Home
Announcements and Call for Papers
Participants
Abstracts
Program
Lodging
Publication
& Guidelines
What's new?
University of Bologna
program: Tuesday, June 10 | Wednesday, June 11 | Thursday, June 12
Friday, June 13 | Saturday, June 14
back to alphabetical survey:
Wolfgang DE MELO, University of Oxford
Extra-paradigmatic subjunctives in early Latin
This paper discusses extra-paradigmatic subjunctives such as faxis, aduenas and duis from a synchronic and diachronic perspective.
The sigmatic subjunctives of the type faxim / faxis have beside them future indicatives like faxo / faxis. The origin of the forms is unclear - they may go back to desideratives or aorists. Except for the fossilized form faxo (= faciam), the indicative forms have the value of future perfects. Their subjunctive counterparts, on the other hand, are semantically close to present subjunctives, cf. (1):
(1) "Ita di faxint" inquito. - Ita di faciant. (Plaut. Aul. 788f.)
This equivalence leads to a synchronic discrepancy between form and meaning: while the future perfect fecero is formed from the same stem as the perfect subjunctive fecerim, the future perfect faxis has beside it a present subjunctive faxis.
The types aduenas (cf. the Umbrian "aorist" stem in benust = ueneris) and duis go back to modal forms of root aorists. Synchronically, they have the value of present subjunctives, cf. the sequence of tenses in (2):
(2) Hanc metuo male, ne mi ex insidiis uerba imprudenti duit. (Plaut. Aul. 61f.)
The forms are disproportionately frequent in prohibitions and ne-clauses, which is also true of the type faxis and may point to an aoristic rather than a desiderative origin for the latter category as well.
References
- Benveniste, E. 1922. Les futurs et subjonctifs sigmatiques du latin archaique. BSLP 23, 32-63.
- Meiser, G. 1998. Historische Laut- und Formenlehre der lateinischen Sprache. Darmstadt.
The sigmatic subjunctives of the type faxim / faxis have beside them future indicatives like faxo / faxis. The origin of the forms is unclear - they may go back to desideratives or aorists. Except for the fossilized form faxo (= faciam), the indicative forms have the value of future perfects. Their subjunctive counterparts, on the other hand, are semantically close to present subjunctives, cf. (1):
- (1) "Ita di faxint" inquito. - Ita di faciant. (Plaut. Aul. 788f.)
This equivalence leads to a synchronic discrepancy between form and meaning: while the future perfect fecero is formed from the same stem as the perfect subjunctive fecerim, the future perfect faxis has beside it a present subjunctive faxis.
The types aduenas (cf. the Umbrian "aorist" stem in benust = ueneris) and duis go back to modal forms of root aorists. Synchronically, they have the value of present subjunctives, cf. the sequence of tenses in (2):
- (2) Hanc metuo male, ne mi ex insidiis uerba imprudenti duit. (Plaut. Aul. 61f.)
The forms are disproportionately frequent in prohibitions and ne-clauses, which is also true of the type faxis and may point to an aoristic rather than a desiderative origin for the latter category as well.
- References
- Benveniste, E. 1922. Les futurs et subjonctifs sigmatiques du latin archaique. BSLP 23, 32-63.
- Meiser, G. 1998. Historische Laut- und Formenlehre der lateinischen Sprache. Darmstadt.