καὶ γὰρ οὐδὲν ἀδύνατον ἔν τινι σκέλει τῆς πρώτης διαιρέσεως ἐμπεριέχεσθαι καί τι σκέλος τῆς δευτέρας διαιρέσεως κατ’ ἄλλην ἔννοιαν, ὡς ἔχει ἐπὶ τοῦ ποσοῦ.
For it is altogether impossible for a member of the first division to include a member of the second division in another sense or quantity.
This is the best I could make out of it.
Doesn’t οὐδὲν ἀδύνατον mean the opposite of “altogether impossible”? And you fudge ὡς ἔχει ἐπὶ τοῦ ποσοῦ (“as is the case with το ποσον”?) Isn’t το ποσον one of Aristotle’s categories? It looks as if we’re in Metaphysics territory.
For it is quite possible for a member of the first division to include a member of the second division in another sense, as is the case with quantity.
Hi. As it’s passive, should it be “to be included” ?
gonz: CP’s translation is not wrong: instead of “a member of the second division to be included in a member of the first division,” he wrote the equivalent “a member of the first division to include a member of the second division.”