ðə hjˈuːmɐnˌɪsts ænd kˈɑːməntˌeɪɾɚz hæd ɹˈiːtʃt ðə pˈɔɪnt wˌɛɹ ðeɪ ɐknˈɑːlɪdʒd ɐ lˈɑːɹdʒ nˈʌmbɚɹ ʌv wˈeɪz ðæt ɐɡɹˈiːmənt kʊd bˈiː “klˈoʊðd” ɪn ˈɔːɹdɚ tə ɡˈɪv ɹˈaɪz tə lˈiːɡəl ˈækʃən, haʊˈɛvɚ, ðeɪ stˈɪl meɪntˈeɪnd ðæt ðiːz wɜːɹ ɛksˈɛpʃənz tə ðə dʒˈɛnɚɹəl ɹˈuːl ðæt ɐn ɐɡɹˈiːmənt kʊd nˌɑːt ɡˈɪv ɹˈaɪz tʊ ɐn ˈækʃən ˌɔn ɪts ˈoʊn.
The humanists and commentators had reached the point where they acknowledged a large number of ways that agreement could be “clothed” in order to give rise to legal action, however, they still maintained that these were exceptions to the general rule that an agreement could not give rise to an action on its own.