Thanks, Michael, for that interesting discussion of the alleged Homeric vocabulary I came up with.
Quite. I didn’t count them of course and was only echoing what I had just read in Van Groningen’s commentary. Having read only the first half of book I, I shouldn’t have made that sweeping generalisation about the abundancy of anacoluthon in Herodotus in the first place. Still, Herodotus prose often gives me the impression of fuzzy syntax, but maybe that’s just the contrast with the overcontrolled periodes of the Third Catilinarian that I’m also reading. Alternatively, it’s my comprehension of Herodotus’ syntax that’s fuzzy instead of the syntax itself.
Back to Van Groningen: the problem is that he makes those remarks about anacoluthon and Homeric vocabulary in his -quite extensive- introductory notes. In those notes he cites the three examples in book I that I mentioned and then writes that further instances will be discussed in the commentary. But since I only received the commentary last week I haven’t used it yet. I’ll try to read up however, and if anything interesting comes up (in connection to syntactical irregularities or vocabulary) I’ll report it in this thread.
I am ashamed to say that made me laugh. Poor Babyloniettes!
Magdalene, yes. Thanks.