Lesson IV, typo?

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
PeterD
Textkit Enthusiast
Posts: 591
Joined: Sat Nov 15, 2003 6:54 pm
Location: Montreal, Canada

Lesson IV, typo?

Post by PeterD » Mon Dec 15, 2008 10:10 pm

Is this a typo?

Section 554: The enclitics are:

1)...4) The present indicative of εἰμί be, and of φημί say (except . . . and possibly the second singular φῄς of φημί).


Should it not be φής instead of φῄς ( the latter being in the subjunctive, not the indicative mood)?
Fanatical ranting is not just fine because it's eloquent. What if I ranted for the extermination of a people in an eloquent manner, would that make it fine? Rather, ranting, be it fanatical or otherwise, is fine if what is said is true and just. ---PeterD, in reply to IreneY and Annis

User avatar
Adelheid
Textkit Enthusiast
Posts: 424
Joined: Mon Mar 29, 2004 8:58 pm
Location: Mijdrecht
Contact:

Re: Lesson IV, typo?

Post by Adelheid » Mon Dec 15, 2008 10:24 pm

This is what I get from the program Diogenes:

Perseus analysis of φῄς:

φημί (Spir. Prooem.): pres ind act 2nd sg

Subjunctive would be:

Perseus analysis of φῇς:

φημί (Spir. Prooem.): subj act 2nd sg

Here is a site with the whole paradigm: http://sphinx.metameat.net/sphinx.php?p ... =_6-t-y!zt
Regards,
Adelheid
http://www.perispomenon.nl

PeterD
Textkit Enthusiast
Posts: 591
Joined: Sat Nov 15, 2003 6:54 pm
Location: Montreal, Canada

Re: Lesson IV, typo?

Post by PeterD » Mon Dec 15, 2008 10:57 pm

In Section 967 of Pharr, conjugation tables, there is no iota subscript for the 2nd pers. sing. ind. act. of φημί.

Indeed, Adelheid, the 2nd pers. sing. subj. act. of φημί has the circumflex. Sorry about that.
Fanatical ranting is not just fine because it's eloquent. What if I ranted for the extermination of a people in an eloquent manner, would that make it fine? Rather, ranting, be it fanatical or otherwise, is fine if what is said is true and just. ---PeterD, in reply to IreneY and Annis

User avatar
Adelheid
Textkit Enthusiast
Posts: 424
Joined: Mon Mar 29, 2004 8:58 pm
Location: Mijdrecht
Contact:

Re: Lesson IV, typo?

Post by Adelheid » Mon Dec 15, 2008 11:17 pm

PeterD wrote:In Section 967 of Pharr, conjugation tables, there is no iota subscript for the 2nd pers. sing. ind. act. of φημί.
Perhaps we should rule that a typo? Still, it looks like both forms are valid:

Perseus analysis of φής:

φης,φημί (Spir. Prooem.): pres ind act 2nd sg
Regards,
Adelheid
http://www.perispomenon.nl

jk0592
Textkit Member
Posts: 140
Joined: Sun Oct 08, 2006 3:20 am
Location: Montreal, Canada

Re: Lesson IV, typo?

Post by jk0592 » Tue Dec 16, 2008 3:59 am

From Athenaze Volume 2, page 308, φᾑς is present indicative second person singular, while φῇς is present subjunctive second person singular. In the vocabulary section, φημι is mentioned as a postpositive enclictic.
Jean K.

PeterD
Textkit Enthusiast
Posts: 591
Joined: Sat Nov 15, 2003 6:54 pm
Location: Montreal, Canada

Re: Lesson IV, typo?

Post by PeterD » Thu Dec 18, 2008 5:23 am

In one section of Pharr, the 2nd pers. sing. ind. act. of φημί, has the iota subscript (554); in another section (967), it does not. Which one is correct? Both?

Thanks.
Fanatical ranting is not just fine because it's eloquent. What if I ranted for the extermination of a people in an eloquent manner, would that make it fine? Rather, ranting, be it fanatical or otherwise, is fine if what is said is true and just. ---PeterD, in reply to IreneY and Annis

Didymus
Textkit Fan
Posts: 218
Joined: Sun Sep 24, 2006 2:46 pm

Re: Lesson IV, typo?

Post by Didymus » Thu Dec 18, 2008 6:47 pm

PeterD wrote:In one section of Pharr, the 2nd pers. sing. ind. act. of φημί, has the iota subscript (554); in another section (967), it does not. Which one is correct? Both?
See Smyth sec. 784: "Instead of φῄς, the spelling φής is infrequently found."

PeterD
Textkit Enthusiast
Posts: 591
Joined: Sat Nov 15, 2003 6:54 pm
Location: Montreal, Canada

Re: Lesson IV, typo?

Post by PeterD » Thu Dec 18, 2008 9:27 pm

Thank you, Didymus. :)
Fanatical ranting is not just fine because it's eloquent. What if I ranted for the extermination of a people in an eloquent manner, would that make it fine? Rather, ranting, be it fanatical or otherwise, is fine if what is said is true and just. ---PeterD, in reply to IreneY and Annis

Post Reply