Indirect Questions
An indirect question is what happens when a real question gets swallowed by a verb of asking, wondering, knowing, or telling. Quid faciās? ("what are you doing?") becomes rogō quid faciās ("I ask what you are doing").
The Latin verb flips from indicative to subjunctive, and the interrogative word (quid, ubi, cūr, quōmodo, num...) stays out front.
The trap students fall into: that subjunctive is non-negotiable in classical Latin. English keeps the indicative ("he asks what I think"), so beginners write rogat mē quid sentiō. Wrong.
It's rogat mē quid sentiam — Cicero's exact line. Once a verb of asking sits in front, every embedded quid / quis / ubi / cūr triggers the subjunctive, and the tense of that subjunctive is set by the sequence of tenses keyed to the main verb.
The other trap: don't confuse this with indirect statement (accusative + infinitive, used after verbs of saying that report a fact, not a question). Dīcit Caesarem venīre = "he says Caesar is coming." Dīcit quandō Caesar veniat = "he tells when Caesar is coming." Same verb dīcit, different construction, because the second one has an interrogative word.
Learnings0 core · 1 AP claim
AP framework claims (1)— verbatim from AP CED
"He asks/knows/tells/wonders WHAT (or WHERE, WHY, WHETHER...) X is/was/will-be doing." The embedded question's verb goes subjunctive; tense follows the sequence rule.
For FUTURE time inside the indirect question, use the first-periphrastic -ūrus sim (primary) or -ūrus essem (secondary) — there is no plain future subjunctive.
| Case | Latin | English | Sequence slot |
|---|---|---|---|
| Pres. subj. after primary | *dīcō quid faciam* | I tell you what I am doing | same time as primary |
| Perf. subj. after primary | *dīcō quid fēcerim* | I tell you what I did / have done | prior to primary |
| Periphrastic after primary | *dīcō quid factūrus sim* | I tell you what I will do | after primary |
| Impf. subj. after secondary | *dīxī quid facerem* | I told you what I was doing | same time as secondary |
| Plpf. subj. after secondary | *dīxī quid fēcissem* | I told you what I had done | prior to secondary |
| Periphrastic after secondary | *dīxī quid factūrus essem* | I told you what I would do | after secondary |
| Future-perfect periphrastic | *dīxī quid factūrus fuissem* | I told you what I would have done | would-have, contrary-to-fact |
See It In Action
— Cic. Cat. ii. 27
Cicero pivots from the rhetorical thunder of the Catilinarians to a quieter threat. Sentiant (subj.) is the indirect-question verb after intellegās ("understand") — note Cicero never wrote sentiunt. Direct form would be quid hī dē tē sentiunt? (indicative). The indirect frame demands subjunctive, full stop.
— Cic. Cat. iii. 11
Lentulus on the rack. Quaesīvit (perf., secondary) puts everything that follows into secondary sequence — so the embedded question's esset is imperfect subjunctive (same time as the asking), not present. English flattens to past ("what business he HAD"), which obscures the relative-time logic Latin keeps explicit.
— Caes. B. G. i. 21
Caesar's narrative voice — two indirect questions stacked under one verb of finding-out. Esset is impf. subj. because the main verb mīsit is perfect (secondary). The interrogative qualis is the trigger; without it, this would be a relative clause taking indicative.
— Caes. B. G. i. 47
Indirect question nested inside an indirect command. Cōgnōscerent ("that they should find out") is indirect command after mandāvit; quae dīceret ("what Ariovistus was saying") is the indirect question inside that command. Both subjunctives sit in secondary sequence because mandāvit is the past anchor.
All three involve a reporting verb. The difference is whether there's an interrogative word and whether the inner verb is subjunctive, infinitive, or indicative.
interrog. word + SUBJUNCTIVE
rogat quid sentiam
he asks what I think (sentiam = pres. subj.)
accusative + INFINITIVE — no interrog. word
dīcit mē sentīre
he says I think (sentīre = pres. inf., mē = acc. subj.)
Tip: Look for an interrogative word (quid, quis, ubi, cūr, num, quōmodo, quandō, utrum). If one is present after a verb of asking/knowing/telling, it's an indirect question — subjunctive. If there's no interrog. word and the reported clause is just a fact, it's indirect statement — accusative + infinitive. Direct question = no reporting verb at all, indicative inside (quid sentīs?).
In Cicero's faciam ut intellegās quid hī dē tē (Cat. ii. 27), which form fills the blank — and why?
Study Tips
- •Whenever you see an interrogative word (quid, quis, ubi, cūr, num, quōmodo, quandō, utrum) sitting after a verb of asking/knowing/telling/wondering, expect subjunctive. If the verb you parse is indicative, double-check — it's almost certainly subjunctive in disguise.
- •Pick the subjunctive's tense from the sequence-of-tenses chart, not from the English. Rogō quid faciās (present subj. after primary main verb) = "I ask what you ARE doing." Rogāvī quid facerēs (impf. subj. after secondary main verb) = "I asked what you WERE doing."
- •For future time inside an indirect question, Latin uses the -ūrus sim / -ūrus essem periphrastic — dīcō quid factūrus sīs = "I tell you what you will do." There's no plain future subjunctive, so the periphrasis fills the gap.
- •Nesciō quis meaning "some-one-or-other" is NOT an indirect question — it's a fixed indefinite phrase. Nesciō quid dīxit = "he said something or other" (dīxit indicative), not "he said I-don't-know-what."