Institutio Oratoria
Quintilian
Quintilian. Institutio Oratoria, Volume 1-4. Butler, Harold Edgeworth, translator. Cambridge, Mass; London: Harvard University Press, William Heinemann Ltd., 1920-1922.
I am not sure, however, whether it is so much a figure of thought as of speech. For the only difference lies in the fact that universals are not contrasted with universals, but particulars with particulars. Celsus, however, and that careful writer Visellius regard it as a figure of thought, while Rutilius Lupus regards it as belonging to both, and calls it antithesis.
To the figures placed by Cicero among the ornaments of thought Rutilius (following the views of Gorgias, a contemporary, whose four books he transferred to his own work, and who is not to be confused with Georgias of Leontini) and Celsus (who follows Rutilius) would add a number of others, such as:
concentration, which the Greek calls διαλλαγή [*](διαλλαγή is corrupt, but the correct term has not yet been discovered. MSS. ΔΙΑΜΑΤΗΝ, ΔΙΑΜΑΠΗΝ, etc. ) a term employed when a number of different arguments are used to establish one point: consequence, which Gorgias calls ἐπακολούθησις and which I have already discussed under the head of argument [*](See v. xiv. 1.) : inference, which Gorgias terms συλλογισμός threats, that is, κατάπληξις exhortation, or παραινετικόν But all of these are perfectly straightforward methods of speaking, unless combined with some one of the figures which I have discussed above.
Besides these, Celsus considers the following to be figures: exclusion, asseveration, refusal, [*]( The meaning of detrectare is uncertain It may mean refuse to deal with some topic, or simply detract. ) excitement of the judge, the use of proverbs, the employment of quotations from poetry, jests, invidious remarks or invocation to intensify a charge (which is identical with δείνωσις ) flattery,
He even includes partition, proposition, division and affinity between two separate things, by which latter he means that two things apparently different signify the same: for example, not only the man who murders another by administering a deadly draught is to be regarded as a poisoner, but also the man who deprives another of his wits by giving him some drug, a point which depends on definition.
To these Rutilius or Gorgias add ἀναγκαῖον that is, the representation of the necessity of a thing, ἀνάμνησις or reminding, ἀνθυποφορά that is, replying to anticipated objections, ἀντίῤῥησις or refutation, παραύξησις or amplification, προέκθεσις which means pointing out what ought to have been done, and then what actually has been done, ἐναντιότης, or arguments from opposites [*]( See IX. iii. 90. For enthymemes κατ᾽ ἐνατίωσιν, see v. xiv. 2. and note on ex pugnantibus, Vol. II. p. 524. ) (whence we get enthymemes styled κατ᾽ ἐναντίωσιν ), and even μετάληψις, which Hermagoras considers a basis. [*]( See III. vi. 46. The term is not used here in the same sense as in VIII. vi. 37, but rather = translatio, see III. vi. 23. Lit. translatio means transference of the charge : the sense is virtually the same as that of exceptio (a plea made by defendant in bar of plaintiffs action). Competence is perhaps the least unsatisfactory rendering. ) Visellius, although he makes the number of figures but small, includes among them the enthymeme, which he calls commentum, and the epicheireme, which he calls ratio. [*](See note on v. xiv. 5, Vol. II. p. 524.) This view is also partially accepted by Celsus, who is in doubt whether consequence is not to be identified with the epicheireme.
Visellius also adds general reflexions to the list. I find others who would add to these διασκευή [*](Apparently some form of exaggeration.) or enhancement, ἀπαγόρευσις or prohibition, and παραδιήγησις or incidental narrative. But though these are not figures, there may be others which have slipped my notice, or are yet to be invented: still, they will be of the same nature as those of which I have spoken above.
III. Figures of speech have always been liable to change and are continually in process of change in accordance with the variations of usage. Consequently when we compare the language of our ancestors with our own, we find that practically everything we say nowadays is figurative. For example, we say invidere hac re for to
grudge a thing,instead of hanc rem, which was the idiom of all the ancients, more especially Cicero, and incumbere illi (to lean upon him) for incumbere in ilium, plenum vino (full of wine) for plenum vini, and huic adulari (to flatter him) for hunc adulari. I might quote a thousand other examples, and only wish I could say that the changes were not often changes for the worse.
But to proceed, figures of speech fall into two main classes. One is defined as the form of language, while the other is mainly to be sought in the arrangement of words. Both are equally applicable in oratory, but we may style the former rather more grammatical and the latter more rhetorical. [*]( These grammatical figures would not be styled figures of speech in English. Figures of language would perhaps be more comprehensive, but figures of speech is the translation and direct descendant of the original Greek σχήματα λέξεως and has therefore been used throughout. ) The former originates from the same sources as errors of language. For every figure of this kind would be an error, if it were accidental and not deliberate.
But as a rule such figures are defended by authority, age and usage, and not infrequently by some reason as well. Consequently, although they involve a divergence from direct and simple language, they are to be regarded as excellences, provided always that they have some praiseworthy precedent to follow. They have one special merit, that they relieve the tedium of everyday stereotyped speech and save us from commonplace language.
If a speaker use them sparingly and only as occasion demands, they will serve as a seasoning to his style and
For abnormal figures lying outside the range of common speech, while they are for that very reason more striking, and stimulate the ear by their novelty, prove cloying if used too lavishly, and make it quite clear that they did not present themselves naturally to the speaker, but were hunted out by him, dragged from obscure corners and artificially piled together. Figures, then,
may be found in connexion with the gender of nouns; for we find oculis capti talpale [*](Georg. i. 183. ) (blind moles) and timidi damae [*](Ecl. viii. 28. ) (timid deer) in Virgil; but there is good reason for this, since in these cases both sexes are covered by a word of one gender, and there is no doubt that there are male moles and deer as well as female. Figures may also affect verbs: for example, we find such phrases as fabricatus est glatdium [*]( Cic. pro Rab Post. iii. 7. He made a sword. ) or inimicum poenitus es. [*](pro Mil. xiii. 33. You punished an enemy. )
This is the less surprising, since the nature of verbs is such that we often express the active by the passive form, as in the case of arbitror (think) and suspicor (suspect), and the passive by the active, as in the case of vapulo (am beaten). Consequently the interchange of the two forms is of common occurrence, and in many cases either form can be used: for example, we may say luxuriatur or luxuriat (luxuriate), fluctuatur or fluctuat (fluctuate), adsentior or adsentio (agree). Figures also occur in connexion with number,
as
whereEcl. iv. 62. [*]( Those that have never smiled on their parents, neither does any god honour him by admitting him to his feats nor goddess deem him worthy of her bed." Although there can be no doubt as to the correctness of Politian's emendation in the passage as quoted here, it is against all MSS. authority, both of Virgil and Quintilian, and it is still frequently held that Virgil wrote cui. )
- qui non risere parentes
- nec deus hunc mensa dea nec dignata cubili est,
he whom no goddess deems,etc., is included among
those who have never smiled,etc.
In a satire again we read,
where the infinitive is used as a noun: for the poet by nostrum vivere means nostram vitam. We also at times use the verb for the participle, as in the phrase,Pers. i. 9. [*](I look at our dreary way of living.)
- nostrum istud vivere triste aspxei,
where ferre is used for ferendum, or the participle may be used for the verb, as in the phrase volo datum (I wish to give).Aen. v. 248. [*](He gives him a great talent-weight to carry.)
- magnum dat ferre talentum,
At times, again, there may be some doubt as to the precise error which a figure resembles. Take, for example, the phrase
where the writer has either changed the parts of speech (making his phrase a variant for virtus estHor. Ep. I. i. 41. [*]('Tis a virtue to shun vice.)
- virtus est vitium fugere,
For example, Timarchides negat esse ei periculum a seuri [*](Verr. v. xliv. 116. Timarchides denies that he is in any danger from the axe of the executioner. ) the present negat is substituted for the past. Or one mood may be used for another, as in the phrase, hoc Ithacus velit. [*](Aen. ii. 104. So wills the Ithacan. On Quintilian's view velit here = vult. But in point of fact this is untrue, since in the context it clearly means would wish. ) In fact, to cut a long matter short, there is a figure corresponding to every form of solecism.
There is also a figure styled ἑτεροίωσις (i.e. alteration of the normal idiom), which bears a strong resemblance to ἐξαλλαγή. For example, we find in Sallust phrases such as neque ea res failsum me habuit [*](Jug. x. 1. Nor did this deceive me. ) and duci probare. [*]( From a lost work. Without the context the meaning is uncertain. ) Such figures as a rule aim not merely at novelty, but at conciseness as well. Hence we get further developments, such as non paeniturum for
not intending to repent,and visuros for
sent to see,both found in the same author.
These may have been figures when Sallust made them; but it is a question whether they can now be so considered, since they have met with such general acceptance. For we are in the habit of accepting common parlance as sufficient authority where current phrases are concerned: for example, rebus agentibus in the sense of while this was going on, which Pollio rebukes Labienus [*](See IV. i. 11; I. V. 8.) for using, has become an accredited idiom, as has contumeliam fecit, which, as is