Callimachus, the Bath of Pallas

Here you can discuss all things Ancient Greek. Use this board to ask questions about grammar, discuss learning strategies, get help with a difficult passage of Greek, and more.
Post Reply
vir litterarum
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 722
Joined: Sat Sep 24, 2005 4:04 am
Location: Chicago, IL

Callimachus, the Bath of Pallas

Post by vir litterarum »

τὸν δὲ χολωσαμένα περ ὅμως προσέφασεν Ἀθάνα
'τίς σε, τὸν ὀφθαλμὼς οὐκέτ᾽ ἀποισόμενον,
ὦ Εὐηρείδα, χαλεπὰν ὁδὸν ἄγαγε δαίμων;᾽

This τὸν seems extraneous to me. I took it in apposition to σε, i.e. What god led you, that one no longer about to carry away his eyes, son of Eueres, over this grievous road?" Doe anyone have any other ideas?

NateD26
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 789
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 10:14 am
Contact:

Re: Callimachus, the Bath of Pallas

Post by NateD26 »

I'm not sure, and I hope others will correct me on that, but (ἀπο-)φέρω usually has the meaning
in the medial of carry off for oneself.

Maybe it's a definite participle with adv. and DO inside, * pretty much the way you've translated it * (edited):

"What god led you over this grievous road, son of Eueres, you who will no longer be able to carry off your own eyes?"

Smyth says in 2044 that a fut. part. with the article denotes the likelihood or the ability of an action to happen.
Here it seems that Athena cursed him with blindness, so it probably denotes a lack of ability.
Nate.

modus.irrealis
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 1093
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2006 6:08 am
Location: Toronto

Re: Callimachus, the Bath of Pallas

Post by modus.irrealis »

I agree about the τὸν, it just makes the participle equivalent to a relative clause instead of it being adverbial.

vir litterarum
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 722
Joined: Sat Sep 24, 2005 4:04 am
Location: Chicago, IL

Re: Callimachus, the Bath of Pallas

Post by vir litterarum »

Smyth says in 2044 that a fut. part. with the article denotes the likelihood or the ability of an action to happen.
Here it seems that Athena cursed him with blindness, so it probably denotes a lack of ability.
Thanks for the reference to Smyth. However, I don't understand how the article adds a sense of likelihood or lack of ability to the future participle.

NateD26
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 789
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 10:14 am
Contact:

Re: Callimachus, the Bath of Pallas

Post by NateD26 »

I really have no idea why the definite future participle would denote likelihood or ability
[I used 'lack of' for the οὐκέτι here]. In parenthesis, Smyth says it is akin to μέλλων + inf,
though he does not list "able to" as possible meaning of μέλλω in 1959.

I hope others will explain the meaning and use of fut. part. here.
Nate.

modus.irrealis
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 1093
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2006 6:08 am
Location: Toronto

Re: Callimachus, the Bath of Pallas

Post by modus.irrealis »

I don't think Smyth means that with the article it has to mean the person likely or able to -- he himself doesn't translate that way in one of his example. I think here the participle just refers to the future and/or Athena's intention. I think the "you who shall no longer" might be closer in English just because (at least for me) "shall" makes it seem more like Athena is intending it.

Without the article the sense would be "what god led you in order for you to no longer..." so the participle would represent the purpose of the god, but I don't think that's the case. I think Athena is just saying that she's going to blind him, like Nathan said.

Post Reply