Textkit Greek and Latin Forums

anphph

There's also the issue of whether they are the same, but the vowel quantity may differ.

Off the top of my head a pretty common one, of course due to crasis, is the Attic

ἅνθρωπος [ie, ὁ + ἄνθρωπος] vs ἄνθρωπος

anphph

Can’t you or your library use Interlibrary Loan services to get hold of materials? Two crucial questions: Are you sufficiently motivated and unencumbered to finish? (Most people accepted into PhD programs never finish.) Are you looking to find a job in the field when you finish? (If so, examine—and...

anphph

I really don't, except that it can't be a huge corpus. This has been the one topic I've come up with so far: Marks of Futurity (Future, Imperative, and Optative) in Epinician Poetry. (In practise this would mean Pindar, Bacchylides and fragments of Simonides.) Sorry for how open-ended this all is. I...

anphph

I mean in Greek, in the sense that it's going to be inside the academic field of classical Greek Philology. Are they calling it Greek Studies yet? The rest is pretty much what the problem is. My previous topic involved Byzantine literature (John of Damascus), but really I was hitting a lack of books...

anphph

I am to write a dissertation in Greek. The university library I have access to is not paltry, but it's not awesomely well-stocked either, so I have to look for topics that would allow me to function with less, rather than with more, bibliography. Also for this reason, something more technical, or li...

anphph

This seems to offer a relatively simple introduction to the thing.

anphph

Walter Burkert (The Orientalizing Revolution, trans. 1998) suggests that this use of ανα might be a Semitism. https://i.imgur.com/LS0WHEC.png I'm not sure how credible this might be, since I couldn't access the source (that's Thekla Horovitz, Vom Logos zur Analogie 1978 137-144). Extremely unlikely...

anphph

Walter Burkert (The Orientalizing Revolution, trans. 1998) suggests that this use of ανα might be a Semitism.

I'm not sure how credible this might be, since I couldn't access the source (that's Thekla Horovitz, Vom Logos zur Analogie 1978 137-144).

anphph

Hey Joel,

Welcome to the forum. I don't know how advanced you are in Greek, but judging from your interests you might want to take a look at this book, plus the supplement freely available online.

Best!

anphph

It's not an ancient ext, so I think it's just more likely that the translator from Greek into Latin was reminded that the perfect of a far more common word like the compound contundere was contudisse and thought about using the uncompounded version, forgetting that the perfect of tundere has, as a r...

anphph

So if I understand correctly, "rerum" is ablative in the same sense of "RE: " in email messages, and we would say something like "Rerum de natura" if we were projecting our own word order onto Latin. I do not understand what you mean here. As I said above, rerum is genitive plural, not ablative. We...

anphph

Welcome to Textkit-- reading the Meditations of Marcus Aurelius. The Meditations are deceptively difficult. Of course you should read that which you are most interested in reading, and the difficulty might push you forward, but Marcus Aurelius' use of specific hellenistic philosophy terminology make...

anphph

Deipnosophistae?

anphph

I don't imagine how there could plausibly be one, but computers will keep finding ways of surprising us.

anphph

16. πάντες ἡμεῖς ἅμα ἐλαυνόμεθα. 16. Omnes eodem cogimur. 16. πάντες αὐτόσε ἀναγκαζόμεθα. I didn't read the rest of the list, but here maybe the error was in the Latin? Eo (and so also, appropriately modified, eodem ) can of course be the ablative of is,ea,id, but it is also an adverb of place mean...

anphph

phonologically false Right, but etymologically correct, which is often a concern for people interested in confirming the pedigree of the language they are using. Portuguese is at the moment suffering the aftershock of an orthographic agreement that got rid of a significant number of "etymological c...

anphph

Aelianus De natura animalium 12.21 Ἴδιον δὲ τῶν ζῴων καὶ ἡ φιλανθρωπία. ἀετὸς γοῦν ἔθρεψε βρέφος. καὶ εἰπεῖν τὸν πάντα λόγον ἐθέλω, ὡς ἂν γένηται μάρτυς ὧν προεθέμην. Βαβυλωνίων βασιλεύοντος Σευηχόρου Χαλδαῖοι λέγουσι τὸν γενόμενον ἐκ τῆς ἐκείνου θυγατρὸς τὴν βασιλείαν ἀφαιρήσεσθαι τὸν πάππον. τοῦτο...

anphph

Qua being an adverbial survival standing for Qua via? In the ablative. The other adverbs are also exstant : It's generally only people who know some Latin who make this particular spelling error... I was once grading a paper for a theology class in which the student consistently spelled "expect" "e...

anphph

Qua being an adverbial survival standing for Qua via? In the ablative.

The other adverbs are also exstant:

Hac,
Istac,
Illac

anphph

Qua being an adverbial survival standing for Qua via? In the ablative.

anphph

No. Why would it be? Indirect discourse is when someone else's speech is being reported, or else when some sort of question or statement is expressed inside a direct statement.

anphph

viseris is present passive indicative from visere . So your translation is wrong and the Loeb gets it right. It should be something like And yet you appear here [ hic ] now [:: are seen] as a ghostly figure to our great disgrace. Visere is not Videre , and so is not often used, as the latter, with ...

anphph

Is there a Mark All Read button?

anphph

I see it less as a neologism than as a purposely ghastly expression and even -- dare I say, or am being too squeamish? -- actually effective as such.

anphph

Miseris is future perfect, right? Seneca seems to use the future perfect quite a lot in cases where I would expect a normal future tense. Yes, future perfect. While it can be used in other cases, here it is caused by the articulation of tenses with the future imperfect occurrent . Why potuit? The f...

anphph

Sloppy writing? Aquinas?! Never! And quia does not mean “because.” [...] But the last thing he can be accused of is sloppiness, either of thought or expression! Quia does not mean because ? Maybe because doesn't mean because ! Here quia is, of course, standing for something like quod -- but, and th...

anphph

"Signum est quia", without seeing what comes after, I'd assume it's just sloppy writing. The sign is because etc What comes right after is this: "(...) signum est quia; dicuntur esse accidentia in subiecto, non autem quod forma substantialis sit in subiecto." Yeah, it's just sloppy writing. The sig...

anphph

Maybe I'm totally missing the point of the thread, but I think that if anyone wanted to separate the two adjectives they would likely separate them. Plus what jeidsath said. καθήμενοι δὲ περὶ τῆς Μυρτάλης <...>, τοῦ Λάμωνος ἐπυνθάνοντο Punctuated like this it could probably mean what you want. As th...

anphph

Thank you!! " Quod autem illud quod est in potentia ad esse accidentale dicatur subiectum, signum est quia ;" What this "quod" is here, is a pronoun that agrees with "illud"? And "signum est quia": "there is a sign because"? No, it doesn't agree with illud. Here it's a conjunction. It functions exa...

anphph

There are some imperative verbs that are used as filler words, such as puta (think, consider) or vide (see) or nota (notice). These even get paired with other words, like utputa (don't confuse it with utpote ), and in that case would mean something like "There are many such examples of these, think ...

anphph

How would you say:

the brothers of my brothers

?

anphph

jeidsath wrote:There still seems to be something wrong with this, because πρευμενοῦς is not an adverb, and should not be modifying νόστου.

πρευμενοῦς is adjective (in the genitive), modifying νόστος. It's in the genitive because that's what tuxein governs.

N πρευμενὴς νόστος
G πρευμενοῦς νόστου

anphph

I don't know Henle's books, but presumably the only thing anyone can recommend you at this stage is that you get a firm basis in Latin grammar, vocabulary, syntax through study books, and then make the jump to De urbe condita . No need to complicate things, and I don't think taking a sidetrack throu...

anphph

Reading the Agamemnon (if glancing from the text to Sidgwick's commentary to Page's commentary to a translation and back to the text can honestly be called reading), I have a question about the chorus. At line 317*, the Chorus says: θεοῖς μὲν αὖθις, ὦ γύναι, προσεύξομαι. Does the fact that the verb...

anphph

This is question about the history of Greek scholarship. Were the 14th century Alandalusian philosopher Averroes' commentaries based on the original Greek text, or only on Arabic translations? In other words, was Greek being taught, learned and studied in the Almohad caliphate before the fall of Co...

anphph

ὧν τε -- epic τε; see Smyth 2970; Denniston pp. 520 ff. The meaning and function of this type of τε are not fully understood, and neither Smyth nor Denniston are the last word on the subject. C. Ruigh wrote a 1000-page treatise Autour de τε épique , but his conclusions are apparently not universall...

anphph

And again to another in lack of children, then (τε?) he is most of all desiring them as he makes his way over earth to Hades. Note — I tried to relate lines 11-> with the statement about old age ruining everything. I felt that the “ἄλλοτε” of line 11 and the “τε” of line 13 had some sort of tempora...

anphph

Barry Hofstetter wrote:Could it simply be read as a hendiadys?

I guess the whole discussion is really about whether or not it is hendiadys or not. In other words, if hybris and man are to be joined together, and if so, how.

anphph

This is West's note.

anphph

οὐδέ τις εὐόρκου χάρις ἔσσεται οὐδὲ δικαίου οὐδ' ἀγαθοῦ, μᾶλλον δὲ κακῶν ῥεκτῆρα καὶ ὕβριν ἀνέρα τιμήσουσι· δίκη δ' ἐν χερσί· καὶ αἰδὼς οὐκ ἔσται, βλάψει δ' ὁ κακὸς τὸν ἀρείονα φῶτα μύθοισι σκολιοῖς ἐνέπων, ἐπὶ δ' ὅρκον ὀμεῖται. . . . it is rather the doer of evil and the outrage man that they will...

Search found 568 matches