1/ How is the infinitive ἀπαγγέλλειν being used? It naturally reads to my eyes as an ‘infinitive of purpose’ but I can’t see specific examples of this type of use with verbs of motion. Smyth (2008) states they’re usually used only with verbs taking the accusative whereas Cambridge Grammar of Classical Greek does say they can be used with verbs of ‘going’ (45.1, note 1) but then the sections dealing more fully with this use (51.16-17) don’t reference its use in this way! (only with verbs of giving, entrusting, taking, having etc).
2/ How are the infinitives δεῖσθαι and ᾁδειν being used? Are they (and by extension the clause in which they’re found) being used to limit (in apposition) γέρας τοῦτο (after correlating with γενόμενον)? i.e. literally ‘having received this gift from the Muses, (namely) having become to have no want of nourishment’. Are there any references to this use of the infinitive in the grammar (I can’t seem to locate any…).
3/ How would you say μηδὲν is being used here? Substantively i.e. ‘having become nothing to have want of nourishment’ or as an adverb i.e. ‘having become to have no want at all of nourishment’. In either case why wouldn’t οὐδέν be used here (perhaps to imply it’s only alleged?)
As ever, your help with my stumblings would be very much appreciated.
I took it as infinitives depending on and describing the γερας from the Muses. And μη is normal in an infinitive phrase. The first infinitive depends on γενομενον though
As an Appositive.—The infinitive may stand in apposition to a preceding substantive, pronoun, or adverb.
εἷς οἰωνὸς ἄριστος, ἀμύ_νεσθαι περὶ πάτρης one omen is best, to fight for our country M 243, > εἶπον . . . τοῦτο μόνον ὁρᾶν πάντας, τῷ πρόσθεν ἕπεσθαι > I told all to pay heed to this only, viz., to follow their leader X. C. 2.2.8, καὶ ὑ_μᾶς δὲ οὕτως, ὦ παῖδες, . . . ἐπαίδευον, τοὺς μὲν γεραιτέρους προτι_μᾶν, τῶν δὲ νεωτέρων προτετι_μῆσθαι and I have instructed you, too, my children (to this effect) to honour your elders in preference to yourselves and to receive honour from the younger in preference t
μηδὲν τροφῆς – τροφῆς is partitive, “no nourishment at all”.
μηδὲν τροφῆς δεῖσθαι γενόμενον – " to need no nourishment at all when born"
Smyth 1971:
The negative of the infinitive is μή; but οὐ, used with a finite mood in direct discourse, is retained when that mood becomes infinitive in indirect discourse. Sometimes, however, μή is used in place of this οὐ (2723 ff.).
I can see you point, but I read it as “having been born not to need…”. I don’t like the circumstantial reading “gift…not to need…, having been born”. γενόμενον seems a bit superfluous.
I read it as “having been born not to need…”. I don’t like the circumstantial reading “gift…not to need…, having been born”. γενόμενον seems a bit superfluous.
ἀλλ᾽ makes it clear that δεῖσθαι is parallel to ᾁδειν and ἀπαγγέλλειν, not somehow subordinate to γενόμενον, and that γενόμενον doesn’t group with ᾁδειν. γενόμενον is not superfluous at all: it stands in contrast to τελευτήσῃ, marking the beginning of the life cycle, just as τελευτήσῃ marks the end.
The “born to” idiom is an Americanism, e.g., “born to run”, “born to ride”, etc.