Textkit Logo

οὐχὶ

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!

οὐχὶ

Postby Helikwps » Tue Aug 05, 2014 4:06 pm

Technically speaking, is οὐχὶ the deictic form of οὐκ? Replies greatly appreciated.
User avatar
Helikwps
Textkit Neophyte
 
Posts: 69
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2011 5:37 am

Re: οὐχὶ

Postby C. S. Bartholomew » Tue Aug 05, 2014 6:01 pm

Helikwps wrote:Technically speaking, is οὐχὶ the deictic form of οὐκ? Replies greatly appreciated.



Deixis is something that referentially points to something else{1}. Pointing includes exophora, anaphora, cataphora …


So are you suggesting that:
οὐχὶ is +deixis
οὐκ is -deixis
or:
οὐ is -deixis


seems like this introduces confusion somewhere. Not sure where.




[1] private communication with Cindy Westfall (McMaster Div.) many moons ago.
C. Stirling Bartholomew
C. S. Bartholomew
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 734
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 10:03 pm

Re: οὐχὶ

Postby Barry Hofstetter » Wed Aug 06, 2014 12:32 pm

Helikwps wrote:Technically speaking, is οὐχὶ the deictic form of οὐκ? Replies greatly appreciated.


A quick scan of my lexical resources (LSJ, BDAG) show nobody using this terminology. They simply report it as "a strengthened form of οὐ..."
N.E. Barry Hofstetter
The Jack M. Barrack Hebrew Academy
Semper melius Latine sonat...
Barry Hofstetter
Textkit Neophyte
 
Posts: 34
Joined: Thu Aug 15, 2013 12:22 pm

Re: οὐχὶ

Postby Barry Hofstetter » Wed Aug 06, 2014 5:32 pm

I think I was half asleep when I wrote my earlier response. The deictic iota in Greek has nothing to do with the way deixis and deictic are used in discourse analysis. It simply makes the word to which it is attached emphatic. I think originally οὐχί certainly had a deictic (emphatic) force, but that tends to be lost in later Greek and even in some Classical contexts.
N.E. Barry Hofstetter
The Jack M. Barrack Hebrew Academy
Semper melius Latine sonat...
Barry Hofstetter
Textkit Neophyte
 
Posts: 34
Joined: Thu Aug 15, 2013 12:22 pm

Re: οὐχὶ

Postby C. S. Bartholomew » Wed Aug 06, 2014 9:04 pm

Barry Hofstetter wrote:The deictic iota in Greek has nothing to do with the way deixis and deictic are used in discourse analysis.


See Smyth 333g deictic iota with demonstrative pronouns and 1120c deictic article.

deictic is used in linguistics not just discourse analysis. A demonstrative pronoun, article, point to something that is either present as member of a currently active cogitative framework, scenario, "present to the mind" or something which is actually present as in on the scene, in view on stage.

English slang: this here man with the red beard.

here is +deixis


οὐχὶ may be empathic but I don't think it is deictic.
C. Stirling Bartholomew
C. S. Bartholomew
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 734
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 10:03 pm

Re: οὐχὶ

Postby Barry Hofstetter » Thu Aug 07, 2014 1:06 pm

C. S. Bartholomew wrote:
Barry Hofstetter wrote:The deictic iota in Greek has nothing to do with the way deixis and deictic are used in discourse analysis.


See Smyth 333g deictic iota with demonstrative pronouns and 1120c deictic article.

deictic is used in linguistics not just discourse analysis. A demonstrative pronoun, article, point to something that is either present as member of a currently active cogitative framework, scenario, "present to the mind" or something which is actually present as in on the scene, in view on stage.

English slang: this here man with the red beard.

here is +deixis


οὐχὶ may be empathic but I don't think it is deictic.


Good to talk to you in this context. Yes, I absolutely agree, but I still think that the origin of the iota was as a deictic particle. What would it point out with regard to οὺ? Perhaps the fact of the negation, hence it becomes emphatic.
N.E. Barry Hofstetter
The Jack M. Barrack Hebrew Academy
Semper melius Latine sonat...
Barry Hofstetter
Textkit Neophyte
 
Posts: 34
Joined: Thu Aug 15, 2013 12:22 pm

Re: οὐχὶ

Postby Paul Derouda » Thu Aug 07, 2014 1:25 pm

I find it difficult to see how οὐχί could be deictic. However – and I'm just guessing here – perhaps (as far as the iota goes) it is related to οὑτοσί, the emphatic variant of οὗτος, in which -i is a "demonstrative", according to LSJ. Perhaps the two are etymologically related, οὐχί being merely emphatic and the deictic force no longer felt. One further caveat: the -i is short in οὐχί and long in οὑτοσί; I'd like to see a serious discussion to the effect that they are related before actually believing it...

LSJ on οὗτος:
In Att. οὗτος was freq. strengthd. by the demonstr. -ί, οὑτοσί, αὑτηί, τουτί, gen. τουτουί, dat. τουτῳί, acc. τουτονί; pl. nom. οὑτοιί, neut. ταυτί, etc., this man here: sts. a Particle is inserted between the Pron. and -ί, as αὑτηγί for αὑτηί γε, Ar.Ach.784; τουτογί for τουτί γε, Id.V.781, Av.894, al.; ταυταγί for ταυτί γε, Id.Eq.492, Pax1057, al.; τουτοδί for τουτὶ δέ, Id.Pl.227; τουτουμενί for τουτουὶ μέν, Id.Ra.965.—In codd. the ν ἐφελκυστικόν is sts. added in the forms οὑτοσίν, οὑτωσίν, and οὑτοσίν is said to be Att. by A.D.Pron.59.24, 82.11. [This ι is always long, and a long vowel or diphthong before it becomes short, as αὑτη̆ί, τουτῳ̆ί, οὑτοῐί, Ar.Nu.201, Pl.44, Ach.40, etc.]
Paul Derouda
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 937
Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 9:39 pm

Re: οὐχὶ

Postby Barry Hofstetter » Thu Aug 07, 2014 2:18 pm

Paul Derouda wrote:I find it difficult to see how οὐχί could be deictic. However – and I'm just guessing here – perhaps (as far as the iota goes) it is related to οὑτοσί, the emphatic variant of οὗτος, in which -i is a "demonstrative", according to LSJ. Perhaps the two are etymologically related, οὐχί being merely emphatic and the deictic force no longer felt. One further caveat: the -i is short in οὐχί and long in οὑτοσί; I'd like to see a serious discussion to the effect that they are related before actually believing it...

LSJ on οὗτος:
In Att. οὗτος was freq. strengthd. by the demonstr. -ί, οὑτοσί, αὑτηί, τουτί, gen. τουτουί, dat. τουτῳί, acc. τουτονί; pl. nom. οὑτοιί, neut. ταυτί, etc., this man here: sts. a Particle is inserted between the Pron. and -ί, as αὑτηγί for αὑτηί γε, Ar.Ach.784; τουτογί for τουτί γε, Id.V.781, Av.894, al.; ταυταγί for ταυτί γε, Id.Eq.492, Pax1057, al.; τουτοδί for τουτὶ δέ, Id.Pl.227; τουτουμενί for τουτουὶ μέν, Id.Ra.965.—In codd. the ν ἐφελκυστικόν is sts. added in the forms οὑτοσίν, οὑτωσίν, and οὑτοσίν is said to be Att. by A.D.Pron.59.24, 82.11. [This ι is always long, and a long vowel or diphthong before it becomes short, as αὑτη̆ί, τουτῳ̆ί, οὑτοῐί, Ar.Nu.201, Pl.44, Ach.40, etc.]


That's a very good observation, Paul, and I agree.
N.E. Barry Hofstetter
The Jack M. Barrack Hebrew Academy
Semper melius Latine sonat...
Barry Hofstetter
Textkit Neophyte
 
Posts: 34
Joined: Thu Aug 15, 2013 12:22 pm

Re: οὐχὶ

Postby Paul Derouda » Thu Aug 07, 2014 7:01 pm

Unfortunately my theory seems to be wrong. I checked Chantraine's Dictionnaire étymologique de la langue grecque, and the these iotas seem to be quite different in origin. To sum up:

1) Long iota in οὑτοσί etc. is a demonstrative, as in LSJ, and seems to go back to Indo-European.
2) οὐχί and οὐκί (both short iota) are actually apparently two different formations; -χι is the same enclitic particle as in Homeric ἧχι "where", while -κι comes from the indefinite -kwi, the same that brought about τι (and Latin qui, etc.).
Paul Derouda
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 937
Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 9:39 pm

Re: οὐχὶ

Postby Barry Hofstetter » Fri Aug 08, 2014 3:07 pm

Paul, this is excellent. I regularly check Chantraine, just didn't think to do so here for some reason. Nor did I take into account the varying vowel quantities. I simply assumed that the iota was originally the same. I really should have known better, but sometimes we get comfortable in our dogmatic slumbers...
N.E. Barry Hofstetter
The Jack M. Barrack Hebrew Academy
Semper melius Latine sonat...
Barry Hofstetter
Textkit Neophyte
 
Posts: 34
Joined: Thu Aug 15, 2013 12:22 pm

Re: οὐχὶ

Postby Scribo » Fri Aug 08, 2014 4:05 pm

It's emphatic. Compare ναί vs ναίχι (the latter poorly attested in literature, I think Gignac on sub-literary language in papyri will have something?).
User avatar
Scribo
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 722
Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2008 2:28 pm
Location: Between Ilias and Odysseia.


Return to Learning Greek

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: ariphron, Yahoo [Bot] and 39 guests