[source noun in gen.] + [noun / adj. of portion]

[blank]
nostrum, the genitive plural of nos, denotes the full range of people from which the one ignorant person (quem) might come.

[blank]
Here detrimenti represents the entire range of harmful things, while (ali)quid refers to just one of those things, whatever it might be.

We could just as well translate (ali)quid detrimenti as, anything harmful.

NOTE:  the partitive genitive is sometimes called the genitive of the whole, a label that catches the case's primary meaning of source.

([source noun in gen.] + [modifying adj.]) + [specific noun]

[blank]
modi represents the entire possible range of decrees, of which Cicero is referring to one in particular.  This use of the genitive is basically partitive.

[source noun in gen.] + [noun with verbal force]

[blank]
Here the people (populus) are a potential source of fear to Catiline.

This use of the genitive is called objective because the verbal idea of fear (timor) governs populus just as a verb governs an accusative direct object.  It is as if Cicero had asked:  "Didn't you fear the people?"—i.e. weren't they the object of your fear?

[source noun in gen.] + [noun with verbal force]

[blank]
Here the republic (rei publicae) was the source of punishment.

This usage differs from the objective genitive in that the republic is perceived as the subject of the implied action (poena);  the republic was doing the punishing.  In the example for the objective genitive, Catiline should have been the one fearing the people (timor populi), not the other way around.

[source noun in gen.]  + [verb / adj. of remembering / forgetting]

blank
This use of the genitive is essentially objective, with the verbal idea of forgetting taking a genitive direct object.

[source noun in gen.] + [verb of accusation] + [direct object]

[blank]
Cicero accuses himself of sloth (inertia) and negligence (nequitia);  they are the source of or bases for his accusations.

[dative referent] + [noun in nom.] + [linking verb]

[blank]
The sentence above is a variation on est rei publicae consilium, The republic has a plan (lit. There is a plan with reference to the republic).  deesse, to be lacking, is from de + esse.

So Cicero says that the plan is not lacking, and the dative rei publicae indicates that it is not lacking with reference to the republic.

[dative referent] + [nom. noun] + [linking verb] + [gerundive predicate]

[blank]
The passive periphrastic expresses duty or obligation, and requires a dative of agent (here mihi), which indicates to whom the obligation is referred.

NOTE:  In the original Latin, what Cicero has to fear is actually a subject noun clause.  See also the entry on clauses of fearing.

[dative referent] + [verb of being]

[blank]
studere (to be eager for) describes Maelius' state of being.  Since a state of being is technically not an action, the verb has no accusative direct object.  We say, then, that studere is an intransitive verb.

As such it is used in conjunction with a dative noun, in this case novis rebus (revolution), which is the reference point (referent) of Maelius' eagerness.

Objective datives are sometimes called datives of direct object, because they function as accusative direct objects.

[nom. noun] + [linking verb] + [dat. referent] +  [dat. of purpose]

blank
The so-called double dative construction combines the dative of purpose (MF 131, AG 382) with a second dative, which expresses the primary meaning of reference (in fact, it is called the dative of reference).

In the above example, morae is the dative of purpose, the end in view.  tibi, then, is the person to whom this purposeis referred.  In this sense, the dative of reference is  basically possessive.

[noun in acc.] + [optional interjection O!]

[blank]
The accusative of exclamation generates the smallest possible Latin sentence.  When a speaker or author wishes to draw attention to something, he or she places that thing in the accusative case—without a verb, almost as if he or she were too agitated to include one.

It helps, perhaps, to understand a verb, e.g. Look at the times (tempora), or Consider the customs (mores).  But the essential message of the accusative of exclamation is, This noun is the endpoint of my attention, and it should be yours as well.

[word of time in acc. (pl.)] + [verb]

[blank]
The accusative of duration (or extent) of time indicates how long an action occurs.

In this sentence the phrase vicesimum diem denotes the endpoint of the Senate's action.  patimur basically has two  objects:  one is the noun clause habescere aciem, and the other is diem;  in a sense both objects tell what the Senate has allowed to happen.

[source noun in abl.] + [verb of being or originating (optional)]

[blank]
Although source is properly a genitive idea, the ablative overlaps in its capacity to indicate from where something arises.

NOTE:  This construction does not require a preposition, although one may appear from time to time, such as e(x).

[origin noun in abl.] + [verb of separation or motion]

blank
The ablative of separation follows closely from the primary meaning from where.  In the last sentence the nobles are separated from Rome.

NOTE:  Roma is here used without a preposition—names of cities seldom are.  Had the nobles been away from (say) the Forum, Cicero would have written a Foro.

[comparative adj. / adv.] + [abl. noun to be compared]

blank
The ablative of comparision contains a separative / from where idea.  If we say, for example, that X is better than Y, we are really saying that X is separated from Y in terms of goodness (good being the positive form of better).

In the example above, Cicero says that Cat.'s plans are clearer than—separated from—daylight.

[word of difference, real or implied] + [abl. noun / adj. defining the difference]

blank
The ablative of degree of difference catches the primary ablative meanings from where and how at once.

On the how side, the adjective multo modifies (in an adverbial sense) the comparative acrius, defining how Cicero's vigilance is keener.

On the from where side, multo distinguishes or separates the idea of more keenly from other similar ideas.  That is, to say that something happens acrius multo, more easily by a little, implies that there is also (say) something happening more keenly by a little (paulo) or by nothing (nihilo).

[abl. noun of time] + [typical sentence]

blank
The reason why Latin often puts words of time in the ablative is directly related to the primary meaning of this case.  You know that the ablative can mean where;  from where it is a small conceptual jump to when, which is nothing more than a location in time.

Compare the accusative of time.

[noun in abl.] + [abl. adj] and/or [abl. participle]

[blank]
The term absolute is from the Latin absolutus, which means disconnected.  Accordingly, an absolute construction is gramatically and syntactically separate from the main clause.

The reason why Latin requires absolutes in the ablative is because such constructions usually define when the main clause happens, as also happens in ablative constructions of time.

Sometimes an ablative absolute defines the circumstances in which the main clause occurs, and so taps into the primary ablative meaning of how.

Technically speaking, then, ablative absolutes function as adverb clauses, which sometimes describe how or when main clauses occur.

In the above example, Cicero wants to describe when it was that the republic had permission to act.  Instead of saying, ubi Marius et Valerius erant consules, he places the names in the ablative and modifes them with consulibus.  No verb or subordinating conjunction (ubi) required.

[pres. stem of verb] + [-nd-] + [neut. sing. noun ending]

Example:  amare, to love = ama + nd + i / o / um / o, loving

The full declension of the above gerund is as follows:

As you can see, there are no nominative gerunds.  To express the idea of loving in the nominative, we use the infinitive, for example:

amare est vivere.  To love is to live (or, Loving is living).

NOTE:  gerunds exist only in the second declension, only in the singular, and only in the neuter.  If you see what looks to be a feminine or masculine gerund, or a gerund in the plural, then you are doubtless looking at a gerundive instead.

There is little space to go into the usage of the gerund here;  nor have we yet encountered any gerunds in the First Catilinarian.

Until we do, however, bear in mind once more that gerunds are nouns.  They are used very simply, often in prepositional phrases.  Some examples:

[blank]
Problems arise when gerunds, in their verbal capacity, take direct objects.  We could for instance, modify our last example thus:

[blank]
In this case amando governs libros as its object.  In practice, however, such constructions are rare.  Rather than gerund + noun, the Romans favored noun + gerundive.  See the section on the basic usage of gerundives for an explanation of the difference between these constructions.

(perfect passive stem) + (4th decl. acc. / abl. ending)

Example:  amare, amatus, to love = amat + um / u

The full declension of the above supine is as follows:

As you can see, there are no nominative, genitive, or dative supines;  given the limited usage of the supine, there is no need for them, either.

NOTE:  to repeat, supines exist only in the fourth declension, only in the singular, only in the masculine, and only in the accusative and ablative.  If you see what looks to be a feminine or neuter supine, or a supine in the plural, then you are doubtless looking at a perfect passive participle instead.

We have only encountered one of the two uses uf the supine thus far:  the supine of purpose (the accusative supine).

Basically, the supine replaces ut plus a subjunctive verb, which are the ingredients of the basic purpose clause.  Consider the following sentence:

blank
Here the supine salutatum does the work of the clause ut salutarent.

Compare this expression of purpose with purpose clauses, gerundives, and relative clauses of purpose.