The most common suffix which makes accessory forms with _-mentum_ is _-men_. Most authorities regard _-mentum_ as an extension of _-men_ by the addition of _-to_. Whether this is true or not, there _are_ many _-mentum_ words that have no accessory forms in _-men_, and a large number of _-men_ words that have no accessory forms in _-mentum_. Corssen (_Krit. Nach._ p. 125 ff.) gives fifty-one _-men_ words from old, classical, and later Latin to which there are no forms in _-mentum_, fifty-two _-mentum_ words from the same periods to which there are no forms in _-men_; twenty-five words with both forms in any one period. He also gives a table showing how the words in the older and classical language preferred the form _-men_ while in later Latin the same words preferred the form _-mentum_. He says the suffix _-mentum_ is only the the extension, on Latin soil, of the suffix _-men_ (Sanskrit, _-man_) with _-to_; and this explains why in later Latin the forms in _-mentum_ become more frequent, also why they are not found in other Italic dialects, nor in the Greek and other related languages. Lindsay says (p. 335) that the suffix _-men_ is found more often in poetry, while _-mentum_ predominates in prose. Etymologically, the suffixes _-bulum_ and _-culum_ go back to original _-dhlo_ and _-tlo_ respectively (Lindsay pp. 334 and 332). A study of the other suffixes which make accessory forms to these words would probably yield results similar to those seen in the case of our suffixes; but all that will be attempted here will be to show parallels wherever possible. Italics will be used here, also, to show what elements in the context go to prove the equivalence in semantic content of the nouns under discussion. A. PARALLELS OF -MENTUM AND ACCESSORY SUFFIXES One of the neatest examples of identity in meaning is the following exactly parallel usage of stramen and stramentum: _tectam_ stramine vidit _casam_, Ov. M. 5, 443; _casae_, quae stramentis _tectae_ erant, B. G. 5, 43. From the use of a genitive denoting a concrete object, fragmentum and fragmen are seen to be identical in meaning in the following examples: adiacebant fragmina _telorum_ equorumque artus, Tac. A. 1, 61; tribunum adoriuntur fragmentis _saeptorum_, Sest. 79. The genitives depending on irritamen and irritamentum in the following examples are not exactly alike, one being concrete and the other abstract; but they are near enough in meaning, and the nouns themselves are used in sufficiently similar contexts to justify us in saying that either one might have been used in place of the other: nisi adiecisset opes, irritamen _animi_ avari, Ov. M. 13, 434; neque salem neque alia irritamenta _gulae_ quaerebant, Sall. Jug. 89, 7. Levamen and levamentum are used in parallel examples: cuius _mali_ (debt) plebes nullum levamen speraret, Liv. 6, 35, 1; non aliud _malorum_ levamentum quam si linquerent castra, Tac. H. 1, 30, 9.