11 I ij#tlPl;jH| T' : "- A.* T ' ill llil Language lllli EX LIBRIS JOHANNIS FLETCHER PER DUO ET VIGINTI ANNOS LINGUAE LATINAE IN COLLEGIO UNIVERSITATIS PROFESSORIS: QUI MENSE JULIO A.D. MDCCCCXVII MORTUUS EST: LI BROS QUOS ILLE PENITUS AMAVERAT UXOR ET FILII EJUS COLLEGIO AMATO DONAVERUNT. DULCES EXUVIAE DUM FATA DEUS-QUE SINEBANT. Virg: Mn: IV. LaL-Gr $47155.2. fiSennett's iLattn Series The Latin Language A HISTORICAL OUTLINE OF ITS SOUNDS, INFLECTIONS, AND SYNTAX BY ^ CHARLES E. BENNETT PROFESSOR OF LATIN IN CORNELL UNIVERSITY Boston Allyn and Bacon 1907 COPYRIGHT, 1907, BY CHARLES E. BENNETT. PREFACE. THIS book is a revision of my Appendix to Bennetfs Latin Grammar, published in 1895. That book was originally pre- pared as a series of lectures to advanced students on subjects not covered in any Latin Grammar published in America. The title " Appendix," however, was misleading and gave to many a wrong impression of the purpose and scope of the book, which was in reality written long in advance of the publication of my Latin Grammar and entirely without reference to that work. The new title is more appropriate to the views discussed and the facts brought out ; hence the change. In the revision some dozen pages of old matter have been omitted, while nearly forty pages of new matter have been intro- duced ; but the general plan and scope of the book are un- changed. I am indebted to Professor J. C. Rolfe, of the University of Pennsylvania, and to Professor Charles L. Durham, of Cornell University, for valuable suggestions made while the book was passing through the press. C. E. B. ITHACA, March, 1907. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS. CHAPTER I, THE ALPHABET. PAGE Origin of the Latin Alphabet . . . I Changes in the Form of the Letters .,,.... I Later Additions to the Alphabet 2 New Characters proposed by Claudius 2 CHAPTER II. PRONUNCIATION. Sources of Information .......... 4 The Vowels . 6 a 6 t 6 i 7 I for u . . . ,*'' -7 o 8 u 8 y 8 The Diphthongs 8 ae 8 oe . . . 9 au .10 eu . . . .10 ui .10 The Consonants. The Semivowels . . II j II V 12 The Liquids . .18 / 18 r 18 vi TABLE OF CONTENTS. PAGE The Nasals 18 m 18 n 20 n-adultertnum 20 nf, ns 20 gn 21 The Spirants 22 / . . 22 S 22 h 23 The Mutes 23 The Voiceless Mutes 23 ' 23 f 24 k >), and Y V (X), being aspirates, represented sounds which did not originally exist in the Latin language. These characters were accordingly intro- duced as numerals, O as 100, as 1000, V as 50. Subse- quently O became G , and finally C. This last form resulted perhaps from associating the character with the initial letter of centum. became first PO, and later M, a change facilitated probably by association with the initial letter of mille. The half of viz. D, was used to designate 500. V (50) became successively ^, _L, and L. 5. In Cicero's day Y and Z were introduced for the translitera- tion of Greek words containing v or . Previously Greek v had been transliterated by u, and by s (initial), ss (medial), as, Olumpio, sona (^vrj), atticisso (drTi/aa>). The Emperor Claudius proposed the introduction of three new characters, J to represent v (i.e. our w), D (Antisigma) for ps, and h to represent the middle sound between and z, as seen in optumus, optimus, etc. These characters were employed in some inscriptions of Claudius's reign, but gained no further recognition. See Tacitus, Ann. xi. 14. THE ALPHABET. 3 On the alphabet in general, see KIRCHHOFF, Studien zur Geschichte des Griechischen Alphabets. 4th ed., Berlin, 1887. LINDSAY, Latin Language. Clarendon Press. Oxford, 1894. p. I ff. Encyclopaedia Britannica, Article Alphabet. JOHNSON'S Encyclopaedia, Article Alphabet. SOMMER, Handbuch der Lateinischen Laut- und Formenlehre. p. 25 ff. 2. In writing j in the Grammar to represent the Latin i-con- sonans, reference has been had mainly to practical consider- ations. Typographical distinction of the vowel and consonant sounds of z is absolutely essential to enable the pupil to tell them apart. Where * is written for both sounds there is nothing to show the student that iam is jam; that etiam is et-i-am ; or that Gaius is Ga-i-us. Moreover, it is still usual to distinguish be- tween the vowel and consonant u, by writing u for the former, and v for the latter. The two cases are perfectly parallel. See Deecke, Erl'duterungen zur lateinischen Schulgrammatik, p. 8, Zusatz 2. CHAPTER II. PRONUNCIATION. 3. Sources of Information. Our sources of knowledge con- cerning the ancient pronunciation of Latin are the following : a) Statements of Roman writers. Much has been left by ihe Roman grammarians on the subject of pronunciation, far more in fact than is commonly supposed. The remains of the gram- matical writers as collected and edited by Keil under the title Grammatici Latini (Leipzig, 1855-1880) fill eight large quarto volumes. These writers cover the entire field of grammar, and most of them devote more or less space to a systematic consider- ation of the sounds of the letters. As representative writers on this subject may be cited : Terentianus Maurus (fl. 185 A.D.), author of a work entitled de Litteris, Syllabis, Metris ; Marius Victorinus (fl. 350 A.D.) ; Martianus Capella (fourth or fifth cen- tury A.D. ; not in Keil's collection) ; Priscian (fl. 500 A.D.), author of the Institutionum Grammaticarum Libri xviii. Even the classical writers have often contributed valuable bits of infor- mation, notably Varro in his de Lingua Latina, Cicero in his rhetorical works, Quintilian in his Institutio Oratoria, and Aulus Gellius in his Noctes Atticae. b) A second important source of evidence is found in inscrip- tions. The total body of these is very great. The Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum, in process of publication since 1863, consists already of fifteen large folio volumes, some of them in several parts, and is not yet completed. These inscriptions dis- close many peculiarities of orthography which are exceedingly instructive for the pronunciation. Thus such spellings as VRPS, 4 SOURCES OF INFORMATION. 5 PLEPS, by the side of VRBS, PLEBS, clearly indicate the assimilation of b to/ before s. Even the blunders of the stone-cutters often give us valuable clues, as, for example, the spelling ACLETARVM for ATHLETARVM, which shows that the th was practically a /; otherwise we could not account for its confusion with c. See 31- c) Greek transliterations of Latin words constitute a third source of knowledge. Not only Greek writers (especially the historians of Roman affairs), but also Greek inscriptions, afford us abundant evidence of this kind. Thus the Greek KIKC/JWV (Cicero) furnishes support for the /-sound of Latin c\ while Aiovia and OwAevria bear similarly upon the w-sound of Latin v. The inscriptions are naturally much more trustworthy guides in this matter than our texts of the Greek authors, for we can never be certain that the Mss. have not undergone alterations in the process of transmission to modern times. d) The Romance Languages also, within limits, may be uti- lized in determining the sounds of Latin. See Grober's Grund- riss der Romanischen Philologie, Vol. I., Strassburg, 1888 ; W. Meyer-Liibke, Grammatik der Romanischen Sprachen, Vol. I., Leipzig, 1890. e) The sound-changes of Latin itself, as analyzed by etymologi- cal investigation. Modern scholars, particularly in the last fifty years, have done much to promote the scientific study of Latin sounds and forms, and, while much remains to be done, the ultimate solution of many problems has already been reached. As representative works in this field may be cited : BRUGMANN, K. Grundriss der Vergleichenden Grammatik der Indogerma- nischen Sprachen. .Vol. I., 2d ed. Strassburg, 1897. BRUGMANN, K. Kurze Vergleichende Grammatik der Indogermanischen Sprachen. Strassburg, 1902. STOLZ, F. Lateinische Grammatik in MULLER'S Handbiich der Klassischen Altertumsivissenschaft. Vol. II., 3d ed. Munich, 1900. 6 PR ONUNCIA TION. STOLZ, F. Lautlehre der Lateinischen Sprache. Leipzig, 1894. LINDSAY, W. M. The Latin Language. Oxford, 1894. GILES, P. A Short Manual of Comparative Philology for Classical Students. 2d ed. London, 1901. SOMMER, F. Handbuch der Lateinischen Laut- und Formenlehre. Heidel- berg, 1902. RIEMANN, O., et GOELZER, H. Grammaire Comparee du Grec et du Latin. Vol. I. Paris, 1897. HENRY, V. Grammaire Comparee du Grec et Latin. 5th ed. Paris, 1894. As special works on pronunciation alone may be cited : SEELMANN, E. Die Aussprache des Latein. Heilbronn, 1885. The most important work on the subject yet published. ROBY, H.J. Latin Grammar. Vol I., 4th ed. pp. xxx-xc. London, 1 88 1. ELLIS, ALEXANDER. The Quantitative Prommciation of Latin. London, 1874. A discussion of special problems. See also the chapter on ' Pronunciation' in the work of Lindsay above cited. SUMMARY OF THE EVIDENCE. THE VOWELS. 4. A. The consensus of the Romance languages indicates clearly that a was pronounced substantially as in English father. In the absence of any specific evidence to the contrary, we may safely believe that a had the same sound qualitatively; in quantity, of course, it was less prolonged. 5. E. Long e was probably close, i.e. spoken with the vocal organs (more particularly the tongue and hard palate) nearer together than in the utterance of short e. Short aoo-TtVos (Fausfinus). 13. EU appears in Latin in only a few words, and in these is of secondary origin. Primitive Latin eu early became ou, whence u. The chief Latin words that have eu are : ecu, neu, seu, heu. The combination appears also in numerous proper names borrowed from the Greek, e.g. Europa, Teucer. In all these the sound was that of a genuine diphthong, i.e. an *), SUSTUS (= Justus), GIOVE (=Jove). Cf. Seelmann, Aussprache des Latein, p. 239. 16. V. i. Vis a labial semivowel, with the sound of English w. It corresponds to the vowel u, just as/ corresponds to the vowel i. THE CONSONANTS. 13 The evidence : a) A single character (V) sufficed with the Romans to indi- cate the vowel u (u vocalis] and the consonant u (u consonans). This indicates a close proximity in sound between u and v, a proximity which manifestly existed, if Latin v was English w. For the vowel u naturally passes into w before a vowel whenever either the preceding or following syllable is energetically stressed. For example, tenuia easily becomes tenvia, and must repeatedly be so read in verse. b) The Roman grammarians (at least down to the close of the first century A.D.) nowhere suggest any essential difference in sound between the vowel and consonant functions of the charac- ter V, no more than in the case of the analogous I. On the other hand, just as in the case of I, they repeatedly suggest that u and v were very similar. Thus Nigidius Figulus, cited above in con- nection with the discussion of /, observes in the same passage (Gellius, xix. 14. 6) that initial V in VALERIVS, VOLVSIVS, is not a vowel, an observation which would be pointless unless the sound of v had been closely similar to that of , i.e. had been that of w. Quintilian in i. 4. 10 gives a similar warning. c) The same Nigidius Figulus (Gellius, x. 4. 4) says that in pro- nouncing vos we thrust out the edges of our lips, which conforms physiologically to the pronunciation of v as English w. d) The Greek ordinarily transliterates Latin v by means of ov, as OwAepios (Valerius), OvoAo-Kot (VolscT), Atovta (Livia). e) 7 and v often interchange in the same words. Thus early Latin la-ru-a (e.g. Plautus, Captivi, 598) appears later as a dis- syllable, larva. Similarly mi-lu-os appears later as milvus. In verse, silva occurs repeatedly as .?;-/&-#, e.g. Horace, Odes,\. 23. 4. On the other hand, tenuis, puella, etc., often appear as tenvis,pvella, etc. This interchange is conceivable only upon the supposition that the vowel and consonant sounds were closely akin. Cf. also Velius Longus (close of the first century A.D.) in Keil, vii. 75. 10, 1 4 PR ON UN CIA TION. to the effect that a-cu-am, ' I shall sharpen,' and aquam, 'water ' (where qu is simply the traditional inconsistent spelling for qv), were liable to confusion in his day. Caesellius (see Seelmann, Aussprache des Latein, p. 234) cannot say whether tennis is a dis- syllable or a trisyllable ; while in the Romance languages we sometimes find doublets pointing to parallel Latin forms, one with u vocalis, another with u consonant, e.g. Old French teneve (rep- resenting a Latin te-nu-is] and tenve (representing a Latin ten-vis). Italian soave points to the existence of a Latin su-a-vis by the side of sua- (i.e. sva-) vis. Cf. Seelmann, p. 234. /) The phonetic changes incident to word-formation also point in the direction of the w-sound of v. Thus from faveo (rootfav-) we gttfau-tor (for *fav-tor) ; from lavo (root lav-) we get lau-tus (for *lav-tus). In such cases the semivowel v natu- rally becomes the vowel u and combines with the preceding vowel to form a diphthong. Had v been a spirant, either labio- dental, like our English v, or bilabial, it would naturally have become /before /in the foregoing examples. Cf., for example, our English haf to (colloquial) for hav(e) to. The evidence given under /) holds, of course, only for the formative period of the language ; but it is valuable as cor- roborative testimony. For Latin v is all the more likely to have been a semivowel in the historical period, if it was such immediately anterior to that period. g) The contracted verb-forms, such as amasti for amavisti, delesfi for delevisfi, audisti for aud'tvistt, commossem for comnio- vissem, all point to a semi-vocalic sound for v, since this sound easily disappears between vowels in an unstressed syllable. Cf. English Hawarden, pronounced Harden; toward, pronounced ford. h) Several anecdotes found among ancient writers give fur- ther confirmation of the similarity in sound of u and v. Thus Cicero (de Divinatione, ii. 84) relates that, when Marcus Crassus THE CONSONANTS. 15 was preparing to set sail from Brundisium on his ill-fated expedi- tion to the East, he heard a vender of figs on the street cry out Cauneas, really the name of a variety of figs, but which Cicero suggests was intended by the gods as a warning to Crassus, viz. cav(e] n(e) eas, don't go. 2. While the above evidence may be accepted as fairly con- clusive for the pronunciation of Lat. v as w in the best period, indications are not wanting that v had begun to change to a spirant sound before the period of the decline. The earliest testimony on this point is that of Velius Longus (close of the first century A.D.), who speaks of v as having a certain aspiratid, e.g. in valente, primitivo (Keil, vii. 58. 17). This reference to aspiratid hints at the development of v from its earlier value as a bilabial (i.e. produced by the two lips) semivowel to a bilabial spirant, somewhat similar to our English v, except that our v is labio-dental (i.e. produced by the teeth and lower lip). This view is confirmed by the fact that, beginning with the second century A.D., we note that v is confused with b, which had also become a bilabial spirant at this period. This confusion, which increases as time goes on, reaches its height in the third century A.D. Examples are : BIGINTI (= vigint'i] ; VENE (=bene) ; FAVIO (= Fabio). 3. Some scholars have sought further confirmation of the spirant character for the period referred to (100 A.D. and after- wards) in the use of Greek (3 as a transliteration of Latin v. Beginning with about 100 A.D. we find (3 frequently employed in Greek inscriptions in place of earlier ov for such transliterations, e.g. Kov/JcVTo? (conventus) ; /?epva (vernd]\ KaA/?etvos (Ca/vmus). Similarly our text of Plutarch (about 100 A.D.) usually has /8 in Latin words (e.g. BaAe/oto?, BeVov? = Venus) where earlier Greek writers mostly employed ov. Now it is believed (cf. Blass, Pro- nunciation of Greek, p. 109) that Greek (3 at this time (beginning of the second century A.D.) had become a bilabial spirant. How- 1 6 PR ONUNCIA TION. ever this may be, little support would be gained from that fact for the pronunciation of Latin v. For while it is true that the use of ft for v assumes great frequency from 100 A.D., yet the earlier spelling ov still remains the predominant one. Eckinger, Orthographic Lateinischer Worter in Griechischen Inschriften, p. 87, gives 234 instances of ov as against 100 of ft in Greek inscriptions of the second century A.D., while often the same inscription exhibits both spellings. Moreover, occasional in- stances of ft = v occur as early as the last years of the Republic, Eckinger, p. 87, cites five examples from the first century B.C., and twenty one from the first century A.D. The facts seem to indicate that the Latin sound was not adequately represented by either ov or ft ; consequently no permanent equivalent was ever adopted. It is, therefore, perfectly conceivable that Latin v should have been transliterated by Greek ft, even at a time when the latter sound had not progressed to its spirant stage. In fact, it is quite possible that the confusion in Latin itself, which resulted in writing b for v, may have contributed to the increas- ing frequency in the employment of ft as against earlier ov in Greek transliterations of Latin words. The two phenomena coincide so accurately in time that the connection suggested becomes extremely probable. Even if Greek ft had by 100 A.D. become a bilabial spirant (as it certainly did ultimately), yet this would not necessarily prove anything for the pronunciation of Latin v. For the bilabial spirant is very easily confused with the semivowel. Thus the dialectal pronunciation of German Wein, Winter with an initial bilabial spirant easily deceives American and English travellers, to whom this sound is not familiar, and produces the impression that an English w is pronounced. The evidence of the Greek, therefore, is purely negative, and while it seems probable, as already indicated, that Latin v at about the beginning of the second century A.D. had begun to become a bilabial spirant, this THE CONSONANTS. \J conclusion rests upon other grounds than the evidence of Greek transliterations. 4. Gothic and Anglo-Saxon loan-words have been thought by some to confirm the w-sound of Latin v, but without reason. Gothic and Anglo-Saxon /, it is true, appears regularly as the representative of v in words borrowed from the Latin, e.g. Gothic wet'n, 'wine' (Lat. vtnum)\ aiwaggeli, 'gospel' (Lak.cvangelium)', Anglo-Saxon weall, 'wall' (Lat. vallum)', -wic, 'town' (Lat. vicus]. But here again it is not only possible but extremely probable that the Gothic and Anglo-Saxon gave only an approxi- mate representation of the Latin sound. Gothic could hardly have borrowed from the Latin before the fourth century, Anglo- Saxon not before the fifth, and it has been shown above that at this period Latin v had already become a bilabial spirant. 5. Others have cited Claudius's attempted introduction of d for v as an indication that v, as early as Claudius's day (50 A.D.), had progressed beyond the semi vocalic stage. Claudius, it is urged, while suggesting the employment of a new character for u consonans (?;), did not suggest a new character for i' con- sondns (/). Hence it is claimed that the relation of v to #, at this time, must have been different from that of/ to i. As/ was a semivowel, v, it is claimed, could have been nothing less than a spirant. But these conclusions would be valid only upon the assumption that Claudius was a competent phonetic observer, and was not acting from mere caprice. Neither of these assumptions would be safe. Moreover, there is no other indi- cation that v had progressed beyond its value as a semivowel as early as Claudius's day. 6. It may be added in conclusion that the development of Latin v was not complete even when the sound had passed from that of a semivowel to that of a bilabial spirant. Later still (fifth century A.D. ?) it became a labio-dental spirant (Eng. v), and with that value passed into the Romance. 1 8 PR ON UN CIA TION. THE LIQUIDS, /, r. 17. L seems to have been pronounced differently, according to its position in a word. No fewer than three different sounds of the letter were recognized by Pliny the Elder, as cited by Priscian (Keil, ii. 29. 9), viz. i) an exilis sonus, as in the second / of Hie, Metellus ; 2) a pinguis sonus, after a consonant or at the end of a word or syllable, as in clarus, sol, silva ; 3) a medius sonus, viz. when inital, as in lectus. Just what the differences were which were involved in these three modes of articulation cannot now be determined. Lindsay (Latin Language, p. 90) thinks that Pliny's exilis sonus and medius sonus were our normal English /, as is the case in the Italian descendants of the Latin words cited by Pliny. The pinguis sonus, Lindsay suggests, consisted in an /-glide pre- ceding or following the / itself, e.g. a l lter cl l arus. The basis for this view he finds in the Romance development of this / pingue ; e.g. clarus becomes Italian chiaro ; flumen becomes fiume ; alter becomes French autre. 18. R was trilled with the tip of the tongue, as is clearly described by Terentianus Maurus (Keil, vi. 332. 238 f.) and Marius Victorinus (Keil, vi. 34. 15). The name littera cariina, given to r as early as Lucilius (ix. 29, M.), agrees excellently with the enunciation attributed to the letter. THE NASALS, m, n. 19. M. Initial and medial m probably had the sound of normal English m. As regards final m, the true pronunciation can prob- ably never be satisfactorily determined. When the following word began with a vowel, final m was only imperfectly uttered. Cf. Quintilian, ix. 4. 40 : ' When m is final and comes in contact with the initial vowel of the following word so that it can pass over to the latter, though it is written, yet it is only slightly uttered, as in THE CONSONANTS. 19 multum ille, quantum erat, so as to give the sound of a new letter, as it were. For it does not absolutely vanish, but is obscured, and is a sort of sign that the two vowels do not become merged.' In ix. 4. 39 Quintilian tells us that Cato the Elder wrote diee for diem, evidently in recognition of the vanishing value of the final nasal. Velius Longus also tells us (Keil, vii. 80, 12 if.) that Verrius Flaccus, who lived under Augustus, proposed a mutilated M,viz. IV , to indicate the sound of final m before an initial vowel. Seelmann (Aussprache des Latein, p. 356), following the above statement of Quintilian, defines the sound in question as a ' bilabial nasal spirant with partial closure.' 1 This seems a just statement. Cf. also Lindsay, Latin Language, p. 62. Evidently the sound must have been quite inconsiderable, as it did not interfere with the slurring of final syllables in -m with a following initial vowel, as is abundantly shown in poetry by the frequency of elision. Ellis (Quantitative Pronunciation of Latin, p. 60 ff., especially p. 65) interprets the testimony of Quintilian above cited to mean that final m was not omitted (neque eximitur), but was inaudible (obscuratur) before an initial vowel. The same scholar also maintains that every final m was inaudible, irrespective of the initial sound of the following word. In case this initial sound was a consonant, Ellis (pp. 55, 65) holds that the consonant was doubled in pronunciation ; e.g. quorum pars, he thinks, was pro- nounced quoruppars, etc. This view, however, is based on the improbable assumption that the Italian with its giammai (for gia mat), ovvero (for o vero), etc., gives the clue to the pronuncia- tion of Latin final m. Latin inscriptions, it is true, in the earliest times show that final m was frequently omitted in writing. Thus the Scipio inscriptions, the earliest of which may antedate 250 B.C., show m omitted before consonants as well as before vowels, but in good inscriptions of the classical period final m was not omitted with any frequency ; hence no argument can be drawn from this source. 2O PRONUNCIATION. 20. N. i . N was the dental nasal, as m was the labial. When initial, n could hardly have differed materially from English n in the same situation. The same is true also of n in the interior of a word when followed by other dental sounds (as /, d, s, n) or a vowel. Before the gutturals, n took on the sound of ng in sing, e.g. in ango, uncus ; i.e. n here became the guttural nasal, a sound as different from dental n as is m, and quite as much entitled to representation by a separate character. Nigidius Figulus recog- nized the individuality of the sound in calling it n-adulterinum (Gellius, xix. 14. 7). Certain Roman writers, according to Priscian (Keil, ii. 30. 13), followed the analogy of the Greek, and used g (= y nasal) for the n-adulterinum, e.g. AgcHises, agceps, aggulus. The Greek phoneticians gave y in such situations the name Agma (as distinguished from Gamma), and their Roman successors sometimes employed the same designation for the sound, e.g. Priscian in the passage just cited. 2. The vowel before nf, ns, as is well known, was regularly long in Latin. See 37. Some have assumed, in consequence, that a nasal vowel was pronounced in such cases, particularly Johannes Schmidt (Zur Geschichte des Indogermanischen Vokal- ismus, I. p. 98 ff .). The chief basis of this hypothesis was found in the omission of n before s in inscriptions, e.g. COSOL (for consul*)^ CESOR, TRASITV. Adjectives in -ensimus and adverbs in -tens were also often written -esimus, -ies, e.g. vicesimus or vicensimus ; vicies or vlciens. Yelius Longus (Keil, vii. 78-79) tells us that Cicero pronounced forensia as foresia, and Megalensia as Megalesia, while in adjectives in -osus the n was permanently lost. Greek transliterations of Latin words also frequently show l for c and d for c, (an .r-like sound developed from c before e and /). The New Umbrian of the same tables is written in Latin characters, and uses C for c, but S f (or S) THE CONSONANTS, 2$ for the s-like sound represented in Old Umbrian by d . This makes it clear that at the time the New Umbrian tablets were written, Latin c before and i had not yet become assibilated. Otherwise the New Umbrian would not have resorted to the use of a special character (S 1 or S) to designate this sound. See Jones, Classical Review, No. i, 1893. The exact date of the New Umbrian tablets is not certain, but they can hardly have been written many years before the beginning of the Christian era. f) No Latin grammarian ever mentions more than one sound for , x, 6 came to be represented with increasing frequency in Latin \*y ph, ch, th, and by Cicero's day this had become the standard orthography. The multitude of Greek words employed in Latin at that time, along with the constantly increasing attention paid by educated Romans to the Greek language and to Greek culture generally, naturally led to this striving for greater exactness. 1 Initial and final/, c, and /, in stressed syllables, in English are also uttered with aspiration, though we do not indicate this in writing. Examples are: top, lock, pot. 28 PR ONUNCIA TION. 3. As a result we notice the aspirates gaining a foothold in cer- tain genuine Latin words, e.g. pulcher, originally pulcer; Gracchus (after Bacchus = BaK^o?), originally Graccus ; Cethegus, origi- nally Cetegus. An English analogy is seen in such words as island, rhyme. Island comes from the Anglo-Saxon igland, Middle English Hand. The s was introduced at a comparatively recent date as a result of associating Hand with French isle (from Latin msula). Rhyme comes from Anglo-Saxon rim, Middle English rime, ' number.' The spelling rhyme is due to the influence of rhythm (Greek pv0/j,o?) , with which rime was associated in the folk consciousness. Cicero {Orator, 48. 160) tells how he him- self, in deference to popular usage, was forced to abandon the pronunciation pulcer, triumpos, Cet'egus, Kartago, in favor of the aspirated forms, pulcher, triumphos, etc. But he adds that he refused to pronounce an aspirate in sepulcrum, corona, lacrima, and some other words, where apparently a popular tendency existed in favor of ch, ph, th, as against the genuine Latin /, c, t. Catullus, in the epigram already cited (Carmen 84), humorously alludes to Arrius's pronunciation of commoda as chommoda. In Bosphorus (Boo-Tropos) the Romans introduced an aspirate for a tenuis ; yet the spelling Bosporus also occurs. 4. With the exception of ph the Latin aspirates retained their original character throughout the history of the language. A proof that th was still an aspirate in the time of the Empire is seen in the spelling ACLETARVM for athletarum, and ACLHETICVM for athl'eticum, in an inscription of about 360 A.D. (Wilmanns, No. 2639). Cf. also CIL. viii. 5352, TERMAS ( = thermas] ; Huebner, Inscriptions Hispaniae Christianae, 142, AETEREAS { aethereas]\ and the variant Chyesten for Thyesten in Horace, Odes, i. 16. 17. This orthography is capable of explanation only on the ground that th was still very close to / (viz. t -\- K). For the confusion of c and /, cf. the occasional English pronunciation of at least as ac least. There is not the slightest indication that Latin th, either THE CONSONANTS. 29 in the flourishing period of the language or in its decline, had a spirant sound like our English th in this or thin. The Romance languages regularly have / as the descendant of Latin th, e.g. Italian teatro (Latin theatrum) ; cattolico (catholicus). Similarly ch must have always been either a genuine aspirate or else the sim- ple mute c, as shown by the Italian in such words as carta (Lat. charta), coro (Lat. chorus]. 5. As regards ph, the aspirate seems in late imperial times (not before the fourth century A.D.) to have developed into the spirant /. Some have thought that this change occurred much earlier, basing their opinion upon the fact that Greek <, which was regu- larly represented in Latin \yj ph, was always employed to trans- literate Latin/ But was simply the nearest equivalent that the Greek alphabet possessed for representing/ Quintilian (i. 4. 14) shows that the two sounds were quite different, by his account of the Greek witness mentioned by Cicero who could not pronounce the Latin word Fundanius. This seems to show that the Greeks, not having the sound of Latin /(a bilabial spirant), chose (a bilabial aspirate) as the nearest equivalent, very much as Slavs and Lithuanians to-day reproduce the / of modern languages by/. In the speech of the educated classes at Rome, ph seems to have followed the history of (f> in Greek. The latter sound, according to Blass (Pronunciation of Greek, 28), did not become the equivalent of/ before the third century A.D., a view substantiated for Latin by the interchange of/ and ph in inscrip- tions of this and the following centuries. The phonetics of the change are as follows : First, we have / + h, i.e. the labial mute -f- a guttural spirant ; secondly, the h is assimilated from the guttural spirant to the labial, / (i.e. pf) ; finally, the / is assimi- lated to/ giving/, which is then simplified to/ Thus an origi- nal Philippus becomes successively Pfilippus, Ffilippus, Filippus. Cf. German Pfalz (the name of the district about Heidelberg). 3O PRONUNCIA TION. The mediaeval Latin designation of this was Palatium, whence Phalatium, German Pfalz, but dialectically often pronounced Falz. THE DOUBLE CONSONANTS, x, z. 32. X. X is always equivalent to cs, never to gz, as it some- times is in English. This conclusion follows from the voiceless character of Latin s, before which a guttural was necessarily assimilated. 33. Z. The value of z is somewhat uncertain. The character is confined exclusively to foreign words, chiefly Greek. Though introduced in the first Latin alphabet, it was early dropped (see 1.3), its place being taken by g. Long afterwards, ap- parently about Cicero's time, it was again introduced for the more accurate transcription of in words borrowed from the Greek. Prior to this time the Latin had transliterated Greek when initial by s, and by ss in the interior of words, e.g. sona (= 0)1/77) ; atticisso (= dTTt/ao>). But with the increasing use of Greek at Rome, a more accurate designation of the sound was felt to be necessary, and accordingly the Greek character itself was introduced. Cf. the care exercised at the same period in designating the aspirate in Greek loan-words. The pronunciation of z in Latin must have followed the pronun- ciation of Greek for the corresponding period. As regards , while it almost certainly had the sound of zd'm the Attic of the fifth century B.C., it is likely that by the beginning of the Mace- donian period (approximately 300 B.C.) it had become a simple z sound (as in English gaze) , though probably somewhat pro- longed; for it still 'made position,' as though a double consonant. See Blass, Pronunciation of Greek, 31. The same sound proba- bly attached to Roman z. For while certain Roman grammarians explain z as equivalent to sd or ds, their statements are probably but the echo of Greek discussions concerning the sound of z. It is worthy of note that one Roman grammarian, Velius Longus, a DIVISION OF WORDS INTO SYLLABLES. 31 most competent witness on phonetic questions, specifically denies that z is the equivalent of sd, and asserts that it is not a double consonant at all, but has the same quality throughout. (Keil, vii. 50. 9.) DOUBLED CONSONANTS. 34. When the mutes were doubled (//, dd; pp, bb ; cc, gg) there were two distinct consonant articulations. Thus in mitto, the first t was uttered with a definite muscular effort, involving closure of the organs in the /-position ; then after a momentary pause a second muscular effort followed, with the organs in the same position. See Seelmann, Aussprache des Latein, p. no. Such doubled consonants do not occur in English. We often write ft, pp, cc, etc., but pronounce only a single t, p, or c, e.g. ut(f]er, up(p}er, etc. But in Italian and several other modern languages these doubled consonants are frequent, e.g. Italian bocca, conobbi, cappello. The same double articulation is probably to be assumed in case of doubled liquids (//, rr), doubled nasals (mm, nti), and doubled spirants (ff, ss), though it is possible that in some words where these combinations followed a long vowel they merely indicated a liquid or spirant that was prolonged in utterance, as, for example, vallum, ullus. DIVISION OF WORDS INTO SYLLABLES. 35. The principles given in the Grammar ( 4) for the division of words into syllables are the traditional ones ; yet the validity of some of them is open to question, particularly of the principle embodied under 4. 3 : ' Such combinations of consonants as can begin a word are joined to the following vowel.' In sup- port of this principle may be cited the testimony of the Roman grammarians, who practically agree in prescribing the rule given above, and some of whom even include such combinations of 32 PR ON UN CIA TION. consonants as can begin a word in Greek, e.g. pt, ct, bd. See for instance Caesellius, cited by Cassiodorus (Keil, vii. 205. i) ; Terentianus Maurus (Keil, vi. 351. 879). On the other hand it may be urged that the principle laid down by the Roman grammarians is merely an echo of rules maintained by Greek scholars for their own language. Cf., for example, Bekker, Anecdota Graeca, iii. p. 1127; Theodosius (ed. Gottling), p. 63, where the same laws for syllable division may be found. We have already seen indications of such irresponsible borrowing in the case of the testimony of the grammarians concerning the pronunciation of z. See 33. Moreover, we find Quintilian (i. 7. 9) advocating an etymological principle of division, e.g. haru-spex, abs-temius. When we come to examine the mode of dividing words fol- lowed in our best Latin inscriptions, the evidence is strikingly at variance with the traditional rule which prescribes joining as many consonants as possible with the following vowel. In about 80 per cent of all the cases in which words are divided at the end of a line, one of the consonants is joined with the preceding vowel, evidently a systematic violation of the grammarians' rule. Even greater is the proportion of violations of the rule in those words which exhibit interpunctuation in inscriptions, i.e. separation of the syllables by dots, e.g. EGES TAS ; vie TO RI ; OP -TA -TVS. For a full presentation of the epigraphic evidence bearing upon this point, see Dennison, in Classical Philology, Vol. I. p. 47 f. There is also evidence of a phonetic nature bearing upon this question. A syllable containing a short vowel followed by two consonants is phonetically long, as recognized by all our gram- mars and demonstrated in every line of Latin poetry. But open syllables containing a short vowel are short ; and in such words as doctus, minister, hospes, if we divide according to the grammarians' rule (i.e. do-ctus, mirii-ster, ho-spes), we get pre- DIVISION OF WORDS INTO SYLLABLES. 33 cisely these open syllables containing a short vowel, i.e. short syllables. For with this utterance, there is no more reason why the do- of do-ctus should be long than the do- of do-cet; or the rii- of mim-ster any more than the rii- of mim-mus. In both cases we have open syllables containing a short vowel, i.e. short syllables. Hence it is clear that the Romans in actual utterance must have joined one of a group of consonants to a preceding short vowel. This gives a closed syllable (i.e. a syllable ending in a consonant), and it is a fundamental phonetic principle that a closed syllable is long. These principles also throw light on the nature of com- mon syllables. A common syllable is one containing a short vowel followed by a mute with / or r (pi, d, tl, pr, cr, tr ; etc.}. In verse such a syllable may be either long or short. But natu- rally a difference of pronunciation must have accompanied this variation of quantity. In a word Vfoepatrem, for example, when the first syllable was used as long the / was joined with the a (pat-rent), thus closing the syllable ; but when the first syllable was used as short, the t was joined with the r (pd-trem), thus leaving the syllable open. Evidence contradicting the grammarians' rule is found also in the division of words in examples cited by ancient writers on Latin prosody. When these writers separate a verse of poetry into its component feet, they divide the syllables not according to the grammarians' rule, but according to the principle ex- plained above as demanded by phonetic considerations, e.g. : Conticu ere om nes in tenti que ora te nebant Turnus ut infractos adverse Marte Latinos Ut bel li sig num Lau renti Turnus ab arce. See especially Hale, Harvard Studies, Vol. VII. p. 268. The rule of the grammarians, therefore, seems thoroughly discredited. It is contradicted by the testimony of inscriptions, by considerations of phonetics, and by syllabification followed 34 PRONUNCIATION. in metrical illustrations by the writers on prosody. It should accordingly be rejected, as resting not upon competent phonetic observation of contemporary speech, but rather upon the tra- ditional rules which the Greek grammarians set up for their own language, rules, by the way, which were no more phonetically accurate for Greek than for Latin. Very likely their phonetic accuracy was never claimed by the ancients them- selves. It is more probable that they were simply copyists' rules intended to furnish a convenient standard for practical use. The phonetic principle for the division of syllables where two or more consonants are involved may be formulated as follows : In case of such combinations of consonants, a mute -f / or r is joined to the following vowel, except when a long syllable is needed, in which latter case the mute is joined to the preceding vowel. Thus regularly pa-tris, volu-cris, a-gri ; but ag-ri, when in poetry the first syllable is used as long. In prepositional com- pounds, also, whose first member ends in a mute, and whose second begins with / or r, the mute is always joined to the pre- ceding vowel, i.e. the preceding syllable is always long, e.g. ab- latus, ab-rumpo. In all other combinations of consonants, the first consonant is joined to the preceding vowel, as al-tus, an-go, hos-pes, dic-tus, minis-tri, mag-nus, mon-strum. This principle obviously demands that x should be divided in pronunciation, as was undoubtedly the case. Thus axis must have been pro- nounced ac-sis, Id-xus as lac-sus ; so, also, very likely after a long vowel, vtc-si (inxT) ; rec-si (rexT), though it is obvious that after a long vowel such division is not phonetically necessary. As regards the rule of the ancient grammarians laid down in the Grammar ( 4. 4), to the effect that prepositional compounds are separated into their component parts, the phonetic evidence seems altogether against this when the preposition ends in a single consonant and the next letter of the compound is a vowel. The division per-eo, inter-ea gives us a closed (i.e. long) syllable ; DIVISION OF WORDS INTO SYLLABLES. 35 whence it would appear that the actual division in such cases was pe-reo, inte-rea, exactly as in ge-ro, te-ro; i.e. compounds of this kind at least were divided precisely like other words. Rule 4 in 4 of the Grammar may therefore, for all scientific purposes, be abandoned, since, except as already indicated, com- pounds call for the application of no special principles. CHAPTER III. HIDDEN QUANTITY. 36. A hidden quantity is the quantity of a vowel before two consonants. Such a quantity is called hidden, as distinguished from the quantity of a vowel before a single consonant, where the metrical employment of the word at once indicates whether the vowel is long or short. The quantity of a vowel before a mute with /or r is hidden unless the syllable containing it appear in verse used as short. The methods of determining hidden quantity are the follow- ing: 1 1. Express testimony of ancient Roman writers, e.g. Cicero, Orator, 48. 159, where the principle for the length of vowels before nf, ns is laid down (see 37) ; Aulus Gellius, Noctes Atti- cae, ii. 17; iv. 17; ix. 6; xii. 3. Nearly every Roman gram- marian furnishes some little testimony of this kind, and though some of them belong to a comparatively late period, their evi- dence often preserves the tradition of earlier usage, and hence is entitled to weight. 2 . The versification of the earlier Roman dramatists, especially "Plautus and Terence, with whom a mute before a liquid never lengthens a syllable whose vowel is short. Hence, before a mute followed by a liquid, the quantity of the vowel always appears in these writers, being the same as the quantity of the syllable, just as in case of a vowel followed by a single consonant. Furthermore, Plautus and Terence not infrequently employ as short many syllables which in classical poetry would be invariably 1 The material here presented is based chiefly upon Marx's Hulfsbiichlein, cited below, p. 39. 36 METHODS OF DETERMINING HIDDEN QUANTITY. 37 long by position. Examples are the following : juventus, Plautus, Mostellaria 30; Curculio 38; volunfas, Trinummus n66;Pseu- dolus 537 ; Stichus 59 ; voluptas, Mostellaria 249, 294 ; Amphi- tnw 939, and elsewhere. These cases are to be explained by the fact that the vowel was short and the following consonants failed to ' make position.' In some instances, it must be confessed, even long vowels are used as short, e.g. boms mis, Plautus, Trinummus 822, forts pultabo, 868. But these cases are of a peculiar sort and may be explained on metrical grounds, or by the iambic nature of the words, as in the examples cited. Cf. 87. 3. 3. Inscriptions. Since the middle of the first century B.C. the apex (or point) appears added to the vowels a, e, o, u to in- dicate their length. Long /was designated originally by /(rising above the other letters and hence called / longa) and by ei ; later, I took the apex. Examples are TRAXI, GIL. x, 2311 ; PRI'SCVS, CIL. xi. 1940; OLLA, CIL. vi. 10006; QU!NQVE, CIL. vi. 3539; M!LLIA, Monumentum Ancyranum, i. 16 ; FECEI, CIL. i. 551. Before the employment of the apex the length of the vowel in case of a, e, u was indicated by doubling the vowel, e.g. PAASTORES, CIL. i. 551 ; PEQVLATVV, CIL. i. 202 ; o is never doubled in this manner. This peculiarity belongs to the period from 130 to 70 B.C. A thoroughly consistent use of these methods of designating the vowel quantities is found, it must be admitted, in but few inscriptions. Of the vowels contained in syllables long by posi- tion only a portion are marked, as a rule, in any single inscrip- tion. Certain official inscriptions of the late republican and early imperial period form an exception to this, and exhibit very full and reliable markings, e.g. the speech of the Emperor Claudius (Bois- sieu, Inscriptions de Lyon, p. 136) and the Monumentum Ancyra- num, containing the Res Gestae Divi Augusft. This latter, among a great number of correct markings, contains also some false ones, e.g. CLVPEI, SVMMA. Such errors also occur occasionally elsewhere. 38 HIDDEN QUANTITY. 4. Greek transcriptions of Latin words. This method is most fruitfully applied in case of the vowels e and o. The employment of Greek e or 77, o or w makes the quantity of the Latin vowel certain, wherever faith may be reposed in the accuracy of the transcription. Thus we may write Esqtiiliae in view of 'Ho-KvAtvos, Strabo, v. 234, 237 ; Vergilius^ after OuepyiAios ; Vesontio^ after OveowriW, Dio Cassius, Ixviii. 24. The quantity of / may also often be determined by Greek trans- literations. Thus ct before two consonants regularly points to Latin z, e.g. Bea//anos, GIG. 5709, = Vtpsanius ; Greek t points to Latin z, e.g. "lo-r/oos = Ister. Inscriptions are naturally of much greater weight in such mat- ters than are our texts of the Greek writers. Cf. 3. c). 5. The iwcalism of the Romance languages. These languages, particularly the Spanish and Italian, treated ^, /, e. KAij/^v?), CIA. iii. 1094, but KA^evros, CIG. 3757 ; KXrJ/u,evrt, CIG. Addenda, 1829 c. ; CRESCNS, CIL. xii. 4030, but CRESCENTI, CIL. vi. 9059; Kprjcr/o/j/s, CIG. 6012, c. ; but Kpjo-Keim, CIG. Addenda, 1994, f. ; npawnys (i.e. Ilpcucr^vs), CIA. iii. 1147, but Ilpcuo-cvrt, npcuWra, CIG. 3175, 399 1- Even where a vowel is naturally long, it sometimes becomes shortened before nt, e.g. in linteum from llnum ; cf. Greek XeWtoi/, CIG. 8695. For the vowel before nd the evidence is not so full. We find the Greek transcriptions KoAeV&us, Lydus, de Mem. iv. 53, 57 ; 4>ov8avtos (i.e. Fundanius), Bulletin de Correspondance Hellenique, ix. p. 439. 4. Vowels are also regularly short before ss, according to the express testimony of Quintilian, i. 7. 20. But see 47. i. PONTEM, FONTEM, MONTEM, FRONTEM, FRONDEM. 41. A slight uncertainty exists as to the quantity of the vowel before nt in the oblique cases oifons, mons, pom, from 44 HIDDEN QUANTITY. (frontis) ; and before ndm frons (frondis). Three sets of facts are to be considered : a) The analogy of other words in -ns (Gen. -ntis). Such words, so far as they are genuine Latin words, have, without exception, a short vowel before nt in the oblique cases. See 40. b] The testimony of the Romance languages. This is as fol- lows for the different words under discussion : fons. The Romance languages seem to point to an antecedent fontis,fdnti, etc. Thus the Italian fonte has close o ; so the Pro- vencal fon. Spanish alone with its fuente points to fontem (Grober, Archiv, ii. p. 426 ; Korting, Lat.-Romanisches Worter- buch). frons (-ndis). The Romance languages all agree in pointing to frondem (Grober, Archiv, ii. p. 426 ; Korting, WorterbucH). frons (-ntis). Provencal fron and Italian f route, with close o, point to frontem. So the other Romance languages, except Spanish, which has fruente, pointing to frontem. (Grober, Archiv, ii. p. 426 ; Korting, Worterbuch^) mons. The Romance languages point unanimously to montem (Grober, Archiv, ii. p. 426 ; Korting, Worterbuch). pons. Provencal pon and Italian ponte with close o point to pontem ; so the other Romance languages, except Spanish, which has puente, pointing to pontem. If mere numerical preponderance were decisive, we might at once conclude that all these words went back to Latin forms with o in the oblique cases, and might explain Spanish fruente, fuente) puente (which should be fronte, fonte, ponte, to represent Latin o) as exceptions to the prevailing law of development. A glance at certain facts, however, in Italian and Provencal, suggests another conclusion. We find it to be a regular law in these languages that an original open Latin o (i.e. short o, see 36. 5), when followed by m, n, or /, -f- another consonant, be- comes close. Thus Latin tondet with open o, becomes Italian VOWELS BEFORE -NT, -ND. 45 tonde, with close o. Similarly respondet becomes risponde ; rhombus becomes rombo ; pol(y)pus becomes polpo, all with close 0. Just what has brought about this change is not certain. D'Ovidio in Grober's Grundriss der Romanischen Philologie, 1. p. 522, thinks it was the analogy of words in on -f- consonant, om + consonant, and ol-\- consonant, in which close o had de- veloped regularly from an earlier u (see 36. 5), e.g. rompe (= rumpii] ; onda (= undo) ; dolce (= dulcis). In accordance with this principle, whose operation is certain, Latin fontem, frondem,frontem, montem, pontem, would (assuming these to be the original forms) regularly become in Italian : fonte, fronde, fronte, monte, ponte, with close o, exactly as we find them. The admission of a long o in the oblique cases of these Latin words is, therefore, not necessary in order to account for Italian and Provencal close o in their Romance descendants. In fact, when we consider Spanish fuente,fruente,puente, all of which point to Latin o, it seems more reasonable to regard Spanish monte and fronde (which point to #) as the exceptions. Grober, who (Archiv, vi. p. 389) expresses himself in favor of assuming an original fontem, etc., in these words, suggests that Spanish monte, fronde, are \oan-vf or ds, while fuente, fruente, flu en te represent an original inheritance. Briefly, then, a fair interpretation of the evidence of the Romance languages seems to warrant the belief that the oblique cases of the words under discussion came into the Romance lan- guages from the Latin with a (short) open o ; that in Italian and Provencal this open o subsequently became close in accordance with a regular law of wide operation. Spanish regularly developed the open o to ue in those words which it inherited from Latin (jnz. \i\fuente,fruente,puente}; while Spanish monte and fronde are probably loan-words from Italian. c} The third bit of evidence comes from Greek transliterations of Latin words as found in Greek inscriptions and Greek authors. 46 HIDDEN QUANTITY, Thus we find Qovrrjios ( = Fonteius) in Plutarch and Appian ; also in an inscription, GIG. iii. 5837, b (59 A.D.) ; <$pot/Tu/os, CIA. iii. 1154 (between 150 and 200 A.D.) ; L (= pontifex], in Dionysius, Dio Cassius, and Zosimus ; 7rovTic, in Lydus, de Mens. iii. 21 ; TTOVTI- LKts, in Plutarch, Numa, 9 ; and Trovrt^tKa, in an inscription in Kaibel's Sylloge Epigrammatitm, Addenda, 888 a. The Gieek never shows an w in any of these words, either in inscriptions or in Mss. The evidence furnished by that language therefore is unanimous in favor of o for the Latin. Nor can recognition be refused the inscriptions above cited on the ground that they are late. As the annexed dates show, they all belong to the good period of the language. We thus have the strongest possible grounds for writing fontis, frondis, etc. The analogy of other words in -ns (Gen. -ntis) favors this view ; the Romance languages favor it, and the testi- mony of Latin words in Greek dress, as exhibited both in texts and in inscriptions, favors it. In fact, the evidence is complete. The isolated apex in FRONT (for FRONTEM, as the context shows), GIL. v. 2915, is certainly a mere blunder of the stone- cutter, as is often the case in other words, even in carefully cut inscriptions (see 36. 3). Christiansen, De Apicibus et I Longis, p. 57, cites thirteen such instances for vowels before nt. HIDDEN QUANTITY IN DECLENSION. 42. i . It is maintained by some scholars (e.g. Marx, ffiflfs- buchlein, p. 2 ; Lane, Harvard Studies, i. p. 89) that the ending -um in the Genitive Plural of nouns of the First and Second -UM IN DEUM, NUMMUM, ETC. 47 Declensions has u in such forms as Aeneadum, deum, nummum ; also in nostrum and vestrum. The facts in evidence are the following : a) On early Latin coins prior to the First Punic War, we find the final m of many Genitives Plural omitted, e.g. ROMANO, CORANO. Coins of the same date regularly retain final m of the Nominative or Accusative Singular, e.g. VOLCANOM, PROPOM (= probuni). This has led Mommsen (CIL. i. p. 9) to infer that there was a difference in the quantity of the o in the two instances. As the o of the Nominative and Accusative Singular was short, Mommsen thought that in the Genitive Plural it must be long. But the material with which Mommsen deals is ex- tremely scanty. Genitive Plural forms occur in some number ; but only a few Nominative and Accusative forms are found, viz. VOLCANOM, PROPOM. Again, ROMANOM (CIL. i. i) and AESER- NINOM (i. 20) show that Genitives sometimes retained the m. Mommsen attempts to solve this difficulty by taking ROMANOM and AESERNINOM as the Nominative Singular Neuter of the Adjec- tive ; but that is awkward. The natural inference must be that there was no system in the omission of final m on these coins. The coins represent no dialect ; in fact they represent widely separated localities ; hence it is no wonder if the final m (always weak) was sometimes written, sometimes omitted. In the Scipio inscriptions, the oldest of which may date within a quarter of a century of these coins, we find final m freely omitted in the Accusative and Nominative Singular just as elsewhere. It is, therefore, extremely unlikely that Mommsen 's hypothesis con- cerning the coins is correct. b) An inscription of Nuceria (CIL. x. 1081) has DVVMVIRATVS, which Schmitz (Rheinisches Museum, x. no) and Lane (Harvard Studies, i. p. 89) regard as evidence that the u of duum (Gen. PI. of duo} was long. But even conceding the correctness of the apex in this isolated instance, it remains to be shown that the 48 HIDDEN QUANTITY. duum- of duumvir and duumviratus is in origin a Genitive. Such an etymology would involve the assumption that the duum- of the Genitive Plural, duumvirum, became transferred to the other cases, replacing duo in earlier duoviri, etc. Such an assumption is extremely improbable. It is much more likely that duumvir and triumvir are formed after the analogy of centumvir. In the singular especially such forms as duovir, tresvir would have been extremely awkward, and it seems probable that the singular duum- vir, triumvir were for that reason historically anterior to duumviri, triumviri. The apex in the Nucerian inscription, if this etymol- ogy be correct, would then be simply a blunder of the engraver, as is altogether probable. The evidence in favor of -urn in these Genitives must, therefore, be regarded as of no weight, especially in view of the regular shortening of vowels before final -m in Latin. Certainly if -urn did by any possibility exist in the days of Augustus, the // had become shortened by 90 A.D. For Quin- tilian (i. 6. 18), as noted by Lane (p. 90), shows that to his ear nummum, Genitive Plural, was nowise different from nummum, Accusative Singular. 2. Words in -er of the Second Declension, and words of the Third Declension in -er and -x, have in oblique cases the same quantity of the vowel as in the Nominative, e.g. dger, dgri ; f rater, fratris ; acer, acris ; pax, pads ; tenax, tenacis ; fax, fads ; rex, regis ; nix, riivis ; corriix, corriids ; calix, cali- ds ; fel,fellis ; os, ossis ; plebs, plebis. Thus sometimes the Nomi- native gives the clue to the hidden quantity in the oblique cases (as dger^ dgn) ; sometimes the oblique cases give the clue to the hidden quantity of the Nominative (as corriids, corriix}. 3. Words of the Third Declension ending in -ns (Gen. -ntis) uniformly have a short vowel in the oblique cases, as already explained in 40. 3. Greek words in -as (Gen. -antis], e.g. Aias, Aiantis ; gigas , gigantis , have the same quantity as in the original (Aids; At'oVros ; ytyds, yiyavros). So, also, contracted ADJECTIVES, NUMERALS. 49 Greek names of cities in -ovs, -oiWog, e.g. Selmus, Selinuntis ; and proper names in -wv, -oWos, e.g. Xenophon, Xenophontis. Acheron (not a contract form) has Acheruntis. 4. In all words of the Third Declension ending in two or more consonants (excepting -ns and -x preceded by a vowel), the hidden vowel before the ending is short, e.g. urbs, sors, drx. Exceptions to this principle are plebs and compounds of uncia ending in -uhx, e.g. deunx, deuncis ; quincunx, quincuncis. Be- fore -x the vowel is sometimes long, sometimes short, as already explained in 2, above. COMPARISON OF ADJECTIVES. 43. In the terminations -issimus, -errimus, -illimus, the hidden vowel is short, e.g. carissimus, acerrimus, facillimus. Apparent traces of a long / in the termination -issimus are found in inscrip- tional forms with / longa. The word of most frequent occurrence is piIssiMUS ; besides this we find a few other words, e.g. CAR!SSIMO, CIL. vi.5325; DVLC!SSIMO, vi. 16926; FORTISSIMO, vi. 1132. But many of these inscriptions belong to the last centuries of the Empire, when the use of / longa had become an extremely untrustworthy guide, as may be seen by palpable errors. As regards the frequent occurrence of PI!SSIMAE, piIssiMO, these may perhaps be explained on the theory that / longa was here used to indicate not merely i, but also the/ which developed in pronunciation between the two f s, i.e. pijissimo. Cf. the similar use of i longa in words like POMPE!IVS, CIL. ix. 3748. At ail events, in the absence of the apex in these superlatives, and in view of the absolute silence of the grammarians, it seems unwise to attach great weight to the occurrence of the / longa alone. Against i, Lindsay (Latin Language, p. 405) urges the occur- rence of late spellings like MERENTESSEMO, KARESSEMO, CIL. ii. 2997. Cf. 6. i. 50 HIDDEN QUANTITY. NUMERALS. 44. As separate words are to be noted : a) quattuor, but quartus (see 53 under area). b) qmnque and its derivatives, all of which have t, as quin- decim, quintus, quingenft, quinquaginta. c) the derivatives of unus : undecim, undev'tginfi, etc. d) m~ille, millia, and mill'esimus. PRONOUNS. 45. i. Nos, vos ; but noster, vester; nostri, vestri, etc. 2. Hunc and hanc have a short vowel. 3. Hie, ipse, iste have t. 4. The suffix -cunque has u. 5. Compounds retain the quantity of the elements of which they are compounded, as qitisquis, cuj usque. CONJUGATION. ROOT FORMS. 46. i. Presents formed by means of the infix n have a short vowel, e.g. fundo (root fud-) ; frdngo (root frag-) ; jungo (root fug-). Before a labial, n becomes m, e.g. rumpo (root rup-) ; lambo (root lab-). Care should be taken not to confuse deriv- ative and contract Presents like vendo, prendo, with genuine nasal formations. 2. In most Presents the hidden vowel is short, e.g. necto, serpo, verto. But the following exceptions are to be noted : a) First conjugation : jurgo (for jurigo), narro, orno, purgo, tracto. ft) Second Conjugation : ardeo. c] Third Conjugation : all verbs in -sco (r), except compesco, disco, posco, vescor. d) Fourth Conjugation : nutria, ordior. ardere drsl ctrsurus gerere gessl gestus scrlbere scrips! scriptus vwere vixl victurus figere fixi /IX21S CONJUGATION. 51 3. The quantity of the vowel in the Present regularly remains unchanged (when it becomes hidden) throughout the entire con- jugation of the verb, e.g. : drdeo gero scribo vivo flgo Thus inscriptions give F!XA, SCR!PTVM, CONSCREIPTVM, vIxiT, VEIXIT. But the following exceptions to this general principle are to be noted : a) duo dicer e dlxi d ictus duco due ere duxl due (us cedo cedere cessl cessurus The short vowel of the Perfect Participles dictus and ductus is assured by the statement of Aulus Gellius (Noctes Atticae, ix. 6) and by the testimony of the Romance languages. (See 52. s.vv.} d) The short vowel of the Present is lengthened in the Perfect Indicative and Perfect Participle, if hidden, in the following verbs : ago agere egt dctus cingo cingere clnxl cinctus delinquo delinquere dellqut dellctus distinguo distinguere disfinxi distlnctus emo etnere eml einptus exstinguo exstingttere exstlnxi exstlnctus Jingo fingerc finxl flctus frango fr anger e fregi frdctus fiingor fungi fiinctussum jungo jungere jiinxi junctus lego legere I'egi lectus pango pangere pepigi pdctus pingo pingere plnxl pictus 52 HIDDEN QUANTITY. pungo pungere pupugt punctus rego regere rexi rectus relinquo relinquere rellqul relictus sancio sancire sdnxi sdnctus struo struere struxl structus tango tangere tetigi tact us tego tegere tex'i tectus tinguo tingiiere tlnxl tinctus traho trahere trdxt trdctus ungo ungere iinxi unctus So also in compounds and derivatives of these verbs. 4. The evidence for the long vowel in the Perfect Participles of the foregoing list is found : a) In the statements of Gellius, who testifies (Noctes Atticae, ix. 6) to the quantity of the vowels of actus, lectus, unctus, and in xii. 3. 4 to that of structus. fr) In the testimony of inscriptions, which show the following : ACTIS CIL. vi. 1377 ; REDACTA vi. 701 ; EXACTVS Boissieu, Inscrip- tions de Lyon, p. 136 ; C!NCTVS CIL. x. 4104 ; DE.FVNCTIS CIL. v. 1326; DlLECTVS VI. 6319; LECTVS xi. 1826; EXSTlNCTOS vi. 25617; INFRACTA ix. 60 ; IVNCTA X. 1 888 ; SEIVNCTVM vi. 1527^. 38; RECTE xii. 2494 ; TECTOR vi. 5205 ; COEMTO Monumentum Ancy- ranum iii. n ; TRA[CTA (not certain) CIL. vi. 1527 e. 14; SANCTA v. 2681 ; Oscan SAA(N)HTOM (= sane torn). c) In the retention of a in compounds of actus, tactus,fractus, pactus, tractus (e.g. coactus, attactus, refractus, etc.), which shows that the a was long ; short a would have become e in this situa- tion, as for example in confectus for an original *conf actus; acceptus for an original *accaptus ; ~ereptus for *erdptus. d) For cinctus, dellctus, dis tinctus, exst'inctus, f Ictus, p'ictus, punctus, relictus, tinctus, the long vowel is assured by the evidence of the Romance, e.g. Italian cinto, delitto,fitto, relitto, tinto. 5. The evidence for the quantity of the vowel in the Perfects of the foregoing list is found : CONJUGATION. 53 a] In inscriptional markings, as CONIVNXIT (Wilmanns, Inscript. Latinae 104); TEXIT (CIL. x. 1793); REXIT (CIL. v. 875); TRAXI (CIL. x. 2311, 1 8). fr) In Priscian's statement (Keil, ii. 466) that rexi and text have e. c} In the testimony of the Romance languages, which point to dnxi, distinxi, exstlnxt, ftnxi, ptnxi, struxi, tinxl, unxt. d) The long a in sanxt rests upon no specific evidence, but may perhaps be safely inferred after the analogy of sanctus. Until recently the principle was maintained (e.g. by Marx in his first edition) that all monosyllabic stems ending in b, d, or g had the hidden vowel long in the Perfect Indicative and Perfect Parti- ciple wherever euphonic changes occurred. According to this theory we should have e.g. scindo, sdndere, scidi, scissus ; mergo, merger e, mersi, mersus. This principle was first laid down by Lachmann (on Lucretius, i. 805) for Perfect Participles alone, and was subsequently assumed by other scholars to apply to the Perfect Indicative as well; but this position is now entirely abandoned. Each long vowel must be supported by specific evidence. In the 3d edition of his Hulfsbuchlein (p. i), Marx lays down the principle that all vowels are long in Latin before nx and net. These combinations occur almost exclusively in the verbs given on pp. 51, 52. Whether the general principle is sound, may be questioned. For example, we have no definite evidence in favor of the long vowel before nx in anxius, lanx, or phalanx. VERBAL ENDINGS. 47. i . The hidden vowel is short before ss ( 40. 4) and st in the terminations of the verb, e.g. fiitssem, amainsse ; fmsti, fiiistis. This is shown not only by the historical origin of these formations, but by such metrical usage as Plautus, Amphitruo, 761, dedisse; Menaechmi, 687, de