Institutio Oratoria
Quintilian
Quintilian. Institutio Oratoria, Volume 1-4. Butler, Harold Edgeworth, translator. Cambridge, Mass; London: Harvard University Press, William Heinemann Ltd., 1920-1922.
I have already said more than was necessary on the subject of figures. But there will still be some who think that the following (which they call ἀνθυποφορὰ is a figure: Incredibile est, quod dico, sed verum: [*](What I say is incredible, but true.ἀνθυποφορὰ = answer to imaginary objection. ) they say the same of Aliquis hoc semel tubit, neno bis, ego ter [*]( Some have endured this once, while no one has endured it twice, but I have endured it thrice. διέξοδος = going through in detail. ) (which they style διέξοδος ), and of Longius evects sum, sed redeo ad propositumr, [*](I have made a long digression, but now return to the point.ἄφοδος strictly = departure, referring to the digression, rather than the return to the point. ) which they call
There are some figures of speech which differ little from figures of thought, as for example that of hesitation. For when we hesitate over a thing, it belongs to the former class, whereas when we hesitate over a word, it must be assigned to the latter, as for instance if we say,
I do not know whether to call this wickedness or folly.[*](Auct. ad Hrem. IV. xxix. 40. )
The same consideration applies to correction. For correction emends, where hesitation expresses a doubt. Some have even held that it applies to personification as well; they think, for example, that Avarice is the mother of cruelly, Sallust's O Romulus of Arpinum in his speech against Cicero, and the Thriasian Oedipus [*]( An allusion to some inhabitant of the Athenian village of Thria. ) of Menander are figures of speech. All these points have been discussed in full detail by those who have not given this subject merely incidental treatment as a portion of a larger theme, but have devoted whole books to the discussion of the topic: I allude to writers such as Caecilius, Dionysius, Rutilius, Cornificius, Visellius and not a few others, although there are living authors who will be no less famous than they.
Now though I am ready to admit that more figures of speech may perhaps be discovered by certain writers, I cannot agree that such figures are better than those which have been laid down by high authorities. Above all I would point out that Cicero has included a number of figures in the third book of the de Oratore, [*](See IX. i. 26.) which in his later work, the Orator, [*](See IX. i. 37.) he has omitted, thereby seeming to indicate that he condemned them. Some of these are figures of thought rather than of speech, such as meiosis, the introduction of the unexpected, imagery, answering our own questions, digression, permission, [*](See IX. ii. 25.) arguments drawn from opposites (for I suppose that by
such as arrangement, distinction by headings, and circumscription, whether this latter term be intended to signify the concise expression of thought or definition, which is actually regarded by Cornificius and Rutilius as a figure of speech. With regard to the elegant transposition of words, that is, hyperbaton, which Caecilius also thinks is a figure, I have included it among tropes. As for mutation [*](Immutatio in Cicero (IX. i. 35) seems to mean metonymy or ὑπαλλαγή (see Orator, xxvii. 92): The ἀλλοίωσις of Rutilius (i. 2) is however differentiation. )
of the kind which Rutilius calls ἀλλοίωσις its function is to point out the differences between men, things and deeds: if it is used on an extended scale, it is not a figure, if on a narrower scale, it is mere antithesis, while if it is intended to mean hypallage, enough has already been said on the subject. [*](VIII. 6. 23.)
Again what sort of a figure is this addition of a reason, for what is advanced, which Rutilius calls αἰτιολογία ? [*](ii. 19.) It may also be doubted whether the assignment of a reason for each distinct statement, with which Rutilius [*](Opening of Book I.) opens his discussion of figures, is really a figure.
He calls it προσαπόδοσις and states [*]( The subj. servetur seems to indicate indirect speech. ) that strictly it applies to a number of propositions, since the reason is either attached to each proposition separately, as in the following passage from Gaius Antonius: [*](Elected consul with Cicero for 63 B.C.)
But I do not fear him as an accuser, for I am innocent; I do not dread him as a rival candidate, for I am Antonius; I do not expect to see him consul, for he is Cicero;