§1## ΠΕΡΙ ΕΡΜΗΝΕΙΑΣ.
ΠΡΩΤΟΝ δεῖ θέσθαι τί ὄνομα καὶ τί ῥῆμα, ἔπειτα τί ἐστιν ἀπόφασις καὶ κατάφασις καὶ ἀπόφανσις καὶ λόγος.
¦1 ON INTERPRETATION First we must define what a noun is and what a verb is, then what a negation, an affirmation, an assertion, and a sentence are.
Ἔστι μὲν οὖν τὰ ἐν τῇ φωνῇ τῶν ἐν τῇ ψυχῇ παθημάτων σύμβολα, καὶ τὰ γραφόμενα τῶν ἐν τῇ φωνῇ.
¦2 Now, spoken words are symbols of affections of the soul, and written words are symbols of spoken words.
Καὶ ὥσπερ οὐδὲ γράμματα πᾶσι τὰ αὐτά, οὐδὲ φωναὶ αἱ αὐταί·
And just as written letters are not the same for all, neither are spoken words the same.
ὧν μέντοι ταῦτα σημεῖα πρώτως, ταὐτὰ πᾶσι παθήματα τῆς ψυχῆς, καὶ ὧν ταῦτα ὁμοιώματα, πράγματα ἤδη ταὐτά.
Yet those things of which these are primarily signs are the same for all, namely the affections of the soul, and those things of which these affections are likenesses are also the same, namely actual things.
Περὶ μὲν οὖν τούτων εἴρηται ἐν τοῖς περὶ ψυχῆς· ἄλλης γὰρ πραγματείας.
These matters have been discussed in the treatise On the Soul, ¦3 for they belong to another inquiry.
Ἔστι δ᾿, ὥσπερ ἐν τῇ ψυχῇ ὁτὲ μὲν νόημα ἄνευ τοῦ ἀληθεύειν ἢ ψεύδεσθαι, ὁτὲ δὲ ἤδη ᾧ ἀνάγκη τούτων ὑπάρχειν θάτερον, οὕτω καὶ ἐν τῇ φωνῇ·
But just as there is sometimes in the soul a thought without truth or falsity, and at other times one to which it is necessary that one of these belongs, so it is also in speech.
περὶ γὰρ σύνθεσιν καὶ διαίρεσίν ἐστι τὸ ψεῦδος καὶ τὸ ἀληθές.
For falsity and truth have to do with combination and division.
Τὰ μὲν οὖν ὀνόματα αὐτὰ καὶ τὰ ῥήματα ἔοικε τῷ ἄνευ συνθέσεως καὶ διαιρέσεως νοήματι, οἷον τὸ ἄνθρωπος ἢ τὸ λευκόν, ὅταν μὴ προστεθῇ τι·
¦4 Therefore, nouns themselves and verbs are like the thought without combination and division, such as "man" or "white", when nothing is added.
οὔτε γὰρ ψεῦδος οὔτε ἀληθές πω.
For they are not yet either true or false.
Σημεῖον δ᾿ ἐστὶ τοῦδε· καὶ γὰρ ὁ τραγέλαφος σημαίνει μέν τι, οὔπω δὲ ἀληθὲς ἢ ψεῦδος, ἐὰν μὴ τὸ εἶναι ἢ μὴ εἶναι προστεθῇ, ἢ ἁπλῶς ἢ κατὰ χρόνον.
There is a sign of this: even "stag-goat" signifies something, but not yet anything true or false, unless "to be" or "not to be" is added, either simply or with respect to time.
§2Ὄνομα μὲν οὖν ἐστὶ φωνὴ σημαντικὴ κατὰ συνθήκην ἄνευ χρόνου, ἧς μηδὲν μέρος ἐστὶ σημαντικὸν κεχωρισμένον·
¦1 A noun, then, is a spoken sound significant by convention, without time, of which no part is significant in separation.
ἐν γὰρ τῷ Κάλλιππος τὸ ἵππος οὐδὲν αὐτὸ καθ᾿ ἑαυτὸ σημαίνει, ὥσπερ ἐν τῷ λόγῳ τῷ καλὸς ἵππος.
For in "Callippus", "hippus" signifies nothing by itself, as it does in the sentence "a beautiful horse".
Οὐ μὴν οὐδ᾿ ὥσπερ ἐν τοῖς ἁπλοῖς ὀνόμασιν, οὕτως ἔχει καὶ ἐν τοῖς συμπεπλεγμένοις·
¦2 However, it is not the same in simple nouns as it is in composite nouns.
ἐν ἐκείνοις μὲν γὰρ τὸ μέρος οὐδαμῶς σημαντικόν, ἐν δὲ τούτοις βούλεται μέν, ἀλλ᾿ οὐδενὸς κεχωρισμένον, οἷον ἐν τῷ ἐπακτροκέλης τὸ κέλης οὐδὲν σημαίνει καθ᾿ ἑαυτό.
For in the former, the part is in no way significant, but in the latter, it intends to be, yet is significant of nothing in separation, as in ¦p.40 "epaktrokeles", "keles" signifies nothing by itself.
Τὸ δὲ κατὰ συνθήκην, ὅτι φύσει τῶν ὀνομάτων οὐδέν ἐστιν, ἀλλ᾿ ὅταν γένηται σύμβολον, ἐπεὶ δηλοῦσί γέ τι καὶ οἱ ἀγράμματοι ψόφοι, οἷον θηρίων, ὧν οὐδέν ἐστιν ὄνομα.
"By convention" means that none of the nouns is so by nature, but only when it becomes a symbol; for even unarticulated noises (such as those of beasts) show something, yet none of them is a noun.
Τὸ δ᾿ οὐκ ἄνθρωπος οὐκ ὄνομα.
¦3 But "not-man" is not a noun.
Οὐ μὴν οὐδὲ κεῖται ὄνομα ὅ τι δεῖ καλεῖν αὐτό· οὔτε γὰρ λόγος οὔτε ἀπόφασίς ἐστιν.
Nor indeed is there any name established to call it; for it is neither a sentence nor a negation.
Ἀλλ᾿ ἔστω ὄνομα ἀόριστον, ὅτι ὁμοίως ἐφ᾿ ὁτουοῦν ὑπάρχει καὶ ὄντος καὶ μὴ ὄντος.
But let it be an "indefinite noun", because it belongs equally to anything whatever, whether existing or non-existing.
Τὸ δὲ Φίλωνος ἢ Φίλωνι καὶ ὅσα τοιαῦτα, οὐκ ὀνόματα ἀλλὰ πτώσεις ὀνόματος.
And "Philo's" or "to Philo" and all such are not nouns, but cases of a noun.
Λόγος δέ ἐστιν αὐτοῦ τὰ μὲν ἄλλα κατὰ τὰ αὐτά· ὅτι δὲ μετὰ τοῦ ἔστιν ἢ ἦν ἢ ἔσται οὐκ ἀληθεύει ἢ ψεύδεται, τὸ δὲ ὄνομα ἀεί·
¦4 Its definition is in other respects the same as that of the noun, but with "is" or "was" or "will be" it does not speak truly or falsely, whereas the noun always does.
οἷον Φίλωνός ἐστιν ἢ οὐκ ἔστιν· οὐδὲν γάρ πω οὔτε ἀληθεύει οὔτε ψεύδεται.
For instance, "Philo's is" or "Philo's is not" does not yet speak truly or falsely.
§3Ῥῆμα δέ ἐστι τὸ προσσημαῖνον χρόνον, οὗ μέρος οὐδὲν σημαίνει χωρίς, καὶ ἔστιν ἀεὶ τῶν καθ᾿ ἑτέρου λεγομένων σημεῖον.
¦1 A verb is that which co-signifies time, of which no part signifies separately, and it is always a sign of things said of another.
Λέγω δ᾿ ὅτι προσσημαίνει χρόνον, οἷον ὑγίεια μὲν ὄνομα, τὸ δὲ ὑγιαίνει ῥῆμα· προσσημαίνει γὰρ τὸ νῦν ὑπάρχειν.
I say "it co-signifies time", as, for example, "health" is a noun, but "is healthy" is a verb, for it co-signifies that it holds "now".
Καὶ ἀεὶ τῶν καθ᾿ ἑτέρου λεγομένων σημεῖόν ἐστιν, οἷον τῶν καθ᾿ ὑποκειμένου ἢ ἐν ὑποκειμένῳ.
And it is always a sign of things said of another, as of things said of a subject or in a subject.
Τὸ δὲ οὐχ ὑγιαίνει καὶ τὸ οὐ κάμνει οὐ ῥῆμα λέγω·
¦2 But "is not healthy" and "is not sick" I do not call verbs.
προσσημαίνει μὲν γὰρ χρόνον καὶ ἀεὶ κατά τινος ὑπάρχει, τῇ δὲ διαφορᾷ ὄνομα οὐ κεῖται·
For they co-signify time and always hold of something, yet no name is established for this difference.
ἀλλ᾿ ἔστω ἀόριστον ῥῆμα, ὅτι ὁμοίως ἐφ᾿ ὁτουοῦν ὑπάρχει, καὶ ὄντος καὶ μὴ ὄντος.
But let them be "indefinite verbs", because they belong equally to anything whatever, whether existing or non-existing.
Ὁμοίως δὲ καὶ τὸ ὑγίανεν ἢ τὸ ὑγιανεῖ οὐ ῥῆμα, ἀλλὰ πτῶσις ῥήματος·
¦3 Similarly, "was healthy" or "will be healthy" are not verbs, but inflections of a verb.
διαφέρει δὲ τοῦ ῥήματος, ὅτι τὸ μὲν τὸν παρόντα προσσημαίνει χρόνον, τὰ δὲ τὸ πέριξ.
They differ from the verb because the verb co-signifies the present time, while they co-signify the time around it.
Αὐτὰ μὲν οὖν καθ᾿ ἑαυτὰ λεγόμενα τὰ ῥήματα ὀνόματά ἐστι καὶ σημαίνει τι (ἵστησι γὰρ ὁ λέγων τὴν διάνοιαν, καὶ ὁ ἀκούσας ἠρέμησεν), ἀλλ᾿ εἰ ἔστιν ἢ μή, οὔπω σημαίνει·
¦4 Now, verbs said by themselves are nouns and signify something (for the speaker halts his thought, and the hearer is at rest), but whether it is or is not, it does not yet signify.
οὐδὲ γὰρ τὸ εἶναι ἢ μὴ εἶναι σημεῖόν ἐστι τοῦ πράγματος, οὐδ᾿ ἐὰν τὸ ὂν εἴπῃς αὐτὸ καθ᾿ ἑαυτὸ ψιλόν.
For "to be" or "not to be" is not a sign of the thing, ¦p.41 not even if you say "being" itself bare by itself.
Αὐτὸ μὲν γὰρ οὐδέν ἐστι, προσσημαίνει δὲ σύνθεσίν τινα, ἣν ἄνευ τῶν συγκειμένων οὐκ ἔστι νοῆσαι.
For by itself it is nothing, but it co-signifies a certain combination, which cannot be thought without the components.