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?
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
but we mean something closer to
"And you yourself threaten to take away my prize from me
(to my disadvantage) ..."