Page 1 of 1

Iliad 1:161

PostPosted: Wed Jan 07, 2004 2:32 am
by Bert
A few times I have been alerted to the fact that the dative case can show possession.
When I was reading Iliad 1:161, I Thought; "Aha! I know why [face=SPIonic]moi[/face] is dative, it is a prize to me, ie; my prize.
The footnote in Pharr however indicates that the dative is to show that the thing is done to its ([face=SPIonic]moi[/face]) disadvantage or advantage.
Here is the line: [face=SPIonic]kai\ dh/ moi ge/raj au)to\j a)fairh/sesqai a)peilei=j[/face],
The way I figured it, this line means: "and you threaten to take away my prize of honour"
The way suggested by Pharr would be: "and you threaten to take away for (from) me the (my) prize of honour".
Am I at least a little bit right or did I misread the replies to some of my previous questions?

Re: Iliad 1:161

PostPosted: Wed Jan 07, 2004 5:44 am
by Paul
Bert wrote:When I was reading Iliad 1:161, I Thought; "Aha! I know why [face=SPIonic]moi[/face] is dative, it is a prize to me, ie; my prize.
The footnote in Pharr however indicates that the dative is to show that the thing is done to its ([face=SPIonic]moi[/face]) disadvantage or advantage.
Here is the line: [face=SPIonic]kai\ dh/ moi ge/raj au)to\j a)fairh/sesqai a)peilei=j[/face],
The way I figured it, this line means: "and you threaten to take away my prize of honour"
The way suggested by Pharr would be: "and you threaten to take away for (from) me the (my) prize of honour".
Am I at least a little bit right or did I misread the replies to some of my previous questions?


Hi Bert,

I now confess that I do not clearly understand the difference between 'dative of interest' and 'dative of (dis)advantage'. To hear Smyth tell it, 'dative of interest' is the person for whom something is or is done; 'dative of (dis)advantage' is the person for whose (dis)advantage something is or is done. I suppose, then, that the latter is a subset of the former. That is, the dative of interest includes the dative of (dis)advantage. Put otherwise, the most general case is a 'doing something for someone' (dative of interest). This 'doing something' could be to someone's advantage or disadvantage (dative of (dis)advantage), or perhaps to neither(?)

In http://www.textkit.com/greek-latin-foru ... php?t=1151 we construed [face=SPIonic]moi[/face] as a type of 'dative of interest', namely as 'dative of the possessor'. But now I'm not so sure. Maybe Pharr is right. Smyth 1481 makes clear that this dative must often be translated as if a possessive genitive was intended. So we translate:

"And you yourself threaten to take away my prize.."

but we mean something closer to

"And you yourself threaten to take away my prize from me (to my disadvantage) ..."

Cordially,

Paul

PostPosted: Thu Jan 08, 2004 12:49 am
by annis
I already wrote one long response to this, then deleted it in a fit of Second Thoughts.

But I come back to my point, if not phrased as strongly as the original post: are these several uses of the dative really different in some fundamental way, or simply the natural result of grammar and stylistic differences between Greek and English?

On the other hand, Smyth notes (sec.1483) that with "verbs of depriving, warding off, and the like, the dative of the person may be used." This seems to apply here.

PostPosted: Thu Jan 08, 2004 1:16 am
by mingshey
The dative is actually dative 'and' ablative combined, perchance?

PostPosted: Fri Jan 09, 2004 12:02 am
by Bert
annis wrote:I already wrote one long response to this, then deleted it in a fit of Second Thoughts.

That explains it! I had an e-mail from Textkit informing me that there was a reply. I clicked on the link and ended up with a notice that said that the message I was after did not exist.

Thanks to you three for replying.

PostPosted: Fri Jan 09, 2004 12:04 am
by annis
mingshey wrote:The dative is actually dative 'and' ablative combined, perchance?


In Greek the genitive got most of the IE ablative.