‘ἀλλὰ χρυσοῦν στέφανον φορήσω.’ — ‘εἰ ἅπαξ ἐπιθυμεῖς στεφάνου, ῥόδινον λαβὼν περίθου: > ὄψει > γὰρ κομψότερον.’
'You will look (intransitive = “appear”)", “it will be seen (to be)” or “in appearance (it is or you will be)”?
I think it makes best sense as the dative from ὄψις, “more elegant in appearance.”
In that case, why accusative?
Future οψομαι is active in meaning, not passive.
“You’ll look nicer.” (οψει intrans., κομψ. adverb.) And smell sweeter, he could have added.
Are you thinking of ὀφθήσῃ ?
I seem to have used English to assume that ὁράω even has an intransitive in my OP. I can’t find evidence of that.
Are there other examples of intransitive use?
[Edit: Some commentary taken out.]
I have another idea…
Taking ὄψεται in the LSJ Senses II.2 sense
- see to, “ἴδε πῶμα” Od.8.443 ; look out for, provide, “τινί τι” S.Aj. 1165 (anap.), Theoc.15.2 ; “πρόβατον εἰς ὁλοκάρπωσιν” LXX Ge.22.8.
To quote those examples:
In this usage of ὁράω there is a noun of what is provided or prepared. Taking the future ὄψει in this sense, followed by the accusative singular masculine κομψότερον, the phrase could mean "you will provide (for yourself) a more elegant (one / crown).
Alternatively and similarly, given the era of the work, it might have the sense that Matthew uses it in:
Based on these two dialogues between Judas and the elders and between Pilate and the crowd, which is similar to the usage above, but different in that it seems to imply that an action should be carried out, ὄψει … κομψότερον, with the future taken as a statement of fact rather than command and the comparative as an adverbial, the phrase could mean, “You will see to (the provision of a crown for yourself) in a more refined manner”.
MWH is correct. See the LSJ:
- c. acc. cogn., like βλέπω 11, look so and so, “δεινὸν ὁρῶν ὄσσοισι” Hes.Sc.426 ; “ὁρᾶν ἀλκάν” Pi.O.9.111 ; “ἔαρ ὁρόωσα Νύχεια” Theoc.13.45 ; also ἡδέως ὁρᾶν look pleasant, E.IA1122: c. acc., “κακῶς ὁρᾶν τινα” Philostr.VA7.42.
However, here is a deeper mystery for everyone. The Digital Loeb’s version:
As a complement to [στέφανον] ῥόδινον.
Is case regularly preserved across a γάρ ?
ekηβολε, You have to learn whom to heed, and whom not.
I actually had that same thought when I had a second look at the phrase in question in context. Without γάρ I think my proposed reading of the text is likely. γάρ however practically requires a main verb form or the equivalent. Since ὁράω can be used of appearance (LSJ), it looks like (!) ὄψει is the verb.
I’m sure there’s a Gorgon joke there somewhere.
If you’re going to be eaten by a snake, you might as well look good doing it.
Very punny indeed.
For a conjunctive yes,but does γὰρ allow an understood repitition? My impression (gotten rightly or wrongly) is that γὰρ introduces a syntactically independent clause.
You’re right. That οψει is verb should never have been questioned.
And κομψοτερον is obviously a misprint for κομφότερον.
I’m not sure I’m comfortable with that suggestion. The logic seems somewhat serpentine, but perhaps that’s my punishment for a hasty reading of the text.