Confusion of similar words
But the most widely extended error of substitution is the confusion of words that are similar in
appearance. Many cases of this confusion really
belong to chap. vi (Confusion of Letters) or chap. vii
(Confusion of Contractions); for the substitution in a
Latin MS. of
lubet for
jubet (iubet) means that the
copyist has mistaken the letter i for the letter l (see
ch. vi. § 1), and the substitution of
quidem for
quid est
means that he has wrongly expanded the contraction
ē (see
ch. vii. § 2). Again, the substitution of
tribus for
tribubus is, properly speaking, a case of Haplography
(see
ch. iii. § 1); and so on. But it will be
convenient for practical purposes to treat in this chapter all cases of the confusion of words, whatever
the secret influence may have been. In most cases it is merely the general similarity of the words that has
caused the mistake, e.g.
militia for
malitia. Here too
the monk-copyist often betrays himself. In Horace MSS., for example, he has substituted
amen for
amem
with comical result in
“tecum vivere amem, tecum obeam libens
”
;
similarly
externa pacata becomes
aeterna peccata, Hebrum
is transformed to
Hebraeum, etc.
In Plautus MSS. the case is common of an archaic word, unfamiliar to the scribe, having been replaced by a familiar
word of similar appearance; e.g.
fuant (
B), the subjunctive of O.
Lat.
fuo (whence
fui), has become
fiant in
Pseud. 1029 (CD).
Such substitution, however, is rather a case of deliberate
emendation, and belongs to chap. i.
