προσιών etc

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
User avatar
Constantinus Philo
Textkit Enthusiast
Posts: 440
Joined: Tue Mar 05, 2019 1:04 pm

προσιών etc

Post by Constantinus Philo » Sun Jan 12, 2020 8:11 pm

καὶ ἤν τινες ἐς τὴν Ἀθηναίων γῆν ἴωσι πολἐμοιο.....Thuc, 5., 23., 2 Smythe says that eimi has always future reference in pres and conjunctive; he also says that ιών is relatively past in one instance in Xen. i however have come across many examples where προσιών is relatively past, so that it seems to be almost a rule. concerning the sentence above, should it be understood like referring to the future and not like present general?
Semper Fidelis

User avatar
seneca2008
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 860
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 1:48 pm
Location: Londinium

Re: προσιών etc

Post by seneca2008 » Mon Jan 13, 2020 11:50 am

Smyth 1880 actually says:

"1880. εἶμι is regularly future (I shall go) in the indicative present. In the subjunctive it is always future; in the optative, infinitive, and participle it may be either future or present. Cp. 774. In ἰὼν ταῦτα λέγε go and say this (X. C. 4.5.17) ἰών is used of time relatively past. In Hom. εἶμι means both I go and I shall go."

which is not exactly how you presented it.

The Cambridge grammar of Classical Greek is perhaps a little clearer on the participle:

"33.19 The present indicative of εἶμι go normally refers to the future: e.g. εἶμι I will go, εἶςι(ν) he will go, ἴασι(ν) they will go. Observe that this does not normally hold for forms other than the present indicative (impf. ᾖα I went, ppl. ἰών going, etc.).

User avatar
jeidsath
Administrator
Posts: 3344
Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2013 2:42 pm
Location: Γαλεήπολις, Οὐισκόνσιν

Re: προσιών etc

Post by jeidsath » Tue Jan 14, 2020 2:21 pm

I think present sense indicative ειμι is only poetic.
Constantinus Philo wrote:
Sun Jan 12, 2020 8:11 pm
concerning the sentence above, should it be understood like referring to the future and not like present general?
Yes, just look at the preceding sentence. κατὰ τάδε ξύμμαχοι ἔσονται Λακεδαιμόνιοι <καὶ Ἀθηναῖοι> πεντήκοντα ἔτη.
Constantinus Philo wrote:
Sun Jan 12, 2020 8:11 pm
i however have come across many examples where προσιών is relatively past, so that it seems to be almost a rule.
Do you have some examples? This seems to be the interesting part of the post.
Joel Eidsath -- jeidsath@gmail.com

User avatar
Constantinus Philo
Textkit Enthusiast
Posts: 440
Joined: Tue Mar 05, 2019 1:04 pm

Re: προσιών etc

Post by Constantinus Philo » Tue Jan 14, 2020 4:06 pm

There is an old Greek Grammar by Sobolevsky (in Russian) which has a appendix of short texts in Ancient Greek (anecdotes, funny stories, jokes, and he does not mention the sources, maybe Stob.,). So In many of these stories i came across of προσιών referring to the past. When I find one i will post it.
Semper Fidelis

User avatar
Constantinus Philo
Textkit Enthusiast
Posts: 440
Joined: Tue Mar 05, 2019 1:04 pm

Re: προσιών etc

Post by Constantinus Philo » Tue Jan 14, 2020 8:22 pm

Δημοκράτης ὁ παλαιστής νοσήσας τοὺς πὸδας παριὼν εἰς τοὺς ἀγῶνας καὶ στὰς ἐν τῷ σταδίῳ περιγράφων ἑαυτῷ κύκλον προσέταττε τοῖς ἀντιπαλαισταῖς ἔξω τῆς γραμμῆς αὐτὸν προέλκειν. οἱ δὲ ἡττῶντο οὐ δυνάμενοι ὀ δὲ στεφανούμενος ἀπήει. (Ael., Var. Hist., 4., 15) Democrates the wrestler having become sick of his legs, used to frequent the competitions, and having positioned himself on the stadium, used to draw a circle round himself and order the competitors outside the line to pull him [outside the circle]. The competitors would be defeated, being incapable[ to do so], and he having been crowned, would go away.
here, παριὼν and περιγράφων refer to the preceding actions, or to the habitual actions in the past.
Δυσκόλῳ ἰατρῷ προσιών τις εἴπεν Ὦ λῷστε κεῖσθαι οὐ δύναμαι οὐδὲ ἑστάναι ἀλλ'οὐδὲ καθῆσθαι. Καὶ ὁ ἰατρός οὐδέν σοι λείπεται ἔφη εἰ μὴ κρεμασθῆναι. (the source not mentioned in Sobolevsky. Someone having come to a difficult physician, said: 'oh my best friend, I am unable to lie , nor to stand nor to sit; and the physician said: nothing else is left for you than to hang yourself. here προσιών refers to an action relatively past.
Semper Fidelis

User avatar
jeidsath
Administrator
Posts: 3344
Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2013 2:42 pm
Location: Γαλεήπολις, Οὐισκόνσιν

Re: προσιών etc

Post by jeidsath » Tue Jan 14, 2020 8:33 pm

Some LSJ searching gave me this, from the article on ἔρχομαι, which would seem to explain it:

In Att. the obl. moods of pres., as well as the impf. and fut. were replaced by forms of εἶμι ibo (q.v.): in LXX and Hellenistic Greek the place of the compounds, esp. ἐξ-, εἰσ-έρχομαι, is commonly taken by ἐκ-, εἰσ-πορεύομαι, etc., the fut., aor., and pf. being supplied as before by ἐλυθ- (ἐλθ-)

The participle isn't really an oblique mood though?
Joel Eidsath -- jeidsath@gmail.com

User avatar
Constantinus Philo
Textkit Enthusiast
Posts: 440
Joined: Tue Mar 05, 2019 1:04 pm

Re: προσιών etc

Post by Constantinus Philo » Fri Jan 17, 2020 6:40 pm

i think it has something to o with the prefixes
Semper Fidelis

phalakros
Textkit Neophyte
Posts: 10
Joined: Sat Nov 16, 2019 9:51 pm

Re: προσιών etc

Post by phalakros » Sun Jan 19, 2020 6:20 pm

Philo, I’m not sure I follow your original question. It’s a “present general” condition by Smyth’s classification. It all refers to future actions (i.e., in the terms of the treaty). Read the context.

εἶμι is generally used as the future of ἔρχομαι in Att. prose (or else ἀφίξομαι, κτλ.). ἐλεύσομαι is found in poetry and Ionic. It’s also the regular form in later Gk, where ἔρχομαι encroaches upon εἶμι and morphologically expands (e.g. ἔρχωμαι for Att. ἴω). At the same time, the meaning of ἔρχομαι is gradually narrowed to “come” in later Gk, so you’ll more often find, e.g., ἐκπορεύομαι (though it’s far from a rule).

The participle ἰών acts like either a present or future ptcp. E.g.,

ὁπότε τοὺς πολεμίους ἐπιόντας ὁρῷεν, ἐϲ φυγὴν καθίσταντο.

vs.

ἐπειδὴ τάχιστα τοὺς πολεμίους εἶδον ἐπιόντας, παρεσκευάσαντο ὡς ἀπιόντες.

Note the crucial distinction between relative and absolute time. Based on your posts, I’m not sure if you are familiar with this. Of your examples, the ptcp in the Aelian passage (adapted?) presents no issues and is consistent with Atticist practice. Another chance to review -μι verbs: can you catch the typo in the last word? Your second example comes from the Philogelos. The text has προσελθών not προσιών (no variants are noted in Thierfelder’s ed.). The latter would be wrong.

I hope I'm not adding to the considerable confusion of this thread.

User avatar
jeidsath
Administrator
Posts: 3344
Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2013 2:42 pm
Location: Γαλεήπολις, Οὐισκόνσιν

Re: προσιών etc

Post by jeidsath » Sun Jan 19, 2020 7:12 pm

It sounds like a modification by Sobolevsky. But things like "καὶ προσιὼν ἠρώτα..." seem to occur often enough in Plutarch, so I'd disagree with "wrong." I believe that it is the difference between him having spoken while approaching or having spoken when he finished the approach.

Approaching the grouchy physician someone said...

versus

Having gone to the grouchy physician someone said...

I think that is generally the aspect with a present tense participle together an aorist main verb. But to reiterate, I'm sure that the original text had προσελθών, of course.
Joel Eidsath -- jeidsath@gmail.com

User avatar
Constantinus Philo
Textkit Enthusiast
Posts: 440
Joined: Tue Mar 05, 2019 1:04 pm

Re: προσιών etc

Post by Constantinus Philo » Sun Jan 19, 2020 7:37 pm

can u plz supply an example from Plutarch?
Semper Fidelis

phalakros
Textkit Neophyte
Posts: 10
Joined: Sat Nov 16, 2019 9:51 pm

Re: προσιών etc

Post by phalakros » Sun Jan 19, 2020 8:18 pm

ἠρώτα is impf! An aor (ἤρετο, ἠρώτησε) would be grammatical, if that’s what you’re getting at. In the σκωμμάτιον, the context makes προσιών unlikely—a clue that something has been altered, as indeed it has. How about πρὸς δύσκολον ἰατρὸν ἐνεχθείς?

User avatar
jeidsath
Administrator
Posts: 3344
Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2013 2:42 pm
Location: Γαλεήπολις, Οὐισκόνσιν

Re: προσιών etc

Post by jeidsath » Sun Jan 19, 2020 8:58 pm

Thank you for catching that, I did think it was aorist, confusing the form with ἤρετο (which I have done before). Here is the same with an aorist, (from Plutarch's De curiositate): ἐπεὶ γάρ τις ἐξ ἀποδημίας προσιὼν ἠρώτησε ‘μή τι καινόν;’ And yes, I misunderstood your "wrong" as referring to the grammar. I imagine Sobolevsky had some didactic purpose for the change, rather than text critical.

πρὸς δύσκολον ἰατρὸν ἐνεχθείς - I don't think you mean that for ενεχω.III.2, as it would take a dative object and active mood, so I'm afraid this went over my head. -- ah, φερω, bourne to the doctor.
Joel Eidsath -- jeidsath@gmail.com

User avatar
Constantinus Philo
Textkit Enthusiast
Posts: 440
Joined: Tue Mar 05, 2019 1:04 pm

Re: προσιών etc

Post by Constantinus Philo » Mon Jan 20, 2020 1:37 am

could u make it more clear for me plz, in ἐπεὶ γάρ τις ἐξ ἀποδημίας προσιὼν ἠρώτησε ‘μή τι καινόν; does προσιὼν refer to habitual action in the past replacing the impf or is it relatively prior to ἠρώτησε ?
Semper Fidelis

mwh
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 3379
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 2:34 am

Re: προσιών etc

Post by mwh » Mon Jan 20, 2020 3:34 am

Thucydides is fond of the word (mostly in compounds of course), and except in the indicative, which will always be future, I think it normally functions as present tense. Later it comes to be used as aorist. That’s my impression, at any rate. I haven’t made a proper study of it.
In Attic it seems to be regularly used for future and also imperfect in preference to erchomai (I mean the relevant forms of erchomai). I won’t venture to suggest why (though I’m tempted), and of course I could be wrong. elqein is always available for unequivocal aorist. Synchronically, different writers and genres have different preferences, and there’s discernible change over time. phalakros may know than me.

User avatar
jeidsath
Administrator
Posts: 3344
Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2013 2:42 pm
Location: Γαλεήπολις, Οὐισκόνσιν

Re: προσιών etc

Post by jeidsath » Mon Jan 20, 2020 3:44 am

A bit more context for the Plutarch:

διὸ καλῶς οἱ τῶν Λοκρῶν ἄρχοντες· ἐπεὶ γάρ τις ἐξ ἀποδημίας προσιὼν ἠρώτησε ‘μή τι καινόν;’ ἐζημίωσαν αὐτόν.

I can't really tell whether the overall story refers to a single event or a repeated action, but the προσιὼν is continuous and simultaneous action relative to ἠρώτησε.

"So the rulers of the Lokroi (?) do well. For when someone approaching them from a journey abroad asked "isn't there anything new?", they punished him. (I suppose that καλῶς refers to the whole bit starting with ἐπεὶ γάρ, and must make it repeated instead of a single event).
Joel Eidsath -- jeidsath@gmail.com

Post Reply