Halo as avi atum–halitans, alitare (verb and noun, that is nominalized infinitive), haleter [to breathe]. See the Spanish dictionaries and the Glossary, etc. (29 Feb. 1824.)
Lino [to smear], linis, livi, et lini, et levi, litum for linǐtum. Observe this verb’s conjugation which seems to be relevant to my other thoughts on this subject [→Z 3704–705, 3848–49, 3852–53]. And consider it further along with its companion linio [to smear] is ivi linītum, with the compounds, etc., of both of them. (29 Feb. 1824.) Alo [I feed] alis alui alitum altum alĕre.
Osado or ossado for che osa, ardito for che ardisce (used as adjectives), hardi, etc., atrevido for quien se atreve present [bold, who is daring], used as an adjective also: and other similar forms. (29 Feb., Quinquagesima Sunday, 1824.)
Men who are fluent and self-confident in conversation, and particularly those who are disdainful, would appear to have more self-love than others and more self-esteem, and timid men less. Quite the opposite. Timid people, because they have an excessive amount of self-love and too high an opinion of themselves, because they always fear they will make a bad impression and lose the esteem of others, and because they want more than anything else to acquire esteem and make a good impression, always feel that their honor, their self-image, their own self-love is at risk, and concentrating on and incapacitated by this thought, lack courage and take no chances. Self-confident and disdainful men are the opposite [4038] for the opposite reason, that is they care little about themselves or their self-image, or have little desire for the esteem of others (which amounts to the same thing), whether they are like that naturally, or through acquired habit. So they give offense often and easily, or risk offending the self-love of other people, and they care little about it, since they have little self-esteem. And timid people always go easy on the self-love of others, they have a thousand qualms and considerations, and not only do they never obtain it of themselves to do it some slight damage, but never to put it at even the slightest or faintest risk, and that is because of their own excessive self-love, which it would appear ought principally to give offense and make them offend that of others. And so because of their own excessive self-esteem, they take care not to show contempt for others, and in fact they do not feel any contempt for them, they actually esteem them excessively for no other reason than for the immense desire and regard they have for their self-esteem, even when they know others are of little account, or else for fear of losing it, even when they see its loss would not amount to much, given the worth of others. Generally children or young people are like that, inexpert and inexperienced in human affairs and in the school of self-love, where it receives so many blows that in the end it becomes hardened against them. And sensitive and imaginative people are like that, more or less for shorter or longer periods of their life, and some for the whole of it, and they often remain as children in maturity and old age, both in terms of their timidity in human society and in so many other respects, because in them timidity is always much more difficult to overcome than in others, and in some it is completely insuperable, as it was in Rousseau. The reason is their excessive self-love, which is inseparable from a superabundance of life and force of mind, and the liveliness of their imagination as well, which is never extinguished, even if it appears completely frozen, and when it has ceased effectively to give birth to any pleasure for the individual himself, [4039] according to his nature he continuously offers fictitious images to this self-love of his, which is extremely intense, of thousands of false dangers and difficulties, or increases and multiplies real ones. Yes, Rousseau and other similarly sensitive and virtuous and magnanimous men, always concentrating on and incapacitated by their insuperable and unstoppable timidity, a mauvaise honte [bashfulness] and propensity to blush, have only ever been and continue to be like that through their own excessive self-love and imagination.1 That is another example of the damage and great unhappiness caused by a superabundance of life in the soul (besides the many I have noted elsewhere [→Z 1382, 1584, 2410–14, 2629–30, 2736–39, 2861, 3921ff.]), of sensitivity, of delicate understanding, of a reflective imaginative nature, etc. Since in natures of this kind self-love is excessive and more needful of successes, desiring the esteem of others and fearing their lack of esteem more than others, and prevented from achieving, while compelled to encounter, those successes and that esteem which others with far less desire and need achieve very easily every day and who avert lack of esteem less fearfully, and who even if they did not get the one or avert the other, would suffer much less from it and be less unhappy, because of the lesser keenness and sensitivity of their self-love, and of their imagination too, which in the others, because of its nature, magnifies, with a thousand false exaggerations and fabrications, the sheer quantity of losses suffered, of what they naturally desire to achieve, of what they do not obtain, of the failures they meet with in society, of the ἀσχημοσύναι [bad impressions they make], which are often not the case, but completely made up by their own imagination, and only exist in their own mind, and it is the same with the success or objectives they set themselves to attain, which are very often illusory and imaginary, and not attained by anyone nor even possible to attain, etc. etc. (1 March, Penultimate Day of Carnival, 1824.) What I said about imagination also goes for self-love, [4040] which in people of this kind, even when it seems worn down and weakened by constant troubles, disappointments, sufferings, etc., and indeed a good deal weaker than in others, and almost completely frozen, asleep, and extinguished, is actually always keener than in others, even young people and novices, and is still full of ardor, still in a state which we might call tenderness toward oneself (as it usually is in youth) even if it is in them more negative than positive, more apt to prevent them from acting than to cause them to act, to motivate passion rather than action, etc., as it is proportionately in people of this kind even in their early years. (3 March, Ash Wednesday, 1824.)
Infundo infusus–infuser [to infuse]. (3 March 1824.)
Positivized diminutives. Lucerta–lucertola, lucertolone. (3 March 1824.) Lacerta–lacertola [lizard].
Φάω, φαείνω, φαείνομαι [to shine]. A desinence alteration with the same meaning, mentioned elsewhere [→Z 2774–75]. (3 March, Ash Wednesday, 1824.)
Positivized diminutives. Fou–follet [madman-imp]. See the French Dictionaries on this word, and note that the latter is an adjective. We have folletto as well although nominalized for the most part by the suppression of the noun spirito. And this word of ours (as perhaps folle too) seems to derive from French or Provençal. See too the Crusca on folletto example 2 and § 2, and the Spanish dictionaries. (3 March, Ash Wednesday, 1824.)
Spiare–spieggiare [to spy on]. (3 March, Ash Wednesday, 1824.) Scoppiare [to explode], scoppiata, noun—scoppiettare, scoppiettata, scoppiettio [to sputter, sputtering]. (4 March 1824.) Incrociare–incrocicchiare, croce–crocicchio [to cross, cross], etc.
To what I said elsewhere [→Z 2685, 3817–18, 4009] about ὀλίγου or μικροῦ δεῖν [almost], etc., add: ὀλίγου is said absolutely (perhaps μικροῦ too) with δεῖν or δέον understood, in the sense of σχεδὸν, etc., as indeed in Italian per poco [almost]. Plato, Phaedrus,1 etc. (4 March 1824.)
Inadvertido, inavveduto, desconocido for sconoscente, malaccorto [ill-advised, careless] and [4041] the like can be added to what was said elsewhere [→Z 3851, 3899, 3992, 4006] about the participles avveduto [shrewd], etc., used as adjectives, etc. Condolido for condolente [condoling], a true participle and not with an adjectival sense. Don Quixote, part 2, ch. 21, before the middle. (4 March 1824.)
Senz’altro patto for senza niun patto [without any agreement]. Guicciardini, bk. 7, Freiburg ed., tome 2, p. 124, beginning, and he adds assolutamente which is the explicit interpretation of the above-mentioned words. (5 March 1824.)
The ulus of the Romans is changed generally by the Italians into io (likewise ulum, and ula into ia) doubling the consonant that precedes it, if it is pure in Latin, like oculu
s–occhio [eye], nebula–nebbia [mist, fog], etc.; if it is impure it does not double, like masculus–maschio [male], etc. (5 March 1824.)
Vischio [mistletoe, birdlime], succhio [sap] noun, and many other similar forms, all seem to be positivized diminutives, formed in the way described in the preceding thought, and derived certainly from Latin, having been used probably in Vulgar Latin in place of their positives succus, viscum or viscus, etc. etc. (5 March 1824.) I have said the same about our verbs in iare, etc., elsewhere [→Z 4005, 4008].
Tomber–tombolare, tombolata [to fall–to tumble, a tumble], etc. (5 March 1824.) Of such Italian verbs, as well as diminutives, frequentatives, terms of endearment, etc., some, or rather perhaps, at least in many cases, quite a few, are pejorative. (6 March 1824.)
To what I said elsewhere [→Z 3515] about apparecchiare, aparejar [to lay out], etc., add sparecchiare [to clear] and similar compounds, etc. Italian, Spanish, and French. (6 March 1824.)
Positivized Greek diminutives. ἴχνος–ἴχνιον [track, print] a diminutive entirely positivized, and proper, apparently, to Homer (on which elsewhere), although it is found as well in Xenophon in the Cynegeticus,1 where we need to see however if it is truly positivized, or if it is, whether it is taken from Homer. (6 March 1824.)
Men would certainly be happy if they had not tried and did not try to be so. Likewise many nations and countries would be rich and happy (with national happiness) if the government, even with all good and sincere intentions, did not try [4042] to make them so, using for this purpose methods (of whatever kind) in matters where the only appropriate method is not to use any, to let nature take her course, as for example in commerce which is more prosperous when it is more free, and the government interferes less. The same can be said about philosophers, etc. Moreover human life is like commerce; it prospers the more the less men, philosophers, etc., interfere with it, the less they try to obtain happiness, and the more they leave to nature.1 (7 March, first Sunday in Lent, 1824.)
Altro for nessuno or redundant. Guicciardini, tome 2, Freiburg ed., p. 144, penultimate line. (7 March, 1st Sunday in Lent, 1824.)
Εὐθὺς γενόμενος [newborn], etc. This form is characteristic of Greek and is used as well with many other adverbs either meaning the same as εὐθὺς [immediately], or with another meaning, like ἅμα, μεταξὺ [together] (which take a present participle as well according to what they mean, and other participles as well as past ones), etc., and it is called, if I am not mistaken, a characteristic of Attic (although it is also found in writers who precede the Attic style, as in Anacreon, ode 33 “εὐθὺς τραφέντες” ode 55 “εὐθὺς ἰδών,” etc.)2—subito nato, dopo nato, appena nato, etc., né à peine (vix natus) [newborn], etc., despues de nacido, etc. See the French and Spanish dictionaries and Forcellini on adverbs corresponding to subito, dopo, etc., simul [immediately, afterward, at the same time], etc. (8 March 1824.)
Indigesto for indigeribile or difficile a digerire [indigestible, difficult to digest]—Indigesto for che non ha digerito or che non digerisce [which has not digested, is not digesting]. (8 March 1824.)
Μινύθω–minuo [to lessen], perhaps both from μινύω, altered in Greek with the interposition of θ (which is common), kept absolutely pure in Latin, even in compound words: I speak at length elsewhere [→Z 2351–54, 2771–79] about this conservation of ancient forms in Latin writers more than in Greek ones. (8 March 1824.)
[4043] ᾿Αργεῖος–argi-v-us. Horace and Ovid also use the common Greek form, argeus [Argos], one form in one passage, and the other in another.1 So too from ἀχαιός, as well as achaeus, achivus [Achaean, Greek], which is perhaps more characteristic of Latin and more vulgar, and achaeus is probably only literary, as argeus most certainly is; and perhaps it is the same with other similar words. (8 March 1824.)
No kind of activity or diversion gives any real pleasure to men. Nevertheless it is certainly the case that the man who is busy or being distracted in some way or other is less unhappy than the man who has nothing to do, or the one who lives an unvarying life without any distraction at all. Why is that? If neither the latter nor the former are any more superior than the other in enjoyment and pleasure, which is the only good for man? It means that life in itself is an ill. When it is busy or distracting, you are aware of it and recognize it less, and in appearance it passes more quickly, and for that reason alone, men who are active or distracted, without having any more good or pleasure than anyone else, are less unhappy. And men with nothing to do and without any distractions, are more unhappy, not because they have good things of less account in their life, but because of an increase of ill, that is more feeling, more awareness of life, and life is (seemingly) longer, although it is without any other particular ill. To feel life less and to make it seem shorter,2 that is the greatest good, or rather the greatest reduction of ill and unhappiness which man can obtain. Boredom is clearly an ill, and the experience of boredom brings unhappiness. Now what is boredom? No particular ill or suffering (in fact the idea and the nature of boredom excludes the presence of any particular ill or suffering)3 but simply life itself fully felt, experienced, recognized, life fully present to the individual and taking him over. Life therefore is simply an ill: and not to live, or to live less, whether in duration or in intensity, is simply a good, or a lesser ill, or rather absolutely and in itself preferable to life, etc. (8 March 1824.) See p. 4074.
[4044] Perhaps a positivized diminutive: σπήλαιον (spelaeum) [grotto, cavern]. See the Lexicons. (9 March 1824.)
For p. 4025. See too tome 2, bk. 7, p. 158, bk. 8, p. 219,1 and there are several other analogous passages in the same author. (9 March 1824.) See here below.
Menare, portare, tirare, etc., pel naso [to lead someone by the nose, up the garden path]—“τῆς ῥινὸς ἕλκειν” in the same sense, Lucian, Dialogi deorum, “Iovis et Junonis,” tome 1, Opera, 1687, p. 196. See the lexicons and the Crusca and Forcellini and the French and Spanish dictionaries. (9 March 1824.) Note that Lucian uses it as a proverb or popular expression, with the word φασὶ [they say].
Λαιὸς–lae-v-us [left]. (March 1824), σκαιός–scae-v-us [left].
To what has been said elsewhere [→Z 3757, 3825–26, 3939] about verbal nouns in bilis in ilis, etc. etc., add those derived from them ending in ilitas, bilitas, and other forms, both in classical and late Latin or in modern languages, whether the verbal nouns from which they are formed are each known or not, etc. etc., whether such substantive verbal nouns derive immediately from the verbs, and if that is the case it is necessary to see from which part of the verbs and in what way, according to the respective forms of these verbal forms. (10 March 1824.)
For paragraph 2 of this page. Also in the League of Cambrai against the Venetians the desire for war against the Turks was taken up as a pretext, or to give greater spurious legitimacy, according to the custom of those days and of earlier times. See Guicciardini, tome 2, p. 180, and notes, and p. 186, toward the end. And in this case the pretext is all the more worthy of note insofar as in order to destroy the Venetians they used the excuse that it was necessary to attack the Turks, whose greatest enemy the Venetians were, and those who had fought the greatest wars with them (as indeed they had recently), and had given and received from them the greatest harm.2 (10 March 1824.) See p. 4073.
Non ne fece altro for non ne fece nulla [he did nothing about it]; non se ne fece altro; non se ne farà, se ne fa altro [nothing was done about it; nothing will be done, is being done]; common expressions in our speech. Non volle farne altro [He did not want to do anything] that is nulla [nothing]: in the notes on Guicciardini, tome 2, pp. 183, 191, 363. (10 March 1824.)
In the whole of Europe (particularly in Italy, where all the social absurdities and problems are greater than elsewhere) there is no infamy in being [4045] or having been depraved, nor in having committed crimes (particularly when it is a question of certain vices or crimes, some of which, even if they are a
trocious, bring more honor, esteem, and respect, than anything else), but rather in being or in having been punished for some vice or misdeed or other, even for some virtue or virtuous action worthy of praise and reward. Certainly punishment brings with it more infamy than the offense.1 In the United States of America public opinion does not attach any infamy to punishment, and the guilty man who has been punished and goes back into society, is freer from opprobrium than the man who goes unpunished in that society, because: (1) it is thought that with his punishment he has expiated his fault, and given reparation and satisfaction for the wrong he has done to society, and paid the debt he contracted with it; (2) it is judged, as in fact generally happens, that the punishment, which there is considered and is called penitence (prisons are called penitentiaries), and the treatment which at the time of punishment are expressly used to cure with both physical and moral remedies the behavior of the guilty man, have corrected and reformed his character, his behavior, his inclinations, his principles, and brought him back to the right path, so that in the eyes of the law and in fact and in public opinion he is entirely back on a level with and equal to all other citizens or noncitizens. See the account of prisons in New York in the Antologia of Florence, no. 37, Jan. 1824, and in particular p. 54.2 (11 March 1824.)
Zibaldone Page 289
