accident on the mountain: aorist imperative

[daivid]

This is a practice for the aorist imperative so 90% of the verbs are in that form.
Any corrections would be very welcome

πρῶτος φίλος - «ἐγείραι.»
δεύτερος φίλος -«λίπε με.»
πρῶτος φίλος - «ἐγείραι. ἀναβῶμεν τὸ ὀρός.»
δεύτερος φίλος - «ἐλέησόν με.»
πρῶτος φίλος - «οὐδαμῶς.»
δι' ὀλίγου
δεύτερος φίλος -«παῦσαι. ἔασόν με ἡσυχάζειν.»
πρῶτος φίλος - «ἀνάβηθι τοῦτον τὸν κολωνόν καὶ ἔπειτα ἡσύχασον»
δι' ὀλίγου
πρῶτος φίλος - «χαλεπὸν ἐστι νῦν. μη πέσῃς»
δεύτερος φίλος -«αααααα! σῶσόν με!»
πρῶτος φίλος - «ἆρα δύνασαι στῆναι»
δεύτερος φίλος -«ουχ! εὑρὲ ὠφέλειαν»
δι' ὀλίγου
πρῶτος φίλος - «ὁ φίλος μου πέπτωκεν. βοηθήσατε!»
ἡγεμὼν τῶν φυλάκων - «φύλακες! ἔλθετε!»
ἐν τούτῳ
λύκος - «ὄσφρησαι»
υἱὸς λύκου - «ὀσφραίνομαι ἀνθρώπου»
λύκος - «ὀσφραίνομαι ἀνθρώπου τετρωμένου. ὀσφραίνομαι δείπνου.»
δι' ὀλίγου
λύκος - «βλέψον τὸν ἄνθρωπον»
υἱὸς λύκου - «πάτερ, ἄκουσον.»
λύκος - «ἀκούω ἀνθρώπου φωνήν. ἀπόστρεψαι!»
δεύτερος φίλος -«βοήθησόν μοι!»
ἡγεμὼν τῶν φυλάκων - «ἡσύχασον. δι' ὀλίγου ἔσει πάλιν εν τῷ ἄστει.»
πρῶτος φίλος - «συγγνώμην σχές»
δεύτερος φίλος -«ἐπεὶ ἄν πάλιν ἀναβαίνῃς, λίπε με.»
πρῶτος φίλος - «λειψω»

[mwh]

Just glancing through, and focussing mainly on the verb forms, not on usage:
πρῶτος
ἔγειραι
παῦσον should be middle, παῦσαι
ἡσύχασον
ἆρα δύνασαι
ὁ φίλος μου
βοηθήσατε
τῶν φυλάκων
(ἀπό)στρεψαι (middle) or (ἀπο)στράφθητι (Active impera. would be στρέψον, but it's transitive)
βοήθησόν μοι
ἡσύχασον
σχές for ἔχε if you want aorist
What's ἕπειν? You mean ἐάν or ἐπάν (ἐπεὶ ἄν)?

Hope this helps.

[daivid]

Just glancing through, and focussing mainly on the verb forms, not on usage:
<snip>
Hope this helps.

Yes it does help lots. Thank you for taking the time to go thru it all.

σχές for ἔχε if you want aorist.

I had wanted to use aorist but I have only seen ἔχε when sorry is intended.
Aorist does seem more logical. I assume there is some shade of meaning conveyed by
the two aspects?

What's ἕπειν? You mean ἐάν or ἐπάν (ἐπεὶ ἄν)?
.

I had intended ἐπεὶ. I'm not sure where the came from.
However ἐπεὶ ἄν seems to fit better.

[mwh]

You're right, εχε is much more idiomatic.

And yes, you need αν with that subjunctive.

[Σαῦλος]

This looks like a great way to practice the aorist. Could you post a revised version and translate it. There are bits I'm not getting.

[Qimmik]

Should ἀκούσω ἀνθρώπου φόνους be ἀκούω ἀνθρώπου φωνήν?

φόνος is "killing" or "murder."

ὀσφραίνομαι takes the genitive:

http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.04.0057%3Aentry%3Do%29sfrai%2Fnomai

Smyth: http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.04.0007%3Asmythp%3D1361

Suggestion: for τραυματισθέντα, you might want to try τετρωμένου.

The aorist would mean something like: "I smell that a man was wounded." Using the perfect (of the basic verb τιτρώσκω) would mean "I smell a man who is in the state of having been wounded," "I smell a wounded man".

υἱὸς λύκου - «ὀσφραίνομαι ἀνθρώπου»
λύκος - «ὀσφραίνομαι ἀνθρώπου τετρωμένου. ὀσφραίνομαι δείπνου.»

[daivid]

This looks like a great way to practice the aorist. Could you post a revised version and translate it. There are bits I'm not getting.

When people suggest corrections I edit them in to the original posting. ( I have already edited in mwh's suggestions. It may take a day to go thru Qimmik's)
If there are bits that you don't get it is most likely to be because I have made a mistake. If it is because I have used a less common form then I think notes might be most useful.

If you could post the bits you find difficult, that would be very useful.

[daivid]

Should ἀκούσω ἀνθρώπου φόνους be ἀκούω ἀνθρώπου φωνήν?

φόνος is "killing" or "murder."

That is seriously embarasing.

ὀσφραίνομαι takes the genitive:

http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.04.0057%3Aentry%3Do%29sfrai%2Fnomai

Smyth: http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.04.0007%3Asmythp%3D1361

Thanks very much for that.

Suggestion: for τραυματισθέντα, you might want to try τετρωμένου.

The aorist would mean something like: "I smell that a man was wounded." Using the perfect (of the basic verb τιτρώσκω) would mean "I smell a man who is in the state of having been wounded," "I smell a wounded man".

υἱὸς λύκου - «ὀσφραίνομαι ἀνθρώπου»
λύκος - «ὀσφραίνομαι ἀνθρώπου τετρωμένου. ὀσφραίνομαι δείπνου.»

That is very interesting. Usually we in English use the perfect where in Anc Greek
they don't. Thanks for showing me it can be the other way round.

Why and not τραυματίζω?

[Markos]

David's desire to come up with innovative drills combined with Qimmik's and Michael's informed constructive criticism produces a very helpful combination for those of us seeking new resources to learn Greek. Thanks to all!

«αααααα! σῶσον με!»

1. I think you might want σῶσόν με.
2. The αααααα! is a clever way to help remind one what σῶσον means without (really) leaving the target language.

[daivid]

David's desire to come up with innovative drills combined with Qimmik's and Michael's informed constructive criticism produces a very helpful combination for those of us seeking new resources to learn Greek. Thanks to all!

Well as I'm always complaining about the resources that do exist I can hardly not have a go myself even if I'm not really up to the job. However, it is due first of all to Qimmik's and Michael's corrections that we might end up with something usable. So to them is owed the biggest thanks.

«αααααα! σῶσον με!»

1. I think you might want σῶσόν με.

I don't understand the difference the second accent makes. Perseus just drops it when I try checking there.

[Qimmik]

σῶσόν με -- see Smyth 183c, which by some miracle happens to give precisely this example!

http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.04.0007%3Asmythp%3D183

[Paul Derouda]

I don't understand the accentuation of egeirai, or I don't understand what Perseus says about it. Shouldn't it be recessive like mwh says, ἔγειραι? But Perseus word study tool proposes only the alternatives ἐγείραι and ἐγεῖραι. Even if the accent were on the second syllable, how could it be ἐγείραι, since -αι should be counted short and in that case a circumflex on the long penult is obligatory?

[daivid]

σῶσόν με -- see Smyth 183c, which by some miracle happens to give precisely this example!

http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.04.0007%3Asmythp%3D183

So even though an enclitic can never have stress of its own it can in certain circumstances bring one into existence on the syllable before. I had been wondering why my spell checker was giving me the option of double accents. Now I know. Thank you very much.

[mwh]

Yes must be ἔγειραι recessive for the middle imperative, as Paul D. says. ἐγεῖραι is active inf., ἐγείραι would be act. opt. (All aor., of course.)

You gotta love Greek accents.

σῶσόν με, cf. βοήθησόν μοι.

[Qimmik]

Paul, never trust the Perseus word study tool--from what I've seen, it's not reliable.

But ἐγείραι is 3rd person aorist active optative: -αι(ς) and -οι(ς) are treated as long in optatives.

Smyth 169: http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.04.0007%3Asmythp%3D169

Smyth 427:

http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.04.0007%3Asmythp%3D427

ἐγεῖραι - first aorist active infinitive -- accent is on the penult, not recessive.

Smyth 425a: http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.04.0007%3Asmythp%3D425

Don't let me fool you. I didn't know about the first aorist active infinitive--I had to look it up.

ἔγειραι, ἐγείραι and ἐγεῖραι illustrate how accent was a distinctive feature in ancient Greek. (Some caution is warranted, because the diacritical accent marks were added to ancient Greek texts at a time when the accents were probably no longer a feature of the spoken language.)

[Qimmik]

Why not τραυματίζω?

τραυματίζω is well-attested in Herodotus and Thucydides, but τιτρώσκω is the more basic verb. You could use τετραυματισμένου here.

[Paul Derouda]

Here's what the Perseus word study tool gave for "egeirai". I have used this tool only rarely, but until now I hadn't spotted any clear mistakes. Both imperative accentuations are wrong and the correct form isn't even included! One of the proposed optative and aorist infinitive forms are also wrong. Henceforth I'll know not to trust Perseus on accents.

ἐγεῖραι verb aor inf act
ἐγεῖραι verb 3rd sg aor opt act <--- WRONG!
ἐγεῖραι verb 2nd sg aor imperat mid <--- WRONG!
ἐγείραι verb 3rd sg aor opt act
ἐγείραι verb aor inf act <--- WRONG!
ἐγείραι verb 2nd sg aor imperat mid <--- WRONG!

ἔγειραι, ἐγείραι and ἐγεῖραι - the sheer beauty of accentuation!

[Paul Derouda]

A couple of other minor accent problems, all with enclitic words:
ἐλέησόν με
ἔασόν με
χαλεπόν ἐστι

Bonus question: why λίπε με and not λίπέ με?

[Qimmik]

why λίπε με and not λίπέ με?

Smyth183d states the rule:

http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.04.0007%3Asmythp%3D183

Why is this the rule? I have no idea.

Five 2d aor. act. 2d pers. sing. imperatives are oxytone: εἰπέ, ἐλθέ, εὑρέ, ἰδέ and λαβέ. λίπε isn't one of them.

http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.04.0007%3Asmythp%3D424

[mwh]

Successive rising tones (i.e. adjacent acute accents) would be counter to how ancient greek prosody works.

For the really serious, two wonderful books on accentuation: H.W. Chandler's 19th-century classic Practical Intro ..., wholly untheorized and with a must-read preface, and Philomen Probert's 21st-century linguistically informed Anc.Gk.Accentuatn.
Oh and in additn to Probert's big book there's her New Short Guide ... too, a better starting point

[Paul Derouda]

I meant the bonus question for Daivid, but well...

In theory, Greek words can be divided into morae, short vowels constituting one mora and long vowels and diphthongs two. Whatever the true nature of the accent, it's convenient to assume that it is really a single mora that carries the accent and not the whole syllable; the mora with the accent has a rise in tone and the next mora has always a fall in tone - two consecutive morae cannot have the accent, because the tone must always drop to baselevel in between.

If a syllable is long (i.e., has two morae) and has the accent, the accent can be either on the first mora or the second. If it's on the first mora, it's a circumflex (e.g. ἐγεῖραι egEerai, the majuscule E representing a rise in tone on the first mora of ει, the following minuscule e a fall in tone on the second mora of ει); if it's on the second mora, the syllable is an acute (ἐγείραι egeErai). If the syllable is short, it has only one mora, so the accent can only be acute (ἔγειραι Egeerai).

λίπέ με is impossible, because it would require a rise in tone in two consecutive morae (*lIpE me). With a circumflex, the tone falls in the second mora of the syllable, so the next syllable can be acute (σῶσόν με sOosOn me).

(I'm aware of one exception to this rule: with interrogative pronouns, there can be an acute on two succesive morae: τίς τ᾽ ἄρ σφωε θεῶν ἔριδι ξυνέηκε μάχεσθαι; (Il. 1. 8.))

[daivid]

I meant the bonus question for Daivid, but well...

I would have been able to answer, having just read the rule, but with your very full explanation of the reason behind it I am ulikely to forget in in the future. Thanks.