num et Pompeianum me valde delectant, nisi quod me aere alieno obruerunt. (Nisi ut are likewise joined together, but in a different sense, ut retaining its proper signification; e. g., nihil aliud ex hac re quaero, nisi ut homines intelligant, except that people may see.)

As the Latin nisi after negatives is rendered in English not only by "except," but by "than," the beginner must beware of translating this "than" by quam. It is only after nihil aliud that we may use either nisi or quam, nisi referring to nihil, and quam to aliud. The difference is this, that nihil aliud nisi signifies "nothing farther," or "nothing more," and nihil aliud quam, "nothing else," or "no other thing but this particular one." Hence, Cic. (de Orat., ii., 12) says, Erat historia nihil aliud nisi annalium confectio (but it should be more); de Off., i., 23, Bellum ita suscipiatur, ut nihil aliud nisi pax quaesita videatur (and not other advantages besides); Tusc., i., 34, Nihil aliud est discere, nisi recordari. Praeter is used in the same sense in Cic., de Off., ii., 2, nec quidquam aliud est philosophia praeter studium sapientiae (nothing more). But in de Leg., i., 8, we read, Virtus est nihil aliud quam in se perfecta et ad summum perducta natura (this definition comprising everything); Nep., Lys., 1, Nihil aliud molitus est quam ut omnes civitates in sua teneret potestate. Quam must, as a matter of course, be used, when it refers to a comparative; as, nihil magis timeo quam illum.

F. Prepositions.

The

[§ 736.] The use of every separate preposition has been fully explained in Chap. LXV., and there is no farther general remark to be made, except that the beginner must be cautioned not to join two prepositions, as we do in English; e. g., "to speak for and against a law," or, "I have learned this with, and, to some extent, from, him." only mode of rendering these sentences in Latin is, pro lege et contra legem dicere; haec cum eo, partim etiam ab eo didici. Those dissyllabic prepositions only, which are also used without a noun and as adverbs, may follow another, without being joined with a case; e. g., Cicero, quod aut secundum naturam esset, aut contra; Livy, cis Pudum ultraque. Caesar (Bell. Civ., iii., 72) reverses the order, intra extraque munitiones. Compare, also, § 794

G. Conjunctions.

[§ 737.] 1. Respecting the signification of the several conjunctions, see Chap. LXVII. Those who wish to acquire a thorough knowledge of the Latin language cannot bestow too much attention on this part of speech. From a careful observation of their use in good authors, we learn that many combinations have, in fact, quite a different meaning from what lies on the surface. Atque adeo, properly" and even," acquires the power of correcting that which precedes, and also enhances the sense; hence it becomes equivalent to vel potius, or rather. (See § 336. Compare what is said of immo in § 277.) E. g., Cic., in Verr., iii., 8, Tu homo minimi consilii, nullius auctoritatis, injussu populi ac senatus, tota Sicilia recusante, cum maximo detrimento atque adeo exitio vectigalium, totam Hieronicam legem sustulisti. At quam legem corrigit, judices, atque adeo totam tollit? and, Verres tot annis atque adeo saeculis inventus est.

[§ 738.] 2. Attention must be paid to the following peculiarity of the Latin language: when the negative power of a proposition is not expressed by non, but contained in some other word, the negative is usually combined with the copulative conjunction; hence, instead of et and ut with the negatives nemo, nihil, nullus, nunquam, we find much more frequently neque (nec) and ne with the corresponding affirmative words quisquam, ullus, unquam, usquam. It must, however, be observed (see § 709), that "in order that no one" is rendered in Latin by ne quis, and never by ne quisquam. But it should not be forgotten that ne cannot be used everywhere, and that ut nemo, ut nullus, &c., are required in all cases in which ut non must be employed, and not ne. (See § 532.) E. g., Cic., Cat. Maj., 12, impedit enim consilium voluptas ac mentis, ut ita dicam, praestringit oculos, nec habet ullum cum virtute commercium; ibid., 19, horae quidem cedunt, et dies et menses et anni: nec praeteritum tempus unquam revertitur; Sallust, Cat., 29, Senatus decrevit, darent operam consules, ne quid respublica detrimenti caperet; Caes., Bell. Gall., i., 46, Caesar suis imperavit, ne quod omnino telum in hostes rejicerent.

[§ 739.] 3. When any clause inserted in another has impeded or disturbed the construction, the return to the con

struction of the leading sentence is indicated by one of the conjunctions igitur, verum, verumtamen, sed, sed tamen, which we commonly render by "I say." In Latin, too, inquam is sometimes so used (as in Cic., in Verr., iv., 29, 67; p. Muren., 30, 63), but the conjunctions are much more common; Cic., de Off., iii., 16, M. Cato sententiam dixit, hujus nostri Catonis pater (ut enim ceteri ex patribus, sic hic, qui illud lumen progenuit, ex filio est nominandus): is igitur judex ita pronuntiavit, emptori damnum praestarı oportere; Philip., ii., 32, Primum quum Caesar ostendisset, se, priusquam proficisceretur, Dolabellam consulem esse jussurum: quem negant regem, qui et faceret semper ejusmodi aliquid et diceret: sed quum Caesar ita dixisset, tum hic bonus augur eo se sacerdotio praeditum esse dixit, &c. See Heusinger on this passage, and compare in Cat., iii., 2, init.; p. Planc., 4; de Leg., ii., 1, Quare ante mirabar -sed mirabar, ut dixi, &c. As for the other conjunctions used in this manner, see in Cat., iv., 11; Philip., ii., 37; de Fin., ii., 22; p. Rosc. Am., 43, in Verr., iii., 2, init.; ad Att., i., 10, init.; p. Sext., 10, init. Nam is also employed in this way; as, p. Planc., 41. Itaque is doubtful in Cic., de Fin., i., 6, 19, but occurs in Liv., ii., 12, init. [§ 740.] 4. Siquis often seems to stand for the relative pronoun, as in Greek eiriç for öçris; but it always contains the idea of "perhaps," which it naturally retains from its proper signification of a possible condition; e.g., Liv., xxi., 37, Nuda fere Alpium cacumina sunt, et si quid est pabuli, obruunt nives; Cic., in Verr., v., 25, iste quasi praeda sibi advecta, non praedonibus captis, si qui senes aut deformes erant, eos in hostium numero ducit, qui aliquid formae, aetatis, artificiique habebant, abducit omnes; Brut., 69, C. Cosconius nullo acumine, eam tamen verborum copiam, si quam habebat, populo praebebat. Ernesti proposed to strike out si, but it may be explained in the manner stated above, for Cicero does not even like to admit that Cosconius possessed copia verborum; and in a similar manner he speaks with some doubt of his own eloquence, c. 87, etsi tu melius existimare videris de ea, si quam nunc habemus, facultate; and, also, Divin., 15, ipse Allienus ex ea facultate, si quam habet, aliquantum detracturus est.

[§ 741.] 5. The conjunction et (que and atque) not unfrequently connects two substantives, and places them on an equality with each other although properly one bears to

the other the relation of a genitive or an adjective. This kind of connexion is called ềv dɩà dvoĩv, that is, one idea is expressed by two words independent of each other, for a genitive and an adjective, when joined to a substantive, constitute only one idea. When, e. g., Virg., Georg., 1, 192, says, pateris libamus et auro, it is equivalent to pateris aureis; and, Aen., i., 61, molem et montes insuper altos imposuit, equivalent to molem altorum montium. But similar expressions occur also in prose, and oratorical dicion thereby gains in fulness and power; e. g., Cic., in Cat., i., 13, ut saepe homines aegri morbo gravi, quum aestu febrique jactantur, i. e., aestu febris; p. Flacc., 2, quem plurimi cives devincti necessitudine ac vetustate, i. e., vetustate necessitudinis; p. Arch., 6, ex his studiis haec quoque crescit oratio et facultas, i. e., facultas dicendi; in Verr., V., 14, jus imaginis ad memoriam posteritatemque prodere, i. e., ad memoriam posteritatis; ibid., iv., 35, complesse coronis et floribus; and, in Curt., iv., 17, navigia redimita floribus coronisque, with garlands of flowers. It is particularly frequent in Tacitus; as, Ann., ii., 69, carmina et devotiones reperiebantur, for carmina devotionum; ii., 83, tempore ac spatio, for temporis spatio; xii., 27, veteranos coloniamque deducere, for coloniam veteranorum. Of a somewhat different, though similar kind, are those combinations of substantives, where the second contains a more accurate definition of the general meaning of the first. The substantive which occurs most frequently in such combinations is vis; as, vi et armis, vi ac minis, vi et contentione, vi ac necessitate.

CHAPTER LXXXV.

PLEONASM.

[§ 742.] 1. PLEONASM is that mode of expression in which several words of the same or similar meaning are accumulated, or in which a thought is conveyed in more words than are necessary to express the meaning.

2. The first kind of pleonasm does not, properly speaking, belong to Latin grammar. Good authors accumulate words of similar meaning only when they intend to set forth a particular thing forcibly and emphatically, and they take care that there is a certain gradation in the words

they put together; as in relinquere ac deser ere, deserere ac derelinquere; aversari et execrari; rogo te oroque, oro te atque obsecro; gaudeo vehementerque laetor, laetor et triumpho; hoc animis eorum insitum atque innatum videtur esse; agitatur et perterretur Furiarum taedis ardentibus; hoc maxime vestros animos excitare atque inflammare debet. Innumerable instances of this kind are found in the orators, and they constitute a great part of the copia verborum which is required of orators. But they go even farther, and when their endeavour to accumulate words for the sake of emphasis becomes still more striking, it is called a rhetorical figure; e. g., when Cicero (in Cat., i., 5) calls on Catiline to quit Rome, Quae quum ita sint, Catilina, perge quo coepisti: egredere aliquando ex urbe: patent portae: proficiscere; and where he describes Catiline's flight (in Cat., ii., 1), Abiit, excessit, evasit, erupit. But in grammar we have to notice only certain combinations, which by usage have become so familiar, that they do not appear to contain any particular emphasis; as, casu et fortuito, forte fortuna, forte temere, prudens sciens, vivus vidensque, volens propitius, fundere et fugare; and some legal and political expressions, where it was originally intended, by an accurate phraseology, to prevent a wrong or ambiguous application. Expressions of this kind are, pecunia capta conciliata, Cic., in Verr., iii., 94: ager datus assignatus, Philip., v., in fin.: nihil aequi boni impetravit, Philip., ii., 37: quum Brutus exercitum conscripserit compararit, in a decree of the senate, Philip., v., 13, and others.

[§ 743.] 3. The second kind of pleonasm belongs to grammar, inasmuch as certain redundant expressions are sanctioned by usage, and can no longer be considerea faulty. But we must not suppose that a thing expressed by a redundancy of words is quite equivalent to a shorter expression which we may meet with elsewhere. The language of good authors is not arbitrary in this respect, and two modes of expression never have quite the same meaning. It is not, however, our object here to trace such differences in their minutest details, but only in general to mention those cases in which the Latin usage employs more words than appear necessary to a person who judges of it by the standard of a modern language.

4. A preceding substantive is often repeated after the