Result CLauses a.k.a. Consecutive Clauses

Result CLausesa.k.a. Consecutive Clauses

The basics • ut + subjunctive • distinguishing from purpose clauses • intensifying adverbs or adjectives • translation tips • sequence of tenses

Examples • usque eo male existimat ut hoc palam dictitet • to such an extent does he despise that he openly repeats this... • dictitare: (“keep on saying”) = first conjugation • dictitet = 3rd singular, present subjunctive e

The same in the past(secondary sequence) • usque eo existimabat ut dictitaret • such was his opinion that he repeated... • imperfect main verb ==> secondary sequence • secondary sequence ==> imperfect subjunctive in subordinate clause

Negative Result • “ut non ...” • contrast with purpose clause: “ne...” • tantam spem recepi ut in exilium non eam • I have gathered so much hope that I am not going into exile

Purpose v. result • A purpose clause gives the reason or motivation for an action. • it doesn’t imply that this desired action was achieved • A result clause gives the action that results from a main clause action • it does usually imply that the result happened (but see later) • When positive, both use the connective ut and a subjunctive verb • negative purpose (so that not, lest): ne + subjunctive • negative result: ut non + subjunctive

intensifiers come in the main clause! • They point out for us the verb (i.e. the action) which causes the result (though usually it is the manner of the action that matters) • I was so happy that I cried • He caught so many fish that he had to let some go • I’ve had such a bad day that I’m going straight to bed • He acted in such a way that we had to laugh • God so loved the world that he gave his only son...

Intensifiers • Adverbs • adeo, eo, usque eo, "to such a degree" • ita, "thus", "so" • tam, "so" • totiens, "so often"

Translating results • Good translation depends on... • recognising that “so... that” may express purpose or result in English. You shouldn’t let this remain ambiguous in your translation - we want to see that you know the difference • translating the intensifier (in the main clause), the main verb and the resulting action so that they fit together elegantly. • Occasionally you may need to choose a different structure in English to successfully translate the result relation (especially when there’s no intensifier in the main clause)

Example • haec dixit, ut ego non laetus essem

haec dixit, ut ego non laetus essem • haec dixit, ut ego non laetus essem. • not a purpose clause (ut non, rather than ne) • no intensifier to get the result idea going --> tricky translation • Either add an intensifier • “He said these things in such a way that I was not happy” • Or go for a bigger change: • “He said these things, and as a result I was not happy.”

Mixed sequences • Normal sequence of tenses: • primary main verb ==> present subjunctive • secondary main verb ==> imperfect subjunctive • primary = present, future, future perfect, sometimes perfect • secondary = imperfect, pluperfect, sometimes perfect

So • When I did something in the past • I express its result with the imperfect subjunctive • When I do something in the present • I express its result with the present subjunctive

But • A result involves a temporal relation - it must follow from the main verb (hence “consecutive” clause) • The result of a past action might be occurring now, or might still be the case • So the sequence may be mixed: • past (secondary) tense main verb • present or - often - perfect subjunctive

haec adeo effecit ut ego nunc omnia perdiderim • he so well achieved this that I have now lost everything

natural or actual • There is an important distinction in many languages between actual results, where the result is asserted to have actually happened: • he so loved her that he gave her all his possessions • and natural results, where the main action is deemed sufficient to cause the result, but that result may or may not have actually happened: • he loved her enough to give her all his possessions • (note that English tends to do this with an infinitive)

Latin does not make a strong distinction between these two: most result clauses will just use ut + subjunctive (normal sequence of tenses), and you’ll need to infer from context whether the result is actual or natural • Sometimes, however, when a speaker wants to really emphasize the actuality of a result, she will use the perfect subjunctive, even in secondary sequence

puellam ita amaverat ut eae omnia dederit • he had so loved the girl that he really did give her all his stuff

Future subjunctive • In this week’s reading we see a variant of this usage: • Cicero wants to emphasize the actuality of a primary sequence result (it really happened!) • but that result is still in the future at the time of speaking (“I’m about to...”) • He could still use the present tense, but that would allow his audience to hear it as a natural result - he wants to exclude that • so he uses the future subjunctive (defixurus sim)

relative results • One last point: • when there’s a strong connection between a noun in the result, and a noun in the main clause, “ut” may be replaced by the appropriate relative pronoun. • we’ll still know it’s a result clause (or rather, a relative clause of result), because of... • the subjunctive verb • the intensifier in the main clause (hopefully it’s there!)

adeo fortis erat qui hostes omnes vinceret • “he was so brave that he defeated all his enemies” • adeo fortes erant hostes quos vincere non posset • the enemies were so strong that he couldn’t defeat them • note that we have to choose between translating as a relative clause and translating as a result clause - we can’t do both at the same time. Here it’s best to translate as a result clause

Result CLauses a.k.a. Consecutive Clauses