§12.10.30duras et illa syllabus facit, quae ad coniungendas demum subiectas sibi uocalis est utilis, alias supervacua, ut equos hac et aequum scribimus; cum etiam ipsae hae vocales duae efficiant sonum, qualis apud Graecos nullus est, ideoque scribi illorum litteris non potest.
That letter also makes syllables harsh, which is useful only for joining the vowels placed under it, otherwise superfluous, as we write "equos" and "aequum" with it; since these two vowels themselves also produce a sound such as is none among the Greeks, and therefore cannot be written in their letters.
quid? quod pleraque nos illa quasi mugiente M littera cludimus in quam nullum Graece verbum cadit: at illi ny iucundam et in fine praecipue quasi tinnientem illius loco ponunt, quae est apud nos rarissima in clausulis.
What about the fact that we close most of our words with that letter M, sounding like a bellowing, into which no Greek word falls? But they in its place put the pleasant N, sounding especially at the end like a ringing, which with us is very rare in endings.
quid? quod syllabae nostrae in B litteram et D innituntur adeo aspere, ut plerique non antiquissimorum quidem, sed tamen veterum mollire temptaverint non solum aversa pro abversis dicendo, sed et in praepositione B litterae absonam et ipsam S subiciendo.
What about the fact that our syllables lean upon the letter B and D so harshly, that many not indeed of the most ancient, but yet of the old writers attempted to soften them, not only by saying "aversa" for "abversis", but also by placing in the preposition under the letter B the itself discordant S?
§12.10.33sed accentus quoque, cum rigore quodam, tum similitudine ipsa, minus suaves habemus, quia ultima syllaba nec acuta unquam excitatur nec flexa circumducitur, sed in gravem vel duas graves cadit semper.
But as for accents also, we have them less sweet, both by a certain rigidity and by their very similarity, because the last syllable is never raised with an acute tone nor rounded with a circumflex, but always falls on a grave or two graves.
itaque tanto est sermo Graecus Latino iucundior, ut nostri poetae, quotiens dulce carmen esse voluerint, illorum id nominibus exornent.
Therefore, the Greek tongue is so much more pleasant than Latin that our poets, whenever they want a poem to be sweet, adorn it with their names.
§12.10.34his ilia potentiora, quod res plurimae carent appellationibus, ut eas necesse sit transferre aut circumire; etiam in iis, quae denominata sunt, summa paupertas in eadem nos frequentissime revolvit; at illis non verborum modo, sed linguarum etiam inter se differentium copia est.
More powerful than these are those facts: that very many things lack names, so that it is necessary to transfer or go around them; even in those which are named, the extreme poverty of vocabulary frequently throws us back into the same ones; but they have an abundance not only of words, but also of dialects differing from one another.
§12.10.35quare qui a Latinis exiget illam gratiam sermonis Attici, det mihi in eloquendo eandem iucunditatem et parem copiam.
Therefore, he who demands from Latins that grace of Attic speech, let him give me in expression the same sweetness and equal abundance.
quod si negatum est, sententias aptabimus iis vocibus quas habemus, nec rerum nimiam tenuitatem, ut non dicam pinguioribus, fortioribus certe verbis miscebimus, ne virtus utraque pereat ipsa confusione.
But if this is denied, we will adapt our thoughts to those words we have, nor will we mix the too great thinness of things with words, I will not say more fat, but certainly stronger, lest both virtues perish by the very confusion.
§12.10.36nam quo minus adiuvat sermo, rerum inventione pugnandum est.
For by how much less our speech helps us, we must fight by the invention of things.
sensus sublimes variique eruantur.
Sublime and varied thoughts must be dug out.
permovendi omnes adfectus erunt, oratio translationum nitore illuminanda.
All emotions must be thoroughly moved, our speech illuminated by the brilliance of metaphors.
non possumus esse tam graciles: simus fortiores.
We cannot be so slender: let us be stronger.
subtilitate vincimur: valeamus pondere.
We are defeated in subtlety: let us prevail in weight.
proprietas penes illos est certior: copia vincamus.
Appropriateness is more certain in their possession: let us conquer by abundance.
§12.10.37ingenia Graecorum etiam minora suos portus habent: nos plerumque maioribus velis mouemur, validior spiritus nostros sinus tendat;
Even the smaller intellects of the Greeks have their own harbors: we are for the most part moved by larger sails; let a stronger breath swell our folds.
non tamen alto semper feremur, nam et litora interim sequenda sunt.
Yet we shall not always be carried in the deep, for sometimes also shores must be followed.
illis facilis per quaelibet vada accessus; ego aliquid, non multo tamen, altius, in quo mea cumba non sidat, inveniam.
To them, access is easy through any shallows; I shall find something, though not much, deeper, in which my skiff may not sink.
§12.10.38neque enim, si tenuiora haec ac pressiora Graeci melius, in eoque vincimur solo et ideo in comoediis non contendimus, prorsus tamen omittenda pars haec orationis, sed exigenda ut optime possumus; possumus autem rerum et modo et iudicio esse similes, verborum gratia, quam in ipsis non habemus, extrinsecus condienda est.
For nor, if the Greeks do these thinner and more compressed things better, and in this alone we are defeated and therefore do not contend in comedies, must this part of speech be entirely omitted by us, but must be pursued as best we can; and we can be similar to them both in the measure and judgment of things, but the grace of words, which we do not have in the words themselves, must be seasoned from without.
§12.10.39an non in privatis et acutus et indistinctus et non super modum elatus M. Tullius? non in M. Calidio insignis haec virtus? non Scipio, Laelius, Cato in eloquendo uelut Attici Romanorum fuerunt? cui porro non satis est, quo nihil esse melius potest?
Or was not Marcus Tullius both sharp and clear and not excessively lofty in private cases? Was not this outstanding virtue in Marcus Calidius? Did not Scipio, Laelius, Cato exist in speaking as if they were the Attics of the Romans? To whom, then, is that not enough, than which nothing can be better?
§12.10.40adhuc quidam nullam esse naturalem putant eloquentiam, nisi quae sit cotidiano sermoni simillima, quo cum amicis, coniugibus, liberis, servis loquamur, contento promere animi voluntatem nihilque arcessiti et elaborati requirente; quidquid huc sit adiectum, id esse adfectationis et ambitiosae in loquendo iactantiae, remotum a veritate fictumque ipsorum gratia verborum, quibus solum natura sit officium attributum, servire sensibus:
Still some think that there is no natural eloquence, except that which is most similar to everyday speech, with which we speak with friends, wives, children, servants, content to bring forth the will of the mind and requiring nothing fetched from afar and elaborate; whatever is added to this, they think that it is of affectation and ambitious boastfulness in speaking, removed from truth and feigned for the sake of the words themselves, to which alone nature has attributed the duty to serve the thoughts.