previous next
[90] Now though I am ready to admit that more figures of speech may perhaps be discovered by certain writers, I cannot agree that such figures are better than those which have been laid down by high authorities. Above all I would point out that Cicero has included a number of figures in the third book of the de Oratore,1 which in his later work, the Orator,2 he has omitted, thereby seeming to indicate that he condemned them. Some of these are figures of thought rather than of speech, such as meiosis, the introduction of the unexpected, imagery, answering our own questions, digression, permission,3 arguments drawn from opposites (for I suppose that by [p. 501] contrarium4 he means what is elsewhere styled ἐναντιότης), and proof borrowed from an opponent. There are some again which are not figures at all,

1 See IX. i. 26.

2 See IX. i. 37.

3 See IX. ii. 25.

4 See IX. i. 33. sqq. If contrarium is what Quintilian supposes, its sense must be approximate to that given above. Cp. Auct. ad Herenn. iv. 25. contrarium est quod ex diversis rebus duabus alteram altera breviter etfacile confirmat. But it is possible that Cicero meant antithesis.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 United States License.

An XML version of this text is available for download, with the additional restriction that you offer Perseus any modifications you make. Perseus provides credit for all accepted changes, storing new additions in a versioning system.

load focus Introduction (Harold Edgeworth Butler, 1922)
hide Display Preferences
Greek Display:
Arabic Display:
View by Default:
Browse Bar: