Nomenclature

[dlb]

Upon returning to my Latin studies, I have realized that I am remiss in my understanding of an overall picture of the various systems of the tenses.
In reviewing Wheelocks I see:
- Present Infinitive Active (Tense/Mood/Voice)
- Perfect Active System (Tense/Voice)
- Future and Imperfect Indicative (Tense/Mood)
- Perfect Active System (Tense/Mood)
- Perfect Passive System (Tense/Voice)
- Perfect and Pluperfect Subjunctive (Tense/Mood)

I guess what I am looking for is a consistent pattern of how to name the systems in Latin.
I would appreciate any help.
Thanks,
dlb
.

[Carolus Raeticus]

Salve dlb,

I do not quite understand what you are looking for. If it is translations for the grammatical terms you seek, then these are the ones used in Oerberg's Lingua Latina Per Se Illustrata:

• Modi verborum: (modus) indicativus (lego), imperativus (lege), optativus (utinam legerem), coniunctivus (cum legam), infinitivus (legere).
• Genera verborum: (genus) activum, passivum, neutrum; (verba) deponentia.
• Numeri verborum: (numerus) singularis (lego), pluralis (legimus).
• Tempora verborum: (tempus) praesens (lego), praeteritum (legi), futurum (legam).
• Tempora in declinatione verborum: (tempus) praesens (lego), praeteritum imperfectum (legebam), praeteritum perfectum (legi), praeteritum plusquamperfectum (legeram), futurum (legam). Strangely enough, Oerberg lists only 5 tenses in the dialogue section Ars Grammatica, whereas in the Appendix he gives a sixth one: (tempus) futurum perfectum.
• Personae verborum: persona prima (lego), secunda (legis), tertia (legit).

By the way, should you look for a quick reference to get back into Latin, I can recommend the Compendium of Latin Grammar, compiled by Andrew Csontos.

Vale,

Carolus Raeticus

[Barry Hofstetter]

Upon returning to my Latin studies, I have realized that I am remiss in my understanding of an overall picture of the various systems of the tenses.
In reviewing Wheelocks I see:
- Present Infinitive Active (Tense/Mood/Voice)
- Perfect Active System (Tense/Voice)
- Future and Imperfect Indicative (Tense/Mood)
- Perfect Active System (Tense/Mood)
- Perfect Passive System (Tense/Voice)
- Perfect and Pluperfect Subjunctive (Tense/Mood)

I guess what I am looking for is a consistent pattern of how to name the systems in Latin.
I would appreciate any help.
Thanks,
dlb
.

Very good that you are getting back to your Latin, welcome home! I agree with Caerolus that I'm not sure precisely what you are asking (and nice link to Csontos, Caerole). However, to respond to what I think you might be asking, the traditional breakdown is the present vs. the perfect systems, based on the principal parts of the verbs. The present system includes the present, the imperfect and the future, and are called the present system because they are all formed from the present stem, by "cutting off" the -re from the infinitive and then attaching the personal endings and tense markers. The perfect system consists of the perfect, pluperfect and future perfect tenses and uses as its stem for the active the third principal part (actually of course the 1st person singular perfect active indicative), cutting of the -i and then adding the appropriate endings for each of the tenses. This same formula works well for the present system passive, but for the perfect system passive requires the 4th principal part of the verb. The formations for the subjunctive are parallel (present stem for the present and imperfect subjunctives, perfect stem and 4th principal part for the perfect and pluperfect). That gives an overall organization for the verbal system which helps to fit everything together once you get your paradigms under control.

Of course, what I've given is a pretty oversimplified way of looking at the verbal system, but one that tends to be very helpful for the beginning student to get the big picture.

[dlb]

Sorry for the confusion folks.
This may be a better question: Why are not all verb systems addressed in the order of
Tense, Voice, Mood?
Maybe they are, or are addressed by some combination of the 3, but I just am missing it.

[Barry Hofstetter]

Sorry for the confusion folks.
This may be a better question: Why are not all verb systems addressed in the order of
Tense, Voice, Mood?
Maybe they are, or are addressed by some combination of the 3, but I just am missing it.

Are you talking about parsing the verb? Usually students will do something like this when asked to parse:

ducet 3rd singular future active indicative fr. duco

Most beginning textbooks teach the indicative first, and the tenses, often in the traditional order of present, imperfect, future, perfect pluperfect and future perfect. The imperative usually gets a single chapter or even paragraph, and the subjunctive usually follows the indicative in didactic progression. Infinitives are usually addressed fairly early on (at least present active infinitives, since they are the second principal part and important for determining the present stem), and participles at a later stage.

Some textbooks use different methods and orders of presentation, particularly texts which use a more inductive approach. CI and TPRS emphasis tends to save grammar per se to a much later stage in language acquisition.

Is that getting closer to answering your question?

[dlb]

Barry Hofstetter: Yes.
I did some research last evening in the few Latin books which I have and found the following:

- Bennett starts with Voice then Mood then Tense (section 101)
- D'Ooge starts with Tense then Voice then Mood (lesson XIX, XX)
- Janson ('A Natural History of Latin') does not even mention Voice in his tables (12a - 13). He list the verbs by Tense then Mood.
- Then there is Wheelocks who appears to emphasize Tense first.
What I gather from this is that verbs are presented in an order which the author feels is best understood by his audience. I prefer to learn them in the order of Tense, Mood, Voice which to me makes more logical sense.
In retrospect I may be making a mountain out of a mole hill and I really don't mean to. I need to understand the big picture first then fill in the details and this has been a stumbling block for me for a while.