The grammatical studies of the Romans were patterned closely after those of the Greeks; the Greek terminology and organization of the science were adopted without change. The Roman interest in the subject was no doubt heightened by the fact that the Roman culture was a bilingual one; thus a broad basis for the study was furnished, and naturally much attention was given to the derivation of words. A large number of scholarly works was produced, and the inferiority of the borrowed Roman culture is perhaps less noticeable in this department than in any other. It was inevitable that this ‘grammar’, in a condensed form, should come to be used in common education. Its outlines, however, were rather vague, and many of its departments did not lend themselves to the concise statement necessary in a text-book. The first Greek school grammar, the τεχνὴ γραμματικὴ[156] of Dionysius Thrax, which was destined to be the basis of all the school grammars of antiquity, appeared about 80 B.C. It is noticeable that although the definition of grammar that is given[157] is the definition of the grammar of the scholars, the subjects actually treated are little more than the parts of speech. It was natural that there should be this gap between promise and performance. For a long time no doubt this mere outline was filled in by the oral interpretation of the masterpieces in the manner of the scholars; but when these ceased to be studied, in the early medieval period, the study of grammar was confined to the material offered in the text-books.[158] [156] It is still in existence. The best text is that of Uhlig, 1883 (Leipzig). [157] “Grammar is a practical knowledge of the usages of language as generally current among poets and prose writers. It is divided into six parts: (1) trained reading with due regard to prosody; (2) explanation according to poetical figures; (3) ready statement of dialectical peculiarities and allusions; (4) discovery of etymology; (5) an accurate account of analogies; (6) criticism of poetical productions, which is the noblest part of grammatic art.” _The Grammar of Dionysius Thrax_, translated by T. Davidson (St. Louis, 1874), p. 3. In contrast to this definition the body of the work is devoted to reading, punctuation, the alphabet, syllables, and the parts of speech. [158] The older definition or its substance was still retained, however. See p. 97. Its retention is rather an evidence of conservatism than a proof of the continued study of the poets.