January is Greek Prose Composition Month!

[NateD26]

Thanks, spiphany. I stand corrected and agree on all points.

[NateD26]

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.

You know, I checked LSJ and I can't find an equivalent phrase for "at night" other than νυκτός.
There's μετὰ νυκτός for "by night" but that's not exactly the meaning needed here.
I suppose if μεθ᾿ ἡμέραν means "during the day", then it stands to reason that μετὰ νύκτα
would mean "during the night", but I couldn't find it in the dictionary.

Διοκλης ὁ φιλόσοφος πένης ἦν ὥστε οὐκ ἐφοβουντο φωρας [οὐκ ἐφοβουντο μὴ κλέποι τις αὐτον].

I remember learning that with a direct object, the active form of φοβέω instead of the "deponent" is used.

[spiphany]

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!
It seems that the usual construction is an indirect statement or a fear clause (duh) -- i.e., for it to be followed by a verb/prepositional phrase rather than an object. LSJ does give a few examples at the very end where it has an accusative or genitive object, but it looks like I'd be better off with something more like the second possibility I proposed. (Sidgwick, for what it's worth, uses a fear clause here). Or there might be some other verb (δέδοικα?) which permits this construction better.

[NateD26]

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!

Oh, true. I forgot that it had an altogether different meaning.

Or there might be some other verb (δέδοικα?) which permits this construction better.

You might be allowed to leave it with φοβοῦμαι after all.

5 c. acc., fear, dread, Δία Od.14.389; σημάντορας ib.4.431, etc.; τὸ σὸν πρόσωπον S.OT448; τοὺς γονέας Pl.R.562e; coupled with φοβοῦμαι, τοὺς Ἀθηναίους ἡγούμενοι ἅπερ ἐδεδίεσαν φοβεῖσθαι Th.4.117; οὐδὲ δέδοικα οὐδὲ φοβοῦμαι τὸν μέλλοντα ἀγῶνα D.21.200, cf. Isoc.12.48, Pl.Euthphr.12b, 12c. LSJ

[NateD26]

Just a quick comparison:

spiphany's:
ἐπίστατο γὰρ τὸν φωρας ἀεὶ γνόντας ὅπου ὁ χρυσὸς συλλεγόμενος πρὶν ἄν ἐρχωνται εἰς οἶκον.

mine:
ᾔδη γὰρ τοὺς κλέπτας ἀεὶ ἐξευρόντας πρὶν οἰκίαν τινὰ εἰσῆλθον ὅπου ἀγείροιεν οἱ ἄνθρωποι τὸν χρυσὸν αὐτῶν·

Now, since the sentence relates a general truth dependent on a knowing verb in the secondary tense,
you'd think that it should have πρὶν with optative under strict sequence, or with ἄν + subj under vivid
sequence, as spiphany did.

But according to Smyth, even general truths must have a negative statement or virtually negative
one in the principal clause for πρὶν to have subj. And even if it were a negative statement,
it was more common to find after a verb in the secondary tense, the inf.+acc. and rarely the opt.

Since this is a positive statement, and πρὶν here can only mean before, it should be πρὶν + inf.

So, I was wrong to use ind. and I don't think spiphany's construction is right either.
I could be wrong though.

[spiphany]

Ahhm, yeah....I guess infinitive sounds like it would be most appropriate here. I have trouble seeing the semantic distinction that dictates the choice of verb form, but your logic makes sense.
For what it's worth Sidgwick also uses an infinitive here:
ᾔδη γὰρ τοὺς φῶρας ἀεὶ πυνθανομένους ὅπου χρυσὸς συνείλεκται πρὶν εἰσιέναι

[spiphany]

Exercise 35
Seemed to be lots of contractions here. I'm hoping I didn't make too many mistakes.

Μέτα τῶν ἐν Θρακῃ τεμνόντων μέταλλα φιλοτιμία καὶ φθόνος πρός ἀλλήλους παρὰ. οἱ μὲν ἄργυρον, οἱ δὲ χρυσὸν ζητουντες ἐν δυοιν στασοιν διεστᾶσιn, ἑκάτεροι γε ἐπώνομοι οἱ ἀργυροῖ καὶ οἱ χρυσοῖ. ποτε χρυσοῦς τις ἦλθε πρὸς ἀργυροῦν παλαιὸς φίλος ὢν · ἐβούλετο γὰρ ὁρᾶν τὰ ἀργύρεα μέταλλα εἰ ἐάσιν. οἱ δὲ ἀσμένως εἴασαν, νεωστὶ εὑροντες μεγαλὴν φλέβα (ὡς λέγουσι) μέγα δὴ φρονουντες. ἀλλὰ τοῦ ἀργυροῦ διηγουμένου ὁποῖα καὶ ὁπόσα ἐδυσθύμαινε ὁ χρυσοῦς. ὁ δὲ γηθων καὶ ἡδόμενος διοτὶ χρήματα ἐπέδειξεν, ἤρετο ὅπως ἔχοιεν οἱ χρυσοῖ. ἐκεῖνος δἐ ἀνανευσας σεμνῶς εἶπε τοὺς φιλους ἀθυμεῖν. ὁ ἀργυροῦς «διὰ τί ;» ἐφη, ἐλπίζων λάθρα ὅτι οἱ χρυσοῖ οὐκ ἐδύναντο εὐρίσκειν χρυσόν. ὁ δὲ ἐφη · ἐπυθόμεθ’ ἀρτίως ἄργυρον ὄντα ὑπὲρ τοῦ ἡμετερου χρυσοῦ καἰ ἡμῖν δεῖ μεγαλῳ πόνῳ διατέμνειν.

[NateD26]

Μέτα τῶν ἐν Θρακῃ τεμνόντων μέταλλα φιλοτιμία καὶ φθόνος πρός ἀλλήλους παρὰ.

can you please explain the use of παρὰ here?

οἱ μὲν ἄργυρον, οἱ δὲ χρυσὸν ζητουντες ἐν δυοιν στασοιν διεστᾶσιn, ἑκάτεροι γε ἐπώνομοι οἱ ἀργυροῖ καὶ οἱ χρυσοῖ.

I really love this construction, especially the use of the dual.

[spiphany]

Aargh. If you're confused you have every right to be. That was me being stupid.
I was thinking of the form πάρα for πάρεστιν, but mixed up both meaning and accent. I was going for something like "there is/there are" and should probably just have stuck with εἰσιν.
Sorry about that.

Edit: I have no idea whether διεστᾶσι is the correct form. ἵστημι confuses me...
I had Caesar's "Gallia est omnis divisa in partes tres" running through my head while trying to write this, which was horribly annoying and didn't help me figure out the Greek at all

[spiphany]

Comments for Nate on exercise 35:
In general I felt like it read pretty smoothly, so I'd say your fears about it being too literal are unjustified.

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...]

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.

διττοὶ γεγόνασιν, ἕτεροι μὲν.... - not a construction I recall having seen before, but it flows well, I think. It's nice when your reading pays off now and again and you can use constructions you've seen in your own compositions.

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.

ἔξεστι - I'm not sure exactly where this falls in the range between "it is possible" (in an absolute sense) and "it is allowed" (moral or normative). Probably ok, as there does tend to be a fair amount of overlap in meaning.

"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.

ἄργυρος ἐπὶ τῷ ἡμετέρῳ χρυσῷ - I like your choice of ἐπὶ better than ὑπὲρ (what I used). It captures the sense of proximity better. (Not just "above" but "right on top of")

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.

[NateD26]

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...]

Thanks for noticing the participle wrong case. It should of course be τεμνόντων.
I agree this partitive usage changes Sidwick's meaning quite significantly. Would changing πολλοί
to πλεῖστοι be somewhat closer to his intended meaning? In any case, I do like and prefer his dative
of possession.

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.

The only occurrence (I'm familiar with) of a similar repetition (albeit interrupted) is in Pl. Ap. 19d,
where each verb required a different case:

ἀξιῶ ὑμᾶς ἀλλήλους διδάσκειν τε καὶ φράζειν, ὅσοι ἐμοῦ
πώποτε ἀκηκόατε διαλεγομένου—πολλοὶ δὲ ὑμῶν οἱ
τοιοῦτοί εἰσιν— φράζετε οὖν ἀλλήλοις εἰ πώποτε ἢ
μικρὸν ἢ μέγα ἤκουσέ τις ὑμῶν ἐμοῦ περὶ τῶν τοιούτων
διαλεγομένου...

I wanted to use a verb, because it seemed to be what he meant in his Notes about Idiom
about getting to the simple message the sentence relates, and in which cases, authentic Greek
would most likely express it with a verb rather than a noun. Nevertheless, it does sound awkward.

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.

Indeed, a fut. part. as it was his purpose. Thanks.

"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.

I tried to get away with "hoping secretly it was because...", but Sidgwick's way of saying it is much
better.

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.

It frustrated me as well. I asked myself whether in depth should be in a simple case (be it dative
or genitive) or some prepositional phrase? I only followed LSJ entry in which ἐκ βάθους
has that meaning. (My accentuation was wrong though.)

[pster]

Sorry guys for going missing. Been dealing with holidays and inlaws. I've still managed to sneak in some reading of Sidgwick every day. I will be posting a bunch of questions that I have been accumulating from the Notes. And before August begins I will start a huge push to do one exercise every two days. I know your skeptical but I swear by Zeus it will happen!!!

[pster]

Hey guys. Got rid of the inlaws finally! So I've read most of the Notes, but still have to finish about half of the Notes on Abstract and Concrete and Sense. They seem really hard to me. Were you guys able to go through them and understand them and even connect them with all the usages he presented elsewhere in the Notes?

[pster]

First example of section 103:

To consider the best method of doing: σκοπεῖν ὅπως ἄριστα δράσουσι

I don't understand this. Is ἄριστα the subject, the object or an adjective or an adverb?? And is δράσουσι a participle? Or a finite form of the verb? And can you elaborate how it works especially if it is a participle?

My guess would be: To consider how the best (things) do. But the things aren't doing the doing! Or are they? Argh.

Thanks in advance.

[NateD26]

To consider the best method of doing: σκοπεῖν ὅπως ἄριστα δράσουσι

The verb σκοπεῖν takes a dependent clause in a form of an oblique question, as Sidgwick put it,
and the verb is future indicative because it refers to the future, relative to σκοπεῖν.
ἄριστα is of course its direct object, but idiomatically it is taken as linked to the verb,
just as κακὰ ποιεῖν means to hurt, to do harm.

Literally the sentence is rendered as to consider how they will/may do (x) the best.

[pster]

Thanks Nate. That was my first guess. But I wanted to be able to rule out some funky dative participle construction. 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?

[NateD26]

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?

Yeah, it does seem odd without context. It might have been adapted from Demosthenes' Exorida 31:

ὑμῖν δὲ παραινῶ μὴ συστασιάζειν μηδετέροις τούτων,
μηδ’ ὅπως ἅτεροι κρατήσουσι σκοπεῖν, ἀλλ’ ὅπως ὑμεῖς ἅπαντες τῶν ἐχθρῶν περιέσεσθε.

[pster]

Not sure if you guys are still interested in Sidgwick, but I am getting back into Greek now. I took a long break to do massive amounts of some other languages. But I did do about 6 more of the Sidgwick exercises, but they are still in longhand. And I am going to try and do every exercise in the book over the next two years. I think it actually makes more sense to do them sequentially than modulo 5 because I started to get the sense that he actually does make them build on each other. It is a pain to put them on the computer. But if you guys want me to and still think you are interested in S, I will. Lemme know what's up.

[Paul Derouda]

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...

[spiphany]

Paul: We actually didn't do a great many exercises from Sidgwick together -- probably not more than 6 or so total, so as far as I'm concerned you're welcome to jump in with whatever lesson you happen to want to work on. I find the process of giving and getting feedback is useful no matter what stage you're at. Participation also hasn't been so overwhelming that I would want to discourage anyone from taking part.

I'll try to participate but I'm moving (abroad) and starting a job in January so the timing isn't ideal. I can at least pop in and offer comments from time to time and if you're still going in February maybe things will have settled down for me by then.

[pster]

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...

Sure, welcome. Start doing exercises. Come January, I will start posting my answers. I plan on doing all the exercises more or less sequentially over the next two years (30min/day). As long as others are posting answers, I will post mine also. If others don't, then I won't bother, since I find typing Greek to be laborious. Maybe I'll look into just scanning written pages and posting pdfs! (Not joking!)