QUANTITY. 



traded ; an J iaibam and Iho, from eo. But when a 

 vowel follows, i is (liort by pofition, as audk-bani. 



Nutr'ihat teneris immulgens ubeia kbris. Virg. 



Lenibunt tatito vulnera iidHrii (imi. Propert. 



Tu ne cede malis ; fed contra nudc-ntior ito. Virg, 



Jungiinus linfpicio dextras, et le&aj'ui'imus. Virg. 



Qui non edittis, (:xi\n file fabiilis. Plant. 



A'„;,,. — Imus in every preterite, and in that of the fimrtli conjugation 



alfo, islhon; as juvimus, vidimus, fecimus, veniinvis, amavimus, 

 ' adoieviniMs, pcpercimus, munivTnius. 



4. Rimus and ritis in the fubjunftive preterite are 

 fhort. 



Egcrhmia na{V\ ; et nimium meminilTe necefli eft. Virg. 



5. Rimus and rlitis in the perfedl future fubjunftive 

 are common. 



Ouas oh res, ubi vida'inius nil pofle creari. I.ucret. 



Net- mi aurum polco, nee imi pretium dcdcrltis. Enn. 

 T^'der'ilis ilelhs illic, ubi circulus axcni. Ovid. 



Dein cum millia multa/ef«-ini«s. Catul. 



OderTnnis magis in culpam pocnal'que creates. Manil. 



Cum maris lonii tranfieritis aquas. Ovid. 



l^ote — We have imiumerable examples to prove that rimis and 

 ritis in the perfeit future fiibjunfVive is common ; but concerning 

 the quantity of rimus and rilis in the preterite fubjuniHive, gram- 

 marians are not agreed. A difficulty in this inveftigation arifes 

 from the fimilarity of the two tenfes ; the latter having not un- 

 frequently been millaken for the former, and vice vcifd : fince 

 " the perfeit: of the potential feems to be both paft-perfeft con- 

 tingent, and future-perfert contingent. The pcrfc(;t future has 

 alio lb great an affinity to the preterperfeil potenti.il, that often a 

 word may, canliftently with the fenfi-, be fuppol'ed to belong to 

 either. As liicfe tenfes are ul'ually interpreted in Englifli, there 

 is a great refemHance in tlieir flruciure, as well as in the ideas 

 which they exprefs. Boi h are conipofed of verbs in prefent time, 

 the one a verb of prefent liberty, or the like, the other of prefent 

 intention or obligation ; of an infinitive denoting fubfequent or 

 dependent pofleflion ; and a participle (igniticant of the perfertion 

 of the ac'tion denoted by the verb : thus, / mai/ liav>: wrilti-n, 

 I Jhall have wrillcn." We find by A. Gellius, 18, a, that it 

 was a fuhjett of difpute at Rome, whether the tenfe in iim ought 

 to be conlidered as jwjl or Jut tire, or both. Such difpiites may, 

 perhaps, have arifen from the acceffory circumftances which are 

 implied, liefides the immediate attion of the verb ; in the fame 

 manKcr as, in Engli(h, two forms, precifely the fame in their 

 itruiSure and reference, are charafleriled by certain erammarians 

 under different times, viz. I may write, and Ijliall leritc, the 

 former being named, from the accefTory idea, a prefent, and 

 the latter, from the depending acftion, a future, while, in 

 reality, if we apply the fame criterion to them, they are both 

 prefent, or both future. Indeed it has been contended that 

 the future had the termination rim, as well as ro ; fo t,hat 

 it is reckoned not improbable that both may originally have 

 been but one tenfe, which had both a paft and future refer- 

 ence. It is evident that this is a coclideration by no means 

 ii'relevant, but indifpenfably necelfary, before we can, with 

 certainty, determine the quantity of nmus and ritis in the lub- 

 junflive preterite. In addition to the authorities for reckoning 

 rimus and ritis common, there is likewife fufficient example from 

 Horace, M,irtial, Ovid, Seneca, Tibullus, and Plautus, to conlider 

 ns of the future, at leall as common ; and this is an argument 

 founded on the analogy of other tenfes between the quantity of 

 the tin.nl fyllable of the fecund perfon lingular, and the penul- 

 timate of the f.rft and fecond perfuns plural, for confidering the 

 following rimics and ritis alfo common. — Ris, rimtis, and ritis, 

 are ufually accounted (hort ; but it is exceedingly probable that, 

 whether referred to the preterite or perfect future, they ftill 

 might be ufed as common. 



70. O, in the increment of verbs, is always long ; as 

 amatote, facitote, itote. 



CumquS loqui poterit, matrem/oci/iife falutet. Ovid. 



71. U, in the increment of verbs, is (hort; as sumus, 

 poisumus, volCimus, maliimus. 



Dicite, Pierides ; non omnia pofsiinius onmes. Virg. 



jVoie. — For U in the penultimate of the future in rus, fee the 

 rule. 



Skction II. — 0« the quiintity of the peniillimale and anle- 

 pemiliimnte fyllahhs, mid on the quantity of j'uch as are ufually 

 faid to be long arjhort by authority. 



Note. — It Is very well known that the profodial rules, hitherto ex- 

 tant, determine not the quantity of every fyllable of the J-atin 

 language ; but of fuch only as arc more commonly afcertained 

 from the circumftances oi pujltioii. dcrivUion, preterites, Jupines, 

 increment, and Jlnat J]/tlables. Confequently, in the greater 

 number of inllances, the inquiries of the ftudcnt are at a (land 

 until lie can appeal to that obfercation, which would be more 

 happily employed in comlirming his previous acq.iifitions. And 

 thus witli but partial inftead of complete information, he arrives 

 at hut mere intimation, the firft llage of his progrefs, at the time 

 when he imquellionably might achieve the fecond, the fatiifactorv 

 and practical illuftration of Ids previous attainments. If we depend 

 on practice for the Jirjl principles of our knou ledge, we lofe its 

 beft and happieft effltt. Practice will always evince its molt pre- 

 valent efficacy, when its oliice is alone to rear the fuperltrutture 

 on the bafis of regular fyllem and theory, and not to attempt the 

 cafual and fortuitous talk uf laying a tranlitory foundation, and that 

 too on a vacuum, the halelefs texture of ignorance, not admitting 

 that analogy and arrangement, that reciprocal and corroborative 

 illuftration, which fo elfentially aid the intellei'tual faculty with 

 effeciual and permanent imprellion. The part which follo.vs is an 

 attempt to fupply this ilejideratum. It was obtained by four con- 

 fecutive analyfes of the languige, in which every word and fyllable 

 palled under minute and dccifive coniideration. This inveftig.nion 

 was undertaken in confequence of its being fufpeited, that lince it 

 isa general rule in the profody of the Latin language, that a vowel 

 ftefore two confonants, Uc. is long, that a law exiits, dire6Hy the 

 reverfe of this, and of not lefs extenlive influence ; viz. that a 

 vowel before a iin^e confonant is ihort : though each of thefe 

 general and very extenlive rules, may have, in fpecial cafes, their 

 exceptions. The refult juliified the expectation, and proved, that 

 principally with the addition of another general rule, the profodial 

 fyllem might become fo comprehenfive, as to include and provide 

 for the whole langtuge ; and confequently, for all thofe fyllables 

 ufually faid to be long or fhort only by authority. The exceptions 

 to this general principle are chiefly included in the rules for the 

 penultimate and antepenultimate fyllables. And though fome of 

 thefe have appeared in former treatifes, yet from their enlarge- 

 ment, the addition of others, the general rule, and its mora 

 fpecial exceptions, which have arifen from the repeated analyfis 

 we have undertaken, it will be eafy to perceive, that we have in 

 this part fome claim to originality. In the preceding rules, and 

 in fuch as (hall follow on final fyllables, in juftice to the fubjedf and 

 our readers, we have felt it indifpenfably incumbent on us to avail 

 ourfelves of the valuable refearches of preceding and contemporary 

 profodians. And the originality of this fection places us under 

 the obligation of devoting peculiar attention, efpccially to the de- 

 monftrative part, that every rule and exception, wiiich we now 

 (iril offer, might not appear to reft on our bare affertion, but on 

 the only legitimate warrant, poetic fandlion. And thus, perhaps, 

 we have now the opportunity, for the tirft time, of offering tie 

 only complete collection or fyllem which determines the quantity 

 of every fyllable, at leart of pure and Auguftan Latin, that has 

 hitherto been prel'ented to the public. 



1. Mafculine patronymics in ades or ides ufually (horten 

 the penultimate ; as Priamidcs, Atlanticides. 



Atque hic/)!'/nm it/em laniatuui corpore toto. Virg. JEn. 6. 494. 



1. Except thofe formed from .nouns in eus ; as 

 ' PelTdes. 



2. Alio 'Amphiaraides, ^BelTdes, ■'Japetionldes, 

 ^ Lycurgldes. 



I . Par (Ibi Pelides : .nee inania Tartara fentit. Ovid. iVIet. i z. 619. 

 z. Ampliiartiides Naup.-!rtoo .--Vcheloo. Ovid. Faf. 2. 43. 



3. Beitdie nomeii P.ilamcdis et i^jclyta fama. Virj:. /En. I. 82. 



4. J«;),'i/imH/« Atlas fuit. Ultima tellus. Ovid. Met. 4. 632. 



5. Quique /.i/c«)gWt'n lethavit, et arbore natum. Ovid, in lb, S^S- 



2. Patronymics and fimilar words in ais, eis, and o/V, 

 lengthen the penultimate ; as Achais, Ptolemais, Chryseis, 

 ^ncis, Minois, ■ and Latois. 



Protinus .Egides, rapti Minoide, Dian. Ovid. Met. 8. 174. 



Except 'Thebais and -Phocais : * Nereis is common. 



■■' 1. The. 



