khairete pantas,
I’m new to this site but hopefuly some one may help me. I am editing Rouses’ Greek Boy (one of the last texts) and I have encountered this world that appears odd to me:
“εἶεν ἂν οὖν εἰδοποιοὶ διαφοραί , ὅσαι ἕτερον εἶδος ποιοῦσαιν , καὶ ὅσαι ἐν τῷ τί ἦν εἶναι παραλαμβάνονται”
Is it possible that that word is a dual dative/genetive female particple?
It’s a typo for ποιοῦσιν.
This isn’t in Greek Boy, at least not that I know of. What chapter is it? It’s a quote from Isagoras. In fact, the OCR error that you’re looking at comes from a scan of this document:
https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=njp.32101075724227;view=1up;seq=72
The document is correct, but the original OCR mistake is here:
I just don’t know how that would have made its way to whatever edition of Greek Boy that you’re looking at.
The takeaway is Never trust OCR-dependent texts. OCR technology has added another layer of corruption to our texts. As if there weren’t enough already. Fortunately it’s usually easy to spot OCR-caused corruption, if you know the language.
Text criticism lives!
Context obviously forbids it, but anyway a dual dative/genitive feminine active participle would be ποιούσαιν, with the accent like that.
χαίρετε πάντες πάλιν,
Thank you to everyone that has replied and sorry for the delay, I had some problems with my account =(
You were right “jeidsath” the text I am working on is “Introduction to Aristotle’s Categories” (Isagoge) and not “Greek Boy.”
ἀσπάζομαί σε!