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

Next SubSect

7.3. Embedded predications functioning as satellites

This section deals with embedded predications functioning as satellites.

-- 116 --

Among these are what the grammars call `adverbial subordinate clauses'. A number of these are formally identical with the constructions we have seen in crosssection 7.2. This formal similarity is the reason why many scholars assumed and, in fact, still assume, a historical relationship between the occurrence of embedded predications as arguments and as satellites (see crosssection 7.6.). In crosssection 7.3.1 I discuss satellites in the function Adjunct, in crosssection 7.3.2 satellites in the function Disjunct. In a final section ( crosssection 7.3.3) I address the question of how subordinate clauses such as that introduced by ubi in (45) are to be described:

(45) exsilium ibi esse putat, ubi virtuti non sit locus (`He thinks that exile is there, where there is no room for virtue', Cic. Mil. 101)

7.3.1 Satellites in the function Adjunct

In this section, as in crosssection 3.3. (pp. 28 ff.), I treat the satellites according to the semantic functions they fulfil. The enumeration of semantic functions does not pretend to be exhaustive.

(i) Manner

Manner clauses introduced by ut, quemadmodum (`just as') are left out of account. K.–St. (I. 752) discuss the use of gerund and gerundive as Manner Adjunct. An example is (46):

(46) qui partis honoribus eosdem in foro gessi labores quos petendis (`I, who have made the same efforts on the forum after having held all offices as when I was striving for those offices', Cic. Phil. 6.17)

It is difficult to analyse instances of this kind: in this particular case I would be more inclined to speak of a Time Position Adjunct. [22]

(ii) Instrument

(47) pultando … confregi fores (`I have forced the doors by battering at them', Pl. Mos. 456)

(48) quae ipse in meis fundis colendo animadverti (`Which I have noticed myself on my estates by cultivating them', Var. R. 1.1.11)

K.–St. mention (48), together with three other cases, as an example of the `causal' use of the gerund(ive). I, however, treat (48) as equivalent to (47), as an Instrument Adjunct. The difference between the two instances is that (47) in all likelihood involves intention, whereas (48) does not. See also (viii) below. [23]

(iii) Degree

Subordinate clauses expressing Degree are as a rule introduced by quantopere, quam and the like (`how much').

-- 117 --

(iv) Position in time

Apart from clauses introduced by subordinators such as postquam (`after'), cum (`when'), quotiens (`whenever'), of which no examples are given here, we also find the gerund(ive) construction:

(49) quod … in redeundo … auspicari esset oblitus (`Because on his return he had forgotten to study the omens', Cic. N. D. 2.11)

For examples see K.–St. I. 753.

(v) Duration

Clauses with this function are as a rule introduced by subordinators such as quamdiu and dum (`as long as').

(vi) Position in space

For clauses introduced by ubi (`where'), unde (`whence'), qua (`along what route'), quo (`whereto') and the like, see crosssection 7.3.3.

(vii) Accompanying circumstances

(50) Bellum Gallicum … C. Caesare imperatore gestum est (`A war was fought in Gaul under the command of C. C.', Cic. Prov. 32)

(51) qui tranquillo mari gubernare se negent posse (`Who say they cannot sail on a calm sea', Cic. Rep. 1.11)

(52) (Cethegus) recitatis litteris … repente conticuit (`After I had read the letter aloud, C. was suddenly silent', Cic. Catil. 3.10)

(53) concursus est ad Templum Concordiae factus senatum illuc vocante Metello consule (`There was a run on the temple of Concordia when the consul M. convened the senate there', Cic. Dom. 11)

In chapter 3 (p. 29) no definition is given of the semantic function `Accompanying Circumstances'. As for the instances given above, one might say that in comparison with the other semantic functions the function `Accompanying Circumstances' is a kind of residual function, which indicates less explicitly than the other functions that the main predication was realized in the light of what is expressed in the embedded predication.

In the four instances cited here both the states of affairs and the entities (persons) involved in main and embedded predication are different, just as in the example on p. 29 assensu omnium refers to an action performed by persons not involved in the main predication. (N. B. nevertheless identity of the Agent is often presupposed: in urbe capta hostes abeunt (`after taking the city the enemies go away') the hostes are of course meant to be understood as those who have taken the city.) I assume that the ablative absolute construction, with which we are dealing here, is in reality nothing else than a Dominant

-- 118 --

participle construction functioning as a satellite with regard to the remainder of the predication (see crosssection 7.4.7. on p. 132 ff.).

(viii) Motive

In the grammars the notions `Cause', `Motive' and `Purpose' are often used without being clearly distinguished. Up to now I have used `Cause' for the non-human, most often inanimate entity responsible for a certain state of affairs. In traditional grammars also `Cause' is used as a label for this type of entity. I use the term `Motive' (German: `Graund') for the considerations which induce someone to do something, where, again, Cause is being used by other linguists. The difference between Cause and Motive can be made clear with the aid of the English paraphrases `due to' and `because of'. I reserve the term `Purpose' for that which someone intends his actions to accomplish. In some cases the reason why someone does something is at the same time that which he wants to accomplish. The main difference seems to be that `Purpose' refers to possible, future, situations, and `Motive' to real, past or present situations (see below). In specific contexts it may be difficult to decide whether one is dealing with Purpose or Motive.

The most common form of Motive Adjuncts is a clause introduced by one of the subordinators quod, quia, quoniam, cum. As correlating adverbs we find propterea, idcirco, ideo. [24] An example of a subordinate clause introduced by a subordinator (quoniam) is (54):

(54) sane gaudeo quod te interpellavi quoniam quidem tam praeclarum mihi dedisti iudicii tui testimonium (`I am very glad that I have interrupted your speech, because you have given me such splended proof of your appreciation', Cic. Leg. 3.1)

Embedded predications in function Motive Adjunct are also found in the form of preposition phrases (ob, propter, de (`on account of') + Dominant participle). An example of a Dominant participle construction introduced by a preposition is (55). Further examples may be found in K.–St. (I.767).

(55) qui ob eam (amicitiam) summa fide, constantia iustitiaque servatam maximam gloriam ceperit (`Who by the very faithful, constant and just preservation of friendship has achieved the greatest fame', Cic. Amic. 25)

We also find constructions of ob, etc. + gerund(ive) construction as Purpose satellites. And example is (56):

(56) existumans Iugurtham ob suos tutandos in manus venturum (`Thinking that I. would open combat in order to protect his subjects', Sal. Jug. 89.2)

Unlike the embedded predication in (55), the embedded predication in (56) does not refer to a state of affairs which has actually obtained (which, in other words, is factive, see p. 79), but to a state of affairs which is intended and will

-- 119 --

possibly obtain. Ob, propter, etc., therefore, occur with two constructions: the `factive' Dominant participle (Motive) and the `non-factive' gerund(ive) (Purpose). In (ix) on Purpose we will see that causa and gratia occur almost exclusively with the gerund(ive).

Just now it was remarked that Purpose and Motive seem to differ in that Purpose refers to states of affairs which do not yet obtain and of which it is not certain that they will obtain. Besides this difference, there are also similarities. Just now, we saw that a number of prepositions is used for both types of Adjunct. Both types of Adjunct may occur as the answer to the question cur? (`Why?'). Moreover, the two types of Adjunct occur in coordination (e.g. Cic. Att. 3.4). [25]

(ix) Purpose

As Purpose Adjuncts we find several constructions. The most common constructions are:

(a) ad + gerund(ive) construction (see K.–St. I.749 ff.); [26]

(b) causa/gratia (`on account of') + gerund(ive);

(c) subordinate clauses introduced by ut (`in order that'; negation ne), quo, qui (see K.–St. II. 232 ff.). Correlating expressions are e.g. idcirco, ideo (`therefore'), eo consilio (`with this intention') and ea condicione (`on this condition'), etc;

(d) supine in -um (see K.–St. I.721 ff.).

(57) legum … idcirco … servi sumus, ut liberi esse possimus (`We are slaves of the law, in order that we can be free', Cic. Clu. 146)

(58) subacto mihi ingenio opus est, ut agro non semel arato, sed novato et iterato, quo meliores fetus possit et grandiores edere (`I need a somewhat developed talent, like a field that has not been ploughed only once, but several times, in order that it may produce better and more copious crops', Cic. de Orat. 2.131)

(59) cum ad vim faciendam quidam armati venissent (`When certain men had come armed in order to commit acts of violence', Cic. Inv. 2.59)

(60) etsi admonitum venimus te, non flagitatum (`Though we come to give you a reminder, not to insist', Cic. de Orat. 3.17)

Besides these more or less common constructions we also find:

(e) infinitive, particularly in poetry and prose from Livy onwards, with predicates of a number of semantic classes (see K.–St. I.680 ff.)

(f) the dative of the gerund(ive) (see K.–St. I.749).

Examples of these constructions are:

-- 120 --

(61) illa … abiit aedem visere Minervae (`She left in order to visit the temple of Minerva', Pl. Bac. 900–1

(62) (Ganymedes) Iovi bibere ministraret (`G. served I. something to drink', Cic. Tusc. 1.65) [27]

(63) serviendae servituti ego servos instruxi mihi, hospes, non qui mi imperarent (`I have trained my slaves to serve me, my friend, not to give me orders', Pl. Mil. 745–6)

Further examples of a pre- and postposition phrase are (64) and (65), respectively:

(64) ad dicendum si quis acuat … iuventutem (`If someone were to train young people to become orators', Cic. Orat. 142)

(65) (filiam) necavere, seu ut vi capta potius arx videretur, seu prodendi exempli causa ne … (`They killed the daughter, either in order to make the citadel seem to have been taken by force, or to set an example', Liv. 1.11.7)

As was already remarked under (viii) above, causa and gratia frequently occur with the gerund(ive) construction but not with the Dominant participle construction, and may, therefore, be regarded as unequivocal markers of embedded predications with the semantic function Purpose. [28]

In crosssection 4.1.4 on p. 34 I have treated ostensible Purpose satellites which are to be described as Disjuncts. They indicate the intention of the speaker with his statement. A different kind of Purpose satellite is found in:

(66) Decii corpus ne eo die inveniretur, nox quaerentes oppressit (`The body of Decius could not be found that day, for night overtook the searchers', Liv. 8.10.10) 28a

(67) inde L. Genucio et Q. Servilio consulibus et ab seditione et a bello quietis rebus ne quando a metu ac periculis vacarent, pestilentia ingens orta (`Then during the consulate of L.G. and Q.S., when the situation was quiet and free from revolts and war, an enormous pestilence broke out, lest they ever be deprived of fear or dangers', Liv. 7.1.7)

For - rare - examples see K.–St. (II. 251, A.4). Utterances of this kind do not express the intention of an argument of the main predication, as in the case of the real Purpose satellites cited above, but with hindsight the speaker postulates a relationship of intentionality between main predication and embedded predication, suggesting an intervention by higher powers. [29]

(x) Result

(68) si quando non pluet ut terra sitiat (`If at some point it will not rain, so that, as a result, the ground becomes thirsty', Cato Agr. 151.4)

-- 121 --

Subordinator: ut (non) (`so that (not)').

Correlating expressions: ita, sic, adeo, usque eo (`so much'), etc.

For examples see K.–St. II. 247 ff. [30]

(xi) Condition

(69) si Fabius oriente Canicula natus est, Fabius in mari non morietur (`If F. was born while the dog-star was rising, F. will not die at sea', Cic. Fat. 12)

(70) si venisses ad exercitum, a tribunis militaribus visus esses (`If you had come to the army, you would have been seen by the army tribunes', Cic. Inv. 1.87)

Subordinator: si (`if').

Correlating expressions: sic, ita (`so'), ea lege (`on that condition'), idcirco (`therefore').

For examples see K.–St. II. 387 ff. [31]

7.3.2 Embedded predications as satellites in the function Disjunct

Instances of such satellites we have seen in chapter 4 (pseudo-Purpose satellites ( crosssection 4.1.4., on p. 34), pseudo-Conditions ( crosssection 4.1.5., on p. 35), pseudo-Cause satellites ( crosssection 4.1.6., on p. 36), limitation of validity ( crosssection 4.1.7., on p. 36)).

7.3.3 Clauses with or without a correlating adverb

In crosssection 6.5.1. (on p. 90) we briefly touched upon the difficulty of the description of the relation between a relative clause and a correlating pronoun such as is. The same difficulty arises in describing the relation between the ubi-clause in (45) and ibi in the main sentence.

(45) exsilium ibi esse putat, ubi virtuti non sit locus (`He thinks that exile is there, where there is no room for virtue', Cic. Mil. 101)

Just as in the case of relative clauses, there are clear instances in which the subordinate clause is Attribute ((71)) or independently functions as a satellite within the sentence ((72)):

(71) homines tenues … adeunt ad ea loca, quae numquam antea viderunt, ubi neque noti esse eis quo venerunt … possunt (`Poor people go to places which they have never seen before, where they cannot be known to those to whom they have come', Cic. Ver. 5.167)

(72) ut mulier … nihil putaret agi callide posse ubi non adesset Aebutius (`So that the woman thought that no clever deals were possible while A. was absent', Cic. Caec. 13)

-- 122 --

In (71) the ubi-clause can be seen as Attribute with ea loca in the main sentence, as also the preceding relative clause quae … viderunt is an Attribute with ea loca. In the subordinate clause ubi is a relative adverb [32] in the function Place Adjunct. Similarly, quae is Object in the relative clause in this example (see p. 82). In the subordinate clause in (72) ubi is also a relative adverb in the function Place Adjunct. The subordinate clause as a whole functions as a Place Adjunct within the main sentence. In a similar way, relative clauses may have an independent function within the sentence (see crosssection 6.5.1. on p. 90). The grammars tend to reconstruct independent subordinate clauses with a relative pronoun or adverb into clauses with an explicit antecedent. (72) would, for instance, be equated with (72a):

(72a) ut mulier nihil putaret agi callide posse ibi, ubi non adesset Aebutius

In a case like (72) the grammars speak of ubi `with implied antecedent'. Also, they usually equate the relation between the ubi-clause and the preceding ibi in (45) with the relation between the ubi-clause and ea loca in (71), which is modified by the subordinate clause. However, just as Attributes with is do not mean very much to us (is bonus (`the good he') does not exist), Attributes with ibi do not seem very plausible either.

The function of a number of subordinators within the subordinate clause is less easy to determine, e.g. si. Also, for si there are no clear correlating adverbs, as there are for example, for ubi.

Previous SubSect

Next SubSect

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