I don't know why I keep having questions doing a review, I should have it all figured out by now...(just kidding.)
I can't figure out the form of ἐδάμησαν[face=Arial][/face] If it is a aorist it would have been ἐδάμασαν would it not? So what is it?
Thanks
Pharr section 165 line 6
-
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 1889
- Joined: Sat May 31, 2003 2:28 am
- Location: Arthur Ontario Canada
-
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 708
- Joined: Sun Jun 15, 2003 4:47 pm
- Location: Maryland
- Contact:
-
- Textkit Enthusiast
- Posts: 672
- Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2003 8:18 am
- Location: Belgium
-
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 1889
- Joined: Sat May 31, 2003 2:28 am
- Location: Arthur Ontario Canada
-
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 3399
- Joined: Fri Jan 03, 2003 4:55 pm
- Location: Madison, WI, USA
- Contact:
Yep. One I personally have been unable to find in Pharr, which is annoying.Bert wrote:Is [face=Arial][/face]ἐδάμησαν just an alternate form?
Cunliffe devotes a bit more than a full column to δαμάζω, about half of which is a listing of various forms.Maybe I'll have to break down and get a Homeric vocabulary quide.
William S. Annis — http://www.aoidoi.org/ — http://www.scholiastae.org/
τίς πατέρ' αἰνήσει εἰ μὴ κακοδαίμονες υἱοί;
τίς πατέρ' αἰνήσει εἰ μὴ κακοδαίμονες υἱοί;