Cum Clauses, RCC, RCP, and Conditions

Cum clauses + subjunctive describe either: (a) the general circumstance when the main action occurs = “cum circumstantial” (b) the cause of the main action = “cum causal” (c) a circumstance that obstructs or is opposed to the main action = “cum adversative” These are all generally constructed in the same way, but the meanings will vary based on the relationship between the main clause and the cum clause. Use the context to figure out what type of cum clause the Latin contains. When translating one of these subjunctive cum clauses, first identify which of the three types it is, then you will know whether to use: “when…”, “since…”/ “because…”, or “although…” Lastly, you will translate the subjunctive verb as an indicative without the help of auxiliary verbs.

Gives the general situation behind the main action. Typically will be translated as “when ______” Cum hoc fecisset, ad te f ū git. When he had done this, he fled to you. Cum illum hominem esse servum novisset, eum comprehendere non dubitavit When he knew that this man was a servant, he did not hesitate to arrest him. Explains the cause of the main action Typically will be translated with “since” or “because” Cum hoc sciret, potuit eos iuvare. Since he knew this, he was able to help them. Quae cum ita sint, confer te in exsilium. Because these things are this way, go into exile.

Gives a circumstance that impeded or is generally opposed to the main action. Translated as “although” Often has tamen “nevertheless” in main clause Cum hoc sciret, tamen milites misit. Although he knew this, nevertheless he sent troops. Cum Gaium diligeremus, non poteramus eum iuvare. Although we loved Gaius, we could not help him.

cum + indic. = Temporal: “when…” Describes precise time of main action cum + subj. = Circumstantial: “when…” Describes general situation around main action cum + subj. = Causal: “since/because…” Describes cause of main action cum + subj. = Adversative: “although…” Describes obstruction of / opposition to main action Remember that the only way to determine the differences between the various subjunctive cum clauses is to know the relationship between the main clause and the cum clause.

Like an indicative relative clause, the RCC gives more information about the antecedent, but instead of a factual description, it provides information about the general quality of the antecedent, making the antecedent less specific (or more indefinite) As a result, Latin uses a subjunctive verb in the RCC Translate using “would” for the subj. verb and an indefinite phrase for the antecedent, like: “the sort of person who…” “the type who…” “the sort who...” Hic est miles qui hostes delet. Hic est miles qui hostes deleat. Describes the character (not the actions) of the antecedent Although there is no limit to how the RCC can start, here are a few common phrases that begin one: sunt qui (there are people who…) quis est qui (who is there who…) nemo est qui (there is no one who…) Indic. Verb = Rel. Cl. Subj. Verb = RCC

Like the RCC, the RCP is a relative clause that uses a subjunctive verb. Instead of describing general qualities, however, the RCP instead functions as a purpose clause, describing the reason “why” someone completes an action. Like other purpose clauses, translate using an infinitive in English or phrases like “so that” or “in order to” The RCP usually follows a main verb of sending or ordering (or something similar) and the subject of RCP will usually be the direct object or indirect object of the main clause. Caesar miles misit qui hostes deleant. Caesar sent the soldiers to destroy the enemy. - or - Caesar sent the soldiers in order that they destroy the enemy. Note that there is not an effective way to translate the RCP into English using a Relative Pronoun, so it’s best just to translate as you would regularly translate a Purpose Clause.

Purpose Clause: ut / ne + Subjunctive (describes “why?” or “for what reason?”) Result Clause: sign word + ut + Subjunctive (describes the outcome of the main clause) IQ: Main Verb of Question/Speech + Question word + Subj. (Reports a question that was asked indirectly) IC: Main Verb of Command/Speech + ut / ne + Subj. (A substantive clause that is the thing ordered) Fear Clause: Main Verb of Fearing + ne / ut + Subj. (Describes an action/event that is feared) Cum Clause: Cum + Subj. (cf. relationship to main clause) (clauses w/ various relationships to main clause) RCC: (Indefinite Antecedent) Relative Pronoun + Subj. (Describes general qualities of antecedent) RCP: Main Verb of Ordering/Sending + Rel. Pron. + Subj. (Descr. the reason why the antecedent is sent)

Conditional sentences generally have two parts: the “if” clause (called the protasis) and the main or “then” clause (called the apodosis). There are 6 total types of conditional statements in Latin: - 3 use indicative verbs - 3 use subjunctive verbs All conditional statements are, to an extent, hypothetical, but if an indicative verb is used, the condition is more likely to occur. Conditions can occur at three times: present, past, and future. Each of the tenses has one ‘simple/real’ (indicative) condition and one ‘unreal’ (subjunctive) condition. Present: simple, contrary-to-fact Past: simple, contrary-to-fact Future: more vivid, less vivid

Expresses a general fact that is true for the present situation: Si laborat, pecuniam optat. If he works, then he desires money. In Latin and English, this is expressed with present indicatives in both the protasis and apodosis.

Expresses a general fact true in a past situation: Si laboravit, pecuniam optavit. Si laborabat, pecuniam optabat. If he has worked, then he has desired money. – or – If he was working, then he was desiring money. In Latin and English, this is expressed by the perfect or imperfect indicatives in both parts.

Expresses a general fact true in the future. Si laborabit, pecuniam optabit. If he works, he will desire money. In Latin, this is expressed with the future indicative in both parts. ***The English and Latin constructions differ in this condition— English uses a present indicative in the protasis: think of it as “present-future,” whereas Latin uses “future-future” Remember: “If you give a mouse a cookie, he will ask for a glass of milk”

This condition expresses an idea that is untrue in the present time. Si non laboraret, pecuniam optaret. If he were not working, then he would want money. In Latin, this is expressed with imperfect subjunctives in both parts. In English, this is the “were… / would…” condition.

Expresses an idea that is untrue in the past. Si non laboravisset, pecuniam optavisset. If he had not worked, then he would have wanted money. In Latin, this is expressed with the pluperfect subjunctive in both parts. In English, think of this as the “had…/would have…” condition.

Expresses an idea that is unlikely or indefinite in the future. Si laboret, pecuniam non optet. If he should work, he would not want money. In Latin, this is expressed with present subjunctives in both parts. In English, this is the “should-would” condition.

Please note that in real Latin you will often encounter instances in which you have a protasis that indicates one type of condition and an apodosis that indicates another type. Just focus on the type of condition for each clause and translate accordingly. Si laboravisset, pecuniam non optaret. Si laborabat, pecuniam non optabit. Another common trend in Latin is to replace the usual verb of the protasis with an imperative or jussive/hortatory subjunctive — this is especially common in the protases of Fut. Move Vivid Conditions.

If you organize the types of condition by time it refers to (past, present, and future) and level of reality (real and unreal), you can view them all in this handy chart: You should be ready to reproduce this chart for the quiz. Real / SimpleUnreal Present Simple Fact Present = Pres. Indic. Contrary to Fact Present = Impf. Subj. Past Simple Fact Past = Past Indic. Contrary to Fact Past = Plupf. Subj. Future Future More Vivid = Fut. Indic. Future Less Vivid = Pres. Subj.