148 Miscellaneous Intelligence. 
merit of being very faithful and of taking no liberties with the origins Fs : 
Something more, however, was to be expected from a translator of Gauss, 
A faithful and indeed a literal translation need not be eenes 27 stilted 5 a 
certainly it can and should be purged of Latinisms. We ar 
to write, “it is also, evidently, allowable to bring the same apie 
under the form,” ete.,* simply ee ~ happen to have in the original 
the 
the words “reducere licet.” is —_ word “ be 
sentence eg sgree a, probes io. praec. solvendi, ex aequationibus 
cos é sind= &e., pe or even nga rendered by “is 
nt de makes ms was ea But it is far different. when 
ough, iscernible priner, 
it is not to raiser that such a case” (the special case in which the 
plane of the orbit coincides with the ecliptic) “would ever actually pre- 
sent itself in nature,” etc. Upon reading which we were seized with a 
strong desire to know what “an indiscernible principle” could be; but 
as the translation gave no clue, we turned to the original, where we were 
amazed to find the sentence to read thus: “Etiamsi vero per prinet 
indise: m haud exspectandum sit, talem casum in rerum natura uim- 
uam se oblaturum esse,” etc. Can it be believed that a translator of 
e neuter accusative singular p 
escdpe t this conclusion, since it is evident that he has at last given up in 
despair of finding out what Gauss meant, and has written down what he 
thought was at least a safe literal translation! It is sane ecessary tO 
tell the reader who has referred to the original, that in the phrase “by 
the principle Basak indiscriminate (thi ),” nie briefly sums up the argu- 
e orbits in. ions indiscrimé: 
if, ipstead of “by an indiscernible principle,” he had given the (unavoid- 
woke free translation, “from the fact that the orbits may fall in all post 
a tions indiscriminately.” 
ae have maatiod, a number of mistranslations (neh at least in our 
qui the hall to notice 
