CHAPTER 25

                "All Infinitives Active and Passive;
                         Indirect Statement"


You've already been working with a couple of infinitive forms of
Latin verbs -- the present infinitive active and passive.  In
this chapter you're going to learn all the remaining infinitives
of a Latin verb: infinitives of the perfect and future tenses,
both active and passive.  Then you'll learn one of the most
common uses of infinitives: their use in indirect statement.

TENSES OF THE INFINITIVE: MORPHOLOGY

Let's set out the formulae for all the infinitives you're going
to study in this chapter, then we'll work with each in more
detail.  Here they are:

                  ACTIVE                          PASSIVE

FUTURE:       fut. act. part.  esse            [supine + iri]
PRESENT:      1st p.p. + re                    1st p.p. + ri
                                               1st p.p. + i
PERFECT:      3rd p.p. + isse                  4th p.p.  esse

FUTURE ACTIVE INFINITIVE

     Do you remember how to form the future active participle?
     You use the fourth principle part + ur + the adjectival
     endings "-us, -a, -um".  (If you're shaky on this, go back
     to Chapter 23 for a reminder.)  The future active infinitive
     is formed by using the future active participle of the verb
     and then uses the infinitive of the verb "esse".  So the
     future active infinitive of the verb "laudo" will be
     "laudaturus (-a, -um) esse".  Translating the future active
     infinitive is a little tricky, however, because we have no
     simple future active infinitive in English.  Two common
     suggestions -- clumsy though they are -- will at least help
     you rough-out the Latin until you can polish up the
     translation: try "to be about to x" or "to be going to x".
     So "laudaturum esse" can be translated "to be about to (or
     to be going to) praise".

FUTURE PASSIVE INFINITIVE

     This infinitive is put in brackets because it's rare in
     Latin and won't come up in your work this year, nor in the
     next most likely.  So we can skip it.  One thing to
     remember, however, is that the future passive infinitive is
     not formed with the future passive participle plus the
     infinitive of the verb "sum".  The future passive participle
     is the gerundive and has the idiomatic sense of obligation:
     "must", "ought", "should", etc.

PRESENT ACTIVE AND PASSIVE INFINITIVES

     These are the infinitives you've been working with all
     along.  No special explanation should be needed.  Remember,
     though, that the passive infinitives of first, second and
     fourth conjugations are formed by adding "-ri" to the stem;
     but the third conjugation deletes the stem vowel and
     replaces it with a single long "-i".

PERFECT ACTIVE INFINITIVE

     The perfect active infinitive is a new form for you: the
     third principal part with the ending "-isse" attached.  The
     literal translation is our English "to have x".  Hence
     "laudavisse" can be translated "to have praised".

PERFECT PASSIVE INFINITIVE

     This infinitive, like the future active infinitive, is made
     up of a participle followed by the infinitive of the verb
     "sum".  The translation for starters is "to have been xed".
     Hence "laudatum esse" may be rendered "to have been
     praised".

DRILLS

Fill in the infinitives for the following paradigm verbs.

1.   amo (1)
                  ACTIVE                          PASSIVE

FUTURE:    ____________________            ____________________

PRESENT:   ____________________            ____________________

PERFECT:   ____________________            ____________________


2.   habeo (2), habui, habitus, -a, -um

                  ACTIVE                          PASSIVE

FUTURE:    ____________________            ____________________

PRESENT:   ____________________            ____________________

PERFECT:   ____________________            ____________________


3.  duco (3), duxi, ductus, -a, -um

                  ACTIVE                          PASSIVE

FUTURE:    ____________________            ____________________

PRESENT:   ____________________            ____________________

PERFECT:   ____________________            ____________________


3 i-stem.   capio (3), cepi, captus, -a, -um

                  ACTIVE                          PASSIVE

FUTURE:    ____________________            ____________________

PRESENT:   ____________________            ____________________

PERFECT:   ____________________            ____________________


4.  audio (4), audivi, auditus, -a, -um

                  ACTIVE                          PASSIVE

FUTURE:    ____________________            ____________________

PRESENT:   ____________________            ____________________

PERFECT:   ____________________            ____________________


THE IDEA OF INDIRECT STATEMENT

So far all the sentences you've been working with in Latin have
been in direct speech.  The difference between direct and
indirect speech is a little difficult to describe completely, but
a couple of examples of each may give you a feel for it.  Here
are some direct statements:

                "She sees her friend".
                "Our times are evil".
                "These things were not known".

In a direct statement, the author cast the thought in a sentence
and addresses it directly to the audience.  In indirect
statement, a thought is treated as the object of a verb, and the
thought is being reported to the audience.  In English we
frequently precede the reported thought, the "indirect
statement", with the conjunction "that",  or we may omit it.

                "I think [that] she sees her friend".
                "He said [that] our times are evil".
                "We heard [that] these things were not known".

If you analyze these sentences, you see that they are complex
sentences (having a main and a subordinate clause).  The verb
which introduces the indirect statement is the main verb, and the
indirect statement, which is treated as an object of the main
verb, is the subordinate clause.

     There are many verbs which can be followed by an indirect
statement, and, naturally enough, they are verbs which conote
some kind of mental activity or speaking or perceiving: verbs
like "to think [that]", "to say [that]", to hear [that]",
"understand [that]", "to suppose [that]"....  In short, there are
dozens of verbs which can introduce indirect statement, and it
would be futile to try to memorize them all outright.  Just use
your common sense.  If a verb is a "head verb" -- if it implies
mental activity or speaking or sensing -- then it can be followed
by indirect statement.

     In English indirect statement, you can see that the form of
the original statement or thought is hardly changed at all when
it is put into indirect statement.  Like this:

     Original Statement:                  "My friends are coming".
  As Indirect Statement:  "I think [that]       my friends are
coming".

     Obviously this is going to require some subsequent
refinement, but in general, and for now, you can see that English
really does very little altering or the original statement when
it is made the object of a "head verb" -- i.e., when it is turned
into an indirect statement.

LATIN: THE ACCUSATIVE-INFINITIVE CONSTRUCTION

In Latin, this is not true.  Latin considerably alters the
original statement when it becomes indirect.  Two things happen:

     (1)   The subject of the original statement, which is in the
           nominative case, is put into the accusative case.
     (2)   The original finite verb (the verb which has person,
           1st, 2nd or 3rd) becomes an infinitive.

The example sentences above would work like this in Latin:

     Original Statement:        "Mei amici veniunt".
  As Indirect Statement:   "Puto meos amicos venire".

We often call this the accusative-infinitive construction,
because the infinitive has a subject which is in the accusative
case.  The literal translation of the second sentence would be "I
think my friends to be coming", and we could make sense of that
if we heard someone say it in English like this.  In fact,
sometimes English can form indirect statement by using this
accusative-infinitive construction.  For example, you'd have no
trouble understanding this: "We think him to be a scoundrel".
The original statement behind this is "He is a scoundrel", which
then becomes "him to be a scoundrel" after the verb which
introduces the thought as an indirect statement.  The differences
is that in English we sometimes have the option which
construction we'll use; but Latin from the period you're studying
had only one construction for indirect statement: the
accusative-infinitive construction.

     There is one more item you need to know before we can pause
and try some exercises.  As you know, because Latin verbs have
personal endings, it's not always necessary to have a subject
pronoun expressed in the sentence.  We simply look at the
personal ending on the verb and insert the correct personal
pronoun in our English translation.  For example:

     Meos amicos laudo.     I am praising my friends.
     Meos amicos laudas.    You are praising my friends.
     Meos amicos laudat.    He is praising my friends.

     Meos amicos laudamus.      We are praising my friends.
     Meos amicos laudatis.      You are praising my friends.
     Meos amicos laudant.   They are praising my friends.

This shouldn't cause you any anxiety.  You've been supplying
personal pronouns for twenty-five chapters, and by now it's
probably second nature for you.  You probably don't even notice
any longer that you're doing it.  The question, though, is how
are we going to make these original direct statements into
indirect statements.  They have no subjects in their original
forms, and you can't just put the verb into the infinitive.
Infinitives have no person, so it would be impossible to tell who
the agent of the action is.

     The solution is really quite simple.  You use the accusative
case of the personal pronoun which is indicated by the original
personal ending on the verb.  What that means is that for
"laudo", for example, you reconstruct the original nominative
form of the personal pronoun -- which would be "ego" -- and then
put it into the accusative case -- which is "me" -- and then put
the original finite verb into the infintive.  The same for the
other persons.  So these sentence in indirect statement would be
this:

     Meos amicos laudo.    -    Dico me meos amicos laudare.
     Meos amicos laudas.   -    Dico te meos amicos laudare.
     Meos amicos laudat.   -    Dico eum meos amicos laudare.

     Meos amicos laudamus.      -    Dico nos meos amicos laudare.
     Meos amicos laudatis.      -    Dico vos meos amicos laudare.
     Meos amicos laudant.       -    Dico eos meos amicos laudare.

     You can see that all indirect statements must have the
subject accusative expressed.  The infinitive, by its nature,
doesn't contain person, so it alone can't tell you its subject.
You must have "me, te, etc" or some accusative-subject expressed
in indirect statement.  Next, how many of you are wondering about
the accusative "meos amicos" in the sentences above?  You may be
wondering how you can tell which accusative is the subject of the
infinitive and which is its object, since Latin word order is
generally very flexible.  That is, what's to keep the first
sentence from meaning: "I say that my friends are praising me".
Here is one place where word order is very important in Latin.
The normal word order in an indirect statement is this:

   Subject-Accusative Direct Object Accusative  Infinitive

           me                amicos meos          laudare

It usually is the case that the first word in the indirect
statement is the subject accusative.  The next accusative, if
there is one, will be the direct object of the verb in the
infinitive.

DRILLS

Change the following direct statements into indirect statements.
Remember: (1) the original subject nominative becomes the subject
accusative; (2) the original finite verb becomes the infinitive;
(3) where there is no subject expressed, you must use the
appropriate pronoun in the accusative case.

Examples:

A.   Veniunt cum amicis tuis.

     Puto eos cum amicis venire.

B.   Veritas sine magno labore inveniri non potest.

     Intellegunt veritatem sine magno labore inveniri non posse.

1.   Illa puella dona multa patri dat.


     Putamus __________________________________________________

2.   Hoc signum ab Caesare dandum est.


     Nuntiat __________________________________________________

3.   Spes novarum rerum mollibus sententiis alitur.


     Scimus __________________________________________________

4.   Vos iuvamus.


     Scitis __________________________________________________

5.   Tyrannus multas copias in mediam urbem ducit.


     Nuntiant __________________________________________________

TENSES OF INFINITIVES: RELATIVE TENSE

Now that you've mastered the basics of the Latin indirect
statement, it's time for some refinement.  Earlier I said that
English generally leaves the form of the direct statement alone
when it becomes and indirect statement.  English often simply
subordinates the original statement to a "head verb" with the
conjunction "that", without changing the original statement at
all.  But this is not always true.  Sometimes we do change the
form of the original statement when it becomes indirect
statement.

     Let's assume that someone says "I am coming", and that you
wish to report what he said to someone else.  You would say, "He
says that he is coming".  Except of the logical change in person,
you haven't changed the form of the original direct statement at
all.  But suppose that he said this yesterday.  That is,
yesterday he said, "I am coming".  To report this statement as
indirect statement, you would say, "He said that he was coming".
Here English lets some of the past tense of the main verb of the
sentence -- "said" -- infect the original direct statement: "am
coming" is changed to "was coming".  He didn't say "I was
coming", rather he said "I am coming".  But because the leading
verb is past tense -- "he said" -- English make the original
statement a past tense, too, although logically it shouldn't
because it distorts what was actually said.  What is worse, it
introduces the possiblility for ambiguity.  What did he really
say?  Did he say "I am coming", or did he really say "I was
coming"?  You can't tell from the sentence "He said that he was
coming".

     Let's change the example slightly.  Suppose he is now
saying, "I will come".  You would report this as "He says that he
will come".  No problem.  But suppose he said "I will come"
yesterday.  You would report his statement as "He said that he
would come".  Once again, you can see that English changes the
form of the original statement when it becomes indirect.  Here,
when a statement referring to the future is reported as a past
event, the original simple future becomes the conditional.  It's
a great big mess.

     In Latin there is none of this nonsense.  First you have to
recognize something about the tenses of the infinitives in Latin:
like the tenses of participles, the tenses of infinitives are not
absolute, but are only relative to the tense of the leading verb
-- the verb which is introducing the indirect statement.  Think
of it this way.  The future tense of a finite verb depicts an
action which has not yet occurred, but a future infinitive
depicts an action which occurs after the action of the leading
verb.  The present tense of a finite verb depicts an action which
is currently going on, but the present infinitive depicts and
action that is going on at the same time as the leading verb.
And finally, the perfect tense (or any of the past tenses) of a
finite verb depicts an action that has already occurred, but the
perfect infinitive depicts an action which occurs before the
leading verb.  To simplify this we say that a present infinitive
shows time contemporaneous, a future infinitive shows time
subsequent, and a perfect infinitive shows time prior.  Let's
look at several examples of this.

1.   Puto eum venire.

     Here the tense of the infinitive in the indirect statement
     is present, so it is showing time contemporaneous with the
     time of the leading verb "puto".  This means that I think
     that he is coming now (while I'm thinking).  We may
     translate the sentence, therefore, "I think that he is
     coming".

2.   Puto eum venturum esse.

     Now the tense of the infinitive is future, showing time
     subsequent to the action of the leading verb.  This means
     that I am thinking now that he will come -- not that he is
     coming but that he will come.  So we can translate the
     sentence "I think that he will come (or that he is going to
     come)".

3.   Puto eum venisse.

     The perfect infinitive shows time prior to the leading verb,
     so at the moment I'm thinking, the action I'm thinking about
     has already occurred.  So the translation is "I think that
     he has come (or that he came)".

4.   Putavi eum venire.

     Since the present infinitive shows time contemporaneous,
     this means that the sentence must be translated "I thought
     that he was coming".  Do you see why?  "Venire" shows time
     contemporaneous with the action of the leading verb, which
     is depicting a past event, so we have to translate the
     sentence into English to show this relationship.  The
     trouble here is not with the Latin.  As you can see, the
     indirect statement "eum venire" doesn't change when we use a
     different tense of the leading verb.  The problem is with
     our English representation of the Latin.

5.   Putavi eum venturum esse.

     How are you going to translate this sentence.  The future
     tense of the infinitive shows time subsequent (after) the
     time of the leading verb, and how do we do that in English?
     We say "I thought that he would come".

6.   Putavi eum venisse.

     The translation is "I thought that he had come".  Can you
     explain why?  This actually can get a little sticky in
     English, because we tend to shy away from the pluperfect
     tense.  We might just as possibly say "I thought that he was
     coming" when we mean that he was coming before I thought
     about it.  In Latin, though, there is no chance for
     ambiguity.   The perfect infinitive "venisse" shows time
     prior to "putavi", and "putavi is already representing a
     past event.  An event before another event in the past is
     represented by the pluperfect tense.  Hence "I thought that
     he had come".

THE REFLEXIVE PRONOUN "SE" IN INDIRECT STATEMENT

You're going to get plenty of chances to work with the indirect
statement and the tenses of the infinitives soon, but there is
one more item in the chapter we have to look at -- although it's
really quite simple.  Consider the following sentence: "He said
that he was a good leader".  Is there anyway you can tell whether
the sentence means "he said that he himself was a good leader",
or "he said that he [somebody else] was good leader"?  You can't.
This is the same problem we saw before with the third person
pronoun: English has no convenient way to distinguish the
reflexive from the non-reflexive third person pronoun.  In Latin,
however, the pronoun "is, ea, id" is always non-reflexive, and
the pronoun "sui, sibi, se, se" is reflexive.  Consequently, "He
said that he [somebody else] was a good leader" is "Dixit eum
ducem bonum esse"; and "He said that he [himself] was a good
leader" is "Dixit se ducem bonum esse".  Remember also that the
reflexive pronoun doesn't show difference in number: "Dixerunt se
bonos ducos esse" is "They said that they [themselves] were good
leaders".

DRILLS

A.   Translate from Latin to English

1.   Putamus omnes bonos viros vitas beatas agere.



_________________________________________________________________
_____

2.   Putamus omnes bonos viros vitas beatas egisse.



_________________________________________________________________
_____

3.   Putamus omnes bonos viros vitas beatas acturos esse.



_________________________________________________________________
_____

4.   Putavimus omnes bonos viros vitas beatas agere.



_________________________________________________________________
_____

5.   Putavimus omnes bonos viros vitas beatas egisse.



_________________________________________________________________
_____

6.   Putavimus omnes bonos viros beatas vitas acturos esse.



_________________________________________________________________
_____

7.   Putabimus omnes bonos viros beatas vitas agere.



_________________________________________________________________
_____

8.   Putabimus omnes bonos viros beatas vitas egisse.



_________________________________________________________________
_____

9.   Putabimus omnes bonos viros beatas vitas acturos esse.



_________________________________________________________________
_____

10.  Putabimus bonum virum vitam beatam acturum esse.



_________________________________________________________________
_____

B.   Translate into Latin


1.   We hear that you (pl.) are coming.



_________________________________________________________________
_____

2.   We heard that you (pl.) were coming.



_________________________________________________________________
_____

3.   We heard that you had come.



_________________________________________________________________
_____

4.   We heard that you would come.



_________________________________________________________________
_____

5.   They think that the letter was written by us.


     ____________________________________________________________
     __________

6.   They think that the letter is being written by us.


     ____________________________________________________________
     __________

7.   They thought that the letter was being written by us.



_________________________________________________________________
_____

8.   They thought that the letter had been written by us.



_________________________________________________________________
_____

9.   They thought that we would write the letter.



_________________________________________________________________
_____

10.  They think that we should write the letter.



_________________________________________________________________
_____


VOCABULARY PUZZLES

hostis, -is (m)      In the singular, it means an enemy -- one
                     person you don't like.  In the plural it
                     means an enemy -- the group of people you
                     don't like -- not a lot of individual
                     enemies.  It means "enemy" in our sense of an
                     enemy of country.

ait, aiunt           "He, she says/ they say". Its first and
                     second persons don't appear in this book, and
                     it's used only in its present tense forms.

spero (1)            "Spero" takes its infinitive in indirect
                     statement in the future tense.  This makes
                     sense, because you generally hope for
                     something that is not now presently the case.
                     "We hope to see our friends" comes over into
                     Latin as "We hope that we will see our
                     friends": "Speramus nos amicos nostros
                     visuros esse".

01/10/93