Hello. Here is an attempt to relate the story of Ariadne on Naxos based on comprehension questions and exercise 6l from Athenaze (eng), but not exactly corresponding to it. I will be very thankful for any corrections and feedback.
Dear bedwere, as always, I’m infinitely thankful to you for dedicating your time and effort to correcting my work. Your help is very valuable to me. A shameful mistake in the very title will make me remember the declension of Naxos, which I in this instance ignored at all. I also forgot that φησίν is enclitic and that ἐράω takes object in genitive. All other suggestions are also taken into account. Thank you as well for aorist suggestions, I will keep them in mind. In Athenaze in these chapters, for didactical reasons, they use present in this case because the students are not yet acquainted with aorist. Thank you very much once again.
Hi! Thank you very much for encouragement and correction! Of course, it should be φοβουμένη. I’m always confused with the participles. Last time I was putting α instead of η in the fem. Acc. s. active participle, this time I did the opposite.
Your remark about the lack of cohesion is true. I feel it myself. The first sentence of the second paragraph seemed to be especially appalling in this regard, but I didn’t know how to restructure it in a better way. Hopefully, it will improve with more reading.
Thank you very much for the reference as well. I haven’t read this poem. I should definitely do so!
You’re most welcome. The sentence you fasten on could be made smoother with just a little reorganization, e.g. Διόνυσος παρθενον τινα βοῶσαν ἀκούσας και απο του ουρανου βλεπων προς την γην ὁρᾷ Αριαδνην, και ευθυς ερῶν πέτεται … (or ευθυς ερᾷ ωστε πετεται … )
Thank you very much for this suggestion and sorry for a belated reply. Your version sounds much better to me. Is it participium coniunctum? I should get better hold of this construction.
Or to make my version a tad more stylish you could omit the και after Αριαδνην and punctuate with a colon before ευθὺς etc., which will then be in asyndeton. But generally you should coordinate your sentences, as I think you realize.
“Participium coniunctum” is a term I’ve never found any use for personally, though it’s much used by Germans in reference to Latin. It’s basically just a matter of using participles for subordination.
Dear, mwh, thank you very much for the suggestions of further improvement, they are taken into consideration. Here I did another bit based on Athenaze 7l exercise in the same manner. As always, I will be very grateful, if you or other colleagues from the forum could have a look, suggest corrections and give some advice.
Thank you so much for the wonderful job you did amending my text! Now it has become much better, and you put your corrections and explanations in such a clear way that it’s easy to grasp their meaning. Some errors, like Nom. instead of Acc. in the first sentence, I should have noticed myself, but in other cases, particularly in what concerns the use of linking words, I need the help of a more experienced eye.
I’m so much grateful for your corrections! I was hesitating whether Odysseus with companions will have singular or plural verb, but now I see, that the subject is only Odysseus, so the verb is singular. As usually, some mistakes, like τῆς νῆσονον instead of νῆσου are due to my lack of concentration. Special thanks for adding μέντοι to my collection of linking words. I should memorise and use it.
I have just two little questions:
1)
Ἐν {ῷ}τούτῳ δε ἡ ναῦς [ὑπ᾽} τοις ἀνέμοις φερομένη
In this phrase I meant, of course ἐν ᾦ instead of {ῷ}. What would be the difference between ἐν ᾦ and ἐν τούτῳ or both will signify more or less the same “meanwhile”?
2)
ἐν ᾦ means “while” (introducing a subordinate clause), not “meanwhile.”
ὅν (“whom” or “which”) introduces a relative clause (again, a subordinate clause). αὐτόν is “him” or “it.” (But be careful not to use the nominative αὐτοί just to mean “they,” which normally doesn’t need to be expressed, since is implicit in the verb.)
Thank you for the explanations! I think I’ve got it and I will try to keep it in mind. Yes, I noticed that you corrected the bits where the subject is “pleonastic”, and I completely agree. It’s like in Portuguese (and, I guess, Spanish), they also omit personal pronouns in such cases.
Dear all, here is the continuation of my composition exercises. Today I tried to tell another part of Theseus’ story using recently learned syntactic constructions and forms (and, I suppose, making a lot of mistakes). As always, I will be very grateful for your corrections, advice and remarks.
You are certainly right with ἔμελλε. It was an attempt to do aorist. I thought μέλλω works like ἀγγέλλω, but it doesn’t and I should have look it up in the dictionary to know that it is ἐμέλλησε in aor. 3s. Anyway, imperfect probably looks better here.
As to δαίτην, if it is “ἡ δαίς, δαιτός” shouldn’t it be δαῖτα in the Acc.?
