On page 257 of Thraymachus the sentence, "αὐτὸς τέταρτος ἦλθεν." is translated as, "he came with three others".
Shouldn't that sentence mean, "he came fourth"?
EDIT: Spelling
autos tetartos elthen
-
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 741
- Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2004 3:52 am
- Location: Melbourne, Australia
autos tetartos elthen
Last edited by Eureka on Sun Jul 25, 2004 1:47 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Textkit Enthusiast
- Posts: 603
- Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2003 11:42 pm
- Location: Cambridge
-
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 741
- Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2004 3:52 am
- Location: Melbourne, Australia
Some answers only rase more questions...
It doesn't appear to mean that at all. After all, the verb is singular, so it applies only to him. What it appears to mean literally is that; he arrived, so did at least three others, and three of the others arrived before him.
Is this one of the subtleties of the Aorist tense? i.e. That because it makes implied reference to four actions (all four people arriving), that those actions must have therefore occurred simultaneously?
If I wanted to say, "he came fourth" in Greek. How would I do it? (I'm thinking perhaps through the use of the pluperfect tense.)
It doesn't appear to mean that at all. After all, the verb is singular, so it applies only to him. What it appears to mean literally is that; he arrived, so did at least three others, and three of the others arrived before him.
Is this one of the subtleties of the Aorist tense? i.e. That because it makes implied reference to four actions (all four people arriving), that those actions must have therefore occurred simultaneously?
If I wanted to say, "he came fourth" in Greek. How would I do it? (I'm thinking perhaps through the use of the pluperfect tense.)
-
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 741
- Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2004 3:52 am
- Location: Melbourne, Australia
-
- Textkit Enthusiast
- Posts: 603
- Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2003 11:42 pm
- Location: Cambridge
hah, most true.
Due credit has to be given to the OLD - it is truly a marvellous work. At this rate Oxford only needs a good 800 years to write a decent book!
I have, however, spent a few months (and many more to come, I hope) on the Greek Lexicon Project - Cambridge's replacing of LSJ founded upon the original Greek, not a revision of LSJ.
As regards the idiom, I think you are getting too bound up in the temporal sense of the ordinal 'fourth'. 'coming fourth in time' is only one way of construing it; here it is based upon a system of counting the numbers of people involved in the group, i.e. 'he came as the fourth'. if you wanted to say 'he came fourth' in the sense of arrived after three others, you may well have to use a construction with pthanw, i.e. 'he arrived anticipated by three [others]' or perhaps use a verb with clear perfective meaning, such as aphikneomai for arrival. the aorist does carry the sense of being a finite marker of an event in the past in Grk, but with erchomai it has no specific local reference but instead refers to the whole journey from A to B, whereas a verb of arrival necessarily focuses on the point of reaching B, and thus carries fixed temporal reference.
~D
Due credit has to be given to the OLD - it is truly a marvellous work. At this rate Oxford only needs a good 800 years to write a decent book!
I have, however, spent a few months (and many more to come, I hope) on the Greek Lexicon Project - Cambridge's replacing of LSJ founded upon the original Greek, not a revision of LSJ.
As regards the idiom, I think you are getting too bound up in the temporal sense of the ordinal 'fourth'. 'coming fourth in time' is only one way of construing it; here it is based upon a system of counting the numbers of people involved in the group, i.e. 'he came as the fourth'. if you wanted to say 'he came fourth' in the sense of arrived after three others, you may well have to use a construction with pthanw, i.e. 'he arrived anticipated by three [others]' or perhaps use a verb with clear perfective meaning, such as aphikneomai for arrival. the aorist does carry the sense of being a finite marker of an event in the past in Grk, but with erchomai it has no specific local reference but instead refers to the whole journey from A to B, whereas a verb of arrival necessarily focuses on the point of reaching B, and thus carries fixed temporal reference.
~D
-
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 741
- Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2004 3:52 am
- Location: Melbourne, Australia