ἀτρακτοειδής, conveniently and etymologically defined in LSJ as “spindle-shaped”, is descriptive, but sort of misses the point that the significance of being “spindle-shaped”, which means being “tapered” (elongatedly cylindrical / becoming narrower at one end than the other). The entry would make more sense if it read, “spindle-shaped, i.e. tapered”.
In a sense you’re certainly right, but I wonder if it is not an excess of zeal to want something that literally reads as “spindle-shaped” to have the meaning expanded from “spindle-shaped.” The sort of visual metaphoric effort at stake in imagining a spindle while reading the expression “spindle-shaped” is exactly the same kind of mental effort required by ἀτρακτοειδές.
I think that the meaning in Greek must take account of the context. If you look up ἄτρακτος, from which ἀτρακτοειδής is derived, you can see that it can mean the shaft of an arrow or part of a ship as well.
Also i think that your English meaning of spindle is not correct. The Oxford shorter dictionary defines Spindle as “A slender round rod usu. tapering at each end…” Further meanings do not refer to any tapering at all.
It would be interesting to hear what examples you have in mind where the lack of an explicit idea of tapering produces some difficulty in understanding the meaning of a text. Frequently when a spindle is mentioned in Greek literature (see Hdt. 5.12 for example) taken in the first sense as a weaving implement it is a marker of femaleness not an activity perhaps to be taken too literally.
In reply to both, I think that not only the significance of being shaped like a spindle (or arrow, or part of a ship) - what image that evokes is lost to a modern user of LSJ, and from my mistake and the need to quote a dictionary to explain the meaning, even the shape of a spindle is lost to people in our age. It is not a possible misunderstanding of a particular text, but of the English that is primarily at stake. Imagining in vacuo is different than imagining a familiar household item. A dictionary needs to cross cultural (and technological boundaries).
I have to confess that I dont really understand the point you are trying to make.
I have to agree with Miguel. And this isn’t exactly a household word. The only attestation recorded in either LSJ or Brill is an obscure medical treatise from the 1st century CE. A literal translation of the Greek, “spindle-shaped,” seems much more useful to anyone making the effort to read that treatise, even if they have to resort to an English dictionary or some other source to find out what a spindle is.
The Greek word means “spindle-shaped”. It’s not absolutely certain that this implies “tapered at both ends.” Readers of the treatise are free to infer that the object to which the adjective was applied (some sort of rod or wand) was tapered at both ends like a spindle (whether already aware what a spindle looks like or informing themselves in response to the dictionary definition), but if the dictionary were to explicitly draw this inference for readers, it would be doing readers a disservice.
Perhaps a simple google image search would suffice?
It is a much more flexible and useful word to describe the shapes of things, if you are not tied to thinking about spindles (or arrows or parts of ships), but are able to abstract the shape. A sabre ξίφος, a carrot σταφυλῖνος, etc. can all be described.
but are able to abstract the shape. A sabre ξίφος, a carrot σταφυλῖνος, etc. can all be described
I see, but all these shapes are quite different. A carrot is essentially a tube and only in cartoons is it conical, a sabre is characterised by being curved, and that is not the first word I would use to translate ξίφος. Surely the more you try to constrict the meanings of words the less helpful they become. If it is essential to get some idea across, a word can be modified with a suitable description.
I agree very much with Hylander’s second paragraph.