Supine vs Infinitve

[vangoff]

Hello! Beginners Latin learner here, I have a question that you may have got before countless times, but I am in desperate need for an answer!

I have recently came across supines in my learning, and I am unsure what the difference is between a supine and an infinitive as they both use the word 'to' before the verb. I understand one is used in motion and one isn't, but how am I meant to discern if I come across a word that I don't know that involves motion. I'm just unsure why there is two. I am quite slow, so if it can be explained simply with examples that would be lovely thank you.

 

[Clemens]

The supine is a verbal noun of the fourth declension that only exists in the accusative and dative/ablative forms. The supine is used in specific, limited contexts: the accusative form with a verb of motion to express purpose, and the dative/ablative form after certain types of adjectives to express things like "easy to say" or "lawful to do." Some of the uses of the supine can be expressed by the infinitive or by a gerund in the accusative (with ad).

More generally, as you progress in Latin you will find many situations where the grammatical forms of Latin do not line up one-to-one with English use. It's hard at the beginning, but it's helpful to endeavor to understand a language's workings on its own terms, and to remember that English translations are simply conveying meaning without necessarily reflecting the grammar of Latin or any other language. The English word to is a good example; in English it can be part of an infinitive, as you mention, it can express motion toward, it can express an indirect object, and there are multiple idiomatic uses. None of these would necessarily be translated the same way in Latin. So in short, that Latin has both an infinitive and a supine, both of which get translated to an English infinitive, may be somewhat confusing to a beginner, you will find that this is only one of dozens of examples where Latin grammar just doesn't neatly correspond to English.

 

[vangoff]

I understand the second part, can you give me a couple examples in Latin and English of the supine, and maybe a link to how it declines? Sorry

 

[Pacifica]

Accusative supine:

Venio libros emptum = I'm coming to buy books.
Rex milites misit hominem quaesitum = The king sent soliders to look for the man.

Ablative/dative supine:

Rex—miserabile dictu!—interfectus est = The king—sad to say!—was killed.
Haec enerratu difficilia sunt = These things are hard to explain.

How it declines: it has only two forms, as stated above. The supine is the fourth principal part of a verb (e.g. dico, dicere, dixi, dictum) with the ending -um for the accusative (e.g. dictum) and the ending -u (long) for the ablative/dative* (e.g. dictu).

*We call it "ablative/dative" because it's kind of a merger of those two cases (it has a complicated history) but for practical purposes this is just one form with one type of use (the one shown above). It's sometimes just called ablative.

 

[AoM]

And just know that you'll see supines a lot less often compared to infinitives.

 

[Dantius]

Also, the accusative supine shows purpose. Infinitives can't be used to show purpose*. If you can replace "to" with "in order to," you shouldn't be using an infinitive. If you can't replace "to" with "in order to," you shouldn't be using a supine.

So veni libros emptum = "I came (in order) to buy books".
Veni libros emere is just bad grammar.

On the other hand, volo libros emere = "I want to buy books," and volo libros emptum is bad grammar, just as "I want in order to buy books" is bad English. So there's really no instance where the accusative supine and infinitive would overlap in standard Latin.

The supine is one of many ways to show purpose; others that you might learn in the future are an ut purpose clause and a gerundive phrase with ad. The supine only works after a verb of motion (note: the verb of motion is the main verb, not the supine). So if I wanted to say "I study Latin (in order) to increase my wisdom," I could not say studeo linguae Latinae sapientiam meam auctum, because studeo doesn't involve any motion (nor, of course, could I use an infinitive, because infinitives can't show purpose). I'd have to use another one of the methods I mentioned at the start of this paragraph.

*(with rare exceptions that you shouldn't worry about at this stage)

 

[Dantius]

Regarding the ablative supine, there's slightly more overlap with the infinitive. For instance, Pacifica's example haec enarratu difficilia sunt ("these things are hard to explain," or literally "these things are difficult with respect to explaining") could also be expressed as haec enarrare difficile est ("it is difficult to explain these things" or "explaining these things is difficult"), where haec is accusative. Maybe these examples might help show how these constructions are different, and where they don't overlap.

 

[Andrea Vitoripa]

Also, the accusative supine shows purpose. Infinitives can't be used to show purpose*.

*(with rare exceptions that you shouldn't worry about at this stage)

Yep, can still tell you where I was the first time I ran across an infinitive showing purpose.

"Libera me, Domine, de morte aeterna, in die illa tremenda: Quando caeli movendi sunt et terra. Dum veneris judicare saeculum per ignem."

 

[vangoff]

Thank you all for your replies, it's really helped me understand. I appreciate the time and effort in your responses.