Do you see where it says (impf.) στρωννύω. I’m pretty sure that means that is only found in the imperfect tense, not that στρωννύω is first person singular imperfect active. Just double checking. Where it says ‘impf. ἐστρώννυον’ on the other hand, since ‘impf’ is not between ( ) then that that means that it is first person singular imperfect active.
None of this should be confusing really, and your interpretation is mostly correct.
“—also στρώννῡμι , and (impf.) στρωννύω” (note the separator dash prefacing it) means that στρώννῡμι and στρωννύω are other attested forms of the verb στόρνῡμι but that στρωννύω (with double ν) is attested only in the imperfect. And it proceeds to note that among the attestations of στρωννύω is ἐστρώννυον in the NT.
Also listed is the corresponding passive ἐστρώννυτο conjectured in Menander,
So much detailed and accurate information, and in such compendious and coherent and intelligible form! It makes you realize how splendid a resource the lexicon is, even though it doesn’t give references. And it’s much more up to date than LSJ, itself a magnificent achievement gradually built up over so many years.
It does give references, they’re just not very obvious. If a word appears only in a few authors then it will list those authors. So ptcpl. στρωννύ̄ς (Plu.) means that στρωννύ̄ς as a participle appears only in Plutarch. It abbreviates every author’s name. Yes, a very magnificent resource. It took 24 years to compile and it shows. I’ve spent 400 hours digitizing the book and parsing the data. It was not easy because there are so many exceptions to their formatting rules. When I’m done I’m going to see if Cambridge is interested in turning it into an app.
Totally agree Michael, the Cambridge Greek Grammar is now my go-to lexicon as I find the entries in it much easier to read than those in LSJ. The CGG entries are also better organized IMO and use (mostly) the latest grammatical terminology.
The only downside for me regarding CGG is its limited scope e.g. it doesn’t include entries for the LXX and for the NT it covers only the Gospels and Acts. But for LXX my fallback is Muraoka’s (mostly) excellent lexicon and for the NT the BAGD can be useful except for certain entries where it digresses into theological excursus.
And if none of the above helps me then I turn to logeion and try to struggle through the entry there for the word I’m looking up.
Mitch, I have to admit that I myself still use LSJ rather than the Diggle lexicon, even though it’s less up to date. It gives more information (references included, and wider biblical coverage for the likes of you!) and I generally prefer its organization. And it’s easily accessible on logeion along with others.
Yep one of these days I’ll have to try and tackle learning how LSJ entries are organized and the abbreviations they use as there are times when I end up turning to logeion to puzzle out a word. But I think for now I’ll stick with the CGG as my primary lexicon because I’m still pretty much a beginner struggling to get a handle on grammar and vocabulary…