§9.22.1amo verecundiam †vel potius libertatem loquendi.
I love modesty, †or rather freedom of speech.
atqui hoc Zenoni placuit, homini me hercule acuto, etsi Academiae nostrae cum eo magna rixa est—sed, ut dico, placet Stoicis suo quamque rem nomine appellare.
And yet this pleased Zeno, a man, by Hercules, acute, although our Academy has a great quarrel with him—but, as I say, it pleases the Stoics to call each thing by its own name.
sic enim disserunt, nihil esse obscenum, nihil turpe dictu; nam si quod sit in obscenitate flagitium, id aut in re esse aut in verbo; nihil esse tertium.
For they argue thus: that nothing is obscene, nothing shameful to say; for if there were any disgrace in obscenity, it would be either in the thing or in the word; there is no third.
in re non est.
It is not in the thing.
itaque non modo in comoedus res ipsa narratur (ut ille in Demiurgo:
"
modo forte——,
"
Nosti canticum; meministi Roscium:
"
ita mé destituit núdum——,
"
totus est sermo verbis tectus, re impudentior), sed etiam in tragoediis.
Therefore, not only in comedies is the thing itself narrated (as that character in the Demiurgus: "just now by chance——, "You know the song; you remember Roscius: "thus he left me naked——, "the whole speech is covered with words, though rather impudent in the thing), but also in tragedies.
quid est enim illud:
"
quae múlier una——
"
quid, inquam, est:
"
Úsurpat dupléx cubile'?
"
quid?
"
huius †ferei 'híc cubile iníre est ausus'?
"
quid est:
"
virginem me quondam invitam per vim violat Iuppiter'?
"
bene 'violat'; atqui idem significat, sed alterum nemo tulisset.
For what is that: "what woman alone—— "what, I say, is: "She usurps a double bed'? "what? "did he dare 'to enter the bed here' of this †beast? "what is: "Jupiter once violates me, a virgin, unwilling, by force'? "well said 'violates'; and yet it means the same thing, but no one would have tolerated the other.
§9.22.2vides igitur, cum eadem res sit, quia verba non sint, nihil videri turpe.
You see therefore, since the thing is the same, because the words are not, nothing seems shameful.
ergo, in re non est; multo minus in verbis.
Therefore, it is not in the thing; much less in the words.
si enim quod verbo significatur, id turpe non est, verbum, quod significat, turpe esse non potest.
For if that which is signified by a word is not shameful, the word which signifies it cannot be shameful.
'anum' appellas alieno nomine;
You call the 'anus' by a foreign name; why not rather by its own?
cur non suo potius? si turpe est, ne alieno quidem; si non est, suo potius.
If it is shameful, not even by a foreign name; if it is not, rather by its own.
caudam antiqui 'penem' vocabant, ex quo est propter similitudinem 'penicillus; at hodie 'penis' est in obscenis.
The ancients called the tail 'penis', from which on account of similarity comes 'penicillus'; but today 'penis' is among obscene things.
'at vero Piso ille Frugi in Annalibus suis queritur adulescentis "peni deditos" esse. ' quod tu in epistula appellas suo nomine, ille tectius 'penem; sed, quia multi, factum est tam obscenum quam id verbum, quo tu usus es.
'But indeed that Piso Frugi in his Annals complains that young men are "devoted to the penis".' What you call by its own name in your letter, he called more covertly 'penis'; but, because many did so, it became as obscene as that word which you used.
quid, quod vulgo dicitur: 'cum nos te voluimus convenire,' num obscenum est? memini in senatu disertum consularem ita eloqui: 'hanc culpam maiorem an illam dicam?' potuit obscenius? 'non,' inquis;
What about what is commonly said: 'when we wished to meet you', is it obscene? I remember a drafty consular orator in the senate speaking thus: 'shall I call this fault greater or that one?' Could it be more obscene?
'non enim ita sensit. ' non ergo in verbo est; docui autem in re non esse; nusquam igitur est.
'No,' you say; 'for he did not mean it so.' It is not therefore in the word; and I have shown that it is not in the thing; therefore it is nowhere.
§9.22.3'Liberis dare operam' quam honeste dicitur! etiam patres rogant filios;
'To give attention to children', how respectably it is said!
eius operae nomen non audent dicere.
Even fathers ask their sons; they do not dare to say the name of that labor.
Socraten fidibus docuit nobilissimus fidicen; 'Connus' vocitatus est;
A most noble lyre-player taught Socrates the lyre; he was called 'Connus'; do you think that is obscene?
num id obscenum putas? Cum loquimur 'terni,' nihil flagiti dicimus; at cum 'bini,' obscenum est.
When we say 'three each', we say nothing disgraceful; but when 'two each', it is obscene.
'Graecis quidem,' inquies.
'To the Greeks indeed,' you will say.
nihil est ergo in verbo, quoniam et ego Graece scio et tamen tibi dico 'bini,' idque tu facis, quasi ego Graece, non Latine dixerim.
There is therefore nothing in the word, since I also know Greek and yet I say 'bini' to you, and you do so as if I had spoken in Greek, not in Latin.
'ruta' et 'menta' recte utrumque; volo mentam pusillam ita appellare ut 'rutulam; non licet.
'Rue' and 'mint', both are correct; I want to call a small mint in such a way as 'rutula'; it is not allowed.
belle 'tectoriola; dic ergo etiam 'pavimenta' isto modo; non potes.
'Small plasters' is fine; say therefore also 'pavements' in that manner; you cannot.
Viden igitur nihil esse nisi ineptias, turpitudinem nec in verbo esse nec in re, itaque nusquam esse?
Do you see therefore that there is nothing but nonsense, and that shamefulness is neither in the word nor in the thing, and therefore is nowhere?
§9.22.4igitur in verbis honestis obscena ponimus.
Therefore, we place obscene things in honest words.
quid enim? non honestum verbum est 'divisio'? at inest obscenum, cui respondet 'intercapedo.
For why? Is not 'division' an honest word? But there is an obscene thing in it, to which 'interruption' responds.
' num haec ergo obscena sunt? nos autem ridicule: si dicimus 'ille patrem strangulavit,' honorem non praefamur; sin de Aurelia aliquid aut Lollia, honos praefandus est.
Are these therefore obscene? But we are ridiculous: if we say 'he strangled his father', we do not preface with an expression of respect; but if we say something about Aurelia or Lollia, respect must be prefaced.
et quidem iam etiam non obscena verba pro obscenis sunt.
And indeed now even non-obscene words are treated as obscene.
'"Batuit," inquit, impudenter, "depsit" multo impudentius. ' atqui neutrum est obscenum.
'"He beat," says he, impudently, "he kneaded" much more impudently.' And yet neither is obscene.
stultorum plena sunt omnia.
All things are full of fools.
'testes' verbum honestissimum in iudicio, alio loco non nimis; et honesti 'colei Lanuvini,' 'Cliternini' non honesti.
'Witnesses' is a most honest word in court, in another place not so much; and 'the hills of Lanuvium' are honest, those of Cliternia are not honest.
quid? ipsa res modo honesta, modo turpis;
What?
suppedit, flagitium est; iam erit nudus in balneo, non reprehendes.
The thing itself is now honest, now shameful; if one farts, it is a disgrace; yet if he is naked in the bath, you will not find fault.
§9.22.5habes scholam Stoicam: o(sofo\s eu)qurrhmonh/sei.
You have the Stoic lecture: 'the wise man will speak directly'.
quam multa ex uno verbo tuo! te adversus me omnia audere gratum est;
How many things from one word of yours!
ego servo et servabo (sic enim adsuevi) Platonis verecundiam.
It is pleasing that you dare all things against me; I keep and will keep (for so I have become accustomed) the modesty of Plato.
itaque tectis verbis ea ad te scripsi, quae apertissimis agunt Stoici; sed illi etiam crepitus aiunt aeque liberos ac ructus esse oportere.
Therefore, I wrote to you in covered words those things which the Stoics treat in the most open terms; but they also say that farts ought to be as free as burps.
honorem igitur K. Martiis.
Respect, therefore, to the Kalends of March.
tu me diliges et valebis.
You will love me, and farewell.