εὔνους appears to be formed by the same contraction as νοῦς, but the accent is given in critical editions as paroxytone:
εὔνῳ, εὔνου, εὔνοις, εὔνων or εὐνόων. Shouldn’t that be εὐνῷ εὐνοῦ, etc., due to contraction of όῳ όου?
I assume that I’m missing something.
Probert 2003, § 121:
“In contracted nouns and adjectives ending in -ους from -οος, such as εὔνους (from εὔνοος), the rules of contraction are disregarded in all cases except the nominative singular and the accent of the contracted nominative is carried throughout (subject to the σωτῆρα rule), except that the nominative/accusative dual in -ω is oxytone.”
Thank you. I should have looked this up. Here is Chandler, who is in fine form on this:
- NOTE.–It would, one might think, puzzle the perverse ingenuity even of a Greek grammarian to justify this strange departure from the ordinary rule of contraction; as Πειρίθοος makes Πειρίθους, so Πειριθόου ought to make Πειριθοῦ, ἐκπλόου ἐκπλοῦ, but by some unaccountable caprice they do not; Ptolemaeus Ascalonites (Schol. Ven. K. 373) did write εὐξοῦ = εὐξόου, but he is condemned by the grammarians for doing so. On δίκροος or δικρόος (?) see Lob. Phryn. 233. Kühner, G. G., 1. 137, observes that the adjective ἐπίπνους retracts the accent; Plat. Symp. 181 C, οἱ ἐκ τούτου τοῦ ἔρωτος ἔπιπνοι, and so it stands in C. F. Hermann’s edition there can be no reason why this one word should have an exceptional accent.