# WORDS 1.94 -
LATIN-to-ENGLISH DICTIONARY PROGRAM

## WORDS (Latin) Version 1.94

SUMMARY
INTRODUCTION
OPERATIONAL DESCRIPTION
Program Operation
Examples
Signs and Abbreviations in Meaning
BRIEF PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
Special Cases
Uniques
Tricks
Codes in Inflection Line
Help for Parameters
GUIDING PHILOSOPHY
Purpose
Method
Word Meanings
Proper Names
Letter Conventions
Dictionary Codes
Evolution of the Dictionary
Current Status and Future Plans
WRITING DICT.LOC AND UNIQUES
DICT.LOC
UNIQUES
DEVELOPERS AND REHOSTING

### SUMMARY

This program, Words for Linux, takes keyboard input or a file of Latin text lines and provides an analysis of each word individually. It uses an INFLECT.SEC, UNIQUES., ADDONS., STEMFILE.GEN, INDXFILE.GEN, and DICTFILE.GEN, and possibly .SPE and DICT.LOC.

The dictionary contains over 18000 entries, as would be counted in an ordinary dictionary. This expands to almost twice that number of individual stems (the count that the program may display at startup), and may generate many hundreds of thousands of 'words' that one can construct over all the declensions and conjugations. This is still a modest dictionary in absolute size. Kidd's Collins Latin Gem, a breast-pocket (8 by 11 cm.) edition (which even has English_to_Latin) contains about 17,000 Latin entries. The ultimate 2100 page Oxford Latin Dictionary has about 35,000 entries, excluding proper names (and it has lots of those). This version of WORDS provides a tool to help in translations for the Latin student, but the dictionary is slowly growing, and A through B can match any dictionary.

A few hundred prefixes and suffixes further enlarge the range. These can generate additional words - some of which are recognized Latin words, some are perfectly reasonable words which may never have been used by Cicero or Caesar but might have been used by Augustine or a monk of Jarrow, and some are nonsense.

### INTRODUCTION

I am no expert in Latin, indeed my training is limited to a couple of years in high school 50 years ago. But I always felt that Latin, as presented after two millennia, was a scientific language. It had the interesting property of inflection, words were constructed in a logical manner. I admired this feature, but could never remember the vocabulary well enough when it came time to exercise it on tests.

I decided to automate an elementary-level Latin vocabulary list. As a first stage, I produced a computer program that will analyze a Latin word and give the various possible interpretations (case, person, gender, tense, mood, etc.), within the limitations of its dictionary. This might be the first step to a full parsing system, but, although just a development tool, it is useful by itself.

Please remember that this is only a computer exercise in automating a Latin dictionary. I am not a Latin scholar and anything in the program or documentation is filtered by me from reading Latin dictionaries. Please let no one go to his teacher and cite me as an authority.

While developing this initial implementation, based on different sources, I learned (or re-learned) something that I had overlooked at the beginning. Latin courses, and even very large Latin dictionaries, are put together under very strict ground rules. Some dictionary might be based exclusively on 'Classical' (200 BC - 200 AD) texts; it might have every word that appears in every surviving writing of Cicero, but nothing much before or since. Such a dictionary will be inadequate for translating medieval theological or scientific texts. In another example, one textbook might use Caesar as their main source of readings (my high school texts did), while another might avoid Caesar and all military writings (either for pacifist reasons, or just because the author had taught Caesar for 30 years and had grown bored with going over the same material, year after year). One can imagine that the selection of words in such different texts would differ considerably; moreover, even with the same words, the meanings attached would be different. This presents a problem in the development of a dictionary for general use.

One could produce a separate dictionary for each era and application or a universal dictionary with tags to indicate the appropriate application and meaning for each word. With such a tag arrangement one would not be offered inappropriate or improbable interpretations. The present system has such a mechanism, but it is not yet exploited.

The Version 1.94 dictionary may be found to be of fairly general use for the student; it has the easy words that every text uses. It also has a goodly number of adverbs, prepositions, and conjunctions, which are not as sensitive to application as are the nouns and verbs. The system also tests a number of prefixes and suffixes, if the raw word cannot be found. This allows an interpretation of many of the words otherwise unknown. The result of this analysis is fairly straightforward in most cases, is accurate but esoteric in some, and for about 1 in 10 constructed words it gives an answer that has no relation to the normal dictionary meaning.

BE WARNED! The program will go to great lengths if all tricks are invoked. If you get a word formed with an enclitic, prefix, suffix, syncope, and a spelling modification trick, be very suspicious! It could be right, but do not bet on it.

With this facility, and a 20000 word dictionary, trials on some tested classical texts give hit rates of 97-99%, excluding proper names (there are very few proper names in the dictionary). (I am an old soldier and seem to have in the dictionary every possible word for attack or distroy. The system is near perfect for Caesar.) The question arises, what hit rate can be expected for a general dictionary. Classical Latin dictionaries have no references to the terminology of Christian theology. The legal documents and deeds of the Middle Ages are a challenge of jargon and abbreviations. These areas require special knowledge and vocabulary, but even there the ability to handle the non-specialized words is a large part of the effort.

The development system allows the inclusion of specialized vocabulary (for instance a SPEcial dictionary for specialized words not wanted in most dictionaries), and the opportunity for the user to add additional words 'on the fly' to a DICT.LOC.

The program is probably much larger than is necessary for the present application. It is still in development but some effort has now been put into optimization.

This is a Shareware program, which means it is proper to copy it and pass it on to your friends. Consider it a developmental item for which there is no charge. However, it is Copyrighted (c), so please don't sell it as your own without at least telling me.

This version is distributed without obligation, but the developer would appreciate comments and suggestions.

William A Whitaker
PO Box 3036
McLean VA 22103-3036
USA
whitaker@erols.com

### OPERATIONAL DESCRIPTION

This write up is rudimentary and assumes that the user is experienced with computers.

The WORDS program, Version 1.94, with it's accompanying data files should run on PC in DOS/Windows 95, any monitor. Simply download the self-extracting EXE file and execute it in your chosen subdirectory to UNZIP the files into a subdirectory of a hard disk. Then call WORDS.

There are a number of files associated with the program. These must be in the subdirectory of the program, and the program must be run from that subdirectory.

- WORDS.EXE is the executable program.
- INFLECT.SEC holds the encoded inflection records.
- STEMFILE.GEN contains the stems of the GENERAL dictionary.
- MEANFILE.GEN contains the meanings of the GENERAL dictionary entries.
- INDXFILE.GEN contains a set of indexes into the DICTFILE.
- There may also be a set of files for a SPECIAL (.SPE) dictionary of the same structure as the GENERAL dictionary, but there is no SPECIAL dictionary in the present distribution.
- A LOCAL dictionary may also be used. This is a limited dictionary of a different form, human readable and writeable. The knowledgeable user can augment and modify it on-line. It would consist of the file DICT.LOC.
- UNIQUES. contains certain words which regular processing does not get.
- ADDONS. contains the set of prefixes, suffixes and enclitics (-que, -ve) and the like.
- Other files may be generated by the program, so run it in a configuration that allows the creation of files.

All these files are necessary to run the program (except the optional dictionaries SPE and LOC). This excess of files is a consequence of the present developmental nature of the program. The files are very simple, almost human-readable. Presumably, a later version could condense and encode them. Nevertheless, beyond the original COPY, the user need not worry about them.

Additionally, there are files that the program may produce on request. All of these share the name WORD, with various extensions, and they are all ASCII text files which can be viewed and processed with an ordinary editor. The casual user probably does not want to get involved with these. WORD.OUT will record the whole output, WORD.UNK will list only words the program is unable to interpret. These outputs are turned on through the PARAMETERS mechanism.

PARAMETERS may be set while running the program by inputting a line containing a '#' mark as the only (or first) character. Alternatively, WORD.MOD contains the MODES that can be set by CHANGE_PARAMETERS. If this file does not exist, default modes will be used. The file may be produced or changed when changing parameters. It can also be modified, if the user is sufficiently confident, with an editor, or deleted, thereby reverting to defaults.

(There is another set of developers parameters which may be set in some versions with the input of '!'. These are not normal user facilities, probably no one but the developer would be interested. They are just mentioned here in case they ever come up accidentally, and to point out that there are other capabilities, actual and possible, which may be invoked if there is a special need.)

WORD.OUT is the file produced if the user requests, in CHANGE_PARAMETERS, output to a file. This output can be used for later manipulation with a text editor, especially when the input was a text file of some length. If the parameter UNKNOWNS_ONLY is set, the output serves as a sort of a Latin spell checker. Those words it cannot match may just not be in the dictionary, but alternatively they may be typos. A WORD.UNK file of unknowns can be generated.

#### Program Operation

To start the program, type `latin' at your shell prompt. A setup procedure will execute, processing files. Then the program will ask for a word to be keyed in. Input the word and give a return (ENTER). Information about the word will be displayed.

One can input a whole line at a time, but only one line since the return at the end of line will start the processing. If the results would fill more than a computer screen, the output is halted until the user responds to the 'MORE' message with a return. A file containing a text, a series of lines, can be input by keying in the character '@', followed (with no spaces) by the name of the file of text. This input file need not be in the program subdirectory, just use the full path and name of the file. This is usually accompanied with the setting of the parameter switchs to create and write to an output file, WORD.OUT.

One can have a comment in the file, a terminal portion of a line that is not parsed. This could be an English meaning, a source where the word was found, an indication that it may have been miscopied, etc. A comment begins with a double dash [--] and continues to the end of the line. The '--' and everything after on that line is ignored by the program.

A '#' character input will permit the user to set modes to prevent the process from trying prefixes and suffixes to get a match on an item unknown to the dictionary, put output to a file, etc. Going into the CHANGE_PARAMETERS, the '?' character calls help for each entry.

Two successive returns with no no text will terminate the program (except in text being read from an @ disk file.)

#### Examples

Following are anotated examples of output. Examination of these will give a good idea of the system. The present version may not match these examples exactly - things are changing - but the principle is there. A recent modification is the output of dictionary forms or 'principle parts' (shown below for some examples).

    =>agricolarum
    agricol.arum       N      1  1 GEN  P M P
    agricola, agricolae
    farmer

This is a simple first declension noun, and a unique interpretation. The '1 1' means it is first declension, with varient 1. This is an internal coding of the program, and may not correspond exactly with the grammatical numbering. The 'N' means it is a noun. It is the form for genative (GEN), plural (1st 'P'). The stem is masculine (M) and represents a person (2nd 'P'). The stem is given as 'agricol' and the ending is 'arum'. The stem is normal in this case, but is a product of the program, and may not always correspond to conventional usage.

    =>feminae
    femin.ae           N      1  1 GEN  S F P
    femin.ae           N      1  1 DAT  S F P
    femin.ae           N      1  1 NOM  P F P
    femin.ae           N      1  1 VOC  P F P
    femina, feminae
    woman

This word has several possible interpretations in case and number (Singular and Plural). The gender is Feminine. Presumably, the user can examine the adjoining words and reduce the set of possibilities. Maybe the program will take care of this in some future version.

    =>cornu
    corn.u             N      4  2 NOM  S N T
    corn.u             N      4  2 DAT  S N T
    corn.u             N      4  2 ACC  S N T
    corn.u             N      4  2 ABL  S N T
    cornu, cornus
    horn (of an animal); horn, trumpet; wing of an attacking army

Here is an example of another declension and a second varient. The Masculine (-us) nouns of the declension (fructus) are '4 1' and the Neuter (-u) nouns are coded as '4 2'. This word is neuter (2nd N) and represents a thing (T).

    =>ego
    ego                PRON   5  1 NOM  S C PERS
    I, me; myself

A pronoun is much like a noun. The gender is common (C), that is, it may be masculine or feminine. It is a personal (PERS) pronoun.

    =>illud
    ill.ud             PRON    6  1 NOM S N ADJECT
    ill.ud             PRON    6  1 ACC S N ADJECT
    that; those (pl.); also DEMONST

Here we have an adjectival (ADJECT) and demonstrative (DEMONST) pronoun.

    =>hic
    hic                ADV    POS
    here, in this place
    h.ic               PRON    3  1 NOM S M ADJECT
    this; these (pl.); also DEMONST

In this case there is a adjectival/demonstrative pronoun, or it may be an adverb. The POS means that the comparison of the adverb is positive.

    =>bonum
    bon.um             N      2  2 NOM  S N T
    bon.um             N      2  2 ACC  S N T
    good thing, profit, advantage; goods (pl.), possessions
    bon.um             ADJ    1  1 NOM  S N POS
    bon.um             ADJ    1  1 ACC  S M POS
    bon.um             ADJ    1  1 ACC  S N POS
    bon.um             ADJ    1  1 VOC  S N POS
    good, honest, brave, noble; better; best

Here we have an adjective, but it might also be a noun. The interpretation of the adjective says that it is POSitive, but note that there are meanings for COMParative and SUPERlative also on the line. Check the comparison value before deciding.

    =>facile
    facile             ADV    POS
    easily, readily
    facil.e            ADJ    3  2 NOM  S N POS
    facil.e            ADJ    3  2 ACC  S N POS
    facil.e            ADJ    3  2 VOC  S N POS
    easy, easy to do, without difficulty, ready, quick, good natured, courteous

Here is an adjective or and adverb. Although they are related in meaning, they are different words.

    =>acerrimus
    acerrim.us         ADJ    3  2 NOM  S M SUPER
    sharp, bitter, pointed, piercing, shrill; sagacious, keen; severe, vigoro

Here we have an adjective in the SUPERlative. The meanings are all POSitive and the user must add the -est by himself.

    =>optime
    optim.e            ADJ    1  1 VOC  S M SUPER
    good, honest, brave, noble; better; best
    optime             ADV    SUPER
    well, very, quite, rightly, agreeably, cheaply, in good, style; better; best

Here is an adjective or and adverb, both are SUPERlative.

    =>monuissemus
    monu.issemus       V       2  1 PLUP ACTIVE  SUB  1 P X
    remind, advise, warn; teach; admonish; foretell

Here is a verb for which the form is PLUPerfect, ACTIVE, SUBjunctive, 1st person, Plural. It is 2nd conjugation, varient 1.

    =>amat
    am.at              V       1  1 PRES ACTIVE  IND  3 S X
    amo, amare, amavi, amatus
    love, like; fall in love with; be fond of; have a tendency to

Another regular verb, PRESent, ACTIVE, INDicative.

    =>amatus
    amat.us            VPAR    1  1 NOM S M PERF PASSIVE PPL X
    amo, amare, amavi, amatus
    love, like; fall in love with; be fond of; have a tendency to

Here we have the PERFect, PASSIVE ParticiPLe, in the NOMinative, Singlar, Masculine.

    =>amatu
    amat.u             SUPINE  1  1 ABL S X
    amo, amare, amavi, amatus
    love, like; fall in love with; be fond of; have a tendency to

Here is the SUPINE of the verb in the ABLative Singular.

    =>orietur
    ori.etur           V       3  4 FUT  PASSIVE IND  3 S DEP
    rise, arise; spring from, appear; be descended; begin, proceed, originate

For DEPondent verbs the passive form is to be translated as if it were active voice.

    =>ab
    ab                 PREP   ABL
    by, from, away from

Here is a PREPosition that takes an ABLative object.

    =>sine
    sin.e              V       3  1 PRES ACTIVE  IMP  2 S X
    allow, permit
    sine               PREP   ABL
    without

Here is a PREPosition that might also be a Verb.

    =>contra
    contra             PREP   ACC
    against, opposite; facing; contrary to, in reply to
    contra             ADV    POS
    in opposition, in turn; opposite, on the contrary

Here is a PREPosition that might also be an ADVerb. This is a very common situation, with the meanings being much the same.

    =>et
    et                 CONJ
    and, and even; also, even;  (et ... et = both ... and)

Here is a straight CONJunction.

    =>vae
    vae                INTERJ
    alas, woe, ah; oh dear;  (Vae, puto deus fio.)

Here is a straight INTERJection.

    =>septem
    septem             NUM     2  0 X   X X CARD       7
    seven

An additional provision is the attempt to recognize and display the value of Roman numerals, even combinations of appropriate letters that do not parse conventionally to a value but may be ill-formed Roman numerals.

    =>VII
    vii                NUM     2  0 X   X X CARD       7
       7  as a ROMAN NUMERAL

Generally, the meaning is given for the base word, as is usual for dictionaries. For the verb, it will be a present meaning, even when the tense given is perfect. For an adjective, the positive meaning is given, even if a comparative or superlative form is shown. This is also so when a word is constructed with a suffix, thus an adverb constructed from its adjective will show the base adjective meaning and an indication of how to make the adverb in English. The user must make the proper interpretation.

In some cases an adjective will be found that is a participle of a verb that is also found. The participle meaning, as infered by the user from the verb meaning, is not superceded by the explicit adjective entry, but suplemented by it with possible specialized meanings.

#### Signs and Abbreviations in Meaning

, [comma] is used to separate meanings that are similar. The philosophy has been to list a number of synonyms just to key the reader in making his translation. There is no rigor in this.

; [semicolon] is used to separate sets of meanings that differ in intent. This is just a general tendency and is not rigorously enforced.

/ [solidus] means 'or' or gives an alternative word. It sometimes replaces the comma and is often used to compress the meaning into a short line.

(...) [parenthses] set off and optional word or modifier, e.g., '(nearly) white' means 'white' or 'nearly white', (matter in) dispute means either the matter in dispute or the dispute itself. They are also used to set off an explanation, further information about the word or meaning, or an example of a translation or a word combination.

? [question mark] in a meaning implies a doubt about the interpretation, or even about the existance of the word at all. For the purposes of this program, it does not matter much. If the dubious word does not exist, no one will ask for it. If it appears in his text, the reader is warned that the interpretation may be questionable to some degree, but is what is available. May indicate somewhat more doubt than (perh.).

~ [tilde] stands for the stem or word in question. Usually it does not have an ending affixed, as is the convention in other dictionaries, but represents the word with whatever ending is proper. It is just a space saving shorthand or abbreviation.

=> in meaning this indicates a translation.

abb. abbreviation.

eccl. ecclestical - designating a special church meaning in a list of conventional meanings.

(esp.) especially - indicates a significant association, but is only advisory.

(perh.) perhaps - denotes an additional uncertainity, but not a strong as (?).

(pl.) means that the Latin word is believed by scholars to be used always in the plural. If it appears in the beginning of the meaning, before the first comma, it applies to all the meanings. If it appears later, it applies only to that and later meanings. For the purpose of this program, this is only advisory. While it is used by some tools to find the expected dictionary entry, the program does not exclude a singular form in the output. While it may be true that in good, classical Latin it is never used in the singular, this does not mean that some text somewhere might not use the singular, nor that it is uncommon in later Latin.

(pure Latin ...) indicates a pure Latin term for a word which is dirived from another language (almost certainly Greek).

(rude) indicates that this meaning was used in a rude, vulgar, coarse, or obscene manner, not what one should hear in polite company. Such use is likely from graffiti or epigrams, or in plays in which the dialogue is to indicate that the characters are low or crude. Meanings given by the program for these words are more polite, and the user is invited to substitute the current street language or obscenity of his choice to get the flavor of text text.

(sg.) means that the Latin word is believed by scholars to be used always in the singular. If it appears in the beginning of the meaning, before the first comma, it applies to all the meanings. If it appears later, it applies only to that and later meanings. For the purpose of this program, this is only advisory.

(usu.) usually is weakly advisory (usu. pl.) is even weaker than pl. and may imply that the pl. tendency occured only during certain periods).

w/ means 'with'.

L&S [Lewis and Short] is used to indicate that the meaning starting from the previous semicolon is information from Lewis and Short 'A Latin Dictionary' that differs from, or significantly expands on, the meaning in the 'Oxford Latin Dictionary' (OLD) which is the baseline for this program. This is not to imply that the meaning listed is otherwise taken directly from the OLD, just that it is not inconsistant with OLD, but the L&S information either inconsistant (likely OLD knows better) or Lewis and Short has included meanings appropriate for late Latin writers beyond the scope of OLD. The program is just warning the reader that there may be some difference. There are cases in which this indication occurs in entries that have Lewis and Short as the source. In those cases, the basic word is in OLD but the entry is a varient form or spelling not cited there.

There are cases where OLD and L&S give somewhat different spellings and meanings for the 'same' word (same in the sense that both dictionaries point to the same citation). In these cases a combination of meanings are given for both entries with the (L&S) code distinction and the entries of different spelling or declension have the SOURCE coded.

While it is usually true that if a classical word has other than OLD as the listed source then it does not appear in that form in OLD, this is not always the case. On ocasion some other dictionary gives a much better or more complete and understandable definintion and the honor of source is thereto given.

### BRIEF PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

A effect of the program is to derive the structure and meaning of individual Latin words. A procedure was devised to:

- examine the ending of a word,
- compare it with the standard endings,
- derive the possible stems that could be consistent,
- compare those stems with a dictionary of stems,
- eliminate those for which the ending is inconsistent with the dictionary stem (e.g., a verb ending with a noun dictionary item),
- if unsuccessful, it tries with a large set of prefixes and suffixes, and various tackons (e.g., -que),
- finally it tries various 'tricks' (e.g., 'ae' may be replaced by 'e', 'inp' by 'imp', syncope, etc.),
- and it reports any resulting matches as possible interpretations.

With the input of a word, or several words in a line, the program returns information about the possible accedience, if it can find an agreeable stem in its dictionary.

    =>amo
    am.o               V       1  1 PRES ACTIVE  IND  1 S X
    love, like; fall in love with; be fond of; have a tendency to

To support this method, an INFLECT.SEC data file was constructed containing possible Latin endings encoded by a structure that identifies the part of speech, declension, conjugation, gender, person, number, etc. This is a pure computer encoding for a 'brute force' search. No sophisticated knowledge of Latin is used at this point. Rules of thumb (e.g., the fact, always noted early in any Latin course, that a neuter noun has the same ending in the nominative and accusative, with a final -a in the plural) are not used in the search. However, it is convenient to combine several identical endings with a general encoding (e.g., the endings of the perfect tenses are the same for all verbs, and are so encoded, not replicated for every conjugation and variant).

Many of the distinguishing differences identifying conjugations come from the voiced length of stem vowels (e.g., between the present, imperfect and future tenses of a third conjugation I-stem verb and a fourth conjugation verb). These aural differences, the features that make Latin 'sound right' to one who speaks it, are lost entirely in the analysis of written endings.

The endings for the verb conjugations are the result of trying to minimize the number of individual endings records, while yet keeping the structure of the inflections data file fairly readable. There is no claim that the resulting arrangement is consonant with any grammarian's view of Latin, nor should it be examined from that viewpoint. While it started from the conjugations in text books, it can only be viewed as some fuzzy intermediate step along a path to a mathematically minimal number of encoded verb endings. Later versions of the program might improve the system.

There are some egregious liberties taken in the encoding. With the inclusion of two present stems, the third conjugation I-stem verbs may share the endings of the regular third conjugation. The fourth conjugation has disappeared altogether, and is represented as a somewhat modified variant of the third conjugation (3, 4)! There is an artificial fifth conjugation for esse and others, and a sixth for eo.

As an example, a verb ending record has the structure:

- PART the part code for a verb = V
- CONjugation consisting of two parts:
- WHICH a conjugation identifier - range 0..9
- VAR a variant identifier, on WHICH - range 0..9
- TENSE an enumeration type - range PRES..FUTP & X
- VOICE an enumeration type - range ACTIVE..PASSIVE & X
- MOOD an enumeration type - range IND..PPL & X
- PERSON person, first to third - range 1..3 & 0
- NUMBER an enumeration type - range S..P & X
- KIND enumeration type of verb - range TO_BE..PERFDEF & X
- KEY which stem to be used - range 1..4
- SIZE number of characters - range 0..9
- ENDING the ending as a string of SIZE characters

Thus, the entry for the ending appropriate to 'amo' is:

    V 1 1 PRES IND ACTIVE 1 S X 1 o

KIND is not often used with the verb endings, but is part of the record for convenience elsewhere. For verbs, the KIND has not yet been exploited significantly, except for DEP and IMPERS.

The rest of the elements are straightforward and generally use the abbreviations that are common in any Latin text. An X or 0 represents the 'don't know' or 'don't care' for enumeration or numeric types. Details are documented below in the CODES section.

A verb dictionary record has the structure:

- STEMS for a verb there are 4 stems
- PART the part code for a verb = V
- WHICH a conjugation identifier - range 0..6 (actually 1..6 & 0)
- VAR a variant identifier - range 0..9 (actually 1..5 & 0)
- KIND enumeration type of verb - range TO_BE..PERFDEF & X
- MEANING text for English translations (up to 80 characters)

Thus, an entry corresponding to 'amo amare amavi amatus' is:

    am am amav amat
    V 1 1 X            X X X X X
    like, love

(The dangling X X X X X are used to encode information about the time in which this word is found and the subject area. There is not yet enough details in the dictionary to allow much exploitation of this information.)

Endings may not uniquely determine which stem, and therefore the right meaning. 'portas' could be the ablative plural of 'gate', or the second person, singular, present indicative active of 'carry'. In both cases the stem is 'port'. All possibilities are reported.

    portas
    port.as V 1 1 PRES IND ACTIVE 2 S X
    carry, bring

    port.as N 1 1 ACC P F T
    gate, entrance; city gates; door; avenue;

And note that the same stem (port) has other uses, for 'portus', 'harbor'.

    portum
    port.um N 4 1 ACC S M T
    port, harbor; refuge, haven, place of refuge

PLEASE NOTE: It is certainly possible for the program to find a valid Latin construction that fits the input word and to have that interpretation be entirely wrong in the context. It is even possible to interpret a number, in Roman numerals, as a word! (But the number would be reported also.)

For the case of defective verbs, the process does not necessarily have to be precise. Since the purpose is only to translate from Latin, even if there are unused forms included in the algorithm, these will not come up in any real Latin text. The endings for the verb conjugations are the result of trying to minimize the number of individual endings records, while keeping the structure of the base INFLECTIONS data file fairly readable.

In general the program will try to construct a match with the inflections and the dictionaries. There are a number of specific checks to reject certain mathematically correct combinations that do not appear in the language, but these check are relatively few. The philosophy has been to allow a generous interpretation. A remark in a text or dictionary that a particular form does not exist must be tempered with the realization that the author probably means that it has not been observed in the surviving classical litterature. This body of reference is miniscule compared to the total use of Latin, even limited to the classical period. Who is to say that further examples would not turn up such an example, even if it might not have been approved of by Cicero. It is also possible the such reasonable, if 'improper', constructs might occur in later writings by less educated, or just different, authors. Certainly English shows this sort of variation over time.

If the exact stem is not found in the dictionary, there are rules for the construction of words which any student would try. The simplest situation is a known stem to which a prefix or suffix has been attached. The method used by the program (if DO_FIXES is on) is to try any fixes that fit, to see if their removal results in an identifiable remainder. Then the meaning is mechanically constructed from the meaning of the fix and the stem. The user may need to interpret with a more conventional English usage. This technique improves the performance significantly. However, in about 40% of the instances in which there is a hit, the derivation is correct but the interpretation takes some imagination. In something less than 10% of the cases, the inferred fix is just wrong, so the user must take some care to see if the interpretation makes any sense.

This method is complicated by the tendency for prefixes to be modified upon attachment (ab+fero => aufero, sub+fero => suffero). The program's 'tricks' take many such instances into account. Ideally, one should look inside the stem for identifiable fragments. One would like to start with the smallest possible stem, and that is most frequently the correct one. While it is mathematically possible that the stem of 'actorum' is 'actor' with the common inflection 'um', no intuitive first semester Latin student would fail to opt for the genitive plural 'orum', and probably be right. To first order, the procedure ignores such hints and reports this word in both forms, as well as a verb participle. However, it can use certain generally applicable rules, like the superlative characteristic 'issim', to further guess.

In addition, there is the capability to examine the word for such common techniques as syncope, the omission of the 've' or 'vi' in certain verb perfect forms (audivissem => audissem).

If the dictionary can not identify a matching stem, it may be possible to derive a stem from 'nearby' stems (an adverb from an adjective is the most common example) and infer a meaning. If all else fails, a portion of the possible dictionary stem can be listed, from which the user can draw in making a guess.

The program is written in Ada, and is machine independent. Ada source code is available for compiling onto other machines.

#### Special Cases

Some adjectives have no conventional positive forms (either missing or undeclined), or the POS forms have more than one COMP/SUPER. In these few cases, the individual COMP or SUPER form is entered separately. Since it is not directly connected with a POS form, and only the POS forms have different nnumbered declensions, the special form is given a declension of (0, 0). An additional consequence is that the dictionary form in output is only for the the COMP/SUPER, and does not reflect all comparisons.

#### Uniques

There are some irregular situations which are not convenient to handle through the general algorithms. For these a UNIQUES file and procedure was established. The number of these special cases is less than one hundred, but may increase as new situations arise, and decrease as algorithms provide better coverage. The user will not see much difference, except in that no dictionary forms are available for these unique words.

#### Tricks

There are a number of situations in Latin writing where certain modifications or conventions regularly are found. While often found, these are not the normal classical forms. If a conventional match is not found, the program may be instructed to TRY_TRICKS. Below is a partial list of current tricks.

- The syncopated form of the perfect often drops the 'v' and loses the vowel.
- An initial 'a' followed by a double letter often is used for an 'ad' prefix, likewise an initial 'ad' prefix is often replaced by an 'a' followed by a double letter.
- An initial 'i' followed by a double letter often is used for an 'in' prefix, likewise an initial 'in' prefix is often replaced by an 'i' followed by a double letter.
- A leading 'inp' could be an 'imp'.
- A leading 'obt' could be an 'opt'.
- An initial 'har...' or 'hal...' may be rendered by an 'ar' or 'al', likewise the dictionary entry may have 'ar'/'al' and the trial word begin with 'ha...'.
- An initial 'c' could be a 'k', or the dictionary entry uses 'c' for 'k'.
- A nonterminal 'ae' is often rendered by an 'e'.
- An initial 'E' can replace an 'Ae'.
- An 'iis...' beginning some forms of 'eo' may be contracted to 'is...'.
- A nonterminal 'ii' is often replaced by just 'i'; including 'ji', since in this program and dictionary all 'j' are made 'i'.
- A 'cl' could be a 'cul'.
- A 'vul' could be a 'vol'.

Various manipulations of 'u' and 'v' are possible: 'v' could be replaced by 'u', like the new Oxford Latin Dictionary, leading 'U' could be replaced by 'V', checking capitalization, all 'U's could have been replaced by 'V', like stone cutting. Previous versions had various kludges attempting to calculate the correct interpretation. They were suprisingly good, but philosophically baseless and certainly failed in a number of cases. The present version simply considers 'u' and 'v' as the same letter in parsing the word. However, the dictionary entries make the distinction and this is reflected in the output.

Various combinations of these tricks are attempted, and each try that results in a possible hit is run against the full dictionary, which can make these efforts time consuming. That is a good reason to make the dictionary as large as possible, rather than counting on a smaller number of roots and doing the maximum word formation.

Finally, while the program can succeed on a word that requires two or three of these tricks to work in combination, there are limits. Some words for which all the modifications are supported will fail, if there are just too many. In fact, it is probably better that that be the case, otherwise one will generate too many false positives. Testing so far does not seem to show excessive zeal on the part of the program, but the user should examine the results, especially when several tricks are involved.

At the state of the 1.94 dictionary there are so few words that both fail the main program and are caught by tricks that this option is defaulted to No.

#### Codes in Inflection Line

For completeness, the enumeration codes used in the output are listed here as Ada statements. Simple numbers are used for person, declension, conjugations, and their varients. Not all the facilities implied by these values are developed or used in the program or the dictionary. This list is only for Version 1.94. Other versions may be somewhat different. This may make their dictionaries incompatible with the present program.

      type PART_OF_SPEECH_TYPE is (
              X,         --  all, none, or unknown
              N,         --  Noun
              PRON,      --  PRONoun
              PACK,      --  PACKOON -- artificial for code
              ADJ,       --  ADJective
              NUM,       --  NUMeral
              ADV,       --  ADVerb
              V,         --  Verb
              VPAR,      --  Verb PARticiple
              SUPINE,    --  SUPINE
              PREP,      --  PREPosition
              CONJ,      --  CONJunction
              INTERJ,    --  INTERJection
              TACKON,    --  TACKON -- artificial for code
              PREFIX,    --  PREFIX --  here artificial for code
              SUFFIX     --  SUFFIX --  here artificial for code
                                    );

      type GENDER_TYPE is (
              X,         --  all, none, or unknown
              M,         --  Masculine
              F,         --  Feminine
              N,         --  Neuter
              C          --  Common (masculine and/or feminine)
                           );

      type CASE_TYPE is (
              X,         --  all, none, or unknown
              NOM,       --  NOMinative
              VOC,       --  VOCative
              GEN,       --  GENitive
              LOC,       --  LOCative
              DAT,       --  DATive
              ABL,       --  ABLative
              ACC        --  ACCusitive
                         );

      type NUMBER_TYPE is (
              X,         --  all, none, or unknown
              S,         --  Singular
              P          --  Plural
                           );

      type COMPARISON_TYPE is (
              X,         --  all, none, or unknown
              POS,       --  POSitive
              COMP,      --  COMParative
              SUPER      --  SUPERlative
                               );

      type TENSE_TYPE is (
              X,         --  all, none, or unknown
              PRES,      --  PRESent
              IMPF,      --  IMPerFect
              FUT,       --  FUTure
              PERF,      --  PERFect
              PLUP,      --  PLUPerfect
              FUTP       --  FUTure Perfect
                          );

      type VOICE_TYPE is (
              X,         --  all, none, or unknown
              ACTIVE,    --  ACTIVE
              PASSIVE    --  PASSIVE
                          );

      type MOOD_TYPE is (
              X,         --  all, none, or unknown
              IND,       --  INDicative
              SUB,       --  SUBjunctive
              IMP,       --  IMPerative
              INF,       --  INFinative
              PPL        --  ParticiPLe
                         );

      type NOUN_KIND_TYPE is (
              X,            --  unknown, nondescript
              S,            --  Singular 'only'
              M,            --  plural or Multiple 'only'
              A,            --  Abstract idea
              N,            --  proper Name
              L,            --  Locale, name of country/city
              P,            --  a Person
              T,            --  a Thing
              W             --  a place Where
                               );

      type PRONOUN_KIND_TYPE is (
              X,            --  unknown, nondescript
              PERS,         --  PERSonal
              REL,          --  RELative
              REFLEX,       --  REFLEXive
              DEMONS,       --  DEMONStrative
              INTERR,       --  INTERRogative
              INDEF,        --  INDEFinite
              ADJECT        --  ADJECTival
                                 );

      type VERB_KIND_TYPE is (
              X,         --  all, none, or unknown
              TO_BE,     --  only the verb TO BE (esse)
              TO_BEING,  --  compounds of the verb to be (esse)
              GEN,       --  verb taking the GENitive
              DAT,       --  verb taking the DATive
              ABL,       --  verb taking the ABLative
              TRANS,     --  TRANSitive verb
              INTRANS,   --  INTRANSitive verb
              IMPERS,    --  IMPERSonal verb (implied subject 'it', 'they', 'God')
                         --  agent implied in action, subject in predicate
              DEP,       --  DEPonent verb
                         --  only passive form but with active meaning
              SEMIDEP,   --  SEMIDEPonent verb (forms perfect as deponent)
                         --  (perfect passive has active force)
              PERFDEF    --  PERFect DEFinite verb
                         --  having only perfect stem, but with persent force
                              );

     type NUMERAL_KIND_TYPE is (
             X,          --  all, none, or unknown
             CARD,       --  CARDinal
             ORD,        --  ORDinal
             DIST,       --  DISTributive
             ADVERB      --  numeral ADVERB
                                );

The KIND_TYPEs represent various aspects of a word which may be useful to some program, not necessarily the present one. They were put in for various reasons, and later versions may change the selection and use. Some of the KIND flags are never used. In some cases more than one KIND flag might be appropriate, but only one is selected. Some seemed to be a good idea at one time, but have not since proved out. The lists above are just for completeness.

NOUN KIND is used in trimming (when set) the output and removing possibily sperious cases (locative for a person, but preserving the vocative).

VERB KIND allows examples (when set) to give a more reasonable meaning. A DEP flag allows the example to reflect active meaning for passive form. It also allows the dictionary form to be constructed properly from stems. TRANS/INTRANS were included to allow a further program a hint as to what kind of object it should expect. This flag is only now being fixed during the update. GEN/DAT/ABL flags have related function, but are almost absent. TO_BE is used to indicate that a form of esse may be part of a compound verb tense with a participle. IMPERS is used to weed out person and forms inappropriate to an impersonal verb, and to insert a special meaning distinct from a gernal form associated with the same verb stem.

NUMERAL KIND really is used by the program in constructing the meaning line.

#### Help for Parameters

One can CHANGE_PARAMETERS by inputting a '#' [number sign] character (ANSI 35) as the input word, followed by a return. (Note that this has changed from previous versions in which '?' was used.) Each parameter is listed and the user is offered the opportunity to change it from the current value by answering Y or N (any case). For each parameter there is some explanation or help. This is displayed by in putting a '?' [question mark], followed by a return.

The various help displays are listed here:

    HAVE_OUTPUT_FILE
       This option instructs the program to create a file which can hold the
       output for later study, otherwise the results are just displayed on
       the screen.  The output file is named WORD.OUT.
       This means that one run will necessarily overwrite a previous run,
       unless the previous results are renamed or copied to a file of another
       name.  Using this output file slows the program, especially if it is
       being executed from a floppy; just having it will not matter much.
       The default is N(o), since this prevents the program from overwriting
       previous work unintentionally.  Y(es) creates the output file.

    WRITE_OUTPUT_TO_FILE
       This option instructs the program, when HAVE_OUTPUT_FILE is on, to
       write results to the file WORD.OUT.
       This option may be turned on and off during running of the program,
       thereby capturing only certain desired results.
       If the option HAVE_OUTPUT_FILE is off, the user will not be given a
       chance to turn this one on.                 Default is N(o).

    DO_UNKNOWNS_ONLY
       This option instructs the program to only output those words that it
       cannot resolve.  Of course, it has to do processing on all words, but
       those that are found (with prefix/suffix, if that option in on) will
       be ignored.  The purpose of this option is o allow a quick look to
       determine if the dictionary and process is going to do an acceptable
       job on the current text.  It also allows the user to assemble a list
       of unknown words to look up manually, and perhaps augment the system
       dictionary.  For those purposes, the system is usually run with the
       MINIMIZE_OUTPUT option, just producing a list.  Another use is to run
       without MINIMIZE to an output file.  This gives a list of the input
       text with the unknown words, by line.  This functions as a spelling
       checker for Latin.  The default is N(o).

    WRITE_UNKNOWNS_TO_FILE
       This option instructs the program to write all unresolved words to a
       UNKNOWNS file named WORD.UNK.
       With this option on , the file of unknowns is written, even though
       the main output contains both known and unknown (unresolved) words.
       One may wish to save the unknowns for later analysis, testing, or to
       form the basis for dictionary additions.  When this option is turned
       on, the UNKNOWNS file is written, destroying any file from a previous
       run.  However, the write may be turned on and off during a single run
       without destroying the information written in that run.
       This option is for specialized use, so its default is N(o).

    IGNORE_UNKNOWN_NAMES
       This option instructs the program to assume that any capitalized word
       longer than three letters is a proper name.  As no dictionary can be
       expected to account for many proper names, many such occur that would
       be called UNKNOWN.  This contaminates the output in most cases, and
       it is often convenient to ignore these sperious UNKNOWN hits.  This
       option implements that mode, and calls such words proper names.  Of
       course, any proper names that are in the dictionary are handled in the
       normal way.                            The default is Y(es).

    DO_COMPOUNDS
       This option instructs the program to look ahead for the verb TO_BE (or
       iri) when it finds a verb participle, with the expectation of finding
       a compound perfect tense or periphastic.  The default choice is Y(es).
       This processing is turned off with the choice of N(o).

    DO_FIXES
       This option instructs the program, when it is unable to find a proper
       match in the dictionary, to attach various prefixes and suffixes and
       try again.  This effort is successful in about a quarter of the cases
       which would otherwise give UNKNOWN results, or so it seems in limited
       tests.  For those cases in which a result is produced, about half give
       easily interpreted output; many of the rest are etymologically true,
       but not necessarily obvious; about a tenth give entirely spurious
       derivations.  The user must proceed with caution.
       The default choice is Y(es), since the results are generally useful.
       This processing can be turned off with the choice of N(o).

    DO_TRICKS
       This option instructs the program, when it is unable to find a proper
       match in the dictionary, and after various prefixes and suffixes, to
       try every dirty Latin trick it can think of, mainly common letter
       replacements like cl -> cul, vul -> vol, ads -> ass, inp -> imp, etc.
       Together these tricks are useful, but may give false positives (>10%).
       They provide for recognized varients in classical spelling.  Most of
       the texts with which this program will be used have been well edited
       and standardized in spelling.  Now, moreover,  the dictionary is being
       populated to such a state that the hit rate on tricks has fallen to a
       low level.  It is very seldom productive, and it is always expensive.
       It may be turned on for trying individual words, but default is N(o).

    DO_DICTIONARY_FORMS
       This option instructs the program to output a line with the forms
       normally associated with a dictionary entry (NOM and GEN of a noun,
       the four principle parts of a verb, M-F-N NOM of an adjective, ...).
       This occurs when there is other output (i.e., not with UNKNOWNS_ONLY).
       The default choice is N(o), but it can be turned on with a Y(es).

    DO_EXAMPLES
       This option instructs the program to provide examples of usage of the
       cases/tenses/etc. that were constructed.  The default choice is N(o).
       This produces lengthly output and is turned on with the choice Y(es).

    SHOW_AGE
       This option causes a flag, like 'Late>' to be put before the meaning
       in the output.  The AGE is an indication when this word/meaning came
       into use, at least from indications is dictionary citations.  It is
       just an indication, not controlling, useful when there are choices.
       The default choice is N(o), but it can be turned on with a Y(es).

    SHOW_FREQUENCY
       This option causes a flag, like 'rare>' to be put before the meaning
       in the output.  The FREQ is an indication of the relative usage of the
       word use, at least from indications is dictionary citations.  It is
       just an indication, not controlling, useful when there are choices.
       The default choice is N(o), but it can be turned on with a Y(es).

    DO_ONLY_MEANINGS
       This option instructs the program to only output the MEANING for a
       word, and omit the inflection details.  This is primarily used in
       analyzing new dictionary material, comparing with the existing.
       However it may be of use for the translator who knows most all of
       the words and just needs a little reminder for a few.
       The default choice is N(o), but it can be turned on with a Y(es).

    DO_STEMS_FOR_UNKNOWN
       This option instructs the program, when it is unable to find a proper
       match in the dictionary, and after various prefixes and suffixes, to
       try even dirtier tricks, specifically to try all the dictionary stems
       that it finds that fit the letters, independent of whether the endings
       match the parts of speech to which the stems are assigned.  This will
       catch a substantive for which only the ADJ stem appears in dictionary,
       an ADJ for which there is only a N stem, etc.  It will also list the
       various endings that match the end of the input word.  A certain
       amount of weeding has been done, so only reasonably common endings
       are quoted, and these are lumped together masking declension, etc.
       Only N, ADJ, and V endings are given, LOC and VOC omitted, etc.
       The user can then make his own judgement.      This option should
       probably only be used with individual UNKNOWN words, and off-line
       from full translations, therefore the default choice is N(o).
       This processing can be turned on with the choice of Y(es).

    TRIM_OUTPUT
       This option instructs the program to remove from the output list of
       possible constructs those which are least likely.  At the present
       stage, there is not much trimming, however, if the program grows more
       powerful this may be a very useful option.  Nevertheless, there is no
       absolute assurence that the items removed are not correct, just that
       they are statistically less likely (e.g., vocatives or locatives in
       certain situations).  Since little is now done, the default is Y(es)

### GUIDING PHILOSOPHY

#### Purpose

The dictionary is intended as a help to someone who knows roughly enough Latin for the document under study. It gives the accidence and meanings possible for an input Latin word. It is for someone reading Latin text. There is no English-to-Latin mode.

This is a translation dictionary. Mostly it provides individual words in English that correspond to, and might be used in a translation of, words in Latin test. The program assumes a fair command of English. This is in contrast to a conventional same-language desktop dictionary which would try to explain the meanings in the same language. The distinction may be obvious but is important. A Latin dictionary in medieval times would have explanations in Latin of Latin words.

There are various approaches to the preparation of a dictionary. The most scholarly might be to select only proper and correct entries, only correct dirivations, grammar, and spelling. This would be a dictionary for one who wished to write 'correct' Latin. The current project has a different goal. This program is successful if any word found in text is given an appropriate meaning, whether or not that word is spelled in the approved way, or is 'good Latin'. Thus the program includes various words and forms that may have been rejected by recent scholars, but still appear in some texts. Philosophically, thus program deals with Latin as it was, not as it should have been. I make no corrections to Cicero, which I might have been tempted to do if I were producing an academic dictionary instead of a program.

A philosophical difference from many dictionary projects is that this one has no firm model of the user or application. It is not limited to classical Latin, or to 'good practice', or to common words, or to words appearing in certain texts. As a result there will be a lot of chaff in the output. Some of this may be trimmed out automatically if desired, but it is there and available.

However inadequately, I hope to document decisions that went into the arrangement of the program and dictionary. I am surprised that there is little or no such information to the user of published dictionaries. If others generate similiar products, or use the data from this one, they can do so in nowledge of how and why processes and forms were constructed.

I make few value judgements and those are mechanical, not scholarly, and are documented herein. Nevertheless some may be arbitary, in spite of good intentions.

#### Method

The program searches a list of stems and tries to make a match. If no exact match is possible, it tries various modifications, begining with prefixes and suffixes, and eventually involving various regular spelling variations (or tricks) common in classical and medieval Latin.

A choice was made that the base was classical Latin as defined by OLD. Arbitary/roughly (-200 +100)

The classical form of words is taken as the base. All modifications are in such a way to correct to this base. Further additions to local dictionaries should keep this in mind. Modifications are made to the input words, not to the dictionary stems. It could be done the other way, but the present situation seems to be much easier. There are some consequences of this approach. For instance, it is easy to remove an 'h' from an input word to match with a stem. It is prohibitively difficult (but not impossible) to add 'h' in all possible positions to check against stems.

It would be possible to match most words with a relatively smaller list of stems (or roots) and generous application of word construction. This approach is not followed. One difficulty is that while words may be constructed correctly, and the underlying meaning to be found from this construction, the common usage may be obscured by a formal interpretation of the parts. In practice this occurs in 20-40% of the cases. This method is still very useful in approaching a word for which there has been no dictionary interpretation, but it puts a considerable burden on the normal user. Further, in about 10% of constructions, the result is just wrong.

In normal usage, if the program finds a simple match, it does not go further and consider what constructed words might also be valid. (One can override and force prefix/suffix construction with a switch, but one would not want to force all possible tricks.)

For instance, if there is an adjective that matches, a corresponding identically spelled, logically valid noun will not be reported unless it is explicitly found in the dictionary.

Therefore, the philosophy is to populate the stem list as densely as possible. Even easily resolved differences are included redundently (adligo as well as alligo - ad- is most of duplicates). The advantage is that while regular single-letter modifications are fairly easy, and two letter differences are possible (but more expensive), further deviations are problematical. The better populated the stem list, the better the chance of a result.

The stem list is also overpopulated with variants suggested by different sources. The problem is that what we have of classical Latin has gone through many monks along the way. These copyists may have made simple mistakes (typos!), or have made what they thought were proper corrections (spell checkers!). And twenty centuries later scholars work hard to reassemble the best Latin to present in the dictionary. But a particular document in the form presented to the reader may have have a variety of spellings for exactly the same word in the same referenced passage (Pliny's Natural History is often subject to this problem). (It may even be that modern texts and dictionaries have misprints!) So all forms found in various dictionaries can be included, with the exception of those explicitly labled 'misread' (and the argument probably could mandate their inclusion also). However, a single example of a varient in one case will not be included as a dictionary entry. If such a word is sufficiently important, if it is used frequently or by several authors, it will be entered as a UNIQUE.

Lewis and Short seem to be more willing then the more recent Oxford Latin Dictionary to raise a few examples of variation to an entry (at least an alternate). Generally, I make an entry if some dictionary does so. But within an entry I generate additional possible stems not noted elsewhere, e.g., I expand first declension verbs with '-av' perfect stems, even though no example exists in classical Latin.

An argument against a large stem list is that it increases the disk storage required (but this is extremely modest by current standards) and increases processing time for search of the stems (this is far offset by the processing which would be required to construct or analyze words working from a smaller stem list).

Additional parts of verbs are included (first conjugation is easily filled out, even excentric verbs if they are compounds of known parts), although they may not have been found in any known documents. Cases can be logically constructed that are 'missing' in classical Latin. Verbs with prefix can be expanded when the base is known. That a form has not been found in surviving (copies of) classical documents does not mean that it was not on the lips of every centurion and his girl friend, or that it might not find its way into medieval texts.

In some cases there are good reasons not to do the mathematical expansion, and these are pointedly avoided. There is no mechanical generation of, for instance, conl- words for every coll- word, unless there is some citation or reasonable rationale. They may be paired in almost every case, but, for instance, collis and collyra are not. However, forms that are mentioned in dictionaries explicitly, or implicitly by being derived from words having varient forms, are included in order to reduce the dependence on 'tricks'. OLD has a conp- for almost every comp- (except derivitives from como). Rare exceptions seem to be rare words for which few examples (or only one) exist. Even in some of these cases, OLD (mechanically?) gives two forms. L&S follows the same pattern, except for words of late Latin (which would not be found in OLD). It is presumed that the general practice in later times was always to use comp-, and the progran dictionary follows that. There are many acc-/adc- pairs, but OLD has a fair number of acc- words without mention of a corresponding adc-, and so the possible generation of these words has been resisted. If an example turns up in text, the appropriate trick procedure should suffice

One suspects that some amount of analytical expansion is present even in the best dictionaries. Otherwise how can one explain four alternate spellings for a word which apparently only appears in a single inscription.

Adjectives from participles are included if an entry is found in some reference dictionary. In some case the adjective has a special meaning not obvious from the verb. The program will return both the adjective and the participle with its verb meaning. The user should give some additional consideration to the adjective meaning in this case. If the adjective is marked rare while the verb is common, it is likely there is reference to a special meaning.

Tricks are expensive in processing time. Each possible modification is made, then the resulting word goes through the full recognition process. If it passed, that is reported as the answer. If it fails, another trick is tried. This is effective if very few words get this far. It is expected that application of single tricks will solve most of the resolvable difficulties. It would be impractical to mechanically apply several tricks in series to a word. If the dictionary is heavily and redundently populated, tricks are rarely necessary (and therefore not an overall processing burden) and largely successful (if the input word is a valid, but unusual, varient/construction).

Even in easy cases the overpopulation is helpful. Antebasis is easily parsed as ante-basis (pedestal before, which is reasonable), but inclusion as a separate word allows the additional information that it is the hindmost pilar of the pedestal of a ballista.

Further, a conventional dictionary, especially one that wishes to set a standard for proper language, excludes words that may not meet criteria of propriety, slang, misspellings, etc. This may place the onus on the reader to convert words. A computer dictionary ought to relieve the reader as much as possible. The present program may be a far way from complete, but it's goal is to strive for that.

#### Word Meanings

The meanings listed are generally those in the literature/dictionaries. In the case of common words, there is general agreement among authors. Some uncommon words display convoluted interpretations.

Generally, the meaning is given for the base word, as is usual for dictionaries. For the verb, it will be a present meaning, even when the tense input is perfect. For an adjective, the positive meaning is given, even if a comparative or superlative form is shown. This is also so when a word is constructed with a suffix, thus an adverb constructed from its adjective will show the base adjective meaning and an indication of how to make the adverb in English.

For the level of usage for this program, and for convenience in coding, the meaning field has been fixed at 80 characters. It is possible to have multiple 80 character lines for an entry, but this only necessary for the most common words. In order to conserve space, extraneous helpers like 'a', 'the', 'to', which sometimes appear in dictionary definitions, are generally omitted. The solidus ('/') is used both to separate equivalent English meanings and to conserve space.

I have taken it upon myself to add some interpretations and synonyms, and propose common usage for otherwise complex discriptive definitions. The idea is to prompt the reader, expecting that the text may not be that from which some dictionary copied the meaning (from some 18th century translator!).

Where available, the Linnean or 'scientific Latin' name is given in parentheses, mostly for plants. This is not a classical Latin name, but a modern designation. Similarity of this designation to some Latin word may not be historically significant.

The spelling of the English meanings is US (plow not plough, color not colour, and English corn is rendered as grain or wheat), in spite of the fact that most of the Latin dictionaries that I have are British and use British spelling. The reason for this is (besides uniformity in the program) that there is much computer processing and checking of the dictionary data, including spell-checking of the English. (This is not to say that everything is correct, but it is much better than it would be without the computer checking.) All my programs speak US English. so I can count on it. Only some are available in UK English, and I do not have all of those versions.

In addition, I have given US meanings to some terms that seem to be litterly translated from the Latin (or German!) (a person who steals/drives off cattle is a rustler in the US).

Most dictionaries have an etymological approach, they are driven by the derivation of words to distinguish with separate entries words that may be identical in spelling but different derivations. But they can lump entirely different, even contradictory, meanings in a single entry if there is some common derivation. Philosophically, this dictionary is usually not sensitive to derivations, but sometimes supports multiple entries for vastly different meanings, application areas, or eras.

#### Proper Names

Only a very few proper names are included, many just for test purposes, others that users have requested. The number of proper names is almost limitless but very few are applicable to a particular document, and if it is an obscure document it is unlikely that the names would be found in any dictionary.

Meaning for proper names may cite a likely exampple of a person with that name. This is just an example; there are lots of others with that name.

There is a switch (defaulted to Yes) that allows the program to assume that any capitalized unknown word is a proper name, and to ignore it. Also, one can make up a local dictionary of names for one's particular application.

#### Letter Conventions

##### U and/or V

Strictly speaking, Latin did not have a V, just a consonant U, or a U character that was easier in capitals (the way Latin was written by the Romans) to write or chisel in stone as V. However, most modern texts and dictionaries (with the important exception of the OLD) make the distinction with two characters (u and v). It appeared most appropriate in a computer context (never distroy information) to make the distinction and follow the common practice. So all dictionary entries maintain the V/v. However, an input word following the U convention will be found. At an earlier version, an algorithm was kludged to convert where necessary. While this worked in most cases, there were difficulties. The present system processes the dictionary and the input word as though U and V were the same letter, although the basic dictionary maintains the distinction and the output reflects this. There is no longer any need for the user to set modes for this process.

##### I and/or J

A similar situation arises with I, and its consonant form, J. In this instance, the common practice is use only I, but there are many counter-examples, both text and dictionaries. (Lewis & Short uses J, but OLD does not.) Because of common practice, the program started out as pure-I dictionary with conversion of J-to-I on input. It remained that way through many versions, in spite of the logical inconsistency with U-V. The technique worked perfectly, but eventually the aesthetic of consistency won out and the U/V technique described above was extended to I/J. As yet, most all dictionary entries are pure-I, but the mechanism is in place to use J in both dictionary and input.

##### W

There are examples of W in some medieval Latin. I have not yet directly faced this, and have no words in the dictionary with W. However, the W problem is not analogous to U/V. While W sometimes could correspond to V or UU, in most cases it is a valid letter, reflecting a Germanic origin of the word. It will be treated as a real letter, and tricks employed were useful.

#### Dictionary Codes

Several codes are associated with each dictionary entry (presently AGE, AREA, GEO, FREQ, SOURCE). These were provided against the possibility of the program using them to make a better interpretation. For the most part, this information is of little additional help to the reader, but it is carried in codes because it is not available to the program in any other way. Some of these codes, like the KIND code for nouns, may be used, others may not. The program is still in development and these are put in to experiment with a possible capability. Later versions may use them, ommit them, or provide others.

The program covers a combination of time periods and applications areas. This is certainly not the way in which dictionaries are usually prepared. Usually there is a clear limit to the time or area of coverage, and with good reason. A computer dictionary may have capabilities that mitigate those reasons. Time or area can be coded into each entry, so that one could return only classical words, even though matching medieval entries existed. (The program has that capability now, but it is not yet clear how to apply it.)

There is some measure of period and frequency that can be used to discriminate between identical forms, but if there is only one possible match to an input word, it will be displayed no matter its era or rarity. The user can choose to display age and frequency warnings associated with stems and meanings, but the present default is not to.

So far these codes have not been of much use, especially since the only significant exercises have been with classical Latin. Other situations may change this. Perhaps the only impact now is for those words which have different meanings in different applications or periods. For these the warning may be useful. Otherwise, if there is only one interpretation for a word, that is given.

Rare and age specific inflection forms are also displayed, but there is a warning associated with each such.

##### AGE

The designation of time period is very rough. It is presently based on dictionary information. If the quotes cited are in the 4th century, and none earlier, then the word is assumed to be late Latin, and one might conclude that it was not current earlier. One flaw in this argument could be that the citation given was just the best illustration from a large number covering a wide period. On the other hand, the word could have been well known in classical times but did not appear in any surviving chassical writings. In such a case, it is reasonable to warn the reader of Cicero that this is not likely the correct interpretation for his example. This capability is still developmental, and its usefulness is still an open question.

If there is a classical citation, the word could be designated as classical, but unless there is some reason to conclude otherwise, it is expected that classical words are valid for use in all periods (X), are universal for well considered (published) Latin.

Much which is designated late or medieval may be vulgar Latin, in common use in classical times but not thought suitable for literary works.

In all periods the tagret is Latin. Archaic Latin, for purposes of the program, is still Latin, not Etruscan or Greek. Medieval Latin is that which was written by scholars as the universal Latin, not versions of early French or Italian.

      type AGE_TYPE is (
       X,   --              --  In use throughout the ages/unknown -- the default
       A,   --  archaic     --  Very early forms gone by classical times
       B,   --  early       --  Early Latin, pre-classical, used for effect/poetry
       C,   --  classical   --  Limited to classical (200 BC - 200 AD)
       D,   --  late        --  Late, post-classical, including Christian (3-6)
       E,   --  later       --  Latin not in use in Classical or Roman times (7-10)
       F,   --  medieval    --  Spanning E and G, including late medieval (11-15)
       G,   --  modern      --  Latin not in use before 16th century (16-18)
       H    --  neo         --  Coined recently, words for new things (19-20)
                                 );

##### AREA

While the reader can make his own interpretation of the area of application from the given meaning, there may be some cases in which the program can also use that information (which it can only get from a direct coding). This has not yet been used in the program, but the possibility exists. If the reader were doing a medical text, then higher priority should be given to words coded B, if a farming book, then A coded words should be given preference.

The area need not apply to all the meanings, just that there is some part of the meaning that is specialized to or applies specifically to that area and so is called out.

      type AREA_TYPE is (
              X,      --  All or none
              A,      --  Agriculture, Flora, Fauna, Land, Equipment, Rural
              B,      --  Biological, Medical, Body Parts
              D,      --  Drama, Music, Theater
              E,      --  Ecclesiastic, Biblical, Religious
              G,      --  Grammar, Retoric, Schools
              L,      --  Legal, Government, Political, Titles
              P,      --  Poetic
              S,      --  Science, Philosophy, Logic, Mathematics
              T,      --  Technical, Architecture, Topography, Surveying
              W,      --  War, Military, Naval, Armor
              Y       --  Mythology
                          );

##### GEO

This code was included to enable the program to distinguish between different usages of a word depending on where it was used or what country was the subject of the text. This is a dual usage, origin or subject.

      type GEO_TYPE is (
              X,      --  All or none
              A,      --  Africa
              B,      --  Britian
              C,      --  China
              D,      --  Scandinavia
              E,      --  Egypt
              F,      --  France, Gaul
              G,      --  Germany
              H,      --  Greece
              I,      --  Italy, Rome
              J,      --  India
              K,      --  Balkans
              N,      --  Netherlands
              P,      --  Persia
              Q,      --  Near East
              R,      --  Russia
              S,      --  Spain, Iberia
              U,      --  Eastern Europe
              Y       --  Mythology
                         );

##### FREQUENCY

There is an indication of relative frequency for each entry. These codes also appply to inflections, with somewhat different meaning. If there were several matches to an input word, this key may be used to sort the output, or to exclude rare interpretations. The first problem is to provide ths score. The initial method is to grade each word by how much column space is allocated to it in the Oxford Latin Dictionary, or the number of citations, on the assumption that many citations mean a word is common. This is not the intent of the compilers of existing dictionaries, but it is almost the only indication of frequency that can be inferred from most dictionaries. In many cases it seems to be a reasonable guess, ceertainly for those most common words, and for those that are very rare. With the understanding that adjustments can be made when additional information is available, the initial numeric criteria are:

    A   full column or more, more than 50 citations
    B   half column, more than 20 citations
    C   more then 5 citations
    D   4-5 citations
    E   2-3 citations
    F   only 1 citation

In the case of late Latin in Lewis and Short, these frquencies may be significant underestimates, since the volume of applicable texts considered seems to be much smaller than for classical Latin resulting in fewer oportunities for citations. Nevertheless, barring additional information, the system is generally followed.

For the situation where there are several slightly different spellings given for a word, they all are given the same initial frequency. The theory is that the spelling is author's choice while the frequency is attached to the wordd no matter how it is spelled. I presume that for a specific text the author always spells the word the same way, that there is no distribution of spellings within a individual text. One exception to this rule is the case where a varient spelling is cited only for inscriptions. There may be some significance to this and a FREQ of I is assigned. The logic of this choice is debatable. However, for some variations there is clearly a difference in application and this can be reflected in the frequency code. Likewise, there are situations wherein words of the same spelling but different meanings may have different frequencies. This may help to select the most likely interpretation.

One has a check against the frequency list of Diederich for the most common, and those are probably the only ones that matter. But the frequency depends on the application, and it should be possible to run a new set of frequencies if one had a reasonable volume of applicable text. The mechanical verification of word frequency codes is a long-term goal of the development, but must wait until the dictionary data is complete.

Inscription and Graffiti are designations of frequency only in that the only citations found were of that nature. One might suppose that if literary examples were known they would have been used. So one might expect that such words would not be found in a student's text. There is no implication that they were not common in the spoken language.

A very special case has been created for 'N' words, words for which the only dictionary citation is Pliny's Natural History. It seems, from reading of dictionaries, that this work may be the only source for these words, that they do not appear in any other surviving texts. They are usually names for animals, plants or stones, many without identification. Such words may appear only in Lewis and Short and the Oxford Latin Dictionary, the unabridged Latin classical dictionaries. These words are omitted from most other Latin dictionaries and, although they fall in the classical period and are from a very well known writer, there is no mention of the omission. So there may be an argument to disparage these words, unless one is reading Pliny.

Most of these words are of Greek origin (although that is also true for much of Latin). For many, the dictionaries report different forms or declensions for the word giving the same citation. Often one dictionary will give a Greek-like form (-os, -on) where another gives a Latinized form (-us). There is no consistency. Both OLD and L&S disagree on Latin and Greek forms, with no overwhelming favoritism to one form attached to either dictionary. This may be a reflection of the fact that the dictionaries grew over a long time with several editors, many workers, and no rigid enforcement of standards.

There is another problem that is found chiefly in connection with Pliny-type words. Since the literature is very sparce on examples, it is often uncertain whether a particular usage is appropriately listed as a noun, as an adjective, or as as adjective used as a substantive. The present dictionary, in blessed innocence, records all forms without bias.

      type FREQUENCY_TYPE is (
        X,    --              --  Unknown or unspecified
        A,    --  very freq   --  Very frequent, in most Elementry Latin books
        B,    --  frequent    --  Frequent
        C,    --  common      --  For Dictionary, in top 10,000 words
        D,    --  uncommon    --  Spanning C and E
        E,    --  very rare   --  Only one reference in OLD
        I,    --  inscription --  Presently not much used
        M,    --  graffiti    --  Presently not much used
        N     --  Pliny       --  May appear only in Pliny's Natural History
                          );

##### SOURCE

Source is the dictionary or grammar which is the source of the information, not the Cicero or Caesar text in which it is found.

For a number of entries, X is given as Source. This is primarily for the vocabulary (about 13000 words) which was in place before the Source parameter was put in, and which has not been updated. In fact, they are from no particular Source, just general vocabulary picked up in various texts and readings. Although, during the dictionary update begining in 1998, all entries are being checked against sources, it may be improper to credit (blame?) a Source when that was not the origin of the entry, remembering that the actual entries are of my generation entirely and may not corespond exactly to any other view. However, in the second pass (as far as it has progressed) all classical entries have been verified with the Oxford Latin Dictionary (OLD). (By that I mean that I have checked, not to imply that I have not made errors.) This does not mean that the entry necessarily agrees with the OLD, but that I read the OLD entry with great respect and put down what I did anyway. Newer entries, added in this process, and those checked later in the process, if found in the OLD, have the O code. Words added from Lewis and Short, but not in OLD, have the S code, etc. All entries for which there is a Source will be found in that Source, but the details of the interpretation of declension and meaning is mine.

There should be no expectation, nor is there any claim, that the result of the program is exactly that from the cited Source. Each entry is my responsibility alone, and there are significant differences and elaborations. However, in each case where there is a Source, the reader can find the basis from which the program data was derived. If I have done a proper job, he will not often be surprised.

The list of sources goes far beyond what has been directly used so far. I have sought and received permission for those which have been extensively used. Others have only been used for an occasional check (fair use) or have denied me permission (Niermeyer).

      type SOURCE_TYPE is (
           X,      --  General or unknown or too common to say
           A,      --  Allen & Greenough, New Latin Grammar, 1888
           B,      --  J.T.Bretzke, Consecrated Pharses: Theolog Dict
           C,      --  Cassell's Latin Dictionary 1968
           D,      --  J.N.Adams, Latin Sexual Vocabulary, 1982
           E,      --  L.F.Stelten, Dictionary of Eccles. Latin, 1995
           G,      --  Gildersleeve & Lodge, Latin Grammar 1895
           H,      --  Harrington/Pucci/Elliott, Medieval Latin 2nd Ed 1997
           L,      --  Lewis, C.S., Elementary Latin Dictionary 1891
           M,      --  Latham, Revised Medieval Word List, 1980
           N,      --  Lynn Nelson, Wordlist
           O,      --  Oxford Latin Dictionary, 1982
           S,      --  Lewis and Short, A Latin Dictionary, 1879
           U,      --  Du Cange
           V,      --  Vademecum in opus Saxonis - Franz Blatt
           W,      --  My personal guess
           Y       --  Niermeyer, Mediae Latinitatis Lexicon Minus
                           );

##### SPECIAL CONVENTIONS

There are a few special conventions in setting codes.

Proper Names

Proper names are often identified by the AGE in which the person lived, not the age of the text in which he is referenced, the AREA of his fame or occupation, and the GEO from which he hailed. This refers to some most-likely person of this name. A name may be shared by others in different ages. Thus Jason, the Argonaut, is Archaic, Myth, Greek (A Y H). (It is not likely that a Latin text would refer to a TV star.) Tertullian, an early 3rd century Church Father from Carthage, author of the first Christian writings in Latin, is Late, Ecclesiastic, Africa (D E A). Jupiter is (A E I), which is a bit sloppy since he is present later. Today he may be a myth, but then he was a god. But even gods are not eternal (X) in language, and an initial place is found for them. Place names are likewise coded, although with less confidence.

#### Evolution of the Dictionary

The stem list was originally put together from what might be called 'common knowledge', those words that most Latin texts have. The first version had about 5000 dictionary entries, giving up to 95% coverage of simple classical texts. This grew to about 13000 entries with specific additions when gaps were found. With this number it was possible to get better than a 99% hit rate on Caesar (an area from which the dictionary was built). Parse of other works fell to 95-97%, which may be mathematically attractive but leaves a lot to be desired in a dictionary, since a translator is usually familiar with the vast bulk of the language and just needs help on the obscure words. Having just the common words is not enough, indeed not much help at all. So an attempt is made to make the dictionary as complete as possible. All possible spellings found in dictionaries are included.

Starting with the 13000, the expansion project begining in 1998 sought to verify the existing words and suplement with any new found ones. Thus all classical Latin words are consistent with the OLD (not to say taken from, because most were not, but checked against). Any significant diviation is indicated, either as from another source, or in the definition itself.

L&S is used for later Latin and to check OLE work. This started with the thought that if a word was in L&S but not in OLE it must be later Latin, beyond the range of OLD. I was surprised at how many words with classical citations were in L&S but not in OLD, and how many are of different spelling.

The refinement is proceeding one letter at a time, as is the tradition for all great dictionaries. First stage refinement has proceeded through B.

The hardest test is against another dictionary. While getting a 97%+ hit rate on long classical texts, a run against a large dictionary might fall to 85%. This is to be expected, since we both have the 10000 most common words and have made somewhat different additions beyond that. So large electronic wordlists are a check on the program, and are reserved for that purpose, not simply incorporated as such.

The Latin Word List of Lynn Nelson is an excellent benchmark, more so because of its medieval content.

#### Current Status and Future Plans

The present phase of refinement has incorporated the Oxford Latin Dictionary and Lewis and Short entires through C (about a fourth). Periodically, when I need a change of task, I run a major author (primarily from the Packard Humanities Institute CD ROM) to check the effectiveness of the code. I may then include some words which turn up frequently as unknowns, but this is done as the spirit moves me. Smaller sections of later authors may also be processed, giving some growth in medieval Latin entries.

I will continue to refine the dictionary and the program. The major goal is to complete the inclusion of OLD and L&S, and this may take years. Along the way, and later, I will expand to medieval Latin. I am not so unrealistic as to believe that I will 'finish', indeed, this is a hobby and there is no advantage to finoshing.

An eventual outcome would be to have some institution, with real Latin capability, provide an exaustive and authorative program of this nature. Until then, I and other individuals will make available our programs.

### WRITING DICT.LOC AND UNIQUES

To make the dictionary files used by the program is not difficult, but it takes several auxillary programs for checking and ordering which are best handled by one center. These are available to anyone who needs them, but I prefer that any general additions to the dictionary be forewarded so that they can be included in the public release for everyone.

However, It is possible for a user to enhance the dictionary for special situations.

#### DICT.LOC

#### UNIQUES

The program is writen in Ada and uses Ada techniques. Ada is designed for high reliability systems (there is no claim the WORDS was developed with all the other safegards that that implies!) and and a consequence is unforgiving. If you want to be sloppy you have to deliberately program that in.

### DEVELOPERS AND REHOSTING

Feedback is invited. If there is a problem in installing or operating, in the results or their display, or if your favorite word is omitted from the dictionary, let me know.

PLEASE comment and check back for new versions releases.

Contact whitaker@erols.com,

or William Whitaker, PO Box 3036, McLean VA 22103 USA.