hyptia wrote:Episcopus, are you trying to say this:
[face=SPIonic]au)th=j to\n palaio\n kalo\n ou)ke/ti e)qe/lei o( e)pi/skopoj o(/n polu\ dida/ceij pi/<nein to\n xlwro/n.[/face]
That's how I would interpret your sentence anyway, based on what I understand of the grammar - roughly translated, "the bishop whom you will often teach to drink of [something] green no longer wants her [somebody else's] ancient virtue."
The word order seems unusual to me but I suppose you did that for emphasis?
mraig wrote:[face=SPIonic]to\n palaio\n kalo\n [/face]
1. cannot mean 'ancient virtue' because it is masculine, not neuter. That would be
[face=SPIonic]to\ palaio\n kalo\n [/face].
As I understand it, the adverb would mean "the formerly beautiful man" while the adjective would mean "the old, beautiful man."
hyptia wrote: -[face=SPIonic]aj[/face] is a second person aorist ending, but the aorist of [face=SPIonic]dida/skw[/face] is [face=SPIonic]edi/daca[/face].
Kopio wrote: or was it just so obvious that now I'm the dupe mentioning it??
Doesn't vinho verde means green wine?
I wonder if Episkopus is saying, in his usual delightful gnomic way, that he no longer wishes so much to carry on with the benefits of his beloved Latin, as to now drink of the vinho verde (new wine) of Greek?
Users browsing this forum: C. S. Bartholomew and 72 guests