Pharr: Lesson 15, trans. (G-E), #3

[PeterD]

Hi,

It appears that the Homeric board has been a tad quiet of late. Time to rouse it up!

In Lesson 15, trans. (G-E), #3, we have the following clause:

[face=SPIonic]to\n ga\r basileu\j )Atrei/dhj e)xo/lwsen[/face] (for the king, son of Atreus, enraged him)

Does not the verb in the clause take a dative object? If so, should it not be [face=SPIonic]tw|=[/face] instead of [face=SPIonic]to/n[/face]?

Thank you,

~PeterD

P.S. How is the diaeresis represented in SPIonic?

[annis]

Does not the verb in the clause take a dative object? If so, should it not be [face=SPIonic]tw|=[/face] instead of [face=SPIonic]to/n[/face]?

It could be, but [face=spionic]xolo/w[/face] can take acc. or dat. of the person angered in Homer.

P.S. How is the diaeresis represented in SPIonic?

+ : o)i/+w makes [face=spionic]o)i/+w[/face].

[PeterD]

Thank you, William.

The reason I asked was because in line 1.9 it's [face=SPIonic]basilh=i xolwqei/j[/face]. And, Pharr does indeed stress (section 996) that these type of verbs take a dative object.