American Journal of Philology

Purchase of this book includes free trial access to www.million-books.com where you can read more than a million books for free. This is an OCR edition with typos. Excerpt from book: IV.?THE APODOSIS OF THE UNREAL CONDITION IN ORATIO OBLIQUA IN LATIN1. In view of the uncertainty and error existing in almost all our Latin grammars concerning the form of the Apodosis of the Unreal Condition in Oratio Obliqua in Latin, I have undertaken to investigate and to ascertain definitely the usage...
More Description

Purchase of this book includes free trial access to www.million-books.com where you can read more than a million books for free. This is an OCR edition with typos. Excerpt from book: IV.?THE APODOSIS OF THE UNREAL CONDITION IN ORATIO OBLIQUA IN LATIN1. In view of the uncertainty and error existing in almost all our Latin grammars concerning the form of the Apodosis of the Unreal Condition in Oratio Obliqua in Latin, I have undertaken to investigate and to ascertain definitely the usage of classical Latin in this construction; my investigation is complete for the following authors: Cato, Varro, Cicero, Caesar, Sallust, Cornelius Nepos, Livy, Velleius Paterculus, Tacitus, Pliny Minor and Suetonius. The rule is variously given in the different grammars, some of them unqualifiedly?and unqualifiedly wrong, as I shall endeavor to show?that for present time the form -rum esse should be used; some qualify by noting that this construction is very rare, others even go so far as to say that it is doubtful, while some state quite correctly that in Indirect Discourse Present Unreal Conditions are not distinguished in the Apodosis from Past. The most striking fact, however, revealed by an examination of the treatment of this subject in the various grammars is the uniformity with which the rule for the use of -rum esse in Present Condition is supported by the one example from Caesar Bell. 'This paper had its origin in a letter written toward the close of 1898 by Prof. Peters of the University of Va. to Prof. Morgan of Harvard. In his letter Prof. Peters criticised the traditional rule for this form of Apodosis, stating that he believed the example in Caes. B. G. 5, 29 to be unique, and that the Romans ordinarily used the form -rum fuisse in both present and past of the Unreal Condition in O. O. Prof. Morgan kindly proposed the subject to me for investigation, the results of which have been to confirm Prof. Peters in every particular. My work was practically com...