Textkit Logo

Difference between δεῖ and χρὴ

Here you can discuss all things Ancient Greek. Use this board to ask questions about grammar, discuss learning strategies, get help with a difficult passage of Greek, and more.

Difference between δεῖ and χρὴ

Postby mahasacham » Mon Oct 05, 2015 5:29 pm

I was re-reading the symposium again the other day and I came across this phrase at 173c.

εἰ οὖν δεῖ καὶ ὑμῖν διηγήσασθαι, ταῦτα χρὴ ποιεῖν.

δεῖ seems to be necessity and χρὴ seems to be obligation. Do I seem to have this correct?
User avatar
mahasacham
Textkit Member
 
Posts: 115
Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2014 1:05 am

Re: Difference between δεῖ and χρὴ

Postby jeidsath » Mon Oct 05, 2015 7:09 pm

δεῖ seems to be necessity and χρὴ seems to be obligation.


The LSJ seems to support that (and it agrees with my sense of the words):

δεῖ: "there is need"
χρή: "it is necessary: c. inf. praes. aut aor., it must needs, one must or ought to do

Also, in the article for δεῖ it mentions that "the sense of moral obligation, prop. belonging to χρή, is later, S.Ph.583, etc."
Joel Eidsath -- jeidsath@gmail.com

μὴ δ’ οὕτως ἀγαθός περ ἐὼν θεοείκελ’ Ἀχιλλεῦ
κλέπτε νόῳ, ἐπεὶ οὐ παρελεύσεαι οὐδέ με πείσεις.
User avatar
jeidsath
Administrator
 
Posts: 2474
Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2013 2:42 pm
Location: Γαλεήπολις, Οὐισκόνσιν

Re: Difference between δεῖ and χρὴ

Postby mwh » Mon Oct 05, 2015 7:51 pm

W.S. Barrett on Eur.Hipp.41:
"δεῖ (a parvenu: only once in Homer) begins to replace χρή first in denoting a need or necessity, leaving the requirements of morality and the like to χρή, and in the 5th cent. this distinction (though far from absolute) can still be felt."

And still in the 4th, evidently. (Here δεῖ "must," "have to", χρή "should," "ought to.")
But the two are often interchangeable, and eventually δεῖ takes over completely.

Edit. At S.Ph.583, λέγονθ’ ἃ μὴ δεῖ, I suspect we may have a rare instance of one word being used instead of another for (unconscious?) euphonic reasons: the successive eta’s of μὴ χρή are avoided.
mwh
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 2801
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 2:34 am

Re: Difference between δεῖ and χρὴ

Postby jeidsath » Mon Oct 05, 2015 10:03 pm

Welcome back, mwh!

I hope that you get the chance to check out Bedwere's Ben-Hur comic book translation on the Latin forum.
Joel Eidsath -- jeidsath@gmail.com

μὴ δ’ οὕτως ἀγαθός περ ἐὼν θεοείκελ’ Ἀχιλλεῦ
κλέπτε νόῳ, ἐπεὶ οὐ παρελεύσεαι οὐδέ με πείσεις.
User avatar
jeidsath
Administrator
 
Posts: 2474
Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2013 2:42 pm
Location: Γαλεήπολις, Οὐισκόνσιν

Re: Difference between δεῖ and χρὴ

Postby mwh » Tue Oct 06, 2015 2:10 pm

Anything to oblige.
mwh
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 2801
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 2:34 am

Re: Difference between δεῖ and χρὴ

Postby mahasacham » Tue Oct 06, 2015 3:30 pm

Oh wow I didn't realize there was a Ben-Hur translation going on.....Ill have to start checking the Latin forums more often. I recently found a copy of the Asterix comic books translated into ancient Greek.

Are the Asterix comics in public domain (In particular the Cleopatra and Asterix edition which was put out in the 1960s).............Are comic books treated differently than books when it comes to public domain?)
User avatar
mahasacham
Textkit Member
 
Posts: 115
Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2014 1:05 am

Re: Difference between δεῖ and χρὴ

Postby mwh » Tue Oct 06, 2015 6:39 pm

Barrett’s Hippolytus is a must for anyone wanting to master Attic Greek. Almost as instructive as Fraenkel’s Agamemnon, and helluva lot more approachable.
mwh
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 2801
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 2:34 am

Re: Difference between δεῖ and χρὴ

Postby Paul Derouda » Tue Oct 06, 2015 7:15 pm

Fraenkel's Agamemnon is quite a stunning piece of learning, literally -- so heavy you could easily kill someone with those volumes. I have read only bits from here and there, of course. But thanks for the tip, I added Hippolytus to the book order I was passing. Now I hope I can smuggle all those new books in without my spouse noticing.
User avatar
Paul Derouda
Global Moderator
 
Posts: 1938
Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 9:39 pm

Re: Difference between δεῖ and χρὴ

Postby jeidsath » Wed Oct 07, 2015 4:33 pm

Literally inaccessible. The price on Amazon is north of $500 for used copies of Fraenkel. I picked up Barrett’s Hippolytus though and will be taking a look.
Joel Eidsath -- jeidsath@gmail.com

μὴ δ’ οὕτως ἀγαθός περ ἐὼν θεοείκελ’ Ἀχιλλεῦ
κλέπτε νόῳ, ἐπεὶ οὐ παρελεύσεαι οὐδέ με πείσεις.
User avatar
jeidsath
Administrator
 
Posts: 2474
Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2013 2:42 pm
Location: Γαλεήπολις, Οὐισκόνσιν

Re: Difference between δεῖ and χρὴ

Postby daivid » Mon Oct 12, 2015 12:39 pm

mwh wrote:Barrett’s Hippolytus is a must for anyone wanting to master Attic Greek. Almost as instructive as Fraenkel’s Agamemnon, and helluva lot more approachable.

Would that be Aeschylus' Agamemnon edited with a commentary by Eduard Fraenkel?
Why is it so valuable?
λονδον
User avatar
daivid
Administrator
 
Posts: 2739
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2011 1:51 pm
Location: ὁ τοῦ βασιλέως λίθος, London, Europe

Re: Difference between δεῖ and χρὴ

Postby Qimmik » Mon Oct 12, 2015 1:20 pm

"Why is it so valuable?"

It's out of print; three large volumes, one of text and two of commentary on about 1700 lines of Greek. Important out of print books are very expensive, but if it were in print, it probably wouldn't be sold for much less. It's a classic of classical scholarship.
Qimmik
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 2090
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2013 10:15 pm

Re: Difference between δεῖ and χρὴ

Postby anuswara » Thu Aug 02, 2018 10:08 am

Hi,

1) OT: there are 3 new books about Agamemnon that will replace Fraenkels commentar. Enrico Medda, Accademia Lincei (the Accademia is working on the opera omnia of Aeschylos to replace West's teubneriana edition). All manuscripits and all the history of conjecturae from Willem Canter up to Martin West. Meddas books are the first one after more than 20 years hard work, coordinator: Vittorio Citti.

2) IT: I still dont understand the difference xrh / dei:
Pindar, Isthm IV, 48:
xrh cannot be transalted as "one shoud" !?!

thanks.
anuswara
Textkit Neophyte
 
Posts: 2
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2018 9:59 am

Re: Difference between δεῖ and χρὴ

Postby anuswara » Thu Aug 02, 2018 10:15 am

Hi again,
perhaps I just found something interesting about xrh/dei here:
Image
Last edited by jeidsath on Fri Aug 03, 2018 4:30 am, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Inline image
anuswara
Textkit Neophyte
 
Posts: 2
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2018 9:59 am

Re: Difference between δεῖ and χρὴ

Postby RandyGibbons » Sun Sep 02, 2018 8:41 pm

Just happened to stumble on this thread quite by accident. Just as fyi, there is this article in 1965 Glotta by the late Seth Benardete from New York University. I mention it just because it is accessible to most of you via JSTOR.

(I haven't read through this thread, so apologies if the article has already been cited or referred to.)

RG
RandyGibbons
Textkit Fan
 
Posts: 209
Joined: Sat Mar 30, 2013 9:10 pm

Re: Difference between δεῖ and χρὴ

Postby mwh » Mon Sep 03, 2018 10:21 pm

If it’s the semantics people are interested in (rather than the etymologies), it’s best looked at diachronically. See my first post above quoting Barrett.
mwh
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 2801
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 2:34 am

Re: Difference between δεῖ and χρὴ

Postby ἑκηβόλος » Sun Oct 07, 2018 6:04 am

How are the negated forms understood? It seems to me that either the necessity is negated or the action after the negated δεῖ is negated. I wonder if that is just a reflection of how I render in English?

An example where it seems ambiguous where the stress of the negation lies is the transitive phrase from Lysistrata 119:
οὐ δεῖ γὰρ κεκρύφθαι τὸν λόγον.

That could conceivably be emphasising the lack of need to concdal, or the need to not conceal.

A reasonably clear example where the necessity is negated is The absolute οὐ δεῖ θαυμάζειν from Strabo 8.6. The ruins of Mycenae are not to be found in the authour's day, so it is not necessary for people to be amazed that other sites of other famous cities are not known.

A contextually clear example of a negation of δεῖ + infinitive - where the following action is negated is from Aeschines, Against Timarchus, 1.83-84. In that case, it is clear that the ὅτι οὐ δεῖ γελᾶν τούτων ἐναντίον means that "it is necessary to not laugh", ie that the negation belongs with the laughing, rather than "it is unnecessary to laugh", which the crowd clearly felt that it was necessary.

The clear context is that the crowd laughs at Autolycus for speaking without due awareness of what the words might mean to others (without an adequate Theory of Mind). As he speaks he makes three or perhaps five faux pas. First, he says that Timarchus was ἐμπειροτέρως ἔχει, and by that he meant in the sense of "well acquainted (by investigation)" with the area of settlement, but understood as "having first hand experience of" the low-cost red light district, which the area was famous for. The laughter continued when he talked about ἐν τῇ ἡσυχίᾳ ταύτῃ in the sense of "during a period free of conflict", but understood with some innuendo (perhaps a description of intercourse without vocalisations of pleasure and passion). Third, Autoclytus spoke of μικρὸν ἀνάλωμα meaning the low cost of gentrification of the suburb, but understood by others as the low cost of payment for services rendered. The final two are conjectured by Adams, the editor to be words similar enough in sound to the male generative organs. Autoclytus is described in terms of ἀγνοεῖν "not know in his understanding" and ἀπαντάω "chance upon", "meet without expectation".
I sang of the dancing stars,
I sang of the daedal Earth,
And of Heaven -- and the giant wars,
And Love, and Death, and Birth, --
(Shelley, Hymn of Pan)
User avatar
ἑκηβόλος
Textkit Enthusiast
 
Posts: 604
Joined: Wed Aug 07, 2013 10:19 am
Location: Nanchang, PRC

Re: Difference between δεῖ and χρὴ

Postby Kurama » Sun Oct 07, 2018 8:39 pm

Qimmik wrote:"Why is it so valuable?"

It's out of print; three large volumes, one of text and two of commentary on about 1700 lines of Greek. Important out of print books are very expensive, but if it were in print, it probably wouldn't be sold for much less. It's a classic of classical scholarship.

OUP is selling the volumes new, but just as expensive as the old copies.
Kurama
Textkit Neophyte
 
Posts: 27
Joined: Mon Sep 12, 2011 8:23 pm

Re: Difference between δεῖ and χρὴ

Postby ἑκηβόλος » Mon Oct 08, 2018 4:56 pm

For the negated usage of the χρή, there is a contrasting affirmative - negative pair in Xenophon,

Xenophon, Cyropaedia, 1.4.7 wrote:
ὁ οὖν Κῦρος τῶν ἑπομένων προθύμως ἐπυνθάνετο ποίοις οὐ χρὴ θηρίοις πελάζειν καὶ ποῖα χρὴ θαρροῦντα διώκειν.
Cyrus, therefore, eagerly inquired of those who attended him what animals one ought not to approach and what animals one might pursue without fear.
(Miller, 1914)


As far as the meaning is concerned, the problem in this example is that affirmative χρὴ in this case really seems to carry what might be another sense, viz. "useful" or "serviceable" sense that shows up in the derivative words, rather than any hint of compulsion, such as χρήσιμος, χρῆμα and the perfect and pluperfect of χράομαι.

How does one identify examples of the use of these impersonals in questions?
I sang of the dancing stars,
I sang of the daedal Earth,
And of Heaven -- and the giant wars,
And Love, and Death, and Birth, --
(Shelley, Hymn of Pan)
User avatar
ἑκηβόλος
Textkit Enthusiast
 
Posts: 604
Joined: Wed Aug 07, 2013 10:19 am
Location: Nanchang, PRC


Return to Learning Greek