Et post hunc Varius dixerunt quid essem.

[Demetrius Petrovsky]

Et post hunc Varius dixerunt quid essem.

Why is the imperfect subjunctive used here instead of an accusative and infinitive?

Thanks

 

[Bitmap]

Because it is an indirect question.

That statement doesn't make much sense as is. Could it be that it actually says Vario?

 

[Issacus Divus]

“Nulla fors mihi te, Maecenas, obtulit: optimus Vergilius et post hunc Varius dixerunt quid essem.”

 

[Issacus Divus]

As Bitmap said, it’s a feature of Latin to use the subjunctive for indirect questions. It’s a bit strange at first, as English renders them with the indicative.

 

[Godmy]

Yeah, so accusative-with-infinitive (AcI) creates a so called "semi-clause" where syntactically the whole unit is actually not a clause (often it is some kind of extended object), but semantically it acts exactly like one. While, if you have some connecting word, a word that introduces a clause (=a clause must have a finite verb: non-finite verb means participle or infinitive) then a finite verb will follow (in an appropriate mood). And "quid" is such a word, quid introduces a finite-verb clause.

 

[Pacifica]

To sum it up:

Indirect statements take the accusative and infinitive.

Indirect questions take the subjunctive.

 

[Demetrius Petrovsky]

Thanks, I was confused at first by what an indirect question is. I was thinking indirect questions actually involve a mention of someone asking something.