Has anyone had a chance to look into it? http://www.onthenewloebrepublic.com/
His tone seems a bit opinionated to me at times but am not qualified to judge the factual correctness of his statements. Hence my question: would you advise a neophyte to trust him or, rather, apply due caution?
Thanks in advance
Quandt's critique of the new Loeb "Republic"
-
- Textkit Enthusiast
- Posts: 562
- Joined: Fri Jun 16, 2017 7:15 am
Quandt's critique of the new Loeb "Republic"
Last edited by Tugodum on Wed Jun 21, 2017 2:08 am, edited 1 time in total.
- jeidsath
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 5332
- Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2013 2:42 pm
- Location: Γαλεήπολις, Οὐισκόνσιν
Re: Quandt's critique of the new Loeb "Republic"
EDIT: I'll give my understanding of the Greek, making minimal modifications from the new Loeb:1) 409A
Δικαστὴς δέ γε, ὦ φίλε, ψυχῇ ψυχῆς ἄρχει, ᾗ οὐκ ἐγχωρεῖ ἐκ νέας ἐν πονηραῖς ψυχαῖς τεθράφθαι τε καὶ ὡμιληκέναι καὶ πάντα ἀδικήματα αὐτὴν ἠδικηκυῖαν διεξεληλυθέναι, ὥστε ὀξέως ἀφ’ αὑτῆς τεκμαίρεσθαι τὰ τῶν ἄλλων ἀδικήματα οἷον κατὰ σῶμα νόσους.
Now the judge, my friend, governs the soul with a soul, which cannot be brought up from childhood and have dealings with base souls, and experience every kind of wrongdoing when it has gone wrong itself, so that it can make shrewd inferences from its own experience as to the wrongdoing of others in the same way as it experiences physical illnesses.
REPLACES
But a judge, mark you, my friend, rules soul with soul and it is not allowable for a soul to have been bred from youth up among evil souls and to have grown familiar with them, and itself to have run the gauntlet of every kind of wrong-doing and injustice so as quickly to infer from itself the misdeeds of others as it might diseases in the body.
Now the judge, my friend, governs the soul using a soul, one which cannot be brought up from childhood among base souls nor have dealings with them, nor itself having gone wrong experience every wrongdoing --
in order that it can sharply distinguish by its own self the wrongdoing of others in the same way as diseases from the healthy body. No, the soul itself must be without experience of, and be uncontaminated by...
I should emphasize that I don't know as much Greek either translator whose passage is used here. I see why they take ὥστε (and ἀλλά in the next section) the way they do, but I feel like τεκμαίρεσθαι isn't quite respected by either of them, nor is κρινεῖν *ὑγιῶς* motivated otherwise. I'm introducing an anacoluthon, but I think that the sense is improved.
“One might get one’s Greek from the very lips of Homer and Plato." "In which case they would certainly plough you for the Little-go. The German scholars have improved Greek so much.”
Joel Eidsath -- jeidsath@gmail.com
Joel Eidsath -- jeidsath@gmail.com
-
- Textkit Enthusiast
- Posts: 562
- Joined: Fri Jun 16, 2017 7:15 am
Re: Quandt's critique of the new Loeb "Republic"
I do like this meaning but what textual grounds are there to infer that σῶμα is implied as a new subject of the ending of the phrase?jeidsath wrote: just as a healthy body can better recognize disease.
In any event, am I getting it right that you direct this particular criticism at both Quandt and the Loeb translators?
- jeidsath
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 5332
- Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2013 2:42 pm
- Location: Γαλεήπολις, Οὐισκόνσιν
Re: Quandt's critique of the new Loeb "Republic"
Sorry, I edited my statement to be more precise about exactly what I was saying before you replied. I don't think that σῶμα is a subject -- it's governed by κατὰ.
Regardless, others will come along in a moment and point out what I got wrong, so I wouldn't take it too seriously. I learn a bit each time, and will hopefully have acquired some Greek in a few more years.
Regardless, others will come along in a moment and point out what I got wrong, so I wouldn't take it too seriously. I learn a bit each time, and will hopefully have acquired some Greek in a few more years.
“One might get one’s Greek from the very lips of Homer and Plato." "In which case they would certainly plough you for the Little-go. The German scholars have improved Greek so much.”
Joel Eidsath -- jeidsath@gmail.com
Joel Eidsath -- jeidsath@gmail.com
- Paul Derouda
- Global Moderator
- Posts: 2292
- Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 9:39 pm
Re: Quandt's critique of the new Loeb "Republic"
The review in BMCR raises similar points, although the reviewer tries to be gentler than Quandt. I don't know much about Plato, but if the new Loeb is as problematic as it seems, it surprising, because generally speaking the newer Loebs from the last decades have been much better than the older ones.
http://bmcr.brynmawr.edu/2013/2013-10-44.html
http://bmcr.brynmawr.edu/2013/2013-10-44.html
- Dante
- Textkit Neophyte
- Posts: 87
- Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2016 10:33 pm
- Location: NYC
Re: Quandt's critique of the new Loeb "Republic"
if you want a translation of the Republic, I would go with C.D.C. Reeve's, and his excellent commentary "Philosopher Kings the Argument of Plato's Republic"
https://www.hackettpublishing.com/republic
https://www.hackettpublishing.com/philosopher-kings
https://www.hackettpublishing.com/republic
https://www.hackettpublishing.com/philosopher-kings
-
- Textkit Enthusiast
- Posts: 562
- Joined: Fri Jun 16, 2017 7:15 am
Re: Quandt's critique of the new Loeb "Republic"
I'm learning a lot from Quandt's "slow reading" of the text elsewhere (http://www.onplatosrepublic.com/) but am not getting some of his idioms. E.g., commenting on 333 b8, he claims: "τε (B8) is noteworthy, as an unobtrusive (because enclitic) wedge making a place for an
otherwise unexpected καί which in turn (because proclitic) creates a berth for the new item, cithera- playing." Is καί proclitic??? I could, of course, address this question to him, but this might give him an impression that I am trying to poke holes in his work, which is not at all my intention. I want only to get out of it as much as I can.
otherwise unexpected καί which in turn (because proclitic) creates a berth for the new item, cithera- playing." Is καί proclitic??? I could, of course, address this question to him, but this might give him an impression that I am trying to poke holes in his work, which is not at all my intention. I want only to get out of it as much as I can.
-
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 4791
- Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 2:34 am
Re: Quandt's critique of the new Loeb "Republic"
He’s using “proclitic” in the sense of “prepositive.” Like a proclitic καί is not an independent word but needs something to follow it. Unlike what are normally termed proclitics (such as οὐ or εἰ or ὁ), καί is conventionally written with an accent, but it behaves in the same way. (οὐ for its part is not always proclitic/prepositive, and when it’s not it too is given an accent. Go figure.)
The point Quandt is making is that in κοινωνος του οικοδομου τε και κιθαριστικου, where nothing has prepared us for the addition of cithara-playing, the τε tips us off to the fact that another item is to follow, introduced (how else?) by και. (He misspells cithara.) He doesn’t explain why Plato didn’t write του τε οικοδομου και του κιθαριστικου.
The point Quandt is making is that in κοινωνος του οικοδομου τε και κιθαριστικου, where nothing has prepared us for the addition of cithara-playing, the τε tips us off to the fact that another item is to follow, introduced (how else?) by και. (He misspells cithara.) He doesn’t explain why Plato didn’t write του τε οικοδομου και του κιθαριστικου.
-
- Textkit Enthusiast
- Posts: 562
- Joined: Fri Jun 16, 2017 7:15 am
Re: Quandt's critique of the new Loeb "Republic"
Thanks a lot! This is very helpful.