bertocchi (1989; 1994). Add: For pragmatic factors (topicality and
empathy), see also Zheltova (2016).
p. 1144, ex. (c) In the translation read: Messalla.
p. 1147, footnote 276 Insert after ‘Pinkster (2005c).’: For Seneca, see Fruyt (2019). Add at end:
For the use of ille in hagiographic texts of the fifth and sixth century, see Joffre et al. (2017).
p. 1148, footnote 279 Add: See also Kiss (2016).
p. 1148, footnote 280 Add: Rosén (1994) draws attention to the increased use in Augustine’s
Confessiones of ille and other determiners with postposed subject constituents of clauses with
two arguments.
p. 1153, l. 3 Read: (a)–(i).
p. 1153, l. 4 Read: (j)–(l).
p. 1153, ll. 13–14 Read: with the escalating particles etiam and et ‘even’, ne . . . quidem ‘not even’.
p. 1153, l. –3 Instead of ‘Restrictive subjuncts’ read: Escalating subjuncts.
p. 1153, footnote 289 Add: For the additive and escalating uses of ipse, see Bertocchi and
Maraldi (2012: 16–19).
p. 1173, ex. (b) Read: 1.41.
p. 1178, l. –13 Read § 11.71.
p. 1179, footnote 4 After ‘2012’ add: , 2018. At the end of the footnote add: See also Pinkster
(2018).
p. 1180, footnote 5 Add: The ordering of the cases in Figure 12.1 is by frequency and deviates
from the canonical order, as presented at p. 35.
p. 1185, l. –6 Instead of ‘ditransitive’ read: bitransitive.
p. 1186, footnote 8 Add: For early medieval texts, see Korkiakangas (2016a; b).
p. 1188 To the note in small type add: Some scholars regard the use of the accusative for the
subject as an ‘ergative trait’ in Latin.9
p. 1233, ex. (b) Replace the translation by: Should I tire you out at your age for the sake of my
love?
Brix, Julius and Niemeyer, Max (19106). Ausgewählte Komödien des T. Maccius Plautus. Captivi.
Leipzig: Teubner.
Kroll, Wilhelm (1913). M. Tulli Ciceronis Orator. Berlin: Weidmann.
Mayhoff, Karl Friedrich Theodor (1870). C. Plini Secundi naturalis historiae libri xxxvii, Vol.
I. Leipzig: Teubner.
Nisbet, Robert George (1939). M. Tulli Ciceronis De domo sua ad pontifices oratio. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Stockert, Walter (1983). T. Maccius Plautus: Aulularia. Stuttgart: Teubner.
Ziegler, Karl (ed.) (1969). M. Tulli Ciceronis de Re publica. Leipzig: Teubner.
Adams, James N. (2016). An Anthology of Informal Latin 200 bc–ad 800. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Adams, James N. and de Melo, Wolfgang (2016). ‘Ad versus the dative: from early to late Latin’,
in James N. Adams and Nigel Vincent (eds), 87–131.
Addenda and corrigenda to Volume I 1241
Adams, James N. and Vincent, Nigel (eds) (2016). Early and Late Latin. Cambridge: Cambrige
University Press.
Baños, José Miguel (2012). ‘Verbos soporte e incorporación sintáctica en latín: el ejemplo de
ludos facere’, Revista de Estudios Latinos 12: 37–57.
Baños, José Miguel (2018). ‘Las construcciones con verbo soporte en latin: una perspectiva
diacrónica’, in Colette Bodelot and Olga Spevak (eds), 21–51.
Barrios-Lech, Peter (2016a). ‘Noli + infinitive in Roman Comedy’, Glotta 92: 18–23.
Barrios-Lech, Peter (2016b). Linguistic Interaction in Roman Comedy. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Barrios-Lech, Peter (2016c). ‘The volo command in Roman Comedy’, Mnemosyne 69: 628–47.
Barrios-Lech, Peter (2017). ‘The imperative in -to in Plautus and Terence’, Classical Quarterly
67: 485–506.
Bertocchi, Alessandra (1989). ‘The role of antecedents of Latin anaphors’, in Gualtiero Calboli
(ed.), 441–62.
Bertocchi, Alessandra and Maraldi, Mirka (2012). ‘La scalarité, application à certaines
phénomènes de la langue latine’, De Lingua Latina, Revue de Linguistique Latine du Centre
Alfred Ernout [Online] 8.
Bertocchi, Alessandra and Maraldi, Mirka (2015). ‘Scalar approximators’, in Gerd V. M. Haverling
(ed.), 518–29.
Bodelot, Colette (2014b). ‘Les propositions complétives dans la Chronique originale de
Frédégaire’, in Piera Molinelli et al. (eds), I.183–203.
Bodelot, Colette (2015). ‘L’adjectif latin et ses expansions: une relation de solidarité à géométrie
variable’, in Gerd V. M. Haverling (ed.), 301–13.
Bodelot, Colette (2017). ‘Sur la valeur controversée du subjonctif nié par non dans les ques-
tions de protestation et de délibération en latin’, De Lingua Latina, Revue de Linguistique
Latine du Centre Alfred Ernout [Online]: 1–22.
Bodelot, Colette and Spevak, Olga (eds) (2018). Les constructions à verbe support en latin.
Clermont-Ferrand: Presses Universitaires Blaise Pascal (Cahiers du LRL 7).
Bortolussi, Bernard (2014). ‘La construction proleptique avec facere ut’, in Bernard Bortolussi
and Peggy Lecaudé (eds), 113–30.
Bortolussi, Bernard and Lecaudé, Peggy (eds) (2014). La causativité en latin. Paris: L’Harmattan.
Cabrillana, Concepción (2016). ‘El estatus sintáctico-semántico del caso dativo con verbos
estativos latinos’, Emerita 84: 145–66.
Cabrillana, Concepción (2019). ‘Praedicativum and subject complement: a question revisited
in light of the Latin verb sto’, in Lidewij W. van Gils et al. (eds), 116–33.
Cabrillana, Concepción and Lehmann, Christian (eds) (2014). Acta XIV Colloquii Internationalis
Linguisticae Latinae. Madrid: Ediciones Clásicas.
Carlier, Anne and Guillot-Barbance, Céline (eds) (2018). Latin tardif, français ancien:
Continuités et ruptures. Berlin: De Gruyter.
Christol, Alain and Spevak, Olga (eds) (2012). Les évolutions du latin. Paris: l’Harmattan.
Cuzzolin, Pierluigi (2015). ‘Reciprocals in Latin. A Reappraisal’, in Gerd V. M. Haverling (ed.),
221–39.
1242 Addenda and corrigenda to Volume I
Decorte, Robrecht (2016). ‘Sic habeto: the functions of -to imperatives in legal Latin and
beyond’, in Paolo Poccetti (ed.), 801–19.
Duarte, Pedro, Fleck, Frédérique, Lecaudé, Peggy, and Morel, Aude (eds) (2017). Histoires des
mots. Paris: Presses de l’Université Paris-Sorbonne.
Eckert, Günter (1992). Thema, Rhema und Fokus: Eine Studie zur Klassifizierung von indirekten
Fragesätzen und Relativsätzen im Lateinischen. Münster: Nodus Publikationen.
Fedriani, Chiara (2014). Experiential Constructions in Latin. Leiden: Brill.
Fedriani, Chiara (2017). ‘Quapropter, quaeso? “Why, for pity’s sake?” Questions and the prag-
matic functions of quaeso, obsecro, and amabo in Plautus’, in Camille Denizot and Olga Spevak
(eds), Pragmatic Approaches to Latin and Ancient Greek. Amsterdam: Benjamins, 83–109.
Fruyt, Michèle (2019). ‘Le système latin de la déixis et de l’endophore: l’évolution linguistique
chez Sénèque’, in Lidewij W. van Gils et al. (eds), 296–316.
Galdi, Giovanbattista (2015). ‘The expression of simultaneity and anteriority in the Historia of
Victor Vitensis’, in Gerd V. M. Haverling (ed.), 183–92.
Galdi, Giovanbattista (2016). ‘On coepi/incipio + infinitive: some new remarks’, in
James N. Adams and Nigel Vincent (eds), 246–64.
García Leal, Alfonso and Prieto, Clara Elena (eds) (2017). Latin vulgaire–latin tardif XI.
Hildesheim: Olms Weidmann.
Gils, Lidewij W. van, de Jong, Irene J. F., and Kroon, Caroline H. M. (eds) (2018). Textual
Strategies in Ancient War Narrative: Thermopylae, Cannae and Beyond. Leiden: Brill.
Gils, Lidewij W. van and Kroon, Caroline H. M. (2018). ‘Discourse-linguistic strategies in
Livy’s account of the battle at Cannae’, in Lidewij W. van Gils et al. (eds), 191–233.
Gils, Lidewij W. van and Kroon, Caroline H. M. (2019). ‘Engaging the audience. An intersubject-
ivity approach to the historic present in Latin’, in Lidewij W. van Gils et al. (eds), 351–73.
Gils, Lidewij W. van, Kroon, Caroline H. M., and Risselada, Rodie (eds) (2019). Lemmata
Linguistica Latina, II: Clause and Discourse. Berlin: de Gruyter.
Giusti, Giuliana and Iovino, Rossella (2015). ‘On the syntax of the Latin quantifier omnis’, in
Gerd V. M. Haverling (ed.), 314–24.
Halla-aho, Hilla (2019). ‘Proleptic accusatives in Latin’, Glotta 95: 135–58.
Haug, Dag (2012). ‘Open verb-based adjuncts in New Testament Greek—with a view to the
Latin Vulgate translation’, in Cathrine Fabricius-Hansen and Dag Haug (eds), Big Events,
Small Clauses. Berlin: De Gruyter, 287–321.
Haverling, Gerd V. M. (2016). ‘On the use of habeo and the perfect participle in earlier and later
Latin’, in James N. Adams and Nigel Vincent (eds), 180–201.
Haverling, Gerd V. M. (ed.) (2015). Latin Linguistics in the Early 21st Century. Acts of the 16th
International Colloquium on Latin Linguistics, Uppsala, 6–11 June 2011. Uppsala: Studia
Latina Upsaliensia. Uppsala Universitet.
Hine, Harry M. (2011). ‘Discite . . . agricolae: modes of instruction in Latin prose agricultural
writing from Cato to Pliny the Elder’, Classical Quarterly 61: 624–54.
Hoffmann, Roland (2014). ‘Les constructions causatives dans les traductions latines des textes
hébreux et grecs: le cas de la Vulgate de Jérôme’, in Bernard Bortolussi and Peggy Lecaudé
(eds), 143–76.
Hoffmann, Roland (2016). ‘On causativity in Latin’, Journal of Latin Linguistics 15: 33–71.
Addenda and corrigenda to Volume I 1243
Moretti, Paola Francesca (2019). ‘Is it possible to identify orality? Verb-phrases “Auxiliary +
Infinitive” in spoken (late) Latin’, Mnemosyne 72: 488–508.
Moussy, Claude (2014). ‘Les emplois intransitifs des verbes curare et evitare’, in Concepción
Cabrillana and Christian Lehmann (eds), 391–400.
Müller, Roman (2017). ‘Nein im klassischen und nicht-klassischen Dialog’, in Alfonso García
Leal and Carla Elena Prieto (eds), 116–26.
Müller, Roman (2019). ‘Ego sum Amphitruo: Selbestidentifikation in der römischen Komödie’,
in Lidewij W. van Gils et al. (eds), 464–78.
Nahon, Peter (2017). ‘Paléoroman daras (Pseudo-Frédégaire, VIIe siècle): de la bonne interpré-
tation d’un jalon de la linguistique’, Bulletin de la Société de Linguistique de Paris 112: 123–30.
Nuti, Andrea (2010). ‘Some notes on the use of stare’, in Peter Anreiter and Manfred Kienpointner
(eds), 437–66.
Nuti, Andrea (2019). ‘Gallia est omnis divisa in partes tres: Sapir’s typology and different
perspectives on totality’, in Lidewij W. van Gils et al. (eds), 219–40.
Orlandini, Anna M. (1995b). ‘De la connexion: une analyse pragmatique des connecteurs
latins atqui et immo’, Lalies 15: 259–69.
Orlandini, Anna M. and Poccetti, Paolo (2014). ‘Gli aspetti semantico-pragmatici del futuro II
latino e la loro evoluzione romanza’, in Piera Molinelli et al. (eds), 1011–30.
Pieroni, Silvia (2019). ‘Themistocles veni, Tarquiniusque loquor’, in Martin Taillade et al. (eds),
217–25.
Pinkster, Harm (2018). ‘ La contribution de marques casuelles à l’interprétation des proposi-
tions’, in Anne Carlier and Céline Guillot-Barbance (eds), 97–125.
Poccetti, Paolo (ed.) (2016). Latinitatis Rationes. Berlin: De Gruyter.
Pompei, Anna (2018). ‘Facere saltum ou dare saltum? Verbes support et noms de mouvement’,
in Colette Bodelot and Olga Spevak (eds), 169–86.
Pultrová, Lucie (2018). ‘Periphrastic comparison in Latin’, Journal of Latin Linguistics 17:
93–110.
Ripoll, Arthur (2012). ‘Le changement invisible ou “que tout reste indentique pour que tout
change” ’, in Alain Christol and Olga Spevak (eds), 299–323.
Rivas, Javier (2000). Ergativity and Transitive Gradients in the Accusative and Infinitive
Construction. Universidade de Santiago de Compostela: Servizo de Publicacións.
Rovai, Francesco (2012). Sistemi di codifica argomentale. Pisa: Pacini.
Schiesaro, Alessandro (1984). ‘Nonne vides in Lucrezio’, Materiali e Discussioni per l’Analisi dei
Testi Classici 13: 143–57.
Schøsler, Lene (2018). ‘ “How useful is case morphology?”: from Latin to French’, in Anne
Carlier and Céline Guillot-Barbance (eds), 127–70.
Sirks, Boudewijn (1993). ‘The sources of the code’, in Jill Harries and Ian Wood (eds), The
Theodosian Code: Studies in the Imperial Law of Late Antiquity. London: Duckworth, 45–67.
Spevak, Olga (2015). ‘L’apposition étroite en latin’, in Gerd V. M. Haverling (ed.), 325–37.
Spevak, Olga (2016a). ‘À propos de l’aspect verbal en grec, en slave et en latin’, Bulletin de la
Société de Linguistique de Paris 111: 243–75.
Addenda and corrigenda to Volume I 1245
Spevak, Olga (2016b). ‘Ex Anniana domo Milonis: les syntagmes nominaux avec deux complé-
ments de possession’, Pallas 102: 35–44.
Spevak, Olga (2017). ‘La construction -tio + esse dans les textes normatifs de l’époque
préclassique’, in Pedro Duarte et al. (eds), 403–11.
Spevak, Olga (2018). ‘Les constructions à verbe support dans les textes normatifs’, in Colette
Bodelot and Olga Spevak (eds), 207–19.
Stienaers, David (2015). ‘Tense and discourse organization in Caesar’s De bello Gallico’, in
Gerd V. M. Haverling (ed.), 208–20.
Stienaers, David (2016). ‘Linguistic features of peaks in Latin narrative texts’, in Paolo Poccetti
(ed.), 902–16.
Torrego, Esperanza (2019). ‘The expression of knowledge in Latin: cognosco, nosco, scio, nescio
and ignoro’, in Lidewij W. van Gils et al. (eds), 20–47.
Unceta, Luis (2015). ‘Sobre el proceso de subjetivación de algunas formas verbales en la lengua
de la comedia romana’, in Gerd V. M. Haverling (ed.), 468–79.
Unceta, Luis (2017). ‘Estrategias de cortesía linguística en Querolus’, Latomus 75: 140–61.
Unceta, Luis (2018). ‘Gli studi sulla (s)cortesia linguistica in latino. Possibilità di analisi e
proposte per il futuro’, Studi e Saggi Linguistici 56: 9–37.
Zheltova, Elena (2016). ‘Latin reflexive pronouns at the crossroads of syntax and pragmatics’,
Pallas 102: 211–18.
BIBLIOGR APH Y
A. Abbreviated references
Merguet (Reden) Merguet, Hugo, Lexikon zu den Reden des Cicero, 4 vols. Jena, 1877.
Neue-W. Neue, Friedrich and Wagener, Carl, Formenlehre der lateinischen Sprache,
3 vols. Leipzig: Reisland, 1892–19023.
New Pauly Cancik, Hubert and Schneider, Helmuth (eds), Der neue Pauly:
Enzyklopädie der Antike. Stuttgart: Verlag J. N. Metzler, 1996ff. (English
translation: Brill’s New Pauly. Leiden: Brill, 2010ff.)
OLD Oxford Latin Dictionary. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1968–82
(20122).
poet. Fragmenta poetarum Latinorum epicorum et lyricorum praeter Ennium et
Lucilium, post W. Morel edidit Carolus Buechner. Leipzig: Teubner, 1982.
Sz. Szantyr, Anton, New edition of Johann Baptist Hofmann, Lateinische
Syntax und Stilistik. Munich: Beck, 19722.
TLL Thesaurus Linguae Latinae. Leipzig: Teubner, 1900–
TPN Wolf, Joseph Georg, Neue Rechtsurkunden aus Pompeji: Tabulae
Pompeianae Novae. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 2010.
B. Linguistic Studies
Aalto, Pentti (1949). Untersuchungen über das lateinische Gerundium und Gerundivum.
Helsinki: Academia Fennica.
Achard, Guy and Ledentu, Marie (eds) (2000). Orateurs, auditeurs, lecteurs: À propos de
l’ éloquence romaine à la fin de la République et au début du Principat. Lyon: Broccard.
Adams, James N. (1971). ‘A type of hyperbaton in Latin prose’, Proceedings of the Cambridge
Philological Society 17: 1–16.
Adams, James N. (1972). ‘The language of the later books of Tacitus’ Annals’, Classical Quarterly
22: 350–73.
Adams, James N. (1976a). ‘A typological approach to Latin word order’, Indogermanische
Forschungen 81: 70–100.
Adams, James N. (1976b). The Text and the Language of a Vulgar Latin Chronicle (Anonymus
Valesianus II). London: BICS.
Adams, James N. (1977). The Vulgar Latin of the Letters of Claudius Terentianus. Manchester:
Manchester University Press.
Adams, James N. (1978). ‘Conventions of naming in Cicero’, Classical Quarterly 28: 145–66.
Adams, James N. (1984). ‘Female speech in Latin comedy’, Antichthon 18: 43–77.
Adams, James N. (1991). ‘Pelagonius and Columella’, Antichthon 25: 72–95.
Adams, James N. (1994a). ‘Wackernagel’s law and the position of unstressed personal pronouns
in classical Latin’, Transactions of the Philological Society 92: 103–78.
Adams, James N. (1994b). Wackernagel’s Law and the Placement of the Copula esse in Classical
Latin. TCPS Supplementary Volume 18.
Adams, James N. (1995). ‘The language of the Vindolanda Tablets: An interim report’, Journal
of Roman Studies 85: 86–134.
Adams, James N. (1996). ‘Interpuncts as evidence for the enclitic character of personal
pronouns in Latin’, Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik 111: 208–10.
Bibliography 1249
Adams, James N. (1999a). ‘Nominative personal pronouns and some patterns of speech in
republican and Augustan poetry’, in James N. Adams and Roland G. Mayer (eds), 97–133.
Adams, James N. (1999b). ‘The poets of Bu Njem: Language, culture and the centurionate’,
Journal of Roman Studies 89: 109–34.
Adams, James N. (2003a). ‘Petronius and new non-literary Latin’, in József Herman and
Hannah Rosén (eds), 11–23.
Adams, James N. (2003b). Bilingualism and the Latin Language. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Adams, James N. (2005a). ‘The accusative and infinitive and dependent quod/quia clauses. The
evidence of non-literary Latin and Petronius’, in Sándor Kiss et al. (eds), 195–206.
Adams, James N. (2005b). ‘The Bellum Africum’, in Tobias Reinhardt et al. (eds), 73–96.
Adams, James N. (2007). The Regional Diversification of Latin, 200 bc–ad 600. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Adams, James N. (2013). Social Variation and the Latin Language. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Adams, James N. (2016). An Anthology of Informal Latin 200 bc–ad 800. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Adams, James N. (2019). ‘The Latin of the new Vindolanda tablets’, Britannia 50: 253–63.
Adams, James N. (forthc.). Asyndeton and Latin Literature. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Adams, James N. and Mayer, Roland G. (eds) (1999). Aspects of the Language of Latin Poetry.
London: Proceedings of the British Academy.
Adams, James N. and Vincent, Nigel (2016). ‘Infinitives with verbs of motion from Latin to
Romance’, in James N. Adams and Nigel Vincent (eds), 265–93.
Adams, James N. and Vincent, Nigel (eds) (2016). Early and Late Latin. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Addabbo, Anna Maria (2001). ‘La proposition relative dans le de agricultura de Caton’, in
Claude Moussy et al. (eds), 159–69.
Adema, Suzanne M. (2017). Speech and Thought in Latin War Narratives: Words of Warriors.
Leiden: Brill.
Adema, Suzanne M. (2019a). ‘Words when it is time for action: Representations of speech and
thought in the battles of Cannae and Zama’, in Lidewij W. van Gils et al. (eds) 293–315.
Adema, Suzanne M. (2019b). Tenses in Vergil’s Aeneid: Narrative Style and Structure. Leiden:
Brill.
Agud, Ana, Fernández Delgado, José A., and Ramos, Agustín (eds) (1996). Las lenguas de
corpus y sus problemas lingüísticos. Madrid: Ediciones Clásicas.
Aili, Hans (1979). The Prose Rhythm of Sallust and Livy. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wicksel.
Albrecht, Michael von (1964). Die Parenthese in Ovids Metamorphosen und ihre dichterische
Funktion. Hildesheim: Olms.
Albrecht, Michael von (2003). Cicero’s Style: A Synopsis. Leiden: Brill.
Albrecht, Michael von (20124). Meister römischer Prosa: Von Cato bis Apuleius: Interpretationen.
Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft.
Allen, Joseph H. and Greenough, James B. (19032). Latin Grammar for Schools and Colleges,
Founded on Comparative Grammar. Boston: Ginn & Company (repr. Eastford: Martino Fine
Books, 2017).
Allen, W. Sidney (1973). Accent and Rhythm. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
1250 Bibliography
Bertocchi, Alessandra and Maraldi, Mirka (2008). ‘Quo plus potestis eo moderatius imperio uti
debetis. Comparative conditionals in Latin’, Papers on Grammar 10: 1–38.
Bertocchi, Alessandra and Maraldi, Mirka (2009). ‘Latin comparative correlatives and
scalarity’, in Pascale Hadermann and Olga Inkova (eds), Approches de la scalarité. Geneva:
Droz, 113–34.
Bertocchi, Alessandra and Maraldi, Mirka (2010a). ‘Concession et scalarité’, Papers on
Grammar 11: 23–44.
Bertocchi, Alessandra and Maraldi, Mirka (2010b). ‘Mid-scalar quantifiers in Latin’, in Peter
Anreiter and Manfred Kienpointner (eds), 193–206.
Bertocchi, Alessandra and Maraldi, Mirka (2011). ‘Conditionals and concessives’, in Philip
Baldi and Pierluigi Cuzzolin (eds), 93–193.
Bertocchi, Alessandra and Maraldi, Mirka (2012). ‘La scalarité, application à certains phénomènes
de la langue latine’, Revue de Linguistique Latine du Centre Alfred Ernout: De Lingua Latina
8 [online]: http://lettres.sorbonne-universite.fr/sites/default/files/media/2020-05/mirka_
sandra_scalarite_relecture_2_.pdf.
Bertocchi, Alessandra and Maraldi, Mirka (2015). ‘Scalar approximators’, in Gerd Haverling
(ed.), 518–29.
Bertocchi, Alessandra and Maraldi, Mirka (2017). ‘Dumtaxat’, in Pedro Duarte et al. (eds), 223–34.
Bertocchi, Alessandra, Maraldi, Mirka and Orlandini, Anna (2010). ‘Quantification’, in Philip
Baldi and Pierluigi Cuzzolin (eds), III.19–173.
Bertocchi, Alessandra and Orlandini, Anna (1996). ‘Quelques aspects de la comparaison en
latin’, Indogermanische Forschungen 101: 195–232.
Bertocchi, Alessandra and Orlandini, Anna (2002). ‘Impossible n’est pas latin’, in Michèle Fruyt
and Claude Moussy (eds), 9–23.
Biraud, Michèle and Mellet, Sylvie (2000). ‘Les faits d’héterogénéité énonciative dans les textes
grecs et latins de l’Antiquité’, in Sylvie Mellet and Marcelle Vuillaume (eds), Le style indirect
libre et ses contextes, Chronos 5. Amsterdam: Rodopi, 9–48.
Bischoff, Bernhard (1990). Latin Palaeography. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bitter, Norbert (1976). Kampfschilderungen bei Ammian. Bonn: Habelt.
Biville, Frédérique (1996). ‘Le statut linguistique des interjections en latin’, in Hannah Rosén
(ed.), 209–20.
Biville, Frédérique (2002). ‘Les modalités interjectives (Virgile, Enéide)’, in Michèle Fruyt and
Claude Moussy (eds), 275–89.
Biville, Frédérique (2003). ‘La syntaxe aux confins de la sémantique et de la phonologie: Les
interjections vues par les grammariens latins’, in Pierre Swiggers and Alfons Wouters (eds),
Syntax in Antiquity. Leuven: Peeters, 227–39.
Biville, Frédérique (2014). ‘Description du latin et métalangue au VIe siècle. Priscien, Martyrius,
Cassiodore’, in Piera Molinelli et al. (eds), 679–712.
Biville, Frédérique (2015). ‘Ad quod dicendum quod . . . Les emplois métalinguistiques et
discursifs de quod dans le discours grammatical latin’, in Gerd Haverling (ed.), 387–98.
Biville, Frédérique, Lhommé, Marie-Karine, and Vallat, Daniel (eds) (2012). Latin vulgaire–
latin tardif IX. Lyon: Maison de l’Orient et de la Méditerranée.
Blaise, Albert (1955). Manuel du latin chrétien. Strasbourg: Le Latin Chrétien.
Blänsdorf, Jürgen (1967). Archaische Gedankengänge in den Komödien des Plautus. Wiesbaden:
Steiner.
Blänsdorf, Jürgen (1978). ‘Erzählende, argumentierende, diskursive Prosa. Versuch einer ange-
wandten Texttypologie’, Würzburger Jahrbücher für die Altertumswissenschaft NF 4: 107–19.
1254 Bibliography
Blomgrén, Sven (1937). ‘De sermone Ammiani Marcellini quaestiones variae’. Dissertation,
Uppsala.
Blümel, Wolfgang (1979). ‘Zur historischen Morphosyntax der Verbalabstrakta im Lateinischen’,
Glotta 57: 77–125.
Bock, Bettina (2009). ‘Relativsätze mit Nebensinn in altindogermanischen Sprachen’, in
Elisabeth Rieken and Paul Widmer (eds), 15–28.
Bodelot, Colette (1987). L’interrogation indirecte en latin. Paris: Société pour l’Information
Grammaticale.
Bodelot, Colette (1995). ‘Complétives appositives en latin: forme, sens, syntaxe’, in Dominique
Longrée (ed.), 45–58.
Bodelot, Colette (1998). ‘Si “complétif ” chez Tite-Live’, in Benjamín García Hernández (ed.),
169–83.
Bodelot, Colette (2000). Espaces fonctionnels de la subordination complétive en latin. Leuven:
Peeters.
Bodelot, Colette (2002a). ‘Réflexions sur la modalité à propos de ut “final” ’, in Michèle Fruyt
and Claude Moussy (eds), 249–63.
Bodelot, Colette (2002b). ‘Habeo quid . . . / habeo quod . . .: Variation libre ou originalité
conditionnée?’, in Alide Machtelt Bolkestein et al. (eds), 43–58.
Bodelot, Colette (2003). ‘L’interrogation indirecte’, in Colette Bodelot (ed.), 193–333.
Bodelot, Colette (2004). ‘Anaphore, cataphore, et corrélation: approche générale de la problé-
matique dans l’optique de la phrase complexe’, in Colette Bodelot (ed.), 13–25.
Bodelot, Colette (2005). ‘Interférences fonctionnelles entre relatives, complétives et circon-
stancielles’, in Gualtiero Calboli (ed.), 467–77.
Bodelot, Colette (2008). ‘Information structure and grammaticalization’, in Elena Seoane and
María José López-Conso (eds), Theoretical and Empirical Issues in Grammaticalization.
Amsterdam: Benjamins, 231–52.
Bodelot, Colette (2010). ‘Propositions complétives entrant en séquence avec un nom ou un
syntagme nominal. Étude morphosyntaxique et sémantique’, in Olga Spevak (ed.), 163–82.
Bodelot, Colette (2011). ‘La grammaticalisation de lat. tamquam (si) + verbe fini: De l’origine
corrélative à l’emploi complétif ’, Bulletin de la Société Linguistique de Paris 106: 263–91.
Bodelot, Colette (2013). ‘La grammaticalisation de si en latin de l’adverbe modal à la conjonc-
tion introduisant une subordonnée complétive’, in Colette Bodelot et al. (eds), 365–80.
Bodelot, Colette (2014a). ‘De la subordonnée circonstancielle à la subordonnée complétive: La
grammaticalisation de tamquam’, in Concepción Cabrillana and Christian Lehmann (eds),
193–210.
Bodelot, Colette (2014b). ‘Les propositions complétives dans la Chronique originale de
Frédégaire’, in Piera Molinelli et al. (eds), I.183–203.
Bodelot, Colette (2016). ‘Retour sur les marges de la subordination complétive en latin’, Journal
of Latin Linguistics 15: 1–32.
Bodelot, Colette (2017). ‘Dico + proposition déclarative en hagiographie du IVe au XIIe s.’, in
Alfonso García Leal and Clara Elena Prieto (eds), 278–92.
Bodelot, Colette (2018). ‘Les subordonnées complétives déclaratives et interrogatives indi-
rectes dans un corpus italo-gaulois d’hagiographie médiolatine’, in Anne Carlier and Céline
Guillot-Barbance (eds), 323–72.
Bodelot, Colette (ed.) (2003). Les propositions complétives en latin. Grammaire fondamentale du
latin X. Leuven: Peeters.
Bibliography 1255
Bortolussi, Bernard (2010). ‘Si quis’, in Peter Anreiter and Manfred Kienpointner (eds),
221–32.
Bortolussi, Bernard (2012). ‘Évolution des indéfinis existentiels et de quisque en latin tardif ’, in
Frédérique Biville et al. (eds), 309–22.
Bortolussi, Bernard (2013). ‘Latin quisque as a floating quantifier’, Journal of Latin Linguistics
12: 5–26.
Bortolussi, Bernard (2014). ‘La construction proleptique avec facere ut’, in Bernard Bortolussi
and Peggy Lecaudé (eds), 113–30.
Bortolussi, Bernard (2016). ‘L’ordre des constituants en poesie: Verbe initial chez Ovide’, in
Paolo Poccetti (ed.), 603–20.
Bortolussi, Bernard (2017). ‘Topicalizations, left dislocations, and the left-periphery’, Catalan
Journal of Linguistics 16: 101–23.
Bortolussi, Bernard (2019). ‘La place du verbe dans le conte de Psyché’, in Joseph Dalbera and
Dominique Longrée (eds), 293–310.
Bortolussi, Bernard and Lecaudé, Peggy (eds) (2014). La causativité en latin. Paris: L’Harmattan.
Bortolussi, Bernard and Sznajder, Lyliane (2001). ‘Syntaxe et interprétation de saltem’, Papers
on Grammar 7: 35–59.
Bortolussi, Bernard and Sznajder, Lyliane (2014). ‘Topicalization versus left-dislocation in
biblical Latin’, Journal of Latin Linguistics 13: 163–95.
Bortolussi, Bernard and Sznajder, Lyliane (2017). ‘Les relatives substantives antéposées dans la
Vulgata: Permanence et innovations’, in Alfonso García Leal and Clara Elena Prieto (eds),
293–308.
Brachet, Jean-Paul and Moussy, Claude (eds) (2006). Latin et langues techniques. Paris: Presses
de l’Université Paris-Sorbonne.
Bräunlich, Alice Freda (1920). ‘The Indicative Indirect Question in Latin’. Dissertation,
University of Chicago.
Brink, Karl (later: Charles) Oscar (1944). ‘A forgotten figure of style in Tacitus’, Classical Review
58: 43–5.
Brink, Karl (later: Charles) Oscar (1969). ‘Horatian notes. Despised readings in the manu-
scripts of the Odes’, Proceedings of the Cambridge Philological Society 15: 1–6.
Briscoe, John (2010). ‘The fragments of Cato’s Origines’, in Eleanor Dickey and Anna Chahoud
(eds), 154–60.
Brodmuehler, Peter (1914). ‘De particulis interrogativis nonnullorum scriptorum aetatis
argenteae’. Dissertation, Bonn.
Brown, Keith and Miller, Jim (eds) (1999). Concise Encyclopedia of Grammatical Categories.
Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Bulhart, Vinzenz (1955). ‘Ausdrucksweisen für das prädikative Verhältnis im Lateinischen’,
Wiener Studien 68: 47–64.
Burckhardt, Georgine (1935). ‘Equidem’, Philologus 90: 498–500.
Bureau, Bruno and Nicolas, Christian (eds) (1998). Moussylanea. Leuven/Paris: Peeters.
Burkard, Thorsten (2019). ‘Was heißt “Dort steht Cornelia” auf Latein?’, Gymnasium 126:
105–26.
Burkard, Thorsten and Schauer, Markus (2000). Lehrbuch der lateinischen Syntax und Semantik.
Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft.
Burton, Philip (2000). The Old Latin Gospels. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Burton, Philip (2011). ‘Christian Latin’, in James Clackson (ed.), 485–501.
1258 Bibliography
Butterfield, David J. (2008). ‘The poetic treatment of atque from Catullus to Juvenal’, Mnemosyne
61: 386–413.
Cabrillana, Concepción (1996). ‘Multifunctional analysis of word order’, in Hannah Rosén
(ed.), 377–88.
Cabrillana, Concepción (1997). ‘Partícula introductoria, negación y uso de los tiempos verbales
en las oraciones consecutivas latinas: Revisión crítica’, Moenia 3: 541–80.
Cabrillana, Concepción (1998). ‘Evolución en la consecutio temporum: La Historia Francorum’,
in Actas del II Congreso Hispánico de Latin Medieval, I. León: Universidad de León, 287–95.
Cabrillana, Concepción (1999a). ‘On the integration of Theme constituents in the predication
of Latin’, Euphrosyne 27: 417–27.
Cabrillana, Concepción (1999b). ‘Type of text, pragmatic function, and constituent order: A
comparative study of the Mulomedicina Chironis and the Peregrinatio Egeriae’, in Hubert
Petersmann and Rudolf Kettemann (eds), 319–30.
Cabrillana, Concepción (2002). ‘Caracterización sintáctica y semántica de las oraciones
comparativas condicionales en latín’, in Empar Espinilla et al. (eds), 63–80.
Cabrillana, Concepción (2004). ‘Forma lingüística y tipo de personaje en la comedia teren-
ciana’, in Antonio López Eire and Agustín Ramos (eds), 11–31.
Cabrillana, Concepción (2008). ‘Vocativo y participantes en el acto de habla en la comedia
latina y la novela de Petronio’, in Roger Wright (ed.), 69–77.
Cabrillana, Concepción (2010a). Consideración sintáctico-semántica de esse: Un estudio a
través de Livio. Santiago de Compostela: Universidade de Santiago de Compostela.
Cabrillana, Concepción (2010b). ‘Praedicativum and subject complement’, in Peter Anreiter
and Manfred Kienpointner (eds), 233–45.
Cabrillana, Concepción (2011). ‘Purpose and result clauses’, in Philip Baldi and Pierluigi
Cuzzolin (eds), 19–92.
Cabrillana, Concepción (2017a). ‘Constituent order in directives with stative verbs in Latin’, in
Camille Denizot and Olga Spevak (eds), 113–35.
Cabrillana, Concepción (2017b). ‘Léxico, semántica y cognición en el orden de constituyentes
latino’, in Jesús de la Villa, Emma Falque Rey, José Francisco González Castro, and María
José Muñoz Jiménez (eds), Conventus Classicorum: Temas y formas del Mundo Clásico.
Madrid: Sociedad Española de Estudios Clásicos, 417–56.
Cabrillana, Concepción (2019a). ‘La dislocation à droite en latin: analyse d’une structure spéci-
fique’, in Martin Taillade et al. (eds), 227–40.
Cabrillana, Concepción (2019b). ‘Praedicativum and subject complement: A question revisited
in light of the Latin verb sto’, in Lidewij W. van Gils et al. (eds), 116–33.
Cabrillana, Concepción (in prep.). ‘Constituent order in constructions with praedicativum in
Latin’. Paper presented at ICLL meeting, Las Palmas (2019).
Cabrillana, Concepción and Lehmann, Christian (eds) (2014). Acta XIV Colloquii
Internationalis Linguisticae Latinae. Madrid: Ediciones Clásicas.
Calaresu, Emilia and Pieroni, Silvia (2019). ‘The diffraction of iam: Contextual effects in
interpretation’, in Lidewij W. van Gils et al. (eds), 280–95.
Calboli, Gualtiero (1961a). ‘Osservazioni grammaticali’, in Il Liceo Torricelli nel primo centenario
della sua fondazione. Faenza: Lega.
Calboli, Gualtiero (1961b). ‘Quisquis et quisque’, Ciceroniana 2: 106–22.
Calboli, Gualtiero (1962). Studi Grammaticali. Bologna: Zanichelli.
Calboli, Gualtiero (1968). ‘I modi del verbo greco e latino 1903–66’, Lustrum 13: 405–511.
Bibliography 1259
Calboli, Gualtiero (1990). ‘Vulgärlatein und Griechisch in der Zeit Trajans’, in Gualtiero Calboli
(ed.), 23–44.
Calboli, Gualtiero (1995/6). ‘The consecutive clause in Latin’, Studi Orientali e Linguistici 6:
137–55.
Calboli, Gualtiero (2006). ‘L’emploi de la proposition relative dans les textes juridiques latins’,
in Jean-Paul Brachet and Claude Moussy (eds), 233–47.
Calboli, Gualtiero (2009). ‘Latin syntax and Greek’, in Philip Baldi and Pierluigi Cuzzolin (eds),
I.65–193.
Calboli, Gualtiero (2012). ‘Syntaxe nominale et subordination en latin tardif ’, in Frédérique
Biville et al. (eds), 440–51.
Calboli, Gualtiero (2014). ‘Persistence and innovation in the studies of Vulgar Latin bilingual-
ism and regional variation’, in Piera Molinelli et al. (eds), 739–63.
Calboli, Gualtiero (ed.) (1989). Subordination and Other Topics in Latin. Amsterdam:
Benjamins.
Calboli, Gualtiero (ed.) (1990). Latin vulgaire–latin tardif II. Tübingen: Niemeyer.
Calboli, Gualtiero (ed.) (2005). Lingua Latina (Papers on Grammar IX), 2 vols. Rome: Herder.
Callebat, Louis (1968). Sermo cotidianus dans les Métamorphoses d’Apulée. Caen: Faculté des
Lettres de l’Université.
Callebat, Louis (1998). Langages du roman latin. Hildesheim: Olms.
Callebat, Louis (ed.) (1995). Latin vulgaire–latin tardif IV. Hildesheim/New York: Olms-
Weidmann.
Cancik, Hubert (1979). ‘Der Text als Bild. Über optische Zeichen zur Konstitution von
Satzgruppen in antiken Texten’, in Helmut Brunner, Richard Kannicht, and Klaus Schwager
(eds), Wort und Bild. Munich: Fink, 81–100.
Carducci, Karen L. (2018). ‘The first supine in Bellum Gallicum and Bellum Civile: A study of
Caesar as grammarian, narrator, and exemplum’, Classical Philology 113: 404–22.
Carlier, Anne and Guillot-Barbance, Céline (eds) (2018). Latin tardif, francनais ancien:
Continuités et ruptures. Berlin: de Gruyter.
Carvalho, Paulo de and Lambert, Frédéric (eds) (2005). Structures parallèles et corrélatives en
grec et en latin. Saint-Étienne: Publications de l’Université de Saint-Étienne.
Catterall, John L. (1938). ‘Variety and inconcinnity of language in the first decade of Livy’,
Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association 69: 292–318.
Cavarzere, Alberto (2011). Gli arcani dell’oratore: Alcuni appunti sull’actio dei Romani. Rome:
Editrice Antenore.
Chafe, Wallace (1994). Discourse, Consciousness, and Time: The Flow and Displacement of
Conscious Experience in Speaking and Writing. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Chausserie-Laprée, Jean-Pierre (1969). L’expression narrative chez les historiens latins. Paris: De
Boccard.
Christensen, H. (1908). ‘Que – que bei den römischen Hexametrikern (bis etwa 500 n. Chr.)’,
Archiv für lateinische Lexicographie und Grammatik 15: 165–211.
Christol, Alain (2014). ‘La causativité chez les cuisiniers’, in Bernard Bortolussi and Peggy
Lecaudé (eds), 131–41.
Christol, Alain and Spevak, Olga (eds) (2012). Les évolutions du latin. Paris: L’Harmattan.
Clackson, James (2004). ‘The word order pattern magna cum laude in Latin and Sabellian’, in
John H. W. Penney (ed.), 391–404.
Clackson, James (ed.) (2011). A Companion to the Latin Language. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.
1260 Bibliography
Coleman, Kathleen M. (2010). ‘Parenthetical remarks in the Silvae’, in Eleanor Dickey and
Anna Chahoud (eds), 292–317.
Coleman, Kathleen M. (2012). ‘Bureaucratic language in the correspondence between Pliny
and Trajan’, Transactions of the American Philological Society 142: 189–238.
Coleman, Robert G. (1971). ‘The origin and development of Latin habeo + infinitive’, Classical
Quarterly 21: 215–32.
Coleman, Robert G. (1983). ‘The structure of Latin complex sentences’, in Harm Pinkster (ed.),
73–94.
Coleman, Robert G. (1989). ‘The rise and fall of absolute constructions: A Latin case history’,
in Gualtiero Calboli (ed.), 353–74.
Coleman, Robert G. (ed.) (1991). New Studies in Latin Linguistics. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Comber, M. R. (1976). ‘Parenthesis in Tacitus’, Rheinisches Museum 119: 181–4.
Compernass, Johann (1916). ‘Vulgaria’, Glotta 8: 88–121.
Comrie, Bernard (19892). Language Universals and Linguistic Typology. Oxford: Blackwell.
Conso, Danièle (2006). ‘Arpentage et lexicologie’, in Jean-Paul Brachet and Claude Moussy
(eds), 279–94.
Conso, Danièle (2007). ‘Cohérence discursive et intégration syntaxique dans les notices des
Libri coloniarum’, in Gérald Purnelle and Joseph Denooz (eds), 31–42.
Conte, Gian Biagio (2016). Critical Notes on Virgil. Berlin: de Gruyter.
Copeland, Rita and Sluiter, Ineke (eds) (2009). Medieval Grammar and Rhetoric. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Coşeriu, Eugenio (1968). ‘Coordinación latina y coordinación románica’, in Actas del III
Congreso Español de Estudios Clásicos. Madrid: SEEC, 35–57.
Courtney, Edward (1999). Archaic Latin Prose. Atlanta, Ga.: Scholars Press.
Cova, Pier Vincenzo (1986). ‘L’ablativo assoluto nella Naturalis Historia’, in Pier Vincenzo Cova
et al., 13–142.
Cova, Pier Vincenzo, Gazich, Roberto, Manzoni, Gian Enrico, and Melzani, Graziano (1986).
Studi sulla lingua di Plinio il Vecchio, Milan: Università Cattolica.
Crawford, Michael H. (ed.) (1996). Roman Statutes, 2 vols. London: Institute of Classical Studies.
Crevels, Mily (2000). ‘Concession: A Typological Study’. Dissertation, Universiteit van
Amsterdam.
Ctibor, Michal (2017a). ‘Pragmatic functions of the Latin vocative’, in Camille Denizot and
Olga Spevak (eds), 45–62.
Ctibor, Michal (2017b). ‘Paragraphs in Classical Latin texts: Problems with editing and the
internal evidence from texts’, Graeco-Latina Brunensia 22: 17–29.
Cugusi, Paolo (1983). Evoluzione e forme dell’ epistolografia latina. Rome: Herder.
Cuvigny, Hélène (ed.) (2012). DIDYMOI. Une Garnison romaine dans le désert Oriental
d’Égypte, II: Les textes. Cairo: Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale.
Cuzzolin, Pierluigi (1994). Sull’origine della costruzione dicere quod: Aspetti sintattici e seman-
tici. Florence: La Nuova Italia.
Cuzzolin, Pierluigi (1996). ‘Some considerations on the verba accidendi’, in Alfred Bammesberger
and Friedrich Heberlein (eds), 222–32.
Cuzzolin, Pierluigi (1998). ‘Quelques remarques syntaxiques à propos de ecce’, in Benjamín
García Hernández (ed.), 261–71.
Cuzzolin, Pierluigi (2011). ‘Comparative and superlative’, in Philip Baldi and Pierluigi Cuzzolin
(eds), 549–659.
Bibliography 1261
Cuzzolin, Pierluigi (2013a). ‘The Latin construction dicere quod revisited’, Graeco-Latina
Brunensia 18: 23–38.
Cuzzolin, Pierluigi (2013b). ‘Some remarks on quia as a subordinator after verbs of saying and
thinking’, Journal of Latin Linguistics 12: 51–70.
Dahl, Bastian (1882). Die lateinische Partikel ut. Kristiania: Grøndahl and Søn.
Dainotti, Paolo (2015). Word Order and Expressiveness in the ‘Aeneid’. Berlin: de Gruyter.
Dalbera, Joseph (2016). ‘Nunc et les deux niveaux de narration’, Pallas 106: 149–57.
Dalbera, Joseph (2019). ‘Valeurs de nunc dans l’oratio obliqua’, in Martin Taillade et al. (eds),
387–9.
Dalbera, Joseph and Longrée, Dominique (eds) (2019). La langue d’Apulée dans les
Métamorphoses. Paris: L’Harmattan.
Damon, Cynthia (2015). Studies on the Text of Caesar’s Bellum civile. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Damon, Cynthia (in press). ‘On (authorial and other) parentheses in Caesar’s commentarii’.
Danckaert, Lieven (2012). Latin Embedded Clauses. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Danckaert, Lieven (2014). ‘Quidem as a marker of emphatic polarity’, Transactions of the
Philological Society 112: 97–138.
Danckaert, Lieven (2015). ‘Spelling out the obvious: Latin quidem and the expression of pre-
suppositional polarity’, Journal of Historical Pragmatics 16: 109–41.
D’Elia, Mario (1975). ‘Sull’uso di quod con il senso di si nel latino giuridico’, in Scritti in onore
di Giuliano Bonfante. Brescia: Paideia, I.191–204.
De Neubourg, Leo (1978). ‘Arguments supplémentaires en faveur de l’analogie dans l’ordre des
mots en latin’, Orbis 27: 352–72.
Declerck, Renaat and Reed, Susan (2001). Conditionals: A Comprehensive Empirical Analysis.
Berlin: de Gruyter.
Denizot, Camille and Dupraz, Emmanuel (eds) (2012). Anaphore et anaphoriques, Rouen/
Havre, Publications des Universités de Rouen et du Havre.
Denizot, Camille and Spevak, Olga (eds) (2017). Pragmatic Approaches to Latin and Ancient
Greek. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Denooz, Joseph (2005). ‘L’interjection dans un corpus d’auteurs latins’, in Gualtiero Calboli
(ed.), 843–52.
Denooz, Joseph (2013). ‘Emploi des types de subordonnants dans un corpus latin’, in Colette
Bodelot et al. (eds), 427–44.
Deroux, Carl (1973). ‘Un problème de syntaxe: doctior ab illo’, Latomus 32: 709–19.
Deufert, Marcus (2018). Kritischer Kommentar zu Lukrezens ‘De rerum natura’. Berlin: de Gruyter.
Devine, Andrew M. and Stephens, Laurence (2006). Latin Word Order: Structured Meaning
and Information. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Di Bene, Pietro (1963). Si nisi si non: Osservazioni di lingua latina. Imola: P. Galeati.
Dickey, Eleanor (2002). Latin Forms of Address. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Dickey, Eleanor (2006). ‘The use of Latin sis as a Focus-marking clitic particle’, Oxford University
Working Papers in Linguistics, Philology and Phonetics 11: 21–5.
Dickey, Eleanor (2007). Ancient Greek Scholarship: A Guide to Finding, Reading, and
Understanding Scholia, Commentaries, Lexica, and Grammatical Treatises, from their
Beginnings to the Byzantine Period. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Dickey, Eleanor and Chahoud, Anna (eds) (2010). Colloquial and Literary Latin. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
1262 Bibliography
Évrard, Étienne (2011). ‘Encore le relatif de liaison: Remarques diachroniques’, Les Études
Classiques 79: 187–203.
Fabb, Nigel (1999). ‘Relative clauses’, in Keith Brown and Jim Miller (eds), 319–24.
Fatello, Fabienne (2016). ‘Les emplois de quando dans l’Histoire romaine de Tite-Live’, Pallas
102: 171–9.
Fedriani, Chiara (2014). Experiential Constructions in Latin. Leiden: Brill.
Fedriani, Chiara and Molinelli, Piera (2013). ‘Ut ita dicam and cognates: A pragmatic account’,
Journal of Latin Linguistics 12: 71–100.
Ferri, Rolando (2008). ‘Politeness in Roman comedy: Some preliminary thoughts’, Materiali e
Discussioni per l’Analisi dei Testi Classici 61: 15–28.
Firbas, Jan (1992). Functional Sentence Perspective in Written and Spoken Communication.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Fischer, Anton (1908). Die Stellung der Demonstrativa bei lateinischen Prosaikern. Tübingen:
Kommissionsverlag der J. J. Heckenhauerschen Buchhandlung.
Fleck, Frédérique (2006). ‘ “Non possum quin”: Évolution d’une construction des comédies de
Plaute à la prose d’art de Fronton et d’Apulée’, Latomus 65: 34–48.
Fleck, Frédérique (2008). Interrogation, coordination et subordination: Le latin quin. Paris:
Presses de l’Université Paris-Sorbonne.
Fleck, Frédérique (2017). ‘Nēdum: Les intermittences de la négation’, in Pedro Duarte et al.
(eds), 375–86.
Flinck-Linkomies, Edwin (1929). De ablativo absoluto quaestiones. Helsingfors: Academia
Fennica.
Flobert, Pierre (2002). ‘Le jeu des modalités dans les manuels latins par question et réponse’, in
Lea Sawicki and Donna Shalev (eds), 114–22.
Foerster, Richard (1902). ‘Die Casusangleichung des Relativpronomen im Lateinischen’,
Jahrbücher für classische Philologie, Supplementband 27: 170–94.
Fontana, Gonzalo (1997). Las construciones comparativas latinas: Aspectos sincrónicos y dia-
crónicos. Zaragoza: Departemento de Ciencias de la Antigüedad, Universidad de Zaragoza.
Forberg, Martin (1913). De salutandi formulis Plautinis et Terentianis. Weidae Thuringorum:
Thomas et Jubert.
Fortson, Benjamin W., IV (2008). Language and Rhythm in Plautus. Berlin: de Gruyter.
Fraenkel, Eduard (1922). Plautinisches im Plautus. Berlin: Weidmannsche Buchhandlung.
Fraenkel, Eduard (1932). ‘Kolon und Satz: Beobachtung zur Gliederung des antiken Satzes’,
Nachrichten der Göttinger Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften, Phil.-hist. Kl.: 197–213 (= 1964,
I.73–92).
Fraenkel, Eduard (1933). ‘Kolon und Satz, II: Beobachtung zur Gliederung des antiken Satzes’,
Nachrichten der Göttinger Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften, Phil.-hist. Kl.: 319–54 (= 1964,
I.93–119).
Fraenkel, Eduard (1934). ‘Zum Interdictum utrubi’, Zeitschrift der Savigny Stiftung 54: 312–15
(= 1964, II.479–82).
Fraenkel, Eduard (1954). ‘Urbem quam statuo vestra est’, Glotta 33: 157–9.
Fraenkel, Eduard (1956). ‘Eine Form römischer Kriegbulletins’, Eranos 54: 189–94 (= 1964:
II.69–73).
Fraenkel, Eduard (1964). Kleine Beiträge zur klassischen Philologie, 2 vols. Rome: Brettschneider.
Fraenkel, Eduard (1965). Noch einmal Kolon und Satz. Munich: Beck.
Fraenkel, Eduard (1966). ‘Zur “Wackelnagenschen” Stellung von hemin, humin, nobis, vobis’,
Museum Helveticum 23: 65–8.
1264 Bibliography
Fraenkel, Eduard (1968). Leseproben aus Reden Ciceros und Catos. Rome: Edizioni di Storia e
Letteratura.
Frischer, Bernard (1983). ‘Inceptive Quoque and the introduction Medias in res in classical and
early medieval Latin literature’, Glotta 61: 236–51.
Fruyt, Michèle (1996). ‘La syntaxe de l’infinitif en latin tardif: Réflexions sur la nature des
processus évolutifs’, Recherches Augustiniennes 29: 43–73.
Fruyt, Michèle (2004). ‘La corrélation en latin: Son rôle dans la subordination et l’endophore’,
in Colette Bodelot (ed.), 29–53.
Fruyt, Michèle (2005a). ‘La corrélation et la proposition relative dans l’Itinerarium d’Égérie’, in
Sándor Kiss et al. (eds), 337–52.
Fruyt, Michèle (2005b). ‘La corrélation en latin: Définition et description’, in Paolo de Carvalho
and Frédéric Lambert (eds), 17–44.
Fruyt, Michèle (2008). ‘Focalisation des pronoms personnels et des adjectifs possessifs en latin’,
in Claude Brunet (ed.), Des formes et des mots. Besançon: Presses Universitaires, 75–89.
Fruyt, Michèle (2019a). ‘Apulée et la créativité lexicale: Le suffixe -tus, -tūs’, in Joseph Dalbera
and Dominique Longrée (eds), 181–201.
Fruyt, Michèle (2019b). ‘Relatives introduites par un adverbe en latin archaïque (Caton, De
agricultura): Un chemin de grammaticalisation vers la conjonction’, in Martin Taillade et al.
(eds), 143–62.
Fruyt, Michèle (2019c). ‘Les relatives en latin perspective évolutive. Comparaison entre Caton
et Sénèque. 1ère partie: Les relatives dans Caton, De agricultura’, Revue de Linguistique
Latine du Centre Alfred Ernout: De Lingua Latina 19: 2–33 [online]: http://lettres.sorbonne-
universite.fr/sites/default/files/media/2020-05/1-revlinglaternout_dll_19fruyt1.pdf.
Fruyt, Michèle (2019d). ‘Les relatives en latin perspective évolutive. Comparaison entre Caton
et Sénèque. 2ème partie: Les relatives dans Sénèque, Naturales quaestiones, livre 1’, Revue de
Linguistique Latine du Centre Alfred Ernout: De Lingua Latina [online]: 19: 34–57, http://lettres.
sorbonne-universite.fr/sites/default/files/media/2020-05/2-revlinglaternout_dll_19fruyt2.pdf.
Fruyt, Michèle and Moussy, Claude (eds) (2002). Les modalités en latin. Paris: Presses de
l’Université de Paris-Sorbonne.
Fugier, Huguette (1978). ‘Les constructions prédicatives en latin’, Glotta 56: 122–43.
Fugier, Huguette (1983a). ‘ “Recte et vera loquere”: L’adverbe complément de verbe en latin
archaïque’, Lalies 2: 41–56.
Fugier, Huguette (1983b). ‘Le syntagme nominal en latin classique’, in Wolfgang Haase (ed.),
212–69.
Fugier, Huguette (1989). ‘Quod, quia, quoniam et leurs effets textuels chez Cicéron’, in Gualtiero
Calboli (ed.), 91–119.
Fugier, Huguette (1991). ‘Nominal anaphor, text, argumentation (from Plautus to Cicero)’, in
Robert Coleman (ed.), 381–99.
Gaertner, Jan Felix (2010). ‘The style of the Bellum Hispaniense’, in Eleanor Dickey and Anna
Chahoud (eds), 243–54.
Gaertner, Jan Felix and Hausburg, Bianca C. (2013). Caesar and the Bellum Alexandrinum.
Göttingen: Vandenhoeck and Ruprecht.
Gagnér, Anders (1920). De hercle, mehercle ceterisque id genus particulis priscae poesis latinae
scaenicae. Greifswald: Abel.
Gago, María del Val (1998). ‘Distribución sintáctica entre ablativo absoluto y cum histórico en
latín’, in Actas del IX Congreso Español de Estudios Clásicos, III. Madrid: Ediciones Clásicas,
109–15.
Bibliography 1265
Galdi, Giovanbattista (2000). ‘Reflexive and possessive pronouns in Greek and Latin inscrip-
tions of the Empire (Moesia Inferior)’, Papers on Grammar 5: 73–94.
Galdi, Giovanbattista (2016a). ‘On coepi/incipio + infinitive: Some new remarks’, in James
N. Adams and Nigel Vincent (eds), 246–64.
Galdi, Giovanbattista (2016b). ‘On so-called adversative nisi’, Pallas 102: 181–90.
Galdi, Giovanbattista (2016c). ‘Remarks on temporal clauses and participial phrases in late
historical texts’, in Paolo Poccetti (ed.), 651–67.
Galdi, Giovanbattista (2016d). ‘Semantische und syntaktische Beobachtungen zum adversa-
tiven Gebrauch von nisi’, Symbolae Osloenses 90: 93–121.
Galdi, Giovanbattista (2017). ‘Zum sogenannten Nominativus Absolutus im Lateinischen:
Neue Auslegungen zu einem alten Problem’, Symbolae Osloenses 91: 28–80.
Galdi, Giovanbattista and Vangaever, Jasper (2019). ‘On the use of the ablative of the gerund
and the nominative of the present participle in Latin technical literature’, in Lidewij W. van
Gils et al. (eds), 96–115.
Gallego, Julie (2012). ‘De talis à tel: Évolution d’un corrélatif consécutif ’, in Frédérique Biville
et al. (eds), 322–34.
Galli, Leonardo (2019). ‘Un presunto caso di copulativa con valore disgiuntivo in Plin. Paneg.
44.8’, Maia 71: 440–6.
Garcea, Alessandro (2003). ‘Représentation et reproduction du discours chez Cicéron’, Lalies
22: 187–200.
García de la Calera, Roberto (2008). ‘Iubeo en César y Salustio: Verbo de dos o de tres posi-
ciones’, Cuadernos de Filología Clásica (Lat) 28: 5–15.
García de la Fuente, Olegario (1981). ‘Sobre el empleo de quod, quia, quoniam con los
verbos de “lengua y entendimiento” en Samuel-Reyes de la Vulgata’, Analecta Malacitana
4: 3–12.
García de la Fuente, Olegario (1992). ‘Sobre la colocación de los adverbios de cantidad en el
latín vulgar y el latín biblico’, in Maria Iliescu and Werner Marxgut (eds), Latin vulgaire–
latin tardif III. Tübingen: Niemeyer 143–57.
García Hernández, Benjamín (ed.) (1998). Estudios de Lingüística latina, 2 vols. Madrid:
Ediciones Clásicas.
García Leal, Alfonso and Prieto, Clara Elena (eds) (2017). Latin vulgaire–latin tardif XI.
Hildesheim: Olms Weidmann.
Gast, Volker and van der Auwera, Johan (2011). ‘Scalar additive operators in the languages of
Europe’, Language 97: 2–54.
Gather, Andreas (2001). Romanische Verb Nomen-Komposita. Tübingen: Narr.
Gavoille, Laurent (2014). ‘Imperare: Du causatif au directif ’, in Bernard Bortolussi and Peggy
Lecaudé (eds), 199–220.
Gayno, Marise (2016). ‘Le système des participes latins et les signes avant-coureurs des change-
ments romans au VIe siècle après J.-Ch.’, in Michèle Fruyt, Gerd V. M. Haverling, and
Rosanna Sornicola (eds), Actes du XXVIIe Congrès international de linguistique et de philolo-
gie romanes (Nancy, 15–20 juillet 2013). Section 2: Linguistique latine/linguistique romane.
Nancy: ATILF, 35–48.
Georgiewa, Nedjalka (1993/4). ‘Zu einer besonderen Art Gliedsätze im Lateinischen’, Helikon
33/34: 435–40.
Gettert, Hans (1999). Konstituenz und lateinische Syntax. Aachen: Shaker Verlag.
Ghiselli, Alfredo (1961). ‘Quicumque num coniunctivum admittat’, in Alfredo Ghiselli (ed.),
Varia Grammatica. Bologna: Gallo, 9–12.
1266 Bibliography
Greco, Paolo (2012). La complementazione frasale nelle cronache latine dell’Italia centro-
meridionale (secoli X–XII). Naples: Liguori editore.
Greco, Paolo (2013). ‘Latin accusativus cum participio: Syntactic description, evidential status,
and diachronic development’, Journal of Latin Linguistics 12: 199–230.
Greco, Paolo (2014). ‘L’alternanza dei complementatori quod, quia e ut in dipendenza da verba
dicendi et sentiendi in alcune agiografie di epoca merovingica (VI–VII secolo)’, in Piera
Molinelli et al. (eds), 287–303.
Greco, Paolo (2018). ‘Strategie di costruzione dell’ Accusativus cum Infinitivo in latino: L’ordine
e la disposizione dei costituenti’, in Martin Glessgen, Johannes Kabatek, and Harald Völker
(eds), Repenser la variation linguistique: Actes du Colloque DIA IV à Zurich (12–14 sept.
2016). Strasbourg: ELiPhi, 215–31.
Greco, Paolo (2019). ‘Forme della subordinazione completiva nel Bellum Iugurthinum di
Sallustio’, Revue de Linguistique Latine du Centre Alfred Ernout: De Lingua Latina 18 [online]:
http://lettres.sorbonne-universite.fr/sites/default/files/media/2020-05/revlinglaternout_
dll_18-greco.pdf.
Greco, Paolo and Ferrari, Valentina (2019). ‘Aspetti della subordinazione a verbo finito nelle
Vulgata’, Acta Antiqua Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 59: 119–31.
Greenberg, Joseph Harold (1963). ‘Some universals of language with reference to the order of
meaningful elements’, in Joseph Harold Greenberg, Universals of Language. Cambridge,
Mass.: MIT, 147–203.
Griend, Margreet E. van de (1989). ‘Pseudo-conditionals in Latin’, in Marius Lavency and
Dominique Longrée (eds), 447–56.
Griffe, Michel (1985). ‘Ut adverbe ou conjonction?’, in Christian Touratier (ed.), 429–52.
Griffe, Michel (2011). ‘Les complétives à antécédent sont-elles des relatives?’, Les Études
Classiques 79: 177–86.
Grover, Claire (1999). ‘Coordination’, in Keith Brown and Jim Miller (eds), 115–22.
Haase, Wolfgang (ed.) (1983). Principat (Aufstieg und Niedergang der römischen Welt II.29.1).
Berlin: de Gruyter.
Habinek, Thomas N. (1985a). The Colometry of Latin Prose. Berkeley: University of California
Press.
Habinek, Thomas N. (1985b). ‘Prose cola and poetic word order: Observations on adjectives
and nouns in the Aeneid’, Helios 12: 51–66.
Haffter, Heinz (1934). Untersuchungen zur altlateinischen Dichtersprache. Berlin: Weidmann.
Hagendahl, Harald (1921). Studia Ammianea. Uppsala: Appelbergs Boktryckeri Aktiebolag.
Hahn, E. Adelaide (1922). ‘Hendiadys: Is there such a thing? (Based on a study of Vergil)’,
Classical Weekly 15: 193–7.
Hahn, E. Adelaide (1928). ‘The ab urbe condita type of expression in Greek and English’,
Classical Journal 23: 266–74.
Hahn, E. Adelaide (1930). ‘Coordination of non-coordinate elements in Vergil’. Dissertation,
New York.
Hahn, E. Adelaide (1956). ‘A source of Vergilian hyperbaton’, Transactions of the American
Philological Association 87: 147–89.
Haida, Roman (1928). ‘Die Wortstellung in der Peregrinatio ad loca sancta’. Dissertation,
Breslau.
Hajdú, István (1999). ‘Pro consule oder proconsul’, Museum Helveticum 56: 119–27.
Håkanson, Lennart (1986). ‘Adverbs in Latin poetry’, Eranos 84: 23–56.
1268 Bibliography
Hale, William Gardner (1891). Die Cum-Konstruktionen: Ihre Geschichte und ihre Funktionen.
Leipzig: Teubner.
Halla-aho, Hilla (2003). ‘Remarks on phraseology, spoken language and language contact in
the letters of Claudius Terentianus (2nd century ad Egypt)’, in Leena Pietilä-Castrén and
Marjaana Vesterinen (eds), Grapta Poikila I. Helsinki: Suomen Ateenan-Instituutin Säätiö,
25–33.
Halla-aho, Hilla (2009). The Non-literary Latin Letters: A Study of their Syntax and Pragmatics.
Helsinki: Societas Scientiarum Fennica.
Halla-aho, Hilla (2010). ‘Linguistic varieties and language level in Latin non-literary letters’,
in Trevor V. Evans and Dirk Obbink (eds), The Language of the Papyri. Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 171–83.
Halla-aho, Hilla (2016). ‘Left-detached constructions from early Latin to late Latin’, in
James N. Adams and Nigel Vincent, 367–89.
Halla-aho, Hilla (2018). Left-dislocation in Latin: Topics and Syntax in Republican Texts. Leiden:
Brill.
Halla-aho, Hilla (2019). ‘Proleptic accusatives in Latin’, Glotta 95: 135–58.
Hand, Ferdinand G. (1829/45). Tursellinus seu de particulis Latinis commentarii, 4 vols. Leipzig:
Weidmann.
Hanson, John A. (1959). ‘Plautus as a source book of Roman religion’, Transactions and
Proceedings of the American Philological Association 90: 48–101.
Happ, Heinz (1976). Grundfragen einer Dependenzgrammatik des Lateinischen. Göttingen:
Vandenhoeck and Ruprecht.
Harrison, Stephen (2006). ‘Some textual problems in Apuleius’ Metamorphoses’, in Wytze
Hette Keulen et al. (eds), Lectiones Scrupulosae. Groningen: Bakhuis, 59–67.
Haspelmath, Martin (1987). ‘Verbal noun or verbal adjective? The case of the Latin gerundive
and gerund.’ Arbeitspapier, N.F., Nr. 3, Institut für Linguistik, Universität zu Köln.
Hatz, Gottlieb (1886). Beiträge zur lateinischen Stilistik (Hendiadys in Ciceros Reden). Programm
Schweinfurt.
Haug, Dag Trygve Truslew (2017). ‘Backward control in Ancient Greek and Latin participial
adjuncts’, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 35: 99–159.
Häusler, Sabine (2000). ‘Parenthesen im Lateinischen am Beispiel der Pliniusbriefe’, Glotta 76:
202–31.
Haverling, Gerd V. M. (1988). Studies of Symmachus’ Language and Style. Göteborg: Studia
Graeca et Latina Gothoburgiensia XLIX.
Haverling, Gerd V. M. (ed.) (2015). Latin Linguistics in the Early 21st Century. Uppsala: Uppsala
Universitet.
Havers, Wilhelm (1925). ‘Der sogenannte nominativus pendens’, Indogermanische Forschungen
43: 207–57.
Hawkins, John A. (1978). Definiteness and Indefiniteness. London: Croom Helm.
Heberlein, Friedrich (1996). ‘Über prädikative Adjektive’, in Alfred Bammesberger and
Friedrich Heberlein (eds), 354–71.
Heberlein, Friedrich (2001). ‘Zur Entwicklung des lateinischen Konsekutivsatzes’, Acta Antiqua
Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 41: 41–54.
Heberlein, Friedrich (2002). ‘Die lateinische Konsekutivsätze auf der Satzverbindungshierarchie’,
in Alide Machtelt Bolkestein et al. (eds), 169–82.
Bibliography 1269
Jeanjaquet, Jules (1894). Recherches sur l’origine de la conjonction ‘que’ et des formes romanes
équivalentes. Paris: Welter.
Jennings, Ray E. (1994). The Genealogy of Disjunction. New York: Oxford University Press.
Jennings, Ray E. (2008). ‘Disjunction’, available online at: http://stanford.library.sydney.edu.au/
archives/win2011/entries/disjunction/#Jen94.
Jocelyn, Henry David (1969). ‘Imperator Histricus’, Yale Classical Studies 21: 97–123.
Jones, Frederick (1990). ‘Cum in Livy’, Liverpool Classical Monthly 15: 37–43.
Jones, Frederick (1991). ‘Subject, topic, given and salient: Sentence-beginnings in Latin’,
Proceedings of the Cambridge Philological Society 37: 81–105.
Jones, Frederick (2000). ‘Reference in Latin’, Mnemosyne 53: 12–29.
Jones, John Carleton (1906). ‘Simul, simulac und Synonyma’, Archiv für lateinische Lexikographie
und Grammatik 14: 89–104; 232–52; 524–31.
Jong, Irene J. F. de (2014). Narratology and Classics: A Practical Guide. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Jong, Jan R. de (1982). ‘Word order within the Latin ablative absolute construction’, in Saskia
Daalder and Marinel Gerritsen (eds), Linguistics in the Netherlands. Amsterdam: North
Holland, 95–101.
Jong, Jan R. de (1983). ‘Word order within Latin noun phrases’, in Harm Pinkster (ed.), 131–41.
Jong, Jan R. de (1986). ‘Hyperbaton en informatiestructuur’, Lampas 19: 323–31.
Jong, Jan R. de (1989). ‘The position of the Latin subject’, in Gualtiero Calboli (ed.), 521–40.
Jong, Jan R. de (1996). ‘The borderline between deixis and anaphora in Latin’, in Hannah Rosén
(ed.), 499–510.
Jonge, Casper C. de (2008). Between Grammar and Rhetoric: Dionysius of Halicarnassus on
Language, Linguistics and Literature. Leiden: Brill.
Jordan, Henri (1879). Kritische Beiträge zur Geschichte der lateinischen Sprache. Berlin:
Weidmann.
Kalb, Wilhelm (1888). Das Juristenlatein. Nuremberg: H. Ballhorn.
Kalb, Wilhelm (1912). Wegweiser in die römische Rechtssprache. Leipzig: Teubner.
Keeline, Thomas and Kirby, Tyler (2019). ‘Auceps syllabarum: A digital analysis of Latin prose
rhythm’, Journal of Roman Studies 109: 161–204.
Kellermann, Georg (1909). Die Wortparataxe in der Klausel des lateinischen Hexameters und
Pentameters. Kempten: Kösel.
Keydana, Götz (1997). Absolute Konstruktionen in altindogermanischen Sprachen. Göttingen:
Vandenhoeck and Ruprecht.
Kirk, William Hamilton (1921). ‘And and Or’, American Journal of Philology 42: 1–11.
Kirk, William Hamilton (1923). ‘Ne and non’, American Journal of Philology 44: 260–73.
Kirk, William Hamilton (1938). ‘Passive verba sentiendi et dicendi with declarative infinitive’,
Classical Philology 33: 182–7.
Kiss, Sándor (2005). ‘Anaphore et coordination dans les textes latins tardifs’, in Gualtiero
Calboli (ed.), 571–6.
Kiss, Sándor (2006). ‘Fonctionnement des connecteurs dans les chroniques latines du haut
Moyen-Âge’, in Carmen Arias (ed.), 381–5.
Kiss, Sándor (2007). ‘Étude de la cohérence textuelle dans les abrégés d’histoire romaine du IVe
siècle’, in Gérald Purnelle and Joseph Denooz (eds), 111–5.
Kiss, Sándor (2010). ‘Termes organisateurs et termes continuateurs dans quelques textes
narratifs latins’, in Peter Anreiter and Manfred Kienpointner (eds), 575–81.
Bibliography 1273
Kiss, Sándor (2016). ‘Schéma narratif et subjectivité du narrateur chez quelques historiens de
l’Antiquité tardive’, Pallas 102: 255–63.
Kiss, Sándor (2019). ‘Progression thématique et types de séquences chez quelques historiens
romains’, in Lidewij W. van Gils et al. (eds), 339–50.
Kiss, Sándor, Mondin, Luca and Salvi, Giampaolo (eds) (2005). Latin et langues romanes
(Études de linguistique offertes à József Herman). Tübingen: Niemeyer.
Knoth, Tine W. (2006). ‘Prima positio: Et functionelt studie i saetningens første position i lat-
insk prosa’. PhD dissertation, University of Copenhagen.
Kohn, Thomas D. (2012). ‘Stage directions in parenthesis in Roman epic’, Classical Quarterly 6:
766–84.
Koll, Hans-Georg (1965). ‘Zur Stellung des Verbs im spätantiken and frühmittelalterlichen
Latein’, Mittellateinisches Jahrbuch 2: 241–72.
König, Ekkehard (1991). The Meaning of Focus Particles. London: Routledge.
König, Ekkehard and Siemund, Peter (2000). ‘Causal and concessive clauses: Formal and semantic
relations’, in Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen and Bernd Kortmann (eds), Cause, Condition,
Concession, Contrast: Cognitive and Discourse Perspectives. Berlin: de Gruyter, 341–60.
Kooreman, Marion (1989). ‘The historical development of the ablative of the gerund’, in Marius
Lavency and Dominique Longrée (eds), 219–30.
Kraus, Christina Shuttleworth (1992). ‘How (not?) to end a sentence: The problem of -que’,
Harvard Studies in Classical Philology 94: 321–9.
Kraus, Walther (1934). ‘Ad spectatores in der römischen Komödie’, Wiener Studien 52: 66–83.
Kraz, Heinrich (1862). Über den Modus der rhetorischen Frage in der lateinischen oratio obli-
qua: Die sogenannte unwillige oder missbilligende Frage mit dem Conjunctiv, mit ut und dem
Conjunctiv, mit dem Accusativ und Infinitiv. Stuttgart.
Krisch, Thomas (1988). Zur semantischen Interpretation von absoluten Konstruktionen in
altindogermanischen Sprachen. Innsbruck: Scientia.
Kroll, Wilhelm (1914). ‘Randbemerkungen’, Rheinisches Museum für Philologie 69: 95–108.
Kroll, Wilhelm (1920). ‘Satzverschränkung’, Glotta 20: 101–8.
Kroon, Caroline H. M. (1989a). ‘Rarum dictu: The Latin second supine construction’, Glotta 67:
198–227.
Kroon, Caroline H. M. (1989b). ‘Causal connectors in Latin: The discourse function of nam,
enim, igitur, ergo’, in Marius Lavency and Dominique Longrée (eds), 231–43.
Kroon, Caroline H. M. (1994). ‘Discourse connectives and discourse type: The case of Latin at’,
in József Herman (ed.), 303–17.
Kroon, Caroline H. M. (1995). Discourse Particles in Latin. Amsterdam: Gieben.
Kroon, Caroline H. M. (1998a). ‘A framework for the description of Latin discourse markers’,
Journal of Pragmatics 30: 205–23.
Kroon, Caroline H. M. (1998b). ‘Discourse particles, tense, and the structure of Latin narrative
texts’, in Rodie Risselada (ed.), 37–61.
Kroon, Caroline H. M. (2002). ‘How to write a ghost story? A linguistic view on narrative
modes in Pliny Ep. 7.27’, in Lea Sawicki and Donna Shalev (eds), 189–200.
Kroon, Caroline H. M. (2004a). ‘Latin quidem and the structure of the move’, in Henk Aertsen,
Mike Hannay, and Rod Lyall (eds), Words in Their Places: A Festschrift for J. Lachlan
Mackenzie. Amsterdam: Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, 199–209.
Kroon, Caroline H. M. (2004b). ‘Scales of involvement and the use of Latin causal connectives’,
in Antonio López Eire and Agustín Ramos (eds), 65–86.
1274 Bibliography
Kroon, Caroline H. M. (2005). The relationship between grammar and discourse: Evidence
from the Latin particle quidem’, in Gualtiero Calboli (ed.), 577–90.
Kroon, Caroline H. M. (2007). ‘Discourse modes and the use of tenses in Ovid’s Metamorphoses’,
in Rutger Allan and Michel Buijs (eds), The Language of Literature. Leiden: Brill, 65–92.
Kroon, Caroline H. M. (2009a). ‘Text structure and referential choice in narrative: The ana-
phoric use of the Latin demonstrative ille’, Belgian Journal of Linguistics 23: 115–31.
Kroon, Caroline H. M. (2009b). ‘Latin linguistics between grammar and discourse. Units of
analysis, levels of analysis’, in Elisabeth Rieken and Paul Widmer (eds), 143–58.
Kroon, Caroline H. M. (2010). ‘Anaphoric reference and referential choice in Ovid’s
Metamorphoses’, in Peter Anreiter and Manfred Kienpointner (eds), 583–97.
Kroon, Caroline H. M. (2011). ‘Latin particles and the grammar of discourse’, in James Clackson
(ed.), 176–95.
Kroon, Caroline H. M. (2014). ‘Causality, coherence, and Latin connectives: A discourse prag-
matic approach’, in Aude Morel-Alizon and Jean-François Thomas (eds), 67–86.
Kroon, Caroline H. M. (2017). ‘Textual deixis and the “anchoring” use of Latin hic’, Mnemosyne
70: 585–612.
Kroon, Caroline H. M. and Risselada, Rodie (1998). ‘The discourse functions of iam’, in
Benjamín García Hernández (ed.), 429–55.
Kroon, Caroline H. M. and Risselada, Rodie (2002). ‘Phasality, polarity, focality; a feature
analysis of the Latin particle iam’, Belgian Journal of Linguistics 16: 63–78.
Kruijer, Mike and la Roi, Ezra (2018). ‘Paradigmatic possibilities as perspective for absolute
constructions’, Mnemosyne 71: 799–822.
Krumbiegel, Richard (1892). De Varroniano scribendi genere quaestiones. Leipzig: Hoffmann.
Kruschwitz, Peter (2004). Römische Inschriften und Wackernagels Gesetz. Heidelberg: Winter.
Krylová, Barbora (1997). ‘Comparison between Greek and Latin consecutive clauses’, Acta
Universitatis Carolinae, Graecolatina Pragensia 15: 73–98.
Krylová, Barbora (2001). ‘Die Partikeln ergo und igitur bei Ammianus Marcellinus: ein tex-
tologischer Beitrag zur Diskussion um Ammians Sprachkompetenz’, in Gabriele Thome
and Jens Holzhausen (eds), Es hat sich viel ereignet, Gutes wie Böses: Lateinische
Geschichtsschreibung der Spät- und Nachantike. Munich: Saur, 57–79.
Krylová, Barbora (2003). ‘Ergo als Konsensus-Partikel in lateinischen narrativen Texten. Eine
Untersuchung an Prosatexten historischer Thematik von Caesar bis Sueton’, Acta Universitatis
Carolinae, Graecolatina Pragensia 18: 63–94.
Krylová, Barbora (2006). ‘Consensus suggested and demanded: The use and role of enim and
ergo in conflict management’, Acta Universitatis Carolinae, Graecolatina Pragensia 20:
95–107.
Kunst, Karl (1908). Die sog. relative Verschränkung und verwandte Satzfügungen in ihrem
Verhältnis zum deutschen Satzbau. Jahresbericht des k.k. Staatsgymnasiums im XIX Bezirke
von Wien für das Schuljahr 1907/1908.
Kurzová-Jedličková, Helena (1981). Der Relativsatz in den indogermanischen Sprachen.
Hamburg: Buske.
Labate, Mario (1983). ‘Et amarunt me quoque Nymphae (Ovid. Met. 3.456)’, Materiali e
Discussioni per l’Analisi dei Testi Classici 10–11: 305–18.
Ladouceur, David J. (1981). ‘Livy’s use of quamquam and the subjunctive’, Glotta 59: 142–5.
Laird, Andrew (1999). Powers of Expression, Expressions of Power. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Bibliography 1275
Lambert, André (1946). ‘Die indirekte Rede als künstlerisches Stilmittel des Livius’. Dissertation,
Zurich.
Lambertz, Thomas (1982). Ausbaumodell zu Lucien Ternière ‘Eléments de Syntaxe Structurale’.
Gerbrunn bei Würzburg: A. Lehmann.
Landgraf, Gustav (1888). ‘Substantivische Parataxen’, Archiv für lateinische Lexikographie und
Grammatik 5: 161–91.
Langen, Peter (1880). Beiträge zur Kritik und Erklärung des Plautus. Leipzig: Teubner.
Langslow, David R. (2000). Medical Latin in the Roman Empire. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Langslow, David R. (2005). ‘Linguistic “highs” and “lows” in late Latin medical texts’, in Sándor
Kiss et al. (eds), 313–25.
Langslow, David R. (2012). ‘Praetor urbanus—urbanus praetor: Some aspects of attributive
adjective placement in Latin’, in Philomen Probert and Andreas Willi (eds), 279–312.
Laughton, Eric (1960). ‘Observations on the style of Varro’, Classical Quarterly 10: 1–28.
Laughton, Eric (1964). The Participle in Cicero. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Lausberg, Heinrich (19903). Handbuch der literarischen Rhetorik. Stuttgart: Steiner.
Lavency, Marius (1975). ‘Les valeurs de la “conjonction” cum en latin classique’, Les Études
Classiques 43: 376–86.
Lavency, Marius (1976). ‘Les valeurs de la “conjonction” cum en latin classique (suite)’, Les
Études Classiques 44: 45–59.
Lavency, Marius (1986). ‘Le paradigme syntaxique de l’ablatif absolu’, in Freddy Decreus and
Carl Deroux (eds), Hommages Jozef Veremans. Brussels: Latomus, 184–91.
Lavency, Marius (1996a). ‘Is qui chez César, Guerre des Gaules, I–VII’, in Alfred Bammesberger
and Friedrich Heberlein (eds), 249–67.
Lavency, Marius (1996b). ‘Rex qui fuit—rex qui esset—rex cum esset’, in Rodie Risselada et al.
(eds), 91–103.
Lavency, Marius (19972). Usus: Grammaire latine: Description du latin classique en vue de la
lecture des auteurs. Leuven: Peeters.
Lavency, Marius (1998a). La proposition relative. Grammaire fondamentale du latin V:2. Leuven:
Peeters.
Lavency, Marius (1998b). ‘Morphèmes cataphoriques et propositions relatives en latin clas-
sique’, in Yves Duhoux (ed.), Langue et langues: Hommage à Albert Maniet. Leuven: Peeters,
99–115.
Lavency, Marius (1999). ‘La période conditionnelle du latin’, Les Études Classiques 67: 361–90.
Lavency, Marius (2003). ‘Les propositions infinitives’, in Colette Bodelot (ed.), 97–192.
Lavency, Marius (2004). ‘Sic / ita / id cataphoriques de la proposition infinitive (A.c.I.)’, in
Colette Bodelot (ed.), 81–93.
Lavency, Marius (2005). ‘Il congiuntivo nella proposizione relativa nominalizzata’, in Gualtiero
Calboli (ed.), 591–5.
Lavency, Marius (2011). ‘Les propositions relatives: Détermination et qualification’, Les Études
Classiques 79: 93–103.
Lavency, Marius and Longrée, Dominique (eds) (1989). Actes du Ve colloque de linguistique
latine: Louvain-la-Neuve/Borzée, 31 mars–4 avril 1989. Proceedings of the Vth colloquium on
Latin linguistics. Leuven: Peeters.
Lease, Emory B. (1928). ‘The ablative absolute limited by conjunctions’, American Journal of
Philology 49: 348–53.
1276 Bibliography
Löfstedt, Bengt (1976). ‘Zum spanischen Mittellatein’, Glotta 54: 117–57 (= 2000: 169–211).
Löfstedt, Bengt (1985). ‘Sprachliches zur Vulgata’, Studia Classica 23: 73–84 (= 2000: 289–301).
Löfstedt, Bengt (2000). Ausgewählte Aufsätze zur lateinischen Sprachgeschichte und Philologie.
Stuttgart: Hersemann.
Löfstedt, Einar (1911). Philologischer Kommentar zur Peregrinatio Aetheriae. Uppsala: Almqvist &
Wiksell.
Löfstedt, Einar (1936). Vermischte Studien zur lateinischen Sprachkunde und Syntax. Lund:
Gleerup.
Löfstedt, Einar (19422/1933). Syntactica, 2 vols. Lund: Gleerup.
Longrée, Dominique (1989). ‘The syntactic function of the so-called Praedicativum in Classical
Latin’, in Marius Lavency and Dominique Longrée (eds), 245–56.
Longrée, Dominique (1991). ‘La relative en apposition, un cas de nominalisation?’, Études
Classiques (Centre Universitaire de Luxembourg): II.77–100.
Longrée, Dominique (1995). ‘Du fonctionnement syntaxique de la construction ab urbe
condita chez Tacite’, in Dominique Longrée (ed.), 175–88.
Longrée, Dominique (1996a). ‘La concurrence entre “rallonge” et “parataxe” chez Tacite:
Conditionnements linguistiques, choix stylistiques’, in Hannah Rosén (ed.), 483–98.
Longrée, Dominique (1996b). ‘ “Relatives en rallonge” ou “relatifs de liaison”: L’exemple de
Tacite’, in Alfred Bammesberger and Friedrich Heberlein (eds), 268–81.
Longrée, Dominique (1998). ‘ “Variatio”, coordination et isofonctionnalité: L’exemple de Tacite’,
in Benjamín García Hernández (ed.), 1115–30.
Longrée, Dominique (2001). ‘Aux frontières de la coordination: Du fonctionnement des termes
“corrélatifs” chez Tacite’, in Claude Moussy et al. (eds), 393–407.
Longrée, Dominique (2002a). ‘Verba sentiendi et modalisation de l’énoncé chez les historiens
latins’, in Michèle Fruyt and Claude Moussy (eds), 77–93.
Longrée, Dominique (2002b). ‘Sur la concurrence entre “relatifs” et “démonstratifs de liaison”
chez les historiens latins: L’exemple de Tacite’, in Alide Machtelt Bolkestein et al. (eds), 205–17.
Longrée, Dominique (2003). ‘Une approche statistique de la concurrence entre démonstratifs
chez les historiens latins (César, Salluste,Tacite)’, in Colette Bodelot (ed.), 157–78.
Longrée, Dominique (2005). ‘ “Relatifs de liaison” et temps verbaux chez les historiens latins’,
in Anna Jaubert (ed.), 28–42.
Longrée, Dominique (2010). ‘Adverbes de lieu, deixis et anaphore chez les historiens latins’,
Revue de Linguistique Latine du Centre Alfred Ernout: De Lingua Latina 3 [online]: http://
lettres.sorbonne-universite.fr/sites/default/files/media/2020-05/longree.pdf.
Longrée, Dominique (2012). ‘ “Anaphore zéro” et identification des acteurs chez les historiens
latins’, in Camille Denizot and Emmanuel Dupraz (eds), 267–80.
Longrée, Dominique (2014). ‘Demisso capite: Ablatif absolu ou épithète détachée? Réflexions
sur la description d’un syntagme à deux constituants obligatoires’, in Concepción Cabrillana
and Christian Lehmann (eds), 361–72.
Longrée, Dominique (ed.) (1995). De usu: Études de syntaxe latine offertes en hommage à
Marius Lavency. Leuven: Peeters.
Longrée, Dominique, Philippart de Foy, Caroline and Purnelle, Gérald (2012). ‘Conditionnements
linguistiques des dislocations à gauche chez César et Tacite: L’apport du projet LatSynt’,
Revue de Linguistique Latine du Centre Alfred Ernout: De Lingua Latina 7 [online]: http://
lettres.sorbonne-universite.fr/sites/default/files/media/2020-05/prolepse_longree_
philippart_purnelle_def.pdf.
1278 Bibliography
Longrée, Dominique, Philippart de Foy, Caroline and Purnelle, Gérald (2013). ‘Dislocations
à gauche et nature des subordonnants en latin classique’, in Colette Bodelot et al. (eds),
445–82.
Longrée, Dominique, Philippart de Foy, Caroline and Purnelle, Gérald (2019). ‘Nature et fonc-
tionnement des syntagmes postposés dans les subordonnées latines: Étude d’un corpus
d’historiens classiques’, in Martin Taillade et al. (eds), 241–52.
López Eire, Antonio and Ramos, Agustín (eds) (2004). Registros lingüísticos en las lenguas
clásicas. Salamanca: Ediciones Universidad.
Luck, Georg (1964). Über einige Interjektionen der lateinischen Umgangssprache. Heidelberg:
Winter.
Ludewig, Antonius (1891). Quomodo Plinius maior, Seneca philosophus, Curtius Rufus,
Quintilianus, Cornelius Tacitus, Plinius Minor particula quidem usi sint. Prague: Verlag
Dominicus.
Lundström, Sven (1961). Abhinc und ante: Studien zur Geschichte der lateinischen
Zeitdifferenzbestimmungen. Lund: Gleerup.
Lundström, Sven (1964). Vermeintliche Glosseme in den Tusculanen. Uppsala: Almqvist &
Wiksell.
Lundström, Sven (1982). Ein textkritisches Problem in den Tusculanen. Uppsala: Almqvist &
Wiksell.
Lundström, Sven (1986). Zur Textkritik der Tusculanen. Uppsala: Almqvist & Wiksell.
Lundström, Sven (1993). ‘Vindikationen zu Senecas Controversiae und Suasoriae’, Eranos 91:
106–19.
Luque, Jesús (2006). Puntos y comas: La grafía de la articulación del habla. Granada: Editorial
Universidad de Granada.
Luraghi, Silvia (1995). ‘The pragmatics of verb initial sentences in some ancient Indo-European
languages’, in Pamela Downing and Michael Noonan (eds), Word Order in Discourse.
Amsterdam: Benjamins, 354–86.
Luraghi, Silvia (2001). ‘The discourse function of cum with the subjunctive in narrative texts’,
in Claude Moussy et al. (eds), 409–26.
Luraghi, Silvia (2016). ‘The position of weak pronouns in Latin prose’, in Paolo Poccetti (ed.),
246–61.
Lussky, E. A. (1953). ‘Misapplication of the term “zeugma” ’, Classical Journal 48: 285–90.
Mack, Sara (1980). ‘ “The single supplie”: Some observations on zeugma with particular refer-
ence to Vergil’, Ramus 9: 101–11.
Magnaldi, Giuseppina (2004). Parola d’autore, parola di copista. Alessandria: Edizioni dell’ Orso.
Maiocco, Marco (2005). Absolute Participial Constructions. Alessandria: Edizioni dell’ Orso.
Malchukov, Andrej (2000). Dependency Reversal in Noun-attribute Constructions: Towards a
Typology. Munich: Lincom.
Maltby, Robert (2002). ‘Gerund and gerundive use in Isidore of Seville’, in Alide Machtelt
Bolkestein et al. (eds), 219–34.
Maltby, Robert (2006). ‘Gerunds, gerundives and their Greek equivalents in Latin Bible trans-
lations’, in Carmen Arias (ed.), 425–42.
Maltby, Robert (2016). ‘Analytic and synthetic forms of the comparative and superlative from
Early to Late Latin’, in James N. Adams and Nigel Vincent (eds), 340–66.
Manfredini, Adriana M. (2014). ‘Tamquam mendici spolium fastidiose venditabat (Petr. 13.1):
Observaciones sobre la función, estructura y el significado de tamquam + sintagmas no
verbales’, in Piera Molinelli et al. (eds), 305–21.
Bibliography 1279
Mayen, Georg (1889). ‘De particulis quod quia quoniam quomodo ut pro acc. cum infinitivo
post verba sentiendi et declarandi positis’. Dissertation, Kiel.
Mazzanti, Alex (2020). ‘With or without ut? Full evidence of subjunctive complementation of
facio in archaic Latin’, Transactions of the Philological Society 118: 79–93.
McDevitt, Arthur S. (1967). ‘Hysteron proteron in the Aeneid’, Classical Quarterly 17: 316–21.
Mednikarova, Iveta (1997). ‘Patterns of hyperbaton in Latin prose from Cato to Bulgaranus’, in
Carl Deroux (ed.), Studies in Latin Literature and Roman History VIII. Brussels: Latomus,
51–84.
Meini, Linda (2004). ‘Le interrogative indirette con si in latino: Modello greco o sviluppo
autonomo’, Studi e Saggi Linguistici 42: 153–71.
Meiser, Gerhard (1998). Historische Laut- und Formenlehre der lateinischen Sprache. Darmstadt:
Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft.
Melander, Johan (1916). Étude sur MAGIS et les expressions adversatives dans les langues romanes.
Uppsala: Almqvist & Wiksell.
Mellado, Joaquín (1998). ‘El relativo y su antecedente en latín’, in Benjamín García Hernández
(ed.), 515–28.
Mellado, Joaquín (2011). ‘La relativa en la estructura sintáctica de la frase latina’, Les Études
Classiques 79: 35–64.
Mellet, Sylvie (1992). ‘Opérations de détermination, remarques sur deux indéfinis latins: quis
et aliquis’, Bulletin de la Société de Linguistique de Paris 87: 147–59.
Mellet, Sylvie (1994). ‘Éléments pour une étude de la synonymie syntaxique: L’exemple des
conjonctions de cause’, in Claude Moussy (ed.), 203–21.
Mellet, Sylvie (1995). ‘Quando, quia, quod, quoniam: Analyse énonciative et syntaxique des
conjonctions de cause en latin’, in Dominique Longrée (ed.), 211–28.
Mellet, Sylvie (1998). ‘Ita . . . ut, sic . . . ut: Polysémie et synomymie?’, in Benjamín García
Hernández (ed.), 529–40.
Mellet, Sylvie (2002). ‘Le système de conjonctions concessives en latin classique’, in
Alide Machtelt Bolkestein et al. (eds), 249–61.
Mellet, Sylvie (2005). ‘Ponctuation et continuité dans les textes latins: La réception des
éditeurs-traducteurs’, in Anna Jaubert (ed.), 13–28.
Mellet, Sylvie (ed.) (1987). Études de linguistique générale et de linguistique latine offertes en
hommage à Guy Serbat. Paris: Société pour l’information grammaticale.
Melo, Wolfgang D. C. de (2006). ‘If in doubt, leave it in’, Oxford University Working Papers in
Linguistics, Philology and Phonetics 11: 5–20.
Melo, Wolfgang D. C. de (2007). The Early Latin Verb System. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Melo, Wolfgang D. C. de (2010). ‘Possessive pronouns in Plautus’, in Eleanor Dickey and Anna
Chahoud (eds), 71–99.
Mendell, Clarence W. (1917). Latin Sentence Connection. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Menk, Edgar Allen (1925). ‘The position of the possessive pronoun in Cicero’s Orations.’
Dissertation, Iowa.
Meo, Cesidio de (20053). Lingue tecniche del latino. Bologna: Pàtron.
Merguet, Hugo (1905/6). Handlexikon zu Cicero. Leipzig.
Merten, Wilhelm (1893). ‘De particularum copulativarum apud veteres Romanorum scriptores
usu’. Dissertation, Marburg, Friedrich.
Meyer-Hermann, Reinhard (2011). ‘Die Syntax der lateinischen Dokumente des Cartulario de
San Millán de la Cogolla (759–1076) entspricht nicht den “patrones del español antiguo”.
Bibliography 1281
Norberg, Dag (1937). In registrum Gregorii Magni studia critica. Uppsala: Almqvist & Wiksell.
Norberg, Dag (1943). Syntaktische Forschungen auf dem Gebiete des Spätlateins und des frühen
Mittellateins. Uppsala: A.B. Lundeqvistka Bokhandeln / Leipzig: O. Harassowitz.
Norberg, Dag (1944). Beiträge zur spätlateinischen Syntax. Uppsala: Almqvist & Wiksell.
Norberg, Dag (1945). ‘Faire faire quelque chose à quelqu’un. Recherches sur l’origine latine de
la construction romane’, Uppsala Universitets Årsskrift 2: 65–106.
Núñez, Salvador (1991). Semántica de la modalidad en latín. Granada: Ediciones de la
Universidad de Granada.
Núñez, Salvador (1996). ‘Semántica y pragmática de los enunciados condicionales en latín’, in
Ana Agud et al. (eds), 257–70.
Núñez, Salvador (1998). ‘Habere + participio de perfecto y la categoría de la anterioridad en
latín y en las lenguas románicas’, in Actas del IX Congreso Español de Estudios Clásicos III.
Madrid: Ediciones Clásicas, 199–203.
Núñez, Salvador (2002). ‘El ecuativo latino con atque: ¿Extensión o reanálisis?’, in Empar
Espinilla et al. (eds), 149–70.
Nuti, Andrea (2019). ‘Gallia est omnis divisa in partes tres: Sapir’s typology and different
perspectives on totality’, in Lidewij W. van Gils et al. (eds), 219–40.
Nutting, Herbert C. (1916). ‘Hysteron proteron’, The Classical Journal 11: 298–301.
Nutting, Herbert C. (1920). ‘The ablative as an appositive’, Classical Philology 15: 389–92.
Nutting, Herbert C. (1925). The Latin Conditional Sentence. Berkeley: University of California
Press.
Nutting, Herbert C. (1928). ‘The utor fruor group’, University of California Publications in
Classical Philology 10: 1–16; 17–36; 37–62; 63–150; 151–68.
Oberhelman, Steven M. (2003). Prose Rhythm in Latin Literature of the Roman Empire: First
Century B.C. Lewiston, N.Y.: Edwin Mellen.
Odelman, Eva (1972). ‘Études sur quelques reflets du style administratif chez César’. Dissertation,
Stockholm.
Odelstierna, Ingrid (1926). De vi futurali ac finali gerundii et gerundivi Latini observationes.
Accedunt de verbo imputandi adnotationes. Uppsala: Almqvist & Wiksell.
Olivera, Mari Cruz (1990). ‘Sobre el uso de quod, quia, quoniam con los verbos de lengua y
entendimiento en el Evangelio de Juan de la Vulgata’, Analecta Malacitana 13: 375–82.
Önnerfors, Alf (1956). Pliniana: In Plinii Maioris Naturalem Historiam studia grammatica,
semantica, critica. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell.
Opelt, Ilona (1964). Die lateinischen Schimpfwörter und verwandte sprachliche Erscheinungen.
Heidelberg: Winter.
Orinsky, Kurt (1923). ‘Die Wortstellung bei Gaius’, Glotta 12: 83–99.
Orlandi, Giovanni (1994). ‘Le statistiche sulle clausole della prosa’, Filologia Mediolatina 6:
1–35.
Orlandi, Giovanni (2005). ‘Metrical and rhythmical clausulae in Medieval Latin prose: Some
aspects and problems’, in Tobias Reinhardt et al. (eds), 395–412.
Orlandini, Anna M. (1993). ‘Le rôle du locuteur dans l’interprétation des systèmes hypothé-
tiques: Une analyse sémantico-pragmatique des systèmes hypothétiques en latin et grec’,
Indogermanische Forschungen 98: 130–54.
Orlandini, Anna M. (1994). ‘De l’oratio obliqua comme papier de tournesol; une analyse
pragmatique d’un phénomène du discours indirect en latin: Le changement des modes’,
Indogermanische Forschungen 99: 130–54.
1284 Bibliography
Orlandini, Anna M. (1995). ‘De la connexion: Une analyse pragmatique des connecteurs latins
atqui et immo’, Lalies 15: 259–69.
Orlandini, Anna M. (1999a). ‘De la connexion: Une analyse pragmatique des connecteurs
latins autem et ceterum’, Indogermanische Forschungen 104: 142–63.
Orlandini, Anna M. (1999b). ‘Tamen. L’argumentation par ré-formulation rectifiante’, Lalies 19:
199–208.
Orlandini, Anna M. (2000). ‘Les pronoms indéfinis et la négation’, Papers on Grammar 5:
151–78.
Orlandini, Anna M. (2001). Négation et argumentation en latin. Leuven: Peeters.
Orlandini, Anna M. (2002a). ‘Les emplois adverbiaux de nisi: Une approche discursive’, in Lea
Sawicki and Donna Shalev (eds), 277–86.
Orlandini, Anna M. (2002b). ‘Pour une pragmatique des propositions circonstancielles en
“sans que” en latin’, Papers on Grammar 8: 159–84.
Orlandini, Anna M. (2003). ‘Les complétives en ne, quin, quominus’, in Colette Bodelot (ed.),
482–527.
Orlandini, Anna M. (2005). ‘Fonctions adverbiales dans des structures corrélatives en latin’, in
Paolo de Carvalho and Frédéric Lambert (eds), 159–80.
Orlandini, Anna and Poccetti, Paolo (2007). ‘Il y a nec et nec: Trois valeurs de la négation en
latin et dans les langues de l’Italie ancienne’, in Franck Floricic (ed.), La négation dans les
langues romanes. Amsterdam: Benjamins, 29–47.
Orlandini, Anna and Poccetti, Paolo (2008). ‘Les relations sémantiques entre la coordination
connective, adversative et disjonctive en latin et dans les langues de l’Italie ancienne’, Papers
on Grammar 10: 179–203.
Orlandini, Anna and Poccetti, Paolo (2009). ‘Corrélation, coordination et comparaison en
latin et dans les langues italiques’, Langages 174.2.53–66.
Orlandini, Anna and Poccetti, Paolo (2010). ‘Magis quantitativum et magis correctivum’, Papers
on Grammar 11: 215–32.
Orlandini, Anna and Poccetti, Paolo (2016). ‘Nuovi percorsi oltre il ciclo di Jespersen: L’apporto
del latino’, in Paolo Poccetti (ed.), 410–29.
Orlandini, Anna and Poccetti, Paolo (2018). ‘La comparazione detta “epistemica” in latino’, in
Jesús de la Villa and Anna Pompei (eds), Classical Languages and Linguistics. Madrid: UAM
Ediciones, 143–58.
Orlandini, Anna and Poccetti, Paolo (2019a). ‘Les parcours sémantiques vers l’adversatif: Une
approche typologique des langues anciennes’, in Lidewij W. van Gils et al. (eds), 259–79.
Orlandini, Anna and Poccetti, Paolo (2019b). ‘Entre corrélation, coordination et subordination:
Quand cum et nisi se rejoignent’, in Martin Taillade et al. (eds), 203–13.
Ortoleva, Vincenzo (2012). ‘Palladio III,30: Un autentico caso di nominativus pendens?’, in
Frédérique Biville et al. (eds), 235–52.
Otto, Clemens (1912). ‘De epexegeseos in Latinorum scriptis usu’. Dissertation, Münster.
Palmén, Erkki (1958). ‘Die lateinischen pronominalen Ortsadverbien in Kasusbedeutung’,
Arctos n.s. 2: 104–42.
Panagl, Oswald (2005). ‘Linguistisches und Stilistisches zum Hendiadyoin’, in Gualtiero Calboli
(ed.), 877–84.
Panagl, Oswald and Krisch, Thomas (eds) (1992). Latein und Indogermanisch: Akten des
Kolloquiums der Indogermanischen Gesellschaft, Salzburg, 23.–26. September 1986. Innsbruck:
Institut für Sprachwissenschaft.
Bibliography 1285
Petersmann, Hubert (1977). Petrons urbane Prosa: Untersuchungen zu Sprache und Text
(Syntax). Vienna: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften.
Petersmann, Hubert and Kettemann, Rudolf (eds) (1999). Latin vulgaire–latin tardif V.
Heidelberg: Winter.
Petersen, Lauren Hackworth (2003). ‘The baker, his tomb, his wife, and her breadbasket: The
monument of Eurysaces in Rome’, The Art Bulletin 85: 230–57.
Pettersson, Oscar (1930). ‘Commentationes Livianae’. Dissertation, Uppsala.
Pezzini, Giuseppe (2005). Terence and the Verb ‘To Be’ in Latin. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Pfister, Raimund (1995). ‘Der Nebensatz, Ein Fachwort ohne Randschärfe’, in Dominique
Longrée (ed.), 237–46.
Pieroni, Silvia (2010). ‘Deixis and anaphora’, in Philip Baldi and Pierluigi Cuzzolin (eds),
III.389–501.
Pinkster, Harm (1969). ‘A B and C coordination in Latin’, Mnemosyne 22: 258–67.
Pinkster, Harm (1972). On Latin Adverbs. Amsterdam: North-Holland (reprint on demand
from Amsterdam University Press).
Pinkster, Harm (1983). ‘Praedicativum’, in Harm Pinkster (ed.), 199–217.
Pinkster, Harm (1987). ‘The pragmatic motivation for the use of subject pronouns: The case of
Petronius’, in Sylvie Mellet (ed.), 193–223.
Pinkster, Harm (1990). ‘La coordination’, L’Information Grammaticale 46: 8–13.
Pinkster, Harm (1991a). ‘Praedicativum’, in Christian Touratier (ed.), 72–8.
Pinkster, Harm (1991b). ‘Evidence for SVO in Latin?’, in Roger Wright (ed.), Latin and the
Romance Languages in the early Middle Ages. London: Routledge, 69–82.
Pinkster, Harm (1992). ‘Notes on the syntax of Celsus’, Mnemosyne 45: 513–24.
Pinkster, Harm (1993). ‘Chronologie et cohérence de quelques évolutions latines et romanes’,
in Gerold Hilty (ed.), Actes du XXe Congrès International de Linguistique et Philologie Romanes.
Tübingen: Francke, III: 239–50.
Pinkster, Harm (1995). ‘Word order in the Late Latin Gesta conventus carthaginiensis’, in Louis
Callebat (ed.), 549–60.
Pinkster, Harm (2004a). ‘Luce . . . ac palam (Amm. 24.4.21): Een geval van hyperbaton?’, Lampas
37: 216–21.
Pinkster, Harm (2004b). ‘Attitudinal and illocutionary satellites in Latin’, in Henk Aertsen, Mike
Hannay, and Rod Lyall (eds), Words in Their Places: A Festschrift for J. Lachlan Mackenzie.
Amsterdam: Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, 191–8.
Pinkster, Harm (2005). ‘The language of Pliny the Elder’, in Tobias Reinhardt et al. (eds),
239–56.
Pinkster, Harm (2009). ‘De Latijnse voegwoorden quia en quoniam (en Nederlands aangezien)’,
in Egbert Beijk et al. (eds), Fons Verborum: Feestbundel Fons Moerdijk. Leiden: INL, 313–20.
Pinkster, Harm (2010a). ‘The use of quia and quoniam in Cicero, Seneca, and Tertullian’, in
D. Richard Page and Aaron D. Rubin (eds), Studies in Classical Linguistics in Honor of Philip
Baldi. Leiden: Brill, 81–95.
Pinkster, Harm (2010b). ‘Notes on the language of Marcus Caelius Rufus’, in Eleanor Dickey
and Anna Chahoud (eds), 186–202.
Pinkster, Harm (2015). ‘Een nieuwe syntaxis voor een dode taal?’, Lampas 48: 168–87.
Pinkster, Harm (2020). ‘Evidence for word order change in Latin OV>VO?’, in Rosario López
Gregoris, Antonio M.ª Martín Rodríguez, Carmen González Vázquez, and Luis Unceta
Bibliography 1287
Pultrová, Lucie (2018). ‘Periphrastic comparison in Latin’, Journal of Latin Linguistics 17:
93–110.
Purnelle, Gérald (1998). ‘Une étude diachronique de la syntaxe de licet’, in Benjamín García
Hernández (ed.), 659–71.
Purnelle, Gérald (2001). ‘Licet et subjonctif, verbe ou conjonction? Seconde enquête’, in Claude
Moussy et al. (eds) 569–82.
Purnelle, Gérald and Denooz, Joseph (eds) (2007). Ordre et cohérence en latin, Biblothèque de
la Faculté de philosophie et Lettres de l’Université de Liège CCXCIII. Geneva: Droz.
Questa, Cesare (2007). La Metrica di Plauto e Terenzio. Urbino: QuattroVenti.
Quirk, Randolph, Greenbaum, Sidney, Leech, Geoffrey, and Svartvik, Jan (1985). A Comprehensive
Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman.
Radatz, Hans-Ingo (2001). Die Semantik der Adjektivstellung. Tübingen: Niemeyer.
Raible, Wolfgang (1993). ‘Die Entwicklung ideographischer Elemente bei der Verschriftlichung
des Wissens’, in Wolfgang Kullmann and Jochen Althoff (eds), Vermittlung und Tradierung
von Wissen in der griechischen Kultur. Tübingen: Narr, 15–37.
Ramírez de Verger, Antonio (2011). ‘Quoque in Ovid, Met. 6.27’, Philologus 155: 383–6.
Raviolo, Francesca (2002). ‘Elementi di latino volgare nei sermoni 1–5 di Agostino’, Orpheus
23: 90–104.
Reggio, Grazia (2005). ‘Relative clauses in juridical Latin’, in Gualtiero Calboli (ed.), 653–61.
Reggio, Grazia (2006). ‘Quelques considérations sur la syntaxe dans les Digesta d’Alvénus
Varus’, in Jean-Paul Brachet and Claude Moussy (eds), 251–62.
Reinhardt, Tobias (2010). ‘Syntactic colloquialism in Lucretius’, in Eleanor Dickey and Anna
Chahoud (eds), 203–28.
Reinhardt, Tobias, Lapidge, Michael, and Adams, James N. (eds) (2005). Aspects of the Language
of Latin Prose, Proceedings of the British Academy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Revuelta, Antonio (1999). ‘Focusing particles in Latin. Some remarks’, in Benjamín García
Hernández (ed.), 689–704.
Revuelta, Antonio (2002). ‘Oraciones comparativas de igualdad: Niveles de integración’, in
Empar Espinilla et al. (eds), 191–228.
Reynolds, Suzanne (1996). Medieval Reading: Grammar, Rhetoric and the Classical Text.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Richmond, John A. (1965). ‘A note on elision of final ĕ in certain particles used by Latin poets’,
Glotta 43: 78–103.
Richter, Elise (1903). Zur Entwicklung der romanischen Wortstellung aus der lateinischen. Halle:
Niemeyer.
Ricottilli, Licinia (1978). ‘Quid tu? Quid vos?’ Materiali e Discussioni 1: 215–21.
Rieken, Elisabeth and Widmer, Paul (eds) (2009). Pragmatische Kategorien: Form, Funktion
und Diachronie. Wiesbaden: Reichert.
Riemann, Othon (1885). Études sur la langue et la grammaire de Tite-Live. Paris: Thorin.
Ripoll, Arthur (2012). ‘Le changement invisible ou “que tout reste identique pour que tout
change” ’, in Alain Christol and Olga Spevak (eds), 299–323.
Riquelme, José (2005). ‘El participio concertado regente de aditamentación sintáctica en
Annales I de Tácito: Variedad de construcciones’, Faventia 27: 25–46.
Risselada, Rodie (1984). ‘Coordination and juxtaposition of adjectives in the Latin NP’, Glotta
62: 202–31.
Risselada, Rodie (1989). ‘Latin illocutionary parentheticals’, in Marius Lavency and Dominique
Longrée (eds), 367–78.
Bibliography 1289
Risselada, Rodie (1994). ‘Modo and sane, or what to do with particles in Latin directives’, in
József Herman (ed.), 319–42.
Risselada, Rodie (1998a). ‘The discourse functions of sane: Latin marker of agreement in
description, interaction and concession’, Journal of Pragmatics 30: 225–44.
Risselada, Rodie (1998b). ‘Tandem and postremo: Two of a kind?’, in Rodie Risselada (ed.),
85–116.
Risselada, Rodie (1998c). ‘Nunc’s use as a discourse marker of “cohesive” shifts’, in Charles-
Marie Ternes (ed.), 142–59.
Risselada, Rodie (2016). ‘The pragmatics of “at least”: saltem, utique, dumtaxat, certe’, Pallas
102: 191–9.
Risselada, Rodie (ed.) (1998). Latin in Use (Amsterdam Studies in the Pragmatics of Latin).
Amsterdam: Gieben.
Risselada, Rodie, Jong, Jan R. de, and Bolkestein, Alide Machtelt (eds) (1996). On Latin:
Linguistic and Literary Studies in Honour of Harm Pinkster. Amsterdam: Gieben.
Roby, Henry J. (1882). A Grammar of the Latin Language from Plautus to Suetonius, 2 vols.
London: Macmillan.
Roca, María José (1997). ‘Quod, quia, quoniam en Amiano Marcelino’, Fortunatae 9: 237–51.
Roca, María José (2001). La subordinación completiva en latín tardío: La extensión de las
subordinadas conjuncionales (QVOD, QVIA, QVONIAM, EO QVOD). Santa Cruz de
Tenerife: Universidad de La Laguna.
Rochette, Bruno (2007). ‘Éléments hors structure dans la Cena Trimalchionis (26.7–78.8):
Remarques sur la structure de la phrase de Pétrone’, in Colette Bodelot (ed.), 265–94.
Rodríguez Martín, V. E. (1993). ‘Quod, quia, quoniam en las Epístolas católicas de la Vulgata:
Su uso con los verbos de lengua y entendimiento’, Analecta Malacitana 16: 43–8.
Roegiest, Eugeen (1983). ‘Do tibi aquam bibere: À propos d’une construction infinitive dans les
langues Romanes’, Zeitschrift für Romanische Philologie 99: 267–87.
Roesch, Sophie (2002). ‘Les stratégies de clôture du dialogue dans les comédies de Plaute’, in
Alide Machtelt Bolkestein et al. (eds), 317–32.
Roesch, Sophie (2005). ‘L’échec des clôtures du dialogue dans les comédies de Plaute’, in
Gualtiero Calboli (ed.), 921–32.
Roesch, Sophie (2008). ‘Les débuts de dialogue dans la comédie et la tragédie latines’, in
Bruno Bureau and Christian Nicolas (eds), Commencer et finir. Lyon: Collection du CRGR,
207–22.
Rohde, Dietrich (1884). Adjectivum quo ordine apud Caesarem et in Ciceronis orationibus
coniunctum sit cum substantivo. Programm Hamburg.
Rohde, Dietrich (1887). Adjectivum quo ordine apud Sallustium coniunctum sit cum substantivo.
Programm Hamburg.
Ros, Hilke (2001). ‘Binding Theory and Valency Grammar in Latin’, Glotta 77: 244–61.
Ros, Hilke (2005). ‘Gratias agere quod: Causal or complement clause’, Mnemosyne 58: 416–23.
Roschatt, Alois (1885). ‘Ueber den Gebrauch der Parenthesen in Ciceros Reden und rhetorischen
Schriften’, Acta Seminarii Philologici Erlangensis 3: 189–244.
Rosén, Hannah (1981). Studies in the Syntax of the Verbal Noun in Early Latin. Munich:
Fink.
Rosén, Hannah (1983). ‘The mechanisms of Latin nominalization and conceptualization in
historical view’, in Wolfgang Haase (ed.), 178–211.
Rosén, Hannah (1989a). ‘General subordinators and sentence complements’, in Gualtiero
Calboli (ed.), 197–217.
1290 Bibliography
Rosén, Hannah (1989b). ‘The use and function of sentential particles in Classical Latin’, in
Marius Lavency and Dominique Longrée (eds), 391–402.
Rosén, Hannah (1990). ‘La coordination asymmétrique comme critère de fonction syntaxique
en latin’, L’Information Grammaticale 46: 34–7.
Rosén, Hannah (1992). ‘Die Arten der Prolepse im Lateinischen in typologischer Sicht’, in
Oswald Panagl and Thomas Krisch (eds), 243–62.
Rosén, Hannah (1993). ‘Demum: A message-articulating particle’, in Jan de Clercq and Piet
Desmet (eds), Florilegium historiographiae linguisticae (= CILL 75). Leuven: Peeters,
173–84.
Rosén, Hannah (1994). ‘The definite article in the making’, in József Herman (ed.), 129–50.
Rosén, Hannah (1996). ‘ “Eam vitam vivere quae est sola vita nominanda”. Reflections on
cognate complements’, in Rodie Risselada et al. (eds), 127–49.
Rosén, Hannah (1998). ‘Latin presentational sentences’, in Benjamín García Hernández (ed.),
723–42.
Rosén, Hannah (1999). Latine loqui: Trends and Directions in the Crystalization of Classical
Latin. Munich: Fink.
Rosén, Hannah (2003). ‘Immo—its atypical use in Petronius’, in József Herman and Hannah
Rosén (eds), 169–81.
Rosén, Hannah (2005). ‘Particles—Hypercharacterization and status shift in Latin and
Romance’, in Sándor Kiss et al. (eds), 227–36.
Rosén, Hannah (2007a). ‘La mise en relief par apodose aux subordonnées en si . . ., qu . . .,
quando . . ., et sim.’, in Colette Bodelot (ed.), 75–90.
Rosén, Hannah (2007b). ‘On particles and otiose emendations: Epitactic sed’, in Juhani Härmä,
Elina Suomela-Härmä, and Olli Välikangas (eds), L’art de la philologie, Mémoires de la
Société Néophilologique de Helsinki 70: 231–8.
Rosén, Hannah (2008). ‘Latin epitaxis in historical and typological view’, Papers on Grammar
10: 205–42.
Rosén, Hannah (2009). ‘Coherence, sentence modification, and sentence-part modification—
the contribution of particles’, in Philip Baldi and Pierluigi Cuzzolin (eds), 317–441.
Rosén, Hannah (2011). ‘Zeroing in on Latin asyndesis’, STUF 54: 136–47.
Rosén, Hannah (2013). ‘About non-direct discourse: Another look at its parameters in Latin’,
Journal of Latin Linguistics 12: 231–68.
Rosén, Hannah (2015). ‘Le continuum des discours rapportés en latin: Du discours indirect
vers le discours direct’, Revue de Linguistique Latine du Centre Alfred Ernout: De Lingua
Latina 10: 1–33 [online]: http://lettres.sorbonne-universite.fr/sites/default/files/media/2020-
05/dll_10_h-rosen.pdf.
Rosén, Hannah (ed.) (1996). Aspects of Latin. Papers from the Seventh International Colloquium
on Latin Linguistics. Innsbruck: Institut für Sprachwissenschaft.
Rosén, Hannah and Shalev, Donna (2017). ‘Quasi: Its Grecizing (?) syntactic patterns’, Pallas
103: 273–82.
Roveri, Alessandro (1959). ‘Osservazioni sull’uso di potius (citius, prius) quam ut in Cicerone’,
in Atti del I Congresso Internazionale di Studi Ciceroniani. Rome: Centro di studi ciceroniani,
II.423–32.
Rubio, Gonzalo (2009). ‘Semitic influence in the history of Latin syntax’, in Philip Baldi and
Pierluigi Cuzzolin (eds), 195–239.
Ruggiero, Ettore de (1956). Dizionario epigrafico di antichità Romane, 3 vols. Rome: L. Pasqualucci
(repr. Rome: l’Erma di Brettschneider).
Bibliography 1291
Ruiz Castellanos, Antonio (2005). ‘Los capítulos como unidades textuales. Enunciados temáticos
+ quippe en Veleyo Patérculo, H.R. 2,1–57’, in Gualtiero Calboli (ed.), 933–42.
Saastamoinen, Ari (2010). The Phraseology of Latin Building Inscriptions in Roman North
Africa. Helsinki: Societas Scientiarum Fennica.
Salonius, Aarne H. (1920). Vitae patrum: Kritische Untersuchungen über Text, Syntax und
Wortschatz der spätlateinischen Vitae patrum. Lund: Gleerup.
Salvi, Giampaolo (2004). La formazione della struttura di frase romanze. Tübingen: Niemeyer.
Sánchez Manzano, María Asunción (2001). ‘Quippe y nam en el estilo histórico de Veleyo
Patérculo’, in M. José Barrios and Emilio Crespo (coords.), X Congreso Español de Estudios
Clásicos, II. Sociedad de Estudios Clásicos.
Sánchez Martínez, Félix (1996). ‘La construcción personal activa: A propósito de Propercio
2.1.41–2’, Cuadernos de Filología Clásica (Lat) 11: 17–27.
Sánchez Martínez, Jesús (2000). Morfosintaxis latina coordinativa. Murcia: Universidad de
Murcia.
Sasse, Hans-Jürgen (1987). ‘The thetic/categorical distinction revisited’, Linguistics 25: 511–80.
Saur, Hugo (1913). ‘Die Adversativpartikeln bei lateinischen Prosaikern’. Dissertation,
Tübingen.
Sawicki, Lea and Shalev, Donna (eds) (2002). Donum Grammaticum. Leuven: Peeters.
Scaglione, Aldo D. (1970). Ars grammatica. The Hague: Mouton.
Scaglione, Aldo D. (1972). The Classical Theory of the Composition from its Origins to the
Present. Chapell Hill: North Carolina University Press.
Schaffner, Emil (1954). Die Entwicklung des lateinischen Adverbs quamvis zur Konjunktion.
Winterthur: Keller Verlag.
Scherer, Anton (1975). Handbuch der lateinischen Syntax. Heidelberg: Winter.
Schlicher, John J. (1933). ‘Non-assertive elements in the language of the Latin historians’,
Classical Philology 28: 289–300.
Schlicher, John J. (1936). ‘The development of Caesar’s narrative style’, Classical Philology 31:
212–24.
Schmalz, Joseph Hermann (1884). ‘Ablativi absoluti im Perf. Depon. mit Objekt’, Archiv für
lateinische Lexikographie und Grammatik 1: 344–7.
Schneider, Nikolaus (1912). ‘De verbi in lingua Latina collocatione’. Dissertation, Münster.
Schrickx, Josine (2009). ‘Namque als Variante von nam?’, Mnemosyne 62: 250–71.
Schrickx, Josine (2011). Lateinische Modalpartikeln: Nempe, quippe, scilicet, videlicet und
nimirum. Leiden: Brill.
Schrickx, Josine (2016). ‘Nedum: “much less” or “much more”?’, Journal of Latin Linguistics 15:
117–44.
Schrickx, Josine (2017). ‘Polar questions in Latin with and without the enclitic particle -ne’, in
Camille Denizot and Olga Spevak (eds), 235–55.
Schrickx, Josine (2018). ‘Waarom nedum altijd “laat staan” betekent’, Lampas 51: 112–25.
Schrijnen, Josef (1939). ‘Ein nominativus absolutus im Altlatein’, in Collectanea Schrijnen.
Nijmegen/Utrecht: Dekker & van de Vegt, 197–201.
Schrijvers, Piet H. (1970). Horror ac divina voluptas: Études sur la poétique et la poésie de
Lucrèce. Amsterdam: Hakkert.
Schünke, Emil (1906). ‘De traiectione coniunctionum et pronominis relativi apud poetas
Latinos’. Dissertation, Kiel.
Schuster, Meinhard (1950/51). ‘Kritisch-exegetische Nachlese zu Catull’, Wiener Studien 65:
42–53.
1292 Bibliography
Scivoletto, Nino (1962). ‘ “Dico quod”, “dico quia” ’, Giornale Italiano di Filologia 15: 1–34.
Selig, Maria (1992). Die Entwicklung der Nominaldeterminanten im Spätlatein. Tübingen: Narr.
Serbat, Guy (1979). ‘L’ablatif absolu’, Revue des Études Latines 57: 340–54.
Serbat, Guy (1984). ‘Erat Pipa quaedam’, Revue des Études Latines 62: 344–56.
Serbat, Guy (1988a). ‘Le nominativus pendens’, Cuadernos de Filología Clásica 21.2: 359–66.
Serbat, Guy (1988b). Linguistique latine et linguistique générale. Leuven: Peeters.
Serbat, Guy (1991). ‘Intégration à la phrase latine d’un groupe nominal sans fonction syntax-
ique (le “nominativus pendens”)’, Langages 104: 22–32.
Serbat, Guy (1996). L’emploi des cas en latin. Grammaire fondamentale du latin VI. Leuven:
Peeters.
Serbat, Guy (2003). ‘Les complétives en quod’, in Colette Bodelot (ed.), 528–753.
Setaioli, Aldo (2000). Facundus Seneca. Bologna: Pàtron.
Shalev, Donna (1998). ‘Vocatives in responses: A bridging mechanism in dialogue exchange’, in
Benjamín García Hernández (ed.), 765–79.
Shalev, Donna (2001). ‘A pattern of agent expression in non-active and non-personal expres-
sions in Latin’, in Claude Moussy et al. (eds), 583–96.
Shackleton Bailey, David R. (1956). Propertiana. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Shipley, Frederick William (1913). ‘Preferred and avoided combinations of the enclitic -que in
Cicero’, Classical Philology 8: 23–47.
Siegert, Hans (1939). Die Syntax der Tempora und Modi der ältesten lateinischen Inschriften (bis
zum Tode Caesars). Würzburg: Triltsch.
Sievers, Gualterus (1907). ‘De zeugmatis quod dicitur usu Horatiano’. Dissertation, Jena.
Siewierska, Anna (1988). Word Order Rules. London: Croom Helm.
Siewierska, Anna (1998). ‘Variation in major constituent orders: A global and European
perspective’, in Anna Siewierska (ed.), 475–551.
Siewierska, Anna (1999). ‘Word order and linearization’, in Keith Brown and Jim Miller (eds),
412–18.
Siewierska, Anna (ed.) (1998). Constituent Order in the Languages of Europe. Berlin: Mouton
de Gruyter.
Siewierska, Anna and Uhlířová, Ludmila (1998). ‘An overview of word order in Slavic languages’,
in Anna Siewierska (ed.), 105–49.
Sihler, Andrew L. (1995). A New Comparative Grammar of Greek and Latin. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Sjögren, Håkan (1900). ‘De particulis copulativis apud Plautum et Terentium quaestiones
selectae’. Dissertation, Uppsala.
Sjöstrand, Nils (1891). De vi et usu supini secundi Latinorum. Lund: H. Möller.
Sluiter, Ineke (2000). ‘Seven grammarians on the ablative absolute’, Historiographia Linguistica
17: 379–414.
Smith, Carlota S. (2003). Modes of Discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Sörbom, Gunnar (1935). Variatio sermonis Tacitei aliaeque apud eundem quaestiones selectae.
Uppsala: Almqvist & Wiksell.
Sörés, Anna (2004). ‘La notion d’ “ordre de base” dans la typologie des langues et son applica-
tion à la langue hongroise’, Bulletin de la Société de Linguistique de Paris 99: 281–310.
Solin, Heikki (2004). ‘Parerga zu den lateinischen Fluchtafeln’, in Kai Brodersen and Amina
Kropp (eds), Fluchtafeln. Frankfurt a.M.: Verlag Antike, 115–28.
Solin, Heikki, Leiwo, Martti, and Halla-aho, Hilla (eds) (2003). Latin vulgaire–latin tardif VI.
Hildesheim: Olms-Weidmann.
Bibliography 1293
Solodow, J. B. (1978). The Latin particle quidem. Boulder, Colo.: American Philological
Association.
Somers, Maartje H. (1994). ‘Theme and topic. The relation between discourse and constituent
fronting in Latin’, in József Herman (ed.), 151–77.
Song, Jae Jung (2010). ‘Word Order Typology’, in Jae Jung Song (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of
Linguistic Typology. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 253–80.
Soubiran, Jean (1966). L’élision dans la poésie latine. Paris: Klincksieck.
Spevak, Olga (1998). ‘L’emploi de licet en latin tardif ’, Acta Universitatis Carolinae, Graecolatina
Pragensia 16: 95–114.
Spevak, Olga (2001). ‘La concession en latin tardif ’. Thesis, Université de Paris IV–Sorbonne.
Spevak, Olga (2004). ‘Verb–subject order in Latin: The case of existential and locative sen-
tences’, Classica et Medievalia 55: 381–96.
Spevak, Olga (2005a). ‘Itinerarium Egeriae: L’ordre des constituants obligatoires’, Mnemosyne
58: 235–61.
Spevak, Olga (2005b). La concession en latin. Brussels: Latomus.
Spevak, Olga (2005c). ‘Concession et corrélation’, in Paolo de Carvalho and Frédéric Lambert
(eds), 141–57.
Spevak, Olga (2006a). ‘Les enclitiques en latin’, Indogermanische Forschungen 111: 249–74.
Spevak, Olga (2006b). ‘Quod, quia et les locutions conjonctives (Isidore de Séville, Étymologies
10)’, in Carmen Arias (ed.), 535–47.
Spevak, Olga (2006c). ‘Tamen. Essai d’une description syntaxique’, Glotta 82: 221–48.
Spevak, Olga (2006d). ‘L’ordre des constituants en latin’. Habilitation, Sorbonne.
Spevak, Olga (2010a). Constituent Order in Classical Latin Prose. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Spevak, Olga (2010b). ‘Le syntagme nominal en latin: Les travaux des trente dernières années’,
in Olga Spevak (ed.), 23–40.
Spevak, Olga (2010c). ‘La place des déterminants et leur combinaisons’, in Olga Spevak (ed.),
57–75.
Spevak, Olga (2012a). ‘La disjonction en latin tardif ’, in Frédérique Biville et al. (eds),
253–69.
Spevak, Olga (2012b). ‘Les enclitiques enim et autem dans la diachronie du latin’, in Alain
Christol and Olga Spevak (eds), 335–52.
Spevak, Olga (2013). ‘La dislocation à droite en latin’, Glotta 89: 195–221.
Spevak, Olga (2014a). The Noun Phrase in Classical Latin Prose. Leiden: Brill.
Spevak, Olga (2014b). ‘Causa et ses compléments’, in Aude Morel-Alizon and Jean-François
Thomas (eds), 17–29.
Spevak, Olga (2015a). ‘Appositive construction or noun phrase? On the status of postnominal
adjectives in Latin and Ancient Greek’, Journal of Latin Linguistics 14: 307–23.
Spevak, Olga (2015b). ‘Les noms verbaux en latin’, Bulletin de la Société de Linguistique de Paris
110: 289–321.
Spevak, Olga (2016a). ‘L’ordre des mots en latin après J. Marouzeau’, Revue des Études Latines
93: 107–28.
Spevak, Olga (2016b). ‘La place des génitifs chez Vitruve et Pline l’Ancien’, in Paolo Poccetti
(ed.), 731–47.
Spevak, Olga (2018). ‘La construction à participe dominant vs. le nom verbal chez Cicéron’,
Revue de Philologie 92: 63–84.
Spevak, Olga (2019). ‘La construction à participe dominant (ab urbe condita): Emplois prépo-
sitionnels’, Listy filologické / Folia philologica 142: 283–306.
1294 Bibliography
Spevak, Olga (ed.) (2010). Le syntagme nominal en latin: Nouvelles contributions. Paris: L’Harmattan.
Stamm, Peter (1885). Die Partikelverbindung et . . . quidem (ac . . . quidem) bei Cicero. Programm
Rössel.
Stassen, Leon (2000). ‘AND-languages and WITH-languages’, Linguistic Typology 4: 1–54.
Steele, Robert Benson (1898). ‘Affirmative final clauses in the Latin historians’, The American
Journal of Philology 19: 255–84.
Steele, Robert Benson (1902). ‘The ablative absolute in Livy’, The American Journal of Philology
23: 295–312.
Steele, Robert Benson (1904). ‘The ablative absolute in the Epistles of Cicero, Seneca, Pliny, and
Fronto’, The American Journal of Philology 25: 315–27.
Stegmann, Carl (1890). ‘Zur lateinischen Schulgrammatik III’, Neue Jahrbücher für Philologie
und Pädagogik 142: 25–37.
Stengaard, Birte (1985). ‘Shift tipológico Tema/Rema y el futuro románico’, Revue Romane 20:
208–30.
Stinton, T. C. W. (1976). ‘Si credere dignum est: Some expressions of disbelief in Euripides and
others’, Proceedings of the Cambridge Philological Society 22: 80–9.
Stockert, Walther (2004). ‘Schwören auch Frauen bei Herkules?—Bemerkungen zu Cist. 52
und anderen Plautusstellen’, in Rolf Hartkamp and Florian Hurka (eds), Studien zu Plautus’
Cistellaria. Tübingen: Gunter Narr Verlag, 363–9.
Storme, Benjamin (2010). ‘Sicilia amissa: Syntagme nominal ou proposition subordonnée?’,
Revue de Philologie 84: 119–36.
Stotz, Peter (1998). Handbuch zur lateinischen Sprache des Mittelalters, IV: Formenlehre, Syntax
und Stilistik. Munich: Beck.
Suárez, Pedro Manuel (2002). ‘Subordinación o coordinación con quam’, in Empar Espinilla et
al. (eds), 229–49.
Suárez, Pedro Manuel (2012). Catégories grammaticales, systèmes grammaticaux et autres ques-
tions de linguistique latine. Hildesheim: Olms.
Sutter, Marc de (1986). ‘A theory of word order within the Latin noun phrase, based on Cato’s
De agri cultura’, in Carl Deroux (ed.), Studies in Latin Literature and Roman History IV.
Brussels: Latomus, 151–83.
Svennung, Josef (1934). ‘Nebensätze ohne Subordinationswort’, Glotta 22: 163–93.
Svennung, Josef (1936). Untersuchungen zu Palladius und zur lateinischen Fach- und Volkssprache.
Uppsala: Almqvist & Wiksell.
Svennung, Josef (1948).‘Sprachliche Bemerkungen zum Irenaeus’, Kungl. Hum. Vet.-Samfundet
i Uppsala, Årsbok: 45–57.
Svennung, Josef (1958). Anredeformen. Uppsala: Almqvist & Wiksell.
Sweetser, Eve (1990). From Etymology to Pragmatics: Metaphorical and Cultural Aspects of
Semantic Structure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Szantyr, Anton (1970). ‘Bemerkungen zum Aufbau der Vergilischen Ekphrasis’, Museum
Helveticum 27: 28–40.
Szantyr, Anton (1972). ‘Missverstandene quod-Sätze’, Gymnasium 79: 499–511.
Szantyr, Anton (1974). ‘Zu Sall. (?) Rep. 2.13.6’, Gymnasium 81: 41–8.
Sznajder, Lyliane (1987). ‘Un procédé d’art chez César: Les complétives paratactiques’, in Sylvie
Mellet (ed.), 293–306.
Sznajder, Lyliane (1996). ‘Construction paratactique et sermo cotidianus dans la langue de
Plaute’, in Jacqueline Dangel and Claude Moussy (eds), Les structures de l’oralité en latin.
Paris: Presses de l’Université de Paris-Sorbonne, 167–80.
Bibliography 1295
Sznajder, Lyliane (1998). ‘Verbes transitifs sans objet en latin’, in Benjamín García Hernández
(ed.), 791–808.
Sznajder, Lyliane (2001a). ‘Complétives latines sans mot subordonnant’, Les Études Classiques
69: 369–88.
Sznajder, Lyliane (2001b). ‘Discours indirect et dépendance syntaxique’, in Claude Moussy
et al. (eds), 609–26.
Sznajder, Lyliane (2003). ‘Les complétives au subjonctif sans conjoncteur’, in Colette Bodelot
(ed.), 13–95.
Sznajder, Lyliane (2005). ‘Stratégies de prise en charge énonciatives dans le discours indirect’,
in Gualtiero Calboli (ed.), 749–61.
Sznajder, Lyliane (2012). ‘Dixit autem serpens ad mulierem / mulier quoque dixit: La double
expression de l’allocutaire dans les propositions introductrices de discours directs dans la
Vulgate’, in Frédérique Biville et al. (eds), 271–88.
Sznajder, Lyliane (2017a). ‘Complétives en quod/quia/infinitives en latin biblique’, Pallas 103:
263–72.
Sznajder, Lyliane (2017b). ‘Quelques réflexions sur des discours hybrides du latin biblique:
oratio obliqua ou oratio recta?’, in Paolo Poccetti (ed.), 95–111.
Sznajder, Lyliane (2019). ‘Les complétives en quoniam: Étude à partir du latin biblique’, in
Lidewij W. van Gils et al. (eds), 174–98.
Taillade, Martin (2019).‘Réflexions sur la syntaxe de fieri en latin classique’, in Martin Taillade
et al. (eds), 163–86.
Taillade, Martin, Gallego, Julia, Fatello, Fabienne, and Gibert, Guillaume (eds) (2019). Nemo
par eloquentia: Mélanges de linguistique ancienne en hommage à Colette Bodelot. Clermont-
Ferrand: Presses Universitaires Blaise-Pascal.
Tarrant, Richard J. (2002). ‘Parenthetically speaking (in Virgil and other poets)’, in Peter E. Knox
and Clive Foss (eds), Style and Tradition: Studies in Honor of Wendell Clausen. Leipzig:
Teubner, 141–57.
Tarriño, Eusebia (1991). ‘Observaciones sobre el acusativo absoluto en Gregorio de Tours’, in
Ramos, Agustín (ed.), Mnemosynum C. Codoñer a discipulis oblatum. Salamanca: Ediciones
Universidad de Salamanca.
Tarriño, Eusebia (1996). ‘Algunos usos irregulares del nominativo en Gregorio de Tours’, in
Ana Agud et al. (eds), 237–55.
Tarriño, Eusebia (2002). ‘Sobre la construcción NcI en Plinio el Viejo’, in Maria José García
Soler (ed.), ΤΙΜΗΣ ΧΑΡΙΝ: Homenaje al Profesor Pedro A. Gainzarain. Vitoria: Universidad
del Pais Vasco, 275–87.
Tarriño, Eusebia (2004). ‘Elementos metacomunicativos en la prosa de Plinio el Viejo’, in
Antonio López Eire and Agustín Ramos (eds), 355–77.
Tarriño, Eusebia (2007). ‘Pseudo-comparativas en latín: “factis potius quam dictis” ’, in Gregorio
Hinojo and José Carlos Fernández Corte (eds), Munus quaesitum meritis: Homenaje a
Carmen Codoñer. Salamanca: Ediciones Universidad de Salamanca, 815–24.
Tarriño, Eusebia (2011). ‘Comparative clauses’, in Philip Baldi and Pierluigi Cuzzolin (eds),
373–426.
Taylor, Margaret E. (1951). ‘The development of the quod clause’, Yale Classical Studies 12:
229–49.
Ternes, Charles-Marie (1998). Oratio soluta—Oratio numerosa: Études Luxembourgeoises
d’histoire et de littérature romaines, vol I. Luxembourg: Centre Alexandre-Wiltheim.
Tesnière, Lucien (1959). Éléments de syntaxe structurale. Paris: Klincksieck.
1296 Bibliography
Thielmann, Philip (1886). ‘Facere mit dem Infinitiv’, Archiv für lateinische Lexikographie und
Grammatik 3: 177–206.
Thomas, François (1956). ‘Dominance et résistance dans la syntaxe latine’, in Hommages à Max
Niedermann. Brussels: Latomus, 315–23.
Thomsen, Hans Christian (1930). Der Pleonasmus bei Plautus und Terenz, I. Uppsala: Almqvist
& Wiksell.
Timpanaro, Sebastiano (1970). ‘Positivus pro comparativo in latino’, in Studia Florentina Alexandro
Ronconi sexagenario oblata. Rome: Edizioni dell’ Ateneo, 455–81 (repr. in Contributi di filo-
logia e di storia della lingua latina. Rome: Edizioni dell’ Atheneo and Bizzarri, 1978: 39–81).
Toledo, Rogelio (2016). ‘Speech act conditionals in two works of Cicero: In Verrem and ad
Atticum’, Pallas 102: 247–54.
Torrego, Esperanza (1986). ‘The system of substantive clauses as complements in Classical
Latin’, Glotta 64: 66–83.
Torrego, Esperanza (1987). ‘Las construcciones pasivas de nominativo con infinitivo en latín
clásico. Estudio sintáctico’, Emerita 55: 71–84.
Torrego, Esperanza (1988). ‘Variantes conjuncionales para la expresión de la finalidad en las
oraciones subordinadas latinas’, Revista española de lingüística 18: 317–29.
Torrego, Esperanza (1998). ‘Praeter + accusativo: Descripción funcional y semántica’, in
Torrego, Esperanza (ed.), 111–45.
Torrego, Esperanza (1999). ‘Cohésion et rupture dans les propositions irréelles latines’, Les
Études Classiques 67: 391–411.
Torrego, Esperanza (2001). ‘Typologie sémantique des propositions finales latines’, in Claude
Moussy et al. (eds), 626–39.
Torrego, Esperanza (2002). ‘Los SN comparativos: El segundo término de la comparación’, in
Empar Espinilla et al. (eds), 251–79.
Torrego, Esperanza (2005). ‘Grammar and pragmatics: The textual uses of repente and subito’,
in Gualtiero Calboli (ed.), 763–73.
Torrego, Esperanza (2013). ‘Iubeo saluere: Una forma de saludos con directivo léxico’, in José
A. Beltrán et al. (eds), 173–84.
Torrego, Esperanza (2014). ‘De l’empêchement à l’interdiction: Échelle de causativité et codage
dans le verbe latin prohibeo’, in Bernard Bortolussi and Peggy Lecaudé (eds), 177–97.
Torrego, Esperanza (2016a). ‘Variantes de complémentation: Infinitif complétif / proposition
complétive à conjonction après les verbes de manipulation’, Pallas 102: 47–56.
Torrego, Esperanza (2016b). ‘Verbos y argumentos: Las combinaciones sintáctico-semánticas
del verbo latino cogo’, Emerita 84: 291–316.
Torrego, Esperanza (2017a). ‘Le verbe latin veto: De Plaute à l’Histoire auguste’, in Pedro Duarte
et al. (eds), 335–47.
Torrego, Esperanza (2017b). ‘Res gestae Divi Augusti: Word order and pragmatics of the Latin
original’, in Camille Denizot and Olga Spevak (eds), 159–79.
Torrego, Esperanza (ed.) (1998). Nombres y funciones: Estudios de sintaxis griega y latina.
Madrid: Ediciones Clásicas.
Torrego, Esperanza, Baños, José Miguel, Cabrillana, Concepción, and Méndez Dosuna, Julián
(eds) (2007). Praedicativa II: Esquemas de complementación verbal en griego antiguo y en
latín, Monografías de Filologia Latina 15. Zaragoza: Universidad de Zaragoza.
Tóth, Alfred (1994). ‘Thema, Topik und Koda. Zu einigen syntaktischen, semantischen und
pragmatischen Problemen der lateinischen Grammatik’, Papers on Grammar 4: 177–210.
Bibliography 1297
Töttössy, Csaba (1998). ‘The development of the usage of the Latin gerundive’, Acta Antiqua
Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 38: 381–9.
Touratier, Christian (1980). La relative: Essai de théorie syntaxique. Paris: Klincksieck.
Touratier, Christian (1994). Syntaxe latine. Leuven: Peeters.
Touratier, Christian (1998). ‘L’imparfait, temps anaphorique?’, in Bruno Bureau and Christian
Nicolas (eds), 265–79.
Touratier, Christian (2002). ‘Discussions épistémologiques et théoriques autour de la relative’,
in Lea Sawicki and Donna Shalev (eds), 351–65.
Touratier, Christian (2005). ‘Esquisse de l’histoire de la complétive en quod’, in Sándor Kiss
et al. (eds), 77–86.
Touratier, Christian (2011). ‘Qu’entend-on par “relative”?’, Les Études Classiques 79: 5–19.
Touratier, Christian (ed.) (1985). Syntaxe et latin: Actes du IIème congrès international de
linguistique latine, Aix-en-Provence, 28–31 mars 1983. Aix-en-Provence: Université de
Provence.
Touratier, Christian (ed.) (1991). Compléments prédicatifs et attributs du complément d’objet en
latin. Aix-en-Provence: Publications de l’Université de Provence.
Traenkle, Hermann (1968). ‘Beobachtungen und Erwägungen zum Wandel der livianischen
Sprache’, Wiener Studien N.F. 2: 103–52.
Traglia, Antonio (1947). Valore e uso dell' ablativo latino di comparazione. Rome: Editrice
Studium.
Trappes-Lomax, John M. (2007). Catullus: A Textual Reappraisal. Swansea: The Classical Press
of Wales.
Ulbricht, Edmundus (1875). Taciti qui ad figuram dicendi ἓν διὰ δυοῖν referuntur ex minoribus
scriptis locos concessit atque interpretatus est E. U. Programm Freiberg.
Ulrich, Miorita (1985). Thetisch und kategorisch: Funktionen der Anordnung von Satzkonstituenten
am Beispiel des Rumänischen und anderen Sprachen. Tübingen: Niemeyer.
Unceta, Luis (2012). ‘Cuando los sentimentos irrumpen I: Valores expresivos de las interjecciones
primarias en las comedias de Plauto’, in Rosario López Gregoris (ed.), Estudios sobre teatro
Romano: El mundo de los sentimentos y su expresión. Zaragoza: Libros Pórtico, 347–95.
Unceta, Luis (2016a). ‘Congratulations in Latin comedy: Types and functions’, Journal of
Politeness Research 12: 267–90.
Unceta, Luis (2016b). ‘Cuando los sentimentos irrumpen II: Valores expresivos de las interjec-
ciones primarias en las comedias de Plauto’, in Benjamín García Hernández and Azucena
Penas (eds), Semántica latina y románica: Unidades de significado conceptual y procedimental.
Bern: Peter Lang, 213–41.
Unceta, Luis (2017a). ‘Quando las emociones irrumpen: Análisis comparativo del empleo de las
interjecciones en las comedias de Terencio y las tragedias de Séneca’, Onomázein 38: 107–46.
Unceta, Luis (2017b). ‘Discursive and pragmatic functions of Latin em’, in Camille Denizot and
Olga Spevak (eds), 63–82.
Vaan, Michiel de (2008). Etymological Dictionary of Latin and the other Italic Languages.
Leiden: Brill.
Väänänen, Veikko (1951). Il est venu comme ambassadeur, il agit en soldat, etc. Helsinki:
Annales Academiae Scientiarum Fennicae.
Väänänen, Veikko (19813). Introduction au latin vulgaire. Paris: Klincksieck.
Väänänen, Veikko (1987). Le journal Épître d’Égérie (Itinerarium Egeriae). Étude linguistique.
Helsinki: Suomainen Tiedeakatemia.
1298 Bibliography
Austin, Roland Gregory (1971). P. Vergili Maronis Aeneidos Liber Primus. Oxford: Clarendon
Press.
Bailey, Cyril (19492). Titi Lucreti Cari De Rerum Natura Libri Sex, 3 vols. Oxford: Clarendon
Press.
Barchiesi, Alessandro and Rosati, Gianpiero (2007). Ovidio Metamorfosi, vol. II. Milan:
Mondadori.
Barsby, John (1986). Plautus: Bacchides. Warminster: Aris & Phillips.
Berry, D. H. (1996). Cicero pro P. Sulla Oratio. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Binder, Gerhard (2019). P. Vergilius Maro: Aeneis: Ein Kommentar, 3 vols. Trier: WVT.
Boeft, Jan den, Drijvers, Jan Willem, Hengst, Daniel den, and Teitler, Hans C. (1987/2018).
Philological and Historical Commentary on Ammianus Marcellinus XX–XXXI, 12 vols.
Groningen: Forsten; Leiden: Brill.
Bömer, Franz (1969/1986). P. Ovidius Naso: Metamorphosen, 6 vols. Heidelberg: Winter.
Briscoe, John (1981). A Commentary on Livy Books XXXIV–XXXVII. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Briscoe, John (2008). A Commentary on Livy: Books 38–40. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Briscoe, John (2012). A Commentary on Livy: Books 41–45. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Calboli, Gualtiero (1993). Cornifici Rhetorica ad C. Herennium. Bologna: Pàtron.
Cavarzere, Alberto (1983). Marco Celio Rufo Lettere (Cic. fam. l. VIII). Brescia: Paideia Editrice.
Christenson, David (2000). Plautus: Amphitruo. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Citroni, Mario (1975). M. Valerius Martialis Epigrammaton Liber I. Florence: La Nuova Italia.
Conte, Gian Biagio (2009). P. Vergilius Maro: Aeneis. Berlin: de Gruyter.
Cornell, Timothy J. (ed.) (2013). The Fragments of the Roman Historians, 3 vols. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Courtney, Edward (1995). Musa Lapidaria. Atlanta, Ga.: Scholars Press.
Diercks, Gerardus Frederik (1978). Luciferi Calaritani opera quae supersunt. Turnhout: Brepols.
Dingel, Joachim (1997). Kommentar zum 9. Buch der Aeneis Vergils. Heidelberg: Winter.
Dougan, Thomas Wilson (1905–35). M. Tulli Ciceronis Tusculanarum Disputationum Libri
Quinque, 2 vols. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Dyck, Andrew R. (2004). A Commentary on Cicero, de Legibus. Ann Arbor: The University of
Michigan Press.
Dyck, Andrew R. (2010). Cicero: Pro Sexto Roscio. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Dyck, Andrew R. (2013). Cicero: Pro Marco Caelio. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Eden, Paul T. (1975). A Commentary on Virgil: Aeneid VIII. Leiden: Brill.
Enk, Pieter-Jan (1932). Plauti Truculentus. Leiden: Sijthoff.
Goodyear, Frank R. D. (1972/81). The Annals of Tacitus, books I and II, 2 vols. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Gowers, Emily (2012). Horace: Satires Book I. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Groningen Commentaries on Apuleius (2004). Apuleius Madaurensis Metamorphoses Books
IV, 28–35, V and VI, 1–24. Groningen: Forsten.
Hall, Jon B. (2008). P. Papinius Statius, vol. III: Thebaid and Achilleid. Newcastle: Cambridge
Scholars Publishing.
Harrison, Stephen J. (1991). Vergil: Aeneid 10. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Heubner, Heinz (1963). P. Cornelius Tacitus: Die Historien, Band I. Heidelberg: Carl Winter.
Heubner, Heinz (1976). P. Cornelius Tacitus: Die Historien, Band IV. Heidelberg: Carl
Winter.
Bibliography 1301
The Index contains all the examples that are discussed in the two volumes of this Syntax. The additional
examples that are given in the Supplements are not included. The examples of volume I come first.
Thereafter follow the examples in volume II, preceded by II. (only once per example). The Index was
prepared by Akke Pinkster.
Abbreviations wherever possible follow the Oxford Latin Dictionary and (for Late Latin authors) Blaise’s
Dictionnaire.
561–2 1146, II.184, 943 749 579, 926, II.377, 555 991 27
566–9 310 750 812 1004 105
567–8 804, 968 751 II.13, 171 1009 II.490
574 II.1011 755 372 1014 287, 709
575 508 758–9 372 1015–16 1099
578–80 II.937 760–1 1145 1020 1165, II.926
580–2 II.1158 760–2 376 1021 739
581–3 II.1195 761 253 1026 891
587 64 763–4 II.885 1029 II.14
592–3 II.911, 923 765–8 II.643 1030 II.556
597 505 772–3 1146, II.101 1033–4 II.283
599–600 207, 1172 778–9 II.864 1037 II.128
601 941, II.723, 748 782–3 II.54, 589, 669, 775 1038 II.236
603 456 791 256 1042 832
607 273, II.907, 954 799–800 543 1045 II.9
608 II.152 799–801 II.905 1046–7 II.591
609 935, 938 812 354, II.945 1051–2 622
610 107, II.430 814 II.38 1056 365, 618
612–15 II.1074 820 678 1057–8 215
617 813 822 1225, II.921 1059 44, 694
617–18 II.524 822–4 II.859 1060 694, II.723
619 742 825–6 972, 981, 1106 1061–2 1210
626–7 II.1187 825–7 II.1075 1066 1046
628 II.1014 826–7 115 1067 414
630 II.460 829 II.743 1067–9 II.1154
632 506 831–2 II.600 1068 II.838
640 II.286 835 1140, II.290 1068–9 1097
641–1a II.719 839–41 1040 1071 942
644–5 652 852 330 1072–3 24
646–7 1020 857 II.323 1073–4 328
646–8 II.323 861–2 205 1080–1 II.936
649 II.959 862–3 1150 1085 1150
652–3 101 869–70 154, II.484 1088–9 315, 323
654–5 1229, II.563 869–72 II.1195 1098–9 615
654–6 II.895 876 783 1098–9 II.254
660 353 880–1 II.332 1102 13, II.1, 259, 1047
665–6 II.1202 895–6 II.1085 1103–4 II.977
668 606 899–900 II.1162 1105–6 657
669 II.414 910–11 II.721 1112 743
671 634 913–14 648 1114–15 981
676–83 II.1229 916–17 II.1172 1122–4 523
682–3 870 922 553 1124–5 162
684 853 924 499 1125 949
687 II.282 933–4 II.326 1131 II.800
695 521 941–2 II.984 fr.5 587, 1069
696–7 639 951 II.515 As.
699–700 II.576 962 341 1 356
709 106 962–5 1143 7 967
714–17 318 963 1200 8 II.281
718–19 II.1210 964 1200 30 345
720 1213, II.139 966 1298 40 502
721 936, 949 972 471, 712, II.10 43 130, II.345
732 808, 1214 973 II.706 47 167
733–4 27, 812 974 987 52–3 627, II.63
741 II.924 974–5 784 57–8 II.827
742 II.693 976 II.152 71–2 1022
744–5 II.1201 977 II.371 80–1 II.267, 533, 895
745 1283 984 II.653 95 169
745–7 1140 986–7 320 101 789, 894
747 II.908, 999 989 II.1085 116–17 466
748 493, II.17, 54 990 II.557, 581 118 673
1332 Index Locorum
The Index covers both volumes of this Syntax. References to volume I are by page number only. References
to volume II are preceded by II (only once per lemma). Numbers in italics signal pages where a definition
or description of a term is given. In longer lemmas, numbers in bold signal pages with the most relevant
information on the subject. The Index for volume I was prepared by Jeremy Brightbill, the Index for
volume II and the integration of the two by Olga Spevak.
with noun phrase as subject or object Greek accusative 242, 264, 915, 1076
complement II.147 in calendar expressions 1229
with nouns of cognition and emotion II.448 in exclamations 363
with nuntius II.435 as object-like constituent with ecce II.928,
with verbs 931
accedit II.160 as object-like constituent with em II.930
arguo II.216 combined with interjections II.932, 933, 934,
cogo II.137 936
decerno II.144 to mark age expressions with natus II.737
est and subject complement II.183 internal accusative 86, 102, 213
facio II.143 object accusative 101, 137, 140, 146, 153, 163,
impersonal est 95 183, 186, 754
iubeo and veto II.176 of degree 330, 334, 697, 885, 1080, 1215
licet and oportet 94 of extent of space 827
mereo(r) II.145 of extent of time 844, 847
mitto and praetereo II.161 of inner object 86, 102, 213; see also expansion
of allowing and tolerating II.175 of arguments
of causation 624, II.159 of limit of motion 92, 178
of communication II.17, 162 of person or thing affected 101, 137; see also
of deciding and determining II.172 object: affected objects
of demanding II.175 of respect 242
of emotion 89, II.161 of result produced 101, 137; see also object:
of fearing 623 effected objects
of happening II.159 of so-called local object, see below, to mark
of manipulation II.19, 173 direction and goal arguments
of obligation and permission II.181 of so-called locative object 92
of ordering and commanding II.131 replacing nominative in Late Latin non-literary
of perception and cognition II.17, 162 texts 1186
of praising, blaming, congratulating, and retained with autocausative passives 264
thanking II.170 retained with passive participles 242
of striving II.140 synecdochical accusative 242, 264, 915
of wishing, desiring, and preferring II.171 to mark arguments of deverbal nouns 1039,
permitto II.136 1215
persuadeo II.135, 168 to mark cognate object 86, 102, 213
prohibeo II.138 to mark direction and goal adjuncts 810, 819
relinquitur II.86 to mark direction and goal arguments 178
volo II.139 to mark extent of space adjuncts 827
without esse 197 to mark extent of time adjuncts 844, 847
distinguished from participial clause II.223 to mark items in a list 1216
without governing verb II.158, 186 to mark manner adjuncts 865
accusative and participle construction II.163, 796 to mark modifiers of adverbs 1215
accusative case 1179, 1183, 1213–16 to mark non-finite clauses as object 1216
accusativus adverbialis 330, 697, 828, 847, 885 to mark object complements 186, 787, 1211
exclamationis 363, 365, II.924, 932, 933, 934, to mark optional attributes of nouns 1028
936 to mark optional modifiers of adjectives 1215
Graecus 244, 267, 1076 to mark price adjuncts 885
adverbial accusative 85, 330, 334, 697, 827, 828, to mark pseudo-object in proleptic
844, 847, 865, 885; see also expansion of construction 631, 759, 1188
arguments to mark quantity and degree adjuncts 330, 334,
quod as II.75 697, 885
anticipatory 759 to mark quantity and degree modifiers of
as ‘base form’ in Late Latin 1216 adjectives 1080
bare accusative of gerund II.408 to mark respect adjuncts 915
bare accusative of gerundive as purpose to mark respect expressions with adjectives 1075
adjunct II.416 to mark second arguments (accusative
cognate accusative 86; see also below, to mark objects) 101, 137, 140, 146, 153, 163,
cognate object 183, 186, 754
double accusative 163 to mark subject of accusative and infinitive
with compound verbs 171, 1185 clause 736, 1186
with verbs of asking 165, 1185 with compound verbs of motion 102
with verbs of teaching 167, 1185 with impersonal verbs of emotion 132
1360 Index of grammatical terms and Latin words
attitudinal disjuncts 923; see also disjuncts: definite and indefinite clauses II.505
attitudinal disjuncts determiners of II.505, 507, 510, 512, 515;
attraction see also determiners (of autonomous
distinguished from autonomous relative clause relative clauses)
with relative phrase II.490, 504 functioning as address II.519
inverse attraction (attractio inversa) II.483, 490 generic clauses II.511, 550
of infinitive to match perfect tense of governing in cleft constructions II.846
verb 540 indefinite clauses II.568
of moods 667, 669 resembling theme constituents II.504
of pronouns to agree with subject or object syntactic functions of II.514
complement 1278 as indirect object 763
of verb to agree with subject complement 1261 as subject of clause 744
progressive attraction (attractio relativi) II.489 use of indirect reflexive pronoun and possessive
attributes 17, 965–1047 adjective in 1126, 1130
adjectival attributes compared with secondary use of moods II.547, 550
predicates in poetry II.786 with adjectives modified by tam and
agreeing attributes compared with tantus II.534
genitives II.1085 with comparative constituent containing
argument or satellite clauses at noun phrase quam II.536
level II.436 with cum as time adverb II.245
autonomous relative clauses as II.514 with partitive genitive 1005
distinguished from adnominal arguments 965 with relative space adverbs II.577, 578; see also
genitives anteposed before prepositions II.1117 space clauses
modified by adverbs 1037 with relative word or phrase II.501, 502
position of adjectival attributes II.1062 with res II.509
position of genitival attributes II.1084, 1095 with resumptive expressions II.504, 506, 515
relative clause as II.474, 478 repetition of noun II.528, 532
audeo, sigmatic subjunctive ausim 491 with sum + relative phrase in ablative or
audio, with subject complement 209 genitive of quality II.553
aut with sum + subject complement II.553
as connector II.583, 1171 auxiliary phrase 211
as coordinator 68, II.586, 658, 676 auxiliary verbs 210–15
conjunctive interpretation II.679 distinguished from full verbs 210
correlative aut . . . aut II.586, 668 habitual, modal, and phasal verbs II.219
with locally negated constituents 691 order of infinitive and auxiliary II.1126
as substitute for vel in comparisons of with infinitive distinguished from prolative
non-equivalence II.728 infinitive clause II.23
autem with passive infinitives 254
as connector II.1172
co-occuring with sed and tum II.1177 back agreement 1278
in parenthetical sentences II.911 basis of comparison II.717
in combination sin autem II.330 befalling, verbs of
position of II.973 with a dative 104, 1192
causing discontinuity II.1101, 1123 with ut clause 624, II.83
authorial perfect (statement) use 409, 416, 425, 552 begging, verbs of
autocausative passives, see passive voice with imperative clause II.133
autonomous relative clauses II.474, 501–55 with prolative infinitive clause II.205
as apposition II.524, 551, 554 bene est 785
as argument with two-place adjectives II.532 beneficiary adjuncts 28, 129, 141, 892–7, 1192
as qualified truth disjunct II.519, 520 compared with (ethic) dative illocutionary
as secondary predicate II.522, 806 disjuncts 931
sequence of tenses in II.537 compared with sympathetic dative 923
with subjunctive mood II.549 beneficiary arguments, of adjectives 218
as space or time adjunct II.521 beneficiary (semantic function) 28
as subject of ablative absolute clause II.398, 526 beneficio (as preposition) 912
as substitute for deverbal noun II.502 Bible translations; see also Greek influence
at adjective or noun phrase level II.514, 523, 532 (probable or proposed)
complex clauses II.527 accusative and infinitive clauses with
co-occurring with adnominal relative facio II.159
clause II.476 adverbs as modifiers of nouns 1036
co-occurring with ipse II.513 competitors to simple future 436
co-occurring with talis and eiusmodi II.535 compound verbs with double accusative 171
1368 Index of grammatical terms and Latin words
‘complement’ clauses II.52; see argument clauses with historic present 607
‘complementary infinitive’, see prolative infinitive concessive illocutionary force 348, 360
clauses concessive interpretation
complements, see arguments; object complements; of relative clauses II.570
subject complements of time clauses II.243
problems of terminology 30 of ut clauses II.375
complex clauses 13 conclusion, of conversations or letters II.1229
complex sentences II.2, 45, 972, 1147 concord, see agreement
coreferentiality of constituents of subordinate condemno, with quod or quia clause II.68
clauses 1124 conditional clauses II.314–54; see also conditional
order of clauses in II.1047–8, 1062 periods
use of tenses in 552, 564, 582 as adjuncts II.314
zero-anaphora 757 adversative/concessive interpretation of
complex subordinators II.15, 378–83 conditional clauses II.336
causal expression + quod II.287 alternative conditional clauses with
preposition directly combined with quod II.381 correlative sive/seu II.346
prepositional expressions + quod or quia II.378 alternative conditional clauses with si . . . sive/
prepositional expressions + ut II.382 seu II.348
pro eo quod II.292 alternative conditions with sīn or si(n)
pronominal support (cum eo) distinguished minus II.330
from preparative pronoun II.378 as second term of comparison of (dis)
with indirect question (ex eo quomodo) II.383 similarity II.753
complex verb forms 51 causal interpretation of conditional
agreement of the nominal part 1245, II.16 clauses II.337
auxiliary sum in 197–200 combined with tam . . . quam II.745
position of -que and -ve II.998 conditional interpretation of time
relative order of components II.1026, 1122–5 clauses II.243
complexity, increase of within a sentence II.45 coordinated by sive/seu II.665
compound clauses 14, II.584 coordinated by -ve II.662
compound sentences II.2, 585, 606, 610 correlative expressions in main clause II.325
compound subjects 1244, 1246–58 ‘elliptical’ si clauses II.332
compound verbs 141, 1185 idiomatic expressions with pignus do/
preverbs 1228 accipio II.334
separation of components (tmesis) II.1132 multiple si clauses II.331
use of cases and prepositions with 1234 ni/nisi de rupture clauses II.341
concealing, verbs of 168 nisi clauses of exception II.350
concedo, with prolative infinitive clause II.207 position of si clauses II.327
concessions, as imperative sentences with ‘purpose’ si clauses II.333, 334
concessive illocutionary force 348, 360 si clauses contrasted with time cum
internal word order II.1036 clauses II.314
use of subjunctive in 509 temporal interpretation of si clauses II.339
concessive clauses II.354–77 with consecutive particle as correlative
as adjuncts II.354, 360 expression II.328
distribution of subordinators formed with with etiam si II.371
si II.369 with ni II.317
so-called concessive conditional with nisi II.317, 320
clauses II.358 with si II.314, 322
with etiamsi II.371 with si minus II.321
with etsi II.370 with si non II.319
with licet 663, II.373 without main clause II.329
with quamquam 663, II.365 as disjuncts
with quamvis 662, II.366 attitudinal disjuncts II.343
with tamenetsi II.373 illocutionary disjuncts II.333, 345
with tametsi II.371 with siquidem II.338
as disjuncts distinguished from si argument clauses II.101,
attitudinal disjuncts II.362 102
illocutionary disjuncts II.364 forms of negation and their distribution II.316
frequency and distribution of position with respect to main clause II.1050
subordinators II.354, 355, 365 use of moods in 654–61
use of moods in 662 conditional comparative clauses, with tamquam
use of tenses in 566, 578 and quasi II.348
1372 Index of grammatical terms and Latin words
conditional periods (sentences) II.315 verbs with different case patterns II.593
abbreviated periods II.332 of preposition in coordinated phrases II.600
alternative conditions with sive II.331 of preposition in the first conjoin II.604
choice between potential and counterfactual of subject 749, II.591, 610, 611
subjunctive 655 of third argument or satellite II.595
condensed protasis or apodosis II.329 of verb 1253
conditional interpretation of a conjunction (word class), see coordinators;
constituent II.329 subordinators
counterfactual conditions 494–7, 654, 660 conjunctive (copulative) coordination II.620;
potential conditions 484, 488, 491, 654, 658 see also coordination; syndetic
‘predictive use’ for logical reasoning II.328 coordination; coordinators: conjunctive
real conditions 654 (copulative) coordinators
tenses and moods in apodosis 484, 654–61 agreement with coordinated subjects 1249
future imperative 518 conjunctive epitactic coordination II.693
imperative clauses as apodosis 657 correlative coordination II.638
imperfect subjunctive (counterfactual emphatic et . . . et and neque . . . neque 1252
use) 495 multiple coordination II.649
imperfect subjunctive (past potential semantic relationship between conjoins II.653,
use) 488 655
indicative tenses 660 connective adverbs
interrogative clauses as apodosis 657 deinde, tum, post, primo, and postremo II.1216
perfect subjunctive 491 distinguished from connectors and
pluperfect subjunctive 495, 496 interactional particles II.1165
present indicative 401 tunc, nunc, interea, and denique II.1217
present subjunctive 484 connective relative pronouns
tenses and moods in protasis 654–61 as part of ablative absolute clause II.555, 556,
future indicative 401 560
future perfect indicative 401 as part of accusative and infinitive clause II.559
imperfect subjunctive (counterfactual preceding subordinators II.556
use) 495 quod(si) II.1174
imperfect subjunctive (past potential connective relative sentences II.555
use) 488 compared with et + is II.555
perfect subjunctive 491 distinguished from relative clauses as
pluperfect subjunctive 495, 496 apposition II.525
present indicative 401 imperative or interrogative sentences II.559
present subjunctive 484, 659 in the accusative and infinitive II.189
congratulating, verbs of with repetition of noun II.1147
with accusative and infinitive clause II.170 connectors 12, 33, 68, II.1165; see also individual
with cum clause II.80 connectors; particles: interactional
with nominative and infinitive particles; connective adverbs
construction II.197 adversative connectors II.1172–93
with quia clause II.78 adverb contra II.1188
with quod clause II.66 adverb nihilominus II.1189
coniunctivus (modus) 56, 387, 481 adverb tamen II.1188
adhortativus 497 adverb/connector vero II.1190
concessivus 509 ast II.1174
exhortativus 497 at II.1175
irrealis 388, 494, 654, II.315 atqui II.1176
iussivus 497 autem II.1177
potentialis 388, 482, 654, II.315 ceterum II.1181
realis 388, 654, II.315 sed II.1184
volitivus 388 verum II.1187
conjoin (coordinated unit) II.584 as means of discourse coherence II.1143
conjugation 53 as non-mobile words II.955
conjunction (clause combining) II.2, 583; see also causing discontinuity II.1101
coordination conjunctive (copulative) connectors
conjunction reduction II.589, 721 II.1166–71
in multiple questions 339 ac/atque II.1167
in second conjoin in adversative et II.1168
coordination II.683 nec/neque II.1170
of head noun 1277 -que II.1166
of object 757, II.592, 611, 613 connecting paragraphs II.1224
Index of grammatical terms and Latin words 1373
dum (clitic particle), used to modulate directive ‘ellipsis’ of subject, see subject: conjunction
expressions 355 reduction of; zero-anaphora
dum clauses ‘ellipsis’, of verbs, see reduction (ellipsis of shared
stipulative clauses 652 constituents)
distinguished from time clauses II.306 elliptic substantivation 954
time clauses 615, 645, II.250–7 elliptical clauses, purpose ut clauses II.303
to indicate co-extensive event (‘as long elliptical interrogative sentences 346
as’) II.251 em (interjection) 368, II.930
to indicate lasting event (‘while’) II.254 embedded clauses, see subordinate clauses
to indicate limit (‘until’) II.255 eminence, verbs of 113, 1193
to locate events in time (‘when’) II.250 emotion, adjectives of, with accusative and
use of moods in 615, 638, 645, 652 infinitive clause II.463
use of tenses in 615 emotion, nouns of
historic present 616 with accusative and infinitive clause II.448
with causal intepretation II.268 with tamquam or quasi clause II.443
dum (subordinator) emotion, verbs of 89, 116, 132
introducing stipulative clauses II.306 use of moods in quod and quia clauses 626
introducing time clauses II.242, 250, 251 with accusative and infinitive clause II.161
as equivalent to cum II.254 with cum clause II.80
dummodo (subordinator) with quia clause II.76
introducing stipulative clauses II.306 with quod clause II.61
dumtaxat, used as emphasizing particle II.893 with reason clause with cur II.285
duo, compared with ambo 987 with tamquam or quasi clause II.104
dynamic (state of affairs) 22 emphasis II.859, 862–5, 951; see also preferential
host; particles: emphasizing particles
ea (adverb) 832 causing discontinuity of noun phrases II.1098
eapropter, as correlative expression with reason conveyed by personal pronouns 740
clause II.283 distinguished from focus II.862
eatenus (adverb) 812 ‘emphatic’ use of is II.507
ec- compounds, in indirect questions II.108, 118 non in initial position 731
ecastor 320, II.919 personal pronouns and possessive adjectives
typical of female speech 353 with -met II.907
ecce (interjection) 368, II.923, 928 preparative expressions as emphasizers II.908
combined with ille and iste 1093, 1148 reduplicated forms of personal
eccum, and other semi-declinable forms II.929 pronouns II.865, 906
ecquis 1165 en (interjection) II.931
ecquid as question particle 335 in exclamations 368
in sentence questions 334 in indirect questions II.108
edepol 320, II.919 in sentence (yes/no) questions 333, II.931
effected objects 27, 101 enallage adiectivi 1051–3
efficio enim 12, II.1193, 1201–6
imperative used as metadirective 351 as connector in parenthetical sentences II.911
with accusative and infinitive clause II.159 as non-mobile word II.956
ego, see personal pronouns as sentence connexion device II.1164
ehem (interjection) II.932 combined with nempe II.1207
eheu (interjection) II.923, 933 combined with quippe II.1200
eho (interjection) II.925 in combination at enim II.1176
ei (interjection) II.932 position of II.973
eia (heia) II.933 causing discontinuity II.1101, 1123
eiusmodi, combined with relative clause II.535 so-called adversative use II.1205
elative use, of superlative 47; see also comparison, so-called affirmative use II.1204
degrees of: absolute (‘elative’) use of so-called causal use II.1201
comparatives; superlatives entitling, verbs of 191
electing, verbs of 191 enumquam II.931
‘ellipsis’, in coordinated clauses, see conjunction eo (adverb)
reduction as summarizing device II.1160
‘ellipsis’ of object, see object: conjunction referring to discourse participants II.1150
reduction of; reduction (conventional) eo (verb) 812
of arguments; zero-anaphora idiomatic expressions with 811
‘ellipsis’, of obligatory constituents, see iri in future passive 532
zero-anaphora position of iri as auxiliary II.1125
Index of grammatical terms and Latin words 1381
in questions with indirect directive negation 672–735; see also zero quantifiers
illocutionary force 345 (negative indefinites)
in rhetorical questions 344 clause negation 672
in ut clauses functioning as indignant double negation 726
questions 347 epexegetic negation 726
position of II.110, 999, 1029 expletive use of negator 700
ne clauses in comparison of non-equivalence II.725
as arguments 700, II.94 in comparison non tam . . . quam
imperative clauses (indirect commands) 567, II.746, 750
621, II.138, 150 in conditional clauses with minus II.321
with verbs of fearing 623, 702, II.94 in conditional clauses with (si) non and
with verbs of hindering, forbidding, and nisi II.316
preventing 622, 701, II.138 in declarative clauses II.57, 59
as satellites ut clauses II.81, 83
as illocutionary disjuncts 566, II.299 in declarative sentences 308, 675
pseudo-final ne clauses 566, II.299, 302 in imperative clauses II.126, 149
purpose (final) ne clauses 566, 573, 703, II.302 ut clauses II.57, 81, 82, 144, 148
ne . . . quidem (emphasizing particle) 680, 695, in imperative sentences 348, 682
1153 in independent accusative and infinitive
combined with superlatives II.774 clauses II.186
position of II.994 in indirect questions with nē II.118
ne/nec . . . saltem, as emphasizing particle II.889 in indirect questions with si II.116
nec/neque 308, 692–4 in interrogative clauses II.57
as connector II.1166, 1170 in interrogative sentences 681
as coordinator II.637–8 in litotes or negatio contrarii 686, 712, 715, 721
correlative nec . . . nec with discontinuity of in multiple indirect questions II.124
conjoins II.1130 in ne clauses with verbs of fearing and
correlative nec/neque . . . ac/atque or et II.647 worrying II.94
correlative nec/neque . . . nec/neque 1252, II.642 in participial clauses II.29
correlative nec/neque . . . -que II.647 in prolative infinitive clauses II.204
in combination nec non 725 in purpose clauses II.297
in epitactic coordination II.693 in result clauses II.312
nec quisquam preferred to et nemo 1168 in sentences with indirect directive
nec/neque + indefinite pronoun as alternative illocutionary force 314
to zero quantifier 711 in si argument clauses II.101
of argument clauses II.81, 127 in stipulative clauses II.306
of clauses II.588 in ut clauses with concessive
of constituents II.637 interpretation II.375
of negative declarative clauses 308, 713 in wishes 359
of negative imperative clauses 717, II.150 indefinite pronouns and determiners in
of result clauses II.312 negative sentences 1107, 1167
so-called .ăuztxzŪ use II.637 lexical negation 734
as local negator 685, 688 distinguished from negative verbs 734
distribution of nec vs. neque 694 local negation 672, 684–91
in negative answers 376 position of negators 731
in non-coordinating function 675, 692 multiple negators in one clause 721–30
nec used in sense of ne . . . quidem as double (or pleonastic) negation 727
emphasizing particle 1153, II.873 negation adverbs 672, 674–708
omission of second conjoin (particula position of 730
pendens) II.642 negative verbs 672, 712
necesse est, with imperative clause combined with negation adverb 722
622, II.147 distinguished from lexical negation 734
necne negator climbing 683–4, II.7
as negating expression in multiple indirect pragmatic negation 673, 732, 1107, 1167;
questions II.124 see also negation by implication
in the second of multiple questions 340 resumptive negation 726
nedum scope of, see scope: of negation
as quasi-coordinator II.699, 700 semantic negation 673, 1107, 1167
as subordinator introducing purpose with ablative of comparison II.730
clauses II.303 with expressions of (dis)similarity aeque and
negatio contrarii 686 aliter II.756
1400 Index of grammatical terms and Latin words
of social relation, age, or profession as forms of position with respect to head noun
address II.942 II.1075
relational nouns 43 with partitive genitive 946, 1006
types of entities 43 with prepositional phrase with ex or
first order entities (concrete) 43, 937 de 1006, 1034
second order entities (events or combined with aliquis 1105
situations) 43, 937 coordination of complex numerals by et
third order entities (mental constructs) 43, II.636
748, 937, 1109, 1140 distributive numerals 982
zero order entities (properties) 43, 748 numquam
valency of 21, 44, 966, 1037–47 as frequency adjunct 852
with argument clause as attribute 436–59 as position in time adjunct 841
accusative and infinitive clause II.448 numquid 328
distinguished from nouns as subject or object in indirect questions II.112
complement and from nouns with num quid vis, as closure formula II.1229
support verbs II.437 numquis 1165
gerundi(v)al clause II.452, 454, 456 nunc
interrogative clause II. II.444 as connective adverb to mark sequence of
ne clause with nouns of fearing and events II.1217
worrying II.442 nuntius, with accusative and infinitive clause
participial clause II.451 II.435
prolative infinitive clause II.449 nuper 841
quia clause II.441 nusquam
quin clause II.443 as direction or goal adjunct 812
quod clause II.440, 441 as position in space adjunct 808
quominus clause II.447
tamquam and quasi clause II.443 o(h) (interjection)
ut clause II.446 as summons 364, II.926
with gerundi(v)al clause as satellite II.458 combined with swear words II.921
with participle, as equivalent to deverbal noun expressive use of II.935
+ genitive, see participial clauses ob (preposition)
(dominant participles) to mark direction and goal adjuncts 812
novus, superlative novissimus as partitive to mark position in space adjuncts 806
adjective 1050 to mark purpose adjuncts 907
NP, see noun phrases to mark reason adjuncts 911
nubo, valency of 894 gerundial adjuncts II.412
nucleus of clause 11, 19, 25 gerundival adjuncts II.419
nugae/nugas 364 ob eam causam/rem
nullatenus 700 as correlative expression
nullus 710 with conditional clause II.338
as floating quantifier negating sentence or with purpose clause II.298
clause 710 with reason clause II.283
as subject complement 710, 770 ob hoc/id ipsum, as correlative expression with
genitive and ablative supplying missing forms reason clause II.283
of nemo 710 obeying, verbs of 104, 1192
in nullo as negator 700 object 29, 754–63; see also pseudo-objects
nulla res supplying missing forms of nihil affected objects 27, 101, 1190
710 clauses as object 755
nullo modo as negator 700 conjunction reduction of II.592
nullum as equivalent to non 698 verbs with different case pattern II.593
position with respect to head noun II.1075 conventional reduction of 70, 80, 98, 756
used as determiner 973 effected objects 27, 101
num (question particle) 316, 328, 681 in first position II.1006, 1010
combined with igitur or ergo 317 in last position II.1022
in indirect questions II.108, 109, 111 ‘inner’ object 865
position of II.1030 nouns and noun phrases as object 754
number (nominal category) 35, 36 object-like constituent with ecce II.928
number (verbal category) 50, 53 object-like constituent with em II.930
numerals relative order of verb and object II.1135
as a word class 50 shared objects in coordinated clauses
as subject complement 771 II.611, 613
cardinal numerals 982 unexpressed object (zero-anaphora) II.1149
1404 Index of grammatical terms and Latin words
object clauses, see argument clauses compared with other directive expressions 298,
object complements 30, 186–92, 787–96 512
adjectives, neuter singular used in future perfect without anterior
with accusative and infinitive clause II.183 meaning 466
with gerundial clause II.229 used personally with infinitive II.201
with prolative infinitive clause II.212 with accusative and infinitive clause II.181
with quod argument clause II.69 with imperative clause II.149
agreement with object 1264, 1265, 1267 with perfect infinitive by attraction 540
notional agreement with collective oppido, in answers to questions 373
object 1292 oppidum, in apposition to name 1058
with pronominal objects 1278 agreement of verb with 1260
autonomous relative clauses as II.514 opposing, verbs of 622
distinguished from accusative and infinitive with ne clause 701
with esse omitted 789 with quin clause 704
distinguished from secondary predicates with quominus clause 706
II.779 optative illocutionary force 348, 357, 357
gerundival clauses as II.233 opus est 116
in first position II.1010 used personally with infinitive II.201
in last position II.1023 with imperative clause 622
in nominative case 1211 with nominal (verbless) clause II.236
non-referring noun phrase as 1085, 1117 with (past perfect) passive participle 256,
with verbs of calling and entitling 191 II.224
with verbs of electing and proclaiming 191 oratio obliqua II.48; see indirect speech
with verbs of showing oneself as, behaving as 192 oratio recta (direct speech) II.48
object incorporation 173 ordering, verbs of
oblique cases 1209 with imperative clause II.131
obsecro 312 with prolative infinitive clause II.204
used as parenthesis in imperative sentences 353 oriundus 295
used to increase urgency of questions 341 oro
obviam 812 used as parenthesis in imperative sentences 353
occīdo 262 with imperative clause II.133
odi 448 with simple subjunctive clause II.151
officium est, with imperative clause II.147
ohe (interjection) II.927 paene, co-occurring with atque II.632
oiei (interjection) II.933 paenitet 132
omission of object, see object: conjunction palam (adverb) 869, 1229
reduction of; reduction (conventional) palam (preposition) 806
of arguments; zero-anaphora paragraphs, as discourse units 32, II.1223
omission of subject, see subject: conjunction parallelism, as artistic word order pattern II.963
reduction of; zero-anaphora parataxis
omitto, imperative used as metadirective 351 juxtaposition of two related words II.962
omnino, co-occurring with sed or verum II.683 juxtaposition of two sentences II.6, 154
omnis 804, 985 parco
as apparent secondary predicate (floating imperative used as metadirective 351
quantifier) II.820, 824 valency of 894
as determiner of autonomous relative parenthetical constituents 26, II.909–19; see also
clause II.512 swear words; interjections
as determiner of head of relative clause II.482 amabo, used as 353
combined with idem 948 containing supine in -u II.425
co-occurring with a determiner 971 in complex clauses II.9
omnium combined with nostrum and relative clause as II.911
vestrum 1044 sentence types of II.914
position with respect to head noun II.1076 verbs of asking and praying, used as 353
so-called predicative use II.824 verbs of perception, cognition, and
substantival use 1172 communication, used as II.917
one-place verbs, see verbs pariter, as correlative expression with conditional
opening, of conversation or letter II.1228 comparative clause II.349
operam do, imperative used as metadirective 351 pars
opinor 309 in ablative as position in space adjunct 803
as parenthesis II.909, 917 repetition of noun in relative clause II.529
compared with qualified truth disjuncts 926 with partitive genitive 1012
oportet 94, 622 participant 11
Index of grammatical terms and Latin words 1405
combined with quam (corrective use) II.749 used to modulate directive expressions 355
priusquam clauses II.265 prolative infinitive 164, 183, 522, 526, II.23
use of moods in 618, 638 prolative infinitive clauses II.22, 204–20
use of tenses in 611 agreement of subject complement II.22
pro consule, as secondary predicate II.804 as attribute at noun phrase level II.449
pro eo ac, as expression of similarity II.752 compared with finite imperative clauses II.127
pro (eo) quod (complex subordinator) II.75, 289, competing with gerundial clauses II.227
292 competing with ut or quod clauses II.204
pro (interjection) II.921 distinguished from accusative and infinitive
pro (preposition) clauses II.18, 156
pro prepositional phrase to mark replacing distinguished from infinitives with auxiliary
focus II.844 verbs II.23
to mark beneficiary adjuncts 897 distinguished from nominative and infinitive
to mark cause adjuncts 904 construction II.23
to mark position in space adjuncts 806 with adjectives of cognition, volition, ability,
to mark subject complements 786 and suitability II.464
with causal intepretation II.292 with impersonal verbs II.149, 215
probe, in answers to questions 373 with passive three-place verbs II.23
process adjuncts 857–99, 1201; see also with subject or object complement II.212, 213
beneficiary adjuncts; manner adjuncts; with verbs
means and instrument adjuncts facio II.142
processes (state of affairs) 22 of advising, warning, exhorting, reminding,
proclaiming, verbs of 191 and admonishing II.205
procul 1229 of begging and requesting II.133, 205
prodelision (contraction), of est and es II.993 of causation II.211
producing a sensation, verbs of 91 of deciding and resolving II.211
profecto 309, 348, 924 of deserving II.212
as attitudinal disjunct in relative clause II.486 of forcing II.208
as correlative expression of hindering and preventing II.138, 208
with concessive clause II.363 of inducing and persuading II.206
with etiamsi clause II.372 of ordering and commanding II.131, 204
as emphasizing particle II.892 of permitting, granting, and allowing II.207
proficiscor, statistical data on tense usage 394 of striving II.209
prohibeo of wishing, desiring, and preferring II.209
with dative beneficiary adjunct 894 persuadeo II.168
with imperative clause II.138 prolepsis (anticipation), of constituent before
with prolative infinitive clause II.208 subordinator II.978
prohibitions 349–58, 497–504 proleptic accusative 759
commands and prohibitions of the past 503 proleptic (‘anticipatory’) use of adjectives in
containing metadirectives 351 poetry II.811
coordination of 717 proleptic constructions 631; see also interlacing;
inhibitive use of present imperative 516 pseudo-objects
modulation of 350 promising, verbs of 525, 567
ne + future imperative 519 pronominal support (of preposition +
ne + perfect subjunctive 352, 498, 683 subordinator) II.15, 56; see also
ne + present imperative 516, 682 complex subordinators
ne + present subjunctive 351, 499, 682 pronominals 50
referring to mental activities 516 pronouns 48, 49
ne quis velit + perfect infinitive 538 anaphoric pronouns, see anaphoric(ally used)
noli + infinitive 352, 513, 683 pronouns
nolito and nolitote + infinitive 519 as head of relative clauses II.492
non + perfect subjunctive 683 demonstrative pronouns, see demonstrative
responses to commands and prohibitions 376 pronouns
statistical data on frequency 513 determinative pronouns, see idem; ipse; is
use of tenses in subordinate clauses after main indefinite pronouns, see indefinite pronouns
clause containing a prohibition 562 interrogative pronouns, see interrogative
proin(de) pronouns
as correlative expression personal pronouns, see personal pronouns
with conditional comparative clause II.349 preparative (cataphoric) use II.15, 31
with manner clause II.271 relative pronouns, see qui (relative)
as expression of similarity II.752 prope (adverb) 1229
in combination proinde ac/atque II.273 as position in space adjunct 808
1414 Index of grammatical terms and Latin words
with preposition, synonymous with relative reason clauses 647, II.285, 286
adverbs of space II.575 use of moods in 647
coordination with repetition of relative variation between authors 649
pronoun II.562 with complex subordinator (ex eo
quī (relative adverb) quia) II.379
as subordinator of imperative clauses II.149, 155 quicumque
in combination quippe qui II.1200 as indefinite determiner 1112
introducing purpose clauses II.297, 305 as indefinite pronoun 1170
qui et (vocatur), as idiom II.490 as relative pronoun 1113
qui(s) (indefinite) 1103 introducing relative clauses II.472, 567, 568
as determiner 972 quid est cur II.580
as pronoun 1164 quid est quod II.75
compared with aliqui(s) and quisquam 1103, quidam 49
1164, 1165, 1167 as determiner 972
in combination si qui(s) introducing indefinite in qualitative sense 1109
relative clause 570 in quantitative sense 1110
malum quod (idiom) 1104 in specifying sense 1108
position of II.983 of autonomous relative clause II.511
statistical data on frequency 1102 of head of relative clause II.480
qui(s) (interrogative) position with respect to head noun II.1071
agreement with subject or object supposed development into indefinite
complement 1278 article 1114
as determiner 49, 336, 974 to indirectly signal focus constituent II.843
anteposed before preposition II.1115 to mark entity as non-identifiable II.832
position with respect to head noun II.1071 as pronoun 1169
as pronoun 49, 336, 1174 neuter quiddam with genitive of
compared with uter 1175 quantity 1169
neuter quid statistical data on frequency 1102
as reason adverb (‘why?’) 913 uses in narrative discourse 1111
in elliptical interrogative sentences 346 quidem (emphasizing particle) 926 II.862, 867,
introducing sentence questions 317, 326 878–84
with genitive of quantity 1019 as non-mobile word II.956
with partitive genitive 1005 as sentence connexion device II.1165
in first sentence position II.954 combined with is as determiner of autonomous
quia (interrogative) 336 relative clause II.507
quia (subordinator) 68 compared with equidem II.877
introducing argument clauses II.76, 440 co-occurring with autem and tamen II.879
introducing reason clauses II.281, 285 co-occurring with ceterum II.685
to translate Greek Ø~t II.64, 77 co-occurring with negation and utinam II.881
quia clauses co-occurring with sed II.683, 879
as arguments II.76–9 co-occurring with verum II.685, 879
as alternative to accusative and infinitive in combination quando quidem
clauses 533, II.63, 77, 202 II.284, 880
compared with quod clauses II.59, 64, 76, 78 in combination quoniam quidem II.289
statistical data on frequency II.60 in combination si quidem II.323, 880
use of moods in 626 in epitactic coordination II.695
use of tenses in 572 in manner clauses II.274
with accedit II.76 in quod clauses of qualification II.377
with adjectives of cognition II.460 in relative clauses II.486
with praetereo II.76 in various subordinate clauses II.880
with preparative pronouns II.78 ne . . . quidem 680, 695, 1153, II.774, 994
with verbs of blaming, praising, position of II.994
congratulating, and thanking II.78 causing discontinuity II.1102
with verbs of emotion 626, II.76 to indicate scope of negation 674, 676
with verbs of happening II.73 quidni 336, 682
with verbs of perception, cognition, and quilibet
communication 627, II.77 as determiner 1112
as satellites as pronoun 1170
combined with idcirco, ideo, and quin clauses
propterea 912 as arguments 704–6, II.96–100
introduced by nisi quia II.381 as attributes governed by nouns II.443
1418 Index of grammatical terms and Latin words
at noun phrase level II.473 with relative adverbs II.575, 579, 580
autonomous relative clauses II.5, 474, 501; without head (antecedent), see autonomous
see also autonomous relative clauses relative clauses
combined with apposition II.526 without relative pronoun II.472
complex relative clauses containing another relative connexion II.555–62; see also connective
subordinate clause II.477 relative pronouns; connective relative
containing modo II.877 sentences
containing quidem II.880 containing a relative clause II.476
coordination of clauses II.498; see also distinguished from relative clause II.485, 551, 555
coordination: of subordinate clauses distribution in authors II.556
with anaphoric pronoun instead of second in accusative and infinitive II.486
relative pronoun II.565 with particles or attitudinal disjuncts II.486
with repetition of relative pronoun II.498 with qualis II.571
without repetition of relative pronoun II.562 with quamobrem, quapropter, and quare 450,
distinguished from connective relatives II.555 II.581
distinguished from indirect questions II.122 with quantus II.572
exceptional case marking of relative words with relative pronoun or phrase II.556
(attraction) II.489 relative phrases II.471
formal ambiguity with interrogative clauses introducing relative clauses II.471, 502
(indirect questions) and comparative in combination with a determiner II.506
constructions 633 in combination with a modifier II.513
frequency of types of relative clauses II.475 syntactic function in relative clause and case
in cleft constructions II.846 marking II.487
in combination quippe, utpote, and ut with adjectival attribute II.503
qui II.541 with genitive of the whole II.502
in indirect speech 670 relative pronouns and determiners, see relative
indefinite relative clauses II.567; see also words; qui (relative)
indefinite relative clauses relative use of tenses 552; see also sequence of
inserted in another subordinate clause tenses
(interlacing) II.492 relative words II.471, 472, 501, 570
multiple relative clauses II.472 anticipation in main clause II.1055
of ‘characteristic’ II.537, 545 as non-mobile words II.955
of ‘purpose’ II.514, 522, 537, 806 attraction of relative adverbs II.491
relative words and phrases II.471 combined with comparative expression
repetition of head noun in relative talis . . . qualis II.573
clause II.528, 530, 531 in non-finite clauses II.487
syntactic function of relative words and case indefinite relative pronouns and adverbs II.472,
marking II.487 567
use of future indicative with directive position of II.978, 981
expression in main clause II.536 preceding subordinators II.493
use of moods in 663, II.538 relative adjectives II.570–5
use of subjunctive and indicative moods in relative pronouns 13
‘causal’ relative clauses II.539 agreement in gender II.488
use of tenses in 566 with subject complement II.552
subjunctive tenses II.537 attraction II.489
with adversative/concessive combined with adjectives (apparent
interpretation II.542, 550 secondary predicates) II.500
with causal interpretation II.537, 539 combined with anaphoric or demonstrative
with conditional interpretation II.550 pronouns in the same clause II.566
with consecutive interpretation II.537, 543, exceptional case marking (attraction) II.489
545, 548 in ablative of comparison II.730
with ‘contained’, ‘incorporated’, or ‘omitted’ head inverse attraction II.490
II.475; see autonomous relative clauses origin of II.504
with cum as time adverb II.245 reduction of preposition (.ă uztxzŪ
with final (purpose) interpretation II.304, 543, figura) II.605
549, 550 syntactic functions and case marking II.487
with historic infinitive 608 relativization, compared with subordination II.4
with historic present 607 relators 1176; see also agreement; case;
with qualis II.571, 572 prepositions; subordinators
with quod II.278; see degree clauses relinquitur, with ut clause II.82, 86
with quod with temporal meaning II.579 reliquus 981, 1051
with relative adjectives II.570, 573 with partitive genitive 1008
1422 Index of grammatical terms and Latin words
secondary predicates 30, 46, 187, 206, II.3, 777, conditional interpretation of II.812
810; see also floating quantifiers in dative with verbs of giving or taking and
adjective phrases as II.789 going or sending II.800
adjectives as II.780–9 of age or social position II.789
as alternative to adverbs in poetry II.784, participles as II.791–6
788 compared with ablative absolute
combined with relative pronouns II.500 clauses II.394
comparable to manner adverbs II.778, 780, distinguished from attributive
816 participles 994
compared with attributes in poetry II.786 future participle 546, II.792
conditional interpretation of II.812 perfect participle II.778, 792
evaluative adjectives II.784 position and pragmatic function II.794
of amount 982 present participle 542, II.777, 791
of mental or physical condition II.777 various semantic interpretations II.813
of physical condition, age, or socio-economic with verbs of perception compared with
position II.782 accusative and infinitive clauses II.796
of relative position II.783, 819 prepositional phrases as 1033, II.803
of size or substance in poetry II.787 proper names as 940
of space or time II.782, 788 quantifiers as
agreement 1264–9, II.779, 807 adjectives of amount, omnis, and
notional agreement with collective quisque II.820
subject 1292 attributive use distinguished from
of verb with quisque as secondary ‘predicative’ use II.824
predicate 1260 omnis and cunctus 985
with implicit object 757 quisque 987
with non-subject arguments 1270 uterque 990
with unexpressed subject of accusative and solus and unus II.822
infinitive 1265 totus as apparent secondary predicate II.823
ambo as apparent secondary predicate 987, transference of adjective to 1053
II.823 with verbs of standing, moving, finding, and
autonomous relative clauses as II.514, 522 perceiving II.779
binary quantifiers as 989 secundum (adverb) 1229
comparative expressions of quality with secundum (preposition) 806
ut II.762, 763 secus, as expression of dissimilarity II.752
compared with cause adjuncts 903 sed
compared with clausal apposition 1074 as connector II.1172, 1184–6
compared with distributive apposition 1067 combined with nempe II.1207
compared with manner adjuncts 859, 861 co-occurring with autem II.1177
compared with time cum clauses 643 in combination sed tamen II.1184
containing question words 337 in parenthetical sentences II.911
coordination with adjuncts II.708 as coordinator 68, II.586, 680, 682
distinguished from attributive participles 994 co-occurring with quidem, omnino, sane,
distinguished from subject or object vero, and tamen II.683
complements 789, II.779 correlative use with non + modo, solum,
distribution of II.807 tantum, or tantummodo II.687
expressions to make semantic relationship to in epitactic coordination II.696
clause explicit 814 as correlative expression with conditional si
gerundives as 289, 293, II.231, 797 clause II.319
idem II.824 position of II.973
in first position II.1013, 1020 sedeo, as copula 207
in infinitive clauses 746 seeing, verbs of, with indirect question with si or
in relative clauses II.472 -ne II.115
in vocative case in poetry 1225, II.947 sei, see si (subordinator)
ipse 1161, II.824 semantic functions 26
medius as 1050 diachronic developments in marking of 1236
modified by adverbs 1037 marked by preposition vs. bare case 1176, 1201
multiple secondary predicates II.825 of adjuncts 799
noun phrases as of arguments 26
in ablative of description or quality II.779, of bare ablative 1199, 1206
801 of disjuncts 923
in genitive of description or quality II.799 of genitive attributes 1000
nouns as II.789–91 of gerundial clauses II.406–13
Index of grammatical terms and Latin words 1425