BIBLIOTHECA SACRA

AND

THEOLOGICAL REVIEW.

NO. XV.

AUGUST, 1847.

ARTICLE I.

ZUMPT'S LATIN GRAMMAR.

A Grammar of the Latin Language, by C. G. Zumpt, Ph. D., Professor in the University, and Member of the Royal Academy of Berlin. From the ninth edition of the original, adapted to the use of English students by Leonhard Schmitz, Ph. D., late of the University of Bonn. London, 1845.

By Charles Siedhof, Ph. D., late Rector of the Gymnasium at Aurich, in the Kingdom of Hanover.

In order to examine this valuable work from a proper point of view, and to form an estimate of it not merely as a grammar, but also.as an indication of the rate of progress made in classical learning, it will be necessary to direct our attention first to other works of a different character, though of a similar design, which preceded it. At a time when nothing was required of the Latin scholar but an ability to write and speak the language as it had been in common use for centuries in the literary world, a lifeless and uniform method, as represented in the Grammar of J. Lange, of which not less than forty-two editions appeared, would meet the demand in elementary instruction. The circle of knowledge was then exceedingly narrow; and besides, the Germans, at that time, possessed no independent national literature. Consequently, reading was rather oft repeated than widely extended; and thus a great intimacy was contracted with the Roman classics, which compensated, in great measure, for the deficiency in VOL. V. No. 15.

36

grammatical training. But an age of independent inquiry succeeded; the trammels of tradition were by degrees thrown off; and scholars were disposed to look into the nature of things, each for himself, more fearlessly and searchingly. Now Basedow made his appearance. With a keen glance, he discovered and exposed the defective character and bad influence of a merely mechanical system of education; but by maintaining that nothing except what was of direct practical utility should be studied by the young, he fell into the opposite extreme, which, in the end, would necessarily produce a reäction. According to his view, since language was but the mere expression of thought, it could best be acquired orally. Consequently grammars should be banished from the schools. From this point of view, the venerable Campe could say that the inventor of the spinning wheel deserved to be held in higher estimation than the author of the Iliad and the Odyssey. It was in allusion to this school that Ernesti said, "the mother-tongue (Frau Muttersprache), becoming proud of her new distinction as mistress, threatens to turn the Latin out of doors." Here, as in all controversies, there were violent partisans on both sides, fighting desperately for existence, and a third class who acted the part of mediators. The philologists of the old school looked with a friendly eye upon these last, whose aim was not to neglect ancient learning, but to exchange its cumbrous and unseemly dress for one of more comeliness and grace. By this means the popular favor, which was beginning to be lost, could be recovered and secured.

The first who attempted a reform of the old system of grammar was Scheller the lexicographer, a very industrious scholar, whose labors will always be regarded with respect, notwithstanding the disposition of later critics, particularly Reisig, to speak disparagingly of them. Bröder's work, with its brief rules and wellchosen examples, was much more successful. His peculiar method of treatment had the effect not only to facilitate the labor of committing to memory, a practice which universally prevailed at that time, but to secure, in his view a much higher end, namely, to allure the student to habits of reflection. After him, Wenck made the first direct attempt to arrange the grammatical materials of the Latin language, not according to arbitrary rules, but according to philosophical principles. The attempt was not very successful, though the elder Grotefend, who had the supervision

To be distinguished from the younger Grotefend, whose Latin Grammar has recently been edited anew by Krüger.

of the later editions of Wenck, had the confidence to say, in a preface, that he believed he had now brought the grammar of the Latin language to its highest degree of perfection. The work, however, had but a limited circulation. It was at this time that Zumpt first made his appearance as a Latin grammarian; and certainly no book of the kind ever published, was more deserving its reputation than this has been; a reputation which it still continues to enjoy. The principal aim of the author seems to have been to devise a logical system of grammar, and in this he has been unusually successful. He has accurately distinguished the different periods in the history of the language, and also the different kinds of composition employed by the various classes of writers, and then has presented the whole in a simple and perspicuous style. In this last respect, his Grammar is the rival of the Greek Grammar of Buttmann, which, as to style and manner of execution, is universally regarded as a model. Like Buttmann, he is willing to appear before the public in the character of a learner. Every successive edition gave evidence of the author's diligence in study.

Ramshorn, who next appeared before the public as a Latin grammarian, though he wrote in different journals disparaging reviews of the work of his predecessor, could effect no more for himself than to secure undue praise for his merit as a collector of original examples to illustrate the rules of grammar. These examples, on which his fame chiefly rests, are often taken from false readings, or from passages misinterpreted by him, and besides not unfrequently fail to establish the point for which they are adduced. A work so artificial in its arrangement, so overloaded with minute divisions and refinements, so erroneous in its rules, followed as they were by a multitude of examples, which, instead of illustrating a principle often perplex one by their obscurity, could never be generally adopted as a guide in teaching the young.

About this time, a new epoch in respect to Latin grammar was introduced. The influence of the Hegelian philosophy did not indeed directly affect this department of study. But the grammatical researches of Grimm, which brought to light such treasures of knowledge hitherto unknown, could not fail to extend their influence to the Latin language. With him commenced a process of historical inquiry so illimitable in its extent and so astonishing in its results, that the cultivators of Latin philology desired to apply the same method to their own department, and see if

they could not arrive at similar results. At the same time, the comparative study of languages in connection with the Sanscrit, as prosecuted by Bopp and others led to the discovery of general laws, by which many isolated facts could be explained that had hitherto baffled all the learning and ingenuity of the grammarians. Meanwhile Becker has brought out a system in respect to the German language, according to which the language appears to have within itself a perfect organization. This development is, to the best of our knowledge, more perfect than any which has been made in respect to other languages. Various writers, as Weissenborn, A. Grotefend, Feldbausch, and, at length, Kühner have endeavored to apply the system of Becker to Latin grammar, while others have given the preference to other methods. Among the latter, Bilroth deserves the first place, whose early death all unite in deploring. He had been trained in the Hegelian school of philosophy; and he retained the discipline and exactness of method which that school imparts to its disciples, while he abandoned its peculiar doctrines. There is no grammatical work on the Latin language, whose design and plan are so perfect as that of the School Grammar of Bilroth, recently edited by Ellendt. The arrangement is so systematic and the rules so clear and precise, that, had the author given as much attention to the details of the language as to the method of treating it, scarcely anything more could be desired. Otto Schulz has also won general respect on account of the logical accuracy and the perspicuity which characterize his Latin Grammar. Reuscher, from Reissig's school, has attracted less notice. Reissig's lectures on Latin grammar, edited after his death by Haase, give abundant evidence of the high aims of their author, but they also betray his defects. In themselves considered, they are a singular compound of seriousness and frivolity, of ingenuity and prejudice; while for the present age they are rendered truly valuable by Haase's ample and critical notes. Though these latter are very rich, and accurate in the examples collected, the results cannot always be trusted, on account of the occasional incompleteness of the collections made.

Before we pass to an examination of the work before us, it seems to us necessary to premise a few observations on the nature of grammar in general, and on the method of the grammar of a given particular language in particular. We may thereby not only avoid a direct collision with the respected author,-which would be of no use here where we are concerned with principles

1847.]

Syntax of Zumpt's Grammar.

419

alone, but we may have more space for the discussion of the necessary details. We have directed our attention, with intense interest, for a series of years to the grammar of Zumpt, and made it the basis of our study of the Latin language, and especially of the language of Cicero, whose entire works we have perused fourteen times for grammatical purposes, and may therefore, perhaps, indulge the hope of being able to contribute something from this source to the improvement of that valuable work. It will, of course, be impossible to incorporate in this review all the results of the investigations which we have thus made. We must, therefore, content ourselves with producing only so much as a regard to the practical influence of this work as a school-book requires.

If language is the form which thought assumes, grammar is one department of the philosophical treatment of that form. Lex. icography is the other. Grammar treats of the connection of single forms of thought in constituting a sentence. Now as every man has an individual character peculiar to himself, so has every nation its peculiar character. Although the individual thinks according to the same general law as the nation, and even the race, still, if he have a marked character, he will express his thoughts in a peculiar way. This constitutes his style, by which nothing is meant but his peculiar mode of expressing his ideas. Precisely the same is true of a nation as such. Its language has different characteristics from those of any other nation. Even when several languages have one common descent, the offspring have a family resemblance. But they nevertheless differ from each other like different children of the same parents.

For authors of grammars, it was a happy era when men were unsuspecting enough to regard grammar as a statute-book, which regardless of legal principles, was a mere record of positive enactments. At that time, all grammars of the various languages were of the same stamp. The grammatical observations of most of the Dutch philologists on particular authors would fit one author just as well as another. When this comfortable manner had had its day, an attempt was made to substitute in its place what was called philosophical grammar. To this class belong the grammatical works of Vater and Sylvester de Sacy. It could not, however, but become evident in a short time, that nothing could come of such a method but definitions; and even these were defective because they were not the result of historical investigation. At present, this method is merged in the logical, founded on the