It is rare to find a true (i.e. non-deponent) passive imperative, because the idea of ordering someone to do something is opposed to the idea of having something done to you.
Pinkster, in Oxford Latin Syntax (pg. 164), explains this more clearly:
The grammatical category of 'mood' is one of the means by which the speaker can convey his view of the ...
Yes, a deponent verb can have an accusative object just like non-deponent verbs do.
If I threaten someone with something in Latin, then alicui aliquid minor.
The person (or other entity) being threatened is in dative, but the threat (death, punishment, fine, ...) is in accusative.
Since minari is a deponent verb, the seemingly passive form can be used as if ...
I am not aware of a possibility of passivizing such a structure.
Instead, I suggest two ways around this:
Use a different verb.
Depending on context, perhaps comitare, haerere, or insistere could replace sequi.
With a non-deponent verb you can form passives as usual.
Use a pronoun meaning "someone".
Although aliquis me sequitur might not be ...
I don't know of a good way to distinguish patere from patēre in a corpus search, so I think you have three choices:
Look through the results.
Come up with another search that captures what you are looking for.
Try to think of a contextual word that would remove (most) false positives.
As it happens, all three methods worked for me!
The second result in ...
Indeed, historically deponents are descended from a middle/reflexive voice. In historical usage, though, deponents lost this, and can take a direct object. See e.g.:
With plenty other examples, and even verbs like uti can take an accusative in some situations.
One could argue that the forms themselves make the ...
Before we understand the gerundive of a deponent verb, we need to first understand the particples of deponent verbs.
Participles of Deponent Verbs
Deponent verbs are often described as verbs with "passive forms but active meanings." While this generally holds true, it ignores a crucial extra step: deponents have participles in both voices! (See ...
You are right to note that a form is missing. It should be there, as there is no obvious reason why the passive voice (or, more importantly, deponent verbs) should not have it. But according the best current philological understanding, no such form ever existed or, if it did, no ancient Roman ever put it in writing.
I say the best current understanding, ...
The Lewis & Short entry for miro indicates that it is an “ante-classical form of miror”. Combining the examples in this entry with those found in An Etymological Analysis of Latin Verbs, I have found the following authors who use the active form instead of the deponent:
Varro (d. 27 BC)
Hospes, quid miras nummo curare Serapim?
Aut ambos mira ...
The present stem is persequ-: this can be found by removing -or from the end of the first person active singular persequor. It is a consonant stem, which gets an -e- in present participles: persequens. The same applies to the gerundive: persequendus.
The supine stem is persecut-: this can be found by removing -um from the end of the supine persecutum. The ...
190b. The perfect participle generally has an active sense, but in verbs otherwise deponent it is often passive: as, mercátus, bought; adeptus, gained (or having gained).
As I read it (with the help of some other paper grammars) this means: “Perfect participles of deponent verbs generally have an active sense. However, there are deponent verbs which follow ...
My understanding is that deponent verbs, unlike passive verbs, are conjugated the same way as active verbs for a few non-finite forms/constructions.
Specifically, according to the document "Deponent Verbs" from The Latin Library online, deponent verbs use the same forms as active verbs for the present active participle, the future active participle and the ...
There is no separate vertor; they're the same word. However, it's not truly passive. Verto in the passive can have a middle sense, i.e. where you are the actor doing the action to yourself. The OLD spells it out clearly:
(pass. in middle sense, cf. uersor) To go to and fro, move about (in a place). b (of affairs, etc.) to be involved (in difficulties). ...
In his Corso elementare di lingua latina ("Elementary Latin course", 1844), Vincenzo De Angelis deals with this in Volume 1, p. 191:
Se il verbo indica azione vi sarà il passivo, come amo ed amor... e perciò amans ed amatus-amaturus ed amandus. Ma ove indicasse uno stato intransitivo, nè il verbo vi sarà con questo doppio valore, e forma; nè ...
FWIW, Google attributes the quote to Calvin Coolidge rather than the Emperor Maurice.
Anyway I see a couple of issues with your translation: eius should be a form of the reflexive suus; obliviscor takes genitive; and gens is a hanging nominative (i.e. it isn't acting as subject of the main clause, since memoria is the subject). Fixing these would yield ...
I looked into how Caesar uses past participles and est.
His style is considered good and he does not aim for anything particularly convoluted or poetic, so I think he is a good choice for this question.
I searched for all examples of -tus close to est in a corpus, and found the following:
There are many examples of a past participle and an est (although ...
It is the second option with arbitrata.
For the purposes of agreement, you can think of the participle as an adjective, so that Syra arbitrata est and Syra Romana est have exactly the same form.
The gender agreement holds for all subjects of all numbers in the same way.
For example, uxores arbitratae sunt and mariti arbitrati sunt.
And there is no difference ...
The same happens with all deponent verbs in Latin.
The Latin participle system is defective for a transitive verb like amare:
The gerundive is not really a participle, although it can play roles similar to the present or future passive participle.
I advice against calling ...
Most of the time, deponent verbs in Latin come from the Indo-European middle voice, which had pretty much completely died out by Classical Latin times. But in other Indo-European languages, such as Ancient Greek and Hittite, the middle voice is well-attested: it's a third voice next to active and passive, which usually links the subject back to itself in ...
Thinking about your very interesting question ("That is, do we ever see non-deponent verbs with passive morphology, but able to take accusative direct objects and not able to take ablative agents?"), here is an example that could be argued (at least, claimed!) to satisfy your grammatical conditions:
flava caput nectentur oliva (Verg. Aen. 5, 309)
The verb κεῖμαι isn't a contract verb like θεάομαι or ἡγέομαι (or a 'regular' verb like λύω); it's an athematic verb like τίθημι, δίδωμι, or ἵημι, but deponent. So, the circumflex isn't showing contraction as it is in θεῶμαι and ἡγοῦμαι; it's used simply because the accent is on the penult, the penult is a long syllable, and the ultima is short, per the ...
Another common example that comes to mind is vapulo, -are, which means "to be beaten."
In at least one case cited in L&S from Quintilian's Institutio Oratoria, vapulo can even be paired with an ablative of agent:
. . . testis in reum, rogatus an ab reo fustibus uapulasset, 'innocens', inquit. . . .
These are the textbook examples:
Fio (and its compounds) functions as the passive of facio (and its compounds). It even can take an agent. But it has some passive forms (fieri, factus sum).
Veneo functions as the passive of vendo.
I would argue that iacēre is of this kind.
Morphologically it is fully active, but semantically it can be seen as a passive form of iacĕre.
Lewis and Short describe it as "to be thrown" and hence "to lie".
However, iacēre is not syntactically fully passive:
It is intransitive so it takes no objects, but to my knowledge it cannot take an ...
@brianpck is right, but it's worth adding that in the example quoted, "Sentio, iudices, moderandum mihi esse iam orationi meae fugiendamque vestram satietatem", Cicero had no choice about making "moderandum" impersonal: it has to be impersonal because, in this sense, "moderari" does not take an accusative direct object but ...
The way I see it, there is no middle voice in Latin, but there can certainly be traces of it.
The situation is similar to the dual number.
That said, looking for such traces is interesting.
Here is one candidate worth considering.
Dictionaries tend to list contemplare and contemplari as separate entries.
However, if we analyze them as the same word, ...
I don't think such a constraint exists; your sentence 2 seems well-formed. Here are two similar examples I found by searching for secuto on PHI.
Suetonius, Vita Claudii 16.11:
Notauitque multos, et quosdam inopinantis et ex causa noui generis, quod se
inscio ac sine commeatu Italia excessissent; quendam uero et quod comes regis in prouincia fuisset, ...
I think that the meanings attributed by sumelic to nasciturus and nascendus ("about to be born" and "needing to be born", respectively) are more or less appropriate (NB: the modal meaning "needing" is not present in all gerundives. Rather the "conditio sine qua non" for gerundives seems to be that their argument must be a Patient/Theme). The form nasciturus ...