CHAPTER VII

GROUPING OF CLAUSES

The foregoing, then, is one branch of the art of composition which requires consideration: namely, that which relates to the primary parts and elements of speech. But there is another, as I said at the beginning, which is concerned with the so-called “members” (“clauses”), and this requires fuller and more elaborate treatment. My views on this topic I will try to express forthwith.

The clauses must be fitted to one another so as to present an aspect of harmony and concord; they must be given the best form which they admit of; they must further be remodelled if necessary by shortening, lengthening, and any other change of form which clauses admit. As to each of these details experience itself must be your teacher. It will often happen that the placing of one clause before or after another brings out a certain euphony and dignity, while a different grouping sounds unpleasing and undignified. My meaning will be clearer if illustrated by an example. There is a well-known passage of Thucydides in the speech of the Plataeans, a delightfully arranged sentence full of deep feeling, which is as follows: “And we fear, men of Sparta, lest you, our only hope, should

[Page 112]

ἡ μόνη ἐλπίς, δέδιμεν μὴ οὐ βέβαιοι ἦτε.” φέρε δή τις λύσας τὴν συζυγίαν ταύτην μεθαρμοσάτω τὰ κῶλα οὕτως· “ὑμεῖς τε, ὦ Λακεδαιμόνιοι, δέδιμεν μὴ οὐ βέβαιοι ἦτε, ἡ μόνη ἐλπίς.” ἆρ’ ἔτι μένει τοῦτον τὸν τρόπον ἡρμοσμένων τῶν κώλων ἡ αὐτὴ χάρις ἢ τὸ αὐτὸ πάθος; οὐδεὶς ἂν εἴποι. τί 5 δ’ εἰ τὴν Δημοσθένους λέξιν ταύτην “τὸ λαβεῖν οὖν τὰ διδόμενα ὁμολογῶν ἔννομον εἶναι, τὸ χάριν τούτων ἀποδοῦναι παρανόμων γράφῃ” λύσας τις καὶ μεταθεὶς τὰ κῶλα τουτονὶ τὸν τρόπον ἐξενέγκαι· “ὁμολογῶν οὖν ἔννομον εἶναι τὸ λαβεῖν τὰ διδόμενα, παρανόμων γράφῃ τὸ τούτων χάριν ἀποδοῦναι,” 10 ἆρ’ ὁμοίως ἔσται δικανικὴ καὶ στρογγύλη; ἐγὼ μὲν οὐκ οἴομαι.

VIII

ἡ μὲν δὴ περὶ τὴν ἁρμογὴν τῶν κώλων θεωρία τοιαύτη, ἡ δὲ περὶ τὸν σχηματισμὸν ποδαπή; οὐκ ἔστιν εἷς τρόπος τῆς ἐκφορᾶς ἁπάντων τῶν νοημάτων, ἀλλὰ τὰ μὲν ὡς 15 ἀποφαινόμενοι λέγομεν, τὰ δ’ ὡς πυνθανόμενοι, τὰ δ’ ὡς εὐχόμενοι, τὰ δ’ ὡς ἐπιτάττοντες, τὰ δ’ ὡς διαποροῦντες, τὰ δ’ ὡς ὑποτιθέμενοι, τὰ δὲ ἄλλως πως σχηματίζοντες, οἷς ἀκολούθως καὶ τὴν λέξιν πειρώμεθα σχηματίζειν. πολλοὶ δὲ δήπου σχηματισμοὶ καὶ τῆς λέξεώς εἰσιν ὥσπερ καὶ τῆς 20 διανοίας, οὓς οὐχ οἷόν τε κεφαλαιωδῶς περιλαβεῖν, ἴσως δὲ καὶ ἄπειροι· περὶ ὧν καὶ πολὺς ὁ λόγος καὶ βαθεῖα ἡ θεωρία. οὐ δὴ τὸ αὐτὸ δύναται ποιεῖν τὸ αὐτὸ κῶλον οὕτω σχηματισθὲν

1 ἡ μόνη ἐλπίς add. in marg. F || ἡ μόνη] ἡμῶν ἡ EF^{1}M^1 || φέρε ... (4) ἦτε add. in marg. F 6 δ’ F: δὲ M: δαὶ PV 8 παρανόμον P: παράνομον F || γράφηι· F: γράφηι· εἰ P, MV | τοῦτον PMV 10 παράνομον FP: παρανόμῳ V || ἀποδιδόναι P 14 ποταπή PMV 15 τῆς om. P || ἁπάντων EF: om. PMV: τῶν om. F || ὀνομάτων PMV

2. It is impossible to give real English equivalents in cases like this,—partly because of the fundamental differences between the two languages, and partly because we do not know Dionysius’ own estimate of the exact effect which the changes he introduces have upon the rhythm, emphasis, and clearness of the sentence. The same considerations apply in lines 6-10, where the English principle of emphasis makes it necessary to depart widely from the Greek order in both the original and the re-written form. See Introduction, pp. 17 ff. _supra_ (under Emphasis). A striking instance of effective emphasis in English is Macduff’s passionate out-burst:—

Not in the legions Of horrid hell can come a devil more damn’d In ills to top Macbeth.

“If you dispose the words in the usual manner, and say, ‘A more damned devil in the legions of horrid hell cannot come to top Macbeth in ills,’ we shall scarcely be persuaded that the thought is the same,” Campbell _Philosophy of Rhetoric_ p. 496. Biblical instances are: (1) “Nevertheless even him did outlandish women cause to sin” (_Nehem._ xiii. 26); (2) “Your fathers, where are they? and the prophets, do they live for ever?” (_Zech._ i. 5).

8. Sometimes the manuscript testimony is quite clear as between such forms as τουτονί and τοῦτον: cp. =116= 9 n. In doubtful cases the -ί form might be adopted—in =64= 6 and =84= 17 as well as in =112= 8 and =178= 10.

14. Cp. Quintil. vi. 3. 70 “figuras quoque montis, quae σχήματα διανοίας dicuntur, res eadem recipit omnes, in quas nonnulli diviserunt species dictorum. nam et interrogamus et dubitamus et affirmamus et minamur et optamus, quaedam ut miserantes, quaedam ut irascentes dicimus,” and Hor. _Ars. P._ 108 “format enim natura prius nos intus ad omnem | fortunarum habitum; iuvat aut impellit ad iram | aut ad humum maerore gravi deducit et angit; | post effert animi motus interprete lingua.”

[Page 113]

fail in steadfastness.”[121] Now let this order be disturbed and the clauses be re-arranged as follows: “And we fear, men of Sparta, lest you should fail in steadfastness, that are our only hope.” When the clauses are arranged in this way, does the same fine charm remain, or the same deep feeling? Plainly not. Again, take this passage of Demosthenes, “So you admit as constitutional the acceptance of the offerings; you indict as unconstitutional the rendering of thanks for them.”[122] Let the order be disturbed, and the clauses interchanged and presented in the following form: “So the acceptance of the offerings you admit as constitutional; the rendering of thanks for them you indict as unconstitutional.” Will the sentence be equally neat and effective? I, for my part, do not think so.