ταρ

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
mwh
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 3394
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 2:34 am

ταρ

Post by mwh » Tue Dec 09, 2014 4:12 am

For those interested in this word, which Cal Watkins rehabilitated and persuaded West to adopt, there's a nice paper by Josh Katz at
http://www.princeton.edu/~pswpc/pdfs/katz/070701.pdf

cb
Textkit Enthusiast
Posts: 456
Joined: Tue Sep 18, 2007 3:52 pm

Re: ταρ

Post by cb » Wed Dec 10, 2014 11:41 am

thanks, this article was great! i love the author's enthusiasm. cheers, chad

User avatar
Paul Derouda
Global Moderator
Posts: 2151
Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 9:39 pm

Re: ταρ

Post by Paul Derouda » Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:43 pm

Thanks, that was nice!

User avatar
jeidsath
Administrator
Posts: 3357
Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2013 2:42 pm
Location: Γαλεήπολις, Οὐισκόνσιν

Re: ταρ

Post by jeidsath » Mon Feb 16, 2015 5:33 am

I'm finally doing a read-through of the Iliad (now that the meter makes it fun), and I was distracted by the ταρ controversy. Here is Nagy:
At one extreme, then, West's edition tends to underestimate the chronological diversity of the Homeric tradition. At the other extreme, however, it occasionally lapses into overestimations that defy credibility. In particular, the relatively older forms tend to be treated without sufficient regard for the operative system of Homeric diction. For example, West (p. xxix) claims that the Luvian particle tar (which he translates as 'usquam') is a cognate of the Homeric particle ταρ, and that the Luvian usage of tar is key to understanding the Greek usage of TAR in the Iliad, as at I 8, 65, 123, and so forth.* In printing ταρ instead of τἄρ in these contexts, West is following the testimony of Apollonius and Herodian, according to whom the particle ταρ counts as one word, by contrast with τἄρ. The particle τἄρ counts as two words, τ' (from τε) plus ἄρ. If Homeric TAR is really cognate with Luvian tar, then it cannot be related etymologically to Homeric τἄρ. And yet, I see no convincing way of separating completely the Homeric contexts of this ταρ from Homeric contexts of τἄρ where the constituents τ' (from τε) plus ἄρ are transparently functional, as at I 93, III 398, and so forth. Moreover, the etymology of γάρ, another particle that counts as one word, can serve as evidence against the etymological separation of ταρ from τἄρ: in the case of γάρ, the constituents are transparently γ' (from γε) plus ἄρ (Chantraine DELG p. 210). Just as some usages of γάρ preserve the syntax of the constituent γε (as in the case of ὁ γάρ via ὅγε plus ἄρ: see Schywzer/Debrunner 1966.560), so also some usages of τἄρ preserve the syntax of the constituent τε (as in the case of τἄρ at III 398, where West's apparatus shows a syntactically analogous textual variant δ' ἄρ actually attested in the papyri). Further, just as other usages of γάρ no longer preserve the syntax of the constituent γε, so also it is possible that other usages of τἄρ no longer preserve the syntax of the constituent τε; whence the special status of Homeric ταρ.

* If indeed Homeric ταρ is derived from τ' (from τε) plus ἄρ just as γάρ is derived from γ' (from γε) plus ἄρ, we still need to account for the enclitic status of ταρ in some Homeric contexts and the non-enclitic status of τἄρ in others. It may be relevant that γάρ is fully lexicalized in all its attestations, that is, it has become a single word, whereas neither ταρ nor ἄρ / ῥα (vs. ἄρα) have achieved that status in Attic/Ionic, outside of poetic diction. With reference to the arguments of Katz 1998, I see further evidence for counter-arguments. For example, not only are αὐτάρ and ἀτάρ syntactically parallel in a variety of Homeric contexts: so also are ἀτάρ and ̔δ'̓ αὖ / ̔δ'̓ αὖτ̔ἐ. Note too the collocations αὐτὰρ ἄρα at II 103 and αὐτὰρ ὃ αὖτε at II 105, 107.

http://bmcr.brynmawr.edu/2000/2000-09-12.html
Joel Eidsath -- jeidsath@gmail.com

mwh
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 3394
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 2:34 am

Re: ταρ

Post by mwh » Mon Feb 16, 2015 5:35 pm

And here is Katz's retort (n.37 in the article I linked to):

"As noted above in the text, Gregory Nagy has not been enthusiastic about ταρ. In his review
of West (1998b), Nagy (2004) 73-4 (~ Nagy (2000)) sets aside the Luvian evidence and rejects
the Watkins/West/Katz view of this particle (he, like some others, cites my 1996 APA abstract,
‘Αὐτάρ,  τάρ, ταρ: the poetics of a particle in Homer’, though mistakenly dating it to 1998).
While Nagy (2004) 74 (also Nagy (2000)) complains that ‘there are problems with West’s
application of linguistics in the process of rewriting the received text of the Iliad’, Nagy’s
wording in the section at issue is extremely sloppy: it is impossible to tell for sure, for example,
whether he accepts any synchronic instances of ταρ—I expect he does, but it is not clear where,
why, or how—and, if indeed he does accept some, what he thinks they reflect diachronically. I
regret that considerations of space have made it impossible for me to include here, as I did on the
handout for the Cambridge conference, an annotated version of Nagy’s entire discussion; still,
anyone who reads it closely will see that it is filled with non sequiturs and rhetoric designed to
make the reader feel unwarranted doubt."

Nagy is alone in his resistance (see Katz p.7 w/ n.25). He is ideologically and unremittingly opposed to West.

The question of ταρ vs. τ’ἄρ in Homer is a complex and very tricky one (perhaps even more so than Katz acknowledges), but does it have any real importance except in historical terms? Listeners and ordinary readers probably wouldn’t even have registered it, and nor would we if we had texts unencumbered by diacritics. Certainly it shouldn't interfere with the fun of reading the Iliad!

User avatar
Paul Derouda
Global Moderator
Posts: 2151
Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 9:39 pm

Re: ταρ

Post by Paul Derouda » Mon Feb 16, 2015 6:08 pm

mwh wrote:Nagy is alone in his resistance (see Katz p.7 w/ n.25). He is ideologically and unremittingly opposed to West.
τίς τάρ σφωε θεῶν ἔριδι ξυνέηκε μάχεσθαι; ;)

Markos
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 2966
Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 8:07 pm
Location: Colorado
Contact:

Re: ταρ

Post by Markos » Mon Feb 16, 2015 9:32 pm

Paul Derouda wrote:
mwh wrote:Nagy is alone in his resistance (see Katz p.7 w/ n.25). He is ideologically and unremittingly opposed to West.
τίς τάρ σφωε θεῶν ἔριδι ξυνέηκε μάχεσθαι; ;)
That's easy, Paul. It would have to be Τάρταρος. :lol:
Wallace Sayre wrote:In any dispute the intensity of feeling is inversely proportional to the value of the issues at stake.
Woody Allen wrote:Academics are like the mafia; they only kill their own.
For my part, τὸ γὰρ "τάρ" οὐ ταράσσει με. :D

User avatar
jeidsath
Administrator
Posts: 3357
Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2013 2:42 pm
Location: Γαλεήπολις, Οὐισκόνσιν

Re: ταρ

Post by jeidsath » Tue Feb 17, 2015 6:09 am

still, anyone who reads it closely will see that it is filled with non sequiturs and rhetoric designed to make the reader feel unwarranted doubt."
I did read it closely, and the doubts raised are quite reasonable, and I would have liked to see Katz speak to them. I did, however, read Katz closely as well. If I really cared (but as mwh points out, life is to short for that sort of thing), I would read Watkins. Not having read Watkins, I found the Luvian connections as presented by Katz to be tenuous. Besides, who hasn't seen this sort of thing before in academia? An untestable claim is put forward (ταρ versus τἄρ), the evidence rests completely on an inaccessible specialization (Luvian), and the unconvinced are confronted by shaming tactics rather than by arguments (see Katz above). That alone puts me on the guard, and makes me careful to demand evidence.

As far as ideological opposition between Nagy and West, I've never read an article by Nagy that I didn't find impressive. Perhaps West deserves the regard that he holds on this forum, but what I've read of him so far (mostly his books on music, and a few articles on Homer) hasn't demonstrated genius to me yet. But by all means, I would love to be corrected if someone would like to link me to his best stuff. It's hard work publishing the vast quantities that West does, and I can certainly understand why the quality might vary.
Joel Eidsath -- jeidsath@gmail.com

User avatar
jeidsath
Administrator
Posts: 3357
Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2013 2:42 pm
Location: Γαλεήπολις, Οὐισκόνσιν

Re: ταρ

Post by jeidsath » Sun Dec 06, 2015 3:42 pm

I revisited this after noticing that Perseus uses ταρ in a number of places, even where West doesn't place it. For example:

Iliad I. 93: οὔ ταρ ὅ γ’ εὐχωλῆς ἐπιμέμφεται οὐδ’ ἑκατόμβης,

Reading through the Katz paper again, I investigated what I thought was one of the more important claims of the paper: that αταρ and αυταρ have complementary distributions, with the first never appearing together with ρα.

This one falls apart when you look. In fact, in the Iliad, αταρ never appears before επει. I assume Katz doesn't assume that there is any deep philological reason behind this? It's a consequence of metre.

But notice that the formula επει ρα is all over the place -- with or without αυταρ. Because αυταρ metrically fits with επει, we get αυταρ επει ρα.

Without that, we're down to the tenuous Luvian parallel -- at least following Katz.

Going beyond the Katz paper, Dyscolus and Herodian called ταρ an enclitic, and maybe they knew something. It's hard to say what they would have known about a particle that would have been disappearing even in Homer's period, although I give this some weight. But notice that West specifically rejects Herodian's supposition in line 93 above.
Joel Eidsath -- jeidsath@gmail.com

mwh
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 3394
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 2:34 am

Re: ταρ

Post by mwh » Mon Dec 07, 2015 1:58 am

That’s interesting about the Perseus text. Whose text is it?

As I commented before, “The question of ταρ vs. τ’ἄρ in Homer is a complex and very tricky one (perhaps even more so than Katz acknowledges).” He and I actually had a huge argument about this.

I too have reservations about Katz’s point about αταρ, but I don’t imagine he’d be much troubled by your attempt to undermine it.

You can find the Luvian evidence and more about ταρ's credentials (long recognized) in Watkins’ How to Kill a Dragon—hardly inaccessible.
pp.150f., online via GoogleBooks and elsewhere

Hylander
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 1955
Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2015 1:16 pm

Re: ταρ

Post by Hylander » Wed Dec 30, 2015 2:17 am

Anyone who questions M.L. West's brilliance should work through his Hesiod commentaries. They're κτηματα εσ αει.

User avatar
Paul Derouda
Global Moderator
Posts: 2151
Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 9:39 pm

Re: ταρ

Post by Paul Derouda » Wed Dec 30, 2015 5:07 pm

I couldn't agree more. I'm just finishing his Theogony commentary, which I had neglected for some reason until now. Amazing stuff. And he was what, 28 years old when finished it?

Post Reply