Iliad 2:195

[Bert]

[face=SPIonic]mh/ ti xolwsa/menoj r(e/ch| kako\n ui(=aj )Axaiw=n.[/face]
I understand every word but I am not sure about which word belongs to which.
Does mh/ belong to ti (not anything) or to the participle (not angering) or the the finite verb (not doing).
Does ti belong to kako/n (something evil)?

[chad]

Hi Bert, here I read that mh/ goes with r(e/ch| (a construction related to 1.26, expressing object of fear) and r(e/ch| takes a double accusative, kako/n and ui(=aj.

The commentators don't agree on which word ti goes with, e.g.:

Benner says kako/n: http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/cgi-bin/pt ... &loc=2.195

It looks like Goodwin agrees (s 261): http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/cgi-bin/pt ... 0005%3a261

Seymour however says mh/: http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/cgi-bin/pt ... &loc=2.195

[Paul]

Hi Bert,

Rearranging the word order:

[face=SPIonic]mh/ r(e/ch| xolwsa/menoj ti kako\n ui(=aj )Axaiw=n [/face]

"May he not work in anger some evil against the sons of the Achaeans".

At least that's how I see it.

Cordially,

Paul

[chad]

hi, after lunch I've come back to this little point again; Willcock also takes ti with mh/.

on reading Goodwin's section again he may be taking ti (neut. acc.) as adverb to r(e/ch| (i.e. r(e/ch| ti), not as indefinite to kako/n (i.e. kako/n ti) as I first read him, I'm not sure exactly how he takes it

oh yeah and I meant Iliad 1.28 in my first post, not 1.26. I was just reading Goodwin 263 about this before I posted.

[Paul]

Hi,

Simply to add to the stew, Cunliffe construes [face=SPIonic]ti[/face] with [face=SPIonic]kako/n[/face].

Cordially,

Paul

[Bert]

Considering the multitude of opinions, I don't have to be embarrassed for stewing over this.
Thanks.