Aoidoi.org — another Homeric Hymn

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
annis
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 3399
Joined: Fri Jan 03, 2003 4:55 pm
Location: Madison, WI, USA
Contact:

Aoidoi.org — another Homeric Hymn

Post by annis »

Homeric Hymn Six, to Aphrodite, has received the usual treatment.
William S. Annis — http://www.aoidoi.org/http://www.scholiastae.org/
τίς πατέρ' αἰνήσει εἰ μὴ κακοδαίμονες υἱοί;

chad
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 757
Joined: Tue Jul 22, 2003 2:55 am

Post by chad »

hey will, thanks very much for this excellent doc!

just v. quickly, you took πε?ί (in line 6) as adverbial, but my 1st reading was in tmesis, i.e. πε?ιέννυμι; also you read ἑλικοβλέφα?ος (in line 19) as "quickly-glancing (?)", but I thought it was quite similar to the familiar homeric ἑλίκωψ, which Hesychius reads as "black-eyed" (for ref, see my notes to Iliad A 98 here: http://www.freewebs.com/mhninaeide/IliadANotes.pdf ).

thanks again, cheers, chad.

annis
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 3399
Joined: Fri Jan 03, 2003 4:55 pm
Location: Madison, WI, USA
Contact:

Post by annis »


William S. Annis — http://www.aoidoi.org/http://www.scholiastae.org/
τίς πατέρ' αἰνήσει εἰ μὴ κακοδαίμονες υἱοί;

IVSTINIANVS
Textkit Neophyte
Posts: 73
Joined: Sun Jun 12, 2005 2:07 am
Location: Somerville, MA (Boston Area)

Post by IVSTINIANVS »

I always thought that from a linguistic point of view, the notion of tmesis was merely an artificial construct invented during the hellenistic period and anachronistically applied back to the language of the Homeric period, during which the elements which later became prefixes were still adverbs and still just as naturally able to appear separately from the verb as attached ... At least, if I remember my Sihler, I think that's what he said :-).

chad
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 757
Joined: Tue Jul 22, 2003 2:55 am

Post by chad »

hey will,

yeah re tmesis i agree both readings work, i just mentioned my 1st reading in passing (if you wanted to add it as a note for your readers who study homer), nb that whole phrase is lifted from iliad 16.670 and 16.680, and lsj states that the verb there is πε?ιέννυμι, and so i doubt the tmesis reading is worse than the other reading (although both readings work because they both take the acc.)

i think the tmesis artificiality point you mention comes from the fact that tmesis isn't found in mycenean: see my notes to Iliad A 25: http://www.freewebs.com/mhninaeide/IliadANotes.pdf )

interesting about hesychius, what other readings have caught your attention as being accommodating?

thanks again for the doc, cheers, chad. :)

annis
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 3399
Joined: Fri Jan 03, 2003 4:55 pm
Location: Madison, WI, USA
Contact:

Post by annis »

IVSTINIANVS wrote:I always thought that from a linguistic point of view, the notion of tmesis was merely an artificial construct invented during the hellenistic period and anachronistically applied back to the language of the Homeric period,
Well, that's the question. That's the common opinion, but it might not be so simple. Chad's post addresses the Myc. data.
William S. Annis — http://www.aoidoi.org/http://www.scholiastae.org/
τίς πατέρ' αἰνήσει εἰ μὴ κακοδαίμονες υἱοί;

annis
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 3399
Joined: Fri Jan 03, 2003 4:55 pm
Location: Madison, WI, USA
Contact:

Post by annis »

chad wrote:i think the tmesis artificiality point you mention comes from the fact that tmesis isn't found in mycenean:
Exactly.
interesting about hesychius, what other readings have caught your attention as being accommodating?
No one thing, just a vague sense he can confirm whatever you want. :) That so many entries are without context causes me a little worry, too. But as I said, I've never made a close study of him.
William S. Annis — http://www.aoidoi.org/http://www.scholiastae.org/
τίς πατέρ' αἰνήσει εἰ μὴ κακοδαίμονες υἱοί;

IVSTINIANVS
Textkit Neophyte
Posts: 73
Joined: Sun Jun 12, 2005 2:07 am
Location: Somerville, MA (Boston Area)

Post by IVSTINIANVS »

chad wrote:i think the tmesis artificiality point you mention comes from the fact that tmesis isn't found in mycenean: see my notes to Iliad A 25: http://www.freewebs.com/mhninaeide/IliadANotes.pdf )
I thought it was much more than that -- for instance comparison with, e.g., Vedic Sanskrit.

chad
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 757
Joined: Tue Jul 22, 2003 2:55 am

Post by chad »

hi yeah but those aren't grk... the artificiality point will mentioned is that preverbs were attached to verbs in earlier grk (myc), but are sometimes separated in homer, cheers, chad.

annis
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 3399
Joined: Fri Jan 03, 2003 4:55 pm
Location: Madison, WI, USA
Contact:

Post by annis »

chad wrote:the artificiality point will mentioned is that preverbs were attached to verbs in earlier grk (myc), but are sometimes separated in homer,
Further questions: 1. Was the fixed preverb location in Myc. typical of all the Greek dialects, or did they each move toward that at different paces? 2. Was the Myc. chancery language typical of spoken Mycenaean (in this matter; pretty clearly it was not in general)?
William S. Annis — http://www.aoidoi.org/http://www.scholiastae.org/
τίς πατέρ' αἰνήσει εἰ μὴ κακοδαίμονες υἱοί;

chad
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 757
Joined: Tue Jul 22, 2003 2:55 am

Post by chad »

hey will, i don't know, cheers, chad. :)

Paul
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 708
Joined: Sun Jun 15, 2003 4:47 pm
Location: Maryland
Contact:

Post by Paul »

The best book I know on this interesting topic is Horrocks' "Space and Time in Homer: Prepositional and Adverbial Particles in the Greek Epic." Concerning the matter of this thread he argues:

1. In its use of particles Mycenaean differs very little from classical Greek. That is, the tablets exhibit no evidence of the so-called independent adverbial particle in "tmesis." Rather, particles are either "pre-positions" in construction with a NP, or they have become "pre-verbs" in construction with a VP.

2. There was much less dialectical diversity in the Mycenaean period than in the classical period. There were two basic dialects, East Greek (Mycenaean) and West Greek.

3. There is little evidence of West Greek features in Homer. Hence Homer can only inherit from Mycenaean.

4. Inherited features present in Homer but absent from the Mycenaean of the tablets must therefore have entered the Epic tradition at a time when they were current in East Greek, i.e., prior to the tablets.

Cordially,

Paul

chad
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 757
Joined: Tue Jul 22, 2003 2:55 am

Post by chad »

hi paul thanks for that :) can i ask, point 4 of your post, and further question 1 of will above, imply (to me) that there was a phase at some point prior to homer where preverbs were separated from verbs in grk, and moved towards a "fusion". how do we know this, if our earliest grk records (myc) don't show separation of preverb from verb? (i.e., why is it assumed that "tmesis" is a hangover from some more ancient stage of the language, which the epic bards somehow still had access to?).

this essay by duhoux on the myc verb is also interesting: i've extracted the relevant page (s6 in the article) on preverbs in myc:

http://www.freewebs.com/mhninaeide/Foot ... 20verb.pdf

cheers, chad. :)

Paul
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 708
Joined: Sun Jun 15, 2003 4:47 pm
Location: Maryland
Contact:

Post by Paul »

Hey Chad,

Yes, a quite reasonable question. Give me some time to dig further into the matter. BTW: Horrocks' book is a revision of his 1978 Ph.D. thesis at Cambridge.

Thanks for the Duhoux link. Yet another opportunity, after Chantraine and Humbert, to dust off my always slightly dusty French. :)

Cordially,

Paul

annis
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 3399
Joined: Fri Jan 03, 2003 4:55 pm
Location: Madison, WI, USA
Contact:

Post by annis »

chad wrote:(i.e., why is it assumed that "tmesis" is a hangover from some more ancient stage of the language, which the epic bards somehow still had access to?).
We have to contend with the Vedic comparative evidence, which is somewhat similar to Greek. Tmesis is fairly common in verse, rare but not unheard of Vedic prose. In both languages the preverbs (several directly cognate) are separated from the verb by the past tense augment, and are further freely usable as prepositions or adverbs.

It seems our choices are either that tmesis reflects an early stage of the language which Indic and Hellenic poetic traditions kept as an archaism, or that tmesis is an ancient innovation of poetic syntax preserved in both verse traditions. Both seem possible to me, and the Myc. evidence doesn't seem old enough to resolve the question.

I wonder how a Homeric audience responded to these.
William S. Annis — http://www.aoidoi.org/http://www.scholiastae.org/
τίς πατέρ' αἰνήσει εἰ μὴ κακοδαίμονες υἱοί;

annis
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 3399
Joined: Fri Jan 03, 2003 4:55 pm
Location: Madison, WI, USA
Contact:

Post by annis »

Paul wrote:The best book I know on this interesting topic is Horrocks' "Space and Time in Homer: Prepositional and Adverbial Particles in the Greek Epic." Concerning the matter of this thread he argues:

...

2. There was much less dialectical diversity in the Mycenaean period than in the classical period. There were two basic dialects, East Greek (Mycenaean) and West Greek.
How on earth does he know that?! I'll have to track down a copy of this myself. Oddly, it seems easier to come by than his more recent book.
William S. Annis — http://www.aoidoi.org/http://www.scholiastae.org/
τίς πατέρ' αἰνήσει εἰ μὴ κακοδαίμονες υἱοί;

annis
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 3399
Joined: Fri Jan 03, 2003 4:55 pm
Location: Madison, WI, USA
Contact:

Post by annis »

Oy. I should always consult Fortston before commenting in these discussions. (Sections 8.9, 8.10).

The intrusion of a non-clitic word between preverb and verb is attested in Old Avestan, Old Hittite, Old Irish, Old Latin, in addition to Vedic and Homeric. Gothic (and Old Irish) quite frequently admit clitics between preverb and verb.

Surely in Homer tmesis is an archaism.
William S. Annis — http://www.aoidoi.org/http://www.scholiastae.org/
τίς πατέρ' αἰνήσει εἰ μὴ κακοδαίμονες υἱοί;

chad
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 757
Joined: Tue Jul 22, 2003 2:55 am

Post by chad »

hey will, thanks for that :) your posts, along with paul's, wrap it up i think (but it'd be interesting, from a curiosity standpoint only, to know how the grk epic bards knew about this archaism, i.e. from earlier grk, or from one of the other non-grk IE traditions you mention above... interesting implications in either case, although the answer to this is probably unrecoverable, i'm not sure), cheers, chad. :)

Post Reply