To understand the distinction between a substantive clause and a relative clause, follow this link.
Of substantive clauses, those that take the subjunctive have two central uses:
To express purpose
To describe results
Both such clauses either take ut or nē (where the purpose/results are negative).
He warns him to avoid all suspicious activities: monet ut omnēs suspīciōnēs vītet.
I beg that you aid her: tē rogō ut eam iuvēs.
He persuades them to leave: persuādet ut abeant.
He orders his men not to return: suīs imperāvit nē redeant.
A few things to note in the examples above:
The third phrase would look identical as either a substantive clause of purpose or result. One must use context to determine whether he is in the process of persuading them to leave, or whether he has already achieved this result.
The verbs that take substantive clauses may also take secondary objects (I beg you; He orders them) in any case except the nominative.
Substantive Clauses of Purpose are used with a variety of verbs and verbal phrases to denote actions that have future/planned directive. Such as:
(id) agō, agere, ēgī, actum, I do it (so that)
censeō, censēre, censuī, censum, I think, suppose, judge, recommend
ēdīcō, ēdīcere, ēdīxī, ēdictum, I publish, decree
mandō, mandāre, mandāvī, mandātum, I order, command
precor, precārī, precātus sum, I beg, pray
In general, verbs of admonishing, asking, bargaining, commanding, decreeing, determining, permitting, persuading, resolving, urging and wishing are apt to take an ut/nē substantive clause of purpose. For a fuller list, see A&G 563 fn1.
In poetry, don’t be surprised to find an infinitive clause standing as a substitute for the substantive. There are also more common prose variations for particular verbs and verbal phrases under this general heading, which I’ll sort through in coming posts.
A&G define the substantive clause as “a clause…used as a noun,” in contrast to the relative clause, which operates in place of adjectives or adverbs.
I am the man whom you are seeking. (relative clause, as adjective)
She ascended, as Ariadne ascended with Dionysius. (relative clause, as adverb)
They warned us this would happen. (substantive clause, as noun)
She wishes to see you immediately. (substantive clause, as noun)
To tease this out more explicitly, the relative clauses redefine or redescribe ‘man’ and ‘ascended,’ whereas the substantive clauses are effectively an apposition of the verb.
They warned us this would happen = their warning was ‘this would happen’
Shes wishes to see you immediately = this is her wish: to see you immediately
A&G refine this, stating that a substantive clause will always apposite a nominative or accusative case. (In the example above, she wishes x and they warned us x would both be in the accusative in Latin.)
English is partial to abstract nouns, where Latin is partial to verbal phrases.
She demanded an investigation: postulābat ut quaestiō habērētur.
Substantive Clauses Take Four General Forms:
Indicative Clauses with quod
Indirect Questions (with the Subjunctive)
This fourth form, the infinitive (with possible subjective accusative) is not properly a clause. Still these often replace ut clauses with the subjunctive, and are the mainstay of indirect discourse.
(I can’t confirm this, but I get the sense that teneō would only take the accusative, and not the airier ‘remembering state’ wit hthe genitive. I feel this is true because it’s more directly attached to physical possession than the other verbs.)
Reminīscor, reminīscī, – is a rare alternative, though it takes the same two options: accusative for physical possession of memory, or gentive of a mindful state.
Recordor, recordārī, recordātus sum usually takes the accusative, though may take dē + ablative.
I am reminded of their tears: dē suōrum lacrimīs recordor.
In double accusative constructions, predicate accusatives are (a) both objects of the same verb and (b) synonymous with one another. They are especially common with verbs of naming, choosing, appointing, making, esteeming and showing.
They elected Cicero consul: Cicerōnem cōnsulem creavērunt.
The people will soon name me augur: populus mē mox augurem nōminābunt.
He thought no one a man in comparison with himself: hominem prae sē nēminem putāvit.
He offered himself as leader: ducem sē praebuit.
She turned boys into men: puerōs virōs vertēbat.
The girl named the horse Blondie: puella Flavum equum appellāvit.
The distinction here is with double accusative constructions that feature two different accusative objects.
She taught the boys the basics: puerōs elementa docuit.
There is no identity between the boys and their basics, whereas with Cicero and consul are now synonymous in the first example above.
When these constructions are made passive, both predicates are put in the nominative.
Cicero is elected consul: Cicerō cōnsul creātur.
Blondie was named by the girl: Flavus ab pellā appellātus est.
The predicate accusative can also be an adjective.
Old age makes men mild and gentle: aevus mītēs et mānsuētōs hominēs facit.