2

Once supply the thought,

And words will follow swift as soon as sought

Ars Poetica, 311.

3

Style has three kinds of excellence, correctness, lucidity and elegance (for many include the all-important quality of appropriateness under the heading of elegance). Its faults are likewise threefold, namely the opposites of these excellences. The teacher of literature therefore must study the rules for correctness of speech, these constituting the first part of his art. [] The observance of these rules is concerned with either one or more words. I must now be understood to usein its most general sense. It has of course two meanings; the one covers all the parts of which language is composed, as in the line of Horace:the other restricts it to a part of speech such asandTo avoid this ambiguity, some authorities prefer the terms] Individual words will either be native or imported, simple or compound, literal or metaphorical, in current use or newly-coined.

4

[p. 81]

A single word is more likely to be faulty than to possess any intrinsic merit. For though we may speak of a word as appropriate, distinguished or sublime, it can possess none of these properties save in relation to connected and consecutive speech; since when we praise words, we do so because they suit the matter. [] There is only one excellence thatcan be isolated for consideration, namely euphony, the Greek term for ourthat is to say that, when we are confronted with making a choice between two exact synonyms, we must select that which sounds best.

5

6

7

[p. 83]

8

9

10

11

12

[p. 85]

13

14

15

16

[p. 87]

17

] In the first placeandmust not be allowed to intrude their offensive presence. These blemishes are however pardoned at times, because we have become accustomed to them or because they have age or authority in their favour or are near akin to positive excellences, since it is often difficult to distinguish such blemishes from figures of speech.1 The teacher therefore, that such slippery customers may not elude detection, must seek to acquire a delicate discrimination; but of this I will speak later when I come to discuss figures of speech. 1 ] For the present I will defineas an offence occurring in connexion with single words. Some of my readers may object that such a topic is beneath the dignity of so ambitious a work. But who does not know that someoccur in writing, others in speaking? For although what is incorrect in writing will also be incorrect in speech, the converse is not necessarily true, inasmuch as mistakes in writing are caused by addition or omission, substitution or transposition, while mistakes in speaking are due to separation or combination of syllables, to aspiration or other errors of sound. [] Trivial as these points may seem, our boys are still at school and I am reminding their instructors of their duty. And if one of our teachers is lacking in education and has done no more than set foot in the outer courts of his art, he will have to confine himself to the rules published in the elementary text-books: themore learned teacher on the other hand will be in a position to go much further: first of all, for example, he will point out that there are many different kinds of] One kind is due to race, such as the insertion of a Spanish or African term; for instance the iron tire of a wheel is called 2 though Persius uses it as established in the Latin language; Catullus picked up 3 (a box) in the valley of the Po, while the author of thebe he Labienus or Cornelius Gallus, importedfrom Gaul in the sense of “follower.” As for 4 which is Sardinian for a “rough coat,” it is introduced by Cicero merely as an object of derision. [] Another kind of barbarism proceeds from the speaker's temper: for instance, we regard it as barbarous if a speaker use cruel or brutal language. [] A third and very common kind, of which anyone may fashion examples for himself, consists in the addition or omission of a letter or syllable, or in the substitution of one for another or in placing one where it has no right to be. [] Some teachers however, to display their learning, are in the habit of picking out examples offrom the poets and attacking the authors whom they are expounding for using such words. A boy should however realize that in poets such peculiarities are pardonable or even praiseworthy, and should therefore be taught less common instances. [] For Tinga of Placentia, if we may believe Hortensius who takes him to task for it, committed twoin one word by sayingforthat is to say he substituted c forand transposedand e. On the other handwhen Ennius writes 5 where theis twice repeated, he is defended on the plea of poetic licence. [] Substitution is however sometimes admitted even in prose, as for instance when Cicero speaks of the army ofis locally styledwhile the number of authors who have been guilty of transposition in writingforhas succeeded in standardising the error. Similar instances may be quoted. Ifbe regarded as the correct form, we must remember that Sisenna saidand that many have followed him on the ground of analogy: on the other hand, ifis the correct form, we must remember thathas the support of current usage. [] And yet our fat fool, the fashionable schoolmaster, will regard one of these forms as an example of omission or the other as an instance of addition. Again there are words which when used separately are undoubtedly incorrect, but when used in conjunction excite no unfavourable comment. [] For instanceandareand differ in gender, but the wordsand 6 have persisted in common parlance down to our own day, and Messala shows that the practice is correct. [] It may perhaps seem absurd to say that awhich is an error in a single word, may be made, like aby errors in connexion with number or gender. But take on the one hand(stairs) and(which literally means a twig, but is used in the sense of broom) and on the other hand(barley) and(mead): here we have substitution, omission and addition of letters, but the blemish consists in the former case merely in the use of singular for plural,in the latter of plural for singular. Those on the other hand who have used the wordare guilty of a mistake in gender. [] I merely mention these as instances: I do not wish anyone to think that I have added a fresh problem to a subject into which the obstinacy of pedants has already introduced confusion.

turn te flagranti deiectum fulmine Plaethon.8



18

19

20

[p. 89]

21

The faults which arise in the course of actual speaking require greater penetration on the part of the critic, since it is impossible to cite examples from writing, except in cases where they occur in poetry, as when the diphthong is divided into two syllables inand 7 ; or when the opposite fault occurs, calledorby the Greeks andby ourselves: as an example I may quote the line of Publius Varro:] If this were prose, it would be possible to give the letters their true syllabic value. I may mention as further anomalies peculiar to poetry the lengthening of a short syllable as in 9 or the shortening of a long such as 10 but in poetry we cannot label these as actual faults. [] Errors in sound on the other hand can be detected by the ear alone; although in Latin, as regards the addition or omission of the aspirate, the question may be raised whether this is an error when it occurs in writing; for there is some doubt whetheris a letter or merely a breathing, practice having frequently varied in different ages. [] Older authors used it but rarely even before vowels, sayingorwhile its conjunction with consonants was for a long time avoided, as in words such asorThen for a short time it broke out into excessive use, witness such spelling aswhich may still be read in certain inscriptions: the well-known epigram of Catullus 11 will be remembered in this connexion. [] The spellings vehementer, comprehendere and mihi have lasted to our own day: and among early writers, especially of tragedy, we actually findforin the older MSS.

22

23

24

[p. 91]

] It is still more difficult to detect errors ofor tone (I note that old writers spell the wordas derived from the Greek), or of accent, styled prosody by the Greeks, such as the substitution of the acute accent for the grave or the grave for the acute: such an example would be the placing of the acute accent on the first syllable of] or the substitution of the grave for the circumflex inan error which results in the alteration of the quantity of the middle syllable, since it means making the first syllable acute; or again the substitution of the circumflex for the grave on the second syllable ofwhere the contraction of two syllables into one circumflexed syllable involves a double error. [] This, however, occurs far more frequently in Greek words such aswhich in our young days was pronounced by the most learned of our elders with an acute accent on the first syllable, necessitating a grave accent on the second; the same remark applies toandSuch has been the tradition as regards accents. 12

25

quae circus litora, circum piscosos scopulos,

Aen. iv. 254.

26

27

28

29

[p. 93]

30

31

32

33

[p. 95]

] Still I am well aware that certain learned men and some professed teachers of literature, to ensure that certain words may be kept distinct, sometimes place an acute accent on the last syllable, both when they are teaching and in ordinary speech: as, for instance, in the following passage:] where they make the last syllable ofacute on the ground that, if that syllable were given the grave accent, it might be thought that they meantnot 13 Similarly whenis interrogative, they give the final syllable a grave accent, but when using it in a comparison, make it acute. This practice, however, they restrict almost entirely to adverbs and pronouns; in other cases they follow the old usage. [] Personally I think that in such phrases as these the circumstances are almost entirely altered by the fact that we join two words together. For when I sayI pronounce the phrase as one word, concealing the fact that it is composed of two, consequently it contains but one acute accent, as though it were a single word. The same thing occurs in the phrase] It sometimes happens that the accent is altered by the metre as in pecudes pictaeque volucres 15 ; for I shall readwith the acute on the middle syllable, because, although that syllable is short by nature, it is long by position: else the last two syllables would form an iambus, which its position in the hexameter does not allow. [] But these same words, if separated, will form no exception to the rule: or if the custom under discussion prevails, the old lawof the language will disappear. (This law is more difficult for the Greeks to observe, because they have several dialects, as they call them, and what is wrong in one may be right in another.) But with us the rule is simplicity itself. [] For in every word the acute accent is restricted to three syllables, whether these be the only syllables in the word or the three last, and will fall either on the penultimate or the antepenultimate. The middle of the three syllables of which I speak will be acute or circumflexed, if long, while if it be short, it will have a grave accent and the acute will be thrown back to the preceding syllable, that is to say the antepenultimate. [] Every word has an acute accent, but never more than one. Further the acute never falls on the last syllable and therefore in dissyllabic words marks the first syllable. Moreover the acute accent and the circumflex are never found in one and the same word, since the circumflex itself contains an acute accent. Neither the circumflex nor the acute, therefore, will ever be found in the last syllable of a Latin word, with this exception, that monosyllables must either be acute or circumflexed; otherwise we should find words without an acute accent at all. [] There are also faults of sound, which we cannot reproduce in writing, as they spring from defects of the voice and tongue. The Greeks who are happier in inventing names than we are call them iotacisms, lambdacisms, 16 (attenuations) and(broadenings); they also use the termwhen the voice seems to proceed from the depths of the mouth. [] There are also certain peculiar and indescribable sounds for which we sometimes take whole nations to fault. To sum up then, if all the faults of which we have just spoken be avoided,we shall be in possession of the Greekthat is to say, an exact and pleasing articulation; for that is what we mean when we speak of correct pronunciation.

34

35

36

37

[p. 97]

38

39

40

41

[p. 99]

42

43

44

[p. 101]

45

46

47

48

49

50

[p. 103]

51

52

53

54

] All other faults in speaking are concerned with more words than one; among this class of faults is thealthough there have been controversies about this as well. For even those who acknowledge that it occurs in connected speech, argue that, since it can be corrected by the alteration of one word, the fault lies in the word and not in the phrase or sentence. [] For example whether 17 or 18 contains a solecism in gender (and personally I object to neither, as Vergil is the author of both; however, for the sake of argument let us assume that one of the two is incorrect), still whichever phrase is incorrect, it can be set right by the alteration of the word in which the fault lies: that is to say we can emend either toorBut it is obvious that these critics misrepresent the case. For neither word is faulty in itself; the error arises from its association with another word. The fault therefore lies in the phrase. [] Those who raise the question as to whether acan arise in a single word show greater intelligence. Is it for instance aif a man when calling a single person to him saysor in dismissing several persons saysorOr again if the answer does not correspond to the question: suppose, for example, when someone said to you “Whom do I see?”, you were to reply “I.” Some too think it aif the spoken word is contradicted by the motion of hand or head. [] I do not entirely concur with this view nor yet do Iwholly dissent. I admit that amay occur in a single word, but with this proviso: there must be something else equivalent to another word, to which the word, in which the error lies, can be referred, so that thearises from the faulty connexion of those symbols by which facts are expressed and purpose indicated. [] To avoid all suspicion of quibbling, I will say that amay occur in one word, but never in a word in isolation. There is, however, some controversy as to the number and nature of the different kinds ofThose who have dealt with the subject most fully make a fourfold division, identical with that which is made in the case ofare brought about by addition, for instance in phrases such as] by omission, in phrases such asorand by transposition as in 19 Under this last head comes the question whethercan be placed first in a sentence: for I note that authors of the first rank disagree on this point, some of them frequently placing it in that position, others never. [] Some distinguish these three classes of error from thestyling addition aomission anand transpositionand they assert that ifis a solecism,might also be so called. [] About substitution, that is when one word is used instead of another, there is no dispute. It is an error which we may detect in connexion with all the parts of speech, but most frequently in the verb, because it has greater varietythan any other: consequently in connexion with the verb we getof gender, tense, person and mood (or “states” or “qualities” if you prefer either of these terms), be these types of error six in number, as some assert, or eight as is insisted by others (for the number of the forms of solecism will depend on the number of subdivisions which you assign to the parts of speech of which we have just spoken). Further there are solecisms of number; [] now Latin has two numbers, singular and plural, while Greek possesses a third, namely the dual. There have however been some who have given us a dual as well in words such asandin which as a matter of fact the final syllable has been softened to avoid harshness, just as in old writers we findforConsequently what they assert to be a dual is concerned solely with this one class of termination, whereas in Greek it is found throughout the whole structure of the verb and in nouns as well, though even then it is but rarely used. [] But we find not a trace of such a usage in any Latin author. On the contrary phrases such as 21 and 22 clearly prove that they have nothing to do with the dual. Moreover 23 although Antonius Rufus cites it as proof to the contrary, is often used by the usher in the courts to denote more than two advocates. [] Again, does not Livy near the beginning of his first book write 24 and laterBut I can produce still better authority. For Cicero in hissays, “I have no objectionto the formthough I regardas the more correct.” 25 ] Similarly in vocables and nounsoccur in connexion with gender, number and more especially case, by substitution of one for another. To these may be addedin the use of comparatives and superlatives, or the employment of patronymics instead of possessives and] As forconnected with expressions of quantity, there are some who will regard phrases such as 26 as a solecism, because the diminutive is used instead of the ordinary noun, which implies no diminution. I think I should call it a misuse of the diminutive rather than afor it is an error of sense, whereas solecisms are not errors of sense, but rather faulty combinations of words. [] As regards participles,occur in case and gender as with nouns, in tense as with verbs, and in number as in both. The pronoun admits ofin gender, number and case. [also occur with great frequency in connexion with parts of speech: but a bare statement on this point is not sufficient, as it may lead a boy to think that such error consists only in the substitution of one part of speech for another, as for instance if a verb is placed where we require a noun, or an adverb takes the place of a pronoun and so on. [] For there are some nouns which are cognate, that is to say of the sameand he who uses the wrong 27 in connexion with one of these will be guilty of the same offence as if he were to change theThusandare conjunctions, but it would be bad Latin to say in a questionand 28 ; [andare adverbs: but he who saysin lieu ofis guilty of a similar mistake, since one negative denies, while the other forbids. Furtherandare adverbs of place, butandare solecisms. [] Similar errors may be committed in connexion with the various kinds of pronouns, interjections and prepositions. It is also a 29 if there is a disagreement between what precedes and what follows within the limits of a single clause. [] Some phrases have all the appearance of aand yet cannot be called faulty; take for instance phrases such asorand 30 : although these are never found in later times, they are the rule in ancient writers. We will therefore style themand, though their use is more frequent in poets, will not deny their employment even to orators. [] Figures however will generally have some justification, as I shall show in a later portion of this work, which I promised you a little while back. 31 I must however point out that a figure, if used unwittingly, will be a] In the same class, though they cannot be called figures, come errors such as the use of masculine names with a female termination and feminine names with a neuter termination. I have said enough aboutfor I did not set out to write a treatise on grammar, but was unwilling to slight the science by passing it by without salutation, when it met me in the course of my journey.

55

[p. 105]

56

57

58

59

60

[p. 107]

61

62

63

64

] I therefore resume the path which I prescribed for myself and point out that words are eithernative or foreign. Foreign words, like our population and our institutions, have come to us from practically every nation upon earth. [] I pass by words of Tuscan, Sabine and Praenestine origin; for though Lucilius attacks Vettius for using them, and Pollio reproves Livy for his lapses into the dialect of Padua, I may be allowed to regard all such words as of native origin. Many Gallic words have become current coin, [] such as(chariot) and(four-wheeled wagon) of which Cicero uses the former and Horace the latter.(napkin) again, a word familiar in connexion with the circus, is claimed by the Carthaginians, while I have heard thatwhich is colloquially used in the sense of “stupid,” is derived from Spain. [] But this distinction between native and foreign words has reference chiefly to Greek. For Latin is largely derived from that language, and we use words which are admittedly Greek to express things for which we have no Latin equivalent. Similiarly they at tines borrow words from us. In this connexion the problem arises whether foreign words should be declined according to their language or our own. [] If you come across an archaistic grammarian, he will insist on absolute conformity to Latin practice, because, since we have an ablative and the Greeks have not, it would be absurd in declining a word to use five Greek cases and one Latin. [] He will also praise the patriotism of those who aimed at strengthening the Latin language and asserted that we had no need of foreign practices. They, therefore, pronouncedwith the second syllable long to bring it into conformity with all those Latin nouns which have the same termination in the nominative asThey also insisted on the formsand(the last being adopted by Cicero), because they could not find any Latin nouns ending in] They were reluctant even to permit masculine Greek nouns to end inin the nominative case, and consequently in Caelius we findand in Messalaand in Cicero 32 So we need not be surprised that the majority of early writers saidand] For, it was urged, if such words are spelt likeandthe genitive should terminate innot inOn the same principle they placed an acute accent on the middle syllable ofandbecause Latin does not allow an acute accent on the first syllable if it is short and is followed by two long syllables. [] So too we get the Latinised genitivesandtogether with many other analogous forms. More recent scholars have instituted the practice of giving Greek nouns their Greek declension, although this is not always possible. Personally I prefer to follow the Latin method, so far as grace of diction will permit. For I should not like to sayon the analogy ofalthough Gaius Caesar in deference to antiquity does adopt this way of declining it. Current practice has however prevailed over his authority. [] In other words which can be declined in either way without impropriety, those who prefer it can employ the Greek form: they will not be speaking Latin, but will not on the other hand deserve censure.

65

[p. 109]

66

67

Nerei repandirostrum incurvticervicum pecs:



The flock

Of Nereus snout-uplifted, neck-inarched



68

[p. 111]

69

70

Simple words are what they are in the nominative, that is, their essential nature. [] Compoundwords are formed by the prefix of a preposition as inthough care must be taken that two conflicting prepositions are not prefixed as in 33 if this be avoided they may in certain cases have a double prefix as inoror the CiceronianThey may also be formed by what I might term the combination of two independent units, as in] For I will not admit that the combination of three is possible at any rate in Latin, although Cicero asserts that 34 is compounded ofand there are to be found scholars who contend thatlikewise is a compound of three parts of speech, namely] As forit is by now universally believed to stand fora derivation which corresponds to the actual sacrifice, which has its counterpart in Homer 35 as well. But these compounds are formed not so much from three words as from the fragments of three. On the other hand Pacuvius seems to have formed compounds of a preposition and two vocables (nouns) as inthe effect is unpleasing. [] Compounds are however formed from two complete Latin words, as for instanceandthough in this case there is some question as to whether the words from which they are formed are complete. 36 They may also be formed of one complete and one incompleteword, as in the case ofor of one incomplete and one complete, such asor of two incomplete words as in(footman), or from one Latin and one foreign word as in(a dining-couch for two), or in the reverse order as in(an upper garment) orand sometimes even from two foreign words as in(a thong attaching the horse to the raeda). For in this last case the preposition is Greek, whileis Gallic, while the compound is employed neither by Greek nor Gaul, but has been appropriated by Rome from the two foreign tongues. [] In the case of prepositions they are frequently changed by the act of compounding: as a result we getthough the preposition isandthough the preposition isThe same is true ofand 37 But compounds are better suited to Greek than to Latin, [] though I do not think that this is due to the nature of our language: the reason rather is that we have a preference for foreign goods, and therefore receivewith applause, whereas we can scarce defendfrom derisive laughter.

71

72

[p. 113]

Words arewhen they bear their original meaning; [when they are used in a sense different from their natural meaning.words are safest to use: there is a spice of danger in coiningFor if they are adopted, our style wins but small glory from them; while if they are rejected, they become a subject for jest. [] Still we must make the venture; for as Cicero 38 says, use softens even these words which at first seemed harsh. On the other hand theis denied us. Who would tolerate an attempt to imitatephrases like the much praised 39 “the bow twanged,” and 40 “the eye hissed”? We should even feel some qualms about using“to baa,” and“to whinny,” if we had not the sanction of antiquity to support us.