[quote author=Paul link=board=2;threadid=312;start=0#2062 date=1059390163]<br />OK, I'll bite: what's wrong with translating the 'te...te' sequence as the familiar 'both...and'?<br /><br />When I first translated line 13 it never occurred to me to translate it any other way.<br />[/quote]<br /><br />Well, using 'both/and' probably will work for most people. To people who like to worry about grammar (i.e., me), two participles coordinated this way imply action at the same time, which is not what we have here.<br /><br /><br />
<br />The evident symmetry of 'participle te'...'participle te' seems to invite such a translation, e.g., 'both desiring to free his daughter and bringing boundless ransom'. <br />
<br /><br />It is also possible Bert [face=SPIonic]te[/face]
are misanalysing at the verse rather than the sentence level. Context:<br /><br />[face=SPIonic]<br />...<br />)Atrei/dhj. o(\ gar\ h)=lqe qoa\j e)pi\ nh=aj )Axaiw=n<br />luso/meno/j te qu/gatra, fe/rwn t' a)perei/si' a)/poina,<br />[/face]
<br /><br />Note that I've introduced some punctuation before the [face=SPIonic]fe/rwn[/face]
; this matches the caesura. This makes the future participle a purpose clause with the preceding line, "he came to the swift ships of the Achaeans to free his daughter, bringing countless ransoms."<br /><br />That might work better.