genitive nostrātis, dative nostrāti, &c., plural nostrates, and neuter nostratia; e. g., verba nostratia, in Cic., Ad Fam., ii., 11. [§ 140.] 4. The peculiar declension of the pronominal adjectives uter, utrā, utrum; alter, altĕra, alterum; alius (neut. aliud), ullus, and nullus, has already been explained in § 49. Nom. uter, Dat. utri. Gen. utrius, Note. In early Latin there occur several instances of the regular formation of the genit. i, ae, and of the dative o, ae, and some are met with even in the best writers. Cic., De Div., ii., 13, aliae pecudis; De Nat. Deor., ii., 26, altero fratri: Nepos, Eum., 1, alterae alae: "Caes., Bell. Gall., v., 27, alterae legioni: Cic., Pro Rosc. Com., 16, nulli consilii: Caes., Bell. Gall., vi., 13, nullo consilio: Propert., i., 20, 25, nullae curae: ibid., iii., 9, 57, toto orbi. According to Priscian, the regular form of neuter was even more common than the other, and in a grammatical sense we find, for instance, generis neutri; but neutrius is nevertheless preferable. The compound alteruter is either declined in both words, genitive alteriusutrius, accusative alterumutrum, or only in the latter; as, alterutri, alterutrum. The former method seems to have been customary chiefly in the genitive, as we now generally read in Cicero, for the other cases easily admitted of an elision. The other compounds with uter, viz., uterque, uterlibet, utervis, and utercunque, are declined entirely like uter, the suffixes being added to the cases without any change. The words unus, solus and totus are declined like ullus. [9 141.] Note 1.-Alter signifies the other, that is, one of two; alius, another, that is, one of many. But it must be observed that where we use another to express general relations, the Latins use alter; e. g., detrahere alteri sui commodi causa contra naturam est, because, in reality, only two persons are here considered as in relation to each other. Note 2.-Uterque signifies both, that is, each of two, or one as well as the other, and is therefore plural in its meaning. The real plural utrique is used only when each of two parties consists of several individuals; e. g., Macedones-Tyrii, uni-alteri, and both together, utrique. But even good prose writers now and then use the plural utrique in speaking of only two persons or things; as, Nepos, Timol., 2, utrique Dionysii: Curtius, vii., 19, utraeque acies: Liv., xlii., 54, utraque oppida: and xxx., 8, utraque cornua: but this is altogether opposed to the practice of Cicero. (See my note on Cic., in Verr., iii., 60). CHAPTER XXXVII. THE VERB.. [§ 142.] 1. THE verb is that part of speech by which it is declared that the subject of a sentence does or suffers something. This most general difference between doing, which originates in the subject, and suffering, which presupposes the doing or acting of another person or thing, is the origin of the two main forms of verbs, viz., the active and passive (activum et passivum). 2. The active form comprises two kinds of verbs: transitive or active, properly so called, and intransitive or neuter verbs. The difference between them is this: an intransitive verb expresses a condition or action which is not communicated from the agent to any other object; e. g., I walk, I stand, I sleep; whereas the transitive verb expresses an action which affects another person or thing (which in grammar is called the object, and is commonly expressed by the accusative); e. g., I love thee, I read the letter. As far as form is concerned this difference is important, for neuter verbs cannot have a passive voice; whereas every transitive or active verb (in its proper sense) must have a passive voice, since the object of the action is the subject of the suffering; e. g., I love thee-thou art loved; I read the letter-the letter is read. [ 143.] Note 1.-It is not meant that every transitive verb must have an object or accusative, but only that an object may be joined with it. It is obvious that in certain cases, when no object is added, transitive verbs take the sense of intransitive ones. Thus edit, amat, when without an accusative, may be considered to be used for coenat and est in amore, and with regard to their meaning they are intransitive, though in grammar they remain transitive, since aliquid may be understood. In some cases the difference between the transitive and intransitive meaning is ex pressed, even in the formation of the verbs themselves, as in jacere, jacere; pendere, pendere; albare, albēre; fugare, fugere; placare, placere; sedare, se dere, and some others of the same kind. Assuesco and consuesco (I accus tom myself) have assumed an intransitive meaning, the pronoun being omitted, and the new forms assuefacio and consuefacio were devised for the transitive sense. In the same manner, we have the intransitive calere, pa tere, stupere, and the transitive calefacere, patefacere, and stupefacere. [$144.] Note 2.-When an accusative is found with a neuter verb, the neuter verb has either assumed a transitive meaning, and then has also a passive voice, or the accusative is used in the sense of an adverb, and is to be accounted for by some ellipsis, or by a license of speech (Concerning both, see ◊ 383.) Sometimes, however, a passive voice is formed from real neuter verbs but only in the infinitive and in the third person singular, and the verb becomes impersonal, i. e., it is without any distinct subject: for instance, stari jubet, he orders (one) to stand; favetur tibi, favour is shown to thee; via excessum est, (people) went out of the way; ventum est, itum est, itur, eatur, ibitur. Thus, when in comedy the question is asked, quid agitur? the humorous answer is statur, or vivitur. When the subject is to be added, it is done by means of ab, as in Livy, Romam frequenter migratum est a parentibus raptarum, which is equivalent to parentes migraverunt; and in Cicero, ejus orationi vehementer ab omnibus reclamatum est, and occurritur autem nobis et quidem a doctis et eruditis, equivalent to omnes reclamarunt and docti occurrunt. [§ 145.] Note 3.-With transitive verbs the subject itself may become the object, e. g., moveo, I move, and moveo me, I move myself. It often occurs in Latin that the pronoun is omitted, and the transitive is thus changed into an intransitive. The verb abstineo admits of all three constructions; transitive, as in manus ab aliqua re abstineo, 1 keep my hands from a thing; with the pronoun of the same person, abstineo me, and intransitive, abstineo aliqua re, Í abstain from a thing. There are some other verbs of this class, consisting chiefly of such as denote change; e. g., vertere and convertere, mutare, flectere and deflectere, inclinare; hence we may say, for instance, inclino rem, sol se declinat; and in an intransitive sense, dies, acies, inclinat; animus inclinat ad pacem faciendam; verto rem, verto me; detrimentum in bonum vertit, ira in rabiem vertit; fortuna rei publicae mutavit; mores populi Romani magnopere mutaverunt. In like manner the following verbs are used both as transitive and intransitive, though with greater restrictions: augere, abolere, decoquere, durare, incipere, continuare, insinuare, laxare, remittere, lavare, movere (chiefly with terra, to quake, in an intransitive sense, though now and then in other connexions also), praecipitare, ruere, suppeditare, turbare, vibrare. The compounds of vertere-devertere, divertere and revertere-are used only in this reflective sense, but occur also in the passive with the same meaning. [ 146.] We must here observe that the passive of many words has not only a properly passive meaning, but also a reflective one, as in crucior, I torment myself; delector, I delight myself; fallor, I deceive myself; feror, I throw myself (upon something); moveor and commoveor, I move or excite myself; homines effunduntur, men rush (towards a place); vehicula franguntur, the vehicles break; lavor, I bathe (myself); inclinor, I incline; mutor, I alter (myself); vertor, but especially de- di- and re-vertor. Many of these passive verbs are classed among the deponents, the active from which they are formed being obsolete, or because the intransitive meaning greatly differs. [§ 147.] 3. It is a peculiarity of the Latin language, that it has a class of verbs of a passive form, but of an active (either transitive or intransitive) signification. They are called deponents (laying aside, as it were, their passive signification), e. g., consōlor, I console; imitor, I imitate; fateor, I confess; sequor, I follow; mentior, I lie; morior, I die. These verbs, even when they have a transitive signification, cannot have a passive voice, because there would be no distinct form for it. Note. Many deponents are, in fact, only passives, either of obsolete actives, or of such as are still in use. The latter can be regarded as deponents only in so far as they have acquired a peculiar signification: e. g., gravor signifies, originally, "I am burdened ;" hence, "I do a thing unwillingly," "I dislike," "I hesitate;" vehor, I am carried, or I ride, equo, on horseback, curru, in a carriage. Several passives, as was remarked above, have acquired the power of deponents from their reflective signification; e. g., pascor, I feed myself; versor, I turn myself, and thence I find myself, or I am. The following deponents are in this manner derived from obsolete actives: laetor, I rejoice; proficiscor, I get myself forward, I travel; vescor, I feed myself, I eat. With regard to the greater number of deponents, however, we are obliged to believe that the Latin language, like the Greek, with its verba media, in forming these middle verbs, followed peculiar laws which are unknown to us. It must be especially observed that many deponents of the first conjugation are derived from nouns, and that they express being that which the noun denotes e. g., ancillor, architector, argutor, aucupor, auguror, &c., as may be seen from the list in § 207. [§ 148.] 4. Before proceeding, we must notice the following special irregularities. The three verbs fio, I become, or am made, vapulo, I am beaten, and veneo, I am sold, or for sale, have a passive signification, and may be used as the passives of facio, verbero, and vendo; but, like all neuter verbs, they have the active form, except that fio makes the perfect tense factus sum, so that form and meaning agree. They are called neutralia passiva. The verbs audeo, fido, gaudeo, and soleo have the passive form with an active signification in the participle of the preterite, and in the tenses formed from it; as, ausus, fisus, gavisus, solitus sum, eram, &c. They may, therefore, be called semideponentia, which is a more appropriate name than neutro-passiva, as they are usually termed, since the fact of their being neuters cannot come here into consideration. To these we must add, but merely with reference to the participle of the preterite, the verbs jurare, coenare, prandere, and potare, of which the participles juratus, coenatus, pransus, and potus have, like those of deponents, the signification: one that has sworn, 'dined, breakfasted, and drunk. The same is the case with some other intransitive verbs, which, as such, ought not to have a participle of the preterite at all; but still we sometimes find conspiratus and coalitus, and frequently adultus and obsoletus (grown up and obsolete), in an active, but intransitive sense, and the poets use cretus (from cresco) like natus.* *["No allusion is made in this chapter to the more philosophical di vision of the conjugations adopted in all Greek grammars, the division, namely, into contracted and uncontracted verbs. The more correct name for the same division would be, verbs in which the crude form (that part independent of inflection) terminates in a vowel, and those in which it terminates in a consonant; contraction is not the criterion, as we see in the forms fert, vult. We believe such a division is preferable even for a beginner. One great advantage of a natural division over that which is artificial consists in the facility the former affords of explaining, on solid principles, those numerous irregularities which appear in every language. CHAPTER XXXVIII. MOODS. TENSES. [§ 149.] THERE are four general modes (moods, modi) in which an action or condition expressed by a verb may We would even carry the division first alluded to somewhat farther. Sup pose, then, in Latin we were to assign one conjugation to those verbs in which a consonant is the characteristic, viz., the conjugation usually placed third in order, and five others to the respective vowels: 1st, a, (amao) amo; 2dly, e, neo; 3dly, i, audio; 4thly, o, as in the stem no or gno, whence the perfects no-vi, and co-gno-vi; and, 5thly, u, (stem argu), as in arguo. Let us press this system a little farther and judge of it by its results. If the perfects of these verbs are uniform, they will be amavi, nevi, audivi, novi, arguvi. The first four are the common forms; in the last, as the repetition of the same vowel was unnecessary, argui became the form in common use; but the perfect was still distinguished by the older writers from the present. Thus, we have a line of Ennius (Priscian, x., 2, Krehl, p. 480), as follows: Annuit sese mecum decernere ferro.' It may well be doubted whether, even in the age of Cicero, the present arguit was altogether confounded in pronunciation with the perfect of the same written form. All these perfects, too, were susceptible of contraction in some of the persons, so that we have no reason to be surprised at monui, habui. That habevi must once have existed is sufficiently proved by the form of habessit, which is contracted from habeverit, exactly as cantassit from cantaverit. Contractions are always more likely to occur in long than short words. Hence neo, fleo, with a few others, retained the original form, while the longer words could afford to spare one of their letters. The examination of the so-called supines would again confirm the simplicity of the system. To this mode of viewing the verbs it has been objected that if amat be really formed from amait, the last syllable should be long. The inference is legitimate, and, accordingly, we find in the earlier writers that such is the case. At the beginning of the De Senectute there occurs the line, 'Que nunc te coquit, et versat in pectore fixa,' where, in the old editions, as Grævius observes, some critic, alarmed for the metre, had substituted sub pectore. The same editor gives another line, quoted by Priscian from Livius Andronicus: Cum socios nostros mandisset impius Cyclops, where the long e in mandisset corresponds with the long vowel in the other persons of the same tense. A second objection to the proposed division may be founded on the class of verbs fugio, cupio, fodio, &c. This objection, it might be replied, is equally applicable to every division. The true explanation is to be found in the fact that many of the Latin verbs had different forms at different periods of the language, or even at the same period in different places. That cupio was looked upon by many as of the fourth conjugation, we have the express authority of Priscian; cupivi and cupitum are formed according to the analogy of that conjugation, and in Plautus and Lucretius we find cupis and cupiri. St. Augustin was in doubt whether to write fugire. This is far below the age of pure Latinity. On the other hand, in the Marcian prophecy, given by Livy, it has been long perceived that the verses were originally hexame ters. The word fuge at the end of the first line has been altered by some to feuge, to complete the metre. Perhaps it would be more correct to read fugito, the more so as the imperative in to, from its more solemn power (arising, probably, from its greater antiquity), is better suited to the dignified language of prophecy. Lastly, many of the verbs of this termi |