ἀλλήλους καθ’ αὑτοὺς φιλοῦσιν

Greek Learning Greek
1

οἱ μὲν οὖν διὰ τὸ χρήσιμον φιλοῦντες ἀλλήλους οὐ καθ’ αὑτοὺς φιλοῦσιν, ἀλλ’ ᾗ γίνεταί τι αὐτοῖς παρ’ ἀλλήλων ἀγαθόν. (Aristotle, EN 1156a10-12)
Assuming that A and B love each other καθ’ αὑτοὺς, does this mean that
(1) A loves B for the sake of A, and B loves A for the sake B;
or that
(2) A loves B for the sake of B, and B loves A for the sake of A?

2

I’d say number 2, but let’s see what some other people have to say about it.

3

Thanks. In case you’re right, my next question would be how to render number 1 in Greek.

4

#1 doesn’t make sense here. So it has to be #2. To get #1, just drop ου.

5

Thanks. My question is about the meaning of the expression in the subject line: does it always mean #1, or it can mean either of the two, depending on the context (and if the former, how then to express #2). The expression in question has no “οὐ” in it, so there is nothing to drop.

6

Sigh.

7

???

8

Hi all, I haven’t read the EN in a while and so could be off-base here, but just to jump in with a few points:

  1. There are different types of pronouns referring to ‘the lovers’ or ‘the loved’ in this sentence:

οἱ μὲν οὖν διὰ τὸ χρήσιμον φιλοῦντες > ἀλλήλους [reciprocal pronoun, referring reciprocally to the loved: each loved by the other] >

οὐ καθ’ > αὑτοὺς [reflexive pronoun, referring in this case to the loved denoted by the reciprocal pronoun, rather than the subject of the sentence, as the context shows — see notes below] > φιλοῦσιν,

ἀλλ’ ᾗ γίνεταί τι > αὐτοῖς [in oblique case as personal pronoun, referring here to the lovers who are the subject of the sentence — using the > reflexive > to refer to the lovers would have jumbled up everything as the reflexive is used elsewhere to refer to the loved] >

παρ’ > ἀλλήλων [reciprocal pronoun, referring reciprocally to the loved: each loved by the other] > ἀγαθόν.

  1. What I think is causing trouble is that the reflexive is not referring to the subject of the sentence (‘the lovers’) as is most common for direct reflexives, but to the object (‘the loved’ , i.e. the persons denoted by the reciprocal pronoun). On this use of the reflexive pronoun referring to the object rather than the subject, see Smyth sec. 1218 final sentence, Cambridge grammar sec. 29.14 note 1, etc.

  2. You cannot therefore tell from the syntax whether the reflexive refers to the subject or the object: this can only come from the context. The context clearly marks the reflexive as denoting the object (the loved): Aristotle says it over and over in the following sentences in 1156a, in sequential οὐ … ἀλλά … constructions, just like the sentence quote in the original post — those loving because of … do not love because of the properties of the object of that love, but because of some utility / good / pleasure accruing to the lovers themselves:

ὁμοίως δὲ καὶ οἱ δι᾽ ἡδονήν· > οὐ γὰρ τῷ ποιούς τινας εἶναι ἀγαπῶσι τοὺς εὐτραπέλους> , ἀλλ᾽ ὅτι ἡδεῖς αὑτοῖς.

οἵ τε δὴ διὰ τὸ χρήσιμον φιλοῦντες διὰ τὸ αὑτοῖς ἀγαθὸν στέργουσι, καὶ οἱ δι᾽ ἡδονὴν διὰ τὸ αὑτοῖς ἡδύ, καὶ > οὐχ ᾗ ὁ φιλούμενός ἐστιν> , ἀλλ᾽ ᾗ χρήσιμος ἢ ἡδύς.

κατὰ συμβεβηκός τε δὴ αἱ φιλίαι αὗταί εἰσιν· > οὐ γὰρ ᾗ ἐστὶν ὅσπερ ἐστὶν ὁ φιλούμενος> , ταύτῃ φιλεῖται, ἀλλ᾽ ᾗ πορίζουσιν οἳ μὲν ἀγαθόν τι οἳ δ᾽ ἡδονήν.

  1. I think the use of the reciprocal throws the other pronouns into constructions that are less clear syntactically (but clear enough in context): the reflexive and reciprocals clearly point at ‘the loved’, whereas the personal pronoun clearly points at ‘the lovers’ (i.e. reflecting back at the subject of the sentence).

  2. There are clearer ways to mark the relation, which Aristotle uses in e.g. 1166a (see how he uses ἐκείνου ἕνεκα versus ἑαυτοῦ ἕνεκα there, where the reflexive clearly points back at the subject ‘for one’s own sake’ in the more usual construction).

  3. This clearer construction is also used in the Lysis, which I’m sure is one of the key works with which Aristotle is engaging in book 8 of the EN, e.g. Lysis 220d:

ἆρ᾽ οὕτω πέφυκέ τε καὶ φιλεῖται τἀγαθὸν διὰ τὸ κακὸν ὑφ᾽ ἡμῶν, τῶν μεταξὺ ὄντων τοῦ κακοῦ τε καὶ τἀγαθοῦ, αὐτὸ δ᾽ > ἑαυτοῦ ἕνεκα > οὐδεμίαν χρείαν ἔχει;

  1. On the οὐ referenced in the thread above:
  • Tugodum, I expect Hylander is referring to the οὐ in the Aristotelian sentence you quote — it’s right before the prepositional phrase you are asking about: οἱ μὲν οὖν διὰ τὸ χρήσιμον φιλοῦντες ἀλλήλους οὐ καθ’ αὑτοὺς φιλοῦσιν, however


  • I don’t think the inclusion or removal of this negative makes a difference to whether the reflexive points at the lovers or the loved. Instead, it’s used in the corrective ‘not A, but B’ construction used over and over in this and the following sentences. Whom the pronoun denotes (i.e. lovers or loved) comes out through the context rather than the syntax (reflexive, negative or otherwise).

Cheers, Chad

9

Wow… Chad, that’s awesome! Thanks a lot!!!