nouns aggregated together so as to form one notion, and without any copulative conjunction; thus we have populus Romanus Quirites for the united people of Romans and Sabines (Niebuhr, H. R. I. p. 294); Patres Conscripti, for the combination of two elements, the original and the elected deputies, in the senate; sarta tecta for sarta et tecta, "sound in wall and roof" (Festus, p. 322), &c. Notwithstanding this old Roman usage of combining related words by mere juxta-position, we find that in later times the language became pedantically accurate in the employment of copulative conjunctions; two epithets to the same word required the intervention of one of these particles; and the best writers made a consistent distinction between et-ad-Ti the particle of addition, -que the particle of combination and parallelism, and at-que (shortened into ac), which is compounded of the other two, and implies that there is not only an addition, but also an intimate connexion between the things coupled together. (2) Of bahu-vrihi compounds there is a long list in Latin. In addition to the possessives mentioned above, we have compounds made up of substantives and their epithets, as versicolor, multi-caulis, acu-pedius; of numerals and substantives, as quadru-pes, bi-dens, quinque-folius; of prepositions and substantives, as com-modus, com-munis, ex-cors, &c.; of verb-roots preceded by particles, as male-dicus, bene-ficus, &c. To this class belong the opposites, pro-sper or pro-sperus, "in accordance with our hopes" (Non. 171, 25: sperem veteres pro spem dicebant, unde et prospere dicimus, h. e. pro-spe) and a-sper, "contrary to our hopes" (i. e. a spe), as in Sallust, Cat. c. 26: aspera fœdaque evenerant," compared with Jug. c. 63: "cuncta prospera eventura." It is more usual to compare prosper with πρόσφορος. 66 (3) Karmadharaya compounds in Latin are such as pœninsula, neg-otium, pro-nepos, ab-avus, in-imicus, &c. (4) We have tat-purusha compounds in Latin words like tibi-cen, for tibii-cen, auri-fodina, opi-fex for operi-fex, lapicidina for lapidi-cidina, mus-cipula, imbri-citor, &c. (5) The Latin determinatives include many dvigu compounds as a subordinate class; such are bi-noctuum, quinquertium, bi-ennium, quadri-vium, &c. (6) Adverbial compounds or avyayi-bhava are in fact cases of nouns with or without epithets or prepositions; as: obviam, affatim, admodum, multi-modis, imprimis, &c. To this class we must refer the correlatives se-dulose-dolo, “ without feeling any weariness," and se-fraude, "without incurring any loss." The epithet malus, technically applied to dolus in the old laws, proves that it does not of itself imply "deceit" or "guile” (see Festus, p. 69), and the verbs dol[a]o, "to belabour,” doleo, “to labour," whence dolor, "labouring," show that the primary meaning of the word is "pain" as connected with exertion. The root is that of tol-lo, tolero, Tλáw, a-Oλios, &c., and Döderlein (Syn. u. Et. I. p. 118) has well compared sedulo with a-πóvws = haud gravate in Soph. Ed. C. 293. In the same way, it may be shown that frau[d]s=fra-va[d]s (above, pp. 122, 298) signified deprivation as an effect, before it indicated dishonesty as the cause. All these examples refer only to nouns, whether substantives or adjectives, and adverbs, considered as cases of nouns. Strictly speaking there are no synthetic or organic compounds of verbs; those, which have a preposition or adverb by way of prefix, are merely parathetic combinations, and, with the exception of an occasional assimilation, the two parts of the word are not really fused into one, and a tmesis or separation is still possible. When a verb contains two or more distinct roots, so melted down into one whole as to be incapable of divulsion, we also find that the verb is a derivation from some compound noun. Thus while bene-facio, male-dico, com-pono, per-lego, and the like, are shown by the unaltered conjugation of the verb to be mere juxta-positions of separable elements, læti-fic[a]o, belli-ger[a]o are manifestly not merely parathetic combinations of latum facio and bellum gero, but verbs derived from the adjectives læti-ficus, belli-ger, probably through a noun of action in -a = ya. As verbals in -us, like beneficus, lætificus, maledicus, &c. are equivalent in meaning to the present participles of the parathetic verbs which they represent, and as their comparatives are actually formed from the participles (e. g. maledicus, maledicentior), we may conclude that the termination is the mutilated form of some pronominal affix, like that of the Greek participles in -ws-vas or vis (New Crat. & 414). When the first part of a genuine compound is an inflected word and the second begins with a consonant, the vowel of con nexion is generally, as in causi-dicus, corni-ger, ædi-fico. The vowel of connexion is sometimes omitted, as in nau-fragus for navi-fragus, mus-cipula for muri-cipula, puer-pera for pueri-pera. Sometimes a consonantal affix is also dropt, as in homi-cida for homini-cida. And in a few cases the connecting vowel is not, but ŏ or u; thus we have aheno-barbus, opulentus, turbu-lentus, Troju-gena, vio-lentus. It is possible that the articulation may be affected here by the letters n and j, which precede, or by the liquid 7 which follows the vowel. In tibicen tibi-i-cen we have a contracted i, but tubi-cen follows the general rule. = CHAPTER XIV. CONSTITUTION AND PATHOLOGY OF THE § 1. Genius of the Latin language. § 2. Abbreviations observable in the written E § 1. Genius of the Latin Language. VERY language may be considered as an organic body possessing within itself a principle of vitality, but also capable of disintegration and decay. We may therefore, without straining the metaphor, speak of its constitution, or power of continuing in a healthy state; and also of its pathology', or of the symptoms of that disease to which it is by its very nature morė peculiarly liable. Accordingly, if it were necessary to describe in one sentence the genius and constitution of the Latin language, one could not do this better than by defining it as a language which is always yearning after contraction. Whether this tendency is indicated in the written remains by the usual processes of synizesis, assimilation, and apocope; whether it appears in the slurring-over of syllables, by which the scansion of the comic metres is effected; or whether we perceive it in the systematic abbreviations which mark the transition from the Roman to the Ro 1 Lobeck, who has called one of his works Pathologiæ Sermonis Græci Prolegomena, gives the following explanation of this term as applied to language: "Cui nomen Pathologic imponere non nefas duxi, fretus auctoritate et exemplo Theodoreti, qui, similitudinem a re medica transferens, librorum suorum elegantissimos παθημάτων Ελληνικών θεραπευτικὴν inscripsit. Videlicet, vocabula quoque affectiones suas habent, non homines solum, et eas similes humanis,-pleonasmos, ellipses, tropasque varias, ad quas et cognoscendas diagnosi opus est et ad corrigendos therapia; nam et hoc nomen usu ceperunt grammatici" (Præf. pp. v. vi.). mance languages, it is still one and the same, it is the type of the language, in its infancy, its maturity, and its decay. The most distinct and vivid picture of the Latin language is, therefore, to be derived from a consideration of this peculiarity, as developed I. In the written language of ancient Rome. II. In the spoken language of ancient Rome, so far as we can discern it in the remains of the comedians. III. In the modern languages (and particularly in the French) which are derived from the Latin. § 2. Abbreviations observable in the written forms. I. With regard to the written forms in which the Latin language has been handed down to us, it would not, perhaps, be too large an assertion, if we said that every etymological difficulty arises more or less from this systematic abbreviation. It is true that all languages are more or less liable to this diminution of the forms of speech, and it is the more observable in proportion as the syntax militates against the permanence of the etymological structures. But the distinctive peculiarity of the Latin appears in the fact that this abridgment coexists with a perfect maintenance of the word-forms, as far as the inflexions are concerned, and does not spring from the superabundance of syntactical substitutes. It is in fact a result of the haste and impatience of the Roman lords of the world, and is quite independent of the inherent principles of the language. If we look to other idioms, we shall see that, although the Sanscrit çlóka runs the words into one another, and so affects the terminations, there is no appearance of abbreviation in the middle of the words. The Hebrew and other Semitic dialects have broken down all the formative machinery, but the triliteral root maintains its consonants, except where assimilation becomes inevitable. To the latest period of Hellenistic Greek the spoken and written language tolerated the syllabic articulation of the longest compounds. High-German still revels in the manufacture of polysyllables. And even the Sclavonic idioms, which have so many points of contact with the Latin, are not led, even by the concourse of consonants, to abridge their composite forms; and in the haste of polite conversation we may |