Constructio ablativi absoluti, quae vocatur, frequenter affirmatur constare ex nomine in casu ablativo et participio, quod cum nomine congruere debeat. Tria autem genera participiorum habet lingua Latina, ut sciunt di hominesque: Primum participium perfecti passivi, deinde participium praesentis activi, postremo participium futuri activi. (Nisi forte sermo est de «participio futuri passivi», quod tamen fas non esse duco.) Primos duos ex quibus nemo negat in ablativo absoluto adhibere licere, sed de tertio genere participiorum, i.e., de participiis futuri activi, hodie volo percontari.
Grammatici non mihi videntur diserte et plane illud genus excludere in constructione ablativi absoluti tractanda; at contra nulla exempla dant. Neque in alio loco ullum inveni exemplum. Itaque rogo: Licetne adhibere participia futuri in ablativo absoluto?
English version:
A so-called ablative absolute is generally said to consist of a noun in the ablative and a participle in agreement with the noun. Latin, however, as everybody knows, has three kinds of participles: The perfect passive participle, the present active participle, and the future active participle. (Unless somebody were to bring up the “future passive participle,” which line of reasoning I do not wish to humour.) The first two everybody agrees may be used in the ablative absolute, but here I want to ask about the third kind, that is, the future active participle.
The grammarians, it seems to me, do not explicitly exclude this kind in their treatments of the ablative absolute, but neither do they give any examples. Nor have I found any examples anywhere else. So my question is: Is it allowed to use future participles in the ablative absolute construction?