'te' line 13 of Iiliad

[megas_yiannakis]

Xairete ,

Im up to chapter 16 in pharr and am trying to translate Iliad, 11 - 16, however ive already hit some trouble...

line 13 is

λυσόμενόs τε θÏ￾γατÏ￾α φέÏ￾ων Ï„' απεÏ￾είσι' άποινα,

with what should i take the first 'te' in the verse?

any help would be apreciated...

Megas_yiannakis

[IreneY]

Hint: "τε" links to words of the same kind

[megas_yiannakis]

hmmm so is a rough translation:

desiring to free both his daughter, and great ransoms.

is the t' in >t' apereisi' apoina < a te or a ta?

because if it is a 'ta' then would a good translation be:

Desirind to free his daughter, and bringing those great transoms....

OR should i take 'te' with the next line to give:

"desiring to free his daughter, bringing both great ransoms and holding the wreaths of Apollo upon a golden sceptre..."

[spiphany]

is the t' in >t' apereisi' apoina < a te or a ta?

τε.
Since τε is an enclitic, it always comes after the word it modifies. So λυσόμενόs τε... and φέÏ￾ων Ï„'... are in parallel construction.

[megas_yiannakis]

ahhh thank you that makes much more sence...

i started with attic for a while before discovering pharr's book and the advantages it would give me by starting with homeric... i only got to about chapter 5 in my attic book so it wasnt much of a big change but if im not wrong... in attic 'te' comes before the words it connects that must have been the source of my confusion... or mayb the use of "kai... kai..." in modern greek...

oh well thanks for helping me with that

sas euharisto!

[Bert]

but if im not wrong... in attic 'te' comes before the words it connects that must have been the source of my confusion... or mayb the use of "kai... kai..." in modern greek...

oh well thanks for helping me with that

sas euharisto!

I seem to remember that I read somewhere that 'te' can come before the word to which it belongs but I have not run across it.

[megas_yiannakis]

mmm.. then definately i was thinking about modern greek. know in modern greek 'kai' comes infront of the word it connects with the 'kai... kai...' combination:

ΤÏ￾αγουδώ και Έλληνικα, και ξένα Ï„Ï￾αγοÏ￾δια.

-I sing both Greek, and Foreign songs.-

Another question about the iliad aswell... in line 20:

παίδα δ' εμοί λÏ￾σαί τε φίλην, τα Ï„' άποινα δέχεσθαι

With what should i take the 'emoi'? it doesnt seem to agree in form with any other noun in the sentence... and the only obvious logical connection i can make is one of context, taking it with 'paida' i.e 'my daughter'... but then wouldn't 'emoi' be in the accusative feminine?

[Bert]

My (gen.)daughter is a daughter to me.(dat.)

[Kasper]

Are you saying it's a dative of possession Bert? I thought it a simple dative, i.e. "release my/the child to me"

[megas_yiannakis]

how is εμοί dative at all in the first place?

if it was dative wouldnt it be εμωι (with the iota subscript?)... pharr doesnt give omicron + iota as a dative singular ending in the book... or have i looked wrong?

[megas_yiannakis]

wait dont mind me... i just looked it up as a form of 'εγώ' which i didnt think to look at as it hasn't been introduced to me yet in pharr... (i thought it was a form of 'έμός'... which is kind of annoying as there is no foot-note talking about it... oh well it makes sence now

thanks everyone!

[IreneY]

mega yannaki "kai" appears in the same position in ancient Greek too We just do not use "te" anymore (unless you take fixed expressions such as "πλίνθοι τε και κέÏ￾αμοι ατάκτως εÏ￾Ï￾ιμμένα/οι" [yes we've done away with the rocks and moved the "te" at some point in our history just don't ask me when] which do not count of course)

[Bert]

Are you saying it's a dative of possession Bert? I thought it a simple dative, i.e. "release my/the child to me"

That is what I meant but I guess there is a case to be made for a dative of advantage (or something like that.)
I like to see it belonging to παῖδα though. That puts the emphasis more solidly on his daughter rather than on him. "Release my daughter, my dear one...." rather than "Release my daughter to me, my dear one...."
In the first case he is doing the begging on behalf of his daughter but in the second case he'd be mentioning himself as beneficiary as well.

[Bert]

One wonders though, if to a (ancient) Greek, both elements are present.
It is one thing for us to discuss what is the better way for us to understand it but quite another what it meant to the author and the original audience.
Would the possesive element be stronger here and the dative of advantage element stronger if á¼￾μοί had occured later in the sentence, maybe after φίλην somewhere?