A subjunctive is practically never negated with οὐ.
The only systematic exception I can find -- and even this is rare -- is in Homer, where the use of the subjunctive is somewhat different from Attic; some subjunctives in Homer are more or less synonymous with future forms, and these are negated with οὐ. But this doesn't happen in Attic. The main uses of ...
In Allen & Greenough p.284; section 449 (Imperative Mood):
"Phyllida mitte mihi, meus est natalis, Iolla; cum faciam vitula pro frugibus, ipse venito" (Ecl. 3.76);
"Send Phyllis to me, it is my birthday, Iollas; when I [shall] sacrifice a heifer for the harvest, come yourself."
Therefore, "mitte" for the present tense ...
Negative future imperatives do indeed exist.
A great many can be found in the laws of twelve tables.
Hominem mortuum in urbe ne sepelito
Do not bury a dead person in the city
Judging by these examples, the syntax is simply ne + future imperative.
I am not sure if memento should be semantically treated as a future imperative.
It is a future ...
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, ...
As Allen & Greenough (§499) points out, one nuance that this participle can express is 'likelihood or 'certaintly.' Sometimes, this certainty is so strong, that it even seems to approach inevitability or 'destiny.' One example that comes immediately to mind is letter 6.16.2 of Pliny, the first of two letters to Tacitus about the eruption of Vesuvius:
In A Grammar of the Latin Language, Karl Gottlob Zumpt says,
But by the combination of the participle future active with the tenses
of esse a really new conjugation is formed denoting an intention to
do something. This intention may arise either from the person's own
will , or from outward circumstances, so that, e. g., scripturus sum
may either mean “I ...
Pretty much never.
LSJ's entry on οὐ mentions οὐ + subjunctive only once:
...with subj[unctive] in fut[ure] sense, only in Ep[ic], “οὐ γάρ τίς με βίῃ γε ἑκὼν ἀέκοντα δίηται” 7.197; “οὐκ ἄν τοι χραίς μῃ κίθαρις” 3.54, cf. 11.387.
To elaborate: the subjunctive mood in Epic can have a meaning closer to the Classical future tense. When this happens, and the ...
I don't believe it is possible. A quick scan of the article in Liddell Scott Jones gave only this:
with subj. in fut. sense, only in Ep., “οὐ γάρ τίς με βίῃ γε ἑκὼν ἀέκοντα δίηται” 7.197; “οὐκ ἄν τοι χραίς μῃ κίθαρις” 3.54, cf. 11.387.
However, θαυμάσῃ is not normally indicative:
ῃ ... is usually given as the proper spelling in the texts of the ...
mementō is formed from the reduplicated perfect stem (IE *me-mn-), not from the present stem (IE *men-). Thus, morphologically it is a perfect imperative, not a future imperative; the latter is always formed from the present stem. The IE imperative ending *-tōd has various different usages in the daughter languages: Greek -τω forms the 3rd sing. present ...
Tenses of the subjunctive
The subjunctive is also known as conjunctive — these two words are synonymous in Latin grammar.
The subjunctive mood has four tenses: present (faciam), imperfect (facerem), perfect (fecerim) and pluperfect (fecissem).
The indicative mood has two more tenses: future and future perfect.
While the subjunctive does not have ...
These terms are presumably intended to refer either to all aorist passives and future passives, or possibly to just the ones with a theta, a.k.a. "first aorist passives" and "first future passives".
Most verbs form their aorist passive and future passive with -θη-, e.g. ἐλύθην, λυθήσομαι. But some form them with just -η-, e.g. ἐφάνην, φανήσομαι. The ...
This is not exactly a sound change, but a substitution: this -am is originally that of the 1sg. subjunctive, which for some reason came to replace the expected -em of the 1sg. fut. There's actually some evidence that Old Latin had the expected ending -em; this is discussed in an article by Churchill 2000 (JSTOR link).
It's not totally obvious why this ...
Main question: they come from the same PIE root.
The verb fīō comes from (the zero-grade of) the PIE root *bhuH-, "to become". This led to a Proto-Italic verb *fui-. In Proto-Italic, the phoneme *f is thought to have been a bilabial fricative, voiceless [ɸ] at the start of a word and voiced [β] everywhere else.
Somewhere around Proto-Italic, this ...
Side question: fīō and faciō seem to be unrelated.
Faciō "to make" comes from the Proto-Italic root *θaki-, probably from PIE *dheh₁ "put" (compare Greek tí-thē-mi, English "do"). I haven't seen a good explanation of the *k, but the *θ seems to be attested in other Italic languages. In Latin, *θ at the start of words later ...
Yes, that is correct. The only tenses/stems that can get θη are the aorist passive and the future passive: the others have passive meaning expressed by the middle voice (this being Greek, there will always be exceptions and idiosyncrasies, but the above is standard).
From what I understand in the comments, where you say 'amabo' is futurum simplex and 'amavero' is futurum exactum, what you are actually asking about is the difference between what most Latin scholars would call the future tense and the future perfect tense. The future tense (amabo, your 'futurum simplex) is simple a verb tense referring to an action that ...
Yes, and in this case "future" means in the future with respect to the main verb. So if you translate sentences like "I said that you would like that steak" or "I am saying that you will like that steak" into Latin, you need the future active infinitive where English has "would like" in one sentence and "will ...
Futurum Simplex (simple future, future imperfect)
The simple future, amābō, is the most common future tense. It refers to something which is going to happen in the future: "I will love". In general, "will" is the best way to translate this into English.
You form the simple future in two different ways:
In the first (amāre) and second (...
Your specific question allows it, so would you be interested in avoiding the construction with a conjugated verb ? If you are, you might consider a few options, some of which are admittedly arcane and maybe not exactly grammatical (because I'm mostly spitballing here):
using a perfect tense in the passive voice plus ellipsis of es/eris (of course, this ...
I will try to add to my answer with a more grammatical explanation if I have time, but for now I can introduce some sample phrases. These examples come from the Lewis & Short entry for donec:
haud desinam, donec perfecero hoc (Ter. Ph. 2, 3, 73)
neque defetiscar usque adeo experirier
donec tibi id quod pollicitus sum ...
Has anybody come across a wish with a future infinitive or something comparable?
It is certainly not easy to come across an example of a future infinitive with the verb volo, since there are other and more common ways to express a desire for the future in Latin.
Nevertheless, the construction you propose is correct, at least in Medieval latin, and here is ...
Such a list of events in sequence gets a bit boring if you use the same structure again and again.
Sometimes this is good for clarity or emphasizing repetition.
There are several structures to express this kind of thing in Latin, and here are some:
A temporal clause: Cum rem primam fecerim, rem secundam faciam. "When I have done the first thing, I will ...
The periphrastic future tenses are often used to convey the subject’s intention at the time of the auxiliary verb.
venturus sum = I intend to come
venturus eram = I was intending to come
But you are right in that is can also be used as equivalent to simple future.
It is all but meaningless to translate a single word. If your teacher does not think so, ask him or her to translate the English word “have” to Latin, or Spanish, or Chinese, or any other language; it is downright impossible. I will explain in a minute why this is especially true of videre, a seemingly innocuous word which actually has a few surprising ...