Hello,
I came across a sentence in teaching material written by a Latin teacher I know:
Antequam adulescens factus erat, puer idoneus ad rustica opera videbatur.
It is unclear to me why he used 'factus erat' instead of 'factus est' since the kid became a grownup only after he seemed fit for farming, so if there was any need for a pluperfect I would have put it in the main clause.
The author kindly tried to explain to me why the sentence reads like this but I really didn't get it.
Could anyone help me understand the logic here?
Thanks!
I came across a sentence in teaching material written by a Latin teacher I know:
Antequam adulescens factus erat, puer idoneus ad rustica opera videbatur.
It is unclear to me why he used 'factus erat' instead of 'factus est' since the kid became a grownup only after he seemed fit for farming, so if there was any need for a pluperfect I would have put it in the main clause.
The author kindly tried to explain to me why the sentence reads like this but I really didn't get it.
Could anyone help me understand the logic here?
Thanks!