# If it rains, if the sun shines



## Casquilho

"If it rains, we'll play cards. If the sun shines, we'll play football"

I don't know if the Romans did have playing cards, and I'm sure they did not have football as we do, but, may you please help me to translate this conditional phrase? I'm confused with the impersonal verb "to rain".


----------



## Scholiast

_si pluet..._

Romans had no playing cards, but they played dice enthusiastically. The emperor Augustus was an addict.


----------



## Casquilho

_Si pluet_ is fine... but, how about "If the sun shines"? Shall it be translated literally?


----------



## Joca

If the sun shines ... = Sole lucenti... (?)


----------



## XiaoRoel

Si est sol… si est pluuia…


----------



## Scholiast

salve iterum!

More logically than in English, 'open' conditions referring to future time are, as in modern French - possibly Spanish too, though I confess my knowledge of Spanish is but rudimentary - usually expressed with a future tense. Therefore 'If the sun shines [tomorrow]' should be something like _si sol lucebit_.


----------



## Casquilho

I've found that _lucebit_ is the future active of indicative. I'm not with my grammar here, but I'm almost certain there's a tense in Latin which "equals", as it were, to the subjunctive future in Pt. We would have, for the verb "brilhar" or "to shine":

[Quando/se] eu brilhar
[Quando/se] tu brilhares
[Quando/se] ele brilhar...

The future subjunctive exprimes a future action, and you always can congugate it with "quando" (when) or "se" (if). 
May this tense be used in Latin with the same meaning?


----------



## XiaoRoel

No es necesario, ni en latín ni en español, el uso del futuro para esta condicional real. Si *x1* entonces *y*, si *x2* entonces *z*.


----------



## Scholiast

salvete!

To Casquilho (#7): there is no conjugated future subjunctive in Latin.* Counterfactual conditions with future reference (in any case rare) are done with the present subjunctive.

To Xiao (#8): I beg to differ - there are semantic or aspectual differences in Latin between present conditions and future. Here are a couple of examples from Cicero:
_
scribes aliquid, si vacabis_ (_ad Att._ 12.38.2).
"You will write something, if you have spare time".

Put this into the present, and it becomes:
_
scribis aliquid, si vacas_.
"You [habitually/generally] write something, if you have spare time".

Or
_
si mihi bona re publica frui non licuerit, at carebo mala_ (_pro Mil._ 34).
"If it is not going to be permitted to me to enjoy good government, at least I shall be rid of bad".

Converted into the present this becomes:

_si mihi bona republica frui non licet, at careo mala._
"[Even] if I am not [now] permitted to enjoy good government, at least I am [now] free of bad".

*Except for the highly unusual _forem_, _fores_, _foret_ &c., from _esse_.


----------



## Casquilho

So, the better choice is,

_Si pluet, alea ludemus. Si sol lucebit, natabimus._

Is this correct? And if instead I said, 

_Si pluat... si sol luceat..._

would it then be correct?

(The subjunctive present still makes sense when translated to Pt - "Se chove... se o sol brilha..." - but the future sounds awkward - "Se choverá... se o sol brilhará...")


----------



## Cagey

XiaoRoel said:


> Si est sol… si est pluuia…



XiaoRoel's suggestion translates literally as:

_If there is sun .... if there is rain. _​ 


XiaoRoel said:


> No es necesario, ni en latín ni en español, el uso del futuro para esta condicional real. Si *x1* entonces *y*, si *x2* entonces *z*.


For the sake of any English speaker reading this thread:

_The use of the future isn't necessary, either in Latin or in Spanish, for this real condition.  If *x1* then *y*, if *x2* then *z*._​


----------



## Scholiast

Dear Casquilho



> _Si pluat... si sol luceat..._
> 
> would it then be correct?



These formulations, with pres. subjunct., are certainly not incorrect in formal grammar. But they would only be seldom found or used in classical literature.

I'm sorry I cannot put this into Portuguese for you, but the "If..." clause refers to an impossible future, for which there is no adequate equivalent in English either, except through a contorted periphrasis:

"If it were ever to rain [but we can be sure/we feel confident that it will not], we would play cards/dice indoors...".

This is such a rare thing, because in contrast with present- and past- tense counterfactuals, the future is always in some sense open.

You might more likely find a mixed-tense or mixed-reference conditional, along the lines of:
_
si haec faceret, numquam eum amicum habeam_
"If he were [now] doing these things, I should not [remotely at any time in the future] consider him a friend."

But this is stretching things to a schoolmasterly extremity.

Best wishes


----------

