Disputatio:Textus Constitutionis Civitatum Foederatarum Americae in Latinum conversus

ut auxilium sit eis, qui de Civitatum Foederatarum Rectione Latine scribant

Inquis "'qui' est subiectum verbi 'scribant', ergo nominativus esse debet."—Ita, probe dicis, and it reads more clearly that way to native English-speakers too, and it must be right; but one keeps remembering Allen & Greenough #307c: "The antecedent may be omitted, especially if it is indefinite," with the example qui cognoscerent misit 'he sent men to reconnoitre'; which in the present case would give us the weirdness of ut auxilium sit qui de Civitatum Foederatarum Rectione Latine scribant, so there must be exceptions, in which the omission of the indefinite antecedent is not possible. The same rule appears in Woodcock's New Latin Syntax, #148: "The noun or pronoun to which the relative refers may be indefinite and unexpressed, as misit qui nuntiarent, 'he sent (men) to report'"—not misit eos qui nuntiarent, and apparently also not misit quos nuntiarent. ¶ Cicero de Sen. 10 says: Ego Q. Maximum, eum qui Tarentum recepit, dilexi. Clearly not quem Tarentum recepit. IacobusAmor 04:03, 14 Maii 2009 (UTC)