The verb _immutare_ in other Latin authors, and even in other parts of Terence himself, signifies _to change_; as in the Phormio, Antipho says, _Non possum_ immutarier. I cannot _be changed_. But here, the sense absolutely requires that _immutatum_ should be rendered _not changed_. Madame Dacier endeavours to reconcile this, according to a conjecture of her father’s, by shewing that _immutatum_ stands for _immutabilis_, as _immotus_ for _immobilis_, _invictus_ for _invincibilis_, &c. But these examples do not remove the difficulty; since those participles always bear a negative sense, which _immutatus_ does not: and thence arises all the difficulty. Terence certainly uses the verb _immutare_ both negatively and positively, as is plain from this passage, and the above passage in the Phormio: and I dare say, with strict propriety. In our own language, we have instances of the same word bearing two senses, directly opposite to each other. The word _let_, for instance, is used in the contradictory meanings of _permission_ and _prohibition_. The modern acceptation of the word is indeed almost entirely confined to the first sense; though we say, even at this day, _without let or molestation_. Shakspeare, in Hamlet, says, ‘I’ll make a ghost of him that _lets_ me;’ “That is, _stops_, _prevents_, _hinders_ me, which is directly opposite to the modern use of the word.”――COLMAN. “_Immutare_ always signifies to _change_, _immutatus_ therefore cannot mean _unchanged_: we see, moreover, that Pamphilus has been all along in love with Glycera, and that he never for a moment entertained the slightest idea of forsaking her. This passage was very difficult; but my father has made it easy, by shewing that _immutatus_ is put for _immutabilis_, and that composed adjectives, which are derived from passive participles, do not always express what is _done_, but sometimes what _may be done_; that is to say, they become potentials. For example, _immotus_ for _immobilis_, _infectus_ for _what cannot be done_, _invictus_ for _invincibilis_, _invisus_ for _invisibilis_, _indomitus_ for _indomabilis_, thus _immutatus_ is for _immutabilis_.”――MADAME DACIER.