mone^i te^i morphe^i me^ ouchi probata einai d.
Is me^ ou indispensable in this construction with infinitive ?
mone^i te^i morphe^i me^ ouchi probata einai d.
Ἡμέρας μὲν οὖν τινας οἴκοι ἔμεινεν ἐλπίζων ὅπερ ἦν͵ ὑπὸ τῆς φήμης αὐτίκα μάλα παμπόλλους τῶν Παφλαγόνων συνδραμεῖσθαι. ἐπεὶ δὲ ὑπερεπέπληστο ἀνθρώπων ἡ πόλις͵ ἁπάντων τοὺς ἐγκεφάλους καὶ τὰς καρδίας προεξῃρημένων οὐδὲν ἐοικότων σιτοφάγοις ἀνδράσιν͵ ἀλλὰ μόνῃ τῇ μορφῇ μὴ οὐχὶ πρόβατα εἶναι διαφερόντων͵ ...
Verb with an inherently negative sense sometimes take a "sympathetic" negation in dependent clauses (Smyth §2739 and after).
Junya wrote:Then why me^ ou is used here ?
The infinitive phrase is translated as from ... when it is constructed with diaphero^ ?
If the LSJ is to be believed, this is a rare usage. I'm not sure what motivates to you dig into this single example so deeply.
τὰ δὲ πρῶτα νοήματα τί διοίσει τοῦ μὴ φαντάσματα εἶναι;
1. eirgei me me^ graphein (he hinders me from writing)
2. eirgei me graphein (the same)
3. eirgei me to me^ graphein (the same)
4. eirgei me to graphein (the same)
5. eirgei me tou me^ graphein (the same)
etc.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 72 guests