Textkit Logo

A.Ag Χορός a hymn 355 ...

Here's where you can discuss all things Ancient Greek. Use this board to ask questions about grammar, discuss learning strategies, get translation help and more!

Re: A.Ag Χορός a hymn 355 ...

Postby C. S. Bartholomew » Wed Nov 28, 2012 10:02 pm

Paul Derouda wrote:A.Ag 420-426 end of Prophetic speech.

ὀνειρόφαντοι δὲ πενθήμονες
πάρεισι δόξαι φέρου-
σαι χάριν ματαίαν.
μάταν γάρ, εὖτ’ ἂν ἐσθλά τις δοκῶν ὁρᾷ,
παραλλάξασα διὰ
χερῶν βέβακεν ὄψις οὐ μεθύστερον
πτεροῖς ὀπαδοῦσ’ ὕπνου κελεύθοις.

I wanted to point out that Denniston here seems to think that here γάρ specifically draws attention to an individual word and not the previous sentence as a whole. I think this idea is well expressed in "theirs is a grace without substance. Unsubstantiated it is.", although there's no because and thus no "formal equivalence" (though I don't know how Grene continues).

Denniston doesn't offer any translation or explanation here, but the first example in the same section is
Hom. Od. 10.437 σὺν δ᾽ ὁ θρασὺς εἵπετ᾽ Ὀδυσσεύς: τούτου γὰρ καὶ κεῖνοι ἀτασθαλίῃσιν ὄλοντο ('I call him θρασὺς, because...')


Paul,

Cooper cites Denniston on γὰρ A.Ag 422-423 (vol4 2:69.14.2.A). Levinsohn[1] does not cite Denniston on γὰρ. What γὰρ draws attention to is a valid question. The repetition of ματαίαν ... μάταν draws attention to ματαίαν without any need for γὰρ. Vanity (futility), dream states, sleep and visions all provide textual cohesion[2]. What γὰρ might add to this is an indication (marking) that some explanatory backgrounded support is introduced at this point. This may not apply to poetry, Agamemnon, Aeschylus, or Attic Tragedy.


[1] Levinsohn, Stephen H. Discourse features of New Testament Greek: A coursebook. Dallas: Summer Institute of Linguistics, 2nd Ed 2000, page 91, sec. 5.4.2.

[2] textual cohesion, M.A.K Halliday Notes on transitivity and theme in English.1967, M.A.K Halliday & Ruqaiya Hasan, Cohesion in English. London: Longman 1976 .
C. Stirling Bartholomew
C. S. Bartholomew
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 734
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 10:03 pm

Re: A.Ag Χορός a hymn 355 ...

Postby C. S. Bartholomew » Thu Nov 29, 2012 10:51 pm

429-436
τὸ πᾶν δ' ἀπ' αἴας Ἕλλαδος συνορμένοις
πένθεια τλησικάρδιος
δόμῳ 'ν ἑκάστου πρέπει.
πολλὰ γοῦν θιγγάνει πρὸς ἧπαρ·
οὓς μὲν γάρ <τις> ἔπεμψεν
οἶδεν, ἀντὶ δὲ φωτῶν
τεύχη καὶ σποδὸς εἰς ἑκά-
στου δόμους ἀφικνεῖται.

Once again, we see what appears to be backgrounded material introduced by γάρ. Only one of the seven English versions I check translated γάρ (L. MacNiece). On the other hand, MacNiece and Fagles both put οὓς μὲν γάρ ... δὲ ... ἀφικνεῖται in an indented paragraph. Fagles put it in separate paragraph with a blank line before and after as well as indenting the text. I would suggest that this functions graphically to indicate the impact of γάρ on the information structure.

οὓς μὲν γάρ <τις> ἔπεμψεν
οἶδεν, ἀντὶ δὲ φωτῶν
τεύχη καὶ σποδὸς εἰς ἑκά-
στου δόμους ἀφικνεῖται.

They knew the men they sent,
but now in place of men
ashes and urns come back
to every hearth.
— R. Fagles

For those they sent to war
They know, but in place of men
That which comes home to them
Is merely an urn of ashes.
— L. Mac Niece




C. Stirling Bartholomew
C. S. Bartholomew
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 734
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 10:03 pm

Re: A.Ag Χορός a hymn 355 ...

Postby C. S. Bartholomew » Fri Nov 30, 2012 7:48 pm

A.Ag 429ff the article demonstrative and/or substantive

τὰ μὲν κατ’ οἴκους ἐφ’ ἑστίας ἄχη
τάδ’ ἐστὶ καὶ τῶνδ’ ὑπερβατώτερα.
τὸ πᾶν δ’ ἀφ’ Ἕλλανος αἴας συνορμένοις
πένθει’ ἀτλησικάρδιος
δόμων ἑκάστου πρέπει.

Some samples of Aeschylus use of articles and demonstratives. I wonder what the difference is between τὰ ... ἄχη and τὸ πᾶν? τὰ with ἄχη indicates that ἄχη is minimally “hearer old” information. In fact it is not only hearer old but also discourse old. In other words τὰ ... ἄχη is not only presumed to be an active part of the audiences cognitive framework, it is also a recently active part of the discourse itself. This distinction is an important one. See R. A. Hoyle SIL 2008[1].

The meta-language used for the article in the reference grammars is somewhat confusing. In the lyric portions of Attic Tragedy the article is used in a manner also found in Homer. I think Paul was making note of this on several occasions. I’m somewhat confused on the subject of demonstrative use of the article. Smyth #1100 states that the demonstrative article can be either substantive or adjectival. Cooper (v3 p2198, 2.50.0.1) goes on and on about the substantive use of the article. He uses the expression so often that it becomes almost impossible to figure out what he means by it. The article can be used to make some constituent function as a substantive. But that is NOT what Smyth or Cooper have in mind when the refer to the substantive use of the article.

The best I can do at this point is the suggest that the substantive use of the article is realized when the article functions like a noun and does not construe with another word/constituent to form a compound substantive constituent. This appears to cause problems for the idea of a demonstrative article functioning as a substantive, a concept I can't understand. For this reason I suspect my definition of substantive use of the article is wrong.

Cooper (v3 p. 2,204, 2.50.2.0) states: "It is not a sufficient description of the substantive article ... to say that it is substantive. The article is clearly a pronoun in the earlier and poetic literature and it shows demonstrative value, i.e. it has meanings and functions which would be represented in prose by ὅδε, οὗτος, ἐκεῖνος."

I suspect but cannot immediately demonstrate that Cooper's treatment of the article suffers from referential recursion, i.e., certain terms like substantive are used to define themselves but this is hidden by being distributed across several different levels of analysis. The reason I suspect this is the term substantive is repeated over and over again in Cooper's treatment of the article, page after page, in a mind numbing manner.

Difficulty with the meta-language is a framework problem in spades. My preferred framework for discussion of the Greek article is found in previously mentioned R. A. Hoyle SIL 2008[1].

[1] Richard A. Hoyle, Scenarios, discourse and translation. SIL 2008, 6.1 The meaning of the article in Greek, page 141ff.
C. Stirling Bartholomew
C. S. Bartholomew
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 734
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 10:03 pm

Re: A.Ag Χορός a hymn 355 ...

Postby NateD26 » Sat Dec 01, 2012 9:04 pm

I know this is relating to a previous passage in question and you seem to have progressed
quite a lot since, but here's what the scholia has to say about lines 412-3 with ἅδιστος kept:

Ag.412a.1
πάρεστι] ἡ Ἑλένη.
Ag.412b.1
πάρεστι] ἰδεῖν αὐτήν.
Ag.412c.1
ἄτιμος] πολύτιμος.
Ag.412d.1
ἀλοίδορος] οὐ γὰρ λοιδοροῦμεν αὐτὴν οὕτως ἀπάρασαν.
Ag.413a.1
ἅδιστος] γλυκεῖα.
Ag.413b.1
Ἀφεμένων ἡμῶν τῆς σιγῆς, ὅ ἐστι καὶ ἀφισταμένων τοῦ σιγᾶν,
τουτέστι καὶ παρρησιαζομένων καὶ φθεγγομένων τι διὰ τὸ μὴ παρεῖναι
τὴν δέσποιναν, ὅμως τῆι παλαιᾶι αἰδοῖ σώζομεν αὐτῆς τὴν παρουσίαν
καὶ πάρεστιν ἡμῖν ἰδεῖν ἡδίστη καὶ πολύτιμος καὶ ἀλοίδορος, ἤγουν
Ag.413b.5
νομίζομεν ἔτι συνεῖναι ἡμῖν αὐτὴν καὶ τῆς παρ' ἡμῶν τιμῆς ἀπολαύειν.
Ag.413c.1
ἀφεμένων] τῆς σιγῆς.
Ag.413d.1
ἰδεῖν] ὥστε.
Ag.413e.1
ἰδεῖν] αὐτὴν τινά.


I'm sure you've seen this already. I can't figure out the sentence, nor the scholia,
but maybe it would be of some help.
Nate.
NateD26
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 789
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 10:14 am

Re: A.Ag Χορός a hymn 355 ...

Postby C. S. Bartholomew » Sun Dec 02, 2012 7:39 pm

NateD26 wrote:I know this is relating to a previous passage in question and you seem to have progressed
quite a lot since, but here's what the scholia has to say about lines 412-3 with ἅδιστος kept:

Ag.412a.1
πάρεστι] ἡ Ἑλένη.
Ag.412b.1
πάρεστι] ἰδεῖν αὐτήν.
Ag.412c.1
ἄτιμος] πολύτιμος.
Ag.412d.1
ἀλοίδορος] οὐ γὰρ λοιδοροῦμεν αὐτὴν οὕτως ἀπάρασαν.
Ag.413a.1
ἅδιστος] γλυκεῖα.
Ag.413b.1
Ἀφεμένων ἡμῶν τῆς σιγῆς, ὅ ἐστι καὶ ἀφισταμένων τοῦ σιγᾶν,
τουτέστι καὶ παρρησιαζομένων καὶ φθεγγομένων τι διὰ τὸ μὴ παρεῖναι
τὴν δέσποιναν, ὅμως τῆι παλαιᾶι αἰδοῖ σώζομεν αὐτῆς τὴν παρουσίαν
καὶ πάρεστιν ἡμῖν ἰδεῖν ἡδίστη καὶ πολύτιμος καὶ ἀλοίδορος, ἤγουν
Ag.413b.5
νομίζομεν ἔτι συνεῖναι ἡμῖν αὐτὴν καὶ τῆς παρ' ἡμῶν τιμῆς ἀπολαύειν.
Ag.413c.1
ἀφεμένων] τῆς σιγῆς.
Ag.413d.1
ἰδεῖν] ὥστε.
Ag.413e.1
ἰδεῖν] αὐτὴν τινά.


I'm sure you've seen this already. I can't figure out the sentence, nor the scholia,
but maybe it would be of some help.


Nate,

A.Ag 412-413
† πάρεστι σιγᾶς ἄτιμος † ἀλοίδορος
ἄλιστος [ἅδιστος] ἀφεμένων ἰδεῖν.

I have no experience reading scholia. ἅδιστος] γλυκεῖα is a simple gloss. The following paragraph Ag.413b.1 appears to be a homily on σιγᾶς ... ἀφεμένων. There are several uses of the first person which doesn't make sense to me. Clytemnestra's absence somehow plays a part in this: διὰ τὸ μὴ παρεῖναι τὴν δέσποιναν. The homily reads almost like parable with a paradox. I'm probably misreading it; " ... the absence of our silence that is to say speaking freely because the queen is not present here ... never the less, the high esteem we preserve for her ... we see ... sweetness precious without reproach ... that is to say we are accustom to her presence ... to have the benefit of our honor "

This is no doubt a total misunderstanding but I have nothing to go by. Don't know the provenance, date or anything else about the scholia. The style does remind me a little of patristic exegesis. But I am not an expert on that either.
C. Stirling Bartholomew
C. S. Bartholomew
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 734
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 10:03 pm

Re: A.Ag Χορός a hymn 355 ...

Postby Paul Derouda » Mon Dec 03, 2012 10:44 pm

C. S. Bartholomew wrote:A.Ag 429ff the article demonstrative and/or substantive

τὰ μὲν κατ’ οἴκους ἐφ’ ἑστίας ἄχη
τάδ’ ἐστὶ καὶ τῶνδ’ ὑπερβατώτερα.
τὸ πᾶν δ’ ἀφ’ Ἕλλανος αἴας συνορμένοις
πένθει’ ἀτλησικάρδιος
δόμων ἑκάστου πρέπει.

Some samples of Aeschylus use of articles and demonstratives. I wonder what the difference is between τὰ ... ἄχη and τὸ πᾶν? τὰ with ἄχη indicates that ἄχη is minimally “hearer old” information. In fact it is not only hearer old but also discourse old. In other words τὰ ... ἄχη is not only presumed to be an active part of the audiences cognitive framework, it is also a recently active part of the discourse itself. This distinction is an important one. See R. A. Hoyle SIL 2008[1].

The meta-language used for the article in the reference grammars is somewhat confusing. In the lyric portions of Attic Tragedy the article is used in a manner also found in Homer. I think Paul was making note of this on several occasions. I’m somewhat confused on the subject of demonstrative use of the article. Smyth #1100 states that the demonstrative article can be either substantive or adjectival. Cooper (v3 p2198, 2.50.0.1) goes on and on about the substantive use of the article. He uses the expression so often that it becomes almost impossible to figure out what he means by it. The article can be used to make some constituent function as a substantive. But that is NOT what Smyth or Cooper have in mind when the refer to the substantive use of the article.

The best I can do at this point is the suggest that the substantive use of the article is realized when the article functions like a noun and does not construe with another word/constituent to form a compound substantive constituent. This appears to cause problems for the idea of a demonstrative article functioning as a substantive, a concept I can't understand. For this reason I suspect my definition of substantive use of the article is wrong.

Cooper (v3 p. 2,204, 2.50.2.0) states: "It is not a sufficient description of the substantive article ... to say that it is substantive. The article is clearly a pronoun in the earlier and poetic literature and it shows demonstrative value, i.e. it has meanings and functions which would be represented in prose by ὅδε, οὗτος, ἐκεῖνος."

I suspect but cannot immediately demonstrate that Cooper's treatment of the article suffers from referential recursion, i.e., certain terms like substantive are used to define themselves but this is hidden by being distributed across several different levels of analysis. The reason I suspect this is the term substantive is repeated over and over again in Cooper's treatment of the article, page after page, in a mind numbing manner.

Difficulty with the meta-language is a framework problem in spades. My preferred framework for discussion of the Greek article is found in previously mentioned R. A. Hoyle SIL 2008[1].

[1] Richard A. Hoyle, Scenarios, discourse and translation. SIL 2008, 6.1 The meaning of the article in Greek, page 141ff.


τὸ πᾶν seems to mean in general or the like, i.e. this is adverbial usage. I think here the article is not to be felt "strongly", this is standard Attic and I suppose even Koine usage.

With τὰ ... ἄχη, the article is "homerically" separated from the noun. Here, I think, it has a stronger, demonstrative force, the way Cooper says in the passages you're quoting. My tentative theory is that the separation here and elsewhere in Aeschylus works as a cue for reader/spectator to take the article with the stronger meaning.

I didn't have really time to really read any of Hoyle's work (though it looks really interesting...); however, it seems to be centered on New Testament usage, and I'd be cautious about extending the conclusions there to Aeschylus, because the "Homeric" uses of the article there are obviously archaic already in Attic.
Last edited by Paul Derouda on Tue Dec 04, 2012 11:30 am, edited 1 time in total.
Paul Derouda
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 937
Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 9:39 pm

Re: A.Ag Χορός a hymn 355 ...

Postby Paul Derouda » Mon Dec 03, 2012 11:50 pm

C. S. Bartholomew wrote:
NateD26 wrote:
Ag.412a.1
πάρεστι] ἡ Ἑλένη.
Ag.412b.1
πάρεστι] ἰδεῖν αὐτήν.
Ag.412c.1
ἄτιμος] πολύτιμος.
Ag.412d.1
ἀλοίδορος] οὐ γὰρ λοιδοροῦμεν αὐτὴν οὕτως ἀπάρασαν.
Ag.413a.1
ἅδιστος] γλυκεῖα.
Ag.413b.1
Ἀφεμένων ἡμῶν τῆς σιγῆς, ὅ ἐστι καὶ ἀφισταμένων τοῦ σιγᾶν,
τουτέστι καὶ παρρησιαζομένων καὶ φθεγγομένων τι διὰ τὸ μὴ παρεῖναι
τὴν δέσποιναν, ὅμως τῆι παλαιᾶι αἰδοῖ σώζομεν αὐτῆς τὴν παρουσίαν
καὶ πάρεστιν ἡμῖν ἰδεῖν ἡδίστη καὶ πολύτιμος καὶ ἀλοίδορος, ἤγουν
Ag.413b.5
νομίζομεν ἔτι συνεῖναι ἡμῖν αὐτὴν καὶ τῆς παρ' ἡμῶν τιμῆς ἀπολαύειν.
Ag.413c.1
ἀφεμένων] τῆς σιγῆς.
Ag.413d.1
ἰδεῖν] ὥστε.
Ag.413e.1
ἰδεῖν] αὐτὴν τινά.


I'm sure you've seen this already. I can't figure out the sentence, nor the scholia,
but maybe it would be of some help.


Nate,

A.Ag 412-413
† πάρεστι σιγᾶς ἄτιμος † ἀλοίδορος
ἄλιστος [ἅδιστος] ἀφεμένων ἰδεῖν.

I have no experience reading scholia. ἅδιστος] γλυκεῖα is a simple gloss. The following paragraph Ag.413b.1 appears to be a homily on σιγᾶς ... ἀφεμένων. There are several uses of the first person which doesn't make sense to me. Clytemnestra's absence somehow plays a part in this: διὰ τὸ μὴ παρεῖναι τὴν δέσποιναν. The homily reads almost like parable with a paradox. I'm probably misreading it; " ... the absence of our silence that is to say speaking freely because the queen is not present here ... never the less, the high esteem we preserve for her ... we see ... sweetness precious without reproach ... that is to say we are accustom to her presence ... to have the benefit of our honor "

This is no doubt a total misunderstanding but I have nothing to go by. Don't know the provenance, date or anything else about the scholia. The style does remind me a little of patristic exegesis. But I am not an expert on that either.


This is difficult, I have no experience of reading scholia either. I'll have a go at scholia 413b for exercise's sake. The scholiast is trying to explain a nonsensical passage, so the explanation is more or less nonsensical too... :) I think it refers to Helen's absence (departure to Troy), not Clytemestra's, as Aeschylus made Agamemnon and Menelaus rule together at Argos.

The absence of our [the prophets' or whatever] silence -- this means, we are able to refrain from silence, that is to say allowed to speak freely because the queen [Helen] is not present here -- although like in old times we still cherish her presence, and we still can see her as sweet and honoured and without reproach, that is to say we consider her to be still among us and enjoy honour among us.


Apparently, the scholiast here reads ἄτιμος = πολύτιμος, i.e. with an α intensive not α privative.
Paul Derouda
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 937
Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 9:39 pm

Re: A.Ag Χορός a hymn 355 ...

Postby C. S. Bartholomew » Mon Dec 10, 2012 11:10 pm

vampires Aesch. Eumenides 302 ?

A.Ag 462-67
... κελαι-
ναὶ δ' Ἐρινύες χρόνῳ
τυχηρὸν ὄντ' ἄνευ δίκας
παλιντυχεῖ τριβᾷ βίου
τιθεῖσ' ἀμαυρόν, ἐν δ' ἀίστοις
τελέθοντος οὔτις ἀλκά·

parsing this is difficult, something like this:

κελαιναὶ ... Ἐρινύες the subject for the verb τιθεῖσ'; χρόνῳ temporal dative; the first object of the verb is a participle clause τυχηρὸν ὄντ' ἄνευ δίκας; second object of the verb ἀμαυρόν. 


οὔτις is the only candidate for subject, ἀλκά predicated of οὔτις, ἐν ... ἀίστοις local dative, among those who are shadows, the unseen (reference to Hades) but what are we to make of the genitive participle τελέθοντος?

While expounding on the concept of the Furies revenge, Denniston leaves out the critical word ἀναίματον (bloodless, anemic) in his citation from Aesch. Eumenides 302

ἀναίματον, βόσκημα δαιμόνων, σκιάν.
blood drained, food of the gods, a shadow

Not quite a reference to vampires but close enough for anyone with an active imagination.
C. Stirling Bartholomew
C. S. Bartholomew
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 734
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 10:03 pm

Re: A.Ag Χορός a hymn 355 ...

Postby Paul Derouda » Tue Dec 11, 2012 11:31 am

C. S. Bartholomew wrote:vampires Aesch. Eumenides 302 ?

A.Ag 462-67
... κελαι-
ναὶ δ' Ἐρινύες χρόνῳ
τυχηρὸν ὄντ' ἄνευ δίκας
παλιντυχεῖ τριβᾷ βίου
τιθεῖσ' ἀμαυρόν, ἐν δ' ἀίστοις
τελέθοντος οὔτις ἀλκά·

parsing this is difficult, something like this:

κελαιναὶ ... Ἐρινύες the subject for the verb τιθεῖσ'; χρόνῳ temporal dative; the first object of the verb is a participle clause τυχηρὸν ὄντ' ἄνευ δίκας; second object of the verb ἀμαυρόν. 


οὔτις is the only candidate for subject, ἀλκά predicated of οὔτις, ἐν ... ἀίστοις local dative, among those who are shadows, the unseen (reference to Hades) but what are we to make of the genitive participle τελέθοντος?

τελέθοντος must be genitive absolute. 'When he'll be among the Unseen, there will be (he will have) no defense."

ἀναίματος is a surprising word, which belongs to the same semantic field as ἀμαυρός and αἴστος. I wonder if it's an ad hoc creation to that particular passage of A. Eum., perhaps to be interpreted vaguely as a strong word for 'pale', 'weak', or is there an longstanding conception of the Erinyes sucking blood. At least I couldn't find a mention of such a conception in Walter Burkert's Greek Religion.
Paul Derouda
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 937
Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 9:39 pm

Re: A.Ag Χορός a hymn 355 ...

Postby C. S. Bartholomew » Tue Dec 11, 2012 7:21 pm

Paul Derouda wrote:
C. S. Bartholomew wrote:vampires Aesch. Eumenides 302 ?

A.Ag 462-67
... κελαι-
ναὶ δ' Ἐρινύες χρόνῳ
τυχηρὸν ὄντ' ἄνευ δίκας
παλιντυχεῖ τριβᾷ βίου
τιθεῖσ' ἀμαυρόν, ἐν δ' ἀίστοις
τελέθοντος οὔτις ἀλκά·

parsing this is difficult, something like this:

κελαιναὶ ... Ἐρινύες the subject for the verb τιθεῖσ'; χρόνῳ temporal dative; the first object of the verb is a participle clause τυχηρὸν ὄντ' ἄνευ δίκας; second object of the verb ἀμαυρόν. 


οὔτις is the only candidate for subject, ἀλκά predicated of οὔτις, ἐν ... ἀίστοις local dative, among those who are shadows, the unseen (reference to Hades) but what are we to make of the genitive participle τελέθοντος?

τελέθοντος must be genitive absolute. 'When he'll be among the Unseen, there will be (he will have) no defense."

ἀναίματος is a surprising word, which belongs to the same semantic field as ἀμαυρός and αἴστος. I wonder if it's an ad hoc creation to that particular passage of A. Eum., perhaps to be interpreted vaguely as a strong word for 'pale', 'weak', or is there an longstanding conception of the Erinyes sucking blood. At least I couldn't find a mention of such a conception in Walter Burkert's Greek Religion.


Paul,
In regard to τελέθοντος genitive absolute R-T and Denn.-Page agree. The participle clause ἐν δ' ἀίστοις τελέθοντος would perform as a contextualizer, anchoring the main clause οὔτις ἀλκά in the preceding discourse where it picks up the idea from τιθεῖσ' ἀμαυρόν. The language is vague. What exactly do the furies accomplish? The offending man is reduced to obscurity. But is ἐν ἀίστοις a reference to Ἅιδης Hades? Also, the intended meaning of the main clause οὔτις ἀλκά is hard to pin down.

In regard to ἀναίματος ... the Erinyes sucking blood. This is discussed in The dream in Homer and Greek tragedy By William Stuart Messe on page 74. Also A Commentary on The Complete Greek Tragedies. Aeschylus By James C. Hogan p100 A.Ag 1477-80 "The Furies are like vampires that feed on the blood of the house ; p156 Eumenides 183f,264f “They are blood-sucking vampries. Maxwell-Stuart (p. 83), ... compares them to bats: they ‘were dark, had membraned wings (51), and shriveled ugly faces ...” .
Last edited by C. S. Bartholomew on Wed Dec 12, 2012 5:21 am, edited 3 times in total.
C. Stirling Bartholomew
C. S. Bartholomew
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 734
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 10:03 pm

Re: A.Ag Χορός a hymn 355 ...

Postby Paul Derouda » Tue Dec 11, 2012 8:50 pm

I think τελέθοντος has a "weak" meaning here, like a copula, just 'to be'; the subject would be τυχηρὸν ὄντ᾽ ἄνευ δίκας. δέ marks the change of subject. I guess ἐν ἀίστοις = Ἅιδης. According to R-T, the Furies pursue their victims even beyond death. 'Even when he's among the Unseen [=dead], [there is] no defense.' (My translation, not R-T's)
Paul Derouda
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 937
Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 9:39 pm

Re: A.Ag Χορός a hymn 355 ...

Postby C. S. Bartholomew » Tue Dec 11, 2012 10:31 pm

[quote="Paul Derouda"]I think τελέθοντος has a "weak" meaning here, like a copula, just 'to be'; the subject would be τυχηρὸν ὄντ᾽ ἄνευ δίκας. δέ marks the change of subject.

Paul,

The subject of the genitive absolute is τυχηρὸν ὄντ᾽ ἄνευ δίκας? Not quite sure about that. I think a subject is not provided for the genitive absolute (see R-T note sc. αὐτοῦ) , if there was a subject for the genitive absolute it would co-referential with τυχηρὸν ὄντ᾽ ἄνευ δίκας. Perhaps that is what you are driving at.
Last edited by C. S. Bartholomew on Wed Dec 12, 2012 4:48 am, edited 1 time in total.
C. Stirling Bartholomew
C. S. Bartholomew
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 734
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 10:03 pm

Re: A.Ag Χορός a hymn 355 ...

Postby C. S. Bartholomew » Wed Dec 12, 2012 2:16 am

C. S. Bartholomew wrote:In regard to ἀναίματος ... the Erinyes sucking blood. This is discussed in The dream in Homer and Greek tragedy By William Stuart Messe on page 74. Also A Commentary on The Complete Greek Tragedies. Aeschylus By James C. Hogan p100 A.Ag 1477-80 "The Furies are like vampires that feed on the blood of the house ; p156 Eumenides 183f,264f “They are blood-sucking vampries. Maxwell-Stuart (p. 83), ... compares them to bats: they ‘were dark, had membraned wings (51), and shriveled ugly faces ...” .


See also
An Introduction to Greek Tragedy Ruth Scodel p. 96 "In myth Erinyes are born of blood, but they are also vampires who drink the blood of those they torment."
C. Stirling Bartholomew
C. S. Bartholomew
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 734
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 10:03 pm

Re: A.Ag Χορός a hymn 355 ...

Postby Paul Derouda » Wed Dec 12, 2012 11:21 am

C. S. Bartholomew wrote:
Paul Derouda wrote:I think τελέθοντος has a "weak" meaning here, like a copula, just 'to be'; the subject would be τυχηρὸν ὄντ᾽ ἄνευ δίκας. δέ marks the change of subject.

Paul,

The subject of the genitive absolute is τυχηρὸν ὄντ᾽ ἄνευ δίκας? Not quite sure about that. I think a subject is not provided for the genitive absolute (see R-T note sc. αὐτοῦ) , if there was a subject for the genitive absolute it would co-referential with τυχηρὸν ὄντ᾽ ἄνευ δίκας. Perhaps that is what you are driving at.


That's what I meant. Grammatically, τελέθοντος has no subject; if there was one, it would have to be in the genitive. But a subject is implied (αὐτοῦ or whatever), and it is co-referential with τυχηρὸν ὄντ᾽ ἄνευ δίκας.
Paul Derouda
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 937
Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 9:39 pm

Re: A.Ag Χορός a hymn 355 ...

Postby Paul Derouda » Wed Dec 12, 2012 12:24 pm

C. S. Bartholomew wrote:See also
An Introduction to Greek Tragedy Ruth Scodel p. 96 "In myth Erinyes are born of blood, but they are also vampires who drink the blood of those they torment."


As a side note, I think I'll read an all-round introductory book, maybe this is the one? According to this review, it's not a bad book. http://bmcr.brynmawr.edu/2011/2011-06-45.html

Apparently, this book is even better, but a more demanding read. Edith Hall, Greek Tragedy: Suffering Under the Sun
Paul Derouda
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 937
Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 9:39 pm

Previous

Return to Learning Greek

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: jaihare, jeidsath, jldecker87 and 40 guests