BMCR 2008.12.15, Lucia Pasetti, Plauto in Apuleio

Lucia Pasetti, Plauto in Apuleio.  Bologna:  Pa\tron Editore, 2007.
Pp. 227.  ISBN 978-88-555-2910-5.  EUR 17.00 (pb).

Reviewed by Regine May, University of Leeds ([email protected])
Word count:  1534 words
-------------------------------
To read a print-formatted version of this review, see
http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/bmcr/2008/2008-12-15.html
To comment on this review, see
http://www.bmcreview.org/2008/12/20081215.html
-------------------------------

In this book, Pasetti (hereafter P.) offers a detailed study of some
linguistic aspects of Apuleius's language and its Plautine influence.
It is based on frequency analyses of three selected phenomena, and its
three chapters always conclude with word lists for Apuleius and Plautus
and statistics. The method of the book is thus quantitative and
stylistic analysis.

In many respects it uses and replaces Desertine,[[1]] which was a
decontextualised attempt at comparing (often only listing) Plautine
words in Apuleius, and, especially in its first chapter, Abate.[[2]]
Both works are difficult to access, and a more modern replacement of
these is very welcome. Like these books, P.'s is very technical, and
thus does not go the way of Callebat,[[3]] who combines a linguistic
with a thematic-interpretative approach and contextualises the use of
Plautine language, especially in the novel.

P.'s book is useful because its analysis expands to cover all extant
works by Apuleius, an approach much favoured in recent scholarship. She
distinguishes carefully between Apuleius's use of words he found in
Plautus (and occasionally the larger comic tradition), and words he
formed himself, following comic word formation patterns (mostly in the
Metamorphoses). Thus her work is full of detailed analyses of special
cases.

Proceeding methodically, she usually starts by discussing words shared
by both Plautus and Apuleius and no other authors in Latin, which she
subjects to detailed contextualised analysis. P. restricts herself to
giving some context and parallel passages, but generally refrains from
a more detailed discussion of possible literary functions, though
sometimes some more literary observations can be found, e.g. on the use
of diminutives in erotic subtexts (p. 19) in both authors.

There are three main sections, and each discusses a major morphological
feature: diminutives, adverbs in -tim, and nominal compounds. In the
main part of each chapter P. discusses systematically each or most
occurrences of the phenomenon at hand. These phenomena are not chosen
randomly, but rather selected because of their frequency in archaic
Latin, followed by a decline of usage during the Classical period, and
then again their popularity in later Latin.

Few people will read this book cover to cover, but since it consists of
many single sections and its argument is orderly structured, many will
wish to consult it.

I will now look at the three main sections in detail:

In the chapter on diminutives P. distinguishes comic from archaic
usage. Diminutives, P. argues, in later Latin did not always maintain
their diminutive character, but have become part of the language
pattern, often used by Apuleius for rhetorical and euphonic reasons.
Diminutives are found amongst Apuleius's works mainly in the
Metamorphoses, and are, according to P., often (but not always)
inspired by context and stylistic richness, but equally often used just
for phonetic or rhetorical reasons (p. 22).

Topics inviting Apuleius to form new diminutives are primarily food and
sex, but they are also often found in highly rhetorical passages,
especially ekphraseis, thus enhancing Apuleius's Kunstprosa.
Diminutives, if not taken directly from Plautus, may often be inspired
by Plautine ethos.

The first chapter finishes with a quick run-through of other possible
sources of diminutives, e.g., neoteric poetry or other archaic
dramatists. P. finds that Apuleius derives his diminutives from similar
semantic areas to dramatists: the sermo comicus and ekphrasis, and
enhancing his stylistic level is his main purpose in using them.

The second chapter discusses adverbs in -tim. This morphological
category was most frequent in Plautus and other comic theatre (e.g.
Atellana), much less so in Lucilius, but another cluster can be found
in tragedy, and occasionally also in other authors and genres, in prose
primarily in Sisenna's Historiae. Thus the analysis of -tim adverbs can
focus less on Plautus. Furthermore, most second century authors
(Apuleius, Fronto and Gellius) have many new formations of this type.
Apuleius's interest in -tim words, P. finds, is again partly
archaising, partly neologising, and he likes to combine two or more of
these adverbs for effect. P. offers a detailed morphological analysis
of different types of -tim adverbs, and again concludes that Apuleius
uses them for rhetorical purposes, as he is very fond of their capacity
for jingling homoioteleuta. The overlap of -tim adverbs between Plautus
and Apuleius is surprisingly small (P. finds only four, all of them in
the Metamorphoses) but even if neologisms and -tim adverbs are not
restricted to derivations from Plautus, much comic influence can be
felt here.

The third and last main chapter, perhaps the most illuminating and
diverse of the three, concentrates on nominal compounds. Plautus uses
them, as P. argues, for comic purposes: examples include the colourful
expression of the lives and punishments of slaves, or the parody of
more serious tragic-epic language and style (e.g. of Ennius). Apuleius,
on the other hand, uses them to enrich his prose, with no parodic
intentions.

Again, the actual overlap between Plautus and Apuleius is very small:
only two nominal compounds that are not too common in other authors
(cordoliumand opiparus) form an obviously conscious usage by Apuleius
of Plautine words. They are discussed in detail.

Cordolium is found in Apuleius Met. 9.21 (the adulterer Philesitherus's
sandals are found under a woman's bed by her husband, who then
experiences this "heartache"). P. says this situation is comic, but is
it not rather inspired by mime, since female adultery is a staple of
that genre rather than comedy, where no woman is actively adulterous?
In Apuleius, it seems, it is difficult to categorize his conscious use
of slippage between genres, even in a linguistic discussion, which is
what P. usually restricts herself to. To give an example of P.'s
method: she discusses (p. 112) the term versipellis, and lists
occurrences in Plautus, and their meaning is briefly contextualised.
Then the same is done for other authors (here Lucilius), and then the
instances in imperial Latin (Petronius, Pliny the Elder), where a
certain narrowing of meaning to "werewolf" alone has taken place.
Finally, the passage in Apuleius's Met. 2.22 is given, with the meaning
of the word and its context. There is little analysis as to how the
meaning of the word could change subtly, and how its effect as a
Plautine or Petronian derivation in the specific Apuleian context would
work.

P. also discusses the influence of poetic language (Virgil, Catullus)
on Apuleius's activity as a creator of neologisms, e.g. in the
proliferation of semi- composita, or the Augustan influence of -fer
compounds on his language. Other suffixes and affixes are again shown
to have primarily rhetorical value.

As with the -tim adverbs,  there is very little overlap between Plautus
and Apuleius in the choice of actual words, but the process of word
formation is similar for both authors: both, according to P., are
fascinated by the phonetic possibilities of these words, and again
Apuleius is rather driven by rhetoric and Kunstprosa. A difference in
usage can however be detected: Plautus primarily parodies epic-tragic
language in his use of nominal compounds, while Apuleius attempts to
poeticise his prose style.

P. concludes that there are different layers and functions of
"Plautisms" in Apuleius: They often are intended to embellish the
stylistic texture, and in that function Plautine words or word
formations are often decontextualised as far as their meaning is
concerned. Sometimes, words are chosen to evoke comic situations, but
not one specific text. It can however be the case occasionally that
Apuleius has a specific Plautine context in mind, and in particular
neologisms in Plautine forms can evoke a comic atmosphere.

Only occasional reference is made to the other body of comic authors,
not only Terence, whose language is of course very different, but to
other fragmentary comic authors, who are rarely brought into the
argument, leaving the comparison very much to the two authors of the
title, Plautus and Apuleius.

P. offers many analyses, detailed studies of Apuleius's language, but
very little in terms of synthesis and interpretation of the phenomena
she discovers. A section summarising the findings for each chapter
would have been useful. As it stands now, the information is rather
fragmentary and unstructured. The single analyses are often useful and
illuminating, but there is little overarching synthesis in the chapters
themselves. Surely more can be said about Apuleius's predilections for
these Plautine words and word derivations, for example about their
function beyond rhetorical embellishment and Kunstprosa, or a
discussion of why an overwhelming amount of the phenomena P. describes
derive from the Metamorphoses rather than the other, more rhetorical or
philosophical, works by Apuleius. Apuleius for P. is primarily keen on
phonetics and a stylist. For Apuleius, Plautus is a poet to be mined
for style, both for words and word formations.

Any commentator on Apuleius's language and editor of his text will need
to consult this book, while literary critics may consider it as a
starting point for further analysis.

The volume contains several indices, lists of instances of references
to secondary literature (not necessarily complete, some gaps are
evident), indices of words and themes discussed, as well as of
passages. The bibliography is full, but there is the occasional slip or
typo. Note for example that footnote 5 on p. 162 should read Swain 2004
instead of 2003, and "commanded" instead of "commended".


------------------
Notes:


1.   H. Desertine, "De Apulei studiis Plautinis", Diss. Nijmegen, 1898.

2.   F.R. Abate, "Diminutives in Apuleian Latinity", Diss. Columbus,
1978.

3.   L. Callebat, Sermo cotidianus dans les Me/tamorphoses d' Apule/e,
Caen 1968; id., Languages du roman latin, Hildesheim 1998, and several
other publications.