Textkit Logo

Xenophon, Mem., 1.2.62 in Dickey's analysis

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.

Xenophon, Mem., 1.2.62 in Dickey's analysis

Postby Tugodum » Sun Sep 10, 2017 7:01 pm

(my apologies for re-posting; it seems that this passed unnoticed on another forum)
On p. 68, the task is to analyze the following sentence by Xenophon (Memorabilia, 1.2.62), indicating, by numbering, all relations of dependence between the units which this sentence includes, each of them containing one and only one verb form:
"κατὰ γὰρ τοὺς νόμους, ἐάν τις φανερὸς γένηται κλέπτων ἢ λωποδυτῶν ἢ βαλλαντιοτομῶν ἢ τοιχωρυχῶν ἢ ἀνδραποδιζόμενος ἢ ἱεροσυλῶν, τούτοις θάνατός ἐστιν ἡ ζημία· ὧν ἐκεῖνος πάντων ἀνθρώπων πλεῖστον ἀπεῖχεν."
As regards the ending, Dickey, in her key, has it thus:
"1 τούτοις θάνατός ἐστιν ἡ ζημία "for these death is the punishment"
1.2 ὧν ἐκεῖνος πάντων ἀνθρώπων πλεῖστον ἀπεῖχεν "from which things that man [sc. Socrates] has most of all men stayed away" (my emphases)
My first question is whether "for these" in her translation refer to the people who have committed the indicated crimes or to the very crimes that they committed. The former seems right to me, given the context; and is so translated in the Loeb edition. But if this is what Dickey meant, I fail to see how the unit labeled "1.2" depends (as it is supposed to) on the unit labeled "1"--if ὧν in 1.2 does, indeed, means, as Dickey translates it (in my view, correctly), "from which things" (not "from such criminals," as the Loeb translation has it).
Tugodum
Textkit Member
 
Posts: 193
Joined: Fri Jun 16, 2017 7:15 am

Re: Xenophon, Mem., 1.2.62 in Dickey's analysis

Postby mwh » Tue Sep 12, 2017 8:18 pm

I haven’t seen the exercise, but it appears she took τουτοις as referring to the crimes rather than to the criminals. I too think that's wrong, but it is an awkward sentence. It could perhaps be argued that τουτοις is ambiguous, or that it's first understood as masculine and then retrospectively as neuter.
mwh
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 2367
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 2:34 am

Re: Xenophon, Mem., 1.2.62 in Dickey's analysis

Postby Tugodum » Tue Sep 12, 2017 9:11 pm

mwh wrote: first understood as masculine and then retrospectively as neuter.
OIC. A case of brachylogy? At any rate, this would justify Dickey's analysis of it. Thanks!
Tugodum
Textkit Member
 
Posts: 193
Joined: Fri Jun 16, 2017 7:15 am


Return to Learning Greek

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 82 guests