Authors/Ockham/Summa Logicae/Book II/Chapter 15

Latin	English
[2.15. DE PROPOSITIONIBUS CATEGORICIS IN QUIBUS PONITUR HOC PRONOMEN 'QUI']	15: On Categorical Propositions which Contain the Pronoun 'Who'
In quacumque propositione, quae secundum vocem est categorica, ponitur hoc relativum 'qui', illi dandae sunt plures exponentes, quia quaelibet aequivalet uni copulativae. Tamen aliter dicendum est de tali propositione quando est universalis et quando est particularis, indefinita vel singularis. Quando enim talis propositio est particularis vel indefinita vel singularis, semper illa propositio aequivalet uni copulativae ex duabus propositionibus, compositae ex antecedente et hoc pronomine relativo 'illud', vel nomine proprio, et altero extremo, nulla variatione alia facta. Sicut ista 'homo, qui est albus, currit' aequivalet isti 'homo currit et ille est albus' sive isti 'homo est albus et ille currit'. Similiter ista 'Sortes, qui currit, disputat' aequivalet isti 'Sortes currit et Sortes disputat'.	In any proposition, categorical in verbal form, where there occurs the relative pronoun 'who' should be assigned several exponents, because each such proposition is equivalent to a single copulative proposition. Yet such a proposition must be treated differently, depending on whether it is universal, or whether it is particular, indefinite, or singular. For when such a proposition is particular or indefinite or singular, that proposition is always equivalent to a conjunction of two propositions, composed from the antecedent and the relative pronoun 'he' (or a proper name) with the other extreme, with no other variation made. For example, 'a man who is white runs' is equivalent to 'a man runs and he is white' or to 'a man is white and he runs'. Likewise, 'Socrates, who runs, disputes' is equivalent to 'Socrates runs and Socrates disputes'.
Sed si talis propositio sit universalis, ipsa est distinguenda secundum amphibologiam, eo quod potest habere duplicem sensum. Unus sensus est per quem denotatur quod de quocumque dicitur illud totum quod praecedit verbum principale, quod de eodem dicitur praedicatum, et non plus denotatur. Et iste a multis vocatur sensus campositionis, vel est convertibilis cum illo sensu. Alius sensus est per quem denotatur quod illud quod sequitur hoc incomplexum 'qui' praedicatur universaliter de antecedente, et quod similiter praedicatum praedicatur universaliter de eodem. Verbi gratia per istam 'omnis homo, qui est albus, currit' in uno sensu denotatur quod de quocumque dicitur hoc totum 'homo qui est albus' quod de eodem dicitur hoc praedicatum 'currit'. Et tunc ad veritatem talis requiruntur duae propositiones, scilicet quod 'aliquis homo est albus' et 'quilibet talis homo currit'. In alio autem sensu denotatur quod istae duae sunt verae 'omnis homo est albus' et 'omnis homo currit'.	But if such a proposition is universal, then it is distinguished by amphibology, in that it can have two senses. One sense is by which it is denoted that whatever the whole phrase preceding the main verb is said of, the predicate is said of, and no more is denoted. And this is called by many the sense of composition, or is convertible with that sense. The other sense is by which it is denoted that what follows the non-complex term 'who' is predicated universally of the antecedent and that, likewise, the predicate is predicated universally of the same antecedent. For example, by 'every man who is white runs', taken in one sense, it is denoted that the predicate 'runs' is said of everything that the whole phrase 'man who is white' is said of. And then for the truth of this proposition two propositions are required, namely 'some man is white' and 'each such man runs'. But in the other sense it is denoted that these two propositions are true: 'Every man is white' and 'Every man is running'.
Verumtamen sciendum est, sicut dicetur inferius, quod quandoque est relatio non personalis, et tunc non oportet quod in copulativa correspondente idem habeat in utraque eandem suppositionem. Quandoque autem est relatio personalis, et tunc debet habere eandem suppositionem.	Nevertheless it should be known, as will be said below, that sometimes the relation is not personal, and then it does not have to be the case that in the corresponding copulative the same term has the same supposition in both parts. But sometimes the relation is personal, and in that case it ought to have the same supposition.