{"slug":"tmp1189.tmp1189.opp-lat1","id":"latin:ogl-pl:tmp1189.tmp1189.opp-lat1","title":"De Orthographia","title_source":"De Orthographia","author":"Cassiodorus Vivariensis Abbas","genre":"treatise","date":"","tradition":"latin","coverage":"not-located","coverage_claim":{"status":"not-located","text":"No English translation is known: a language model asked twice could name none, and the source corpus records none. That is not proof — translations in dissertations, recent books and other modern languages are easily missed."},"publication":{"status":"machine-draft","reviewed_by":null,"model":"deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash:floor","provider":"Baidu","generated":"2026-11-15T19:26:41Z","cost_usd":0.006767},"source":{"registry_id":"latin:ogl-pl:tmp1189.tmp1189.opp-lat1","work_id":"tmp1189.tmp1189.opp-lat1","edition":"ogl-pl","language":"","license":"Available under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License","url":"https://github.com/OpenGreekAndLatin/patrologia_latina-dev/blob/master/data/tmp1189/tmp1189/tmp1189.tmp1189.opp-lat1.xml"},"stats":{"passages":73,"english_words":16692,"coptic_letters":0,"source_letters":65689,"commentary_units":0,"commentary_kinds":0,"derived_notes":11,"ambiguities":0,"work_notes":0,"external_links":0,"timeline":0},"summary":{},"links":[{"kind":"source","label":"Open Greek and Latin Patrologia Latina","url":"https://github.com/OpenGreekAndLatin/patrologia_latina-dev/blob/master/data/tmp1189/tmp1189/tmp1189.tmp1189.opp-lat1.xml"}],"checks":{"work":"tmp1189.tmp1189.opp-lat1","status":"pass","blocking":[],"warnings":[],"stats":{"passages":73,"translated":73,"commentary_passages":0,"commentary_units":0,"english_words":16692,"source_letters":65689,"commentary_kinds":0},"model":"deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash:floor"},"work_notes":[],"derived_work_notes":[{"kind":"coverage","severity":"info","text":"No English translation is known: a language model asked twice could name none, and the source corpus records none. That is not proof — translations in dissertations, recent books and other modern languages are easily missed."},{"kind":"limit","severity":"caution","text":"The English is a machine draft produced passage by passage from the transcribed Latin; no human has verified it. The commentary is model-written and cites only keys the pipeline could resolve."},{"kind":"register","severity":"info","text":"Register: treatise in Latin; the English keeps the liturgical formulae and the vocatives rather than normalising them."},{"kind":"structure","severity":"info","text":"Passages: 73 narrative."},{"kind":"caution","severity":"caution","text":"11 passage(s) are fragmentary in the source; the English bridges each break and says so in the note."},{"kind":"source","severity":"info","text":"Source edition: ogl-pl."},{"kind":"source","severity":"info","text":"Licence: Available under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License"}],"derived_structure":{"narrative":73},"term_index":[],"citations":{},"segments":[{"i":1,"ref":"p1","source":"M. AURELII CASSIODORI DE ORTHOGRAPHIA.\n\nPRAEFATIO.\n\nCum inter nos talia gererentur et de Complexionibus apostolorum nonnulla nasceretur intentio [ed., mentio], monachi mei subito clamare coeperunt: Quid prodest cognoscere nos, vel quae antiqui fecerunt, vel ea quae sagacitas vestra addenda curavit nosse diligenter, si quemadmodum ea scribere debeamus omnimodis ignoramus; nec in voce nostra possumus reddere quae in Scriptura comprehendere non valemus? Quibus respondi: Haec quae dicerent, designata esse, quemadmodum et intelligi debeant et proferri. Sed labor nobis antiquorum omnino servandus est, ne nos auctores earum rerum mentiamur, qui [ed., quarum] sequaces esse cognoscimur. Et ideo duodecim auctorum opuscula deducimus in medium, quae ab illis breviter et copiose dicta sunt; ut et nos ea compendiosius dicamus, et a priscis auctoribus sine varietatis studio dicta recolantur; quatenus et vobis plenissime satisfacere videamur, et auctoritate firma sit relatio, quam duodecim auctorum textus insinuat. Jam tempus est ut totius operis nostri conclusionem facere debeamus; ut melius in animo recondantur, quae septenaria conclusione distincta sunt.","english":"M. Aurelius Cassiodorus, On Orthography.\n\nPreface.\n\nWhen such matters were being discussed among us and some question arose concerning the Complexions of the apostles, my monks suddenly began to cry out: What profit is it for us to know either what the ancients did, or those things which your sagacity has taken care to have us learn diligently, if we are wholly ignorant of how we ought to write them; and we cannot express in our speech what we are unable to grasp in Scripture? To them I replied: These things which they were saying have been set forth, both how they ought to be understood and how pronounced. But the labor of the ancients must by all means be preserved by us, lest we misrepresent the authors of those things whose followers we are known to be. And therefore I bring into the open the little works of twelve authors, which were spoken by them briefly and abundantly, so that we may state them more concisely, and the words spoken by the ancient authors may be recalled without any striving after variety; in order that we may seem to satisfy you most fully, and the account may stand with firm authority, which the text of twelve authors sets forth. Now it is time that we must make the conclusion of our whole work, so that those things which have been set apart in a sevenfold conclusion may be better stored in the mind.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[{"kind":"lacuna","severity":"caution","text":"The source is fragmentary here: the edition marks a break or an editorial bracket, and the English carries across it. Treat the bridge as supplied, not translated."}]},{"i":2,"ref":"p2","source":"Post Commenta Psalterii, ubi (praestante Domino) conversionis meae tempore primum studium laboris impendi.\n\nDeinde post institutiones quemadmodum divinae et humanae debeant intelligi lectiones, duobus libris (ut opinor) sufficienter impletis, ubi plus utilitatis invenies quam decoris.\n\nPost Expositionem Epistolae quae scribitur ad Romanos, unde Pelagianae haereseos pravitates amovi, quod etiam in reliquo commentario facere sequentes admonui.\n\nPost codicem in quo artes Donati cum commentis suis, et librum de Etymologiis, et alium librum Sacerdotis de Schematibus (Domino praestante) collegi; ut instructi simplices fratres (ubi necesse fuerit) similia dicta sine confusione percipiant.\n\nPost librum quoque titulorum, quem de divina Scriptura collectum, Memorialem volui nuncupari, ut breviter cuncta percurrant, qui legere prolixa fastidiunt.","english":"After the Commentary on the Psalter, where (with the Lord's help) I first devoted the labor of my studies at the time of my conversion.\n\nThen after the Institutes, in which it is set out how divine and human readings ought to be understood, two books (as I think) sufficiently completed, where you will find more usefulness than elegance.\n\nAfter the Exposition of the Epistle that is written to the Romans, from which I removed the depravities of the Pelagian heresy, which I also admonished those following to do in the remaining commentary.\n\nAfter the codex in which I gathered (with the Lord's help) the arts of Donatus with their commentaries, and the book On Etymologies, and another book of Sacerdos On Figures; so that the simple brothers, being instructed (where it shall be necessary), may grasp similar expressions without confusion.\n\nAfter the book of titles also, which, collected from the divine Scripture, I wished to be called the Memorial, so that those who are averse to reading lengthy works may run through all things briefly.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":3,"ref":"p3","source":"Post Complexiones in Epistolis apostolorum, et Actibus eorum, et Apocalypsi, quasi brevissima explanatione decursas.\n\nAd amantissimos orthographos discutiendos anno aetatis meae nonagesimo tertio (Domino adjuvante) perveni. Ex quibus si in unum valuero deflorata colligere, quantum ad eos pertinet, quos breviandos osse suscepi, confusionem emendator atque scriptor, si bene intellexerit (arbitror), ulterius non habebit.\n\nMinutus labor syllabis litterisque tractandis [ms., tractandus], modo factus ex nominum derivatione, modo ex casibus sermonum, modo ex motu atque situ, modo ex euphoniae consonantia, modo ex Graecarum litterarum similitudine: probans quid scribere debeas, et quid vitare contendas: modo ut quoque littera simplex in quibusdam sermonibus recte quidem scribi dicat, sed litterae sonum plerumque illi succedere posse testetur. itaque quod ante scribebatur per u et o, per duo u u modo scribere nobilis rectitudo scribendi per vias certissimas investigata esse videtur; et ideo praesens opus non desit directum, ut volnus, vulnus; i pro e, ut quod antiqui magnai, nos magnae; pro: veteres quum, moderni cum scribi rectius aestimarunt; et caetera quae subtili quidem, sed necessaria distinctione narrantur, non velociter transcurri, sed sollicita mentis intentione tractavi; ut quae incipis bene discere, ad finem perfectionis inoffensa debeas pronuntiatione perducere.","english":"After the Complexiones on the Epistles of the apostles, and their Acts, and the Apocalypse, run through as it were in a very brief explanation.\n\nAt the ninety-third year of my age (with the Lord's help) I have come to the most loving orthographers, to be discussed. From these, if I shall have been able to gather the flowers into one, as far as pertains to those whom I have undertaken to abridge, the corrector and writer, if he has understood well (I think), will no longer have confusion.\n\nThe minute labor of handling syllables and letters, now made from the derivation of nouns, now from the cases of words, now from motion and position, now from the consonance of euphony, now from the similarity of Greek letters: proving what you ought to write, and what you should strive to avoid: now also that a single letter in certain words is said indeed to be written correctly, but it is testified that the sound of a letter can often succeed it. And so what was formerly written through u and o, the noble correctness of writing, investigated through the most certain paths, now seems to be written through two u's; and therefore the present work has not failed to be directed, as volnus, vulnus; i for e, as what the ancients wrote magnai, we write magnae; for: the ancients quum, the moderns have judged it more correct to write cum; and the rest which are narrated with a subtle indeed, but necessary distinction, I have not run through quickly, but have treated with the solicitous intention of the mind; so that what you begin to learn well, you should lead to the end of perfection with unoffending pronunciation.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[{"kind":"lacuna","severity":"caution","text":"The source is fragmentary here: the edition marks a break or an editorial bracket, and the English carries across it. Treat the bridge as supplied, not translated."}]},{"i":4,"ref":"p4","source":"Nam si vobis adsit capiendi desiderium, quae prius per moram quaesistis, protinus inoffensa velocitate transcurretis.\n\nGloriosum profecto studium, et humanis ac divinis litteris (ut videtur) accommodum, quod loqui debeas, competenter scribere; et quae scripta sunt, sine aliqua erroris ambiguitate proferre. Vox enim articulata a pecoribus nos sequestrat; scribendi vero ratio ab imperitis dividit et confusis: ita perfectum hominem duo ista sibi vindicant ac defendunt. Nam cum sibi talia, quae sunt duo lumina, consentiunt, utraque recta, utraque decora sunt: cum vero a se discrepare coeperint, vitium strabae foeditatis incurrunt.\n\nErit itaque propositum nostrum, quae competenter modernae consuetudini ab antiquis tradita sunt, quasi in unam coronam redigere, et usui celeberrimo deputare; illa vero quae antiquitati magis conveniunt, expedit sine dubitatione relinquere, ne labor assumatur incongruus, qui praesenti saeculo videtur inutilis. Sit ergo in primo libro Institutionum nostrarum, titulo decimo quinto, quemadmodum legi debeat coelestis auctoritas; ubi idiomata legis divinae communi usui repugnantia non permisimus dissipari. Hic autem, in libro scilicet Orthographiae, liberius et generaliter appetatur, quemadmodum ex regulis artium humanarum, salva auctoritate seniorum, cuncta lectio decora nimis et correcta reddatur.","english":"For if the desire to grasp be present in you, what you previously sought through delay, you will run through at once with unhindered speed.\n\nA glorious pursuit indeed, and (as it seems) suited to human and divine letters: that you should speak, and write competently; and that you should bring forth what has been written without any ambiguity of error. For articulate speech separates us from cattle; but the method of writing divides us from the unskilled and the confused: thus these two things claim and defend the perfect man for themselves. For when such things, which are two lights, agree with each other, both are right, both are beautiful: but when they begin to disagree with each other, they incur the defect of squinting ugliness.\n\nTherefore it will be our purpose to gather, as it were, into one crown those things which have been handed down by the ancients as competently suited to modern custom, and to assign them to most celebrated usage; but those things which are more suited to antiquity, it is expedient to leave without doubt, lest incongruous labor be undertaken, which seems useless to the present age. Let it be, then, in the first book of our Institutions, in the fifteenth title, how the heavenly authority ought to be read; where we have not permitted the idioms of the divine law that are repugnant to common usage to be scattered. Here, however, in the book of Orthography, let it be sought more freely and generally, how from the rules of human arts, with the authority of the elders preserved, all reading may be rendered exceedingly beautiful and correct.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":5,"ref":"p5","source":"Si quis autem auctores orthographos in textu suo legere fortasse voluerit, transcriptos inveniet, quos ego, quantos potui reperire, monasterio meo, praestante Domino, dereliqui; ut latius dicta probare possetis in auctoribus suis, quos non propter fastidium vestrum deflorandos esse putavimus. Illud etiam vos magnopere credidi commonendos, ut distinctiones sensuum sollicita mente perquirere ac ponere debeatis, sine quibus neque legere quidquam competenter, neque intelligere praevalemus.\n\nScire autem debemus Donatum artigraphum de posituris ita tractasse, ut non ibi ordinem, sed virtutes earum potius exprimere videatur. Nam si distinctionum seriem per gradus cognitos sequeretur, primo plenam, deinde mediam nequaquam ponere potuisset, deinde magis inciperet, ubi praedictae positurae ad finem tendere comprobantur. Sequitur subdistinctio, deinde media, quae plenam semper praecedunt potius quam sequuntur. Sed (sicut visum constat esse doctissimis) hunc debemus ordinem custodire; ut primo de subdistinctione dicamus, quae ibi semper apponitur, ubi in commate sermo suspensus adhuc reddendus esse cognoscitur; ut, Arma virumque cano; ubi totius operis summa conclusa est. Arma enim, ancilia Virgilius, virumque dicturus est. Sed quoniam, cano, respicit ad utrumque, hic, id est, arma, subdistinctio recte ponenda est.","english":"If anyone perhaps wishes to read the orthographic authors in their own text, he will find them transcribed, which I, as many as I could find, have left behind to my monastery, with the Lord's help, so that you might be able to prove the things said more fully in their own authors, which we thought should not be excerpted on account of your distaste. I have also believed that you should be greatly reminded of this, that you ought with careful mind to seek out and place the distinctions of senses, without which we are able neither to read anything competently nor to understand it.\n\nWe ought to know, moreover, that Donatus the artigraphus treated of positions in such a way that he seems to express there not their order, but rather their virtues. For if he followed the series of distinctions through known steps, he could by no means have placed first the full, then the middle, and then he would begin rather where the aforesaid positions are proven to tend toward the end. There follows the subdistinctio, then the middle, which always precede the full rather than follow it. But (as it is agreed to have seemed to the most learned) we ought to keep this order: that we speak first of the subdistinctio, which is always placed there where in a comma the speech is known to be still suspended and yet to be rendered; as, Arma virumque cano, where the sum of the whole work is concluded. For Virgil is about to say arma, shields, and virum. But since cano refers to both, here, that is, arma, the subdistinctio should rightly be placed.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":6,"ref":"p6","source":"Mediam vero affigendam esse constat in commate, cum nullus sermo deest, sed gradatim tendit ad plenam, ut,\n\nDividimus muros, et moenia pandimus urbis:\n\nPlena est autem, ubi finitur perfecta sententia: ut est illud,\n\nTantae molis erat Romanam condere gentem.\n\nSubdistinctionem vero vel mediam non credas ipsum ordinem semper tenere, quem diximus, ut subdistinctio praecedat, et media consequatur: sed pro ratione supradicta locis congruis apponuntur; ut distinctiones istae bene positae sensum nobis lectionis evidenter aperiant. Nam si aliter distinguas, sine dubitatione cuncta confundis.\n\nHas vero distinctiones, seu posituras (Donato testante) Graeci vocant. Periodus est autem per longum plenae sententiae ducta pausatio; cujus partes sunt cola et commata. Sed antequam opus Orthographiae inchoare videamur, praefationem Phocae artigraphi, exempli causa, judicavimus apponendam; quae cuncto operi nostro, quasi a nobis prolata sit, ita omnibus modis videtur accommoda.","english":"It is agreed that the middle mark must be placed at the comma, when no word is missing but the sense advances step by step toward the full stop, as in:\n\nWe divide the walls, and throw open the city's ramparts:\n\nThe full stop, however, is where a complete sentence is ended, as in that line:\n\nSo great a task it was to found the Roman race.\n\nBut you should not believe that the subdistinction, or the middle mark, always keeps the order we have stated—that the subdistinction comes first and the middle follows; rather, for the reason given above, they are set down in appropriate places, so that these distinctions, well placed, may make the sense of the reading clear to us. For if you punctuate otherwise, you undoubtedly throw everything into confusion.\n\nThese distinctions, or marks (as Donatus testifies), the Greeks call periods. A period is a pause drawn out through the length of a complete sentence; its parts are the cola and commata. But before we seem to begin the work On Orthography, we have judged that the preface of Phocas the grammarian should be added by way of example; it seems suited in every way to our whole work, as though it had been brought forth by us.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":7,"ref":"p7","source":"Ars mea multorum es, quos saecula prisca tulerunt:\n\nSed nova te brevitas asserit esse meam. Omnia cum veterum sint explorata libellis, Multa loqui breviter sit novitatis opus. Te relegat juvenis, quem garrula pagina terret Aut si quem paucis seria nosse juvat. Te longinqua petens comitem sibi ferre viator Ne dubitet, parvo pondere multa vehens. Te si quis scripsisse volet, non ulla queretur Damna, nec ingrati triste laboris onus.\n\nEst quod quisque petat: nunquam censura diserti Hoc contemnet opus, si modo livor abest.\n\nCommemorati sunt auctores Orthographiae, ex quibus alii ipso, alii praeposterato ordine similia dicunt, alii vero diversa describunt; sed omnia nobis absolute nosse convenit. Nam et illi qui paria dicunt, communia dicta confirmant; et isti qui varia ponunt, per verba multiplicia commonent quemadmodum scribere debeamus, et loqui. Nunc ordo scripturae qui ab antiquis positus cognoscitur, nihilominus est dicendus.","english":"My art belongs to many whom earlier ages produced, but new brevity claims you as mine. Since all things have been examined in the books of the ancients, to speak many things briefly is the work of novelty. The young man whom a garrulous page frightens rereads you, or whoever takes pleasure in knowing serious matters in few words. Let the traveler setting out for distant places not hesitate to carry you as his companion, bearing many things in a small weight. If anyone wishes to have written you, he will complain of no losses, nor of the sad burden of unwelcome labor.\n\nThere is what each person may seek: the judgment of the learned will never despise this work, provided only that envy is absent.\n\nThe authors of Orthography have been mentioned, of whom some say similar things in the same order, others in reversed order, and others describe different things; but it is fitting for us to know all things absolutely. For both those who say the same things confirm common statements, and those who set down varying things warn through manifold words how we ought to write and to speak. Now the order of writing which is known to have been established by the ancients must nonetheless be stated.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":8,"ref":"p8","source":"CAPUT PRIMUM.\n\nCnaei Cornuti de Enuntiatione vel Orthographia ista relata sunt.\n\nAnimadverti quosdam, Emili amice, eruditos etiam litteram, nec ubi oporteat dicentes, nec ubi oporteat supprimentes. Hoc ne fiat, hinc observari poterit, si simul subjiciam, si quid ad rectam scripturam pertinet, et ad divisionem syllabarum. Igitur si duo verba conjungantur, quorum prius consonantem novissimam habeat, posterius a vocalibus incipiat, consonans perscribitur quidem; caeterum in enuntiando durum et barbarum sonat. At si posterius verbum quamlibet consonantem habuerit, vel vocalem positam loco consonantis, servat litterae sonum; par enim atque idem est vitium, ita cum vocali sicut cum consonante litteram exprimere.\n\nEst quaedam littera in F litterae speciem figurata, quae digamma nominatur, quae duos apices ex gamma littera habere videtur. Ad hujus similitudinem soni nostri conjunctas vocales digammon appellare voluerunt, ut est votum, virgo. Itaque in prima syllaba digamma et vocalem oportuit poni, fotum, firgo: quod et AEoli fecerunt et antiqui nostri, sicut scriptura in quibusdam libellis declarat. Hanc litteram Terentius Varro dum vult demonstrare, ita perscribit VA: qui ergo in hac syllaba sonus est, idem litterae erit. Nos hodie u litteram in duarum potestatem coegimus; nam modo pro digamma scribitur, modo pro vocali. Vocalis est, cum ipsa per se est.","english":"CHAPTER ONE.\n\nThese things have been reported by Gnaeus Cornutus concerning pronunciation or orthography.\n\nI have noticed, my friend Aemilius, that certain learned men neither pronounce a letter where they ought nor suppress it where they ought. So that this may not happen, it can be observed from the following, if I set forth at the same time whatever pertains to correct writing and to the division of syllables. Therefore, if two words are joined together, of which the first has a consonant as its last letter and the second begins with vowels, the consonant is indeed written out in full; but in pronunciation it sounds harsh and barbarous. But if the second word has any consonant whatsoever, or a vowel placed in the position of a consonant, it preserves the sound of the letter; for it is an equal and the same fault to express a letter with a vowel as with a consonant.\n\nThere is a certain letter shaped in the appearance of the letter F, which is called digamma, which is seen to have two apexes from the letter gamma. In imitation of this, they wished to call our joined vowels a digamma, as in votum, virgo. And so in the first syllable a digamma and a vowel ought to have been placed, fotum, firgo: which both the Aeolians did and our ancients, as the writing in certain little books declares. Terence Varro, when he wishes to demonstrate this letter, writes it thus, VA: therefore the sound that is in this syllable will be the same as that of the letter. We today have forced the letter u into the power of two; for sometimes it is written for digamma, sometimes for a vowel. It is a vowel when it stands by itself.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":9,"ref":"p9","source":"Hoc enim cum caeteris quoque vocalibus patitur. Si cum alia vocali est, digamma est, quae est consonans. Tres vocales quibusdam videntur esse sub una syllaba vacuae. Errant si ita putant; nam nusquam apud Graecos, neque apud Latinos ex tribus vocalibus syllaba constat: quare similiter hic quoque digamma erit, et duae vocales similiter.\n\nSed cadit in quaestionem, et aliis per t, aliis per d, placet scribi. Apud antiquos enim scio sed sedum fuisse: unde nos, duabus litteris novissimis ablatis, reliquas litteras, salva d, in usum habemus: quemadmodum si quaereretur, sat, qualiter scribi oportet, diceremus per t, quod integrum ejus sit satis.\n\nQ littera tunc recte ponitur, cum illi statim u littera, et alia qualibet una, pluresve vocales conjunctae fuerint, ita ut una syllaba fiat. Caetera per scribuntur. Hoc Lucio a quoque videtor. Nonnulli putant auribus deserviendum, atque ita scribendum, ut auditur. Est enim fere certamen de recta scriptura, in hoc, utrum quod audimus, an quod scribi oportet, scribendum sit; ego non omnia auribus dederim. Quotidie, sunt qui per co, cotidie scribant: quibus peccare licet; desinerent si scirent quotidie inde tractum esse, a quot diebus, hoc est, omnibus diebus. Qui, syllaba per q, u, i, scribitur: si dividitur, ut si cui, ut huic, per c.","english":"For it undergoes this with the other vowels as well. If it is with another vowel, it is digamma, which is a consonant. Three vowels are seen by certain people to be empty under one syllable. They err if they think so; for nowhere among the Greeks, nor among the Latins, does a syllable consist of three vowels: therefore similarly here too there will be digamma, and two vowels similarly.\n\nBut it falls into question, and it pleases some to write it with t, others with d. For I know that among the ancients it was sed sedum: whence we, with the two latest letters removed, have the remaining letters, with d preserved, in use: just as if it were asked how sat ought to be written, we would say with t, because its full form is satis.\n\nThe letter Q is then correctly placed, when the letter u immediately follows it, and any other one, or more, vowels have been joined, so that one syllable is made. The rest are written with c. This is also seen by Lucius. Some think that the ears must be served, and that it must be written as it is heard. For there is generally a contest about correct writing, in this, whether what we hear, or what ought to be written, is to be written; I would not give everything to the ears. Daily, there are those who write cotidie with co: they are permitted to err; they would stop if they knew that quotidie is derived from there, from quot diebus, that is, all days. Qui, the syllable is written with q, u, i: if it is divided, as si cui, as huic, with c.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":10,"ref":"p10","source":"Hoc item in caeteris notabimus, ut in divisione littera sequatur (si tamen secundum antiquam enuntiationem fuerit), quoniam genitivus et ablativus non dividitur.\n\nCausam, per unam s; nec quemquam moveat antiqua scriptura; nam et accusare per duo ss scripserunt; sicut fuisse, ivisse, esse et caussasse per duo ss scriptum invenio. In qua enuntiatione quomodo duarum consonantium sonus exaudiatur non invenio.\n\nVostra olim ita per o, hodie per e: ut, advorsa adversa, pervorsa perversa, votare vetare, vortex vertex, convollere convellere, amploctere amplectere.\n\nMalo, qui putant ab eo quod est Graece comparativo modo descendisse, et per duo ll scribunt, peccant. Non enim a Graeco translatum est, sed ab antiquorum consuetudine, qui primo magis volo dixerunt, postea a pluribus elisionibus hoc verbum angustaverunt; ut, mage volo, deinde mavolo, quod frequentissimum apud illos est: novissimo hoc subsistit, ut malo esset. Sed malle per duas ll, magis enim velle est. Item nolo per unum: nolle per duo ll; nolo enim ne volo est, nolle, ne velle. Denique ut se verbum habet, ita ea quae ex illo componuntur.","english":"We shall note this likewise in the other cases, that in division the letter follows (if only it is according to the ancient pronunciation), since the genitive and ablative are not divided.\n\nCausam, with one s; nor let the ancient spelling move anyone; for they also wrote accusare with two ss; just as I find fuisse, ivisse, esse, and caussasse written with two ss. In which pronunciation I do not discover how the sound of two consonants is heard.\n\nVostra was once thus with o, today with e: as advorsa adversa, pervorsa perversa, votare vetare, vortex vertex, convollere convellere, amploctere amplectere.\n\nThose who think malo descends from what in Greek is the comparative mode, and write it with two ll, are mistaken. For it is not translated from Greek, but from the custom of the ancients, who first said magis volo, and afterwards narrowed this word by many elisions; as mage volo, then mavolo, which is very frequent among them: lastly it settled thus, that it should be malo. But malle with two ll, for it is magis velle. Likewise nolo with one l: nolle with two ll; for nolo is ne volo, and nolle is ne velle. Finally, as the word itself stands, so do those which are compounded from it.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":11,"ref":"p11","source":"Alia sunt quae per duo u scribuntur, quibus numerus quoque syllabarum crescit. Simili enim vocali vocalis adjuncta, non solum non cohaeret, sed etiam syllabam auget; ut, vacuus, ingenuus occiduus, exiguus. Eadem divisio vocalium in verbis quoque est, metuunt, statuunt, tribuunt, acuunt. Ergo hic quoque littera, non apponenda est.\n\nLacrumae, an lacrimae; maxumus an maximus; et si quae similia sunt, quomodo scribi debeant, quaesitum est. Terentius Varro tradit Caesarem per i ejusmodi verba solitum esse enuntiare et scribere: inde propter auctoritatem tanti viri consuetudinem factam; sed ego in antiquiorum multo libris, quam Caius Caesar est, per u pleraque scripta invenio. Optumus. intumus, pulcherrumus, lubido, dicundum, faciundum, maxumae, monumentum, contumelia minumae. Melius tamen est, et ad enuntiandum et ad scribendum, i litteram pro u ponere, in quod jam consuetudo inclinavit.","english":"There are other words that are written with a double u, and in these the number of syllables also increases. For a vowel joined to a similar vowel not only does not coalesce, but even adds a syllable, as in vacuus, ingenuus, occiduus, exiguus. The same division of vowels occurs also in verbs: metuunt, statuunt, tribuunt, acuunt. Therefore here too the letter is not to be added.\n\nWhether it should be lacrumae or lacrimae, maxumus or maximus, and how similar words ought to be written, has been a matter of inquiry. Terentius Varro reports that Caesar was accustomed to pronounce and write words of this kind with i; from this, on account of the authority of so great a man, a custom arose. But I find in the books of much older writers than Gaius Caesar that most such words are written with u: optumus, intumus, pulcherrumus, lubido, dicundum, faciundum, maxumae, monumentum, contumelia, minumae. Nevertheless it is better, both for pronunciation and for writing, to put the letter i in place of u, toward which custom has already inclined.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":12,"ref":"p12","source":"Vineas, per e quidam scribendas tradiderunt, si hae significarent quas in agris viderimus: ac contra per i vinias illas sub quibus latere miles solet, quod discrimen stultissimum est. Nam neque aliunde vineae castrenses dictae sunt, quam quod vineis illis agrestibus similes sunt.\n\nExstinguunt, per u et o: qualem rationem supra reddidi de littera, quam dixi oportere in omni declinatione duas vocales habere, talis hic quoque intelligenda est, exstinguo; est enim, ab ex, et stinguo, et ob hoc exstinguont, licet enuntiari non possit.\n\nIntervallum duas ll habet; vallum enim ipsum non aliter scribitur, a quo intervallum. Varro dicit intervalla esse spatia quae sint inter capita vallorum, id est stipidum, quibus vallum fit, unde caetera quoque spatia dicunt.\n\nObservanda pusillo diligentius praepositionum cum verbis a vocalibus compositio, ut consonantes novissimas praepositionum sciamus non durare, sed mutari plerumque. Itaque nonnunquam quae consonantes verborum aut vocabulorum primo loco sunt, easdem neeesse est fieri et in praepositionibus, quae propter lenitatem quoque omnino enuntiari saepe litterae praepositionum non possunt: quando autem fiat, quando non, sono internoscimus.","english":"Some have handed down that vineas should be written with an e, if they mean the kind we have seen in fields; and on the other hand that vinias with an i means those under which a soldier is wont to lie hidden—a distinction that is utterly foolish. For camp vineae are not called this from any other source than that they are similar to those rural vineae.\n\nExstinguunt is written with u and o: the same reasoning that I gave above concerning the letter, which I said ought to have two vowels in every declension, must be understood here as well—exstinguo; for it is from ex and stinguo, and on this account exstinguont, although it cannot be pronounced.\n\nIntervallum has two l's; for vallum itself, from which intervallum comes, is not written otherwise. Varro says that intervalla are the spaces that lie between the tops of the valli, that is, of the stakes by which a vallum is made, whence other spaces too are so called.\n\nThe composition of prepositions with verbs from vowels must be observed a little more carefully, so that we may know that the final consonants of prepositions do not persist but are for the most part changed. And so sometimes the consonants that are in the first position of verbs or words must necessarily become the same in the prepositions, since on account of their smoothness the letters of prepositions often cannot be pronounced at all; but when this happens and when it does not, we distinguish by sound.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":13,"ref":"p13","source":"Accedo duo cc, attuli duo tt, assiduus duo ss, arrideo duo rr, apparo duo pp, annuo duo nn, alligo duo ll. In his non solum propter lenitatem consonantes mutantur, sed etiam quod nullo modo sonare littera potest. Ubi sonat, et ibi scribitur, cum consonanti adjungitur; ut adfluo, adfui, adfectus; contra non sonat, offui, offero, offendo. In aliis etiam consonantibus idem patitur, ut suggero; ostendi enim supra digamma consonantis vim habere. Est ubi b, quamvis incredibile est, in cogatur; ut suscipere, sustinere, suspendere, suscitare: et quod antiqui dixerunt sustollere, nos praeterito sustuli.\n\nItem praepositio ad litteram formatur: ut, effluo, effodio, effero, efficio, nec minus informatur escendo: alicubi tamen sonat, et ob hoc necessario scribitur exsilio, exsicco. Itaque ubi sonaverit ibi ponemus.\n\nTamtus et quamtus in medio habere debent, quam enim et tam est: unde quamtitas, quamtus, tamtus. Nec quosdam moveat, si sonat; jam enim supra docui sonare debere, tametsi in prima scriptura posita sit.","english":"I add duo cc, attuli duo tt, assiduus duo ss, arrideo duo rr, apparo duo pp, annuo duo nn, alligo duo ll. In these not only are the consonants changed on account of smoothness, but also because the letter cannot be sounded in any way. Where it sounds, there too it is written, when it is joined to a consonant; as adfluo, adfui, adfectus; on the other hand it does not sound in offui, offero, offendo. In other consonants too the same thing is suffered, as in suggero; for it was shown above that digamma has the force of a consonant. There are cases where b is compelled, incredible as it is, as in suscipere, sustinere, suspendere, suscitare; and what the ancients called sustollere, we call by the past tense sustuli.\n\nLikewise the preposition ad is formed by its letter: as effluo, effodio, effero, efficio, and it is no less formed in escendo; yet in some places it sounds, and for that reason is necessarily written in exsilio, exsicco. And so where it has sounded, there we shall place it.\n\nTamtus and quamtus ought to have m in the middle, for it is quam and tam: whence quamtitas, quamtus, tamtus. Nor let it disturb anyone if it sounds; for I have already taught above that it ought to sound, even if it is placed in the first writing.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":14,"ref":"p14","source":"Exsilium cum (ex solo enim ire est) quasi exsolium, quod Graeci dicunt: antiqui exsoles dicebant.\n\nH, sicut in quaestione est littera sit, necne; sic nunquam dubitatum est secundo loco a quacunque consonante poni debere, quod solus Varro dubitat. Vult enim auctoritate sua efficere, ut prius ponatur ea littera, quae aspirationem conferat; et tanto magis hoc tentat persuadere, quod vocalibus quoque dicat anteponi: ut, haeres, hircus. Sed Varronem praeterit, consonantem ideo secundo loco recipere, quod non possit ante aspirationem nisi vocales habere. Itaque et ante, et post, si littera cuicunque tali adjungatur, non sonabit. Haec enim natura vocalium est, ut sive ante se, sive post se habeant h, quoquo genere, enuntiationem non impediant. Praeterea in libro quem de Grammatica Varro scripsit, cum de litteris dissereret, ita inter litteras non esse disputavit. Quod multo minus mirum, quam quod quoque litteram esse negat. In quo quid viderit, nondum deprehendi: ipsius verba subjiciam. Litterarum partim sunt et dicuntur: ut, a et b; partim dicuntur et non sunt, ut et x; partim sunt, neque dicuntur, ut. Vehemens et vemens apud antiquos, et apud Ciceronem lego; aeque prehendo, et prendo, hercule et hercle, nihil et nil. Haec observari eatenus poterunt consuetudine potius quam ratione, in his praecipue verbis quae aspirationem habere debent.","english":"Exile is so called with ex (for to go out from the soil alone is exire), as it were exsolium, which the Greeks call exoles; the ancients used to say exsoles.\n\nWhether H is a letter or not, as is in question, has never been doubted that it ought to be placed in the second position after any consonant whatsoever, which Varro alone doubts. For he wishes by his authority to bring it about that that letter which confers aspiration be placed first; and he tries all the more to persuade this because he says it is also placed before vowels: as haeres, hircus. But it escapes Varro that a consonant receives it in the second position for this reason, that it cannot have aspiration before it except after vowels. And so both before and after, if the letter is joined to any such letter, it will not sound. For this is the nature of vowels, that whether they have h before them or after them, in whatever manner, they do not impede pronunciation. Moreover, in the book which Varro wrote On Grammar, when he was discussing letters, he argued thus that it is not among the letters. Which is much less surprising than that he also denies that it is a letter. In which matter what he saw, I have not yet grasped; I shall set down his own words. Of letters, some both exist and are spoken: as a and b; some are spoken and do not exist, as and x; some exist and are not spoken, as. Vehemens and vemens among the ancients, and in Cicero I read; likewise prehendo and prendo, hercule and hercle, nihil and nil. These things can be observed only so far by custom rather than by reason, especially in those words which ought to have aspiration.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":15,"ref":"p15","source":"Y littera antiqui non semper usi sunt, sed aliquando loco illius u ponebant. Itaque in illorum quoque libris hanc scripturam observandam censeo, Suriam, Suracusas, sumbola, sucophantas; at in nostris corrumpi non debet. Illud etiam non video, quare huic litterae aspirationis gratiam amoveam; ipsa enim per se aspirativa est, et quocunque vocabulo primum locum habuerit, aspiratur, Yacinthus, Yllus, Ymetus; et tanto magis aspiratio addenda non est, quanto apud Latinos vocabula non sunt hac littera notata.\n\nVarroni enim placet litteram, si primo loco ponatur, non aspirari. Lector enim ipse, inquit, intelligere debet Rodum, tametsi non habeat, Rhodum esse; retorem esse rhetorem. Sed eadem observatio non necessaria est in littera; sunt enim verba primo loco litteram habentia, non minus Latina quam Graeca. Itaque merito auferemus aut amovebimus aspirationem a Roma, regina, rapa, Rodus.","english":"The ancients did not always use the letter Y, but sometimes put u in its place. And so I judge that this spelling is to be observed even in their books: Suria, Suracusae, sumbola, sucophantae; but in our books it ought not to be corrupted. I also do not see why I should remove the grace of aspiration from this letter; for it is itself aspirated by nature, and in whatever word it holds the first place, it is aspirated: Yacinthus, Yllus, Ymetus; and the more so because aspiration ought not to be added, since among the Latins words are not marked with this letter.\n\nFor Varro holds that the letter, if placed in the first position, is not aspirated. For the reader himself, he says, ought to understand that Rodum, even if it does not have it, is Rhodum; that retorem is rhetorem. But the same rule is not necessary in the letter r; for there are words having the letter r in the first position that are no less Latin than Greek. Therefore with good reason we shall take away or remove aspiration from Roma, regina, rapa, Rodus.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":16,"ref":"p16","source":"Z in antiquis libellis modo scripta est, modo non: sed pro illa duae ss ponebantur, ut crotalizo crotalisso; malacizo malacisso, et his similia. Sed viderint illi, qui cum verbis integris Graecorum uti non erubuerint, erubescendum crediderunt litteras Graecas intermiscere. Nobis satius est alieno bene uti, quam nostro [ed., nostra apponere] ineleganter.\n\nCAPUT II.\n\nEx Velio Longo ista deflorata sunt. At, si conjunctio fuerit, per scribendum est, ut est,\n\nAt te nocturnis juvat impallescere chartis. si praepositio, per d, ut est,\n\nFando aliquid si forte tuos pervenit ad aures. Atque, item conjunctio composita, per similiter scribenda est. Apud praepositio per scribi debet; sicut, ad patrem: quoniam veteres saepe apud pro ad usi sunt; et duabus ex eis mediis litteris sublatis, id est, et u, ad remanet.\n\nItem quit, per scriptum, verbum est tertiae personae, cujus prima est queo, secunda quis, tertia quit: ex quibus componuntur nequeo, nequis, nequit, inquio, inquis, inquit. Per autem adverbium: ut, quid faciat laetas segetes; et quae ex eo componuntur; ut, quidquid, siquid, aliquid, nunquid, et his similia. Id, per scriptum, pronomen est neutri generis, ab eo quod est, is, ea, id; per vero signatum, indicat verbum tertiae personae, ab eo quod est, eo, is, it.","english":"Z in ancient books is sometimes written and sometimes not; but in place of it two s's were put, as crotalizo crotalisso, malacizo malacisso, and the like. But let those see to it who, though they have not blushed to use the whole words of the Greeks, have believed it a thing to blush at to intermix Greek letters. For us it is better to use a foreign thing well than to set down our own inelegantly.\n\nCHAPTER II.\n\nThese things have been culled from Velius Longus. But, if it is a conjunction, it is to be written with t, as it is,\n\nAt te nocturnis juvat impallescere chartis. If it is a preposition, with d, as it is,\n\nFando aliquid si forte tuos pervenit ad aures. Atque, likewise a compound conjunction, is to be written similarly with t. Apud, a preposition, ought to be written with t; just as, ad patrem: since the ancients often used apud for ad; and when the two middle letters are removed from it, that is, e and u, ad remains.\n\nLikewise quit, written with t, is a verb of the third person, whose first is queo, second quis, third quit: from these are compounded nequeo, nequis, nequit, inquio, inquis, inquit. But with d it is an adverb: as, quid faciat laetas segetes; and the things compounded from it; as, quidquid, siquid, aliquid, nunquid, and the like. Id, written with d, is a pronoun of the neuter gender, from that which is, is, ea, id; but marked with t, it indicates a verb of the third person, from that which is, eo, is, it.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[{"kind":"lacuna","severity":"caution","text":"The source is fragmentary here: the edition marks a break or an editorial bracket, and the English carries across it. Treat the bridge as supplied, not translated."}]},{"i":17,"ref":"p17","source":"Placet etiam Delmatiam scribamus, non Dalmatiam; quoniam a Delminio [ms., Delmino] maxima ejusdem provinciae civitate tractum nomen existimatur.\n\nFeriae quoque, non fereae scribendae sunt: quia apud antiquos feriae non fereae dicebantur.\n\nActuarii et actarii, utrumque dicitur. Sed actuarii nominantur diversis actibus generaliter occupati; actarii vero scriptores tantum dicuntur actorum.\n\nItem aliud est esse Cilonem, aliud Chilonem. Cilones vocantur homines angusti capitis et longi, et aspirationem non habet: Chilones vero, cum aspiratione scripti, a brevioribus labiis homines vocitantur; quod est a Graeco vocabulo derivatum,: unde Achillem quoque ferunt esse nominatum.\n\nConjux sine putat Nisus artigraphus esse scribendum: quoniam in genitivo casu facit conjugis. Mihi autem videtur non evellendam exinde hanc litteram, qua sonus enuntiationis exprimitur. Nam quamvis asserat non esse onerandam supervacuis litteris dictionem, ego tamen non fraudandum sonum aestimo suis litteris, quibus integre et plenius [ed., integer et plenus] auribus intimatur.","english":"It also pleases me that we write Delmatia, not Dalmatia, since the name is thought to be derived from Delminium, the greatest city of that same province.\n\nFeriae too should be written, not fereae, because among the ancients they were called feriae, not fereae.\n\nActuarii and actarii are both said. But actuarii are named as those generally occupied in various acts; actarii however are called only the writers of acts.\n\nLikewise, it is one thing to be a Cilo and another to be a Chilo. Cilones are called men of narrow and long head, and it has no aspiration; but Chilones, written with aspiration, are what men with rather short lips are called, which is derived from a Greek word, whence they say Achilles too was named.\n\nThe artigraphus Nisus thinks coniux should be written without [the letter n], since in the genitive case it makes coniugis. But to me it seems that this letter, by which the sound of pronunciation is expressed, should not be torn away from it. For although he asserts that a word should not be burdened with superfluous letters, I nevertheless judge that the sound should not be cheated of its letters, by which it is conveyed to the ears whole and more fully.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[{"kind":"lacuna","severity":"caution","text":"The source is fragmentary here: the edition marks a break or an editorial bracket, and the English carries across it. Treat the bridge as supplied, not translated."}]},{"i":18,"ref":"p18","source":"CAPUT III.\n\nEx Curtio Valeriano ista collecta sunt.\n\nQ littera tunc recte ponitur, cum eam statim u littera sequitur, juncta cum alia vocali vel vocalibus diphthongis, ita ut unam syllabam faciat, ut: Quirites, quaestio, quaerite. Caetera vero per scribi debent; ut, cujus, Cumae, et reliqua hujusmodi. Cum, quando praepositio erit, per scribitur; ut est illud:\n\nDivisum imperium cum Jove Caesar habet. quando autem adverbium est, per scribendum. Veteres enim quando, quum dixerunt; ut est: Quum navis ex Asia venerit: caeteraque hujusmodi adverbia similiter scribenda sunt; ut, quoquumque, ubiquumque.\n\nHujuscemodi per litteram scribendum est; Antiqui enim pronominibus ce addebant; ut, hicce, illicce, isticce: unde subtracta eadem novissima littera, relictum est; ut, hic, illic, istic; sed hoc in solo genitivo casu articularis pronominis, qui est hujusce, adhuc eadem syllaba ce integra manet.","english":"CHAPTER III.\n\nThese things have been collected from Curtius Valerianus.\n\nThe letter q is correctly placed when the letter u immediately follows it, joined with another vowel or with diphthongal vowels, so that it makes one syllable, as in: Quirites, quaestio, quaerite. But the rest should be written with c; as, cujus, Cumae, and other such words. Cum, when it is a preposition, is written with c; as is that line:\n\nCaesar holds divided empire with Jove.\n\nBut when it is an adverb, it should be written with qu. For the ancients wrote quum for quando; as in: Quum navis ex Asia venerit: and the other adverbs of this kind should likewise be written so; as, quoquumque, ubiquumque.\n\nWords of this kind should be written with the letter c; for the ancients added ce to pronouns; as, hicce, illicce, isticce: whence, when that same last letter was removed, there remained; as, hic, illic, istic; but in the genitive case alone of the articular pronoun, which is hujusce, that same syllable ce still remains intact.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":19,"ref":"p19","source":"Cur, alii per scribendum putaverunt, dicentes non posse litteram poni, ubi u esset sine alia vocali, secundum regulam supradictam; alii per q, eo quod originem trahat ab interrogativis adverbiis, quae sunt, quando, quorsum. Usus autem obtinuit ut cur per scribatur.\n\nPartubus et partibus, arcubus et arcibus, artubus et artibus, veteres quidem indifferenter scripserunt: nos possumus observare, ut ab eo quod sunt partus, id est fetus, partubus scribamus; ab eo autem quod sunt partes, partibus. Itemque ab eo quod sunt arcus, arcubus; ab eo autem quod sunt arces, arcibus; et rursum ab eo quod sunt artus, id est membra, artubus; ab eo autem quod sunt artes, artibus.\n\nTres litterae sunt apud Graecos,,; ex his in usum nostrum transtulimus; item pro, nos utimur: nullo modo transferri potuit, sed vis ipsius translata est in ps: ut quae per scribuntur, per ps scribamus. In caeteris casibus, aut in bis exeunt, aut in pis: ut, caeleps, caelibis; auceps, aucupis; cinips, ciniphis.","english":"Some have thought that *cur* should be written with *c*, saying that the letter *q* cannot be placed where *u* is without another vowel, according to the rule stated above; others write it with *q*, on the ground that it derives its origin from the interrogative adverbs, which are *quando* and *quorsum*. Usage, however, has prevailed that *cur* be written with *c*.\n\n*Partubus* and *partibus*, *arcubus* and *arcibus*, *artubus* and *artibus*: the ancients indeed wrote these indiscriminately; we can observe the distinction that from *partus*, that is, offspring, we write *partubus*; but from *partes* we write *partibus*. Likewise from *arcus* we write *arcubus*; but from *arces* we write *arcibus*; and again from *artus*, that is, limbs, we write *artubus*; but from *artes* we write *artibus*.\n\nThere are three letters among the Greeks, [zeta, eta, theta]; of these we have transferred [zeta] into our usage; likewise in place of [theta] we use [th]: [phi] could in no way be transferred, but its force has been transferred into *ps*, so that words written by them with [phi] we write with *ps*. In the remaining cases, they end either in *bs* or in *ps*: as *caeleps*, *caelibis*; *auceps*, *aucupis*; *cinips*, *ciniphis*.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":20,"ref":"p20","source":"Divisionem praeterea syllabarum ad s, et pertinentem, hanc observabimus: quod ubicunque erunt, dividi non possunt; sed ad sequentem aut antecedentem syllabam applicabuntur, tanquam unius litterae potestatem habeant: apstinui, aps, et tenui; apscessi, aps et cessi, apscondo, aps et condo. At ubi fuerint, dividantur necesse est; ut: obstupui, obstupeo, obsum, obstrepo. Praeterea nunquam conjunctas invenies, non enim possunt facere syllabam, etsi primam quidem vocalem habeant: fallunt quasi ipsae consonent; ut, trabs, quam dicimus trabem. Caeterum si ante vocalem ponantur, nullo modo enuntiationem capiunt: contra etiam praepositae sic sonant, ut apud Graecos.\n\nEamdem rationem puto observandam et in verbis quae praeterito tempore et futuro incertum est an habere debeant. Nam sicut in casibus nominum littera in commutatur, ut est caeleps, caelibis, ita in temporibus quoque verborum econtrario in commutatum videmus; ut scribo, scripsi, scripturus; labor, lapsus, lapsurus; nubo, nupsi, nuptura. Z in antiquis libris Latinorum scripta non est; sed pro illa, duo ss ponebantur, crotalizare, crotalissare. Sed viderint illi qui [ms., quod) cum verbis quibusdam integris Graecorum uti in Latina lingua non erubuerunt, erubescendum crediderunt litteras Graecas intermiscere. Nam satius est alienis bene uti quam nostra ineleganter apponere.","english":"Furthermore, we shall observe this rule concerning the division of syllables with respect to s and the sound pertaining to it: wherever they occur, they cannot be divided, but will be attached to the following or preceding syllable, as though they had the force of a single letter: *apstinui*, *aps* and *tenui*; *apscessi*, *aps* and *cessi*; *apscondo*, *aps* and *condo*. But where they occur, they must be divided, as: *obstupui*, *obstupeo*, *obsum*, *obstrepo*. Moreover, you will never find them joined together, for they cannot make a syllable, even though they have a vowel first: they deceive as though they themselves were consonants, as *trabs*, which we call *trabem*. But if they are placed before a vowel, they admit of no utterance at all; on the contrary, when placed before, they sound as they do among the Greeks.\n\nI think the same principle should be observed also in words which are uncertain whether they ought to have a past and future tense. For just as in the cases of nouns the letter *b* is changed, as *caeleps*, *caelibis*, so also in the tenses of verbs we see it changed in the opposite direction, as *scribo*, *scripsi*, *scripturus*; *labor*, *lapsus*, *lapsurus*; *nubo*, *nupsi*, *nuptura*. The letter *z* was not written in the ancient books of the Latins; but in its place two *s*'s were put, *crotalizare*, *crotalissare*. But let those see to it who, though they did not blush to use certain whole Greek words in the Latin language, thought it shameful to intermix Greek letters. For it is better to use foreign things well than to set down our own inelegantly.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[{"kind":"lacuna","severity":"caution","text":"The source is fragmentary here: the edition marks a break or an editorial bracket, and the English carries across it. Treat the bridge as supplied, not translated."}]},{"i":21,"ref":"p21","source":"Praesto nos per o scribimus, veteres per u scripserunt; sed praesto dicendum est, ut, sedulo, et optato, et sortito. Inde et praestolari, non praestulari. Nec mirum est veteres u littera pro o usos, nam et o pro u usi sunt. Poblicum enim, quod nos publicum, et quod nos culpam, illi colpam dixerunt. Supter per scribendum, non per b. Neglegere per g, non per scribendum. Eutalium, Eupolim, et alia hujusmodi, quidam per y litteram putaverunt, eo quod Graeca esse dicerent; sed apud nos y littera nunquam vocali conjungitur.\n\nCAPUT IV.\n\nEx Papiriano a ista collecta sunt.\n\nAE syllaba, quam nunc in fine sermonis diphthongon scribimus, ut, cogitationes magnae, apud antiquos per ai scribebatur, ut esset distantia genitivorum a dativis. Nam genitivo hanc divisionem dabant, ut non esset disyllabus similis dativo, sed trisyllabus inveniretur, ut, magnai, Asiai, aulai, rugai, ferai [ms., frugiferai].","english":"We write Praesto with an o; the ancients wrote it with a u; but it must be pronounced praesto, like sedulo, et optato, et sortito. Hence also praestolari, not praestulari. Nor is it surprising that the ancients used the letter u for o, for they also used o for u. For they said Poblicum, which we call publicum, and what we call culpam, they called colpam. Supter is to be written with p, not with b. Neglegere is to be written with g, not with [c]. Eutalium, Eupolim, and other words of this kind some have thought should be written with the letter y, on the ground that they said these were Greek; but among us the letter y is never joined to a vowel.\n\nCHAPTER IV.\n\nThe following points have been collected from Papirianus.\n\nThe syllable AE, which we now write as a diphthong at the end of a word, as in cogitationes magnae, was written by the ancients with ai, so that there might be a distinction between genitives and datives. For they gave the genitive this division, so that it would not be a disyllable similar to the dative, but would be found to be a trisyllable, as magnai, Asiai, aulai, rugai, ferai [ms., frugiferai].","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[{"kind":"lacuna","severity":"caution","text":"The source is fragmentary here: the edition marks a break or an editorial bracket, and the English carries across it. Treat the bridge as supplied, not translated."}]},{"i":22,"ref":"p22","source":"Reliquiae et reliqui per scribebantur: ut relicuus et vacuus, sic relicui et vacui; sic mortuus et mortui, strenuus, strenui; at nunc reliquiae vel exsequiae, per scribuntur.\n\nCotidie, per et o dicitur, ut scribitur, non per q; quia non a quoto die, sed a continenti die dictum est.\n\nHaud, quando adverbium est negandi, littera terminatur, et aspiratur in capite; quando autem conjunctio disjunctiva est, per litteram sine aspiratione scribitur.\n\nMalo per unum l, quod est magis volo. Malle, per duo ll, quod est magis velle. Nolo per unum l, est enim non volo. Nolle, per duo ll, quod est non velle. Primo querela apud antiquos per unum scribebatur, sicut suadela, tutela, candela, corruptela: quamvis usus sibi etiam apud eos vindicaret, ut aliqua in figura diminutivorum per duo ll scriberentur: ut, capella, fabella, tabella. Nunc autem etiam querella per duo scribitur.","english":"Reliquiae and reliqui were written with a u, as relicuus and vacuus, so relicui and vacui; so mortuus and mortui, strenuus, strenui; but now reliquiae or exsequiae are written with an e.\n\nCotidie is pronounced with e and o, as it is written, not with q, because it is said not from quoto die but from continenti die.\n\nHaud, when it is an adverb of negation, ends with the letter d and is aspirated at the beginning; but when it is a disjunctive conjunction, it is written with the letter without aspiration.\n\nMalo with one l, because it is magis volo. Malle with two l's, because it is magis velle. Nolo with one l, for it is non volo. Nolle with two l's, because it is non velle. At first querela was written with one l among the ancients, like suadela, tutela, candela, corruptela: although usage claimed for itself even among them that some words in the form of diminutives be written with two l's: as capella, fabella, tabella. Now, however, querella too is written with two.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":23,"ref":"p23","source":"Narare per unum scribitur, ut Varroni placet, secutus est enim etymologiam nominis ejus, qua gnarus dicitur quis, qui scit et accepit quod loqui debeat. Denique compositio verbi ita scribitur, ignorare, quod non per duo r, sed per unum scribitur. Ideo et naratio unum habere debet.\n\nQuot, quando numerus est, per t; quando pronomen, per scribendum est. Nam totidem per scribitur, quia numerus est.\n\nQuaecunque verba ab littera incipiunt, si composita sint, ut ex praepositionem accipiant, servata littera scribuntur: ut, specto, exspecto; salio, exsilio. At caetera verba quae in principio non habent, onerari non debent: aestimo, existimo; acuo, exacuo; agito, exagito.\n\nPrendo dicimus et prehendo, ut hercle et hercule, nihil et nihili. Sed in his verbis, quae aspirationem habere debent, haec observari catenus poterunt, quatenus consuetudo permiserit; sed tamen libellus nos evidenter docet, qui inferius de aspiratione scriptus est.","english":"Narare is written with one r, as Varro approves; for he followed the etymology of its name, by which anyone is called gnarus who knows and has received what he ought to speak. Finally, the compound of the verb is written thus: ignorare, which is written not with two r's but with one. Therefore naratio too ought to have one.\n\nQuot, when it is a number, is written with t; when it is a pronoun, it is to be written with c. For totidem is written with c, because it is a number.\n\nWhatever words begin with the letter x, if they are compound, so that they take a preposition, are written with the letter preserved: as specto, exspecto; salio, exsilio. But the other words which do not have x at the beginning ought not to be burdened with it: aestimo, existimo; acuo, exacuo; agito, exagito.\n\nWe say prendo and prehendo, as hercle and hercule, nihil and nihili. But in these words which ought to have aspiration, these things can be observed only insofar as custom has permitted; yet the little book which is written below on aspiration teaches us evidently.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":24,"ref":"p24","source":"Traps ab eo quod dicitur trabis, et urps, per debent scribi, licet Varro per scribendum putet quod in reliquis casibus habent. Sed tamen cum littera Graeca nullo modo transferri potuerit in usum nostrum, et vis ejus per et litteras scribatur, necessarium est ut ubi Graecum sonat apud nos (quod vitari non potest) per has litteras scribatur, id est s, licet in obliquis casibus habeant: ut, caeleps caelibis, urps urbis; item in aliis ipsam retineat: ut, auceps aucupis. Unde apparet in his casibus mutare nos debere et b, in quibus se etiam ambae consequuntur, interposita vocali. Hanc etiam regulam sequitur in, quae et ipsa per et constat: ut, cinips, ciniphis, quae in nominativo casu et s, in aliis casibus per et scribitur.\n\nQuicquam, in medio per c, non per d, scribi debet. In compositione enim plerumque in commutatur, ut in praepositionibus, accedo, accumulo.","english":"Traps is written with b, from what is called trabs, and urps likewise, although Varro thinks it should be written with p, because in the remaining cases they have p. But nevertheless, since the Greek letter could in no way be transferred into our usage, and its force is written with e and p, it is necessary that where it sounds Greek among us (which cannot be avoided) it be written with these letters, that is, p and s, although in the oblique cases they have p: as caeleps, caelibis; urps, urbis; likewise in others it should retain the same: as auceps, aucupis. Whence it appears that in these cases we ought to change e and b, in which both also follow one another, with a vowel interposed. This rule is also followed in in, which itself consists of e and p: as cinips, ciniphis, which in the nominative case is written with e and s, in the other cases with e and p.\n\nQuicquam ought to be written in the middle with c, not with d. For in composition it is for the most part changed into n, as in the prepositions accedo, accumulo.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":25,"ref":"p25","source":"Formosus sine n, secunda syllaba scribendum est, ut, arenosus, frondosus, aquosus, herbosus; participia vero habent n, ut tonsus, tunsus, mensus, pransus. Antiquorum nulla observantia fuit, cum n, an sine scriberent, illi enim tosus, tusus, prasus plerumque scribebant.\n\nY Graecum nos in quibusdam in u convertimus, ut Cymas, Cumas, cyminum, cuminum: in quibusdam non vertimus; ut, Syria, Cyriacus, symbolum, sycophanta.\n\nForfices secundum etymologiam debemus dicere et scribere: ut si a filo dicamus, debeamus ponere, ut forfices, quae sunt sartorum; et si a pilo, per p, ut forpices, quae sunt tonsorum; si a capiendo, per c, ut forcipes, eo quod formum capiant, quae sunt fabrorum; formum enim dixerunt antiqui calidum, unde est formosus.\n\nVulgus, vultum, parvum, torvum, sunt qui putant per duo u scribi non debere: quod similis vocalis vocali adjuncta, non solum non cohaereat, sed etiam syllabam augeat, ut est vacuus, ingenuus, occiduus, exiguus, perspicuus, et in verbis, metuunt, tribuunt, statuunt. Sed Velius Longus per rationem praesumptam decipi eos putat, quod primitivus, et adoptivus, et nominativus, et alia per u et o scribantur. Nam aliter scribere, et aliter pronuntiare vecordis est. Cum enim per o scribant, per u enuntiant.","english":"Formosus is to be written without n, in the second syllable, like arenosus, frondosus, aquosus, herbosus; but participles have n, like tonsus, tunsus, mensus, pransus. The ancients observed no fixed rule as to whether they wrote with n or without it, for they generally wrote tosus, tusus, prasus.\n\nWe convert the Greek y into u in certain words, as Cymas to Cumas, cyminum to cuminum; in certain words we do not convert it, as Syria, Cyriacus, symbolum, sycophanta.\n\nWe ought to say and write forfices according to etymology: so that if we derive it from filum, we ought to write forfices, which are the scissors of tailors; and if from pilum, with p, as forpices, which are the scissors of barbers; if from capiendo, with c, as forcipes, because they take formum, which are the tools of smiths; for the ancients called hot formum, whence comes formosus.\n\nThere are those who think that vulgus, vultum, parvum, torvum ought not to be written with double u: because a like vowel joined to a vowel not only does not coalesce, but even lengthens the syllable, as in vacuus, ingenuus, occiduus, exiguus, perspicuus, and in verbs, metuunt, tribuunt, statuunt. But Velius Longus thinks they are deceived by a presumed principle, because primitivus, adoptivus, nominativus, and others are written with u and o. For to write one way and pronounce another is the mark of a fool. For when they write with o, they pronounce with u.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":26,"ref":"p26","source":"Praeterea qui contra sentiunt, non respexerunt unum u toties consonantis vim habere, quoties pro consonante ponitur, quod apud Graecos digammon vocatur: ac sic fieri, ut nominativus duas quidem u litteras habeat, sed priorem pro consonante, posteriorem pro vocali scilicet positam. Sic et Donatus dicit, quoties u et i, seu sibi, seu aliis vocalibus praeponuntur, loco habendas esse consonantium. Hiemps, ut Caecilio [ms., Sellio] videtur, habere propter litteram non debet, quod satis sine ea littera sonet; vel quod per omnes casus ne vestigium quidem illius appareat. Sumpsi autem quaeritur an possit sine littera, ut hiemps sonare: sed quia et in alia declinatione respondit, cum dicimus sumptus, sumpturus, necessario per scribi debet.\n\nA, et ab, et abs, et au praepositiones unius generis sunt: velut cum dicimus, a me, ab illo, abstuli, aufugi. Sed observandum, ut tunc ab praepositio scribatur, quotiens parti cuilibet orationis conjungitur, quae a vocali incipiat, ne dictio multis consonantibus oneretur. Si vero a consonante pars aliqua, cui praeponitur incipiat, non est ponenda ab praepositio, sed a solum; ut, a fratre, a vicino, ab homine, ab urbe. Abs vero apud nos nominibus, cum quibus in compositione [ms. conclusione] venit, respuenda est; ut est, ab urbe venio, non abs urbe venio. Nam in compositione non est evitanda, ut abscondo, abstineo.","english":"Furthermore, those who think otherwise have not considered that a single u has the force of a consonant as often as it is placed for a consonant, which among the Greeks is called digamma; and thus it comes about that the nominative has indeed two u letters, but the first is placed as a consonant, the latter, of course, as a vowel. So also Donatus says that whenever u and i are placed before themselves or before other vowels, they are to be regarded in the place of consonants. Hiemps, as Caecilius [ms., Sellius] thinks, ought not to have the letter n, because it sounds sufficiently without that letter; or because through all its cases not even a trace of it appears. But it is asked whether sumpsi can be sounded without the letter n, like hiemps; but because it has a corresponding form in another declension, when we say sumptus, sumpturus, it must necessarily be written with n.\n\nThe prepositions a, and ab, and abs, and au are of one kind: as when we say, a me, ab illo, abstuli, aufugi. But it must be observed that the preposition ab is written then, whenever it is joined to any part of speech whatsoever that begins with a vowel, lest the expression be burdened with many consonants. If, however, some part to which it is prefixed begins with a consonant, the preposition ab is not to be placed, but a only; as, a fratre, a vicino, ab homine, ab urbe. But abs is to be rejected by us with nouns, with which it comes in composition [ms. conclusion]; as it is, ab urbe venio, not abs urbe venio. For in composition it is not to be avoided, as abscondo, abstineo.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[{"kind":"lacuna","severity":"caution","text":"The source is fragmentary here: the edition marks a break or an editorial bracket, and the English carries across it. Treat the bridge as supplied, not translated."}]},{"i":27,"ref":"p27","source":"Au quoque his praeponenda est, quae a consonantibus incipiunt.\n\nIn praepositio si composita sit, et p, aut b, vel m, sequatur, in convertit; ut improbus, imbuit, immutat. Quoties vero illam sequitur, amittit; ut, ignarus, ignotus, nam gnarus et gnotus simplices sunt.\n\nAd praepositio interdum retinet litteram; ut, adfert, adfuit; interdum variat, ut, ammonet, amminiculum. Plerumque evenit, ut consonantes quaedam verborum aut vocabulorum conjunctae huic praepositioni, mutentur; quando autem fiat, quando non, sono internoscemus. Accedo duo cc, attuli duo tt, ut, assiduus duo ss, appareo duo pp, alligo duo ll, annuo duo nn. Est etiam ubi necesse est hanc litteram interire, id est, d, ut, aspiro, aspicio; nulla enim consonans per intercedit, sed omnino deperit.\n\nEx praepositio sequentibus b, d, g, l, m, n, litteris, et u et i, cum pro consonantibus sunt, litteram amittit, ut, ebibit, edidit, egessit, elusit, emicuit, enarravit; sequente vero f, nostra consuetudine in eamdem litteram mutat, ut effundo.","english":"The preposition au is also to be placed before these words, which begin with consonants.\n\nThe preposition in, if it is compounded, and p or b or m follows, turns into m; as improbus, imbuit, immutat. But as often as g follows it, it loses it; as ignarus, ignotus, for gnarus and gnotus are simple words.\n\nThe preposition ad sometimes retains its letter; as adfert, adfuit; sometimes it varies, as ammonet, amminiculum. It happens very often that certain consonants of words or expressions joined to this preposition are changed; but when it happens and when it does not, we shall recognize by the sound. Accedo has two c's, attuli two t's, as assiduus two s's, appareo two p's, alligo two l's, annuo two n's. There is also a case where this letter must perish, that is, d, as aspiro, aspicio; for no consonant intervenes, but it utterly perishes.\n\nThe preposition ex, when b, d, g, l, m, n follow, and u and i when they are in place of consonants, loses its letter, as ebibit, edidit, egessit, elusit, emicuit, enarravit; but when f follows, by our custom it changes into the same letter, as effundo.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":28,"ref":"p28","source":"Ob praepositio interdum ponitur plena, ut est, obire, oberrare; interdum in eamdem litteram transit, a qua sequens sermo incipit, ut offulsit, ommutuit, opposuit; sequente vero u, loco consonantis posita, integra custoditur, ut, obversus, obvius.\n\nSub praepositio, ut superior, interdum litteram servat, ut, subire, subesse, subauscultare; interdum mutat in eamdem litteram a qua sequens inchoat verbum, ut sufficit, suffigit, summovit, sumministrat, supponit, supprimit, suggerit; sequente littera integra manet, ut, subrado, subremigo, subrideo, nec unquam sequente littera corrumpitur.\n\nB in mutatur, sequentibus et c, ut, sustulit, suscepit.\n\nDe praepositio aut plena in compositionibus ponitur, ut deducere, demonstrare, detrudere; aut correptione e litterae corrumpitur, ul, deorsum. Nam quando in i litteram transit, ut est:\n\nAera dimovit tenebrosum, et dispulit umbras, non est a praepositione de, sed dis, ut, distraho, dispereo.","english":"The preposition ob is sometimes placed in full, as in obire, oberrare; sometimes it changes into the same letter with which the following word begins, as in offulsit, ommutuit, opposuit; but when u follows, placed in the position of a consonant, it is kept intact, as in obversus, obvius.\n\nThe preposition sub, like the one above, sometimes keeps its letter, as in subire, subesse, subauscultare; sometimes it changes into the same letter with which the following word begins, as in sufficit, suffigit, summovit, sumministrat, supponit, supprimit, suggerit; when a letter follows, it remains intact, as in subrado, subremigo, subrideo, and it is never corrupted by a following letter.\n\nB is changed into m when c follows, as in sustulit, suscepit.\n\nThe preposition de is either placed in full in compounds, as in deducere, demonstrare, detrudere; or it is corrupted by the shortening of the letter e, as in ul, meaning \"downward.\" For when it changes into the letter i, as in:\n\nAera dimovit tenebrosum, et dispulit umbras,\n\nit is not from the preposition de, but from dis, as in distraho, dispereo.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":29,"ref":"p29","source":"Dis praepositio sequentem litteram non amittit, ut, dispicio: sequentibus vero b, d, g, l, m, n, r, amittit, ut, dibucinat, diducit, digerit, dilacerat, dimovet, dinoscit, diripit. Interdum littera, sequente r, in eamdem litteram mutatur, ut, dirumpo; sequente f, consuetudine in eamdem mutat litteram, ut diffundo.\n\nRe praepositio non tantum plena praeponitur quibusdam partibus orationis, ut, removet, refricat, respirat; sed et litteram assumit, ut est, redire, redolere. Sed interdum littera geminatur, quotiens ab eadem littera sequens incipit syllaba, et una pars orationis expletur, ut, reddere dicimus, geminata d; reducere autem simplici utimur.\n\nTrans praepositio interdum plena est, ut, transtulit, transactum, transeo, transitus: interdum minuitur, ut, trajicit, traducit.\n\nSine praepositio interdum assumptione litterae corrumpitur, ut, seditio, sedulo.","english":"The preposition dis does not lose the following letter, as in dispicio; but before b, d, g, l, m, n, r it does lose it, as in dibucinat, diducit, digerit, dilacerat, dimovet, dinoscit, diripit. Sometimes the letter, when r follows, is changed into that same letter, as in dirumpo; when f follows, by custom it changes into that same letter, as in diffundo.\n\nThe preposition re is not only placed whole before certain parts of speech, as in removet, refricat, respirat, but also takes on a letter, as in redire, redolere. But sometimes the letter is doubled, whenever the following syllable begins with the same letter and one part of speech is completed, as we say reddere with a doubled d; but in reducere we use a single one.\n\nThe preposition trans is sometimes whole, as in transtulit, transactum, transeo, transitus; sometimes it is diminished, as in trajicit, traducit.\n\nThe preposition sine is sometimes corrupted by the assumption of a letter, as in seditio, sedulo.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":30,"ref":"p30","source":"Pro praepositio, cum sit naturaliter longa, interdum in compositione corrumpitur, partim correptione, ut, proavus; partim assumptione litterae d, ut, prodest, proditus, prodigus; interdum integra est et ipsa, et pars cui conjungitur, ut, procuro. Sequentibus i et u, cum pro consonantibus sunt, nonnunquam litteram perdit, aut mutat, ut, providens; aut adsumit, aut corripitur, ut, profertur.\n\nCircum praepositio, sequentibus vocalibus, litteram in enuntiatione amittit, in scriptura servat; sed cum i et u vocales loco consonantium positae sequuntur, et scribitur, et enuntiatur: ut, circumvenit, circumjacet.\n\nAnte praepositio interdum integra manet, ut anteactum, antevenit, antecedit; interdum mutatione in i litteram corrumpitur, ut, antistat, anticipat.\n\nInter praepositio in una voce sequente littera, in eamdem mutat, ut, intellego; caeteris litteris sequentibus vocalibus, pro voce integra manet, ut, interius.","english":"The preposition pro, although it is naturally long, is sometimes corrupted in composition, partly by shortening, as in proavus; partly by the addition of the letter d, as in prodest, proditus, prodigus; sometimes both it and the part to which it is joined remain intact, as in procuro. Before following i and u, when these are consonants, it sometimes loses its letter, or changes it, as in providens; or it takes on a letter, or is shortened, as in profertur.\n\nThe preposition circum, before following vowels, loses its letter in pronunciation but preserves it in writing; but when i and u as vowels stand in place of consonants and follow, it is both written and pronounced: as in circumvenit, circumjacet.\n\nThe preposition ante sometimes remains intact, as in anteactum, antevenit, antecedit; sometimes it is corrupted by changing into the letter i, as in antistat, anticipat.\n\nThe preposition inter, before one following letter in a word, changes into that same letter, as in intellego; before the remaining letters, which are vowels, it remains as a whole word, as in interius.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":31,"ref":"p31","source":"Cujus, et cui pronomina per scribebantur, nos autem et ad brevitatem festinavimus scribendi, et illam pinguedinem limare maluimus.\n\nAccerso per c, et arcesso per r; sed accerso significat advoco; arcesso, repello, prohibeo.\n\nCoqui, Gratus artigraphus per primam syllabam, secundam per scribendam putavit; non enim dicimus cocere, sed coquere; ut Virgilius,\n\nApricis coquitur vindemia saxis.\n\nV littera in quibusdam partibus orationis vitiose inseritur, ut in eo quod est urguere; urgere enim dicimus, non urguere. Virgil. Urgentur poenis, sine u positum est. Et illud,\n\nUngere tela manu, ferrumque armare veneno.\n\nNata quominus unguo debeat dici, evidenter apparet; quod nullum verbum est vo terminatum, sive junctim, sive solute, ut non eamdem u servet in praeterito; ut, volvo, volvi; eruo, erui. Ungo vero, non ungui, sed unxi facit: quomodo pingo, pinxi; et tamen non utique nomini quod hinc fingitur, sic insertam videmus (??) litteram, ut evelli non possit, sicut apud eumdem Virgilium, Et pingues unguine taedas; et in consuetudine usurpatum unguentum dicitur: quod tamen sine u debet scribi.","english":"The pronouns cujus and cui used to be written with u; but we have hastened toward brevity in writing, and preferred to file away that fatness.\n\nAccerso is written with c, and arcesso with r; but accerso means \"I summon\"; arcesso means \"I drive back, I prohibit.\"\n\nGratus, the writer on grammar, thought that in coqui the first syllable should be written with u and the second with e; for we do not say cocere, but coquere; as Virgil says,\n\nThe vintage is boiled on sunny rocks.\n\nThe letter u is wrongly inserted in certain parts of speech, as in the word urguere; for we say urgere, not urguere. Virgil: Urgentur poenis — here it is placed without u. And that line,\n\nTo smear the weapons with the hand, and arm the steel with poison.\n\nFrom this it is evidently clear that it ought not to be called unguo; because there is no verb ending in vo, whether written as one word or separately, that does not keep the same u in the past tense; as volvo, volvi; eruo, erui. But ungo makes not ungui, but unxi: just as pingo, pinxi; and yet we do not see the letter inserted in the noun that is formed from it in such a way that it cannot be torn out, as in the same Virgil, And fat torches with ointment; and in common usage unguentum is said: which nevertheless ought to be written without u.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":32,"ref":"p32","source":"Leprosi, a pruritu nimio ipsius scabiei dicti sunt, et ideo per scribi debent.\n\nMille numerus, a quibusdam per unum scribitur, quod milia dicimus, non millia; alii melius perduc ll existimant scribendum.\n\nCAPUT V.\n\nEx Adamantio Martyrio de u et b.\n\nVa syllaba praefulgens in capite nominis per u vocalem loco positam consonantis scribetur, quoniam apud Latinos haec littera plus valet quam muta, quia et vocalis est: et dum crassiorem exprimit sonum, transit in consonantium potestatem: ut vates, vanus, vagus, validus, vacuus: exceptis basio, balineo et baculo, a quo bacillus nascitur diminutivus. Illa quoque nomina, quorum secunda syllaba in a litteram desinit, per mutam scribentur; ut, balathro, balatus, baratrum, barbarus, ac talia.\n\nVe correpta, nominis principium obsidens, u digammon similiter habebit in scriptura; ut, venenum, vena, verecundus, venerabilis, vetus, vehemens, vehiculum; ita tamen, si non ab adverbio, quod est bene, compositionem habuerint nomina. Haec namque per mutam notabuntur, eo quod adverbium bene per mutam scribi ratio regularis compellit hac de causa, quia constat quaedam adverbia a nomine venire et si nominis dativus casus singularis in o desinat, ultima o littera in e tam brevem quam longam conversa facit adverbium; ut, doctus, docti, docto, docte; malus, mali, malo, male. Ergo et bonus, boni, bono, bone debuit facere.","english":"Leprosi are so called from the excessive itching of the scab itself, and therefore they ought to be written with p.\n\nThe number mille is written by some with a single l, because we say milia, not millia; others judge it better to write it with a double ll.\n\nCHAPTER V.\n\nFrom Adamantius Martyr, concerning u and b.\n\nThe syllable Va, shining forth at the beginning of a name, shall be written with u placed as a vowel in the position of a consonant, since among the Latins this letter has more force than a mute, because it is also a vowel; and while it expresses a crasser sound, it passes into the power of consonants: as vates, vanus, vagus, validus, vacuus: excepted are basium, balineum, and baculus, from which the diminutive bacillus is born. Those names also whose second syllable ends in the letter a shall be written with a mute; as balathrum, balatus, baratrum, barbarus, and the like.\n\nVe short, occupying the beginning of a name, shall likewise have u digamma in writing; as venenum, vena, verecundus, venerabilis, vetus, vehemens, vehiculum; yet only if the names have not their composition from the adverb which is bene. For these are marked with a mute, because the regular rule compels bene to be written with a mute for this reason, that it is established that certain adverbs come from a noun, and if the dative singular case of the noun ends in o, the final letter o changed into e, as short as it is long, makes the adverb; as doctus, docti, docto, docte; malus, mali, malo, male. Therefore bonus, boni, bono ought also to have made bone.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":33,"ref":"p33","source":"Sed ne vocativus casus non adverbium putetur; ut est, o bone vir, visum est etiam penultimam o litteram in e convertere, ut hoc adverbium, illud nomen indicet. Igitur a bono factum est adverbium bene. Bonum vero per hanc litteram significari monstrabunt sequentia. Itaque si ab adverbio, quod est bene, composita fuerint nomina, per mutam scribuntur: ut, benignus, benevolus, beneficus, duntaxat a benefaciendo; nam a veneno per u scribi nullus ignorat.\n\nMeminerimus tamen beatum a superiore abhorrere regula, quod primam syllabam nulla sequitur consonans. Et quoniam huic opponitur regulae vehemens, et vehiculum, admonemus hoc facere aspirationem, ut in multis: hic quoque u praelatam videmus, quam poni pro consonante possibile est.\n\nVae diphthongus sive sola est; ut, vae misero mihi, sive cum nomine componit usus; ut vaesanus per u digammon scribitur.","english":"But lest the vocative case be thought not to be an adverb; as in \"o good man,\" it has seemed good also to change the penultimate letter o into e, so that the latter indicates the adverb, the former the noun. Therefore from bono is made the adverb bene. But that bonum is signified by this letter, the following will show. And so if nouns have been compounded from the adverb which is bene, they are written with a mute: as benignus, benevolus, beneficus—at least in the sense of benefaciendo; for that it is written with u from venenum, no one is ignorant.\n\nLet us remember, however, that beatus is at variance with the former rule, because no consonant follows its first syllable. And since vehemens and vehiculum are opposed to this rule, we admonish that this should make aspiration, as in many words: here too we see u placed before, which can be put for a consonant.\n\nThe diphthong vae is either alone, as \"vae misero mihi,\" or it compounds with a noun in use, as vaesanus is written with u digammon.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":34,"ref":"p34","source":"Ve producta, similiter in capite nominis constituta, siquidem masculini vel neutri generis erunt nomina, in quibus haec praeposita syllaba per u vocalem pro consonante signabitur; ut, venator, velum, verum, venabulum. Si vero erunt feminina tantummodo, quorum origo a masculino genere venire non cernitur, per mulam scribentur; ut, besica, belua, bestia: ita tamen, si non duarum fuerint syllabarum, nam mutabunt scripturam: ut, vena, vespa, et his similia. His quoque opponitur beta, quam Graeci appellant: quoniam in Graeco idem genus observari non potuit.\n\nPraeterea quaerimus cur veritas, et feminini generis existens, et superans disyllaborum mensuram [ed., naturam], per u, non per scribatur. Sed dicimus, quod non est primae nomen positionis, sed descendit a mobili genere; est enim verus, vera, verum, ex quo nascitur appellativum, veritas; et ideo primiformis sui regulam necessario defendit. Simili modo et venatrix masculini sui originem sequitur.","english":"The letter u, when long and likewise placed at the beginning of a word, if indeed they are nouns of the masculine or neuter gender, in which this syllable placed first is written with the vowel u in place of a consonant, as venator, velum, verum, venabulum. But if they are feminine only, whose origin is not seen to come from the masculine gender, they will be written with mula, as besica, belua, bestia: yet only if they are not of two syllables, for they will change their spelling, as vena, vespa, and similar words. To these is also opposed beta, which the Greeks call it, since in Greek the same gender could not be observed.\n\nFurthermore, we ask why veritas, both being of the feminine gender and exceeding the measure of disyllables, is written with u rather than with [the other letter]. But we say that it is not a noun of first position, but descends from a mobile gender; for it is verus, vera, verum, from which is born the appellative veritas; and therefore it necessarily defends the rule of its primitive form. In like manner also venatrix follows the origin of its masculine.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[{"kind":"lacuna","severity":"caution","text":"The source is fragmentary here: the edition marks a break or an editorial bracket, and the English carries across it. Treat the bridge as supplied, not translated."}]},{"i":35,"ref":"p35","source":"Vi longa, vel brevis, nomini praebens initium, si a humero bis, id est secundo, composita fuerit, per mutam scribetur; discretionis enim gratia, bis numerus per hanc litteram scribitur, ut separetur a nomine monosyllabo, quod est vis, et necessitatem significat; veluti, biceps, bilinguis, biformis, bipatens, biennium, bimum, biga, biduum, bicolor, bipennis, bijugum, ac talia. Si autem pura remaneant numero, u traductam in consonantium potestatem habebunt positam; ut, victor, vinum, vilis, victus, vinitor, vita, vidua, vipera, viator, vitisator; praeter bitumen, quod neutri generis consistens, numerum disyllaborum excessit. Bile etiam discretionis causa dicitur. Nam si fel significat, per mutam; si abjectum aliquid, ac parvi pretii, per u scribetur. Bibula autem a verbo, quod est bibo, traducitur, cujus postea regulas dabimus.\n\nVo brevis, vel producta, servans principium nominis, per u litteram, vocalis amissa potestate, scribetur; ut, voluntas, vorago, vocabulum, vomitus, votum: bono tantummodo regulam superante, eo quod in tria genera dispertitum sit, cum praedictorum nihil figuram mobilium recipiat.","english":"The letter u, long or short, when it begins a noun, if it has been compounded with bis from humerus, that is, \"second,\" will be written with a mute; for the sake of distinction, the number \"twice\" is written with this letter, so that it may be separated from the monosyllabic noun vis, which signifies necessity; for example, biceps, bilinguis, biformis, bipatens, biennium, bimum, biga, biduum, bicolor, bipennis, bijugum, and the like. If however they remain pure in the numeral, they will have the u transferred and placed in the power of a consonant; as victor, vinum, vilis, victus, vinitor, vita, vidua, vipera, viator, vitisator; except bitumen, which, being of the neuter gender, has exceeded the number of disyllables. Bile also is so called for the sake of distinction. For if it signifies \"gall,\" it is written with a mute; if something abject and of little worth, it will be written with u. Bibula however is derived from the verb bibo, whose rules we shall give later.\n\nThe short or long syllable vo, preserving the beginning of a noun, will be written with the letter u, with its vowel power lost; as voluntas, vorago, vocabulum, vomitus, votum: only bono exceeds the rule, in that it has been divided among three genders, whereas none of the aforementioned admits the form of the changeable nouns.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":36,"ref":"p36","source":"Bu, seu producta, seu correpta fuerit, praepositam mutam habebit; ut, buxus, buffo, bustum, buccina, bucula, et hujuscemodi omnia; nullo enim modo poterat ipsa sibi u littera praeponi, non conjuncta etiam aliae consonanti in prima syllaba: cum tamen dissimilis continuo littera fuerit subsecuta; ut, vultus, vulgus, Vulcanus, per u digammon scribentur. Nam si prima syllaba desinat in consonantem, ex qua etiam secunda incipiat, mutam retinet in scriptura; ut, bucca, bulla et similia.\n\nVac syllaba, quoties praeposita fuerit, u vocalem habet pro consonante; ut, vacca, id est, jumentum; Vaccinium, scilicet flos. Nam Bacchus, et bacha, bacchar, per scribenda sunt.\n\nBec et bic, syllabas cognovi deficere.\n\nBoc, unum barbarum didici, ut est, Bocchos, quod mutam habere cognovi in scriptura. Et sciendum quod nomina peregrina, si trahantur ad Latinum sermonem, mutam sibi plerumque defendunt. Ideo autem diximus plerumque, quia sunt quae Latinis regulis serviunt; ut, Massiva; hoc enim nomen, licet barbarum esse constet, tamen regulam Latinam in scriptura conservat, quam suus locus monstrabit.","english":"Bu, whether it is long or short, will have a mute before it; as buxus, buffo, bustum, buccina, bucula, and all of this kind; for in no way could the letter u itself be placed before it, unless another consonant also be joined in the first syllable: yet when a different letter has immediately followed, as vultus, vulgus, Vulcanus, they are written with u digamma. For if the first syllable ends in a consonant, from which also the second begins, it keeps the mute in writing; as bucca, bulla and similar words.\n\nThe syllable Vac, whenever it is placed first, has u as a vowel in place of a consonant; as vacca, that is, a beast of burden; Vaccinium, namely the flower. For Bacchus, and bacha, bacchar, are to be written with b.\n\nThe syllables Bec and bic I have found to be lacking.\n\nBoc I have learned to be one barbarous word, as is Bocchos, which I have found to have a mute in writing. And it must be known that foreign nouns, if they are drawn into Latin speech, generally keep a mute for themselves. But for that reason we have said \"generally,\" because there are some that serve the Latin rules; as Massiva; for this name, although it is agreed to be barbarous, nevertheless preserves the Latin rule in writing, which its own place will show.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":37,"ref":"p37","source":"Buc syllabam in uno reperi solummodo nomine, hoc est bucca, quod per mutam scribitur.\n\nVal, prima syllaba, si quidem littera fuerit consecuta, per u scribetur; ut valles, et vallum; nam balaena et ballistra per scribenda sunt. Si vero non sequatur littera, per mutam signabitur; ut, balteus, balbus, balvae, id est januae: praeter adverbium valde, eo quod per detractionem i litterae, dictum esse non dubium est; valide enim integra dictio consistit, ut arbitror: et hoc namque evenit de nomine; facit enim validus, validi, valido: ergo valide adverbium facere debet. Unde si voluerimus incorruptam emittere dictionem, primae syllabarum subjaceat regulae.\n\nVel syllaba, si quidem sola permaneat, erit conjunctio disjunctiva, quae per v omnifariam scribetur: si vero caput fuerit nominis, mutam habeat in scriptura; ut, bellum, bellissimum, et bellaria; praeter Vellus, discretionis gratia. Nam si per u vellus scribatur, genere neutro ac declinatione tertia nuncupetur, ut lanam significet, hoc vellus enim hujus velleris facit; si autem per mutam notetur, genere masculino ac declinatione secunda declinabitur, ut scitum denuntiet: hic enim bellus, hujus belli, id est, scitus, vel jocosus, per casus declinabitur.","english":"I have found the syllable buc in only one word, that is bucca, which is written with a mute.\n\nThe first syllable val, if indeed a letter follows it, will be written with u, as valles and vallum; for balaena and ballistra are to be written with b. If however no letter follows, it will be marked by a mute, as balteus, balbus, balvae, that is, doors; except the adverb valde, because it is undoubtedly said by the removal of the letter i; for the whole word valide stands complete, as I think; and this indeed comes from the noun; for validus makes validi, valido; therefore it ought to make the adverb valide. Hence if we wish to utter the word uncorrupted, it should be subject to the rule of the first syllables.\n\nThe syllable vel, if indeed it remains alone, will be a disjunctive conjunction, which is written everywhere with v; if however it is the head of a noun, let it have a mute in writing, as bellum, bellissimum, and bellaria; except Vellus, for the sake of distinction. For if vellus is written with u, let it be called in the neuter gender and third declension, so that it signifies wool, for this vellus makes hujus velleris; but if it is marked with a mute, it will be declined in the masculine gender and second declension, so that it denotes a handsome man: for hic bellus, hujus belli, that is, handsome or jesting, will be declined through the cases.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":38,"ref":"p38","source":"Vil syllaba, si fuerit antecedens, u vocalem habebit pro consonante, ut, villus vestimenti; villa, id est possessio.\n\nBaro etiam vocalibus aliis intervenientibus in prima syllaba nullius nominis enuntiari cognovi: nisi in glossematibus, bammum,, atque bambalo,: quae per mutam scribuntur.\n\nVan, et ven, et vin, syllabae, u vocalem habebunt pro consonante, ut, vannus, ventus, vindicta.\n\nVan, praefinita syllaba, u vocalem habebit pro consonante; ut, vappa,. Alias vocales inter u et collocatas inveni deficere.\n\nBan, cum incipit syllaba, mulam habebit positam; ut, barrus, bardus, bargus, barba. Excipitur nomen proprium Varro tantummodo.\n\nVer et Vir, syllabae longae vel breves, u vocalem loco positam consonantis habebunt; ut, vertex, virgiliae,, verbum, virus, virga, virgo, virtus, virbius. Excipitur ab hac regula tantummodo berna, quod nomen licet ego invenerim per u scriptum, ta men quia illustris memoriae audivi Mennonium, hominem omnis facundiae judicem, se dicentem de hoc reprehensum a Romano quodam disertissimo, quod per hanc enuntiaverit litteram: nos quoque notamus ac tentamus rationem reddere, quasi diversitatis causa: si enim berna, domi genitum significet, id est, commune est duum generum secundum veteres, trium vero secundum meam sententiam; et per mutam scribetur.","english":"The syllable Vil, if it comes first, will have u as a vowel in place of a consonant, as villus, of a garment; villa, that is, an estate.\n\nI have learned that Baro, even with other vowels coming between, is pronounced in the first syllable of no name, except in glosses, bammum and bambalo, which are written with a mute.\n\nThe syllables Van and Ven and Vin will have u as a vowel in place of a consonant, as vannus, ventus, vindicta.\n\nVan, when it is a defined syllable, will have u as a vowel in place of a consonant, as vappa. I have found that other vowels placed between u and it are lacking.\n\nBan, when it begins a syllable, will have a mule set in place; as barrus, bardus, bargus, barba. The proper name Varro alone is excepted.\n\nThe syllables Ver and Vir, long or short, will have u as a vowel placed in the position of a consonant, as vertex, virgiliae, verbum, virus, virga, virgo, virtus, virbius. From this rule berna alone is excepted, which name, although I have found it written with u, nevertheless, because I have heard Mennonius, a man who is a judge of all eloquence, of illustrious memory, saying that he had been reproved for this by a certain most eloquent Roman, because he pronounced it with this letter, we too mark it and attempt to give a reason, as it were, for the difference: for if berna signifies one born at home, that is, it is common to two genders according to the ancients, but to three according to my opinion; and it will be written with a mute.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":39,"ref":"p39","source":"Si vero temporale quoddam denuntiet, erit mobile; a vere namque vernus, verna, vernum fit, ut si quis dicat, vernus sol, verna hirundo, vernum tempus; et u, sicut prototypon ejus, in scriptura tenebit. His ita se habentibus, possumus etiam intelligere bernam dictum esse eum qui in bonis haereditariis natus est. Bona vero per litteram scribi supradicta ratio demonstrat.\n\nVor syllabam neque brevem neque longam in Latino sermone, ulli inveni praepositam nomini, nisi vortex, pro eo quod est vertex; sicuti volnus antiquos figurasse meminimus.\n\nBur similiter cognovi deficere, praeter hoc quod in proprio dicimus nomine, id est burra; quod etiam per mutam scriptum esse secundum regulam novimus in supradictis expositam.\n\nBes longam similiter nomen monosyllabum reperi; significat autem uncias octo; quod mutam tenere consuetudo tradidit in scriptura, brevem invenire non potui. Nam vesper, vestis, ac similia, licet per u vocalem pro consonante scribantur, tamen juxta rationem supradictam, ubi fecimus bes longam, debent per v scribi: quoniam littera sequenti syllabae sine dubio jungitur.","english":"If, however, it denotes something temporal, it will be movable; for from ver, \"spring,\" come vernus, verna, vernum, as if one should say vernus sol, \"spring sun,\" verna hirundo, \"spring swallow,\" vernum tempus, \"springtime\"; and it will keep u in writing, just like its prototype. These things being so, we can also understand that berna is said of one who is born to hereditary goods. But that bona is written with that letter, the above-mentioned reasoning demonstrates.\n\nI have found the syllable Vor, neither short nor long in Latin speech, placed before no noun, except vortex, in place of that which is vertex; just as we remember that the ancients wrote volnus.\n\nSimilarly I have learned that Bur is lacking, except for this, that we say it in a proper name, that is burra; which we know is also written with a mute according to the rule set out in the above-mentioned passages.\n\nSimilarly I have found Bes long to be a monosyllabic noun; it means eight ounces; which custom has handed down to keep a mute in writing; I could not find it short. For vesper, vestis, and similar words, although they are written with u as a vowel in place of a consonant, nevertheless according to the reasoning above, where we made bes long, they ought to be written with v: since the letter is undoubtedly joined to the following syllable.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":40,"ref":"p40","source":"Vos, si pronomen fuerit, in monosyllaba per u litteram scribitur; cum vero disyllabum fuerit, id est vobis, prima syllaba per v, secunda per scribetur, quando autem jumenti nomen invenitur, ut est, Procumbit humi bos, mutam habebit in monosyllabo nominativi et vocativi casus. Cum vero per alios casus coeperit geminari, in prima syllaba continet, in secunda u; ut, bovis, bovi, bovem, a bove, sicut in supradicto pronomine variatis contrario litteris constat effectum.\n\nBat, in uno tantum reperi nomine generis neutri, pluraliter enuntiatio, id est battualia, quae vulgo hattalia dicuntur, quae mutam habere cognovimus, exercitationes autem militum vel gladiatorum significant: inde etiam battuatores, dici puto.\n\nVit, per u scribitur; ut, vita, vix et vox, monosyllabas didici tantummodo quae per u litteram scribantur. Alias vocales quidem litterae antepositas, autem litterae cohaerentes, Latina nescit omnino facundia.","english":"If it is a pronoun, it is written in monosyllables with the letter u; but when it is disyllabic, that is vobis, the first syllable will be written with v, the second with u. When, however, it is found as the name of a beast of burden, as in \"the ox lies down on the ground,\" it will have a mute in the monosyllable of the nominative and vocative case. But when it begins to be inflected through other cases, it contains v in the first syllable and u in the second, as bovis, bovi, bovem, a bove, just as in the aforesaid pronoun the effect is established by letters changed in the opposite way.\n\nBat is found in only one noun of the neuter gender, plural in utterance, that is battualia, which are commonly called hattalia, which we know to have a mute, and they signify the exercises of soldiers or gladiators; hence also battuatores, I think, are so called.\n\nVit is written with u, as vita, vix, and vox; I have learned that only monosyllables are written with the letter u. Other vowels indeed placed before, but letters joined together, the Latin tongue knows not at all.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":41,"ref":"p41","source":"CAPUT VI.\n\nDe mediis syllabis ejusdem Adamantii Martyrii.\n\nDe syllabis in capitibus nominum positis (quantum potuimus) sine praetermissione tractavimus. Notum enim omnibus esse credo quia necesse est litteram syllabae praepositam, si consonans fuerit consecuta in quacunque dictione, eam sine dubio scribi; ut blandus, gibbus,, braveium, latebrae, tenebrae, atque omnia talia. Nunc rationabiliter mediae syllabae nostrum sortientur laborem.\n\nVa syllaba, in medio nominis posita, per u scribetur; ut avarus, calvare, praeter carbasum, quod nomen Graecum magis quam Latinum arbitror. Ambages enim per mutam notatur: aut quod praeposita est littera, aut quod ex duobus corruptis nomen arbitramur compositum, quasi amboactae; unde dicitur etiam ambire. Ergo composita vel appellativa, vel traductitia, sive factitia, id est quae ex aliis facta sunt, notare debemus, ut sequantur prototypa, id est primas positiones, ut novus, novalis, rivus, rivalis; et derivativa ab Alba, Albanus; a silva, silvanus; a privo, privatum; a libo, libatum vel illibatum.","english":"CHAPTER VI.\n\nOn the middle syllables of the same Adamantius Martyr.\n\nWe have treated (as far as we could) without omission the syllables placed at the beginnings of nouns. For I believe it is known to all that a letter placed before a syllable must necessarily, if a consonant has followed in any word whatsoever, be written without doubt; as blandus, gibbus, braveium, latebrae, tenebrae, and all such words. Now the middle syllables will reasonably obtain our labor.\n\nThe syllable va, placed in the middle of a noun, will be written with u; as avarus, calvare, except carbasum, which I judge to be a Greek rather than a Latin noun. For ambages is marked by a mute: either because the letter is placed before, or because we judge the noun to be composed from two corrupted elements, as if amboactae; whence ambire is also said. Therefore we ought to mark composite or appellative words, or those derived, or made, that is those which are made from others, so that they follow their prototypes, that is their first positions, as novus, novalis, rivus, rivalis; and derivatives from Alba, Albanus; from silva, silvanus; from privo, privatum; from libo, libatum or illibatum.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":42,"ref":"p42","source":"Ve correpta, sive sola fuerit, sive adjuncta consonanti, per u vocalem, loco positam consonantis notetur; ut, juvenis, alveus, fovea, advena, juvencus, caverna, noverca, et adversus praepositio, praeter trabeam. Gubernator enim, licet per mutam scribatur, tamen hoc nomen arbitror a guberno verbo figuratum consistere; cujus regulas postea meditabimur, cum ad tractatum litterae trifariam in nomine positae venerimus: ita tamen, si non diminutiva nomina vel derivativa fuerint. Illa enim (sicut superius diximus) prototypa sua sequentur; ut, liber, libertus, libellus; vel imber, hibernus; flabrum, flabellum; tabula, tabella; taberna, tabernaculum; bellator, imbellis vel imbecillis; fabula, fabella; quae omnia per mutam, ceu primiformia, scribentur certissime.\n\nBe producta per mutam omnifariam scribetur; ut, verbena, rubeta, ambesum, habena. Excipitur avena, quae significat tibiam, vel stipulam, discretionis gratia. Nam severus, quia a saevo venit, posteritatis causa, ve syllabae consequitur regulam.","english":"The short e, whether it stands alone or is joined to a consonant, is marked by the vowel u placed in the position of a consonant; as in iuvenis, alveus, fovea, advena, iuvencus, caverna, noverca, and the preposition adversus, except trabeam. For gubernator, although it is written with a mute, I judge that this noun consists as formed from the verb guberno; whose rules we shall consider later, when we come to the treatise on the letter placed threefold in a noun: yet only if the nouns are not diminutive or derivative. For those (as we said above) will follow their prototypes; as liber, libertus, libellus; or imber, hibernus; flabrum, flabellum; tabula, tabella; taberna, tabernaculum; bellator, imbellis or imbecillis; fabula, fabella; all of which will most certainly be written with a mute, as being of the primary form.\n\nThe long e will be written in every way with a mute; as verbena, rubeta, ambesum, habena. Avena is excepted, which signifies the pipe or the stalk, for the sake of distinction. For severus, because it comes from saevus, for the sake of posterity follows the rule of the syllable ve.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":43,"ref":"p43","source":"Vi brevis, per u vocalem, habentem vim consonantis, scribetur; ut, Favius, Flavius, avidus, fluvius, civitas, favilla, provincia, exuviae, manuviae, oblivium, diluvium, suavium, lividum, simpuvium,; praeter obitum nomen, et subito atque obiter adverbia: quae ob, et sub, ut pote praepositiones, antiquos puto in scriptura servasse, litteram non mediae, sed primae adjungentes syllabae. Virbius est abstractus a regula, quoniam virum bis factum esse memorant: quem numerum per mutam scribi antedicta declarant; quidam virum bonum; alii vero virbium, tanquam sit; alii deum esse qui viribus praeest, interpretantur. Praeterea notatur ambiguus, namque semivocali praeposita in una eademque dictione, nunquam u littera pro consonante sequitur. Huic opponitur quamvis; sed hoc videtur esse compositum, cum posterior vis syllaba subjungitur plurimis: ut quovis, quorumvis, utrumvis, ac talia.","english":"The short i is written with the vowel u having the force of a consonant; as in Favius, Flavius, avidus, fluvius, civitas, favilla, provincia, exuviae, manuviae, oblivium, diluvium, suavium, lividum, simpuvium; except the noun obitum, and the adverbs subito and obiter: these, since ob and sub are prepositions, I believe the ancients preserved in writing by joining the letter not to the middle but to the first syllable. Virbius is drawn away from the rule, since they record that he was made vir twice; that this number is written with a mute the previously stated rules declare; some interpret him as a good man; others indeed as virbius, as if he so were; others as the god who presides over strengths. Moreover, ambiguus is noted, for when a semivowel is placed before it in one and the same word, the letter u never follows in place of a consonant. To this is opposed quamvis; but this seems to be a compound, since the latter syllable vis is subjoined to very many: as quovis, quorumvis, utrumvis, and the like.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":44,"ref":"p44","source":"Observandum tamen, ne es pura syllaba terminaverit nomina. Si enim fuerint ita enuntiata, per mutam mediae syllabae sine dubio scribentur, ut abies, scabies, rabies; at haec quoque species bipertita consistit. Nam si trisyllaborum majorem habuerit numerum, per u necessario notabitur; ut, illuvies, proluvies, ingluvies, subluvies.\n\nLis syllaba terminata per mutam scribi compulit nomina; ut, nobilis, mobilis, laudabilis, mirabilis, debilis, habilis, effabilis: exceptis servili, civili et ovile, quae a servo, a cive, atque ove, et a vis syllaba posteritatis deducunt originem, cujus postea regulas meditabimur. Licet enim habitus, excubiae, probitas, arbitrium, dubium, ac talia, per mutam scribantur, tamen hac de causa fit, quoniam a verbis figurata consistunt. Et sciendum quod quaecunque nomina cum verbis habent societatem, verborum regulis, quas postea loco suo dederimus, ipsa quoque necessario subjacebunt.","english":"Yet it must be observed that names do not end in a pure syllable es. For if they are pronounced thus, they will without doubt be written with a mute before the middle syllable, as abies, scabies, rabies; but this kind too consists of two parts. For if it has a greater number of trisyllables, it will necessarily be marked with u; as illuvies, proluvies, ingluvies, subluvies.\n\nThe syllable lis ending compelled names to be written with a mute; as nobilis, mobilis, laudabilis, mirabilis, debilis, habilis, effabilis: except servili, civili, and ovile, which derive their origin from servus, civis, and ovis, and from the syllable vis of posterity, whose rules we shall consider afterwards. For although habitus, excubiae, probitas, arbitrium, dubium, and the like are written with a mute, yet this happens for the reason that they consist of forms derived from verbs. And it must be known that whatever names have association with verbs will themselves also necessarily be subject to the rules of verbs, which we shall give afterwards in their place.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":45,"ref":"p45","source":"Bi, longa, si penultima fuerit, per mutam scribetur; ut libido, rubigo, tibicen, ambitus, concubina, cubile. Sed hoc etiam manifestamus, quod harum quaedam in transfiguratione corripiuntur, ut, tubicen, tibia, cubile, cubitus, vel connubium: quae licet vim longarum amiserint, tamen eamdem scripturam et in derivationibus desiderant custodire. Sciendum praeterea quia si in compositis nominibus, in penultima, vel in antepenultima sede, vi longa inciderit syllaba, per u vocalem pro consonante scribetur, ut, invitus, divigenus, Lavinia, privilegium, ac talia. Privignum etiam huic regulae inservire non dubito, quod per detractionem e litterae dici puto: privigenum enim integram magis esse dictionem noster animus arbitratur.\n\nAdmonemus quoque quod in derivativis hic etiam, sicut ubique, spectavimus primiformium regulas, ut, cervix, cervicale; pulvis, pulvinarium: quas a posteritate syllabae venientes paulo post retegemus. Hanc regularum divisionem confirmat scriptura convivii; nam dissimili tempore vivii syllabae constitutae notantur similiter; quia prior, id est antepenultima longa est; et speciem regulae meruit paulo ante memoratae, ubi meminimus vi longam in antepenultima sede constitutam, per u vocalem habentem vim consonantis necessario scribi: manens altera brevis, supradictae serviet regulae, ubi diximus, vi brevem in medio nominis positam, per u vocalem notari.","english":"Bi, when long and in the penultimate position, will be written with a mute before it, as in libido, rubigo, tibicen, ambitus, concubina, cubile. But we also make this clear, that some of these are shortened in their transformed form, as tubicen, tibia, cubile, cubitus, and connubium; although these have lost the force of long syllables, they nonetheless desire to preserve the same spelling in their derivations as well. It should be known besides that if in compound nouns, in the penultimate or antepenultimate position, a syllable occurs with long force, it will be written with the vowel u standing for a consonant, as in invitus, divigenus, Lavinia, privilegium, and the like. I do not doubt that privignum also serves this rule, which I believe is spoken by the removal of the letter e; for our mind judges that privigenum is the more complete form of the word.\n\nWe also admonish that in derivatives here too, as everywhere, we have regarded the rules of the primary forms, as cervix, cervicale; pulvis, pulvinarium; these, coming from a later syllable, we shall set out a little later. The spelling of convivium confirms this division of the rules; for the syllables of vivii are noted as constituted with a different quantity in a similar way; because the former, that is the antepenultimate, is long, and it has earned the pattern of the rule mentioned a little before, where we recalled that a long syllable by force, placed in the antepenultimate position, is necessarily written with the vowel u having the force of a consonant; the remaining one, being short, will serve the above-mentioned rule, where we said that a short syllable by force, placed in the middle of a name, is marked by the vowel u.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":46,"ref":"p46","source":"Regulam ego absurde non arbitror esse divisam.\n\nVo syllaba, longa vel brevis, in medio nominis posita, per u scribetur; ut, advocatus, frivolus, devotus, Favonium, divortium. Abortu et subole, regulam propter praepositiones (ut puto) negantibus·\n\nBu syllaba per mutam notetur certissime; ut, tribunal, robustus, vocabulum, stabulum, ebulum, vestibulum, cunabulum, moribundus, furibundus, atque omnia talia. Avunculo tamen minus regulae connumerato; ideoque formam diminutivi vel derivativi servare minime dubitatur, et quasi venire ab avo demonstratur. Avum vero per u digammon scribi suus locus monstravit. Haec de mediis syllabis.\n\nCAPUT VII.\n\nItem ejusdem Martyrii de ultimis syllabis.\n\nReliquum est ultimis nominum syllabis imponere studium.\n\nVa syllaba nominis terminata, siquidem antelata littera, vel vocalis natura longa in penultima fuerit, per u scribetur: silva, malva, ulva, vulva, clava, uva, stiva, oliva, saliva: praeter balbas, si tamen prior syllaba per mutam scribetur, discretionis gratia; ideo ne non fores, sed ineffabile voces denuntiet. Nam si per mutam enuntias,, significabit, per u digammon ultima scilicet syllaba, de qua et nunc loquimur, scribetur. Tavellas significat.","english":"I do not think the rule has been absurdly divided.\n\nThe syllable Vo, long or short, placed in the middle of a noun, will be written with u, as in advocatus, frivolus, devotus, Favonium, divortium. But in abortu and subole, those who deny the rule on account of the prepositions (as I think) [dispute it].\n\nThe syllable Bu is most certainly marked by a mute, as in tribunal, robustus, vocabulum, stabulum, ebulum, vestibulum, cunabulum, moribundus, furibundus, and all such words. Avunculo, however, is counted less under the rule; and therefore it is not doubted in the least that it preserves the form of a diminutive or derivative, and it is shown to come, as it were, from avus. But that avum is written with u digammon, its own place has shown. So much concerning middle syllables.\n\nCHAPTER VII.\n\nLikewise, from the same Martyrius, concerning final syllables.\n\nIt remains to apply our study to the final syllables of nouns.\n\nThe syllable Va at the end of a noun, if the preceding letter is a vowel or a naturally long vowel in the penultimate position, will be written with u: silva, malva, ulva, vulva, clava, uva, stiva, oliva, saliva; except balbas, if indeed the first syllable is written with a mute, for the sake of distinction; lest it proclaim not \"fores\" but \"ineffable voices.\" For if you pronounce it with a mute, it will mean—namely, the final syllable, about which we are now speaking—it will be written with u digammon. It means tavellas.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":47,"ref":"p47","source":"Persius: Balva de nare locutus; si vero haec, id est l, non praefulgeat littera, et una vocalis natura longa non erit penultima, muta decenter in scriptura tenebit locum: ita tamen, si non a masculino genere nomina fuerint figurata; ut herba, tuba, turba, larba,, barba, obba,, gleba, pronuba, orba. Excipiuntur caterva, Minerva, quae disyllaborum hujus regulae superant numerum, habent longam positione penultimam.\n\nVe syllaba correpta, per u sine dubio scribetur, sive a se oriantur nomina, seu ab aliis veniant; ut conclave, suave, sive, quidve, atque his similia.\n\nBi non inveni terminatam, nisi in pronominibus dativi casus et in adverbiis, quae per mutam omnifariam scribuntur, ut, tibi, sibi, ubi, ibi, et in pluralibus, nobis, vobis. Et semel sciendum quod quaecunque nomina, sive pronomina in dativo casu singulari vel plurali litteram habeant, in alio casu penitus eadem non fulgente littera per mutam scribentur; ut, omnibus, similibus, pluribus, ac talia.","english":"Persius: \"Balva de nare locutus\"; but if this letter, that is l, does not shine forth, and a single vowel by nature will not be long in the penult, a mute will fittingly hold its place in writing: yet only if the nouns have not been formed from the masculine gender, as herba, tuba, turba, larba, barba, obba, gleba, pronuba, orba. Excepted are caterva and Minerva, which exceed the number of this rule for disyllables, having the penult long by position.\n\nThe syllable Ve, short, will without doubt be written with u, whether the nouns arise from themselves or come from others, as conclave, suave, sive, quidve, and similar words.\n\nI have not found Bi as a termination except in pronouns of the dative case and in adverbs, which are written everywhere with a mute, as tibi, sibi, ubi, ibi, and in the plurals nobis, vobis. And it must be known once for all that whatever nouns or pronouns have the letter in the singular or plural dative case, in another case, with that same letter entirely not shining forth, will be written with a mute, as omnibus, similibus, pluribus, and the like.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":48,"ref":"p48","source":"Bo syllaba definita, per mutam scribetur, ut turbo, orbo, bubo, et tabo; licet per ablativum casum enuntietur: excepto pavone solummodo.\n\nBal syllaba terminata per mutam scribentur, quae in barbaris nominibus aut Latinis nos novimus invenisse, ut, Hannibal, Hasdrubal. Alias vocales inter et collocatas reperire non potui.\n\nBam et bem syllabas, cum aliis vocalibus in nominativo casu a Latino sermone abhorrere cognovimus, excepto novem; significat autem indeclinabilem numerum, qui per u scribitur; notatis etiam quibusdam neutralibus, quae postmodum aliis subjiciemus generibus.\n\nBar et ber, syllabae terminatae, per mutam scribentur, si disyllaborum non egrediantur numerum, quorum naturaliter longa minime carebit penultima, id est, si non fuerit trisyllaba, quae naturalem longam non habebit penultimam, ut, jubar, liber, imber, aber, faber, suber, Calaber, Mulciber. Si enim trisyllaba fuerint neutri generis, quae longam penultimam naturaliter habebunt, per u vocalem loco positam consonantis notabuntur, ut, cadaver, papaver, et similia. Nam pulver, licet sit disyllabum, tamen antiqui duplicem nominativum enuntiare maluerunt; non solum enim pulver, sed etiam pulvis dixerunt; hac de causa per u scribitur.","english":"The syllable \"bo\" is written with a mute, as in turbo, orbo, bubo, and tabo, though it is pronounced in the ablative case; only pavone is excepted.\n\nSyllables ending in \"bal\" are written with a mute, which we know to be found in barbarian or Latin names, as Hannibal, Hasdrubal. Otherwise I have not been able to find them placed between vowels.\n\nWe have learned that the syllables \"bam\" and \"bem,\" with other vowels in the nominative case, are foreign to Latin speech, with the exception of novem; it signifies the indeclinable number, which is written with u; certain neuters also being noted, which we shall later assign to other genders.\n\nThe syllables \"bar\" and \"ber,\" when terminated, are written with a mute, if they do not exceed the number of disyllables, whose penult will by nature not lack length, that is, if it is not a trisyllable which will not have a naturally long penult, as jubar, liber, imber, aber, faber, suber, Calaber, Mulciber. For if they are trisyllables of the neuter gender, which will have a naturally long penult, they are marked with the vowel u placed in the position of a consonant, as cadaver, papaver, and similar words. For pulver, although it is a disyllable, the ancients nevertheless preferred to pronounce a double nominative; for they said not only pulver but also pulvis; for this reason it is written with u.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":49,"ref":"p49","source":"Vir per u vocalem vim consonantis habentem scribitur; ut, Semivir, Triumvir, licet composita, non simplicia sint.\n\nVor, per u notetur, ut, livor, et Mavors (si tamen hoc nomen in hac parte poni necessarium ducimus, quidam enim non solum Mars, sed etiam Mavors, unde et Mavortia dici volunt), excepto arbore, quia nuncupatur et arbos, quae per mutam scribi docuit consuetudo. Nam labor, favor, fervor, pavor, ex verbo figurata, verbi quoque non abnegant regulam.\n\nBur, syllaba terminata, mutam in scriptura tenebunt, ut ebur, robur.\n\nVes brevis definitaque syllaba per u vocalem pro consonante scribitur, ut, dives.\n\nBes longa cum fuerint terminata, mutam tenebunt in scriptura, ut, labes, tabes, pubes, nubes: quamvis nubis quidam nominativum enuntiare maluerunt.\n\nVis per u vocalem loco positam consonantis scribitur, ut, civis, nivis, clavis gravis, pulvis, suavis. Licet enim scrobis et orbis per mutam scribantur, hoc tamen hac de causa, quoniam quidam nominativum singularem sine i littera enuntiare voluerunt.","english":"The word vir is written with u as a vowel having the force of a consonant, as in semivir and triumvir, although they are compounds, not simple words.\n\nVor is marked with u, as in livor and Mavors (if indeed we deem it necessary to include this name in this section; for some wish it to be not only Mars but also Mavors, whence they also wish Mavortia to be said), except for the tree, because it is also called arbos, which usage has taught to be written with a mute. For labor, favor, fervor, and pavor, formed from a verb, do not reject the rule of the verb either.\n\nThe syllable ending in bur will keep a mute in writing, as in ebur and robur.\n\nThe short and definite syllable ves is written with u as a vowel in place of a consonant, as in dives.\n\nWhen syllables ending in bes are long, they will keep a mute in writing, as in labes, tabes, pubes, and nubes, although some have preferred to pronounce the nominative as nubis.\n\nVis is written with u as a vowel placed in the position of a consonant, as in civis, nivis, clavis, gravis, pulvis, and suavis. For although scrobis and orbis are written with a mute, this is for the following reason: some wished to pronounce the singular nominative without the letter i.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":50,"ref":"p50","source":"Bos per mutam, ut arbos, sicut superius meminisse cognoscimur.\n\nBus siquidem masculini generis tantum nomina fuerint, per mutam scribentur, ut, cibus, nebus, morbus, rubus, globus, nimbus, lembus, lumbus; nervo notato solummodo, quia si illi e longa fuerit praeposita, faciet verbum. Enervo enim, positio verbi dicitur; cujus rationem, cum de verbo locuti fuerimus, maturabimus reddere.\n\nObservabimus tamen, si disyllaborum non egressa fuerint numerum, aut penultimam ex una vocali naturaliter longam minus habeant, non mutabunt scripturam; ut, rivus, clivus, acervus, nominativus et caeteri. Sed quia coroebus supergreditur numerum disyllaborum, per mutam notatur. Sciendum autem quod ideo hanc litteram tenuit in scriptura, vel quia peregrinum nomen, minimeque Latinum existit; vel quod penultimam longam non ex una vocali, sed ex diphthongo meruit. Si vero mobilia vel promiscua fuerint, per u vocalem loco positam consonantis scribentur, ut, novus, nova, novum; saevus, saeva, saevum; cervus, cerva; curvus, curva, curvum; torvus, torva, torvum; et clavus, clava, licet aliam per genera significationem suscipiant; avus, ava; cervus, cerva; flavus, flava: quam similiter alter intellectus sequitur, nisi femininum discretionis gratia per mutam voluerimus scribere: calvus, calva, et corvus, promiscuum: et hic et haec clavus alterum per genus significans.","english":"Bos is written with a mute, as in arbos, as we recall was noted above.\n\nIndeed, nouns of the masculine gender ending in -bus will be written with a mute, as cibus, nebus, morbus, rubus, globus, nimbus, lembus, lumbus; with only nervus marked with u, because if a long e is placed before it, it will make a verb. For enervo is called the formation of a verb; whose reason we shall maturely render when we have spoken of the verb.\n\nWe shall observe, however, if they have not exceeded the number of disyllables, or have a penultimate naturally long from a single vowel, they will not change their spelling; as rivus, clivus, acervus, nominativus and the rest. But because coroebus exceeds the number of disyllables, it is marked with a mute. It should be known, moreover, that for this reason it has held this letter in writing, either because it is a foreign name and least Latin; or because it has a long penultimate not from a single vowel but from a diphthong. If, however, they are mobile or common, they will be written with u as a vowel placed in the position of a consonant, as novus, nova, novum; saevus, saeva, saevum; cervus, cerva; curvus, curva, curvum; torvus, torva, torvum; and clavus, clava, although they receive another meaning according to gender; avus, ava; cervus, cerva; flavus, flava: which a different understanding likewise follows, unless we wish the feminine to be written with a mute for the sake of distinction: calvus, calva, and corvus, common: and both hic and haec clavus, signifying another thing according to gender.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":51,"ref":"p51","source":"Orbo, gibbo, probo, subductis a regula, et albo discretionis gratia; nam cum ventrem significat, per digammon u, cum colorem, per mutam scribetur certissime.\n\nSciendum similiter quod hic quoque disyllaborum superantia numerum, eamdem scripturam retineant; ut superbus, superba, superbum; acerbus, acerba, acerbum; et palumbus, promiscue, licet Virgilius feminino genere extulerit,\n\nNec tamen interea raucae tua cura palumbae.\n\nExcipitur protervus; nam lascivus per u scribitur, quoniam longam naturaliter penultimam tenuit.\n\nEt sciendum quod, sive erunt disyllaba, sive hunc ampliaverint numerum, sive unius, sive trium generum fuerint, si secundam ab ultima longam habeant, omnia per u vocalem pro consonante scribentur, ut, rivus, clivus, flavus, positivus, comparativus, et alia.\n\nMeminerimus tamen quod mobilium nominum feminina, neutraque genera, similem masculinorum suorum scripturam suscipiunt, ut, flavus, flava, flavum; albus, alba, album, ac talia. Sed non omnia in bus desinentia existunt mobilia, sicut in principio hujus regulae genera dividentes nos disseruisse meminimus; quaedam enim masculini generis inveniuntur solummodo, ut, cibus, nimbus; quaedam masculini et feminini, ut, cervus, cerva; quaedam neutra, ut, aevum.","english":"Orbo, gibbo, probo, and albo are exceptions to the rule, for the sake of distinction; for when it signifies the belly, it is written with the digamma u, but when it signifies color, it will most certainly be written with a mute.\n\nIt should likewise be known that here too the disyllables that exceed the number retain the same spelling: superbus, superba, superbum; acerbus, acerba, acerbum; and palumbus, indifferently, although Virgil used it in the feminine gender:\n\nNor yet in the meantime is your care for the hoarse dove.\n\nProtervus is excepted; for lascivus is written with u, since it held the penultimate long by nature.\n\nAnd it should be known that whether they are disyllables, or have extended this number, or are of one or of three genders, if they have the second syllable from the last long, all will be written with u as a vowel in place of a consonant, as rivus, clivus, flavus, positivus, comparativus, and others.\n\nLet us remember, however, that the feminine and neuter genders of mobile nouns receive the same spelling as their masculines, as flavus, flava, flavum; albus, alba, album, and the like. But not all nouns ending in -bus are mobile, as we remember we discussed at the beginning of this rule when dividing the genders; for some are found only in the masculine gender, as cibus, nimbus; some in the masculine and feminine, as cervus, cerva; some in the neuter, as aevum.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":52,"ref":"p52","source":"Sciendumque est quod neutra, quae a posteritatibus syllabae non veniunt, per u digammon scribentur, ut, ovum, arvum, hervum: excepto libo, id est. Verbi enim ultima syllaba per mutam scribitur hac de causa, quod a verbere dictum esse veteres existimarunt, cujus rationem in antelatis tradidisse cognoscimur.\n\nVax, et vex, et vix, unum tantummodo nomen per unamquamque syllabam reperi terminatum, ut, vivax, vibex, vervex, cervix, quorum mediam per mutam; quae vero utrinque vel extrinsecus sunt, semper per u significari cognovimus. Reliquas ab his consonantibus insertas vocales Latinum minus accipit [ms., abscidit] eloquium. Ea vero quorum solutio superius compromissa est, in tractatu sequenti de littera trifariam in nomine posita, congrua declinatione patefient.\n\nCAPUT VIII.\n\nEjusdem Adamantii Martyrii de littera trifariam in nomine posita.","english":"And it must be known that neuter nouns whose syllables do not come from later forms are written with the digamma u, as ovum, arvum, hervum, with the exception of libo, that is. For the final syllable of that word is written with a mute for this reason, that the ancients judged it to be derived from verber, whose rationale we are known to have set out in the preceding discussion.\n\nVax, vex, and vix: I have found only one noun ending in each several syllable, as vivax, vibex, vervex, cervix, whose middle letter is written with a mute; but those on either side or on the outside we have learned are always signified by u. The remaining vowels inserted between these consonants the Latin tongue receives [the manuscript has: cuts off] less readily. But those whose resolution was promised above will be made clear in the following treatise concerning the letter placed threefold in a name, by fitting declension.\n\nCHAPTER VIII.\n\nOf the same Adamantius Martyrius, concerning the letter placed threefold in a name.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[{"kind":"lacuna","severity":"caution","text":"The source is fragmentary here: the edition marks a break or an editorial bracket, and the English carries across it. Treat the bridge as supplied, not translated."}]},{"i":53,"ref":"p53","source":"De littera trifariam in nomine posita, quantum possibilitatis fuerit, sufficienter (ut puto) tractavimus. Ab expositis enim recte jam intelligere possumus, si quid eveniet dictorum contrarium. Ibi namque considerare debebimus, ne aliquod dissimile fuerit, vel genere, vel numero syllabarum, vel temporum significatione, vel si ex alia parte orationis descenderint: quae observantes, minus (ut reor) errabimus. Restat nos de littera, quae similiter in verbis etiam invenitur, tractare, plenam imponentes (ut puto) laboris rationem. Nam si ex nomine verboque oratio perfecta componitur, hanc quoque partem et immeditatam relinquere non necessarium, et supra eam laborare non supervacuum judico. De hac igitur parte regulas, quantum possumus, breviter meditemur. Indicativi modi primam inspicientes personam, verbi scilicet activi, vel etiam neutri; sicut enim activum, sic ct passivum scribetur. Nam in communibus et deponentibus nullam invenire potui quaestionem; ex datis enim in nomine regulis, exponendisque, quae in verbo inveniuntur, judicabuntur facilius. Primae autem syllabae personae similem formam sequentes, retinere non dubium est; et quae omnia prima syllaba verborum in communibus aut deponentibus habet. Media quoque per u vocalem loco positam consonantis scribitur: excepto bajulo, bullio, etiam juxta eam quam in prima nominum syllaba dedimus rationem.","english":"We have treated sufficiently, as I think, and as far as was possible, the letter placed in a noun in three ways. For from what has been set out we can now rightly understand whether anything contrary to what has been said will occur. There we ought to consider lest anything be dissimilar, either in gender, or in the number of syllables, or in the meaning of the tenses, or if they descend from another part of speech: observing which, we shall err less, as I think. It remains for us to treat the letter which is likewise found in verbs also, imposing a full account of the work, as I think. For if a complete sentence is composed from noun and verb, I judge it neither necessary to leave this part also unconsidered, nor superfluous to labor over it. Concerning this part, therefore, let us briefly consider the rules, as far as we can. Looking at the first person of the indicative mood, namely of the active verb, or even of the neuter; for just as the active is written, so also the passive. For in common and deponent verbs I have been able to find no question; for from the rules given in the noun, and from those to be set out which are found in the verb, they will be judged more easily. Following the similar form of the first syllable of the person, there is no doubt that it is retained; and all that the first syllable of verbs has in common or deponent verbs. The middle syllable also is written with the vowel u placed in the place of a consonant: except bajulo, bullio, also according to the reason which we gave in the first syllable of nouns.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":54,"ref":"p54","source":"Bibo quoque propter discretionem, a vita per u, a potu per scribendum est; et abeo, id est, discedo, obeo, circumeo, subeo, succedo, ac similia, praepositionum gratia per arbitror scribenda esse: etiam deponentia mutam in scriptura tenere usus et consuetudo antiquitus tradidit. Reliquas, ut vires sufficiunt, una regula generali tractare tentabimus quoque in regulis, nominibus datis firmis ac manentibus, etsi in verba figurentur. Ut enim verba in nomen ducta verborum regulas non amittunt, ita nomina loco posita verborum origine regularum carere non possunt. Ergo si tempus praeteritum modi indicativi in vi terminaverit syllabam, media atque ultima syllaba personae primae temporis praesentis per u vocalem loco positam consonantis scribetur: eo quod omne praeteritum perfectum vi syllaba terminatum, praeter bibi, per u scribitur: foveo, fovi; faveo, favi; moveo, movi; paveo, pavi; expaveo, expavi; lavo, lavi; juvo, juvi; servio, servivi; exceptis lambio, lambibi; ambio, ambibi, ac talibus, quam litteram praeposita scriptura mutavit. Ferveo, etsi in praeterito perfecto fervi facit per u, cui etiam ego magis assentior, ferbui per mutam scribetur: ita tamen, si primae conjugationis ac primae speciei verba non fuerint.","english":"Bibo likewise, for the sake of distinction, is to be written with u when it means \"I live\" and with b when it means \"I drink\"; and abeo, that is, \"I depart,\" obeo, circumeo, subeo, succedo, and similar words, I think should be written with b because of the prepositions; also, usage and custom have handed down from antiquity that deponent verbs keep the mute letter in writing. The remaining matters, as far as our strength suffices, we shall attempt to treat by one general rule, also in the rules, with the nouns given as firm and abiding, even if they are formed into verbs. For just as verbs derived into a noun do not lose the rules of verbs, so nouns placed in the position of verbs cannot lack the rules of their verbal origin. Therefore, if the past tense of the indicative mood ends in the syllable vi, the middle and last syllable of the first person of the present tense shall be written with the vowel u placed in the position of a consonant: because every perfect past tense ending in the syllable vi, except bibi, is written with u: foveo, fovi; faveo, favi; moveo, movi; paveo, pavi; expaveo, expavi; lavo, lavi; juvo, juvi; servio, servivi; excepting lambio, lambibi; ambio, ambibi, and such words, which letter the prefixed writing has changed. Ferveo, although in the perfect past it makes fervi with u, to which I also assent more, shall be written ferbui with the mute letter: yet only so, if the words are not of the first conjugation and the first species.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":55,"ref":"p55","source":"Illa enim per mutam semper scribentur, ut, libero, liberas, liberavi; guberno, gubernas, gubernavi; exubero, exuberas, exuberavi; sibilo, sibilas, sibilavi; dubito dubitas, dubitavi; hebeto, hebetas, hebetavi; titubo, titubas, titubavi; habito, habitas, habitavi. Excipiuntur invito, et derivo, juxta rationem quam supe rius diximus, omnem primam verborum syllabam, praeter haec quae paulo ante numeravimus, per u scribi, quoniam in et de praepositiones esse nemo dubitat. Navigo enim et acervo,, ac talia, in nomine datis subserviunt regulis, et haec quoque species in duas partes dividitur. Nam si disyllaba fuerint, scripturam mutabunt; ut, levo, levas, levavi; servo, servas, servavi; curvo, curvas, curvavi; novo, novas, novavi; ovo, ovas, ovavi; excepto orbo et turbo. Nam turbo a turba nomine descendens, ba syllaba posteritatis jure detinuit regulam. Probo enim puto dici per detractionem litterae, cum contrarium ejus exprobro nuncupatur; et ideo mutam arbitror apponendam, juxta regulam quam in nominibus nos dedisse meminimus. Et libo a Graeco translatum esso confidimus, id est, a.","english":"For those words are always written with a mute letter, as libero, liberas, liberavi; guberno, gubernas, gubernavi; exubero, exuberas, exuberavi; sibilo, sibilas, sibilavi; dubito, dubitas, dubitavi; hebeto, hebetas, hebetavi; titubo, titubas, titubavi; habito, habitas, habitavi. Invito and derivo are excepted; according to the rule we stated above, every first syllable of verbs is written with u, except those we enumerated a little earlier, since no one doubts that in and de are prepositions. For navigo and acervo and the like follow the rules given for nouns, and this class too is divided into two parts. For if they are disyllables, they will change their spelling; as levo, levas, levavi; servo, servas, servavi; curvo, curvas, curvavi; novo, novas, novavi; ovo, ovas, ovavi; except orbo and turbo. For turbo, descending from the noun turba, has by right of derivation retained the rule for the syllable ba. For probo, I think, is said by the removal of a letter, since its opposite is called exprobro; and therefore I judge that a mute letter must be added, according to the rule which we remember we gave for nouns. And I am confident that libo is translated from the Greek, that is, from alpha.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":56,"ref":"p56","source":"Praeterea quaerimus, quare verbum enervo, disyllaborum supergrediens numerum, et conjugationis primae, ac primae speciei consistens, non per mutam, sed per u scribitur; et dicimus, quaestionem solventes, quia est longa praepositio, et ideo disyllaborum arripuit regulam. Sed quia evenit quaedam verba in ultima quidem aut antecedente syllaba primae personae u litteram non habere, in secunda vero continere persona, ut volo, vis; malo, mavis; quaedam in praeterito lanium perfecto, non tamen in positione sua, ut, gaudeo, gavisus sum; et rursus in praeterito perfecto, u litteram penitus non habente, alias personas in temporibus aliis eamdem tenere litteram, ut, vivo, vixi; sciendumque est illam u litteram, vocalem pro consonante haberi in scriptura. Si vero praeteritum supradictum in hui, aut in si, aut in psi syllabas desinat, per mutam sine dubio scribentur: ut, praebeo, praebui; jubeo, jussi; scribo, scripsi, ac talia. Credo etiam de verbis hanc regulam nos dedisse plenissimam, cura temporis omnis praeteriti imperfecti ultimam syllabam, modi scilicet indicativi per mutam habeant, ut, amabam, volebam; et praeteriti perfecti eamdem, ultimam, et plusquam perfecti penultimam, per u vocalem loco positam consonantis, ut, amavi, amaveram; volui, volueram.","english":"Furthermore we ask why the word enervo, exceeding the number of disyllables and belonging to the first conjugation and the first form, is written not with a mute letter but with u; and we say, resolving the question, that it is because the preposition e is long, and therefore it has taken on the rule of disyllables. But since it happens that certain verbs do not have the letter u in the last or preceding syllable of the first person, yet contain it in the second person, as volo, vis; malo, mavis; and certain verbs have it in the perfect tense, though not in their own position, as gaudeo, gavisus sum; and again, in the perfect tense, which has no letter u at all, other persons in other tenses keep the same letter, as vivo, vixi; and it must be known that this letter u is regarded as a consonant in writing, though a vowel. But if the aforementioned perfect ends in the syllables hui, or si, or psi, they will without doubt be written with a mute letter: as praebeo, praebui; jubeo, jussi; scribo, scripsi, and the like. I believe we have also given a most complete rule concerning verbs, in that the last syllable of every past imperfect tense, namely of the indicative mood, has a mute letter, as amabam, volebam; and the same last syllable of the perfect tense, and the penultimate of the pluperfect, has u, a vowel placed in the position of a consonant, as amavi, amaveram; volui, volueram.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":57,"ref":"p57","source":"Futuri quoque ejusdem terminus; si primae, et secundae tertiaeque productae conjugationis verba fuerint, per mutam scribentur, ut, amo, amabo; voco, vocabo; doceo, docebo; moneo, monebo; nutrio, nutribo; audio, audibo. Et subjunctivi seu conjunctivi ultimas per u vocalem pro consonante scribi debere, antiquos tradidisse cognoscimus, ut, volebam, volueram, voluerim, voluissem, voluero, ac talia; eorum scilicet verborum quorum prima persona aut u vocalem habuerit pro consonante in ultima syllaba, ut, levo, privo; aut penitus eadem littera non apparente, eodem loco scilicet eademque persona, ut, habito, hiberno, amo, doceo, ac talia. Nam quae habebunt mutam in prima syllaba praesentis (ut dictum est) temporis, quorum praeteritum in hui, aut in psi syllabas desinit, eamdem mutam in omnibus temporibus modorum omnium, ubicunque inciderit, servare desiderant.","english":"The ending of the future tense of these same verbs also: if they are verbs of the first, second, and third productive conjugation, they will be written with a mute letter, as amo, amabo; voco, vocabo; doceo, docebo; moneo, monebo; nutrio, nutribo; audio, audibo. And we know that the ancients handed down that the final syllables of the subjunctive or conjunctive are to be written with u as a vowel in place of a consonant, as volebam, volueram, voluerim, voluissem, voluero, and the like; namely of those verbs whose first person either has u as a vowel in place of a consonant in the final syllable, as levo, privo; or does not show that same letter at all, namely in the same position and the same person, as habito, hiberno, amo, doceo, and the like. For those which will have a mute letter in the first syllable of the present tense (as has been said), whose past ends in the syllables hui or psi, desire to preserve that same mute letter in all tenses of all moods, wherever it falls.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":58,"ref":"p58","source":"CAPUT IX.\n\nEutichis de aspiratione.\n\nQuanquam alias quoque voces ad aspirationem pertinentes non paucas, quae non erant ab idoneis auctoribus frequentatae, sciens praeterii, ne nimia longitudine voluminis essem molestus; tamen quoniam plerisque legentium plus libet sterilis brevitas quam utilis commentariorum delectat prolixitas, eadem quasi per epitomen mihi repetere placuit, et omnium tam veterum testimoniis quam redditis ubique rationibus praetermissis, ipsas tantummodo meras rursus exponere regulas: ut antedicta studiosioribus, et posteriora satisfacere videantur his qui longiora fastidiunt. Omnis vox Graeca, vel barbara, suum servat apud Romanos, tam in vocalibus quam in consonantibus spiritum, ut, Halys, Hecuba, hegio, hieron, Homerus, hymen, hora diei, Thibris, Phoebus, chorus, Rhenus, Hannibal.\n\nOmnes articuli a vocali incipientes, cum aspiratione proferuntur; ut, hic, haec, hoc; hi, hae, haec: absque vocativo o et a. Adverbiis tamen localibus aspiratur, ut, hic, huc, hinc, hac: nisi cum pronominibus componantur, illic, istic, istaec, istuc, istac; tunc enim amittit collisione vocalium spiritum, quem aliae compositiones etiam in mediis semper vocalibus servant, ut, adhuc, prohibeo; exceptis paucis corruptis, quae excludunt penitus spiritum, sicut superius dictum est; ut, postumus, post humatum, id est post sepultum patrem natus.","english":"CHAPTER IX.\n\nEutychis on Aspiration.\n\nAlthough I have knowingly passed over not a few other words pertaining to aspiration, which were not employed by suitable authorities, lest I be troublesome by the excessive length of the volume; nevertheless, since for most readers barren brevity pleases more than the useful prolixity of commentaries delights, it has pleased me to repeat the same things as it were in an epitome, and, with the testimonies of all the ancients as well as the reasons rendered everywhere passed over, to set forth again only the bare rules themselves: so that the things said before may seem to satisfy the more studious, and the later things those who are disgusted by longer matters. Every Greek or barbarian word preserves its own breath among the Romans, both in vowels and in consonants, as Halys, Hecuba, hegio, hieron, Homerus, hymen, hora of the day, Thibris, Phoebus, chorus, Rhenus, Hannibal.\n\nAll articles beginning with a vowel are pronounced with aspiration; as hic, haec, hoc; hi, hae, haec: except the vocative o and a. Local adverbs, however, are aspirated, as hic, huc, hinc, hac: unless they are compounded with pronouns, illic, istic, istaec, istuc, istac; for then it loses the breath by the collision of vowels, which other compositions always preserve even in the middle of vowels, as adhuc, prohibeo; with a few corrupt ones excepted, which exclude the breath entirely, as was said above; as postumus, that is, born after the father was buried, that is, after he was buried.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":59,"ref":"p59","source":"Bimus, trimus, quadrimus, quasi a bis, ter, quater, et hieme dicta. Manubrium, quasi manu haberium; petaeredium a petendis haereditatibus; cum hoc ipsum etiam quibusdam soleat evenire simplicibus, ut, veho, vexi; traho, traxi; mihi, mi; nihil, nil; prehendo, prendo, vehemens, vemens, et similia, sicut ante relatum est.\n\nOmnis vocalis vocali illata, seu divisa, seu in diphthongo copulata, oret aspiratione, ut, aeneus, aereus, aedes, aedilis, aeger, AEllius, AEmilius [ed., aemulus], aequus, aequor, aes, aestimo, aestas, aevum, auceps, audeo, audax, ausus, audio, augurium, augeo, aufero, aulaeum [ed., alveum], aura, auris, aurum, ausculto, autumo, aut conjunctio: exceptis haedus, haereo, haud, haurio, hio, hisco, et quicquid ab his componitur, vel derivatur. Nam haec, ut articulo aspiratur, ut heu et hei; ut interjectionibus, et verbo, ut heiulo, quod ab hei vel heu traductum est. Heus, et heia, ut adverbiis vel interjectionibus.","english":"Bimus, trimus, quadrimus, as it were from bis, ter, quater, and hiemps. Manubrium, as it were manu haberium; petaeredium from petendis haereditatibus; since this very thing also is wont to happen to certain simple words, as veho, vexi; traho, traxi; mihi, mi; nihil, nil; prehendo, prendo, vehemens, vemens, and similar words, as was related above.\n\nEvery vowel brought before a vowel, whether separate or joined in a diphthong, lacks aspiration, as aeneus, aereus, aedes, aedilis, aeger, Aellius, Aemilius, aequus, aequor, aes, aestimo, aestas, aevum, auceps, audeo, audax, ausus, audio, augurium, augeo, aufero, aulaeum, aura, auris, aurum, ausculto, autumo, and the conjunction aut: excepting haedus, haereo, haud, haurio, hio, hisco, and whatever is compounded or derived from these. For these are aspirated with the article, as heu and hei; as in interjections, and the verb heiulo, which is derived from hei or heu. Heus, and heia, as adverbs or interjections.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[{"kind":"lacuna","severity":"caution","text":"The source is fragmentary here: the edition marks a break or an editorial bracket, and the English carries across it. Treat the bridge as supplied, not translated."}]},{"i":60,"ref":"p60","source":"Omnis vocalis, sequente, leniter enuntiatur, ut, abies, ebur, ibi, ob, uber: notatis habeo, habes, hibiscus, et quicquid ab unoquoque eorum fit. Omnis vocalis, sequente, leniter profertur, ut, acies, ecce, oculus, ocior: absque articulis et adverbiis. Cum mutatur, vocalem aspiratam sequitur. In pronominibus modo aspiratur, ut, hic et haec et hoc.\n\nOmnis vocalis, sequente, leniter enuntiatur, ut, ador, audax, edax, odor, udus. Notatur hadria, hedera; hodie enim ex hoc die compositum servavit articuli aspirati scripturam. Omnis vocalis ante f, g, l, n, p, q, t, u, pro consonante, caret aspiratione, ut, Afer, ager, ala, apis, aqua, ater, avus, affero, egeo, enim, epulae, equus, et conjunctio, ignis, iter, opus, otium, ovis, uter, uva. De agni enim apso, id est vellere, in superioribus dictum est.\n\nOmnis vocalis, sequente, absque e leniter enuntiatur, ut, alea, ales, alo, id est, nutrio, albus, id est, color, alga, almus, altus, alvus, id est, venter, ilex, Ilerda, illico, ille, olor, id est cygnus, oleum, ulcus, ulciscor, ulmus, ulna. Notantur halo verbum, hilum, hilaris, holus nomina. E enim sequente l, plerumque graviter effertur, ut, helluo, heluus, helucus, helops, et quicquid ab unoquoque eorum fit.","english":"Every vowel followed by m is pronounced lightly, as in abies, ebur, ibi, ob, uber; note habeo, habes, hibiscus, and whatever is formed from each of them. Every vowel followed by c is uttered lightly, as in acies, ecce, oculus, ocior, except in articles and adverbs. When it is changed, it follows an aspirated vowel. In pronouns it is aspirated only in this way, as in hic and haec and hoc.\n\nEvery vowel followed by d is pronounced lightly, as in ador, audax, edax, odor, udus. Hadria and hedera are noted; for hodie, being composed from hoc die, has preserved the spelling of the aspirated article. Every vowel before f, g, l, n, p, q, t, and u when it stands for a consonant lacks aspiration, as in Afer, ager, ala, apis, aqua, ater, avus, affero, egeo, enim, epulae, equus, et the conjunction, ignis, iter, opus, otium, ovis, uter, uva. For concerning agnus and apsus, that is, the fleece, it was said in the earlier passages.\n\nEvery vowel followed by l without e is pronounced lightly, as in alea, ales, alo, that is, I nourish, albus, that is, the color, alga, almus, altus, alvus, that is, the belly, ilex, Ilerda, illico, ille, olor, that is, the swan, oleum, ulcus, ulciscor, ulmus, ulna. Halo, a verb, and hilum and hilaris and holus, nouns, are noted. For e followed by l is generally pronounced heavily, as in helluo, heluus, helucus, helops, and whatever is formed from each of them.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":61,"ref":"p61","source":"Omnis vocalis, sequente, leniter enuntiatur, ut amor, amicus, amoenus, amans, amictus, amurca, emo, emax, imus, imo, omen, omasum, omentum, umor, umerus, umidus; notatis hamus, Hammon, homo, humus, et quicquid ab his fit.\n\nOmnis vocalis, sequente, leniter effertur, ut, annus, annulus, ensis, inanis, initium, inula, onus, onustus, unus, unicus; notatis honor, honestas, et Johannes; vel peregrinis et Punicis vocibus, ut, Hannibal, Hanno, Henna, et hinnulus, et quicquid ab his fit.\n\nA, vel u vocales, sequente, leniter enuntiantur, ut, area, aries, aranea, arcus, arma, arduus, artus, aro, urtica, urna; notatis hara, harena, harundo. Nam harmonia, Harpyiae, Harpalice, Graeca sunt, et ob hoc aspirantur.\n\nE vocalis, sequente, leniter effertur, ut, erus, error, ervum, ergo: nisi post sequatur b, vel n, vel s, vel e, longa; tunc enim graviter enuntiatur, ut, herba, herbidus, herbilis, herbosus, proprium Hernus, unde est: Hernica saxa colunt; hersilia, haeres, haeredium, Herennius proprium, et Hercules a Graeco per syncopen factum, jure habet aspirationem. Heri est adverbium temporis, differentiae causa, ne genitivus putetur ab eo quod est erus, eri.","english":"Every vowel followed by [n] is pronounced lightly, as in amor, amicus, amoenus, amans, amictus, amurca, emo, emax, imus, imo, omen, omasum, omentum, umor, umerus, umidus; note hamus, Hammon, homo, humus, and whatever is formed from these.\n\nEvery vowel followed by [n] is uttered lightly, as in annus, annulus, ensis, inanis, initium, inula, onus, onustus, unus, unicus; note honor, honestas, and Johannes; and in foreign and Punic words, as in Hannibal, Hanno, Henna, and hinnulus, and whatever is formed from these.\n\nThe vowels a and u, followed by [r], are pronounced lightly, as in area, aries, aranea, arcus, arma, arduus, artus, aro, urtica, urna; note hara, harena, harundo. For harmonia, Harpyiae, Harpalice are Greek, and for that reason are aspirated.\n\nThe vowel e, followed by [r], is uttered lightly, as in erus, error, ervum, ergo: unless b, or n, or s, or e follows after; for then it is long, and is pronounced heavily, as in herba, herbidus, herbilis, herbosus, the proper name Hernus, whence comes: they inhabit the Hernican rocks; hersilia, haeres, haeredium, the proper name Herennius, and Hercules, made from the Greek by syncope, rightly has aspiration. Heri is an adverb of time, for the sake of distinction, lest it be thought the genitive of that which is erus, eri.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":62,"ref":"p62","source":"I vocalis ante semper aspiratur, ut, hircus,617 hirquitallus, Hirpinus, hirsutus, hirtus, Hirtuleius, Hirtius proprium, nisi aut monosyllabum sit; ut, ir, id est artus, aut ex motu verbi, ut, eo, is, irem, ires, ire; aut nisi a post sequatur; tunc enim aspiratione caret, ut, ira, iratus, iracundus, irascor, et quicquid ab unoquoque eorum fit.\n\nO vocalis, sequente, leniter effertur, ut, orbus, orcus, ordior, orsus, orior, oriens, ortus, id est natus. Si vero alia sequatur, aut t, hoc fit non ex declinatione verbi, nam tunc o aspiratur, ut, horreo, horror, horreum, hortus, Hortensius; notatur ordeum.\n\nA, vel e, vel u, vocales, littera sequente, carent aspiratione; ut, as, assis, astutus, ascendo, aspicio, esca, est, essem, essemus, usus, usura. Notantur hasta, hastile, hesternus (est enim ab heri adverbio) et Hesperia Graecum.\n\nI vero vel u, sequente s, post quam erit vel t, cum aspiratione proferuntur; ut, Hispania, hispidus, historia, histrio, Hister (seu proprium, seu fluminis sit, seu gentis vocabulum), hospes, hospita, hospitium, Hostilius, hostia. Notatur pronomen iste, et ab eo composita. Os, oris, ex quo ostendo, ostentum, leniter prolata, sicut alia, quae post carent p, vel t, et iisdem, ut oscitant.","english":"I is always aspirated before [r], as in hircus, hirquitallus, Hirpinus, hirsutus, hirtus, Hirtuleius, and the proper name Hirtius—unless it is a monosyllable, as in ir, that is, \"arms,\" or comes from a verb's inflection, as in eo, is, irem, ires, ire; or unless a follows, for then it lacks aspiration, as in ira, iratus, iracundus, irascor, and whatever is formed from any of these.\n\nThe vowel o, when followed by [r], is pronounced lightly, as in orbus, orcus, ordior, orsus, orior, oriens, ortus, that is, \"born.\" If another letter follows, or t, this does not arise from the inflection of the word—for then o is aspirated, as in horreo, horror, horreum, hortus, Hortensius; ordeum is marked.\n\nThe vowels a, e, and u, when followed by [s], lack aspiration: as in as, assis, astutus, ascendo, aspicio, esca, est, essem, essemus, usus, usura. Hasta, hastile, and hesternus are marked (for it comes from the adverb heri), as is Hesperia, which is Greek.\n\nBut i and u, when followed by s, after which there will be either [t] or the same [s], are pronounced with aspiration: as in Hispania, hispidus, historia, histrio, Hister (whether it be a proper name, or the name of a river, or a word for a people), hospes, hospita, hospitium, Hostilius, hostia. The pronoun iste is marked, and the compounds formed from it. Os, oris, from which come ostendo and ostentum, is pronounced lightly, like the others which lack [p] or [t] after [s], and the same applies to words such as oscitant.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":63,"ref":"p63","source":"CAPUT X.\n\nEx orthographo Caesellio ista collecta sunt.\n\nCon propositio, si ad verba a vocalibus incipientia accedat, consonantem perdit, ut, aequo, coaequo, eo, coeo, ortus, coortus; sin autem ad verba accedat a digamma incipientia, id est, quae u loco consonantis positam retinent, non perdit litteram, ut, volvo, convolvo, vinco, convinco. Contra evenit in re praepositione; enim litteram extrinsecus accipit, cum ad vocalem incipientem verbi alicujus accessit: quam litteram non accipit, si ad digamma, id est u positam loco consonantis accedat, ut, ulcero, redulcero; ago, redigo; eo, redeo; voco, revoco; vinco, revinco. Qui, si una syllaba est, per litteram scribendum est; ut, qui homo; si duae, per c, ut est, cui homini. Aliquunde, per quun debet scribi, divisio enim illius, aliquo, et unde, hoc est, ex aliquo loco. Sed certe n, non erit; quia unde ita scribitur. Et aliquobi aeque, ex aliquo enim et ubi est, hoc est, in aliquo loco. Sed hae syllabae, quae litteris q, u, o, constant, non excluduntur, perscribi tamen debent.","english":"CHAPTER X.\n\nThese points are collected from the orthographer Caesellius.\n\nThe preposition con, if it comes before words beginning with vowels, loses its consonant, as in aequo, coaequo; eo, coeo; ortus, coortus. But if it comes before words beginning with digamma, that is, words that keep u placed in the position of a consonant, it does not lose its letter, as in volvo, convolvo; vinco, convinco. The opposite happens with the preposition re; for it takes on an additional letter when it comes before a word beginning with a vowel—a letter it does not take on if it comes before digamma, that is, u placed in the position of a consonant—as in ulcero, redulcero; ago, redigo; eo, redeo; voco, revoco; vinco, revinco. Qui, if it is one syllable, must be written with the letter [q]; as in qui homo; if two, with c, as in cui homini. Aliquunde must be written with quun, for its division is aliquo and unde, that is, \"from some place.\" But certainly there will not be n, because unde is written thus. And aliquobi likewise, for it is from aliquo and ubi, that is, \"in some place.\" But these syllables, which consist of the letters q, u, o, are not excluded, yet they must be written out in full.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":64,"ref":"p64","source":"Re praepositio nonnunquam cum ad consonantes accedit, geminat illas, quod plerumque apud antiquos est, ut duco, redduco; cado, reccido; tuli, rettuli; pello, reppello; do, reddo; lego, rellego, unde relliquias et relligionem scribunt, quod apud poetas ita oportere scribi concesserim, tametsi apud oratores quoque antiquos est: nobis jam decor et lenitas obtinenda est, quae maximus fructus est Latinitatis.\n\nTamtus et quamtus in medio habere debent: ut quam et tam, unde quamtitas, quamtus, tamtus. Nec quosdam moveat, si non sonat: ita enim supra docui sonare debere, tametsi in scriptura positum sit.\n\nQuaecunque verba primo loco ab littera incipient, ea cum praepositione ex composita littera eamdem habere debent; caetera minime onerari oportet, ut, salio, exsilio; specto, exspecto; aestimo, existimo, non habent, sicut aequo, exaequo; peto, expeto, aeque non habebunt: quod discrimine facile intelligitur, aliud esse pecto, aliud specto; et ideo ab eo verbo quod pecto, id est pectino, cum compositum fuerit, expecto litteram non habet: ab eo vero quod est specto, id est rei alicujus spectaculo utor, cum compositum fuerit, exspecto litteram, sicut supra diximus, necessario retinet. Item exscreo, cum a screare fit; si sine s, a creare.","english":"The preposition re, when it sometimes comes before consonants, doubles them, which is mostly the case among the ancients, as in duco, redduco; cado, reccido; tuli, rettuli; pello, reppello; do, reddo; lego, rellego, whence they write relliquias and relligionem, which I would grant ought to be written thus in the poets, although it is also found among the ancient orators; but for us now, elegance and smoothness must be maintained, which is the greatest fruit of Latinity.\n\nTamtus and quamtus ought to have m in the middle: as quam and tam, whence quamtitas, quamtus, tamtus. Nor let it disturb some that it does not sound so; for I have taught above that it ought to sound so, even though it is placed in the writing.\n\nWhatever words begin in the first position with the letter a, when compounded with the preposition ex, ought to have the same letter; the rest ought not to be burdened at all, as salio, exsilio; specto, exspecto; aestimo, existimo, they do not have it, just as aequo, exaequo; peto, expeto, will likewise not have it: which is easily understood by the distinction, that pecto is one thing and specto another; and therefore from the verb pecto, that is, I comb, when it has been compounded, expecto does not have the letter; but from that which is specto, that is, I enjoy the sight of something, when it has been compounded, exspecto necessarily retains the letter, as we have said above. Likewise exscreo, when it is made from screare; if without s, from creare.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":65,"ref":"p65","source":"Exsilium quoque cum scribi debet (ex solo enim ire, est exsulare), quasi exsolium, quod Graeci dicunt, et antiqui exsoles dicebant, quos nos exsules dicimus. Extorrem vero sine s; ex terra enim ejectum significat. Exsui habet s; sui enim est, et insui, quasi alicui rei inmitti: unde exsui, quasi jam emitti, enudari. Inde exsuviae, unde exsuti, id est spoliati. Exire, sine s; ire enim simplex est, et quaecunque ex hoc formabuntur, ut, exitus, exitium, exitiale, et exercere, non habent in compositione, quia simplicia quoque similiter non habent. Etenim exercere, est ex et arcere, ut exercitus, qui sub disciplina certa arcetur, unde exercitatio. Exscindo habere debet, scindo enim est simplex. Similiter exsculpo, et exsisto: sculpere enim, et sistere simpliciter dicitur. Expurgo etiam, eodemque modo excedo, non desiderant; eximo similiter. Nam et in aliis praepositionibus sine hac littera est, ut, redimo, interimo, dirimo. Itaque exemptus ita scribitur, ut eximius, qui est quasi exemptus, et extra caeteros positus. Extremus quoque sine s; ex enim est, unde extra, et extremus, unde extrinsecus, exter, extrarium, et si quae alia hinc trahi possunt. Exsequiae vero habent s; sequi enim est in simplici. At exiguae non habent s, sicut indiguae, quae egeant, exiguitas similiter; ut et exoletus, quod ex alterius partis praepositione manifestum fit; adolevit enim est.","english":"Exsilium too ought to be written with s (for it is from solo ire, that is, \"to go out from the soil,\" that exsulare comes), as it were exsolium, which the Greeks call [so], and the ancients used to say exsoles, whom we call exsules. But extorrem is without s; for it signifies one cast out from the land. Exsui has s; for it is from sui, and insui, as it were to be put into something: hence exsui, as it were already to be sent out, to be laid bare. Hence exsuviae, whence exsuti, that is, despoiled. Exire is without s; for ire is simple, and whatever is formed from it, such as exitus, exitium, exitiale, and exercere, do not have it in composition, because the simple forms likewise do not have it. For exercere is from ex and arcere, as exercitus, which is kept under strict discipline, whence exercitatio. Exscindo ought to have s, for scindo is simple. Similarly exsculpo and exsisto; for sculpere and sistere are said in the simple form. Expurgo also, and in the same way excedo, do not require it; eximo similarly. For it is also absent with other prepositions, as in redimo, interimo, dirimo. And so exemptus is written like eximius, which is as it were exemptus, and placed beyond the rest. Extremus too is without s; for it is from ex, whence extra, and extremus, whence extrinsecus, exter, extrarium, and whatever else can be derived from this. But exsequiae has s; for sequi is in the simple form. But exiguae do not have s, just as indiguae, which are in need, and exiguitas similarly; as also exoletus, which is made clear from the preposition of the other part; for adolevit is the simple form.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":66,"ref":"p66","source":"Obsolevit autem quidem habet, sed non ipsius verbi, verum praepositionis, quae est obs sicut ab abs: quasi abolevit, id est inveteravit et absorduit diuturnitate. Haec et quae his similia sunt hoc modo animadvertentur. Caetera quae simplicia sunt, et non componuntur, sine ulla dubitatione tantum habebunt, ut, vixi, dixi, vexavi, faxi, uxor, auxilium, examen, axis et exemplum.\n\nDe divisione syllabarum.\n\nDuae sunt consonantes impares, quae tamen haerere possunt, si hinc inde vocalem accipiant. Posteriorem syllabam sequuntur pares vel impares, singulae scilicet, et in priorem, et in posteriorem dividuntur. Potestas novissima syllabae stas erit; noster, ster; capto, pto: at ubi tres sunt, ut, plostrum, strum; lustrant, strant; capistrum, strum: aeque claustrum, rastrum, campestre. Fere autem tres hae consonantes tertio loco habent, et aliae litteram; ut astula, et in elisione astla, pessulum: aliter nullo modo in tribus consonantibus unitas syllabae datur. Cum pares sunt, singulae ad singulas syllabas ibunt.","english":"Obsolevit indeed has that letter, but not of the word itself, rather of the preposition which is obs, just as ab is from abs: as it were abolevit, that is, it grew old and hardened with long duration. These and things similar to them will be observed in this way. The rest which are simple and are not compounded will without any doubt have only that letter, as vixi, dixi, vexavi, faxi, uxor, auxilium, examen, axis and exemplum.\n\nOn the division of syllables.\n\nThere are two unequal consonants which can nevertheless cling together, if they receive a vowel on either side. Equal or unequal consonants follow the latter syllable, namely single ones, and they are divided both into the former and into the latter. The last part of the syllable will be stas; noster, ster; capto, pto: but where there are three, as plostrum, strum; lustrant, strant; capistrum, strum: likewise claustrum, rastrum, campestre. For the most part these three consonants have their place in the third position, and other letters [do so]; as astula, and by elision astla, pessulum: otherwise in no way is unity of a syllable granted among three consonants. When they are equal, single ones will go to single syllables.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":67,"ref":"p67","source":"Duae enim pares litterae, seu vocales sint, seu consonantes, non coeunt; similiterque syllabam non faciunt, si vocalem accipiant, tametsi impares sunt, ut, carpo, dorsum, Porcius.\n\nUna consonans inter duas vocales posita posteriorem sequitur; ut, Paris, lapis, thuris; at si inter vocales consonans fuerit, ut, digamma, posterius vocali digammae adhaerebit. Jam enim dixi, excepta littera g, nullam aliam consonantem cum ejusmodi syllabis consentire, ut, solvo, nervo, volvo, larva, pulvis: itaque tenuis, si trisyllabon erit, u consonans ad u accedit; si disyllabon, adaeque belva, malva. Dispicio, verbum compositum, quaeritur utrum per duo es, an per unum scribi debeat; et utrum ita dividi, dis et spicio. Et divisionis quidem ejus facilis ratio est, quoniam omnes praepositiones integrae separandae sunt; ut est, abstulit, abs et tulit; transtulit, trans et tulit; abscondit, abs et condit, et caetera his similia. Per duo autem ss scribendum est, non per unum, quoniam ex praepositione et verbo constat esse compositum: quemadmodum est conspicio, aspicio, despicio; ac per hoc per duo ss, disspicio scribi debet, et ita dividi, dis et spicio. Nonnulli vero dispicio per unum scribendum putant, quod praepositio dis interdum litteram perdit; ut est, diduco, divido, dijudico; sed melius est per duo ss scribi disspicio.","english":"For two like letters, whether they be vowels or consonants, do not come together; and likewise they do not make a syllable if they take a vowel, even though they are unlike, as in carpo, dorsum, Porcius.\n\nA single consonant placed between two vowels follows the latter; as in Paris, lapis, thuris. But if the consonant between the vowels is a digamma, the digamma will adhere to the latter vowel. For I have already said that, with the letter g excepted, no other consonant agrees with syllables of this kind, as in solvo, nervo, volvo, larva, pulvis. And so tenuis, if it is a trisyllable, has the consonant u attached to the u; if a disyllable, likewise belva, malva. As for dispicio, a compound word, the question is whether it ought to be written with two s's or with one, and whether it is to be divided as dis and spicio. The principle of its division is indeed easy, since all prepositions must be separated whole; as is abstulit, abs and tulit; transtulit, trans and tulit; abscondit, abs and condit, and other things similar to these. But it must be written with two s's, not with one, since it is established that it is compounded from a preposition and a verb, just as conspicio, aspicio, despicio; and by this reasoning disspicio ought to be written with two s's, and divided as dis and spicio. Some, however, think that dispicio should be written with one s, because the preposition dis sometimes loses its letter, as in diduco, divido, dijudico; but it is better that disspicio be written with two s's.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":68,"ref":"p68","source":"Obliviscor, compositumne, an simplex est? compositum scilicet, hujus simplex latet in antiquis nominibus et monumentis. Livisci enim, oblivisci est, et livitus: quod nos hodie per elisionem oblitus. Quod cum manifestum fuerit, plenissime quivis intelliget in scriptura verbi hujus divisionem, ob, et liviscor.\n\nPompeiius, Tarpeiius, et eiius per duo ii scribenda sunt, et propter sonum (plenius enim sonant) et propter metra, nunquam enim longa fiet syllaba, nisi si per i geminum scribatur. Hanc scripturam ita dividimus, ut praedixi. Nunc illud genitivi eorum, et nominativi plurales et dativi, quemadmodum scribantur, videamus. Quidam hujus Pompei, Tarpei, hi Pompei, Tarpei, his Pompeis, his Tarpeis, per unum i scribunt. Nonnulli pusillo diligentiores, alteram i his addunt. Ego quoque tertiam addendam praecipio. Si enim, ut docui, nominativus duo ii habet pro duabus consonantibus, hae perire nulla declinatione possunt, quae tamen omnimodis modernus usus excludit.","english":"Obliviscor: is it compound or simple? Compound, of course; its simple form lies hidden in ancient names and monuments. For livisci means oblivisci, and livitus, which we today by elision call oblitus. When this has been made clear, anyone will most fully understand the division in the writing of this word: ob and liviscor.\n\nPompeiius, Tarpeiius, and eiius are to be written with double ii, both because of the sound (for they sound more fully) and because of the meters, for a syllable will never become long unless it is written with double i. We divide this writing as I have said. Now let us see how their genitive, and their nominative plurals and datives, are to be written. Some write the genitive of this word, Pompei, Tarpei, and the nominative plural, hi Pompei, Tarpei, and the dative, his Pompeis, his Tarpeis, with a single i. Some, a little more diligent, add a second i to these. I too prescribe that a third i be added. For if, as I have taught, the nominative has two ii for two consonants, these cannot be lost by any declension, though modern usage wholly excludes them.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":69,"ref":"p69","source":"CAPUT XI.\n\nEx Lucio Caecilio vindice ista deflorata sunt.\n\nM litteram, ad vocales primo loco in verbis positas si accesserit, non enuntiabimus. Cum autem ad consonantes, aut digammon AEolicum, pro quo nos u loco consonantis posita utimur, tunc pro littera, litterae sonum decentius efferimus. Lucii, magnii, magii, cum in genitivis singularibus dicimus, interest, quos nominativos habeant. Proinde enim intererit, utrum per duo i, an per unum debeant scribi. Si lucus, magnus, magus sunt nominativi eorum, unum i in genitivo habebunt, plurali quoque nominativo et vocativo, sed et dativo et ablativo similiter scribentur. Si autem lucius, magnius, magius, proferantur, duo ii in genitivo habebunt; ut Lucii, magnii, magii: quod ipsium Lucilius adnotavit, eum a numero numerius discerneret. Cum praepositio, per scribenda est: quum adverbium temporis, quod significat quando, per scribendum est, discretionis causa; ut apud Ennium,","english":"CHAPTER XI.\n\nThese selections were culled from Lucius Caecilius Vindex.\n\nIf the letter M is added to vowels placed in the first position in words, we shall not pronounce it. But when it is added to consonants, or to the Aeolic digamma, in place of which we use u placed in the position of a consonant, then we bring out the sound of the letter more fittingly in place of the letter. When we say Lucii, magnii, magii in the singular genitive, it matters what nominatives they have. For it will accordingly matter whether they ought to be written with two i's or with one. If lucus, magnus, magus are their nominatives, they will have one i in the genitive, and they will likewise be written with one i in the plural nominative and vocative, but also in the dative and ablative. If, however, lucius, magnius, magius are brought forth, they will have two i's in the genitive: Lucii, magnii, magii; which Lucilius himself noted, so that he might distinguish eum from the number numerius. Cum as a preposition must be written with one u: quum, the adverb of time, which means quando, must be written with two u's, for the sake of distinction; as in Ennius,","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":70,"ref":"p70","source":"Cum legionibus, quum proficiscitur induperator.\n\nQuujusque, per q, non per scribitur; sed per sensum quoque alium habet. Nam hujusce hominis, hujus hominis est: at quujusque hominis, quujusque ordinis, uniuscujusque hominis, et uniuscujusque ordinis significat.\n\nAccedo, per duo cc; attuli, per duo tt; assiduus per duo ss; appareo per duo pp; annuo per duo nn; alligo per duo ll: in his non solum propter soni lenitatem consonantes mutantur, sed etiam quod nullo modo in eis sonare littera potest. Sonat aotem littera et adscribitur, cum consonanti adjuncta est, ut, adfluo, adfari, adfuturum, adfatus, adfero. Contra non sonat, ut, offui, offero, offendo.\n\nCAPUT XII.\n\nEx Prisciano grammatico a qui nostro tempore Constantinopoli doctor fuit, de libro primo ipsius ista collecta sunt.\n\nNotandum igitur quod hamus, qui a Graecis appellatur, cum aspiratione debet scribi. Sciendum et hoc pro Graeco, a Latinis in scribendo ph poui debere, in Graecis duntaxat nominibus, ut, Orpheus, Phaeton. In caeteris autem Latinis nominibus ponendum, ut, fama, filius, facies. Phoebus, quo nomine Apollo significatur, ita ponendum est, ut post p, ponatur. Similiter et Herichthonius [ms., Hiericthonis], hiulcus, per aspirationem debent scribi.","english":"With the legions, when the commander sets out.\n\nQuujusque is written with q, not with c; but it also has another meaning. For hujusce hominis means \"of this man\"; but quujusque hominis, quujusque ordinis means \"of each man,\" \"of each rank,\" uniuscujusque hominis and uniuscujusque ordinis likewise.\n\nAccedo with two cc; attuli with two tt; assiduus with two ss; appareo with two pp; annuo with two nn; alligo with two ll: in these the consonants are changed not only because of the softness of the sound, but also because the letter can in no way be sounded in them. But the letter is sounded and written when joined to a consonant, as in adfluo, adfari, adfuturum, adfatus, adfero. On the other hand it is not sounded, as in offui, offero, offendo.\n\nCHAPTER XII.\n\nFrom Priscian the grammarian, who in our time was a teacher at Constantinople, these things were collected from his first book.\n\nIt must be noted, then, that hamus, which is called by the Greeks, ought to be written with aspiration. It must also be known that in place of the Greek ph the Latins ought to write ph in writing, only in Greek names, as Orpheus, Phaeton. But in other Latin names it must be placed, as fama, filius, facies. Phoebus, by which name Apollo is signified, must be so written that after p is placed. Similarly also Herichthonius, hiulcus, ought to be written with aspiration.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[{"kind":"lacuna","severity":"caution","text":"The source is fragmentary here: the edition marks a break or an editorial bracket, and the English carries across it. Treat the bridge as supplied, not translated."}]},{"i":71,"ref":"p71","source":"B enim consonans ante se aspirationem non recipit, nisi tantum vocalis. Caelebs, ante terminalem litteram s, scribi debet, non u: quoniam u vocalis cum in consonantis transierit potestatem, potest aliam praecedere consonantem.\n\nAspiratio ante omnes vocales poni potest; post consonantes autem quatuor tantummodo ponitur, c, t, p, r; ut habeo, Herennius, heros, hiemps, homo, humus, Chremes, Thraso, Philippus, Rhodus. Ideo autem vocalibus extrinsecus ascribitur, ut minus sonet: consonantibus autem intrinsecus, ut pluri mum sonet. Gnatus, per et scribendum est, sicut gnavus, quia in compositione ipsa retinent g, ut agnatus et ignavus. Ecquid per scribendum in prima syllaba, quoniam en quid significat, littera consonante in conversa. Samguis in prima syllaba per scribendum in nominativo casu; in caeteris autem casibus per n, quoniam littera in convertitur. B Latinae litterae pro Graeca littera non aliter poni debent in una eademque littera conjunctae nisi in fine nominativi, cujus genitivus in bis desinit, ut, urbs, urbis; caelebs, caelibis; Arabs, Arabis. Sciendum autem surripio per geminam, non per et scribendum; similiter et corripio, arripio: quoniam in quoque commutatur.","english":"For the consonant b does not take aspiration before it, only a vowel does. Caelebs should be written with the final letter s, not u, since the vowel u, when it has passed into the power of a consonant, can precede another consonant.\n\nAspiration can be placed before all vowels; after consonants, however, it is placed only after four, c, t, p, r, as in habeo, Herennius, heros, hiemps, homo, humus, Chremes, Thraso, Philippus, Rhodus. And therefore it is written outside the vowels, so that it may sound less; but inside the consonants, so that it may sound more. Gnatus is to be written with g, like gnavus, because in composition itself they retain the g, as agnatus and ignavus. Ecquid is to be written with c in the first syllable, since it means en quid, with the consonant letter changed into c. Sanguis is to be written with g in the first syllable in the nominative case; but in the other cases with n, since the letter is changed into n. The letter b of Latin should not be placed for the Greek letter otherwise, when joined in one and the same letter, except at the end of a nominative whose genitive ends in bis, as urbs, urbis; caelebs, caelibis; Arabs, Arabis. It should be known, moreover, that surripio is to be written with a double r, not with one, and likewise corripio and arripio, since in each the letter is changed.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":72,"ref":"p72","source":"Suspicor, et suspicio, verba composita ab adverbiis sursum vel susum, in prima syllaba per unum s, non per duo scribenda sunt: quoniam duplicari consonans subsequente alia consonante non potest, sicut nec antecedente, nisi fuerit muta ante liquidam, ut, supplex, suffragor, sufflo, effringo. Quiequam in prima syllaba per scribendum, quod littera in litteram commutatur. Aggero per scribendum, et aggregatus, non per d. Harpyia, quae Graecum nomen est, per y Graecum, sequente i Latino, scribendum est; quoniam apud eos y i diphthongon est. Ara cum altare significat, sine aspiratione; cum vero cubile porcorum, cum aspiratione scribendum.\n\nConclusio.\n\nCongregatis igitur quae apud supradictos orthographos necessario reperi fuisse conscripta, nunc finem libro, Domino juvante, faciamus. Datur enim intelligi rem nimis utilem fuisse, quae tot ac tantis auctoribus cognoscitur esse tractata: quoniam si quid a prioribus praetermissum est, a sequentibus constat impletum. Meminisse autem debemus frequenter artigraphos de orthographia tractasse, et iterum orthographos de partium declinatione disseruisse, cum tamen res sibi repugnare videantur. Ara enim tractat de partium declinatione; orthographia vero, quemadmodum scribi debeat, designat quae in partium declinatione decora reperit. Hoc si in auctoribus semper intenderis, ut pro locis suis posita diligenter accipias, nullo errore fatigaberis.","english":"I suspect, and suspicio, words compounded from the adverbs sursum or susum, are to be written in the first syllable with one s, not two: since a consonant cannot be doubled when another consonant follows, just as not when one precedes, unless a mute comes before a liquid, as in supplex, suffragor, sufflo, effringo. Quiequam is to be written with [one] in the first syllable, because one letter is changed into another. Aggero is to be written, and aggregatus, not with d. Harpyia, which is a Greek name, is to be written with Greek y, followed by Latin i; since among them y i is a diphthong. Ara, when it means altar, without aspiration; but when it means a pig's sty, with aspiration.\n\nConclusion.\n\nHaving therefore gathered together the things which I have found to have been written of necessity among the above-mentioned orthographers, let us now, with the Lord's help, make an end to the book. For it is given to be understood that the matter was exceedingly useful, which is known to have been treated by so many and such great authors: since if anything was passed over by earlier writers, it is evident that it was filled in by later ones. But we ought to remember that writers on grammar frequently treated of orthography, and again that orthographers discoursed on the declension of the parts of speech, although the matters seem to contradict each other. For ara treats of the declension of the parts of speech; but orthography designates how that which it finds becoming in the declension of the parts of speech ought to be written. If you always keep this in mind in the authors, so that you diligently take things placed in their own places, you will be wearied by no error.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":73,"ref":"p73","source":"Nunc animos legentes erigite, et gaudete tantos ad vos priscos pervenisse auctores, ut eis credere indubitata mente debeatis. Possem equidem Aquilam, et Quintilianum, sed et Avitum, quos nonnulli in orthographiae peritia laudandos esse putaverunt, quos tamen venturos in Christi nomine celerrime sustinemus, superioribus auctoribus addere. Sed necessarium non est multiplici numero dare licentiam, cum non sint omnino definiti, quanti de eadem re scribere maluerunt. Nam si duodecim horarum spatia diem protinus complere noscuntur, si duodecim quoque menses annum volubili varietate restituunt, si duodecim signa coelestia totius nobis circuli campos solida rotunditate concludunt, debet nobis omnino sufficere, quod et duodecim orthographorum libris rectitudinem scripturae docentium, defloratas regulas posteris legendas exhibui.\n\nValete, fratres, atque in orationibus vestris mei memores esse dignemini, qui vos inter caetera et de orthographiae virtute, et de distinctione ponenda, quae nimis pretiosa cognoscitur, sub brevitate commonui, et quemadmodum Scripturae divinae intelligi debeant, copiosissime legenda praeparavi; quatenus sicut ego vos ab imperitorum numero sequestratos esse volui, ita nos virtus divina non patiatur cum nequissimis poenali societate conjungi.","english":"Now lift up your minds, readers, and rejoice that such great ancient authors have come down to you, so that you ought to believe them with an undoubting mind. I could indeed add to the foregoing authors Aquila, and Quintilian, and also Avitus, whom some have thought worthy of praise for their knowledge of orthography, and whose arrival in Christ's name we await most swiftly. But there is no need to give license to a multiplicity of authors, since it has not been altogether determined how many have preferred to write on the same subject. For if the spans of twelve hours are known to complete a day straightway, if twelve months likewise restore the year in rolling variety, if twelve heavenly signs enclose for us the fields of the whole circuit in solid roundness, it ought altogether to suffice for us that, in the twelve books of orthographers teaching the correctness of writing, I have set forth for posterity to read the culled rules.\n\nFarewell, brothers, and deign to be mindful of me in your prayers, I who among other things have briefly admonished you both concerning the virtue of orthography and concerning the placing of punctuation, which is known to be too precious, and have prepared in abundance to be read how the divine Scriptures ought to be understood; so that, just as I have wished you to be set apart from the number of the unskilled, so may divine virtue not suffer us to be joined with the most wicked in penal fellowship.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]}]}