A sentence from Athenaze

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
markcmueller
Textkit Neophyte
Posts: 20
Joined: Sat May 12, 2018 11:43 am

A sentence from Athenaze

Post by markcmueller » Tue Nov 13, 2018 1:10 am

In the Italian Athenaze, volume II, chapter 20, line 70, Dikaiopolos is speaking about tragic poets:

οἱ γὰρ ἄριστοι τῶν ποιητῶν οὐ μόνον ἐκ τῆς ὄψεως τὸ φοβερὸν καὶ ἐλεεινὸν ἐγείρουσιν, ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐξ αὐτῶν τῶν πραγμάτων· οὔτω γὰρ συνιστᾶσι τὰ τῶν μύθων πράγματα ὥστε καὶ ἄνευ τοῦ ὁρᾶν τὸν ἀκούοντα καὶ φρίττειν καὶ ἐλεεῖν.

The best of the poets not only from visuals arouse fear and pity, but from the events themselves: in such a way do they arrange the events of the stories that even without seeing the hearer shudders and pities.

I cannot see why τὸν ἀκούοντα is accusative, nor why φρίττειν καὶ ἐλεεῖν are infinitives. I must be missing something.

Mark

Hylander
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 1501
Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2015 1:16 pm

Re: A sentence from Athenaze

Post by Hylander » Tue Nov 13, 2018 2:00 am

This is what is generally referred to as a "result clause." There are two types of these constructions in Greek:

1. ὥστε + indicative: a result that actually occurred as a result of the preceding clause. It's simply a statement of what happened, joined to the preceding clause by ὥστε, "X happened, with the result that Y happened". You could almost just as well translate ὥστε as "and".

2. ὥστε + accusative and infinitive: a potential or probable result that would be likely to occur as a result of the preceding clause but did not necessarily occur in any specific instance. This is the ὥστε construction in the sentence you're asking about. "They put the events of the stories together in such a way that someone hearing them without seeing anything would be likely to/be prone to/tend to shudder and feel pity." The speaker doesn't necessarily have any specific person or any specific instance of shuddering and feeling pity in mind.

You can read about these constructions in Smyth at sections 2249 ff. The second type of result clause is discussed in sections 2260 ff. Here's a link:

http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/tex ... 99.04.0007

But you can probably find a discussion of these types of constructions in your textbook under the heading of "result" or "consecutive" clauses.

markcmueller
Textkit Neophyte
Posts: 20
Joined: Sat May 12, 2018 11:43 am

Re: A sentence from Athenaze

Post by markcmueller » Wed Nov 14, 2018 5:15 am

Thanks, Hylander! I was thinking this was a purpose clause and was expecting the subjunctive.

Hylander
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 1501
Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2015 1:16 pm

Re: A sentence from Athenaze

Post by Hylander » Wed Nov 14, 2018 2:33 pm

Generally, ὥστε introduces a result construction, not a purpose clause. [Edit: I changed "result clause" to "result construction" in keeping with what I wrote below.]
Last edited by Hylander on Wed Nov 14, 2018 4:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
jeidsath
Administrator
Posts: 2631
Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2013 2:42 pm
Location: Γαλεήπολις, Οὐισκόνσιν

Re: A sentence from Athenaze

Post by jeidsath » Wed Nov 14, 2018 2:42 pm

I mentioned these articles in my post in the Koine forum thread, but I found this T.S. Evans discussion of ὥστε, and how to translate it, very enjoyable.

Image
Joel Eidsath -- jeidsath@gmail.com

μὴ δ’ οὕτως ἀγαθός περ ἐὼν θεοείκελ’ Ἀχιλλεῦ
κλέπτε νόῳ, ἐπεὶ οὐ παρελεύσεαι οὐδέ με πείσεις.

Hylander
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 1501
Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2015 1:16 pm

Re: A sentence from Athenaze

Post by Hylander » Wed Nov 14, 2018 4:15 pm

I think the traditional label, "result/consecutive clause," suggesting that these constructions are subordinate clauses, is a little misleading, and perhaps acquired currency by an analogy with Latin grammar that doesn't really work for Greek.

ὥστε + indicative is not a subordinate clause. ὥστε functions as a coordinating, not a subordinating, conjunction, and the two elements that are joined by it could be stand-alone sentences in their own right. In this type of construction, ὥστε can be translated ". . . and, as a result, . . . ".

ὥστε + infinitive is not really a clause, in the sense that it doesn't necessarily have a subject. If it does have a subject, the subject is indefinite and in the accusative case. Translating this type of construction into English, it's necessary to use use something like "so as to" or if there is a subject, "with the potential result that an X might/would."

The key to understanding the difference is simply to remember that with ὥστε + indicative, the writer is telling you that the result actually occurred. ὥστε + infinitive means that there is no implication that the result occurred in any specific instance, just a probability or tendency. It''s really not that difficult.

But as I mentioned, if you're used to Latin grammar, where all types of result constructions are subordinate clauses introduced by ut (non) with subjunctive verbs, it may be more difficult to wrap your mind around the Greek constructions. This is one instance where knowing some Latin may be a slight impediment to learning Greek.

markcmueller
Textkit Neophyte
Posts: 20
Joined: Sat May 12, 2018 11:43 am

Re: A sentence from Athenaze

Post by markcmueller » Wed Nov 14, 2018 11:41 pm

Thanks, guys! This is very helpful. Particularly since I was unaware that after ὥστε + infinitive the subject, if any, is in the accusative. (Looking at one example I found, the object, if any, is also in the accusative.)

But to be totally honest, I was confusing ὥστε with ὅπως. You know, four letters, an omega, a sigma....

User avatar
wdf1088
Textkit Neophyte
Posts: 1
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2018 4:27 pm

Re: A sentence from Athenaze

Post by wdf1088 » Thu Dec 06, 2018 5:14 pm

I would add to these already very good responses that the two types of the result clause are sometimes called (1) clause of actual result (verb in the indicative) and (2) clause of natural result (verb in the infinitive).

Here are some examples (taken from Hansen and Quinn) which should help further clarify the distinction:

Clause of actual result: τοῖς θεοῖς θύουσιν ὥστε σωθήσονται. They sacrifice to the gods with the result they will be saved.

Clause of natural result: θύουσιν ὥστε σωθῆναι ὑπὸ τῶν θεῶν. They sacrifice so as to be saved by the gods.

This really just illustrates the point already made by others. In the first case, the Greek tells us their being saved has happened or we know that it will happen as a result of having made a sacrifice to the gods. In the second, the Greek tells us that we expect (but don't know) that they will be saved as a natural result of having made a sacrifice to the gods.

I disagree with Hylander on one point, however: I don't think the subject of a clause of natural result has to be indefinite. E.g., I've seen such clauses refer to specific persons.

Hope this helps.
Auch ich in Arkadien!

mwh
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 2885
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 2:34 am

Re: A sentence from Athenaze

Post by mwh » Thu Dec 06, 2018 5:32 pm

My own disagreement with Hylander would be with his denying that ωστε+indic. is a subordinate clause. But I don’t want to argue the point.

Hylander
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 1501
Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2015 1:16 pm

Re: A sentence from Athenaze

Post by Hylander » Thu Dec 06, 2018 8:11 pm

I don't think the subject of a clause of natural result has to be indefinite. E.g., I've seen such clauses refer to specific persons.
The subject doesn't have to be indefinite but in this case, τὸν ἀκούοντα is indefinite in the sense that there is no specific hearer in mind. I should have made it clearer that I was describing this particular sentence.

I'll accept mwh's criticism.

mwh
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 2885
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 2:34 am

Re: A sentence from Athenaze

Post by mwh » Thu Dec 06, 2018 10:36 pm

Thanks for conceding, Hylander. It’s true that editors do sometimes start a new sentence with ωστε + indicative, even if I don’t think they should.
And of course it doesn’t have to be indicative. E.g. Soph.El.333 ὥστ’ αν … δηλωσαιμ’ αν οἷ’ αυτοις φρονῶ.

Hylander
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 1501
Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2015 1:16 pm

Re: A sentence from Athenaze

Post by Hylander » Fri Dec 07, 2018 4:15 am

I see what you mean. ωστε is a fossilized form: the relative adverb ως + τε épique, isn't it?

By the way, mwh, did you see my post in this thread?

viewtopic.php?f=2&t=68752

I'm still debating with myself whether it's right.

mwh
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 2885
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 2:34 am

Re: A sentence from Athenaze

Post by mwh » Fri Dec 07, 2018 7:38 pm

For me it’s less a matter of analyzing ωστε as a word than of recognizing its syntactically subordinating function in actual use, even when the leading verb is without a correlative ουτως or τοσουτον or the like.

That other post seems fine to me. Of course there’s no way of telling whether αν ειναι would be αν ειεν or αν ησαν as an independent statement, but I agree that here it would be better understood as representing the latter, used as an imperfect.

Post Reply