50. Substantive standing before its Relative, and yet put in the same case with it ib. CHAPTER I.-POETICAL ELEGANCE. §1. Difference of Prose and Poetry. Examination of page § 2. Characteristic Distinctions of Prose and Poetry 3. Examination of a passage in Virgil 129 131 4. Poetical Privileges of Language. a. Archaisms. b. New-coined words. c. Græcism in Words. d. Græcism in Phrases 138 8. Feminine Gender preferred by poets to the Masculine ib. 11. Epithets for Possessive Pronouns 12. Comparative Degree put for the Superlative 13. Cardinal and Distributive Numerals joined with 147 ib. 148 149 bis, ter, quater, &c. ib. 14. Numbers of Years expressed by a Definite Period 15. Definite Number put for a large Indefinite one 16. Bis, ter, and quater put for an Indefinite Number 17. What Pronouns unpoetical 150 151 ib. 152 3. Metonomy. a. Metonomy of Cause. b. Of Effect. c. Of the Subjunct and Adjunct 162 4. Synecdoche. a. The Whole and its Part interchanged. b. The Genus, Species, and Individual interchanged 165 7. Figures of Words. a. Brachylogia. b. Asyndeton. c. Polysyndeton. d. Epizeuxis. e. Climax. f. Anaphora. g. Anadiplosis. h. Epanalepsis. 13. Periphrases of Nouns. a. Two Substantives put for - 14. Periphrases of Verbs. a. Participle with esse for the Verb. b. Supine in um with eo for the Future Tense. c. Passive Participle with dare for the Verb. d. Periphrases of cæpi. e. Periphrases of curo. f. Peripharases of mitto, parco, &c. g. Fu- gio, parco, facere, &c. for non facio. h. Memento with an Infinitive for the Imperative. i. Other 15. Periphrases of Particles. a. Est ut for a simple ib. page § 18. Periphrasis of, a. never b. always c. number 201 203 CHAPTER I.-ON THE USE OF EPITHETS, 216 PRELIMINARY OBSERVATIONS. BEFORE we enter upon our examination of the laws of Latin Verse, and the means by which its elegancies are to be acquired, it may be useful to give a slight sketch of the writers whose authority we admit, and the language which they employed. To begin with a short account of the latter.* The nations or tribes by whom Italy was peopled, whatever might have been their primal source, flowed immediately and directly from Greece. The Pelasgi and Tyrrheni, who are recorded as the early colonists of that country, probably spoke βάρβαρόν τινα γλῶσσαν, as Herodotus says, but their language must have borne strong affinity to the old Æolic, the mother dialect of the Greeks, and the undoubted parent of the Italian languages, which may be distinguished into six; the Etrurian, Euganean, Volscian, Oscan, Samnite, and Umbrian. The first of these was longest preserved, being the language almost entirely appropriated to religious ceremonies, in which the Etrurians were considered preeminently skilful. It was the language in which the Sibyl is supposed to have spoken; in which the Augurs interpreted omens, and the Aruspices explained prognostics. The others soon fell into disuse at Rome, though traces of them were long distinguishable in the more retired parts of Italy, and probably were never entirely lost, until merged in the modern Italian. The language of Rome itself was at first that of its neighbour Latium; and from thence it received its name. But owing to the constant succession of new tributaries and allies, and the incessant influx of strangers, it remained long in an unsettled and imperfect state. As soon, however, as the thirst for conquest Whoever would obtain more minute information on this knotty subject, should consult Funccius "De Origine et Pueritiâ Latinæ Linguæ," Niebuhr's "Roman History," Eustace's "Classical Tour in Italy," and Dunlop's "History of Roman Literature.” B |