[Footnote 49: Aristot. De Interpr. p. 16, a. 3-8: [Greek: e)/sti me\n ou)=n ta\ e)n tê=| phônê=| tô=n e)n tê=| psuchê=| pathêma/tôn su/mbola--ô(=n me/ntoi tau=ta sêmei=a _prô/tôs_, tau)ta\ pa=si pathê/mata tê=s psuchê=s, kai\ ô(=n tau=ta o(moiô/mata, pra/gmata ê)/dê tau)ta/.] Ibid. a. 13: [Greek: ta\ me\n ou)=n o)no/mata au)ta\ kai\ ta\ r(ê/mata e)/oike tô=| a)/neu sunthe/seôs kai\ diaire/seôs noê/mati--ou)/te ga\r pseu=dos ou)/t' a)lêthe/s pô.] Ib. p. 17, a. 2: [Greek: lo/gos a)pophantiko\s, e)n ô(=| to\ a)lêtheu/ein ê)\ pseu/desthai u(pa/rchei]. Compare p. 20, a. 34.] [Footnote 50: Aristot. De Interpret. p. 23, a. 32: [Greek: ta\ me\n e)n tê=| phônê=| a)kolouthei= toi=s e)n tê=| dianoi/a|, e)kei= de\ e)nanti/a do/xa ê( tou= e)nanti/ou], &c. Ib. p. 24, b. 1: [Greek: ô(/ste ei)/per e)pi\ do/xês ou(/tôs e)/chei, ei)si\ de\ ai( e)n tê=| phônê=| katapha/seis kai\ a)popha/seis su/mbola tô=n e)n tê=| psuchê=|, dê=lon o(/ti kai\ katapha/sei e)nanti/a me\n a)po/phasis ê(/ peri\ tou= au)tou= katho/lou], &c. Ib. p. 17, a. 22: [Greek: e)/sti de\ ê( a(plê= a)po/phansis phônê\ sêmantikê\ peri\ tou= u(pa/rchein ti ê)\ mê\ u(pa/rchein], &c.] [Footnote 51: Ibid. p. 17, a. 5. [Greek: oi( me\n ou)=n a)/lloi (lo/goi) a)phei/sthôsan; r(êtorikê=s ga\r ê)\ poiêtikê=s oi)keiote/ra ê( ske/psis; o( de\ a)pophantiko\s tê=s nu=n theôri/as.]] [Footnote 52: Ammonius (in the Scholia on De Interpret. p. 130, a. 16, seq., Brand.) ranks all modal propositions under the same category, and considers the number of them to be, not indeed infinite, but very great. He gives as examples: "The moon changes _fast_; Plato loves Dion _vehemently_." Sir W. Hamilton adopts the same view as Ammonius: "Modes may be conceived without end--all must be admitted, if any are; the line of distinction attempted to be drawn is futile." (Discussions on Phil. ut sup. p. 145.) On the other hand, we learn from Ammonius that most of the Aristotelian interpreters preceding him reckoned the simple proposition [Greek: to\ u(pa/rchein] as a modal; and Aristotle himself seems so to mention it (Analytica Priora, I. ii. p. 25, a. 1); besides that he enumerates _true_ and _false_, which undoubtedly attach to [Greek: to\ u(pa/rchein], as examples of modes (De Interpret. c. 12, p. 22, a. 13). Ammonius himself protests against this doctrine of the former interpreters.