Acciarino, D. (2017), ‘The Renaissance Editions of Festus,’ Acta Classica 60, 162–72.Google Scholar

Adamik, B. (2014), ‘Zur Prosodie, Metrik und Interpretation von Catulls Carmen 116’, WS 127, 151–64.Google Scholar

Adams, I. (2016), ‘Some Latin Funerary Formulae with OBITVS as a Direct Object: Origin, Meaning and Use’, CQ 66, 525–39.Google Scholar

Adams, J. N. (1977), ‘The Vocabulary of the Annales Regni Francorum’, Glotta 55, 257–82.Google Scholar

Adams, J. N. (1982), The Latin Sexual Vocabulary. London.Google Scholar

Adams, J. N. (1983), ‘Words for “Prostitute” in Latin’, RhM 126, 321–58.Google Scholar

Adams, J. N. (1984), ‘Female Speech in Latin Comedy’, Antichthon 18, 43–77.Google Scholar

Adams, J. N. (1994a), Wackernagel’s Law and the Placement of the Copula ‘esse’ in Classical Latin. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Adams, J. N. (1994b), ‘Wackernagel’s Law and the Position of Unstressed Personal Pronouns in Classical Latin’, TPhS 92, 103–78.Google Scholar

Adams, J. N. (1995), Pelagonius and Latin Veterinary Terminology in the Roman Empire. Leiden.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Adams, J. N. (2003), Bilingualism and the Latin Language. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Adams, J. N. (2004), ‘A Passage of Varro, “De Lingua Latina” and an Oscan Fragment of Atellan Farce’, Mnemosyne 57, 352–8.Google Scholar

Adams, J. N. (2005), ‘The Bellum Africum’, in Reinhardt, , Lapidge, and Adams, (2005), 73–96.Google Scholar

Adams, J. N. (2007), The Regional Diversification of Latin, 200 bc – ad 600. Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Adams, J. N. (2013), Social Variation and the Latin Language. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Adams, J. N. (2016), An Anthology of Informal Latin 200 bc – ad 900. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Adams, J. N. (2021), Asyndeton and its Interpretation in Latin Literature: History, Patterns, Textual Criticism. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Adams, J. N. (forthcoming), ‘Ancient Writing (Latin)’, in de Melo, and Scullion, (forthcoming).Google Scholar

Adams, J. N. and Mayer, R. (eds.) (1999), Aspects of the Language of Latin Poetry. Oxford.Google Scholar

Adams, J. N. and Vincent, N. (eds.) (2016), Early and Late Latin: Continuity or Change? Cambridge.Google Scholar

Agostiniani, L. (2013), ‘Sulla procedure di analisi dei sistemi di scrittura e sulla rappresentazione di /f/ nell’alfabeto nucerino’, in Bruni, and Cianferoni, (eds.), 29–52.Google Scholar

Agostiniani, L., Calderini, A. and Masserelli, R. (2011), Screhto est, lingua e scrittura degli antichi umbri: catalogo della mostra. Perugia.Google Scholar

Agustín, A. (1559), De M. Verrii Flacci quae extant. Ex Sex. Pompei Festi de uerborum significatione. Venice.Google Scholar

Albrecht, M. von (1989), Masters of Roman Prose from Cato to Apuleius: Interpretative Studies, transl. N. Adkin. Leeds.Google Scholar

Albrecht, M. von and Schubert, W. (eds.) (1990), Musik und Dichtung: Neue Forschungsbeiträge. Viktor Pöschl zum 80. Geburtstag gewidmet. Frankfurt.Google Scholar

Allardice, J. T. (1929), Syntax of Terence. London.Google Scholar

Amsel, G. (1887), De ui atque indole rhytmorum quid ueteres iudicauerint. Breslau.Google Scholar

Ancilotti, A., Calderini, A., and Massarelli, M. (eds.) (2016), Forme e strutture della religione nell’Italia mediana antica. Rome.Google Scholar

Anderson, W. S. (2001), ‘Plautus’ Mastery of Comic Language’, in Segal, E. (ed.), Oxford Readings in Menander, Plautus, and Terence (Oxford), 107–14.Google Scholar

André, J.-M. (1959), ‘Erreurs de traduction chez Pline l’ancien’, REL 37, 203–15.Google Scholar

André, J.-M. (1964), Pline l’ancien, Histoire naturelle: Livre xvii . Paris.Google Scholar

Ángel Espinos, J. et al. (eds.) (2015), Hygíeia kaì gélos: Homenaje a I. Rodríguez Alfageme. Zaragoza.Google Scholar

Anreiter, P. and Jerem, E. (eds.) (1999), Studia Celtica et Indogermanica: Festschrift für Wolfgang Meid. Budapest.Google Scholar

Appel, G. (1909), De Romanorum precationibus. Giessen.Google Scholar

Arias Abellán, C. (2002), ‘Les dérivés latins en -arius’, in Kircher-Durand, (2002), 161–84.Google Scholar

Arnim, M. von (1903–1905), Stoicorum Veterum Fragmenta. 4 vols. Stuttgart.Google Scholar

Artigas, E. (1990), Pacuviana: Marco Pacuvio en Cicerón. Barcelona.Google Scholar

Astbury, R. (2002), M. Terentius Varro Saturarum Menippearum fragmenta, 2nd ed. Munich and Leipzig.Google Scholar

Astin, A. E. (1978), Cato the Censor. Oxford.Google Scholar

Attenni, L. and Maras, D. F. (2004), ‘Materiali arcaici dalla collezione Dionigi di Lanuvio ed il più antico alfebetario latino’, SE 70, 61–78.Google Scholar

Augoustakis, A. and Traill, A. (eds.) (2013), A Companion to Terence. Oxford.Google Scholar

Ax, W. (1986), ‘Quadripartita ratio: Bemerkungen zur Geschichte eines aktuellen Kategoriensystems’, Historiographia Linguistica 13, 191–214.Google Scholar

Ax, W. (2011), Quintilians Grammatik (Inst. orat. 1.4–8): Text, Übersetzung und Kommentar. Berlin.Google Scholar

Bader, F. (1962), La formation des composés nominaux du latin. Paris.Google Scholar

Bagnasco, G. (1999), ‘L’acquisizione della scrittura in Etruria: materiali a confronto per la ricostruzione del quadro storico e culturale’, in Bagnasco, and Cordano, (1999), 85–106.Google Scholar

Bagnasco, G. and Cordano, F. (eds.) (1999), Scritture mediterranee tra il ix e il vii secolo a.C. Atti del seminario: Università degli Studi di Milano, Istituto di Storia Antica, 23–24 febbraio 1998. Milan.Google Scholar

Bagordo, A. (2007), ‘Langversstil und Senarstil bei Terenz’, in Kruschwitz, , Ehlers, and Felgentreu, (2007), 127–42.Google Scholar

Bailey, C. (1947), Titi Lucreti Cari De rerum natura libri sex. Oxford.Google Scholar

Bakkum, G. C. L. M. (1996), ‘Capenate esú, CIL I(2).476.6 = xi.6707.6, CIL 12.2496.9’, in Risselada, , Jong, and Bolkestein, (1996), 1–6.Google Scholar

Bakkum, G. C. L. M. (2009), The Latin Dialect of the Ager Faliscus. 2 vols. Amsterdam.Google Scholar

Baldelli, G. and Lo Schiavo, F. (eds.) (2014), Amore per l’antico: Dal Tirreno all’Adriatico, dalla Preistoria al Medioevo e oltre, Studi di antichità in ricordo di Giuliano de Marinis: Volume 1, 2 vols. Rome.Google Scholar

Baldi, P. (2002), The Foundations of Latin. Berlin and New York.Google Scholar

Baldi, P. and Cuzzolin, P. (eds.) (2009–2014), New Perspectives on Historical Latin Syntax, 4 vols. Berlin and New York.Google Scholar

Ballu, A. (1906), ‘Fouilles archéologiques d’Algérie en 1905’, Bulletin archéologique du Comité des Travaux Historiques et Scientifiques, 182–222.Google Scholar

Bammesberger, A. and Heberlein, F. (eds.) (1996), Akten des VIII. internationalen Kolloquiums zur lateinischen Linguistik. Heidelberg.Google Scholar

Baños, J. M. (2009), Sintaxis del latín clásico. Madrid.Google Scholar

Baños, J. M. (2012), ‘Verbos soporte e incorporación sintáctica en latín: el ejemplo de ludos facere’, Revista de Estudios Latinos 12, 37–57.Google Scholar

Baños, J. M. (2013), ‘Sobre las maneras de “hacer la guerra” en latín (bellum gero, belligero, bello)’, in Beltrán, , Encuentra, and Fontana, (2013), 27–39.Google Scholar

Baños, J. M. (2014), ‘Consilium (habere, capere, dare): un sustantivo hecho predicado’, in Baños, et al. (2014), 103–14.Google Scholar

Baños, J. M. (2015a), ‘Bellum gerere y proelium facere: Sobre las construcciones con verbo soporte en latín (y en griego)’, in Muñoz, and Carrasco, (2015), 227–34.Google Scholar

Baños, J. M. (2015b), ‘Colocaciones verbo-nominales y traducción del griego al latín: el Evangelio de san Mateo’, in Ángel Espinos, et al. (2015), 61–72.Google Scholar

Baños, J. M. (2016), ‘Las construcciones con verbo soporte en latín: sintaxis y semántica’, in Borrell, and De la Cruz, (2016), 15–39.Google Scholar

Baños, J. M. (2018), ‘Las construcciones con verbo soporte en latín: una perspectiva diacrónica’, in Bodelot, and Spevak, (2018), 21–52.Google Scholar

Baños, J. M. (2021), ‘Proelia miscere: sobre las construcciones con verbo soporte en la poesía latina’, in Unceta, L., Martín, A. M., López Grégoris, R. and González Vázquez, C. (eds.), Homenaje a Benjamín García Hernández. Madrid, 593–608.Google Scholar

Baños, J. M. et al. (eds.) (2014), Philologia, Universitas, Vita: Trabajos en honor de T. González Rolán. Madrid.Google Scholar

Baños, J. M. and Jiménez López, M. D. (2017), ‘«Odiar» en el Nuevo Testamento (odi, odio sum, odio habeo): traducción y construcciones con verbo soporte en la Vulgata’, Euphrosyne 45, 59–78.Google Scholar

Barabino, G. (1981), ‘Osservazioni sul senario giambico di Fedro’, in Fabiano, G. and Salvaneschi, E. (eds.), Desmos koinōnias: scritti di filologia e filosofia. Genoa, 91–122.Google Scholar

Barabino, G. (1985), ‘Note metriche sui senari giambici delle “Sententiae” di Publilio Siro’, AALig 42, 202–28.Google Scholar

Barabino, G. (2005), ‘L’auctoritas di Plauto in Nonio Marcello’, in Taifacos, (2005), 91–7.Google Scholar

Barabino, G. (2006), Scripta Noniana. Genoa.Google Scholar

Baratin, M., Colombat, B., and Holtz, L. (eds.) (2009), Priscien: transmission et refondation de la grammaire de l’Antiquité aux Modernes. Turnhout.Google Scholar

Bàrberi Squarotti, G. (ed.) (1994), Voce di molte acque: miscellanea di studi offerti a Eugenio Corsini. Turin.Google Scholar

Barchiesi, M. (1962), Nevio epico: storia, interpretazione, edizione critica dei frammenti del primo epos latino. Padua.Google Scholar

Barnes, J. (1989), ‘The Size of the Sun in Antiquity’, ACD 25: 29–41.Google Scholar

Barnes, J. (2015), Mantissa: Essays in Ancient Philosophy iv . Oxford.Google Scholar

Barðdal, J. et al. (2013), ‘The Story of “Woe”’, Journal of Indo-European Studies 41, 321–77.Google Scholar

Barrios-Lech, P. (2016), Linguistic Interaction in Roman Comedy. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Barrios-Lech, P. (2017), ‘Tyndarus’ Bilingual Pun and the Ambiguities of Plautus’ Captivi’, CPh 112, 253–67.Google Scholar

Barsby, J. (1999), Terence Eunuchus. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Barsby, J. (2001), Terence, 2 vols. Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar

Bartalucci, A. (1997), ‘Arcaismi’, in Enciclopedia Oraziana 3 (Rome), 797–9.Google Scholar

Bartoněk, A. and Bu, chner, G. (1995), ‘Die ältesten griechischen Inschriften von Pithekoussai (2. Hälfte des VIII. bis 1. Hälfte des VII. Jhs.)’, Die Sprache 37, 129–31.Google Scholar

Batstone, W. W. (1996), ‘The Fragments of Furius Antias’, CQ 46, 387–402.Google Scholar

Bauer, B. (2009), ‘Word Order’, in Baldi, and Cuzzolin, (2009–2014), 1. 241–316.Google Scholar

Bauer, B. (2011), ‘Word Formation’, in Maiden, , Smith, and Ledgeway, (2011), 532–63.Google Scholar

Beare, W. (1930), ‘Plautus and the Fabula Atellana’, CR 44, 165–8.Google Scholar

Beare, W. (1949), ‘The Date of the Bellum Punicum’, CR 63, 48.Google Scholar

Beare, W. (1964), The Roman Stage: A Short History of Latin Drama in the Time of the Republic, 3rd ed. London [1st ed. 1950].Google Scholar

Beaujeu, J. (1951), Pline l’ancien, Histoire naturelle: Livre ii . Paris.Google Scholar

Beaujeu, J. (1982), ‘La langue de l’astronomie dans l’Histoire naturelle de Pline l’ancien’, in Plinio il Vecchio sotto il profilo storico e letterario. Atti del Convegno di Como, 5-6-7 ottobre 1979. Atti della Tavola rotonda nella ricorrenza centenaria della morte di Plinio il Vecchio, Bologna 16 dicembre 1979 (Como) (Como), 83–95.Google Scholar

Beazley, J. D. (1949), ‘The World of the Etruscan Mirror’, JHS 69, 1–17.Google Scholar

Becker, E. (1873), ‘De syntaxi interrogationum obliquarum apud priscos scriptores Latinos’, Studemunds Studien 1, 113–314.Google Scholar

Bellelli, V. and Benelli, E. (eds.) (2018), Gli Etruschi: La scrittura, la lingua, la società. Rome.Google Scholar

Beltrán, J. A., Encuentra, A., and Fontana, G. (eds.) (2013), Otium cum dignitate: estudios en homenaje al profesor José Javier Iso Echegoyen. Zaragoza.Google Scholar

Benedetti, M. et al. (eds.) (2016), Grammatiche e grammatici. Teorie, testi e contesti, Atti del xxxix Convegno della Società Italiana di Glottologia. Rome.Google Scholar

Benelli, E. (2008), ‘L’aspetto grafico’, in Santoro, (2008), 23–7.Google Scholar

Benelli, E. (2013), ‘Agro falisco e Sabina: qualche osservazioni’, in Cifani, (2013), 313–19.Google Scholar

Benelli, E. (2014), ‘Diaspore Sabine’, in Baldelli, and Lo Schiavo, (2014), 25–9.Google Scholar

Bennett, C. E. (1910–1914), Syntax of Early Latin, 2 vols. Boston and Leipzig.Google Scholar

Bernardi Perini, G. (1983), ‘Le “riforme” ortografiche latine di età repubblicana’, AION(ling) 5, 141–69.Google Scholar

Bernays, J. (1885), Gesammelte Abhandlungen, 2 vols. Berlin.Google Scholar

Berrendonner, C. (2009), ‘L’invention des épitaphes dans la Rome médio-républicaine’, in Haack, (2009), 181–201.Google Scholar

Bertini, F. (ed.) (2003), Prolegomena Noniana 2. Genoa.Google Scholar

Bertrand, É. (1897), ‘Cicéron au théâtre’, Annales de l’Université de Grenoble 9, 83–208.Google Scholar

Beta, S. (2015), ‘Cyclops’, in Lauriola, and Demetriou, (2015), 607–20.Google Scholar

Bettini, M. (1979), Studi e note su Ennio. Pisa.Google Scholar

Bettini, M. (1982), ‘A proposito dei versi sotadei, greci e romani: con alcuni capitoli di ‘analisi metrica lineare’, MD 9, 59–105.Google Scholar

Bettini, M. (1984), ‘Arcaismi’, in Enciclopedia Virgiliana (Rome), 287–91.Google Scholar

Bettini, M. (1990), ‘La “correptio iambica”’, in Danese, , Gori, and Questa, (1990), 263–409.Google Scholar

Bibauw, J. (ed.) (1969), Hommages à Marcel Renard, Volume 2. Leuven.Google Scholar

Biddau, F. (2008), Q. Terentii Scauri De orthographia. Hildesheim.Google Scholar

Bilde, P. G. and Poulsen, B. (2008) The Temple of Castor and Pollux 2.1: The Finds. 2 vols. Rome.Google Scholar

Biville, F. (1989), ‘Grec et latin: contacts linguistiques et création lexicale; Pour une typologie des héllenismes lexicaux du latin’, in Lavency, and Longrée, (1989), 29–40.Google Scholar

Biville, F. (1990), Les emprunts du latin au grec: approche phonétique; Tome I: Introduction et consonantisme. Leuven and Paris.Google Scholar

Biville, F. (1995), Les emprunts du latin au grec: approche phonétique; Tome II: Vocalisme et conclusions. Leuven and Paris.Google Scholar

Biville, F. (1996), ‘Le statut linguistique des interjections en latin’, in Rosén, (1996), 209–20.Google Scholar

Biville, F. (2000), ‘Bilinguisme gréco-latin et créations éphémères de discours’, in Fruyt, and Nicolas, (2000), 91–107.Google Scholar

Blanchard-Lemée, M. (1980), ‘La mosaïque de Khamissa, au Musée de Guelma (Algérie)’, Bulletin de l’AIEMA 8, 50–1.Google Scholar

Blanchard-Lemée, M. (1988), ‘Euphronesis’, LIMC 4, 74.Google Scholar

Blank, D. (2008), ‘Varro and the Epistemological Status of Etymology’, HEL 30, 49–73.Google Scholar

Blänsdorf, J. (1974), ‘Das Bild der Komödie in der späten Republik’, in Reinhardt, and Sallmann, (1974), 141–57.Google Scholar

Blänsdorf, J. (2011), Fragmenta poetarum Latinorum epicorum et lyricorum praeter Enni Annales et Ciceronis Germanicique Aratea, post W. Morel et K. Büchner, 4th ed. Berlin.Google Scholar

Bloomer, W. M. (ed.) (2015), A Companion to Ancient Education. Malden, MA.Google Scholar

Blümel, W. (1972), Untersuchungen zu Lautsystem und Morphologie des vorklassischen Lateins. Munich.Google Scholar

Bodel, J. (1994), Graveyards and Groves. A Study of the Lex Lucerina. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Bodelot, C. (1987), L’interrogation indirecte en latin: Syntaxe – Valeur illocutoire – Formes. Paris.Google Scholar

Bodelot, C. (1990), Termes introducteurs et modes dans l’interrogation indirecte en latin de Plaute à Juvénal. Avignon.Google Scholar

Bodelot, C. (2000), Espaces fonctionnels de la subordination complétive en latin: Étude morpho-syntactique et sémantico-énonciative. Paris.Google Scholar

Bodelot, C. (2003), ‘L’interrogation indirecte’, in Bodelot, C. (ed.), Grammaire fondamentale du latin Tome X: Les propositions complétives en latin. Paris, 193–333.Google Scholar

Bodelot, C. (2021a), ‘Faits de langue et variations génériques chez Cicéron: étude de ecquis’, in L. Unceta Gómez, C. González Vázquez, R. López Gregoris and A. M. Martín Rodríguez (eds.), Amice benigneque honorem nostrum habes. Estudios lingüísticos en homenaje al Profesor Benjamin García-Hernández. Madrid, 553–67.Google Scholar

Bodelot, C. (2021b), ‘Ecquis en latin classique’, in A. M. Martín Rodríguez (ed.), Linguisticae Dissertationes, Current Perspectives on Latin Grammar, Lexicon and Pragmatics. Selected Papers from the 20th International Colloquium on Latin Linguistics (Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, Spain, June 17-21, 2019). Madrid, 313–26.Google Scholar

Bodelot, C. and Spevak, O. (eds.) (2018), Les constructions à verbe support en latin. Clermont-Ferrand.Google Scholar

Boissier, G. (1901), ‘Claveau d’une des portes de la façade du théâtre de Khamissa (Afrique)’, Comptes-rendus des séances de l’Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres 45, 344–6.Google Scholar

Boldrini, S. (2004), Fondamenti di prosodia e metrica latina. Rome.Google Scholar

Boldrini, S. (2017), La prosodia e la metrica dei Romani, 3rd ed. Rome (1st ed. 1992).Google Scholar

Bonadeo, A. and Romano, E. (eds.) (2007), Dialogando con il passato: permanenze e innovazioni nella cultura latina di età flavia. Florence.Google Scholar

Bonaria, M. (1965), Romani mimi. Rome.Google Scholar

Bondarko, N. A. and Kazanskij, N. N. (eds.) (2009), Indoevropejskoe jazykoznanie i klassičeskaja filologija xiii . St. Petersburg.Google Scholar

Bonnet, G. (2013), ‘Les formes verbales archaïques sous le regard des grammairiens latins’, in Garcea, , Lhommé, and Vallat, (2013), 729–41.Google Scholar

Booth, J. (ed.) (2007), Cicero on the Attack. Invective and Subversion in the Orations and Beyond. Swansea.Google Scholar

Bordenaque Battaglia, G. and Emiliozzi, A. (1990), Le ciste prenestine I, 2 vols. Rome.Google Scholar

Borrell, E. and Cruz, O. de la (eds.) (2016), Omnia mutantur: Canvi, transformació i pervivència en la cultura clàssica, en les seves llengües i en el seu llegat, 2 vols. Barcelona.Google Scholar

Boscherini, S. (1970a), ‘Due probabili calchi greci in Catone’, in Mille: I dibattiti del Circolo linguistico fiorentino, 1945–1970. Florence, 27–32.Google Scholar

Boscherini, S. (1970b), Lingua e scienza greca nel De agri cultura di Catone. Rome.Google Scholar

Boscherini, S. (1976), ‘Città e campagna nella dottrina linguistica di Varrone’, in Atti del congresso internazionale di studi varroniani. Rieti, 317–20.Google Scholar

Boscherini, S. (1993), ‘Termini medici negli scritti di M. Porcio Catone’, in Boscherini, S. (ed.), Studi di lessicologia medica antica. Bologna, 31–43.Google Scholar

Botley, P. (2014), ‘Three Very Different Translators: Joseph Scaliger, Isaac Casaubon and Richard Thomson’, CRCL 41, 477–91.Google Scholar

Botley, P. and van Miert, D. (2012), The Correspondence of Joseph Justus Scaliger. Geneva.Google Scholar

Boyle, A. J. (2006), An Introduction to Roman Tragedy. London.Google Scholar

Brachet, J. P. and Moussy, C. (eds.) (2006), Latin et langues techniques. Paris.Google Scholar

Braun, L. (1980), Scenae suppositiciae, oder Der falsche Plautus. Göttingen.Google Scholar

Bräunlich, A. F. (1920), The Indicative Indirect Question in Latin. Chicago.Google Scholar

Breed, B. B., Keitel, E. E. and Wallace, R. (eds.) (2018), Lucilius and Satire in Second-Century bc Rome. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Brender, F. (1920), Die rückläufige Ableitung im Lateinischen. Diss. Basel.Google Scholar

Breyer, G. (1993), Etruskisches Sprachgut im Lateinischen unter Ausschluss des spezifisch onomastischen Bereiches. Leuven.Google Scholar

Briggs, W. W. (1983), Concordantia in Varronis libros De re rustica. Hildesheim, Zurich and New York.Google Scholar

Briquel, D. (1984), Les Pélasges en Italie: recherches sur l’histoire de la légende. Paris and Rome.Google Scholar

Briscoe, J. (1973), A Commentary on Livy, Books 31–33. Oxford.Google Scholar

Briscoe, J. (1981), A Commentary on Livy, Books 34–37. Oxford.Google Scholar

Briscoe, J. (1986), Titi Liui ab urbe condita libri xli–xlv. Stuttgart.Google Scholar

Briscoe, J. (1991), Titi Liui ab urbe condita libri xxxi–xl, 2 vols. Stuttgart.Google Scholar

Briscoe, J. (2005), ‘The Language and Style of the Fragmentary Republican Historians’, in Reinhardt, , Lapidge, and Adams, (2005), 53–72.Google Scholar

Briscoe, J. (2008), A Commentary on Livy, Books 38–40. Oxford.Google Scholar

Briscoe, J. (2012), A Commentary on Livy, Books 41–45. Oxford.Google Scholar

Briscoe, J. (2016), Titi Liui ab urbe condita tomus iii libri xxi–xxv. Oxford.Google Scholar

Briscoe, J. (2018), Liviana: Studies on Livy. Oxford.Google Scholar

Brocato, P. (1995), ‘Lazio, Roma’, SE 60, 301–2.Google Scholar

Broise, H. and Scheid, J. (1993), ‘Étude d’un cas: le lucus deae Diae à Rome’, in de Cazanove, and Scheid, (1993), 145–57.Google Scholar

Brotherton, B. E. M. (1926), The Vocabulary of Intrigue in Roman Comedy. Diss. Chicago.Google Scholar

Broughton, T. R. S. (1950–1968), The Magistrates of the Roman Republic, 3 vols. New York and Atlanta, GA.Google Scholar

Brown, P. H., Joseph, B. D. and Wallace, R. (2009), ‘Questions and Answers’, in Baldi, and Cuzzolin, (2009–2014), 1. 489–530.Google Scholar

Bruder, H. (1970), Bedeutung und Funktion des Verswechsels bei Terenz. Zurich.Google Scholar

Bruni, S. and Cianferoni, G. C., (eds.) (2013), Dósis d’olige te phile te: studi per Antonella Romualdi. Florence.Google Scholar

Buescu, V. (1966), Cicéron, les Aratea. Hildesheim.Google Scholar

Butler, C. (1985), Statistics in Linguistics. Oxford.Google Scholar

Butterfield, D. J. (2008), ‘Sigmatic Ecthlipsis in Lucretius’, Hermes 136, 188–205.Google Scholar

Butterfield, D. J. (2013), The Early Textual History of Lucretius’ De rerum natura. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Butterfield, D. J. (ed.) (2015), Varro Varius: The Polymath of the Roman World. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Cabrillana, C. (2016), ‘Directives in Latin Comedy: Pragmatics, Dramatic Role and Social Status’, Journal of Latin Linguistics 15, 179–214.Google Scholar

Caiazza, D. (ed.) (2005), Italica ars: Studi in onore di Giovanni Colonna per il premio I Sanniti. Alife.Google Scholar

Calboli, G. (1978), Marci Porci Catonis Oratio pro Rhodiensibus: Catone, l’Oriente greco e gli imprenditori romani. Bologna.Google Scholar

Calboli, G. (1982), ‘La retorica preciceroniana e la politica a Roma’, in Ludwig, (1982), 41–100.Google Scholar

Calboli, G. (1986), ‘I modelli dell’arcaismo: M. Porcio Catone’, AION(ling) 8, 37–69.Google Scholar

Calboli, G. (1993), Cornifici Rhetorica ad C. Herennium, 2nd ed. Bologna.Google Scholar

Calboli, G. (1997), ‘Asindeto e polisindeto’, in Enciclopedia Oraziana, Volume ii (Rome), 799–803.Google Scholar

Calboli, G. (ed.) (2005), Papers on Grammar ix, 2: Latina Lingua! Proceedings of the Twelfth International Colloquium on Latin Linguistics, Bologna, 9–14 June 2003. Rome.Google Scholar

Calboli, G. (2006), ‘L’emploi de la proposition relative dans les textes juridiques latins’, in Brachet, and Moussy, (2006), 233–50.Google Scholar

Calboli, G. (2009), ‘Latin Syntax and Greek’, in Baldi, and Cuzzolin, (2009–2014), 1. 65–193.Google Scholar

Callebat, L. (1968), Sermo cotidianus dans les Métamorphoses d’Apulée. Caen.Google Scholar

Camporeale, G. (ed.) (1999), Incontro di studi in memoria di Massimo Pallotino. Pisa and Rome.Google Scholar

Camporeale, G. (2015), ‘L’arrivo dell’alfabeto in Etruria’, in Camporeale, G. (ed.), Gli Etruschi: Maestri di Scrittura (Milan), 18–25.Google Scholar

Caplan, H. (1954), Cicero: Rhetorica ad Herennium. Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar

Caruso, C. (2012), ‘i.5 Un innamorato’, in Friggeri, , Granino Cecere, and Gregori, (2012), 29.Google Scholar

Cassard, J. (2005), ‘Les composés en -fer et en -ger dans les traités de rhétorique de l’époque républicaine’, in Moussy, (2005b), 179–96.Google Scholar

Caston, R. R. (2015), ‘Pacuuius hoc melius quam Sophocles: Cicero’s Use of Drama in the Treatment of the Emotions’, in Cairns, D. and Fulkerson, L. (eds.), Emotions between Greece and Rome (BICS Suppl. 125), 129–48.Google Scholar

Ceccarelli, L. (1991), ‘Prosodia e metrica latina arcaica 1956–1990’, Lustrum 33, 227–400, 411–15.Google Scholar

Chahoud, A. (1998), C. Lucilii reliquiarum concordantiae. Hildesheim.Google Scholar

Chahoud, A. (2004), ‘The Roman Satirist Speaks Greek’, Classics Ireland 11, 1–46.Google Scholar

Chahoud, A. (2007), ‘Antiquity and Authority in Nonius Marcellus’, in Scourfield, (2007), 69–96.Google Scholar

Chahoud, A. (2010), ‘Idiom(s) and Literariness in Classical Literary Criticism’, in Dickey, and Chahoud, (2010), 42–64.Google Scholar

Chahoud, A. (2011), ‘The Language of Latin Verse Satire’, in Clackson, (2011), 367–84.Google Scholar

Chahoud, A. (2018), ‘Verbal Mosaics: Speech Patterns and Generic Stylisation in Lucilius’, in Breed, , Keitel, and Wallace, , (2018), 132–61.Google Scholar

Chahoud, A. (2019), ‘Lucilius on Latin Spelling, Grammar and Usage’, in Pezzini, and Taylor, (2019), 46–78.Google Scholar

Chahoud, A. (2021), ‘The Language of Catullus’, in DuQuesnay, and Woodman, (2021), 116–42.Google Scholar

Chantraine, P. (1968–1980), Dictionnaire étymologique de la langue grecque, 4 vols. Paris.Google Scholar

Chapot, F. and Laurot, B. (2001), Corpus de prières grecques et romaines. Turnhout.Google Scholar

Charpin, F. (1978–1991) Lucilius, Satires. 3 vols. Paris.Google Scholar

Chassignet, M. (1986), Caton: Les Origines (fragments). Paris.Google Scholar

Chrestien, F. (1605), Euripidis Cyclops Tragoedia Q. Septimio Florente Christiano interprete. Printed as an appendix to Casaubon, I. (1605), De Satyrica Graecorum poesi & Romanorum Satira libri duo, in quibus etiam poetae recensentur, qui in utraque poesi floruerunt. Paris.Google Scholar

Christenson, D. (2000), Plautus Amphitruo. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Churchill, J. B. (1996), The Elder Cato: A Philological Reassessment. Diss. Urbana-Champaign.Google Scholar

Cifani, G. (ed.) (2013), Tra Roma e l’Etruria: Cultura, identità e territorio dei Falisci. Rome.Google Scholar

Citroni, M. (ed.) (2003), Memoria e identità: La cultura romana costruisce la sua immagine. Florence.Google Scholar

Clackson, J. (ed.) (2011a), A Companion to the Latin Language. Malden and Oxford.Google Scholar

Clackson, J. (2011b), ‘Classical Latin’, in Clackson, (2011a), 236–56.Google Scholar

Clackson, J. (2016), ‘The Language of a Pompeian Tavern: Submerged Latin?’, in Adams, and Vincent, (2016), 69–86.Google Scholar

Clackson, J. and Horrocks, G. (2007), The Blackwell History of the Latin Language. Malden, MA, and Oxford.Google Scholar

Clausen, W. (1994), A Commentary on Virgil, Eclogues. Oxford.Google Scholar

Coarelli, F. (2011), Le origini di Roma: La cultura artistica dalle origini al III secolo a.C. Rome.Google Scholar

Cobet, C. G. (1860), ‘Livius nonnullis locis emendatus’, Mnemosyne 9, 298.Google Scholar

Coleman, R. (1999), ‘Poetic Diction, Poetic Discourse and the Poetic Register’, in Adams, and Mayer, (1999), 21–93.Google Scholar

Colonna, G. (1980a), ‘Appendice: le iscrizioni strumentali latine del VI e V secolo a.C.’, in Stibbe et al. (1980a), 53–69.Google Scholar

Colonna, G. (1980b), ‘Graeco more bibere: l’iscrizione della tomba 115 dell’Osteria dell’Osa’, Archaeologia Laziale 3, 51–5.Google Scholar

Colonna, G. (1988), ‘L’écriture dans l’Italie centrale à l’époque archaïque’, in Revue de la Société des élèves, anciens élèves et amis de la section des sciences religieuses de l’É.P.H.É (Paris), 22–31.Google Scholar

Colonna, G. (1995a), ‘Ager Signinus’, SE 60, 298–301.Google Scholar

Colonna, G. (1995b), ‘Lazio, Roma: Iscrizione latina arcaica dai pressi della Meta Sudans (valle dal Colosseo)’, SE 61, 347–50.Google Scholar

Colonna, G. (1999a), ‘L’iscrizione del biconico di Uppsala: Un documento del paleoumbro’, in Camporeale, (1999), 19–29.Google Scholar

Colonna, G. (1999b), ‘Epigrafi etrusche e latine a confronto’, in Atti dell’ XI Congresso Internazionale di Epigrafia Greca e Latina. Roma, 18–24 settembre 1997, 435–50.Google Scholar

Colonna, G. (2005), ‘Il cippo di Tragliatella (e questioni connesse)’, SE 71, 83–109.Google Scholar

Colonna, G. and Beijer, A. (1992), ‘Lazio, Satricum: Un’ iscrizione latina di VII secolo da Satricum’, SE 58, 316–20.Google Scholar

Colonna, G. and Gatti, S. (1992), ‘Anagni. Iscrizioni in dialetto ernico’, Studi Etruschi 58, 323–7.Google Scholar

Colonna, G. and Gnade, M. (2003), ‘Dolio con iscrizioni latine arcaiche da Satricum’, Archeologia classica 54, 1–21.Google Scholar

Conrad, C. (1965), ‘Traditional Patterns of Word-Order in Latin Epic from Ennius to Vergil’, HSPh 69, 195–258.Google Scholar

Conrad, F. (1931), ‘Die Deminutiva im Altlatein’, Glotta 20, 78–84.Google Scholar

Consoli, M. E. (2014), Quintus Ennius: Fortuna ed enigma. Lecce.Google Scholar

Conte, G. B. (1982), Gaio Plinio Secondo Storia Naturale, vol. 1, Cosmologia e geografia: libri 1–6. Turin.Google Scholar

Conway, R. S. and Johnson, S. K. (1935), Titi Liui ab urbe condita tomus iv libri xxvi–xxx. Oxford.Google Scholar

Cook, A. B. (1902), ‘Unconscious Iterations (With Special Reference to Classical Literature)’, CR 16, 146–58, 256–67.Google Scholar

Corbeill, A. (2015), Sexing the World: Grammatical Gender and Biological Sex in Ancient Rome. Princeton.Google Scholar

Cornell, T. J. (1991), ‘The Tyranny of the Evidence: A Discussion of the Possible Uses of Literacy in Etruria and Latium in the Archaic Age’, in Humphrey, (1991), 7–33.Google Scholar

Cornell, T. J. (1995), The Beginnings of Rome: Italy from the Bronze Age to the Punic Wars (c. 1000–264 bc). London and New York.Google Scholar

Cornell, T. J. (ed.) (2013), The Fragments of the Roman Historians, 3 vols. Oxford.Google Scholar

Coulmas, F. (2002), Writing Systems: An Introduction to Their Linguistic Analysis. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Coulter, C. C. (1916), ‘Compound Adjectives in Early Latin Poetry’, TAPhA 47, 153–72.Google Scholar

Courtney, E. (1991), The Poems of Petronius. Atlanta, GA.Google Scholar

Courtney, E. (1995), Musa Lapidaria: A Selection of Latin Verse Inscriptions. Atlanta, GA.Google Scholar

Courtney, E. (1999), Archaic Latin Prose. Atlanta, GA.Google Scholar

Courtney, E. (2003), The Fragmentary Latin Poets. Oxford [1st ed. 1993].Google Scholar

Courtney, E. (2004), ‘The “Greek” Accusative’, CJ 99, 425–31.Google Scholar

Cova, P. V. et al. (eds.) (1986), Studi sulla lingua di Plinio il Vecchio. Milan.Google Scholar

Cova, P. V. (1986a), ‘La lingua di Plinio il Vecchio: Studi e problemi’, BStudLat 16, 47–54.Google Scholar

Cova, P. V. (1986b), ‘L’ablativo assoluto nella Naturalis Historia’, in Cova, et al. (1986), 13–142.Google Scholar

Crampon, M. (2000), ‘Création de mots chez Plaute’, in Fruyt, and Nicolas, (2000), 149–54.Google Scholar

Crawford, M. H. (1974), Roman Republican Coinage, 2 vols. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Crawford, M. H. (1996), Roman Statutes, 2 vols. London.Google Scholar

Cristofani, M. (1972), ‘Sull’origine e la diffusione dell’alfabeto etrusco’, ANRW 1.2, 466–89.Google Scholar

Cristofani, M. (1978), ‘Rapporto sulla diffusione della scrittura nell’Italia antica’, S&C 2, 5–33.Google Scholar

Cugusi, P. (1970–1979), Epistolographi Latini minores, 2 vols. Turin.Google Scholar

Cugusi, P. and Sblendorio Cugusi, M. T. (2001), Marco Porcio Catone Censore: Opere. Turin.Google Scholar

Cullhed, A. (2015), The Shadow of Creusa: Negotiating Fictionality in Late Antique Latin Literature. Berlin and Boston.Google Scholar

Cunliffe, B. (ed.) (1988), The Temple of Sulis Minerva at Bath. Vol. 2: The Finds from the Sacred Spring. Oxford.Google Scholar

Cupaiuolo, G. (1963), Un capitolo sull’esametro latino. Naples.Google Scholar

D’Alessandro, P. (2004), Rufini Antiochensis Commentaria in metra terentiana et de compositione et de numeris oratorum. Hildesheim.Google Scholar

D’Alessandro, P. (2012), Varrone e la tradizione metrica antica. Hildesheim.Google Scholar

D’Elia, M. (1976), ‘Sull’uso di ‘quod’ con il senso di ‘si’ nel latino giuridico’, in Scritti in onore di Giuliano Bonfante: Vol. 1 (Brescia), 191–204.Google Scholar

Danese, R. M., Gori, F., and Questa, C. (eds.) (1990), Metrica classica e linguistica: Atti del colloquio, Urbino 3–6 ottobre 1988. Urbino.Google Scholar

Danese, R. M. (2010), ‘Stile e sesso nei frammenti dell’Atellana letteraria’, in Raffaelli, and Tontini, (2010), 101–17.Google Scholar

Dangel, J. (1995), Accius, Œuvres. Paris.Google Scholar

Dangel, J. (ed.) (1994), Grammaire et rhétorique à Rome: notion de Romanité. Strasbourg.Google Scholar

Daube, D. (1956), Forms of Roman Legislation. Oxford.Google Scholar

Daviault, A. (1981), Comoedia togata: fragments. Paris.Google Scholar

De Cazanove, O. (2000), ‘I destinatari dell’iscrizione di Tiriolo e la questione del campo di applicazione del Senatoconsulto de Bacchanalibus’, Athenaeum 88, 59–68.Google Scholar

De Cazanove, O. and Scheid, J. (eds.) (1993), Les bois sacrés: Actes du colloque international, Naples, 23–25 novembre 1989. Paris.Google Scholar

de Melo, W. D. C. (2006), ‘If in Doubt, Leave It in: Subject Accusatives in Plautus and Terence’, Oxford University Working Papers in Linguistics 11, 5–20.Google Scholar

de Melo, W. D. C. (2007), The Early Latin Verb System: Archaic Forms in Plautus, Terence, and beyond. Oxford.Google Scholar

de Melo, W. D. C. (2009), ‘Scies (Mil. 520) e scibis (Mil. 1365): Variazione accidentale?’, in Raffaelli, and Tontini, (2009), 41–52.Google Scholar

de Melo, W. D. C. (2010a), ‘Possessive Pronouns in Plautus’, in Dickey, and Chahoud, (2010), 71–99.Google Scholar

de Melo, W. D. C. (2010b), ‘The Language of Atellan Farce’, in Raffaelli, and Tontini, (2010), 89–123.Google Scholar

de Melo, W. D. C. (2011), ‘The Language of Roman Comedy’, in Clackson, (2011a), 321–43.Google Scholar

de Melo, W. D. C. (2011–2013), Plautus, 5 vols. Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar

de Melo, W. D. C. (2014), ‘The Latin Saturnian Revisited: a Critical Look at Mercado’s Italic Verse, Followed by a Fresh Analysis of the Metre’, Kratylos 59, 53–81.Google Scholar

de Melo, W. D. C. (2019), Varro, De Lingua Latina: Introduction, Text, Translation, and Commentary. Oxford.Google Scholar

de Melo, W. D. C. and Scullion, S. (eds.) (forthcoming), The Oxford Handbook of Greek and Latin Textual Criticism. Oxford.Google Scholar

De Meo, C. (2005), Lingue tecniche del latino, 3rd ed. Bologna.Google Scholar

De Nonno, M. (1990), ‘Ruolo e funzione della metrica nei grammatici latini’, in Danese, , Gori, and Questa, (1990), 453–94.Google Scholar

De Nonno, M. (2010), ‘I grammatici e la tradizione dell’Atellana letteraria’, in Raffaelli, and Tontini, (2010), 37–67.Google Scholar

De Nonno, M. (2017), ‘Vetustas e antiquitas, ueteres e antiqui nei grammatici latini’, in Rocchi, and Mussini, (2007), 213–47.Google Scholar

De Pachtère, F. G. (1909), Musée de Guelma. Paris.Google Scholar

De Paolis, P. (2010), ‘L’insegnamento dell’ortografia latina fra Tardoantico e alto Medioevo: teorie e manuali’, in Del Corso, and Pecere, (2010), 229–91.Google Scholar

De Paolis, P. (2014), ‘Sordidi sermones uiri: Velio Longo, Flavio Capro e la lingua di Lucano’, in Piras, (2014), 97–109.Google Scholar

De Paolis, P. (2015), ‘La parentela linguistica fra greco e latino nella tradizione grammaticale latina’, in Haverling, (2015), 610–24.Google Scholar

De Simone, C. (1968–1970), Die griechische Entlehnung im Etruskischen, 2 vols. Wiesbaden.Google Scholar

De Simone, C. (1968), ‘Zur altetruskischen Inschrift aus Rom (ni araziia laraniia)’, Glotta 46, 2007–12.Google Scholar

De Simone, C. (1972), ‘Per la storia degli imprestiti greci in etrusco’, ANRW 1.2, 490–521.Google Scholar

De Vaan, M. (2008), Etymological Dictionary of Latin and the Other Italic Languages. Leiden and Boston.Google Scholar

De Vos Raiijmakers, M. and Pepe, C. (2015), ‘A New Funerary Epigram of a Syrian Migrant near Thugga (Africa Proconsularis), Tunisian tell’, ZPE 194, 73–9.Google Scholar

Degl’Innocenti Pierini, R. (1975), ‘Un modulo del linguaggio critico di Cicerone (Brutus, 76)’, SIFC 47, 68–85.Google Scholar

Del Castillo Herrera, M. (2011), ‘Los infinitivos pasivos en -ier en la literatura latina: de Plauto a Juvenal’, Latomus 70, 51–66.Google Scholar

Del Corso, L. and Pecere, O. (eds.) (2010), Libri di scuola e pratiche didattiche. Dall’antichità al rinascimento. Cassino.Google Scholar

DeLancey, S. (1997), ‘Mirativity: The Grammatical Marking of Unexpected Information’, Linguistic Typology 1, 33–52.Google Scholar

Della Casa, A. (1969), Il Dubius sermo di Plinio. Genoa.Google Scholar

Della Casa, A. (1982), ‘Plinio grammatico’, in Plinio il Vecchio sotto il profilo storico e letterario. Atti del Convegno di Como, 5-6-7 ottobre 1979. Atti della Tavola rotonda nella ricorrenza centenaria della morte di Plinio il Vecchio, Bologna 16 dicembre 1979 (Como) (Como), 109–15.Google Scholar

Delvigo, M. L. (2013), ‘Servio e i ueteres’, in Stok, (2013), 83–100.Google Scholar

Den Boeft, J. et al. (2013), Philological and Historical Commentary on Ammianus Marcellinus xxix . Leiden.Google Scholar

Denizot, C. and Spevak, O. (eds.) (2017), Pragmatic Approaches to Latin and Ancient Greek. Amsterdam.Google Scholar

Denniston, J. D. (1934), The Greek Particles. Oxford.Google Scholar

Desbordes, F. (1983), ‘Le schéma “addition, soustraction, mutation, métathèse” dans les textes anciens’, HEL 5, 23–30. (= Idées grecques et romaines sur le langage (Lyon 2007), 55–63).Google Scholar

Deufert, M. (2002), Textgeschichte und Rezeption der plautinischen Komödien im Altertum. Berlin.Google Scholar

Deufert, M. (2007), ‘Terenz und die altlateinische Verskunst: ein Beitrag zur Technik des Enjambements in der neuen Komödie’, in Kruschwitz, Ehlers and Felgentreu (2007), 51–71.Google Scholar

Deufert, M. (2010), ‘“Quid aliud est Plautina emendare quam ludere?”: Gottfried Hermanns Bedeutung für die Plautusphilologie des 19. Jahrhunderts’, in Sier, and Wockener-Gade, (2010), 277–97.Google Scholar

Deufert, M. (2014), ‘Metrics and Music’, in Fontaine, and Scafuro, (2014), 477–97.Google Scholar

Devoto, G. (1940), Storia della lingua di Roma. Bologna.Google Scholar

Di Napoli, M. (2011), Velii Longi De orthographia. Hildesheim.Google Scholar

Dickey, E. (2002), Latin Forms of Address: from Plautus to Apuleius. Oxford.Google Scholar

Dickey, E. (2018), ‘What Is a Loanword? The Case of Latin Borrowings and Codeswitches in Ancient Greek’, Lingue e linguaggio 17, 7–36.Google Scholar

Dickey, E. and Chahoud, A. (eds.) (2010), Colloquial and Literary Latin. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Diederich, S. (2005), ‘Das römische Agrarhandbuch als Medium der Selbstdarstellung’, in Fögen, (2005), 271–88.Google Scholar

Diels, H. (1922), ‘Lukrezstudien v ’, Sitzungsberichte der Preußischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, philosophisch-historische Klasse, 46–59. (= Diels, 1969, 365–78).Google Scholar

Diels, H. (1969), Kleine Schriften zur Geschichte der antiken Philosophie, Burkert, W. (ed.). Darmstadt.Google Scholar

Dimsdale, M. S. (1889), Livy Book xxii. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Dinter, M. T. (ed.) (2019), The Cambridge Companion to Roman Comedy. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Dousa, F. (1597), C Lucillii Suessani Auruncani satyrographorum principis … Satyrarum quae supersunt reliquiae. Franciscus Iani f. Dousa collegit, disposuit et notas addidit. Leiden.Google Scholar

Drago Troccoli, L. (ed.) (2009), Il Lazio dai Colli Albani ai Monti Lepini tra preistoria ed età moderna. Rome.Google Scholar

Dressler, W. U. (1975), ‘Methodisches zu Allegro-Regeln’, in Dressler, and Mareš, (1975), 219–34.Google Scholar

Dressler, W. U. and Mareš, F. V. (eds.) (1975), Phonologica 1972: Akten der Zweiten Internationalen Phonologie-Tagung, Wien, 5.-8. September 1972. Munich.Google Scholar

Drexler, H. (1967), Einführung in die römische Metrik. Darmstadt.Google Scholar

Drexler, H. (1969), Die Iambenkürzung: Kürzung der zweiten Silbe eines iambischen Wortes – eines iambischen Wortanfangs. Hildesheim.Google Scholar

Dugan, J. (2005), Making a New Man: Ciceronian Self-Fashioning in the Rhetorical Works. Oxford.Google Scholar

Dugan, J. (2018), ‘Netting the Wolf-Fish: Gaius Titius in Macrobius and Cicero’, in Gray, et al. (2018), 135–50.Google Scholar

Dunbabin, K. M. D. (1989), ‘Baiarum grata voluptas: Pleasures and Dangers of the Baths’, PBSR 57, 6–46.Google Scholar

Dunkel, G. E. (1997), ‘Mono- and Disyllabic ā´ in the R̥gveda’, in Pirart, E. (ed.), Syntaxe des langues indo-iraniennes anciennes. Barcelona, 9–27.Google Scholar

Dunkel, G. E. (1998), ‘On the Short Vowel in the Name Ἡρακλῆς’, MH 55, 76–83.Google Scholar

Dupraz, E. (2011), Sabellian Demonstratives: Forms and Functions. Leiden and Boston.Google Scholar

DuQuesnay, I. M. le M. and Woodman, T. (eds.) (2021), The Cambridge Companion to Catullus. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Durante, M. (1976), Sulla preistoria della tradizione poetica greca 2: Risultanze della comparazione indoeuropea. Rome.Google Scholar

Dutsch, D. (2008), Feminine Discourse in Roman Comedy: on Echoes and Voices. Oxford.Google Scholar

Dyck, A. R. (2010), Cicero: Pro Sexto Roscio. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Ebbeler, J. V. (2012), Disciplining Christians: Correction and Community in Augustine’s Letters. Oxford.Google Scholar

Eckert, A. (2018), ‘Roman Orators between Greece and Rome: The Case of Cato the Elder, L. Crassus, and M. Antonius’, in Gray, et al. (2018), 19–32.Google Scholar

Eichner, H. (1988–1990a), ‘Ein Heldendenkmal der Sabiner mit trochäischem Epigramm eines pikenischen Plautus des fünften Jahrhunderts v. Chr.’, Die Sprache 34, 198–206.Google Scholar

Eichner, H. (1988–1990b), ‘Reklameiamben aus Roms Königszeit’, Die Sprache 34, 207–38.Google Scholar

Eichner, H. (1995), ‘Zu frühlateinischen Wortformen auf dem Forumscippus CIL I2, 1’, in Ofitsch, and Zinko, (1995), 65–73.Google Scholar

Elliott, J. (2007), ‘The Voices of Ennius’ Annals’, in Fitzgerald, and Gowers, (2007), 38–54.Google Scholar

Elliott, J. (2013), Ennius and the Architecture of the Annales. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Emiliozzi, A. (2008), ‘Dialoghi prenestini su cista e specchio figurati’, Bollettino di Archeologia online i 2010/Volume speciale D/D5/3, 27–35.Google Scholar

Ernout, A. (1908–1909), ‘Recherches sur l’emploi du passif latin à l’époque républicaine’, Mémoires de la Société de Linguistique de Paris 15, 273–333.Google Scholar

Ernout, A. (1936), Plaute 4: Menaechmi, Mercator, Miles Gloriosus. Paris.Google Scholar

Ernout, A. (1953), Morphologie historique du latin, 3rd ed. Paris.Google Scholar

Ernout, A. (1954), Aspects du vocabulaire latin. Paris.Google Scholar

Ernout, A. (1957), Recueil de textes latins archaïques, 2nd ed. Paris.Google Scholar

Ernout, A. and Meillet, A. (1985), Dictionnaire étymologique de la langue latine: histoire des mots, 4th ed. Paris.Google Scholar

Ernout, A. and Robin, L. (1962), Lucrèce, De rerum natura: Commentaire exégétique et critique, précédé d’une introduction sur l’art de Lucrèce et d’une traduction des lettres et pensées d’Épicure, 2nd ed. Paris.Google Scholar

Estienne, R. and Estienne, H. (1564), Fragmenta poetarum ueterum Romanorum, quorum opera non extant… undique a Roberto Stephano summa diligentia olim congesta: nunc autem ab Henrico Stephano eius filio digesta, et priscarum quae in illis sunt uocum expositione illustrata: additis etiam alicubi uersibus Graecis quos interpretantur. Geneva.Google Scholar

Facchetti, G. M. (2016), ‘Tinas cliniiaras’, in Ancilotti, , Calderini, and Massarelli, (2016), 279–99.Google Scholar

Farrell, J. and Damon, C. (eds.) (2020), Ennius’ Annals: Poetry and History. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Fedeli, P. (1972), Il carme 61 di Catullo. Fribourg.Google Scholar

Fedriani, C. (2017), ‘Quapropter, quaeso? “Why, for pity’s sake?”’, in Denizot, C. and Spevak, O. (eds.), Pragmatic Approaches to Latin and Ancient Greek (Amsterdam), 83–109.Google Scholar

Feeney, D. (2005), ‘Review: The Beginnings of a Literature in Latin’, JRS 95, 226–40.Google Scholar

Feeney, D. (2016), Beyond Greek: The Beginnings of Latin Literature. Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar

Fehling, D. (1969), Die Wiederholungsfiguren und ihr Gebrauch bei den Griechen vor Gorgias. Berlin.Google Scholar

Ferrara, G. (1905), Della voce “Scutula”: nota di semantica latina. Milan.Google Scholar

Ferrary, J.-L. (ed.) (2012), Leges publicae: La legge nell’esperienza giuridica romana. Pavia.Google Scholar

Fitzgerald, W. and Gowers, E. (eds.) (2007), Ennius Perennis: The Annals and Beyond. Oxford.Google Scholar

Flach, D. (2005), Marcus Porcius Cato: Über den Ackerbau. Stuttgart.Google Scholar

Flobert, P. (1975), Les verbes déponents latins des origines à Charlemagne. Paris.Google Scholar

Flobert, P. (1988), ‘Lingua Latina et lingua Romana: purisme, administration et invasions barbares’, Ktema 13, 205–12. (= Flobert 2014: 442–53).Google Scholar

Flobert, P. (1996), ‘Verbes supports en latin’, in Bammesberger, and Heberlein, (1996), 193–9.Google Scholar

Flobert, P. (2009), ‘Le chapitre de Priscien sur la voix et la diathèse (GL 2,373–404)’, in Baratin, , Colombat, and Holtz, (2009), 331–40.Google Scholar

Flobert, P. (2014), Grammaire comparée et variétés du latin: Articles revus et mis à jour (1964–2012). Geneva.Google Scholar

Flores, E. (2014), Commentario a Cn. Naevi Bellum Poenicum. Naples.Google Scholar

Flores, E. et al. (2002), Quinto Ennio, Annali (libri I–VIII): Volume 2 Commentari. Naples.Google Scholar

Fögen, T. (ed.) (2005), Antike Fachtexte/Ancient Technical Texts. Berlin.Google Scholar

Fontaine, M. (2006), ‘Sicilicissitat (Plautus, Menaechmi 12) and Early Geminate Writing in Latin (with an Appendix on Men. 13)’, Mnemosyne 59, 95–110.Google Scholar

Fontaine, M. (2010), Funny Words in Plautine Comedy. Oxford.Google Scholar

Fontaine, M. and Scafuro, A. C. (eds.) (2014), The Oxford Handbook of Greek and Roman Comedy. Oxford.Google Scholar

Fordyce, C. J. (1961), Catullus: A Commentary. Oxford.Google Scholar

Fortini, P. (2005), ‘Una nuova iscrizione latina arcaica dal Foro Romano (area del cd. Equus Domitiani)’, in Caiazza, (2005), 267–76.Google Scholar

Fortson, B. W. (2008), Language and Rhythm in Plautus. Berlin and New York.Google Scholar

Fortson, B. W. (2011a), ‘Latin Prosody and Metrics’, in Clackson, (2011a), 92–104.Google Scholar

Fortson, B. W. (2011b), ‘The Historical Background to Latin within the Indo-European Language Family’, in Clackson, (2011b), 199–219.Google Scholar

Fortson, B. W. (2017), ‘The Dialectology of Italic’, in Klein, , Joseph, and Fritz, (2017), 835–58.Google Scholar

Fortson, B. W. and Potter, D. (2011), ‘A Fragmentary Early Republican Public Inscription from Gabii’, ZPE 178, 255–60.Google Scholar

Fournier, N. (1998), ‘Les termes en qu- et l’opposition animé / non animé’, IG 78, 4–12.Google Scholar

Fowler, D. (2002), Lucretius on Atomic Motion: A Commentary on De Rerum Natura, Book Two, Lines 1–332. Oxford.Google Scholar

Fraenkel, E. (1917), ‘Das Geschlecht von dies’, Glotta 8, 24–68 (= Fraenkel 1964: 1.26–72).Google Scholar

Fraenkel, E. (1931), ‘Livius Andronicus’, RE Supplementum 5, 598–607.Google Scholar

Fraenkel, E. (1956), ‘Eine Form römischer Kriegsbulletins’, Eranos 54, 189–94 (= Fraenkel 1964: 2.69–73).Google Scholar

Fraenkel, E. (1964), Kleine Beiträge zur classischen Philologie, 2 vols. Rome.Google Scholar

Fraenkel, E. (1968), Leseproben aus Reden Ciceros und Catos. Rome.Google Scholar

Fraenkel, E. (2007), Plautine Elements in Plautus, transl. T. Drevikovsky and F. Muecke. Oxford (1st ed. German ed. Berlin 1922; Italian ed. Florence 1960).Google Scholar

Franchi de Bellis, A. (2005), Iscrizioni prenestine su specchi e ciste. Alessandria.Google Scholar

Frassinetti, P. (1967), Atellanae Fabulae, 2nd ed. Rome.Google Scholar

Friggeri, R., Granino Cecere, M. G., and Gregori, G. L. (eds.) (2012), Terme di Diocleziano: La collezione epigrafica. Rome.Google Scholar

Frisk, H. (1960–1972), Griechisches etymologisches Wörterbuch, 3 vols. Heidelberg.Google Scholar

Fruyt, M. (2002), ‘Constraints and Productivity in Latin Nominal Compounding’, TPhS 100, 259–97.Google Scholar

Fruyt, M. (2005), ‘Le statut des composés nominaux dans le lexique latin’, in Moussy, (2005b), 29–54.Google Scholar

Fruyt, M. (2011a), ‘Word-Formation in Classical Latin’, in Clackson, (2011a), 157–75.Google Scholar

Fruyt, M. (2011b), ‘Grammaticalization in Latin’, in Baldi, and Cuzzolin, (2009–2014), 4. 661–864.Google Scholar

Fruyt, M. and Moussy, C. (eds.) (1996), Structures lexicales du latin. Paris.Google Scholar

Fruyt, M. and Nicolas, C. (eds.) (2000), La création lexicale en latin. Paris.Google Scholar

Fruyt, M. and Van Laer, S. (eds.) (2008), Adverbes et évolution linguistique en latin. Paris.Google Scholar

Funaioli, G. (1907), Grammaticae Romanae Fragmenta. Leipzig.Google Scholar

Gaertner, J. F. and Hausburg, B. (2013), Caesar and the Bellum Alexandrinum. Göttingen.Google Scholar

Gagnér, A. (1920), De ‘hercle’ ‘mehercle’ ceterisque id genus particulis priscae poesis latinae scaenicae. Greifswald.Google Scholar

Gaide, F. (1988), Les substantifs masculins latins en …(i)ō, …(i)ōnis. Louvain and Paris.Google Scholar

Galdi, G. (2018), ‘On the Use of facio as Support Verb in Late and Merovingian Latin’, Journal of Latin Linguistics 17, 231–57.Google Scholar

Gale, M. (1994), Myth and Poetry in Lucretius. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Garcea, A. (2012a), Caesar’s De Analogia: Edition, Translation, and Commentary. Oxford.Google Scholar

Garcea, A. (2012b), ‘Probus et l’accent’, REL 90, 245–51.Google Scholar

Garcea, A. (2019), ‘Cornificius, Varro and the quadripertita ratio’, in Swiggers, (2019), 247–56.Google Scholar

Garcea, A. and Lomanto, V. (2004), ‘Aulus Gellius and Fronto on Loan Words and Literary Models: Their Evaluation of Laberius’, in Holford-Strevens, and Vardi, (2004), 41–64.Google Scholar

Garcea, A., Lhommé, M. K., and Vallat, D. (eds.) (2013), Polyphonia Romana: Hommages à Frédérique Biville. Hildesheim.Google Scholar

Garcea, A., Lhommé, M. K., and Vallat, D. (eds.) (2016), Fragments d’érudition. Servius et le savoir antique. Hildesheim.Google Scholar

Garcea, A., Rosellini, M., and Silvano, L. (eds.) (2019), Latin in Byzantium I: Late Antiquity and Beyond. Turnhout.Google Scholar

Gasperin, i, L. (1970) ‘La più antica dedica a Dite’, Epigraphica 32, 35–49.Google Scholar

Gee, E. (2013a), Aratus and the Astronomical Tradition. Oxford.Google Scholar

Gee, E. (2013b), ‘Cicero’s Poetry’ in Steel, (2013), 88–106.Google Scholar

Georgescu, T. (2019), ‘Les mots latins d’origine grecque avec diffusion panromane: comment et pourquoi?’, in Holmes, N. et al. (eds.) (2019), Lemmata Linguistica Latina Volume I: Words and Sounds (Berlin), 277–93.Google Scholar

Ghini, G. (ed.) (2009), ‘Su due iscrizioni protoitaliche dal tempo delle Stimmate a Velletri’, in Ghini, G. (ed.), Lazio e Sabina 5, Scoperte, scavi e ricerche: atti del convegno quinto incontro di studi sul Lazio e la Sabina, Roma 3–5 dicembre 2007 (Rome), 325–30.Google Scholar

Gigante Lanzara, V. (2000) Licofrone: Alessandra. Milan.Google Scholar

Gitner, A. (2015), ‘Varro Aeolicus: Latin’s Affiliation with Greek’, in Butterfield, (2015), 33–50.Google Scholar

Glareanus, H. (1540), T. Livi Patavini Historiarum Ab Urbe Condita Libri. Basel.Google Scholar

Glucker, J. and Burnett, C. S. F. (eds.) (2012), Greek into Latin from Antiquity until the Nineteenth Century. London.Google Scholar

Godwin, J. (2014), Metamorphoses III: An Extract 511–733. London.Google Scholar

Goldberg, S. M. (1983), ‘Terence, Cato, and the Rhetorical Prologue’, CPh 78, 198–211.Google Scholar

Goldberg, S. M. (1995), Epic in Republican Rome. Oxford.Google Scholar

Goldberg, S. M. (2005), Constructing Literature in the Roman Republic. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Goldberg, S. M. (2010), ‘Fact, Fiction and Form in Early Roman Epic’, in Konstan, and Raaflaub, (2010), 167–84.Google Scholar

Goldberg, S. M. (2018), ‘Lucilius and the poetae seniores’, in Breed, , Keitel, and Wallace, (2018), 39–56.Google Scholar

Goldberg, S. M. and Manuwald, G. (2017), Fragmentary Republican Latin i : Ennius, Testimonia. Epic Fragments. Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar

Goldberg, S. M. and Manuwald, G. (2018), Fragmentary Republican Latin ii : Ennius, Dramatic Fragments; Minor Works. Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar

Goold, G. P. (1989), Catullus, 2nd ed. Cambridge, MA and London.Google Scholar

Grafton, A. (1983), Joseph Scaliger. A Study in the History of Classical Scholarship. i. Textual Criticism and Exegesis. Oxford.Google Scholar

Gratwick, A. S. (1982a), ‘Ennius the Hellenistic Poet: Epic Diction and Verse’, in Kenney, and Clausen, (1982), 66–75.Google Scholar

Gratwick, A. S. (1982b), ‘The Form and Verse of Roman Drama’, in Kenney, and Clausen, (1982), 84–93.Google Scholar

Gratwick, A. S. (1993), Plautus Menaechmi. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Gratwick, A. S. (1999), Terence The Brothers, 2nd ed. Warminster (1st ed. 1987).Google Scholar

Gray, C. et al. (eds.) (2018), Reading Republican Oratory: Reconstructions, Contexts, Receptions. Oxford.Google Scholar

Gross, G. (1993), ‘Les passifs nominaux’, Langages 109, 103–25.Google Scholar

Gross, G. (2004), ‘Pour un Bescherelle de prédicats nominaux’, in Gross, and Pontonx, (2004), 343–58.Google Scholar

Gross, G. and Pontonx, S. (eds.) (2004), Verbes supports: Nouvel état des lieux. Paris.Google Scholar

Gruen, E. S. (1990), Studies in Greek Culture and Roman Policy. Leiden (repr. Berkeley 1996).Google Scholar

Gruen, E. S. (1992), Culture and National Identity in Republican Rome. Ithaca, NY.Google Scholar

Gsell, S. (1922), Inscriptions latines de l’Algérie. Tome premier: inscriptions de la proconsulaire. Paris.Google Scholar

Gsell, S. and Joly, C. A. (1914), Khamissa, Mdaourouch, Announa: fouilles exécutées par le Service des Monuments Historiques de l’Algérie. Première partie: Khamissa. Paris.Google Scholar

Guardì, T. (1974), Cecilio Stazio: I frammenti. Palermo.Google Scholar

Guardì, T. (1995), ‘Afranio in Nonio’, Pan 13, 17–37.Google Scholar

Guldager, P. and Poulsen, B. (2008), The Temple of Castor and Pollux, ii, 1: The Finds. Rome.Google Scholar

Gunkel, D. et al. (eds.) (2018), Vina Diem Celebrent: Studies in Linguistics and Philology in Honor of Brent Vine. Ann Arbor, MI.Google Scholar

Haack, M.-L. (ed.) (2009), Écritures, cultures, sociétés dans les nécropoles d’Italie ancienne. Pessac.Google Scholar

Habinek, T. (2006), ‘The Wisdom of Ennius’, Arethusa 39, 471–88.Google Scholar

Hackstein, O. (2014), ‘Univerbierung und irreguläre Reduktion in temporalen Adverbien: uridg. ges-tern von Bopp bis heute’, in Melchert, H. C., Rieken, E., and Steer, T. (eds.), Munus amicitiae Norbert Oettinger a collegis et amicis datum. Ann Arbor, MI, 32–45.Google Scholar

Hackstein, O. and Gunkel, D. (eds.) (2018), Language and Meter. Leiden.Google Scholar

Haffter, H. (1934), Untersuchungen zur altlateinischen Dichtersprache. Berlin.Google Scholar

Haffter, H. (1969), Terenzio e la sua personalità artistica, transl. D. Nardo. Rome.Google Scholar

Hagendahl, H. (1967), Augustine and the Latin Classics, 2 vols. Gothenburg.Google Scholar

Hahn, E. A. (1960), ‘The Origin of the Greek Accusative in Latin’, TAPhA 91, 221–38.Google Scholar

Hall, J. (2009), Politeness and Politics in Cicero’s Letters. Oxford.Google Scholar

Halla-aho, H. (2019), ‘Proleptic Accusatives in Latin’, Glotta 95, 135–58.Google Scholar

Halla-aho, H. and Kruschwitz, P. (2010), ‘Colloquial and Literary Latin in Early Roman Tragedy’, in Dickey, and Chahoud, (2010), 127–53.Google Scholar

Hallett, J. P. (2018), ‘Oratorum Romanarum Fragmenta Liberae Rei Publicae: The Letter of Cornelia, Mater Gracchorum, and the Speeches of Her Father and Son’, in Gray, et al. (2018), 309–18.Google Scholar

Halm, K. (1863), Rhetores Latini Minores. Leipzig.Google Scholar

Handford, S. A. (1947), The Latin Subjunctive: Its Usage and Development from Plautus to Tacitus. London.Google Scholar

Hanssen, J. S. T. (1953), Latin Diminutives. A Semantic Study. Bergen.Google Scholar

Happ, H. (1967), ‘Die lateinische Umgangssprache und die Kunstsprache des Plautus’, Glotta 45, 60–104.Google Scholar

Hardie, P. R. (1986), Virgil’s Aeneid: Cosmos and Imperium, Oxford.Google Scholar

Harries, B. (2007), ‘Acting the Part: Techniques of the Comic Stage in Cicero’s Early Speeches’, in Booth, (2007), 129–47.Google Scholar

Harris, W. V. (1989), Ancient Literacy. Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar

Harrison, G. W. M. (ed.) (2015), Brill’s Companion to Roman Tragedy. Leiden.Google Scholar

Harrison, S. (2002), ‘Ennius and the Prologue to Lucretius DRN (1.1–148)’, LICS 1, 1–13.Google Scholar

Harrison, S. J. (2004), Apuleius: A Latin Sophist. Oxford.Google Scholar

Harsh, P. W. (1959), ‘Early Latin Meter and Prosody’, Lustrum 3, 215–50.Google Scholar

Hartmann, M. (2005), Die frühlateinischen Inschriften und ihre Datierung. Bremen.Google Scholar

Hasenmüller, J. (1864), ‘Die Formel der heiligen Frühlingsweihe. (zu Liv. xxii. 10)’, RhM 19, 402–9.Google Scholar

Haspelmath, M. (2004a), ‘Coordinating Constructions: An Overview’, in Haspelmath (2004b), 3–39.Google Scholar

Haspelmath, M. (ed.) (2004b), Coordinating Constructions. Amsterdam and Philadelphia.Google Scholar

Haspelmath, M. and Tadmor, U. (eds.) (2009), Loanwords in the World’s Languages: A Comparative Handbook. Berlin.Google Scholar

Hassall, M. W. C. and Tomlin, R. S. O. (1989), ‘Roman Britain in 1988. ii. Inscriptions’, Britannia 20, 327–45.Google Scholar

Hassall, M. W. C. and Tomlin, R. S. O. (1992), ‘Roman Britain in 1991. ii. Inscriptions’, Britannia 23, 309–23.Google Scholar

Hassall, M. W. C. and Tomlin, R. S. O. (1995), ‘Roman Britain in 1994. ii. Inscriptions’, Britannia 26, 371–90.Google Scholar

Haugen, K. L. (2011), Richard Bentley: Poetry and Enlightenment. Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar

Haverling, G. (ed.) (2015), Latin Linguistics in the Early 21st Century. Acts of the 16th International Colloquium on Latin Linguistics. Uppsala.Google Scholar

Havers, W. (1911), Untersuchungen zur Kasussyntax der indogermanischen Sprachen. Strassburg.Google Scholar

Havet, L. (1880), De Saturnio Latinorum uersu. Paris.Google Scholar

Havet, L. (1895), Phaedri Augusti liberti Fabulae Aesopiae. Paris.Google Scholar

Hayes, B. (2009), Introductory Phonology. Malden, Oxford, and Chichester.Google Scholar

Heick, O. W. (1936), The Ab Urbe Condita Construction in Latin. Lincoln, NB.Google Scholar

Heikkinen, S. (2014), ‘The Resurrection and Afterlife of an Archaic Metre: Bede, the Carolingians and the Trochaic Septenarius’, C&M 65, 241–81.Google Scholar

Heinsius, D. (1643), De tragoediae constitutione liber, in quo inter cetera tota de hac Aristotelis sententia dilucide explicatur. 2nd ed. Leiden (1st ed. 1611).Google Scholar

Heinze, R. (1897), T. Lucretius Carus: De rerum natura Buch iii . Leipzig.Google Scholar

Helttula, A. (1985), ‘Post depositum militiae munus’, in Studia in honorem Iiro Kajanto (Helsinki), 41–56.Google Scholar

Henzen, G. (1874), Acta fratrum Arualium quae supersunt. Berlin.Google Scholar

Hermann, G. (1816), Elementa doctrinae metricae. Leipzig.Google Scholar

Hertz, M. (1855), Prisciani grammatici Caesariensis institutionum grammaticarum libri xviii . Leipzig.Google Scholar

Heusinger, K. (1821), Livius. Römische Geschichte. Übersetzung mit kritischen und erklärenden Anmerkungen. Braunschweig.Google Scholar

Hickson, F. V. (1993), Roman Prayer Language: Livy and the Aneid [sic] of Vergil. Stuttgart.Google Scholar

Hilka, A., Schumann, O. and Meyer, W. (1970), Carmina Burana: Band i, Text. Heidelberg.Google Scholar

Hill, J. (2021), ‘True Friendship: Ennius and Other Poets in Catullus 116’, TAPhA 151, 155–84.Google Scholar

Hinds, S. (1998), Allusion and Intertext: Dynamics of Appropriation in Roman Poetry. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Hine, H. (2005), ‘Poetic Influence on Prose: The Case of the Younger Seneca’, in Reinhardt, , Lapidge, and Adams, (2005), 211–37.Google Scholar

Hoff, F. (1979), Le système linguistique de l’interrogation en latin classique. Diss. Strasbourg.Google Scholar

Hoffmann, R. (1996), ‘Funktionsverbgefüge im Lateinischen’, in Bammesberger, and Heberlein, (1996), 200–12.Google Scholar

Hofmann, J. B. (1951), Lateinische Umgangssprache, 3rd ed. Heidelberg.Google Scholar

Hofmann, J. B. and Ricottilli, L. (2003), La lingua d’uso latina, 3rd ed. Bologna (2nd ed. 1985, 1st ed. 1980 = Hofmann, 1951).Google Scholar

Hofmann, J. B. and Szantyr, A. (1965), Lateinische Syntax und Stilistik. Munich.Google Scholar

Holford-Strevens, L. (1976), ‘Elocutio nouella’, CQ 26, 140–1.Google Scholar

Holford-Strevens, L. (2003), Aulus Gellius: an Antonine Scholar and his Achievement, 2nd ed. Oxford.Google Scholar

Holford-Strevens, L. (2010), ‘Current and Ancient Colloquial in Gellius’, in Dickey, and Chahoud, (2010), 331–8.Google Scholar

Holford-Strevens, L. (2017), ‘Fronto’s and Gellius’ Veteres’, in Rocchi, and Mussini, (2007), 199–211.Google Scholar

Holford-Strevens, L. and Vardi, A. (eds.) (2004), The Worlds of Aulus Gellius. Oxford.Google Scholar

Horn, W. (1924), ‘Beobachtungen über Sprachkörper und Sprachfunktion’, in Horn, W. (ed.), Beiträge zur germanischen Sprachwissenschaft: Festschrift für Otto Behaghel. Heidelberg, 58–82.Google Scholar

Hornblower, S. (2015), Lycophron, Alexandra. Oxford.Google Scholar

Hornblower, S. (2018), Lycophron’s Alexandra, Rome, and the Hellenistic World. Oxford.Google Scholar

Horsfall, N. (2003), Virgil, Aeneid 11: A Commentary. Leiden.Google Scholar

Horsfall, N. (ed.) (1988), Vir bonus discendi peritus: Studies in Celebration of Otto Skutsch. London.Google Scholar

Hough, J. N. (1934), ‘The Use of Greek Words by Plautus’, AJPh 55, 346–64.Google Scholar

Housman, A. E. (1927), M. Annaei Lucani Belli civilis libri decem, 2nd ed. Oxford.Google Scholar

Howley, J. A. (2014), ‘Valuing the Mediators of Antiquity in the Noctes Atticae’, in Ker, and Pieper, (2014), 465–84.Google Scholar

Huddleston, R. (2002), ‘Syntactic Overview’, in Huddleston, and Pullum, (2002), 43–69.Google Scholar

Huddleston, R. and Pullum, G. K. (eds.) (2002), The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Huddleston, R., Payne, J. and Peterson, P. (2002), ‘Coordination and Supplementation’, in Huddleston, and Pullum, (2002), 1273–1362.Google Scholar

Humphrey, J. H. (ed.) (1991), Literacy in the Roman World. Ann Arbor, MI.Google Scholar

Hutchinson, G. O. (2013), Greek to Latin: Frameworks and Contexts for Intertextuality. Oxford.Google Scholar

Hyart, C. (1954), Les origines du style indirect latin et son emploi jusqu’à l’époque de César. Brussels.Google Scholar

Jakobson, R. (1960), ‘Concluding Statement: Linguistics and Poetics’, in Sebeok, (1960), 350–77.Google Scholar

Jamison, S. W., Welchert, H. C., and Vine, B. (eds.) (2013), Proceedings of the 24th Annual UCLA Indo-European Conference. Bremen.Google Scholar

Jiménez López, M. D. (2017), ‘On Support Verb Constructions in Ancient Greek’, AGI 101, 180–204.Google Scholar

Jiménez Martínez, M. I. (2016), Colocaciones y verbos soporte en latín: sintaxis y semántica de pono. Madrid.Google Scholar

Jocelyn, H. D. (1967), The Tragedies of Ennius. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Jocelyn, H. D. (1969), ‘Chrysalus and the Fall of Troy (Plautus, Bacchides 925–978)’, HSPh 73, 135–52.Google Scholar

Jocelyn, H. D. (1972), ‘Ennius as a Dramatic Poet’, in Skutsch, (1972), 39–88.Google Scholar

Jocelyn, H. D. (1973), ‘Greek Poetry in Cicero’s Prose Writing’, YCS 23, 61–112.Google Scholar

Jocelyn, H. D. (1984–1985), ‘The Annotations of M. Valerius Probus, i – iii ’, CQ 34, 464–72, 35, 149–61.Google Scholar

Jocelyn, H. D. (1999), ‘The Arrangement and the Language of Catullus’ So-Called Polymetra with Special Reference to the Sequence 10–11–12’, in Adams, and Mayer, (1999), 335–75.Google Scholar

Johnson, A. C., Coleman-Norton, P. R. and Bourne, F. C. (1961), Ancient Roman Statutes. Austin, TX.Google Scholar

Johnston, A. C. (2015), ‘Another Early Fragmentary Public Inscription from Gabii’, ZPE 195, 255–8.Google Scholar

Jordan, H. (1860), M. Catonis praeter librum de re rustica quae extant. Leipzig.Google Scholar

Julia, M. A. (2013), ‘Sur ecce et quelques présentatifs des langues anciennes’. Paper presented at the Seventeenth International Colloquium on Latin Linguistics, Rome, 20–25 May 2013.Google Scholar

Julia, M. A. (2018), Les présentatifs dans les langues anciennes et modernes. Beau Bassin.Google Scholar

Kahle, W. (1918), De vocabulis Graecis Plauti aetate in sermonem latinum vere receptis. Münster.Google Scholar