Textkit Logo

Pl. Ap. 34c6-7

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. 34c6-7

Postby NateD26 » Thu Oct 14, 2010 10:15 am


τάχ᾽ ἂν οὖν τις ταῦτα ἐννοήσας αὐθαδέστερον ἂν πρός με σχοίη
καὶ ὀργισθεὶς αὐτοῖς τούτοις θεῖτο ἂν μετ᾽ ὀργῆς τὴν ψῆφον.


Why was ἄν repeated so many times? Wouldn't it have been understood that the postpositive ἄν after τάχα goes with
σχοίη & θεῖτο? Or was it done perhaps to prevent its association with the aorist participles (contary-to-fact, which wouldn't have made
sense in this context)?
Nate.
NateD26
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 789
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 10:14 am

Re: Pl. Ap. 34c6-7

Postby modus.irrealis » Fri Oct 15, 2010 1:28 pm

I think the third one is not surprising as it seems relatively common to have ἄν repeated after a conjunction like καί, e.g. from Laws ἐν ὁπόσαις μὲν γὰρ οἱ ἀμείνονες νικῶσιν τὸ πλῆθος καὶ τοὺς χείρους, ὀρθῶς ἂν αὕτη κρείττων τε ἑαυτῆς λέγοιθ’ ἡ πόλις, ἐπαινοῖτό τε ἂν δικαιότατα τῇ τοιαύτῃ νίκῃ. But like you say, it's not necessary.

For the second one, after thinking about it, I think the likeliest thing is that it does go with the participle but represents the aorist optative, so it would be equivalent to τάχ' ἂν οὖν τις ταῦτα ἐννοήσαι καὶ ...

I'd compare it to things like ὑμεῖς δ’ ἴσως τάχ’ ἂν ἀχθόμενοι, ὥσπερ οἱ νυστάζοντες ἐγειρόμενοι, κρούσαντες ἄν με, πειθόμενοι Ἀνύτῳ, ῥᾳδίως ἂν ἀποκτείναιτε (Apology 31a)

But then I can find things like τάχ’ οὖν ἂν ὑπὸ φιλοτιμίας ἐπίσχοι ἡμῖν ἂν τοῦ γράφειν (Phaedrus 257c) where it's just repeated. I know that sometimes it's repeated if there's a large break between the original ἄν and the verb, but I don't know if that applies in this case, but maybe there's some subtle emphasis that these repeated ἄν reflect?
modus.irrealis
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 1093
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2006 6:08 am
Location: Toronto

Re: Pl. Ap. 34c6-7

Postby NateD26 » Fri Oct 15, 2010 4:48 pm

modus.irrealis wrote:I think the third one is not surprising as it seems relatively common to have ἄν repeated after a conjunction like καί, e.g. from Laws ἐν ὁπόσαις μὲν γὰρ οἱ ἀμείνονες νικῶσιν τὸ πλῆθος καὶ τοὺς χείρους, ὀρθῶς ἂν αὕτη κρείττων τε ἑαυτῆς λέγοιθ’ ἡ πόλις, ἐπαινοῖτό τε ἂν δικαιότατα τῇ τοιαύτῃ νίκῃ. But like you say, it's not necessary.

Thanks, modus. Does ἐν ὁπόσαις here mean "in the number of ways in which the better..."? The translation on Perseus confused me.

modus.irrealis wrote:For the second one, after thinking about it, I think the likeliest thing is that it does go with the participle but represents the aorist optative, so it would be equivalent to τάχ' ἂν οὖν τις ταῦτα ἐννοήσαι καὶ ...

I'd compare it to things like ὑμεῖς δ’ ἴσως τάχ’ ἂν ἀχθόμενοι, ὥσπερ οἱ νυστάζοντες ἐγειρόμενοι, κρούσαντες ἄν με, πειθόμενοι Ἀνύτῳ, ῥᾳδίως ἂν ἀποκτείναιτε (Apology 31a)

Thanks. That makes much sense. But would you agree that ὀργισθεὶς is then a regular circumstantial participle, having been angered by these very
arguments,
as the remaining ἄν goes with θεῖτο?

modus.irrealis wrote:But then I can find things like τάχ’ οὖν ἂν ὑπὸ φιλοτιμίας ἐπίσχοι ἡμῖν ἂν τοῦ γράφειν (Phaedrus 257c) where it's just repeated. I know that sometimes it's repeated if there's a large break between the original ἄν and the verb, but I don't know if that applies in this case, but maybe there's some subtle emphasis that these repeated ἄν reflect?

Smyth does note both options (break for subordinate clause, etc, & for emphasis) in 1765 (although I didn't understand
his translation for X.A.4.6.13 in subsection a, mainly why he translated χρῆσθαι as to find). Is the emphasis related
perhaps to αὐθαδέστερον?
Nate.
NateD26
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 789
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 10:14 am

Re: Pl. Ap. 34c6-7

Postby modus.irrealis » Fri Oct 15, 2010 5:55 pm

NateD26 wrote:Thanks, modus. Does ἐν ὁπόσαις here mean "in the number of ways in which the better..."? The translation on Perseus confused me.

There's an implicit πόλεσι, "in all cities where..."

modus.irrealis"Thanks. That makes much sense. But would you agree that ὀργισθεὶς is then a regular circumstantial participle, having been angered by these very arguments, as the remaining ἄν goes with θεῖτο?[/quote]
Yes. But then is there some difference the ἄν is supposed to indicate? It all seems very subtle to me.

[quote="modus.irrealis wrote:
Smyth does note both options (break for subordinate clause, etc, & for emphasis) in 1765 (although I didn't understand
his translation for X.A.4.6.13 in subsection a, mainly why he translated χρῆσθαι as to find). Is the emphasis related
perhaps to αὐθαδέστερον?

Thanks for the reference. αὐθαδέστερον is natural for emphasis, so I'd say that's the best explanation. (I think that χρῆσθαι is difficult to translate -- I'd guess the basic idea in the Greek is "we would experience/make use of the mountain as having fewer defenders" which at least implies "find that it has fewer defenders" but is a bit stronger.)
modus.irrealis
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 1093
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2006 6:08 am
Location: Toronto


Return to Learning Greek

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: bedwere, Bing [Bot] and 71 guests

cron