Cicero redivivus, or, The art of oratory refin'd being two essays of elegancy : the first, containing plain and easie rules for scholars to make eloquent Latin, the second, usefull directions for young gentlemen and students to adorn their discourse and writings with a refin'd and genteel style / by John Twells, School-Master.

A GENERAL EXAMINATION OF THE Elegant Grammar.

Senec. 3. Contr.

Magna & varia res est Eloquentia, nec adhuc ulli sic indulsit, ut tota contingeret. Satis felix est, qui in aliquam ejus partem receptus est.

A. WHat is the Elegant Gram∣mar?

B. The Elegant Grammar is the Art of speaking elegantly.

A. What mean you by speaking elegant∣ly?

B. To speak elegantly, is to express the sense of our minds otherwise than the rules of the native way of speaking require; and yet to be understood with more delight, than we should be, should we follow the natural cur∣rent of Speech.

To speak elegantly according to art, is to have in readiness the ways of garnishing Speech; and to be able to give an account why a Sen∣tence must be changed so or so.

A. Wherein doth the elegancy of a sentence consist?

B. The elegancy of a sentence consists gene∣rally in the transformation of the same, from its native, into another aspect, the sense remaining unaltered.

A. How many ways may this transfor∣mation be performed?

B. Nine:

For the same thing may be expressed other∣wise, three manners of ways generally: the first of which is subdivided into two, the se∣cond into three, the third into four ways.

For Example:

The same otherwise placed, by	Perspicuity. 1.
Transposition. 2.
The same thing may be exprest by words	Other	more Latine, by	Idiotism. 3
simply equipollent, by	Transmutat. 4
allegorically equipoll. by	Transnomi∣nation. 5.
The same, or other, yet expressed after a∣nother manner, viz.	By more than the matter requires, by	Dilatation. 6
By fewer than ordinary, by	Contraction. 7
With an unusual affection, by	Figures. 8
Bound up, by	Verse. 9

A. How many therefore are the parts of the Elegant Grammar?

B. Nine.

• I. Exposition, clarification, perspicuity.
• II. Idiotism.
• III. Transposition
• IV. Transmutation.
• V. Transnomination.
• VI. Dilatation.
• VII. Contraction.
• VIII. Figuration.
• IX. Versification.

A. Illustrate what you have said by an example; propose a sentence.

B. Magister meus docet exemplis perpetuis.

A. How many ways may this sentence be adorn'd?

B. These nine ways.

1. If there be any thing obscure or ambigu∣ous, (or at least may seem such) by explaining and limiting it by some addition, or mutation into another, not ambiguous, word, so that nothing else can be understood, but what I design.

A. Is there any obscure or ambiguous word in the sentence you proposed?

B. Yes. Magister is an ambiguous word; for the Masters of divers Arts and Handy-crafts, the Masters of the Horse to Persons of Honour, and the rest, may be stiled Magistri: as, Ma∣gister

Artis, Magister Tabernae, Officinae, Magister Equitum, &c.

A. What must a Scholar do in this case?

B. In this case the Scholar must either add some other words, to restrain the generality of the word Magister; as, Magister studiorum me∣orum: or change it for another synonimous word, which is not ambiguous; as, Ludimagi∣ster, or Praeceptor meus.

So if any one should be said cepisse labracem, the sentence will be obscure, because there are few that understand the word, tho' it be extant in Plinie and Plautus. And again, if a man be said cepisse Lupum, it will be ambiguous, because it may be understood that he hath caught ei∣ther a four-footed Beast, or a Fish, so called. Therefore, if you would have the latter under∣stood, say, Lupum piscem; or change it for a synonymous word signifying nothing else, and say, Lucium cepit.

A. What do you call such an Explana∣tion of Speech?

B. I call it Perspicuity.

A. What is Perspicuity?

B. Perspicuity is the easiness of a Sentence, as to the matter to be understood.

A. What is the vertue of Perspicuity?

B. The Greeks call it 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, that is, so great

a plainness of Speech, as that the things seem to be set before the eyes.

A. What are the vices contrary to this vertue?

B. The vices contrary to Perspicuity, are Ob∣scurity and Ambiguity.

A. When may a Sentence be said to be obscure?

B. When it can scarce be understood: as, that of Varro, Omnia dapatilia comîsse Jani cusio∣nes; for, Omnia opipara comedisse Jani Curiones.

A. Whence ariseth this obscurity?

B. This obscurity proceeds from words un∣known to the People.

A. What Sentence may be said to be ambiguous?

B. That which admits of a various interpre∣tation: as, if a man should say, Peto jus; he may mean either jusculum, or justitiam.

A. Whence ariseth this ambiguity?

B. It ariseth from equivocal or homonymous words.

Therefore a word that is obscure, homony∣mous, or too general, is, like a Rock, to be avoided by him that has a mind to speak per∣spicuously.

For this reason in our familiar discourse we say not, Clepta, or Directarius, but Fur; nor jus, but jusculum; nor rem inveni, but hoc, or illud.

Or, if such a word should thrust it self in, let a∣nother word more common, distinct, & special, be immediately subjoyned, to enlighten & limit the former; or let some explicatory, discretive, or determinative epithet be added: as, Clepta, quod Latinis furem sonat. Jus seu jusculum. Rem perdidit, nempe bona sua: Or, Clepta furax. Jus coctum. Rem possessam perdidit.

Words, that by chance light into the same termination, may sometimes be changed into another, free from ambiguity; as, if you should say, Tu canis; 'twill be uncertain whether you call any one a Dog, or mean he sings. If the first, you will speak more clearly by an Ad∣jective, Tu impure Canis; or, Tu latras ut Canis. If the latter, you had better say, Tu cantas, &c. Or they are to be discriminated by an accent (if possible) either pronounced or marked: as, venit in the present tense, from vênit in the pre∣terperfect tense. Moreover, he that desires to acquire this great Ornament, must studiously avoid Amphibolie, that is, such a placing of the words as may render the sense doubtful. Such is that in Terence: Adeò uno animo omnes Socrus oderunt Nurus; for one would be at a stand, scarcely discerning, whether Socrus was the Nominative Plural, and Nurus the Accusative; or contrariwise. It is supposed the Poet so placed the words, with a design to set out the

reciprocal odium between Mothers-in-law and Daughters-in-law; which, if so, 'twas artificially done.

A. Must then words that are obscure, homonymous, of a more general significa∣tion, and amphibolous, be for ever inter∣dicted a studied clarity?

B. To your four-fold question I answer di∣stinctly, thus:

1. An obscure word appositely used, and in its right place, is commendable: as, if there be any thing you would not have all men in∣differently understand, but some one only, that is privy to your counsels and purposes, or some few of the more sagacious. With these did Cicero fill his Epistles to Atticus, a wise man, and his intimate friend.

2. An homonymous word, in its proper place, ceaseth to be such; because words are under∣stood according to the subject matter. For example: A Cook speaks not ambiguously, that says, Jus piscinum; or an Astronomer, that says, Sol in piscibus. An homonymous word set on purpose for the ambiguity of the sense, is a pleasant elegancy. As when Tully said, that Octa∣vius was laudandum & tollendum, for he might be understood either tollendum esse laudibus, or tollendum de vitâ.

3. Words of a very general signification are

happily homonymous; for they augment the treasure of the Language with variety of Ele∣gancies. Such are these Latine Nouns, Res, Vis, Locus, Natura, Substantia, Genus, Species; and the Verbs, Sum, Habeo, Facio, Do, Gero, &c.

4. Words of a doubtful meaning fitly dispo∣sed in the same Sentence, increase the Elegancy; as, Jura te velle servare jura. And Lingua pue∣rorum facilè discit diversas linguas. Hence the Distick so much celebrated.

Quid facies, facies Veneris si veneris ante? Ne sedeas, sed eas; ne pereas per eas.

A word so placed betwixt two, that it matters not to which it is referred, is an Elegancy; as, Opus caeptum urgeas vehementer oro. For here it is a question whether I mean the work is to be mightily hastned, or that I mightily desire it: And yet, which way so ever you take it, it will not be amiss; and more full if you understand it both ways. But if yet you have a mind to speak it very perspicuously, you may do it by a Comma, or a Repetition, thus:

Ut opus urgeas vehementer, oro.

Ut opus urgeas, vehementer oro.

Ut opus vehementer urgeas, vehementer oro.

A. Proceed to the second part.

B. Secondly, by putting, instead of the usual speech, and common language, Idiotical, and proper only to the Latine tongue; as if, instead

of Magister studiorum meorum, one should say more latinely, Meus à studiis.

A. What do you call this Ornament?

B. This second part is called Idiotism, and in specie Latinism, Graecism, Hebraism, &c. when this Language, or that, hath an elegancy un∣known to others.

A. What is Idiotism?

B. Idiotism is an emphatical custom of speak∣ing, proper and peculiar to some one tongue: Or thus,

Idiotism, or Idiom, is a propriety, phrase, or form of speaking, peculiar to its own tongue, which cannot be rendred word for word into any other language, but with much barbarity and baldness of expression.

A. How many fold is Idiotism?

B. Idiotism is two fold, or there are two sorts of Idiotism, i. e. Lexical and Grammatical: Of the first in Latine this may be an example, Potiri rerum, to reign; of the latter this, Potiente rerum Augusto, when Augustus reigned.

A. What mean you by Lexical Idiotisms?

B. By Lexical Idiotisms, I mean such as can∣not be translated out of Latine into English, Greek, &c. word for word, or iisdem verbis; as, Audire bene, Dare verba, &c.

A. What mean you by Grammatical Idio∣tisms?

B: By Grammatical, I mean such as cannot be translated by the same Case, Person, Tense, &c. as, Sole orto, &c.

Of Lexical Idiotisms see a plentiful Harvest in Mr. Walker's Idiomatical Dictionary; of Gram∣matical here.

A. How many are the general subjects of Grammatical Idiotisms?

B. The general subjects of Grammatical Idio∣tisms are two.

A. Which are they?

B. 1. Single words. 2. Phrases.

A. In what heads of single words are Grammatical Idiotisms found?

B. 1. In Substantives. 2. In Adjectives. 3. In Pronouns. 4. In Verbs. 5. In Participles. 6. In Ad∣verbs.

A. How many Rules do you observe in delivering the Idiotisms of Substantives?

B. Four.

A. Which is the first Rule?

B. It is an Elegancy, instead of the Substan∣tive or Abstract, to use the Adjective or concrete, in the neuter Gender, either singular or plural; as, Verum, falsum, bonum, multum, &c. (or vera, falsa, &c.) for veritas, falsitas, bonitas, multitu∣do, &c.

A. Which is the second?

B. To circumscribe the names of Offices by a Noun which denotes the Subject or Object, with ab or ad, is the peculiar of the Latines:

For the say, For

• ...Secretarius, à secretis.
• Scriba, à manu, or ad manum.
• Consiliarius, à consiliis, or ad consilia.

This form of speaking requires a Dative case of the person to whom this duty or service is performed: as, Est mihi à manu; Domino suo à pedibus, &c. unless you speak by a Personal Adjective, as Cicero did, when he said, Servus meus à pedibus.

A. Which is the third?

B. Any Noun assuming Res, and being turned into the Genitive case, or into an Adjective, makes an elegant Idiotism: For Plautus says, Res voluptatum, for voluptas; res cibi, for cibus: and Cicero, Res bellica, militaris, num∣maria, &c. for bellum, militia, nummus or pecu∣nia, &c. So also Vis: as, Vis flammae, or flam∣mea, for flamma; magna canum vis, for multi canes, &c.

A. Which is the fourth?

B. The Latines do elegantly compare Nouns Substantive by the Adverb magis: as Plautus, Hominem magis asinum nunquam vidi.

In imitation of which, why may not one say, Magis Homo, Rex, Doctor, Miles, &c. magis vi∣num,

&c? that is veriùs, more truly; or me∣liùs, better. But that jocular comparison of Nouns, which the same Author used, O patrue mi patruissime! and, Nullus me est hodie punus pu∣nior, we ought not to imitate, except, as he did it, for sport.

A. How many Rules are to be observed for the Idiotisms of Adjectives?

B. Four.

A. Which is the first?

B. A local Adjective is changed into its Sub∣stantive with the Preposition De, or A: as, Aper Sylvestris, or de Sylvâ; Homo aulicus, de aulâ; Scholasticus, de scholâ, &c. So Cicero's Poeta de papulo, that is; popularis; Ovid's Ales ab Indis, for Indica.

Observation. Nay the Preposition is sometimes understood, especially in Poets; as Sallust, Taeda pice & sulphure, for è pice & sulphure, or pieca & sulphurea. Aere Clypeus Virg. Syracusis soleae, for è Syracusis, Syracusanae, &c. Therefore we speak most latinely, Vinum Cretâ, Hispaniâ, Hungariâ, &c. for è Cretâ or Cretense, &c.

A. Which is the secund Rule?

B. A Local or temporal Adjective is changed for on Adverb: as Plaut. Tu intus pateram pro∣ferto foras, for pateram intraneam, or quae est intus. Virg. Apparet domus intus, i. e. interior. Ter. Hinc civis, i. e. hujus loci. Idem. Interea

tempus, for interjectum tempus, &c. Plaut. Nunc copia, for praesens copia.

A. Is this elegancy common?

B. No. Very rare, yet worth knowing.

A. Which is the third Rule?

B. Adjectives of quality are changed into their abstract Nouns with the Verb sapit, olet, or the like; for we say, instead of novus, novitaters sapit; barbarus, barbariem olet, redolet; rusticus, rus refert, &c.

A. Which is the fourth Rule?

B. Partitive Adjectives are elegantly changed into the Noun Genus, or else joyn themselves to it: as, Quidam homines, quoddam genus homi∣num. Omnes homines, omne genus hominum. Nulli homines, nullum genus hominum. Quod genus homi∣num, i. e. quales. Id genus hominum, i. e. tales homines, &c.

A. How many Rules are there for the Idiotisms of Pronouns?

B. Six.

A. Which is the first?

B. In lieu of the Interrogative quis, the La∣tines use quid with a Genitive case, elegantly: as, Quid homo, or quid hominis? Quae res, or quid rei? The same happens in the Redditive: as, id hominis, id rei, &c. for is homo, ea res, &c.

A. Which is the second?

B. When any one speaks of his own affairs,

he useth hoc; when of his, whom he speaks to, istud; when of the affairs of some third man, and one who is absent, illud: as, Per caput hoc juro, says the Deity in Virgil, pointing to its own.

Sic oculos, sic ille manus, sic or a gerebat. Id.

A. Which is the third?

B. Ille and ipse demonstrate some person or thing with honour, iste with content for the most part.

A. Which is the fourth?

B. When two things are to be expressed by Pronouns, hic is spoken of the nearer, ille of the more remote: But when three, hic signifies the nearest, iste the more remote, ille the far∣thest off. And yet Valerius Maximus, tho' a superstitious observer of this elegancy, once neglected it: as, Brutus, inquit, par gloriâ Ro∣mulo: quia ille urbem, hic libertatem Romanam condidit.

A. Which is the fifth?

B. Idem qui, and idem ac, and idem illi, are said most Latinely: but idem cum illo wants the authority of the middle-age: as,

Hesperus ea∣dem stella

• ...Quae Phosophorus.
• ...Ac Phosphorus.
• ...Cum Phosphoro.
• Phosphoro in the Dative is Poetical.

A. Which is the fixth?

B. These Pronoun Primitives, Ego, tu, sui, do

emphatically double their Accusatives; as, me∣me, for me; tete, for te; sese, for se.

A. How many Rules are to be observed for the Idiotisms of Verbs?

B. Seven.

A. Which is the first?

B. The Latines very elegantly use some a∣ctive Verbs, instead of passives: as, Terra mo∣vet, for movetur. Cic. Venti posuêre, for posuê∣runt se. And Tempestas sedavit, for sedata est. Virg. Cum mare turbat, Varro. Mores Populi Romani mutârunt, for mutati sunt. Liv. Prae∣cipitat nox. Virg. Olim volventibus annis, Idem. Non qui volvunt, sed qui volvuntur. Decollat spes, i. e. decollatur. Vehens curru; not the Cha∣rioteer, but the Passenger, &c.

N. B. In all these the Pronoun se seems to be ellipted. See the 1 Sylvula Verborum in the Ox∣ford Grammar.

A. Which is the second?

B. On the contrary, they use some absolute Verbs actively: as, Spirare odorem; olere hircum; sapere rem suam. Plaut. Celerare iter; penetrare se aliquo; ruere se, &c. See more of this sort in the second Sylvula Verborum.

A. Which is the third?

B. The Latines elegantly signifie passion by Deponent Verbs, i. e. such as indeed were once Commons, but even in Tully's age had either

altogether, or almost, laid down their passive signification: as, Adipiscor, auxilior, complector, meditor, polliceor, testor, &c. For, says Flautus, Non aetate, sed ingenio, adipiscitur sapientia. Lucil. Auxiliatus est à me. Cic. Uno maleficio scelera omnia complexa esse videntur. Ter. Meditata mihi sunt omnia. Metellus, Aliis statuae pollicebantur. Cic. Publicis literis testata sunt omnia, &c. See the fourth Sylvula Verborum. But these are as it were Laxical; let us come to Grammatical.

A. Which is the fourth?

B. Any one speaking of himself in Latine, may elegantly speak in the plural number; as, Cic. Nos valemus, i. e ego valeo.

OBS. Modern Languages do the same in the second person, by way of complement: but for that reason to speak so in Latine, ineptire est, says Comenius

B. Which is the fifth?

B. The Imperative Mood by the help of the Indicative of the same Verb, Si coming between, commands more urgently; as, Plautus, Bibe, si bibis. In imitation whereof you may rightly say, fac, si facis; scribe, si scribis; perge, si pergis; by the figure Antanaclasis.

A. Which is the sixth?

B. Perfect time, whether past or to come, is very Latinely expressed by a Participle of the preter or future tense, with the Verbs do, reddo,

volo, curo, rogo: as, Dabo tibi hoc effectum, for efficiam; curabo efficiendum; volo te rogatum, &c.

A. Which is the seventh Rule?

B. An action perfectly past is elegantly ex∣pressed by a Neuter Participle of that tense, with the Verb habeo: And therefore a man may say instead of feci, habeo factum, scripsi, habeo scriptum; Solvi, habeo solutum. One would take it for a meer Anglicism, Germanism, or Italism; but it flows from the nature of things. And this construction is meat with the English and Ger∣mans, and sawce with the Latines.

A. How many Rules do you give for the Idiotism of Participles?

B. One only.

A. What is it?

B. A Participle of the present tense, coming with a Verb of the preter tense, or future, takes to it self the signification of that tense: as, that of Martial, Vilior haec nobis alio mittente fuisset, i. e. si alius misisset. Caesar. 1. Civil. Quos ab urbe discedens Pompeius erat adhortatus, i. e. quum discessit. Plaut. Menaechmei A. 2. sc. 3. Herus emit me dicto audientem, non imperantem sibi, i. e. qui futurus essem dicto audiens. See Franciscus Sanctius, lib. 1. cap. 4. Vossius de Analogiâ pag. 233.

A. How many Rules do you give for the Idiotisms of Adverbs?

B. Four.

A. Which is the first?

B. Adverbs of place, time, and plenty, have elegantly a Genitive case after them: as, Ubi locorum? Ubi{que} terrarum, nusquam Gentium, in∣tereà loci, Nunc temporis, olim seculorum, &c. Sa∣tis verborum, Ter. Abunde fraudis, Virg. Largi∣ter mercedis indipiscar, Plaut.

A. Which is the second?

B. By a Grecism also Adverbs of plenty ad∣mit of an Accusative case: as, Cic. Satis tempus habet. Si satis consilium haberem. Ovid. fortunam habuit satis. Apul. Vinum affatim habemus, &c.

A. Which is the third?

B. To change an Adverb into an Adjective of the Neuter Gender, either singular or plural, is a pleasant hellenism: as, in the singular, Tur∣bidum laetari, Hor. Sursum ferri. Lucr. magnum clamare, Plaut. indoctum canere, Hor. In the plural, Multa gemens; insueta rudentem; terram crebra ferit, for crebrò, Virg.

A Which is the fourth?

B. 'Tis no less pleasant to leave that Adjective in the Gender of the person, whether masculine or feminine: as, Virg. Nec minus Aeneas se ma∣tutinus agebat, for mané. Idem. Gregibus noctur∣nus obambulat. Hor. Serus in coelum redeas. Idem. Delicta majorum. Immeritus lues. Impar congres∣sus Achilli, Virg. 1 Aen. v. 479. for impariter.

A. In how many Rules do you lay down the Doctrine of Idiotical Phrases?

B. In Fifteen.

A. Which is the first?

B. A proper name being put by Apposition (as the modern Grammarians, or Epexegesis, as the ancient call it) to a common name, may be turned into the Genitive case, or changed into an Adjective: as, we say grammatically, Urbs Romae, arbor ficus, &c. but more latinely, Urbs Romae, or Romana. Arbor fici, Cic. or ficulnea, Appuleius. So Livie, Arboris abietis. For (says J. C. Scaliger) it is one thing to speak Gram∣matically, another to speak Latinely.

A. Which is the second Rule?

B. It is a Grecism, when Nouns betokening divers things are put in the same case, as if they belonged to the same thing: as, we say grammatically, Terra Galliae, Regio Thessaliae, &c. but more latinely, Terra Gallia, Regio Thessalia, &c. Thus Livie and Appuleius use to speak.

A. Which is the third Rule?

B. A Noun Substantive is most latinely chan∣ged into an Adjective, and put into the Neuter Gender: as, we say grammatically, Generosa honestas; mordax veritas; quanta inanitas; ma∣jor serenitas, &c. And yet Persius said more la∣tinely, Generosum honestum; mordaci radere vero

auriculas. Quantum est in rebus inane! And Sta∣tius also, Majus serenum, &c.

By the same Rule.

It is a Grecism, but most grateful, to Latine-ears, for the Adjective to be changed into the Neuter Gender, and the Substantive to be put in the Genitive case: as, we say grammatically, Secretus locus. Lubrica juventus: Ultima seditio. Ardui montes. Serenum coelum. Vanus rumor; or inanis fama, &c. But Tacitus and others have said more latinely, Secretum loci. Lubricum ju∣ventae. Ultimum seditionis. Ardua montium. Se∣rena coeli. Vana rumoris; inania famae, &c.

It is also a Grecism to change the Adjective into an Adverb, and the Substantive into the Ge∣nitive case: as, when Plautus, for larga merces, said largiter mercedis. But it is an Hebraism to change the Adjective into the Genitive case of the abstract Substantive: as when for vir iracundus, is said vir irae. Jac. 1.20. for spiritus lenis, is said, spiritus lenitatis. Gal. 6.1. And for Mam∣mona iniquus Mammona iuiquitatis. Luc. 16.9. And so often in Scripture.

A. Which is the fourth Rule?

B. An Adjective of fitness is elegantly omit∣ted, and instead of the Dative case, is used a Gerund in do: as we say grammatically, Esne par oneri ferendo? Non sum sufficiens debito sol∣vendo. Semen idoneum sationi. Charta apta scri∣ptioni,

&c. Latinely, Esne ferendo? Non sum solvendo. Semen exoletum non est ferendo, Plin. Charta emporeutica non est scribendo, &c.

A. Which is the fifth Rule?

B. It is a Grecism to put the part affected after Verbs, Participles, and Adjectives in the Accusative case: as we say grammatically, Clarus genere. Hirsutus pedibus. Similis voce, colo∣re, crinibus, &c. Tacitus more latinely, Clari ge∣nus. Virg. Hirsutus crura. Mercurio similis vocém{que} colorêm{que} & flavos crines, &c. In the Accusa∣tives, quod ad, quantum attinet are ellipted.

According to the same Rule.

Adjectives of plenty, knowledge, care, stu∣dy, and their contraries, require in a Latine construction an Ablative, in a Greek a Genitive case: as one may say grammatically, Cantha∣rus plenus aquâ, vacuus vino; vir praestans animo, invictus labore, eruditus artibus, plenus vitiis, &c. But more latinely, Plenus aquae, vacuus vini. Arabes frugum pauperes, odorum divites, Apul. Sociorum inops, Tac. Rudis artium. Peritus rerum, ignarus omnium. Praestans animi. Invictuslaboris. Integer vitae sceleris{que} purus. Hor. Yet in all these Genitives there is a defect of some Ablative, which governs them. As, Arabes pauperes [pro∣ventu] frugum. Inops [à comitatu] sociorum. Ru∣dis [cognitione] artium. Purus [à crimine] scele∣ris, &c.

By the same.

Adjectives of power, in imitation of the Greeks, change an Ablative case for an Infinitive Mood. A man may say grammatically, Dignus amore. Difficilis fiexu. Largus donis. Audax subeundis passionibus. Bonus inflandis calamis, & dicendis versibus &c. And yet more sweetly by an In∣finitive Mood, Dignus amari. Difficilis flecti. Largus donare, Horat. Audaxomnia perpeti, Idem. Boni convenimus ambo, tu calamos inflare, ego dicere versus, Virg.

A. Which is the sixth Rule?

B. To express the Accusative case of the Pronoun me, te, se, before an Infinitive Mood, after a Verb of a Finite Mood, signifying desire, is an insolent, rare, and yet pleasant Latinism. Grammatically, Facere studeo. Faciam, ut tu cupias facere sumtum. Quis{que} studet praestare cae∣teris. Plautus more latinely, Ego me id facere studeo. Faciam, tu ut te cupias facere sumtum. Omnes homines, qui sese student praestare caeteris, Sallust.

A. Which is the seventh Rule?

B. To Verbs of disagreeing, keeping off, conten∣ding with, and some signifying motion is joyned a Dative case, in imitation of the Greeks. Gram∣matically, Dissidere ab aliquo. Differre ab alio. Ar∣cere lupos à grege. Comitari aliquem, &c. Latinely, Discordat parcus avaro, Hor. Differt sermoni ser∣mo,

Idem. Virg. Solus tibicertet Amyntas. Idem, Arcebis gravido pecori. Idem, Solstitium pecori de∣fendite. Plaut. Voluptati comes maerer sequitur, &c:

A. Which is the eighth Rule?

B. The Latines have a custom of putting ma∣ny Verbs Actives Absolute, that is of concealing their Accusative cases. As you may say gram∣matically, Abstinere se à placitis. Degere alicubi vitam. Solvere navim è portu. Fallere hostem-Occupare animum, &c. Latinely, Abstinere placi∣tis. Degere alicubi, for habitare. Solvere è portu, for egredi. Non fefellerunt insidiae, Liv. Opinio falsa occupavit, for obtinuit, Agellius.

A. Which is the ninth Rule?

B. There are four ranks of Verbs, that instead of an Ablative case, elegantly assume a Genitive; but by an ellipsis of some Ablative, viz. 1. Verbs of being thoughtful, doubtful, and pensive. 2. Verbs of plenty or scarceness. 3. Verbs of pri∣sing, and buying. 4. Verbs of accusing, con∣demning, or assoiling.

1. We say grammatically, pendere animo, and excruciari animo. Defipere mente. Falli spe, &c. But Latinists had rather say, Pendere animi [sup∣ple, cogitatione.] Excruciarianimi [sc. sollicitudine.] Desipere mentis [sc. errore.] Falli spei [sc. opinione or expectatione, or some such Ablative.]

2. Grammatically, Abundare divitiis, egere consilio, implere vino, carere pecuniâ, &c. More

latinely, Quarum abundemus rerum, & quarum indigeamus, Lucilius [sc. copiâ] Cic. egere consilii [sc. ope, rc.] Virg. Implere vini [sc. liquore.] Ter. carendem erat tui [sc. praesentiâ.]

3. Grammatically, Aestimare magno, Cic. Vendere plurimo, Idem. Valere minimo, Ulpian. Data magno aestimas, accepta parvo, Sen. Yet the self-same good Authors have spoken more la∣tinely by a Genitive. Aestimare magni, vel parvi. Flocci facere. Nihili pendere. Nauci ha∣bere, &c. Quanti vendidisti? Tanti, pluris, mi∣noris, &c. To compleat the sense thus supply the ellipsis, Aestimare [rem] magni [pretii;] or thus, [pro] magni [aeris pretio.] Facere [rem] flecci; or [pro re] flocci. Quanti [aeris pretio] hoc emisti, aut vendidisti?

4. Cicero said grammatically, Accusare [ali∣quem] de veneficio; and again in another place elliptically, Condemnare crimine [supple De.] But again elsewhere more latinely by a Geni∣tive, Postulare flagitii; Absolvere criminis, con∣demnare capitis; tenere furti, &c.

That you may the better apprehend these elegancies, note that accusare de veneficio is en∣tire, but that the Genitive after these Verbs de∣pends on some of these Ablatives, either expres∣sed, or suppressed, sc. Crimine, scelere, peccato, actione, causâ, paena. So that a man may be said accusari, and afterward condemnari, or absolvi

de crimine veneficii, [which is complete.] But for brevity and elegancy (the general causes of ellipsis's in all Languages) [De] was first omitted. So Martial, Arguitur lentae crimine pigritiae. At length the Ablative it self became concealed, and the Genitive only was expressed: as, Arguere pigritiae. Accusare veneficii. Damnare sceleris, &c.

A. Which is the tenth Rule?

B. That which a Latine Grammarian speaks by Gerunds and Supines: Ibo visum, or ad visen∣dum. Misit quaesitum, &c. an imitator of Gre∣cism expresses by an Infinitive Mood: as, Ter. It visere ad eam. Plaut. Parasitum misi petere ar∣gentum. Hor. Persequar frangere. Virg. Non ve∣nimus populare penates, &c.

A. Which is the eleventh Rule?

B. The common Grammar saith, Cum hoc & hoc fieret, or sub, ab hoc; inter haec; postquam, &c. Which are most latinely exprest by two Ablatives, the one a Noun, the other a Partici∣ciple, which the Latine Grammarians commonly call Ablativus consequentiae, and the English the Ablative case Absolute: as, Pompeio pugnante, that is, cum pugnaret, in ipsâ pugnâ. Pompeio victo; postquam esset victus: Or thus, [sub] Pompeio pugnante. [à] Pompeio victo.

Obs. 1. You may also find two Nouns so put, by an ellipsis of the Participle: as, Cicerone

Consule, sc. Res gerente. Me puero, sc. Existente. Navigare vento secundo, sc. aspirante; vento ad∣verso, sc. obsistente. Vento nullo, sc. afflante, &c.

Obs. 2. Again you may find a Participle of the Preter tense used alone so, as it may betoken a consequence; yet the Ablative case of some other Substantive is tacitly implyed: as, Caesar, audito, sc. rumore. Nondum comperto, sc. Nun∣tio, &c.

A. Which is the twelfth Rule?

B. Instead of a Participle you may use a Verbal Substantive most latinely: as, Agellius says, Homo fabulator. Virgil, Populum late regem, i. e. regnantem.

A. Which is the thirteenth Rule?

B. A Grammarian to the Verb joyns its Ad∣verb, but a Latinist had rather have an Ad∣jective in the Neuter Gender, nay sometimes in the Masculine or Feminine, either singular or Plural. See the third and fourth Rules for the Idiotisms of Adverbs.

By a Hebraism also, not grating to Latine-ears, a Gerund noting the certainty of the action may be joyned to a Verb: as, Videndo videre, &c.

A. Which is the fourteenth Rule?

B. The Latines have a strong inclination to the ellipsis of Prepositions, especially in Nouns, 1 of Time, 2 of Place, 3 of Measure, 4 of the Cause.

1. Of Time. Anno hoc, (i.e. in anno hoc.) Men∣se Maio [in.] Die quinta [in.] Colloquebamur tres horas, [i. e. per] or tribus horis, [in.]

2. Of place. Unde venis? Ex Italiâ, Vene∣tiis, Mediolano, Româ. [i.e. ex Venetiis, è Me∣diolano, &c.

Quo ibis? In Italiam, Venetias, Mediolanum, Romam, [i.e. in Venetias, &c.]

Ubi est ille? In Italiâ. Venetiis, [i. e. in] Medi∣olani. Roma.

Here the Candidate of Eloquence must ob∣serve three things.

1. That Names of Cities and Towns are very commonly used elliptically: the Names of whole Countries and Islands very seldom: as, Navigare Cyprum, for in Cyprum, said Livie. And Ter. Proficisci Aegyptum, [i. e. in Aegyptum.]

2. That the Names of Cities of the first and second Declension, and the singular number, are put in the Genitive case instead of the Ablative, by a double ellipsis. So, Ubi? Romae [in urbe Re∣mae.] Mediolani [sc. in urbe Mediolani.]

3. That this ellipsis is imitated by five Noun-Substantives common, viz. Domus, humus, rus, bellum, militia: and yet not in every thing; for we say only,

Ubiest? Domi, humi, rure, or ruri, belli, militiae.

Unde redis? Domo, rure. Tolle humo.

Quo ibis? Domum, rus.

3. Of Measure. The Preposition is understood in Nouns of Measure: as, Capua distat Româ

• ...Iter tridui [per iter tridui.]
• ...Itinere tridui [ab itinere tridui.

4. Of the Cause, Whence, or why, any thing is, or is said, may also be put elliptically in the Ablative case: as, Est puer aetate, [i. e. ab aetate.] Sapientiâ senex, [i. e. à.] Est mater nomine [à no∣mine.] Noverca re, &c.

The same Latines put two Prepositions toge∣ther, one of their casual words being understood. Cicero often, In ante Calendas [in Diem ante Cal.] Ex ante diem nonarum [ex termino, qui fuit ante—] Liv. Ex templo è circa Praetorem missi ad civitates nuntii [ex hominibus, qui erant circa Praetorem.] So Seneca in de irâ [in libro de irâ,] &c.

A. Which is the fifteenth Rule?

B. It is a delicacy amongst the Latines to joyn together two Conjunctions, or Adverbs of the same signification: as, 1. Copulatives, Que &; Etiam &; Etiam quo{que} Quo{que} etiam: for says Cicero, Apertâ{que} & clarà voce dicere. Ma∣crobius, Existimo nonnihil ad consuetudinem vete∣rum, etiam & Praetoris, accedere. Plaut. Et hoc quo{que} etiam. Lucret. Est etiam que{que} ubi proprio cum lumine possit, &c. 2. Concessives, Etsi quam∣vis non fueris suasor, approbator certè fuisti, Cic. Quanquam etsi magnum me dixisset, Apul. 3. Or∣dinatives,

Pòst deinde, Ter. Deinceps inde, Liv. Deinde postea, Ulp. Tandem deni{que} Apul. 4. Illatives, Ergo igitur, Apul. Itaque ergò; Ter.

A. Are Idioms always confined to some one language only?

B. Idioms, strictly so call'd, are so peculiar to one Language, that others cannot imitate them, whether they lie in single words: as the Greek 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, which the Romans themselves are fain to circumlocute thus, Vis rerum viva, motuum principium; and the Latine, Parentare, i. e. Personis funeratis aut funerandis, ceremonia∣rum apparatu, honorem (veluti Parentibus) exhi∣bere: Or in Sentences: as, Post homines natos, Since the creation of man, which no modern Language can translate ad verbum, no nor the Greek neither. These are termed Idiotismi stricti.

Others are not so the monopoly of any one tongue, but that they may be common to two or more Languages. Such are all pure Latine words used by Classic Authors, and many Senten∣ces: as that of Plautus, Nescio quid habeo in mundo; Anglicè, I know not what in the world I have. So habeo scriptum, solutum, may idiomatically be translated verbum de verbo into the English, Ger∣man, and Italian Tongues. Quantum est in rebus inane? for quanta est in rebus inanitas? is com∣mon to Latine and Greek: So inania famae, lu∣bricum juventae, for inanis fama, lubrica juven∣tus, &c.

Vir irae, spiritus lenitatis, mammona iniquitatis, are common Idioms to the Hebrew, Latine, and English Languages. These therefore are stiled Idiotismi laxi.

A. Wherein lies the Ʋirtue of Idiotism?

B. The Virtue of this Ornament lies in the Emphasis that is in the validity of the significa∣tion, which other tongues cannot attain to even with a Periphrasis; such are many expressions of the Greeks, Latines, English, &c. inimitable in equal nervositie by other Languages.

A. How many Ʋices are contrary to this Ʋirtue?

B. The Vices which stand in opposition to this Virtue are Three, sc. Barbarism, Solecism, Xe∣nism, or Peregrinity.

A. What it Barbarism?

B. Barbarism is defined by Diogenes in his seventh Book thus, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. By Suidas thus, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. In English thus, Barbarism is a word used contrary to the custom of approved Authors. Again, Comenius defines it thus, Bar∣barism is, when in a Latine Sentence a word is made use of, which either is not Latine, as avi∣sare for certiorem facere, or praemonere, or not conformable, in some circumstance or other to the practice of pure writers, as filie for fili.

Sciopius thus, Barbarism is a sin against the Rules of Orthoepia, Prosodia, Etymologia: such Rules, I mean, as are built upon the Writers of Tully's Age.

1. Against Orthoepia: as, Mecaenas for Maece∣nas, Expecto for exspecto, doc-tus for do-ctus, &c.

2. Prosodia: as, Compétitor for Competítor, Opo∣rínus for Opórinus.

3. Analogia: as, Gratitudo and ingratitudo for animus gratus and ingratus, or gratum and in∣gratum, certitudo and incertitudo for certum and incertum, adversitas for res adversae, turbidae, gravis fortuna, &c.

A. What is the true signification of the Adjective barbarus, a, um?

B. Barbarus is synonymous to extraneus, pere∣grinus, one of another Country, from דב extra, foras.

A. What is Solecism?

B. Suidas defines Solecism thus, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Vox incongruè constructa, the Latines call it Stribligo.

Sciopius thus, It is (saith he) a sin against the Rules and Figures of Construction.

Comenius thus, It is a Solecism when Latine words are joyned together unlatinely, that is, after a manner unusual to the Latines: as if one should say, Facere damnum for dare, or dare

jacturam for facere. Milites viligant in monte for milites speculantur de monte, in these the words are Latine, but coupled unlatinely. So if one should say, Magna fur, or misera homo, it would be Solecism, no less than pugio mea, pro∣fectus Londini, penes Romanis, or such-like.

A. What is Xenism or Pereginity?

B. Peregrinity or Xenism is when we in Latine, or Greek, &c. unelegantly imitate an Idiotism, elegant in another Language.

Sciopius defines it thus, Peregrinitas est verbo∣rum Latinorum usus ad idiomata aliarum linguarum consuetudinem conformatus: as, Non me latet is an unelegant imitation of the Greeks 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. So superior illius is a Peregrinity in imitation of the Greeks, who use a Genitive case after a Com∣parative degree, by an ellipsis of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, which really governs the case, instead of illo, which is governed of prae understood.

So the verbal translations of our English Idioms into Latine is mostly Xenism: as, Let us take our heels and run away: Capiamus nostros calces & fugiamus: for which Terence saith ele∣gantly, Nos in pedes conjiciamus, &c. Caesar, Nos fugae mandemus.

He doth the clean contrary: Politum opposi∣tum facit, for which Tully saith, Ab illo contra fit.

I stand in great need of Learning: Sto in

magno opere doctrinae: for which Cicero said, Doctrinam magnopere desidero, and such-like.

A. Methinks no man should ever happen upon such uncouth expressione, but having con∣sulted his Grammar and Dictionary, should without any more to de, say with Terence, Nos in pedes conjiciamus, or with Caesar, &c.

B. You think so, because you have already gone thro' Terence and Plautus, Caesar and Cicero, and by long use and custom have bin so inured to this & no other Phrases upon this subject, that all other seem uncouth to you: but to convince you that it is far otherwise than you imagin, do but consult the Vulgars translated last night by one of the lower Forms, or rather those your self translated three or four years ago. And again, Tell me this, seeing every thing may be expressed so many several ways (I have heard our Master say at least an hundred) in a queint and elegant stile, and seeing some few of the ways are only proper in a plain and familiar stile, which we are now speaking of, because they only are idiotical, and in use: do you think that all Nations have made choice of the same forms and expressions to be in com∣mon use, and agreed together which should be rejected?

A. It were impessible that they should: for how should we that speal English know what

Phrases they have made use of to be in common use in France, Italy, or Spain; or what are the common Phrases in German, Turkish, or Persian Languages? And as impossible it would be for them to know what ours are:

B. So that you must now confess, that if One of any of these Nations should come to learn our Language, or One of our Country to learn theirs, and know the significations of all words in their respective Tongues, yet he might fall upon as uncouth Phrases as those I propounded.

A. I am now convinced that he may: for how shall we Englishment know that these are in use more than any other in their Languages, having one perhaps clear differing from theirs in our own Mother Tongue; and probably Theirs will seem as strange to Vs, as Ours do to Them.

B. No question but it will; but this, which you rightly apprehend, will be more clear by an instance or two. Suppose Latine was now spoke in Italy, as once it was; here comes one of that Country into England, and English is the Language, he hath a desire upon occasion to speak the same in effect with this piece of his Mother Tongue, Rogo te, amice, mihi Virgilium tuum ad horam unam aut alteram utendum des, & cum tibi reddam integrum: How do you think he would express himself?

A. I fancy that he (not knowing the Idiom of our Language, and observing the manner of speech in use in his own tongue) would be apt to say thus: I intreat thee, my Friend, that thou maist give to me, to be used, thy Virgil, to one hour or another, and I shall render him to you entire. Nor indeed can I well conceive how he should speak any otherwise, being ignorant of our usual manner of speech, in this particular; but surely we should count it very strange English.

B. If a French man should come, he would have some other kind, which yet would differ as much from our English, and seem as strange, the same you may understand of an Italian, of a Spaniard of a Dutch-man, or any other what∣ever. All would be different, and all uncouth:

A. How would a Frenchman speak in this case?

B. My master, I pray you of lending me your Virgil for an hour or two, &c.

A. How a Dutchman?

B. Do me though (i. e. amabo) your Virgil an hour, two, three, and I will give you it back again unhurt.

A. How an Englishman that can speak pure, i. e. proper, good English?

B. Sir, I would desire you to lend me your Virgil for an hour or two, and I will send it safe back.

This is Idiotical; the other Peregrinity.

A. How would a Latinist (for want of skill in the propriety of the English tongue) at the first meeting salute you?

B. Be safe, Friend.

A. Why do you suppose he would choose that form of expressing himself?

B. Because it is an Idiom in Latine, Salve amice.

A. How would a Frenchman speak upon the same occasion, and for the same reason?

B. Good day, my Master, how do you bear your self?

A. An Italian how?

B. How stands your Lordship? or, how stand you?

A. How a Dutchman?

B. Good day, my Master, how goes it with your health?

A. What should they say, if they would speak proper English?

How do you do, Sir? I am glad to see you well: for the other are Xenisms in imitation of their own familiar expressions; but this is our Idiom.

A. Are these three all the vices opposite to the virtue of Idiotism?

B. To these you may add one more, tho' some comprise it under Xenism.

A. What is that?

B. It is called Archaïsm.

A. What is Archaïm?

B. Scioppius answers for me thus, Archaîsmus est usus verborum, quae intelligebantur quidem Ci∣ceronis aetate, sed tamen in usu esse desiêrunt. Ar∣chaîsm is the use of words, which truly were understood in the Age wherein Tully lived, but yet had ceased to be in use: as, Senati for Senatüs, Plebes for Plebs, Satias for Satietas, Secus virile for Sexus virilis, Locus hostibus igna∣rus for ignotus, Bellum Punicum posterior for posterius. Such are Naevius's words, who begins his first Punick War thus, Queiterrai Latiai (vel Latiei) hemones tuserint. Virésque frudésque Poi∣nicas fabor; for Qui terrae Latiae homines tude∣rint (vel fregerint) vires fraudésque Punicas fabor.

FINIS.