Universa Philosophia

THIRDLY I infer that all adjective names are syncategorematic terms; substantives however are categorematic terms. This second part of the inference is easily granted by those who think only distributive terms are syncategoremata, and it is proved: because categorematic is perfectly significative, or predicable, because category signifies predication, but all substantive names signify perfectly and are predicable, therefore they are categorematic terms. But against the first part of the inference the Summulists make an attack in close array, for whom it is common that syncategorematic terms are omnis, nullus, aliquis: because by themselves alone they do not signify, and need conjunction with others, as omnis homo. But I confirm the inference first from the etymology of names: for syncategorematic (according to Calepino) is consignificative, that is, signifying with another, but every adjective term is consignificative, because it signifies together with the substantive, therefore every adjective is syncategorematic. Secondly, because an adjective term signifies as imperfectly by itself alone as the syncategoremata omnis, nullus; for just as when this word nullus is heard, no perfect sense is formed unless homo is added, so when the word albus is heard. Wherefore the authors of the royal art, lib. 3, rightly say that a substantive name is: That which signifies by itself alone in speech; but an adjective, that which cannot stand by itself alone in speech.