One called nouns, the other verbs. The science of language, in all its branches, was young in the time of Plato. Words of general meaning were necessarily used in a technical sense. So here ὄνομα and ῥῆμα are used as parts of grammatical terminology in the sense of verb and noun, though Plato elsewhere employs them with their ordinary meanings. Similarly the distinction between vowels and consonants (Plat. Theaet. 203; cf. Plat. Soph. 253) was at least relatively new, as was that between the active and the passive voice. How important Plato’s part was in the development of linguistic study can no longer be accurately determined.
Define each of them.
The indication which relates to action we may call a verb.
Yes.
And the vocal sign applied to those who perform the actions in question we call a noun.
Exactly.
Hence discourse is never composed of nouns alone spoken in succession, nor of verbs spoken without nouns.
I do not understand that.
I see; you evidently had something else in mind when you assented just now; for what I wished to say was just this, that verbs and nouns do not make discourse if spoken successively in this way.
In what way?
For instance, walks,runs,sleeps and the other verbs which denote actions, even if you utter all there are of them in succession, do not make discourse for all that.
No, of course not.
And again, when lion,stag,horse, and all other names of those who perform these actions are uttered,
such a succession of words does not yet make discourse; for in neither case do the words uttered indicate action or inaction or existence of anything that exists or does not exist, until the verbs are mingled with the nouns; then the words fit, and their first combination is a sentence, about the first and shortest form of discourse.
What do you mean by that?
When one says a man learns, you agree that this is the least and first of sentences, do you not?
Yes.
For when he says that, he makes a statement about that which is or is becoming or has become or is to be; he does not merely give names, but he reaches a conclusion by combining verbs with nouns. That is why we said that he discourses and does not merely give names, and therefore we gave to this combination the name of discourse.
That was right.
So, then, just as of things some fit each other and some do not, so too some vocal signs do not fit,
but some of them do fit and form discourse.
Certainly.
Now there is another little point.
What is it?
A sentence, if it is to be a sentence, must have a subject; without a subject it is impossible.
True.
And it must also be of some quality, must it not?
Of course.
Now let us pay attention to each other.
Yes, at any rate we ought to do so.
Now, then, I will speak a sentence to you in which a action and the result of action are combined by means of a noun and a verb, and whatever the subject of the sentence is do you tell me.