Textkit Logo

Pharr dissyllabic enclitic and accenting

Are you reading Homeric Greek or studying Homeric Greek with Pharr's Homeric Greek - A Book For Beginners? Here's where you can meet other Homeric Greek learners. Use this board for all things Homeric Greek.

Pharr dissyllabic enclitic and accenting

Postby perispomenon » Sat Sep 15, 2007 7:08 pm

User avatar
perispomenon
Textkit Fan
 
Posts: 256
Joined: Sat May 20, 2006 5:19 pm
Location: Mijdrecht

Postby Bert » Sun Sep 16, 2007 1:16 am

I think you caught some mistakes in Pharr.
It looks like he treats ouk as an enclitic.
(Accenting is not my strong point though.
Bert
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 1890
Joined: Sat May 31, 2003 2:28 am
Location: Arthur Ontario Canada

Postby jk0592 » Sun Sep 16, 2007 2:21 am

jk0592
Textkit Member
 
Posts: 137
Joined: Sun Oct 08, 2006 3:20 am
Location: Montreal, Canada

Postby perispomenon » Sun Sep 16, 2007 7:40 am

User avatar
perispomenon
Textkit Fan
 
Posts: 256
Joined: Sat May 20, 2006 5:19 pm
Location: Mijdrecht

Postby Bert » Sun Sep 16, 2007 12:17 pm

Bert
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 1890
Joined: Sat May 31, 2003 2:28 am
Location: Arthur Ontario Canada

Postby Bert » Sun Sep 16, 2007 12:57 pm

Bert
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 1890
Joined: Sat May 31, 2003 2:28 am
Location: Arthur Ontario Canada

Postby perispomenon » Sun Sep 16, 2007 1:09 pm

User avatar
perispomenon
Textkit Fan
 
Posts: 256
Joined: Sat May 20, 2006 5:19 pm
Location: Mijdrecht

Postby jk0592 » Sun Sep 16, 2007 2:58 pm

jk0592
Textkit Member
 
Posts: 137
Joined: Sun Oct 08, 2006 3:20 am
Location: Montreal, Canada

Postby perispomenon » Sun Sep 16, 2007 5:40 pm

I am inclined to agree. Although, typo's? Oversights more likely.
User avatar
perispomenon
Textkit Fan
 
Posts: 256
Joined: Sat May 20, 2006 5:19 pm
Location: Mijdrecht

Postby jk0592 » Mon Sep 17, 2007 5:03 pm

I think it is easy for both a printer and the author reviewing preprints, to miss accents in books such as these.
This would be compounded when combined with breathing.

I am inclined to think typo...
jk0592
Textkit Member
 
Posts: 137
Joined: Sun Oct 08, 2006 3:20 am
Location: Montreal, Canada

Postby edonnelly » Mon Sep 17, 2007 6:02 pm

Well, either way it seems curious that, if it is an error, it could go unnoticed and uncorrected for 65 years (the same sentence appears in both the 1920 and 1985/revised editions).
The lists:
G'Oogle and the Internet Pharrchive - 1100 or so free Latin and Greek books.
DownLOEBables - Free books from the Loeb Classical Library
User avatar
edonnelly
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 959
Joined: Sun Jan 16, 2005 2:47 am
Location: Music City, USA

Postby perispomenon » Mon Sep 17, 2007 7:26 pm

edonnelly wrote:Well, either way it seems curious that, if it is an error, it could go unnoticed and uncorrected for 65 years (the same sentence appears in both the 1920 and 1985/revised editions).


Yup, you are right. That's why I was/am inclined to think that it was me, missing some obvious rule.
User avatar
perispomenon
Textkit Fan
 
Posts: 256
Joined: Sat May 20, 2006 5:19 pm
Location: Mijdrecht

Postby Bert » Mon Sep 17, 2007 11:04 pm

Especially considering that you had no problem googling many other instances.
Bert
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 1890
Joined: Sat May 31, 2003 2:28 am
Location: Arthur Ontario Canada

Postby jk0592 » Mon Sep 17, 2007 11:28 pm

I can imagine Pharr giving his classes with his book, giving errata notices to students, and may even have challenged students to find errors.

The errors, such as those you pointed out, may not easily come to notice since they occur in exercises not related to accenting rules. The emphasis of both paragraphs is to work with -mi verbs.

I am just trying to excuse Pharr; I am sure he did his very best. When I was a student, we did have books with typos...

Maybe we should hunt for typos/errors and set up a Pharr errata for all textkit users.
jk0592
Textkit Member
 
Posts: 137
Joined: Sun Oct 08, 2006 3:20 am
Location: Montreal, Canada

Postby Arvid » Tue Sep 18, 2007 12:45 am

edonnelly wrote:Well, either way it seems curious that, if it is an error, it could go unnoticed and uncorrected for 65 years (the same sentence appears in both the 1920 and 1985/revised editions).


All I remember about the 1985 revised edition, from thumbing through it in bookstores (a long time ago) was that its main concern seemed to be eliminating most of Pharr's historical notes, and not correcting any errors or typos. So you could say they've stood for 87 years, instead of 65. Does the statute of limitations now make them correct?
phpbb
Arvid
Textkit Member
 
Posts: 163
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2007 8:06 am
Location: Seattle WA

Postby edonnelly » Tue Sep 18, 2007 2:34 am

Arvid wrote:All I remember about the 1985 revised edition, from thumbing through it in bookstores (a long time ago) was that its main concern seemed to be eliminating most of Pharr's historical notes, and not correcting any errors or typos.


You could tell by thumbing through it in a bookstore that they hadn't corrected any errors or typos?
The lists:
G'Oogle and the Internet Pharrchive - 1100 or so free Latin and Greek books.
DownLOEBables - Free books from the Loeb Classical Library
User avatar
edonnelly
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 959
Joined: Sun Jan 16, 2005 2:47 am
Location: Music City, USA


Return to Homeric Greek and Pharr's Homeric Greek - A Book For Beginners

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Lucretius2327 and 13 guests