The Classical Review http://journals.cambridge.org/CAR

Additional services for The Classical Review:

Email alerts: Click here Subscriptions: Click here Commercial reprints: Click here Terms of use : Click here

Latin Syntax 1 Ausführliche Grammatik der lateinischen Sprache. R. Von Kühner. Second edition. Vol. II.: Satzlehre, Part ii., neubearbeitet von C. Stegmann. Pp. viii + 738. 9¼″ × 6¼″. Hannover: Hahnsche Buchhandlung, 1914. M. 16.50; bound, M. 18.50. 2 Syntax of Early Latin. By C. E. Bennett. Vol.1.:The Verb. Pp.xx + 506 (1910). Vol. II.: The Cases. Pp.x + 409. 8¼″× 6″ (1914). Boston: Allyn and Bacon. \ $4 each volume.

W. E. P. Pantin

The Classical Review / Volume 29 / Issue 04 / June 1915, pp 119 - 121 DOI: 10.1017/S0009840X00048423, Published online: 27 October 2009

Link to this article: http://journals.cambridge.org/abstract_S0009840X00048423

How to cite this article: W. E. P. Pantin (1915). The Classical Review, 29, pp 119-121 doi:10.1017/ S0009840X00048423

Request Permissions : Click here

Downloaded from http://journals.cambridge.org/CAR, IP address: 128.122.253.212 on 12 Apr 2015 THE CLASSICAL REVIEW 119 of Christiania in the Zeitschrift fur with the biirgerlich type of Essenes— die Neutestamentliche Wissenschaft, 1913, those, that is, who lived in the towns p. 145 ff., in which the author con- as a sort of Third Order as opposed to cludes that in early days the Chris- the desert-dwellers or Essenes proper. tians were identified with the Nazo- W. K. LOWTHER CLARKE. raeans, who in their turn were identical Cavendish, Suffolk.

LATIN SYNTAX. 1. Ausfuhrliche Grammatik der latein- Plasberg's edition, his speeches from ischen Sprache. Von R. KUHNER. the Oxford text. Above all, the in- Second edition. Vol. II.: Satzlehre, formation is fuller; so much so that Part ii., neubearbeitet von C. STEG- the Syntax ' volume,' if we reckon its MANN. Pp. viii + 738. gi* x 6\". two parts together, has 400 pages more Hannover: Hahnsche Buchhandlung, than in the old edition. The quotations 1914. M. 16.50; bound, M. 18.50. and references are more numerous and more carefully selected. The passages 2. Syntax of Early Latin. By C. E. quoted are generally sufficient if one BENNETT. Vol.1.: The Verb. Pp.xx wants to find quickly a good set of + 506 (1910). Vol. II.: The Cases. typical instances; if one wishes to go Pp.x + 409. 8J"x6" (1914). Boston: more fully into any subject the refer- Allyn and Bacon. $4 each volume. ences are helpful; they often include OF the new edition of Kuhner it is not a good hint such as cp. Madvig, de necessary to speak at length, because Fin., or Lebreton's book on Cicero, the work has already been described in which means that further evidence is this Review. The first volume (price collected in the place referred to. I 24s.), dealing with Formenlehre, etc., have noted few misprints. On p. 406 has not been well revised for the new the reference to Terrell's article (on edition, and cannot be recommended scripturum fuisse as the regular oblique Plautus to Tacitus, and especially for number of sections, and have found the language of the time of Cicero and again and again evidence of careful Augustus, it is and long will be the best revision. Incorrect statements have of its kind. been put right: e.g. Kuhner says there For a fuller study of Early Latin the js a Passive Future Subjunctive, non student will turn to Professor Bennett's dubito quin futurum sit ut laudere ; Steg- handsome volumes. mann rightly says that this is not Professor Bennett takes 100 B.C. as Latin, and shows (p. 181) how the his later limit, and has ' endeavoured Romans expressed their meaning with- to consider all the remains of any syn- out such a periphrasis. The most tactical significance from the earliest recent texts have been used for the period down to this time.' ' Had I examples; in this second part Cicero's extended the scope of my work,' he philosophical writings are cited from continues, ' for another quarter of a I2O THE CLASSICAL REVIEW century, the additions would have been was in search of at the end of the sec- insignificant—merely a few citations tion, printed without a heading, so that from the Sullan annalists and con- it seems to belong to * Names of Rivera temporary inscriptions.' As a matter and Nations.' In some places where of fact, he would have included some the evidence is apparently intended to of Cicero's early work, a very interest- be complete I have noted omissions r ing addition, differing in kind from any for instance, in I. 426, ' Present In- of the literature here studied. finitive with future force,' add A sin. In the Preface to Vol. I. it is stated 699, and, a very good example, Most. that the ' concluding portion of the 633, die te daturum, ut abeat. Th. egon work' will treat the Cases, the Ad- dicam dare ? II. 384,' Ablative of Time jectives, the Pronouns, and the Par- within Which,' add Bacch. 422, nego tibi ticles. In the Preface to Vol. II., which hoc annis viginti fuisse primis copiae . . . treats the Cases, nothing is said of any pedem ut ecferres aedibus. further instalment. But the book is not merely a reper- The most notable point about Pro- torium in which one can find, and fessor Bennett's work is that he has generally find easily, abundant examples aimed at making his record of examples of any usage. The exposition is valu- a very full one. Unless he tells us to able and interesting. The author writes the contrary, either by putting ' e.g.' or clearly and vigorously; he has read ' frequent' before his examples, or by widely in grammatical literature and giving in parenthesis the number of formed very definite opinions on the occurrences, his quotations and refer- various questions involved; when there ences ' are intended to represent the is any need he sets out fully and some- complete material belonging under the times at considerable length the reasons given topic' This completeness seems in favour of the principle of classifica- to me a great advantage, though there tion which he adopts. A quotation may are a few places (for instance, II. $j- give some idea of the quality of his 50, the ' Possessive Genitive' strictly work: so-called) where it has seemed doubtful ' We cannot bear too closely in mind whether a selection would not have that, while the great mass of all syn- been equally useful. But, as he says, tactical constructions falls naturally ' it is impossible to foresee what par- into large groups of closely related uses, ticular information the student may yet this condition was not original. At seek in a syntactical manual.' The the outset there was greater variety and book will no doubt be used mainly for flexibility than later. With time the reference. In so using it one must be crystallisation into related groups of careful not to suppose that a set of uses advanced further and further. Yet examples is intended to be complete there always remained traces of the unless one has read the whole section earlier freedom, many uses lying quite in which they occur. It may happen outside the clearly marked formal that a statement to the effect that only categories, others hovering between a selection is given has been made some two related groups. This principle pages back. The writer thinks of his applies not only to the Genitive and readers as going through the pages other cases, but to the moods and continuously: e.g. anyone in search of tenses as well. To ignore it is to re- expressions like Rhodo mercator might verse the order of syntactical develop- be puzzled by the classification of the ment, and to represent as primitive Ablative of Separation (II. 280). He what was a matter of growth' (II. 11 f.). would note, 'A. Uses with Verbs. That is well put. I hope I may not B. With Adjectives and Adverbs,' and seem hypercritical if I raise objection would be surprised not to find ' With to the author's occasional use, when Nouns.' Perhaps he would turn to there is no need of them, of German ' D. Proper names designating place,' technical words in the midst of an but he would not find his example here English sentence: e.g. ' There was under ' Names of Islands.' If he per- no " einheitlicher" Genitive in the sisted he would find the paragraph he Ursprache' (II. 10). And is it pedantic THE CLASSICAL REVIEW 121 .to protest against the careless use of is inconsistent with the statement about 'after' and 'with'? II. 294, 'The quadriduo J\ In other words, the Romans Ablative is the regular construction themselves seem with time to have lost after comparatives in negative expres- consciousness of the true nature of the sions.' (The examples show that idiom.' Is there not a more natural ' before' would be rather more suit- explanation, one which involves no such able: hoc nemo doctior shows the more assumptions ? The ' Ablative of Time usual order.) II. 199, ' Accusative of within Which' is, as Professor Bennett Inner Object with Neuter Pronouns': says,' a direct outgrowth of the Ablative e.g. si quid erro. Why deprive ' with' of Time at Which.' They shade off of its sociative force ? It is curious by into one another, so that uno die may the way that in a book devoted to the mean ' on a single day' or 'in the careful study of language, and especially course of a single day.' Hence such of the cases, our own case-phrases should a sentence as Diebus X, quibus materia be used somewhat loosely. coepta erat comportari, otnni opere effecto Professor Bennett's explanations exercitus traducitur (Caes. B.G. IV. 18,1) generally carry conviction. In one does not seem different in type from place he seems to me to adopt a very Eodem die ilium vidi quo te. Compare improbable account of the origin of a the English ' I saw him in the course construction. II. 298 he says that the of the same day that I saw you' with 'Ablative of Time after Which . . . ' In the course of the ten days in which seems to exist by implication in the the collection of the timber began the omitted antecedent of the relative in whole structure was finished, etc' The such expressions as Ter. And. 104, meaning is not 'ten days after,' but in diebus paucis quibus haec acta sunt; ' not more than ten days after,' ' within Cic. R. A. 20, quadriduo quo haec gesta the ten days.' sunt, res ad Chrysogonum defertur.' This I have called attention to a few points latter 'passage means "within four in which the book might perhaps be days from what time these things took improved in a second edition. But place," i.e. quo is here equivalent to none of these is of any great import- ab eo tempore quo (the antecedent of quo ance. It will be useful, not only to obviously cannot be quadriduo).' In those who are working specially at the Terence passage and other similar Early Latin, but also to those whose passages he thinks we have ' a case of main interests are in the later literature. formal attraction merely. In strictness There are, of course, differences between the correct form would have been: paucis the syntax of Plautus and that of Cicero, diebus quo, i-e. paucis diebus {ab eo tem- but the main features of the language pore) quo, but the analogy of quadriduo are the same. It is a great satisfaction quo (which must represent the origin to have in English a work on this scale of our idiom) would naturally lead to to which one can turn for evidence in a paucis diebus quibus, when the ante- case of doubt. cedent was plural. [Note that B. calls W. E. P. PANTIN. diebus the antecedent to quibus, which Si. Paul's School.

DE NUGIS CURIALIUM. Walter Map, De Nugis Curialium. known—one of the late fourteenth cen- Edited by MONTAGUE RHODES JAMES. tury, which belonged to John Wells, a (Anecdota Oxoniensia). Oxford, 1914. monk of Ramsey, known as an opponent of Wycliffe, and in his day Prior of the THE editio princeps of Map's book, On students at Gloucester Hall in Oxford. the Trifling Pursuits of Courtiers, was This MS. is now in the Bodleian published in 1850 for the Camden Society Library. Sixty-four years later, the by Thomas Wright from the only MS. Provost of King's has presented us with