Cincinnatus was asked to come ....

[Gregorius Textor]

Please check my translations:

15.1 Cincinnatus was asked to come.
Cincinnátus rogátus est veníre.

I believe the classical approach would be to use a jussive noun clause;
however, I'm not sure what tense to use in the jussive clause:
Cincinnātus rogātus est ut veniat.

Incidentally, is this called a jussive noun clause -- although there's
no noun in it! -- because it functions as the object of the verb 'rogo',
and therefore as a noun?

15.2 Marcus seemed (i.e., was seen -- passive of videre) to love Mary.
Marcus visus est amáre Maríam.

15.3 The legend was written.
Fábula scripta est.

16.1 Hannibal was conquered by the Romans.
Hannibal victus est a Romanis.

16.2 But he had conquered the Romans in many battles.
Sed vicerat Romanis in multā pugnā.
OR
Sed vicerat Romanis in multa proelia.

16.3 Hannibal was a brave general.
Hannibal fuit imperator fortis.

-- Exercises from William G. Most, Latin by the Natural Method, First Year (3rd ed., 1964).

 

[Pacifica]

15.1 Cincinnatus was asked to come.
Cincinnátus rogátus est veníre.

I believe the classical approach would be to use a jussive noun clause;
however, I'm not sure what tense to use in the jussive clause:
Cincinnātus rogātus est ut veniat.

Check the sequence of tenses in the ut version.

Incidentally, is this called a jussive noun clause -- although there's
no noun in it! -- because it functions as the object of the verb 'rogo',
and therefore as a noun?

Yes.

15.2 Marcus seemed (i.e., was seen -- passive of videre) to love Mary.
Marcus visus est amáre Maríam.

15.3 The legend was written.
Fábula scripta est.

16.1 Hannibal was conquered by the Romans.
Hannibal victus est a Romanis.

Good.

16.2 But he had conquered the Romans in many battles.
Sed vicerat Romanis in multā pugnā.

Check the case of Romanis and the number of multa pugna.

Note that in isn't necessary though it's not really wrong to have it, either.

OR
Sed vicerat Romanis in multa proelia.

Check the case of both Romanis and multa proelia.

16.3 Hannibal was a brave general.
Hannibal fuit imperator fortis.

Good.

 

[cinefactus]

I believe the classical approach would be to use a jussive noun clause;
however, I'm not sure what tense to use in the jussive clause:
Cincinnātus rogātus est ut veniat.

I was wondering if, "Rogatum est ut Cincinnatus veniat" would work.

 

[Pacifica]

The sequence of tenses is still wrong. If you fix that, it's grammatically correct but of course it means something slightly different because it doesn't state that Cincinnatus was the one directly asked.

 

[cinefactus]

The sequence of tenses is still wrong. If you fix that, it's grammatically correct but of course it means something slightly different because it doesn't state that Cincinnatus was the one directly asked.

Oops...

So how would you express the difference in English?

 

[Pacifica]

Maybe rogatum est etc. could be "a request was made that Cincinnatus should come" or something like that.

 

[Gregorius Textor]

O = Original, C = Pacifica's comment; R = Revised.

15.1

O: Cincinnātus rogātus est ut veniat.

C: check the sequence of tenses.

R: I think since rogātus est is perfect passive, the verb after ut should be imperfect subjective:
Cincinnātus rogātus est ut venīret.

16.2

O: Sed vicerat Romanis in multā pugnā.

C: Check the case of Romanis and the number of multa pugna.

R: Sed vicerat Romanos (in) multīs pugnīs.

Alternately,

O: Sed vicerat Romanis in multa proelia.

C: Check case of Romanis and multa proelia.

R: Sed vicerat Romanos (in) multīs proeliīs.

Thanks very much!

 

[Pacifica]

All good.