The First Book of Logical Exercises by Andreas Libavius

3. Objection: whether new terms were invented for the infamy of the ancients and are barbaric.

...these things, teacher, and I love you for your clear declarations. Nevertheless, some will occur who say that this style of speech was invented for the infamy of the former, and is said everywhere to be much more clever and excellent, when nevertheless it seems to be more barbaric.
Or. Those who judge and speak from prejudice rather than a true estimation of things say various things, so that they may bring into hatred things that are good in themselves. But you attend to true judgment. It is known that the old Greek terms do indeed signify their objects conveniently, but they are not free from ambiguity, and they generate empty and frivolous distinctions that must be learned with great labor; partly, they are suspected of barbarism. Others followed who enunciated things much more conveniently, especially in Latin. The translators of Aristotle were harsh and enunciated many things quite barbarically. If they had attended to Cicero, Quintilian, and other authors of polished language, they would have spoken more correctly and taught the precepts better. How shameful it is that we do not follow the words of the best, most eloquent, and most ingenious practitioners when describing metallic matters, yet refuse to do so in the most exact art of logic? Dr. Philip Melanchthon repudiated many things from monastic ineptitudes; may we not do the same? And the terms which are believed to be new by our usage are repeated from Cicero and older authors; nor are they all unknown to Aristotle, nor are they all unheard of. What madness is it to reject them?