I am reading Alcestis and encountered the following line which might be of interest as there have been a few posts recently about the peculiarities of accents:
ἀλλ᾽ οὖν ἐκεῖσε προσδόκα μ᾽, ὅταν θάνω,
καὶ δῶμ᾽ ἑτοίμαζ᾽, ὡς συνοικήσουσά μοι.
Isn’t this just an example of the rule that when an enclitic follows a proparoxytone word (accent on antepenult), the last syllable of the proparoxytone takes an additional, acute, accent?
Yes it is, see Probert 287. But this always foxed me when I started learning Greek. I thought others less expert than you might be confused and it was worth a post.
Well, you could see a good example of my so-called “expertise” in the “contracted vs. uncontracted” thread, if you read it before I edited it when mwh called me to account.
Even Homer nods.
Hylander can be excessively modest at times. He knew very well what he meant to write. His expertise is not in question.
With personal pronouns, an editor often has to decide whether it’s enclitic or not. E.g. (just looking at the Alcestis) οὔκουν δοκεῖ σοι τήνδε μοι δοῦναι χάριν;
δοκεῖ σοι or δοκεῖ σοὶ, τήνδε μοι or τήνδ’ ἐμοὶ?
A better example: Eurip. Hippolytus 1409 (Hipp.'s deathbed reconciliation with his father Theseus):
στένω σε μᾶλλον ἢ ’μὲ τῆς ἁμαρτίας. (“I grieve for you more than for myself over your mistake.”)
Here σε should surely be σὲ, emphatic.