Bowen's Advanced Greek Unseens

Greek Learning Greek
21

I have in a rather different manner from both of you. I don’t translate at all as I read. Nor do I look ahead and pick sentences apart.

I can’t speak for mwh, but I certainly don’t translate as I read. I do pick sentences apart if I don’t understand them after reading them a few times, which is what you should do. But the idea is to get to a point where you’re in command of the noun and verb forms as well as the syntax and you can read without translating and without picking sentences apart most of the time. And you can’t get to that point without knowing the grammar. Unlike English, Greek encodes a substantial amount of meaning in inflectional endings.

these attempts at literal translation are showing me exactly what I need to work on.

You’re well aware of what you need to work on, and I think that attempting sight translations of moderately difficult passages is not advancing you at this point. In translating, you tend to put English sentences together out of the English equivalents of the Greek words according to what you think the Greek ought to mean without understanding the relationships among the Greek words, which works sometimes but often leads you astray precisely at critical junctures. Attempting sight translations of these passages is simply reinforcing this tendency. Sight translations of this sort, incidentally, are aimed at students who have already been studying Greek for many year – since grammar school, in fact – and who are in complete command of Greek inflections. You need to get to the point where you automatically recognize the forms most of the time without having to think about it. Right now, picking sentences apart – or to put it less dismissively, analyzing sentences – is exactly what you need to do to take your Greek to the next level. Translating the texts set for sight translation would seem to be a useful exercise, provided you don’t attempt sight translation.

I would be happy to continue commenting on your attempts at translation to the best of my abilities (I can’t guarantee that I never make mistakes), provided that you make the effort to provide a finished product. While there is some value to me in going over your work – it helps refresh and sharpen my own knowledge of Greek – it takes a lot of time to do so with the level of care that is needed. When you don’t make the effort to pay attention to the endings or to look up unfamiliar words in the dictionary, it takes all that much more time and effort on my part, and it’s not helpful to you, either.

I’m sorry if I’ve expressed myself too harshly: the last sentence in the passage from Demosthenes set me off because it demonstrated exactly what the problem is: your failure to pay attention to the noun and verb forms.

Bill

22

I had drafted this earlier but suppressed it, but I may as well post it now, if only to back up Bill.

This cuts little ice, Joel. No-one’s suggesting you should look ahead and pick sentences apart, let alone that you should work it all out with a pencil! How many times have I advocated taking things in the order in which they come? If you simply apply what you already know as you read through, then you will not for a single moment imagine that ἐνταῦθα δὴ περιέβαλλον ἀλλήλους καὶ στρατηγοὺς καὶ λοχαγοὺς δακρύοντες means “they were hugging each other and the generals and the captains were crying.”

I don’t mean to rub this particular blunder in your face, but it’s enough to show that you’re going about things the wrong way. Unless you do indeed shore up what you call the “more traditional skills” (such as the ability to distinguish στρατηγούς from στρατηγοί), you’re going to continue to misunderstand what you read.

23

Oh, I certainly didn’t mistake the accusative for the nominative there. I’m master of the 2nd declension at the very least. It’s useless and probably not possible to explain error, but I believe that I was distracted by the και…και there, and just didn’t expect those to be three direct objects in a row. Even looking at it now, I can’t tell if καὶ στρατηγοὺς καὶ λοχαγοὺς isn’t modifying ἀλλήλους (and therefore acting as extensions of the subject). I’m not reliably able to tell the difference between και (and) and και (even).

24

I was distracted by the και…και there, and just didn’t expect those to be three direct objects in a row. Even looking at it now, I can’t tell if καὶ στρατηγοὺς καὶ λοχαγοὺς isn’t modifying ἀλλήλους (and therefore acting as extensions of the subject). I’m not reliably able to tell the difference between και (and) and και (even).

Joel, I’m sorry, but this has me tearing my hair out (figuratively, since I don’t have much anymore). How could you possibly have mistaken δακρύοντες – nominative, as you know full well – for a modifier of στρατηγοὺς καὶ λοχαγοὺς – accusative – and turned it into a finite verb with accusative subjects?

I think I know the answer, and it’s exactly what I’ve been talking about. You look at the Greek words, associate them with their English equivalents, and then put the English words together in a way that you think makes sense without focusing on or understanding how the Greek words fit together. You were making the same sorts of mistakes about a year ago when you were reading and translating Andocides and Demosthenes.

I hate to say this, but you’re not advancing. You are stuck in your scattershot method. It actually works sometimes, but it’s hampering you from taking your Greek to a level of substantial competence. I’ve been working with you for long enough to see this happening again and again. If you’re satisfied with that approach, that’s fine, but don’t post your translations on the internet, where they could mislead others. But if you really want to acquire an understanding of ancient Greek, you simply have to knuckle down and master the grammar. Maybe even picking sentences apart – analyzing the grammar – from time to time wouldn’t hurt.

25

I am benefitting from viewing mistakes/then corrections. The time you and mwh have taken to correct and teach is appreciated.

26

Even though I’m just a beginner, I agree with Phil. I’m finding this instructive. Of course I make the same mistakes all the time and recognize that when I don’t understand a sentence I figure out what the words mean and try to make some sense out of their separate meanings and decide that that’s what the sentence must mean.

This discussion reminds me of classroom instruction where students learn from others’ mistakes. This is something that a self-learner rarely gets.

Mark

27

Bill, I think that you are mistaken. Haven’t you seen the grammar errors I make here from time to time in English? And that’s my native language.

Od. 16.186-206

τὸν δ’ ἠμείβετ’ ἔπειτα πολύτλας δῖος Ὀδυσσεύς·
“οὔ τίς τοι θεός εἰμι· τί μ’ ἀθανάτοισιν ἐΐσκεις;
ἀλλὰ πατὴρ τεός εἰμι, τοῦ εἵνεκα σὺ στεναχίζων
πάσχεις ἄλγεα πολλά, βίας ὑποδέγμενος ἀνδρῶν.”
ὣς ἄρα φωνήσας υἱὸν κύσε, κὰδ δὲ παρειῶν (190)
δάκρυον ἧκε χαμᾶζε· πάρος δ’ ἔχε νωλεμὲς αἰεί. @1
Τηλέμαχος δ’, οὐ γάρ πω ἐπείθετο ὃν πατέρ’ εἶναι,
ἐξαῦτίς μιν ἔπεσσιν ἀμειβόμενος προσέειπεν·
“οὐ σύ γ’ Ὀδυσσεύς ἐσσι πατὴρ ἐμός, ἀλλά με δαίμων
θέλγει, ὄφρ’ ἔτι μᾶλλον ὀδυρόμενος στεναχίζω. (195)
οὐ γάρ πως ἂν θνητὸς ἀνὴρ τάδε μηχανόῳτο
ᾧ αὐτοῦ γε νόῳ, ὅτε μὴ θεὸς αὐτὸς ἐπελθὼν
ῥηϊδίως ἐθέλων θείη νέον ἠδὲ γέροντα.
ἦ γάρ τοι νέον ἦσθα γέρων καὶ ἀεικέα ἕσσο·
νῦν δὲ θεοῖσιν ἔοικας, οἳ οὐρανὸν εὐρὺν ἔχουσι.” (200)
τὸν δ’ ἀπαμειβόμενος προσέφη πολύμητις Ὀδυσσεύς·
“Τηλέμαχ’, οὔ σε ἔοικε φίλον πατέρ’ ἔνδον ἐόντα
οὔτε τι θαυμάζειν περιώσιον οὔτ’ ἀγάασθαι·
οὐ μὲν γάρ τοι ἔτ’ ἄλλος ἐλεύσεται ἐνθάδ’ Ὀδυσσεύς,
ἀλλ’ ὅδ’ ἐγὼ τοιόσδε, παθὼν κακά, πολλὰ δ’ ἀληθείς, (205)
ἤλυθον εἰκοστῷ ἔτεϊ ἐς πατρίδα γαῖαν.

First draft, without dictionary or other tools:

And then much-daring godlike Odysseus answered him:
“I am not some god. Why do you liken me to the immortals?
Rather, I am your father, the one on whose behalf you are groaning (?),
suffering many evils, undergoing the violence of men.”
Having spoken thus he kissed (?) his son, (??) and from his cheeks
a tear fell to the ground, <πάρος δ’ ἔχε νωλεμὲς αἰεί> (continuously crying?).
But Telemachus, for he was not yet believing that he was his father,
Immediately answered him with words saying
"You at least are not Odysseus my father, rather some deity
tricking me, in order that I may groan (?) being pained (?)
For there is no way a mortal man could devise this,
which is here the idea, (ὅτε?) unless a god himself having come
desiring to do so easily might set a youth and an old man. (talking about a disguise?)
For verily you were youthful (adv?) and [now] you are old and pained.
And now you seem to be one of the gods, who hold broad heaven.
Answering him, much-counseling Odysseus spoke
"Telemachus, it’s not right for you, your own father being inside,
either to be amazed at anything overmuch (?) nor to rejoice.
For there isn’t yet any other father Odysseus coming here to you,
rather this one such is me, having suffered evil, and much truth (?) [in truth, having suffered much?]
having come in twenty years to his native land.

κὰδ – what sort of word is that?

Looking up things in Cunliffe/Smyth, plus correcting other random errors

κὰδ δὲ = κατὰ δὲ

And then much-daring godlike Odysseus answered him:
“I am not some god. Why do you liken me to the immortals?
Rather, I am your father, the one on whose behalf you are groaning,
suffering many evils, having received violence of men.”
Having spoken thus he kissed his son, and down from his cheeks
a tear fell to the ground, before this he had checked it always.
But Telemachus, for he was not yet believing that he was his father,
Immediately answered him with words saying
"You at least are not Odysseus my father, rather some deity
tricks me, in order that I may groan lamenting
For there is no way a mortal man could devise this,
which is here the scheme, except when a god himself having come
desiring to do so easily makes himself a youth or an old man. – [still a guess]
For verily you were just now an old man and you were dressed shabbily
And now you seem to be one of the gods, who hold broad heaven.
Answering him, much-counseling Odysseus spoke
"Telemachus, it’s not right for you, your own father being inside,
either to be amazed at anything overmuch nor to marvel.
For there isn’t yet any other Odysseus who will come here to you,
rather this one such is me, having suffered terribly and wandered much,
I came in the twentieth year to my native land.

28

This is better.

πολύτλας – “having suffered/endured much”

κὰδ . . . ἧκε = καθηκε (tmesis) from καθ-ιημι “throw/cast down”. Transitive. Review the conjugation of ιημι.

κὰδ δὲ παρειῶν δάκρυον ἧκε χαμᾶζε – literally, “he cast a tear down on the ground”.

σύ γ’ – emphatic σύ: “YOU are not my father Odysseus”

θέλγει – better something like “enchants”, “bewitches”.

ὄφρ’ ἔτι μᾶλλον ὀδυρόμενος στεναχίζω "so that I groan lamenting even more

ᾧ αὐτοῦ γε νόῳ – “with his own mind at least”

ὅτε μὴ θεὸς αὐτὸς ἐπελθὼν ῥηϊδίως ἐθέλων θείη – ἐπελθὼν – “coming upon him”; here, maybe something like “intervening”. ἐθέλων – I would translate this as a condition: “if he wanted to”. “in circumstances where a god himself, intervening, did not easily make [him] a young man and/or an old man”, “unless a god himself, intervening, were to easily make him young or old if he wanted to”.

οὔ σε ἔοικε φίλον πατέρ’ ἔνδον ἐόντα οὔτε τι θαυμάζειν περιώσιον οὔτ’ ἀγάασθαι· – πατέρ’ ἔνδον ἐόντα is the direct object of θαυμάζειν and ἀγάασθαι: “you shouldn’t wonder or be amazed too much that your own father is within”. It’s not an accusative absolute, which is an Attic construction that is limited to impersonal expressions with certain participles and doesn’t occur in Homer. See Smyth 2076. But at least here I think you’ve tried to understand the syntax.

τοιόσδε – maybe something like “in this state you see me in”

Incidentally, I think these collections of “unseens” – what I call “sight translations” – are for the use of teachers and the passages are not necessarily intended to be given to students without any help with vocabulary or grammar. It’s up to the teacher to decide what level of assistance the students require.

29

From what I read in the Introduction, these passages were intended to broaden the student’s vocabulary and acquaint him with a broader range of material from the Greek classics than was possible by reading whole works, thus enabling the student to succeed at a pass examination for a Bachelor’s Degree without Honors, at which “unseen” passages for sight translation would be given.

30

You may be thinking of Cook and Merchant’s original Advanced Greek Unseens (1898, available on Archive.org). Bowen’s (1980) is an updated version. Most importantly, Cook & Merchant gives slightly abridged or adapted texts; Bowen’s passages are unadapted and taken from more recent OCTs or Teubners. As Hylander points out, one use is for a classroom setting where teachers can decide what they want to gloss. More advanced students, however, can benefit from working through them on their own without glosses. I found this collection and its Latin counterpart helpful in preparing for my doctoral exams.

There’s an interesting pedagogical study of “unseen translation” from Cambridge called “Rethinking ‘Unseen’ Translation: A Pilot Scheme for Developing Students’ Reading Skills in Greek and Latin.” It’s available online. The appendices are particularly useful.

31

I did find the edition of “Advanced Greek Unseens” I was paraphrasing on archive.org, however it appears to have been published in 1904 and its editor is one B.J. Hayes. It was the only version I could find, so perhaps this was a reprint or a reworking of the original. Here’s the link:
https://archive.org/search.php?query=advanced%20greek%20unseens
Thanks for the reference to that study! I’ll have to give it a look.

32

Plutarch: Life of Nicias 29.2-3

ἔνιοι δὲ καὶ δι’ Εὐριπίδην ἐσώθησαν. μάλιστα γὰρ ὡς ἔοικε τῶν ἐκτὸς Ἑλλήνων ἐπόθησαν αὐτοῦ τὴν μοῦσαν οἱ περὶ Σικελίαν, καὶ μικρὰ τῶν ἀφικνουμένων ἑκάστοτε δείγματα καὶ γεύματα κομιζόντων ἐκμανθάνοντες ἀγαπητῶς μετεδίδοσαν ἀλλήλοις. τότε γοῦν φασι τῶν σωθέντων οἴκαδε συχνοὺς ἀσπάζεσθαί τε τὸν Εὐριπίδην φιλοφρόνως, καὶ διηγεῖσθαι τοὺς μὲν ὅτι δουλεύοντες ἀφείθησαν, ἐκδιδάξαντες ὅσα τῶν ἐκείνου ποιημάτων ἐμέμνηντο, τοὺς δ’ ὅτι πλανώμενοι μετὰ τὴν μάχην τροφῆς καὶ ὕδατος μετελάμβανον τῶν μελῶν ᾄσαντες. οὐ δεῖ δὴ θαυμάζειν ὅτι τοὺς Καυνίους φασὶ πλοίου προσφερομένου τοῖς λιμέσιν ὑπὸ λῃστρίδων διωκομένου μὴ δέχεσθαι τὸ πρῶτον, ἀλλ’ ἀπείργειν, εἶτα μέντοι διαπυνθανομένους εἰ γιγνώσκουσιν ᾄσματα τῶν Εὐριπίδου, φησάντων δ’ ἐκείνων, οὕτω παρεῖναι καὶ συγκαταγαγεῖν τὸ πλοῖον.

“Unseen” translation:

And some were even saved through Euripides. For it appears that of those outside Greece, those about Sicily especially desire his music. And every time visitors come bringing small examples and tastes, gratefully learning from them they share them among themselves. At least at that time the majority (συχνοὺς?) of those saved both learnedly enjoyed Euripides at home, and said either that serving as slaves they were set free after having taught what they they had memorized of his poetry, or that wandering after the battle they received food and water for singing his lines. So no need to wonder that they say the Kaunioi do not at first accept a ship entering their harbor being chased by pirates, but refuse them (?), however after having learned if they know songs of Euripides, and those on the ship having said them, they in this way meet and escort the ship.

Revision:

And some were even saved through Euripides. For it appears that of those outside Greece, those about Sicily especially desire his music. And every time visitors come bringing small examples and tastes, gratefully learning these from them, they share them among themselves. At least at that time many of those saved both learnedly enjoyed Euripides at home, and said either that serving as slaves they were set free after having taught what they they had memorized of his poetry, or that wandering after the battle they received food and water for singing his lines. So no need to wonder that they say the residents of Caunus do not at first accept a ship putting into their harbor while being chased by pirates, but refuse them, however after having learned if they know songs of Euripides, and those on the ship having said them, they in this way meet and escort the ship.

33

Some of the tenses in this selection are tricky.

τῶν ἐκτὸς Ἑλλήνων – “those outside the Greeks/the Greek nation”, rather than “outside Greece”, but this is strange to me at least because I would have thought that Greek colonies outside Greece would be considered Hellenes. Edit: see mwh’s comment below. “The Greeks outside,” i..e, the Greeks outside Greece proper.

ἐπόθησαν, μετεδίδοσαν – what is the tense? These tenses shouldn’t be tricky. Even if the endings may be slightly unfamiliar (though they shouldn’t be), the augment should immediately trigger a “past, not present” reaction. Translations of some infinitives and participles have to be changed, too.

ἀγαπητῶς – “lovingly”, They loved Euripides’ poetry. Visitors brought bits and scraps [δείγματα καὶ γεύματα] of Euripides – i.e., they knew them by heart – and recited them to the Sicilians, who learned them “lovingly” and shared them among themselves.

γοῦν is just emphatic ουν., not “at least” here. LSJ: “freq. in adducing an instance, or a fact giving rise to a presumption.” Here the treatment of those who managed to survive and could recite or sing parts of Euripides is an instance of the Sicilians’ love for Euripides. Maybe here “and so” or just “so”.

τότε γοῦν φασι – “They say that at that time”. “The tradition is that at that time”. Plutarch is evidently writing in the 2nd century CE about (I assume) the disastrous end of the Sicilian expedition of the Athenians in 413 BCE, when Nicias was executed by the Sicilians.

τῶν σωθέντων . . . συχνοὺς . . . τοὺς μὲν ὅτι . . . τοὺς δ’ ὅτι: many [συχνοὺς] of the survivors . . . ; and some [of them] told/narrated that . . .; others, that . . . .

τῶν σωθέντων οἴκαδε – those who survived [and reached] home; The suffix -αδε implies motion to a place. As often, the “aorist passive” form is functionally (and was originally) intransitive, rather than passive. The forms with -θην are more typically passive. But here there is no agent of salvation in sight, so an intransitive translation, “survived”, or “escaped” rather than “were saved” is probably better, though in the first sentence “were saved by Euripides” might be better.

ἀσπάζεσθαί τε τὸν Εὐριπίδην φιλοφρόνως, “greeted him warmly/wholeheartedly”. Don’t translate τε . . . καὶ here as “both . . . and” – just “and”.

μὴ δέχεσθαι . . . ἀπείργειν . . . διαπυνθανομένους . . . παρεῖναι . . . συγκαταγαγεῖν – this is an anecdote that happened on a single occasion and should be translated by past-tense verbs. (Second) aorist infinitive συγκαταγαγεῖν (instead of present infinitive, which would be συγκατάγειν; note difference in accent) makes it clear that this is a one-time occurrence, not a customary practice, but the story really doesn’t make sense as a habitual or customary practice. μὴ δέχεσθαι . . . ἀπείργειν represent imperfects: "At first they were [refusing to] accept them . . "

ἀπείργειν – “were holding them off/keeping them away”

διαπυνθανομένους – “inquiring” here, not “learning”. They didn’t learn until the people on the boat responded to their question.

γιγνώσκουσιν – this is present tense in Greek but in English it would be have to be translated by a past tense. It’s a subordinate clause in indirect discourse, in secondary sequence because the present participle διαπυνθανομένους stands for imperfect in the past-tense narrative. It could optionally be present optative in classical Attic (but Plutarch was writing in the period when the optative was fading from use in non-Atticizing Greek). See Smyth 2619.

τὸ πρῶτον . . . εἶτα – at first . . . but then

φησάντων – as often in Greek, this means not just “said” but “said, ‘yes, we did’”.

παρεῖναι – “came to their assistance”, from ειμι “to be”, not “to come”. For some reason, I couldn’t find this word in the clunky online version of LSJ.

συγκαταγαγεῖν – from καταγω, “to bring a ship to port”, here, “helped them [συν-] bring their boat to port”. αναγω “to put a ship out to sea”.

Not bad, but it would be worthwhile to go over this one more time.

34

. Isn’t it “the outside Greeks" (gen. of οι εκτος Ελληνες), as distinct from mainland Greeks or Greeks much closer to home? There’s no suggestion that the Syracusans are non-Greek.

35

Yes, I missed that. I hope you checked the rest of what I posted for my other mistakes.

36

Well no I didn’t. I spend too much of my time correcting mistakes as it is, my own among them. I just happened to notice this at the top of your post. I’d be surprised if there were any more.

37

I went through each verb form and wrote down the forms that I thought were correct from memory. Then I went back over each with Perseus and found two errors: μετεδίδοσαν (impf.) and παρεῖναι (aor., from ἴημι, not εἰμί). This really helps me take more care with tenses on re-reads.

ἐσώθησαν - aor. pass.
ἔοικε - perf. act.
ἐπόθησαν - aor. act.
ἀφικνουμένων - part. pres. mid.
κομιζόντων - part. pres. act.
ἐκμανθάνοντες - part. pres. act.
μετεδίδοσαν - aor. act. WRONG, imperf.
φασι - pres. act.
σωθέντων - part. aor. pass.
ἀσπάζεσθαί - inf. pres. mid.
διηγεῖσθαι - inf. pres. mid.
δουλεύοντες - part. pres. act.
ἀφείθησαν - aor. pass.
ἐκδιδάξαντες - part. aor. act.
ἐμέμνηντο - plupf. mid.
πλανώμενοι - part. pres. mid.
μετελάμβανον - impf. act.
ᾄσαντες - part. aor. act.
δεῖ - pres. act.
θαυμάζειν - inf. pres. act.
φασὶ - pres. act.
προσφερομένου - part. pres. pass.
διωκομένου - part. pres. pass.
δέχεσθαι - inf. pres. mid.
ἀπείργειν - inf. pres. act.
διαπυνθανομένους - part. pres. mid.
γιγνώσκουσιν - pres. act.
φησάντων - part. aor. act.
παρεῖναι - inf. pres. act. WRONG VERB, aor.
συγκαταγαγεῖν - inf. aor. act.

γιγνώσκουσιν – this is present tense in Greek but in English it would be have to be translated by a past tense. It’s a subordinate clause in indirect discourse, in secondary sequence because the present participle διαπυνθανομένους stands for imperfect in the past-tense narrative. It could optionally be present optative in classical Attic (but Plutarch was writing in the period when the optative was fading from use in non-Atticizing Greek). See Smyth 2619.

Thank you. I hadn’t realized that διαπυνθανομένους made it a indirect discourse with a past verb. Given that it’s following εἰ, I should only very rarely expect present optative even in Attic Greek, correct?

παρεῖναι – “came to their assistance”, from ειμι “to be”, not “to come”. For some reason, I couldn’t find this word in the clunky online version of LSJ.

I think it may be παρίημι. LSJ: “V. allow to pass, admit”. This would make it aorist, not present, which would reinforce your point about this being a one-time occurrence.

38

I think it may be παρίημι

Yes, you’re clearly right about that.

Given that it’s following εἰ, I should only very rarely expect present optative even in Attic Greek, correct?

That’s what Smyth says.

It might be helpful to redo the translation at this point, which shouldn’t take long. If you do that, I think you’ll find that the passage is much more coherent than the earlier attempts. If something doesn’t feel right in English translation, it’s a good idea to rethink it.

39

Sure, here goes again:

And some were also saved because of Euripides. For especially those in Sciliy, out of all Greeks outside of Greece, longed for his music. And each time vistors came bearing small examples and tastes, the Sicilians learned from them and were lovingly sharing them among each other. They say that at that time many of those who got away greeted Euripides warmly at home, and some said that serving as slaves they were set free, having taught as much of his works as they had memorized, and others that wandering after the battle, food and water were shared with them for having sung his songs. No need to wonder then that they say the Caunusians would not receive at first a ship borne into their harbor being chased by pirates, but refused it, afterwards however having learned whether they knew lyrics of Eurpides, and them having affirmed, thus they allowed them entrance and escorted the boat.

(Why μὴ δέχεσθαι instead of οὐ?)

40

Why μὴ δέχεσθαι instead of οὐ?

I don’t really have an answer. Usually φημι + infinitive would be take ου, to negate the infinitive. Perhaps here the negative refusal is emphatic, “You will not enter our port!” or maybe because it’s an official decision to refuse entry, or because there’s an implicit prohibition. Cf. Smyth 2724. I think the choice between ου and μη outside the indicative isn’t always as clear-cut as the rules in grammars would have you believe, and the “rules” are really general tendencies that don’t cover all situations. Perhaps the emphatic μη when the men in the boat seek entry makes what follows – the reversal of the order upon learning that the men in the ship know Euripides – more dramatic.

“escorted the boat” – again, καταγω has a very specific meaning: “to bring a ship/boat to harbor.” You might translate “escorted the boat into the harbor/to the dock” or something like that, but for the sake of precision, i think you need to get in the idea of a landing somehow, not just escort.