Hide browse bar
Your current position in the text is marked in blue. Click anywhere in the
line to jump to another position:
Table of Contents:
Latin and English Style.
Two differences between Latin and English prose are noticeable. Latin prose is periodic in its structure ; i.e. the main idea, instead of being expressed at once, briefly followed or preceded by its modifications, all in short detached sentences (as in English), is so put as to embrace all its modifying clauses with itself in one harmonious whole. This is also done at times in formal discourse in English, but in Latin it was the prevailing style. Though this method of presentation seems to us involved, yet it is after all only an artistic elaboration of the loose parenthetical way of speaking habitual with unlettered persons, or, in other words, it simply follows the natural processes of the human mind. But when developed it allows and stimulates an antithetic balance of thought both in sound and sense, so that each element of an idea is brought into notice by an opposing one, or is so embroidered on the level surface of the main idea or injected into it that it cannot fail to get its true effect at the instant when that effect is required.
1
If we take the opening period of the oration for Roscius (p.2), the main clause is credo ego; the rest of the sentence is all the object of credo in the indirect discourse. The main verb of the indirect discourse is mirari (changed from miramini), with vos in the accusative as its subject. The object of mirari is the indirect question quid sit quod, etc., embracing all the rest (changed from a direct question quid est quod, etc.). Again, the subject of sit is all that follows, being a clause with quod, of which surrexerim is the main verb and all the other clauses are modifiers. The clause cum . . . sedeant is a kind of adverbial modifier of surrexerim, while the clause qui . . . sim . . . comparandus is a kind of adjective modifier of ego the subject of surrexerim, and qui sedeant is a kind of adjective modifier of his. Omnes hi etc., is an independent sentence, but is connected in thought with the preceding, and explains the fact at which the jurors are supposed to be surprised, i.e. "I suppose you wonder", etc., "but the fact is," etc.
In another sentence, the beginning of the Manilian Law, we have a good example of the antithetic balancing of one word or clause against another which marks the Latin periodic style. The sentence consists of two parts, - the first concessive, introduced by qumquam; the second adversative, introduced by tamen. So, in the first, conspectus balances locus, which is brought into relief by autem ("and again"); while ad agendum amplissimus and ad dicendum ornatissimus are balanced in like manner against each othen In the second part, the relative clause qui. . . patuit (virtually concessive) is, as usual, embodied in the main clause, bringing the relative as near as possible to its antecedent aditu; voluntas and rationes are set in antithesis by sed; while the main verb, prohibuerunt, comes last as usual. The logical form of the whole is, "Though political speaking has its advantages, yet I have been prevented," etc.
By stating first the leading thought (hoc aditu, etc.), and putting the verb at the end, Latin is able to make the main clause active, thus partly disguising the art of the antithesis. Here, as elsewhere, it is of great help in reading to observe these two rules: (1) that Latin puts first the main idea, the key to the whole; and (2) that it constantly deals in antitheses, often forcing them when they do not naturally occur (as in amplissimus and ornatissimus), each thought or expression having its pendant, like ornaments which go in pairs.
The second main difference between Latin and English prose style is that in English the emphasis gravitates towards the end, while in Latin the more emphatic word always comes first. This is not, like the corresponding usage in English, a mere tendency, but a universal practice, which can be and is managed by the writer with exquisite skill, so that a Latin prose sentence bears on its face its own emphasis, giving the same effect to the eye that the best reader or speaker in English can to the ear.
Thus the first paragraph of the oration for Roscius (above cited) shows its emphasis as follows: "I suppose (conceding something he will presently contradict or explain) you (who do not, as I do, know or think of the state of things) wonder why it is that, etc., but the fact is (implied as the antithesis of the emphatic credo)," etc. Again, omnes is emphatic, i.e. I am not the only one, but all would speak were it not for circumstances," which he proceeds to mention. Even videtis has an emphatic position: "who, as you see, are in attendance." Again, putant oportere defendi i.e. think (though they do nothing) ought to be averted by a defence, but to make the defence themselves," etc.
If we take the beginning of the oration for Milo, there is the same artistic arrangement: "Though I am afraid,
2 gentlemen, that it is not quite becoming, when I get up to speak for a very brave man, to be alarmed, and that it is particularly unbecoming, when TITUS ANNIUS himself is more alarmed for the welfare of the state than for his own, that I in his case cannot show an equally lofty spirit, nevertheless this strange form of a strange court terrifies me as I gaze on it, for wherever my eyes fall they miss the customary appearance of the Forum and the old established style of courts."
It is only by attention to this feature of Latin style that the full force of the author, with all the implications, connotations, and hints, can be clearly seen.
