relative tenses of the infinitive (2)

john abshire

Well-Known Member
from my textbook- example 20 in "exercises for chapter 25"
heri audivit (A) eos venire (heri); (B) eos venisse (e.g. pridie, the day before yesterday); (C) eos venturos (paucis diebus).
Yesterday he heared; (A) they were coming (yesterday); (B) that they had come (e.g. the day before yesterday); (C) that they would come (in a few days).
______________________________________________________
1-With a perfect tense main verb, is it possible to have present tense for the infinitive? i.e.; with a perfect tense main verb, the time after the perfect tense is the present tense, but in the example above (taken out of my textbook), the tense after the perfect is future, would come.
2- (pacifica)- i do recognize "future in the past"; with a perfect main verb, the future infinitive is translated would come, instead of will come.
3-With an indirect statement and a perfect main verb, what infinitive do you use to express the present tense? I am guessing it is a modification of the future infinitive?
 

Pacifica

grammaticissima
Staff member
Let me make sure I understand correctly what you're asking about.

Are you asking how to express in Latin something like "He said that grass is green"?
 

Pacifica

grammaticissima
Staff member
You use the present infinitive. So, in Latin, there's no difference between "He said that grass was green" and "He said that grass is green". In both cases, grass is green while the person makes that statement.
 

john abshire

Well-Known Member
You use the present infinitive. So, in Latin, there's no difference between "He said that grass was green" and "He said that grass is green". In both cases, grass is green while the person makes that statement.
This does make sense, if the translation is relative to the person doing the talking, or doing, etc.
example 24-
Negaverunt urbem ab hostibus capi (captum esse).
They denied that the city was being captured by the enemy (had been captured).

-since negaverunt and capi are the same tense (but different voice), then "was being captured" could be "is being captured" correct?
 

Pacifica

grammaticissima
Staff member
-since negaverunt and capi are the same tense (but different voice), then "was being captured" could be "is being captured" correct?
If you were talking about events that were still current, yes.
 

john abshire

Well-Known Member
If you were talking about events that were still current, yes.
what i mean is; relative negaverunt (they denied), capi could be translated "is being captured", or "was being captured"? (and assuming the capturing was still going on, or you don't know if it is or not)
 

Pacifica

grammaticissima
Staff member
Yes, you can say "is being captured" if the capturing is or may still be going on.
 
Top