Sequence of Tenses w/ the Subjunctive

[CORNELIVS XXXIV]

Hi All,

I have a question regarding sequence of tenses with the subjunctive.

Here is a sentence I wrote in response to a question from my textbook:

Igitur, Mēdus servus vēnditus est cum pecūniam dēbitam solvere nōn posset.
(Therefore, Medus was sold as a slave because he was not able to pay the owed money.)

I am a little unsure about what tense I should use for the terminating verb.
As you can see above, I used the imperfect subjunctive – posset.

I have learned that a perfect tense indicative verb in the main clause is often followed by an imperfect tense subjunctive in the dependent clause.
Is the construction as I have set it up correct here?

Thank you!
Cornelius

P. S.
For those of you who don't know the plot of Ørberg's Lingua Latina, there is a pretty interesting backstory to why the guy was sold.
He wasn't just being negligent with the money!

 

[Pacifica]

Your tense is right. There are only two grammatically correct options here: non posset = "wasn't able", and non potuisset = "hadn't been able".

Note that passive forms of vendo are extremely rare (except the perfect participle used alone—not as part of the perfect passive tense like here). Usually, "to be sold" is venire (from veneo, not venio) or venum dari.

 

[CORNELIVS XXXIV]

Great, thank you for confirming.
In my textbook, the pluperfect subjunctive is taught in the chapter following the one where this question is asked, so the imperfect subjunctive was really my only choice.

Out of curiosity, why would the perfect subjunctive be grammatically incorrect here?

 

[Notascooby]

Because the main verb is in secondary sequence. Only imperfect or pluperfect are possible.

 

[Pacifica]

Because the perfect subjunctive would relate to a main event in the present.

For instance, you could say, "Since Medus was unable to pay, he is now a slave" = Medus cum solvere non potuerit, nunc servit.

 

[CORNELIVS XXXIV]

I think I see what you mean – using the perfect subjunctive places the action in the dependent clause on the same chronological "level" as the indicative verb in the main clause.
This brings confusion because it seems like the two actions occurred simultaneously, which is not true.
So using the imperfect or pluperfect subjunctive in the dependent clause makes it clear that the dependent action happened at a different time.
Is that sort of the idea?

 

[Pacifica]

Your first sentence sounds right, but I'm not sure I understand the rest of your post.

The rule is as follows:

- If the main verb is in the present (or future) tense, the verb in the cum clause will be present subjunctive if it happens at the same time as the main verb (e.g. cum parum dormias, fessus es = "Since you sleep too little, you are tired") and perfect subjunctive if it happened before the main verb (e.g. cum parum dormiveris, fessus es = "Since you slept too little, you are tired").

- If the main verb is in a past tense, the verb in the cum clause will be imperfect subjunctive if it happened at the same time as the main verb (e.g. cum parum dormires, fessus eras = "Since you slept too little, you were tired") and pluperfect subjunctive if it happened before the main verb (e.g. cum parum dormivisses, fessus eras = "Since you had slept too little, you were tired").

 

[CORNELIVS XXXIV]

Thanks for laying the sequence out, and the examples are also very helpful.
I think I will find myself referring back to this thread in the future.

 

[CORNELIVS XXXIV]

With these sequence rules in mind, I composed some sentences in response to questions from Ch. 33 of Lingua Latina.

1. Aemilius epistulās legēns permovētur cum patriam suam et amīcōs suōs vidēre velit.
(Aemilius, reading the letters, is moved since he wants to see his country and his friends.)
The sequencing was simple here, since both the indicative and subjunctive verbs are present tense.

2. Ipse paucās epistlās scrīpsit quod (sīcut dixit) vix tempus habēret ad dormiendum!
(He himself wrote few letters since [as he said] he had / was having hardly time for sleeping!)
Originally I had habuerit (perfect subjunctive) but changed it to imperfect to fit the sequence; correct choice?

3. Hostēs castra Rōmāna non expugnāvērunt cum mīlitēs parātī essent ad castra dēfendenda ac cum iī fortissimē pugnārent.
(The enemy did not conquer the Roman camp since the soldiers had been prepared for defending the camp and since they fought most bravely.)
Since the preparation came before the fighting, I used parātī essent (pluperfect) and pugnārent (imperfect) to match the sequence of tenses.

The third sentence really pushed my sequence of tenses knowledge to the maximum.
I would greatly appreciate any insights or improvements on my tense usage in the above sentences.

 

[Pacifica]

1. Aemilius epistulās legēns permovētur cum patriam suam et amīcōs suōs vidēre velit.
(Aemilius, reading the letters, is moved since he wants to see his country and his friends.)
The sequencing was simple here, since both the indicative and subjunctive verbs are present tense.

Good. Note that the repetition of suam-suos is unnecessary, unless you want to emphasise "his". Otherwise, just suam alone, or even no possessive at all, is fine.

2. Ipse paucās epistlās scrīpsit quod (sīcut dixit) vix tempus habēret ad dormiendum!
(He himself wrote few letters since [as he said] he had / was having hardly time for sleeping!)
Originally I had habuerit (perfect subjunctive) but changed it to imperfect to fit the sequence; correct choice?

Yes, correct choice.

3. Hostēs castra Rōmāna non expugnāvērunt cum mīlitēs parātī essent ad castra dēfendenda ac cum iī fortissimē pugnārent.
(The enemy did not conquer the Roman camp since the soldiers had been prepared for defending the camp and since they fought most bravely.)
Since the preparation came before the fighting, I used parātī essent (pluperfect) and pugnārent (imperfect) to match the sequence of tenses.

The tenses are right. Cum ii sounds a little awkward.

 

[CORNELIVS XXXIV]

Good. Note that the repetition of suam-suos is unnecessary, unless you want to emphasise "his". Otherwise, just suam alone, or even no possessive at all, is fine.

You're right; in English we would only say "his country and friends" – I just put suōs for purposes of case agreement.

Yes, correct choice.

Excellent – I almost didn't catch that.

The tenses are right. Cum ii sounds a little awkward.

Great to hear about the tenses.
I included iī to emphasize that they did the fighting, but I see that the sentence would probably flow better without it.

Thanks for these evaluations!

 

[CORNELIVS XXXIV]

Today I finished the sentence composition for Ch. 34 of Lingua Latina, which means I am done with all my class coursework!
Among the dozen or so sentences I composed were a few cum clauses with the subjunctive.

Thanks to this forum I have greatly improved my skill with sequence of tenses.
As a result, I feel confident about all the subjunctive sentences I wrote today where cum means "since".

In one sentence though, I tried something I have never done before: setting up cum to mean "although" –

Catullus Lesbiam et amābat et ōderat cum ratiōnem nescīret.
Catullus was both loving and hating Lesbia although he did not know the reason.*

I read about such usage of cum in a very helpful PDF from Wheelock: http://www.wheelockslatin.com/handouts/SUBJUNCTIVE SUMMARY.pdf
Did I construct the clause correctly in this sentence?

Thank you!

*Refers to Catullus 85

 

[CORNELIVS XXXIV]

Just putting this^ back up to where it will be seen.

 

[Pacifica]

Today I finished the sentence composition for Ch. 34 of Lingua Latina, which means I am done with all my class coursework!
Among the dozen or so sentences I composed were a few cum clauses with the subjunctive.

Thanks to this forum I have greatly improved my skill with sequence of tenses.
As a result, I feel confident about all the subjunctive sentences I wrote today where cum means "since".

In one sentence though, I tried something I have never done before: setting up cum to mean "although" –

Catullus Lesbiam et amābat et ōderat cum ratiōnem nescīret.
Catullus was both loving and hating Lesbia although he did not know the reason.*

I read about such usage of cum in a very helpful PDF from Wheelock: http://www.wheelockslatin.com/handouts/SUBJUNCTIVE SUMMARY.pdf
Did I construct the clause correctly in this sentence?

Thank you!

*Refers to Catullus 85

I saw you online and it reminded me that this post was still awaiting an answer. I'm sorry; I've been rather busy.

Your sentence is correct, though causam would perhaps have been more common than rationem for "the reason".

 

[CORNELIVS XXXIV]

No problem – thank you for confirming!

It just so happened that Ch. 34 introduced the noun ratio, so it was on the top of my head when I wrote that sentence.
Thanks for pointing that detail out though.
I checked a couple online dictionaries and indeed the specific English word "reason" seems more strongly associated with causa than ratio.

 

[Pacifica]

I checked a couple online dictionaries and indeed the specific English word "reason" seems more strongly associated with causa than ratio.

It depends in which sense. "Reason" in the sense of "cause" is more usually causa, but "reason" in the sense of the faculty of reasoning is ratio. Ratio has many meanings, though, including the other kind of "reason", to some extent (at least, it can translate to it in some contexts).