The subjunctive mood in Latin (coniunctivus) is a grammatical mood used to express hypothetical, unreal, or dependent actions and their temporal relationships in the Latin language. It comprises four primary forms: present, imperfect, perfect, and pluperfect subjunctive. No subjunctive forms exist for future tenses; instead, a periphrastic construction with the future participle is used. The subjunctive appears in both independent and dependent clauses. In independent clauses, it denotes unreal actions, with the specific subjunctive form indicating the speaker's stance toward the action. It is more commonly used in dependent clauses, where its form depends on the temporal relationship with the main clause's verb, governed by the sequence of tenses. The subjunctive is prevalent in various dependent clause types, such as indirect discourse, result clauses, and temporal clauses.
Forms Latin verbs can appear in one of four subjunctive forms:
Present subjunctive (coniunctivus praesentis) Imperfect subjunctive (coniunctivus imperfecti) Perfect subjunctive (coniunctivus perfecti) Pluperfect subjunctive (coniunctivus plusquamperfecti)
Coniunctivus praesentis The active voice endings for the present subjunctive are: -m, -s, -t for singular, and -mus, -tis, -nt for plural. The present subjunctive is formed as follows:
In the first conjugation, the thematic vowel changes from -a to -e: dissimulamus → dissimulemus, sperant → sperent In the second and fourth conjugations, -a is added to the stem: cupit → cupiat, delent → deleant In the third conjugation, the vowels -i- and -u- change to -a- For the verb esse, the subjunctive stem is si: sim, sis, sit, etc. The passive voice follows a similar pattern.
Coniunctivus imperfecti The imperfect subjunctive is formed by adding the suffix -re- to the present stem, followed by the same endings as the present subjunctive: -m, -s, -t for singular, and -mus, -tis, -nt for plural. These forms resemble the active infinitive, though historically, the coniunctivus imperfecti developed differently. The passive voice follows a similar pattern.
For the verb esse, the imperfect subjunctive stem is esse.
Coniunctivus perfecti and plusquamperfecti The perfect subjunctive is formed by adding the endings -erim, -eris, -erit, -erimus, -eritis, -erint to the perfect stem (third principal part). The pluperfect subjunctive uses the endings -issem, -isses, -isset, -issemus, -issetis, -issent.
The passive subjunctive is formed by combining the past participle (from the supine stem) with the present subjunctive of esse (sim, sis, sit, etc.) for the perfect subjunctive, or the imperfect subjunctive of esse (essem, esses, esset, etc.) for the pluperfect:
amatus sim, amatus sis, amatus sit, amati simus, amati sitis, amati sint → I would be loved, you would be loved, etc. sublatus essem, sublatus esses, sublatus esset, sublati essemus, sublati essetis, sublati essent → I would have been lifted, you would have been lifted, etc.
Use in independent clauses The subjunctive, sometimes called the conjectural mood, is used in independent clauses to express unreality. The speaker adopts one of two stances toward the unreal action: a rational stance or a volitional stance. The rational stance is expressed as follows:
The speaker considers the unreal action possible (coniunctivus potentialis) The speaker considers the unreal action impossible (coniunctivus irrealis) The speaker expresses uncertainty or hesitation toward the unreal action (coniunctivus dubitativus) The negation for the subjunctive in the rational stance is non. The volitional stance reflects the speaker's desire for the unreal action to occur, expressed as:
Strong desire (coniunctivus hortativus, coniunctivus iussivus, coniunctivus prohibitivus) Gentle desire (coniunctivus optativus) Resignation or concession (coniunctivus concessivus) The negation for the subjunctive in the volitional stance is ne.
Coniunctivus optativus The optative subjunctive expresses a wish, which may be possible or impossible:
Possible wishes about the present or future, often resembling a prayer, use the coniunctivus praesens, with non as a possible negation. For example, Vivat → Let him live! Often introduced by utinam (meaning "if only"): Utinam falsus vates sim → May I be a false prophet. Verbs like vellem, nollem, and mallem are also used. Impossible wishes in the present or future use the coniunctivus imperfecti: Utinam ne aeger essem! → If only I weren't sick! (spoken by someone who is sick). Possible wishes in the past use the coniunctivus perfecti: Utinam pater meus ibi adfuerit → If only my father were there (uncertain if he was). Impossible past wishes use the coniunctivus plusquamperfecti: Utinam illo tempore vixissem → If only I had lived in those times.
Coniunctivus hortativus Derived from hortor, hortari (to encourage), this form expresses encouragement in the first person plural, using the coniunctivus praesentis. The negation is ne. For example, Gaudeamus igitur → Let us therefore rejoice, Ut unum sint → That they may be one.
Coniunctivus iussivus Derived from iubeo, iubere (to command), this form is used for commands in the third person singular and plural, and occasionally in the second person as a substitute for the imperative. For example, Quidquid agis, prudenter agas et respice finem! → Whatever you do, do it wisely and consider the end!
Coniunctivus prohibitivus Derived from prohibeo, prohibere (to prevent, forbid), this form complements the imperative mood. It is used in the first person plural and third person singular and plural with the negations ne or neve. For example, Ne timeamus neve desperamus de salute → Let us not fear nor despair of salvation. For prohibitions in the second person, the construction ne + coniunctivus perfecti is used: Ne desperaveris → Do not despair.
Coniunctivus potentialis This form expresses possibility or supposition in the present, often in impersonal expressions using the coniunctivus imperfecti in the second person. The negation is non. It frequently appears in rhetorical questions with interrogative or indefinite pronouns as subjects. For example, Inter milites haud facile discerneres ducem → Among the soldiers, you could hardly distinguish the leader. Quis hoc credat? → Who would believe this? For past possibilities, the coniunctivus perfecti is used: Quis hoc crediderit? → Who could have believed this? Quis dubitet? → Who could doubt?
… excerpt ends here. Continue reading the full article.
