Rules of Construction in English Grammar
The source for this document is https://quod.lib.umich.edu/e/eebo2/A12988.0001.001
Project Note
This is licensed under Creative Commons CC BY-NC-ND. This license allows reusers to copy and distribute the material in any medium or format in unadapted form only, for noncommercial purposes only, and only so long as attribution is given to the creator.
The source of this document is the Early English Books Online (EEBO-TCP) website. Those books were transcribed in a character for character manner and can be very cumbersome to read since there was no standard spelling during that time. Many spelling variations such as "unlesse", "vnlesse", and "vnles" regularly appear.
This project was conceived to clean up those books as much as possible and make them more accessible to the interested reader, leading to the creation of a massive list of variant spellings and their corrections. This was used to clean up the text, but is of course only as complete as the list itself. Because of the nature of the original transcription, some words have missing characters or places where the original language (e.g., Greek) was not transcribed. This effort does not change that. Be aware that the original transcription can also be faulty and in some cases entire sentences may be missing.
Although this is no substitute for a properly compared, proofed, and scholarly edition, I believe that the result is a document which is far more accessible, particularly for searching for terms using standard spelling. The document has been cleaned and presented in what I hope is a pleasing and useful format for the vast majority of Christian brothers and sisters who just want access to read these spiritually nourishing works.
However, a word of warning: The Puritans were a very diverse group of people and their age was characterized with godliness, but also much upheaval, disputation and strife. They disagreed on many doctrines and some of these works contain less orthodox or Scriptural views than others. The reader is strongly advised to read with discernment, particularly if it is unknown whether author is trustworthy.
This project took a huge amount of time and skill to bring to fruition. I would particularly like to thank David Jonescue for the initial list of Puritans he found on EEBO and the concept behind this project as well as the continuous, unceasing efforts toward seeing this complete. Without his labor, this would not be available. Alex Sarrouf was invaluable in providing the initial list of over 7,000 spelling variations he had identified and corrected, as well as continuing to review more than 16,000 additions to that list for any typos.
Logan West
(with David Jonescue and Alex Sarrouf)
www.puritansearch.org
A PLAIN AND EASIE LAYING open of the meaning and understanding of the Rules of Construction in the English ACCIDENCE, appointed by authority to be taught in all Schools of hir Majesty's dominions, for the great use and benefit of young beginners: by JOHN STOCKWOOD sometime Schoolmaster of Tunbridge.
Imprinted at London, by the Assigns of Francis Flower. 1590
THE BOOKE TO THE young Punies and Petits of the Grammar School.
TO THE RIGHT WORSHIPFUL (unto whom in the Lord for sundry considerations I stand most singularly beholding) Master WILLIAM LEWIN, Doctor of both Laws, Justice of peace, one of hir Majesty's high Commission for causes ecclesiastical, Judge of the court of Prerogatiues, &c. JOHN STOCKWOOD Minister and preacher of the word of God, wisheth a plentiful increase of all heavenly graces, for the good of God his Church, and benefit of the Common-wealth.
S VCH (RIGHT WORSHIPFUL) have been the many and manifold bounties and favors, ever since my first being acquainted with you until this day, extended from your W. in most courteous manner not only unto myself, but also vouchsaved sundry other of my good friends at my request, that howsoever unto others I have peradventure given such worthy testimony of the same, as wherewithal they have been contented, and supposed me to be a thankful recounter of benefits received, yet could I never heerwithall satisfy and content myself, because the greatness of your deserts towards me and my friends hath seemed worthily to be further published unto the knowledge of all posterity, unto whom (as duty bindeth me) I do most willingly acknowledge, that the grateful remembrance of the same, so long as life doth last, and breth not fail, shall never be extinguished, nor buried in the loathsome lake of odious oblivion, but always be reserved fast locked up in the safe custody of a most dutiful and thankful mind. And to this end having no other means of better value, to testify my thankful duty, I have presumed under your worshipful and learned patronage to send abroad this plain and easy laying open of the English rules of Construction for the young Punies of the Grammar school, in so familiar and evident a manner, as the meanest wits, and slenderest capacities may to their no small benefit and profit (as I am persuaded) understand and bear away the same. And herein though I have chiefly framed myself unto the simplicity of the little ones and yoonglings that are occupied in these kind of studies, yet something here and there I have inserted, not unworthy altogether of the observation and marking of those which are of further reading.
If it shall of any be laid unto me for a fault, that I spend time in these small trifles, and Grammar matters, the which might better be employed about things more serious and of greater moment and importance, my defense is, that to have laid well the ground work, and as it were the foundation, whereupon the whole frame and building in a manner of the Latin tongue must be settled, is not in deed and in truth, to be deemed a light and toyish matter, but that shall bring great ease unto the master, and also good furtherance unto the young beginners, if with diligence and heedfulness they look into the same. Besides that I know not how it cometh to pass, that as, Nauita de stellis, de bobus narrat arator, and everyone as he hath been brought up, delighteth to be talking of those things for the most part wherein he hath been most exercised: so I having spent many years about the instructing of youth in the principles and rudiments of the latin tongue, cannot choose but ever now and then be harping on those matters, with the which in former times I have been so long and well acquainted. If any benefit may grow thereby unto those little ones, for whose sake, as well to save them from the rod, as also to encourage them by this plain laying open of the meaning of their rules, with more willingness, and cheerfulness to go forward in their studies: I shall have obtained my desire, submitting in all humility this my simple travel, such as it is, unto your wise and learned censure, whom I most heartily pray and beseech after your accustomed and wonted clemency in such sort to accept of the same, as by me towards your W. it hath been meant, namely an unfeigned token of most dutiful and hearty good will, the which for many curtesies I owe unto your Worship, whom I pray the Almighty long to preserve in peace and prosperity to your good contentment, and benefit of your Country. Tunbridge this 16. November, 1590.
Your W. most bounden, and humble in the Lord to be commanded, JOHN STOCKWOOD.
TO THE FRIENDLY READER concerning the profit of this book.
N OT being altogether ignorant (right gentle Reader) of the slender capacity of many young beginners in the Grammar schools, having myself by the space of twenty years exercised the office of a poor Schoolmaster, during the which time I have had the trial of many wits, and finding by experience, that one and the selfsame thing being often repeated in teaching, and as it were by small drops instilled into the tender ears of the little Punies and Petites: yet by reason of the weakness of their wits in those young years, it hath quickly passed away without any great profit, I have wished many times, that some good body would take pains for to lay open the rules of construction in our English Accidence, in such a plain and ready manner, as that the little ones, might as it were by themselves easily conceive of the meaning of the same, by the apt applying of every example unto his several rule. For this being well performed, a ready way is opened to the more easy passing through the examining and parsing of such lectures, as their teachers afterwards shall think good to read unto them. Which labor, because none hitherto hath entered upon, I myself in the vacation time of the twel •• • aies (as they call it) have taken upon me, and with God his help •• nished the same. And I have the rather made choice to deal with the English rules, because it is the first thing that the Accidentiaries do enter into, after they have learned their eight parts of speech, and as it were the foundation of all the rest of the Grammar building, the which being well laid, they shall be the better able to proceed to the understanding of Latin Authors. And for as much as there lieth a great weight in the manner of teaching the young beginners the understanding of these rules, which is chiefly to be attained by letting them familiarly and plainly see, how every example agreeth with his rule, I hope that I have in such sort performed this point, as that the child of meanest conceit, if he diligently read and mark this book, may almost without any help of his master, be able of himself, by the example, to show the meaning of every rule, to everyone that shall demand the meaning of the same. So that the long time, the which the master was wont to spend before, about the beating into their heads of the understanding of their rules, may now be spent about other matters tending to their profit, and they themselves, when as their masters words oftentimes were no sooner in at the one ear, but that they were as quickly out again at the other to his great grief, and many times to their greater smart, when they were well whipped for their dullness, may by the help of this book opened and laid before them, have such a master as will at all times most gently and plainly teach them, if they will but vouchsafe to repair and resort unto him.
The Schoolmaster then shall by this book be eased of much pains, that he was forced to use before to little purpose, because that the sound of his words striking their ears for the time, was straight ways forgotten: and the scholar that carrying away many a stripe for his dullness and forgetfulness was much discouraged, and not daring for fear to ask his master again the thing which he told him twenty times before, may resort hither, and without any blows hear again and again the same thing even so often as he list, the which neither time nor tediousness will suffer his master to repeat unto him.
Yea every loving and careful father for the profit of his son, the which hath sometimes in his youth been a smatterer in Grammar, and now through continuance of time, and other business almost clean forgotten the same, by using this book, and questioning at spare times with his child, when he cometh from the Grammar school, may partly increase his forlorn knowledge, and partly help forward by his riper wit, the tender understanding of his little child, and perceive how he profiteth, so far forth as concerneth the conceiving of the meaning of every rule, by applying every example unto the same, to which purpose I dare boldly pronounce, that nothing is omitted, that any way concerneth the fitting of every example to every rule throughout the whole rules of construction, having framed myself to be as it were dunstically plain, for the better understanding of the young ones, unto whom nothing can be made too plain, in which respect the learneder sort will vouchsafe me their pardon, knowing that these pains were purposedly taken for the profit of the small ones: yet it may be that same things are here set down, the which being well marked, may save my master scholars of the higher forms now and then a scouring, and also make a way for them by themselves to do the like to their great profit, in the applieng the examples of their latin Syntaxis, unto the rules of the same, the which will be the easier for them by the help of this book, wherein they may behold the like to be performed in all the English rules, in which respect they will also be the willinger to have the English Accidence bound with this, to aide them in the same.
And by this means my friends the Printers of the English Accidence shall stand not a little beholding unto me, in as much as this Book will be so far off from hindering the sale thereof, as that it will cause the same to sell much faster, everyone minding to buy this, being desirous also to have that, to join with it, that they may the better confer the one with the other, and see in the Accidence the rule naked by it self seeming to be hard, here made plain by the example, to appear most clear and easy for the capacity of the very meanest, besides that, for the marking of the order observed both in the one and the other, it shall be very behooveful to have them both bound together.
Now if any curiously conceited, and given unto novelties, liking better of the later, though darker devises of others, then being content to use the more ancient and plainer Grammar of our own, will demand of me, wherefore I did not rather bestow these pains upon the making familiar the Grammar precepts of some stranger, then in opening the rules of our own Countriman: mine answer shall be, that concerning myself (under the correction of others be it spoken) I know none in this argument (all circumstances considered) to whom our Grammar allowed by public authority, ought to yield one foot of ground, in regard of plainness and easines, if it be rightly understood, and taught accordingly. And for the profitableness of the same, if there were nothing else to be alleged, but the great number of most excellent learned men, shining as notable lights, both in the church, and also the commonwealth, yet might this in the judgment of all wise men, seem for to plead for the same sufficiently. So that I would wish our own auctorized Grammar so long to be publicly propounded in schools unto youth, until these admirers of new things, can avouch so much profit to have common by their new devises, as we know by experience to have proceeded already of this our old Grammar, wherein so many profitable instruments in the civil and church government have hitherto been trained.
Wherefore as I judge our own Grammar to be, if not more profitable, yet in every point as profitable as any others whatsoever, so have I been hereby moved to labor in it before in any other, and in this part of it especially, the which most concerneth the young beginners, for whose sake I have not only applied all the examples of all the rules of construction in the English Accidence, to express the meaning of every several rule, but have also Englished all the examples, which hitherto have gone only in Latin, whereby the little ones may be much furthered.
And moreover for their greater profit, I have borrowed from the Latin Grammar so many rules, as I have thought most convenient and necessary, and have set them down here also in English in their several places, as may well appear unto so many as binding the English accidence with this shall take pains to compare the rules of the one with the other. As many as shall reap commodity hereby (as I hope all those youthes especially shall, the which with diligence shall be occupied in the same) let them give unto God alone all the glory, and in consideration of my pains afoord me their earnest and faithful prayers, that whilst I live, I may always carry a mind continually to do good in his church and common-wealth, to his praise, and benefit of my country. From my study at Tunbridge the 14. of Ian. 1588.
Thy poor brother in Christ, vnfeinedlie tendering thy good, wherein he may: JOHN STOCKWOOD.
RVLES OF CONSTRVCTION made plain for young beginners in the Grammar school.
Question.
W Hat is next to be done, after that you have once perfectly learned the eight parts of speech set down in your Accidence?
Answer. We do then commonly, and for the most part use to enter into the rules of construction, that we may be able to learn some easy Autor in the Latin tongue, meetest for the capacity and understanding of young beginners.
Quest. To what end do these rules of construction principally, and especially serve?
An. To teach which of these eight parts of speech may most aptly and fitly in making of Latin, or construing of Autors be joined together, and agree the one with the other in some certain properties, or else be governed and as it were ruled the one of the other.
Qu. It seemeth then by this your answer, that for teaching sake, all your rules of construction may be in such sort divided, as that they may be referred unto either concord and agreeing, or else unto ruling and government.
An. So it is indeed, and so far forth as is sufficient for the Punies and Petites in the Grammar school to know, reserving the more curious divisions for such as are of riper and further years.
Qu. Tel me therefore, how many things are chiefly to be marked in these your English rules of construction?
An. There are two things especially to be regarded and considered.
Qu. What are they?
An. The concord and agreeing of words together: and the governing or ruling one word of another.
Qu. What call you a Concord?
An. A Concord is the agreeing and joining together of two Latin words at the least, in certain conditions and properties, the which of the Grammarians are called accidents, as of the verb personal and his nominative case, in number and person: of the substantive and the adjective, in case, gender, and number: of the relative and antecedent, in gender, number and person.
Qu. How many concords are there?
Qu. Which be they?
An. The first, between the nominative case and the verb: the second, between the substantive and the adjective: the third, between the antecedent and the relative. Unto these some do add two other, that is, two substantives, when they be joined together in one case: and the agreeing together of the word that asketh a question, and the word that answereth unto the same question, the which they call the interrogatiue and his redditiue. But because these are not so properly concords, we will follow our own Accidence, and content our selves with the three first named.
Qu. Wherefore were these concords at the first invented?
An. They do serve (as we are taught in the very first words of our English rules) to learn us how to join words duly and orderly together in construction.
Qu. Is there then any order to be kept in the joining of words together in construction?
An. If there be a vocatiue case in the sentence, you must first begin your construing with it, next must follow the nominative case with such other words as are to be joined with it: after the nominative case cometh the principal verb with such words in the same sentence as he doth govern, or do depend upon him, wherewith by the help of your master, and often practice in construing you shall easily be acquainted.
Qu. What is first to be done then in turning an English into Latin, or in construing of your lesson?
An. First of all the principal verb must be sought out, because without the verb the sentence is imperfect.
Qu. How shall you find out the principal verb?
An. Our book doth teach us, that if there be but one verb in the sentence, the same is the principal verb: but if there be more verbs than one in the sentence, the first is the principal verb, except it be the infinitiue mood, or have before it a relative, as that, whom, which, and in Latin qui, quae, quod: or a conjunction, as vt, that, cum, when, si, if, and such others: or else some adverb of wishing, as vtinam, I would to God, o, si, ô that, and such like.
Qu. After that you have the principal verb, what must next be done?
An. I must seek out his nominative case, unless it be a verb impersonall, which will have no nominative case.
Qu. By what means may the nominative case be found out?
An. By asking this question who, or what: for the word that answereth to this question, shall be the nominative case to the verb.
Qu. Shew me this by some example.
An. When I say in English: God is good, if I would know which word in this sentence is the nominative case, I shall find it by putting this question who, or what before the verb is, after this manner, saying, who, or what is good, and the answer is, God, the which hereby I know to be the nominative case: so in this sentence, Good scholars use diligence, if I ask, who use diligence, the answer is, Good scholars, which is the nominative case. And so forth in the like.
Qu. How must the nominative case be placed in making or construing of Latin?
An. He must be set next before the verb, except a question be asked.
Qu. What if a question be asked?
An. Then the nominative case is to be set after the verb, or after the sign of the verb.
Qu. Shew me this by the examples set down in your Accidence?
An. Amas tu, lovest thou? In this question the word tu, thou, being the nominative case, is set after the verb Amas. In the other example, venitne rex, doth the king come? the word rex, the king, being the nominative case, is in the English set after this word doth, which is in this place the sign of the verb come.
Qu. How shall I know the sign of the verb, from the verb it self?
An. That is well asked of you, because it is not expressed in the Accidence, and yet may be some trouble unto a young beginner.
Qu. Let me see then what you can answer unto this questiō.
An. There be diverse words in English, the which sometimes are signs of a verb, and sometimes they are verbs themselves.
Qu. Which be they?
An. These among the rest: Do, doest, doth, did, diddest, have, hast, hath, had, haddest, shall, shalt, will, wilt, may, can, might, would, should, ought, oughtest, am, art, are, was, wast, been, be, and such like, the which being set before other verbs, are but signs of the verb, and sometimes are tokens of the tense of the verb, and sometimes are tokens of the voice of the verb, as namely whether he be active, passive, or neuter. And sometimes they are verbs themselves, and that for the most part, being set alone.
Qu. Give me one or two examples of this, and so shall I know that you understand what you say.
An. When I say in English, I do love, thou doest love, he doth love, &c. these words do, doest, doth, are signs of the verb love, and tokens of the present tense. But in these sayings, I do, thou doest, he doth, these words, do, doest, doth, are verbs themselves, and the like is to be said of all the rest for the most part.
Qu. Are there no more exceptions causing the nominative case to be set after the verb?
An. Yes, there are two other.
Qu. Rehearse them.
[unspec 2] An. If the verb be of the imperatiue mood, the nominative case shall be set after the verb, or after the sign of the verb, as Ama tu, love thou, where the nominative case, tu, thou, is set after the verb ama, love. Amato ill, let him love, in which example the nominative case ill in Latin, is set after the verb amato, and in English after this word let, being the sign of the imperatiue mood, before the verb love.
Qu. What is the third exception?
[unspec 3] An. Sometime when this sign it, or there, cometh before the English of the verb, the nominative case shall be set after the verb: as Est liber meus, It is my book, where this word liber, book, is set after the verb est, is, because this sign it is placed before the verb. Again, Venit ad me quidam, There came one unto me, in which example, quidam, one, is set after the verb venit, came, because this sign there cometh before it.
Further it is to be noted, that oftentimes in Latin the nominative case for elegancy sake is set after the verb, with a far better grace than it could be set before the verb, the which notwithstanding in construing of the same into English, is to be set before the verb.
Qu. You have said that the word the which in construing cometh before the verb, is the nominative case, and that his most usual place is to be set before the verb: but what case shall that word be, the which in Latin making, and in construing cometh next after the verb?
An. If it be a casual word, that is, such a word as is declined with case, and answereth to this question whom, or what, made by the verb, it shall commonly be the accusative case, unless the verb do require some other case to be governed withal, as Deum cole, Worship God. Ask this question whom or what, saying, Worship whom, you answer God, which hereby you know to be the accusative case.
Qu. Yea but you said (me thought) Deum cole, where the word Deum, which you say signifieth God, and is also the accusative case, the which should follow the verb, is placed notwithstanding (as you see) before the verb.
An. Albeit that in the words as they lie in Latin, Deum be set before the verb cole, yet in construing it cometh after the verb, as cole, worship thou, Deum, God. And here you must mark that like as many times in Latin (as it was said immediately before) the nominative case is set after the verb, and yet in construing is to be placed before the verb: so contrariwise the accusative case is often in Latin set before the verb, when as notwithstanding in construing it must be placed after the verb.
Qu. Now recite the example of your book, where the word following the verb, is not the accusative case, but is put in some other case, and show me withal the reason of the same.
An. Si cupis placere magistro, vtere diligentia, nec sis tantus cessator, vt calcaribus indigeas. If thou covet to please the master, use diligence, and be not so slack (or so great a sluggard) that thou shalt need spurs.
In this example there be three several casual words, following three several verbs, and answering to the question whom or what to be made by the verb (as placere magistro, please the master, vtere diligentia, use diligence, calcaribus indigeas, need spurs ) and yet neither of them are the accusative case, but magistro, the dative case, because placere will have a dative case, diligentia the ablative case, because vtere will have an ablative case, calcaribus also the ablative case, because the verb indigeas doth govern an ablative case, by such rules as follow hereafter. And the like is to be answered for other casual words in this manner following after verbs, and yet being not put in the accusative, but in some other cases.
The first Concord.
Qu. THese things in your Accidence are set down as necessary points generally to be known before you come unto the concords, the which being after this plain and easy manner run over, tell me now which is the first concord.
An. The first concord is between the verb personal and his nominative case.
Qu. In how many things doth a verb personal and his nominative case agree?
An. They agree in these two things, that is, in number and person.
Qu. In this manner of speaking, what mean you by this word Agree.
An. Where my rule saith that A verb personal agreeth with his nominative case in number and person, the meaning is, that look what number and person the nominative case is, of the same number and person must the verb be: as if the nominative case be the singular number and first person, the verb must likewise be the singular number and first person. If the nominative case be the singular number, and second person, the verb must be the singular number and second person. If the nominative case be the singular number and third person, the verb must be the singular number and third person, and so forth of the persons of the plural number.
Qu. Make this plain by some few examples.
An. When I say in Latin, Ego amo, I love, the verb amo is the singular number and first person, because the nominative case Ego is the singular number and first person. Tu amas, thou lovest, the verb amas is the singular number and second person, because the nominative case Tu is the singular number and second person. Ille amat, he loveth, the verb amat is the singular number and third person, because the nominative case Ille is the singular number, and third person.
Qu. May I not then say in Latin, Ego amas, or Tu amatis &c.
An. You may not: because in the first example, though amas the verb be the singular number like as the nominative case Ego, is, yet is it not the first person, but the second, and therefore is there no true agreement, for that the verb must be the singular number and first person, like as the nominative case Ego, is. And in the second example Tu amatis, albeit the verb amatis be the second person, as his nominative case Tu, is, yet is not the verb the singular number, as the nominative case Tu, is, and therefore there is no agreement.
Qu. Now rehearse the rule for your first concord.
An. A verb personal agreeth with his nominative case in number and person, as Praeceptor legit, vos vero negligitis, The master readeth, and ye regard not.
Qu. How fit you this example to express the meaning of this rule?
An. In this example there are two verbs, and two nominative cases. The verbs are legit, readeth, and negligitis, regard not.
The nominative case unto the verb legit, is praeceptor, master, and the nominative case unto the verb negligitis, is vos.
In the first part of the sentence praeceptor legit, the verb legit, is the singular number, and the third person, because his nominative case praeceptor, is the singular number and third person, by this rule, A verb personal agreeth with his nominative case, &c.
In the latter part of this sentence, vos negligitis, the verb negligitis is the plural number and second person, because his nominative case vos is the plural number and second person, by this selfsame rule.
Qu. But how can there be agreement between the verb and the nominative case, when as the verb is many times put without any nominative case at all?
An. The nominative case in verbs of the first and second person, and also sometimes in verbs of the third person is not expressly set down always, but yet is it notwithstanding always to be understood, and so the verb hath always a nominative case, either expressly, or else by understanding.
Qu. To what end is the rule following added, which saith, Here is to be noted, that the first person is more worthy than the second, and the second more worthy than the third.
An. To make a way unto the exception immediately following, which teacheth, when two or mo nominative cases of the singular number are joined together with a conjunction copulative, and are of diverse persons, with which of them the verb shall agree, and after what manner.
Qu. In what respect then is the first person said to be more worthy than the second, and the second more worthy than the third?
An. This woorthines of one person above another, is not of birth or blood, or wealth, or in any such like consideration, but rather of privilege and prerogative (as I may so term it) that the one hath above the other, in binding the verb to agree with him, rather than with the other, that is, in causing the verb to be of the same person, the which in this respect is said to be the more worthy.
Qu. Make this yet somewhat more plainer for the helping of young beginners.
An. Where my note saith, that the first person is more worthy than the second, and the second more worthy than the third, the meaning is, that when two nominative cases one of the first person, and the other of the second, or one of the second person, and the other of the third, being coupled together by a conjunction copulative coming between them, be set before a verb, that then the verb referred to the nominative cases of the first sort, shall be of the first person, and not of the second: and referred to the nominative cases of the second sort, shall be put in the second person, and not in the third.
Qu. You have said well, and yet shall this more plainly appear in applying of the examples of the next exception unto the opening of the meaning of the same. But tell me first, whether the verb personal doth always agree with his nominative case in number and person.
An. There are certain exceptions from this rule, and the same of two sorts, the one concerning the verb, and the other concerning the nominative case. For the verb is not always of the same number that his nominative case is of: and the nominative case unto the verb, is not always someone casual word, that is, a word declined with case, but sometimes some other thing.
Qu. How many are the exceptions concerning the verb?
An. They are three. Wherof the first is this: Many nominative cases singular with a conjunction copulative coming between them, will have a verb plural, the which verb plural, or of the plural number, shall agree with his nominative case of the most worthy person: as Ego & tu sumus in tuto, I and thou be in safeguard. Tu & pater periclitamini, Thou and thy father are in jeopardy. Pater & praeceptor accersunt te, Thy father and thy master do send for thee.
Qu. What do you learn by this exception?
An. First, that two or mo nominative cases of the singular number, joined together by a conjunction copulative (as et, atque, nec neque, and cum put for et ) do notwithstanding require a verb of the plural number.
Secondly, that the same verb must in person agree with his nominative case of the most worthy person, that is, must be of the same person, that his nominative case of the most worthy person is, so that if among the nominative cases one be of the first person, and the rest of any other person, yet must the verb be only of the first person: or if among the nominative cases one be of the second person, and the other of the third, then shall the verb be of the second person.
Qu. But what if the nominative cases thus coupled together, be all of the third person?
An. Then must the verb be likewise of the third person.
Qu. Now show the meaning of this exception by the examples of the same.
An. The first example is, Ego & tu sumus in tuto. Here are two nominative cases Ego and tu coupled together by this conjunction copulative et, coming both of them before the verb sumus, and being both of them of the singular number, yet do they cause the verb sumus to be the plural number, because that many nominative cases singular being joined together with a conjunction copulative, will have a verb of the plural number. And because the one of the nominative cases namely Ego, is of the first person, therefore the verb sumus doth agree with him in person, rather than with the other nominative case tu, being of the second person, for that the first person is more worthy than the second, that is, causeth the verb rather to be of the first person than of the second, when the nominative cases of the first and second person are so coupled together.
The second example is, Tu et pater periclitamini. In this example two nominative cases Tu and pater both of the singular number, coupled together by this conjunction copulative et, do come before the verb periclitamini, and therefore they cause him to be of the plural number, because many nominative cases singular coupled with a conjunction copulative, will have a verb of the plural number. And because the first nominative case tu is the second person, therefore the verb periclitamini rather agreeth with him in person, than with pater the nominative case of the third person, that is, is rather of the second person than of the third, because the second person is more worthy than the third, that is, in such kind of coupling together of the second and third person, causeth the verb to be of the second person, and not of the third.
The third example is, Pater et praeceptor accersunt te. Here are two nominative cases singular, pater and praeceptor, coupled together like as the other before mentioned, by a conjunction copulative et, and coming before the verb accersunt, which therefore is the plural number, though both the nominative cases be of the singular number, because many nominative cases of the singular number being coupled together with a copulative conjunction will have a verb of the plural number. And because these nominative cases pater and praeceptor are both of the third person, therefore is the verb accersunt also of the third person.
Qu. What is the second exception, where the verb seemeth to disagree with his nominative case, that is, seemeth not to be of the same number with his nominative case?
An. When a verb cometh between two nominative cases of diverse numbers (that is, one being of the singular number, and the other of the plural, or one being of the plural number, and the other of the singular) the verb may indifferently accord with either of them, so that they be both of one person: as Amantium irae, amoris redintegratio est, The falling out of lovers, is the renewing of love. Quid enim nisi vota supersunt? For what remaineth saving only prayers? Pectora percussit, pectus quoque robora fiunt, She stroke hir breast, and hir breast turned into oke also.
Qu. There is not one of these examples the which can fitly be applied unto this second exception.
An. Why so I pray you?
Qu. Bicause the exception speaketh of a verb coming between two nominative cases, and in all the examples the verb cometh not between, but after the nominative cases.
An. This maketh no matter at all: for we must have regard how the verb is placed in the English and construing of the sentence, and not how it is set in the Latin. For albeit that in the frame of words as they lie in Latin, the verb do come last in these and such like examples, yet as you may easily see by the English, the verb in construing is put between the nominative cases according unto the rule.
Qu. Go to then, declare by your examples the meaning of this exception.
An. Hmantium irae, amoris redintegratio est. In this sentence the verb est, in English, is, being in the construing to be placed between these two nominative cases irae, the falling out, and redintegratio, the renewing, the which are of diverse numbers, for irae is the plural number, and redintegratio the singular: the verb est agreeth with the nominative case redintegratio, being of the singular number as redintegratio is. But you may make it agree in the plural number with the nominative case irae, the which is likewise of the plural number, saying, Amantium irae, sunt amoris redintegratio.
In the second example, Quid enim nisi vota supersunt? The verb supersunt, remaineth, in construing being to be put between these two nominative cases of diverse numbers Quid, what, and vota, prayers, Quid the singular number, and vota the plural number, the verb supersunt (I say) is the plural number, and agreeth with the nominative case vota of the same number: but it may also agree with the nominative case Quid of the singular number, if you say thus, Quid enim superest nisi vota?
In the third sentence, Pectora percussit, pectus quoque robora fiunt. The verb fiunt, turned, in the construing coming between these two nominative cases of diverse numbers, pectus, breast, and robora, oke, pectus the singular number, robora the plural number, the verb fiunt (I say) agreeth with the nominative case robora of the plural number. But it may be made to agree with pectus the singular number, if you say thus, pectus quoque fit robora.
Qu. But in these and such like examples, when you make the verb to agree with the other nominative case, is it to be counted as good Latin, as the former?
An. It is congrue, or true Latin. But in this behalf you must mark how the best writers use to speak, and follow them, which is always most safest for you to do, and so shall you be sure to speak and write the best Latin. And for your better help in these and such like examples belonging to this rule, understand you thus much by the way, that when a verb is put between two nominative cases of diverse numbers, the verb doth most commonly agree with the former nominative case: but when the verb is set before or after nominative cases of diverse numbers, then doth it most usually agree with the latter, rather than with the former.
Qu. Now let us come unto the third exception, where the verb and his nominative case are not both of one number.
An. Many times when the nominative case coming before the verb is the singular number, and yet is such a word as doth signify a multitude, or company, or more than one person, in such cases the verb is often put in the plural number, as Pars abiere, Part of them are gone away. Suo quisque tempore adierunt, They went unto him every man in his time.
Qu. How frame you these examples unto this rule of exception?
An. Pars abiere, Here the verb abiere is the plural number, because his nominative case pars is a word signifying a multitude in the singular number.
Suo quisque tempore adierunt, In this place also the verb adierunt is the plural number, because his nominative case quisque in the singular number doth signify more than one.
Qu. Thus much of the exceptions concerning the verb, where he seemeth to disagree from his nominative case. Now tell me how many exceptions there are likewise concerning the nominative case.
An. It was said before that the verb must have a nominative case coming before him for the most part, if it be a verb personal: but because that he hath not always a word declined with case to serve this turn, but hath this supplied by some other means, therefore here also are certain exceptions to be marked.
Qu. How many are there of these exceptions?
An. There be three, whereof the first two are set down in the Accidence in these words.
Here note also, that sometime the infinitiue mood of a verb, or else a whole clause afore going, or else some member of a sentence may be the nominative case to the verb, as Diluculo surgere, saluberrimum est, To arise be time in the morning, is the most wholesome thing in the world. Multum scire, vita iucundissima, To know much is the most pleasant, or sweetest life of all.
Qu. Set down the meaning of this rule in fewer words, and supply the examples from elsewhere, if any be wanting in any part of the same.
An. Somtime the infinitiue mood before a verb, is put instead of the nominative case unto the same verb, as Mentiri non est meum, It is not my guise or property to lie.
Qu. How serveth this example unto this rule?
An. Here the verb est, hath no casual word to be his nominative case, but instead of it, the infinitiue mood mentiri supplieth the room of the nominative case unto the said verb est.
Qu. What is the second exception?
An. Somtimes a whole clause, that is, a whole sentence going before the verb is the nominative case to the verb, and sometime some piece of a sentence is put for the nominative case unto the verb. Of a whole sentence put for the nominative case before the verb, let this example serve being borrowed out of the Latin rules of construction: Add quod ingenuas didicisse fideliter arts: Emollit mores, nec sinit esse feros. Add unto the things before spoken, that to have learned the liberal arts faithfully, or well and thoroughly, doth make the manners or behavior of men to be civil, and suffereth them not to be rude or barbarous.
In this example the whole sentence, Add quod ingenuas didicisse fideliter arts, is put instead of the nominative case unto the verb emollit.
Qu. What are the examples of the other part of this exception, where part of the sentence supplieth the room of the nominative case before the verb?
An. They be two, and expressed in these words in our Accidence. Diluculo surgere saluberrimum est, where Diluculo surgere, part of this sentence, is nominative case unto the verb est.
The other example is, Multum scire, vita iucundissima.
Qu. But how will this example frame to this rule, seeing there is no verb at all in this sentence?
An. The verb est is to be understood in this sentence: before which verb so understood, this part of the sentence, Multum scire, is put for the nominative case.
Qu. Is there nothing else to be noted concerning this rule?
An. Yes truly. For if but one infinitiue mood, or but part of a sentence be put instead of the nominative case unto the verb, then shall the verb be of the singular number and third person. But if (as many times it cometh so to pass) more than one infinitiue mood, or more than one sentence, or piece of a sentence, especially joined together by a copulative conjunction, be put for the nominative case, then shall the verb be of the plural number, and third person.
Qu. Now set down the third exception concerning the nominative case before the verb.
An. Somtime an adverb with his genitive case is instead of the nominative case unto the verb, and then, if the genitive case governed of the adverb be the plural number, the verb shall likewise be the plural number, and third person, as Partim virorum ceciderunt in bello, Part of the men were slain in battle. Partim signorum sunt combusta, Part of the ensigns were burned.
In the first of these examples the adverb partim with his genitive case virorum of the plural number, is put for the nominative case before the verb ceciderunt, and therefore is the verb ceciderunt the plural number and third person by this rule.
In the second example also, the adverb partim with his genitive case signorum of the plural number, is put for the nominative case before the verb sunt, and therefore is the said verb sunt the plural number and third person by this rule.
But if the genitive case governed of the adverb, and together with the adverb supplying the room of the nominative case before the verb, be the singular number, then shall the verb also be the singular number, and third person, as Satis pecuniae est mihi, I have money enough. In this example the adverb satis with his genitive case pecuniae of the singular number, is put for the nominative case before the verb est, and therefore is the same verb the singular number and third person by this rule.
The second Concord.
Qu. WHat is the second concord, or rather between what things is the second concord?
An. The second concord is between the substantive and the adjective.
Qu. How shall you find out the substantive unto the adjective?
An. By asking this question Who, or what, and the word that answereth to the question, shall be the substantive, as in these examples, It is my master, ask this question who, or what, saying, My who, or what is it, and the answer is, master, the which hereby I do know to be the substantive unto this adjective my. Again, when I say thus in English, A sure friend, if I ask this question who, or what, and say, a sure what? the answer is, friend, the which hereby I know to be the substantive unto the adjective sure, and the like is to be done for the finding out of other substantives in like cases.
Qu. In how many things doth the adjective and the substantive agree?
An. The adjective and his substantive do agree in three things, namely, in case, gender, and number.
Qu. What call you to agree in case, gender, and number?
An. To be of the same case, gender, and number that the substantive is of, as if the substantive be the nominative case, the masculine gender, and singular number, the adjective also must be the nominative case, the masculine gender, and singular number.
If the substantive be the ablative case, the feminine gender, and singular number, the adjective must likewise be the ablative case, the feminine gender, and singular number, and so forth, as appeareth by the examples of this second concord.
Qu. What is the rule in your Accidence concerning this concord between the substantive and the adjective?
An. The adjective, whether it be a noun, pronoun, or participle, agreeth with his substantive in case, gender, and number: as Amicus certus in re incerta cernitur, A sure friend is tried in a doubtful matter. Homo armatus, A man armed. Ager colendus, A field to be tilled. Hic vir, This man. Meus herus est, It is my master.
Qu. What do you by the way, gather generally out of this rule?
An. That there are three kinds of adjectives, that is to say, a noun adjective, a pronoun adjective, and a participle adjective.
Qu. Shew by the examples of the rule by you rehearsed before, how the adjective agreeth with his substantive in case, gender, and number.
An. Amicus certus in re incerta cernitur. In this example there be two substantives, and two noun adjectives, namely, Amicus certus, and re incerta, where the first noun adjective certus agreeth with the first substantive amicus in case, gender, and number, that is to say, the first adjective certus is the nominative case, the masculine gender, and the singular number, because his substantive amicus is the nominative case, the masculine gender, and singular number, by this rule, The adjective whether it be a noun, &c. And the second noun adjective incerta, agreeth with the second substantive re, in case, gender, and number, that is to say, the second adjective incerta, is the ablative case, the feminine gender, and singular number, because his substantive re, is the ablative case, the feminine gender, and singular number, by the same rule.
In the second example Homo armatus, the participle adjective armatus is the nominative case, the masculine gender, and singular number, because his substantive homo is the nominative case, the masculine gender, and singular number, by this same rule.
In the third example Ager colendus, the participle adjective colendus, is the nominative case, the masculine gender, and singular number, because so is his substantive ager, by the same rule.
In the fourth example Hic vir, the pronoun adjective hic is the nominative case, the masculine gender, and singular number, because his substantive vir is so, by the same rule.
In the fifth example, Meus herus est, the pronounce adjective meus is the nominative case, the masculine gender, and singular number, because his substantive herus is the nominative case, the masculine gender, and singular number, by the same rule, The adjective whether it be a noun, pronoun, and so forth, as it is in the words of this rule.
Qu. Is this rule so general concerning the agreement of the substantive and the adjective, that it hath no exception?
An. Yes, there falleth out sometimes some show of disagreement between the substantive and the adjective both in gender and in number, especially when many substantives singular, that is, of the singular number, are joined together with a conjunction copulative.
Qu. What reason is there of this?
An. Bicause that then the adjective must first be of the plural number, though the substantives be all of the singular number, and secondly the adjective doth not agree with all the substantives in gender, if they be of diverse genders, but with someone of them, that is, the adjective is not of the same gender that all the substantives are of, but of the same gender of the which someone of the substantives is of, the which they call the substantive of the most worthy gender, because (as it was said before in the woorthines of the three persons one above the other) he hath this prerogative, to cause the adjective to agree with him in gender, that is, to be of the same gender that he himself is of.
Qu. What are the rules in your Accidence touching these points?
An. They be in number two, whereof the first is of the woorthines of one gender above another: and the second of the adjectives being of the plural number, and agreeing with the substantive of the most worthy gender.
Qu. Set down the words of the first rule.
An. Where note, that the masculine gender is more worthy than the feminine, and the feminine more worthy than the neuter.
Qu. What is the meaning of this rule?
An. When an adjective hath for his substantive more than one word, that is, two or more substantive of diverse genders coupled together with a copulative conjunction, if one of the substantives be the masculine gender, and the other the feminine, or neuter gender, yet shall the adjective be the masculine gender: or if one of the substantives be the feminine gender, and the other the neuter gender, then shall the adjective be the feminine gender, and not of the neuter gender. For where there is diversity of genders in the substantives unto the adjective, there the adjective shall rather agree with the substantive of the masculine gender, than with the substantive of the feminine gender, and with the substantive of the feminine gender, than with the substantive of the neuter gender, except it be in substantives betokening things without life, of the which something shall be spoken hereafter in handling the next rule.
Qu. What is your second rule of the adjective his being of the plural number, albeit the substantives be of the singular number, and of his agreeing with the substantive of the most worthy gender.
An. Many substantives singular, having a conjunction copulative coming between them, will have an adjective plural, which adjective shall agree with the substantive of the most worthy gender: as Rex et regina beati, The king and the queen are blessed.
Qu. How do you apply this example unto your rule?
An. In this example there are two substantives Rex and regina coupled together by this conjunction copulative et, wherefore they do cause the adjective beati, to be the plural number, and because one of these substantives, namely Rex, is the masculine gender, and the other regina, the feminine gender, therefore doth the adjective beati agree with the substantive Rex in gender, rather than with the substantive regina, that is to say, is rather the masculine gender with Rex, than the feminine gender with regina, because Rex the masculine gender is more worthy than regina the feminine gender, that is, causeth the adjective rather to be put in the masculine, than in the feminine gender.
Qu. Doth the adjective being referred unto substantives of diverse genders, always rather agree with the masculine gender than with the feminine, and with the feminine rather than with the neuter?
An. If the substantives betoken things without life, then is the neuter gender the most worthy gender, that is, if there be any of them the neuter gender, the adjective shall likewise be the neuter gender: nay if one of them be the masculine gender and the other the feminine, and none of them the neuter, yet shall the adjective be the neuter gender.
Qu. Bring some examples for the making more plain of this that you have said.
An. Coelum et terra sunt à Deo condita: Heaven and earth were made by God. In this sentence are two substantives coelum and terra, coelum the neuter gender, and terra the feminine gender, and because that both of them do signify things not having life, therefore doth the participle adjective condita agree in gender with the substantive coelum, and not with the substantive terra, with the which, if they had signified things having life, it ought to have agreed, that is, therefore in this example the adjective condita, is of the neuter gender with the substantive coelum, and not the feminine gender with the substantive terra, because that in things not having life, the neuter gender is the most worthy, that is, doth make the adjective to be of the neuter gender rather then of any other gender.
Qu. Give an example, of the adjective being the neuter gender, when one of the substantives is the feminine gender, and the other the masculine gender, and none of them of the neuter gender.
An. Requies et iocus in vita necessaria esse videntur, Rest and sport do seem in life to be necessary. Here are two substantives Requies and iocus, Requies the feminine gender, and iocus the masculine gender, betokening things without life, and yet is the adjective necessaria the neuter gender, because that in substantives betokening things without life, though none of them be the neuter gender, yet shall the adjective notwithstanding be put in the neuter gender.
And in both the examples before going, the adjective condita in the first, and likewise the adjective necessaria in the second is the plural number, though the substantives be the singular number, because that many substantives of the singular number being coupled together with a conjunction copulative, will cause the adjective to be of the plural number.
Qu. But is there nothing else to be marked as touching this rule of the adjective to be put in the neuter gender, when he is to be referred unto substantives signifying things without life?
An. The figures called Syllepsis and Zeugma, do often cause an alteration in this rule. But because that these are with the hardest for young beginners, we will leave them to be opened by their learned masters, at such time as for their capacities, they shall think most convenient.
Qu. What if the substantives signifying things without life be both of one gender, that is, either both the masculine gender, or both the feminine gender?
An. Then may the adjective agree with them in gender, that is, if the substantives be the masculine gender, the adjective may be the masculine gender: if the substantives be the feminine gender, the adjective may also be the feminine gender.
Qu. Shew this by example, for the young beginners sake.
An. I may say in latin, Codex et coulter meus sunt amissi, My book and my knife are lost: where the participle adjective amissi, is the masculine gender, because both the substantives codex and coulter are the masculine gender.
So I may say, Iustitia & temperantia sunt amplectendae, Justice and temperance are to be embraced, where the participle adjective amplectendae is the feminine gender, because both the substantives iustitia and temperantia, are the feminine gender, but yet in these kind of speeches it is more usual to have the adjective put in the neuter gender.
And here is further to be understanded, that sometimes when as both the substantives do signify things having life, yet is the adjective found to be put in the neuter gender, though the substantive be of the masculine or feminine gender, but this is a thing that falleth out very seldom, but yet not to be passed over without marking.
Qu. What else have you to say concerning this concord of the substantive and the adjective?
An. Some Grammarians give this rule, that when a participle adjective that cometh either of a verb substantive as factus of fio, or of a verb passive having the signification of calling, or the like, as dictus, of dicor, appellatus, of appellor, is put between two substantives of diverse genders, then shall that adjective agree with the first substantive, that is, be of the same gender that the first substantive is of, as, pecunia dicta est neruus belli, Monie is called the sinews, or strength of war, where the participle adjective dicta, called, coming of dicor to be called, being put between two substantives of diverse genders, namely pecunia the feminine gender, and neruus the masculine gender, it doth agree with pecunia the former substantive, and not with neruus the latter substantive. But if the adjective participle coming of such verbs as is aforesaid, or the like be put after two substantives of diverse genders, then he may indifferently agree with either of the substantives, that is, be of the same gender, that either of the substantives is of, as Ludos Megalesia appellatos, Plaies called Megalesia: Gens vniuersa Veneti appellati, The whole people called Venetians. In these two examples there are two participle adjectives of calling, whereof appellatos in the first example being set after these two substantives of diverse genders ludos and Megalesia, Ludos the masculine gender, and Megalesia the neuter gender, the adjective participle appellatos is the masculine gender with the first substantive ludos.
In the second example the same participle adjective appellati, being set after gens & Veneti, gens the feminine gender, and Veneti the masculine gender, it doth agree with the latter substantive Veneti being the masculine gender, as it is, showing that in such like placing of the substantives, the adjective may agree with whether of them you will, so that you may say, Ludos Megalesia appellatos, or Ludos Megalesia appellata. Gens vniuersa Veneti appellati, or Gens vniuersa Veneti appellata: Paupertas onus visum est, or Paupertas onus visa est, & so of such like, if the nature of the word will bear the same.
Qu. Why say you if the nature of the word will bear the same?
An. Bicause you cannot say in latin, Verbum caro facta est, but Verbum caro factum est. nor Aqua vinum factum est, but aqua vinum facta est, for otherwise you should speak against the nature and truth of the matter.
Qu. Have you now done with this second concord?
An. There is yet further to be considered, that many times the adjective and the substantive are of diverse numbers and genders, and cases by reason of certain figurative speeches, as by Synthesis, Antiptosis, Enallage and such like, whereof when scholars are of further learning and understanding, their masters must instruct them.
Lastly the adjective (like as the verb before spoken of in the first concord) hath for his substantive sometimes, the infinitiue mood, sometimes a whole sentence, or piece of a sentence, and sometimes an adverb with his genitive case, and then in the three former, he shall be the singular number and neuter gender: but if the adjective have more then one infinitiue mood, or more then one sentence, or more then one piece of a sentence, coupled with a conjunction copulative, for his substantive, then shall the adjective be the neuter gender and plural number.
And when an adjective hath for his substantive an adverb with his genitive case, then the adjective must be the same gender and number, that his genitive case coming after the adverb, is of.
The third Concord, between the antecedent and the relative.
Qu. WHat is the third concord, or between what things is the third concord?
An. The third concord is between the antecedent and the relative.
Qu. In how many things doth the antecedent and the relative agree?
An. In three things, that is to say, in gender, number and person.
Qu. By what rule?
An. By this rule: the relative agreeth with his antecedent in gender, number, and person: as, Vir sapit, qui pauca loquitur, That man is wise, that speaketh few things or words.
Qu. How shall you know the antecedent unto the relative.
An. The antecedent is a word that commonly goeth before the relative, and therefore hath his name in latin of foregoing, and is known by asking this question, who, or what, for the word next before the relative, and being rehearsed again of the relative by asking this question who, or what, and answereth unto the same, is the antecedent.
An. Shew this by the example of your rule before going.
Qu. The man is wise that speaketh few things or words. In this example this word that is the relative, & this word man going before him is the antecedent, the which by asking this question who, or what with the relative that, is rehearsed again by the relative, & answereth to the question who, or what, whereby I know it to be the Antecedent: as for example, The man is wise that speaketh, &c. Ask the question who, or what, by the Relatiue that, saying, That who or what is wise, the answer is, that man, where the word man answereth to the question, who or what, & is rehearsed again of the relative before whom in the sentence it went, and therefore it is the antecedent. And thus you must do for the finding out of the antecedent in all other sentences.
Qu. Now let me hear you apply the Latin example unto the rule of the third concord between the antecedent and the relative.
An. Vir sapit, qui pauca loquitur. Here the relative qui agreeth in gender, number, and person with his antecedent vir, that is to say, the relative qui is the masculine gender, the singular number, and the third person, because his antecedent vir, is the masculine gender, the singular number, and the third person by this rule, The relative agreeth with his antecedent in gender, number and person.
Qu. How is the relative qui, quae, quod englished for the most part?
An. It is most commonly englished by this word which, and sometime by this english that, which may be turned into this English which, as in my example before alleged, The man is wise, that speaketh few things or words. The relative that may be englished also by the word which: for I may say as well, The man is wise, which speaketh few things or words.
Qu. Wherefore serveth this note?
An. To put a difference between the relative that, when it may be turned into this English which, being in Latin called qui, quae, quod, and the conjunction quod or vt, the which is also englished by this word that. But this is the difference, that this word that, when it is a relative, may be turned into this English which, but this word that, when it is a conjunction, cannot so be turned.
Qu. What rule have you for this in your Accidence?
An. When this English that, may be turned into this english which, it is a relative, otherwise it is a conjunction, which in Latin is called quod, or vt: and in Latin making it may elegantly be put away by turning the nominative case into the accusative case, and the verb into the infinitiue mood: as Gaudeo quod tu been vales: Gaudeo te been valere, I am glad that thou art in good health. Iubeo vt tu abeas: Iubeo te abire, I bid that thou go hence.
Qu. Is this the only cause of making this rule, thereby to put a difference between the relative that, and the conjunction that?
An. No, there is yet a further use of this rule, namely this, to teach that when this English that, is not a relative, but a conjunction, called in Latin quod or vt, coming between two verbs personals, that then in Latin this word quod or vt may elegantly for the most part be put away, by turning the nominative case before which it is set, into the accusative case, and the latter of the two verbs into the infinitiue mood.
Qu. Shew me this by the two examples in your rule before.
An. Gaudeo quod tu been vales. Here is in Latin the conjunction quod, in English that, put before two verbs personals, Gaudeo and vales, and because that this English that, cannot be turned into this English which, for it is no good English to say, I am glad which you are in good health, but, that you are in good health, therefore I know this word that to be a conjunction and no relative: this quod therefore may be better put away, turning the nominative case tu coming after it, into the accusative case te, and the latter verb vales into the infinitiue mood valere, saying, Gaudeo te been valere.
So in the second example, Iubeo vt tu abeas, the conjunction vt, in English that (therefore a conjunction, and not a relative, because it cannot in this sentence be turned into this English which, for it is no English to say, I am glad which thou art in good health, but, that thou art in good health ) this conjunction vt (I say) coming between these two verbs personals Iubeo and abeas, may elegantly be put away, by turning the nominative case tu, into the accusative case te, and the latter verb of the subiunctiue mood abeas, into the infinitiue mood abire, saying, Iubeo te abire.
Qu. Why, is it not good Latin to say, Gaudeo quod tu been vales: or Iubeo vt tu abeas?
An. It is congrue or true Latin, but not good and fine Latin, but rather Portuis or Popish priests Latin for the most part, in all such kind of speeches, and therefore young scholars were better not to know it, than to be acquainted with it. So that this rule is much better for them borrowed from the Latin Grammar: Verbes of the infinitiue mood coming after verbs personals, instead of a nominative case, will have an accusative case before them.
Qu. Hath the relative always for his antecedent a word declined with case?
An. No: for sometimes the whole reason or sentence before going, is put for the antecedent, and then shall the relative be the neuter gender, and the singular number.
Qu. What is your rule for this?
An. Sometime the relative hath for his antecedent the whole reason that goeth before him, and then he shall be put in the neuter gender, and singular number: as In tempore veni, quod omnium rerum est primum, I came in season, which is the chiefest thing of all.
Qu. Declare the meaning of this rule by the example?
An. In this sentence, these words In tempore veni, being the whole reason or sentence before the relative quod, is put for the antecedent unto the said relative, and therefore is quod the neuter gender, and singular number by this rule.
Qu. But what if there be two, or more sentences, or pieces of sentences put instead of the antecedent?
An. Then the relative shall be the neuter gender, and plural number by this rule:
But if the relative be referred to two clauses, or parts of sentences, or more, the relative shall be put in the plural number, and neuter gender: as, Tu multùm dormis, & saepe pota • quae ambo sunt corpori inimica, Thou sleepest much, and drinkest often, which both things are naught for the body.
Qu. Apply the example to make plain the meaning of the rule.
An. In this example, these two clauses or parts of a sentence, Tu multum dormis, and & saepe potas, are put for the antecedent unto the relative quae, and therefore is the said relative put in the plural number, and the neuter gender by this rule.
And further here is to be understood, that like as hath been already noted in the two concords before going, sometime the relative hath for his antecedent an adverb with his genitive case, and then shall the relative be the same gender and number, that the genitive case governed of the adverb is of.
Qu. Let these exceptions suffice to have shown, that the relative sometime hath for his antecedent a word that is not declined with case. And now go to the next exception, where the antecedent and the relative do seem to be of contrary gender and number.
An. Many antecedents singular (that is, of the singular number) having a conjunction copulative between them, will have a relative plural (that is, of the plural number) which relative shall agree with the antecedent of the most worthy gender: as, Imperium & dignitas, quae petijsti, The rule and dignity, which thou hast required.
Qu. Let me hear how you can make this example agree with the rule.
An. Here are many antecedents (for by many in this place is meant more than one) of the singular number, namely Imperium and dignitas, having the conjunction copulative et, coming between them, and therefore by this rule they cause the relative quae to be the plural number, and because these two antecedents are of diverse genders, that is, Imperium the neuter gender, and dignitas the feminine gender, therefore doth the relative quae agree with the antecedent imperium, the most worthy gender, that is, the relative quae is the neuter gender with the antecedent imperium, and not the feminine gender with the antecedent dignitas.
Qu. You said before in the second concord, that the feminine gender was more worthy than the neuter, that is, doth cause the adjective or relative to be rather the feminine gender than the neuter, when two substantives or antecedents one of the feminine gender, and the other of the neuter gender do come before an adjective or relative?
An. So it is indeed in substantives or antecedents being the names of things that have life, but in things having no life the neuter gender is most worthy, that is, causeth the adjective or relative rather to be of the neuter gender.
Qu. Have you a rule for this in relatives?
An. This is the rule: In things not apt to have life, the neuter gender is most worthy, yea and in such case, though the substantives or antecedents, be of the masculine, or of the feminine gender, and none of them of the neuter, yet may the adjective or relative be put in the neuter gender: as Arcus et calami sunt bona, The bow and the arrows are good: Arcus et calami, quae fregisti, The bow and the arrows which thou hast broken.
Qu. Fit the examples to express the meaning of this rule.
An. Arcus et calami sunt bona, this is an example of an adjective referred unto substantives of contrary gender, for here these two substantives arcus and calami, being both the masculine gender, are notwithstanding joined with the adjective bona of the neuter gender, because that in substantives of things without life, though none of them be the neuter gender, yet may the adjective be the neuter gender, as here it is by this rule.
Yet note, that because both these substantives are of one gender, namely the masculine, therefore may the adjective also be the masculine gender, so that you may say, Arcus et calami sunt boni, as well as bona.
The second example is more proper unto this place, for that it is of a relative referred unto antecedents of things without life. In the latter example therefore, Arcus et calami quae fregisti, the relative quae is the neuter gender, though his antecedents arcus and calami be both of the masculine gender, because that in antecedents betokening things without life (as bow and arrows do) the relative shall be the neuter gender, as here it is, though the antecedents be both of the masculine gender, as here they are by this rule.
Note also that if the antecedents be both of one gender, as here they are, the relative also may be of the same gender, so that you may say, Arcus et calami, quos fregisti, as well as quae fregisti.
Qu. What other exceptions have you yet behind containing some show of disagreement between the relative and the antecedent?
An. There are yet two, the one to be fet from the ende of the treatise of the case of the relative following, because it is fitter to be handled here, in as much as it agreeth with the matter in hand, and the other is to be supplied from else where.
Qu. Rehearse the exception set down in the ende of the treatise of the case of the relative.
An. When a relative cometh between two substantives of diverse genders, it may indifferently agree with either of them: as Auis, quae passer appellatur, or Auis, qui passer appellatur, The bird which is called a sparrow.
Yea though the substantives be of diverse numbers, yet may the relative agree with either of thē: as, Est ne ea Lutetia, quā nos Parisios dicimus? Is not that called Lutetia, that we do call Paris? or else, Est ne ea Lutetia, quos nos Parisios dicimus?
Qu. Shew how these examples agree with this exception.
An. Auis quae passer appellatur. Here the relative quae being put between these two substantives auis the feminine gender, and passer the masculine gender, agreeth with auis the feminine gender. And where it is said auis qui passer appellatur, there the relative qui agreeth with passer the latter substantive of the masculine gender by this rule.
Est ne ea Lutetia quam nos Parisios dicimus. In this sentence the relative quam being put between these two substantives Lutetia and Parisios, of diverse genders and also numbers, Lutetia the feminine gender & singular number, and Parisios the masculine gender and plural number, it doth agree with the substantive Lutetia of the feminine gender and singular number, according to this rule. And in the other saying, Est ne ea Lutetia, quos nos Parisios dicimus, the relative quos agreeth with the latter substantive Parisios of the masculine gender and plural number by the same rule. For in such like cases the relative may as well agree with the one substantive as with the other.
Qu. What is your other exception?
An. Sometime the relative agreeth not with the thing or antecedent that went next before, but with the person unto whom the thing belongeth, as Laudabant fortunam meam, qui filium haberem tali ingenio praeditum, They praised my fortune, which had a son endued with such a disposition or nature. Here the relative qui agreeth not with fortunam, that went next before, for it is the feminine gender, and qui the masculine gender, but qui is referred to the person whereof he speaketh, namely himself, of whom he speaketh in the first person ego understood, which being the masculine gender, the relative qui also is in this sentence put in the masculine gender.
Further it is here also to be noted, that figurative speeches do often cause the relative and antecedent to be of diverse genders, numbers, and persons, the which for the hardness sake, we will not cumber young wits withal, trusting to the help of their painful teachers in this behalf.
The case of the relative.
Qu. TO what use or purpose serve these rules following, which have this title set over the head of them, The case of the relative?
An. To show what case the relative shall be, as well when he cometh before the verb, as after the verb, or after any other part of speech, for although the relative be always set before the verb in respect of his placing, yet in order of construction he is often in such sort considered as following the verb, or else some other part of speech, whereof he is governed.
Qu. What is your first rule?
An. When there cometh no nominative case between the relative and the verb, the relative shall be the nominative case unto the verb: as Miser est, qui nummos admiratur, Wretched is that person, which is in love with monie.
In this example the relative qui, is the nominative case unto the verb admiratur, because there is no other nominative case coming before him and the verb.
Qu. Rehearse the second rule.
An. But when there cometh a nominative case between the relative and the verb, the relative shall be such case as the verb will have after him: as Felix, quem faciunt aliena pericula cautum, Happy is he, whom other men's harms do make to beware.
Here this word pericula though in the latin it be set after the verb, yet is it in construing the nominative case, and to be set before the verb faciunt, between whom and the relative quem in construing it doth come, and therefore is the relative quem the accusative case governed of the verb faciunt, by the rule of verbs transitiues following here after among the rules for the cases which verbs do govern.
As the relative may be the nominative case unto the verb, so it may be the substantive unto the adjective, that is joined with him, or cometh next after him: as Diuitias amare noli, quod omnium est sordidissimum, Will not thou love riches, which to do, is the most beggarly thing in the world.
Here the relative quod, being the nominative case before the verb est, is also substantive unto the adjective sordidissimum by this rule. And mark, that whatsoever may be the nominative case unto the verb, or antecedent unto the relative, the same also may be the substantive unto the adjective.
Nounes interrogatiues and indefinites follow the rule of the relative: as Quis, who, vter, whether, qualis, what manner one, quantus, how great, quotus, how many, &c. And these evermore come before the verb, like as the relative doth: as Hei mihi, qualis erat? talis erat, qualem nunquam vidi, Woe is me, what manner of person was he? such a one he was, the like whereof I never saw.
In this example, the noun interrogatiue qualis, is nominative case unto the verb est, because there is no other nominative case between him and the verb, and so is talis also the noun redditiue, or indefinite, and qualem is the accusative case in construction after the verb vidi, because that the nominative case ego, understood cometh before the verb: for these kind of nounes do follow the rule of the relative, that is, if there come no nominative case between them, and the verb, then are they the nominative case unto the verb, like as the relative is, but if there come a nominative case between them and the verb, then shall they be such case as the verb will have after him, like as the relative must be.
Qu. Have you nothing else to say concerning these kind of nounes?
An. As the relative agreeth in gender, number and person with his antecedent, the which for the most part goeth before the relative, so these nounes do always agree with the word that followeth after them: as, quot homines, tot sententiae, So many men, so many minds, where in the first place quot agreeth with homines following after him, and in the second place tot is the same case, gender, and number that his substantive sententiae, which followeth after him, is of.
Qu. What say you then unto this sentence of the poet Horace: Mammaeque putres, equina quales vbera, And rotten breasts, such as are the vdders of a mare: Where you see this noun quales, to be the feminine gender, with the former substantive mammae, and not the neuter gender, with the latter substantive vbera?
An. This saying of Horace is to be noted of young scholars, but not to be followed: for he should rather have said, qualia, than quales, making it to agree with vbera the substantive following, according to the rule.
Qu. What is the next rule of relatives?
An. Yet here is to be understanded and noted, that the relative is not always governed of the verb that he cometh before, but sometime of the infinitiue mood that cometh after the verb: as Quibus voluisti me gratias agere, egi, What persons thou willedst me to thank, I have thanked.
In this sentence the relative quibus is not governed of the verb voluisti, before whom he cometh, but of the infinitiue mood agere, coming after the verb voluisti, and it is the dative case, by a rule of verbs governing a dative case, which rule followeth in his due place.
Somtime of a participle: as Quibus rebus adductus fecisti? With what things moved diddest thou it?
Here quibus the relative is the ablative case governed of the participle adductus, by the rule of participles governing such case, as the verb they come of.
Somtime of the gerund: as Quae nunc non est narrandi locus, Which things at this present it is no time to tell.
In this place the relative quae is the accusative case plural, governed of the gerund narrandi by the rule of gerunds, which will have such case as their verbs, whereof they come, do require.
Sometime of a preposition set before him: as Quem in locum deducta res sit, vides, Into what state the matter is now brought, thou seest.
In this example the relative quem is governed of the preposition in, which in construction is set before him, albeit in the order of words, as they lie in Latin, this preposition in be put between quem and locum. But in truth qui in this example is rather an indefinite than a relative, and agreeth with locum in case, gender, and number, by the rule of the adjective agreeing with his substantive, so that locum and not quem is here governed of the preposition in, albeit that it is not to be denied, but that sometimes the preposition in may cause the relative quem to be put in the accusative case, like as other prepositions may cause him to be put in other cases also.
Somtime of the substantive, that he doth accord or agree with: as Senties qui vir siem, Thou shalt perceive what a fellow I am. Albeit in this manner of speaking, qui is an indefinite, and not a relative.
Here the relative qui, agreeth with the substantive vir being the nominative case, the masculine gender, and singular number, as vir is by the rule last before set down: for qui is in this place a noun indefinite, that is, noting no any one certain thing, and not a relative.
Somtime of a noun partitiue, or distributive: as Quarum rerum vtram minus velim, non facile possum existimare, Of the which two things, whether I would with less will have, I cannot easily esteem.
In this example the relative quarum is the genitive case plural governed of the partitiue vtram by the rule of interrogatiues, partitiues, distributiues, governing a genitive case, as shall be shown afterward: yet here also qui is rather an indefinite, and agreeth with the genitive case rerum in case, gender, and number, which genitive case rerum is governed of the partitiue vtram by the rule aforesaid, albeit the relative is notwithstanding sometime put in the genitive case, by the same rule of interrogatiues and partitiues, and such like, governing a genitive case.
Somtime it is put in the genitive case, by reason of a substantive coming next after him: as Ego illum non noui, cuius causa hoc incipis, I knew him not, for whose cause thou beginnest this matter.
Here the relative cuius is the genitive case governed of the substantive causa coming after him, by the rule of substantives coming together betokening diverse things, whereof the latter must be the genitive case. Where note that in such cases the relative cuius supplieth the room of a substantive, and in construction is taken to be the latter substantive, albeit that in Latin he be always set foremost.
Somtime it is otherwise governed of a noun substantive: as, Omnia tibi dabuntur, quibus opus habes, All things shall be given thee, which thou hast need of.
In this place the relative quibus is the ablative case plural, governed of the substantive opus, which requireth an ablative case by a rule to be set down in his place.
Somtime it is put in the ablative case with this sign than, and is governed of the comparative degree coming after him: as Vtere virtute, qua nihil est melius, Use virtue, than the which nothing is better.
In this example the relative qua is the ablative case singular, having in the construing in English this sign than before it, and is governed of the comparative degree melius, which will have an ablative case, when it may be expounded by this adverb quàm, in English than, as shall be shown hereafter.
Somtime it is not governed at all, but is put in the ablative case absolute: as Quantus erat Julius Caesar, quo imperatore, Romani primum Britanniam ingressi sunt? How worthy a man was Julius Caesar, under whose conduct (or who being emperor) the Romans first entered into Britain?
Here the relative quo hath no word whereof it may be governed, but is put in the ablative case, which in this kind of speaking, is called the ablative case absolute, for a cause to be shown hereafter.
Also when it signifieth an instrument wherewith a thing to be done, it is put in the ablative case: as Ferrum habuit, quo se occideret, He had asword, wherewith he would have killed himself.
In this example the relative quo is the ablative case singular, governed of the verb occideret, because the said quo in this place signifieth an instrument to do something withal, and therefore must be put in the ablative case by a rule hereafter following concerning this matter.
Somtime the relative is governed of an adverb: as Cui vtrum obuiam procedam, nondum statui, Whom, whether I will go to meet with, I have not yet determined.
Here the relative cui, is the dative case singular governed of the adverb obuiam, which with such other like will have a dative case, as hereafter shall be declared more at large.
There are besides these, many other rules whereby a relative may be governed, yea almost by all the rules of all other partes of speech, but these before are the most principal by which the young beginners may be learned to judge of the rest.
The construction of nounes substantives, or what cases they may govern.
Qu. YOu have said at the beginning, that all the parts of speech do either agree together in some certain conditions and properties, or else are governed and ruled one of another. Of Concord or agreement hath been spoken at large, wherefore now order requireth that we entreat of government. Tell me therefore what you call government?
An. Government properly in Grammar matters, is the requiring of some certain case to be put after another word in order of construction: As for example, to make this as plain as may be for the very simplest to conceive, when I say, some nounes do govern a genitive case, I mean that some nounes require a genitive case, that is, do cause the casual word that in construction doth follow next after them to be put in the genitive case. Some verbs do govern an accusative case, in thus saying my meaning is, that some verbs require an accusative case, that is, do cause the word that in construing doth come next after them, to be put in the accusative case.
Qu. You mean then that the word which requireth such, or such a case after him, is said to govern, and that the word put in this or that case after another word going before it, is said to be governed.
An. That is my meaning, so that when I say in latin: Amor dei, The love of God, this first substantive amor, is said to govern, and the seconde substantive dei being the genitive case after amor the former, is said to be governed of amor.
Qu. This is plain enough for all the rest of like sort. Now seeing in this whole treatise as well that which hath gone before, as this also which cometh here after we deal with construction, show me briefly, what construction is, and what it is constre? for the little petits are peradventure to seek in this.
An. Construction, is the due and orderly joining and knitting of the parts of speech together, according unto the right order of grammar.
And to constre, is to set the words in due or right frame, as they ought to go before, or to follow the one the other, when you turn latin into english (for taking this pains for young beginners, we will content our selves with latin only) so that it be placed first, that ought in construing to have the first place, and that second, the which is to be set in the second place, and so of the rest, whereof something hath been spoken at the beginning.
Qu. Now then following the order of your Accidence, we will first begin with the construction of nounes substantives, declaring what cases they will govern or have after them in construction. Tell me therefore how many cases a noun substantive may govern?
An. A noun substantive may govern three cases, that is a genitive, a genitive or an ablative, and an ablative case alone.
Qu. What is your rule for a substantive governing a genitive case?
An. When two substantives come together betokening diverse things the latter shall be the genitive case: as, Facundia Ciceronis, The eloquence of Cicero. Opus Vergilij, the work of Virgil. Amator studiorum, a lover of studies. Dogma Platonis, the opinion of Plato.
Qu. Applie the examples of this rule to declare the meaning of the same.
Facundia Ciceronis, here are two substantives betokening diverse things, and therefore the latter substantive Ciceronis is the genitive case governed of the former Facundia, by this rule.
Opus Vergilij. In this example opus and Vergilij two substantives coming together, and betokening diverse things, Vergilij the latter of them is the genitive case governed of opus the former by this rule.
Amator studiorum. Here are two substantives, amator, and studiorum coming together, and betokening diverse things, wherefore studiorum the latter substantive is put in the genitive case being governed of amator the former, by this rule.
Dogma Platonis. In this example these two substantives dogma and Platonis do come together and do betoken diverse things, wherefore Platonis the latter of them is put in the genitive case, being governed of dogma the former, by this rule.
Qu. But what if the two substantives coming together do appertain both unto one thing?
An. Then they shall be put both in one case by the rule following, which is this,
But if they belong both unto one thing, they shall be put both in one case: as Pater meus vir, amat me puerum, My father being a man, loveth me a child.
In the first branch of this sentence, there are two substantives pater and vir coming together, and because they do belong both unto one thing, therefore are they put both in one case, that is, vir the latter substantive is the nominative with pater the former substantive. And so likewise in the latter part of this same sentence, there are other two substantives me and puerum, coming together, and because they also do appertain both to one thing, they are put both in one case, so that puerum the latter substantive is put in the accusative case with me, the former, by this exception.
Qu. What have you further to note concerning this first rule?
An. Somtime the former of the two substantives coming together, and being referred unto diverse things, and the which should cause the latter subsantiue to be put in the genitive case, is not expressly set down, but understood: as Vbi ad Dianae veneris, When you come unto the temple of Diana. Heer is only the latter substantive Dianae the genitive case expressly set down, and the former substantive Templum, which causeth it to be put in the genitive case is understood, whereof in authors you shall find many more such like examples.
Qu. But sometime you shall have an adjective in the neuter gender to govern a substantive after him in the genitive case.
An. When this cometh to pass, then is the same adjective said to be put absolutely, that is, by himself alone having no substantive to agree with, and being thus put, he looseth the nature of an adjective, and is taken for a substantive, causing the other substantive following to be put in the genitive case, as if he himself were a substantive, by this rule:
An adjective in the neuter gender, put alone without a substantive, standeth for a substantive, and may have a genitive case after him, as if he were a substantive: as Multum lucri, Much gains. Quantum negotij? How much business? Id operis, That work.
Qu. How apply you these examples unto the rule?
An. Multum lucri. In this example the adjective Multum of the neuter gender, being set alone without a substantive to agree with, causeth the substantive lucri to be the genitive case, as if he himself were also a substantive.
Quantum negotij? In this second example the adjective quantum being set alone in the neuter gender without any substantive, wherewith he may agree, doth stand for a substantive, and causeth the substantive negotij following after him, to be put in the genitive case, as if quantum it self had been a substantive.
Id operis. In this third example the adjective id is set alone in the neuter gender without a substantive to agree with, and therefore doth he cause the substantive operis coming after him, to be put in the genitive case, as if he were a substantive.
Qu. Wherefore do you say in all these examples, that the adjective is set alone without a substantive to agree with, seeing that in everyone of them, every several adjective hath his several substantive joined with him.
An. Bicause that albeit every adjective hath a several substantive following him, yet doth not any of the adjectives agree with any of the substantives, or is put in the same case, gender, and number, that the substantive following him is of, but doth govern the said substantives, causing them to be put in the genitive case by this rule.
Qu. There is yet one rule put in here among the rules of substantives, concerning the English of this word Res, a thing, put with an adjective, and causing the adjective to become a substantive, the which, I see not how it can very fitly agree with this place.
An. This rule I grant, might more properly have been handled in the second concord between the substantive and the adjective, in as much as an adjective being so put as this rule requireth, doth oftentimes become a substantive, with the which the adjective following in the same sentence doth agree in case, gender, and number. But yet seeing that this place treateth of substantives, and that in such consideration as in this rule is specified, and adjective may become a substantive: for this cause as I take it, the Author of our Accidence thought good to set down this rule among the other rules of substantives, the which is as followeth.
When the English of this word Res, a thing, is put with an adjective, ye may put away Res, and put the adjective in the neuter gender, like a substantive: as Multa me impedierunt, Many things have letted me.
And being so put, it may be the substantive to an adjective: as, Pauca his similia, A few things like unto these. Nonnulla huiusmodi, Many things of like sort.
In the first example the adjective multa, many things, having in English the signification of this word res, a thing, joined with him, in Latin shutteth clean out this word res, and is put alone in the neuter gender, and plural number, being the nominative case unto the verb impedierunt, as if he were a substantive by this rule.
In the second example, Pauca his fimilia, the adjective pauca, few things, having in English the signification of this word res, a thing, joined with him, in Latin shutteth out the said word, and is put alone in the neuter gender, and plural number like a substantive, with the which the adjective similia doth agree in case, gender, and number, being the nominative case, the neuter gender, and the plural number, like as pauca is, by this rule.
In the third example, Nonnulla huiusmodi, the adjective nonnulla, many things, having in English the signification of this word res joined with him, doth in Latin shut out the word res, and is put alone in the neuter gender, and plural number, like a substantive, with the which the adjective huiusmodi doth agree in case, gender, and number, being the nominative case, the neuter gender, and plural number, like as nonnulla is, by this rule.
Qu. Thus much concerning substantives governing a genitive case only, with such other matters as appertained thereunto. What is now your next rule?
An. Our next rule is of the second kind of construction of substantives, where they do govern indifferently a genitive case, or an ablative.
Qu. By what rule?
An. Words importing indument of any quality or property, to the praise or dispraise of a thing, coming after a noun substantive, or a verb substantive, may be put in the genitive case, or in the ablative: as Puer boni ingenij, or Puer bono ingenio, A child of a good wit. Puer bona indole, or Puer bona indolis, A child of a good towardness.
Qu. Can you not express the meaning of this rule in fewer words?
An. It may be shortly set down thus: A noun substantive betokening praise or dispraise of a thing (the which commonly is perceived by the adjective joined with him) coming after a noun substantive, or a verb substantive, may be put in the genitive, or ablative case.
Qu. Now apply your examples unto the rule.
An. Puer boni ingenij. Here the substantive ingenij being a word of praise, is put in the genitive case coming after the other noun substantive pure by this rule. And in the other saying, Puer bono ingenio, the substantive of praise ingenio, is put after the other substantive pure in the ablative case by the same rule, because such kind of substantives in such manner of speaking, may be put either in the genitive case, or else in the ablative.
Puer bona indole. Here indole a substantive of praise is put in the ablative case after the other substantive pure by this rule. And in the other saying pure bonae indolis, the substantive of praise indolis, is put after the other substantive pure in the genitive case by the same rule, because that in such like speaking the substantive of praise or dispraise may be put in the ablative or genitive case.
Qu. Let us now come unto the third kind of substantives governing only an ablative case.
An. They are but two in number, namely, opus and vsus, and are in such kind of construction vndeclined, that is having in all their cases the same termination.
Qu. What are the words of your rule?
An. Opus and vsus when they be latin for need, require an ablative case: as Opus est mihi tuo iudicio, I have need of thy judgment, Viginti minis vsus est filio, My son hath need of twenty pounds.
Opus est mihi tuo iudicio. In this example iudicio is the ablative case, governed of opus by this rule.
Viginti minis vsus est filio. Here is the ablative case, governed of vsus by this rule.
Sometime this word opus is taken for an adjective, and hath the signification of necesse, or necessarius, needful, or necessary, and then it may have a nominative or an accusative case to be construed withal, and some other construction also.
The construction of nounes adjectives or what case they will have after them. And first of such adjectives, as require a genitive case.
Qu. HAuing passed through the rules set down in your Accidence for such case as nounes substantives will have after them, let us now hear what is to be said for the construction of adjectives. What cases may adjectives have after them?
An. Some adjectives have only a genitive case; some a dative only: some only an accusative case: and some only an ablative: and some may have one, or more of these cases together.
Qu. We will then take this course, that we will first handle such adjectives, as have but one case after them only, and afterwards deal with them that have more then one case. And first of adjectives governing a genitive case, for the which what is your first rule?
An. Adiectiues that signify desire, knowledge, remembrance, ignorance, or forgetting, and such like, require a genitive case: as, Cupidus auri, Covetous of monie. Peritus belli, Expert of warfare. Ignarus omnium, Ignorant of all things. Fidens animi, Bould of heart. Dubius mentis, Doubtfull of mind. Memor praeteriti, Mindfull of that is past. Reus furti, Accused of theft.
Qu. Shew the meaning of this rule, by the several examples of the same.
This rule hath seven examples, whereof the first is, Cupidus auri, in which example the adjective cupidus signifying desire, doth cause the substantive auri coming after him to be put in the genitive case by this rule.
Peritus belli. Here the adjective peritus betokening knowledge, causeth the substantive belli coming after him, to be put in the genitive case by this rule.
Ignarus omnium. In this example, the adjective ignarus, signifying ignorance, causeth omnium the word following him, to be the genitive case by this rule.
Fidens animi. Here fidens an adjective signifying boldness, causeth the substantive animi to be put in the genitive case by this rule.
Dubius mentis. In this sentence the adjective dubius betokening doubtfulness, causeth the substantive mentis to be the genitive case by this rule.
Memor praeteriti. Here memor the adjective signifying remembrance, causeth praeteriti the word following to be put in the genitive case by this rule.
Reus furti. In this example the adjective reus betokening accusing, doth govern the substantive furti in the genitive case by this rule.
Qu. Are there no other adjectives of like signification unto these expressed in the former rule, the which do govern also a genitive case?
An. There are besides these a great number of adjectives derived of verbs, the which do also govern a genitive case, whereof some ende in us, some in ax, some in idus, or ius, some in rus, and tus with many others, the which cannot be comprehended under any certain rule, and therefore are to be marked by diligent reading of good authors.
Qu. Rehearse the next rule for adjectives governing a genitive case.
An. Nounes partitiues, and certain interrogatiues, with certain nounes of number, require a genitive case: as Aliquis, Some body. Vter, Whether. Neuter, Nether. Nemo, No body. Nullus, None. Solus, Alone. Vnus, One. Medius, The middlemost. Quisque, Everyone. Quisquis, Whosoever. Quicunque, Whosoever. Quidam, Some. quis for Aliquis, Some body: or, quis an interrogatiue, Who. Vnus, one, duo, two, tres, three, primus, first, secundus, second, tertius, third, &c. As, Aliquis nostrum, Some of us. Primus omnium, First of all.
Qu. Apply your examples unto this rule.
An. Aliquis nostrum. Here the noun partitiue aliquis doth make the pronoun nostrum to be the genitive case by this rule.
Primus omnium. In this example primus a noun of number doth cause omnium to be put in the genitive case by this rule.
Qu. What do you call a noun partitiue?
An. Those are called nounes partitiues, the which do either signify many, as quisque, everyone, or else one among many, as alter, another.
Qu. And what are nounes interrogatiues?
An. Such as do ask a question, as quis, who, and such like.
Qu. What else is there to be noted concerning this rule?
An. The adjectives, which by this rule do govern a genitive case, must be of the same gender that the genitive case is, the which they do govern for the most part, except the genitive case be either this word rerum, or else some noun collectiue, that is, such a noun as in the singular number doth signify a multitude: for then may the adjective, and the genitive case which he governeth, be of contrary genders.
Qu. What have you more to say, as touching this rule?
An. Somtimes the adjectives appertaining unto this rule, are construed with a dative case, and sometimes with an accusative case with a preposition, and sometime with an ablative case with a preposition.
Qu. What is the next rule?
An. When a question is asked, the answer in Latin must be made by the same case of a noun, pronoun, or participle, and by the same tense of a verb, that the question is asked by: as Cuius est fundus? Vicini. Whose ground is it? My neighbors. Quid agitur in ludo literario? Studetur. What do they in the school? They study.
Qu. To what purpose is this rule brought in here among adjectives governing a genitive case, when as oftentimes in the examples of this rule there is neither adjective, nor yet genitive case at all?
An. Yet for as much as many times the question is asked by Cuius, the genitive case of quis the interrogatiue, and for that the word that answereth the same question, is oftentimes the genitive case also, this rule is not unfitly placed here among the other rules of adjectives governing a genitive case.
Qu. Let us see then how the examples agree with the rule.
An. Cuius est fundus? Vicini. In this example the question is asked by the genitive case Cuius, and the answer is made by this word vicini, being put in the genitive case by this rule, which will have the word asking the question, and the word answering the question to be put both in one case.
Quid agitur in ludo literario? Studetur. Here the question being asked by quid and the verb agitur of the present tense, the answer is made by studetur, a verb likewise of the present tense, by the second branch of the same rule requiring, if the question be asked by a verb, that the answer be made by another verb of the same tense.
Qu. How many exceptions are there from this rule?
An. There are three exceptions. The first, when the question is asked by Cuius, cuia, cuium, Whose? The second, when the question is asked by a word that may govern diverse cases. The third, when the answer must be made by one of these pronounes possessiues, Meus, mine, tuus, thine, suus, his, noster, ours, vester, yours.
Qu. Rehearse these in order as they are set down in your Accidence.
An. Except a question be asked by Cuius, cuia, cuium: as Cuia est sententia? Ciceronis. Whose sentence is it? Ciceroes.
Qu. This exception is somewhat dark for a young beginner: Make it therefore more plain: for it seemeth to be an imperfect sentence.
An. If a question be asked by Cuius, cuia, cuium, the nominative case, then the answer must be made not by the same case, but by the genitive, as Cuia est sententia? Ciceronis, where the question is asked by the nominative case Cuia, and answered by the genitive case Ciceronis, by this exception.
Qu. What is the second exception?
An. Or by a word that may govern diverse cases, as Quanti emisti librum? Paruo. For how much bought you the book? For a little.
Qu. Make this exception also more plain.
An. When a question is asked by a word that may govern diverse cases, the word that asketh the question, and the word that answereth the same, shall not be both of one case, as in this example: Quanti emisti librum? Paruo: the question is asked by the genitive case quanti, because the verb emisti doth cause this adjective with certain others being set without substantives, to be the genitive case: and the answer is made by the word paruo in the ablative case, because the same verb also will have an ablative case of this adjective, and certain others, and so because it governeth diverse cases, the word quanti asking the question, and the word paruo answering the question, are in this example put in diverse cases.
Qu. What is the third exception?
An. Or except I must answer by one of these possessiues, Meus, tuus, suus, noster, vester: as Cuius est domus? Non vestra, sed nostra. Whose house is it? Not yours, but ours.
Qu. Make this exception also as plain as may be.
An. If the question must be answered by any of those pronounes possessiues, Meus, tuus, suus, noster, vester: then the word asking the question, and the word answering the question shall not be both of one case, as in the former example the word Cuius is the genitive case asking the question, and the word vestra a pronoun possessiue answering the question, is the nominative case by this exception.
Qu. Come to the next rule of adjectives governing a genitive case.
An. Nounes of the comparative and the superlative degree being put partitiuely, that is to say, having after them this English, Of, or Among, require a genitive case: as Aurium mollior est sinistra, Of the ears, the left is the softer. Cicero oratorum eloquentissimus, Cicero the most eloquent of orators.
In this first example, Aurium mollior est sinistra, the word aurium is the genitive case, governed by the comparative degree mollior, the which hereby I know to be put partitiuely, because aurium hath before it in English this sign Of, according unto this rule.
In the second example, Cicero oratorum eloquentissimus, this word oratorum is put in the genitive case governed of the superlative degree eloquentissimus, being put partitiuely, the which I know by this sign of, going in English before the word oratorum, when it is construed, by this rule.
Of Adiectiues governing a dative case.
ADiectiues, that betoken profit, or disprofit, likeness, vnlikenes, pleasure, submitting, or belonging to anything, require a dative case: as Labor est vtilis corpori, Labor is profitable for the body. Aequalis Hectori, Equall to Hector. Idoneus bello, Fit for war. Iucundus omnibus, Pleasant to all persons. Parenti supplex, Suppliant to his father. Mihi proprium, Proper to me.
In this rule are six examples, whereof the first is, Labor est vtilis corpori, in the which corpori is the dative case governed of the adjective vtilis signifying profit by this rule.
In the second example, Aequalis Hectori, this word Hectori is the dative case governed of aequalis, an adjective signifying likeness by this rule. Where note that many adjectives signifying likeness do sometimes govern a genitive case.
In the third example, Idoneus bello, the word bello is the dative case governed of the adjective idoneus, signifying profit by this rule. Where note also that this adjective idoneus, fit, or profitable, with certain others, as Natus, borne, commodus, profitable, incommodus, unprofitable, vtilis profitable, inutilis, unprofitable, vehemens, darnest, aptus, fit, will some time have an accusative case with the preposition ad, to.
In the fourth example Iucundus omnibus, the word omnibus is the dative case governed of the adjective iucundus, betokening pleasure by this rule.
In the fifth example Parenti supplex, parenti is the dative case governed of the adjective supplex betokening submitting, by this rule.
In the sixth example Mihi proprium, this word mihi is the dative case governed of the adjective proprium, signifying a belonging to a thing, by this rule. And this adjective proprium doth sometime also govern a genitive case.
Qu. What is your next rule for adjectives requiring a dative case?
An. Likewise nounes adjectives of the passive signification in bilis, and participials in dus, require a dative case: as Flebilis, flendus omnibus, To be lamented of all men. Formidabilis, formidandus hosti, To be feared of his enemies.
In the first of these examples, Flebilis, flendus omnibus, the adjective flebilis of the passive or suffering signification, and the participial adjective flendus ending in dus, do govern the word omnibus in the dative case by this rule.
In the second example Formidabilis, formidandus hosti, the adjective formidabilis of the passive or suffering signification ending in bilis, and the participial adjective formidandus ending in dus, do govern the word hosti in the dative case by this rule.
Qu. What do you call a participial in dus?
An. A participial in this place is taken for an adjective like a participle, but yet in deed no participle, because he doth not signify time, as when he is a participle, he always ought to do.
And further here is to be noted that many adjectives compounded with the preposition con, do also govern a dative case, and that these adjectives, communis, common, alienus, strange, immunis, free, are construed with diverse cases, as sometimes a dative, sometimes a dative with an ablative, sometimes with a genitive, sometimes with an ablative with a preposition only, saving that the variety of this kind of construction is to be diligently observed in these adjectives, joining them in latin writing with such cases only, as the best approved writers do use to match them withal.
Adiectiues governing an accusative case for the most part.
THe measure of length, breadth, or thickness of anything, is put after adjectives in the accusative case, and sometime in the ablative case: as, Turris alta centum pedes, A tower an hundredth foot high. Arborlata tres digitos, A tree three fingers broad. Liber crassus tres pollices, vel tribus pollicibus, A book three inches thick.
In the first example. Turris alta centum pedes, this word pedes betokening the height of a thing, that is, of the tower spoken of in this sentence, is put after the adjective alta in the accusative case by this rule.
Arbor lata tres digitos. In this sentence the word digitos betokening the measure of breadth, is put after the adjective lata in the accusative case by this rule.
In the third example. Liber crassus tres pollices, vel tribus pollicibus, after the adjective crassus, the word pollices is put in the accusative case, being a word that here resembleth thickness, and it may be said also in the ablative case pollicibus, because that these words of the measure of anything, may be put after adjectives in the accusative or ablative case indifferently.
Qu. But how shall a young Punie know whether the word of measure do signify, either the depth, height, length, thickness, squarenes, roundnes, or any such other quantity of a thing?
An. That is to be gathered by the signification of the adjective going before it in the same sentence, for if the adjective have the signification of thickness, then is the substantive, which he governeth to be understood to be spoken of thickness in that place also: if the adjective signify breadth, the word of measure, which he governeth, carrieth the signification of breadth, in that sentence also: if the adjective signify height, the substantive of measure governed by him in the same sentence is to be supposed to be meant of height also, as appeareth in all the examples before, and the like is to be said of all such other like, as for example when I say, thirty foot high, here the word foot is understood of height, ten foot broad, here it is spoken of breadth, two foot deep, in this place it is to be referred unto depth, and so forth in all other measures.
Qu. Set down this rule then in fewer words for the ease of the yoonger one.
An. The word of measure may be put after adjectives in the accusative case, and sometime in the ablative or genitive.
Note also that many adjectives do govern an accusative or an ablative case by the figure Synecdoche, of the which, as time serveth, the good schoolmaster will instruct his scholars according to their capacity.
Adiectiues governing an ablative case.
NOunes of the comparative degree, having than or by after them, do cause the word following to be the ablative case: as Frigidior glacie, More cold then ye. Doctior multo, Better learned by a great deal. Vno pede altior, Higher by a foot.
This rule hath three examples, in the first of the which Frigidior glacie, the substantive glacie, when you do construe it, being englished with this sign than before it, is the ablative case governed of the comparative degree frigidior, by this rule.
In the second example Doctior multo, the comparative degree doctior doth cause the word multo coming after him, and when it is englished, having this sign by before it, to be put in the ablative case by this rule.
In the third example, Vno pede altior, the word altior of the comparative degree causeth the substantive pede to be the ablative case, because it followeth in construction the said word altior, and hath before it this sign by, by this rule.
The adjectives Dignus, Woorthy, Indignus, Vnwoorthy, Praeditus, Endued, Captus, Taken, Contentus, Content, with such others, will have an ablative case: as Dignus honor, Woorthy of honor, captus oculis, Taken in his eyes, or blind, virtute praeditus, Endued with virtue, paucis contentus, Content with few things.
In these examples, honor after dignus, oculis after captus, virtute after praeditus, paucis after contentus, are the ablative case by this rule.
Note also that dignus and indignus sometime do govern a genitive case.
And note further, that dignus, indignus, and contentus, may instead of the ablative case have an infinitiue mood of a verb: as, Dignus laudari, Woorthy to be praised, contentus in pace viuere, Content to live in peace.
Dignus laudari, in this example the infinitiue mood laudari, is put after the adjective dignus, instead of an ablative case, by this rule.
Contentus in pace viuere, in this example the infinitiue mood viuere is put after the adjective contentus, instead of an ablative case, by this rule.
Qu. Are there no other rules besides these, for adjectives governing an ablative case?
An. There are yet three other rules in the Latin grammar, the which in English are as followeth.
Nounes that betoken diversity, will have an ablative case with a preposition: as Diuersus ab isto, Divers from this man, where the adjective diuersus betokening diversity, causeth isto to be put in the ablative case with the preposition ab, by this rule.
Adiectiues will have an ablative case signifying the cause of a thing: as Liuida armis brachia, Arms black and blew with weapons, where the adjective liuida governeth the word armis in the ablative case, signifying the cause of the same by this rule.
Adiectiues will have an ablative case signifying the form or manner of a thing: as, Facies miris modis pallida, a face pale after a marvelous manner. In this example the adjective pallida hath modis an ablative case after him, signifying the manner of the palenes by this rule.
Adiectiues governing an ablative case, or a genitive case.
ADiectiues signifying fullness, emptiness, plenty or wanting, require an ablative case, and sometimes a genitive: as, copijs abundance, abounding in riches, crura thymo plenae, bees having their thighs full of thyme: vacuus ira, irae, ab ira, void of anger. Nulla epistola inanis re aliqua, No epistle without some matter. Ditissimus agri, most rich in land. Stultorum plena sunt omnia, all places are full of fools. Quis nisi mentis inops, oblatum respuat aurum? Who, except he be void of wit, will refuse gold offered him? Integer vitae, scelerisque purus, non eget Mauri iaculis, nec arcu, He that is innocent of life, and clear of wickedness, needeth neither the darts, nor bow of the Moore. Expers omnium, void of all thiags. Corpus inane animae, a body without a soul.
Qu. Bicause the many examples of this rule mingled together, do cause the same to be long and dark for the yoonger sort, divide the examples of the same into their several heads by themselves.
An. The examples of this rule are of two forts, the one of adjectives with an ablative case according to this rule, and the other of adjectives with a genitive case by the same rule.
Qu. How many are the examples of adjectives of this rule with an ablative case?
[unspec 1] An. They are in number four, whereof the first is, copijs abundance, in which example the adjective abundance signifying plenty, doth govern the substantive copijs in the ablative case by this rule.
[unspec 2] In the second example, crura thymo plenae, the adjective plenae betokening fullness, doth govern the substantive thymo in the ablative case by this rule.
[unspec 3] Vacuus ira, irae, ab ira. In this example vacuus the adjective signifying emptiness, doth govern ira the substantive in the ablative case by this rule, so like wise he may be construed with agenitiue case, saying vacuus irae, by the same rule, and moreover he may have an ablative case with a preposition, as vacuus ab ira.
[unspec 4] In the fourth example, Nulla epistola inanis re aliqua, the adjective inanis signifying emptiness, doth govern the substantive re in the ablative case, by this rule.
Qu. How many examples are there of adjectives by this rule governing a genitive case?
[unspec 1] An. There be six, whereof the first is, Ditissimus agri, in which example the adjective ditissimus betokening plenty, doth govern the substantive agri in the genitive case by this rule.
[unspec 2] In the second example, Stultorum plena sunt omnia, the adjective plena signifying fullness, causeth stultorum to be the genitive case by this rule.
[unspec 3] In the third example, Quis nisi mentis inops, &c. the adjective inops betokening wanting, doth govern the substantive mentis in the genitive case by this rule.
[unspec 4] In the fourth example, Integer vitae, sceleris{que} purus, &c. the adjective integer betokening wanting, doth govern vitae in the genitive case, and the adjective purus likewise signifying wanting, doth govern the substantive sceleris in the genitive case by this rule.
[unspec 5] In the fifth example, Expers omnium, the adjective expers signifying emptiness, doth govern omnium in the genitive case by this rule.
[unspec 6] In the sixth example, Corpus inane animae, the adjective inane betokening wanting, governeth the substantive animae in the genitive case by this rule.
Construction of certain Pronounes, and how they are governed.
THese genitive cases of the primitiues, Mei, tui, sui, nostri and vestri, be used when the passion or suffering is signified: as Pars tui, Part of thee, Amor mei, The love of me.
But when possession of a thing is signified, Meus, tuus, suus, noster, and vester be used: as Ars tua, thine art. Imago tua, thine image.
[unspec 1] Pars tui, in this example the genitive case tui of the primitive Tu, signifying suffering, is put after the substantive pars by this rule.
[unspec 2] Amor mei, in this example, the genitive case mei of the primitive ego, betokening suffering, is put after the substantive amor by this rule.
[unspec 3] Ars tua, here because possession of a thing is signified, the possessiue pronoun tua is joined with ars, and not tui the genitive of the primitive tu, by this rule.
[unspec 4] Imago tua, in this example likewise the possessiue pronoun tua, is used with the substantive imago, and not the genitive tui, of the primitive tu, because possession of a thing is signified, by this rule.
For the better understanding of this rule the which in deed is too hard for young beginners, let the learned master teach thē, when the genitive case is taken actively, when passively, & when possessiuely, whereof let the scholars of more learning read Despauterius in his rule of Mei, tui, sui, nostri, and vestri.
These genitive cases, Nostrum, vestrum, be used after distributiues, comparatiues, partitiues, and superlatiues: as Aliquis nostrum, Some of us. Major vestrum, The greater of you. Maximus natu nostrum, The elders of us.
[unspec 1] In the first example, Aliquis nostrum, the genitive case nostrum, is used after the distributive aliquis by this rule.
[unspec 2] Major vestrum, in this place the genitive case vestrum, is used after the comparative major, by this rule.
[unspec 3] In the third example, Maximus natu nostrum, the genitive case nostrum, is used after the superlative degree maximus, by this rule.
Also these possessiues Meus, tuus, suus, noster and vester, have after them sometimes these genitive cases: Ipsius, solius, vnius, duorum, trium, omnium, plurium, paucorum, cuiusque, and sometimes the genitive case of a participle.
Construction of verbs, or what cases verbs do govern: and first of verbs governing a nominative case.
SVm, I am, Forem, I were, fio, I am made, existo, I am, and certain verbs passiues, as dicor, I am said, or called, vocor, I am called, salutor, I am saluted, appellor, I am named, habeor, I am counted, existimor, I am esteemed, videor, I am seen, or accounted, with other like, will have such case after them, as they have before them: as, Fama est malum, Fame is an evil thing. Malus cultura fit bonus, An evil person by due ordering or governance is made good. Croesus vocatur diues, Cresus is called rich. Horatius salutatur poëta, Horace is saluted by the name of poet. Malo te diuitem esse quàm haberi, I had leifer thou were rich in deed, than so accounted.
This rule hath five examples: four of a nominative case after the verb, and the fifth of an accusative case after the verb.
[unspec 1] In the first example Fama est malum, the verb est having fama the nominative case before him causeth malum also to be the nominative case after him by this rule.
[unspec 2] Malus cultura fit bonus, In this second example malus is the nominative case before the verb fit, and therefore doth the same verb cause bonus to be the nominative case after him by this rule.
[unspec 3] Croesus vocatur diues, In this third example Croesus is the nominative case before the verb passive vocatur, and therefore is diues the nominative case after him by this rule.
[unspec 4] Horatius salutatur poëta. In this fourth example Horatius is the nominative case before the verb passive salutatur, and therefore is poëta the nominative case after the said verb by this rule.
[unspec 5] In the fifth example, Malo te diuitem esse quàm haberi, te is the accusative case before the infinitiue mood esse, and therefore in construction diuitem is likewise the accusative case after the same verb by this rule.
Also verbs that betoken bodily moving, going, resting, or doing, which be properly called verbs of gesture, as, Eo, I go, incedo, I go, curro, I run, sedeo, I sit, cubo, I lie, appareo, I appear, bibo, I drink, studeo, I study, dormio, I sleep, somnio, I dream, and such other like, as they have before them a nominative case of the dooer, or sufferer, so may they have a nominative case after them, of a noun or a participle, declaring the manner of circumstance of the doing, or suffering: as Incedo claudus, I go lame, Petrus dormit securus, Peter sleepeth void of care. Tu cubas supinus, Thou liest in bed with thy face upward. Somnias vigilans, Thou dreamest waking. Studeto stance, Study thou standing.
And likewise in the accusative case: as, Non decet quenquam meiere currentem aut mandentem, It doth not become any man to pisse, running, or eating.
This rule hath six examples, of the which the first five are of a nominative case after such kind of verbs as are mentioned in this rule, which are called verbs of gesture, and the sixth is of an accusative case after the said verbs.
[unspec 1] In the first example Incedo claudus, as this verb of gesture incedo hath ego understood for his nominative case before him, so hath he claudus the nominative case after him by this rule.
[unspec 2] Petrus domit securus, in this second example, as Petrus is nominative case before dormio a verb of gesture, so is securus nominative case after him by this rule.
[unspec 3] Tu cubas supinus, in this third example tu is nominative case before the verb of gesture cubas, and therefore is supinus nominative case after him by this rule.
[unspec 4] Somnias vigilans, in this fourth example as the pronoun tu understood is nominative case before the verb of gesture somnias, so is vigilans the nominative case after him by this rule.
[unspec 5] In the fifth example studeto stance, like as the pronoun tu understood is the nominative case before the verb of gesture studeto, so is stance the nominative case after him by this rule.
[unspec 6] Non decet quenquam meiere currentem, aut mandentem, in this sixth example this word quenquam is the accusative case before the infinitiue mood meiere, a verb of gesture, and therefore currentem is the accusative case after the said verb by this rule.
It had been long and tedious in everyone of these examples to have shown how the nominative case before the verb signified doing or suffering, and how the nominative after the verb declared the manner of circumstance of the doing or suffering, and therefore the examples are applied unto the rule as it is shorter set down in the margin before, nevertheless the master, if he think the capacity of his scholar will beat it, may apply the examples in the other manner: that is more large.
And generally, when the word that goeth before the verb, and the word that cometh after the verb, belong both to one thing, that is to say, have respect either to other, or depend either of other, they shall be put both in one case, whether the verb be transitiue or intransitiue, or of what kind soever the verb be: as, Loquor frequens, I speak often. Taceo multus, I hold my peace much. Scribo epistolas rarissimus, I write letters very seldom. Ne assuescas bibere vinum ieiunus, Accustome not thyself to drink wine next thine heart, or not having eaten somewhat before.
[unspec 1] This rule hath four examples, whereof the first is, Loquor frequens, in which example, as ego understood is nominative case before the verba loquor, so frequens is the nominative case after him, as having respect unto ego the nominative case before the verb by this rule.
[unspec 2] Taceo multus. In this second example also ego is nominative case before the verb taceo, and multus nominative case after the verb taceo, because they belong unto one thing by this rule.
[unspec 3] Scribo epistolas rarissimus. In this example rarissimus is nominative case after the verb scribo, because it hath respect unto ego understood, which is the nominative case before the same verb, by this rule.
[unspec 4] Ne assuescas bibere vinum ieiunus. In this fourth example ieiunus is nominative case after the verb assuescas, because it hath respect unto tu the nominative case understood before the said verb, by this rule.
Verbes governing a genitive case after them.
THis verb Sum, when it betokeneth or importeth possession, owing, or otherwise pertaining to a thing, as a token, property, duty, or guise, it causeth the noun, pronoun, or participle following to be put in the genitive case: as, Haec vestis est patris, This garment is my fathers. Insipientis est dicere, non putâram, It is the property of a fool to say, I had not thought. Extremae est dementiae discere dediscenda, It is a point of the greatest folly in the world to learn things that afterward must be learned otherwise. Orantis est, nihil nisi coelestia cogitare, It is the duty of a man that is saying of his prayers to have mind on nothing but heavenly things.
[unspec 1] There be four examples in this rule, in the first whereof Haec vestis est patris, this word patris is the genitive case governed of the verb est betokening possession, or showing whose the garment is, by this rule.
[unspec 2] In the second example, Insipientis est dicere, non putâram, this word insipientis is the genitive case, governed of the verb est betokening a property, by this rule.
[unspec 3] In the third example, Extremae est dementiae discere dediscenda, this word dementiae is the genitive case governed of the verb est, signifying the pertaining or belonging unto a fool, or the point and token of a fool, by this rule.
[unspec 4] In the fourth example, Orantis est, nihil nisi coelestia cogitare, this participle orantis is the genitive case governed of the verb est, signifying a duty, by this rule.
Qu. Is this rule always true, so that it hath none exception?
An. Not so. For if any of these pronounes, Meus, tuus, suus, noster, and vester be used after this verb Sum in such manner of speaking, when it betokeneth or importeth possession, or pertaining to a thing, they shall be put in the nominative case, and not in the genitive, by this exception following:
Except that these pronounes, Meus, tuus, suus, noster, and vester shall in such manner of speaking be used in the nominative case: as Hic codex est meus, This book is mine. Haec domus est vestra, This house is yours. Non est mentiri meum, It is not my guise, or property to lie. Nostrum est iniuriam non infer, It is our parts not to do wrong. Tuum est omnia iuxta pati, It is thy part or duty, to suffer all things in like.
[unspec 1] This exception hath five examples, whereof the first is, Hic codex est meus, in which example because this pronoun meus cometh after the verb est betokening possession, it is put in the nominative case by this exception.
[unspec 2] In the second example Haec domus est vestra, this pronoun vestra being put after the verb est signifying possession, is the nominative case by this exception.
[unspec 3] In the third example Non est mentiri meum, the pronoun meum coming after the verb est betokening a property, is put in the nominative case, & not in the genitive by this exception.
[unspec 4] In the fourth example Nostrum est iniuriam non infer, the pronoun nostrum is the nominative case after the verb est betokening a part or duty, by this exception.
[unspec 5] In the fifth example Tuum est omnia iuxta pati, the pronoun tuum coming after the verb est betokening a duty, is put in the nominative case, and not in the genitive case by this exception.
Qu. But can you show me any reason, why in these kinds of speaking, these pronounes after the verb Sum should rather be used in the nominative case, than in the genitive?
An. These pronounes after the verb Sum, in these kinds of speaking, are rather put in the nominative case than in the genitive, because that they have substantives always as nominative cases unto the verb, either expressed or understood, with the which they must agree in case, gender, & number, the which substātiues, if they be expressed are many & diverse: if they be understood, it is for the most part this word officiū, in english duty.
Verbes that betoken to esteem or regard, require a genitive case betokening the value: as, Parui ducitur probitas, Honesty is reckoned little worth. Maximi penditur nobilitas, Noblenes of birth is very much regarded.
[unspec 1] This rule hath two examples. The first is Parui ducitur probitas, in the which this word parui betokening the value, is the genitive case after the verb ducitur, signifying esteeming by this rule.
[unspec 2] In the second example Maximi penditur nobilitas, Maximi betokening the value is the genitive case after penditur, a verb of regarding, by this rule.
Here is to be noted that this verb aestimo, to esteem or regard, may have an ablative case also, as well as a genitive.
[unspec 3] Verbs of accusing, condemning, warning, purging, quiting, or assoiling, will have a genitive case, of the crime, or of the cause, or of the thing that one is accused, condemned, or warned of: or else an ablative case most commonly without a preposition: as Hic furti se alligat, vel furto, This man accuseth himself of theft. Admonuit me errati, vel errato, He admonished me, or gave me warning of my fault. De pecunijs reperundis damnatus est, He is condemned of bribery.
[unspec 1] This rule hath three examples, in the first whereof Hic furti se alligat vel furto, this word furti, the genitive case betokening the crime, is governed of the verb of accusing alligat, by this rule, and you may say it also in the ablative case furto, after the same verb, thus, Hic furto se alligat, by this rule.
[unspec 2] In the second example, Admonuit me errati, vel errato, admonuit a verb of warning doth govern the word errati betokening the crime, in the genitive case, by this rule, and it may also be said errato in the ablative case thus, admonuit me errato vel de errato, by the same rule.
[unspec 3] In the third example, De pecunijs repetundis damnatus est, the word pecunijs betokening the crime is put in the ablative case with the preposition de after damnatus est, a verb of condemning by this rule.
[unspec 4] These verbs Satago, to have as much as one can do, misereor, to have mercy, miseresco, to have pity, require a genitive case: as, Rerum suarum satagit, He hath as much as he can do of his own matters. Miserere mei deus, Have mercy on me O God.
[unspec 1] This rule hath two examples, in the first whereof, Rerum suarum satagit, the word rerum is the genitive case after the verb satagit by this rule.
[unspec 2] In the second example Mei is the genitive case after the verb miserere, by this rule, but misercor and miseresco have sometimes also a dative case, but this is very seldom.
These verbs Reminiscor, to remember, obliuiscor, to forget, recordor, to remember; and memini, to remember, will have a genitive or an accusative case: as, Reminiscor historiae, I remember the history. Obliuiscor carminis, I forget the verse. Recordor pueritiam, I call to remembrance my childhood. Obliuiscor lectionem, I forget my lesson. Memini tui vel te, I remember thee. Memini de te; I spake of thee.
[unspec 1] The examples of this rule are five, whereof the first is Reminiscor historiae, in the which reminiscor doth govern the word historiae, in the genitive case by this rule, and you may say it by the accusative case thus, Reminiscor historiam, by the same rule.
[unspec 2] In the second example Obliuiscor carminis, the verb obliuiscor governeth the genitive case carminis, by this rule, and it may be said by the accusative case, Obliuiscor carmen, by the same rule.
[unspec 3] In the third example Recordor pueritiam, the verb recordor causeth pueritiam to be put in the accusative case by this rule, and it may be said by the genitive case recordor pucritiae, by the same rule.
[unspec 4] In the fourth example Obliuiscor lectionem, the word lectionem is the accusative case after the verb obliuiscor by this rule, and it may be said by the genitive case Obliuiscor lectionis, by the same rule.
[unspec 5] In the fifth example Memini tui vel te, the verb memini doth govern the genitive case tui, and the accusative case te by this rule. And in the other sentence, Memini de te, the same verb memini doth govern the word te in the ablative case with the preposition de, but in another signification. For the verb memini with a genitive or an accusative case doth signify to Remember, and with an ablative case with the preposition de, doth signify to make mention, or to speak of a thing.
Qu. But wherefore is this sentence, Indigeo tui vel te, I have need of thee, set here in this place?
An. To show that the verb indigeo may have either a genitive case, as tui in this example is, or that it may be construed with an ablative case, as te in the same example is: but indeed this example doth more properly belong unto the rule of verbs betokening fullness, emptiness, &c. following hereafter.
This verb Potior to conquer, enjoy, or obtain, will have a genitive, or an ablative case: as, Potior vrbis, I conquer the city, Potior voto, I obtain my desire.
[unspec 1] This rule hath two examples, in the first whereof Potior vrbis, the verb potior hath a genitive case by this rule.
[unspec 2] In the second example Potior voto, the verb potior governeth an ablative case by the same rule.
Verbes governing a dative case.
ALl manner of verbs put acquisitiuely, that is to say, with these tokens to or for after them, will have a dative case: as, Non omnibus dormio, I sleep not to all men. Huic habeo, non tibi, I have it for this man, and not for thee.
[unspec 1] In this rule be two examples, in the first, Non omnibus dormio, the verb dormio being put acquisitiuely, doth govern omnibus in the dative case with this token to, before it in English, by this rule.
[unspec 2] In the second example, Huic habeo, non tibi, the verb Habeo put acquisitiuely doth govern the dative case tibi, with this sign for, before it in English, by this rule.
This rule is very large, and hath many heads or branches, and therefore unto the same do belong these kind of verbs following signifying
To
- 1 Profit or disprofit: as, commodo, to profit, incommodo, to disprofit, noceo. to hurt.
- 2 Give or restore: as, dono, to give, reddo, to restore, refero. to give again.
- 3 Promise, or to pay: as, promitto, to promise, polliceor, to promise, soluo. to pay.
- 4 Command, or show: as, impero, to command, indico, to show, monstro. to show.
- 5 Trust: as, fido, to trust, confido, to trust, fidem habeo. to trust.
- 6 Obey or to be against: as, obedio, to obey, adulor, to flatter, repugno. to resist.
- 7 Threatē or to be angry w t : as, minor, to threaten, indignor, to be angry, irascor to be angry
- 8 Compare: as, comparo, to compare, compono, to compare, confero. to compare.
Also this verb sum, with his compounds, except possum, as Absum, to be absent, adsum, to be present, desum, to be wanting, insum, to be in, intersum, to be present, praesum, to be chief, prosum, to profit, will have a dative case.
Also verbs compounded with these aduerbes satis, been, and male: as satisfacio, to satisfy, benefacio, to do a good turn, malefacio, to do an ill turn, will have a dative case.
Finally, certain verbs compound with these prepositions, prae, ad, con, sub, ante, post, ob, in, and inter, will have a dative case: as praeluceo, to excel, or to bear light before one, adiac • o, to lie near, condono, to pardon, suboleo, to smellou • , antesto, to stand before, or to excel, posthabeo, to set less by, obijcio, to lay against one, insulto, to leap upon, intersero, to put between, with many other such like, the which sometimes are joined with other cases also.
This verb Sum, es, fui, may oftentimes be set for habeo, to have, and then the word that seemeth in the english to be the nominative case, shall be put in the dative case, and the word that seemeth to be the accusative case, shall be the nominative: as, Est mihi mater, I have a mother, Non est mihi argentum, I have no monie.
[unspec 1] This rule hath two examples, the first is, Est mihi mater, which sentence being Englished, it appeareth that this verb est is set for habeo, and therefore the word I, which in the English seemeth to be the nominative case, is put into the dative in the Latin by this word mihi, and mother, which in English seemed to be the accusative case, in Latin is the nominative case by this word mater, by this rule.
[unspec 2] In the second example Non est mihi argentum, by Englishing the same it appeareth that this verb est is set for habeo, and therefore the word I, the which in the English seemed to be the nominative case before the verb I have, in the Latin is after the verb est turned into the dative case tibi, and the word monie, which in English seemed to be the accusative case after the verb have, in Latin is turned into the nominative case argentum unto the verb est by this rule.
But if sum (that is the word which cometh of sum ) be the infinitiue mood, this nominative case shall be turned into the accusative case; as Scio tibi non esse argentum, I know thou hast no monie.
This rule hath one example, the which one hundredth scholars, which think themselves somebody, may at the first brunt be peradventure set up with, and unless it be thus to be applied to express the meaning of the exception, I for my part confess that I know not what may be the meaning.
In this example therefore, Scio tibi non esse argentum, this word argentum is the accusative case in construing before the infinitiue mood esse, coming of this verbs sum, in this sentence in English, set for habeo, the which accusative case here, before the infinitiue mood, if the sentence were to be uttered by any other mood of the verb sum, should in the Latin be the nominative case, as est tibi argentum, thou hast monie, vtinam esset illi liber, I would he had a book, and so forth of the like speeches: where when they are to be made by the infinitiue mood, the word which before in the Latin was the nominative case, must be turned before the infinitiue mood of sum, into the accusative case: as Laetor illi esse librum, I am glad he hath a book, but all this much a do, and tedious for the little Punies, may be remedied, by teaching them briefly, that when est hath in English the signification of habeo, to have, it doth require a dative case.
Also when sum, hath after him a nominative case, and a dative, the word that is the nominative case, may be put also in the dative: so that sum may in such manner of speaking be construed with a double dative case: as, Sum tibi praesidio, I am to thee a safeguard. Haec res est mihi voluptati, This thing is to me a pleasure.
[unspec 1] This rule hath two examples, in the first whereof Sum tibi praesidio, the word praesidio which in the English I am to thee a safeguard, seemed to be the nominative case after the verb sum, I am, the which had after it this dative case thee, in Latin tibi, this word I say praesidio is put in the dative case, and so hath sum a double, or two dative cases by this rule.
[unspec 2] In the second example, Haec res est mihi voluptati, this thing is to me a pleasure, this word voluptati, which in English after the verb is, with his dative case to me, seemed to be the nominative case after the same verb, is put into the dative, & so the verb sum hath a double dative case, by this rule. But this rule more shortly and easily for young scholars is thus:
This verb sum may oftentimes be construed with a double dative case.
And not only sum, but also many other verbs, may in such manner speaking have a dooble dative case, one of the person, and another of the thing: as, Do tibi vestem pignori, I give thee a garment for a pledge. Verto tibi vitio, I lay it to thee for a fault. Hoc tu tibi laudi ducis, Thou accountest this for a praise unto thee.
[unspec 1] This rule hath three examples, in the first, Do tibi vestem pignori, the verb do hath two dative cases tibi and pignori, tibi of the person, and pignori of the thing by this rule.
[unspec 2] In the second example Verto tibi vitio, the verb verto hath a double dative case, tibi of the person, and vitio of the thing, by this rule.
[unspec 3] In the third example Hoc tu tibi laudi ducis, the verb ducis hath two dative cases, tibi of the person, and laudi of the thing, by this rule.
Verbes with an accusative case.
VErbes transitiues are all such as have after them an accusative case of the doer or sufferer, whether they be actiues, common, or deponent: as, Vsus promtos facit, Use maketh men ready or cunning. Foeminae ludificantur viros, Women do mock men. Largitur pecuniam, He giveth money.
[unspec 1] In this rule are three examples. In the first the verb transitiue facit hath promtos in the accusative case by this rule.
[unspec 2] In the second, foeminae ludificantur viros, the verb transitiue ludificantur governeth viros in the accusative case by this rule.
[unspec 3] In the third example, Largitur pecuniam, the verb largitur doth govern an accusative case, being a verb transitiue by this rule.
Qu. What call you a verb transitiue?
An. A verb transitiue deriving his name of transeo, to pass over, is such a verb as passeth over his signification into some other thing, as when I say, I love God, this verb love passeth over his signification into this word God, which is the thing loved.
Qu. Wherefore serveth this note, whereby some verbs are termed by the name of transitiues?
An. To make a difference between them and certain other verbs neuters, the which are called intransitiues, or absolute, because they do not pass over their signification into any other thing, but do finish it in themselves: as Dormio, I sleep, aegroto, I am sick, which verbs and such like do determine their action in themselves, and do not pass it over into any other thing, like as verbs transitiues do.
Also verbs neuters may have an accusative case of their own signification: as Endymionis somnum dormis, Thou sleepest the sleep of Endymion. Gaudeo gaudium, I joy a joy. Viuo vitam, I live a life.
[unspec 1] In this rule are three examples: in the first whereof Endymionis somnum dormis, the verb neuter dormio to sleep, hath the accusative case somnum sleep, of his own signification after him by this rule.
[unspec 2] In the second example Gaudeo gaudium, the verb neuter gaudeo to joy, hath after him the accusative case gaudium joy, of his own signification by this rule.
[unspec 3] In the third example Viuo vitam, the verb neuter viuo to live, hath after him vitam life, an accusative case of his own signification by this rule.
Where note that this accusative case after verbs neuters is turned sometime into the ablative case.
There are also certain verbs neuters, the which sometimes have an accusative case, not of their own signification, but this is by a figure called Enallage in the most of them: as Viuunt Bacchanalia, for Bacchanaliter.
Verbs of asking, teaching, and araying, will have two accusative cases, one of the sufferer, and another of the thing: as Rogo te pecuniam, I ask thee monie. Doceo te literas, I teach thee letters. Quod te iamdudum hortor, Which thing this good while I exhort thee unto. Exuo me gladium, I put off my sword from me.
[unspec 1] This rule hath four examples, the first is Rogo te pecuniam, where this verb of asking rogo hath two accusative cases, namely te of the sufferer, & pecuniā of the thing, by this rule.
[unspec 2] In the second example Doceo te literas, the verb of teaching doceo hath by this rule two accusative cases, namely te of the sufferer, and literas of the thing.
[unspec 3] Quod te iamdudum hortor. In this third example the verb of asking hortor hath two accusative cases by this rule, to wit, te of the sufferer, and quod of the thing.
[unspec 4] In the fourth example Exuo me gladium, this verb exuo, of araying, or rather indeed of vnaraying, hath two accusative cases, me of the sufferer, and gladium of the thing, by this rule.
Here note that verbs of asking do sometime turn one of the accusative cases into the ablative case with a preposition.
Also verbs of araying, or vnaraying, do sometime turn one of the accusative cases either into the dative, or else into the ablative, without a preposition.
Verbs governing an ablative case after them.
ALl verbs require an ablative case of the instrument, put with this sign with, before it, or of the cause, or of the manner of doing: as Ferit eum gladio, He striketh him with a sword. Taceo metu, I hold my peace for fear. Summa eloquentia causam egit, He pleaded the cause with great eloquence.
[unspec 1] In this rule are three examples. In the first, Ferit eum gladio, the verb ferit hath after him this word gladio the ablative case of the instrument, with this sign with before it in English, by this rule.
[unspec 2] Taceo metu, in this second example the verb taceo hath after him this word metu, the ablative case of the cause, by this rule.
[unspec 3] In the third example, Summa eloquentia causam egit, the verb egit hath after him the ablative case eloquentia of the manner of doing, by this rule.
The word of price is put after verbs in the ablative case: as, Vendidi auro, I sold it for gold. Emtus sum argento, I was bought for monie.
[unspec 1] In this rule are two examples, in the first whereof vendidi auro, the verb vendidi doth govern auro in the ablative case, being a word of price, or a word that signifieth the price or value, wherefore the thing was sold, by this rule.
[unspec 2] In the second example, Emtus sum argento, the verb emtus sum hath after him the ablative case argento, being the word of price, or signifying the value wherefore the thing was bought, by this rule.
This former rule hath two exceptions, which are as followeth.
Except these genitive cases, when they be put alone without substantives (for if they have substantives they shall be put in the ablative case) Tanti, so much, quanti, how much, pluris, for more, minoris, for less, tantidem, for so much, tantiuis, for so much, quantiuis, for how much soever, quantilibet, for as much as you list, quanticunque, for how much soever: as quanti mercatus es hūc equum? for how much bought you this horse? certe pluris quàm vellem, truly for more than I would.
[unspec 1] This exception hath two examples. The first is, Quanti mercatus es hunc equum? where quanti a word of price, because it is put without a substantive, is put in the genitive case after the verb mercatus es, by this exception.
[unspec 2] In the second example, Certe pluris quam vellem, the word of price pluris, being put alone without a substantive, is put in the genitive case after the verb mercatus sum understood, by this rule.
Sauing that after verbs of price, we shall always use these aduerbes in steed of their casuals: carius, more dear, vilius, better, cheap, melius, better, peius, worse, not that these words and no other are to be used after verbs of price, that is, verbs betokening, buyeng, selling, bargaining, and such like, but that when occasion is offered of such kind of speaking, then these aduerbes are to be used, and not their comparatiues being nounes adjectives, unless their substantives be joined with them, and then they shall both be put in the ablative case.
Note also that after this verb valeo, betokening the value, or worth of a thing, the word of price may sometimes be put in the accusative case.
Verbes of plenty, or scarcenes, filling, emptieng, loding, or vnloding, will have an ablative case; as affluis opibus, thou flowest in wealth: cares virtute, thou art void of virtue: expleo te fabulis, I fill thee with tales: spoliauit me bonis omnibus, he spoiled or robbed me of all my goods: oneras stomachum cibo, thou lodest thy stomach with meat: leuabo te hoc onere, I will ease thee of this burden.
[unspec 1] in the first whereof, affluis opibus, this verb of plenty affluis hath the ablative case opibus, by this rule.
[unspec 2] Cares virtute, in this second example virtute is the ablative case after the verb of wanting or scarcenes cares, by this rule.
[unspec 3] In the third example expleo te fabulis, the verb of filling expleo, hath after him the ablative case fabulis by this rule.
[unspec 4] Spoliauit me bonis omnibus, in this fourth example bonis is the ablative case after the verb of emptieng spoliauit, by this rule.
[unspec 5] In the fifth example oneras stomachum cibo, this word cibo is the ablative case after the verb of loding oneras, by this rule.
[unspec 6] Leuabo te hoc onere. In this sixth example this word onere is the ablative case after the verb of vnloding leuabo, by this rule.
Also these verbs following, with certain other like, will have an ablative case: as Vtor, to use, fruor, to enjoy, fungor, to execute an office, potior, to obtain, laetor, to rejoice, gaudeo, to be glad, dignor, to vouchsaue, or think one worthy, muto, to change, munero, to reward, communico, to make partaker of, afficio, to trouble, prosequor, to pursue, impertio, impertior, to bestow, and such like. And here is to be marked, that these two verbs afficio and prosequor are for the most part to be englished accordingly as the ablative case which they govern, will give occasion: as, afficio te dolore, I make thee sorry. Prosequor te odio, I hate thee, &c.
Verbs that betoken receiving, distance, or taking away, will have an ablative case with these prepositions, a, ab, e, ex, or de: as, Accepit literas à Petro, He received letters of Peter. Audiui ex nuncio, I heard it of the messenger. Longe distat à nobis, It is far distant, or far off from us. Eripui te e malis, I delivered thee out of troubles.
[unspec 1] This rule hath four examples. In the first Accepit literas à Petro, this word accepit a verb of receiving, hath an ablative case with the preposition a, namely à Petro, by this rule.
[unspec 2] In the second example, Audiui ex nuncio, the verb of receiving audiui, hath an ablative case with the preposition ex, namely ex nuncio, by this rule.
[unspec 3] Longe distatà nobis. In this third example, the verb of distance distat, hath an ablative case with the preposition à, namely à nobis, by this rule.
[unspec 4] In the fourth example, Eripui te e malis, the verb of taking away eripui, hath an ablative case with this preposition e, namely e malis, by this rule.
And this ablative after verbs of taking away, may be turned into the dative: as, Subtraxit mihi cingulum, He took from me my girdle. Eripuit illi vitam, He took from him his life.
[unspec 1] This exception hath two examples. In the first, Subtraxit mihi cingulum, the word subtraxit, being a verb of taking away, hath after him the dative case mihi by this exception.
[unspec 2] Eripuit illi vitam. In this second example, eripuit being a verb of taking away, hath after him the dative case illi, by this exception.
Verbs of comparing or exceeding, may have an ablative case of the word that signifieth the measure of exceeding: as, Praefero hunc multis gradibus, I prefer this man by many degrees. Paulo interuallo illum superat, He is beyond the other but a little space.
[unspec 1] The examples of this rule are two. The first is, Praefero hunc multis gradibus, in which example praefero a verb of comparing or rather of exceeding, hath after him the word gradibus an ablative case betokening the measure of exceeding, by this rule.
[unspec 2] Paulo interuallo illum superat. In this second example, superat a verb of exceeding, hath after him the word interuallo in the ablative case, betokening the measure of exceeding, by this rule.
A noun or a pronoun substantive joined with a participle, expressed or understood, and having no other word whereof it may be governed, it shall be put in the ablative case absolute, that is, the ablative case set alone without any word to govern him: as, Rege veniente, hosts fugerunt, The king coming, the enemies fled. Me duce vinces, I being captain, thou shalt overcome.
[unspec 1] This rule hath two examples. In the first, Rege veniente, hosts fugerunt, the noun substantive rege joined with the participle veniente here expressed, and having no other word to govern it, is put in the ablative case absolute by this rule.
[unspec 2] In the second example, Me duce vinces, the pronoun substantive me joined with the participle existente understood, and having no other word whereof it may be governed, is put in the ablative case absolute, by this rule.
Where note, that if there be no participle expressly set down with the ablative case absolute, then for the most part you are to understand this participle existens, the which causeth always the substantive following to be the ablative case, by the rule of participles governing such case as the verb that they come of. And because that Existo will have such case after him as he had before him, therefore the participle existens understood with the ablative case absolute before him, doth cause the substantive following, if there be any, to be put also in the ablative case, as appeareth in this example, Me duce, where the participle existente understood with the ablative case absolute me, causeth the substantive duce following, to be the ablative case also, by the rule next before in this note alleged: and the like is to be said of all other such speeches.
And this ablative case absolute may be resolved, or turned into other Latin by any of these words, dum, whilst, cum, when, quando, when, si, if, quanquam, although, postquam, after that, and then the ablative case must be turned into the nominative case, and the participle into the verb, as in these examples, Rege veniente, the king coming, id est, that is to say, dum veniret rex, whilst, or when the king came. Me duce, I being captain, .i. si ego dux fuero, or rather extitero, turning the participle existente understood, into the verb extitero.
Some verbs may have an ablative case by the figure Synecdoche, and sometime a genitive, and sometime an accusative, after such manner as Poets use to speak.
One and the same verb, in diverse respects, or by diverse rules, may have diverse cases, as a double dative case, an accusative case, an ablative case absolute, the ablative case of the instrument, and such like, whereof in the Latin grammar there is this example: Dedit mihi vestem pignori, te praesente, propria manu, He gave me a garment to pledge, you being present, with his own hand.
The Construction of verbs passiues, or what case they will govern.
A Verbe passive will have after him an ablative case with a preposition, or sometime a dative of the doer: as, Virgilius legitur à me, Virgil is read of me. Tibi fama petatur, Let fame be sought after by thee.
In this rule are two examples, whereof in the first, [unspec 1] Virgilius legitur à me, the verb passive legitur doth govern the ablative case of the doer me, with the preposition à, by this rule.
[unspec 2] In the second example, Tibi fama petatur, the verb passive petatur doth govern the word tibi the dative case of the doer, by this rule.
And this ablative or dative shall be turned into the nominative case, and the nominative into the accusative, if the sentence be turned by the active voice: as, Ego lego Virgilium, I read Virgil, where me the ablative case in the sentence of the rule before, is here turned into the nominative ego, and the passive legitur, into the active lego, and the nominative case Virgilius into the accusative case Virgilium.
Petas tu famam, Seek thou fame, where tibi the dative case in the former rule is turned into the nominative tu, the passive petatur into the active petas, and the nominative fama, into the accusative famam, by this rule.
These five verbs called neuter passiues, will have such construction as passiues by the first rule had: vapulo, to be beaten, vaeneo, to be sold, liceo, to be set at a price, fio, to be made, exulo, to be banished.
The construction of gerunds, or how they are used, and what cases they govern.
GErundes will have such cases, as the verbs that they come of: as, Ocium scribendi literas, Leisure to write letters. Ad consulendum tibi, To counsel thee.
This rule hath two examples, [unspec 1] the first is Ocium scribendi literas, where the gerund scribendi doth govern literas in the accusative case, because that the verb scribo whereof it cometh, will have an accusative case by the rule of verbs transitiues, &c.
[unspec 2] Ad consulendum tibi, in this example the gerund ••• sulendum hath the dative case tibi, because consulo the verb whereof he cometh will have a dative case in this signification, by the rule of verbs of giving or restoring, &c.
When the English of the infinitiue mood cometh after any of these nounes substantives, studium, desire, causa, cause, tempus, time, gratia, cause, ocium, leisure, occasio, occasion, libido, lust, spes, hope, opportunitas, fit occasion, voluntas, will, modus, manner, ratio, reason, gestus, gesture, satietas, fullness, potestas, power, licentia, leave, consuetudo, custom, consilium, counsel, vis, force, norma, a rule, amor, love, cupido, desire, locus, place, and others like, if the verb should be of the active voice, it shall be made by the gerund in di, as when I say Ocium scribendi, leisure to write, here in the English to write, the English of the infinitiue mood to write, cometh after the substantive leisure, in Latin ocium, and therefore it is put in the gerund in di, by this rule, and so of the rest.
And the same gerund in di, is used also after certain adjectives: as, Cupidus visendi, desirous to go see, Certus eundi, determined to go. Peritus iaculandi. skillful in darting, Gnarus bellandi, cunning in warring.
In all these four examples, after these adjectives, cupidus, Certus, Peritus, Gnarus, these words Visendi, Eundi, Iaculandi, Bellandi, are put in the gerund in di, by this rule.
The gerund in do.
WHen you have the English of the participle of the present tense, with this sign of or with, coming after a noun adjective, it shall in Latin making be put in the gerund in do, as, Defessus sum ambulando, I am weary of walking, here in this sentence is the english of the participle of the present tense walking, with this sign of before it, coming after the adjective weary, and therefore is the said english of the participle of the present tense with of before it, as namely, of walking, in Latin turned into the gerund in do, faieng, defessus sum ambulando, I am weary of walking, by this rule.
Also the english of the participle of the present tense, coming without a substantive, with this sign in or by, before him, shall in Latin making be put in the gerund in do: as, Caesar dando, subleuando, ignoscendo, gloriam adeptus est, Caesar by giving, by helping, by forgiving, got praise and renown. In apparando totum hunc consumunt diem, They spend this whole day in making ready.
[unspec 1] Here are two examples in this rule, whereof the first is Caesar dando, subleuando, ignoscendo, gloriam adeptus est, in the which example being Englished, there is in three places the English of the participle of the present tense put alone without a substantive with this sign by, before it, as namely, by giving, by helping, by forgiving, and therefore in the Latin it is turned into the gerund in do, saying, dando, subleuando, ignoscendo, by this rule.
[unspec 2] In the second example, In apparando totum hunc consumunt diem, here in this sentence being Englished, as appeareth before in the rule, there is the English of the participle of the present tense set alone without a substantive, with this sign in before it, namely thus, in preparing or making ready, and therefore in Latin it is made by the gerund in do, apparando, by this rule.
And the same gerund in do, is used either without a preposition, or else after one of these prepositions, A, ab, de, ex, cum, in: as, Deterrentà bibendo, they fear them from drinking. Ab amando, from loving. Cogitat de edendo, he thinketh upon eating. Ratio been scribendicum loquendo coniuncta est, the way to write well is joined with speaking.
[unspec 1] In this rule are four examples, in the first of the which deterrent à bibendo, the gerund in do, bibendo, is used after the preposition a, by this rule.
[unspec 2] Ab amando, in this second example the gerund in do, amando, is used with the preposition ab, by this rule.
[unspec 3] In the third example, cogitat de edendo, the gerund edendo is used with the preposition de by this rule.
[unspec 4] In the fourth example, Ratio been scribendi cum loquendo coniuncta est, the gerund loquendo is used with the preposition cum by this rule. And of the gerund in do used without a preposition, you had an example before in this sentence, Caesar dando, &c.
The gerund in dum.
THe English of the infinitiue mood coming after a reason, and showing the cause of the reason, may be put in the gerund in dum: as, Dies mihi vt satis sit ad agendū, vereor, I fear that a whole day will not be enough for me to do my business, in the English of this sentence or reason there cometh the English of the infinitiue mood, namely, to do my business, and showeth the cause of the reason, and therefore it is in Latin put in the gerund in dum, agendum, by this rule. But this example more properly belongeth unto the next rule, yea and the rule it self is more hard then that young beginners can easily understand the meaning of the same.
The gerund in dum is used after one of these prepositions, Ad, ob, propter, inter, ante: as, Ad capiendum hosts, to take the enemies. Ob, vel propter redimendum captiuos, for to redeem the prisoners. Inter coenandum, whilst they are at supper. Ante damnandum, before they are condemned.
This rule hath four examples, [unspec 1] in the first the gerund in dum, capiendum is used after the preposition ad, by this rule.
[unspec 2] In the second the gerund redimendum is used after the prepositions ob vel propter, by this rule.
[unspec 3] In this third the gerund coenandum, is used after the preposition inter, by this rule.
[unspec 4] In the fourth the gerund damnandum, is used after the preposition ante, by the same rule.
And when ye have this English must, or ought in a reason, where it seemeth to be made by the verb oportet, it may be put in the gerund in dum, with this verb est set impersonally: and then the word which in the English seemeth to be the nominative case, shall be put in the dative: as, abeundum est mihi, I must go hence.
In this reason or sentence in English we have this word must before the word go, whereby it may seem that it is in latin to be made by the verb oportet, and therefore it is put in the gerund in dum, abeundum, with this verb est set impersonally, and the word I which in the English, when I say, I must go hence, seemeth to be the nominative case, is in Latin turned into the dative case mihi, by this rule, saying abeundum est mihi.
Here is to be noted, that sometimes these gerunds are turned into adjectives called gerundiues, because they come of the gerunds, and when they be thus turned, you shall know them by this, that they govern no case, but agree with their substātiues in case, gender and number, like as other adjectives do.
Supines, and of their construction, and how they are used.
SVpines do govern such case, as the verbs that they come of: as, Auditum poëtas, to hear poëts. In which example the first supine auditum doth govern poëtas in the accusative case by this rule, because the verb audio, of which he cometh will have an accusative case by the rule of verb transitiues, &c.
The first supine hath his active signification, saving that in some few verbs it signifieth passively: And it is put after verbs and participles that betoken moving to a place: as Ego cubitum, I go to rest. Spectatum admissi, risum teneatis amici? my friends, being let in to behold such a sight, can you forbear laughing?
This rule hath two examples, [unspec 1] in the first Eo cubitum, the supine cubitum is put after eo a verb of moving or betokening moving by this rule.
Spectatum admissi, &c. [unspec 2] In this second example the supine spectatum is put after the participle admissi, by this rule.
Where note that sometime the first supine is put absolutely or alone after the verb est, and doth not follow any other verb betokening any moving at all: as many Grammarians do note, as Cessatum est satis. But under their correction, I would say that in such manner of speaking it were rather a verb impersonall, then a supine.
The latter supine hath his passive signification, and is put after nounes adjectives: as dignus, worthy, indignus, unworthy, turpis, filthy, foedus, foul, procliuis, ready, facilis, easy, odiosus, hateful, mirabilis, wonderful, optimus, best, & such like: as facile factu, easy to be done. Turpe dictu, dishonest to be spoken.
[unspec 1] Here are two examples, whereof in the first Facile factu, the latter supine factu signifying passively, is put after the adjective facile, by this rule.
[unspec 2] In the second example Turpe dictu, the latter supine dictu, signifying passiuelie is put after y e adjective turpe, by this rule.
And this latter supine after nounes adjectives may be turned into the infinitiue mood passive, as, Facile fieri, Easie to be done, Turpe dici, dishonest to be spoken.
The Time, or in what case words betokening time, shall be put after verbs.
NOunes that betoken part of time, be commonly put in the ablative case: as, Nocte vigilas, Thou watchest in the night. Luce dormis, Thou sleepest in the day.
[unspec 1] This rule hath two examples. The first is Nocte vigilas, where this word nocte signifying part of time, or taken for part of the night, is in construction put in the ablative case after the verb vigilas, by this rule.
[unspec 2] In the second example, Luce dormis, the word luce signifying part of time, or taken for part of the day, is in construction put in the ablative case after the verb dormis, by this rule.
But nounes that betoken continual term of time, without intermission or ceasing, be commonly used in the accusative case : as, Sexaginta annos natus est, He is threescore years old. Hyemem totam stertis, Thou sleepest the whole winter.
[unspec 1] There be two examples in this rule. The first is, Sexaginta annos natus est, in the which this word annos betokening continual term of time, is in construction set after the verb natus est in the accusative case, by this rule.
[unspec 2] In the second example, Hyemem totam stertis, this word hyemem betokening continual term of time, or being taken for the whole winter, is in construction put in the accusative case after the verb stertis, by this rule.
Space of place, or in what case a word that signifieth space of place, shall be put after verbs.
NOunes that betoken space between place and place, be commonly put in the accusative case, and sometimes also in the ablative: as, Pedem hinc ne discesseris, Go thou not a foot from this place.
In this one example, the word pedem betokening space of place, is in construction put after the verb discesseris in the accusative case, by this rule.
A place, or the case wherein such names of places as are either nounes common, or nounes proper, shall be put after verbs.
NOunes appellatiues, or names of great places, be put with a preposition, if they follow a verb that signifieth in a place, to a place, from a place, or by a place: as Viuo in Anglia, I live in England. Veni per Galliam in Italiam, I came through France into Italy. Proficiscor ex vrbe, I go forth of the city.
Here are three examples of this rule. The two first are of proper names of countries, and the third is of a common name of a place.
[unspec 1] In the first example, Vino in Anglia, this word Anglia being the proper name of a great place or country, is put with the preposition in, in the ablative case signifying in a place, after the verb viuo, by this rule.
[unspec 2] In the second example, Veni per Galliam in Italiam, the word Galliam signifying a great place or country, is put with the preposition per in the accusative case after the verb veni signifying going by a place, by this rule, and so is Italiam with the preposition in put into the accusative case, being the name of a country, and following the same verb signifying to a place, by the same rule.
[unspec 3] In the third example, Proficiscor ex vrbe, the word vrbe being a noun appellatiue, or common name of a place, is put in the ablative case with a preposition ex after the verb proficiscor, signifying the going from a place, by this rule.
Here note, that by nouns appellatiues in this rule is meant nounes common, signifying the names of places, as a city, a country, a town, an iland, the market, the church, the school, and such like. And by names of great places are understood the proper names of Countries and Islands, as France, Italy, Spain, Scotland, England, and such like: for the proper names of smaller places, as cities, towns, and villages belong to the rules following.
In a place or at a place, if the place be a proper name, and of the first or second declension, and singular number, it shall be put in the genitive case: as, Vixit Londini, he lived at London. Studuit Oxoniae, he studied at Oxford.
[unspec 1] This rule hath two examples. In the first, Vixit Londini, the word Londini being the proper name of a city, signifying in or at a place, and being also of the second declension, and singular number, it is put in the genitive case, by this rule.
[unspec 2] In the second example, Studuit Oxoniae, the word Oxoniae signifying in a place or at a place, being the name of a city, and of the first declension, and singular number, is put in the genitive case, by this rule.
And these nounes, Humi, on the ground, domi, at home, militiae, at warfare, belli, at war, be likewise used, that is, after verbs signifying in a place or at a place, they are put for the most part in the genitive case, like as the proper names of places in the rule before going: as, Procumbit humi bos, The ox lieth on the ground. Militiae enutritus est, He was brought up in warfare. Domi, belli{que} ociosi viuitis, Ye live idlie both at home and in war.
In these three examples, humi in the first, Militiae in the second, domi and belli in the third, are put in the genitive case, like as if they were proper nounes belonging to the former rule, by this rule.
But if the place be of the third declension, or of the plural number, it shall be put in the dative, or in the ablative case: as Militauit Carthagini, or Carthagine, He served in the wars at Carthage. Athenis natus est, He was borne at Athens.
[unspec 1] This rule hath two examples. In the first, Militauit Carthagini, vel Carthagine, the word Carthagini being the proper name of a city, and signifying at or in a place, because it is the third declension, is put in the dative case by this rule, or you may say it by the ablative case Carthagine, thus, Militauit Carthagine, by the same rule.
[unspec 2] In the second example, Athenis natus est, the word Athenis being the proper name of a city, and betokening in or at a place, because it is the plural number is put in the dative or ablative case, by this rule.
Likewise we use this word ruri or rure, betokening in or at a place, in the dative or ablative case, as in this example: Ruri or rure educatus est, He was brought up in the country.
To a place, if the place be a proper name, it shall be put in the accusative case, without a preposition: as, Eo Romam, I go to Rome.
In this example this word Romam being the proper name of a city, and signifying to a place, is put in the accusative case without a preposition, by this rule. But sometimes it is also put in the accusative case with a preposition, but very seldom, and then rather to be marked than followed.
So also are these words domus and rus signifying to a place put in the accusative case: as Confero me domum, I go home. Recipio me rus, I go into the country.
[unspec 1] In this rule are two examples. In the first Confero me domum, the word domum betokening to a place is put in the accusative case by this rule.
[unspec 2] In the second Recipio me rus, the word rus signifying to a place, is put in the accusative case also by the same rule.
From a place, or by a place, if the place be a proper name, it shall be put in the ablative case without a preposition, and sometime in the accusative case with a preposition betokening by or through a place: as, Profectus est Londino (vel per Londinum) Cantabr •• am, He went from London, or by London to Cambridge. In this example Londino, the proper name of a city, and signifying from a place, is put in the ablative case without a preposition, by this rule, and it may also with the preposition per, be put in the accusative case, signifying by or through a place, by the same rule, and the like is to be said of all such other examples.
Domus and rus be likewise used in the ablative case signifying from a place: as, Abijt domo, He went from home. Rure reuersus est, He returned from the country. In which two examples domo in the first, and rure in the second both signifying from a place, are put in the ablative case by this rule.
Verbes impersonals and what case they govern.
A Verbe impersonall hath no nominative case before him, and this word it or there, is commonly his sign: as, Decet, it becometh. Oportet aliquem esse, there must be somebody.
[unspec 1] In the first of these examples Decet, I know the said verb to be an impersonall, by this sign it before him in English, when I say, it becometh, by this rule.
[unspec 2] In the second example, Oportet aliquem esse, I know this word oportet, to be a verb impersonall, because in English he hath this sign there before him, when I say there must, by this rule.
But if the verb impersonall have neither of these signs, it or there, before him, then the word that seemeth to be in the English the nominative case, shall in Latin be such case as the verb impersonall will have after him: as Me oportet, I must, tibi licet, thou mayest.
This rule hath two examples, [unspec 1] Me oportet, I must, is the first, where because this impersonall must, oportet, hath none of these signs it or there before him in English, therefore this word I that seemeth to be the nominative case, is in Latin turned into the accusative case me, by this rule, because oportet will have an accusative case after him.
[unspec 2] In the second example, Tibi licet, thou mayest, the impersonal mayest, hath neither it nor there, before it, and therefore the word thou, which in the English seemeth to be the nominative case, is in the Latin put into the dative, by this rule, because licet will have a dative case after him.
These impersonals, interest, it behooveth, refert, it belongeth, or appertaineth, and est set for interest, require a genitive case of all casual words, that is, words declined with case, except Mea, tua, sua, nostra, vestra, and cuia, the ablative cases of the pronounes possessiues: as, Interest omnium recte agere, It behooveth all men to do rightly. Tua refert teipsum nosse, It appertaineth unto thee, or it is thy part to know thyself.
[unspec 1] In this rule are two examples. In the first, Interest omnium recte agere, the impersonall interest hath the genitive case omnium, by this rule.
[unspec 2] In the second, Tua refert teipsum nosse. The impersonall refert hath tua the ablative case of the pronoun possessiue tuus, by this rule.
Certain impersonals require a dative case: as, Libet, it listeth, licet, it is lawful, patet, it is manifest, liquet, it is evident, constat, it is certain, placet, it pleaseth, expedit, it is expedient, prodest, it profiteth, sufficit, it is sufficient, vacat, it hath leisure, accidit, it chanceth, conuenit, it is meet, contingit, it happeneth, and such other like.
Some will have an accusative case only: as, Delectat, it delighteth, decet, it becometh, juuat, it delighteth or helpeth, oportet, it behooveth.
Some besides the accusative case, will have also a genitive: as, Nostri nosmet poenitet, We are weary of our own estate. Me ciuitatis taedet, I am weary of the city. Pudet me negligentiae, I am ashamed of my negligence. Miseret me tui, I take pity on thee. Me illorum miserescit, I have pity on them.
[unspec 1] Here are five examples in this rule. In the first, Nostri nosmet poenitet, the impersonall poenitet beside the accusative case nos, hath the genitive case nostri, by this rule.
[unspec 2] In the second, Me ciuitatis taeder, the impersonall taedet besides the accusative case me, hath also the genitive case ciuitatis, by this rule.
[unspec 3] In the third, Pudet me negligentiae, the impersonall pudet besides the accusative case me, hath the genitive case negligentiae, by the same rule.
[unspec 4] In the fourth, Miseret me tui, the impersonall miseret besides the accusative case me, hath the genitive case tui, by this rule.
[unspec 5] Me illorum miserescit. In this fifth example the impersonall miserescit, besides the accusative case me, hath also the genitive case illorum, by this rule.
Verbes impersonals of the passive voice being formed of neuters, do govern such case, as the verbs neuters which they come of: as, Parcatur sumtui, Let cost be spared, where the passive impersonal parcatur, coming of the verb neuter parco, to spare, hath the dative case sumtui, because the neuter parco will have a dative case, as when we say, Parcamus pecuniae, Let us spare monie.
A verb impersonall of the passive voice hath like case as other verbs passive have: as, Benefit multis à principe, Many are pleasured by the prince.
In this example, the verb impersonall benefit having the passive signification, hath an ablative case after him of the dooer, with a preposition à principe, like as other verbs personals passiues have, by the first rule of verbs personals passiues, in their place set down before.
Yet many times this case is not expressed, but understood: as, Maxima vi certatur, (subaudi understand) ab illis, They fight with most great force, where the ablative case with the preposition, ab illis, is understood, by this rule. And the like is to be said of all other such speeches.
When a deed is signified to be done of many, the verb being a verb neuter, we may well change the verb neuter into the impersonall in tur: as, In ignem posita est, fletur, She was put into the fire, they wept. In this example when I say they weep, there is a deed signified to be done by many, and because that the verb weep is a verb neuter, in Latin flent, it may be turned into the impersonall in tur fletur, by this rule.
A Participle, and his case.
PArticiples govern such case as the verbs that they come of: as, Fruiturus amicis, one that will use his friends. Consulens tibi, one giving counsel unto thee. Diligendus ab omnibus, one to be beloved of all men.
[unspec 1] There be three examples in this rule. In the first example the participle fruiturus hath the ablative case amicis, because the verb fruor of which he cometh, will have an ablative case.
[unspec 2] In the second example, the participle Consulens hath the dative case tibi, because his verb consulo will have a dative case.
[unspec 3] In the third example, the participle diligendus hath an ablative case with a preposition, namely ab omnibus, because his verb diligor by the rule of passiues, will have an ablative case with a preposition.
Here note that participles may four manner ways be changed into nounes, and so, oftentimes govern not the case of their verbs.
[unspec 1] The first way is, when the voice of a participle is construed with another case than the verb that it cometh of: as, Appetens vini, greedy of wine, where appetens is a noun and not a participle, because it hath a genitive case, when as his verb appeto will have an accusative case.
[unspec 2] The second, when it is compounded with a preposition, which the verb it cometh of cannot be compounded withal: as, Indoctus, unlearned, Innocens, innocent, or giltles, both which words are nounes and not participles, because their verbs doceor and noceo, cannot be compounded with the preposition in, as they are.
[unspec 3] The third, when it formeth all the degrees of comparison, as, Amans, loving, amantior, more loving, amantissimus, most loving.
[unspec 4] The fourth, when it hath no respect or express difference of time: as, Homo laudatus, a man laudable, where laudatus, because it signifieth no time present, past, or to come, is a noun and not a participle. Puer amandus, a child worthy to be loved, where amandus is a noun, because it hath no express difference of time. And all these are properly called nounes participials.
Participles when they be changed into nounes, require a genitive case: as, Fugitans litium, avoiding strife. Indoctus pilae, not skillful to play at the baull. Cupientissimus tui, most desirous of thee. Lactis abundance, having store of milk, all which four words are known hereby to be nounes and not participles, because they govern a genitive case, by this rule.
These participiall voices, Perosus, hating deadly, exosus, detesting or loathing, pertaesus, weary or loathing, have always the active signification, and govern an accusative case: as, Exosus saeuitiam, hating cruelty. Vitam pertaesus, weary of life.
Here are two examples in this rule. In the first, Exosus saeuitiam, this participiall voice exosus hath the active signification, and doth govern the word saeuitiam in the accusative case, by this rule.
In the second example, Vitam pertaesus, this participiall voice pertaesus signifying actively, doth govern the word vitam in the accusative case, by this rule.
Here note, that these participles, Natus, borne, prognatus, coming of some stock or linage, cretus, borne, ortus, borne, editus, sproong or begotten, satus, borne, creatus, created, will have an ablative case.
The Adverb, or what case Aduerbes do govern.
ADuerbs of quantity, time, and place, require a genitive case: as, Multum lucri, much gain. Tunc temporis, at that time. Vbique gentium, in all places.
This rule hath three examples. [unspec 1] In the first, Multum lucri, the adverb multum being an adverb betokening quantity, hath the genitive case lucri after him by this rule, but multum indeed is rather a noun than an adverb, as hath been seen before, yet are there many other aduerbes of quantity which do govern a genitive case.
[unspec 2] Tunc temporis. In this second example the adverb of time tunc doth govern the genitive case temporis by this rule.
[unspec 3] In the third example, Vbique gentium, the aduerb of place vbique doth govern gentium in the genitive case by this rule.
Certain adverbs will have a dative case, like as the nounes that they come of: as, Venit obuiam illi, He came to meet him. Canit similiter huic, He singeth like unto him.
[unspec 1] In this rule are two examples. The first is Venit obuiam illi, where the adverb obuiam doth govern the dative case illi, by this rule, because the noun adjective obuius whereof the adverb obuiam cometh doth govern a dative case.
[unspec 2] Canit similiter huic. In this second example the adverb similiter, doth govern the dative case huic, by this rule, because the noun adjective similis, whereof similiter cometh, will have a dative case.
These dative cases Tempori, In time, Luci, In the day time, Vesperi, At night, are used aduerbially, that is, like as if they were adverbs: as, Tempori surgendum, We must arise in time. Vesperi cubandum, We must lie down at night. Luci laborandum, We must work in the day time.
Certain aduerbes will have an accusative case, like as the prepositions which they come of: as, Propius vrbem, Neere to the city. Proxime castra, Next to the tents.
[unspec 1] Here are two examples in this rule. In the first whereof propius vrbem, the adverb propius doth govern the accusative case vrbem by this rule, because the preposition prope, whereof propius cometh, will have an accusative case.
[unspec 2] In the second example proxime castra, the aduerb proxime doth govern the accusative case castra by this rule, because the preposition prope whereof the adverb proxime cometh will have an accusative case.
Where note, that prepositions, when they be set without a case, or else do form the degrees of comparison, be changed into aduerbes.
The aduerb plus, more, may have a genitive, an accusative, or an ablative case.
Aduerbes of the comparative and superlative degree, will have such case as the nounes adjectives which they come of, of the same degree will have.
Of the construction of coniunctions.
COniunctions copulatiues, and disiunctiues, with these four, Quàm, then. Nisi, except, or unless. Praeterquam, besides. An, whether, do couple like cases: as, Xenophon & Plato fuere aequales, Xenophon and Plato were equal.
In this example because Xenophon is the nominative case before the conjunction copulative &, therefore doth the said conjunction cause Plato likewise to be the nominative case by this rule.
And sometimes the coniunctions aforesaid are put between diverse cases: as, Studui Romae et Athenis, I studied at Rome, and at Athens. Est liber meus et fratris, It is my book and my brothers. Emi fundum centum nummis et pluris, I bought the ground for a hundredth pieces of monie, and more.
This rule hath three examples. [unspec 1] In the first Studui Romae et Athenis, the conjunction et is put between diverse cases, namely, Romae the genitive, and Athenis the dative by this rule.
[unspec 2] In the second, Est liber meus et fratris, the conjunction et is put between liber the nominative case, and fratris the genitive case, by this rule.
[unspec 3] In the third example Emi fundum centum nummis et pluris, the conjunction et is put between nummis the ablative case, and pluris the genitive case by this exception.
Coniunctions copulatiues and disiunctiues most commonly couple like moodes and tenses together: as, Petrus et Johannes precabantur et docebant, Peter and John did preach and pray.
In this example the conjunction copulative et doth join these two verbs precabantur and docebant, in the indicatiue mood and preterimperfect tense, by this rule.
And sometime diverse tenses are coupled together: as, Et habeturet referetur tibi à me gratia, I do both thank you, and will also requite you.
In this example the conjunction et doth join habetur, the present tense, and referetur the future tense together by this rule.
The preposition and his case.
SOmetime this preposition In, is not expressed but understood, and the casual word nevertheless is put in the ablative case: as, Habeo te loco parentis, I have, or account thee in steed of my father.
In this example the preposition in, is not expressed before the word loco, but understood, and yet loco be put in the ablative case by this rule.
Not only In. but any other preposition of the ablative case being understood, may cause the word whereunto it is understood, to be the ablative case.
A verb compound with a preposition, sometime requireth the case of the preposition that he is compounded withal: as, Exeo domo, I go from home. Praetereo te insalutatum, I pass by thee vnsaluted. Adeo templum, I go to church.
[unspec 1] In the first example exeo domo, the verb exeo compounded with the preposition ex, doth govern domo, in the ablative case by this rule, because the preposition ex, wherewith he is compounded, will have an ablative case.
[unspec 2] In the second example praetereo te insalutatum, the verb praetereo doth govern te in the accusative case, being compounded with the preposition praeter, the which out of composition will have an accusative case, by this rule.
[unspec 3] In the third example adeo templum, the verb adeo being compounded with the preposition ad, doth govern templum, in the accusative case, by this rule, because the preposition ad out of composition will have an accusative case.
An interiection, and his case.
CErtaine interiections require a nominative case: as, O festus dies hominis, O joyful day of man.
In this example the interiection ô doth govern dies in the nominative case by this rule.
Certain interiections require a dative case: as, Hei mihi, we is one, where mihi is the dative case governed of the interiection hei, by this rule.
Certain interiections have an accusative case: as, Heu stirpem inuisam, Alas the hated stock, where the interiection heu doth govern the accusative case stirpem, by this rule. And this heu hath sometimes also a nominative case.
Certain interiections have a vocatiue case: as, Probsancte Jupiter, O holy Jupiter, where Jupiter is the vocatiue case governed of prô, or proh, by this rule.
And this proh will have also an accusative case: as, proh deûm atque hominum fidem, O the faith of gods and men, where proh governeth fidem in the accusative case by this rule.
The rest of the interiections for the most part do govern no case at all.
Qu. Having thus gone through all the English rules of construction, tell me now in a word, how the little Punies of the Grammar school, in examining and parsing their lessons may find out the rules to show them the case of every part of speech in the same?
An. They must first learn perfectly what part of speech every word of their lesson is, and then consider of what word he is governed, and also what part of speech the same is, and so shall he easily turn to the rule, that showeth the case of his word.
As for example, if the word governing (which for the most part is the word that in construing goeth next before the word governed) be a substantive, turning to the rules of substantives, you shall there find what case he governeth: if he be an adjective, look among the adjectives: if a verb, look among the rules for verbs, and so of all other parts of speech accordingly.
Qu. Now to make an ende of this Treatise, set down some few general rules to be marked of young beginners, in construction, as you find them else where.
[unspec 1] An. Look what case the singular number will have, she same also hath the plural: as, Memor praeteriti, Memoros praeteriti.
[unspec 2] Look what case the nominative case hath after him, the same may all the rest of the cases have.
Look what case the positive degree hath, the same hath the comparative, and the superlative.
[unspec 4] Look what case the indicatiue mood hath, the same all the other moodes may have also.
[unspec 5] Look what case the verb active hath, the same may the verb passive likewise have, except the accusative case of the sufferer.