The Pseudo-Zonaras lexicon has the following entry under the word Ἐλθεῖν:
“<Ἐλθεῖν>. τὸ γυμνῇ τῇ παρουσίᾳ χρήσασθαι.
παρεισελθεῖν δὲ τὸ μετ’ ἄλλου πλαγιάσαντος
συνεισελθεῖν. καὶ ὁ Ἀπόστολος· παρεισῆλθεν
ὁ νόμος.”
Can someone explain what the entry says?
Something like:
Ἐλθεῖν. To signify the mere presence. And παρεισελθεῖν is to enter with another having taken a different route. Even as Apostolus says: the law παρεισῆλθεν.
I’m not sure that I have “signify” right for χρήσασθαι, or the definition of παρεισελθεῖν correct.
Ἐλθεῖν. To signify the mere presence. And παρεισελθεῖν is to enter with another having taken a different route. Even as Apostolus says: the law παρεισῆλθεν.
Thank you for the translation. Since the word ελθεῖν is a form of the word ἔρχομαι, which means “come,” is it more correct to translate the word παρουσία as “coming” in the definition of ελθεῖν?
Maybe “to merely arrive.” This seems to be the usage of χρήσασθαι here:
“Apostolus” should of course be “the apostle.”
The expression “παρεισελθεῖν δὲ τὸ μετ’ ἄλλου πλαγιάσαντος συνεισελθεῖν” in the entry seems to be an example of how the word ελθεῖν is used (in the form παρεισελθεῖν), even though no author is named. The entry thus seems to contain two quotations: one from an unnamed author and the other from a certain apostle. There are some other entries in the lexicon where the author of a quotation is not specified.
The certain apostle is Paul in Romans. And no, I think that “παρεισελθεῖν δὲ τὸ μετ’ ἄλλου πλαγιάσαντος συνεισελθεῖν” is a definition, not a quotation.