intelligi noluit, omittamus, Cic. It must be observed, as a peculiarity, that ut, even without there being any particular emphasis, is commonly placed after the words vix, paene, and prope, and also after the negatives nullus, nemo, nihil, and the word tantum; e. g., vix ut arma retinere posset; nihil ut de commodis suis cogitarent. The conjunctions que, ve, and ne are appended to other words, and stand with them at the beginning of a proposition; but when a monosyllabic preposition stands at the beginning they often attach themselves to the case governed by those prepositions; e. g., Romam Cato (Tusculo) demigravit, in foroque esse coepit; legatum miserunt, ut is apud eum causam aratorum ageret, ab eoque peteret; and so, also, ad populum ad plebemve ferre; in nostrane potestate est quid meminerimus? We never find adque, obque, aque; whereas proque summa benevolentia, and the like, are used exclusively; and in other combinations either method may be adopted: cumque his copiis and cum firmisque praesidiis; exque his and ex iisque; eque republica, deque universa rep. and de provinciaque decessit. Apud quosque, in Cic., de Off., 1., 35, is an excusable peculiarity, because apudque quos would be against all euphony.

[$357.] What was said above concerning the different positions of itaque and igitur in Cicero is well known, and generally correct; but it is not so well known that igitur is, nevertheless, placed by that author now and then at the beginning of a proposition, and that not only in philosophic reasonings, as Bremi states on Cic., de Fin., i., 18, and as we find it in de Fin., iv., 19, si illud, hoc: non autem hoc, igitur ne illud quidem; but in the ordinary connexion of sentences; in Rull., ii., 27, igitur pecuniam omnem Decemviri tenebunt; de Prov. Cons., 4, igitur in Syria nihil aliud actum est; Lael., 11, igitur ne suspicari quidem possumus; Philip., ii., 16, in fin., igitur fratrem exheredans te faciebat heredem; Philip., x., 8, igitur illi certissimi Caesaris actorum patroni pro D. Bruti salute bellum gerunt; de Leg., i., 6, Igitur doctissimis viris proficisci placuit a lege; ad Att., vi., i., 22, Igitur tu quoque salutem utique adscribito. Sallust too frequently places igitur at the beginning. But itaque in the second place does not occur in Cicero, for in Philip., vii., 3, we must read, according to the best MS., igitur, instead of itaque, in the sentence, ego itaque pacis, ut ita dicam, alumnus, and in Partit. Orat., 7, quidem is more correct. In Curtius, itaque appears in the second place only once (vii., 39). In like manner, the rule cannot be upset by the few passages in which Cicero places vero, in answers, at the beginning (just as enim is used by the comic writers). See de Republ., i., 37, 43; de Leg., i., 24; in Rull., ii., 25; p. Mur., 31, § 65.

[ 358.] All this applies only to the practice of prose writers. Poets, according to the necessity of the verse, place even the prepositive_conjunctions after one or more words of a proposition; e. g., Horat., Epod., 17, 45, et tu, potes nam, solve me dementiae; Serm., i., 5, 86, quattuor hinc rapimur viginti et milia rhedis; ibid., i., 10, 71, vivos et roderet ungues. They separate et from the word belonging to it; as, Horat., Carm., iii., 4, 6, audire et videor pios errare per lucos; Serm., ii., 6, 3, Auctius atque dii melius fecere; and they append que and ve neither to the first word of a proposition, nor to their proper words in other connexions; e. g., Tibull., i., 3, 55,

Hic jacet immiti consumptus morte Tibullus,
Messallam terra dum sequiturque mari,

instead of the prose form terra marique; and in Horat., Serm., ii., 3, 139, Non Pyladen ferro violare aususve sororem.

But it is to be observed that those conjunctions in such arbitrary positions are joined only to verbs. Isolated exceptions, such as in Horat., Carm,, ii., 19, 28, pacis eras mediusque belli; and iii, 1, 12, Moribus hic meliorque fama contendat; Ovid., Met., ii., 89, dum resque sinit; and Pedo Albín., de Morte Drusi, 20, cannot be taken into account.

CHAPTER LXVIII.

INTERJECTIONS.

[§ 359.] 1. INTERJECTIONS are sounds uttered under the influence of strong emotions. They are indeclinable, and stand in no close connexion with the rest of the sentence; for the dative and accusative, which are joined with some of them, are easily explained by an ellipsis. See § 402 and 403.

2. The number of interjections in any language cannot be fixed. Those which occur most frequently in Latin authors are the following:

(a) Of joy: io, iu, ha, he, hahahe, euoe, euax.

(b) Of grief: vae, heu, eheu, ohe, au, hei, pro.

(c) Of astonishment; o, en or ecce, hui, hem, ehem, aha, atat, papae, vah; and of disgust: phui, apage. (See § 222.)

(d) Of calling: heus, o, eho, chodum; of attestation: pro, also written proh.

(e). Of praise or flattery: eia, euge.

[§ 360.] 3. Other parts of speech, especially nouns, substantive and adjective, adverbs and verbs, and even complex expressions, such as oaths and invocations, must in particular connexions be regarded as interjections. Such nouns are: pax (be still!), malum, indignum, nefandum, miserum, miserabile-to express astonishment and indignation; macte, and with a plural macti, is expressive of approbation. (See § 103.) Adverbs: nae, profecto, cito, bene, belle! Verbs used as interjections are: quaeso, precor, oro, obsecro, amabo (to all of which te or vos may be added), used in imploring and requesting. So, also, age, agite, cedo, sodes (for si audes), sis, sultis (for si vis, si vultis), and agesis, agedum, agitedum.

Note.-Nae in the best writers is joined only with pronouns: nae ego, nae illi vehementer errant, nae ista gloriosa sapientia non magni aestimanda est. Pyrrhus, after the battle of Heraclea, said, Nae ego, si iterum eodem modo vicero, sine ullo milite in Epirum revertar, Oros., iv., 1.

[§ 361.] 4. Among the invocations of the gods, the following are particularly frequent: mehercule, mehercle, hercule, hercle, or mehercules, hercules, medius fidius, mecastor, ecastor, pol, edepol, per deum, per deum immortalem, per deos, per Jovem, pro (or proh) Juppiter, pro sancte (su

preme) Juppiter, pro dii immortales, pro deum fidem, pro deum atque hominum fidem, pro deum or pro deum immortalium (scil. fidem), and several others of this kind.

Note.-Me before the names of gods must be explained by an ellipsis : the complete expression was, ita me (e. g., Hercules) juvet; or with the vocative, ita me Hercule juves. The interjection medius fidius arose, in all probability, from me dius (Alós) fidius, which is archaic for filius, and is thus equivalent to mehercules, for Hercules is the son of that god. Mehercule is the form which Cicero (Orat., 47) approves, and which, along with hercule, occurs most frequently in his writings. See my note on in Verr., iii., 62. The oath by Pollux (pol) is a very light one, and hence it is given especially to women in the comic writers. In edepol and edecastor the e is either the same as me, or it is a mere sound of interjection; de is deus.*

SYNTAX.

I. CONNEXION OF SUBJECT AND PREDICATE.+

CHAPTER LXIX.

[§ 362.] 1. THE subject of a proposition is that concerning which anything is declared, and the predicate that which is declared concerning the subject. The subject appears either in the form of a substantive, or in that of an adjective or pronoun, supplying the place of a substantive. Whenever there is no such grammatical subject, the indeclinable part of speech or proposition which takes its place is treated as a substantive of the neuter gender. (Compare § 43.)

[363.] Note 1.-The manner in which a pronoun supplies the place of a substantive requires no explanation. An adjective can be used as a substantive only when a real substantive is understood. The substantive most frequently and easily understood is homo, and many Latin words which are properly adjectives have thus acquired the meaning of substantives; e. g., amicus, familiaris, aequalis, vicinus, &c. (see $ 410, foll.), and others, such as socius, servus, libertinus, reus, candidatus, although most fre quently used as substantives, nevertheless occur also as adjectives. But upon this point the Dictionary must be consulted, and we only remark that

[The more common, and very probably the more correct opinion makes edepol and edecastor to be for per adem Pollucis, and per adem Castoris, i. e.,"by the temple of Pollux," &c. These forms are still farther shortened into Epol, Ecastor. The dental D appears to have been dropped in the forms of the old Latin language when preceded and followed by a vowel, just as we find it to be frequently the case in the French forms of Latin words. (Donaldson's Varronianus, p. 272, note.)]-Am. Ed.

+[For a more extended view of this subject, consult Weissenborn (Lat. Schulgramm., p. 184, seqq.).]—Am. Ed.

[Writers on general grammar make the adjective as truly a noun, or the name of a thing, as a substantive. (Consult Donaldson's New Cratylus, p. 375, seqq.)]-Am. Ed.

ordinary adjectives are used as substantives with the ellipsis of homo, as bonus, nocens, innocens. But an adjective in the singular is not commonly used in this way, and we scarcely ever find such a phrase as probus nemi nem laedit, instead of homo probus neminem laedit. Sapiens, a sage, or a phi losopher, and liber, a free man, alone are used as substantives in the sin gular. In the plural, however, the omission of the substantive homines, denoting general classes of men, is much more frequent, and we find, e. g., pauperes, divites, boni, improbi, docti, and indocti, just as we say the rich, the poor, &c. It must, however, be observed that very few adjectives, when used as substantives, can be accompanied by other adjectives, and we cannot say, e. g., multi docti for multi homines (viri) docti.* The neuters of adjectives of the second declension, however, are used very frequently as substantives, both in the singular and plural. Thus we read bonum, a good thing; contrarium, the contrary; verum, that which is true; malum, evil; honestum in the sense of virtus, and bona, mala, contraria, &c In the plural neuter adjectives of the third declension are used in the same way; as, turpia, levia, coelestia. But the Latins, in general, preferred adding the substantive res to an adjective, to using the neuter of it as a substantive; as, res contrariae, res multae, res leviores, just as we do in English.

[364.] Note 2.-It is worth noticing that the word miles is frequently used in Latin in the singular where we should have expected the plural; e. g., in Curtius, iii., init., Alexander ad conducendum ex Peloponneso militem Cleandrum cum pecunia mittit; Tac., Ann., ii., 31, cingebatur interim milite domus, strepebant etiam in vestibulo. Similar words, such as eques, pedes, are used in the same way, and the instances are very numerous.† Romanus, Poenus, and others are likewise used for Romani and Poeni in the sense of Roman, Punian soldiers.

[§ 365.] 2. The predicate appears either in the form of a verb, or of the auxiliary combined with a noun.

The predicate accommodates itself as much as possible to its subject. When the predicate is a verb, it must be in the same number as the subject; e. g., arbor viret, the tree is green; arbores virent, the trees are green; deus est, God is; dii sunt, the gods are or exist. When the predicate is an adjective, participle, or adjective pronoun, combined with the auxiliary esse, it takes the number and gender of the subject; e. g., puer est modestus, libri sunt mei, prata sunt secta. When the predicate is a substantive with the auxiliary esse, it is independent of the subject both in regard to number and gender; e. g., captivi militum praeda fuerant; amicitia vinculum quoddam est hominum inter se. But when a substantive has two forms, one masculine and the other feminine; as, rex, reginą; magister, magistra; inventor, inventrix; indagator, indagatrix; corruptor, corruptrix; praeceptor, praeceptrix,

[But we can say multa bona, plurimi improbi, &c. Consult Billroth, Lat. Gr., p. 204, ed. Ellendt.]-Am. Ed

+ [In all these cases we are to regard miles, eques, &c., as collective nouns. A much rarer usage is the following, rex for reges (Cic., Deiot., 9, 26); amicus for amicorum genus, (Cic., Lael., 16, 65.)]—Am. Ed.

the predicate must appear in the same gender as the subject; e. g., licentia corruptrix est morum; stilus optimus est dicendi effector et magister. When the subject is a neuter the predicate takes the masculine form, the latter being more nearly allied to the neuter than the feminine; e. g., tempus vitae magister est. When the subject is a noun epicene (see § 42), the predicate follows its grammatical gender; as, aquila volucrum regina, fida ministra Jovis, though it would not be wrong to say aquila rex volucrum.

It is only by way of exception that esse is sometimes connected with adverbs of place; such as aliquis or aliquid prope, propter, longe, procul est, or when esse signifies to be in a condition;" e. g., Cic., ad Fam, ix., 9, praeterea rectissime sunt apud te omnia, everything with you is in a very good state or condition; de Leg., i., 17, quod est longe aliter; Liv., viii., 19 (dicebant), se sub imperio populi Romani fideliter atque obedienter futuros. Sallust and Tacitus connect esse, also, with the adverbs abunde, impune, and frustra, and use them as indeclinable adjectives; e. g., omnia mala abunde erant; ea res frustra fuit; dicta impune erant.*

[9 366.] Note 1.-Collective nouns, that is, such as denote a multitude of individual persons or things; e. g., multitudo, turba, vis, exercitus, juventus, nobilitas, gens, plebs, vulgus, frequently occur in poetry with a plural verb for their predicate; e. g., Ovid., Metam., xii., 53, Atria turba tenent, veniunt lege vulgus euntque; Fast., ii., 507, Tura ferant placentque novum pia turba Quirinum. As for the practice of prose writers, there is no passage in Cicero to prove that he used this construction (see my note on Cic., in Verr., i., 31, 80), and in Caesar and Sallust it occurs either in some solitary instance, as Caes., Bell. Gall., ii., 6, quum tanta multitudo lapides ac tela conjicerent, or the passages are not critically certain. (See Oudendorp on Caes., Bell. Gall., iii., 17, and Corte on Sallust, Jugurth., 28.) But Livy takes greater liberty, and connects collective substantives with the plural, as ii., 5, Desectam segetem magna vis hominum immissa corbibus fudere in Tiberim; xxiv., 3, Locros omnis multitudo abeunt; xxxii., 12, Cetera omnis multitudo, velut signum aliquod secuta, in unum quum convenisset, frequenti agmine petunt Thessaliam. (Compare Drakenborch on xxxv., 26.) He even expresses the plurality of a collective noun by using the noun standing by its side in the plural; as in xxvi., 35, Haec non in occulto, sed propalam in foro atque oculis ipsorum Consulum ingens turba circumfusi fremebant; xxv., 34, Cuneus is hostium, qui in confertos circa ducem impetum fecerat, ut exanimem labentem ex equo Scipionem vidit, alacres gaudio cum clamore per totam aciem nuntiantes discurrunt; xxvii., 51, tum enimvero omnis aetas currĕre obvii; so, also, in i., 41, clamor inde concursusque populi, mirantium quid rei esset. But such instances are, after all, rare and surprising. The case is different when the notion of a plurality is derived from a collective noun of a preceding proposition, and made the subject of a proposition which follows. Instances of this kind occur now and then in Cicero; de Nat.

* [Consult Weissenborn, Lat. Schulgr., p. 186, § 155, Anm. 3.]—Am. Ed.