Textus Originalis

DE REBUS ORTHOGRAPHICIS.

Diodorum severas quasdam leges orthographiae sibi scripsisse, id quod affirmavit Dindorf, numquam credidi (I p. XXVIII). Tamen in prioribus libris edendis Dindorfium ut iniquae mentis asellus sequebar; hoc tandem in tertio volumine illam servitutem repellere coepi. Primum enim, ut statim dicam quod sentio, illas quaestiunculas, utrum δυοῖν an δυεῖν, πλέον an πλεῖον, οὐδεὶς an οὐϑείς, εἵλετο an εἵλατο, εἰώϑεσαν an εἰώϑεισαν scribatur, tanti esse nego, quanti mystae quidam artis philologicae faciunt. An quotusquisque est, cuius multum intersit, utrum nostrates historici scribant Ereignis an Ereigniss, Turm an Thurm, ungefähr an ohngefähr, mehre an mehrere, stand an stund? Atque, ne dicam de Goethei aliorumque poetarum operibus, nonne omnes academiae Berolinensi assentimur et gratiam habemus, quod in operibus Friderici Magni edendis orthographiam regis maxime variam et inconstantem reddere supersedit? Tum Diodori opera minime ita comparata sunt, ut res per se tam mobiles ad unam certamque regulam dirigantur. Nam primum aetas illa, qua fuit Diodorus, licet certis legibus orthographicis usa sit, a nobis certe haud facile certis legibus constringi potest. Deinde Diodorus ipse triginta annos in bibliotheca sua componenda consumpsit: nobis forte accidit, ut eodem die in eodem verbo scribendo nobis non constemus. Tum bibliothecam ex auctoribus variis congessit; itaque mirae quaedam et illis omnia aequandi cupidis molestae formae non numquam ad fontem Diodori exquirendum aliquantum conferre possunt. Denique codices nostri praeter P recentiores

Traduzione

ON ORTHOGRAPHIC MATTERS.

I have never believed that Diodorus prescribed for himself certain strict laws of orthography, as Dindorf affirmed (I p. XXVIII). Yet in editing the previous books I followed Dindorf like an ass of unfair mind; in this third volume, at last, I have begun to shake off that servitude. For first, to say at once what I think, I deny that those little questions—whether to write δυοῖν or δυεῖν (of two), πλέον or πλεῖον (more), οὐδεὶς or οὐθείς (no one), εἵλετο or εἵλατο (he chose), εἰώθεσαν or εἰώθεισαν (they were accustomed)—are as important as certain initiates of philological art make them. For how many people are there who greatly care whether our historians write Ereignis or Ereigniss, Turm or Thurm, ungefähr or ohngefähr, mehre or mehrere, stand or stund? And, not to speak of the works of Goethe and other poets, do we not all agree with and give thanks to the Berlin Academy for having refrained, in editing the works of Frederick the Great, from reproducing the king's highly varied and inconsistent orthography? Then Diodorus' works are by no means so constituted that things so changeable in themselves can be directed to one fixed rule. For, first, that age in which Diodorus lived, although it may have used certain orthographic laws, can certainly not easily be constrained by us to fixed laws. Secondly, Diodorus himself spent thirty years composing his library: it happens by chance to us that on the same day we are not consistent in writing the same word. Then he compiled his library from various sources; thus certain forms, strange and troublesome to those eager to level everything, can sometimes contribute something to the investigation of Diodorus' source. Finally, our manuscripts, except P, are more recent.

Commentario Arethe