Cōncordia (Pars II Incipit)

Pars II — Syntaxis. The morphology of Pars I is now to be deployed in sentences. The first principle of Latin syntax is concord (cōncordia): words that grammatically belong together must agree in the appropriate features.

The Latin agreement system is more pervasive and stricter than English. While English shows agreement only between subject and verb (and even then weakly), Latin shows fourfold agreement, with rich morphological consequences:

Latin has four kinds of concord, each parallel to the corresponding Pars I morphology:

(1) Verb with subject — agree in person and number. The most basic agreement.
(2) Adjective with noun — agree in gender, number, and case. The most pervasive agreement (every adjective with every noun).
(3) Pronoun with antecedent — agree in gender and number; relative pronouns also take the case appropriate to their function in the relative clause.
(4) Apposition — a noun in apposition agrees with its head in case (gender and number when possible).

This morphological strictness is what allows Latin's flexible word order: because the inflection encodes role, words can be positioned for emphasis, balance, climax, or rhythm without losing grammatical clarity.

The basic rule: the verb agrees with its subject in person and number. puer venit "the boy comes"; puerī veniunt "the boys come"; nōs venīmus "we come". This rule is rigorous and has few exceptions.

Compound subjects (joined by et, atque, -que): the verb is plural. With persons of different rank, the verb takes the highest person — first over second, second over third: tū et ego venīmus "you and I come (= we come)" — 1st person (1pl.) wins over 2nd; tū et ille venītis "you and he are coming" — 2pl. (2nd person wins over 3rd, plural agreement).

Disjunctive subjects (joined by aut, vel, -ve): the verb agrees with the nearest, often singular: aut Caesar aut nēmō hoc faciet "either Caesar or no-one will do this". The construction emphasizes one alternative at a time, hence singular.

Collective nouns (turba, multitūdō, pars, populus, exercitus) take a singular verb in classical prose, in agreement with their grammatical singular form. But a plural is permissible (cōnstrūctiō ad sēnsum "construction by sense") when emphasizing individual members: multitūdō hominum convēnit (sg., "the multitude of men met") vs pars cīvium fugērunt (pl., "some of the citizens fled" — emphasizing individuals). Caesar and Livy use both freely.

Indefinite subjects: quisque "each one" takes singular; aliquis, quīdam, nēmō singular; aliquī (plural form) plural.

Impersonal verbs: only 3sg. form, no agreement needed: licet, oportet, decet, paenitet. The "subject" is an infinitive or noun-clause.

Passive intransitives: become impersonal, 3sg.: itur "there is going / people are going"; pugnātur "fighting is happening".

An adjective agrees with its noun in gender, number, and case — three-fold agreement, the most demanding in Latin syntax. Every Latin adjective in every position must show this agreement.

Detailed rules:

(1) Single noun: simple agreement: vir bonus "a good man" (m.sg.nom.); fēminam bonam "a good woman" (f.sg.acc.).

(2) Two or more nouns of the same gender: adjective is plural in that gender. vir et puer fortēs "a brave man and boy" (m.pl.).

(3) Two or more nouns of different genders, persons: masculine prevails. vir et fēmina bonī "the good man and woman" (m.pl., though one is feminine).

(4) Things, neuter prevails: arma et iacula nova "new arms and javelins" (n.pl., regardless of original genders).

(5) Person and thing: the noun closest to the adjective often wins; or each gets its own adjective: arma et virī fortēs (m.pl. — person wins by being closer or by category) vs arma virōrum sunt fortia; fortēs virī et acria arma (each gets own).

(6) Predicate adjective: agrees with the subject through the linking verb: vir bonus est; cōnsilia bona sunt; multitūdō magna est.

(7) Predicate noun in different gender from subject: the predicate noun retains its own gender: Athēnae sunt urbs "Athens is a city" (Athēnae f.pl., urbs f.sg. — but verb agrees with Athēnae).

(8) Special cases of attraction: in some cases, an adjective in apposition or relative-clause may attract to a closer noun: animal quod vocāmus hominem "the animal which we call man" (relative quod agrees with antecedent animal n., not with predicate hominem m.).

A relative pronoun (quī, quae, quod) agrees with its antecedent in gender and number, but takes its case from its function in the relative clause. This dual rule means a relative pronoun can show "split" agreement:

• Gender from antecedent: vir quem vīdī "the man whom I saw" — quem = m. (matches vir).
• Case from relative-clause function: quem = acc. (because object of vīdī).

Combined: vir quem vīdī = "the man (m.) whom (m.acc.) I saw".

The agent in passive constructions: fēmina ā quā amātur "the woman by whom he is loved" — quā = f. (matches fēmina) and abl. (because of ā).

Multiple antecedents for a relative: usually masculine plural prevails (cf. § 296 mixed-gender adj.): vir et fēmina, quī ad mē vēnērunt "the man and woman, who came to me".

Attraction (rare): relative may attract its case to the antecedent — only when very close: amīcus quem habeō / amīcus quī mihi est (both = "the friend I have"; second uses dative-of-possession).

The reflexive pronoun (suī, sē, sibi): always refers to the subject of its clause. Caesar sē laudat "Caesar praises himself"; Caesar eum laudat = "Caesar praises him" (someone else). The contrast between sē (reflexive) and eum (non-reflexive 3rd person) is rigorously maintained.

Reflexive in indirect statement: refers to the subject of the introducing verb (= the speaker), not the local clause subject. Caesar dīxit sē Galliam vīcisse "Caesar said that he (himself, Caesar) had conquered Gaul" — sē refers to Caesar, the subject of dīxit.

An appositive (appositiō) is a noun set in the same case as another noun to which it refers, identifying or describing it:

Caesar, dux Rōmānōrum "Caesar, the leader of the Romans" — both Caesar and dux in the nominative.
Caesarem, ducem Rōmānōrum, vīdimus "we saw Caesar, the leader of the Romans" — both in the accusative.

An appositive may be:
(a) A single noun: Rōma, urbs sacra "Rome, the sacred city".
(b) A phrase: Caesar, vir bellī perītus "Caesar, a man skilled in war".
(c) A partitive expression: nōs Rōmānī "we Romans"; vōs cīvēs "you citizens".
(d) A clause (rare): haec rēs, quod absurdum est "this matter, which is absurd".

In predicate constructions, the verb of "calling, naming, electing, making, considering" (vocō, nōminō, creō, faciō, putō, dūcō, habeō, cōnstituō, ēligō, exīstimō) can take a double accusative (object + complement) in the active voice. In passive, both elements become nominative:

Cicerōnem cōnsulem creāvērunt "they elected Cicero consul" → Cicerō cōnsul creātur "Cicero is elected consul".

This concord-and-case-system gives Latin its characteristic flexibility of word order: because morphology already encodes role (subject, object, modifier), the writer can position words for emphasis, balance, climax, or rhythm. A "normal" SOV order serves as default, but classical authors deviate freely:

Stylistic devices:
• Hyperbaton: separating words that grammatically belong together: magnam ille gerit cum hostibus pugnam "He wages a great battle with the enemy".
• Chiasmus: ABBA pattern: nōn ut edam vīvō, sed ut vīvam edō "I don't live to eat, but eat to live" (Quint., paraphrased).
• Anaphora: repetition at start: illa fortis, illa lēvis, illa pulchra "she is brave, she is light, she is beautiful".
• Tricolon: three parallel clauses: vēnī, vīdī, vīcī.

The reader's task is to identify the morphological agreement and trace the syntactic relationships through the artistic word order.