Is there a semantic difference between a past participle followed by esse and a passive verb?
Example. Roma destructa est. / Roma destruitur.
Latin Language Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for linguists, teachers, and students wanting to discuss the finer points of the Latin language. It only takes a minute to sign up.Sign up to join this community
The difference is tense. The present tense is destruitur, the perfect tense is destructa est. Is Rome being destroyed or has it been destroyed?
Only active forms are formed from the perfect stem destrux-. The corresponding passive forms (perfect, pluperfect and future perfect tenses) are formed with the passive perfect participle desctructus (in appropriate number and gender) and esse.
In the active the present (destruit) and perfect (destruxit), but in the passive the perfect group of forms looks very different.