The Ambiguity lies again in [Greek:  touto], as we shew’d before.  But these Sentences may be render’d into Latin well enough; but that which follows cannot possibly by any Means be render’d, [Greek:  Ara ho sy phes einai, touto sy phes einai; phes de lithon einai sy ara phes lithos einai].  Which they thus render, putas quod tu dicis esse, hoc tu dicis esse:  dicis autem lapidem esse, tu ergo lapis dicis esse. Pray tell me what Sense can be made of these Words?  For the Ambiguity lies partly in the Idiom of the Greek Phrase, which is in the major and minor.  Although in the major there is another Ambiguity in the two Words [Greek:  o] and [Greek:  touto], which if they be taken in the nominative Case, the Sense will be, That which thou sayest thou art, that thou art. But if in the accusative Case the Sense will be, Whatsoever thou sayst is, that thou sayst is; and to this Sense he subjoins [Greek:  lithon phes einai], but to the former Sense he subjoins [Greek:  sy ara phes lithos einai]. Catullus once attempted to imitate the Propriety of the Greek Tongue: 

      Phaselus iste, quem videtis, hospites,
      Ait fuisse navium celerrimus.

      My Guests, that Gally which you see
      The most swift of the Navy is, says he._

For so was this Verse in the old Edition.  Those who write Commentaries on these Places being ignorant of this, must of Necessity err many Ways.  Neither indeed can that which immediately follows be perspicuous in the Latin. [Greek:  Kai ara eoti sigonta legein; ditton gar esti to sigonta legein, to te ton legonta sigan, kai to ta legomena.] That they have render’d thus; Et putas, est tacentem dicere?  Duplex enim est, tacentem dicere; et hunc dicere tacentem, et quae dicuntur. Are not these Words more obscure than the Books of the Sibyls?

Hi. I am not satisfy’d with the Greek.

Le. I’ll interpret it as well as I can. Is it possible for a Man to speak while he is silent? This Interrogation has a two-Fold Sense, the one of which is false and absurd, and the other may be true; for it cannot possibly be that he who speaks, should not speak what he does speak; that is that he should be silent while he is speaking; but it is possible, that he who speaks may be silent of him who speaks.  Although this Example falls into another Form that he adds a little after.  And again, I admire, that a little after, in that kind of Ambiguity that arises from more Words conjoin’d, the Greeks have chang’d the Word Seculum into the Letters, [Greek:  epistasthai ta grammata], seeing that the Latin Copies have it, scire seculum.  For here arises a double Sense, either that the Age itself might know something, or that somebody might know the Age.  But this is an easier Translation of it into [Greek:  aiona] or [Greek:  kosmon], than into [Greek:  grammata].  For