My words are these: "Our language is noble, full, and
significant; and I know not why he, who is a master of, it, may not
clothe ordinary things in it as decently as in the Latin, if he use
the same diligence in his choice of words." One would think, "unlock
a door," was a thing as vulgar as could be spoken; yet Seneca could
make it sound high and lofty in his Latin.
"_Reserate clusos regii postes laris_."
But he says of me, "That being filled with the precedents of the
ancients, who writ their plays in verse, I commend the thing,
declaring our language to be full, noble, and significant, and
charging all defects upon the _ill placing of words_, which I
prove by quoting Seneca loftily expressing such an ordinary thing as
_shutting a door_."
Here he manifestly mistakes; for I spoke not of the placing, but
of the choice of words; for which I quoted that aphorism of
Julius Caesar, _Delectus verborum est origo eloquentiae_; but
_delectus verborum_ is no more Latin for the _placing of
words_, than _reserate_ is Latin for _shut the door_,
as he interprets it, which I ignorantly construed _unlock_ or
_open_ it.
He supposes I was highly affected with the sound of those words, and
I suppose I may more justly imagine it of him; for if he had not been
extremely satisfied with the sound, he would have minded the sense a
little better.
Pages:
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286