* Passive Voice: The participle inherently expresses passive voice. The action was done *to* the subject, not *by* the subject.
* Perfect Tense: It indicates an action completed in the past. The action is finished.
* Participle Nature: It functions as an adjective, modifying a noun. It can also be used with a form of the verb "to be" to create a perfect passive sentence.
Therefore, translations vary widely. Here's a breakdown of common translation approaches:
* As an Adjective: This is the most common approach. You translate the participle to reflect its meaning in the passive voice and then use it to describe a noun. For example, if the fourth principal part of *amō* (I love) is *amātus*, meaning "loved," you might translate "puer amatus" as "the loved boy" or "the boy who was loved."
* With "to be" (Perfect Passive): This creates a full sentence in the perfect passive. You translate the participle as a past participle and combine it with a form of "to be" (often "was" or "were" in English). "Puer amatus erat" becomes "The boy had been loved." The tense of "to be" can change the overall tense (e.g., "The boy will have been loved").
* As a Noun (Gerundive): In certain cases, particularly with a possessive pronoun, it can function almost as a verbal noun. Consider "amandum est," often translated as "it must be loved" or "it needs to be loved." Though not strictly the perfect passive, this illustrates the participle's flexibility.
Example:
Let's take the verb *dūcō* (I lead). Its fourth principal part is *ductus*.
* "Miles ductus est." "The soldier was led." (Perfect Passive)
* "Miles ductus ad imperatorem." "The led soldier (to the emperor)." or "The soldier who was led to the emperor." (Adjective modifying "miles")
In short, translating the fourth principal part requires understanding its grammatical function within the sentence and choosing a translation that reflects both the passive voice and the completed action it describes. Always consider the surrounding words to determine the most appropriate translation.