|
Post by Pacifica on Apr 25, 2023 12:22:05 GMT
Quid est sapientia? Semper idem velle atque idem nolle. Licet illam exceptiunculam non adicias, ut rectum sit quod velis; non potest enim cuiquam idem semper placere nisi rectum.
—Seneca.
Do you guys think ut rectum sit quod velis can be called an indirect command? It feels a bit like it, but then again it also feels a bit like a proviso clause (which itself is, let's face it, a bit of a command or wish in the first place...). I'm not sure what the most accurate label is. I usually wouldn't give a damn, but I need this for work.
|
|
|
Post by Pacifica on Apr 25, 2023 12:34:44 GMT
"Proviso clause" is probably the more precise term...
|
|
|
Post by Bitmap on Apr 25, 2023 12:54:47 GMT
It would be called an ut explicativum in German ... or an explicative ut clause.
|
|
|
Post by Pacifica on Apr 25, 2023 13:22:14 GMT
That makes sense. I guess it's an explicative clause with a command/proviso-like shade of meaning.
|
|
|
Post by Bitmap on Apr 25, 2023 16:20:02 GMT
I have to admit that I haven't heard the term "proviso clause" before. Grammatically speaking, it is an ut explicativum which gives a closer definition for illam exceptiunculam. Such clauses fall under the category of consecutive clauses ... or whatever the English-speaking weirdos call them.
In terms of context or semantics, you could of course consider that praeteritio an indirect command.
|
|
|
Post by Bitmap on Apr 25, 2023 16:21:45 GMT
I should also mention that I don't see how this question can be deemed boring.
|
|