Pharr para 107 line2

Are you reading Homeric Greek? Whether you are a total beginner or an advanced Homerist, here you can meet kindred spirits. Besides Homer, use this board for all things early Greek poetry.
Post Reply
Bert
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 1890
Joined: Sat May 31, 2003 2:28 am
Location: Arthur Ontario Canada

Pharr para 107 line2

Post by Bert » Sun Aug 03, 2003 11:03 pm

My question is concerning the subject of [size=150]δηθύνει in <br />[size=150])αγαμέμνων οὐ κιχήσεται γεροντα παρὰ κοίλῃσι νηυσίν, οὐ γὰρ δηθύνει ὲν στρατῷ )αχαιῶν <br />Agamemnon will not overtake the old man by the hollow(empty?) ships, for he did not loiter in the camp of the Achaeans.<br />If I take Agamemnon as the subject of both overtake and loiter, the sentence does not make sense. It would follow logically that he did not overtake him if he did loiter.<br />In the case of dependent clauses starting with [size=150]ἵνα or [size=150]ὅτι the subject is different from the one in the main sentence. Is this the case here? Does [size=150]γάρ also introduce a dependent clause? Then the old man would be the subject of loiter, and the sentence makes good sense.<br />Thanks in advance.

User avatar
Paul
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 700
Joined: Sun Jun 15, 2003 4:47 pm
Location: New York
Contact:

Re:Pharr para 107 line2

Post by Paul » Mon Aug 04, 2003 3:52 am

There is in the meaning of the sentence a kind of subordination of ideas: it is because the old man doesn't tarry that he is not overtaken by Agamemnon.<br />The second idea (not tarrying) explains the first idea (not overtaken). Such subordination suggests that we are in the realm of the complex sentence. So from a semantic perspective it does indeed seem that [size=150]γάρ is introducing a dependent clause.<br /><br />But from a formal perspective, [size=150]γάρ is a particle that can function as a causal, coordinating conjunction; what Smyth calls " Causal [size=150]γάρ ". Coordination by means of such a conjunction places us in the realm of the compound sentence. In compound sentences there is no subordinate (dependent) clause.<br /><br />So, "Does [size=150]γάρ also introduce a dependent clause?" I guess my answer is it depends on the perspective. Mind you, I am not trying to be clever. I really find this problematic. The ideas of the sentence so readily conform to a kind of subordination which makes the second clause dependent. But [size=150]γάρ is supposed to be a coordinating conjunction....<br /><br />I'd very much like to know what others have to say.<br /><br />Cordially,<br /><br />Paul<br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />

User avatar
Skylax
Textkit Enthusiast
Posts: 672
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2003 8:18 am
Location: Belgium

Re:Pharr para 107 line2

Post by Skylax » Mon Aug 04, 2003 12:25 pm

Bert de Haan wrote:<br />My question is concerning the subject of [size=150]δηθύνει in <br />[size=150])αγαμέμνων οὐ κιχήσεται γεροντα παρὰ κοίλῃσι νηυσίν, οὐ γὰρ δηθύνει ὲν στρατῷ )αχαιῶν <br />Agamemnon will not overtake the old man by the hollow(empty?) ships, for he did not loiter in the camp of the Achaeans.<br />
<br /><br />"hollow" here is an "Homeric attribute" (if you call it so). It is maybe opposing "real" sea going ships to rafts...<br /><br />The subject of [size=150]δηθύνει is obviously the old man. But it emerges from the context.<br /><br />
<br />In the case of dependent clauses starting with [size=150]ἵνα or [size=150]ὅτι the subject is different from the one in the main sentence.
<br /><br />I've never heard of such a tendency...<br /><br />See for example Plato, Republic, 426d:<br />[size=150]ὅσοι οἴονται πολιτικοὶ εἶναι ὅτι ἐπαινοῦνται ὑπὸ τῶν πολλῶν<br />"...those who (...) suppose themselves to be in truth statesmen because they are praised by the many."<br /><br />The subject is the same for both verbs.<br />Can you provide some more information?<br /><br />[size=150]ἔρρωσο

Ptolemaios
Textkit Neophyte
Posts: 79
Joined: Mon Jul 21, 2003 7:15 am
Location: The Netherlands

Re:Pharr para 107 line2

Post by Ptolemaios » Mon Aug 04, 2003 1:11 pm

The problem is: even Pharr is not a native speaker. The subject of [size=150]δηθύνει can (logically) be no other than the old man. But I think that in real Greek such a topic shift (from Agamemnon to the old man) would have been marked in some way.<br /><br />[size=150]εὔχομαι σε ἐρρῶσθαι<br /><br />Ptolemaios

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

Re:Pharr para 107 line2

Post by Bert » Mon Aug 04, 2003 1:47 pm

(skylax)<br />In the case of dependent clauses starting with [size=150]ἵνα or [size=150]ὅτι the subject is different from the one in the main sentence.
<br /> <br />I've never heard of such a tendency...<br /><br />I didn't say that right. It is possible for the subject to be the same, but because it can be a different one, you don't look for the main subject in the dependent clause. <br /> English examples;1. If I work hard, I get a sore back.<br /> 2. If I work hard, my children can eat three meals per day.<br /><br />I don't want to assume that after [size=150]γάρ the subject can change, because then I am making my own grammar rules. I am barely able to abide by someone else's rules, let alone make up my own as I go.<br /><br />Thanks for the replies.<br /><br /><br />

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

Re:Pharr para 107 line2

Post by annis » Sun Aug 10, 2003 3:16 pm

[quote author=Bert de Haan link=board=2;threadid=356;start=0#2717 date=1060004868]<br />I don't want to assume that after [size=150]γάρ the subject can change, because then I am making my own grammar rules.<br />[/quote]<br /><br />Ahah! I found it.<br /><br />It is true that you cannot assume that the subject has changed when you see [size=150]γάρ. But I did know this, but I only now found the reference. Smyth 1112 says, "[size=150]ὁ δέ, ἡ δέ, τὸ δέ (without a preceding [size=150]μέν clause) often means but (or and) he, she, this. In the nominative the person referred to is usually different from the subject of the main verb: [size=150]κῦρος δίδωσιν αὐτῷ μυρίους δαρεικούς· ὁ δὲ λαβὼν τὸ χρυσίον κ.τ.λ. Cyrus gives him (Clearchus) 10,000 darics; and he taking the money... etc."
William S. Annis — http://www.aoidoi.org/http://www.scholiastae.org/
τίς πατέρ' αἰνήσει εἰ μὴ κακοδαίμονες υἱοί;

Ptolemaios
Textkit Neophyte
Posts: 79
Joined: Mon Jul 21, 2003 7:15 am
Location: The Netherlands

Re:Pharr para 107 line2

Post by Ptolemaios » Mon Aug 11, 2003 7:35 am

[quote author=William Annis link=board=2;threadid=356;start=0#3334 date=1060528596]<br /><br />Smyth 1112 says, "[size=150]ὁ δέ, ἡ δέ, τὸ δέ (without a preceding [size=150]μέν clause) often means but (or and) he, she, this. In the nominative the person referred to is usually different from the subject of the main verb: [size=150]κῦρος δίδωσιν αὐτῷ μυρίους δαρεικούς· ὁ δὲ λαβὼν τὸ χρυσίον κ.τ.λ. Cyrus gives him (Clearchus) 10,000 darics; and he taking the money... etc."<br />[/quote]<br /><br />I think this should be: is usually different from the preceding topic. The particle [size=150]δέ is a sign of what is called 'topic shift' (topic as a technical term from functional linguistics). Though the main verb of the [size=150]ὁ δὲ λαβὼν τὸ χρυσίον κ.τ.λ isn't cited, my guess is that this is not a subordinate clause with (is that the right preposition?) the preceding sentence, so in this case de can't signal that the subject is different from the main subject.<br />The article to read on this subject is by Egbert Bakker (I can't remember any further bibliographical data)<br /><br />[size=150]εὔχομαι σε ἐρρῶσθαι<br /><br />Ptolemaios

Post Reply