Accusative Case
The accusative is the case that completes the verb. Where the nominative names the doer, the accusative names what the doing lands on — Brūtus Caesarem interfēcit, "Brutus killed Caesar." That is the home use, the direct object, and most accusatives in any Latin sentence are doing exactly that.
But Latin pushes the case much further. The accusative also marks how far (mille passuum, "a mile"), how long (multōs annōs, "for many years"), where to (Rōmam, "to Rome"), in what respect (nūda genū, "bare as to the knee"), what is taught or asked (docet puerōs elementa, "he teaches the boys their letters"), what is exclaimed (ō tempora, ō mōrēs!), and the subject of every infinitive in indirect statement (dīcit eum venīre, "he says that he is coming").
One case, many jobs — the trap is reading every accusative as a direct object when half the time it is doing something else.
Names what the verb's action lands on — and many other things the verb needs to feel complete.
Default reading is direct object. Switch only when the verb already has one, or the noun obviously marks time, distance, motion-toward, or respect.
See It In Action
— A&G § 387
The textbook accusative — Caesarem is the direct object, what Brutus's killing lands on. Nine times out of ten an accusative is doing this.
— B. G. i. 3
Two accusatives, two jobs: regnum is the direct object, multōs annōs measures duration. Latin rolls 'for' into the case itself — no preposition.
— B. C. i. 83
The compound verb trāicit governs two accusatives at once — the people thrown (Germānōs) and the river crossed (flūmen). The trāns- in the verb is doing prepositional work.
— Verg. Aen. i. 320
Vergil uses an accusative to narrow nūda — bare in WHAT respect? The knee. This is the Greek accusative, almost always poetic, almost always a body part.
noun + transitive verb → drop into English as the object
Caesarem interfēcit → 'killed Caesar'
supply 'for' (time) or just an adverbial of length (space)
tres diēs morātus est → 'he stayed for three days'
supply 'to' or 'into' even when no preposition appears
Rōmam contendit → 'he hurried to Rome'
render as 'as to / in respect of', or shift to an English prepositional phrase ('about', 'in')
saucius pectus → 'wounded in the chest'
open with 'that ' and turn the infinitive into a finite verb
dīcit eum venīre → 'he says THAT HE IS COMING'
An accusative right next to an infinitive is usually NOT the object of the main verb — it is the subject of the infinitive in indirect statement.
what the main verb's action lands on
Caesarem videt
he sees Caesar
subject of indirect-statement infinitive
dīcit Caesarem venīre
he says that Caesar is coming
Tip: If a verb of saying, thinking, knowing, or perceiving is in play AND there is an infinitive, the accusative is the subject of that infinitive — not the object of the main verb.
In intellegō tē sapere ("I see that you are wise"), what job is tē doing?
Study Tips
- •Default to direct object when you see an accusative — it is right most of the time. Only switch readings when the verb already has its object, or the noun obviously names a stretch of time, space, or motion-toward.
- •Memorize the four exclamatory openers — mē miserum, ō tempora, ō fortūnātam, ēn quattuor — so you do not waste time hunting for a missing verb that was never there.
- •When you meet docet, rogat, cēlat, or poscit, expect TWO accusatives — one for the person, one for the thing. The verb teaches both at once.
- •Every infinitive after a verb of saying, thinking, knowing, or perceiving needs an accusative subject. If you cannot find one, you are not yet inside the indirect statement.