Syntactic Figures & Style
A&G closes its syntax with a confession: two more subjunctives don't fit any of the chapter headings you've already learned.
The first is informal indirect discourse — a subordinate clause slips into the subjunctive because it carries someone else's thought, even though no full ōrātiō oblīqua is in play.
The second is attraction (subjunctive of integral part) — a clause already inside a subjunctive or infinitive gets pulled into the subjunctive itself, by sheer grammatical gravity.
Both show up constantly in Cicero and Caesar, and both look like "random" subjunctives unless you know the trap.
After teaching those two, this hub also serves as the syntax map: A&G's 91-rule summary of every Latin construction, organized so you can navigate from "I forget which case takes ūtor" to the right spoke in three clicks.
After all the named subjunctive uses, two more remain: someone-else's-thought and grammatical contagion.
Both produce subjunctives that look unmotivated. Neither translates as "would" or "might" — render the verb as plain indicative in English.
See It In Action
— B. G. iv. 21
possit is informal indirect discourse — Caesar's words echoing inside the order. If Caesar had said "the states he can," he meant the indicative; the subjunctive marks it as HIS thought, not Caesar-the-author's.
— Cic. Cat. iii. 11
vellet would be indicative in pure narration. The subjunctive turns the sī-clause into Cicero's offer-as-spoken-to-Lentulus: "if you wish to say anything…"
— B. G. iv. 19
Translate as plain "if they were pressed." The subjunctive premerentur is informal indirect discourse — the sī-clause carries the conditional Caesar promised, not Caesar-the-author's speculation.
— Cic. Or. 151
sint interfectī would be plain indicative if the relative clause stood alone. It's subjunctive by attraction — pulled in because it belongs grammatically inside laudārī. Translate as plain "who have been slain."
translate the subj. as plain indicative; the "reportedness" was already shown in English by the framing verb
pollicitus, sī premerentur → "having promised, if they were pressed" (NOT "if they should be pressed")
render the subj. as the natural English form of the command/wish, no "would/should" forced in
imperat quās possit adeat → "he orders him to visit what states he can"
translate the subj. clause as if it were indicative — the subjunctive is mechanical, not semantic
mōs est laudārī eōs quī sint interfectī → "…to eulogize those who have been slain"
the indicative MARKS the clause as the writer's independent assertion — translate with the same flavor
ut, quem ad modum est, sīc appellētur → "that he be called as he in fact IS" (the est asserts a fact)
Both produce subjunctives in subordinate clauses with no purpose/result/cum-frame to blame. The difference: whose thought drives it.
subj. because it voices a character's thought
sī vellet, fēcī potestātem
if he wished, I gave him a chance
subj. because it sits inside another subj./inf. clause
eōs quī sint interfectī laudārī
that those who have been slain be eulogized
Tip: Ask: "If I rip this clause out and put it on its own, would it be indicative?" If yes and the surrounding verb voices someone's thought → informal indirect discourse. If yes and the clause just happens to live inside a subjunctive/infinitive → attraction.
In Caesar's huic imperat quās possit adeat cīvitātēs ("he orders him to visit what states he can"), why is possit subjunctive rather than indicative?
Study Tips
- •When a subordinate verb is subjunctive and you can't name a reason (purpose, result, cum-clause, indirect question), ask: "Whose thought is this?" If it's a character's, you've found informal indirect discourse.
- •Attraction is mechanical, not semantic. A relative clause inside an indirect-statement infinitive will go subjunctive even if its content is plain fact — don't translate the subjunctive as "would" or "might."
- •Use the 91-rule map (ConstructionMap below) as your syntax index. When reading, jot the rule number next to a construction you stumble on; over time you'll see which 10 rules account for 80% of your hesitations.