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
Suetonius, Caius (Caligula) 58:
...alii Sabinum summota per conscios centuriones turba signum more militiae petisse et Caio "lovem" dante Chaeream exclamasse: "accipe ratum" respicientique maxillam ictu discidisse.
The present participle, respicienti(que), is it linked to the ablative absolute Caio dante—with Caligula giving; continuing—with Caligula looking up; if so, respicienti would require the case-ending "e", not "i"?
As Sumelic says, both -i and -e can be used as the ablative ending of a participle. Even so, mixing them in the same sentence would probably be unusual.
Respicienti is really a dative here; the new a.c.i. (discidisse) has a different construction from the previous one (exclamasse with an ablative absolute Caio dante). The new construction is like Chaerea [Gaio] respicienti maxillam discidit: "Chaerea split (for) him his jaw when he looked back". The archetype is alicui maxillam discindere: to split the jaw for someone = to split someone's jaw.
Cf. Suetonius, De Vita Caesarum Aug. 67.2.4:
Thallo a manu, quod pro epistula prodita denarios quingentos accepisset, crura ei fregit; ...
"He broke his (Thallus's) legs", with dative ei.
