« PreviousContinue »
tuus avunculus vivit, vult esse vos salvos ; si periit, superstites voluit, it is difficult to conceive of any possibility of putting the dilemma in any other form. It is neither a more nor a less vivid statement; it is absolutely colorless so far as any implication about the facts is concerned.
Again, suppose we examine the proposed category, “Indeterminate conditions : (a) Conditions in any time with nothing implied as to their fulfilment, expressed positively (vividly) in the Indicative.” Now, in the first place, of course the examples quoted above can be fairly cited as a reasonable ground of objection to this classification as a whole. But, besides this, may it not be doubted whether it is consistent to speak of a condition with “nothing implied as to its fulfilment ” as being expressed " positively” ? How can we speak “positively” and yet convey no hint of the truth or falsity of our words? In referring to future time, to be sure, one may have a choice of moods, and thus express or imply a feeling on his own part of a greater or less degree of probability that the con. dition will be fulfilled. In cases, however, where present or past time is expressed in the assumption no such variation in the degree of probability can be expressed by any variation of mood.
Now it would be highly satisfactory if we could make such a classification as this:
I. Probable conditions : Indicative mood.
But without multiplying objections, it is sufficient to say that (1) while a large proportion of Indicative conditions do imply probability, from the standpoint of the speaker, or of the person addressed, or of the world in general, that is not always the case ; (2) sometimes primary tenses of the Subjunctive are used to imply non-fulfilment of a condition; and (3) secondary tenses of the Subjunctive do not always imply a supposition contrary to fact.
It seems, therefore, wiser to make a modal classification, with such subdivisions according to general signification as are warranted by the facts. The proposed classification is according to protases, which are the rational basis of such classification, and no attempt is made to include any abnormal types, but to give due recognition to all the regularly occurring types, as follows:
I. INDICATIVE CONDITIONS.
(a) Suppositions implying actual fulfilment. Si hoc post hominum memoriam contigit nemini, vocis exspectas contumeliam, cum sis gravissimo iudicio taciturnitatis oppressus ? Cic. in Cat. i. 16.
(6) Suppositions implying probable fulfilment. Si damnatus eris, atque adeo cum damnatus eris (nam dubitatio damnationis, illis recuperatoribus, quae potest esse ?) virgis te ad necem caede necesse erit. Cic. in Verr. II. iii. 70.
(c) Suppositions implying possible fulfilment (in future time). Si patriam prodere conabitur pater, silebitne filius ? Cic. de Of. iii. 90.
(d) Suppositions implying nothing as to fulfilment. Si frater tuus, tuus avunculus vivit, vult esse vos salvos; si periit, superstites voluit. Pliny, Ep. vi. 20, 1o.
II. SUBJUNCTIVE CONDITIONS. 1. Primary Tenses. — (a) Suppositions implying actual or probable fulfilment (in general conditions). Nam vita humana prope uti ferrum est: si exerceas, conteritur ; si non exerceas, tamen robigo interficit. Cato, de Mor.
(6) Suppositions implying possible fulfilment in future time. Si, inquis, deus te interroget, . . . quid respondeas. Cic. Ac. ii. 80. (c) Suppositions implying non-fulfilment (comparatively rare).
Eos non curare opinor, quid agut humanum genus: Nam si curent, bene bonis sit, male malis, quod nunc abest. Ennius, Tel.
2. Secondary Tenses. — (a) Suppositions implying customary fulfilment (past general conditions). Accusatores si facultas incideret, poenis adficiebantur. Tac. Ann. vi. 30.
(6) Suppositions implying non-fulfilment. Mam nisi Ilias illa exstitisset idem tumulus, qui corpus eius contexerat, nomen etiam obruisset. Cic. pro Arch. 24.
27. Types of Sentence Structure in Latin Prose Writers, by Pro fessor Clarence Linton Meader, of the University of Michigan.
This paper is printed in the TRANSACTIONS.
The Association met in the usual place at 3 P.M.
Professor Thomas Day Seymour, of Yale University, reported the following list of officers for the year 1905–1906, as proposed by the Nominating Committee :
President, Professor Elmer Truesdell Merrill, Trinity College.
Professor Francis W. Kelsey, University of Michigan. Secretary and Treasurer, Professor Frank Gardner Moore, Dartmouth College. Assistant Secretary, Professor William Kelly Prentice, Princeton University. Executive Committee, The above-named officers, and
Professor Charles E. Bennett, Cornell University.
Professor Paul Shorey, University of Chicago.
The report of the Nominating Committee having been accepted and adopted, the President declared the officers elected.
The present membership of the Standing Committee to Nominate Officers is as follows:
To serve for one year, Professor T. D. Seymour, Chairman.
28. Gemination in Terence, by Professor Eva Johnston, of the University of Missouri.
The term gemination is adopted to denote the repetition of a word without change in form or meaning. Terence's use of gemination corresponds to that of other writers in that he oftenest doubles vocatives, imperatives, interjections. He furnishes six examples of the gemination of a vocative, four of them. used in address, two in calling to some one. All of them are found in passages where intense feeling is shown.
There are five examples of the gemination of an imperative; excitement is regularly back of this repetition.
Age age with interjectional force is found five times. Terence regularly puts the words into the mouth of some one who has decided to pursue a certain course of action against his better judgment. Five times we have heus heus. In three of the examples the word is repeated in calling to some one, in two when knocking at a door. Au au is used once and denotes distress on the part of the speaker.
In the gemination of vocatives, imperatives, interjections, Terence's use stands close to that of Plautus, but it is to be noted that Plautus occasionally trebles such words, while Terence never does.
In one or two cases the repetition of a word indicates doubt and uncertainty on the part of the speaker, and occasionally rhetorical effect is gained by such repetition, but in most cases gemination is found in passages in which deep emotion, such as joy, sorrow, or anger, is shown.
The paper was discussed by Professor Meader, of the University of Michigan.
On motion of Professor Merrill the following minute was adopted :
The American Philological Association desires to express its grateful appreciation of the hospitality extended to it during its session now drawing to a close. Its warmest thanks are extended to ex-President White, to President Schurman, and the other authorities of Cornell University, and to individual representatives thereof, for their exceptionally generous and thoughtful kindness; to Professor Elmer for arrangements that have left nothing undone that could be devised for the comfort and convenience of his fellow-members; and to the Town and Gown Club for courtesies that have added much to the enjoyment of the meeting. The Association will remember the present session among the most delightful that it has held.
29. Donatus's Version of the Terence Didascaliae, by Dr. John C. Watson, of Cornell University.
This paper is published in full in the TRANSACTIONS.
30. The Oxyrhynchus Epitome of Livy and Reinhold's Lost Chronicon, by Professor Henry A. Sanders, of the University of Michigan. This paper
in the TRANSACTIONS. Professor Hempl presented the report of the Joint Committee representing the National Educational Association, the American Philological Association, and the Modern Language Association of America.
Voted, that the Association sanction the alphabet proposed by the Joint Committee, and recommend its use to the makers of dictionaries; also that the report of the Committee be printed in the PROCEEDINGS.
31. The Meaning of Aeschylus, Prometheus 435, by Professor J. E. Harry, of the University of Cincinnati (read by title).
The interpretation that naturally suggests itself to the reader, is the one given by Wecklein : στένουσιν άλγος οικτρόν = στένουσιν αλγεινόν στόνoν, στένουσιν άλγούσαι. But στένειν is always used either absolutely or with a direct object. Cf. 397, 409 f., 432, while otévw &lyos in the sense of otévw otávov has no parallel in Greek literature. But examples in the sense of στένουσιν αυτόν του άλγους can be cited from both Sophocles and Euripides : Medea 996 metaOTÉvouai dè σον άλγος, Soph. Phil. 339 f. oίμαι μεν αρκεϊν σοί γε και τα σ', ώ τάλας, | αλγήμαθ', ώστε μη τα των πελας στένειν. Cf. Aesch. Εum. 58 f. μεταστένειν πόνον (the very substantive used so frequently throughout the Prometheus to designate the Titan's άλγος οικτρόν) and Lucian, Poseidon and Nereid I oίκτιστα υπό της μητρυιάς πεπονθυίαν with Aesch. Prom. 238 πάσχειν μεν αλγειναΐσιν, οικτραϊσιν 8' 18€îv (a nuovaio.). For other examples of this use of anyos cf. Soph. Phil. 734, Ai: 259, 1397, El. 1176, Eur. Ion 798, Phoen. 371. In Plato's Laws (727 C) we ind a collateral form associated with πόνοι and λύπαι (άλγηδόνας). From the first sentence in the Iliad down to the passage in the Frogs (221), where Dionysus complains that he is getting sore from zealous rowing (αλγειν άρχομαι τον όρρον), the physical signification of anyos is never lost sight of. The actual bodily pain (dolor) is expressed by anyos as well as the mental anguish (maeror) : M 305, Eur. Med. 486, Androm. 304. Cf. Dem. 54. 11.
The word algos is frequently combined with ovupopa and its synonyms; e.g. Εur. Οr. 18o f. υπό γάρ άλγεων υπό τε συμφοράς | διoιχόμεθ(α), Androm. 98ο ήλγουν μεν ήλγουν, συμφοράς δ' ήνειχόμην. The word άλγος is a species of the genus ovudopá (cf. Prom. 974), and both, with their synonyms, are favorite objects of otévw. Cf. Eur. Tro. 578, Phoen. 378, Hec. 589, Hel. 463, El. 505, H. F. 1141; Soph. El. 140, 788 f.; Aesch. Prom. 98, Pers. 471, Suppl. 18, Cho. 931. The cog. nate accusative and the absolute constructions are also frequent. If the dative had been employed in the Aeschylean passage, the meaning would have been unmistakable, but that would have produced hiatus. Cf. Eur. Alc. 199, 652. In Hel. 186 we find a dative of manner (aisyuaoi OTévovo a). The ode under discussion begins with στένω σε ουλομένας τύχας (which is a constantly recurring thought in the song) and ends with otevovo iv älyos olkt póv. Cf. Eur. Alc. 1038 f. Not only Prometheus, but the other characters constantly advert to the Titan's álynuata: 267, 268, 298, 302, 306, 326, 375, 397, 413, 471, 512, 525, 541. Cf. esp. 615 and 695 ff., and 934.
32. Notes on Plautus and Terence, by Professor Charles Knapp, of Columbia University (read by title).
Among the fifteen passages discussed were the following from the Adelphoe :
(1) 20, 21. Proof was offered that sine superbia must be interpreted of the predicate of its clause, not, as recent editors have held, of the subject.
(2) 137. It was argued that the phrase si obsto is not, as editors seem to think, transparent, but that we must supply with it Aeschini factis or the like. The spirit of the remark Demea was about to make can best be got by comparing 989 ff., especially 992 ff. The latter passage, too, was discussed; the author held that sense demands that secundare, “ give a favorable turn to,” “ bring to a happy issue,” not obsecundare, “support,"
,” “ further" (so Mss), shall be read. (3) 160, 161. It was argued that at ita ut usquam fuit fide quisquam optuma can be explained only as due to a fusion of (1) at ita (leno sum = talis leno sum) ut ille fuit qui optuma fide fuit and (2) at optuma fide (leno sum) si usquam quisquam ita fuit. Mode i is essentially affirmative, mode 2 is essentially negative in spirit. Other passages from Greek and Latin writers showing similar fusion of different syntactical elements were cited and discussed.
(4) 163–166. The author sought to determine the bearing of the quom-clause in 166. It cannot give the reason for dabitur ... hac. Nor can it be easily or naturally associated with those words in adversative force. He proposed, there. fore, to remove the period commonly set after feceris, 164, to set a dash there, and another after hac, 166; then the quom-clause can be joined directly with ego meum . . . feceris, 164, as causal in force, giving the reason for the threat contained in those words. In this view nollem factum ... iniuria hac is an excited parenthetical commentary on vostra haec. Here, as so often elsewhere, emotional exaltation is attended by syntactical dislocation. All this throws important light on the text in 165, 166. The Mss text gives here a trochaic octonarius followed by an iambic octonarius. Bentley condemned the change of rhythm, and editors in general have followed him, emending in various ways in 165, 166 to make 166 also trochaic. The author held that all such alterations are futile. The Ms text, reënforced by the proposed punctuation, is extremely effective; it throws out into such sharp relief the vital part of the quoted words, indignum iniuria hac. The author thus arrived, quite independently, at the conclusions previously reached by Kauer ; that scholar, in his revision of Dziatzko's annotated edition, had argued strongly for the retention of the Ms reading, though he gave no heed to the difficulty of interpreting the quom-clause if the ordinary punctuation is retained.