Playing with composition recently, I thought I would post a passage. I would be grateful for any comments; or in turn to comment on anyone else’s version. I picked a random selection from Sidgwick that I hadn’t attempted before. I wrote without consulting any resources, including Sidgwick’s key, and kept myself to a relatively short time. No doubt there are many things that could be improved.
English prompt:
Talirantes happened once to be in the city at the time when a certain sophist, named Ion, was living there, who professed to be able to teach all philosophy, so that all the citizens eagerly sent their sons to him that they might learn, gladly paying large sums of money. But when two years had gone by, and the young men did not seem to be growing wiser, nay, rather began to despise the sophist and neglect learning, at last the citizens, repenting of their mistake, cast about to get rid of this sophist, and find another more skilful to teach their sons. And one man said he knew of a Sicilian sophist, whose fame was so great that people came even from Asia to hear him; this man, he heard, was coming to the city, and if they tried, perhaps they could persuade him to teach the young men instead of Ion. And he, having arrived, and being asked, agreed to do so: and it seemed good to the citizens that the fathers should hear him first, that they might know whether they ought to send their sons. And there was collected so great a crowd to hear him, that they could with difficulty enter; and when he had finished speaking, Talirantes said, ‘Who could have expected we should long for the good Ion so soon?’
ἔτυχε δέ ποτε Ταλιράντης ἐπιδημῶν ἐν ᾧ σοφιστής τις ὄνομα Ἴων καὶ ἐκεῖ διῃτᾶτο, ὅσπερ ἐπηγγέλλετ’ οἷός τ’ εἶναι πᾶσαν διδάξαι φιλοσοφίαν. ὥσϑ’ ἅπαντες οἱ πολῖται τοὺς ὑεῖς προθύμως ἔπεμψαν ὡς αὐτὸν ἀργύριον ἡδέως ἀποδιδόντες θαυμάσιον ὅσον. τῷ μέντοι τρίτῳ ἔτει, ὡς οἱ παῖδες οὐχ ὅπως σοφώτεροί πως αὐτοὶ αὑτῶν ἐγένοντο ἀλλὰ καὶ τῆς τε σοφιστοῦ κατεφρόνουν καὶ τῆς παιδείας ἠμέλουν, τελευτῶντες οἱ πολῖται μεταγνόντες ὃ ἥμαρτον ἐπεμελοῦντ’ ὅπως ἐκεῖνον μὲν ἐκβαλοῦσιν, ἕτερον δέ τινα σοφώτερον ὄντ’ ἐξευρήσουσιν ὅς γε τοὺς ὑεῖς ὄντως παιδεύσει. ἔφη δέ τις τῶν αὐτόθεν Σικελιώτην τινὰ γιγνώσκειν σοφὸν ἄνδρα ὃς οὕτως ἐπιφανὴς εἶναι ὥστε πολλοὺς πόρρωθεν πλεῖν καὶ ἐκ τῆς Ἀσίας αὐτοῦ ἀκουσομένους λέγοντος. τοῦτον δὲ πυθέσθαι μέλλοντα ἐπιδημεῖν ὥστ’ εἰ αὐτοῖς εἴη βουλομένοις τοῦτον ἂν πεῖσαι τοὺς νέους παιδεύειν ἀντὶ τοῦ Ἴωνος. ὁ μὲν οὖν Σικελιώτης ἀφικόμενος αὐτίκα συνεχώρησεν, τοῖς δὲ πολίταις πρότερον ἔδοξεν αὐτοῦ γ’ ἀκοῦσαι λέγοντος πρὶν τοὺς αὑτῶν πέμψαι. ἐκεῖσε δ’ ἠγέρθη τοσοῦτος ὄχλος ὥστε σχεδόν τι ἀδύνατον εἶναι καὶ εἰσιέναι εἰς τὴν πόλιν. τέλος δὲ δημηγορήσαντος Ταλιράντης ‘τίς ποτ’ ἄν’ ἔφη ‘καὶ προσεδόκησεν ἡμᾶς ἤδη τὸν Ἴωνα ποθῆσαι ἄν;’
Quickly reading through, one or two things.
ἐπηγγέλλετ’ οἷός: -εθ’, unless you’re insisting on single aspiration. Cf. later ἐπεμελοῦντ’ ὅπως. Good to effect the elision though!
οὐχ ὅπως How I hate this idiom!
ἀποδιδόντες better aor.
αὐτοὶ αὑτῶν: del. αὑτῶν, in fact del. πως αὐτοὶ αὑτῶν
τῆς τε σοφιστοῦ: τοῦ!
ἐπιφανὴς εἶναι horrid attraction: ειη
πυθέσθαι μέλλοντα: or just μελλειν?
ἐπιδημεῖν better fut.?
τουτον twice too close: αυτον δε for the first, τουτον γε for the second?
πρότερον ἔδοξεν invert?
εἰς τὴν πόλιν: εις το χωριον?
τοσοῦτος ὄχλος: τοσουτοι less pejorative
δημηγορήσαντος: αυτου δ.?
καὶ προσεδόκησεν: cut the και (and the earlier one too)
Several good touches.
I readily agree about most of your edits. A few thoughts/follow ups, if I may:
-Why do you hate the οὐχ ὅπως idiom? It looks like Sidgwick used μᾶλλον μὲν οὖν here–I think mine works better. (I see a few questionable choices in his version).
-What’s unsuitable about the αὐτοὶ αὑτῶν idiom here? Simpler without it? I thought it was fitting. Rereading, ἐγένοντο needs to be ἐγίγνοντο.
-I agree about ἐπιφανὴς εἶναι being a botched attempt at inf attraction (sometimes not an easy idiom to use convincingly!). Specifically, I don’t think it works at all following a nom like this (ὃς…ἐπιφανής).
-τοῦτον δὲ (πυθέσθαι): Yes, too many toutons. Initially I wrote this first one as connecting ὅνπερ. αὐτὸν δὲ better.
-μέλλοντα ἐπιδημεῖν: I initially wrote ἐπιδημήσειν but the form seems off/late to me without looking into attestation. I still prefer the pres inf in this case.
-Definitely yes about inverting πρότερον ἔδοξεν and τοσοῦτος ὄχλος—>τοσοῦτοι (τοσοῦτος ὄχλος too submissive to the English)
-καὶ εἰσιέναι & καὶ προσεδόκησεν: of course you’re right about these overzealous καίs. I was specifically trying to use καί idiomatically in dependent clauses + questions yesterday—it didn’t go so well.
-τῆς σοφιστοῦ: antiemetics required (and yes, the faulty elisions and ἀποδιδόντες just careless error)
Thanks again! Composition can be a lonely business—it’s nice to connect.
@phalakros
Sidgwick’s seems to read well enough, though not very pure. I see he has αποδιδοντες too, and οχλος.
I know I ought not have anything against the ουχ οπως idiom, it just always seems precious to me. But you used it perfectly well, and I don’t at all like Sidgwick here.
More later perhaps, or perhaps not.
Sidgwick wrote the Greek first, and then translated it to English for his composition book. (Making relatively few backedits or revisions to the Greek for the key, as far as I can tell, though it’s impossible to be certain here.) You can see it in rare difficult Greek-following pronoun choices in the English, and (lesser evidence) sometimes where the advice in the composition exercise is not followed in the key.
His Greek in this particular composition (no surprise!) is lucid and very easy for me to follow. I could read it half-asleep. Maybe he’s using some non-Attic tells…but those transitions are so smooth! On the other hand, since he was telling a story out of his head, not working from English, of course the transitions are smooth.
The μᾶλλον version, whether “correct” or not, is lucid. Sidgwick read a lot of Plato, I guess, who really puts his μᾶλλονs to work.
Starting the Greek with ἔτυχε δέ, as he does, is an in media res opening. It only makes sense in an ongoing narrative immediately following something else about Talirantes. I assume the last story was about him too. Again shedding some light on Sidgwick’s composition practice for this key
ἐπηγγέλλετο governing οἷός τ’ εἶναι as you both use it is something the LSJ says happens…but it makes my head hurt a bit when I have to pause to guess from context whether οἷός τ’ εἶναι is governed by the verb or to be read at sentence-level. The actual Plato reference by the LSJ uses it slightly differently, ἐπηγγέλλετο μόνος οἷός τ’ εἶναι or something like that, with the οἷός τ’ εἶναι as predicate to the μόνος. Regardless, the Plato version reads smooth and doesn’t make me stop and think. I very much suspect that Sidgwick took this usage from his dictionary rather than his reading.
A few comments before I say χαίρειν to Talirantes.
-οὐχ ὅπως and the like: “precious” seems right. I believe most often used in elevated contexts (esp by the orators). In later Gk it’s a marker of fancy register. Chiefly, though, it was used to confound Classics students thousands of years later.
-Sidgwick’s version: ἀποδιδόντες works with his impf ἔπεμπον, but the sense of what follows (they sent them the youth at once then waited 2 years) suggests ἔπεμψαν…ἀποδόντες. His ὥστε καὶ ἐξ Ἀσίας ἥκοντας ἀκούειν is incoherent; Σικελόν not good prose. His versions often need a few emendations. The writing in “Lectures on Greek Prose Comp” is much more polished (a book from which I’ve learned a great deal). Still, I’m not sure how much Sidgwick will profit from our comments.
@jeidsath
-There’s nothing special about ἐπηγγέλλεθ’ οἷός τ’ εἶναι; no need to add μόνος. On its own there’s no reference to Plato in the phrase (though of course the passage as a whole alludes to the Ion). If it makes your head hurt a physician may be of more use than a philologist.
-“Talirantes” is one of a few recurring personalities in Sidgwick’s textbook and you’re right that this is to be written as one in a series of Talirantes tales. Sidg.’s punch-line narratives get tiresome (hence I skipped several in Part I).
-On your version: there are several errors, but I know you’d be able to spot them yourself and self-correct. On a quick read I marked in bold the words with more important morphological or syntactical issues.
ὁ Ταλιραντες ἐν τῇ πόλει ἔτυχε ὤν ποτε ἐν ᾧ αὐτὴν σόφος τις τοῦ ὀναμάτος Ἰόντος διέτριβε περισκεδνύων ὡς αὑτῷ ἦν τὸ διδάσκειν τῶν πασῶν ἐπιστημῶν πᾶσι ἀνθρώποις. πιστεύοντες οὖν ἐκείνῳ πάντες τῶν πολίτων τοὺς υἱοὺς αὐτῶν εἰς τοῦτον ἐπέδωκαν, χρήματα πόλλα ἐπιλύοντες, ὥστε ταῦτα μαθεῖν τοὺς υἱούς. οὕτως δὴ ἐποίησαν δύω ἐτοῦς. τέλος δὲ οἱ πολῖτοι γιγνώσκοντες τῶν υἱῶν ὡς οὐ σοφωτέρων γιγόνται ἀλλὰ κατέφρονουν τὸν διδάσκαλον καὶ τὸ μαθεῖν, μετήγνοντοτὸ ἅμαρτοναὐτῶν καὶ ηὕρισκον ὅπως τούτου ἀπολυοίεν ἐφευρόντες ἄνδρα τινὰ δεινότερόν πως ἀλλόν ὡς τῷ ἐκνείῳ οἱ υἱοὶ αὐτῶν διδασκόμενοι τυγχάνοιεν. εἷς δέ τις γνοὺς τοῦ σόφου τοῦ Σικιλέου ἐπιφανέντος ὡς ἀπ’ Ἀσίας ἐπορευέσθοντο πολλοὶ ἄνθρωποι θέλοντες αὐτοῦ ἀκοῦσαι, εἶπε ὅτι οὖτος ὁ ἀνὴρ, ὡς ἀκούω, εἰς τὴν πόλιν μέλλει ἀφικνεῖσθαι καὶ εἰ ἡμᾶς πειρᾶσθαι τὸ πράγμα ἴσως οἷούς τ’ εἶναι ποιῆσαι αὐτὸν παιδεύεσθαι τοὺς νεανίσκους ἀντὶ τοῦ Ἰόντος. οὗτος δὲ ἀφικόμενος καὶ ἐρωταθεὶς συνωμολόγησ’ αὐτοῖς τοῦτο ποιήσειν. τοῖς δὲ πολίταις ἐδόκει τοὺς πατέρας πρῶτον ἀκοῦσαι ὅτι ἴσασιν πότερον τοὺς υἱοὺς εἰς αὐτὸν πέμψσαι. ὄχλος μὲν συνἤγαγε μέγας ὥστε οὐ ῥᾳδίως εἰσέρχεταί τις, τελοῦντος δὲ τοῦ σόφου εἰπεῖν ἔφη Ταλιραντες τίς ἂν δόκοιτο ὅτι ἡμεῖς ἂν ἀποποθούωμεντοῦ καλοῦ Ἰόντος ὡς ταχίστα.
Me spot my own errors? I’ve done only about a 5 to 10 pages of written composition in my life, all from Sidgwick, and I’m afraid that’s expecting far too much from me. I appreciate the sea of bolding.
You misunderstood something the Plato statement(s). The LSJ points to two references (I thought it was one, but two now that I look) in all of Attic Greek where ἐπαγγέλλεσθαι governs οἷός τ’ εἶναι. They are both in Plato. They (both) read easily. FIN. And in a completely separate and earlier paragraph, I said that Sidgwick, like Plato, really puts his μᾶλλονs to use.
I don’t know if the see a physician thing was said good-naturedly or in anger, but given your earlier posts, and the bolding exercise, I assume upset of some sort. I have really said nothing to trigger you. I didn’t even comment on your prose. I joined your thread with an attempt at composition without outside resources, just like you wanted people to do here, and wrote a post about Sidgwick’s methods. The idea is that people see someone like me willing to make errors, think “that’s not so hard, really,” and join in themselves, and your thread succeeds…Unless, that is, the original poster takes yet another opportunity to have his pride somehow offended. Did you start this thread because you really wanted people to join in and have some fun and make you feel less lonely in your composition, as you said, or was that not really it?
…good-naturedly, as the smiley face attempted to show. As was me trying to point to the places in your composition you might retry (after looking at grammars, etc). I never said how others had to set about composition, just that I would be happy to offer comments—as I was grateful to others for commenting on mine (my reason for posting). I understood what you meant about Plato.
Then we can be friends again. I appreciate your having put yourself out, and hopefully it improves my prose. Still, everything said here about smiley usage is Gospel truth.
It may be gospel truth for Gen Z, a class to which neither you nor (I suspect) phalakros belongs. Your post would have been better, certainly more gracious, without that undercutting final sentence. I have given up trying to help you improve your understanding of Greek. You should be more grateful that phalakros has not.
He was mad posting, and his smiley was not meant at all good-naturedly. Let’s not be dopes.
Now I’m sorry not to have your help, but my Greek does very slowly improve somehow anyway, as far as I can tell. And it remains bizarre to me that nobody else attempts the unseens on the random Greek passages thread. Phalakros at the least is obligated, as I was willing to make public mistakes on his thread, when he asked (and nobody else has yet, I see).
I usually am so baffled and overwhelmed by unseens that I can’t even get started. It may be that attempting unseens is an art that can be learned, but if so I haven’t learned it.
