Varro: DE LINGVA LATINA

1. Deus autem vel dea generale nomen est omnibus * * * Varro ad Ciceronem tertio: "Ita respondeant cur dicant deos, cum de omnibus antiqui dixerint divos."

1. But "god" or "goddess" is a general name for all * * * Varro to Cicero in the third: "Thus let them answer why they say gods, since the ancients said divine ones of all."

2. Figor ambigue declinatur apud veteres tempore perfecto. Reperimus enim fictus et fixus * * * Varro ad Ciceronem tertio "fixum".

2. "Figor" is declined ambiguously among the ancients in the perfect tense. We find
indeed "fictus" and "fixus" * * * Varro to Cicero in the third "fixum".

3. Hoc nomen licet veteres Latinum negent, auctoritate tamen valet. Dicebant enim leonem masculum et feminam * * * . Leam vero Varro ad Ciceronem dicit libro III: "Sicut non est panthera et lea."

3. Although the ancients deny this name to be Latin, nevertheless it prevails by authority. For they used to use “lion” for both the male and the female * * * . “Lea,” however, Varro to Cicero says in Book 3: “Just as there is not panthera and lea.”

LIBER IV

BOOK 4

4. "Prolubium et lubidinem dici ab eo quod lubeat: unde etiam lucus Veneris Lubentinae dicatur."

4. "Prolubium and lubido are said to derive from 'it pleases': whence also the grove of Venus Lubentina is said to be called."

LIBER VIII

BOOK 8

5. M. Varronis liber ad Ciceronem de Lingua Latina octavus nullam esse observationem similium docet inque omnibus paene verbis consuetudinem dominari ostendit: "Sicuti cum dicimus", inquit, "lupus lupi, probus probi et lepus leporis, item paro paravi et lauo lavi, pungo pupugi, tundo tutudi et pingo pinxi. Cumque," inquit, "a ceno et prandeo et poto et cenatus sum et pransus sum et potus sum dicamus, a destringor tamen et extergeor et lavor destrinxi et extersi et lavi dicimus.

5. M. Varro’s eighth book to Cicero On the Latin Language teaches that there is no observation of similars and shows that in almost all words usage holds sway: "Just as when we say," he says, "lupus lupi, probus probi and lepus
leporis, likewise paro paravi and lauo lavi, pungo pupugi, tundo tutudi and pingo
pinxi. And when," he says, "from ceno and prandeo and poto we say cenatus sum and pransus
sum and potus sum, yet from destringor and extergeor and lavor we say destrinxi
and extersi and lavi."

"Item cum dicamus ab Osco Tusco Graeco Osce Tusce Graece, a Gallo tamen et Mauro Gallice et Maurice dicimus; item a probus probe, a doctus docte, sed a rarus non dicitur rare, sed alii raro dicunt, alii rarenter."

"Likewise, when we say from Oscan, Tuscan, Greek: Osce, Tusce, Graece, yet from the Gaul and the Moor we say Gallice and Maurice; likewise from probus probe, from doctus docte, but from rarus one does not say rare, but some say raro, others rarenter."

Idem M. Varro in eodem libro: "Sentior," inquit, "nemo dicit et id per se nihil est, adsentior tamen fere omnes dicunt. Sisenna unus adsentio in senatu dicebat et eum postea multi secuti, neque tamen vincere consuetudinem potuerunt." Sed idem Varro in aliis libris multa pro analogiai tuenda scribit.

The same M. Varro in the same book: "Sentior," he says, "no one says, and
that in itself is nothing; yet almost all say 'adsentior.' Sisenna alone said 'adsentio'
in the Senate, and many afterward followed him, yet they could not overcome usage."
But the same Varro in other books writes many things for the defense of analogy.

LIBER IX

BOOK 9

6. Et ubi auctoritas maiorum genus tibi non demonstraverit, quid ibi faciendum est? Scripsit Varro ad Ciceronem: "Potestatis nostrae est illis rebus dare genera, quae ex natura genus non habent."

6. And where the authority of the ancestors has not pointed out a genus to you, what is to be done there? Varro wrote to Cicero: "It is within our power to give genera to those things which by nature do not have a genus."

7 A. Nunc de generibus dicamus. Varro dicit genera dicta a generando. Quicquid enim gignit aut gignitur, hoc potest genus dici et genus facere". Quod si verum est, nulla potest res integrum genus habere nisi masculinum et femininum.

7 A. Now let us speak about genera. Varro says that genera are so called from generating. For whatever begets or is begotten, this can be said to be a genus and to make a genus".
But if this is true, no thing can have an entire genus except the masculine and the feminine.

7 B. Tractat de generibus. Varro ait "genera tantum illa esse quae generant: illa proprie dicuntur genera." Quodsi sequemur auctoritatem ipsius, non erunt genera nisi duo, masculinum et femininum. Nulla enim genera creare possunt nisi haec duo.

7 B. He treats of genera. Varro says, "only those are genera which generate: those are properly called genera." But if we follow his authority, there will be only two genera, the masculine and the feminine. For no genera can create except these two.

8. Ostrea primae declinationis fuerit, sicut Musa, feminino genere declinabitur, ut ad animal referamus; si ad testam, ostreum dicendum est neutro genere et ad secundam declinationem, ut sit huius ostrei, huic ostreo, quia dicit Varro "nullam rem animalem neutro genere declinari."

8. Ostrea will be of the first declension, like Musa, it will be declined in the feminine gender,
when we refer it to the animal; if to the shell, ostreum is to be said, in the neuter gender
and of the second declension, so that it be huius ostrei, huic ostreo, because Varro says
"no animate thing is declined in the neuter gender."

9. Ait Plinius Secundus secutus Varronem: "Quando dubitamus principale genus, redeamus ad diminutionem, et ex diminutivo cognoscimus principale genus. Puta arbor ignoro cuius generis sit: fac diminutivum arbuscula, ecce hinc intellegis et principale genus quale sit. Item si dicas columna, cuius generis est?

9. Pliny Secundus says, following Varro: "Whenever we are in doubt about the principal gender, let us return to the diminution, and from the diminutive we come to know the principal gender. Suppose arbor—I do not know of what gender it is: make the diminutive arbuscula, behold, from this you understand also what the principal gender is like. Likewise, if you say columna, of what gender is it?

facis inde diminutivum, id est columella, et inde intellegis quoniam principale feminini generis est."

you make from that a diminutive, that is, columella, and from that you understand that the principal is of the feminine gender."

10. "Hypocorismata semper generibus suis unde oriuntur consonant, pauca dissonant, velut haec rana hic ranunculus, hic unguis haec ungula, hoc glandium haec glandula, hic panis hic pastillus et hoc pastillum," ut Varro dixit: "haec beta hic betaceus, haec malva hic malvaceus, hoc pistrinum haec pistrilla, ut Terentius in Adelphis, hic ensis haec ensicula et hic ensiculus: sic in Rudente Plautus."

10. "Hypocorisms always harmonize with their genders whence they arise; a few disagree, as these: haec rana hic ranunculus, hic unguis haec ungula, hoc glandium haec glandula, hic panis hic pastillus and hoc pastillum," as Varro said: "haec beta hic betaceus, haec malva hic malvaceus, hoc pistrinum haec pistrilla, as Terence in the Adelphi, hic ensis haec ensicula and hic ensiculus: so Plautus in the Rudens."

11. Dies communis generis est. Qui masculino genere dicendum putaverunt, has causas reddiderunt, quod dies festos auctores dixerunt, non festas, et quartum et quintum Kalendas, non quartam nec quintam, et cum hodie dicimus,nihil aliud quam hoc die intelligitur. Qui vero feminino, catholico utuntur, quod ablativo casu E non nisi producta finiatur, et quod deminutio eius diecula sit, non dieculus, ut ait, Terentius:

11. Dies is of common gender. Those who thought it ought to be said in the masculine gave these reasons: that the authors said dies festos, not festas, and “the fourth and the fifth before the Kalends,” not the fourth nor the fifth (fem.), and when we say “today,” nothing other than “on this day” is understood. But those who [make it] feminine employ the catholic (i.e., general) rule, because in the ablative case it ends in E, and only with a lengthened one, and because its diminutive is diecula, not dieculus, as, says Terence:

Quod tibi addo dieculam.

Since I add you a daylet.

Varro autem distinxit, ut masculino genere unius diei cursum significaret, feminino autem temporis spatium; quod nemo servavit.

Varro, however, distinguished it thus: with the masculine gender he would signify the course of a single day, but with the feminine the span of time; which no one has observed.

12. Catinus masculino genere dicitur * * * et hinc deminutive catillus fit * * * Sed Varro ad Ciceronem XI "catinuli" dixit, non catilli.

12. Catinus is said in the masculine gender * * * and hence, diminutively, catillus is formed * * * But Varro to Cicero 11 said "catinuli," not "catilli."

13. Naevus generis neutri, sed Varro ad Ciceronem "hic naevus".

13. 'Nevus' is of the neuter gender, but Varro, in a letter to Cicero, writes 'hic naevus'.

14 A. Antiquissimi tamen et hic gausapes et haec gausapa et hoc gausape et plurale neutri haec gausapa quasi a nominativo hoc gausapum protulisse inveniuntur * * * . Varro vero de Lingua Latina ait, "talia ex Graeco sumpta ex masculino in femininum transire et A litera finiri: Ho kochlias haec cochlea, ho chartes haec charta, ho gausapes haec gausapa".

14 A. The most ancient, however, are found to have put forward both “hic gausapes” and “haec gausapa” and “hoc gausape,” and the neuter plural “haec gausapa,” as if from the nominative “hoc gausapum” * * * . Varro, indeed, in On the Latin Language says, “such things taken from Greek pass from the masculine into the feminine and end with the letter A: ho kochlias — haec cochlea, ho chartes — haec charta, ho gausapes — haec gausapa.”

14 B. Varro autem ait "vocabula ex Graeco sumpta, si suum genus non retineant, ex masculino in femininum Latine transire et A littera terminari velut kochlias cochlea, Hermes herma, chartes charta, ergo gausape gausapa".

14 B. But Varro says "vocables taken from Greek, if they do not retain their own gender, pass in Latin from masculine into feminine and be terminated by the letter A, as kochlias cochlea, Hermes herma, chartes charta, therefore gausape gausapa".

14 C. Margarita feminini generis est, quia Graeca nomina -es terminata in A transeunt et fiunt feminina, ut ho chartes haec charta, margarites margarita, aut communia, ut athletes athleta. Ergo neutraliter hoc margaritum dicere uitiosum est; et tamen multi dixerunt, ut Valgius * * * et Varro Epistularum VIII "margaritum unum, margarita plura." Sed idem Varro saepe et alii plures margarita feminine dixerunt; in genetivo tamen plurali non nisi feminino genere margaritarum.

14 C. Margarita is of the feminine gender, because Greek nouns terminated in -es pass into A and become feminine, as ho chartes haec charta, margarites
margarita, or common, as athletes athleta. Therefore to say in the neuter hoc margaritum
is faulty; and yet many have said it, as Valgius * * * and Varro, Letters 8, "margaritum unum, margarita plura." But the same Varro often, and many others, said margarita as feminine; in the genitive, however, plural, only in the feminine
gender margaritarum.

15. VAS terminata et SIS faciunt genitivo et DIS, hoc vas huius vasis; utrumque Varro ait de Lingua Latina: hic vas huius vadis.

15. those terminated in VAS and SIS make in the genitive IS and DIS, this vas, of this vasis; Varro says both in On the Latin Language: this vas, of this vadis.

16. VIS et ipsa tertiae sunt declinationis et similem nominativo faciunt genetivum, hic civis huius civis, haec vis huius vis et plurali hae vis, sicut Lucretius et Varro: nam hae vires numero semper plurali declinantur.

16. VIS too is of the third declension and makes a genitive similar to the nominative, hic civis huius civis, haec vis huius vis, and in the plural hae vis, as Lucretius and Varro: for these vires are always declined in the plural number.

17. M. Varronem et P. Nigidium, viros Romani generis doctissimos, comperimus non aliter elocutos esse et scripsisse quam senatuis et domuis et fluctuis, qui est patrius casus ab eo quod est senatus, domus, fluctus; huic senatui, domui, fluctui, ceteraque is consimilia pariter dixisse.

17. We have found that M. Varro and P. Nigidius, most learned men of the Roman stock, did not express and write otherwise than “senatuis” and “domuis” and “fluctuis,” which is the ancestral case from that which is “senatus,” “domus,” “fluctus”; “to this” (dative) “senatui,” “domui,” “fluctui,” and that they likewise said the other things similar to these.

18. Amni Maro,

18. To the river, Maro,

Secundo defluit amni.

It flows down with the favorable stream.

Ubi Plinius eodem libro "Ab antiquis" inquit "quos Varro reprehendit, observatio omnis illa damnata est, non quidem in totum. Dicimus enim," inquit, "ab hoc canali siti tussi febri. Maiore tamen ex parte forma mutata est.

Where Pliny in the same book says "Of the ancients," he says, "whom Varro reproves, all that observation
is condemned, not indeed entirely. For we say," he says, "from
this channel thirst, cough, fever. Yet for the greater part the form has been changed.

Ab hoc enim cane orbe carbone turre falce igne ueste fine monte fonte ponte strigile tegete ave asse axe nave classe dicimus."

From this, indeed, we say from this dog, orb, carbon, turret, sickle, fire, vest, end, mountain, font, bridge strigil, mat, bird, as, axle, ship, fleet."

19. Quem Plinius ad eundem XI "rure ordinatum arbustum" dixisse laudat.

19. whom Pliny, in the same Book 11, praises as having said "a plantation ordered in the countryside."

20. Fonteis: "Quorum nominum genetivi pluralis ante UM syllabam I litteram merebuntur, accusativus," inquit Plinius, "per EIS loquetur, montium monteis; licet Varro," inquit, "exemplis hanc regulam confutare temptarit istius modi, falcium falces, non falceis facit, nec has merceis, nec hos axeis lintreis ventreis stirpeis urbeis corbeis vecteis menteis. Et tamen manus dat praemissae regulae ridicule, ut exceptis his nominibus valeat regula."

20. Fonteis: "Of which nouns the genitive plural will deserve the letter I before the syllable UM, the accusative," says Pliny, "will speak by EIS, montium monteis; although Varro," he says, "has attempted to confute this rule by examples of this sort, falcium falces, not falceis he makes, nor these merceis, nor those axeis lintreis ventreis stirpeis urbeis corbeis vecteis menteis. And yet he gives his hand to the aforesaid rule ridiculously, so that, with these nouns excepted, the rule may be valid."

21. Poematorum et in II et in III idem Varro adsidue dicit et his poematis, tam quam nominativo hoc poematum sit et non hoc poema. Nam et ad Ciceronem XI, horum poematorum et his poematis oportere dici.

21. Poematorum, and in 2 and in 3 this same Varro says continually, and his poematis, as though the nominative were this poematum and not this poema. For also to Cicero 11, that horum poematorum and his poematis ought to be said.

22. Git: Varro ad Ciceronem XI per omnes casus id nomen ire debere conmeminit; vulgo autem hoc gitti dicunt.

22. Git: Varro, in To Cicero 11, records that that noun ought to go through all cases; but commonly they say "this gitti."

LIBER XIII

BOOK 13

23. Palpetras per T Varro ad Ciceronem XIII dixit. Sed Fabianus de Animalibus primo palpebras per B. Alii dicunt palpetras genas, palpebras autem ipsos pilos.

23. "Palpetras" with T, Varro, in To Cicero 13, said.
But Fabianus, On Animals, in the first [book], "palpebras" with B. Others call "palpetras" the cheeks, but "palpebrae" the hairs themselves.

24. Oxo: "Varro ad Ciceronem XIII olivo et oxo putat fieri," inquit Plinius Sermonis Dubii libro VI.

24. Oxo: "Varro to Cicero 13 thinks it is made with olive-oil and oxo," says Pliny in book 6 of Doubtful Speech.

LIBER XVIII

BOOK 18

25. Indiscriminatim, indifferenter. Varro de Lingua Latina lib. XVIII: "Quibus nos in hoc libro, proinde ut nihil intersit, utemur indiscriminatim, promisce."

25. Indiscriminately, indifferently. Varro, On the Latin Language, Book 18:
"Which terms we, in this book, just as if it made no difference, will use indiscriminately,
promiscuously."

LIBER XXII

BOOK 22

26. Rure Terentius in Eunucho:

26. In the country Terence in the Eunuch:

Ex meo propinquo rure hoc capio commodi.

From my neighboring country estate I get this convenience.

Itaque et Varro ad Ciceronem XXII "rure veni."

And so also Varro to Cicero 22 "I came from the countryside."

LIBER XXIII

BOOK 23

27. Varro ad Ciceronem in libro XXIII: "ingluvies tori," inquit, "sunt circa gulam, qui propter pinguedinem fiunt atque interiectas habent rugas." Sed nunc pro gula positum.

27. Varro to Cicero in book 23: "ingluvies tori," he says, "are
around the throat, which are made on account of fatness and have interposed wrinkles." But now it is used in place of "gula."

28. Cum in disciplinas dialecticas induci atque imbui vellemus, necessus fuit adire atque cognoscere quas vocant dialectici eisagogas. Tum, quia in primo peri axiomaton discendum, quae M. Varro alias profata, alias proloquia appellat, Commentarium de Proloquiis L. Aelii, docti hominis, qui magister Varronis fuit, studiose quaesivimus eumque in Pacis Bibliotheca repertum legimus. Sed in eo nihil edocenter neque ad instituendum explanate scriptum est, fecisseque videtur eum librum Aelius sui magis admonendi quam aliorum docendi gratia.

28. When we wished to be inducted and imbued into the dialectical disciplines, it was necessary to approach and to come to know the introductions which the dialecticians call eisagogas. Then, since first there is to be learned On Axioms, which M. Varro elsewhere calls “profata,” elsewhere “proloquia,” we diligently sought the Commentary On Proloquia of L. Aelius, a learned man who was the teacher of Varro, and, having found it in the Library of Peace, we read it. But in it nothing is written instructively nor clearly for instruction, and Aelius seems to have made that book more for the sake of admonishing himself than of teaching others.

Redimus igitur necessario ad Graecos libros. Ex quibus accepimus axioma esse his verbis definitum: lekton autoteles apophanton hoson eph'hautoi. Hoc ego supersedi vertere, quia novis et inconditis vocibus utendum fuit, quas pati aures per insolentiam vix possent.

We return, therefore, of necessity to the Greek books. From these we have learned that an axiom is defined in these words: lekton autoteles apophanton hoson eph'hautoi. I for my part refrained from translating this, because one would have to use new and ill-composed words, which ears could scarcely endure by reason of their unusualness.

Sed M. Varro in libro de Lingua Latina ad Ciceronem quarto vicesimo expeditissime ita finit: "Proloquium est sententia in qua nihil desideratur."

But M. Varro, in the 24th book of On the Latin Language to Cicero, most expeditiously thus defines: "Prolocution is a sentence in which nothing is lacking."

Erit autem planius quid istud sit, si exemplum eius dixerimus. Axioma igitur, sive id proloquium dicere placet, huiuscemodi est: Hannibal Poenus fuit; Scipio Numantiam delevit; Milo caedis damnatus est; Neque bonum est voluptas neque malum; et omnino quicquid ita dicitur plena atque perfecta verborum sententia, ut id necesse sit aut verum aut falsum esse, id a dialecticis axioma appellatum est, a M. Varrone, sicuti dixi, proloquium, a M. autem Cicerone pronuntiatum, quo ille tamen vocabulo tantisper uti se adtestatus est, "quoad melius," inquit, "invenero."

It will be plainer, however, what that is, if we shall give an example of it. Therefore an axiom, or, if it pleases to call it a proloquium, is of this sort: Hannibal
was a Carthaginian; Scipio destroyed Numantia; Milo was condemned for murder; Nor
is pleasure a good nor an evil; and in general whatever is thus said a full and
perfect sentence of words, such that it must be either true or false,
that has been called an axiom by the dialecticians, a proloquium by M. Varro, as I said,
and a pronuntiatum by M. Cicero; which term, however, he attested that he would use only for so long,
“until,” he says, “I shall have found a better.”

Sed quod Graeci synemmenon axioma dicunt, id alii nostrorum adiunctum, alii conexum dixerunt. Id conexum tale est: Si Plato ambulat, Plato movetur; Si dies est, so super terras est. Item quod illi sympeplegmenon, nos vel coniunctum vel copulatum dicimus, quod est eiusdemmodi: P. Scipio, Pauli filius, et bis consul fuit et triumphavit et censura functus est et collega in censura L. Mummi fuit.

But what the Greeks call a synemmenon axioma, some of our men have called an adjunct,
others a connected (one). Such a connected (one) is of this sort: If Plato walks, Plato moves;
If it is day, the sun is over the lands. Likewise, what they call a sympeplegmenon, we call either
a conjunct or a copulated (one), which is of the same sort: P. Scipio, the son of Paulus, was both twice consul and triumphed and performed the censorship and was colleague in the censorship with L. Mummius.

In omni autem coniuncto si unum est mendacium, etiamsi cetera vera sunt, totum esse mendacium dicitur. Nam si ad ea omnia quae de Scipione illo vera dixi addidero Et Hannibalem in Africa superavit, quod est falsum, universa quoque illa quae coniuncte dicta sunt, propter hoc unum quod falsum accesserit, quia simul dicentur, vera non erunt.

In every conjoined statement, however, if one item is a falsehood, even if the rest are true, the whole is said to be a falsehood. For if to all those things which I said truly about that Scipio I should add “And he defeated Hannibal in Africa,” which is false, then likewise all those things which are said conjointly, on account of this one thing which, being false, has been added, since they are said together, will not be true.

Est item aliud quod Graeci diezeugmenon axioma, nos disiunctum dicimus. Id huiuscemodi est: Aut malum est voluptas aut bonum, aut neque bonum neque malum est. Omnia autem quae disiunguntur pugnantia esse inter sese oportet, eorumque opposita, quae antikeimena Graeci dicunt, ea quoque ipsa inter se adversa esse.

There is likewise another thing which the Greeks call a diezeugmenon axiom, we call disjunct. It is of this kind: Either pleasure is an evil or a good, or neither good nor
evil. But all things which are disjoined ought to be in conflict among themselves, and their opposites, which the Greeks call antikeimena, those too are themselves opposed among one another.

Ex omnibus quae disiunguntur unum esse verum debet, falsa cetera. Quod si aut nihil omnium verum aut omnia plurave quam unum vera erunt, aut quae disiuncta sunt non pugnabunt, aut quae opposita eorum sunt contraria inter sese non erunt, tunc id disiunctum mendacium est et appellatur paradizeugmenon, sicuti hoc est, in quo quae opposita non sunt contraria: Aut curris aut ambulas aut stas. Nam ipsa quidem inter se adversa sunt, sed opposita eorum non pugnant: non ambulare enim et non stare et non currere contraria inter sese non sunt, quoniam contraria ea dicuntur quae simul vera esse non queunt; possis simul eodemque tempore neque ambulare neque stare neque currere.

Of all the things that are disjoined, one ought to be true, the rest false. But if either none of them is true, or all, or more than one will be true, or the things disjoined will not be in conflict, or the opposites of these will not be contraries among themselves, then that disjunct is a falsehood and is called a paradizeugmenon, as this is, in which the opposites are not contraries: Either you run or you walk or you stand. For the things themselves are indeed adverse among themselves, but their opposites do not clash: for to not walk and to not stand and to not run are not contraries among themselves, since those things are called contraries which cannot be true at the same time; you can at the same and at one and the same time neither walk nor stand nor run.

29. Excipiuntur haurio hausi (invenitur tamen etiam haurivi uel haurii; Varro in XXIIII ad Ciceronem: "Cum indidem haurierint"), saepio saepsi * * * .

29. Are excepted haurio hausi (however there is also found haurivi or haurii; Varro in 24 to Cicero: "When they shall have drawn from the same place"), saepio saepsi
* * * .