ἤ σῖγ’ ἔχομεν; Eur., Or., 1539
σῖγ’ here stands probably for σιγῇ. What is this phenomenon called, for this is not elision that affects short vowels. Nor have I found any rule for this shift of accent.
I think it’s from the adverb:
σῖγα [cf. Goth. sweiban?, OHG swīgēn] adv. in silence, silently AESCHL. Sept. 250, al. SOPH. Ai. 75, al. etc.; σῖγʼ ἔχειν to remain silent SOPH. El. 1236, Ph. 258 etc. | s.times exclam. as a command silence!, keep quiet! AESCHL. Ag. 1344 ARISTOPH. Ach. 238, Th. 1006 etc.; κάθησο, σῖγα sit down and keep quiet ARISTOPH. Ach. 59 ‖ extens. quietly, secretly, clandestinely AESCHL. Ag. 449 SOPH. Ant. 700, al. etc.
Montanari, F. (2015). M. Goh & C. Schroeder (Eds.), The Brill Dictionary of Ancient Greek. Leiden; Boston: Brill.
I agree, thank you
So what is the meaning of the phrase? Something like “or we remain silent”?
More like keep silent. In the original context this is one of a series of questions. Thus the Loeb:
τί δρῶμεν; ἀγγέλλωμεν ἐς πόλιν τάδε;
1540ἢ σῖγ᾿ ἔχωμεν; ἀσφαλέστερον, φίλαι.
What shall we do? Shall we bear this news to the city
or keep silent? Silence is safer, my friends.
But wasn’t there an omicron in the original post? This one has an omega instead.
I don’t have the relevant volume of Diggle but the Loeb prints ἔχωμεν (Kovacs) as does Perseus (Murray).
ἔχομεν would be unmetrical.
what is the meaning of the phrase? Something like “or we remain silent”?
It’s just the usual intransitive ἔχω + adverb, more or less equivalent to “be” + adjective. LSJ ἔχω:
II. simply, be, “ἑκὰς εἶχον” Od.12.435; “ἔ. κατ᾽ οἴκους” Hdt.6.39; “περὶ πολλῶν ἔ. πρηγμάτων” Id.3.128; ἀγῶνα διὰ πάσης ἀγωνίης ἔχοντα consisting in . . , Id.2.91; “ἔ. ἐν ἀνάγκαισι” E.Ba. 88 (lyr.); “ὅπου συμφορᾶς ἔχεις” Id.El.238; “ἐκποδὼν ἔχειν” Id.IT1226, etc.
2. freq. with Advbs. of manner, “εὖ ἔχει” Od.24.245, etc.; καλῶς ἔχει, κακῶς ἔχει, it is, is going on well or ill, v. καλός, κακός (but fut. σχήσειν καλῶς will turn out well, D.1.9, cf. 18.45; “εὖ σχήσει” S.Aj. 684); οὕτως . . σχεῖν to turn out, happen thus, Pl.Ap.39b; οὕτως ἔχει so the case stands, Ar.Pl.110; οὕτως ἐχόντων, Lat. cum res ita se habeant, X.An.3.2.10; “ὡς ὧδ᾽ ἐχόντων” S.Aj.981; “οὕτω χρὴ διὰ στέρνων ἔχειν” Id.Ant.639; “οὕτως ἔ. περί τινος” X.Mem.4.8.7, cf. Hdt.6.16; “πρός τι” D. 9.45; “τῇδ᾽ ἔ.” S.Ph.1336; “κοσμίως ἔ.” Ar.Th.854; “ἥδιον ἔ. πρός τινας” D.9.63; ὡς εἶχε just as he was, Hdt.1.114; “ὥσπερ εἶχε” Th.1.134, X. HG4.1.30; ὡς ἔχω how I am, Ar.Lys.610; “ὥσπερ ἔχομεν” Th.3.30; “τἀναντία εἶχεν” D.9.41; ἀσφαλέως, ἀναγκαίως ἔχει, = ἀσφαλές, ἀναγκαῖόν ἐστι, Hdt.1.86,9.27; καλῶς ἔχει no, I thank you, v. καλός.
ἔχομεν is a manuscript variant, though clearly bad, and not that it affects the original question any.
If only they had had good whistleblower protections, then to ἀγγεῖλαι ἐς πόλιν ταῦτ᾽ ᾖ ἀσφαλέστερον ἢ σῖγ᾽ ἔχειν.
Joel, I’m not sure why you are saying that, in the present context, deciding between indicative ἔχομεν and subjunctive ἔχωμεν would make no difference in meaning.
I did not say it would make no difference in meaning. I said it would “not affect the original question any.”
I see what you mean now, sorry.
As Hylander said, ἔχομεν would be unmetrical. And it would give the wrong sense. It’s obvious at first glance what it should be. Presumably just a typo by Consr.Phjilo.
σῖγα is quite common in tragedy. It seems to be one of those an old adverbial forms in -α, but it’s odd that it doesn’t show up before Aeschylus.
Nor does any form of σιγή except for “σιγῇ” show up before Aeschylus. And only Sophocles, among the tragedians, uses σιγῇ (but usually σῖγα).
Joel, the point is that such adverbs (taxa, mala, etc.) are all amply attested in archaic Greek lit. So σῖγα is an oddity. But never mind. This thread is surely exhausted.
Confusion between ο/ω is prevalent in later manuscripts, especially if there is a possible ambiguity, since the pronunciation distinction is lost by that time. A famous NT example using ἔχομεν/ἔχωμεν is Rom 5:1, but there the context could bear either reading, and not so in Euripides.