me/n - de/ in Iliad 18 - 20

[Bert]

ὑμῖν μὲν θεοὶ δοῖεν Ὀλύμπια δώματ' ἔχοντες
á¼￾κπέÏ￾σαι ΠÏ￾ιάμοιο πόλιν, á¼￾ὺ δ'οἴκαδ' ἱκέσθαι·
παῖδα δ'á¼￾μοὶ λῦσαί τε φίλην, Ï„á½± Ï„' ἄποινα δέχεσθαι
I don't know if the me/n - de/ pair is; (1) On the one hand may they grant to you the city of Priam to sack, on the other hand may you arrive home safely, or; (2) On the one hand may THEY grant TO YOU the city to sack and to arrive home safely and YOU return TO ME my daughter . .
The one possibility leaves the first DE/ clause without a finite verb which the second possibility solved by including it with the verb DOI=EN but then the second DE/ clause is left without a finite verb.
Pharr takes choice (2) and he says that the two infinitives in the second DE/ clause are used as imperatives. Does that mean that the sentence does not need a finite verb because the infinitives take its place?
It would seem natural (how would I know though) to take the following de/ to belong to me/n. If the intend was to take the second de/, the ambiguity could be avoided by replacing the first one with te.

[IreneY]

Hmmm

The second pair (this and that to you, this and that to me) seems to me to be the right one. I am afraid I got a bit confused about what you mean about no finitive verb etc. There's no need to repeat the verb since it is easy to understand what it is by context (DOIEN)

[perispomenon]

I went for the imperative option: the gods may grant the Achaeans to sack a city, but it seems strange to me to say 'may the gods grant you to free my daughter'. The Achaeans are free to decide for themselves to do that, I would think.

I translated it as 'may the gods grant you to sack the city (...), but free my daughter and accept these ransoms'.

I really didn't think too much about de/ though.

[annis]

I'm inclined to go with the pair ὑμῖν μέν... á¼￾ὺ δ’.

However, some editors read λύυσαιτε for λῦσαί τε. This leads to a pair of clauses with optatives, and the resulting parallelism might point more at your option (2).

[Bert]

Hmmm

I am afraid I got a bit confused about what you mean about no finitive verb etc.

It would not be fair if I am the only confused one so now I feel I have good company

There's no need to repeat the verb since it is easy to understand what it is by context (DOIEN)

What I meant is this; In the case of me/n de/ being "may he grant this AND may he grant that," δοῖεν has to refer to both clauses, but δοῖεν is part of the me/n clause. Would that not mean that it is part of the contrast? If I had to compose this in Greek I would have something like; θεοὶ δοῖν ἡμῖν μὲν á¼￾κπέÏ￾σαι ΠÏ￾ιάμοιο πόλιν, á¼￾ὺ δ' οἴκαδ' ἱκέσθαι.
In other words, may the gods give... would be outside the me/n de/ pair.
May the gods grant, on the one hand for you to sack the city and on the other hand for you to return home.
With δοῖεν coming after me/n I would be looking for another verb in the second clause.

but it seems strange to me to say 'may the gods grant you to free my daughter'. The Achaeans are free to decide for themselves to do that, I would think.

With that option, δοῖεν would be complemented by the infinitives (to sack and to arrive) but it would not belong to "freeing my daughter."
So the pair would be either " May they give this to you AND that to you," or it would be "May they give this and that to you, And you do this and that for me."

Part of my original question has not been addressed yet.

Pharr says that the two infinitives in the second DE/ clause are used as imperatives. Does that mean that the sentence does not need a finite verb because the infinitives take its place?

[annis]

With δοῖεν coming after me/n I would be looking for another verb in the second clause.

Ahh. While μέν often does follow words to which attention seems to be directed, it and δέ may refer rather to the entire clauses in which they appear (Smyth 2915).

Pharr says that the two infinitives in the second DE/ clause are used as imperatives. Does that mean that the sentence does not need a finite verb because the infinitives take its place?

Yes, but.

I'd say that it's often tough to make a firm distinction between clause and sentence in Homer. In comparing texts I find editors often differ among themselves on whether to us a comma, a period or a raised-dot. λῦσαι might just as well be taken to complement δοῖεν, too. Well, maybe that's a stretch, but I think it's not completely indefensible.

[IreneY]

Ah!! Now I see the light (took me a while).

I'm afraid I cannot add anything to what annis has already said

[Paul]

Interesting.

I've always read this passage according to Bert's 2nd choice. But my reason for this reading is not based chiefly on syntax or morphology. Rather, I detect a meaningful contrast in the analogy gods:heros::heros:"regular men". So it is quite natural for me to locate the μέν / δέ contrast along the lines of "as the gods give you, may you give me."

I construe the first δέ in á¼￾ὺ δ'οἴκαδ' ἱκέσθαι· as merely continuative.

-Paul

[cdm2003]

I detect a meaningful contrast in the analogy gods:heros::heros:"regular men". So it is quite natural for me to locate the μέν / δέ contrast along the lines of "as the gods give you, may you give me."

Could it even be a simpler contrast, as if Chryses is implying "I really hope you get what you want (μέν) and that I get what I want (δέ)?"

Chris

[Paul]

Could it even be a simpler contrast, as if Chryses is implying "I really hope you get what you want (μέν) and that I get what I want (δέ)?" Chris

Sure. That seems quite reasonable to me.
-pb