Domestica cōnfābulātiō
Quō noster Leonardus? — Ad tē ībam. — Istud quidem facis īnsolēns. — Quam ob rem? — Quia jam annus est, quod nōs nōn invīseris.
I’ve found an appropriate meaning of quod in OLD:
(introducing a cl. stating an event from which a period of time is reckoned) That.
iam diu est quod uentri uictum non datis Pl. Am. 302
tertius dies est, quod audiui recitantem Sentium Augurinum Plin. Ep. 4.27.1
sat pol diu est quod intermisimus te Apul. Met. 1.24
Naturally, the indicative is everywhere. (OLD says that the subjunctive occurs only if the clause depends on a subordinate clause.) Yet is there a rule to justify the use of the subjunctive by Erasmus (perhaps on account of the colloquial style), or is it a flaw of the great Latinist?
Any help is appreciated.
Quō noster Leonardus? — Ad tē ībam. — Istud quidem facis īnsolēns. — Quam ob rem? — Quia jam annus est, quod nōs nōn invīseris.
I’ve found an appropriate meaning of quod in OLD:
(introducing a cl. stating an event from which a period of time is reckoned) That.
iam diu est quod uentri uictum non datis Pl. Am. 302
tertius dies est, quod audiui recitantem Sentium Augurinum Plin. Ep. 4.27.1
sat pol diu est quod intermisimus te Apul. Met. 1.24
Naturally, the indicative is everywhere. (OLD says that the subjunctive occurs only if the clause depends on a subordinate clause.) Yet is there a rule to justify the use of the subjunctive by Erasmus (perhaps on account of the colloquial style), or is it a flaw of the great Latinist?
Any help is appreciated.