Chapter 20

RULE 1: Fourth declension is the u-stem declension.

I. Grammar
The next three chapters contain relatively little new materialthe last two noun declensions and the passive forms of third, third -io and fourth conjugationswhich will be comparatively easy for you to master. With that, it's a good idea to start studying for the final exam now. Over the course of the next few chapters, we will also review the uses of the ablative.

A. Fourth-Declension Nouns
Fourth declension is composed of nouns with a base ending in short- u. The endings used for masculine/feminine nouns in fourth declension are reminiscent of other declensions, especially third: SINGULAR -u + s = -us -u + is = -s -u + = -u -u + em = -um -u + e = - PLURAL -u + s = -s -u + um = -uum -u + ibus = -ibus -u + s = -s -u + ibus = -ibus

NOM GEN DAT ACC ABL

There are three important mandatory long marks in this declension, all resulting in -s: the genitive singular, the nominative plural, and the accusative plural. Each of these endings is distinguished from the nominative singular by its long mark. The neuter endings differ from the masculine/feminine endings in half of their forms: the nominative/accusative singular (-), the dative singular (-) and the nominative/accusative plural (-ua). Finally, only a few nouns in this declension are feminine (e.g. manus, domus). Fourth declension consists primarily of masculine nouns, and some neuter.

B. The Ablative of Separation

When the ablative is used without a preposition to denote separation of some sort (usually with verbs of lacking, freeing and depriving), the construction is called the "ablative of separation." It's best simply to note individual verbs which take the ablative of separation as we come across them in vocabulary and reading.

Chapter 21
RULE 1: In third conjugation, -eris (short e) is present tense, whereas -ris (long ) is future tense.

I. Grammar
Note that there is a mandatory long mark which makes an important distinction in the passive forms of the third, third -io and fourth conjugations: the second-person singular present-tense form in third conjugation (-eris) has a short -e- (the thematic vowel), in contrast to the second-person singular future-tense form (-ris) which has a long -- (the future tense sign). Note also the present passive infinitive in the third and third -io conjugations which has a very abridged ending, -, lacking the usual -r- which marks other infinitives.

Chapter 22
RULE 1: Fifth declension represents e-stem nouns. Most are feminine in gender.

I. Grammar
A. Fifth Declension
Representing nouns which have a base ending in -e, fifth declension exhibits endings which look most like those seen in third declension (with second-declension endings in the genitive). Note how eand long , in particulardominates the declension. SINGULAR -e + s = -s -e + = -e -e + = -e -e + em = -em -e + e = - PLURAL -e + s = -s -e + rum = -rum -e + ibus = -bus -e + s = -s -e + ibus = -bus

NOM GEN DAT ACC ABL

Chapter 23
RULE 1: Latin has only four participles: the present active, future active, perfect passive and future passive. It lacks a present passive participle ("being X-ed") and a perfect active participle ("having X-ed"). RULE 2: The perfect passive, future active and future passive participles belong to first/second declension. The present active participle belongs to third declension. RULE 3: The verb esse has only a future active participle (futurus). It lacks both the present active and all passive participles. RULE 4: Participles show relative time.

I. Grammar
A. What is a Participle?
Participles bridge the world of verbs and the world of adjectives. As adjectives, Latin participles have case endings and thus agree with a noun in number, gender and case. They can also form substantives and indeed often serve as nouns. As verbs, Latin participles are built on verb bases and expect objects, adverbs or any construction the base verb can take after it (e.g. direct object, indirect object, complementary infinitive, agent, ablative of separation, etc.). In sum, their first half (the verb base) looks ahead in the sentence to what follows (object, predicate, agent, etc.); their second half (adjective ending) looks back in the sentence to the noun with which the participle agrees.

B. The Formation of Latin Participles

Latin has only four participles (present active, perfect passive, future active, future passive). It lacks the two others which would fill out the system (present passive, perfect active). Here is how each are formed: 1. Present Active Participle: present stem (ama-) + -nt- + third-declension endings = amans, amantis, . . . 2. Perfect Passive Participle: fourth principal part stem (amat-) + first/second-declension endings = amatus, a, -um 3. Future Active Participle: fourth principal part stem (amat-) + -ur- + first/second-declension endings = amaturus, -a, -um, etc. 4. Future Passive Participle: present stem (ama-) + -nd- + first/second-declension endings = amandus, -a, -um, etc. Stems. Two of the participles use the present stem (e.g. am[a]-): present active (amans), future passive (amandus). The other two use the fourth principal part stem which must be memorized for each verb (e.g. amat): perfect passive (amatus), future active (amaturus). Endings. Three of the participles use first/second-declension endings (-us, -a, -um): perfect passive (amatus), future active (amaturus), and future passive (amandus). One uses third-declension endings (-ns, -ntis): present active (amans). Note that, like third-declension adjectives in general, present active participles are i-stem, with ia (neuter nominative/accusative plural) and -ium (genitive plural). But there is one exception: in the ablative singular they may end with either -i (most often when used as an adjective) or -e (when used as a substantive).

C. The Translation of Participles

Literal Translation. Each of the participle has a distinctive translation based on its tense and voice: 1. Present Active Participle: "X-ing"; or as a substantive "the one X-ing, the one who is X-ing, the X-er" 2. Perfect Passive Participle: "having been X-ed" (not just "X-ed"!); or as a substantive "the one having been X-ed, the one who has been (or was) X-ed" 3. Future Active Participle: "about to X, going to X, likely to X, intending to X"; or as a substantive "the one about to X, the one who will X"

4. Future Passive Participle: "to be X-ed, deserving to be X-ed, fit to be X-ed, "worth X-ing"; or as a substantive "the one who must/should be X-ed" (this use will be discussed more fully in the next chapter) The Translation of Participles as Subordinate Clauses in English. Where English more often uses extended subordinate clauses, Latin tends to deploy participles alone to cover the same territory, frequently leaving the logical relationship between participle and main sentence implicit in the context of the sentence. Therefore, a Latin participle like actum ("[the thing] having been done") can be used where English would more naturally have "when it was done" (implying a temporal connection between participle and main sentence), "since it was done" (implying a logical or causal connection), "although it was done" (implying a contrary-to-expectation or concessive connection) and "if it was done" (implying a condition). We will focus at first on the literal meaning of participles before we attempt to translate them figuratively.

D. Participles and Relative Time

In both English and Latin, participles show time relative to the main verb. That is, a present participle happens at the same time as the main verb (+0 in time value), whereas a perfect participle shows action prior in time to the main verb (-1) and a future participle action time subsequent to the main verb (+1). Better names for these participles might be "contemporaneous," "prior" and "subsequent." The main difficulty in dealing with relative versus absolute time comes when changing a participle which uses relative time into a clause which uses a finite verb and absolute time. Remember that this is not a problem exclusive to Latin. English speakers innately know how to shift between relative and absolute time, since it is a part of speaking the English language. Past-Tense Main Verb + Present Participle (versus Clauses which use finite verbs). Most problems arise when the main verb is in the past tense: Present Participle: The student, ignoring the rules of tense formation in participles, failed the class. Finite-Verb Clause: The student, who ignored the rules of tense formation in participles, failed the class. Perfect Participle: The rules, having been ignored, came back to haunt the foolish student. Finite-Verb Clause: The rules, which had been ignored, came back to haunt the foolish student.

E. Participle of Esse
The verb esse has only one participle in Latin: the future active futurus which, like all forms of the linking verb, expects a predicate. The absence of a present active participle for essethe counterpart of "being" in English is unexpected and precipitates difficulties in certain constructions (see Chapter 24, Ablative Absolute).

Chapter 24
RULE 1: The noun/subject of an ablative absolute is "absolute" from (i.e. not a constituent of ) the main sentence, in theory. RULE 2: The passive periphrastic carries a sense of obligation or necessity ("must, have to"). It uses the dative case (without a preposition) to express the agent.

I. Grammar
A. The Ablative Absolute

There are basically three types of ablative absolutes in Latin: 1. ablative noun + ablative perfect participle (the most common type): "with X having been Y-ed"; 2. ablative noun + ablative present participle: "with X Y-ing"; 3. ablative noun + ablative noun/adjective: "with X (being) Y" [there is no present participle for sum]. As with participles, learn the literal meaning of the ablative absolute first, then the figurative translation ("when, if, since, although"). Note that the "absolute" part of the ablative absolute means that the construction is grammatically "removed" from the main sentence. In other words, the subject of the ablative absolute should not be a constituent of the main sentence, in theorythere are, however, many exceptions in Latinand if the noun in the ablative absolute is used elsewhere in the sentence, the participle should be attached to the noun there, making an ablative absolute unnecessary. For the sake of simplicity, we will refer to the noun of the ablative absolute as the "subject of the ablative absolute" and the participle as the "verb of the ablative absolute."

B. The Passive Periphrastic

Arguably, the most difficult thing about the passive periphrastic is its name. "Periphrastic" is derived from Greek and refers to a "roundabout (peri-) way of saying (-phrastic) something"cf. the Latin-based term circumlocution ("speak around")in this case "something said in an indirect way using the passive voice." A more descriptive and precise name might be the "gerundive of obligation or necessity." This construction adds to the verb a sense of obligation or necessity, usually encompassed in English with "must" or "should." It's important to remember that the Latin construction is always passive, implying "must be, should be." In addition to that, there are three important points about the passive periphrastic: 1. Voice. Because the Latin construction is always passive and the English is not, often the best translation of a Latin passive periphrastic entails changing the voice of the verb from passive to active in English (and making other necessary alterations in the sentence). And because Roman writers often use this construction, this inversion of voice will happen with some frequency in translation. As with other constructions, however, learn the literal translation of the passive periphrastic first. Only after you've mastered this, move on to making the passive-active transition. 2. Have to. In regard to expressions of obligation or necessity, English offers its own pecularities. For instance, "must" has no true past-tense form"must have" is not the past tense of "must" but implies probability (e.g. "He must have left," meaning that he has probably departed)thus, to create a past tense for "must" (showing necessity), English is obliged to use another verb form, "had to" (the past form of "has/have to"). This is another example of "composite conjugation" (cf. go/went and am/is/be), comparable to Latin fero/tuli and tollo/sustuli (see Chapter 22). 3. Dative of Agent. Unlike other passive forms, the passive periphrastic does not take an ablative agent but a dative of agent. Since no dative form will ever be the object of a free-standing preposition, there can be no distinction in the passive periphrastic between personal and impersonal agent, in the same way that the presence or absence of the preposition ab distinguishes agents in other passive constructions.

Chapter 25
RULE 1: Indirect Statement = Accusative Subject + Infinitive Verb [There is no "that" in Latin!]

I. Grammar
A. Formation of Infinitives
Unlike with participles, Latin has a full set of infinitives, that is, all six which are possible, encompassing both voices (active/passive) and all three tenses (past/present/future). Out of these, we have encountered in whole or in part all but one, the perfect active infinitive which is formed by adding -isse to the perfect active base (the third principal part minus -i). Because it is so rare, you may ignore for the time being the future passive infinitive. The formation underlying all the others has already been covered (present active and passive) or are combinations of forms we have studied previously. The latter constitute the periphrastic infinitives ( i.e. involving two words)the perfect passive and the future activewhich entail the union of the appropriate participle (giving the infinitive its tense and voice) and esse (representing the "mood"). Note that, since the periphrastic infinitives involve the use of participles which are by definition adjectives and thus must agree with an antecedent, the participle part of the infinitive will decline and agree with whatever the participle refers to (i.e. usually who or what is the "subject" of the infinitive).

B. Indirect Statement
1. Indirect Statement in English Indirect Statement is a form of subordinate clause, in this case "a subordinate clause which relates a thought or statement indirectly" (e.g. "He said that he was very good."). It is the opposite of direct statement, which entails quoting a person's words or ideas directly ("He said, "I am so good!"). There are the two essential ingredients in an indirect statement: 1. The first is a verb of perception or, as my old Latin teacher used to say, "verbs of the head" (i.e. verbs which encompass things most often done from the neck up: thinking, speaking , hearing , sensing, etc.). For a list of verbs which can introduce indirect statement, see Wheelock, p.119 (bottom of the page). 2. The second is a a subordinate clause with its own subject and verb. This clause is the indirect statement itself. The most significant difference between indirect statement in English and Latin is that the classical Romans lacked a conjunction equivalent to the English word "that," that is, not the demonstrative or relative pronoun "that," but the "that" that introduces many English indirect statements and calls for a finite verb (e.g. "I said that . . . "). Instead, Latin uses an accusative plus an infinitive to express the same, in the same way that English does with some verbs, for instance, "believe": 1. I believe him to be a good man. 2. I believe that he is a good man. This use of "believe" with (1) an accusative plus an infinitive and (2) a "that" clause demonstrates the essential difference between Latin and English.

2. Indirect Statement in Latin: No "that" in Latin! Classical Latin has nothing equivalent to sentence 2 above. All indirect statements are formed by using an equivalent of the clause in sentence 1 which has an accusative subject and infinitive verb: SUBJECT MAIN VERB ACCUSATIVE INFINITIVE PREDICATE (= ACC!) I consider him to be a good man. When writing in Latin, you must learn to change the nominative subject of an English "that" clause into an accusative form in Latin and the English indicative (finite) verb into a Latin infinitive, the same way that "that he is" in sentence 2 is equivalent to "him to be" in sentence 1. 3. Relative Tense in Indirect Statement This entails another important change, the difference between relative and absolute time (tense). Infinitives, like participles, operate on relative timethat is, their tense is relative to that of the main verbthus, the true time of the infinitive in indirect statement depends on the tense of the main verb. As with participles, the present infinitive shows contemporaneous action, the perfect prior action and the future subsequent action. Whereas this change involves participles only when one chooses to translate them from their literal Latin meaning into English clauses, there is no choice but to convert the infinitive ("him to be") into a finite verb ("that he is") in indirect statement since all Latin verbs use infinitives in this construction but few English verbs. Now you must master how to effect this exchange, recognizing that the majority of complications come with a past-tense main verb. With a present-tense main verb (time +0), there is no problem with the conversion from accusative-infinitive indirect statement to the English "that" construction, because infinitive tenses (in relative time) correspond directly to their finite equivalents (in absolute time): English 1. I say that he is good 2. I say that he will be good 3. I say that he was/has been good Latin I say him to be a good man (present infinitive = +0) Dico eum esse bonum I say him to be about to be good (future infinitive = +1) Dico eum futurum esse bonum I say him to have been good (perfect infinitive = -1) Dico eum fuisse bonum

PRESENT MAIN VERB ("I say") [time = +0]

= = =

The same is true if the main verb is future tense (+1): English I will say that he is good I will say that he will be good Latin I will say him to be good (present infinitive = +0) Dicam eum esse bonum I will say him to be about to be good (future infinitive = +1) Dicam eum futurum esse bonum I will say him to have been good (perfect infinitive = 1) Dicam eum fuisse bonum

4. FUTURE MAIN VERB ("I will say") 5. [time = +1] 6.

= =

I will say that he was good =

Problems arise when the main verb is past-tense (-1): English I said that he was good Latin I said him to be good (present infinitive = +0) Dixi eum esse bonum I said him to be about to be good (future infinitive = +1) Dixi eum futurum esse bonum I said him to have been good (perfect infinitive = -1) Dixi eum fuisse bonum

7. PAST MAIN VERB ("I said") 8. [time = -1] 9.

I said that he would be good =

I said that he had been good =

Note the following: In sentence 7, was is contemporaneous with the main verbboth are past tense (-1)so the proper infinitive to use is the present or contemporaneous infinitive (esse) which is +0 in time. In sentence 8, would shows subsequent action (+1), and the proper Latin infinitive to use is, therefore, the future infinitive (futurum esse) which is +1 in time. [As far as you know now, would is a signal in English that the Latin sentence contains an indirect statement with a past-tense main verb and a future infinitive.] In sentence 9, had which is the English modal signifying the pluperfect tense (-2) is the result of a past-tense infinitive (-1) compounded onto a past-tense main verb (-1); so, the proper infinitive to use in this case is the perfect infinitive (fuisse) which is -1 in time. Remember "to believe"! With certain verbs like "believe," English can tolerate an interchange between "that" and accusative/infinitive constructions and so native English speakers are used to making this transition in tenses. Consider the last three examples: 7. I believed that he was good = I believed him to be good 8. I believed that he would be good = I believed him to be about/going to be good 9. I believed that he had been good = I believed him to have been good Thus, mastering relative versus absolute time is really only a matter of expanding one's knowledge of English infinitive usage. Remember that Latin indirect statement introduces no syntactic forms entirely foreign to English and that there are three important things to bear in mind here: (1) leave out "that," (2) change nominative subjects into the accusative and (3) turn absolute-tense main verbs to relative-tense infinitives. 4. The Subject in Indirect Statement Because the verb of indirect statement is an infinitivenot a finite verb which takes a nominative subjectthe subject will be accusative, just as in English: "I believe him to be good." That means that, if the verb is linking, the predicate noun or adjective will be accusative also, to agree with the subject: "I believe the teacher to be him." Finally, when the subject of the indirect statement is the same as that of the main sentence, it will be reflexive: "I believe myself to be a good person," "You believe yourself to be a good person," etc. Here, Latin uses the first- and second-person pronouns which, you will remember, are identical to the first- and second-person reflexives, e.g. "I believe me to be a good person."

In the third person, however, sense demands a distinction between "him(self)" and "him" (someone else). In Latin, the reflexive se is used for "him(self)" when the subject in indirect statement is the same as that of the main sentence. This is true for both singular ("him/her/it[self]")and plural ("them[selves]"): SINGULAR: He believes himself to be (se esse) a good person. PLURAL: They believe themselves to be (se esse) good people. When the third-person subject of indirect statement is non-reflexive, Latin uses a demonstrative pronoun: SINGULAR: He believes him (i.e. someone else) to be (eum esse) a good person. PLURAL: They believe them (i.e. some other people) to be (eos esse) good people. The same holds true for suus, -a, -um and eius/eorum/earum: "He believes me to be his (own) friend (= suum)" versus "He believes me to be his (i.e. someone else's) friend (= eius)."

Chapter 26
RULE 1: There are three degrees of adjectives: positive ("big"), comparative ("bigger") and superlative ("biggest"). RULE 2: The regular comparative ending in Latin is -ior, -ioris. No matter the declension of the positive adjective, all comparatives belong to third declension (but are not i-stem!). RULE 3: The regular superlative ending in Latin is -issimus, -a, -um. All superlatives belong to first/second declension. RULE 4: After a comparative, "than" is expressed in Latin by quam (+ same case) or the ablative of comparison. RULE 5: Quam + superlative = "as X as possible"

I. Grammar
A. The Comparison of Latin Adjectives: Terminology, Formation and Translation
There are three degrees of adjectives: positive (big), comparative (bigger) and superlative (biggest). By nature, comparatives imply the existence of two contrasting entities and superlatives that of at least three. Comparatives and superlatives in Latin are formed in the following way: COMPARATIVE = Adjective Base + -ior, -ioris (third declension) SUPERLATIVE = Adjective Base + -issimus, -a, -um (first/second declension) Note that these formulae are consistent across declensional lines. That is, no matter the declension of the original adjective, all comparatives belong to third declension and all superlatives to first/second declension.

1. Comparatives Compared to superlatives, the declension of comparatives is more complex: 1. Comparatives belong to the third declension. 2. As third-declension adjectives, comparatives should be i-stem but they're not: the ablative singular is -e (not i), the genitive plural is -um (not -ium), and the neuter nominative/accusative plural is -a (not -ia). See Wheelock, p. 123, note 3. 3. The neuter nominative/accusative singular ending is -ius, lacking the distinctive -ior- of the other forms which is easy to confuse with -us, the masculine nominative singular ending of first/second declension adjective in its positive degree (cf. certus vs. certius). Finally, the translation and usage of comparatives and superlatives are somewhat broader in Latin than English. As well as meaning "X-er" or "more X," comparatives can mean "somewhat X," "rather X" or "too X," i.e. "X in some way above the positive degree." In similar fashion, the superlative "most X" or "X-est" can mean "very X."

B. "Than" Constructions
Latin has two ways of denoting "than." Wheelock introduces only one in this chapter, the more common one which employs quam. The other, the ablative of comparison, is outlined in the Supplementary Syntax at the back of the book (pp. 374-379). You should learn both. 1. Quam + Same Case We will refer to the comparative construction which uses quam as "quam + same case" because the noun following quam (the thing being compared) is put in the "same case" in Latin as the noun to which it is being compared. Therefore, if asked "What case and why?" in reference to the noun following quamfor example, eam amo plus quam oculos meos ("I love her more than my eyes") with the question "What case is oculos and why?"the correct answer is "Accusative, quam + same case (in this instance, the same case as the direct object eam)." 2. The Ablative of Comparison The ablative of comparison is, in fact, a simpler construction than quam + same caseno conjunction and no variable case depending on the thing to which the comparison is being madewhen associated with a comparative, the ablative simply connotes "than" (see Wheelock, p. 377). Practice changing the sentences in this chapter which have quam + same case constructions to the ablative of comparison.

C. Quam + Superlative
Quam + superlative = "as X as possible." See quam in the vocabulary on p. 124.

Chapter 27
RULE 1: Adjective bases ending in -l- and -(e)r- form superlatives ending in -limus and -rimus, respectively.

I. Grammar
This is largely a chapter of memorization: (1) two rules for forming "irregular" superlatives (those ending in limus and -rimus); and (2) seven adjectives which exhibit "irregular comparison" (Wheelock, p. 128). While memorizing the irregular forms, it's important that you focus also on reviewing the constructions introduced in Chapters 23-26 There is one especially important irregularity to note here. The singular of plus operates as a (neuter) noun and takes a partitive genitive after it (cf. satis); conversely, the plural (plures/plura) functions as an adjective.

Chapter 28
RULE 1: The subjunctive is the mood of uncertainty. It is used primarily in subordinate clauses. RULE 2: The present subjunctive is formed by changing the thematic vowel (generally, from a to e or e/i to a). Remember this sentence: SHE READS A DIARY.

I. Grammar
If the subjunctive were still fully active in English, learning Latin would much easier because English speakers would have something in their own language to build from, but unfortunately the English subjunctive is now largely a "schoolbook" form with little relevance to the spoken language. In other words, "If this be true, . . ." now sits on a dusty shelf in the Museum of Good Englishhorrendum dictu!so you'll be learning as much about your own tongue as the Romans' in this and the next few lessons.

A. The Subjunctive Mood

If anything, the subjunctive is the mood of uncertainty. It's generally applied to verbs to show potentiality, volition, exhortation, prohibition, deliberation and other situations in which a speaker's statement does not necessarily reflect established fact or recognizable certainty.

B. The Translation of the Latin Subjunctive

With no clear counterpart in Englishno single English word (such as "might," "may," "would") can cover the Latin in any way that's even remotely comprehensivethe Latin subjunctive has to be identified in form and usage independent of translation. Thus, you must learn to match the subjunctive form to its use and then disregard both, rendering the Latin subjunctive as an English indicative or in a way that accords with the proper English expression of a particular construction. Accordingly, then, when drilling subjunctive forms, you'll be asked to identify that the verb is subjunctive in form by writing an "S" next to it. After that, we'll address the use of this mood in context and you'll learn how to tell what constructions in Latin require the subjunctive mood and how to translate each.

C. The Formation of the Present Subjunctive in Latin

In the present tense, a simple change of thematic vowel shifts the mood of the verb from indicative to subjunctive. Here are the components of a Latin verb in the present-tense system and the information conveyed by each of these components: PREFIX modifies verb action PRESENT BASE THEMATIC VOWEL TENSE MARKER PERSONAL ENDING basic meaning mood & conjunction tense/aspect person/number & voice

Although there is a simple guideline for changing the present verbs of the four conjugations from indicative to subjunctive (a > e; e/i > a), here is a good mnemonic device: SHE READS A DIARY. The vowels of the English words match the subjunctive markers of the Latin conjugations in order from first to fourth/third -io. Note the first-person singular present subjunctive in third, third -io and fourth conjugations (e.g. ducam) is identical in form to the first-person singular future indicative. Context will dictate whether to interpret ducam as "I will lead" or "let me lead."

D. The Use of the Subjunctive

By the end of the class, you will have learned ten uses of the subjunctive, two of which are included in this chapter: the jussive subjunctive and purpose clauses. 1. Jussive Subjunctive The jussive subjunctive is different from the other subjunctive constructions we will cover in this class in that it has a corresponding verb form in English: "Let . . . !," "May . . . !" Also unlike most other subjunctive constructions we'll encounter, it serves as the main verb of the sentence. On the other hand, similarly to other subjunctive constructions, it is negated with ne (not non). 2. Purpose Clauses From the perspective of English speakers, one of the hardest features of Classical Latin to learn is that there is no infinitive of purpose (e.g. "I went to the store to buy bread"). Instead, the Romans use the subordinate conjunctive ut/ne + the subjunctive mood to express purpose. This has a counterpart in English: "I went to the store so that I might buy bread."

Chapter 29
RULE 1: Imperfect Subjunctive = Present Active Infinitive + Personal Endings RULE 2: There is no future subjunctive. RULE 3: The base of the present subjunctive of esse is si-. RULE 4: Result Clauses are anticipated by "sign words" (e.g. tam, talis, tantus, ita or sic [also tot, Chapter 40]) and introduced by ut or ut non (nemo, nihil, etc.).

I. Grammar
A. The Imperfect Subjunctive
Wheelock is right that the imperfect subjunctive is the easiest of the subjunctives to recognize and form. Superficially, it looks like merely the second principal part (i.e. the present active infinitive) plus personal endings. Note, however, that its form did not arise originally from the infinitive, but the subjunctive marker -sewhich later became -re-. The original -se- form is still visible in essem.

B. No Future Subjunctive!
Since in many ways the subjunctive and the future address different aspects of the same thingthat is, future events and upcoming possibilitiesa "future subjunctive" would be at once redundant and contradictory ("an uncertain and definite future"?). Thus, there is no future subjunctive in Latin.

C. Subjunctive of Esse
The present base of the subjunctive of esse is si-, rendering the remarkably predictable sim, sis, sit, etc. The imperfect of esse is formed as if it were a combination of the infinitive esse and personal endings: essem, esses, etc.

D. Result Clauses
There are three basic ingredients in a result clause: 1. a "sign word" such as tam, talis, tantus, ita, sic [also tot, Chapter 40]; 2. the subordinating conjunction ut or ut non, ut nihil, ut numquam (or any negator but ne) which introduces the clause; 3. and a subjunctive verb inside the clause. Though not absolutely necessary in real Latin, a "sign word" should introduce a result clause. For the purposes of this class, there will always will be a sign word if there is a result clause.

Chapter 30
RULE 1: Perfect Active Subjunctive = Perfect Active Stem + -eri- + personal endings. RULE 2: Pluperfect Active Subjunctive = Perfect Active Infinitive + personal endings. RULE 3: The perfect and pluperfect passive subjunctive substitute subjunctive sim and essem for indicative sum and eram with the perfect passive participle. There is no future perfect subjunctive. RULE 4: Sequence of Tenses: 1) Primary = Present, Future, Future Perfect main verb + Present or Perfect subjunctive verb in clause; 2) Secondary = Imperfect, Perfect, Pluperfect main verb + Imperfect or Pluperfect subjunctive verb in clause.

I. Grammar
A. The Perfect Subjunctive
The similarity between perfect subjunctive forms (e.g. amaverim, amaveris, etc.) and future perfect indicative active forms (e.g. amavero, amaveris, etc.) points up the common link between the subjunctive and the future. Hence, just as there is no future subjunctive, there is no future perfect subjunctive. Note the one ostensible difference between the perfect subjunctive and future perfect indicative: the first person singular, laudaverim (perfect subjunctive) and laudavero (future perfect indicative). For the most part, context will dictate how to tell the difference between these forms. That is, a perfect subjunctive will almost always be in a clause requiring the subjunctive, whereas a future perfect indicative will be a main verb or in a clause not requiring the subjunctive.

B. The Pluperfect Subjunctive

Like the imperfect subjunctive, the pluperfect subjunctive is ostensibly formed from the perfect active infinitive plus personal endings.

C. Indirect Questions
An indirect question is a form of a question which has been rephrased so that it is not quoted "directly" (verbatim) but is a restatement of the original question, e.g. "Who was he?" (direct question) versus "He asked who he was" (indirect question). Indirect questions have three components: 1. Verb of Asking, Requesting, Demanding, etc. Indirect questions must be introduced by a word which can express a question indirectly, e.g. think (why...), wonder (how...), realize (who...), etc. 2. Question Word. Both Latin and English indirect questions are introduced by a "question word" (e.g. who, how, when, whether, etc.). 3. Subordinate Verb. Indirect questions in English are distinct from direct questions by reversing the usual inversion of subject and verb/modal in direct questions, as in the example cited above ("Who was he?" versus "He asked who he was."). In Latin, where no such shift of word order would create meaningful syntax, indirect questions take the subjunctive, as opposed to direct questions which use the indicative. Note that Latin indirect questions follow Sequence of Tenses (see below).

D. An Overview of Indirect Discourse

There are essentially three types of sentences: statements, questions and commands. People restating "indirectly" another's words must be able to relate any of the three types of sentences in an "indirect" fashion. For that reason, there are indirect statements (Chapter 25), indirect questions (this chapter) and indirect commands (called Jussive Noun Clauses, Chapter 36). All three are formed differently from each other in Latin and English: ENGLISH Indirect Statement He said that he was good. (that clause) Indirect Question He asked who he was. (inverted-question word order) Indirect Command** He ordered me to be good. (accusastive + infinitive)
**You are not required to know Indirect Command until Chapter 36.

LATIN Dixit se esse bonum. (accusastive + infinitive) Rogavit quis sit. (question word + subjunctive) Imperavit ut bonus essem. (ut/ne + subjunctive)

Note that, where the Romans used the accusative + infinitive in Indirect Statement and (most often) a subordinate clause in Indirect Command, English is inclined toward the reverse.

E. Sequence of Tenses
For all the complicated tables and charts Wheelock provides (pp.142-3), there are only two situations where the concept of sequence of tenses has any real bearing on translation: 1) with a present- or future-tense main verb (primary sequence), a dependent clause shows prior action with a perfect (not imperfect) subjunctive; 2) with a past-tense main verb (secondary sequence), a dependent clause shows contemporaneous action with an imperfect (not perfect) subjunctive. Common sense dictates the rest. That is, a subjunctive verb which is present will always be present (contemporaneous action in primary sequence) and one which includes "had" will always be pluperfect (prior action in secondary sequence). Know the following terms: "historical tense," "primary sequence," "secondary sequence," "contemporaneous action" and "prior action." If asked "What tense and why?" in relation to a subjunctive verb in a subordinate clause, these terms will be key.