A LATIN ENGLISH DICTIONARY.*
By the Rev. J. T. White and the Rev. J. E. Riddle.
"I nova the young men of the present day," said Dr. Johnson ; "bat the dogs are not such good scholars as we were." We wonder if any veteran scholar of 1862 has the same opinion of the rising genera- tion. We have, indeed, heard it muttered by Fellows of Oxford Colleges that classical excellence is declining. More especially, say they, has this been the case during the last ten years, under the system which we owe to the exertions of the University Commis- sioners. Nay, the very means taken for the express purpose of en- couraging it seems to have had a contrary effect. We have more scholars, is the cry, and less scholarship. It matters very little prac- tically whether this complaint be true or false. For if true, we sus- pect it is traceable to conditions which are more likely to be extended than reversed. In the first place, it must be remembered that to learn the Greek and Latin languages thoroughly, so as to be able to read them and write them easily and correctly, without the assistance of a lexicon, requires a vast amount of time. If we add to this as much acquaintance with philology as is essential to the character of a scholar at the present day we augment that large amount con- siderably. Yet step by step with those changes which have widened the area of our scholarship have new demands sprung into being upon the time and energy of our students ; so that while they have more to learn they have far less time given them to learn it in. When all that a boy had to do, from ten years of age to twenty, was to master the grammar, idiom, and vocabulary of these two languages, it is only natural that lie should have done it rather more completely than when not only comparative philology, but physical science and French and German literature, demand to take their turn as well. We can easily believe, then, that the scholarship of thirty years ago, or even twenty, may have possessed a ripeness and finish which lat- terly have become less frequent. The more a thing is chewed, of course, the better it is digested, and the more completely it is absorbed into the system. But those days are over. The " elegant scholar" is gradually following the " fine gentleman." Latin Alcaics are sinking into shabby gentility, and striving vainly to keep up ap- pearances. It is very sad : we are not jesting when we say that the decline of this species of scholarship is a real loss. But what can we do? It is an ornament—a luxury—which, owing to the in- creasing demands upon us, we are no longer able to afford. We are simply laying it down as a man lays down his carriage when he has six mouths to feed instead of two.
Quite in accordance with this view of the progress of scholarship is the impetus imparted of late years to Greek and Latin lexico- graphy: The publication of Liddell and Scott's Greek Lexicon was an era in the Greek scholarship of this country : not so much as the proof of great scholarship on the part of the lexicographers as a recognition of the wants of the age, and as the first step towards smoothing as much as possible the path of the learner. Dr. JelPs translation of Kiihner's Greek Grammar, Mr. Wood's translation of Madvig, followed up by Dr. Andrew's translation of Dr. Frennd's Latin Dictionary, completed, within something like fifteen years, a kind of outfit for the young classical student such as our fathers would have envied. It is not only due to the character of English scholarship that works such as these should be available to our students, but if our previous observations are correct, it is only by the aid of such auxiliaries that the study of the classical languages can hope to hold its own at all. We do not believe they will ever compensate for the results of that more arduous toil which previous generations underwent. Idioms which we learn only by experience remain far more deeply rooted in the memory than momentary acqui- sitions from the lexicon. But we have no choice; and we welcome, therefore, every fresh improvement upon our existing classical equip- ments, whether in the shape of grammars, lexicons, or editions.
The latest of the kind is the Latin Dictionary of White and Riddle. It is founded upon that of Dr. Andrews, and we suspect that, in almost everything but arrangement, it is a reproduction of the earlier work. Some few errors are corrected; certain useful additions have been made ; but the fundamental scholarship of each work appears to be the same. No doubt, however, it is a distinct improvement on its predecessor. Great pains have been taken with it, and great expense has, we believe, been incurred in carrying out, to their full extent, the projects of its authors. It is, therefore, unquestionably a. work which deserves the attention of scholars, and the patronage of our schools and universities. For, however little better than Andrew's, still it is better ; and better because of changes which are not speculative or disputable, but practical and easily un- derstood.
Whether the insertion of the Sanscrit roots after all Latin words which are supposed to be developed from them be or be not an im- provement depends on the justice of the reasons assigned by Dr. Freund for the contrary practice. He inserts none, and he reasons on the subject as follows :
"But, after all, I cannot decide to travel this road, which previous labours have already rendered quite smooth and level ; for, in my opinion, such a comparative method passes beyond the bounds of a lexicon designed for a single language, and belongs exclusively and solely to comparative or universal lexicography. For, if every special lexicon is to institute this comparison of roots, the same parenthesis which is attached to the
•
Hebrew root, must be repeated in the Greek, Latin, Gothic, English, or German lexicon; so that all that is peculiar to the single lexicon will be taken away. Just as little as we would expect of the Latin grammar to place the Sanscrit astni by the side of sum, or the Gothic and old high German declensions by the side of the Latin, notwithstanding the insight into the grammatical structure which it would afford; just so little, in my judgment, ought it to be made the duty of the Latin lexicon to accompany every Latin word with all the equivalent words in other languages that can be collected together. The very interesting nature of such combina- tions, and the novelity of the truly wonderful discoveries to which they have led, seem in this matter to have produced in many a want of due regard for the laws of scientific and well-defined lexicography: so that the strong stamp of the special threatens almost wholly to disappear under the influence of such generalizations. To this very swallowing up of the special by the general, it is, no doubt, to be ascribed that the soil itself, where the Latin reached its bloom, has been hitherto so little explored; al- though this soil acted powerfully upon the earliest condition of the foreign plant, and in many cases altered it so that it can no longer be recognized."
The difficulty of adopting this principle, which has, at all events, simplicity to recommend it, consists in knowing where to draw the line. It seems hardly consistent with Freund's theory to insert the Greek roots. Yet he does insert them. Philology and lexicography are no doubt two distinct things, and the less any two things which are distinct are permitted to run into each other the better. But the only English works, as far as we can remember at present, which are specially devoted to the origin and growth of the Greek and Latin languages, are the Varronianus and the New Cratylus. These are not accessible to all students, and are beyond the compre- hension of some: while the latest German work upon the subject, of which Messrs. Liddell and Scott have availed themselves in the last edition of their lexicon, has not yet put on an English dress: and even when it has, may perhaps be liable to the same objections. Dr. Freund, therefore, may possibly be right in principle ; but we cannot blame Messrs. White and Riddle for adopting a contrary system : and perhaps in the present state of English classical literature it must be allowed to be an improvement.
The " classification of quotations according to the principles of syntax," though adopted to some extent by Dr. Freund, has been carried much further in the new dictionary. Its authors have aimed at effecting this in every case. It,must be conceded, therefore, that they have improved on Dr. Freund, for if the system is a good one, it is worth while to act upon it always. Whether it be a good one or not is a separate question ; and perhaps as much might be said against mixinn up grammar with lexicography, as against doing the same thing with philology. In carrying out this practice, however, they have done what is certainly very useful: that is, introduced more of the context into their examples than has hitherto been usual. This enables one to remember the meaning of a word more easily than the old system : as well as to comprehend more clearly exactly how much is conveyed by it. Among other additions a number of words belonging to ecclesias- tical Latin have been introduced, so that the student of the vulgate or Latin Fathers will find what he wants in this dictionary as well as the classical scholar. In conclusion, we have only to note one piece of carelessness which has crept into the arrangement of meanings. Freund divided his meanings according to the "exegetical element" into literal, metonymical, and figurative, a division which is based on a philosophical principle, and which'is adopted unreservedly by our authors. Thus the literal meaning of arena is " sand;" the meto- nymical meaning " an amphitheatre" which is strewn with sand; the figurative meaning "a sphere of life" in which the physical sense is spiritualized. It is clear, therefore, that the meanings should always he arranged in this order. But we observe in the new dictionary that no rule is observed on this point ; the two last meanings are transposed frequently ; and if an instance be required we would refer our readers to the word inounglio.
Previous page
