KOINONIA Greek Forum Login To Start Posting!
KOINONIA - Greek Forum
Profile | Active Topics | Latest Topics | Latest Replies | Popular
RSS Feed | Partners | Search | AFQ


» Forgot your Password?

 All Communities
 The language
 Speaking Greek
 Omission of main verb in Aeschylus
 New Topic  Reply to Topic
Registration is closed. The Forum remains available only as a source of published information.

 


 
Next Page
Author Previous Topic Topic Next Topic
Page: of 3

vir litterarum

USA
42 Posts

Posted - 17 Feb 2007 :  11:39:40  


Χορός
γιγνομέναισι λάχη τάδ᾽ ἐφ᾽ ἁμὶν ἐκράνθη:
ἀθανάτων δ᾽ ἀπέχειν χέρας, οὐδέ τις ἐστί
συνδαίτωρ μετάκοινος:
Eum. 349-351

In the clause beginning with ἀθανάτων, is a form of "dei" or "chre" supposed to be inferred from context?


 

George

Greece
615 Posts

Posted - 18 Feb 2007 :  14:17:57  

 

Hi,

Murray's text of Eumenides is here a little different : γιγνομέναισι λάχη τάδε φαμὶ κεκράνθαι͵ ἀθανάτων δ΄ ἀπέχειν χέρας͵ οὐδέ τις ἐστὶ συνδαίτωρ μετάκοινος͵ παλλεύκων δὲ πέπλων ἄμοιρος ἄκληρος ἐτύχθην.

Go to Top of Page


vir litterarum

USA
42 Posts

Posted - 18 Feb 2007 :  19:07:10  

 

That definitely seems more logical. I also looked At Smyth 2013 b. where it says that the infinitive is used for the third person of the imperative in legal terms. This seems like it could also be the case.

Go to Top of Page


George

Greece
615 Posts

Posted - 19 Feb 2007 :  01:18:55  

 

The infinitive is used for the imperative, yet is this the case here? Is it an order to the immortals!? Then, how the next sentence should be related and connected with the immortals? Notice also δ', which makes a contrast with the fate, about which the chorus speaks.

Go to Top of Page


vir litterarum

USA
42 Posts

Posted - 19 Feb 2007 :  12:15:08  

 

I took "de" as being coordinating, not adversative. I believe this is an order to the immortals, commanding them that they must stay away from the Furies. I have looked at Fagles', Smyth's, and Lattimore's translations of this passage, and all have either "may not..." or "must not..." in them. The infinitive by itself cannot be translated thus, and, since the text I and at least Smyth used does not have φαμὶ, there has to be some explanation of it being used independently of a leading verb. This seems to be the only logical explanation.

Go to Top of Page


George

Greece
615 Posts

Posted - 19 Feb 2007 :  12:37:22  

 

What could be the reason of such a command, when immediately after that it is admitted that οὐδέ τις ἐστὶ συνδαίτωρ μετάκοινος ?

Go to Top of Page


Page: of 3 Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  
Next Page
 New Topic  Reply to Topic
Jump To:

Promote Greek Learning

Use Elpenor's Libraries and Greek Language departments to stimulate your thinking. To refer to a text there published, just copy its url and paste it in your post. ||| Get updates of all Ellopos sites by e-mail. ||| Download Shortcuts for easy access to the Communities - or drag this icon and drop it in the Links bar of your browser :ELPENOR

Reference address : https://www.ellopos.net/elpenor/koinonia/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=234© Elpenor