« ForrigeFortsæt »
will be delighted and astonished at the profound research, the extensive erudition, and solid judgment with which each word and each family of words is examined and traced from the old Epic poetry through every succeeding stage of the language, through every writer in which it occurs, and every analogy in which it can be advantageously compared. He will find a novel system of investigation, admirably calculated to ascertain on the surest grounds the true sense of an author, reconciling discrepancies, and solving difficulties which have baffled the ingenuity of ancients and moderns. But by enlarging on these points I shall be only doing an injustice to my author: the Work will better speak for itself.
I have made another minor alteration by a fresh arrangement of the Articles. Buttmann wrote and published as he met with a difficult or doubtful word in the course of his readings. I have arranged the Articles alphabetically; a change which I could not have ventured to make, had there been a chance of the Lexilogus being continued at any future time: but as the Author, alas! has been taken away in the midst of his literary career, all hopes of that nature are for ever at an end.
The additions which I have made are very trifling: here and there a few short notes explanatory of German words or phrases, which I have taken care to distinguish from those of the Author by inserting them within brackets, and marking them with "ED." I have likewise added the opinions of the German lexicographers Schneider and Passow whenever they happen to differ from or elucidate those of Buttmann. When references are made to German writers, I have generally given a translation of the passage referred to; as in the case of Schneider's Lexicon and Buttmann's large Grammar which he entitles "Ausführliche Sprachlehre." When,
however, he refers to his Grammar, properly so called, of which an English translation has been published, I have thought it sufficient to give the reference only.
And here I might perhaps be excused were I tempted to extend this Preface by indulging in the recollection of past days, and dedicating a page or two to the memory of the Author, whose friendship I enjoyed, and in whose literary acquirements I found delight and assistance during the greater part of three years: but I must content myself with referring those who wish to see some account of his life or character to a short biographical memoir of him prefixed to the translation of his Greek Grammar. Meanwhile let me indulge in the hope, that by the following version of his Lexilogus I may be raising an honourable and lasting tribute to his memory; confident as I am, that if the present publication do not raise his literary fame in this country to the same proud preeminence which it enjoys in Germany, the fault will be not in the Author but in the Translator.
LITTLE CHEVEREL, WILTS. December, 1835.
J. R. F.
TRANSLATOR'S PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION.
IN preparing this second Edition of the Lexilogus, I have carefully read and compared it anew with the original, by which I have been able to correct some errors of translation, and to render, I hope, more intelligible many passages which were obscure or ambiguous. I have also added a few Notes and Illustrations, for some of which I am indebted to the kindness of a young Cambridge Friend, whose communications I take this opportunity of acknowledging, both in justice to the contributor, as well as with the hope that others may be induced to confer on me the same favour.
LITTLE CHEVEREL, WILTS. January, 1840.
J. R. F.
TRANSLATOR'S PREFACE TO THE THIRD EDITION.
WHEN the second Edition of the Lexilogus was put to press, I flattered myself that I understood, and had translated correctly every sentence in the work. I have since found that I was mistaken; and therefore in preparing this third edition every line has been carefully examined and compared again with the original. I have thus detected several mistranslations, for which the abstruseness of Buttmann's style and still more of his arguments will, I trust, be some excuse. I now hope and believe that I have not left many imperfections of this kind. These corrections and a few additional notes are the principal advantages offered by this edition.
J. R. F.
Little Cheverel, Wilts. January, 1846.
WHENEVER I have been engaged in examining Homer somewhat more critically than usual, an observation has always forced itself upon me, that with regard to the explanation of his language more remained to be done, and might be done, than is generally supposed. In particular, I found that even very superior philologists, swayed partly by the authority of tradition, partly by the undoubted meaning which some words have in the later writers, and partly by an etymology apparently satisfactory, have imagined that in many words they saw their way perfectly clear, or at least essentially so, and therefore they never instituted a more accurate examination, of which such words are still capable.
And although I was aware that short accounts and concise explanations may generally be sufficient for the more advanced scholar, yet, at the same time, I thought that I might find an opportunity of being useful to young philologists also, by setting them the example of a mode of investigation which cannot be sufficiently recommended; namely, that of unravelling an author's usage of words as much as possible from himself. In the case of Homer there is the strongest inducement to follow this method, nay, we are driven to it of necessity, as we have nothing cotemporary with him. At the same time however this plan is rendered easier in Homer than in
most other writers by a work of rare industry, the merits of which are not known so generally as they ought to be, Damm's Homeric Dictionary1. It is true that the book has great and striking defects, of which the principal is that want of order in the arrangement of words which makes it so inconvenient for use. And what renders this fault the more striking is, that the author, who had no idea of a perfect arrangement, unless it were opposed to the usual plan of dictionaries, in which system is sacrificed to alphabetical order, and unless it were grounded on etymological arrangement, as the only method calculated to attain its object and produce advantageous results,-that he, in the praiseworthy attempt to put this idea into execution, should fall into the opposite error, and ground his arrangement on an etymology not merely speculative from beginning to end, but (which no one will dispute) completely arbitrary'. This defect is however for the most part compensated, on the one
1 This ought to be its title, if it were named from that which constitutes its peculiar merit: it is now entitled "Novum Lexicon Græcum etymologicum et reale, cui pro basi substratæ sunt concordantiæ Homericæ et Pindaricæ. Collegit C. T. Damm. Berol. 1765.” 4to.
2 If compilers of not only large and small dictionaries, but also of verbal indexes to particular authors, should ever adopt an arrangement grounded on etymology as the only method of bringing perfectly before the student the true richness and extent of a language, I certainly do not anticipate their falling into the same extreme as the excellent Damm has done; but mischief is to be apprehended wherever the true principle of etymological arrangement is misunderstood, even though it be to a less extent, as we see in Stephens's Thesaurus and in many vocabularies. A lexicographer should follow, not that etymology which is true and capable of proof, but that which is acknowledged and felt. Nay, even families of words, whose mutual relationship cannot be doubted, must still be separated (if a separation can be easily made) for practical purposes, without however each being injured in its particular circle, and the separation must be pointed out by references. Gesner's caution on this point in his Latin Thesaurus might be recommended for imitation, if he had not destroyed the greatest part of the advantage of this method by separating the compounds from the simples.