Let's Read: AJAX

Greek Learning Greek
1

Per the Halloween thread I wanted to start a Let’s Read thread that focuses on examples rather than grammar discussion. For vocabulary, rather than (just) giving an English gloss, I’d like to give a Greek example usage. For grammar or syntax, rather than (just) providing a rule or translation, I want to try to provide a parallel construction.

But mainly I wanted to read Sophocles.

Jebb’s Commentary + Translation

Scholia (nice font)
Scholia (easy font)

Reading of the first 13 lines

Meter (of the beginning):

xx LL ss LL xx LL ss LL xx LL ss LL (iambic trimeter)

xx = anceps (short or long syllable)
LL = long syllable (long vowel / short vowel followed by double consonant)
ss = short syllable (short vowel)

The last syllable of a line counts as long (even when it is short).

For whatever reason, the rhythm of the iambic trimeter seems much easier for me to feel / hear than other Greek meters. I don’t understand why that would be so, since it has so many anceps positions.

Lines 1-13

Ἀθηνᾶ
ἀεὶ μέν, ὦ παῖ Λαρτίου, δέδορκά σε
πεῖράν τιν’ ἐχθρῶν ἁρπάσαι θηρώμενον·
καὶ νῦν ἐπὶ σκηναῖς σε ναυτικαῖς ὁρῶ
Αἴαντος, ἔνθα τάξιν ἐσχάτην ἔχει,
πάλαι κυνηγετοῦντα καὶ μετρούμενον
ἴχνη τὰ κείνου νεοχάραχθ’, ὅπως ἴδῃς
εἴτ’ ἔνδον εἴτ’ οὐκ ἔνδον. εὖ δέ σ’ ἐκφέρει
κυνὸς Λακαίνης ὥς τις εὔρινος βάσις.
ἔνδον γὰρ ἁνὴρ ἄρτι τυγχάνει, κάρα
στάζων ἱδρῶτι καὶ χέρας ξιφοκτόνους.
καί σ’ οὐδὲν εἴσω τῆσδε παπταίνειν πύλης
ἔτ’ ἔργον ἐστίν, ἐννέπειν δ’ ὅτου χάριν
σπουδὴν ἔθου τήνδ’, ὡς παρ’ εἰδυίας μάθῃς.

  1. εὖ δέ σ’ ἐκφέρει κυνὸς Λακαίνης ὥς τις εὔρινος βάσις.

The subject of ἐκφέρει is ἴχνη, I assume. And in prose, would it be something like this?

τὰ ἴχνη ἐκφέρει σε ὤς εὔρινός τις βάσις ἐκφέρει κύνα Λακαίνην

  1. “ὅτου χάριν σπουδὴν ἔθου τήνδ’”

That seems like a strange way to use χάριν. Jebb translates “eager quest” and it makes sense, but I would be interested in parallel usages.

Ajax 1-200
2

The subject of ἐκφέρει (“bring you to your goal”) is βάσις (“your course”, “your steps”). The scholiast takes βάσις as that of Aias, not Odysseus.

See LSJ ἐκφέρω A IV:

http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.04.0057%3Aentry%3De)kfe%2Frw

LSJ βάσις:

http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.04.0057%3Aentry%3Dba%2Fsis

As Jebb notes, there’s a dispute, which goes back to antiquity and is still raging, as to whether εὔρινος is nominative, modifying βάσις (with enallage, transferred epithet) or genitive from εὔρις, an adjective that also occurs in Aeschylus, modifying κυνὸς.

http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.04.0057%3Aentry%3Deu)%2Fris

Something like: “Your course, like one of a keen-scented Laconian dog, brings you well to your goal.”

ὅτου χάριν – χάριν is used here like a preposition (or, more accurately, a postposition): “for the sake of what?”, i.e., “why?”. This is a common usage of accusative χάριν in prose as well as verse. See LSJ χάρις VI 1 b:

http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.04.0057%3Aentry%3Dxa%2Fris

Jebb’s “eager quest” is σπουδὴν.

Hope this helps!

3

Thank you. It does help!

I’m not sure about this yet: εὖ δέ σ’ ἐκφέρει κυνὸς Λακαίνης ὥς τις εὔρινος βάσις.

It’s just that with with these images I wouldn’t have expected a line there about about feet bringing you to your goal. I would expect a comparison between Odysseus and a dog following a scent.

I notice that one of the scholia agrees and one not:

ΕΥ ΔΕ Σ’ ΕΚΦΕΡΕΙ: ἔξω τῆς σκηνῆς τοῦ Αἴαντος ἐπάγεταί σε ἡ βάδισις τοῦ Αἴαντος, δίκην κυνὸς εὐοσφρήτου, ἀπὸ τοῦ ἴχνους ζητοῦντα, εἰ ἔνδον γέγονεν ὁ Αἴας

ΕΥ ΔΕ Σ’ ΕΚΦΕΡΕΙ: καλῶς δὲ εἰς τέλος ἐξάγει σε, ἡ βάσις ἀπὸ κοινοῦ, ἥγουν πορεία, ὥς τις εὐόσφρητος βάσις Λακαίνης κυνός.

Your explanation of χάριν makes sense. I was confused and thought that σπουδὴν was an adjective modifying it. Here is the same usage of ὅτου χάριν in Plotinus:

http://www.loebclassics.com/view/plotinus-enneas/1966/pb_LCL441.281.xml

Ἀλλὰ γὰρ, ὅπως καὶ ταῦτα εἴρηται αὐτοῖς καὶ ὅτου χάριν, δῆλον

4

The βάσις must refer to that of Odysseus, pace the scholiast. O’s βάσις – the way he walks or goes – is like a βάσις of a well-nosed Laconian bitch. Or his well-nosed βάσις is like a βάσις of a Laconian bitch. The scholiast’s apparent attribution of the word βάσις to Aias is difficult to make sense of here. It’s O’s going/walking/course/steps that is/are like that of a Laconian dog following a scent (as in Jebb’s translation), not Aias’ footprints. The comparison is O’s βάσις with the βάσις basis of a hunting dog tracking game.

5

Well, βάσις is also footprint. And I could see εὔρινος meaning easy-to-the-nose (ie., fragrant, εὔοσμος). The same way as εὐόφθαλμος can mean either beautiful eyes or – as we might say – easy on the eyes. Jebb mentions that εὔρινος as equivalent to εὔρις doesn’t seem to occur until later Greek.

6

Aias’ fragrant footsteps seems a bit far-fetched. There’s no reason to apply the epithet to A.'s footprints. ευρινοσ seems more natural and apt to refer to a dog’s capacity to track by scent–O.'s keen tracking ability is compared to a dog’s nose. Nominative ευρινοσ can be applied to βασισ by enallage–a common poetic figure, but I prefer ευρινοσ as genitive modifying κυνοσ.

The fact that the word ευρινοσ (nom.) doesn’t happen to occur again until much later in preserved texts isn’t a very compelling objection, however.

7

Ὀδυσσεύς
ὦ φθέγμ’ Ἀθάνας, φιλτάτης ἐμοὶ θεῶν,
ὡς εὐμαθές σου, κἂν ἄποπτος ᾖς ὅμως,
φώνημ’ ἀκούω καὶ ξυναρπάζω φρενὶ
χαλκοστόμου κώδωνος ὡς Τυρσηνικῆς.

These last two lines remind me of the εὖ δέ σ’ ἐκφέρει… above.

καὶ νῦν ἐπέγνως εὖ μ’ ἐπ’ ἀνδρὶ δυσμενεῖ
βάσιν κυκλοῦντ’, Αἴαντι τῷ σακεσφόρῳ·
κεῖνον γάρ, οὐδέν’ ἄλλον, ἰχνεύω πάλαι.
νυκτὸς γὰρ ἡμᾶς τῆσδε πρᾶγος ἄσκοπον
ἔχει περάνας, εἴπερ εἴργασται τάδε·

It seems clears what ἔχει περάνας means here – but what is this construction exactly? What sorts of participles can go with ἔχει like this?

ἴσμεν γὰρ οὐδὲν τρανές, ἀλλ’ ἀλώμεθα·
κἀγὼ ’θελοντὴς τῷδ’ ὑπεζύγην πόνῳ.

Is ὑπεζύγην πόνῳ mildly self-deprecating, ie., is Odysseus calling himself everybody’s packhorse?

ἐφθαρμένας γὰρ ἀρτίως εὑρίσκομεν
λείας ἁπάσας καὶ κατηναρισμένας
ἐκ χειρὸς αὐτοῖς ποιμνίων ἐπιστάταις.
τήνδ’ οὖν ἐκείνῳ πᾶς τις αἰτίαν νέμει.
καί μοί τις ὀπτὴρ αὐτὸν εἰσιδὼν μόνον
πηδῶντα πεδία σὺν νεορράντῳ ξίφει

The first two syllables of πεδία are resolved here? Does that happen often?

φράζει τε κἀδήλωσεν· εὐθέως δ’ ἐγὼ
κατ’ ἴχνος ᾄσσω, καὶ τὰ μὲν σημαίνομαι,
τὰ δ’ ἐκπέπληγμαι κοὐκ ἔχω μαθεῖν ὅτου.

-πλ- is counted as a single consonant in ἐκπέπληγμαι (as it often is).

καιρὸν δ’ ἐφήκεις· πάντα γὰρ τά τ’ οὖν πάρος
τά τ’ εἰσέπειτα σῇ κυβερνῶμαι χερί.

The above speech is a lot easier than Athena’s opening speech, I notice. Is Odysseus more plain-spoken than the God?

8

Is ὑπεζύγην πόνῳ mildly self-deprecating, ie., is Odysseus calling himself everybody’s packhorse?

I think it’s self-laudatory. Odysseus thinks of himself as a pro-active stand-up guy who does what’s necessary on behalf of the community.

The first two syllables of πεδία are resolved here? Does that happen often?

Less common in tragedy than in comedy, but still not uncommon. It’s a license that’s used with discretion by Sophocles, but it’s fairly common. Overuse would destroy the feeling for the iambic rhythm. But Aristophanes comes much closer to normal Attic speech.

LSJ εχω:

IV. after Hom., ἔχω as auxiliary, c. aor. part. giving a perfect sense, “κρύψαντες ἔχουσι” Hes.Op.42; “ἀποκληΐσας ἔχεις” Hdt.1.37; “ἐγκλῄσασ᾽ ἔχει” Ar.Ec.355, cf. Th.706; freq. in S., “θαυμάσας ἔχω” OC1140, cf. Ant.22, al.: also in late Prose, “ἀναλώσας ἔχεις” Aristid. Or.18(20).1; “ὅς σφε νῦν ἀτιμάσας ἔχει” E.Med.33: less freq. c. pf. part., S.OT 701, Ph.600, X.An.1.3.14,4.7.1: rarely c. pres. part., “πατρίδα καταστένουσ᾽ ἔχεις” E.Tr.318 (lyr.), cf. X.Cyn.10.11.

9

Reading through the scholia for this section I found a couple of bits about the craft:

ἔστι μέντοι ἐπὶ τῆς σκηνῆς ἡ Ἀθηνᾶ· δεῖ γὰρ τοῦτο χαρίζεσθαι τῷ θεατῇ

Like Darth Vader and the new Star Wars movies (prediction).

Εὐφυῶς δὲ ἄρχεται ὑποθέσεως ὁ ποιητὴς, ὥστε τρανῶσαι τὸ πᾶν διὰ τῆς Ἀθηνᾶς· θεραπεύει δὲ ὁ Ὀδυσσεὺς τὴν Ἀθηνᾶν, ἵνα καὶ ἐν τοῖς ἑξῆς ἕξῃ αὐτὴν εὐμενῆ.

Not only do we get the hypothesis of the play in this exchange, but Odysseus’ service of Athena gives her the necessary character motivation for the upcoming scenes.

10

It seems clears what ἔχει περάνας means here – but what is this construction exactly? What sorts of participles can go with ἔχει like this?

See Hylander’s LSJ link. Another ex. is Dionysus in Eur. Bacchae prolog, ὧν οὕνεκ’ εἶδος θνητὸν ἀλλάξας ἔχω “So I have swapped mortal form” (D is in human disguise, as gods are when they consort with mortals. Athena heard not seen by Od.)

The first two syllables of πεδία are resolved here? Does that happen often?

See Hylander. We had an example in line 6 above, ἴχνη τὰ κείνου νεοχάραχθ’, ὅπως ἴδῃς. Makes no difference whether preceding syllable is heavy or light.

πηδῶντα πεδία notably alliterative, and the string of shorts conveys impression of speed. An expressive phrase.

The above speech is a lot easier than Athena’s opening speech, I notice. Is Odysseus more plain-spoken than the God?

I don’t discern any stylistic difference myself. Sophoclean characters all talk Sophoclean.

ἔστι μέντοι ἐπὶ τῆς σκηνῆς ἡ Ἀθηνᾶ· δεῖ γὰρ τοῦτο χαρίζεσθαι τῷ θεατῇ

Pure guesswork. She was probaby visible to audience (as in epilogs) but probably not on the skene with the characters; but we don’t really know. Sophocles follows tragic convention.

θεραπεύει δὲ ὁ Ὀδυσσεὺς τὴν Ἀθηνᾶν, ἵνα καὶ ἐν τοῖς ἑξῆς ἕξῃ αὐτὴν εὐμενῆ.

“Od. butters her up so as to keep her sweet in the upcoming scenes.”
ἕξῃ is a non-form. I suspect it was ἔχῃ, corrupted by ἑξῆς preceding.

11

ἕξῃ is a non-form. I suspect it was ἔχῃ, corrupted by ἑξῆς preceding.

Not ἔξῃ?

12

No not ἔξῃ; that is a non-form. ἕξῃ, however, can perhaps stand after all. It’s formed as if it were future subjunctive, and of course there is no such thing as a future subjunctive, but the form is occasionally found in late (very late) Greek used evidently as aorist subjunctive, equivalent to σχῇ. That makes me less confident in proposing εχη > εξη under the influence of εξης. If ἕξῃ was what the scholiast wrote, then the note is of no great antiquity.
— But it’s an extremely tiny matter. Let’s stick to Sophocles!

13

It’s called a periphrastic construction in modern linguistic lingo, typically involving either ἔχω or εἰμί + a participle. Albert Rijksbaron’s The Syntax and Semantics of the Verb in Classical Greek (p. 130) actually gives this passage as the first example of the ἔχω + participle type.

ἔχω + participle

This is virtually confined to ἔχω + aorist participle
[…]
This periphrastic construction, which is called σχῆμα Ἀττικόν or Σοφόκλειον and is mainly found in Sophocles, Herodotus and Euripides, is generally considered to have the same stative-confective value as the monolectic perfect; one may point, in this connection, to the presence of the perfect εἴργασται in [the Ajax passage at hand], which refers to the same state as ἔχει περάνας. It is often said that these periphrastic perfects, rather than being alternatives to a monolectic form, with many verbs are the sole forms available to express stative-confective meaning in the active voice, since the monolectic perfects are not attested at all, or came into use after the classical period. […too lazy to copy everything…] So in the end we have to reckon that with the possibility that this periphrastic construction, too, like the other ones, has a value of its own; with Moorhouse we might say that ‘the aor. part. here seems to add a past notion to the continuing effect of ἔχω’.

Rijksbaron’s book is pretty nice, not difficult and not too long, and with lots of illustrating examples. I’d recommend it, although I don’t like all the jargon there, especially the constant use of the monster “state of affairs” instead of the much simpler “action”.

14

And I too launched into reading Ajax. The beginning is surprisingly easy, I wonder if my Greek really has improved since I last attempted tragedy, or is this just another δόλος to lure me to read beyond the point of no return and then throttle me with extremely difficult cruces.

15

To encourage Paul, and maybe others, I think it’s fair to say that the rest of the spoken dialogue throughout the play is no more difficult than the beginning. The sung parts are another matter, but really they’re not so very tough either, and they’re intensely interesting. And Joel has linked Jebb’s translation and notes to help us along.

Paul can say later whether this is Odyssean dolos designed to suck him in.

16

Ἀθηνᾶ
ἔγνων, Ὀδυσσεῦ, καὶ πάλαι φύλαξ ἔβην
τῇ σῇ πρόθυμος εἰς ὁδὸν κυναγίᾳ.

This is hard for me because of all the delayed resolution going on at once. My brain isn’t good enough yet at expecting what is coming. πρόθυμος is answering φύλαξ at the same time as ἔβην is waiting for εἰς ὁδὸν and τῇ σῇ is waiting for κυναγίᾳ. Take any one of the elements out and I can read it naturally, but 3 is too much for me right now.

Also maybe someone can explain Doric forms like κυναγίᾳ and Ἀθάνας to me? I know about α sometimes replacing η, but that’s about it. Also where does Sophocles use Doricisms? And why?

Ὀδυσσεύς
ἦ καί, φίλη δέσποινα, πρὸς καιρὸν πονῶ;
Ἀθηνᾶ
ὡς ἔστιν ἀνδρὸς τοῦδε τἄργα ταῦτά σοι.

Jebb helpfully mentions the ethical dative. It always reminds me of the comedy bit in Taming of the Shrew that goes “rap me this gate, knock me that door,” etc.

Ὀδυσσεύς
καὶ πρὸς τί δυσλόγιστον ὧδ’ ᾖξεν χέρα;
Ἀθηνᾶ
χόλῳ βαρυνθεὶς τῶν Ἀχιλλείων ὅπλων.
Ὀδυσσεύς
τί δῆτα ποίμναις τήνδ’ ἐπεμπίπτει βάσιν;

Why βάσιν?

Ἀθηνᾶ
δοκῶν ἐν ὑμῖν χεῖρα χραίνεσθαι φόνῳ.
Ὀδυσσεύς
ἦ καὶ τὸ βούλευμ’ ὡς ἐπ’ Ἀργείοις τόδ’ ἦν;
Ἀθηνᾶ
κἂν ἐξεπράξατ’, εἰ κατημέλησ’ ἐγώ.
Ὀδυσσεύς
ποίαισι τόλμαις ταῖσδε καὶ φρενῶν θράσει;
Ἀθηνᾶ
νύκτωρ ἐφ’ ὑμᾶς δόλιος ὁρμᾶται μόνος.
Ὀδυσσεύς
ἦ καὶ παρέστη κἀπὶ τέρμ’ ἀφίκετο;
Ἀθηνᾶ
καὶ δὴ ’πὶ δισσαῖς ἦν στρατηγίσιν πύλαις.
Ὀδυσσεύς
καὶ πῶς ἐπέσχε χεῖρα μαιμῶσαν φόνου;

I don’t really know the word μαιμῶσαν, but for some reason I’m surprised to see φόνου instead of a participle. Also the LSJ mentions that it might go with ἐπέσχε instead.

17

κυναγίᾳ – It’s not usual to find a Doric form in tragic dialogue, but LSJ cites two other instances (one merely probable) of this word in tragedy. I don’t have an answer for this.

The dialogue in Greek (Athenian) drama is Attic-ionic; the choral/lyric passages are in “Doric”, which is really a lightly Doricized Attic. You will see examples of this when the chorus marches in. Genre and dialect are inextricably linked in classical Greek. Doric is the dialect of choral poetry, even when written by Boeotians or Athenians, just as Tyrtaeus wrote quintessentially Spartan elegy in Ionic. But literary “Doric” is far removed from the language actually spoken in Doric-speaking communities.

“This is hard for me because of all the delayed resolution going on at once.” You’d better get used to hyperbaton–it’s a natural feature of inflected languages. It’s as pervasive in contemporary colloquial Russian, for example, as in ancient Greek.

τί δῆτα ποίμναις τήνδ’ ἐπεμπίπτει βάσιν; I would explain βάσιν as an internal accusative or accusative of respect, “this attack” maybe.

χεῖρα μαιμῶσαν φόνου – Smyth 1349:

The genitive is used with verbs signifying to aim at, strive after, desire (genitive of the end desired).
““ἀνθρώπων στοχάζεσθαι” to aim at men” X. C. 1.6.29, ““ἐφι_έμενοι τῶν κερδῶν” desiring gain” T. 1.8, ““πάντες τῶν ἀγαθῶν ἐπιθυ_μοῦσιν” all men desire what is good” P. R. 438a, ““τὸ ἐρᾶν τῶν καλῶν” the passionate love of what is noble” Aes. 1.137, ““πεινῶσι χρημάτων” they are hungry for wealth” X. S. 4. 36, ““πόλις ἐλευθερία_ς διψήσα_σα” a state thirsting for freedom” P. R. 562c. So with ὀϊστεύειν shoot at (poet.), λιλαίεσθαι desire (poet.), γλίχεσθαι desire. φιλεῖν love, ποθεῖν long for take the accusative.

http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Smyth+grammar+1349&fromdoc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.04.0007

18

ἐπέσχε χεῖρα μαιμῶσαν φόνου – LSJ suggests that φόνου could be a complement of ἐπέσχε rather than of μαιμῶσαν:

“What restrained his desiring/aiming hand from murder?”

as opposed to

“What restrained his hand desiring/aiming at murder?”.

Both alternatives are plausible.

19

ἔγνων, Ὀδυσσεῦ, καὶ πάλαι φύλαξ ἔβην
τῇ σῇ πρόθυμος εἰς ὁδὸν κυναγίᾳ.

This is hard for me because of all the delayed resolution going on at once. My brain isn’t good enough yet at expecting what is coming. πρόθυμος is answering φύλαξ at the same time as ἔβην is waiting for εἰς ὁδὸν and τῇ σῇ is waiting for κυναγίᾳ. Take any one of the elements out and I can read it naturally, but 3 is too much for me right now.

You’ll get used to it. And there’s really not much in the way of delay here. You have to put τῃ σῃ on hold pending its noun at the end, but otherwise the words fall “naturally” into place. The information is fed out bit by bit, and that’s the way we ought to process it. Whatever you do don’t go reshuffling them.

Also maybe someone can explain Doric forms like κυναγίᾳ and Ἀθάνας to me? I know about α sometimes replacing η, but that’s about it. Also where does Sophocles use Doricisms? And why?

“I was hoping you weren’t going to ask that particular question.” These are freaks. You expect Attic κυνηγ-, but for some reason Attic drama uses the Doric form even in spoken dialogue, where normally only Attic forms are used. And you might expect Αθήνης, but ordinary Attic uses Αθηνᾶς (contracted from Αθηναίας) instead, and tragedy sticks to the Doric form, don’t ask me why. As I say, they’re freaks, but regular in tragedy, for whatever reason. Best not to fret about them.

Doric forms in lyric are another matter. In a nutshell: In Ionic and Attic, long alpha, sometimes called “Doric” alpha (but it’s Aeolic too), was replaced by η, with certain phonologically defined exceptions in Attic. (So it’s actually back-to-front to call it Doric alpha: really it’s Attic eta.) Dictionary entries follow the Attic form, so if you want to look a word up you have to convert it to its Attic form first.

The Athenian dramatists used these “Doric” forms in lyric passages, i.e. passages that were sung, whether by the chorus or by individual characters. It’s a nod to their heritage, and in compliance with convention; it’s a matter of generic propriety. Stesichorus, Pindar, Bacchylides, regardless of their own dialects, composed in a more or less standardized form of “literary Doric," and it became de rigueur—including for dithyrambs and paeans performed at Athens.
In tragedy, however, it’s much watered down, and the distinctively Doric forms (verb endings, for instance) don’t occur. Practically all you find is this universal alpha for the Attic eta. So it’s easy! [Edit: And meter helps with identifying long alphas.]

τί δῆτα ποίμναις τήνδ’ ἐπεμπίπτει βάσιν;

Why βάσιν?

Short answer: It’s euphemistic; it’s somewhat highflown, in keeping with Sophoclean dialogue. I see no significance in its lexical repeat of the Laconian hound’s ευρινος βασις, but no doubt others would.

καὶ πῶς ἐπέσχε χεῖρα μαιμῶσαν φόνου;

I don’t really know the word μαιμῶσαν, but for some reason I’m surprised to see φόνου instead of a participle. Also the LSJ mentions that it might go with ἐπέσχε instead.

μαιμῶσαν gives you your participle (though I’m not sure why you were expecting one). φόνου is practically inevitable. Whether it goes with επεσχε or with μαιμωσαν is a false dilemma. We should resist these either/or choices.

PS Above written before seeing Hylander. You can expect less from me from now on!

20

Promises, promises.

36-50
Ath. ἔγνων, Ὀδυσσεῦ, καὶ πάλαι φύλαξ ἔβην
τῇ σῇ πρόθυμος εἰς ὁδὸν κυναγίᾳ.
Q.(Od.) ἦ καί, φίλη δέσποινα, πρὸς καιρὸν πονῶ;
A. ὡς ἔστιν ἀνδρὸς τοῦδε τἄργα ταῦτά σοι.
Q. καὶ πρὸς τί δυσλόγιστον ὧδ’ ᾖξεν χέρα;
A. χόλῳ βαρυνθεὶς τῶν Ἀχιλλείων ὅπλων.
Q. τί δῆτα ποίμναις τήνδ’ ἐπεμπίπτει βάσιν;
A. δοκῶν ἐν ὑμῖν χεῖρα χραίνεσθαι φόνῳ.
Q. ἦ καὶ τὸ βούλευμ’ ὡς ἐπ’ Ἀργείοις τόδ’ ἦν;
A. κἂν ἐξεπράξατ’, εἰ κατημέλησ’ ἐγώ.
Q. ποίαισι τόλμαις ταῖσδε καὶ φρενῶν θράσει;
A. νύκτωρ ἐφ’ ὑμᾶς δόλιος ὁρμᾶται μόνος.
Q. ἦ καὶ παρέστη κἀπὶ τέρμ’ ἀφίκετο;
A. καὶ δὴ ’πὶ δισσαῖς ἦν στρατηγίσιν πύλαις.
Q. καὶ πῶς ἐπέσχε χεῖρα μαιμῶσαν φόνου;
A. ἐγώ σφ’ ἀπείργω, and on she goes with a mini-messenger speech.

In this stichomythic Q&A section between Odysseus and Athena I was struck by all the καί’s, how they enliven the dialogue and add nuance and a sense of engagement. And with other particles. Here we have usage examples of ἦ καί (3 times!), and καὶ δή, and τί δῆτα, and καί itself, in both questions and answers. All these are worth looking at in context. Not a single word is arbitrary or otiose. And not a γε in sight.
Amazing how with such a formal structure (the characters alternating with a single verse apiece) Sophocles manages to create a dialogue so very realistic in its progression.

Also striking, of course, going back a bit, is the startlingly abrupt way Sophocles begins the play, with Athena addressing Odysseus as he snuffles around. Euripides routinely kicks off his plays with an expository prolog, clueing us in to what we need to know. Sophocles feeds us the background info in a more, well, a more dramatic way, throwing us directly into the action under way and having the characters explain things to each other.