μήτε

Here you can discuss all things Ancient Greek. Use this board to ask questions about grammar, discuss learning strategies, get help with a difficult passage of Greek, and more.
Post Reply
User avatar
bedwere
Global Moderator
Posts: 5101
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 10:23 pm
Location: Didacopoli in California
Contact:

μήτε

Post by bedwere »

At p. 138 of the Griechisches Comenianisches Vestibulum, μήτε is followed by the aorist imperative. Since μήτε is μή + τε, I think we should rather have the aorist subjunctive:

τὰ ἀγνοούμενα μήτε καταφήσῃς, μήτε ἀποφήσῃς

Comments?

Hylander
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 2504
Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2015 1:16 pm

Re: μήτε

Post by Hylander »

I think you are right. See Smyth 1840:
1840. Prohibitions are expressed by μή with the present or aorist subjunctive in the first person plural; by μή with the present imperative or the aorist subjunctive in the second and third person singular or plural (cp. 1800). The aorist imperative is rare in prohibitions.

* * *

B. 2 Person.—μὴ γράφε (μὴ γράφετε): ““μὴ θαύμαζε” don't be astonished” P. G. 482a, ““μὴ θορυβεῖτε” don't raise a disturbance” P. A. 21a, ““τὰ μὲν ποίει, τὰ δὲ μὴ ποίει” do this and refrain from doing that” P. Pr. 325d, ““μὴ μέγα λέγε” don't boast so” P. Ph. 95b.—μὴ γράψῃς (μὴ γράψητε): ““μηδὲ θαυμάσῃς τόδε” and do not wonder at this” A. Ag. 879, ““μὴ θορυβήσητε” don't raise a disturbance” P. A. 20e, ““μὴ ἄλλως ποιήσῃς” don't do otherwise” P. Lach. 201b, μηδαμῶς ἄλλως ποιήσῃς Ar. Av. 133.

N.—The type μὴ γράφῃς is never used. μὴ γράψον occurs rarely in poetry (Δ 410, Σ 134.—ω 248, S. fr. 453 parodied in Ar. Thesm. 870).
http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/tex ... 99.04.0007

However, Smyth 1841e notes:
In maxims μή with the present imperative is preferred: μὴ κλέπτε don't be a thief, μὴ κλέψῃς don't steal this or that
So perhaps the present imperative might be better than aorist subjunctive here.

You might want to read over Smyth 1841, which goes over in depth the difference between the present imperative and aorist subjunctive in prohibitions.

http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/tex ... 99.04.0007
Bill Walderman

User avatar
bedwere
Global Moderator
Posts: 5101
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 10:23 pm
Location: Didacopoli in California
Contact:

Re: μήτε

Post by bedwere »

Thank you, Bill.

mwh
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 4790
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 2:34 am

Re: μήτε

Post by mwh »

How old is this book, and how well did its compiler know Greek?
Anyway, yes here present imperatives are called for, if it’s meant as a general maxim, as presumably it is. If with reference to a particular set of unknowns (unlikely), yes aor. subj. not impera.
And how about the peinwn fage, dipswn pine pair, which don’t even match?

User avatar
bedwere
Global Moderator
Posts: 5101
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 10:23 pm
Location: Didacopoli in California
Contact:

Re: μήτε

Post by bedwere »

Thank you.
I went through the Greek quotations of Dictionary of Latin and Greek quotations, proverbs, maxims, and mottos, classical and mediaeval, including law terms and phrases and the large majority of commands or exhortations uses the present imperative. The only exceptions with aorist imperative or (negative) aorist subjunctive are:

Ἄκρον λάβε, καὶ μέσον ἕξεις.
Γνῶθι σεαυτόν.
Δός τι, καὶ λάβε τι.
Ἰατρέ, θεράπευσον σεαυτόν.
Καιρὸν γνῶθι.
Κύριε ἐλέησον.
Μὴ ἐπιλαθώμεθα τῆς ζάλης ἐν τῇ γαλήνῃ, μηδὲ τῆς ἀρρωστίας ἐν τῷ καιρῷ τῆς ὑγιείας.
Φάγωμεν καὶ πίωμεν· αὔριον γὰρ ἀποθνήσκομεν.

One could argue that they are simply repetitions of commands actually given by someone at some time and turned into proverbial phrases.

mwh
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 4790
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 2:34 am

Re: μήτε

Post by mwh »

Yes with most of these it’s pretty obvious why aorist was used.
And note in particular fagwmen kai piwmen, both aorist (quite rightly), while Comenius wrote fage and pine, evidently under the impression that fage was present tense.
So that’s two instances of bad Greek in only a few lines of the Vestibulum. And earlier didn’t we have some other such syntactical grotesquerie? Such errors are forgivable for the 17th cent. or even for the 18th, but not today! Is the idea to amend Comenius’ Greek? If so, it can hardly be called Comenius, can it? “Comenius revised” would be more accurate, along with notes recording Comenius’ actual text. Seventeenth-century ancient Greek is of historical interest.

RandyGibbons
Textkit Enthusiast
Posts: 465
Joined: Sat Mar 30, 2013 9:10 pm

Re: μήτε

Post by RandyGibbons »

For the record, this was someone translating the Vestibulum into Greek, not Comenius himself. Maybe Bedwere knows who?

There are pretty decent Greek translations of Comenius's Janua and Orbis Sensualium. These two works were intended to and are composed and organized for the purpose of teaching Latin vocabulary to young students (they are written as extremely simple declarative sentences, with an intentional avoidance of any complicated syntax or grammar). Their Greek translations do a pretty good job of teaching equivalent Greek vocabulary (given that there isn't always a good equivalent between any two given languages).

The Vestibulum, if I recall correctly, isn't just about vocabulary; it takes baby steps to introduce some basic grammar, so I'm glad, Bedwere, you're wrestling to get it right.

Post Reply