Зображення сторінки

wrote Bruges instead of Phryges; because the latter mode of spelling the nominative case would have obliged them to write the oblique cases also with Greek letters, though with Latin terminations. Phryges would be a complete Greek word; Brugibus, a complete Latin word; Phrygibus, neither the one nor the other: “Vi patefecerunt Bruges, non Phryges ipsius antiqui declarant libri ; nec enim Græcam literam adhibebant (nunc autem etiam duas): et cum Phrygum et cum Phrygibus dicendum esset, absurdum erat, aut tantum barbaris casibus Græcam literam adhibere, aut recto casu solum Græce loqui." (Orator. 48.) But whether this solution be correct or not, it is impossible, unless we go beyond Gesner, and pronounce the whole passage of Quinctilian to be absolute nonsense, to avoid the conclusion, that at that time the Greeks laid the accent on the first syllable of Olvutog and of rúpavvoc: for had they called those words Ολύμπος and τυράννος, this would have agreed with the ordinary Roman accentuation, and would have left nothing to change: whereas the word “ dederunt” necessarily implies, that the critics in question did make a change, did give (that is, apply) an accent to a syllable in the Latin word, which had none in the corresponding Greek word. Apollonius, in contending that vikóvde and words of that construction are not adverbs, but that they consist of two words, a noun and the particle dè, says that this is proved by the accent : Τα μεν εκ της

τάσεως προφανή πώς γαρ τρίτη από τέλους η περισπωμένη και πως τετάρτη από τέλους η οξεία ; λέγω εν τω οίκόνδε, ούλυμπόνδε. (De Adverbio in Bekker.

Anecdot. Græc. p. 592.) This proves beyond a question, that the accent was on the first syllable of Oϋλυμπον.

Tryphon, speaking of the accent of movnpoc and μοχθηρος, argues that they ought, according to analogy, to have the accent on the last syllable, though the Attics make them barytones : Ei dè οι Αττικοί βαρυτονουσιν, ου θαυμαστόν εστι χαίρουσι γαρ τη βαρύτητι άδελφε γαρ λέγουσι, την πρώτην οξυτονούντες, ως απελθε. (Cit. in Ammon. Περί ομοίων και διαφόρων λέξεων. υoc. Πονηρόν.) Apollonius says that words having an acute or a circumflex on the penultimate, yet when com. pounded, have the accent on the antepenultimate, as κούρος, άκουρος, επίκουρος, &c. (Syntax, 1. 23. p. 60.) The same author tells us that we may know by the accent, whether a part of a sentence is to be taken to consist of two words or of one: Το γαρ Διός κόρος παροξυνόμενον μεν την γενικήν έχει ιδια νοουμένην, όμοιον όν τώ Διός υιός, προπαροξυνόμενον δε, όμοιόν εστι τώ Διόγνητος Διόσδοτος. (Syntax, iv. 1. p. 298.) And again, in pursuing the same subject witb respect to verbs, after saying that we cannot distinguish by the accent of καθηψα Or προείχον, whether they are compounded or separate words, he adds, that the fact of composition is at once ascertained in these words, in which the accent is carried back (roic


Η ση

[ocr errors]

αναβιβαζομένοις). The examples he then gives are: 'Ανεβιβάσθη το κάθηται, το συνειμι, το σύμφημι, το σύνοιδα,

κάτεχ' ουρανόν Νέστωρ δ' αύτις έφιζε

ένεσαν στoνόεντες οϊστοί

ξύνισαν μεγάλη άλαλητή άλλα πλείστα, υπέρ ών τας αιτίας έκθησόμεθα· ώς γε και επί των ονομάτων φαμέν τινα συντιθέμενα αναβιβάζειν τον τόνον, καί τινα την ταυτότητα του τόνου τηρείν. Το δε μείζον, όλη η προστακτική έγκλισις κατά την των ενεργητικών ρημάτων προφοράν ούσα δισύλλαβος αναβιβάζει τον τόνον, κατελθε, κατάλαβε, περίγραφε, και ουδε κατ' ολίγον διστάξαι έστι περί της συνθέσεως. (iv. 8. p. 323.) That Apollonius, in this and similar passages, is speaking, not of marks, but of accents, that is, of actual pronunciation, is proved, if proof can be thought wanting, by the expression προφοράν, Again he says: Από γούν του δούλος προπερισπωμένου το σύνδουλος και κοινών και προπαροξυνόμενον. (De Pronom. p. 37.) And in discussing the question, whether the first letter of εκείνος is pleonastic, he says: Το Eπλεονάζον εν δισυλλάβοις αναβιβάζει τον τόνον, έειπεν, έοργαν, εεδνα, έαδεν, ει πλεονασμός: το γαρ εώρων δια το χρονικός παράγγελμα ουκ ανεβίβασε τον τόνον, πώς ούν ού προπαροξύνεται το εκείνος ; (Ιbid, p. 74.) His expression as to εώρων, evidently supposes the rule above laid down as to the accent depending on the quantity of the last syllable.

Herodian goes so far as roundly to accuse of barbarism those who pronounce βουλώμαι instead of βούλωμαι: Κατά δε τόνον βαρβαρίζουσιν οι λέγοντες εαν βουλώμαι, και εάν αρχώμαι: δει γαρ λέγειν, εαν βούλωμαι, και εάν άρχωμαι επειδή τα υποτακτικά τοις ιδίοις οριστικούς ομοτονεί, φέρομαι, εαν φέρωμαι, λέγομαι, εαν λέγωμαι ούτω και εαν βούλωμαι, και εαν άρχωμαι. Ομοίως και περί τους τόνους βαρβαρίζουσιν, οι λέγοντες ακράτον προπερισπωμένως δει γαρ λέγειν άκρατον προπαροξυτόνως. (De Barbarismo et Solecismo, p. 196.) The same author says that pouns when compounded sometimes throw back their accent, as αληθής, φιλαλήθης, αρχαιος, φιλάρχαιος. (Παρεκβολαι, κ. τ. λ. p. 213.) :

It must however be admitted, that the accentu. ation of some trisyllables having in the penultimate a diphthong or a long vowel, appears to have been different at different periods. · Isaac Vossius lays it down that the word avópovoe should be avoρούσε, and πολύχαλκον should be πολυχάλκον; and in support of his position, after citing some authors whose works are not now extant, he goes on: “ Sed et ex iis, qui omnium manibus teruntur, compilatore videlicet Etymologici Magni, et Eustatbio, idem observare est, utpote qui non uno loco testentur, in antiquis exemplaribus et præceptis veterum Grammaticorum, longe diversam accentuum occurrere rationem ab ea quæ postmo. dum placuit. In iis enim monent, non scriptum fuisse έτοιμον, έρημον, τρόπαιον, sed έτοιμον, έρημον, τροπαιον. Ιtem non ταχύτης ταχύτητος, et βραδύτης βραδύτητος, sed ταχυτης ταχυτητος, et βραδυτης

[ocr errors]

Bpaduraroc, et sic in cæteris omnibus, ita ut accentus veræ et naturali syllabarum semper conveniret mensuræ.(De Poematum Cantu et Viribus Rhythmi, Oxon. 1673. p. 19.) The passages to which he refers seem to be the following: (Etymol. Magm.)-lav KinTucòe oisérepov, ảmò nhucos γεγονός, τρίτης από τέλους έχει την οξείαν' οιον, κεφαλή, κεφάλαιον" γυνή, γύναιον όθεν και τροπή, τρόπαιον" οι δε παλαιοί Αττικοί προπερισπωσι. (Ιη voce Tpóralov.) Here we may observe, that so far is the author from laying it down as a rule that the accentuation ought to be that approved by Vossius, that his rule is just the reverse; for his statement that these words have the accent on the antepenultimate, must mean that they have it by usage, or in other words, that they ought to have it. It is true, he adds as a fact, that the ancient Attics placed a circumflex on the penultimate ; but he by no means says that this ancient accentuation ought to prevail, or that the more recent is a corruption or a barbarism. That this comparatively less ancient pronunciation of the word opóralov was at least five hundred years old at the time when the Etymologist wrote, which was probably about the tenth century, is clear from the note of Servius on the word Trophæum (Virgil. Æn. 10. v. 542): “Declinatio Latina est : unde penultima habebit accentum. In numero vero plurali, quia tropæa dicimus, nec aliquid inde mutilamus, erit Græcus accentus, sicut apud Græcos, scilicet tertia syllaba a fine.”


« НазадПродовжити »