Forgive the simple question, but I’m slightly confused by the placing of accents in the answer given (in the Independent Study Guide) to the following question: He is and he is not.
ἔστι καὶ οὐκ ἔστιν.
(My attempt was ἐστί καὶ οὐκ ἐστί.).
Why has ἐστί become ἔστι?
I assume it’s because ἐστί is enclitic, but according to Wikisource (I know, I know), this isn’t the case:
Enclitics at the beginning of a sentence or clause retain their accent. Enclitics used emphatically also retain their accent.
ἐστί is written ἔστι at the beginning of a sentence, if it follows οὐκ (ouk), μή (mḗ), εἰ (ei), ὡς (hōs), ἀλλ’ (all’), τοῦτ’ (toût’), and in the phrase ἔστιν ὅτε (éstin hóte, “sometimes”).
… neither of which appear to apply here. The change isn’t explained in JACT as far as I can tell. What have I misunderstood, please?
Probert “A new short guide to the Accentuation of Ancient Greek” p 144 says:
“The form ἐστί, normally enclitic, has a fully accented variant ἔστι. This fully accented variant is used at the beginning of a verse sentence or clause and when the word expresses existence or possibility…”
That is the one of the few times that I have seen a book on Amazon with all 5 star reviews, all written giving good reasons for the rating. Looks like it’s worth getting.
I was taught Greek initially by someone who ignored the accents. This was a disaster which I never really recovered from in my formal studies. So I am using Probert to remedy this defect. I find it very clear and informative.
Probert gives some other interesting info quoting Herodian, Hermann’s rule (which she follows) and criticism by Wackernagel/Barrett/West. I thought this was a bit too advanced for the OP and probably everyone else here already knows it.