Kitap 3
14
VARRO believes that dimidium librum legi (I have read half the book ), or dimidiam fabulam legi (I have read half the play ), or any other expression of that kind, is incorrect and faulty usage. For, says he, Fr. p. 349, Bipont. one ought to say dimidiatum librum ('the halved book'), not dimidium, and dimidiatam fabulam, not dimidiam. But, on the contrary, if from a pint a half-pint has been poured, one should not say that 'a halved pint' has been poured, but a ' half-pint,' and when one has received five hundred sesterces out of a thousand that were owing him, we must say that he has received a half sestertium, The sestertium was the designation of a thousand sesterces, originally a gen. plur., later a norm. sing. neut. not a halved one. But if a silver bowl," he says, which I own in common with another person, has been divided into two parts, I ought to speak of it as 'halved,' not as 'a half': but my share of the silver of which the bowl is made is a 'half,' not 'halved.' Thus Varro discusses and analyzes very acutely the difference between dimidium and dimidiatum, and he declares that Quintus Ennius spoke, in his Annals, with understanding in the line: Ann. 536, Vahlen2, reading sicut. As if one brought a halved cup of wine, and similarly the part that is missing from the cup should be spoken of as half, not halved.
