Given my description below on nested/double predicative participle constructions (e.g., quo mortuo nuntiato) and given the well-known parallelism between so-called “dominant” participle constructions (aka Ab urbe condita-constructions) and Ablative Absolute constructions, the specific question I have is the following one: do you think that a nested dominant participle construction like Ab urbe condita nuntiata could also be possible in Latin with the intended meaning: ‘since the announcement of the foundation of Rome’?
As noted above, some nested or double predicative participle constructions can be found in Classical Latin. In particular, the following one from Cicero really attracted my attention, which involves a wonderful syntactic "nesting" of two Ablative Absolutes, the inner one being quo mortuo and the outer one being something similar to (but, as you'll see immediately, not identical to) HOC (i.e., quo mortuo) nuntiato:
Quo mortuo nuntiato, sella sublata est. (Cic. Fam. 7, 30, 1).
Loeb translation: ‘His death was announced and the chair was removed’ (‘After his death was announced, the chair was removed’).
So I understand that constructions like the following ones could be well-formed in Latin: Cicerone mortuo nuntiato, …. (cf. “Ciceronis morte nuntiata, ….”), Terentia mortua nuntiata,… (cf. “Terentiae morte nuntiata, ….”), and, admittedly, perhaps with some reservation (what do you think?) even the following example: Urbe capta nuntiata, …. (cf. “Urbis expugnatione nuntiata,…”).
Of course, I do not have a native competence in Latin but a construction like Urbe capta nuntiato sounds quite awful to me, although I can acknowledge that, semantically speaking, this construction could be said to be “logical” since what was announced is not a city but the event encoded in the inner Ablative Absolute: Hoc (this event: urbe capta) nuntiato, …). Interestingly, a construction like Urbem captam (esse) nuntiato could also be a valid Ablative Absolute at least in Livy (cf. his well-known example: Cognito vivere Ptolomaeum). Accordingly, constructions like Quem mortuum (esse) nuntiato or Ciceronem mortuum (esse) nuntiato could be both valid examples along with Quo mortuo nuntiato and Cicerone mortuo nuntiato, respectively.
Notice moreover that the abovementioned examples of complex Ablative Absolutes must not be fully collapsed with the ones typically mentioned in the handbooks of Latin syntax (e.g., Cicerone consule creato), where there are two predicates involved as well (consule and creato, the former depending on the latter; cf. Ciceronem consulem creare). Cf. the ill-formed example Ciceronem consulem creato with the well-formed one Ciceronem mortuum nuntiato, which shows that both constructions cannot be collapsed into a single/identical syntactic type.
Another potential example of a nested/double dominant participle construction could be the following one (NB: in this case it is not an Ablative Absolute):
Ante proelium in Thessalia factum cognitum, ... (Caes. Bell. Civ. 3, 100, 4).
This example, unlike Cicero’s one above, can be claimed to be syntactically ambiguous since in this case it is not required that factum be interpreted as a dominant participle, whereby the participle clause in Thessalia factum can in fact be understood as an optional relative clause quod in Thessalia factum est. Basically, this explains the following contrast between the well-formed dominant participle construction Ante proelium cognitum (cf. Ante proelium in Thessalia factum cognitum) and the ill-formed/anomalous Ablative Absolute ??Cicerone nuntiato (cf. ok Cicerone mortuo nuntiato). So I've been unable to verify if a non-ambiguous nested dominant participle construction like Ab urbe condita nuntiata would be grammatical in Classical Latin.