1.
mvp-aristotle-comment-750
1.
mvp-aristotle-comment-751
31
ἁπλοῦν... διπλοῦν:
see
20, 1457 12
, and
De interpr.
2, 16ª 19
(quoted above on
20, 1457 10
). In the
De Interpretatione (
2, 16ª23
) the general term for a compound is
συμπεπλεγμένον ὄνομα. The
Rhetoric has more than one reference to this chapter on the species of names:
Rhet.
3. 1, 1404 36
οὐχ ἅπαντα ὅσα περὶ λέξεως ἔστιν εἰπεῖν ἀκριβολογητέον ἡμῖν, ἀλλ᾽ ὅσα περὶ τοιαῦτης οἷας λέγομεν. περὶ δ᾽ ἐκείνης εἴρηται ἐν τοῖς περὶ ποιητικῆς.
-
3. 2, 1404b5
τῶν δ᾽ ὀνομάτων καὶ ῥημάτων σαφὴ μὲν ποιεῖ τὰ κύρια, μὴ ταπεινὴν δὲ ἀλλὰ κεκοσμημένην τάλλα ὀνόματα ὅσα εἴρηται ἐν τοῖς περὶ ποιητικῆς.
26
ὄντων δ᾽ ὀνομάτων καὶ ῥημάτων ἐξ ὧν ὁ λόγος συνέστηκεν, τῶν δ᾽ ὀνομάτων τοσαῦτ᾽ ἐχόντων εἴδη ὅσα τεθεώρηται ἐν τοῖς περὶ ποιήσεως, τούτων γλώτταις μὲν καὶ διπλοῖς ὀνόμασι καὶ πεποιημένοις ὀλιγάκις καὶ ὀλιγαχοῦ χρηστέον ... τὸ δὲ κύριον καὶ τὸ οἰκεῖον καὶ μεταφορὰ μόναι χρήσιμοι πρὸς τὴν τῶν ψιλῶν λόγων λέξιν.
3.
mvp-aristotle-comment-752
μεγαλειωτῶν
is all but identical with the reading in A
o,
μεγαλιωτῶν, and simpler than
Tyrwhitt's
μεγαλείων ὡς or
Vahlen's
μεγαλείων ὧν. Α
μεγαλειωτὸν ὄνομα would be a name that has been 'made grand', an exaggerated or amplified name. Though a verb
μεγαλειοῦν is not found in extant literature, it is a legitimate derivative from
μεγαλεῖος, which is sometimes used of words (e. g. in
Xenophon
Mem.
2. 1. 34
); and it is presupposed in the LXX. word
μεγαλείωμα. After
μεγαλειωτῶν we may supply
οἷον =
e.g. For similar instances of the omission of
οἷον see
25, 1461ª26
;
An. pr.
1. 4, 26ª8
;
De gen. et corr.
2. 5, 332b14
;
Eth. N.
5. 8, 1133ª7
;
Rhet.
3. 5, 1407ª38
;
3. 6, 1408b6
(etc.). In lieu of
μεγαλιωτῶν (or
μεγαλειωτῶν) the Arabic version is said to imply
Μασσαλιωτῶν— reading which has met with the approval of
Diels (
Berlin Academy, Sitzungsb.1888 p. 53
) as well as others. An expression like
τὰ πολλὰ τῶν Μασσαλιωτῶν, however, is certainly not free from difficulty. The general view seems to be that it is practically equivalent to
τὰ πολλὰ τῶν Μασσαλιωτικῶν; so that
Aristotle is to be credited with the statement that the majority (
τὰ πολλά) of the proper or other names in use at
Massilia
were of the abnormal type described in the text. There is, as far as I know, no hint of anything of the kind in any ancient writer; and it is to my thinking too improbable to be believed without very distinct evidence.
The recent translators, who accept the new reading, must have felt the difficulty, as they tone down the expression by a free rendering of
τὰ πολλά, making the clause mean either 'like so many Massilian expressions' (
Butcher), or 'wie jene massaliotischen Namen' (
Gomperz). It has to be remembered also that it was hardly necessary for
Aristotle to go as far as
Marseilles
for instances of such names. They were certainly not unknown in
Athens
(
Wilamowitz,
Aristoteles und Athen2 p. 29
); and to judge from their appearance in
Plautus, they must have been common enough in the later Attic Comedy.
3.
mvp-aristotle-comment-753
Ἑρμοκαϊκόξανθος:
a compound of three river-names, Hermus, Caicus, and Xanthus (comp.
Dindorf in
HSt.
s.v., and
Letronne,
Étude des noms propres grecs p. 62). After this the Greek text must have lost something, as the Arabic version, as translated by
Margoliouth, renders the passage by
Ermocaicon Xanthus qui supplicabatur Dominum caelorum (or
Iovem), which
Diels supposes to represent an hexameter line,
Ἑρμοκαϊκόξανθος, ἐπευξάμενος Διὶ πατρί. I hesitate to adopt this very attractive conjecture, though it has been accepted by both
Butcher and
Gomperz, because the context seems to me to suggest rather a second instance of the same kind of word, a
τετραπλοῦν ὄνομα of some sort. Some such compound as
ἐπευξιθεῶναξ, if one may venture to invent the word, would represent the general sense of the Arabic. As these abnormal compounds were characteristic of the Dithyramb (see on
22, 1459ª9
), and not uncommon in Comedy, it is difficult to see why
Aristotle should have had recourse to what would seem to be an epic or a mock epic for an instance of a
τριπλοῦν ὄνομα.
1
ἅπαν δὲ ὄνομα κτέ.
The present survey of the vocabulary of poetry may be compared with that in
Isocrates
190 D
τοῖς μὲν γὰρ ποιηταῖς πολλὰ δέδονται κόσμοι· καὶ γὰρ ... οἷόν τ᾿ αὐτοῖς ... δηλῶσαι μὴ μόνον τοῖς τεταγμένοις ὀνόμασιν, ἀλλὰ τὰ μὲν ξένοις, τὰ δὲ καινοῖς, τὰ δὲ μεταφοραῖς, καὶ μηδὲν παραλιπεῖν ἀλλὰ πᾶσι τοῖς εἴδεσι διαποικῖλαι τὴν ποίησιν.
4.
mvp-aristotle-comment-754
κύριον.
The
κύριον ὄνομα is the established and familiar term for a thing, as distinct from the
γλῶττα, the
μεταφορά and the other
ξενικὰ ὀνόματα (see on
22, 1458ª22
). In actual usage, however, the
κύριον ὄνομα is more especially opposed to the metaphor. As the metaphor is an
ἀλλότριον ὄνομα (
infra b7), the
κύριον ὄνομα is much the same thing as the
οἰκεῖον or 'proper' name for the thing; comp.
Rhet.
3. 2, 1404b 31
τὸ δὲ κύριον καὶ τὸ οἰκεῖον
[=
i. e.
τὸ
οἰκεῖον]
καὶ μεταφορὰ μόναι χρήσιμοι πρὸς τὴν τῶν ψιλῶν λόγων λέξιν.
Hence it is that in Latin
proprie often represents the
κυρίως, and
propria nomina the
κύρια ὀνόματα of Greek writers.
Horace has an attempt at a more literal translation of the latter term in
A. P.
234
Non ego inornata et dominantia nomina solum verbaque, Pisones, satyrorum scriptor amabo.
In
Isocrates
190 D-E
the designation for the words in common use, in contradistinction to those belonging more especially to poetry, is
τὰ τεταγμένα or
τὰ πολιτικὰ ὀνόματα.
4.
mvp-aristotle-comment-755
κόσμος.
The term reappears in
22, 1458 b 33
. As
Aristotle's explanation is lost (see on b33), the technical sense to be attached to it is a matter of conjecture. In
Isocrates
190 D
(see above on b1) the metaphor, the strange word, and the coined word are grouped together under the general head of
κόσμοι; and
Aristotle himself in the
Rhetoric (
3. 2, 1404 b5
and
1405ª14
) uses the verb
κοσμεῖν in an equally wide sense, to denote the embellishment of style by means of metaphor and other unusual forms of expression. In the present passage, however, it is clear that the term
κόσμος must have a special meaning, since instead of including the
γλῶττα, the
μεταφορά, etc., it is expressly distinguished and made to stand apart from them. The only positive hint we have in the
Poetics of the sense of the term is in
22, 1459ª11
, where it is said to be allowable not only in epic poetry, but also in oratory and in the iambic parts of Tragedy:
ἐν δὲ τοῖς ἰαμβείοις διὰ τὸ ὅτι μάλιστα λέξιν μιμεῖσθαι ταῦτα ἁρμόττει τῶν ὀνομάτων ὅσοις κἂν ἐν λόγοις τις χρήσαιτο· ἔστι δὲ τὰ τοιαῦτα τὸ κύριον καὶ μεταφορὰ καὶ κόσμος.
Aristotle is generally supposed to be referring to the
epitheton ornans; in support of which interpretation
Tyrwhitt and others point to the use of
κόσμος in
Rhet.
3. 7, 1408 a 13
μηδ' ἐπὶ τῷ εὐτελεῖ ὀνόματι ἐπῇ κόσμος· εἰ δὲ μή, κωμῳδία φαίνεται, οἷον ποιεῖ Κλεοφῶν· ὁμοίως γὰρ ἔνια ἔλεγε καὶ εἰ εἶπειεν ἂν πότνια συκή.
This passage in the
Rhetoric, however, does not justify this view.
πότνια is regarded there as a
κόσμος, not because it is a certain kind of epithet, but because it is a
γλῶττα (
v. on b4), and therefore one of the unusual words which according to the
Rhetoric (
3. 2, 1404 b5
) serve to embellish the style. An
epitheton ornans need not be of this kind; in
γάλα λευκόν, for instance, the epithet is
κύριον ὄνομα. As the
κόσμος, according to the classification in the text, is a special kind of word, distinguished from the
κύριον ὄνομα on the one side and the
γλῶττα,
μεταφορά, etc., on the other, we may perhaps suppose it to be the ornamental synonym, a word, for example, like
Πηλείδης for Achilles,
Ἤφαιστος for fire,
ὄλεθρος for one who causes destruction - the kind of word which in the ancient classification of tropes came under the heads of synecdoche, antonomasia, and metonymia (comp.
Volkmann,
Rhetorik der Gr. u. Röm. p. 421-5). If
Aristotle's
κόσμος does not include such synonyms, he has ignored what he elsewhere (
Rhet.
3. 2, 1404b39
) knows to be an important element in the poetic vocabulary.
Cicero
De Oratore
3. 167
distinguishes between the 'coined' word,
factum verbum (
Aristotle's
πεποιημένον ὄνομα), the 'transferred' word,
translatum verbum (
i. e.
μεταφορά), and the 'ornamental equivalent',
ornandi causa proprium proprio commutatum; this last being apparently identical with the
κόσμος of the
Poetics. We must not forget that
Aristotle recognizes some words as being more beautiful than others:
Rhet.
3. 2, 1405 a 6
καὶ ἀπὸ καλῶν [
scil.
δεῖ μεταφέρειν]·
κάλλος δὲ ὀνόματος τὸ μέν, ὥσπερ Λικύμνιος λέγει, ἐν τοῖς ψόφοις ἢ τῷ σημαινομένῳ
[
i. e. either in its sound or in its associations],
καὶ αἶσχος δὲ ὡσαύτως
with which we may compare the definition of
Theophrastus (
ap.
Demetr.
De eloc.
173
),
κάλλος ὀνόματός ἐστι τὸ πρὸς τὴν ἀκοὴν ἢ πρὸς τὴν ὄψιν ἡδὺ ἢ τὸ τῇ διανοίᾳ ἔντιμον
(
v.
Rabe,
De Theophrasti libris περὶ λέξεως p. 44). It would be strange if this very obvious artifice of poetical expression were overlooked by
Aristotle in a book like the
Poetics.
6.
mvp-aristotle-comment-756
γλώτταν.
The term is sufficiently general to include foreign, dialectical, and also obsolete words-all words (or senses) in fact which require explanation, because outside the limits of ordinary Attic Greek (comp.
Rhet.
3. 1, 1404a33
τῶν ὀνομάτων ἀφείκασιν
[
i. e. the tragedians]
ὅσα παρὰ τὴν διάλεκτόν ἐστιν
). For instances in the
Poetics see
22, 1458 b 21
and
25, 1461a10
; others are to be found in
Rhet.
3. 3, 1406a7
, where the use of
γλώτται in prose is said to be a frigid affectation:
μία δὲ [
scil.
αἰτία ψυχρότητος]
τὸ χρῆσθαι γλώτταις, οἷον Λυκόφρων Ξέρξην πέλωρον ἄνδρα, καὶ Σκίρων σίννις ἀνήρ, καὶ Ἀλκιδάμας ἄθυρμα τῇ ποιήσει, καὶ τὴν τῆς φύσεως ἀτασθαλίαν, καὶ ἀκράτῳ τῆς διανοίας ὀργῇ τεθηγμένον.
6.
mvp-aristotle-comment-757
μὴ τοῖς αὐτοῖς δέ:
De caelo
1. 3, 269 b 26
ἀνάγκη δὲ πᾶν τὸ φερόμενον ἢ κάτω ἢ ἄνω ἢ κουφότητ᾽ ἔχειν ἢ βάρος ἢ ἄμφω, μὴ πρὸς τὸ αὐτὸ δέ.
6.
mvp-aristotle-comment-758
σίγυνον.
The gloss in
Hesychius is
σίγυνοι· τὰ ξυστὰ δόρατα, ἢ τοὺς ὁλοσιδήρους ἄκοντας
(comp.
Schol. Plat. Amat. p. 87 R. and
Apoll. Rh.2. 99
). The word exists in a variety of forms (
HSt.
s. v.
σιβύνη). That it belonged to the Cyprian dialect is said also by
Herodotus
5. 9
σιγύννας δ᾽ ὧν καλέουσι Λίγυες . . . τοὺς καπήλους, Κύπριοι δὲ τὰ δόρατα
, and by
Schol. Apoll. Rh.2. 99
σιγύννους δὲ καλοῦσιν οἱ Κύπριοι τὰ ἀκόντια
. I suspect we should restore
σίγυνος in the present passage, as there seems to be no trace elsewhere of a neuter form.
Herwerden also (
Lex. gr. suppl.) tacitly assumes
σίγυννος as the nominative in
Aristotle.
7.
mvp-aristotle-comment-759
μεταφορά.
μεταφέρειν, said of a word, means to transfer it from its proper object to another more or less like that (
v.
22, 1459a8
and
Bon.
Ind. 462a1). The substantive
μεταφορά has two meanings, (1) the abstract sense of transference (
e. g. in the present passage, and
infra b 30), and (2) the concrete sense of the word in its transferred or metaphorical application (
e. g.
supra b1;
22, 1458a22, 25, 33
, etc.).
Metaphor, according to
Aristotle, consists in transferring a word from the object to which it is appropriate to another kind of object more or less like it; comp.
22, 1459a8
, and
Top.
6. 2, 140 b 9
ἡ μεταφορὰ ποιεῖ πως γνώριμον τὸ σημαινόμενον διὰ τὴν ὁμοιότητα πάντες γὰρ οἱ μεταφέροντες κατά τινα ὁμοιότητα μεταφέρουσιν.
Four kinds of similarity are noted in the text, that between genus and species, that between species and genus, that between species and species, and that between a thing and its analogue-where there is a similarity of relations. The present classification of metaphors is assumed in
Rhet.
3. 2, 1405 a 3
and
3. 10, 1410 b 36
.
5.
mvp-aristotle-comment-760
λέγω δὲ,
scil.
ἐπιφοράν, or
μεταφοράν.
8.
mvp-aristotle-comment-761
νηῦς κτέ.:
Od.
1, 185
and
24, 308
.
8.
mvp-aristotle-comment-762
ἑστάναι τι:
comp.
infra b 16
ἀφελεῖν τι. In the present passage, however, the indefinite
τι is the subject of the infinitive, in the same way for instance as in
Phys.
5. 1, 224 b 23
τῷ τούτου τι μεταβάλλειν
(
intr.), and in
Rhet.
2. 8, 1386 b 12, 13
. It is just as much the subject as
τοῦτο is in
Eth. N.
3. 7, 1114 b 11
τὸ καλῶς τοῦτο πεφυκέναι ἡ τελεία καὶ ἀληθινὴ ἂν εἴη εὐφυΐα.
Compare also
Metaph.
4, 1047b13
τὸ γάρ σε ἑστάναι νῦν ψεῦδος μέν, οὐκ ἀδύνατον δέ.
The traditional rendering of
ἑστάναι τι is 'a kind of standing' (
stare aliquod, or
stare quoddam in the old versions), but it has not the sanction of
Tyrwhitt and
Hermann, who translate
ἑστάναι τι simply by
stare; which shows that they were not insensible to the grammatical objection against making the
τι qualify an infinitive. See
infra on b 16 (
ἀφελεῖν τι).
9.
mvp-aristotle-comment-763
δὴ μυρί᾽ Ὀδυσσεὺς κτέ.:
Il.
2, 272
.
9.
mvp-aristotle-comment-764
ἀπ᾿ εἴδους:
Rhet.
3. 11, 1413a14
καὶ αἱ παροιμίαι μεταφοραὶ ἀπ᾿ εἴδους ἐπ᾿ εἶδός εἰσιν· οἷον ἄν τις ὡς ἀγαθὸν πεισόμενος αὐτὸς ἐπαγά-
γηται εἶτα βλαβῇ ὡς ὁ Καρπάθιός φησι τὸν λαγώ. ἄμφω γὰρ τὸ εἰρημένον πεπόνθασιν.
See
Rhet.
3. 10, 1410 b 14
and
11, 1411b 26
for other instances of this description.
The two quotations in the text, which have been supposed to be fragments either of some epic poet (
Kinkel,
EGF. p. 72) or of a parodist (
Brandt,
Parod. gr. rel. p. 112), were probably both of them from the
Καθαρμοί of
Empedocles. The second,
τεμὼν ἀτειρέι χαλκῷ, is, as
Vahlen has pointed out, identical with part of the Empedoclean line (fr. 143
Diels), preserved by
Theo Smyrnaeus:
Arithm. p. 20
Gelder (=p. 15
Hiller)
η̂ των͂ πολιτικῶν [Πλατωνικῶν Hiller] λόγων παράδοσις τὸ μὲν πρῶτον έχει καθαρμόν τινα ... ὁ μὲν γὰρ Ἐμπεδοκλῆς κρηνάων ἄπο πέντ᾿ ἀνιμῶντά φησιν ἀτειρέι χαλκῷ δεῖν ἀπορρύπτεσθαι, ὁ δὲ Πλάτων ἀπὸ πέντε μαθημάτων δεῖν φησι ποιεῖσθαι τὴν κάθαρσιν.
The exact form of the verse of
Empedocles is perhaps irrecoverable, but it is not difficult to see that
Theo's
ἀνιμῶντα is a prosaic substitute for the
τεμὼν preserved by
Aristotle (comp.
Diels,
Hermes15, 173
).
ἀτειρής—a favourite epithet with
Empedocles (
v.
Diels,
Index p. 232)—is a reminiscence of
Homer. The same may be said also of
χαλκός, if it meant, as it probably did in
Empedocles (
v.
Bullialdus
ad loc. p. 128 ed.
Gelder), a brazen urn, such as was used in certain rites.
Aristotle elsewhere refers to
Empedocles in a way which implies that his poems might be assumed to be familiar to every one (
v. on b 24). As he regards him as a master of metaphor (
μεταφορικός fr. 70; see on
1, 1447b18
), there is a special propriety in his quoting instances of metaphor from the writings of
Empedocles.
ἀφελεῖν τι.
The recent interpreters seem to agree in supposing this to mean 'a kind of removing' (
auferre aliquod in
Lat.), though a very different view was taken of it by
Victorius,
Heinsius,
Goulston,
Tyrwhitt,
Hermann, and
Ritter, who represent it by
auferre aliquid or
auferre quiddam. The now usual rendering implies that the infinitive is treated as an ordinary substantive, with the indefinite pronoun attached to it in the same way as in
ἡδονή τις,
γένεσίς τις, and the like. There is no recorded instance of this construction in classical Greek. In the parallels in the
Sophistici Elenchi (
22, 178b12 sqq.
) the
τι in
ποιεῖν τι,
πάσχειν τι, and
αἰσθάνεσθαί τι is assuredly (as
Pacius saw) the object after these verbs. Aristotle's assumption is that a generic may be supplanted by a specific term, when it comes to be applied to a special kind of object. Thus
ἑστάναι, said of a ship, is supplanted by
ὁρμεῖν, and
ἀφελεῖν, said of water, by
ἀρύσαι. If he had had the instance cited in b 27 before him here, he might very well have said
τὸ σπείρειν ἀφιέναι τί ἐστι where the
τι would have represented the accusative,
τὸν καρπόν, of the later passage.
11.
mvp-aristotle-comment-765
τῷ δὲ ἀνάλογον
(comp.
Metaph. I 4, 1070b 17
) replaces the
κατὰ τὸ ἀνάλογον in 659,
ἐπιφοράν being again understood. Analogy or proportion is thus defined in
Eth. N. 5. 5. 1131*31,
ἡ ἀναλογία ἰσότης ἐστὶ λόγων καὶ ἐν τέτταρσιν ἐλαχίστοις
. In the statement in the text the general form of analogy, B: A :: D: C, is illustrated by an example :—
φιάλη (Β):
Διόνυσος (Α) ::
ἀσπίς (D) :
Ἄρης (C). Metaphor consists in giving the
φιάλη (B) the name belonging to its analogue (D), viz.
ἀσπίς, or vice versa. This transference of a name, as
Aristotle proceeds to tell us (
καὶ ἐνίοτε προστιθέασιν, 619), is sometimes softened by an explanatory addition to the word in its new application. The addition may be either (1) positive or (2) negative. Thus instead of simply speaking of the shield (D) as a cup (B), we may (1) add the term to which the shield is properly related (C), i. e.
Ares, and thus call the shield the 'cup of Ares' (B+C); or (2) we may add a negative epithet, to show that the word is used in a non-natural sense, and describe the shield as 'a cup that holds no wine' (
φιάλη ἄοινος). A string of metaphors from analogy is quoted in
Rhet. 3. 10, 1410b 36
τῶν δὲ μεταφορῶν τεττάρων οὐσῶν εὐδοκιμοῦσι μάλιστα αἱ κατ᾿ ἀναλογίαν, ὥσπερ Περικλῆς ἔφη τὴν νεότητα τὴν ἀπολομένην ἐν τῷ πολέμῳ οὕτως ἠφανίσθαι ἐκ τῆς πόλεως ὥσπερ εἴ τις τὸ ἔαρ ἐκ τοῦ ἐνιαυτοῦ ἐξέλοι κτέ.
The use of such metaphors, as serving for instance to give life to a description of things inanimate, is considered at length in
Rhet. 3. 11
; comp. esp.
3. 11, 1411 b 32
ἐν πᾶσι δὲ τῷ ἐνέργειαν ποιεῖν εὐδοκιμεῖ οἷον ἐν τοῖσδε, “αὐτις ἐπὶ δάπεδόνδε κυλίνδετο λᾶας ἀναιδής”, καὶ “ ἔπτατ᾿ ὀιστός”, ... καὶ “ αἰχμὴ δὲ στέρνοιο διέσσυτο μαιμώωσα”. ἐν πᾶσι γὰρ τούτοις διὰ τὸ ἔμψυχα εἶναι ἐνεργοῦντα φαίνεται· τὸ ἀναισχυντεῖν γὰρ καὶ μαιμᾶν καὶ τὰ ἄλλα ἐνέργεια. ταῦτα δὲ προσήψε διὰ τῆς κατ᾿ ἀναλογίαν μεταφορᾶς· ὡς γὰρ ὁ λίθος πρὸς τὸν Σίσυφον, ὁ ἀναισχυντῶν πρὸς τὸν ἀναισχυντούμενον.
11.
mvp-aristotle-comment-766
ἐρεῖ:
comp.
infra b 21, 23, and
εἴρηκεν and
λέγει in the context (b 15, 20). The subject, if one must be supplied, is 'the poet', just as in the parallels in the
Topics it would be 'the disputant'.
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.
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).
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.
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 ).
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.
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
).
3.
mvp-aristotle-comment-791
ἴσα... πλήθη.
πλήθη is 'numbers', as the plural of
πλῆθος,
numerus or
summa. It is hardly necessary, therefore, to restore
πλήθει from certain of the apographs.
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.
