Latin Purpose, Result and cum Clauses: ut, ne and the Sequence of Tenses

You have the forms. Now for the two conjunctions that account for most of the subjunctives on any page of Latin prose, and the rule that decides which tense of subjunctive turns up after which main verb.

ut is not one word

Ut is one of the hardest-working words in Latin and it does not have a single meaning. Before anything else, check the mood of the verb in its clause:

• Ut plus the indicative means as or when. Ut dixi, as I said.
• Ut plus the subjunctive is one of the constructions below.

That check costs nothing and rules out a whole family of wrong readings straight away.

Purpose: ut and ne

A purpose clause says what somebody was aiming at. It is ut plus the subjunctive, negative ne:

Venit ut regem videat. He comes in order to see the king.

Venit ut regem videret. He came in order to see the king.

Milites missi sunt ut urbem defenderent. The soldiers were sent to defend the city.

Fugit ne caperetur. He fled so that he would not be captured.

Notice the first two sentences. Venit is both present and perfect indicative, identical in spelling, and in isolation you cannot tell which. The subjunctive in the purpose clause settles it: videat says the main verb is present, videret says it is past. The subordinate clause is doing the work of disambiguating the main one, which is not a favour English would ever do you.

English has half a dozen ways of translating a purpose clause (to, in order to, so as to, so that he might), and Latin has one construction for all of them. Do not hunt for a formula; write whichever English is least awkward.

Two variants are worth recognising:

• Relative purpose. Instead of ut, a relative pronoun: legatos misit qui pacem peterent, he sent envoys to seek peace. Literally who should seek peace.
• quo plus a comparative. When the purpose contains a comparison, quo replaces ut: exempla dat quo facilius intellegant, he gives examples so that they may understand more easily.

Result: ut and its signposts

A result clause reports what actually followed. It is also ut plus the subjunctive, which is why the two get confused, but two things separate them cleanly.

First, the negative is ut non, not ne, along with ut nemo, ut nihil, ut numquam and ut nullus.

Second, and more usefully, a result clause is nearly always announced in advance by a signpost word in the main clause:

In practice you spot the signpost several words before you reach the ut, and you know what is coming:

Tantus erat clamor ut nemo vocem audiret.

So great was the shout that nobody could hear a voice.

Adeo longa erat via ut multi non pervenirent.

The road was so long that many did not arrive.

Ita scripsit ut omnes intellegerent.

He wrote in such a way that everyone understood.

Tot erant hostes ut nemo fugere posset.

There were so many enemies that nobody could flee.

The three tests, then, in the order you should apply them: signpost word (present means result), negative (ne means purpose, ut non means result), sense (intended means purpose, achieved means result). The first two are matters of form and are worth more than the third, which is a matter of judgement and can be argued about.

Sequence of tenses

Which tense of subjunctive follows a given main verb is not free. Latin sorts main verbs into two groups and each group takes its own pair of subjunctives.

So venit ut videat (he comes to see) against venit ut videret (he came to see). The purpose clause did not change its meaning; it changed its tense because the main verb did.

Two things worth knowing about that table:

Purpose clauses only ever use the left column. A purpose is by definition still ahead of the verb that aims at it, so a purpose clause never contains a perfect or pluperfect subjunctive. If you see one, you are not looking at a purpose clause. The right column belongs to indirect questions and other constructions you will meet later.

Result clauses break the rule on purpose. A result clause after a historic main verb sometimes takes the perfect subjunctive rather than the imperfect, to stress that the result really did occur as a single completed fact:

Tantus fuit timor ut omnes fugerint. So great was the fear that they all fled.

That is deliberate and idiomatic, not an error, and it is one of the few places where breaking sequence carries meaning.

The historic present, a past narrative told in the present tense for vividness, may take either sequence, and Roman authors switch between them within a single sentence without apology.

cum is two words

You have known cum since the cases article as the preposition meaning with, taking the ablative: cum militibus, with the soldiers. There is a second cum, spelled identically, which is a conjunction introducing a clause. Telling them apart is trivial: the preposition is followed by a noun in the ablative, the conjunction by a clause with its own verb.

cum plus the indicative

When cum does nothing but fix the time, it takes the indicative. This is the normal pattern with a present or future main verb, with cum primum meaning as soon as, and with repeated action meaning whenever:

Cum veniet, videbimus. When he comes, we shall see.

Cum primum hostes vidit, fugit. As soon as he saw the enemy, he fled.

Cum dux venit, milites semper gaudent. Whenever the leader comes, the soldiers rejoice.

cum plus the subjunctive

Everywhere else, and especially in past narrative, cum takes the subjunctive and carries one of three senses.

When, in a narrative. Imperfect subjunctive for circumstances running alongside the main action, pluperfect for something completed before it:

Cum in urbe essemus, multa vidimus. When we were in the city, we saw many things.

Cum haec dixisset, abiit. When he had said this, he went away.

Since. The clause gives the reason:

Cum dux abesset, milites nihil fecerunt. Since the leader was absent, the soldiers did nothing.

Although. The clause concedes something, and the main clause almost always answers it with tamen:

Cum fortis esset, tamen fugit. Although he was brave, he nevertheless fled.

Three senses, one construction, and nothing in the Latin marks which is meant except context. The practical routine: if the main clause has tamen in it, read although. If the cum clause explains why the main clause happened, read since. Otherwise read when, which is right more often than the other two combined.

Three ut clauses that are neither purpose nor result

Brief warnings, because they are common enough to trip you.

• Indirect command. After verbs of advising, ordering and asking, ut plus the subjunctive reports a command: monet ut veniant, he advises them to come. Note that iubeo refuses to join in and takes an accusative and infinitive instead (iubet milites venire), which the indirect statement article covers.
• Fearing clauses, where the negatives invert. After a verb of fearing, ne means that and ut means that not. Timeo ne veniat is I am afraid that he will come, not that he will not. This looks like a mistake and is not: the ne began life as a wish that the thing would not happen.
• ut plus the indicative. As above: as or when, nothing to do with the subjunctive at all.

What to take away

• Check the mood after ut before anything else. Indicative means as or when.
• Purpose is ut plus subjunctive, negative ne.
• Result is ut plus subjunctive, negative ut non, and a signpost word (tam, ita, sic, adeo, tantus, talis, tot) usually flags it first.
• Primary main verb takes the present subjunctive, historic main verb takes the imperfect.
• Purpose clauses never contain a perfect or pluperfect subjunctive.
• Cum plus a noun means with; cum plus a clause is a conjunction.
• Cum plus indicative dates the action. Cum plus subjunctive means when, since or although, and tamen in the main clause is the tell for although.

Next: the ablative absolute, where the participles you met in chapter 8 learn to swallow a subordinate clause whole.