GRICE E COLONELLO: VOCI SEGNI

 Greek Latin English (16a.) [ΠΕΡΙ ΕΡΜΗΝΕΙΑΣ] ARISTOTELES: DE INTERPRETATIONE ↵ Πρῶτον δεῖ θέσθαι τί ὄνομακαὶ τί ῥῆμα, ἔπειτα τί ἐστιν ἀπόφασιςκαὶ κατάφασις καὶ ἀπόφανσις καὶ λόγος. Primum oportet constituere quid sit nomen et quid verbum, postea quid est negatio et affirmatio et enuntiatio et oratio. Chapter 1 First we must define the terms 'noun' and 'verb', then the terms 'denial' and 'affirmation', then 'proposition' and 'sentence.' ↵Ἔστι μὲν οὖν τὰ ἐν τῇ φωνῇ τῶν ἐν τῇ ψυχῇ παθημάτων σύμβολα, καὶ τὰ γραφόμενα τῶν ἐν τῇ φωνῇ. ↵ καὶ ὥσπερ οὐδὲ γράμματα πᾶσι τὰ αὐτά, οὐδὲ φωναὶ αἱ αὐταί• ὧν μέντοι ταῦτα σημεῖα πρώτων, ταὐτὰ πᾶσι παθήματα τῆς ψυχῆς, καὶ ὧν ταῦτα ὁμοιώματα πράγματα ἤδη ταὐτά. Sunt ergo ea quae sunt in voce earum quae sunt in anima passionum notae, et ea quae scribuntur eorum quae sunt in voce. Et quemadmodum nec litterae omnibus eaedem, sic nec eaedem voces; quorum autem hae primorum notae, eaedem omnibus passiones animae sunt, et quorum hae similitudines, res etiam eaedem. Spoken words are the symbols of mental experience and written words are the symbols of spoken words. Just as all men have not the same writing, so all men have not the same speech sounds, but the mental experiences, which these directly symbolize, are the same for all, as also are those things of which our experiences are the images. περὶ μὲν οὖν τούτων εἴρηται ἐν τοῖς περὶ ψυχῆς, —ἄλλης γὰρ πραγματείας• De his quidemdictum est in his quae sunt dicta de anima -- alterius est enim negotii. This matter has, however, been discussed in my treatise about the soul, for it belongs to an investigation distinct from that which lies before us. — ἔστι δέ, ὥσπερ ἐν τῇ ψυχῇ ↵ ὁτὲ μὲν νόημα ἄνευ τοῦ ἀληθεύειν ἢ ψεύδεσθαι ὁτὲ δὲ ἤδη ᾧ ἀνάγκη τούτων ὑπάρχειν θάτερον, οὕτω καὶ ἐν τῇ φωνῇ• περὶ γὰρ σύνθεσιν καὶ διαίρεσίν ἐστι τὸ ψεῦδός τε καὶ τὸ ἀληθές. ↵Est autem, quemadmodum in anima aliquotiens quidem intellectus sine vero vel falso, aliquotiens autem cum iam necesse est horum alterum inesse, sic etiam in voce; circa compositionem enim et divisionem est falsitas veritasque. As there are in the mind thoughts which do not involve truth or falsity, and also those which must be either true or false, so it is in speech. For truth and falsity imply combination and separation. τὰ μὲν οὖν ὀνόματα αὐτὰ καὶ τὰ ῥήματα ἔοικε τῷ ἄνευ συνθέσεως καὶ διαιρέσεως νοήματι, οἷον τὸ ἄνθρω↵πος ἢ λευκόν, ὅταν μὴ προστεθῇ τι• οὔτε γὰρ ψεῦδος οὔτε ἀληθές πω. σημεῖον δ’ ἐστὶ τοῦδε• καὶ γὰρ ὁ τραγέλαφοςσημαίνει μέν τι, οὔπω δὲ ἀληθὲς ἢ ψεῦδος, ἐὰν μὴ τὸ εἶναι ἢ μὴ εἶναι προστεθῇ ἢ ἁπλῶς ἢ κατὰ χρόνον. Nomina igitur ipsa et verba consimilia sunt sine compositione vel divisione ↵intellectui, ut 'homo' vel 'album', quando non additur aliquid; neque enim adhuc verum aut falsum est. Huius autem signum: 'hircocervus' enim significat aliquid sed nondum verum vel falsum, si non vel 'esse' vel 'non esse' addatur vel simpliciter vel secundum tempus. Nouns and verbs, provided nothing is added, are like thoughts without combination or separation; 'man' and 'white', as isolated terms, are not yet either true or false. In proof of this, consider the word 'goat-stag.' It has significance, but there is no truth or falsity about it, unless 'is' or 'is not' is added, either in the present or in some other tense. Ὄνομα μὲν οὖν ἐστὶ φωνὴ σημαντικὴ κατὰ συνθήκην ↵ ἄνευ χρόνου, ἧς μηδὲν μέρος ἐστὶ σημαντικὸν κεχωρι- σμένον• ἐν γὰρ τῷ Κάλλιππος τὸ ιππος οὐδὲν καθ’ αὑτὸ σημαίνει, ὥσπερ ἐν τῷ λόγῳ τῷ καλὸς ἵππος . Nomen ergo est vox significativa secundum placitum ↵sine tempore, cuius nulla pars est significativa separata; in 'equiferus' enim 'ferus' nihil per se significat, quemadmodum in oratione quae est 'equus ferus'. Chapter 2 By a noun we mean a sound significant by convention, which has no reference to time, and of which no part is significant apart from the rest. In the noun 'Fairsteed,' the part 'steed' has no significance in and by itself, as in the phrase 'fair steed.' οὐ μὴν οὐδ’ ὥσπερ ἐν τοῖς ἁπλοῖς ὀνόμασιν, οὕτως ἔχει καὶ ἐν τοῖς πεπλεγμένοις• ἐν ἐκείνοις μὲν γὰρ οὐδαμῶς τὸ μέρος ση↵μαντικόν, ἐν δὲ τούτοις βούλεται μέν, ἀλλ’ οὐδενὸς κεχωρισμένον , οἷον ἐν τῷ ἐπακτροκέλης τὸ κελης. At vero nonquemadmodum in simplicibus nominibus, sic se habet et in compositis; in illis enim nullo modo pars significativa est↵, in his autem vult quidem sed nullius separati, ut in 'equiferus' <'ferus'>. Yet there is a difference between simple and composite nouns; for in the former the part is in no way significant, in the latter it contributes to the meaning of the whole, although it has not an independent meaning. Thus in the word 'pirate-boat' the word 'boat' has no meaning except as part of the whole word. ↵τὸ δὲ κατὰ συνθήκην, ὅτι φύσει τῶν ὀνομάτων οὐδέν ἐστιν, ἀλλ’ ὅταν γένηται σύμβολον• ἐπεὶ δηλοῦσί γέ τι καὶ οἱ ἀγράμ- ματοι ψόφοι, οἷον θηρίων, ὧν οὐδέν ἐστιν ὄνομα. "Secundum placitum" vero, quoniam naturaliter nominum nihil est sed quando fit nota; nam designant et inlitterati soni, ut ferarum, quorum nihil est nomen. The limitation 'by convention' was introduced because nothing is by nature a noun or name-it is only so when it becomes a symbol; inarticulate sounds, such as those which brutes produce, are significant, yet none of these constitutes a noun. τὸ ↵ δ’ οὐκ ἄνθρωπος οὐκ ὄνομα• οὐ μὴν οὐδὲ κεῖται ὄνομα ὅ τι δεῖ καλεῖν αὐτό, —οὔτε γὰρ λόγος οὔτε ἀπόφασίς ἐστιν• — ἀλλ’ ἔστω ὄνομα ἀόριστον. ↵ 'Non homo' vero non est nomen; at vero nec positum est nomen quod illud oporteat appellari -- neque enim oratio aut negatio est -- sed sit nomen infinitum. The expression 'not-man' is not a noun. There is indeed no recognized term by which we may denote such an expression, for it is not a sentence or a denial. Let it then be called an indefinite noun. ↵τὸ δὲ Φίλωνος ἢ Φίλωνι καὶ ὅσα (16b.) τοιαῦτα οὐκ ὀνόματα ἀλλὰ πτώσεις ὀνόματος. 'Catonis' autem vel 'Catoni' et quaecumque talia sunt non sunt nomina sed casus nominis. The expressions 'of Philo', 'to Philo', and so on, constitute not nouns, but cases of a noun. λόγος δέ ἐστιν αὐτοῦ τὰ μὲν ἄλλα κατὰ τὰ αὐτά, ὅτι δὲ μετὰ τοῦ ἔστιν ἢ ἦν ἢ ἔσται οὐκ ἀληθεύει ἢ ψεύδεται, —τὸ δ’ ὄνομα ἀεί,— οἷον Φίλωνός ἐστιν ἢ οὐκ ἔστιν• οὐδὲν γάρ πω οὔτε ἀλη↵θεύει οὔτε ψεύδεται. Ratio autem eius est in aliis quidem eadem sed differt quoniam, cum 'est' vel 'fuit' vel 'erit' adiunctum, neque verum neque falsum est, nomen vero semper; ut 'Catonis est' vel 'non est' -- nondum enim aliquid neque rerum dicit neque mentitur. The definition of these cases of a noun is in other respects the same as that of the noun proper, but, when coupled with 'is', 'was', or will be', they do not, as they are, form a proposition either true or false, and this the noun proper always does, under these conditions. Take the words 'of Philo is' or 'of or 'of Philo is not'; these words do not, as they stand, form either a true or a false proposition. ↵Ῥῆμα δέ ἐστι τὸ προσσημαῖνον χρόνον, οὗ μέρος οὐδὲν σημαίνει χωρίς• ἔστι δὲ τῶν καθ’ ἑτέρου λεγομένων σημεῖον. Verbum autem est quod consignificat tempus, cuius pars nihil extra significat; et est semper eorum quae de altero praedicantur nota. Chapter 3 A verb is that which, in addition to its proper meaning, carries with it the notion of time. No part of it has any independent meaning, and it is a sign of something said of something else. λέγω δ’ ὅτι προσσημαίνει χρόνον, οἷον ὑγίεια μὲν ὄνομα, τὸ δ’ ὑγιαίνει ῥῆμα• προσσημαίνει γὰρ τὸ νῦν ὑπάρχειν. καὶ ἀεὶ ↵ τῶν ὑπαρχόντων σημεῖόν ἐστιν, οἷον τῶν καθ’ ὑποκειμένου. Dico autem quoniamconsignificat tempus, ut 'cursus' quidem nomen est, 'currit' vero verbum -- consignificat enim nunc esse -- ; et semper eorum quae de altero dicuntur nota est, ut eorum quae de subiecto vel in subiecto. I will explain what I mean by saying that it carries with it the notion of time. 'Health' is a noun, but 'is healthy' is a verb; for besides its proper meaning it indicates the present existence of the state in question. Moreover, a verb is always a sign of something said of something else, i.e. of something either predicable of or present in some other thing. τὸ δὲ οὐχ ὑγιαίνει καὶ τὸ οὐ κάμνει οὐ ῥῆμα λέγω• προσσημαίνει μὲν γὰρ χρόνον καὶ ἀεὶ κατά τινος ὑπάρχει, τῇ διαφορᾷ δὲ ὄνομα οὐ κεῖται• ἀλλ’ ἔστω ἀόριστον ῥῆμα, ↵ ὅτι ὁμοίως ἐφ’ ὁτουοῦν ὑπάρχει καὶ ὄντος καὶ μὴ ὄντος. 'Non currit' vero et 'non laborat' non verbum dico; consignificat quidem tempus et semper de aliquo est, differentiae autem huic nomen non est positum; sed sit infinitum verbum, quoniam similiter in quolibet est vel quod est vel quod non est. Such expressions as 'is not-healthy', 'is not, ill', I do not describe as verbs; for though they carry the additional note of time, and always form a predicate, there is no specified name for this variety; but let them be called indefinite verbs, since they apply equally well to that which exists and to that which does not. ὁμοίως δὲ καὶ τὸ ὑγίανεν ἢ τὸ ὑγιανεῖ οὐ ῥῆμα, ἀλλὰ πτῶσις ῥήματος• διαφέρει δὲ τοῦ ῥήματος, ὅτι τὸ μὲν τὸν παρόντα προσσημαίνει χρόνον, τὰ δὲ τὸν πέριξ. Similiter autem vel 'curret' vel 'currebat' non verbum est sed casus verbi; differt autem a verbo quoniam hoc quidem praesens significat tempus, illa vero quod complectitur. Similarly 'he was healthy', 'he will be healthy', are not verbs, but tenses of a verb; the difference lies in the fact that the verb indicates present time, while the tenses of the verb indicate those times which lie outside the present. αὐτὰ μὲν οὖν καθ’ αὑτὰ λεγόμενα τὰ ῥήματα ὀνόματά ↵ἐστι καὶ σημαίνει τι, —ἵστησι γὰρ ὁ λέγων τὴν διάνοιαν, καὶ ὁ ἀκούσας ἠρέμησεν,— ἀλλ’ εἰ ἔστιν ἢ μή οὔπω σημαίνει• οὐ γὰρ τὸ εἶναι ἢ μὴ εἶναι σημεῖόν ἐστι τοῦ πράγματος, οὐδ’ ἐὰν τὸ ὂν εἴπῃς ψιλόν. αὐτὸ μὲν γὰρ οὐδέν ἐστιν, προσσημαίνει δὲ σύνθεσίν τινα, ἣν ἄνευ τῶν ↵συγκειμένων οὐκ ἔστι νοῆσαι. Ipsa quidemsecundum se dicta verba nomina sunt et significant aliquid -- constituit enim qui dicit intellectum, et qui audit quiescit -- sed si est vel non est nondum significat. Neque enim 'esse' signum est rei vel 'non esse', nec si hoc ipsum 'est' purum dixeris: ipsum quidem nihil est, consignificat autem quandam compositionem quam sine compositis non est intellegere. Verbs in and by themselves are substantival and have significance, for he who uses such expressions arrests the hearer's mind, and fixes his attention; but they do not, as they stand, express any judgement, either positive or negative. For neither are 'to be' and 'not to be' the participle 'being' significant of any fact, unless something is added; for they do not themselves indicate anything, but imply a copulation, of which we cannot form a conception apart from the things coupled. ↵Λόγος δέ ἐστι φωνὴ σημαντική, ἧς τῶν μερῶν τι σημαντικόν ἐστι κεχωρισμένον, ὡς φάσις ἀλλ’ οὐχ ὡς κατάφασις. Oratio autem est vox significativa, cuius partium aliquid significativum est separatum (ut dictio, non ut affirmatio); Chapter 4 A sentence is a significant portion of speech, some parts of which have an independent meaning, that is to say, as an utterance, though not as the expression of any positive judgement. λέγω δέ, οἷον ἄνθρωπος σημαίνει τι, ἀλλ’ οὐχ ὅτι ἔστιν ἢ οὐκ ἔστιν (ἀλλ’ ἔσται κατάφασις ἢ ἀπό↵φασις ἐάν τι προστεθῇ)• ἀλλ’ οὐχ ἡ τοῦ ἀνθρώπου συλλαβὴ μία• οὐδὲ γὰρ ἐν τῷ μῦς τὸ υς σημαντικόν, ἀλλὰ φωνή ἐστι νῦν μόνον. dico autem ut 'homo' significat aliquid (sed non quoniam est aut non est; sed erit affirmatio vel negatio, si quid addatur) sed non una 'hominis' syllaba; nec in hoc quod est 'sorex' 'rex' significat sed vox est nunc sola. Let me explain. The word 'human' has meaning, but does not constitute a proposition, either positive or negative. It is only when other words are added that the whole will form an affirmation or denial. But if we separate one syllable of the word 'human' from the other, it has no meaning; similarly in the word 'mouse', the part 'ouse' has no meaning in itself, but is merely a sound. ἐν δὲ τοῖς διπλοῖς σημαίνει μέν, ἀλλ’ οὐ καθ’ αὑτό, ὥσπερ εἴρηται. In duplicibus vero significat quidem sed non secundum se, quemadmodum dictum est. In composite words, indeed, the parts contribute to the meaning of the whole; yet, as has been pointed out, they have not an independent meaning. ↵ἔστι δὲ λόγος ἅπας μὲν σημαντικός, οὐχ ὡς ὄργανον δέ, ἀλλ’ ὥσπερ εἴρηται κατὰ συνθήκην• ἀποφαντικὸς δὲ οὐ πᾶς, ἀλλ’ ἐν ᾧ τὸ ἀληθεύειν ἢ ψεύδεσθαι ὑπάρχει• οὐκ ἐν ἅπασι δὲ ὑπάρχει, οἷον ἡ εὐχὴ λόγος μέν, ἀλλ’ οὔτ’ ἀληθὴς οὔτε ψευδής. Est autem oratioomnis quidem significativa non sicut instrumentum sed (quemadmodum dictum est) secundum placitum; enuntiativa vero non omnis sed in qua verum vel falsum inest; non autem in omnibus, ut deprecatio oratio quidem est sed neque vera neque falsa. Every sentence has meaning, not as being the natural means by which a physical faculty is realized, but, as we have said, by convention. Yet every sentence is not a proposition; only such are propositions as have in them either truth or falsity. Thus a prayer is a sentence, but is neither true nor false. οἱ ↵ μὲν οὖν ἄλλοι ἀφείσθωσαν, —ῥητορικῆς γὰρ ἢ ποιητικῆς οἰκειοτέρα ἡ σκέψις,— ὁ δὲ ἀποφαντικὸς τῆς νῦν θεωρίας. Et caeterae quidemrelinquantur (rhetoricae enim vel poeticae convenientior consideratio est; enuntiativa vero praesentis considerationis est). Let us therefore dismiss all other types of sentence but the proposition, for this last concerns our present inquiry, whereas the investigation of the others belongs rather to the study of rhetoric or of poetry. ↵Ἔστι δὲ εἷς πρῶτος λόγος ἀποφαντικὸς κατάφασις, εἶτα ἀπόφασις• οἱ δὲ ἄλλοι συνδέσμῳ εἷς. Est autem una primaoratio enuntiativa affirmatio, deinde negatio; aliae vero coniunctione unae. Chapter 5 The first class of simple propositions is the simple affirmation, the next, the simple denial; all others are only one by conjunction. ↵ἀνάγκη δὲ ↵πάντα λόγον ἀποφαντικὸν ἐκ ῥήματος εἶναι ἢ πτώσεως• καὶ γὰρ ὁ τοῦ ἀνθρώπου λόγος, ἐὰν μὴ τὸ ἔστιν ἢ ἔσται ἢ ἦν ἤ τι τοιοῦτο προστεθῇ, οὔπω λόγος ἀποφαντικός (διότι δὲ ἕν τί ἐστιν ἀλλ’ οὐ πολλὰ τὸ ζῷον πεζὸν δίπουν, —οὐ γὰρ δὴ τῷ σύνεγγυς εἰρῆσθαι εἷς ἔσται,— ἔστι δὲ ἄλλης ↵ τοῦτο πραγματείας εἰπεῖν). Necesse est autemomnem orationem enuntiativam ex verbo esse vel casu; et enim, hominis rationi si non aut 'est' aut 'erit' aut 'fuit' aut aliquid huiusmodi addatur, nondum est oratio enuntiativa. Quare autem unum quiddam est et non multa 'animal gressibile bipes' -- neque enim eo quod propinque dicuntur unum erit -- est alterius hoc tractare negotii. Every proposition must contain a verb or the tense of a verb. The phrase which defines the species 'man', if no verb in present, past, or future time be added, is not a proposition. It may be asked how the expression 'a footed animal with two feet' can be called single; for it is not the circumstance that the words follow in unbroken succession that effects the unity. This inquiry, however, finds its place in an investigation foreign to that before us. ἔστι δὲ εἷς λόγος ἀποφαντικὸς ἢ ὁ ἓν δηλῶν ἢ ὁ συνδέσμῳ εἷς, πολλοὶ δὲ οἱ πολλὰ καὶ μὴ ἓν ἢ οἱ ἀσύνδετοι. Est autem una oratioenuntiativa quae unum significat vel coniunctione una, plures autem quae plura et non unum vel inconiunctae. We call those propositions single which indicate a single fact, or the conjunction of the parts of which results in unity: those propositions, on the other hand, are separate and many in number, which indicate many facts, or whose parts have no conjunction. ↵τὸ μὲν οὖν ὄνομα καὶ τὸ ῥῆμα φάσις ἔστω μόνον, ἐπεὶ οὐκ ἔστιν εἰπεῖν οὕτω δηλοῦντά τι τῇ φωνῇ ὥστ’ ἀποφαίνεσθαι, ἢ ἐρωτῶντός τινος, ἢ μὴ ἀλλ’ αὐτὸν ↵προαιρούμενον. Nomen ergo et verbum dictio sit sola, quoniam non est dicere sic aliquid significantem voce enuntiare, vel aliquo interrogante vel non sed ipsum proferentem. Let us, moreover, consent to call a noun or a verb an expression only, and not a proposition, since it is not possible for a man to speak in this way when he is expressing something, in such a way as to make a statement, whether his utterance is an answer to a question or an act of his own initiation. τούτων δ’ ἡ μὲν ἁπλῆ ἐστὶν ἀπόφανσις, οἷον τὶ κατὰ τινὸς ἢ τὶ ἀπὸ τινός, ἡ δ’ ἐκ τούτων συγκειμένη, οἷον λόγος τις ἤδη σύνθετος. Harum autem haec quidem simplex est enuntiatio, ut aliquid de aliquo vel aliquid ab aliquo, haec autem ex his coniuncta, velut oratio quaedam iam composita. To return: of propositions one kind is simple, i.e. that which asserts or denies something of something, the other composite, i.e. that which is compounded of simple propositions. Ἔστι δ’ ἡ μὲν ἁπλῆ ἀπόφανσις φωνὴ σημαντικὴ περὶ τοῦ εἰ ὑπάρχει τι ἢ μὴ ὑπάρχει, ὡς οἱ χρόνοι διῄρηνται. Est autem simplexenuntiatio vox significativa de eo quod est aliquid vel non est, quemadmodum tempora divisa sunt. A simple proposition is a statement, with meaning, as to the presence of something in a subject or its absence, in the present, past, or future, according to the divisions of time. ↵ Κατάφασις δέ ἐστιν ἀπόφανσις τινὸς κατὰ τινός, ἀπόφασις δέ ἐστιν ἀπόφανσις τινὸς ἀπὸ τινός. Affirmatio vero est enuntiatio alicuius de aliquo, negatio vero enuntiatio alicuius ab aliquo. Chapter 6 An affirmation is a positive assertion of something about something, a denial a negative assertion. ↵ἐπεὶ δὲ ἔστι καὶ τὸ ὑπάρχον ἀποφαίνεσθαι ὡς μὴ ὑπάρχον καὶ τὸ μὴ ὑπάρχον ὡς ὑπάρχον καὶ τὸ ὑπάρχον ὡς ὑπάρχον καὶ τὸ μὴ ὑπάρχον ὡς μὴ ὑπάρχον, καὶ περὶ τοὺς ἐκτὸς δὲ ↵τοῦ νῦν χρόνους ὡσαύτως, ἅπαν ἂν ἐνδέχοιτο καὶ ὃ κατέφησέ τις ἀποφῆσαι καὶ ὃ ἀπέφησε καταφῆσαι• ὥστε δῆλον ὅτι πάσῃ καταφάσει ἐστὶν ἀπόφασις ἀντικειμένη καὶ πάσῃ ἀποφάσει κατάφασις. Quoniam autem est enuntiare et quod est non esse et quod non est esse et quod est esse et quod non est non esse, et circa ea extrinsecus praesentis temporis similiter omne contingit quod quis affirmaverit negare et quod quis negaverit affirmare; quare manifestum est quoniam omni affirmationi est negatio opposita et omni negationi affirmatio. Now it is possible both to affirm and to deny the presence of something which is present or of something which is not, and since these same affirmations and denials are possible with reference to those times which lie outside the present, it would be possible to contradict any affirmation or denial. Thus it is plain that every affirmation has an opposite denial, and similarly every denial an opposite affirmation. καὶ ἔστω ἀντίφασις τοῦτο, κατάφασις καὶ ἀπόφασις αἱ ἀντικείμεναι• λέγω δὲ ἀντικεῖσθαι ↵τὴν τοῦ αὐτοῦ κατὰ τοῦ αὐτοῦ, —μὴ ὁμωνύμως δέ, καὶ ὅσα ἄλλα τῶν τοιούτων προσδιοριζόμεθα πρὸς τὰς σοφιστικὰς ἐνοχλήσεις. Et sit hoccontradictio, affirmatio et negatio oppositae; dico autem opponi eiusdem de eodem, non autemaequivoce et quaecumquecaetera talium determinamus contra sophisticas importunitates. We will call such a pair of propositions a pair of contradictories. Those positive and negative propositions are said to be contradictory which have the same subject and predicate. The identity of subject and of predicate must not be 'equivocal'. Indeed there are definitive qualifications besides this, which we make to meet the casuistries of sophists. ↵Ἐπεὶ δέ ἐστι τὰ μὲν καθόλου τῶν πραγμάτων τὰ δὲ καθ’ ἕκαστον, —λέγω δὲ καθόλου μὲν ὃ ἐπὶ πλειόνων πέφυκε ↵κατηγορεῖσθαι, καθ’ ἕκαστον δὲ ὃ μή, οἷον ἄνθρωπος μὲν ↵ τῶν καθόλου Καλλίας δὲ τῶν καθ’ ἕκαστον,— ἀνάγκη δ’ ἀποφαίνεσθαι ὡς ὑπάρχει τι ἢ μή, ὁτὲ μὲν τῶν καθόλου τινί, ὁτὲ δὲ τῶν καθ’ ἕκαστον. Quoniam autemsunt haec quidem rerum universalia, illa vero singillatim (dico autem universale quod in pluribus natum est praedicari, singulare vero quod non, ut 'homo' quidem universale, 'Plato' vero eorum quae sunt singularia), necesse est autem enuntiare quoniam inest aliquid aut non, aliquotiens quidem eorum alicui quae sunt universalia, aliquotiens vero eorum quae sunt singularia. Chapter 7Some things are universal, others individual. By the term 'universal' I mean that which is of such a nature as to be predicated of many subjects, by 'individual' that which is not thus predicated. Thus 'man' is a universal, 'Callias' an individual. Our propositions necessarily sometimes concern a universal subject, sometimes an individual. ἐὰν μὲν οὖν καθόλου ἀποφαίνηται ἐπὶ τοῦ καθόλου ὅτι ὑπάρχει ἢ μή, ἔσονται ἐναντίαι ↵ἀποφάνσεις, —λέγω δὲ ἐπὶ τοῦ καθόλου ἀποφαίνεσθαι καθόλου, οἷον πᾶς ἄνθρωπος λευκός, οὐδεὶς ἄνθρωπος λευκός• — ὅταν δὲ ἐπὶ τῶν καθόλου μέν, μὴ καθόλου δέ, οὐκ εἰσὶν ἐναντίαι, τὰ μέντοι δηλούμενα ἔστιν εἶναι ἐναντία, —λέγω δὲ τὸ μὴ καθόλου ἀποφαίνεσθαι ἐπὶ τῶν καθόλου, οἷον ἔστι ↵ λευκὸς ἄνθρωπος, οὐκ ἔστι λευκὸς ἄνθρωπος• καθόλου γὰρ ὄντος τοῦ ἄνθρωπος οὐχ ὡς καθόλου χρῆται τῇ ἀποφάνσει• τὸ ↵γὰρ πᾶς οὐ τὸ καθόλου σημαίνει ἀλλ’ ὅτι καθόλου. Si ergo universaliterenuntiet in universali quoniam est aut non, erunt contrariae enuntiationes (dico autem in universali enuntiationem universalem ut 'omnis homo albus est', 'nullus homo albus est'); quando autem in universalibus non universaliter, non sunt contrariae, quae autemsignificantur est esse contraria (dico autem non universaliter enuntiare in his quae sunt universalia, ut 'est albus homo', 'non est albus homo'; cum enim universale sit homo, non universaliter utitur enuntiatione; 'omnis' namque non 'universale' sed 'quoniam universaliter' consignificat). If, then, a man states a positive and a negative proposition of universal character with regard to a universal, these two propositions are 'contrary'. By the expression 'a proposition of universal character with regard to a universal', such propositions as 'every man is white', 'no man is white' are meant. When, on the other hand, the positive and negative propositions, though they have regard to a universal, are yet not of universal character, they will not be contrary, albeit the meaning intended is sometimes contrary. As instances of propositions made with regard to a universal, but not of universal character, we may take the 'propositions 'man is white', 'man is not white'. 'Man' is a universal, but the proposition is not made as of universal character; for the word 'every' does not make the subject a universal, but rather gives the proposition a universal character. — ἐπὶ δὲ τοῦ κατηγορουμένου τὸ καθόλου κατηγορεῖν καθόλου οὐκ ἔστιν ἀληθές• οὐδεμία γὰρ κατάφασις ἔσται, ἐν ᾗ τοῦ κατηγορου↵μένου καθόλου τὸ καθόλου κατηγορηθήσεται, οἷον ἔστι πᾶς ἄνθρωπος πᾶν ζῷον. In eo vero quod praedicatur universaliter universale praedicare universaliter non est verum; nulla enim affirmatio erit, in qua de universaliter praedicato universale praedicetur, ut 'omnis homo omne animal'. If, however, both predicate and subject are distributed, the proposition thus constituted is contrary to truth; no affirmation will, under such circumstances, be true. The proposition 'every man is every animal' is an example of this type. ↵ Ἀντικεῖσθαι μὲν οὖν κατάφασιν ἀποφάσει λέγω ἀντιφατικῶς τὴν τὸ καθόλου σημαίνουσαν τῷ αὐτῷ ὅτι οὐ καθόλου, οἷον πᾶς ἄνθρωπος λευκός—οὐ πᾶς ἄνθρωπος λευκός, οὐδεὶς ἄνθρωπος λευκός—ἔστι τις ἄνθρω↵πος λευκός• ἐναντίως δὲ τὴν τοῦ καθόλου κατάφασιν καὶ τὴν τοῦ καθόλου ἀπόφασιν, οἷον πᾶς ἄνθρωπος δίκαιος—οὐδεὶς ἄνθρωπος δίκαιος• Opponi autemaffirmationem negationi dico contradictorie quae universale significat eidem quoniam non universaliter, ut 'omnis homo albus est', 'non omnis homo albus est', 'nullus homo albus est', 'quidam homo albus est'; contrarie vero universalem affirmationem et universalem negationem, 'ut omnis homo iustus est', 'nullus homo iustus est'; An affirmation is opposed to a denial in the sense which I denote by the term 'contradictory', when, while the subject remains the same, the affirmation is of universal character and the denial is not. The affirmation 'every man is white' is the contradictory of the denial 'not every man is white', or again, the proposition 'no man is white' is the contradictory of the proposition 'some men are white'. But propositions are opposed as contraries when both the affirmation and the denial are universal, as in the sentences 'every man is white', 'no man is white', 'every man is just', 'no man is just'.