# Relative Clause vs. Indirect Question



## discipulalatinae

I have studied Latin for a year and have now realized that I come across suome difficulty now and again as to whether something is a rel. clause or an ind. question. Is there a clear definition with an example that might help me make the distinction better?
For example, here I have: 

"Sermo oritur non de villis et domibus alienis; sed id quaerimus quod magus ad nos pertinet et nescire malum est: utrum divitiis an virtute homines fiant beati; quidd nos ad amicitiam trahat, usus an rectum; et quae sit natura boni et quid sit summum bonum."

My translation: 
"Conversation arose not about the villas and houses belonging to others, but we seek that which pertains most to us and it is bad not to know: either by riches or by virtue men may become happy; what draws us to friendship, advantage or the right; and which is nature of the good and which is the highest good."

I know that if the subjunctive is used, then it must be an indirect question we are taking about and not a relative clause...I presume so anyway. I just find it difficult to differentiate between the two, even though I really do know the difference. Just when I go to translate and apply my knowledge, it makes less sense to me.
I would appreciate any help at all on the topic and on the sentence I have here translated!

Thanks,
discipulalatinae


----------



## relativamente

Salve

In my wiev your translation is good. 

id quaerimus quod magis ad nos pertinet    we seek that which pertains most to us 
quod is relative and its  antecedent id 
   id... quod           that... which
the verb in indicative  pertinet and not subjunctive pertineat.malum est not malum sit
The verb of the relative clause could be in subjunctive mode in other cases

after the colon: everything is indirect question and the verbs are in subjunctive


----------



## Fred_C

Hi,
Perhaps you did not see that "utrum ... an" means "wether ... or".


----------



## XiaoRoel

"Sermo oritur non de villis et domibus alienis; sed id quaerimus quod magis ad nos pertinet et nescire malum est: utrum divitiis an virtute homines fiant beati; quid nos ad amicitiam trahat, usus an rectum; et quae sit natura boni et quid sit summum bonum."


> "Comienza una conversación no sobre las haciendas y casas ajenas, sino que preguntamos sobre aquello que más nos atañe y es malo ignorar: ¿Acaso los hombres logran la felicidad con las riquezas, o con la virtud? ¿Qué nos impulsa a la amistad: la costumbre o la rectitud? Y también: ¿cuál será la naturaleza del bien y cuál será el mayor bien?"


Esperemos que Cagey, tan amable como siempre os pueda retraducir al inglés este hermoso fragmento del _*De finibus*_ de Cicerón, de tan bella prosa. La traducción es lo más literal posible, para que, aunque sea en una lengua romance, se pueda captar algo del estilo del Arpinate.


----------



## Cagey

Here is my translation of XiaoRoel's translation of Cicero's sentence.  My translation of XiaoRoel is not as graceful as his translation of Cicero, but I have tried to be as literal as possible. As always, I will welcome corrections.


> A conversation begins, not about villas or the houses of others, but we ask about that which concerns us most and of which is wrong to be ignorant: Do men achieve happiness with riches, or with virtue?  What draws us to friendship, custom or rectitude?  What is the nature of the good, and what is the greater good?


I am translating _nescire/ ignorar _as "not to know/ to be ignorant of".  XiaoRoel will tell us if he thinks "to ignore/ not to give attention to" would be better. _usus_, here translated as 'custom', means something like familiarity, what you are 'used to'. 

You will see that XiaoRoel has translated the last clauses as questions.  They all are introduced by interrogatives:utrum divitiis an virtute homines fiant beati; quid nos ad amicitiam  trahat, usus an rectum; et quae sit natura boni et quid sit summum  bonum.

As Fred C points out, _utrum _introduces questions about alternatives. Similarly _quid_ is an interrogative; the relative form would be _quod_.  _quae_ has the same form whether it is an interrogative or relative, but here it is parallel to _quid_ and so most easily interpreted as an interrogative. The conjunction _an_ is used primarily in direct and indirect questions.​  Although indirect questions will contain subjunctives, some relative clauses that are not indirect questions also take the subjunctive.  You will have to look for other clues, such as the presence of interrogatives that you have here.


----------



## discipulalatinae

Salvete omnes,

Thanks ever so much for all your helpfulness! 
Yes, I hadn't realized the meaning of utrum...an in combined usage. However, Cagey, how does "utrum...an-whether...or" turn into a question? I can't quite see somehow; sorry! 





> _utrum _introduces questions about alternatives


 
I recognise now that after the colon the pronouns must be interrogative and not relative because of the absence of an antecedant; unlike the first half of the sentence in which relativamente pointed out 'id' as being the antecedant.
I definitely understand better now because of all the explanations. 
Thanks so much for translating, XiaoRoel and Cagey, and for correcting the mistakes I made. It's a lot more elegant than mine and clarifies the logic of the grammar in my mind.


----------



## Imber Ranae

discipulalatinae said:


> Salvete omnes,
> 
> Thanks ever so much for all your helpfulness!
> Yes, I hadn't realized the meaning of utrum...an in combined usage. However, Cagey, how does "utrum...an-whether...or" turn into a question? I can't quite see somehow; sorry!


 
"Whether...or" is used for indirect double questions in English, e.g. "I asked him whether he wanted to walk or take the bus."

Modern English often uses "if" in place of "whether", but this use shouldn't be confused with conditional "if" (_si_ in Latin). In other words you can't use _si_ for double questions in Latin like we can use "if...or" for double questions in English; instead it's usually either _utrum...an_ or _-ne...an_.

This also shouldn't be confused with the other use of "whether...or" in English, which is not interrogative, as in "Whether you like it or not, we're leaving." Latin would use _sive...sive_ here.



			
				discipulalatinae said:
			
		

> I recognise now that after the colon the pronouns must be interrogative and not relative because of the absence of an antecedant; unlike the first half of the sentence in which relativamente pointed out 'id' as being the antecedant.
> I definitely understand better now because of all the explanations.
> Thanks so much for translating, XiaoRoel and Cagey, and for correcting the mistakes I made. It's a lot more elegant than mine and clarifies the logic of the grammar in my mind.



In case you were wondering, XiaoRoel's translation uses direct questions to translate Cicero's indirect questions in the original Latin. This might be affecting your understanding.

Another thing to keep in mind is that the neuter singular nominative/accusative form of the interrogative pronoun is always _quid_ in Latin; the equivalent form of the relative pronoun is _quod_.


----------



## discipulalatinae

Hi,

thanks very much. That clarifies my problem. I think I understood utrum...an as meaning whether...or in the sense of sive...sive. It makes sense to me now! And thanks for highlighting the difference between quid and quod.

Amabo te!


----------

