§1.6.24quodsi animadverterent litterarum adfinitatem, scirent sic ab eo, quod est robur, roboris fieri, quomodo ab eo, quod est miles limes, militis limitis, index vindex, iudicis vindicis, et quae supra iam attigi.
But if they observed the affinity of letters, they would know that 'roboris' is formed from 'robur' in the same way as 'militis' and 'limitis' from 'miles' and 'limes', 'iudicis' and 'vindicis' from 'index' and 'vindex', and those examples which I have already touched upon above.
§1.6.25quid vero quod, ut dicebam, similes positiones in longe diversas figures per obliquos casus exeunt, ut virgo Iuno, lusus lusus, cuspis puppis et mille alia? cum illud etiam accidat, ut quaedam pluraliter non dicantur, quaedam contra singulari numero, quaedam casibus careant, quaedam a primis statim positionibus tota mutentur, ut Iuppiter.
What indeed of the fact that, as I was saying, similar nominative forms end in far different inflections through the oblique cases, as 'virgo' and 'Iuno', 'lusus' and 'lusus', 'cuspis' and 'puppis', and a thousand others? Especially since it also happens that some words are not used in the plural, others conversely not in the singular number, some lack cases altogether, and some are completely changed from their very first nominative forms, like 'Iuppiter'.
§1.6.26quod verbis etiam accidit ut illi fero, cuius praeteritum perfectum et ulterius non invenitur.
This also happens to verbs, as to that word 'fero', whose perfect and subsequent tenses are not found.
nec plurimum refert, nulla haec an praedura sint.
Nor does it matter much whether these forms do not exist at all or are extremely harsh.
nam quid progenies genitivo singulari, quid plurali spes faciet? quomodo autem quire et ruere vel in praeterita patiendi modo vel in participia transibunt?
For what will 'progenies' make in the genitive singular, or 'spes' in the plural? And how will 'quire' and 'ruere' pass either into the past tenses of the passive voice or into participles?
§1.6.27quid de aliis dicam, cum senatus senati an senatus faciat, incertum sit? quare mihi non invenuste dici videtur, aliud esse Latine aliud grammatice loqui.
What shall I say of other words, when it is uncertain whether 'senatus' makes 'senati' or 'senatus' in the genitive? Therefore, it seems to me to be said not without wit, that it is one thing to speak Latin, another to speak grammatically.
ac de analogia nimium.
But enough of analogy.
§1.6.28etymologia, quae verborum originem inquirit, a Cicerone dicta est notatio, quia nomen eius apud Aristotelem invenitur σύμβολον, quod est nota; nam verbum ex verbo ductum, id est veriloquium, ipse Cicero, qui finxit, reformidat.
Etymology, which inquires into the origin of words, was called by Cicero 'notatio', because its name is found in Aristotle as 'σύμβολον', which means 'nota'; for Cicero himself, who coined it, shrinks from a word-for-word translation, that is, 'veriloquium'.
sunt qui vim potius intuiti originationem vocent.
There are some who, looking rather to its force, call it 'originatio'.
§1.6.29haec habet aliquando usum necessarium, quotiens interpretatione res, de qua quaeritur, eget, ut M. Caelius se esse hominem frugi vult probare, non quia abstinens sit (nam id ne ementiri quidem poterat), sed quia utilis multis, id est fructuosus, unde sit ducta frugalitas.
This sometimes has a necessary use, whenever the thing under discussion stands in need of interpretation, as Marcus Caelius wishes to prove that he is a man 'frugi', not because he is abstemious (for he could not even pretend that), but because he is useful to many, that is, 'fructuosus', from which 'frugalitas' is derived.
ideoque in definitionibus assignatur etymologiae locus.
And therefore, a place is assigned to etymology in definitions.
§1.6.30nonnunquam etiam barbara ab emendatis conatur discernere, ut cum, triquetram dici Siciliam an Triquedram, meridiem an medidiem oporteat quaeritur, §1.6.31aliaque quae consuetudini serviunt.
Sometimes also it attempts to distinguish barbarous words from correct ones, as when it is questioned whether Sicily ought to be called 'triquetra' or 'Triquedra', 'meridies' or 'medidiem', and other things which serve custom.
continet autem in se multam eruditionem, sive ex Graecis orta tractemus, quae sunt plurima, praecipueque Aeolica ratione (cui est sermo noster simillimus) declinata, sive ex historiarum veterum notitia nomina hominum, locorum, gentium, urbium requiramus, unde Bruti, Publicolae, Pythici? cur Latium, Italia, Beneventum? quae Capitolium et collem Quirinalem et Argiletum appellandi ratio?
Moreover, it contains in itself much erudition, whether we treat of words derived from Greek, which are very numerous, and especially inflected according to the Aeolic dialect (to which our tongue is most similar), or whether we seek from the knowledge of ancient histories the names of men, places, nations, and cities: whence 'Bruti', 'Publicolae', 'Pythici'? why 'Latium', 'Italia', 'Beneventum'? what is the reason for naming the 'Capitolium', the Quirinal hill, and the 'Argiletum'?
§1.6.32iam illa minora, in quibus maxime studiosi eius rei fatigantur, qui verba paulum declinata varie et multipliciter ad veritatem reducunt aut correptis aut porrectis, aut adiectis aut detractis, aut permutatis litteris syllabisve.
Now there are those lesser matters, in which those most devoted to this study exhaust themselves, who, by shortening or lengthening, adding or taking away, or changing letters or syllables, reduce words that have been slightly altered, in various and manifold ways, back to their true origin.
inde pravis ingeniis ad foedissima usque ludibria labuntur.
From this, they slide, through perverse intellects, into the most shameful absurdities.
sit enim consul a consulendo vel a iudicando; nam et hoc consulere veteres vocaverunt, unde adhuc remanet illud rogat boni consulas, id est bonum iudices.
For let 'consul' be from 'consulere' or from 'iudicando'; for the ancients called this latter also 'consulere', whence there still remains that expression, 'he asks that you take it in good part', that is, 'judge it good'.
§1.6.33senatui nomen dederit aetas (nam iidem Patres sunt), et rex rector et alia plurima indubitata; nec abnuerim tegulae regulaeque et similium his rationem.
Age may have given its name to 'senatus' (for they are the same as 'Patres'), and 'rex' from 'rector', and many other things are beyond doubt; nor would I deny the derivation of 'tegula', 'regula', and the like.
iam sit et classis a calando et lepus levipes et vulpes volipes: §1.6.34etiamne a contrariis aliqua sinemus trahi, ut lucus, quia umbra opacus parum luceat, et ludus, quia sit longissime a lusu, et Ditis, quia minime dives? etiamne hominem appellari, quia sit humo natus (quasi vero non omnibus animalibus eadem origo, aut illi primi mortales ante nomen imposuerint terrae quam sibi), et verba ab aere verberato?
Now let 'classis' also be from 'calando', and 'lepus' 'levipes', and 'vulpes' 'volipes': shall we even permit some words to be derived from their contraries, as 'lucus' because, being dark with shade, it shines little, and 'ludus' because it is furthest from play, and 'Ditis' because he is least rich? Shall we also allow that 'homo' is so called because he was born from the ground—as if, forsooth, all animals had not the same origin, or those first mortals had imposed a name on the earth before themselves—and 'verba' from beaten air?
§1.6.35Pergamus: sic perveniemus eo usque, ut stella luminis stilla credatur, cuius etymologiae auctorem clarum sane in litteris nominari in ea parte, qua a me reprehenditur, inhumanum est.
Let us go on: in this way we shall arrive at the point that 'stella' is believed to be a drop of light, the author of which etymology, a man indeed famous in literature, it would be unhandsome to name in that part where he is censured by me.