Textkit Logo

Pl. Ap. 32a5-8

Here's where you can discuss all things Ancient Greek. Use this board to ask questions about grammar, discuss learning strategies, get translation help and more!

Pl. Ap. 32a5-8

Postby NateD26 » Tue Sep 07, 2010 2:38 pm


ἀκούσατε δή μοι τὰ συμβεβηκότα, ἵνα εἰδῆτε ὅτι οὐδ᾽ ἂν ἑνὶ ὑπεικάθοιμι
παρὰ τὸ δίκαιον δείσας θάνατον, μὴ ὑπείκων δὲ ἀλλὰ κἂν ἀπολοίμην.

What does this participle stand for and how does it fit with the main clause?

Thanks.
Nate.
NateD26
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 787
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 10:14 am

Re: Pl. Ap. 32a5-8

Postby modus.irrealis » Wed Sep 08, 2010 12:49 am

To be honest, with the ἀλλὰ I don't think it makes sense as it stands -- the text is probably corrupt here (see the note here about the manuscripts, and if you search, you'll find various amendments, like

μὴ ὑπείκων δὲ ἅμα κἂν ἀπολοίμην

With this one, the δέ signals a new clause (inside the ὅτι-clause) and the participle goes with ἀπολοίμην, something like "know that ... but [that] at the same time in not yielding I would even perish."

If the ἀλλά is there, though, I don't see how to make sense of it.
modus.irrealis
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 1093
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2006 6:08 am
Location: Toronto

Re: Pl. Ap. 32a5-8

Postby NateD26 » Wed Sep 08, 2010 9:07 am

Thank you, modus. W.Tyler in his commentary chose the version of two ἅμα throwing the first at the participle:
and as soon as I did not yield, just so soon I should perish.

I wondered why we also have δὲ here and if it should be translated, but you explained it clearly.

Only thing I don't understand is why was the participle negated with μή?
Nate.
NateD26
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 787
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 10:14 am

Re: Pl. Ap. 32a5-8

Postby modus.irrealis » Wed Sep 08, 2010 12:59 pm

NateD26 wrote:Only thing I don't understand is why was the participle negated with μή?

Because of the general meaning of the participle -- οὐ would indicate some specific fact, but with the optative the whole sentence has the idea of "whenever" or "in any circumstance".
modus.irrealis
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 1093
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2006 6:08 am
Location: Toronto

Re: Pl. Ap. 32a5-8

Postby Imber Ranae » Thu Sep 09, 2010 1:31 am

Yep, μή is used with participles when the participle has conditional or general force (just as after εἰ).

I think οὐδ᾽ and μὴ...δὲ (= μηδέ) are correlative conjunctions.
Ex mala malo
bono malo uesci
quam ex bona malo
malo malo malo.
Imber Ranae
Textkit Member
 
Posts: 190
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2009 5:06 am

Re: Pl. Ap. 32a5-8

Postby modus.irrealis » Fri Sep 10, 2010 1:18 pm

Imber Ranae wrote:I think οὐδ᾽ and μὴ...δὲ (= μηδέ) are correlative conjunctions.

How would you understand the sentence? (It's just that I'm not clear on what you mean here.)

I took the οὐδ' ... ἑνί as being the emphatic form of οὐδείς.
modus.irrealis
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 1093
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2006 6:08 am
Location: Toronto

Re: Pl. Ap. 32a5-8

Postby Imber Ranae » Fri Sep 10, 2010 9:53 pm

modus.irrealis wrote:How would you understand the sentence? (It's just that I'm not clear on what you mean here.)

I took the οὐδ' ... ἑνί as being the emphatic form of οὐδείς.


Ah, I see now. I didn't know that οὐδ' ἑνί was simply an emphatic version of οὐδενί, without any conjunctive force in the word οὐδέ, but I looked it up and it appears you are correct.

I had figured it was closer to something like Latin nec cuiquam, but that's clearly not the case in other passages where οὐδ' ἑνί is used, e.g. Symposion 213d.
Ex mala malo
bono malo uesci
quam ex bona malo
malo malo malo.
Imber Ranae
Textkit Member
 
Posts: 190
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2009 5:06 am


Return to Learning Greek

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google Adsense [Bot], MSNbot Media, Yahoo [Bot] and 61 guests