The treatment of war wounds in Graeco-Roman antiquity

differences between such "technical terms" and everyday vocabulary. However, this general definition is modified to explain what should presently be understood under "medical Latin". Even if there are cultural and social differences between ancient and modem medical languages, "medical Latin" will be a term used to denote a "Fachsprache", i.e., a variety of language used by those with a special medical knowledge. This first chapter ends with an introduction to the above-mentioned four authors, including a summary of the works studied. After this extensive account, a much shorter catalogue of other medical texts is included. The second chapter deals with lexical borrowing. With his exhaustive account of the Greek terms used by the four authors, Langslow shows that the borrowing of Greek terms is commonly overestimated, for instance, in the case of Cassius, apparently the most Hellenizing author, Greek borrowings are never more than 45 per cent of all the medical terms considered. But Greek terms are used in very different ways by the authors, and Langslow establishes a precise typology depending on the presentation of the Greek term in the text and on its integration in the technical vocabulary. Semantic extension, phrasal terms, and compounding and affixal derivation are covered in the following three chapters. Here the results of the research show very clear distinctions among the lexical fields he distinguishes (anatomy, pathology and therapeutics); for example, specific semantic dimensions are closely related to anatomy. Concerning phrasal terms, they seem to have a basic unmarked word order. Langslow suggests that exceptions to this order may be explained by contextual or stylistic factors. The last chapter is probably the most suggestive part of the book because it provides very interesting possibilities for the use of such semantic study. By making comparisons between the alternation of simple technical terms with clausal expressions, Langslow goes further to deal with some syntactic features and shows how important the combination of both fields can be, above all to determine the style, nature and age of the works studied. The author must be praised for combining the tasks of a linguist with those of a classicist. His work is therefore intended for those with knowledge both of Latin and linguistics. Nevertheless, the book and the three indexes included in the appendix will be used as an essential reference tool for future research. Attempts to examine this subject are few indeed. E Gurlt, Geschichte der Chirurgie, …