Aristotle Poetics 21.16

Theodore Alois Buckley (Translator)

Table of Contents

Search the Perseus Catalog for:

View: By Chapter
← Previous Next →
And a word is changed when the poet leaves part of it, and invents part; as, Changed. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Instead of δεξιόν. [18 Further still, of nouns some are masculine, others feminine,

Poetics. Aristotle. Theodore Alois Buckley (Translator). London. 1857.

Current edition Experimental

The Poetic of Aristotle (Theodore Alois Buckley) (OCR draft) (English) (Theodore Alois Buckley's English translation, first published in 1850 and represented from the Henry G. Bohn 1857 printing; corrected against a second OCR and aligned to the Kassel reference passage sequence.)

Provisional text from uncorrected OCR; expect errors.

Editions (4)
Περὶ ποιητικῆς (OCR draft) (Aristotle, Poetics. Immanuel Bekker, editor, Aristotelis Opera, volume 2. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1837.) — 21 focus
Περὶ ποιητικῆς (OCR draft) Perseus (Aristotle, De arte poetica liber. Rudolf Kassel, editor. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1965. Reference edition for passage alignment.) — 21 focus
Poetics, Greek text (Ingram Bywater, 1909) (OCR draft) Experimental (Ingram Bywater's Greek text of Aristotle's Poetics, published in 1909.) — 21 focus
Poetics, Greek text (Franz Ritter, 1839) (OCR draft) Experimental (Franz Ritter's 1839 Greek edition, corrected against OCR of the represented copy and aligned to the conventional Perseus chapter-and-subchapter sequence.) — 21 focus
Translations (13)
Poetics (W. H. Fyfe) (OCR draft) Perseus (William Hamilton Fyfe's English translation of Aristotle's Poetics, Loeb Classical Library, 1939 printing.) — 21 focus
Arabic Poetics (Badawī edition, 1953) (OCR draft) (The ancient Arabic translation of Aristotle's Poetics in ʿAbd al-Raḥmān Badawī's 1953 edition.) — 21 focus
Poetics (S. H. Butcher, 1911) (OCR draft) Experimental (S. H. Butcher's English translation from Aristotle's Theory of Poetry and Fine Art, fourth edition, 1911.) — 21 focus
Aristotle on the Art of Poetry (Ingram Bywater, 1909) (OCR draft) Experimental (Ingram Bywater's English translation of Aristotle's Poetics, published in 1909.) — 21 focus
Poetics (Thomas Twining, 1789) (OCR draft) Experimental (Thomas Twining's English translation of Aristotle's Poetics, published in 1789 and aligned to the Kassel reference passage sequence.) — 21.16 focus
as if, instead of calling a shield the cup of Mars, we should call it the wineless cup 1 .
The Poetic of Aristotle (Henry James Pye, revised 1792) (OCR draft) Experimental (Henry James Pye's revised 1792 English translation, corrected against the 1788 first edition, aligned to the Kassel reference edition, and supplied with a selective apparatus of substantive 1788 readings.) — 21.16 focus
As if a shield should be called • The wineless cup of Mars.' [1] An invented name is an appellation given to a thing by the poet which was not before in general use. The substituting "Ἕρνυθαι [κ] instead of Κέραζα for HORNS and calling a PRIEST ᾿Αρητής, instead of ῾Ιερεύς, seem to come under this description.
Poetica Latine conversa (Franciscus Ritter, 1839) (OCR draft) Experimental (Franz Ritter's Latin translation, corrected against OCR of the represented copy and aligned to the conventional Perseus chapter-and-subchapter sequence.) — 21 focus
La poëtique d'Aristote (André Dacier, 1692) (OCR draft) Experimental (André Dacier's French translation of Aristotle's Poetics, published in 1692.) — 21.16 focus
Par exemple, aprés avoir appellé le bouclier, la coupe, on ajoûte ſans vin, au lieu d'ajoûter de Mars.
Poetica d'Aristotile (Bernardo Segni, 1549) (OCR draft) Experimental (Bernardo Segni's 1549 Florentine Italian translation, aligned to the Kassel reference passage sequence.) — 21 focus
De poetica (Antonio Riccobono, 1587) (OCR draft) Experimental (Antonio Riccobono's Latin translation, first published in 1587; text represented from Immanuel Bekker's 1831 edition.) — 21 focus
De arte poetica liber (William of Moerbeke, ca. 1277) (OCR draft) Experimental (William of Moerbeke's medieval Latin translation, represented by the 1953 Aristoteles Latinus edition.) — 21 focus
Arabic Poetics (Abū Bishr Mattā; Tkatsch edition) (OCR draft) Experimental (The Arabic translation attributed to Abū Bishr Mattā, edited by Jaroslaus Tkatsch in 1928 and aligned to the Kassel reference passage sequence.) — 21 focus
Arabic Poetics (Abū Bishr Mattā; Tkatsch edition, unaligned) (OCR draft) Experimental (Tkatsch's edition of the medieval Arabic translation in its original, unaligned segmentation.) — 21 focus

Notes on the current edition

Poetics

1.
Thy sun is set, thy spring is gone." Gray, Ode on Spring.
" Yet hath my night of life some memory." Shakspeare, Corn. of Errors—last scene. Twining.
"
2. i. e. branches ; which we also use for the horns of a stag. But Aristotle means a new word, not a new application merely of a word already in use. Twining.
3. A supplicator; literally, a prayer, taken in the sense of one who prays; as seer is used for prophet. Twining.
4. κρῖ is used Il. 5. 196. Δω̃, 1l. A. 425. Twining.
5. Part of a verse of Empedocles, quoted by Strabo, p. 3&1, ed. Cantab.
6. 12. On genders.

Commentary

Commentary on the Poetics (Ingram Bywater, 1909) (OCR draft) (Ingram Bywater's English commentary on Aristotle's Poetics.) focus

12. mvp-aristotle-comment-767

b 19 προστιθέασιν. Instead of the metaphor pure and simple, i. e. 'cup' for shield, they add on to it the term to which the proper word (i. e. shield) supplanted by the metaphor (i. e. cup), is relative. The shield being relative to Ares, the metaphor may be softened by describing it as 'the cup of Ares'. In the Greek here ἀνθ᾿ οὗ λέγει = τὸ ἀνθ᾽ οὗ λέγει τὴν μεταφοράν, 'the original term supplanted by the metaphor'; and it has to be taken as the subject of the ἐστί in πρὸς ὅ ἐστι; the clause, therefore, might have been thus given : προστιθέασιν τὸ πρὸς ὅ ἐστι τὸ ἀνθ᾽ οὗ λέγει τὴν μεταφοράν ; comp. Castelvetro's rendering (in his Basel edition), 'aggiungono la cosa a che ha riguardo quello, in iscambio di che dice'; and Tyrwhitt's, 'adjiciunt illud, ad quod relativum est id, pro quo translatum dicit.' The distinction here described, between the metaphor with a qualifying addition (positive or negative) and the metaphor without it, is recognized in Rhet. 3. 11, 1412 b 32
αἱ εἰκόνες τρόπον τινὰ μεταφοραί· ἀεὶ γὰρ ἐκ δυοῖν λέγονται, ὥσπερ ἡ ἀνάλογον μεταφορά· οἷον ἡ ἀσπίς, φαμέν, ἐστὶ φιάλη Ἄρεως καὶ τὸ τόξον φόρμιγξ ἄχορδος. οὕτω μὲν οὖν λέγουσιν οὐχ ἁπλοῦν, τὸ δ᾽ εἰπεῖν τὸ τόξον φόρμιγγα ἢ τὴν ἀσπίδα φιάλην ἁπλοῦν.
For the singular λέγει v. supra on
ἐρεῖ,
1457b18 . For the difference of number in προστιθέασιν comp. 4, 1448 b 17; 26, 1461 b 30; Eth. N. 5. 8, 1132b 34
ἢ γὰρ τὸ κακῶς ζητοῦσιν· εἰ δὲ μή, δουλεία δοκεῖ εἶναι, εἰ μὴ ἀντιποιήσει
 (see Vahlen on 26, 1461 b 30, and Kühner, Gr. Gr. 2, 1 p. 87 ).

12. mvp-aristotle-comment-768

21 ἐρεῖ τοίνυν κτέ.: Rhet. 3. 4, 1407a 14( Roemer)
ἀεὶ δὲ δεῖ τὴν μεταφορὰν τὴν ἐκ τοῦ ἀνάλογον ἀνταποδιδόναι καὶ ἐπὶ θάτερα [καὶ ἐπὶ] τῶν ὁμογενῶν· οἷον εἰ ἡ φιάλη ἀσπὶς Διονύσου, καὶ τὴν ἀσπίδα ἁρμόττει λέγεσθαι φιάλην Ἄρεως.
 φιάλη Ἄρεως was the bold metaphor of the dithyrambic poet Timotheus (fr. 16 Bergk = 22 Wilamowitz). The idea was doubtless suggested by the similarity of shape between a shield and the φιάλη which Dionysus sometimes had in his hand in ancient art.
b 24

13. mvp-aristotle-comment-769

ἢ ὥσπερ Ἐμπεδοκλῆς. The actual words of Empedocles, which Aristotle supposes us to know, are not to be found among his extant fragments; all that can be said of them is that they must have been something like γῆρας ἡμέρας but different from that in point of phraseology. The metaphor in Emped. 20. 5 Diels,
περὶ ῥηγμῖνι βίοιο
, is not sufficiently like this to be what Aristotle had in mind. This allusive way of referring to something supposed to be known to the reader is not uncommon in Aristotle; see 17, 1455 b 9 ( εἴθ᾽ ὡς Εὐριπίδης), 25, 1460 b 36 ( ἔτυχεν ὥσπερ Ξενοφάνει); comp. Metaph. Γ 5, 1010 a 5
οὕτω γὰρ ἁρμόττει μᾶλλον εἰπεῖν ἢ ὥσπερ Ἐπίχαρμος εἰς Ξενοφάνην
.

13. mvp-aristotle-comment-770

ἑσπέραν βίου: Alexis fr. 228 Kock
ἤδη γὰρ ὁ βίος οὐμὸς ἑσπέραν ἄγει
.

13. mvp-aristotle-comment-771

25 δυσμὰς βίου: Plato Laws 6, 770 A
ἐν δυσμαῖς τοῦ βίου
.

14. mvp-aristotle-comment-772

ὄνομα κείμενον, an existing or established name, as in Top. 6. 2, 140b 3
ἔτι εἰ μὴ κειμένοις ὀνόμασι χρῆται, οἷον Πλάτων ὀφρυόσκιον τὸν ὀφθαλμόν, ἢ τὸ φαλάγγιον σηψιδακές, ἢ τὸν μυελὸν ὀστεογενές· πᾶν γὰρ ἀσαφὲς τὸ μὴ εἰωθός
; comp. also Top. 2. 1, 109a 28
εἰσὶ διτταί [scil. καὶ ἁμαρτίαι], ἢ τῷ ψεύδεσθαι ἢ τῷ παραβαίνειν τὴν κειμένην λέξιν οἱ τοῖς ἀλλοτρίοις ὀνόμασι τὰ πράγματα προσαγορεύοντες, οἷον τὴν πλάτανον ἄνθρωπον, παραβαίνουσι τὴν κειμένην ὀνομασίαν
 (comp. Bon. Ind. 380b 31). Metaphor is often a way of supplying the deficiencies of ordinary language ( Meteor. 4. 3, 380 a 18, b 28 ; Rhet. 3. 2, 1405a 36 ; Quintilian 8. 6, 5, 18 ). In the present passage Aristotle reminds us that, if one of the terms in an analogy has no special name of its own, it may still be described in just the same way as in the preceding instances ( ὁμοίως λεχθήσεται), i. e. by a metaphor softened or explained by the mention of that to which the nameless thing or act is relative. Thus the sowing (B) of seed (A) on the part of the husbandman is analogous to the scattering (D) abroad of light or flame (C) on the part of the sun. This act of the sun has no special name; but we may metaphorically call it 'sowing' (B), and then qualify the metaphor by adding the term to which the act (D) itself is relative, viz. 'flame' (C), and speak of the sun as 'sowing flame' — σπείρων φλόγα (B+C) σπείρων φλόγα is a qualified metaphor on exactly the same lines as φιάλη Ἄρεως (see on b 16); the only difference is that in the one case there is an ὄνομα κείμενον for the thing meant (viz. ἀσπίς), whereas in the other such a name does not exist in actual language.

14. mvp-aristotle-comment-773

27 ἐπὶ τοῦ ἡλίου ἀνώνυμον: for the preposition, comp. Pol. 3. 1, 1275a 30
ἀνώνυμον τὸ κοινὸν ἐπὶ δικαστοῦ καὶ ἐκκλησιαστοῦ
. Aristotle's use of ἀνώνυμος has been already considered (on 1, 1447b 9).

14. mvp-aristotle-comment-774

b 28 πρὸς τὸν ἥλιον. Aristotle, unconsciously passing from one sense of ἥλιος to another, is now using it as the prosaic equivalent for the word φλόξ in the poetical quotation in the next line, i. e. in the sense of sunshine or sunlight, the meaning ἥλιος has in Herodotus 8. 23
ἅμα ἡλίῳ σκιδναμένῳ πᾶσα ἡ στρατιὴ ἐπέπλεε ἁλὴς ἐπὶ τὸ Ἀρτεμίσιον
, and in several well-known expressions.

14. mvp-aristotle-comment-775

b 29 πρὸς τὸν καρπόν. Castelvetro's πρὸς τὸν ἀφιέντα τὸν καρπόν, which has been accepted by several editors, rests on the assumption that the analogy in Aristotle's mind was simply that between sowing (B) on the part of the husbandman (A), and the nameless act, the emission of light (D), on the part of the sun (C). In that case the epithet θεοκτίσταν in the quotation must be taken to represent the addition required to soften the metaphor.

14. mvp-aristotle-comment-776

30 διὸ εἴρηται: comp. ὅθεν πεποίηται and ὅθεν εἴρηται in 25, 1461a 28–29. Quotations similarly introduced will be found in Rhet. 2. 9, 1387a 33 , and in 2. 10, 1388a 7, 15 . That in the text was perhaps from a tragedy ( Nauck, TGF.2 p. 856).
31

15. mvp-aristotle-comment-777

ἔστι δὲ τῷ τρόπῳ τούτῳ κτέ.: see above on b 16. προσαγορεύσαντα τὸ ἀλλότριον, scil. ὄνομα, as in Pol. 4. 7, 1293b 39
πέμπτη δ' ἐστὶν [scil. πολιτεία] ἣ προσαγορεύεται τὸ κοινὸν ὄνομα πασῶν
. The more usual construction in Aristotle is προσαγορεύειν ὀνόματι. In saying προσαγορεύσαντα τὸ ἀλλότριον ἀποφῆσαι τῶν οἰκείων τι he seems to have fallen into a false antithesis. φιάλη, in the illustration, is ἀλλότριον in relation to the shield, and ἄοινος negatives something οἰκεῖον in relation to a cup. Words like ἄοινος come under the general designation of στερήσεις ( Bon. Ind. 699 b 42). The free use of them in the metaphors of poetry is noted in Rhet. 3. 6, 1408a 6
ὅθεν καὶ τὰ ὀνόματα οἱ ποιηταὶ φέρουσι, τὸ ἄχορδον καὶ τὸ ἄλυρον μέλος· ἐκ τῶν στερήσεων γὰρ ἐπιφέρουσιν
.
εὐδοκιμεῖ γὰρ τοῦτο ἐν ταῖς μεταφοραῖς λεγόμενον ταῖς ἀνάλογον, οἷον τὸ φάναι τὴν σάλπιγγα εἶναι μέλος ἄλυρον
. The instance in Rhet. 3. 11, 1413 a 1 is φόρμιγξ ἄχορδος, a way of describing a bow.
33

17. mvp-aristotle-comment-778

πεποιημένον. A πεποιημένον ὄνομα is a word coined by the poet for the occasion, and in this respect unlike the words hitherto considered (the κύριον ὄνομα, the γλῶττα, and the μεταφορά), which are parts of an already existing vocabulary. Such coining of new words was termed ὀνοματοποιία ( Volkmann, Rhetorik p. 425). καλούμενον: comp. 21, 1458a 6 ὀνομαζομένου.

17. mvp-aristotle-comment-779

b 34 τίθεται. For the middle comp. H. A. 7. 12, 588 a 9
διὸ καὶ τὰ ὀνόματα τότε τίθενται, ὡς πιστεύοντες ἤδη μᾶλλον τῇ σωτηρίᾳ
. — Rhet. 3. 13, 1414 b 15 :
δεῖ δὲ εἰδός τι λέγοντα καὶ διαφορὰν ὄνομα τίθεσθαι
.
δοκεῖ γὰρ ἔνια εἶναι τοιαῦτα
is a parenthesis giving a reason for the instances that come after it; comp. 25, 1460b 24, and the note on Eth. N. 5. 1, 1129 a 29 in my Textual Criticism of the Nic. Ethics p. 43; also Kühner, Gr. Gr. 2 p. 853.

17. mvp-aristotle-comment-780

35 ἐρνύγας, scil. καλεῖ or λέγει, to be understood from τίθεται in the preceding line; comp. Top. 6. 2, 140 a 3 (quoted on b 25), Rhet. 3. 3, 1406 a 7 (quoted on b 4), and Eth. N. 6. 7, 1141 a 9
τὴν δὲ σοφίαν ἔν τε ταῖς τέχναις τοῖς ἀκριβεστάτοις τὰς τέχνας ἀποδί- δομεν, οἷον Φειδίαν λιθουργὸν σοφὸν καὶ Πολύκλειτον ἀνδριαντοποιόν [scil. λέγομεν]
. We do not know where Aristotle found the word, and there is no evidence for the form of the nom. sing.; the correction of Victorius, ἔρνυγας, assumes it to have been ἔρνυξ, like ἄντυξ; but it is just as likely that it was ἐρνύγη. An explanation of the word survives in Hesychius:
ἔρνυτας [sic] ἔρνη. βλαστήματα, κλάδοι
. The form in Hesychius, with a τ instead of a γ, has been defended by Meineke as the acc. pl. of a Cretan word ἔρους (= ἔρνος) supposed to be implied in Ἐπιρνύτιος, a Cretan name for Zeus according to Hesychius s. v. (see note in M. Schmidt's ed.). Aristotle's view of it, however, is that it is a coined word, not a γλῶττα as a Cretan word would be; it is to be remembered too that he shows himself elsewhere (25, 1461a 14) not wholly unfamiliar with the Cretan dialect.

17. mvp-aristotle-comment-781

ἀρητῆρα. The reference is no doubt to the use of the word in Il. 1. 11
οὕνεκα τὸν Χρύσην ἠτίμασεν ἀρητῆρα
. Hesychius has the same explanation:
ἀρητῆρα· ἱερέα
.

18. mvp-aristotle-comment-782

ἐπεκτεταμένον κτέ. The three kinds of word remaining for consideration are abnormal only in form. As they are substantially the same as the usual words, they are said to be intelligible to all (22, 1458b 4), i. e. they do not require explanation as a γλῶττα might do. The ἐπεκτεταμένον ὄνομα is the ordinary word lengthened out in one or other of two ways, either through the lengthening of a syllable normally short, or through the insertion of an extra syllable. Aristotle's standard being Attic, he regards πόληος for instance as a lengthened form of πόλεως. ἐπεκτείνειν has this same sense in Metaph. Δ 4, 1014 b 17
εἴ τις ἐπεκτείνας λέγοι τὸ υ (in the word φύσις)
.
4 1458 a 4 Πηλείδου. The reading of A c, Πηλέος, is retained by Vahlen, who marks a lacuna after the word. M. Schmidt fills up the assumed gap by the following restoration: τὸ Πηλέος (Πηλῆος καὶ τὸ Πηλείδου) Πηληιάδεω. It is quite as easy, however, to suppose Πηλέος to have got in by assimilation to the preceding πόλεως (or πόλεος, as it is in A c); and it must be admitted that a second instance of this sort of lengthening is hardly wanted. As regards Πηληιάδεω for Πηλείδου, Aristotle's view apparently is that the -ā- in it is epenthetic, συλλαβὴ ἐμβεβλημένη (v. on 20, 1456b 34). Its other deviations from the normal word ( -ηι = -ει-, and -εω = -ου) would be, according to ancient theory, instances of διαίρεσις, 'resolution', with a lengthening of vowels in the resolved diphthongs.

18. mvp-aristotle-comment-783

ἀφῃρημένον. As the ἀφῃρημένον is the opposite of the ἐπεκτεταμένον ὄνομα (v. supra 1), we may take the term to include (1) a word with a shortened vowel, and (2) a word shortened by the omission of a syllable, whether in the beginning, middle, or end of it, i. e. a word which in the terminology of the grammarians has suffered ἀφαίρεσις, συγκοπή, or ἀποκοπή. Aristotle's examples, however, κρῖ, δῶ, [blank], are all instances of ἀποκοπή — the term he himself uses with reference to this class of words in 22, 1458 b 2; comp. Strabo's (364 Cas.) explanation of Μέσση in Il. 2. 582 :
ἔνιοι δὲ καὶ κατ᾿ ἀποκοπὴν δέχονται τὴν Μεσσήνην· παραδείγμασι δὲ χρῶνται τοῦ μὲν ποιητοῦ τῷ κρῖ καὶ δῶ καὶ μάψ, καὶ ἔτι ‘ἥρως δ᾽ Αὐτομέδων τε καὶ Ἀλκιμος’ ἀντὶ τοῦ Ἀλκιμέδων . . παρ᾿ Ἐμπεδοκλεῖ δὲ ‘μία γίνεται ἀμφοτέρων ὄψ’, ἡ ὄψις
. It is clear that Aristotle's ἀφῃρημένον ὄνομα covers a wider ground than the ἀφαίρεσις of the grammarians, and that it must include their ἀποκοπή and συγκοπή. In the preliminary statement in 21, 1457b 2 the shortened word is termed the ὑφῃρημένον, not the ἀφῃρημένον ὄνομα. In the interests of uniformity—which one can hardly suppose Aristotle to have ignored in a matter so technical as this—one must either read ἀφῃρημένον in 21, 1457 b 2 (with Spengel), or restore ὑφῃρημένον throughout the present section. Some of the grammarians seem to have used ὑφαίρεσις (v. HSt. s. v.) for the dropping of a letter in the middle of a word.

19. mvp-aristotle-comment-784

5 μία γίνεται ἀμφοτέρων ὄψ: Empedocles fr. 88 Diels. The reading of the MS. οησ (see on 18, 1456a) must represent ὄψις, a gloss on ὄψ (comp. Strabo 364, quoted above on 4).

20. mvp-aristotle-comment-785

ἐξηλλαγμένον. The 'changed' word is in regard to some one part of it the invention of the poet. To that extent, therefore, it has a certain affinity with the 'coined' word, the πεποιημένον ὄνομα (21, 1457 b 33).

20. mvp-aristotle-comment-786

7 δεξιτερὸν κατὰ μαζόν: Il. 5. 393 (comp. Plutarch Qu. conv. 5. 4, p. 677 D, and Athenaeus 423 ).
8

21. mvp-aristotle-comment-787

αὐτῶν δὲ τῶν ὀνομάτων κτέ. Up to this point names have been viewed in reference to their origin, sense, or form. Apart from these aspects, however, they may also be classified according to their gender, and distinguished as masculine, feminine, and neuter. This classification of names according to gender will be seen to be founded on the terminations of the nominatives in Attic. The primary distinction between masculine and feminine terminations seems to have been generalized from the names of objects in which there is a visible distinction of sex, and more especially from the names of men and women (comp. Aristoph. Nub. 682 ). Thus nouns ending in the consonants Ν, Ρ, Σ, Ψ, Ξ are regarded as normally masculine, because names like Δίων, Νέστωρ, Πάρις, Πέλοψ, Κόραξ, are names of males; those ending in the vowels Η, Ω, and Α (long or short) are normally feminine, because Ἑλένη, Κλειώ, Ἥρα, Μοῦσα are names of females. The names of sexless things (the neuters, as we call them) Aristotle terms τὰ μεταξύ, because as a class these words occupy an ambiguous position, their final letters being sometimes those of the masculines and sometimes those of the feminines. Thus δένδρον, ἦτορ, τεῖχος, as ending in the consonants Ν, Ρ, Σ, have what Aristotle regards as masculine terminations; whereas κάρα, τέρμα, etc., have feminine ones; the other neuters also, μέλι, γόνυ, etc., as ending in vowels, show a certain affinity with the feminines. This seems to be the rationale of the present scheme of genders; and it is in essentials the same as that of the grammarians, though theirs no doubt is both fuller and more systematic, and leaves fewer facts to be treated as anomalies or exceptions (comp. Dionysius Thrax p. 15 Uhlig). Aristotle's classification is based on that of Protagoras, who distinguished nouns into masculine, feminine, and σκεύη ( Rhet. 3. 5, 1407b 7
Πρωταγόρας τὰ γένη τῶν ὀνομάτων διήρει, ἄρρενα καὶ θήλεα καὶ σκεύη
) — the last of the three terms meaning with him not 'things' but 'names of things', as it does also in Aristotle, in Soph. el. 14, 173b 39
καὶ ἐπὶ τῶν θηλέων ὀνομάτων ὡσαύτως, καὶ ἐπὶ τῶν λεγομένων μὲν σκευῶν ἐχόντων δὲ θηλείας ἢ ἄρρενος κλῆσιν
. In Soph. el. 14, 173b 19 we are told that Protagoras said it was a solecism to make μῆνις and πήληξ feminine, evidently because he thought and E to be normally masculine terminations, just as Aristotle does. Aristophanes, Nub. 658, ridicules this new ὀρθοέπεια of Protagoras in the matter of gender. Stilpo is said to have disputed the propriety of speaking of Athene as a θεός:
μὴ γὰρ εἶναι αὐτὴν θεὸν ἀλλὰ θεάν· θεοὺς δὲ εἶναι τοὺς ἄρρενας
( Diog. Laert. 2. 116 ).

22. mvp-aristotle-comment-788

9 ὅσα τελευτᾷ εἰς τὸ Ν καὶ Ρ καὶ Σ. This may seem an overstatement, as there are neuters which have these endings (see 17). The explanation is to be found in Aristotle's view of the neuters; he does not conceive them as having terminations peculiar to themselves, but as holding an intermediate position between the two main classes, some of them having a masculine and others a feminine termination.
1458a11

22. mvp-aristotle-comment-789

ἐκ τῶν φωνήεντων is equivalent to a partitive genitive (comp. 1458 a 11 ; Pol. 5. 1, 1302 a 4 ; Rhet. 1. 9, 1367 b 36 ; 10, 1369 b 7 ). Van Cleef, Index Antiphonteus p. 58, has noted several instances of this use of ex in Antiphon.

23. mvp-aristotle-comment-790

12 τῶν ἐπεκτεινομένων εἰς Α , 'in Α among the vowels capable of being lengthened'. The remaining dichronous vowels (see on 20, 1456 b 32 ), Ι and Υ, are said a little further on to be found in the terminations of neuters ( a 15 ).

25. mvp-aristotle-comment-792

οὐδὲ εἰς φωνῆεν βραχύ. It is to be remembered that there is no Greek noun ending in Ε or Ο. A neuter pronoun, like τοῦτο τοιοῦτο (comp. Herodian 2 p. 764 Lentz), would be in Aristotle's classification (see on 20, 1457 b 18 ) not an ὄνομα proper but a πτῶσις ὀνόματος.

26. mvp-aristotle-comment-793

τρία. No mention is made here of κίκι, which Plato had used in Tim. 60 A . This and sundry other words of the same order (see Lobeck, Phryn. p. 288) may perhaps have been in Aristotle's view not sufficiently naturalized to require recognition.

26. mvp-aristotle-comment-794

16 πέντε. The old editions (with some few of the apographs) explain this by adding τὸ πῶν τὸ νᾶπυ τὸ γόνυ τὸ δόρυ τὸ ἄστυ after πέντε. The nouns ending in Υ are certainly more than five in number (comp. Herodian 1 p. 354 Lentz). We may perhaps suppose Aristotle to have arrived at this number by ignoring words like γλάφυ, δάκρυ, μέθυ, μῶλυ φῖτυ as antiquated, and taking account only of those which formed part of the existing Attic vocabulary.

26. mvp-aristotle-comment-795

τὰ δὲ μεταξύ: see above on 8. Our word 'neuters', which represents the οὐδέτερα of the grammarians, points to the difference between the neuters and the masculines and feminines; Aristotle's τὰ μεταξύ to their resemblance; they are said to occupy an intermediate position, because in their terminations some of them resemble the masculine and others the feminine nouns; they have in fact no distinctive terminations of their own.

26. mvp-aristotle-comment-796

εἰς ταῦτα καὶ Ν καὶ Ρ καὶ Σ. The text, as thus amended, acknowledges the neuters ending in Ρ ( ὕδωρ, ἧπαρ, etc.); but it apparently says nothing of those ending in Α ( κῦμα, ποίημα, κάρα, etc.). It has been proposed accordingly to insert καὶ Α after ταῦτα, so as to complete the list of neuter endings (comp. Herodian 2 p. 646 Lentz
τελικὰ οὐδετέρων ὀνομάτων ἔξ, ᾶ, ι, ν, ρ, υ, ς
). It is just possible to keep to the traditional text here, by supposing that in a statement so loosely drafted as this ταῦτα was meant to recall not only the two vowels ( Ι and Υ) just considered, but also Α, which has been described in the preceding context ( a 12 ) as one of the ἐπεκτεινόμενα or dichronous vowels. In that case ταῦτα will stand allusively for τὰ ἐπεκτεινόμενα, and include Α as well as Ι and Υ.

Remarques sur la poëtique d'Aristote (André Dacier, 1692) (OCR draft) (André Dacier's French commentary on Aristotle's Poetics.) focus

16. mvp-aristotle-comment-500

21.12 16. Quelquefois mème on ajoûte la chose à laquelle ſe fait le raport, & qu'on met à la place de celle qui est propre.] 1

17. mvp-aristotle-comment-501

21.12 17. On dira donc en parlant d'un Bouclier, que c'est la Coupe de Mars.] 2

18. mvp-aristotle-comment-502

21.14 18. Il arrive quelquefois qu'on tombe ſur des choses qui n'ont point de terme analogique; mais on ne laiſſe pas de s'en ſervir de la même manière.) 3

19. mvp-aristotle-comment-503

21.15 19. On ſe ſert encore d'une autre manière de cette metaphore. quand après le nom metaphorique, on ajoûte une Epithete qui nie quelqu'une des qualitez qui luy ſont propres.) 4

20. mvp-aristotle-comment-504

21.17 20. Le nom inventé eſt celuy que le Poëte, &c.] 5

21. mvp-aristotle-comment-505

21.17 21. Le nom inventé est celuy que le Poëte crée luy-même, & qui étoit auparavant inconnu.] 6

22. mvp-aristotle-comment-506

21.18 22. Les noms alongez ſont ceux, où l'on met une voyelle longue, au lieu d'une breve.] 7

23. mvp-aristotle-comment-507

21.19 23. Les mots racourcis ſont ceux à qui l'on ote une ſyllabe, comme
κρῖ
pour
κρίμνον
.] 8

24. mvp-aristotle-comment-508

21.21 24. Il y a encore une autre difference entre les noms, les uns font masculins, & les autres feminins, & les autres neutres.] 9

25. mvp-aristotle-comment-509

21.26 25. On n'en trouve que trois qui se terminent en
ι
,
μέλι
,
κόμμι
,
πέπερι
.] 10

26. mvp-aristotle-comment-510

21.26 26. Et cinq en
υ
.] 11

Commentary on the Poetics (Thomas Twining, 1789) (OCR draft) (Thomas Twining's notes on Aristotle's Poetics, aligned to the Kassel reference edition.) focus

184. mvp-aristotle-comment-184

NOTE 184. P. 108.

21.12 AND, SOMETIMES, THE PROPER TERM IS ALSO INTRODUCED, BESIDES ITS RELATIVE TERM. —
Και ἐνιοτε προστιθεασιν ἀνθ᾿ ὁυ λεγει προς ὁ ἐστι.
— No words can well be more obscure and perplexing. Taking them as they are, they seem to admit, fairly, of only one sense — that which Victorius gives them.
"Et quandoque apponunt, pro quo dicit ad quod est."
That is, as he explains this literal and obscure version, they add, "ad quod refertur illud nomen quod omittunt, et pro quo aliud vocabulum usurpant."
Προστιθεασι, προς ὁ ἐστι [sc. τουτο] ἀνθ᾿ ὁυ λεγει
: i. e. they add, to the substituted word ( cup), the word to which the proper word ( shield) relates; i. e. Mars. They not only name cup, instead of shield, but call it the cup of Mars.
My objection to this sense of the passage is, that it seems to confound the analogical metaphor with that from species to species, in which one word is simply put in the room of the other, as
καλαμη
is used in the passage of Homer, referred to by Aristotle as an example of that fort of metaphor: 1
Αλλ' ἐμπης καλαμην γε σ' οἴομαι ἐισοροωντα / Γινώσκειν.
Od. ξ. 214.
For if, "sometimes,"
ἐνιοτε
, this addition is made, it is implied, that not only sometimes, but generally, and for the most part, the analogical metaphor is used in the same manner as that
ἀπ' ἐιδους
&c. and cup is merely called shield, and old age, evening. But, if I understand the matter rightly, it is essential to this kind of metaphor to express two terms, at least, of the four which constitute the analogy; i. e. to express with the metaphorical word, either the thing to which the proper word belongs, (as, evening of life,) or, as Aristotle presently after says, a negative epithet. See NOTE 189.
And the philosopher himself seems to have said this, (for I confess the passage is not perfectly clear,) in the following words:
ΑΙΕΙ γαρ ΕΚ ΔΥΟΙΝ λεγονται [sc. ἐικονες, comparisons], ΩΣΠΕΡ Ἡ ΑΝΑΛΟΓΟΝ ΜΕΤΑΦΟΡΑ· διον, ἡ ἀσπις, φαμεν, ἐστι ΦΙΑΛΗ ΑΡΕΟΣ, και, τοξον, ΦΟΡΜΙΓΞ ΑΧΟΡΔΟΣ· ουτω μεν ουν λεγουσιν, ΟΥΧ ΑΠΛΟΥΝ το δ᾿ ἐιπειν το τοξον “φορμιγγα” ἢ την άσπιδα “φιάλην,” ῾ΑΠΛΟΥΝ.
2 Thus
"capitis nives"
3 for gray hairs; evening of life; morning of the year; eye of day; and, among many instances in the Rhetoric,
δημε ροπαλον — λημη του Πειραιεως — ὁδου των λόγων
, &c. 4 The fact, indeed, seems to be, that this analogical metaphor is only a way of stating metaphors founded on resemblance, when that resemblance, depending wholly, or chiefly, on relation, would not be obvious, and the metaphor, consequently, would be harsh and obscure, unless the relation were, by some means or other, pointed out. 5 — Victorius himself allows, that, in Aristotle's own examples, the mere substitution of cup for shield, and of evening for old age, would be
"nimis durum."
I think, then, that Aristotle meant to say, and, in some way or other, had said, "And sometimes," (
ἐνιοτε
,) now and then, for the sake of clearness, "they add the proper word, (the word,
ἀνθ᾿ ὁυ
for which, the metaphorical word is put,) to, or besides, the
προς ὁ ἐστι
— i. e. that to which the proper word relates." They not only call the shield, the cup of Mars, but they mention shield also, and say, the shield is the cup of Mars: or, taking the other instance, old age is the evening of life. Thus all will follow naturally:
ΚΑΙ ἐνιοτε
— And, sometimes, they add the proper term, &c.
Ένιοις δε, ουκ ἐστιν όνομα — ἀναλογον.
— But, in some analogical metaphors, there is no proper term; in that case, therefore, the meta- phor cannot be used: yet it may be used in the first, and most common way, as well as if such proper term subsisted; it is still an analogical metaphor, and may be used as such: —
ουδεν ήττον, ὁμοιως
[i. e.
ἀναλογως
, as Castelvetro rightly explains it,]
λεχθησεται
. Thus, in the metaphor exemplified, of sowing, applied to the sun, we may say the sun sows his rays, though we cannot assign any proper term, for which sows is put — any word appropriated to the dispersion of light from the sun, as, to sow, is appropriated to the dispersion of seed. Such appears to me to be the connection of this passage.
It will, undoubtedly, be objected, that the sense I would give the words
προστιθεασι
&c. cannot be fairly obtained from them as they now stand: and I confess it cannot; unless we might be allowed to render the words thus, taking
προς
as a repetition of the preposition in
προστιθεασιν
: "they add the word, for which they use, or say, the metaphorical word, (
ἀνθ᾿ ὁυ λΕΓΕΙ
,)
το ὁ ΕΣΤΙ
To what it is — to the word which is used: they add the word that should be to the word that is." But this appears to me so harsh and improbable a construction, that I would rather suppose the passage to be defective. Perhaps it might originally be thus: —
Και ἐνιοτε προστιθ. ἀνθ᾿ ὁυ λέγει, ΠΑΡΑ [το] προς ὁ ἐστι
— i. e. besides adding the thing to which the proper term relates. 6 But there seems to be still another fault in the passage. I cannot reconcile the plural
προστιθεασιν
, with the singular,
λέγει
. Goulston renders
"apponit;"
and I am surprised that no MS. should exhibit
προστίθησιν
. That
λέγει
is right, is highly probable, from the singular verb
ἐρει
, repeatedly used here, and the
ἐποι
, afterwards:
ἐι την ἀσπίδα ΕΙΠΟΙ κ. τ. αλλ.

185. mvp-aristotle-comment-185

NOTE 185. P. 108.

21.12 THE SHIELD, THE CUP OF MARS, &C.
Φιαλην Αρεως
. The
φιαλη
seems to have been a large, expanded, (
ἐκπεταλον
,) kind of vessel, like a ewer. See Il. 4. 270 , and the notes. Hesych. v. Αμφιθετο . — It had also, sometimes, an
ὀμφαλος
, or
umbo
. See Athen. p. 501 . It had probably, therefore, some resemblance to a shield, which makes the metaphor appear less strange; as Piccolomini has remarked, p. 306 : who also observes, very well, that this kind of metaphor is then most clear and perfect, when the resemblance of relation is aided by some degree of resemblance between the things themselves and that here, for example, if lance were used instead of shield, the metaphor would be spoiled, though the common relation would still subsist.
This seems to have been a favourite instance of this sort of metaphor; for it occurs several times in the Rhetoric. See III. 4, p. 588 , and 11, p. 596, E . In the former of these passages Aristotle says, that an analogical metaphor ought to admit of inversion: thus, says he, if we may call the cup the shield of Bacchus, we may, with equal propriety, call the shield the cup of Mars. But Demetrius observes, alluding to that passage of the Rhetoric, that this is not the case of every such metaphor:
ἐπει την ὑπωρειαν μεν της ἴδης, ποδα ἐξην ἐιπειν τον ποιητην, τον δε του ἀνθρωπου ποδα, ἐκετι ὑπωρειαν ἐιπειν.
Sect. 79.

186. mvp-aristotle-comment-186

NOTE 186. P. 108.

21.13 OR AS EMPEDOCLES HAS EXPRESSED IT, LIFE'S SETTING SUN.
Δυσμας βιου
. — Victorius has pointed out this expression in Plato's sixth book De Legibus , where the Athenian says,
ἡμεις δ᾽ ἐν δυσμαις του βιου, οι δε, ὡς προς ἡμας, νεοι
: probably alluding, in Plato's usual manner, to the very passage of Empedocles . 7 See also Ælian, Var. Hist. II. 34 .
ἐπι δυσμαις ἐσμεν
: where, as the metaphor was sufficiently explained by the subject of the conversation, the word
βιου
is not added.
Victorius remarks, also, the
βιου ΔΥΝΤΟΣ αυγαις
of Æschylus, Agamem. v. 1123 . The rest of that passage is very obscure; 8 but this expression seems, clearly enough, to describe the dying eye, that opens, for the last time, upon the light: —
Βλεψαι προς ΑΥΓΑΣ βουλεται τας ήλιου, / Ως οὐποτ᾿ ἀυθις, άλλα νυν πανυστατον, / Ακτινα, κυκλονθ᾿, ήλιου προσοψεται.
Eurip. Alcest. 203.
or, in the finest picture of the kind, I think, that Poetry affords, —
oculisque errantibus, alto / Quæsivit cælo lucem, ingemuitque reperta.
Æn. IV. 691.
— The poetical reader, I believe, will pardon me, if I wander so much farther from my subject, as to take occasion, from these beautiful passages, to point out three lines of Petrarch , which shew, that his powers were not confined to the expression of amorous tenderness, but were capable of rising, on occasion, to the true sublime. In the sonnet,
"Se lamentar augelli,"
&c. written after the death of Laura , he imagines himself to hear her voice, in his solitude, consoling him for his loss, in these lines: —
Di me non pianger tu; ch' i miei di fersi / Morendo eterni; e, NEL ETERNO LUME, / Quando mostrai di chiuder gli occhi, APERSI! —
Ed. di Gesualdo, p. 288.

187. mvp-aristotle-comment-187

NOTE 187. P. 108.

21.14 THERE IS NO PROPER ANALOGOUS TERM, &C.
Όνομα κειμενον
. —
Κειμενον
, here, is equivalent to
κυριον
; a word established by common usage.
Ετι, ἐι ΜΗ ΚΕΙΜΕΝΟΙΣ όνομασι χρηται, διον Πλατων, ὀφρυοσκιον, τον ὀφθαλμον· παν γαρ ἀσαφες το ΜΗ ΕΙΩΘΟΣ.
— Topic. VI. 2. p. 242. See also, Categ. c. vii. p. 23, C.

188. mvp-aristotle-comment-188

NOTE 188. P. 109.

21.14 SOWING ABROAD HIS HEAVEN-CREATED FLAME.
Σπειρων θεοκτισταν φλογα
. — Part of an Iambic verse, and probably from some Tragic Poet. The commentators quote Virgil's
"Spargebat lumine terras."
This, however, is not exactly applicable, because
spargere
does not, I think, appear to have been the proper, specific word, for sowing, as
σπειρειν
was. The passage of Lucretius is more apposite: —
Sol etiam summo de vertice dissupat omnes / Ardorem in partes, et lumine CONSERIT arva.
p. 211.
Every reader will recollect Milton's beautiful application of this metaphor to the stars: —
And sow'd with stars the heav'n, thick as a field. —
P. L. VII. 358.
— and to the dew-drops, metaphorized into pearls, V. 1. But the idea of pouring, applied to the great fountain of light, seems both a more just, and a more elevated, metaphor. It is happily touched by Virgil in this line: —
Jam sole infuso, jam rebus luce retectis.
Æn. IX. 461.
— a sketch which Thomson has finely filled up, and finished: —
young day pours in apace, / And opens all the lawny prospect wide: / The dripping rock, the mountain's misty top, / Swell on the sight, and brighten with the dawn; / Blue, thro' the dusk, the smoaking currents shine.
Summer, 52.
In his hymn, he has taken up the metaphor in a sublimer tone: —
Great source of day! best image here below / Of thy Creator, ever POURING wide, / From world to world, the vital ocean round!
l. 66.
— To which I cannot restrain myself from adding a fine passage of the same kind in the hymn of Dionysius to the sun: —
᾿Ακτινα πολυστρεφον ἀμπλεκων, / ᾿Αιγλας πολυδερκεα ΠΑΓΑΝ / Περι γαιαν άπασαν ἑλισσων. / ΠΟΤΑΜΟΙ δε σεθεν ΠΥΡΟΣ ΑΜΒΡΟΤΟΥ / Τικτουσιν ἐπηρατον άμεραν.
9

189. mvp-aristotle-comment-189

NOTE 189. P. 109.

21.16 THE WINELESS CUP. —
Φιαλην ἀοινον
. This emendation of Victorius , (instead of
ἀλλα οινου
, the reading of all the editions and MSS.) seems confirmed, beyond all doubt, by Rhet. III. 6, p. 590, A. and 11, p. 597, A.
Metaphors, from their nature, are in danger of being obscure, or forced, though it is essential to their beauty and effect, that they should be clear and apposite. For this purpose, a metaphor may be guarded in various ways. 10 If the simple substitution of the improper, for the proper, term, would be obscure, or harsh, the metaphor may be converted into an image, or comparison; it may be used analogically, and we may say,
φιαλη ΑΡΕΩΣ
, or
φιαλη ΑΟΙΝΟΣ
; or, if that be not sufficient for perspicuity — that is, if the meaning be not sufficiently pointed out by the manner, or circumstances, in which the expression is introduced, we may join these, (
φιαλη Αρεως ἀοινος
,) or even add to either of them the proper word itself. 11
There is a fine instance of this negative mode of explaining a metaphor, in Isaiah, li. 21 .
"Thou drunken, but not with wine."
12 The same end is often answered by an epithet, affirming of the thing expressed some quality belonging to the thing signified; thus, ships are "floating bulwarks," and the lyre a "chorded shell," 13 where Dryden has made the same use of the affirmative epithet, chorded, that Theognis did of the negative,
ἀχορδον
, in his metaphorical expression for a bow —
φορμιγξ άχορδος
. 14 Sometimes the explanatory epithet is itself a metaphor; as in the
πτερωτοις άρμασι
of Euripides ; "winged chariots." Here we have a double metaphor, chariot for ship, and wing for sail.
It should be remembered, that these negative epithets are very common in the Greek Poets. Victorius points out many instances:
κωμον ἀναυλοτατον
, Eurip. Phoeniss. 818 .
θιασον ἀβακχευτον
, Orest. 319 .
μηνυτηρα ἀφθεγκτον
, Æfch. Eumen. 245 .
ἀπτεροις πωτημασιν
, ibid. 250 , &c.

190. mvp-aristotle-comment-190

NOTE 190. P. 109.

21.17 AN INVENTED WORD, &C.Between this and the preceding definition Aristotle must have placed that of
Κοσμος
the ornament, or ornamental word. That it was purposely passed over by him is hardly credible. This is, most probably, one of the lamentable
διαβρωματα
that Strabo talks of. 15 The commentators differ widely as to the meaning of
κοσμος
. Castelvetro says, the word admits, here, of five different senses, which he sets up, like nine-pins, for the pleasure of knocking them all down. — The only reasonable account of the matter seems to be that given by Dacier from Victorius . It seems clear enough, that what Aristotle here calls
κοσμος
, is included, at least, under what he calls
ὀικειον
in the Rhetoric. For he says, at the end of the next chapter (cap. xxii.) speaking of those species of words that are used in prose, that they are these three,
το κύριον
, και
μεταφορα
, και
ΚΟΣΜΟΣ
: and in the Rhetoric, after referring to the very enumeration of words in this chapter, and setting aside such as he calls poetical, (i. e.
γλωτται, διπλα ὀνοματα
, &c.) he says,
το δε κυριον, και το ΟΙΚΕΙΟΝ, και μεταφοραι, μοναι χρησιμοι προς την των ψίλων λόγων λεξιν· παντες γαρ μεταφοραις διαλεγονται, και τοις ΟΙΚΕΙΟΙΣ, και τοις κυρίοις
. 16
And these
ὀικεια ὀνοματα
, again, seem plainly synonymous with
ἐπιθετα
, mentioned presently after: —
δει δε και τα ἐπιθετα και τας μεταφ. κ. τ. λ.
— By
ὀικεια
and
ἐπιθετα
, Aristotle seems to have expressed the genus, of which,
κοσμος
, the ornamental or embellishing epithet, was a species. But as he has not, by any means, explained himself fully, nor given any definition either of
ὀικειον
or
ἐπιθετον
, the mist which he has left upon this subject must remain. I shall only remark, that the word
κοσμος
is once, (and I think but once,) used by him in his Rhetoric, apparently in the same sense as in this chapter. For, speaking of the propriety of diction, and its correspondence to the subject, he observes, that "an ornament should not be applied to a mean word; for this," says he, "has the appearance of burlesque; which is the case with Cleophon , who has used expressions of this sort as ridiculous, as it would be to talk of an "AUGUST fig-tree." 17 The word
κοσμος
here, and the example by which he explains it, seem to prove, that
κοσμος
, in the treatise on Poetry, means such an epithet as embellishes or elevates the thing to which it is applied. For I do not imagine that the term includes what the Grammarians call perpetual epithets, such as
"humida vina,"
γαλα λευκον
, &c. because Aristotle expressly says, that the
κοσμος
is used in common speech: now these redundant epithets are banished, both by him, and by Quintilian , even from oratory; much more from ordinary discourse. 18
It may be objected, as it has been objected by Piccolomini (p. 337) , that, as an epithet may, at the same time, be a foreign word, a metaphorical, an extended, or of any of the other sorts, it could not be enumerated by Aristotle as a distinct species of words among the rest. But the truth is, that he is not there enumerating so many distinct species of words, which exclude each other, but only a number of distinct properties of words, several of which may subsist together in the same word. Thus, an extended word may, manifestly, be, at the same time, a metaphorical, or a foreign word, or both: a metaphorical word may be, also, an invented, extended, altered word, &c. But none of these words can be, at the same time,
κυρια
, common words; and the only exclusive distinction that Aristotle intended, is between the common word, and the others; all of which are words, on some account or other, uncommon.

191. mvp-aristotle-comment-191

NOTE 191. P. 110.

21.21 NOUNS ARE DIVIDED, &C.In passages where great corruption and little importance meet, a commentator may be reasonably indulged in silence, or brevity. What all this has to do in the midst of an analysis of poetical language, as distinguished from that of prose, I confess myself totally unable to see.
The defects of the passage have been fully pointed out by almost all the annotators. See Mr. Winstanley's note, p. 300, ed. Ox. 1780 . — But we have lately been told, that all the commentators have entirely mistaken the sense of the passage, and supposed it, without reason, to be imperfect, merely because they did not see, that Aristotle here speaks, not as a Grammarian, but as a Philosopher, and is considering, not the conventional gender of verbal inflection, but the real gender of the things signified. Thus, it is admitted, indeed, that all words ending in
ν
and
ρ
, are not masculine; yet, if we examine the nature of the things denoted by words of those terminations, we shall find, it seems, that they are masculine, though the words themselves are regarded as feminine. 19 Let us try, then.
Μητηρ
, for example, ends in
ρ
. Did Aristotle's philosophy lead him to consider a mother as of the masculine gender?

Commentarius in Aristotelis Poeticam (Franciscus Ritter, 1839) (OCR draft) (Ritter's Latin commentary, extracted from the 1839 volume, divided by Ritter's chapters and sections, and linked to the corresponding Perseus reference subsections.) focus

6. mvp-aristotle-comment-152

Ritter, cap. 21 § 6

καὶ ἐνίοτε προστιθέασιν ἀνθ' οὗ λέγει, πρὸς ὅ ἐστιν: post finitam quartae speciei explicationem non continuo exempla sequuntur, idque fieri posset, si etiam eius quae sequitur admonitionis exemplum aliquod additum legeretur, quod factum non esse cernimus. ipsa verba consideres velim; et interdum addunt (qui scribunt) pro quo dicat (qui scribit), ad quid spectet (nomen translatum). nonne vides miram confusionem et explicationis obscuritatem summae infantiae signum? hoc mihi liquet, πρὸς ὅ ἐστιν nihil esse nisi ἐπεξήγησιν commatis antecedentis ἀνθ' οὗ λέγει. interpolator huiusmodi exempla fortasse respexit, τὸ γῆρας ἑσπέρα βίου μοι πάρεστιν pro eo quod quis nude dicat ἑσπέρα βίου μοι πάρεστιν. haud dubie hoc ita obscure dictum est, ut prae ceteris exemplo illustrandum esset, quod cum nonsit factum, et exempli defectus et loquendi obscuritas et locus non aptus conspirant, ut multis modis personati auctoris vultum agnoscamus. ἐρεῖ τοίνυν, h. e. is qui scribit. metaphora hic commemorata usus est Timotheus dithyramborum scriptor, quem ridet Antiphanes comicus. v. Athen. X. p. 433 C. οὐκ ἂν ἁμάρτοι δέ τις καὶ τὸ ποτήριον αὐτοῦ λέγων φιάλην Αρεως κατὰ τὸν ᾿Αντιφάνους Καινέα, ἐν ᾧ λέγεται οὕτως· ἦτει 1) δ' ἥρως φιάλην ῎Αρεως, κατὰ Τιμόθεον, ξυστόν τε βέλος. eiusdem metaphorae mentionem facit Aristoteles Rhetor. III, 4 extr. et 11. pag 1412 b 35.

7. mvp-aristotle-comment-153

Ritter, cap. 21 § 7

ἐνίοις δ' οὐκ ἔστιν ὄνομα κείμενον τό ἀνάλογον: per ὄνομα et nomen et verbum hoc loco complectitur vulgarem dicendi usum secutus, idemque bis factum ante, §. 2 et 4. τὸ δὲ τὴν φλόγα ἀπὸ τοῦ ἡλίου ἀνώνυμον: h. e. solis radios demittere per unum verbum Graece enuntiari nequit. καὶ τὸ σπείρειν πρὸς τὸν καρπόν: ut analogia constet, καρπός intelligendus est moles frumenti, unde particulae proiiciuntur in agrum. iam radios demittere se habet ad solem sicut serere (frumenti particulas demittere) ad saccum frumenti plenum. unde σπείρων θεοκτίσταν φλόγα sumptum sit, nobis haud compertum. Latinos poetas eadem uti metaphora monent interpretes afferentes Virgil. Aen. II, 584. Lucret. II, 211.

8. mvp-aristotle-comment-154

Ritter, cap. 21 § 8

ἀλλ᾽ ἄοινον: qui scutum appellat pateram vini expertem, is dum scutum alieno nomine ( φιάλην) designat ( προσαγορεύσας τὸ ἀλλότριον), adiecto ἄo ινo ν aliquid denegat ( τῶν οἰκείων τι ἀπύφησι) quod est paterae proprium: eo autem lector admonetur non proprie accipienda esse quae de patera dicuntur. peracuta sane observatio est et philosopho digna. 1) ᾔτει δ' ἥρως Tyrwhittus in annot. ad h. 1. scite dedit; Athenaei codices εἰ τῇ δῆλος.

9. mvp-aristotle-comment-155

Ritter, cap. 21 § 9

πεποιημένον - ἀρητῆρα: πεποιημένον est factum fictumque a poeta. eiusmodi verba novata appellat Cicero de Orat. III, 38, 154. novantur autem verba quae ab eo qui dicit ipso gignuntur ac fiunt. pro exemplis ibidem affert expectorare, versutiloquus, incurviscere. - δοκεῖ γὰρ ἔνια εἶναι τοιαῦτα: dubitat, et recte quidem, utrum eiusmodi voces scriptoris ingenio an usui antiquo et obsoleto tribuat. οἷον τὰ κέρατα ἔρνυγας. κτλ. quemadmodum cornua ramulos et sacerdotem precatorem. recte ab Hermanno observatum est ἔρνυξ eiusdem esse significationis atque ἔρνος, sed formatum ut ἄντυξ. Bekkerus cum antiquis editoribus ἐρνύγας dedit, nominativum ἐρνύγη accipiens, non ἔρνυξ. Hesychius et Favorinus : ἐρνύ) τας (sic), ἔρνη, βλαστήματα, κλάδους. hoc vocabulum ex cyclico quodam carmine sumptum videtur. ἀρητὴρ Homeri est Il. A. 94. Е. 78.

10. mvp-aristotle-comment-156

Ritter, cap. 21 § 10

ἀφηρημένον δὲ οἷον τὸ κρῖ καὶ τὸ δῶ: stirpes illae nominum δῶμα et κριθή saepius apud Homerum ceterosque poetas epicos reperiuntur. nomina sunt imperfecta potius quam mutilata, quatenus terminos non tam amiserunt quam omnino non receperunt. conf. Strabo VIII. p. 364 (p. 560): παραδείγμασι δὲ χρῶνται τοῦ μὲν ποιητοῦ τῷ κρῖ καὶ δῶ καὶ μάψ, καὶ ἔτι (Il. Τ. 392) “ ἵππους δ᾽ Αὐτομέδων · τε καὶ Αλκιμος᾽ ἀντὶ τοῦ ᾿Αλκιμέδων, Ἡσιόδου δέ, ὅτι τὸ ῥᾴδιον ῥᾶ, Ἐπίχαρμος δὲ τὸ λίαν λί, Συρακὼ δὲ τὰς Συρακούσας. παρ' Ἐμπεδοκλεῖ δὲ “ μία γίνεται ἀμφοτέρων ὄψ” ἡ ὄψις. καὶ παρ' ᾿Αντιμάχῳ “ Δήμητρός τοι Ἐλευσινίης ἱερὴ ὄψ,” καὶ τὸ ἄλφιτον ἄλφι. paulo post Empedoclis hemistichium (Empedoclis esse Strabo nos docet) totum ab Aristotele transcriptum est, ut lectores vocem ὄψ pro decurtata ὄψις, non pro foramine, acciperent.

11. mvp-aristotle-comment-157

Ritter, cap. 21 § 11

οἷον τὸ “ δεξιτερὸν κατὰ μαζόν᾽ ἀντὶ τοῦ δεξιόν: secundum hanc opinionem poeta δεξι reliquit, τερος ipse fecit. τὸ ὀνομαζόμενον est quod vulgo dicitur, h. e. nomen usitatum.

12. mvp-aristotle-comment-158

Ritter, cap. 21 § 12

αὐτῶν δὲ τῶν ὀνομάτων - καὶ Ν καὶ Σ:quae hinc usque ad finem capitis leguntur, ab Aristotele scribi potuisse nego: ille enim non canones grammaticos voluit perscribere sed ex rebus grammaticis nonnisi eligere quae ad illustrandam dictionem poeticam pertinerent. sed haec de genere nominum disputatio et ab illo consilio utique aliena est et absurdo ludi magistro digna. ipsa quae docentur gravibus vitiis laborant. nimirum nomina in Net Pet ∑ desinentia mascula esse audimus, quamquam permulta et neutrius et feminini generis esse constat, ut ὀστέον, φρέαρ πέρας, νῆσος et sexcenta alia. paulo post sibi ipse non constat scribens τὰ δὲ μεταξὺ (neutrius generis nomina) εἰς ταῦτα καὶ Σ. vulgaris et ineptus grammaticus agnoscitur etiam in illis ὥστε ἴσα συμβαίνει 'πλήθει εἰς ὅσα τὰ ἄρρενα καὶ τὰ θήλεα. εἰς δὲ τὸ Ιτρία μόνον, μέλι κόμμι πέπερι: doctius Athenaeus II. p. 66 F: τοῦτο δὲ ἡμᾶς τηρῆσαι δεῖ, ὅτι οὐδέτερον ὄνομα οὐδέν ἐστι παρὰ τοῖς Ἕλλησιν εἰς Ι λῆγον, εἰ μὴ μόνον τὸ μέλι. τὸ γὰρ πέπερι καὶ κόμμι καὶ κοῖφι ξενικά.