nal element, and corresponding to the Greek endings in -TOs, -vos, and the Latin -tus=-nus. In fact, the suffix of infinitive (b) is tv = Fa or va, while that of participle (3) is t- only. § 13. The GERUNDIUM and GERUNDIVUM shown to be active and present. The infinitive (c) and the participle (a) are, in fact, different, or apparently different, applications of one and the same form. In its infinitive use this verbal in -ndus is called by two namesthe gerundium when it governs the object of the verb, and the gerundivum when it agrees with the object. Thus, in "consilium capiendi urbem," we have a gerundium; in “consilium urbis capienda," a gerundivum. As participles, the ordinary grammatical nomenclature most incorrectly distinguishes the form in -ndus as "a future passive," from the form -n[t]s considered as "a present active." The form in -ndus is never a future, and it bears no resemblance to the passive in form. The real difficulty is to explain to the student the seeming alternation of an active and passive meaning in these forms. Perhaps there is no better way of doing this than by directing attention to the fact, that the difference between active and passive really becomes evanescent in the infinitive use of a verb. "He is a man = to love"="he is a man to be loved;" "I give you this to eat" "I give you this to be eaten," &c. The Greek active infinitives in -μera, -vai, are really passive forms in their inflected use 2; and that the Latin forms in -ndus, which seem to be 66 1 We observe the same fact in the use of the participles in English and German. Thus, in Herefordshire, "a good-leapt horse" means a goodleaping horse;" and in German there is no perceptible difference between kam geritten and kam reitend. See Mr. Lewis's Glossary of Provincial Words used in Herefordshire, p. 58; and Grimm, D. Gr. IV. p. 129. 2 Conversely, the forms in -T-, which are always active when used in concord with a noun, are occasionally employed in that infinitive sense in which the differences of voice seem to be neglected. Thus we have, Soph. Αj. 579: θρηνεῖν ἐπῳδὰς πρὸς τομῶντι πήματι (“ ad vulnus quod secturam desideret" s. “secandum sit”). Ed. Col. 1219: ötav tis és „λéov TÉσŋ TOÙ BéλOVTOS ("quando quis cupiendi satietatem expleverit" s. "id quod cupiebat plene consecutus fuerit"). Thucyd. I. 36: yváτw тò μèv δεδιὸς αὑτοῦ τοὺς ἐναντίους μᾶλλον φοβῆσον (“ sciat timere illud suum majorem adversariis metum incussurum esse"). passive in their use as gerundiva, are really only secondary forms of the participle in -n[t]s, appears not only from etymological considerations (New Crat. § 415), but also from their use both as active infinitives and active participles. When the gerundivum is apparently passive, it seems to attach to itself the sense of duty or obligation. Thus, we should translate delenda est Carthago, "Carthage is to be destroyed"="we ought to destroy Carthage ;" and no one has taken the trouble to inquire whether this oportet is really contained in the gerundivum. If it is, all attempts at explanation must be unavailing. But since it is not necessary to seek in the participial form this notion, which may be conveyed by the substantive verb (e. g. sapientis est seipsum nosse), it is surely better to connect the gerundivum with the gerundium, and to reconcile the use of the one with the ordinary force of the other. Supposing, therefore, that da-ndus is a secondary form of da-n[t]s, and synonymous with it, on the analogy of Acraga[nt]s, Agrige-ntum; orie-n[t]s, oriu-ndus; &c.; how do we get the phrase da-nda est occasio, “an opportunity is to be given," from d-a-ndus=dan[t]s, "giving ?" Simply from the gerundial or infinitive use of the participle. Thus, (A) da-ndus=da-n[t]s signifies "giving;" (B) this, used as an infinitive, still retains its active signification, for ad dandum opes means "for giving riches"=" to give riches;" (c) when this is attracted into the case of the object, the sense is not altered, for ad opes dandas is precisely equivalent to ad dandum opes; (D) when, however, this attraction appears in the nominative case, the error at once takes root, and no one is willing to see that it is still merely an attraction from the infinitive or indeclinable use of the participle. Even here, however, the intransitive verb enables us to bring back the student to a consideration of the real principle. For one can hardly fail to see that vivendum est=vivere est i. q. oportet vivere; and that there may be no doubt as to the identity of the uninflected with the inflected gerund in this case, Horace has put them together in the same sentence: "nunc est bibendum, nunc pede libero pulsanda tellus," where it is obvious that tellus pulsanda est is no less equivalent to "oportet pulsare tellurem," than “bibendum est" is to "oportet bibere." At all events, his Greek original expressed both notions by the infinitive with xp: νῦν χρὴ μεθύσθην καί τινα πρὸς βίαν (Alcæus, Fr. 20. p. 575, Bergk.) The strongest proof, that the involved meaning of the gerundivum is strictly that of the active verb, is furnished by the well-known fact that the attracted form is regularly preferred to the gerund in -di, -do, -dum governing the case, when the verb of the gerund requires an accusative case; thus we have: ad tolerandos rather than ad tolerandum, labores; consuetudo hominum immolandorum rather than homines immolandi; triumviri reipublicæ constituendæ rather than constituendo rempublicam. Indeed this is rarely departed from, except when two gerunds of a different construction occur in the same sentence, as in Sall. Cat. 4: "neque vero agrum colendo aut venando, servilibus officiis, intentum ætatem agere," because venando has nothing to do with agrum. The student might be led to suppose at first sight that the phrase: lex de pecuniis repetundis, “a law about extortion," literally denoted "a law concerning money to be refunded," and that therefore the gerundivum was passive in signification. But this gerundivum is used only in the genitive and ablative plural, to agree with pecuniarum and pecuniis, and we happen to have a passage of Tacitus (Annal. XIII. 33) which proves that the verbal is transitive: for the words: a quo Lycii repetebant are immediately followed by: lege repetundarum damnatus est; and thus we see that lex de pecuniis repetundis does not mean "a law concerning money to be refunded," but, "a law which provides for the redemanding of money illegally exacted." This view of the case appears to me to remove most of the difficulties and confusions by which the subject of the gerund has hitherto been encumbered. There are three supplementary considerations which deserve to be adduced. The first is, that in the particular case where the gerundivum appears to be most emphatically passive—namely, when it implies that a thing is given out or commissioned to be done-it is found by the side of the active infinitive: thus, while we have such phrases as: "Antigonus Eumenem mortuum propinquis sepeliendum tradidit” (Corn. Nep. Eum. 13), we have by their side such as: "tristitiam et metus tradam protervis in mare Creticum portare ventis" (Hor. I. Carm. 26, 1). That the gerund in this case is really present, as well as active, appears from its opposition to the use of the past participle; thus: hoc faciundum curabo means "I will provide for the doing of this:" hoc factum volo means "I wish it were already done." The second point to be noticed is that deponent verbs, which have no passive voice, employ the gerundivum in the attributive use, which, we are told, cannot easily be wrested to an active signification; as: prœlia conjugibus loquenda, "battles for wives to speak of." The third case is this; that the supines, which are only different cases of one and the same verbal, appear as active infinitives when the accusative is used (-tum), and as passive when the ablative is employed (-tu). Now, this seemingly passive use of the supine in -tu arises from the fact, that it appears only by the side of adjectives, in which case the active and passive forms of the infinitive are often used indifferently, and some adjectives take the supine in -tu when they expressly require an active infinitive, as in: "difficile est dictu (= dicere), quanto opere conciliet homines comitas affabilitasque sermonis " (Cic. Off. II. 14). Now this supine, which is thus identical with the infinitive active, frequently alternates with the gerund; compare, for instance: quid est tam jucundum auditu (Cic. de Or. I. 8), with: verba ad audiendum jucunda (id. ibid. I. 49). The active sense of the verbal in -tus--sus is equally apparent in the dative case: thus we find such phrases as (Sallust, Jugurth. 24): "quoniam eo natus sum ut Jugurthæ scelerum ostentui essem,' " i. e. " since I have been born to serve as an exhibition of (=to exhibit) the wickedness of Jugurtha." -tus. But the form in -ndus is not only active in voice, but also, as has been mentioned, present in tense. Thus, if we take a deponent verb, we often find a form in -ndus acting as a collateral to the common form in -n[t]s, and opposed with it to the form in For instance, secundus and sequen[t]s both signify "following," but secutus="having followed." The same is the distinction between morien[t]s, moriundus; orien[t]s, oriundus; irascen[t]s, ira[s]cundus ; &c., on the one hand, and mortuus, ortus, iratus, &c., on the other. This cannot be remarked in active verbs, because the Latin language has no active past participle. If, however, we turn to the gerundial use of the form in -ndus, we may observe a distinction of tense between it and the participle in -tus even in the case of active verbs. Thus volvendus is really a present tense in Virgil, Æneid. IX. 7: volvenda dies, en, attulit ultro; comp. Ennius (apud Varro. L. L. VII. § 104, p. 160, Müller), and Lucretius, V. 1275; because, in its inflected form, it is equivalent in meaning to volvendo; and the following passages show that the gerund is equivalent to the present participle: Virgil, Georg. II. 225: "multa virum volvens durando sæcula vincit;" Lucret. I. 203: "multaque vivendo vitalia vincere sæcla ;" and id. III. 961: "omnia si pergas vivendo vincere sæcla." And the words of Livy (præf. ad Hist.): "quæ ante conditam condendamve urbem traduntur," can only mean "traditions derived from a period when the city was neither built nor building." § 14. The Participle in -túrus. The participle (y) in -rus or -ūrus, which always bears a future signification, is supported by an analogy in the Latin language which has no parallel either in Greek or Sanscrit. The Greek desiderative is formed from the ordinary future by the insertion of the element i-: thus Spá-w, fut. Spá-ow, desiderative Spa-oeiw. This desiderative is the common future in Sanscrit ; δρα-σείω. though the Vêdas have a future, like the Greek, formed by the elements only, without the addition of 2-1. Now the regular future of scribo would be scrip-so, indicated by the aorist scripsi; but the desiderative is scripturio. We may infer, then, that in the loss of the regular future of the Latin verb, the desiderative and future participle have been formed by the addition of the futurers and the desiderative risi, not to the crude form of the verb, but to the verbal in -tus, so that the desiderative is deduced immediately from the future participle in -tur-us or from the noun of agency in -tor (above, p. 360). We have seen above (§ 4) that the form fuerim=fuesim is really a subjunctive tense of the usual kind derived from the perfect indicative fui fuesa. As, however, the first person is occasionally written fuero, just as sim = esim or erim is shortened into ero, it has been common among grammarians to imagine two tenses as distinct as ero and sim. But this view is represented under two different forms: for while the older gram 1 See Rosen, on the Rig-Véda Sanhita, p. iv. |