Go/come/approach words

Greek Homeric Greek and Early Greek Poetry
1

While studying Pharr’s Iliad, I have encountered a series of words that have similar meanings of to go, to come, or to approach:

βαίνω - come, go, walk
ἔρχομαι - come, go (intransitive)
ἱκνέομαι - arrive, reach one’s destination
εἶμι - come, go; pres. often with fut. meaning, shall come, shall go
κιχᾱ́νω - come upon, overtake, arrive at
ἀντιάω - approach, prepare, partake, share, go (come) to meet
ἔπειμι - come on, come upon, approach
ἐποίχομαι - go to, go against, attack, ply
νέομαι - usually in future sense come, go, return

I’ve added many of these words to Anki, but I wonder if there’s any real difference worth memorizing? I understand that ἔρχομαι and εἶμι are functionally the same verb, with εἶμι acting as the future tense even when present tense, but otherwise I’m not exactly clear on what distinctions I should be drawing between these words.

2

While these words may seem similar they have different meanings. βαίνω is surely not the same as ἱκνέομαι.

Some are similar like βαίνω and ἔρχομαι but are used differently.

For example βαίνω is often used to board a ship or mount a chariot. It can also mean To start or set out to go, run, etc. You will se that ἔρχομαι is not used in that way but is used to describe the motion of birds, bees and clouds etc, βαίνω doesnt seem to be used in this way . You will find many examples of the use of these verbs in Cunliffe which you can access on line here http://stephanus.tlg.uci.edu. Look under lexica, you will need to register (?) for a free account.

Words which have a similar meaning will be used in different contexts for a variety of reasons, not least the metrical possibilities, βαίνω for example has the very useful form βῆ.

The verbs you cite are all very common in Ancient Greek and are well worth learning.

3

I’ve hesitated to answer this because there is a lot that can be said about each of these verbs. I would venture to say books have written about several of them. Seneca has given you some good advice as to the importance of learning them.

4

Both of these replies have been very helpful. I’m not going to worry too much about whether I can memorize them in Anki, but will instead take a broader picture view and try and see how these words are used in context so I can get a good foundation.

Interesting that Seneca gave advice for learning Greek. Do you have any recommendations for where to learn about his advice?

5

:laughing: Sorry, I was referring to our Seneca2008! I was being lazy and left off the 2008.

6

There is also ἥκω, which, again, is just a little different than the other verbs you mentioned.

Each has its own specific use; you don’t learn those from a list, but from reading original texts and from instruction.

I don’t want to be a spoilsport, but I have doubts about self-learning Greek. I think one needs a teacher and preferably a class, too.

7

Herman, I agree that to learn Greek or Latin, one will have a much greater chance of success with a teacher and a class, but I also maintain that it is not impossible to achieve an acceptable level of proficiency in these languages, given sufficient self-discipline, honest self-assessment, and a means to resolve one’s questions.

8

There’s also βλωσκω/εμολον/μεμβλωκα.

9

If Greek were my first foreign language I’d be a bit more worried about my ability to continue making process, but as it is, I studied Latin for two years of high school and Chinese throughout college, so I’m already quite aware of what it takes to learn a language. So far, all of my questions have been answered rather promptly in this forum, which gives me confidence that a classroom won’t be necessary.

Also, the list was of my own making, after reviewing my study of the first 32 lines of the Iliad or so. Because I’m reading through Pharr, I haven’t been reading a great deal of primary texts yet, as I’m just starting to even learn every form of verbs, having not even learned optative and subjunctive mood conjugations yet.

10

There must be more. κίον comes to my mind. But I think the best thing is just to go on reading and try learn the verbs and their differences as you go, progressively.

but I wonder if there’s any real difference worth memorizing?

A French scholar has written a whole book on the subject! (Not a book you’ll need for the time being, you can be sure!)
https://www.amazon.com/Allait-Pareil-Nuit-Suppletisme-Commentaires/dp/2865630951

11

Interesting that Seneca gave advice for learning Greek. Do you have any recommendations for where to learn about his advice?

I am not sure that Seneca is someone I would take much advice from given the sticky end he came to. :smiley:

If you are Latinless read a translation of his epistles for a crash course in stoicism. Miriam T. Griffin wrote Seneca A Philosopher in Politics Oxford University Press, USA which completely ignores all the plays he wrote but offers some good background. There are good translations of the tragedies in Oxford World’s Classics by Emily Wilson.

But if you want to learn latin I highly recommend Lingua Latina per se illustrata pars I Familia Romana by Ørberg.

On the Greek verbs mentioned above you won’t have much option but to learn them if you are going to read Greek. As others have said learning from lists is not very productive especially when meanings are so dependent on context.

12

One of these days I’ll likely get back into Latin, as it is, it’s years in the past for me. But since I’m already having fun with Greek, I don’t really want to burden myself with Latin too much until I am happy with my progress.

Generally speaking, when I start studying a language, I tend to work with trying to find out which words have more or less perfect equivalents in English, and which ones don’t. For example, pronouns, adverbs, conjunctions and prepositions, generally speaking, differ widely in use in foreign languages, as they don’t map onto concrete ideas. At the same time, many words clearly do map onto specific ideas, or at least enough of an idea that flashcards prove very useful.

For example, I know that θυγάτηρ is daughter, νηῦς is boat or ship, and θάλασσα is sea. But does θυγάτηρ mean daughter only literally, or figuratively as well? For example, in Chinese I’ve found that terms of familiar relation are used far more figuratively than in English. But for now, I only know the word because it applies to the relationship between Chryses and Chryseis. Similar to νηῦς: from the context I know so far, I know it applies to the ships the Achaeans used to sail to Asia to fight Troy. But could it equally apply to a small fishing vessel? A rowboat? a raft? I don’t know, but I’m sure I’ll find out in the future. What about θάλασσα? I know there’s other words in Greek meaning similar things, such as pontos and okeanos, and I’m sure I’ll find out the relative meanings in the future.

At the same time, all three of these nouns can be fixed well enough to an English definition, as are many others, that I don’t really worry about the outer meaning of these words, because I already have a general idea of what it means, and it’s not overly similar to other words I know already. Simply mapping θυγάτηρ to daughter, νηῦς to ship, and θάλασσα to sea is sufficient for now, I can always learn more later.

Which brings me back to words for movement in Greek. Because I’m so new to the language, I appreciate everybody telling me that these words are worth studying and singular focus! Much like a pronoun, where simply memorizing the meaning of μέν or ἐπί just won’t do, I will also put the words of motion into my special box of words that can’t simply be memorized through an English definition, as there’s simply too much overlap between them in meaning, and the concepts themselves are too subjective to simply rely on English definitions being useful.

13

In my view it is paramount to keep in mind the Greeks didn’t speak and write Greek with the object of being understood and / or translated into a modern language.

Obviously, to a degree, in the case of concrete nouns, like ship and daughter, there is a pretty solid overlap. But just think of words like kalos or arete. There are no shortcuts to English words.

Same with the verb system, and action and aspect.

My gymnasium professor of Greek (a third generation classicist BTW) used to tell me NOT to consult a dictionary, to look up what any given word meant. Because then I would just be looking for the translation. I should try to figure the word out by looking for the root of the word presented.

On the other hand, I seem to recall an anecdote about the response of some awesome Great Generation Greek scholar like W.S. Barret or E. R. Dodds, when asked at a dinner party what he did for a living. “I look things up, madam.”

14

For myself, I’ve found that contexts are infinitely better than glosses for most purposes other than Loebology. Seeing a word in its natural habitat gives you a feel for it that the sketches or reports of fellow travelers will not do. I’ve heard reams of language advice over the years, but the the only practice that I’ve ever found to give me consistent results in improved comprehension has been reading and seeing the words where they live.

Whether it was Barrett or Dodds who gave the “look things up” quote, Barrett wrote an essay attacking the Wilamowitz opinion that I have in my sig, that we learn the language mainly to read it. So opinions differ.

15
  • νίσσομαι; οἰχνῶ
16

I think it was Barrett, who seems to have been a rather dry person, very much in reaction to the humanist / aestheticist school of the previous generations.. His sense of Greek was deemed to be flawless, though.

17

Oh yes, his Greek is great, though I think he was wrong in the essay to emphasize minute and careful reading over wide and, well, careless reading. His notes to Apology, etc., are wonderful. Some of his theories about Plato and the Pythagoreans struck me as a bit crazy – anything but dry.

18

That quip is attributed to Shackleton Bailey (famous Latinist), as far as I know.

(…I suspect different Barretts are being conflated in this discussion)

19

I’m thinking of Burnet. Barrett is the one with Hippolytos? I’ve read only parts of his notes. Well-researched, but my Greek was worse the last time I looked at it. I don’t have an opinion about him.

20

That’s indeed what happens to those anecdotes. They kind of float around on their own weightlessness and attach themselves to all passers-by.

Here’s a quote:
“The story is perhaps apocryphal, but legend has it that at a Cambridge cocktail party sometime in the 1980s a woman turned to Ernst’s Harvard colleague, the great Latinist Dr. Shackleton Bailey, and asked him “so what do you do?” His answer: “I look things up.” Whatever the veracity of the anecdote, Ernst certainly put a premium on “looking things up,” &c.”

Please note “legend”, “veracity” and “apocryphal”.

The Barrett I mentioned is indeed W.S. Barrett, the editor of the big 1964 Hippolytos commentary, which together with the 2nd edition of Dodds’ Bacchae commentary (1960), has long been the gold standard of Greek commentaries.