been expected from his unique position in Roman literature, his efforts were on sounder lines, and the effect on the language of his successors is discernible at once, particularly in the line of expressive compounds. PACUVIUS. The bulk of fragments of the tragedies of Pacuvius is little greater than in the case of Ennius; but the proportion of new words is considerably larger, the total number of 66 being nearly one in 6 verses. Furthermore, we discover at once a marked tendency to experiment with the language, not only on the lines already followed by Ennius, but on others, in some of which none had led, and few would follow. An examination of the complete list of words brings out the following facts: 1. Only one Greek word occurs. 2. Nine compound adjectives, all the way from the picturesque tardigradus to the monstrous incurvicervicus, and 6 compound verbs illustrate an increasing tendency. 3. The most striking phenomenon, however, is the appearance among the derivatives of not less than 17 new abstract nouns, 6 ending in -tas, 8 in -tudo, and 3 in -or. These range from the indispensable to the fantastic, from unanimitas to anxitudo; and remind one of the two periods in the development of the English language (one immediately after Chaucer, the other during the "revival of learning") when it was the fashion to produce such words as 'facundious,' 'pulcritude,' 'consuetude,' 'mulierosity,' 'solertiousness,' etc. Various derivative verbs (some 13 in all) should be added here, especially 4 inceptives. 4. Other words include but 3 adverbs, and do not need especial notice. 5. That Pacuvius was an experimenter who went too far to be cordially and thoroughly imitated is evident at once from the fact that 25 of these 66 new words never occur again. On the other hand, quite a number found a permanent place in the language. Of course Latin did not need prolixitudo and concorditas; and geminitudo and matresco were plainly called for only by the occasion. But there was undoubtedly a place for mollitudo and timiditas, while bonifer and globosus could hardly be spared from the working force of the language. Although the verse containing the two enormities, incurvicervicus and repandirostrus, is commonly cited to prove the devotion of Pacuvius to outlandish compounds, a careful search fails to discover good ground for the charge. 6. Tardigradus is worthy of Lucretius, and should have endured. The same is true of macor, taetro, cornifrons, and abjugo; while unanimitas, largificus, and flexanimus certainly deserved a more extended use than they ever enjoyed. 7. On the whole, the inference can hardly be avoided that the complete works of Pacuvius would doubtless show extensive contributions to the language along the well-established lines of composition and derivation. ACCIUS. In Accius the total number of new words is larger than in any of his predecessors in Roman tragedy; but, the number of verses being about 700, the 78 words do not bring the percentage up so high as was the case in Pacuvius, and not much above that of Ennius. Of those 78 words, 25, or nearly }, are ära§ λεγόμενα. Accius evidently followed the general tendencies already observed in Pacuvius. 1. We find no case of borrowing from the Greek except the imitation of TETPάToλis, quadrurbem. 2. Among new compounds, the adjectives number 6, the verbs 9, and the nouns 2. There is an apparent falling off in the coinage of the picturesque descriptive adjectives; sonipes endured as a poetic word; while such compounds as taurigenus and fallaciloquus were doomed to retirement. But disicio, allido, oblittero, and eniteo were valuable acquisitions to the language. Such a noun as vitisator, used later by Vergil, is hardly more than an epithet. 3. The craze for new abstracts has not died out yet. There are 12 in -tas, and II in -tudo. Vastitas, crudelitas, and stupiditas were useful additions; magnitas, honestitudo, and that ilk, are mere doubles of words already in common use; while noxitudo, nitiditas, and the like, did not secure the stamp of popular approval. Of the derivative verbs the inceptives in -sco continue to be the most noteworthy additions; yet most of them died a speedy death. Such formations as vastesco and sanctesco do not seem in harmony with the genius of the language. There were, however, several useful derivative verbs, like divito and locupleto. 4. The list of derivative adjectives shows the largest increase of any, including II words, of which exspes, fremibundus, vorax, and praefervidus endured. 5. Indecorabiliter is the only new adverb and that a ärağ λeyóμevov. 6. Appetisso, delitor, celebresco, perfremo, tabificabilis, orbifico, and taetritudo might well have endured. 7. Accius illustrates pretty well what was to be expected from one who kept up to the mark of word-coinage set down by his immediate predecessors. There are fewer fanciful forms, but a more earnest effort to broaden the language and to give parallel forms to many already existing words. The language did not, however, in most cases, care for doubles of this kind, and hence it is that so large a proportion of his new words perished at once. In the somewhat more than 1600 fragmentary verses of Roman tragedy we find, accordingly, 213 words which there is more or less reason to consider coined by the tragic writers. Of these, 55 (or a little more than ) never appear again; and of the rest, a good-sized majority never came into very common use. This fact may appear a little disappointing at first thought, but we have already seen that the conditions under which we study this question are such as to bring the rarest words into special prominence. And even those which did not themselves become a permanent part of the language, exercised an indirect influence that cannot be estimated. Not only did the tragedians set the pace in word-building, but also scores of their new words were accepted and incorporated in the language. It is remarkable, considering the source of this body of dramatic literature, how few Greek words (not over 18 in all the fragments) were borrowed. It indicates a better self-denial and a keener industry than we have sometimes been inclined to credit to these writers. It was rather in the lines of the expressive compound and the timely derivative that we find the tendencies most marked. Probably the least valuable fashion was that of multiplying ponderous abstract nouns, which seem particularly out of place in poetic composition. Tragedy showed the Romans how to write dignified Latin poetry, combining beauty and feeling, and marked out plainly the line along which the vocabulary of each author should enrich the language in a perfectly rational development. In the main the succeeding Roman writers followed suit. The greatest failure to measure up to the possibilities before them was in the expressive composition of words. Such word-painting as we find in Ennius and Pacuvius might have been continued by the poets that followed, and extended indefinitely; and geniuses like Lucretius and Catullus made good use of the example. But, as in English, by non-use the facility of such composition was rapidly diminished, and the language lost here much of its flexibility. Remarks were made by Professor A. G. Harkness and by Dr. Knapp. Adjourned at 12.45 P.M. AFTERNOON SESSION. The Association reassembled at 3.15 P.M. Professor Albert Harkness reported that the Auditing Committee had examined the account of the Treasurer, compared it with the vouchers and found it correct. The report was adopted. 15. Notes on the véκva of Peisandros, Aristophanes, Aves, 15531564, by Professor B. Perrin, of Yale University. This is a parody on the véкvia of Odysseus, full of Homeric reminiscences. The Mun is the 'Nкeavós of к 508, λ 13, w II, and the unwashed Socrates as ψυχαγωγός answers to the Hermes of ω. Peisandros takes the rôle of Odysseus in A, and goes down to the confines of Hades to consult his own spirit, not that of Teiresias. As a sacrifice, the ram and black sheep of Odysseus, Peisandros has a camel-lamb. He sacrifices it, then like Odysseus turns away (άĥλ0€ 1561), when up there comes to him from the lower world-Chairephon the Bat (so called as the spirits of the suitors are compared to bats w 6 ff.). In 1561, noting the surprising lack of correspondence with X 36 ff., commentators almost universally suspect or correct dπîλ0€. Kock's earlier кa0σTO, and his later кaτîλ0€ are fair examples of corrections made to restore correspondence with Homer. But the ảπîλe of Aristophanes is faultless in its tradition, whereas A 35-49 shew clear signs of alteration from an original context which corresponded minutely with × 526-536, the forerunner-passage. At just the point where the minute correspondence is broken, we find in a group of verses to which the Alexandrian critics took exception. They are memorable and faultless verses in themselves, but they are not adapted closely to their present context. At some point in the tradition of the Homeric poems, probably the time of their committal to writing, the desire to preserve this av0os led to its substitution in A in place of verses corresponding minutely to κ 528-530, where there is an expression of which the ảπîλ of Aristophanes is a faultless parody. It is most natural surely that a brilliant parody of the véκvia of Odysseus should base itself on the main account of that vékvia rather than on its forerunner-passage, i.e. on A rather than on ê. Either, then, the manuscript of Aristophanes' Odyssey had at X 38 something corresponding to the dπovóσ тpañéodaɩ of к 528, or the oral tradition of the poem, kept vivid by public recitation, had this. We thus get a glimpse of a written or oral status of a famous passage in Homer which was superior, in point of exact correspondence, to the subsequent vulgate which became the basis for Alexandrian criticism. The Homer of Plato has been shewn to differ in more than mere minutiae from this vulgate. In one case, at least, the Homer of Aristophanes so differed. It was probably a long and gradual process by which the vulgate won its ascendancy. Remarks were made by Professors Gudemann and Elwell, and by the author in reply. 16. "NoTe in the Orators, with special reference to Isocrates, by W. A. Eckels, of Baltimore. Professor Gildersleeve (A. J. P. XIV. 241) records his conviction that "it is safe to speak of stylistic effect within the range of wore," and indicates as a marked source of such effect the use of wore with or without a preceding correlative (OUTWS, TOLOÛTOS, etc.). The same writer (A. J. P. VII. 171) notes Isocrates' effective use of σTe correlative in the construction of long periods. Seume (De Sententiis Consecutivis Graecis) speaks of the large use of the wore sentence in the orators, and its "great oratorical force." This paper aimed to give a few results of a study undertaken in pursuance of these suggestions, with a view to testing the value of wore as an index of style in the orators. Only the more general and obvious results could find place in so brief a summary. Isocrates is an author in whom we especially look for the conscious use of rhetorical effects. The plan of this study has been to compare Isocrates' use of σTE (1) with that of several other orators; (2) in the different classes of Isocratean writings; (3) in different orations of the same class; (4) in different parts of the same oration. The points especially studied have been (1) the use of the moods, (2) the employment or omission of the correlative, and (3) the frequency of occurrence of wore in general. The conclusion was reached that (3) is of minor importance as a stylistic test, while (2) is of decided value. Taking the average occurrence of wore to the Teubner page in six orators, the curve runs thus: Antiphon .28; Lysias .95; Isocrates 1.00; Isaeus .69; Demosthenes .49; Aeschines .30. These results are interesting, but it is not easy to connect them with characteristic differences of style. We should hardly expect, e.g., so close a correspondence in authors differing so widely as Isocrates and Lysias. But the test of correlation brings out a real difference. In Isocrates, correlative ore greatly preponderates over non-correlative. In Lysias it falls a little below it. Isoc. correlative: non-correlative:: 21: 1; Lys. 1: 1. Here we seem to have a true norm of style - the free wore in the simpler, less periodic style of Lysias, the correlative wore in the more complicated structure of Isocrates. Isaeus marks a further gain for the non-correlative type-cor. I; non-cor. 1. The closer "grip" of argument in Isaeus still had need of wore as a logical instrument; it could better dispense with the rhetorically effective οὕτως — ὥστε, which was brought into frequent service by the narrative of Isocrates and Lysias.1 1 The ratio of correlative to non-correlative in the six orators studied stands thus: Ant. 1: 2}; Lys. 11; Isoc. 21: 1; Isae. 1: 1; Dem. 1: 1; Aesch. 1 : 1. Again, compare two works of Isocrates. The Adv. Euthynum is a strictly forensic work-close argument, almost devoid of narrative, so concise and plain in style as to be denied to Isocrates by some. The Helen is an epideictic speech of the most ornate type, full of flowing periods and involved sentences. In the average of the occurrence of ore they both occupy a high place, — the Euth. first of the twenty-one works, the Helen sixth. But these are sentences differ widely in rhetorical effect. Out of 15 cases in the Euth., 12 are of the noncorrelative type; and almost all these represent what may be called the “σTE of logical inference,” — a sort of “therefore,” introducing an opinion or conclusion. Out of 18 examples in the Helen, 16 are of the correlative type — the ouτws often at the head of its clause, giving an effective balance. For the two types, compare Euth. 5 and Hel. 37.1 The predominance of these two types in ratios of 4:1 and 8: I respectively seems an excellent index to the widely differing styles of these two orations. Attention was now concentrated on Isocrates, and a table presented showing the average occurrence for each oration, for each class, the number of correlatives and non-correlatives in each oration, and the ratio of correlatives to noncorrelatives for each class. The works are classified according to Jebb, thus avoiding any tendency to twist the classification in the interest of a theory. The ratios of correlative to non-correlative for the several classes are as follows: (1) Epideictic, 33:1; (2) Philosophical (Essays on Education), 2}:1; (3) Political, 24:1; (4) Forensic, 14:1; (5) Hortatory, 11:1. Assuming that the correlative wore is suited to a dignified, elaborate, and consciously rhetorical style, this order of classes is much what we should expect. Epideictic discourse is the natural home of this kind of writing, and the Philosophical and Political, in Isocrates at least, are much tinged with it. Hortatory and Forensic work involve an opposite tendency (on the yévos dikavikóv, cf. Panath. 1), and are unfriendly to elaborate periods and correlative structure. The test of correlation was next applied to the individual orations within each department. When we find a work differing widely in its use of σTE from the normal usage of its class, we inquire whether it is in other respects abnormal whether it is a fair representative of that class. In nearly every instance wide departures from type in the use of wore were found to coincide with lack of conformity in other respects. The Archidamus, e.g., stands lowest in the Political class in use of the correlative type, — correl. 1}: non-correl. 1, as against 2: for its class. But this speech was noted by the Pseudo-Longinus as an instance of роσяожоuía-feigned speech of another; the speaker is a young man and a Spartan prince. In closeness of argument and earnestness of tone it approaches the forensic class, and recedes furthest from the epideictic coloring which marks the Areopagiticus and Panegyricus — orations which stand at the opposite end of this class in respect to correlation, with ratios of correl. 41 : noncorrel. I, and 3: I, respectively. The widest variations in style in any one class are found in the Forensic, and here are seen the widest extremes in the use of ore correlative and non 1 Euth. 5: Νικίας τοίνυν Εὐθύνου πλείω μὲν ἔχει, ἧττον δὲ δύναται λέγειν· ὥστ ̓ οὐκ ἔστι δι' ὅτι ἂν ἐπήρθη ἀδίκως ἐπ ̓ Εὐθύνουν ἐλθεῖν. Hel. 37 : Οὕτω γὰρ νομίμως καὶ καλῶς διῴκει τὴν πόλιν, ὥστ ̓ ἔτι καὶ νῦν ἔχνος τῆς ἐκείνου πραότητος ἐν τοῖς ἤθεσιν ἡμῶν καταλελείφθαι. |