Only in written English, and inserting [ed: bla bla] is one solution.I think that proves my point, frankly.
Benefits of Studying Latin
- Thread starter Akela
- Start date
I don't think it removes it at all -- I really don't know which option you're trying to imply here (no, I'm not just being difficult.)
Clunky.
Yes.
Latin also would have to clunkily express some things English does easily.
If the relative clause is part of the utterance of the reporting speaker under what circumstances would he or she use the pluperfect like that?
I see your reasoning, but colloquial usage is imprecise enough that I think either could come up (at any rate, I think I've heard it used in both circumstances.)
Three have been mentioned so far, none have been addressed.
The 'Latin is better than English because...' argument only works if one selectively ignores any contrary evidence whatsoever (corresponding to metrics that are arbitrary to begin with). By contrast, 'I personally like Latin more than English' takes zero evidence, and it reflects reality much better.
I think we can all agree on that, both ways around.
I agree it's pretty pointless trying to argue that one language is "better" than another, since everyone has a different definition of what they mean by "better" anyway.
Oh yes, I had wanted to ask about this; I wasn't entirely sure whether (in the second example) to use perfect or pluperfect, and I'm still unsure why this works the way it does. If the comment (quod amicus mihi Roma misit) is my own thought, not my friend's, wouldn't it be more logical to use pluperfect since it (the action of sending the wine) occurred before my friend speaking -- and I'm commenting on both from my own perspective?
Either is possible, really, it depends on what's in your mind, whether you're considering the sending from the point of view of the time when your friend said that (He said the wine, which my friend had sent me from Rome, was exquisite), or from the point of view of the time when you're speaking now (He said the wine, which my friend sent me from Rome, was exquisite).
Pluperfect is also an option, I think
edit: yep
edit: yep
Ah, that makes even more sense (and adds a further level of nuance/elegance
). Thanks.
Note though, that whereas when the relative clause is "additional info" on the speaker's part, a similar difference can be made in both English and Latin between sent/misit and had sent/miserat, in the version where the relative clause is part of the reported speech, Latin can only use the pluperfect (because in that case it's necessarily from the point of view of when "he" said that, since they are his words), even though English can still be less precise and say "He said the wine my friend sent me..."Ah, that makes even more sense (and adds a further level of nuance/elegance
I'm confused -- I understand that it has to be the pluperfect in this case due to the rules of sequence of tenses, but I don't entirely follow your reasoning here...
Let's say his original words were something like: "Vinum quod amicus tuus Roma tibi misit optimum est!"
Now, when I'm reporting it, I keep esse in the present tense because that's how indirect discourse works; but misit gets shifted back into the pluperfect...why exactly? Because it's relative to dixit, I'd assumed; if we really were looking at it "from the point of view when "he" said that", wouldn't it stay in perfect tense, not move to pluperfect?
Yes.
Hmm, maybe I didn't choose the right words, but it's hard for me to find others right now... Let's say, maybe, that it's still, of course, from the point of view of the speaker who's now reporting "his" speech, but this speaker is considering the sending from the point of view of the time when "he" talked about it: he's considering it as past relatively to that time (which means pluperfect), and not just as past relatively to now (which would mean perfect, but is impossible in this case because "he" said it then, not now).
Yes, generally cum clauses are used to make up the deficit.