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 ...
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 ...
I have not been able to find any attested forms of an imperative for velle (see linked question) or cupio (cupi, cupite, cupito, cupitote).
Expanding to other synonyms, though, you quickly find alternatives that preserve the structure (and perhaps strangeness) of your example sentence.
Quid ergo est? Vide quomodo quisque illorum tulerit et, ...
Ave meaning 'hail' is the imperative of aveo, as you mention; when you hail someone you are instructing them to fare well (normally we would say you are wishing them to fare well), in much the same way that in English we can use 'farewell' to say goodbye. 'Hail' works the same way, except that the meaning 'be healthy' is very outdated now.
Consequently, if ...
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 ...
It was vel. From the LSJ:
old imperative of volo properly, "will, choose, take your choice;" "hence."
You cannot use it for your purpose, of course. This is merely its origin, but not its function.* In years of reading everything from Andronicus to Augustine, I've yet to see a real imperative of velle, and no grammar mentions one, either.
*See comments ...
To answer your question, one could choose to interpret it to have an unspoken clause, as per the comments to the first answer. There are indeed ways to express this in Latin: nē (…) quidem [–––] nōn mōdō expresses ‘not even [–––] much less’ or the likes. Examples:
nē suēs quidem id velint, nōn mōdō ipse: not even swine would like that, no less he.
Hmm. My understanding is that the bare subjunctive as a positive request/command is actually rather rare in classical Latin. Woodcock's New Latin Syntax, p. 97, after a discussion of noli, nolite + infinitive as more polite than ne + perfect subjunctive, tells us:
Besides noli, nolite with the infinitive, the following periphrases also are frequently ...
To supplement Tom Cotton's answer—
There's one other verb which similarly shortens its imperative: ferō, ferre, tulī, lātus, imperative fer, ferte. Compounds always use the shortened/apocopated form (adfer/adferte, offer/offerte etc), with *adfere / *adferete, *offere / *offerete etc entirely absent from the PHI corpus.
So these two seem relatively certain:...
Generally, verbs of mixed 3rd/4th conjugation and their compounds (inf. -ere, 1st. pres. sing. in -io) all follow the same pattern, which includes compounds of facio, but not facio itself — which means that effice, etc. are the correct forms. Fac is a peculiarity.
Unlike those of facio, the compounds of dico and duco mainly follow the pattern of the simple ...
Orders in second person are typically expressed with imperative, but orders in third person with conjunctive (=subjunctive).
Second and third person orders look different in English, too.
Compare "jump!" and "may he jump!" or other similar constructions.
There is no "direct third person imperative" in English, but you have to find a circumlocution.
Welcome to the site! I can only think of an emphatic demonstrative pronoun:
Carpe hunce diem!
The emphasis expressed by the long form of the pronoun could be interpreted as enthouasism, although other interpretation would be possible. In context, though, I think the emphatic pronoun, the exclamation mark, and the meaning of the saying together will ...
This has to do with the verbal conjugation system of Proto-Indo-European (PIE), the ancestor language of Latin. The Latin third conjugation is largely descended from so-called "thematic" PIE verbs. Thematic verbs are those which have a vowel, either e or o, between the verb root and the ending; this is known as the "thematic vowel". In this case, the vowel ...
The perfect imperative is effectively extinct in Latin. I have never seen it with a perfect meaning, and in fact did not realize that mementō was based on a perfect stem until fdb pointed it out (though in retrospect the reduplication and perfect endings are a pretty good clue).
The best place to look for evidence would be defective verbs, which might not ...
As Weiss 2009/2011 mentions, word-final –e is “normally retained” (p. 147; emphasis mine – Alex B.). That being said, there are some few cases when word-final –e was lost (or apocopated).
In your question, you ask us specifically about imperatives from compound verbs of dico, duco, and facio. In my answer below I will address this issue only. If you are ...
That case is weird. If you want to build a welfare state, you do not need to want to share, but only to share. Depending on the author, you'd see either an indirect command or hortatory subjunctive urging them to share, or even an if-clause:
If you want to build a welfare state, it is necessary to share.
If you absolutely needed an imperative here, there ...
I would prefer tibi oportet communicare, without using velle: 'it behoves you to share'. Or you could instead use the gerundive of velle (if you accept its existence, which I'm personally a bit doubtful of): Communicare est tibi volendum.
I have not seen the movie, so I am not sure that I fully understand the question, but it seems obvious that this is a variation on a phrase in the requiem liturgy: "Libera me, domine, de morte aeterna". Only with the difference that it is asking not God, but you yourself, to save you. "Libera te tutemet" is acceptable, but neither "de" nor "ex" sounds like ...
First of all, Google Translate is horrible with Latin and should not be trusted at all.
It fails here, too.
I would translate "Ne fiat servus" as "May he not become a slave".
It is a reasonable wish for a third party, but not what you wanted to express.
There is a simple way to say "don't X" in Latin:
just say noli X, where X is an infinitive form of a verb....
The construction noli with infinitive is widely attested in classical Latin, and I have never seen anyone mention that esse or any other word would be ineligible.
Here is an example from Cicero (Pro Murena 9–10):
Nam si tibi
necesse putas etiam adversariis amicorum tuorum de iure
consulentibus respondere, et si turpe existimas te advocato
I suppose in all the dictionaries it appears:
Noli: Imperative present of nolo.
Nolle: Infinitive present of nolo .
Nolo: (...) Noli is used as an imperative in prohibitions (with similar words).
It is necessary to consider that there are "twist idiomatic" in the expressions of:
These forms are usually addressed in the ...
The origin of primum non nocere sheds some lights to its meaning.
Wikipedia gives a somewhat detailed story with reasonable-looking sources.
In short, the idea is ancient but the exact phrasing is quite new.
The Latin phrase primum non nocere seems to have been introduced in the 19th century.
The idea is that it is only the second law of medicine to do good,...
I believe this is due to vowel reduction. Latin vowel reduction is complicated and there seem to be various processes involved; however, a common pattern is vowels turning to /i/.
Syllable and Segment in Latin, by Ranjan Sen (2015), describes a process called "Archaic Latin vowel reduction" whereby short vowels in internal (not initial or final) open ...
If you really want to give a command, use imperative.
If you want to request someone to do something, use conjunctive.
The difference between curre and curras is similar to the difference between "run" and "please run".
What you are looking for is an adverb that means "not even," as "Do not even move!" Various words could fit this description, such as nec, necnon, or ne...quidem. Ne...quidem was the most common form of the three, so I would think that you would use that primarily. Quidem by itself is probably not a good idea, because it most likely was used in the context ...