spiphany wrote:You had μεθ᾿ ἡμέραν and νυκτὸς. I was thinking you might want to consider using the same construction for both temporal expressions. Not necessary by any means, just thought it might sound nice that way.
spiphany wrote:Διοκλης ὁ φιλόσοφος πένης ἦν ὥστε οὐκ ἐφοβουντο φωρας [οὐκ ἐφοβουντο μὴ κλέποι τις αὐτον].
spiphany wrote:Now that you mention it, having a direct object with a verb in the middle voice like φοβέομαι does seem a bit odd. An internal accusative, perhaps, like other verbs of thinking/feeling, but not necessarily a direct object.
However, I checked LSJ and it looks like the active voice isn't appropriate here either, as it means "put to flight" or "terrify, alarm" rather than "fear". And Diocles certainly isn't doing any terrifying here!
spiphany wrote:Or there might be some other verb (δέδοικα?) which permits this construction better.
spiphany wrote:Μέτα τῶν ἐν Θρακῃ τεμνόντων μέταλλα φιλοτιμία καὶ φθόνος πρός ἀλλήλους παρὰ.
spiphany wrote:οἱ μὲν ἄργυρον, οἱ δὲ χρυσὸν ζητουντες ἐν δυοιν στασοιν διεστᾶσιn, ἑκάτεροι γε ἐπώνομοι οἱ ἀργυροῖ καὶ οἱ χρυσοῖ.
spiphany wrote:τέμνων - make sure to decline the participle to agree with τῶν.
I like your use of the partitive construction, although I think it changes the meaning a bit. Sidgwick's English basically says, "those working in the mines have a great deal of rivalry & jealousy". The partitive makes it: "out of all those who work in the mines, many..." (i.e., only a particular subset of the miners as opposed to miners in general). The Greek is fine, and meaningwise I don't really see anything wrong with your version, it just gives a different nuance.
[Sidgwick uses a dative of possession here, which I found interesting: τοῖς τὰ μέταλλα ἐν Θράκῃ τέμνουσι πολλὴ φιλοτιμία...]
spiphany wrote:πρὸς ἀλλήλους ...ἀλλήλοις - the repetition is a bit awkward here. However, since you chose a verbal construction to express the jealousy & rivalry, I'm not sure if there's really a way to avoid it, if you feel that it's necessary to make the reciprocity explicit. It may not be.
spiphany wrote:ἦλθεν ὁρᾶν - I thought and thought about Sidgwick's "come to see/visit" but could not figure out if there was a similar idiom in Greek or how I would go about looking it up if there were. So I just avoided it...
I did just make a quick check in the LSJ (see the entry for ἔρχομαι section IV) and it looks like there are similar usages, but that you would need to use a (future) participle instead of an infinitive.
spiphany wrote:"τί δέ;" ἔφη ὁ ἀργυροῦς λάθρα ἐλπίζων διὰ τὸ μηδὲν χρυσὸν εὑρεῖν δύνασθαι - I think you forgot something here? The "he would answer that..." bit.
Sidgwick has ἐλπίζων ἀποκρινεῖσθαι ὅτι διὰ τὸ..., which would fit right into your sentence.
spiphany wrote:τρεῖς πόδες ἐκ βαθοῦς - not sure I understand your use of ἐκ here. I think it should probably be βάθος (acc of um, respect or extent of space or something). The "three feet" part stumped me (I got frustrated and simply omitted the whole phrase). For what it's worth Sidgwick has ἐς τριῶν ποδῶν βάθος.
pster wrote:To consider the best method of doing: σκοπεῖν ὅπως ἄριστα δράσουσι
pster wrote:But, I just don't know how Sidgwick can introduce "they" there without context. There would have to be a "they" in the context wouldn't there? It couldn't be a stand alone translation could it?
Paul Derouda wrote:Hi! You seem to have been working with Sidgwick for a while already, but is it possible to join you?
I've just been reading and never really written Greek myself before, being an autodidact... But I guess I must start one day. If I notice my Greek is too lousy I'll just drop out, ok...
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Exabot [Bot], MSNbot Media and 59 guests