From the former have come all the uses of the Indicative in protasis; from the latter
all the uses of the Subjunctive in protasis. The Apodosis has either (1) the Indicative,
expressing the conclusion as a fact, and the Present and Perfect Subjunctive, express-
ing it originally as future — and hence more or less doubtful — or (2) the Imperfect
and Pluperfect Subjunctive expressing it as futurum in praeterito,! and so unfulfilled
in the present or past. Thus, — ridés, mAidre cachinnó concutitur, you laugh, he shakes
with more boisterous laughter, is the original form for the Indicative in protasis and
apodosis; si ridés originally means merely you laugh in some way or other, and so,
later, rF you laugh. So rogés Aristénem, neget, ask Aristo, he would say no, is the
original form of the subjunctive in protasis and apodosis; si rogés would mean ask in
some way or other. In si rogáres, negáret, the Imperfect rogarés transfers the command
of rogés to past time,? with the meaning suppose you had asked, and si would have the
same meaning as before; while negáret transfers the future idea of neget to past time,
and means he was going to deny. Now the stating of this supposition at all gives
rise to the implication that it is untrue in point of fact, — because, if it were true,
there would ordinarily be no need to state it as a supposition: for it would then be a
simple fact, and as such would be put in theindicative.8 Such a condition or conclusion


1 The futurum in praeteritó is a tense future relatively to a time absolutely past.
