CHAPTER 19 "Perfect Passive System of All Verbs; Interrogative Pronouns and Adjectives" PERFECT PASSIVE SYSTEM We divide the Latin tense system into two categories. (1) The present system, active and passive, uses the first principal part of the verb. It includes the present, future and imperfect tenses. Notice, these tenses use the first principal part for both the active and passive voices. The only difference between the active and passive voices in the present system is the personal endings. You learned all about this in Chapter 18. (2) The perfect system active uses the third principal part of the verb and attaches different personal endings to get the three different tenses of the perfect system. Write out the endings: Perfect Pluperfect Future Perfect 1 __________ ___________ __________ 2 __________ ___________ __________ 3 __________ ___________ __________ 1 __________ ___________ __________ 2 __________ ___________ __________ 3 __________ ___________ __________ Notice, now, that the third principal part is the stem for the perfect system active only. To form the perfect system tense in the passive voice, Latin uses the fourth principal part of the verb. Since it uses a different principal part, the Perfect System Passive is considered to be a different category of tenses. So there are three tense systems in Latin: (1) the Present System Active and Passive; (2) the Perfect System Active; (3) the Perfect System Passive. The tenses of systems (2) and (3) are the same -- Perfect, Pluperfect and Future Perfect; the only difference is in the voice, and the principal part of the verb on which they're built. THE PASSIVE VOICE IN ENGLISH: THE PARTICIPLE DEFINED First, let's look at how English forms its passive voice again. As we saw in Chapter 18, English uses the third principal part of the verb and uses an inflected form of the verb "to be" as the auxiliary or helping verb. That is to say, the verb "to be" will indicate the tense, the number, and the mood of the verb, while the third principal part of the verb will define the specific action involved. For example, for the verb "to see, saw, seen": Betty is seen by George. is being seen will be seen would be seen should be seen was seen was being seen has been seen had been seen should have been seen would have been seen You can clearly see that the constant in all these modifications is the verbal form "seen". The verb "to be" is doing all the work. So let's look at little more closely at the verbal form "seen". The third principal part of the English verb is called a "participle". Now listen closely; this is going to be an important definition: A participle is a "verbal adjective". That is, an adjective which is derived from a verb. In fact, that's why we call it a participle, because it "participates" in the essence of both a verb and of an adjective. So in the constructions of the English passive voice, the participle "seen" is actually "modifying" the subject of the verb "to be". I can say "Betty is tall" and "Betty is seen", and these two sentences are analogous. In the predicate of both these sentences the subject further modified, since it is linked to an adjective by the verb "to be". It may seem bizarre to be thinking of a verbal construction as being essentially adjectival, but watch how we can use participles where their adjectival force is quite obvious: "the written text", "the spoken word", "the destroyed city", "the bewildered students", "the beleaguered professor", etc. THE LATIN PERFECT PASSIVE PARTICIPLE So where are we? English forms the passive voice of all its tenses by using the participle of the verb which it links to the subject with a conjugated form of the verb "to be". Now you already know that Latin forms the passive voice of some of its tenses -- those of the present system -- simply by using special passive endings. The formation of the passive voice of the perfect system, however, doesn't work that way. The Latin perfect passive system is perfectly analogous to the formation of the English passive voice. The perfect passive system in Latin uses the fourth principal part of the verb, which is then linked to the subject with an inflected form of the verb "sum". The fourth principal part of a Latin verb is called the "Perfect Passive Participle". Let's zero in on all the parts of this description. (1) We call it "Perfect" because the action is considered to have been completed. This is an important difference with the English participle. In English, we might say "Betty is being seen", and the participle doesn't force us to understand that the action is finished. In this example, the action is clearly still going on. (2) We say "Passive" since whatever the participle is going with had something done to it, rather than being the agent of some action. Again, the English participle can be used in conditions where the passive force is not so obvious. In the sentence "I have seen Betty", the participle "seen" doesn't strike us as passive in force, but rather as a part of an active construction. (3) We say "Participle" because it is a "verbal adjective", and for Latin, this is going to have monumental implications. The participle is an adjective, so it must agree in number, gender, and case with the noun is modifying. And if it must agree with nouns, then the participle must be able to decline to get the different numbers, genders, and cases it needs. (This is the feature of the Perfect System Passive which causes students the most trouble. It's difficult for them to realize that the passive voice in the perfect system is essentially adjectival: the verb "sum" linking the subject of the verb with a predicate adjective.) Now let's look at the fourth principal part of a verb. As you know, the dictionary must give you all the principal parts of the verb you're considering. (1) The first entry is the first person singular of the present tense. (2) The second is the present infinitive, from which you drop the "-re" to get the present system stem. (3) The third is the first person singular of the perfect tense, from which you get the perfect active stem by dropping the "-i". (4) The fourth entry is the perfect passive participle, which is used with the auxiliary verb "sum" in the formation of the perfect system passive. We've said that the perfect passive participle is a verbal adjective, so it must be able to decline, just like adjectives, in order to agree with the nouns they're modifying. The perfect passive participles of all verbs declines just like the first adjectives you learned: just like "magnus, -a, -um". That is, it uses endings of the first declension to modify feminine nouns, endings of the second declension "-us" type to modify masculine nouns, and endings of the second declension "-um" type to modify neuter nouns. The dictionaries tell you this in a number of different ways; but they're all telling you the same thing. Some write out the whole "-us, -a, -um"; others abbreviate it by using only the neuter "-um" or the masculine "-us". So you may see the entry for the fourth principal part of "laudo", for example, given in these three different ways: (1) laudatus, -a, -um (2) laudatum (3) laudatus PERFECT TENSE PASSIVE So let's put this participle to work. How would you translate this in Latin: "I was praised". Well, the tense is obviously perfect -- that is, the action was completed before it was reported -- so we must use the perfect passive participle: "laudatus, -a, -um". The person is first and the number is singular. Let's assume that the "I" is male. What case is "I"? Obviously nominative -- it's the subject of the verb -- so the form of the participle will be "laudatus" -- masculine, nominative singular. Got that? The participle is going to agree with the subject of the verb. The subject of the verb is nominative, so the participle must be nominative, too. Now what form of the verb "sum" should we use. Of course, we'll use the first person singular, but what tense? Did you guess "eram" -- "I was"? If you did, that's one demerit. Look, the fourth principal part is the "perfect passive participle" and the "perfect" tells you that the action is considered to have been already completed. That is, in the participle itself is the notion of a past event, so "laudatus" could be translated as "having been praised". Therefore you needn't repeat the idea of past completion in the auxiliary verb "to be". So the correct form of the auxiliary is the present tense: "sum". Think of it this way, and I admit this may seem clumsy: "Laudatus sum" means "I am now in the condition of having been praised". We can bring this over into English as either "I was praised" or "I have been praised". So to form the perfect tense passive in Latin, you use the perfect passive participle + the verb "sum" as the auxiliary in the present tense. Now let's suppose that the subject "I" is feminine. What changes would this necessitate? Well, the participle is a verbal adjective, so it must agree in number, gender and case with whatever it's modifying. If the subject of the verb is feminine, then the participle has to be feminine, nominative, singular to agree with it. So the participle will have be "laudata". Therefore, if a woman is speaking, should would say "Laudata sum" for "I was praised". PLUPERFECT TENSE PASSIVE So how do you imagine Latin forms the passive of the pluperfect tense? Think. You're still going to use the perfect passive participle linked to the subject with a conjugated form of the verb "sum". All perfect system passive tenses do that. But tense will the verb "sum" be in? Right! Now you use the auxiliary verb "sum" in the imperfect tense. What you're doing is adding an additional past idea in auxiliary to the past idea already implicit in the participle. Therefore "Laudatus eram" means "I was in the condition of having been praised" or "I had been praised". And if the subject were feminine: "Laudata eram". FUTURE PERFECT TENSE PASSIVE And the future perfect tense? Yes. You use the future of the verb "sum", thus attaching a future idea to the past idea in the participle, and that's the definition of the future perfect tense. "Laudatus ero" therefore means "I will be in the condition of having been praised", which comes out "I will have been praised". And if the subject were feminine "Laudata ero". PERFECT SYSTEM PASSIVE SUMMARIZED So let's look at all this. Conjugate in full the three tenses of the perfect system passive, using the verb "laudo". (Carry all the possible genders and check your work against list lists on page 88.) PARTICIPLE PERFECT PLUPERFECT FUTURE PERFECT laudatus, -a, -um sum eram ero _________________ __________ __________ __________ _________________ __________ __________ __________ laudati, -ae, -a __________ __________ __________ _________________ __________ __________ __________ _________________ __________ __________ __________ THE FOURTH PRINCIPAL PART OF VERBS In Chapter 12, you realized that you were going to have to memorize the third principal part of all your verbs if you wanted to be able to work with them in all their tense systems. Similarly, now you must go back and memorize the fourth principal parts of your verbs if you want to work with them in the perfect system passive. As with the third principal parts, the formation of the fourth will follow some regular patterns, so the task of memorization will not be as tedious as it at first might seem. FIRST CONJUGATION VERBS The vast majority of first conjugation verbs, as you know, are regular. This means that its principal parts are formed regularly using the first principal part as the stem. The third principal part, as you recall, is just the first principal part + "vi". The fourth principal part also is a regular derivation from the first principal part: it's the first principal part + "t" plus the adjectival endings "-us, -a, -um". So for "laudo", the fourth principal part is "laudatus, -a, -um" (lauda + t + us, -a, -um) which is often abbreviated just as "laudatus" or "laudatum". Here are all the first conjugation verbs you've had up to this chapter. Fill out the principal parts, and double check your work. You can use these lists to review from. II III IV amo _______________ _______________ _______________ cogito _______________ _______________ _______________ conservo _______________ _______________ _______________ do _______________ _______________ datus erro _______________ _______________ _______________ exspecto _______________ _______________ _______________ iuvo _______________ _______________ _______________ laudo _______________ _______________ _______________ libero _______________ _______________ _______________ muto _______________ _______________ _______________ paro _______________ _______________ _______________ servo _______________ _______________ _______________ supero _______________ _______________ _______________ tolero _______________ _______________ _______________ voco _______________ _______________ _______________ (The two exceptions to this regularity of the first conjugation verbs is "do, dare, dedi, datus", and "[ad]iuvo, -iuvare, -iuvi, -iutus". If you look closely, however, you'll see that "do" isn't really a first conjugation verb, since the stem vowel "-a-" is not long.) SECOND CONJUGATION VERBS Although second conjugation verbs are slightly less regular than first conjugation verbs, they do tend to follow a pattern in their formation of the second, third, and fourth principal parts. But because there are occasional irregularities in third second conjugation verbs, the dictionary will list all four principal parts of a second conjugation verb. Often the third principal part of a third conjugation verb is the first principal part + vi", which them becomes simplified from "-evi" to just "-ui". The fourth principal part very often ends "-itus, -a, -um". So for the paradigm verb "moneo", the principal parts are "moneo, monere, monui, monitus". Again, here is the complete list of the second conjugation verbs you've had till now. I've left the principal parts of the regular verbs blank for you to fill in on your own. When a verb lack one of the principal parts, I've left no blank. Some verbs have unusual principal parts, which would involve some explanation. Where verbs have principal parts which are outside our interest here, I've inserted dashes. For now, they don't exist and just memorize the principal parts the verbs do have. audeo _______________ --------------- --------------- debeo _______________ _______________ _______________ deleo _______________ delevi deletus doceo _______________ _______________ doctus habeo _______________ _______________ _______________ moneo _______________ _______________ _______________ moveo _______________ movi motus remaneo _______________ remansi remansus teneo _______________ _______________ tentus terreo _______________ _______________ _______________ timeo _______________ _______________ --------------- valeo _______________ _______________ --------------- video _______________ vidi visus THIRD CONJUGATION VERBS The third conjugation (-i- stem and non -i- stem) displays several different ways of forming third and fourth principal parts. Each verb is best treated individually as if they were irregular, but certain patters are obvious. Additionally, a great many of our English derivations come from the fourth principal part of the original Latin verb. If you keep this in mind as you try to memorize these forms, you'll find they'll stick more readily. ago _______________ _______________ actus capio _______________ _______________ captus coepi coeptus committo _______________ _______________ commissus curro _______________ _______________ cursus dico _______________ _______________ dictus duco _______________ _______________ ductus diligo _______________ _______________ dilectus eicio _______________ _______________ eiectus facio _______________ _______________ factus fugio _______________ _______________ ------- gero _______________ _______________ gestus iacio _______________ _______________ iactus incipio _______________ _______________ inceptus intellego _______________ _______________ -tellectus iungo _______________ _______________ iunctus lego _______________ _______________ lectus mitto _______________ _______________ missus neglego _______________ _______________ neglectus scribo _______________ _______________ scriptus traho _______________ _______________ tractus vinco _______________ _______________ victus vivo _______________ _______________ victus FOURTH CONJUGATION VERBS The fourth conjugation sometimes forms third and fourth principal parts regularly by adding "-vi" to the present stem for the third and by adding "-tus, -a, -um" for the fourth. But there are so many irregularities that fourth conjugation verbs are listed with all four principal parts. Here's your list of all the four conjugation verbs you've had up to Chapter 19. audio _______________ _______________ auditus invenio _______________ _______________ inventus sentio _______________ _______________ sensus venio _______________ _______________ ventus THE INTERROGATIVE PRONOUN Do you remember how Latin asks a question? You've learned that enclitic "-ne" is attached to the end of the first word of the sentence to indicate a question. Latin must do this because the word order is so flexible that no rearrangement of the words will indicate necessarily that a question is coming up. In English, we ask a simple question by inverting the subject of the verb with an auxiliary. The statement "You are walking the dog" becomes a question like this: "Are you walking the dog?" But Latin doesn't have all these handy auxiliary verbs, and besides, since Latin doesn't rely on word order much to tell you the syntax of the words in the sentence, inverting words won't help. So Latin uses the enclitic, and the word the enclitic is attached to is the focus of the question. For example, in the question "Laudatisne filios huius viri?" the point of inquiry is whether you are performing the action of praising. But if we begin the sentence with "the sons" -- "Filiosne huius viri laudatis?" then the focus of the question changes: "Are you praising this man's sons? We can accomplish this effect in English by inflecting our voice when we reach the word that is the point of the question. Now look more closely at each of these questions. Even though each has a different emphasis, all the questions are essentially asking one thing: "If I should turn this question into a statement, would it be true?" That is, the question is about the validity of the predication. The question "Are you praising this man's sons" is asking whether it is true to say "You are praising this man's sons". We call this kind of question a simple question; it ask for no information that is not contained in its structure. Now look at these questions: (1) "Why are you praising this man's sons"? (2) "When are you praising this man's sons"? (3) "How are you praising this man's sons"? Here it is taken for granted that the predication is true -- you are praising this man's sons -- and the questions being asked are not whether you're praising the sons, but why, when, or how? These questions are calling for information that is not contained within the syntax of the question; they are asking for specific kinds of additional information. And the kind of information they're asking for is indicated in the words "why, when, and how". We call words which ask for specific kinds of information "interrogatives". Some more questions with another kind of interrogative: (1) "Who's there?" (2) "What's that?" (3) "Whose mess is this?" (4) "Whom are you accusing?" (5) "What are you trying to say?" In these questions, the predication is taken as true: (1) someone is there; (2) that is something; (3) the mess does belong to someone; (4) you are accusing someone; (5) you are trying to say something. The information the questions are asking for, however, is temporarily replaced with another word, and the hope is that soon the information will be plugged into the spot where its replacement now stands. What do we call a word which takes the place of another word or idea? Right! We call them pronouns, so these words are interrogative (because they're asking questions) and pronouns (because they're replacing other nouns or ideas): "interrogative pronouns". The English interrogative pronouns, as you can see in the examples above, have different cases and even genders. The gender is determined by what is be filled in for, but the case is determined by the way the pronoun is being used in the question. MASCULINE AND FEMININE INANIMATE Nom. who what Gen. whose whose Acc. whom what Do you see any similarity between the interrogative pronouns and the relative pronouns? Of course you do. "Who, whose, and whom" are all forms that can also be used as relative pronouns. Only the interrogative pronoun "what" has no use as an relative pronoun. The Latin interrogative pronoun also resembles the Latin relative pronoun. In the plural, the forms of the interrogative pronoun are identical to those of the relative pronoun. In the singular many of the forms of the interrogative pronouns overlap with those of the relative pronouns, but there are some differences: (1) For one, the forms for the masculine and feminine are the same. Consequently, there are only two forms for the nominative singular: one for the masculine and feminine genders, and one for the neuter. Similarly, there are only two forms for the genitive singular -- one masculine and feminine, and one neuter. And so on for all the cases in the singular. Only two forms. (2) Next, two of the forms are just plain different from those of the relative pronoun. (a) For the masculine and feminine nominative singular, the form is "quis", not "qui" or "quae" as you might expect. (b) You might expect "quod" for neuter nominative and accusative singular, but the form is "quid". (c) For the remaining cases of the masculine/feminine forms, the interrogative pronoun uses the masculine forms of the relative pronoun. Look this description closely over and try to write out the Latin interrogative pronoun (see Wheelock, page 89). MASCULINE AND FEMININE NEUTER Nom. _______________ _______________ Gen. _______________ _______________ Dat. _______________ _______________ Acc. _______________ _______________ Abl. _______________ _______________ MASCULINE FEMININE NEUTER Nom. _______________ _______________ _______________ Gen. _______________ _______________ _______________ Dat. _______________ _______________ _______________ Acc. _______________ _______________ _______________ Abl. _______________ _______________ _______________ Let's look at some examples of how the interrogative pronoun works in Latin. You'll that it has some surprising properties, which the English interrogative pronoun "who, what", etc. doesn't have. "Quis librum tibi dedit?" ("Who gave you the book?") You can tell this sentence is a question, obviously, because it is introduced with the interrogative pronoun and because it ends with a question mark. But the English translation isn't as precise as the Latin. Why not? Look at "quis". It's nominative because it is used as the subject of the verb. But what about its number and gender? It's masculine/feminine in gender and singular in number. That means that the question was formed in such a way as to imply that there was only one person who gave you the book. Now look at the English "who". Can you tell whether the person asking the question expects there to be only one person who gave you the book? No, you can't. So, in Latin, the questioner reveals more about the kind of answer expected because the pronoun reveals more about the possible antecedent. How would we translate these into English: (a) "Qui librum tibi dederunt?" (b) "Quae librum tibi dederunt?" We'd have to translate them both as "Who gave you the book?", but look more closely at the Latin. In (a), the question implies that more than one person gave you the book and that they are either all male or mixed male and female. In (b), those who gave you the book are implied to be plural and all feminine. Look at another example. All of these Latin question can be translated into English as "Whose book did Cicero give you?": "Cuius librum Cicero tibi dedit?" "Quorum librum Cicero tibi dedit?" "Quarum librum Cicero tibi dedit?" The interrogative pronoun in each of these question is in the genitive case because the point of the question is to learn more about the owner(s) of the book. But each question suggests an different kind of answer. Can you spot the different expectations? INTERROGATIVE ADJECTIVE Okay, you know that the interrogative pronoun is a word which takes the place of another noun or idea about which certain information is being sought. Because it asks a question we call it "interrogative"; because it stands in for something else, we call it a "pronoun": "interrogative pronoun". So what is an "interrogative adjective". Start from the beginning. "Interrogative" means that it will be asking a question. "Adjective" means that it will be modifying a noun in the sentence and to modify a noun an adjective must agree with it in number, gender, and case. Putting these two parts together, we come up with this: an "interrogative adjective" is a word which modifies an noun in a way that asks more information about it. How does this work? Look at these English questions: (a) "What child is this?" (b) "Which way did he go?" (c) "For what reason are we doing this?" In each of these questions, more information is being requested about something which is already expressed in the question. Like this. What's the difference between "What is this"? and "What child is this"? In (a), the answer sought is not restricted to anything specified in the sentence itself. But in the second, the potential responder is directed to limit his reply to something in particular; namely, "the child". The same is true with (b) and (c). (B) is not asking whether he's gone, but which way he went; (c) is not asking what we're doing, but for what reason. So English uses the adjective "which or what" to ask for information specific to something already expressed in the sentence. Latin also has interrogative adjectives for this purpose, but because Latin is a fully inflected language, the interrogative adjective has many more forms than its English analogue. After all, the Latin interrogative adjective is going to have to agree with masculine, feminine, or neuter nouns in any one of the ten cases and numbers. You'll be pleased to know, however, that you're not going to have to learn anything new, because the Latin interrogative adjective uses the forms of its relative pronoun. Go ahead and write out the forms of the interrogative adjective to refresh your memory. (Remember, it's exactly the same as the relative pronoun). INTERROGATIVE ADJECTIVE MASCULINE FEMININE NEUTER Nom. _______________ _______________ _______________ Gen. _______________ _______________ _______________ Dat. _______________ _______________ _______________ Acc. _______________ _______________ _______________ Abl. _______________ _______________ _______________ Nom. _______________ _______________ _______________ Gen. _______________ _______________ _______________ Dat. _______________ _______________ _______________ Acc. _______________ _______________ _______________ Abl. _______________ _______________ _______________ Because the interrogative adjective is an adjective, its form is determined entirely by the noun with which it is agreeing in the sentence. Like this: "Quem librum legebatis?" (What (or which) book were you reading?) The interrogative adjective "quem" is singular, accusative, masculine because the noun about which the question is seeking more information is singular, accusative, and masculine. Study these examples: (a) "Quibus feminis libros illos dedistis?" (To which women did you give those books?) (b) "A quo viro admoniti sunt?" (By which (or what) man were they warned?) (c) "A quibus viris admoniti sunt?" (By which (or what) men were they warned?) (d) "A qua femina admoniti sunt?" (By which woman were they warned?) DRILLS Translate the following short sentences. 1. Cui libros dederunt? __________________________________________________ 2. Qui ei libros dederunt? __________________________________________________ 3. A quo libri dati sunt? __________________________________________________ 4. A quibus hi libri lecti erant? __________________________________________________ 5. A quibus discipulis hi libri lecti sunt? __________________________________________________ 6. Quis ab omnibus civibus amatus est? __________________________________________________ 7. Cuius civitatis ille homo erat? __________________________________________________ 8. E qua urbe iste tyrannus venit? __________________________________________________ 9. E quorum urbe iste tyrannus venit? __________________________________________________ 10. Qui vir ab omnibus civibus amatus est? __________________________________________________ 11. Who came from that city? __________________________________________________ 12. Which books did you read? __________________________________________________ 13. To whom were these books given? __________________________________________________ 14. Which students read these books? __________________________________________________ 15. Which citizens loved this man? __________________________________________________ 16. Whose city was loved by that tyrant? __________________________________________________ 17. By whom were those books given to the students? __________________________________________________ 18. By whom was this city loved? __________________________________________________ 19. To which women was the book given? __________________________________________________ 20. To which woman was the book given? __________________________________________________ VOCABULARY PUZZLES senex, senis This word is much more bizarre than Wheelock lets on. You'll see it mainly as a noun, meaning "old man" or "old woman". Don't expect to see it modifying a neuter noun. It'll always be masculine or feminine. Because it's really a third declension adjective, it'll decline like: senex senes senis senium seni senibus senem senes seni senibus novus, -a, -um Like most ancient civilizations, ancient Rome didn't care much for change. So a way of asking "What's wrong"? was "Quid novum est"? 01/08/20