V. To the Arguments against the Opinion of Lombard

17. One must respond accordingly [n.16] to the arguments that are against the opinion of the Master [nn.8-10].

To the first [n.8] I say that ‘to be sent’ states a respect of reason to the sender formally; but it connotes an eternal respect, not indeed to the sender because he sends, but to someone indistinctly. Hence the following proposition is to be denied, that “‘to be sent’ only states a respect to him to whom he is sent, or to the sender’,” if he be understood insofar as he is sender, and this both as to the principal thing signified and to the connoted thing; for the proposition states by connoting a respect of the one proceeding, and this in relation to the one producing - not insofar as he is sender, because a person that is not producer can be a sender, although a producer is always a sender.

18. To the second [nn.9-10] I concede that the active and the passive voices signify the same thing under opposite grammatical forms, although something the same that is not diversified by those forms could be connoted in each; ‘to show’ indeed and ‘to be shown’ - which are what is principally implied - are diversified by those forms, but not so as regard ‘person proceeds’; for the latter is what is connoted uniformly, both by the active and by the passive voices. There is an example of this in other things: for I know fire heats, and fire is known to heat. Although there is here a grammatical variation as to the ‘know’ and ‘to be known’, yet not as to that which is indicated to the term ‘to know’ and ‘to be known’, because that is uniformly the same in both cases; and if one active form were imposed to signify the whole phrase ‘to know fire heats’, its passive form would not connote ‘fire known to be heated’ but only that the ‘to be known’ is in the passive form and that the thing connoted is in the active form, namely ‘fire heats’.

19. Hereby things are made plain for the confirmation ‘to send and to be sent are correlatives’. This is true as to the things formally signified, and each states per se a respect of reason; however it is possible for one of them to include, as a thing connoted, some extreme of the relation and for the other of them not to include that extreme’s correlative, as is clear in the example given, because the verb thus imposed would include ‘to heat’ and the passive verb corresponding to it would not include the ‘to be heated’.