Pinkster, Harm (1942-) [1990], Latin Syntax and Semantics [info], xii, 320 p.: ill.; 24 cm. [word count] [Pinkster].

Next Sub2Sect

7.1.1 Working definition of the notion `complex sentence'

In the preceding chapters, examples have been given, without any further explanation, of subordinate clauses functioning as arguments or satellites within predications. In this chapter we will discuss such clauses in more detail. By way of introduction, I repeat a number of the examples already given above:

(1) Caesar cohortatur suos, ne animo deficiant (Caes. Civ. 2.43.1)

(2) me a portu praemisit, ut haec nuntiem uxori suae (Pl. Am. 195)

(3) (Romani) ex loco superiore … strage ac ruina fudere Gallos, ut nunquam postea nec pars nec universi temptaverint tale pugnae genus (Liv. 5.43.3)

(In (1) the italicized part of the sentence is an argument with the syntactic function Complement. In (2) the italicized part of the sentence is a satellite, with the function (Purpose) Adjunct. In (3) the italicized part of the sentence is a satellite as well, with the function (Result) Adjunct. Subordinate clauses with the function Disjunct may be found in crosssection 4.1.3–7 on pp. 34–7. Besides the predicate and its arguments, these clauses may in their turn contain satellites (e.g. numquam postea in (3)). In other words, a subordinate clause constitutes a predication which forms part of – is embedded in – the main (or matrix) predication.

Besides occurring as argument or satellite with their own function within a main predication, embedded predications may, as we have seen in chapter 6, also occur on the NP level. Examples are (4) and (5):

(4) cum … nuntium accepissem te mihi quaestorem obtigisse (`When I had received word that you had been assigned to me as quaestor', Cic. Fam. 2.19.1)

(5) hostes qui fugiunt non sunt timendi (`Enemies who flee need not be feared', see K.–St. II. 279)

-- 100 --

In (4) we find a so-called Accusative and Infinitive construction (AcI) which further specifies the content of nuntius (see p. 78). In (5) we see a relative clause in the function Attribute with hostes.

In this chapter we understand by `complex sentences' only those instances in which we find an embedded predication functioning as an argument or as a satellite with the main predicate. [1] Embedded predications may take the form of clauses introduced by a subordinator (e.g. ne, ut), but also that of an AcI, gerund, supine, infinitive, etc.

The grammars (Sz. XI; K.–St. II. 5) also treat as complex sentences cases like (6):

(6) ego hanc amo et haec me amat (`I love her and she loves me', Pl. As. 631)

In (6) the coordinator (so-called `coordinating conjunction') et connects two predications in one sentence. This instance differs from examples (1)–(3), however, in that here one predication is not embedded in the other as an argument or satellite. The grammars call (6) an instance of parataxis (`coordination', `Beiordnung') and (1)–(3) instances of hypotaxis (`subordination', `Unterordnung'). [2] To distinguish particles such as ne in (1) and ut in (2) and (3) from et, sed and other coordinators, they will be called `subordinators' (`subordinating conjunctions'). I will return to parataxis in chapter 12.

Next Sub2Sect


Pinkster, Harm (1942-) [1990], Latin Syntax and Semantics [info], xii, 320 p.: ill.; 24 cm. [word count] [Pinkster].
Powered by PhiloLogic