« PreviousContinue »
some of his translations: two bks. of Xenophon (Mem. I think), Xen. de Rep. Lacedaem., Xen. Agesilaus, Plutarch's Lycurgus and Numa. Cyriacus of Ancona : These four inss. which you brought from the Peloponnesus are very valuable. Answers him also on the question what were the doctrines of the ancient philosophers on the parts of the soul (Pythagoras, Democritus and Epicurus, Stoics, Plato, Aristotle).
1446: Poethius commended, esp. in Logic: desires to have copies made of certain sections. F. will provide a copyist. 1447: would like to borrow Commentaries on Porphyry and Aristotle's Categories (* Praedicamenta ') and repi 'Epunvelas, for copying.
1447: I have been compelled to borrow a codex of Lactantius from another. Why do you not return the one I loaned you? I must return it to its owner.
1448: Thomasius, 'philosopher and physician': Have sent you my Latin version of Hippocrates' de Flatibus and de Passionibus Corporis : please return when read. My Macrobius' Saturnalia has just been brought to Milan, a codex which I lost when I lived at Vicenza, before my journey to Constantinople (1419). To Card. Bessarion : Very sorry I cannot let you have my Iliad engrossed by Theodorus Gaza. To Guarino of Verona: My Strabo ? Am sorry: it is with all my Greek codices in the care of Bernardo Giustiniani in Venice (Barbaro is using them there).
1449: begs of a physician of Milan to loan F. a codex containing Celsus, both Soranus, Democritus (sic) Apuleius (sic); would like to have a copy made. I want to read those medical authors for the scholarship which they furnish.
On Augustine and Jerome : A. had the keener penetration; Jerome the better style; J. a good Greek scholar; A. less so; J. a Hebrew scholar ; A. ignorant there. 1450: consoles his former pupil Perleoni, an underpaid Humanist at Genoa, with a citation from Theocritus. To the priest Cassianus: Send me my Greek codices which Victorinus (da Feltre) has loaned you. Proclus on Plato, Timaeus, Aristotle's Dialectica with commentaries by Alexander and Themistius, Euripides, Libri Mathematici. You have had them too long. I want my books around me. Thomasius : Send your Ptolemy. 1451: is looking for a codex of Strabo (Febr. 15). The Greeks to-day talk as Euripides and Aristophanes did, as to enunciation : of course, with this, there is grammatical and ungrammatical speech. At Aurispa's there is Guch a copy of the geographer Strabo: I have so heard at Guarino's. Please return my orations of Cicero: you have had them long enough. “De anno autem pro scaenio apud Plautum: textus ille corruptus est: Nannio enim scribi oportet' (v. Plautus, Amphitr. prol. 91). Is looking for Arrian. Why he went to Constantinople in 1419: quo Graeca sapientia factus doctior maiori vel usui vel ornamento latinae futurus essem (note the grammar). On ae and ai. I desire Pliny's N.H. I hear the prince (d'Este, at Ferrara) has a copy very highly emended through the labors of Aurispa and Guarino. Have you a good copyist there?
1452: those twelve comedies of Plautus brought into Italy in the last years from Gerniany: F. desires copy made for himself. Owner (addressed) is said to be unwilling to trust the codex to any one. Is there any Greek copyist at Rome? I find that a copy of Cicero's Epistolae Familiares (so F. puts it) is for sale here, in Milan, for ten ducats. This codex is .et pulcher et novus et satis emendate scriptus. 1453: I want my codex containing my Latin
version of two orations of Lysias, of Aristotle's Rhetorica ad Alexandrum (really the texvn of Anaximenes). I lent you this codex in the time of duke Visconti. I made these versions when professor at Florence. (Dec. 15, 1453: first mention by F. of fall of Constantinople.) Nobody here in Milan has a copy of Plutarch's Parallel Lives : I have Latinized Numa and Lycurgus. 1454: Francesco Barbaro is dead in Venice: combination of Greek and Latin scholar. ship (as in him) is very rare.
re. Get my Greek codices from his heirs. Now (1454 sqq.) writes many letters to the rich and great in Italy and France, bespeaking money for travelling Greeks who are collecting funds for Turkish
Are there any Greek codices for sale in Turin ? F. wishes to employ a domestic copyist, an expert in abbreviations (notae). 1456: To Pope Calixtus III (see p. vii fin.). Pity that Nicholas V failed in his desire to have a version of Homer made. That pope, after fall of Constantinople, sent his envoys through all that part of Europe and Asia to buy up Greek codices. Argyropulos is among the Greeks now collecting funds for ransom. Expects a librarius' from Mantua, to be employed in his house at Milan. 1458: Have not been able to find any book on Greek quantities. I need a Greek copyist. He thanks new Pope, Pius II (Humanist), for a codex of Plutarch.
1460: F. has had copied for himself Porphyrio on Horace. To his son Xenophon at Ragusa in Dalmatia: Are there any ancient monuments at Ragusa? any old inss. with name of town? Keep a lookout for Greek codices. To Alamanni at Florence: F. hears that many Greek codices have reached Florence from the shipwreck of Constantinople. Find out who has that codex of Silius Italicus, once acquired at Montepulciano from the estate of a man who was secretary to Pope Martin V († 1431): 'nam codices omnes, quotquot illo exemplari exscripti sunt, depravatos corruptosque invenio. I desire a copy made of the Latin translation of Aesop: ‘nam auctor ipse periit apud Graecos.' 1461: To his faithful correspondent, Palla Strozzi, the Florentine exile (in Padua): I hear there are for sale there: Palaiphatos trepi malalwr lo topwv; Cornutus tepi adanyopôv; Syncellus : have copies made at my expense, or send the codices for copying. In a ferocious diatribe against his minor fellow. humanist Candido Dicembre F. cites, for quantity, Donatus, Servius, Priscian; for geography he quotes Strabo, Ptolemy, Pliny N.H., Polybius. We close this abstract with Filelfo's own words which he wrote for publication (as we now would say) or at least for the public: Unus Filelfus audet affirmare, (vel insani. ente Candido) neminem esse hac tempestate nec fuisse umquam apud Latinos, quantum constet ex omni hominum memoria, qui praeter se unum idem unus tenuerit exercueritque pariter et Graecam pariter et Latinam orationem in omni dicendi genere, et prosa et versu.'
And in spite of this fanfaronade we may well accept the judgment of his biographer Rosmini : la sua vasta erudizione per que' tempi maravigliosa.'
3. The Titles of Caesar's Works, by Professor Francis W. Kelsey, of the University of Michigan. This paper appears in the TRANSACTIONS.
Remarks were made by Professor Sihler.
4. Futures in -bo in modern Hindu Dialects, by Professor E. Washburn Hopkins, of Yale University (read by Dr. Magoun).
It will doubtless surprise the classical scholar to learn that modern Hindu (Aryan) dialects possess futures in -bo. They have in fact futures in -bo and futures in -am, so that, as striking parallels to ibo or dabo and dicam, they show yābo, ‘I will go,' from yā, ‘go,' and kaham, 'I will speak,' from kah, speak.' I hasten to add that between the Hindu and Latin terminations there is no genetic connection.
But these forms of the Hindu verb are worth noticing. They show, when their history is traced, first, that pronominal endings occur as verbal suffixes in purely Aryan verbs, and second that precise tense-meanings may develop out of a merely adjectival verbal form. The history of terminations in Greek and Latin is doubtful; the greater value attaches to a growth which can be followed back to its beginning.
For the modern material here referred to and for the earlier middle Indic -bo forms I am indebted to the great thesaurus of Dr. Grierson, whose Linguistic Survey of India is a mine of wealth to the student of modern Hindu dialects.
The forms in -bo are, in a word, only the latest development of adjectival forms parallel to Greek adjectives in - Téov plus a pronoun-ending. As Auréov compared with Autóv has passed from a general meaning to one prevailingly gerundive, so the Hindu adjective in -tavyà has passed from a general adjectival (infinitive) meaning to one prevailingly gerundive. In Greek itself the -tóv form has also the sense of the - Téov form : åkovo tbv is ‘audible'; mpaktóv, what 'may be done'; Tiuntéos is a man to be honored,' venerandus. In Sanskrit, the -tavyà form gradually receives an almost stereotyped gerundive meaning: han-tavyà is not merely about to be killed' but ‘killable.' But in the earlier Vedic use, as found in (jätdm) janitavyàm, the sense is merely to be born.' At this stage no subject is needed, but when found it is in the instrumental case. But the potential note becomes pronounced very early, and this, again, is paralleled by the closely related adjectival forms in -tva (tua). Thus krtäni are things done,' as opposed to kártvāni, things “to be done,' and in ydj jātdin ydc ca jantvam, 'going to be born,' is simply future by implication. The notion of possibility, the potential idea, comes next, as in the Greek otvyvos, 'hateful,' as well as “hated,' or Latin invictus, unconquerable' as well as unconquered.' So (RV.) jayātu jétvāni, 'conquer what can be conquered,' (RV.) nintvāni, 'conquerable,' (RV.) snátvam (udakam), 'bathable' (water). Another Greek parallel may be found in such forms as öylos, Sk. yajyd, the latter being a noun as well as an adjective. So yujya is not only iunctus, but a friend,' just as tárlos is . fixed,'' firm.' Latest of all is the moral gerundive sense, nd brāhmaṇo hinsitavyàḥ, AV. v, 18. 6, “inviolate is the priest.'
The connection with the infinitive, to which the -tavyà form is an adjective, makes certain the indefiniteness in meaning of the Sanskrit form. Thus kar. tavyà is ‘to be done' or 'to do' (cf. the inf. kartave), and the infinitive itself is used in the same way: prå'ndham ... cdkșase krthaḥ, “ye have made the blind to see'; ydd im usmasi kartave, 'what we wish to be done.'
Now when the middle Indic dialects made their future they operated in part with this verbal adjective like -tavya. First they took car or cal, ‘go,' for example, and using the verbal adjective to express futurity, made, with regular phonetic change, (calitavyam) calidavvam and caliavvam. This in turn became caliba, or, in Bengali, calib, not by any means at first a personal future, but impersonal, for any person and number. For this reason, when a Bengali had to say *I shall go,' he added to calib (eundum) the word ā, which is pronounced, and often phonetically spelled, 7, that is, the word 'me' in the agent-case; so that calibo or yābo is Latin, eundum-mihi, ibo, maribo is ‘I shall strike' (“to strike by me'). Here then we have a verbal ending which in reality is nothing but a personal pronoun.
In exactly the same way, māris is . he struck' and the s, although to all appear. ance a verbal termination, is in reality the final reduction of the third personal pronoun, meaning ‘by him,' while the first part of māris is a phonetic reduction of the past passive participle, mārita, mārida, māria, mārya, māri. In both of these cases the impersonal form was preferred, as it is in Sanskrit. So māry-am is struck by me' in the Sauraseni form, am being 'by me' (in Hindi, mārilam māridam has the same origin). The last stage is exemplified in Rājasthāni, where the agent-case has been supplanted by the nominative. Thus wah uthio, "he rose' (instead of usā, “risen by him '). This is a recent development, showing that all sense of the impersonal origin has been lost and the verbal has at last attained to the state of a completely inflected verbal form, the nominative pronoun replacing the agent-case. So the Hindi has hü maio, 'I killed,' instead of killed by me.'
To the adaptationist, who repudiates such synthesis as un-Aryan, such a development within comparatively recent time should furnish food for reflection. On the other hand, the genesis of a tense of precise future meaning out of the indefinite (infinitive) meaning supports the view that the direction of development of meaning is toward precision. The vague and general becomes exact and specific.
But further. Future forms may serve as subjunctives. In one group of dialects the same form in one dialect is future, in another subjunctive. But this future. subjunctive is really an indicative filled out with the copula 'be.' Thus in Rājasthāni the subjunctive differs in the first person from the indicative only in adding to the latter • (1) am.' 'I go’is indicative, “I am go' (going) is subjunctive, as in karū and karů hãi (hãi, 'I am '). Both future and subjunctive are expressed by hữ mārīgo, 'I shall (or may) beat,' hữ uțhugo, ‘I will arise '; as in the preterite jito ha gio (gio, ‘went') is literally ‘I (be)came alive. But in one dialect of this group, hũ mārūgo serves only as future, ' I shall beat’and hii mărâ häi, I am beating,' serves as subjunctive. The usual future is made with go, hi us-tah kahugõ, ‘I will speak to him.' 1
In all this we are reminded of the Tibeto-Burman verb (or lack of it), where there is only a verbal noun and the future is made by adding a post-positive. for,' in the sense of in order to.' In Burmese we find 'gā,' with,' added to a stem to serve as a future-sign, just as 'with’ (ge-) makes a German perfect. In the Lushai dialect, 'do,' thwa, is added to a stem to make an imperative, suggesting that in tou, Sk. idhi, we have really .do come, vdhā. In the Hindu-Kush the deliberative subjunctive is made by adding to the indicative the interrogative a, which, when added to a stem in a, makes ā, just as hanti, indicative, becomes hanati, subjunctive, and bhdrati becomes bhdrāti. As another example of an ending which is a word, some dialects make the subjunctive by adding kyah, 'perhaps, to the indicative; thus kudddu is 'I strike,' and kudddukyah is ‘I may strike,
1 The Sanskrit scholar will observe how the ablative' sense has yielded to that of the locative in us-tah, “him-to.' But really location in general is expressed by tas even in Sanskrit. Thus itah is “here,' even 'to here' as well as 'hence,' as in sak. ito dattadršļiis 'with look directed hither,'' on this side.'
The passive in Yidghah is made by adding kshiyah to the verbal stem, and kshiyah is the word for 'go. The present as a future may be illustrated by the Bhojpuri of Palaman, which regularly uses present as future, yai, 'I will go,' kahi, ‘I will say,' instead of yaib (yābo) and kahab (kaham). This indicative is the Nāipāli future. By adding là, 'gone,' to the present indicative (subjunctive) a future is produced like that of Hindusthāni (with gā, dekhūgā, *I am going [that] I see,' that is, 'I shall see '); thus dekhūlā is 'I shall see' in Nāipālī, but the Bhojpuri uses the same form, dekhīlā, as a present. Eastern Maithili has here dekhibo (©), like Bengali -ibă (o). And what is the 'inserted i' in dekh-i-bo? It appears also in one of the Eastern Hindi dialects (called by Dr. Grierson Surgujia), where there is " a tendency to pronounce [i.e. insert] a final or unaccented short i in the preceding syllable,” best illustrated by ka-i-r for kar, ma-i-nase for manise. A “tendency' of this sort may be enough to explain the same phenomenon at an earlier date.
Hindi is analytic, Bengali is synthetic. Thus ghara-kā or ghara-mă of Hindi becomes gharak, etc. So in modern Aryan we have just the conditions which would have produced 'endings.' Hindi gharak is a combination of two words (the kā is reduced from krta in oblique form as ' for '), the latter of which has become a mere ending, but was once a separate special word with a definite meaning. Why should we doubt that in the same way it was of old quite Aryan (as it is now) to possess analytical forms reducible to synthetic combinations? Further, as regards the subjunctive idea, it is plain that there is no a priori necessity for deriving it from a volitive through a deliberative into a prospective notion, as is now generally thought to have been its course.
5. The Relation of Accent to Elision in Latin Verse, by Professor Albert Granger Harkness, of Brown University. This paper will be found in the TRANSACTIONS.
In the discussion Professors Bennett, Radford, H. F. Burton, Fitch, Knapp, Dr. Magoun, and the author participated.
6. Some Linguistic Principles and Questions involved in the Simplification of the Nomenclature of the Brain, by Professor Burt G. Wilder, of Cornell University; read by invitation.
? On the connection of the -tavyd forms with the infinitive, see Brugmann, KVG. $ 80g; Gr. Gr., $ 583. The gerundive meaning, even after it is fully established in Sanskrit, occasionally lapses back into the infinitive-potential sense. Thus in Mbh. vii. 54. 37, yady evam etat kartavyam mayā na syad vinā prabho, means only " if this cannot be done without me, O Lord,” (“not to do'). The Sanskrit future stem is also employed to make verbal adjectives. The oldest case is yáni karisya krņuhi,' do what (things) are to be done' (kartavyāni) RV. i. 165. 9, according to Sāyaṇa; but this may be a false reading, as is now generally assumed. Later we find janisya as in Rām. vii. 24. 5. 58, na jāto na janisyo vā, as in the older phrase jāto janitavyo vā.