صور الصفحة
PDF
النشر الإلكتروني

PAN 21 1910

[blocks in formation]

I. The CUM Constructions: their history and functions, by William Gardner Hale. Parti:
Critical, 1887. Part ii: Constructive, 1889.

(Out of Print.)

II. Analogy and the Scope of its Application in Language, by Benjamin Ide Wheeler, 1887.

(Out of Print.)
(Price 80 cts.)

III. The Cult of Asklepios, by Alice Walton, 1894.
IV. The Development of the Athenian Constitution, by George Willis Botsford, 1893.

V. Index Antiphonteus: composuit Frank Lovis van Cleef, 1895.
VI. Studies in Latin Moods and Tenses, by Herbert Charles Elmer, 1898.
VII. The Athenian Secretaries, by William Scott Ferguson, 1898.
VIII. The Five Post-Kleisthenean Tribes, by Fred Orlando Bates, 1898.
IX. Critique of some Recent Subjunctive Theories, by Charles Edwin Bennett, 1898.

(Price $1.50.)
(Price $1.00.)
(Price $1.50.)
(Price 50 cts.)
(Price 50 cts.)

(Price 50 cts.)

X. The Athenian Archons of the Third and Second Centuries Before Christ, by William
Scott Ferguson, 1899.
XI. Index in Xenophontis Memorabilia, Confecerunt Catherina Maria Gloth, Maria Francisco
Kellogg, 1900.
(Price $1.00.)

(Price 75 cts.)

XII. A Study of the Greek Paean, with Appendixes containing the Hymns found at Delphi
and the other extant Fragments of Paeans, by Arthur Fairbanks, 1900. (Price $1.00.)
XIII. The Subjunctive Substantive Clauses in Plautus, not including Indirect Questions,
by Charles L. Durham, 1901.
(Price 80 cts.)
XIV. A Study in Case-Rivalry, being an Investigation Regarding the Use of the Genitive and
Accusative in Latin with Verbs of Remembering and Forgetting, by Clinton L. Babcock,
(Price 60 cts.)
XV. The Case-Construction after the Comparative in Latin, by K. P. R. Neville, 1901.
(Price 60 cts.)

1901.

XVI. The Epigraphical Evidence for the Reigns of Vespasian and Titus, by Homer Curtis
Newton, 1901.
XVII. Erichthonius and the three Daughters of Cecrops, by Benjamin Powell, 1906.

(Price 80 cts.)

(Price 60 cts.)

XVIII. Index to the Fragments of the Greek Elegiac and Iambic Poets, as Contained in the
Hiller-Crusius Edition of Bergk's Anthologia Lyrica, by Mary Corwin Lane, 1908.
(Price 80 cts.)
XIX. The Poetic Plural of Greek Tragedy, in the Light of Homeric Usage, by Horace Leonard
Jones, 1910.
(Price 80 cts.)

LONGMANS, GREEN & CO.,

443 Fourth Ave., New York

FOR THE SECOND YEAR OF LATIN

CAESAR IN GAUL

By BENJAMIN L. D’OOGE, Michigan State Normal College

and FREDERICK C. EASTMAN, State University of Iowa

A new book that will make the student enjoy his second year of Latin. After a brief historical introduction and a biography of Caesar in simple Latin, the student is ready for the Gallic War. The indirect discourse of the first two books has been changed to direct, but the original indirect discourse is given later.

Breaks in the Latin narrative are supplied by brief summaries in English that keep alive interest in the story as a story. Notes adequate to the student's needs, a complete Caesarean grammar and vocabulary help him through the difficult places.

G

Maps, battle plans, and illustrations also add to the understanding of the text.

$1.40

GINN AND COMPANY

70 FIFTH AVENUE

NEW YORK

Some of the Reasons Why Pearson's Essentials of Latin for Beginners

is in use in more of the representative Schools in this country than any other similar book.

Thorough
Teaching of
Vocabulary

The 500 "Lodge Vocabulary" words presented in the first 70 lessons are repeatedly

used in the exercises. They are worked over and over until they become a part of the pupil's daily thought.

Frequent
Well-planned
Reviews

With this book the teacher is relieved of the burden of planning reviews. After the third lesson there is a special review exercise in every lesson and there are vocabulary reviews and declension and conjugation drills.

[blocks in formation]

for Caesar

Besides the ten read

Preparationing lessons covering the first ten chapters of the Gallic War, Book I, the book contains reading from Viri Romae, and the first 20 chapters of the Gallic War, Book II, in simplified form.

This book contains abundant material to meet the requirements of the New Syllabus for New York State.

AMERICAN BOOK COMPANY

NEW YORK

CINCINNATI

CHICAGO

BOSTON

ATLANTA

[graphic]

Entered as second-class matter November 18, 1907, at the Post Office, New York, N. Y., under the Act of Congress of March 1, 1879

VOL. XI

NEW YORK, JANUARY 14, 1918

'LONG' SYLLABLES IN LATIN

In The Classical Journal 11.367, Professor E. D. Wright published an interesting note, entitled A Graphic Device for Marking Syllabic Quantity in Latin. In cases where, according to current terminology, a syllable is 'long', though its vowel is short, current practice, as he rightly reminds us, gives such abominations as patris, patrem! This is done not only by beginners in class-rooms, but in books by thoroughly competent scholars. I open at random such a book as R. Klotz's Grundzüge Altrömischer Metrik, at page 327, and find portum processimus, ādvērsum sententiam! As a cure for such sinfulness Professor Wright suggests that, to indicate syllabic quantity, we set the macron and the breve beneath the line. He tells us, finally, that he made this suggestion as long ago as November 28, 1904, in The Latin Leaflet. There, it might be added, he advocated the use of the macron above the line to indicate vowel quantity: short vowels he there left unmarked.

It may interest some readers to learn that Professor Wright, in his paper in The Latin Leaflet, began with a reference to a discussion of this subject which formed part of an address on Form in Latin Poetry, which I delivered before The New York Latin Club, in May, 1904, and which was printed in Numbers 101-103 of The Latin Leaflet, October 3, 10, 17, 1904. In that discussion I proposed the invention of a new symbol for the marking of syllabic quantity as distinct from vowel quantity. This suggestion Professor Wright quite properly negatived, pointing out that the purpose I had in mind could be achieved very well by the simple device he has recalled to our minds in his note in The Classical Journal. In the paper on Form in Latin Poetry I repeated the suggestion I had made in my edition of the Aeneid (1901), § 229, that vowels should be differentiated as long and short, and syllables as heavy and light-an entirely simple differentiation, borrowed from the manual in which I began my study of Sanskrit. In marking the scansion of lines in my Vergil, in the Introduction, I set the macron only over long vowels, leaving the short vowels unmarked-the regular practice in editions of Latin prose writings in which the quantities are marked. The place of the metrical accent was indicated by a dot beneath the line. This is a very simple system, as effective, I think, as Professor Wright's. I have, however, been long using in my teaching Professor Wright's suggestion, without, however, recalling, I am sorry to say, that this specific suggestion had come from him.

But, unhappily for both of us, the conservatism of teachers has rendered futile, it would seem, our good intentions. I felt this in 1909, when I reiterated my own suggestion, in the course of a paper on The Scansion of Vergil and the Schools, in THE CLASSICAL WEEKLY 3.2-5, 10-12 (see page 10, second column). Of this conservatism I had once a very striking and very disheartening example. I asked a Summer Session class in Plautus to bring in to me certain verses of Plautus,

No. 12

with the scansion marked. This I did after explaining carefully the whole matter at issue. At the next session of the class, when the marked papers were due, one member, who had the title of Professor, most earnestly asked me to allow him to use the system to which he was accustomed the plan I had suggested was too confusing! No wonder the publishers report that of the third edition back of a certain well known handbook there is still a large sale!

This note is meant as a contribution to the history of the suggestion under consideration-a trifling matter, to be sure, and-more important, by far-with the hope, faint, but not yet quite extinct, that some day so simple, but so fruitful a suggestion will be universally adopted.

LET US SAVE THE CLASSICS1

C. K.

War or no war, education has to go on. Our colleges send their seniors and their juniors into the army, but the younger classes should be nearly as large as ever, and the primary and the secondary schools will have full ranks. But the war is teaching us that we must so reform our system of education that it will produce leaders who can master emergencies.

One direction that the reform must take is obvious: for war or for peace, scientific research must have every encouragement. It is the policy that gave Germany its wonderful commercial development, and that has thus far saved it from collapse. Because of its scientific knowledge it has been able to find ingenious substitutes for things that it must have, and that the rest of the world has refused, or been unable, to furnish it. So much we can learn from the enemy. We must follow his example, not in copying or taking over what Germans have discovered or made, but by studying the secrets of nature for the mere love of knowledge, firm in the belief that here, as in Germany, business will find a way to apply the knowledge to industrial uses.

The other direction is not so obvious. Many will sneer when it is urged that it is as essential to our national well-being that we return to classical education as it is that we encourage scientific research. Who are the men that have risen to political leadership? In almost every case they are men who have been trained in the classics. Every country needs strong, wellbalanced leaders, and to be well-balanced they must be well-educated. If scientific training will give them the proper equipment, all the better; but hitherto that form of education has not disposed its strong men to seek high place in government.

That, however, is only one of several reasons for urging a study of the classics. No other groundwork so well prepares a man for a high career in literature. It trains the mind to accuracy of thought and to conciseness of expression. Not everyone is capable of acquiring a classical education or of making the best use of it.

Editorial in The Youth's Companion, October 4, 1917. C. K.

For

Therefore, the old rule of prescribing classics for all, and nothing except classics, was a mistake that no onenow defends and that will not be repeated; but it is an even greater mistake to drop Greek altogether, as most of the secondary schools have done, and to be hostile or indifferent to Latin, as too many of them are. those whom the ancient languages and literature attract, there should be ample and generous provision. Is there any keener or purer intellectual delight than that which scholars find in studying the masterpieces of Greek and Latin literature? Whether it be poetry, drama, history or philosophy, those works are preeminent in the indefinable quality that we call style. No translation can absorb the flavor of such literature. No translator is ever satisfied with his own version. He feels what those literary masters succeeded in saying, but he cannot put the ideas into words of his own language that will enable others to feel it as he does.

There is still room in the will always be need of them. not be intellectual progress. take of denying facilities for ceived and remedied.

world for scholars-there Without them there canSooner or later the mismaking them will be per

ON TRANSLATING HORACE

Horace has, perhaps, attracted more English translators than any other Latin poet. Few indeed are his readers (even those of the class-room) who do not feel at some time a voluntary impulse toward making a written version of a favorite ode. Persons of every class and temperament have not only succumbed to this impulse, but have even entrusted to print its results. Among their numerous ranks may be found famous literati so diverse as Sir Philip Sidney and Dean Swift, Ben Jonson and William Cowper; famous statesmen, such as Gladstone and Warren Hastings; men not famous at all. They present an interesting example of the tendency of humankind to fly in the face of principles which it freely accepts and acknowledges. Every one of them, probably, would agree to the dictum of Shelley1 (himself an offender) concerning "the vanity of translation"-a dictum which states wisely and beautifully the idea we express blunderingly and on the whole untruthfully when we say that it is impossible to dissociate form and content. Nay, they will go farther, and, if they write prefaces to their translations, will almost inevitably declare that Horace is, owing to certain characteristics, even more untranslatable than most poets. I suppose any translator would admit this fact; indeed, he usually takes it into account in his preface, if he have one, and gives it as his reason for adopting some particular method of procedure. And in the vast majority of cases it leads him to translate Horace into verse. Conington, for example, frequently said to be on the whole the most successful renderer of Horace, sets down as the first requisite of a translation "some kind of metrical conformity to <the> original”.

In A Defense of Poetry: "It were as wise to cast a violet into a crucible that you might discover the formal principles of its color and odor, as seek to transfuse from one language into another the creations of a poet. The plant must spring again from its seed, or it will bear no flower-and this is the burthen of the curse of Babel".

This is without doubt a worthy ideal; but it has one serious disadvantage the absolute impossibility of attainment. It is safe, I think, to say that there is no English meter which at all conforms to a Horatian meter, even aside from the vexed question of accent versus quantity. Conington defends his point in more detail than do some of his fellow-translators; but, when we turn to his own practice, we find that the only resemblances his translation of the Sapphic strophe, for instance, with its iambic tetrameters varied by a shorter fourth verse, bears to Horace are the equal number of lines (of which he makes a great deal in his Introduction), and a sort of similarity in appearance on the printed page. The last point applies equally well to Keats's La Belle Dame Sans Merci, than which we can imagine nothing more un-Horatian in sound. Surely it would be shutting our eyes to the real significance of the phrase to allow that such minor resemblances as these constitute metrical conformity! Meter is always a thing to be heard, not seen.

Let us take an example from a poet who was doubly blessed in having both native genius and an excellent classical training. Tennyson wrote of The Daisy: "In a meter which I invented, representing in some measure the grandest of meters, the Horatian Alcaic". Here, then, if at all, we might expect some kind of conformity-some similarity of effect. But we are, it seems to me, disappointed. Tennyson's stanza is very musical and beautiful

O love, what hours were thine and mine,
In lands of palm and southern pine;

In lands of palm, of orange-blossom,
Of olive, aloe, and maize and vine;

but it is difficult to get from it an impression in any wise similar to that gained from Horace's

Velox amoenum saepe Lucretilem
mutat Lycaeo Faunus et igneam
defendit aestatem capellis

usque meis pluviosque ventos.

(I purposely select a stanza not very different in mood from that of Tennyson). There is, it appears, in the Tennysonian measure no room for the stateliness which the inventor himself recognizes as a frequent quality of Horace's Alcaics2; and its easy flow does not readily lend itself to terse, even epigrammatic, expressions, such as the Horatian

or

Dulce et decorum est pro patria mori, Vixere fortes ante Agamemnona, and so on. It is open to question whether many would have guessed that Tennyson's meter was inspired by Horace, had it not been for his note.

The greatest English poet to put his name to a metrical version of Horace is without doubt Milton, whose fine translation of Odes 1.5 has been highly and deservedly praised. It is "Rendred . . . according to the Latin measure", says the translator; and I think we must admit that

See Hallam Tennyson, Alfred Lord Tennyson, 2.377.

[blocks in formation]

the gulf is too wide to leap. To comment on only the most obvious divergence, in this translation, good as it is, the accented syllables do not correspond in position to the long syllables of the original. Milton's lines are iambic; in the first line, for instance, the accent falls on the second, fourth, sixth, eighth, and tenth syllables. But these are by no means Horace's long syllables.

There is another suggestion concerning meter, discussed pro and con so often and so fiercely that one hesitates to bring it up again: the possibility of using the Latin meters in English. But in spite of much persevering effort in this field by many poets, experience seems to show that Latin verse forms, especially the lyric, do not flourish in the climate of our language. There are exceptions, of course notably some of Swinburne's experiments, as for instance his Choriambics:

What strange faces of dreams, voices that called, hands that were raised to wave,

Lured or led thee, alas, out of the sun, down to the sunless grave?

or Tennyson's Alcaics:

O mighty-mouth'd inventor of harmonies,
O skill'd to sing of Time or Eternity,
God-gifted organ-voice of England,
Milton, a name to resound for ages!

Even these, however, have a foreign sound to our ears, as though the words belonged in some other mould. Moreover, they are not really like the Latin forms. Tennyson is careful to point out, "My Alcaics are not intended for Horatian Alcaics". The scope of this paper forbids a minute discussion of the differences the reader of both Latin and English cannot but feel; let me refer in passing, however, to Calverley's careful analysis of them in his essay On Metrical Translation.

But, were we to stop at this point, we should have got nowhere. We may agree, on the strength of the evidence presented, that the form of Horace cannot be reproduced or imitated in English verse; yet neither can it, in all conscience, in prose! Thus far, then, verse and prose translations stand on an equal footing, verse being, if anything, a trifle in the lead, since it is usually the more agreeable medium.

There are, however, further counts against verse; and the first of these is lack of exactness. By exactness, let it be noted, is not meant absolute faithfulness to the order of words and the idiom of the original, which would of course be impossible in any English version; but rather the transfer of Horace's idea to us in words

and idiom that shall not impress us as quaint or foreign, yet shall convey to us what Horace actually said. For instance, we do not want redeunt iam gramina campis arboribusque comae rendered literally as 'return now grasses to the fields and to the trees leaves'; but neither do we want to read it after Dr. Samuel Johnson as

The fields and woods, behold, are green,

when what it really says is, 'Now grass comes back to the fields and foliage to the trees'.

The very best verse translations must, in the nature of things, sin in this way. One cannot at the same time observe the conventions of the verse-form one has chosen, and use all the ideas of the poet and only his ideas, and see to it that the result is intelligible, even pleasing: this threefold effort is too much for mortal man, or has been up to the present time. And, since failures in the first and third requirements are the ones most immediately obvious to the reader, it is the second -the sense—that suffers. Take the Miltonic translation already quoted, which is as nearly faithful as verse rendition can be: in the first stanza alone we find multa in rosa appearing as "on roses", with the adjective nowhere to be found, while the single line Cui flavam religas comam?

is expanded into

For whom bind'st thou
In wreaths thy golden hair?

These are, to be sure, small points; but they are worthy of notice as being the sort of thing that even the genius and the care of Milton could not avoid, and that, usually in much greater measure, interfere with the accuracy of all metrical translations.

It will be worth our while to examine, in this connection, several renditions into verse of a single ode. I choose, for the sake of its brevity and familiarity, 3.13: O fons Bandusiae splendidior vitro, dulci digne mero non sine floribus, cras donaberis haedo,

cui frons turgida cornibus primis et venerem et proelia destinat, frustra, nam gelidos inficiet tibi

rubro sanguine rivos

lascivi suboles gregis.

Te flagrantis atrox hora Caniculae
nescit tangere, tu frigus amabile
fessis vomere tauris

praebes et pecori vago.

Fies nobilium tu quoque fontium,
me dicente cavis inpositam ilicem
saxis, unde loquaces

lymphae desiliunt tuae.

Let us compare with this, not such obviously farfetched English versions as the eighteenth-century one beginning

Ye waves, that gushing fall with purest stream,
Bandusian fount!

but translations that have been admired and acclaimed J. Warton (1776).

« السابقةمتابعة »