των αγαθων - for the good things

[Asterisk1234]

Mastronarde Unit 14, exercise IV - Render into Greek

4. Are they not grateful to Peisistratus for the good things he does?

The answer key translates "for the good things" as "των αγαθων" I am puzzled by the use of the genitive. My first attempt was "δια τα καλα".

Comments?

Thanks to all.

Asterisk1234

[Constantinus Philo]

Πεισιστράτῳ χάριν ἔχω τῶν ἀγαθῶν. Genetivus causae. Ἆρα οὐ χάριν ἔχουσι Πεισιστράτῳ τῶν ἀγαθῶν ὧν σφίσι ποιεῖ; δια τα καλα means by means of beautiful things.

[seneca2008]

If you look on p 119 you will find

"χάρις in the sense gratitude is used in various verbal idioms, such as χάριν ἔχειν, to be grateful, χάριν εἰδέναι, to feel gratitude (literally, to know gratitude), and (ἀπο) δοῦναι χάριν, give, pay back gratitude. In these phrases there may be an objective genitive of what one is grateful for and a dative of the person to whom one feels or pays gratitude.

τούτοις τοῖς θεοῖς χάριν τῶν καλῶν δώρων ἔχομεν. We are grateful to these gods for the fine gifts."

The subjective and objective genitive are explained on p 86-87 of unit 10. If this is not clear then I am happy to explain further.

[Asterisk1234]

Πεισιστράτῳ χάριν ἔχω τῶν ἀγαθῶν. Genetivus causae. Ἆρα οὐ χάριν ἔχουσι Πεισιστράτῳ τῶν ἀγαθῶν ὧν σφίσι ποιεῖ; δια τα καλα means by means of beautiful things.

I still don't get why the genitive is used to mean "for" the good things. I understand the genitive to be used for "of" or "from" or "out of" etc. this use baffles me.

Thanks anyway.

[Asterisk1234]

Thanks to Seneca (I don't know how to reply to a particular post, but this reply applies to the post from Seneca)

Thanks - yes, I've been reviewing the objective genitive as explained on page 86, section 6 c for days, and I did suspect that the sentence was a case of objective genitive. But I did not pay (enough) attention to the paragraphs you mention. The answer given by the key is "χαριν ουκ εχουσι τω Ηεισιστρατω α ποιει'" I recognized the dative of the person (with the dative definite article), but I saw neither an article nor a preposition (meaning "for") in front of the genitive, and that puzzled me.
Your answer completely solves my problem.

Many thanks.

[seneca2008]

Constantinus Philo wrote: ↑Sun Jun 23, 2019 4:02 am
Πεισιστράτῳ χάριν ἔχω τῶν ἀγαθῶν. Genetivus causae. Ἆρα οὐ χάριν ἔχουσι Πεισιστράτῳ τῶν ἀγαθῶν ὧν σφίσι ποιεῖ; δια τα καλα means by means of beautiful things.

I still don't get why the genitive is used to mean "for" the good things. I understand the genitive to be used for "of" or "from" or "out of" etc. this use baffles me.

@Asterisk1234 you are baffled because C. Philo is mistaken. The genitive can have a wide range of meanings including the “source” of something. But that’s not the case here when it’s clearly intended to be an objective genitive to illustrate the grammar in the lesson.

Don’t be confused by the English translation. There is no literal translation you just have to accept that English and Greek have different constructions.

[Constantinus Philo]

if im mistaken then im mistaken in a good company including Engllish-Greek dictionary that classifies this genetive as causal.

[Asterisk1234]

OK - thanks.

[Barry Hofstetter]

if im mistaken then im mistaken in a good company including Engllish-Greek dictionary that classifies this genetive as causal.

I personally don't see how it can be anything but objective. Which English-Greek dictionary classifies it as causal? LSJ lists the usage and gives an English gloss but doesn't mention what type of genitive it is (perhaps because it's supposed to be obvious to anyone with skill level to be consulting the lexicon).

χάριν εἰδέναι τινί to acknowledge a sense of favour, feel grateful, once in Hom., ἐγὼ δέ κέ τοι ἰδέω χ. ἤματα πάντα Il.14.235; freq. in Prose, Hdt.3.21, Lys.2.23, Isoc.4.175, etc.; τούτων for a thing, X.Cyr.1.6.11, etc.; τοῖς διαπεπραγμένοις Plu.Alex.62; μοι χ. οἶδεν ἐπὶ τούτοις Luc.Bis Acc.17; χ. προσειδέναι Pl.Ap.20a; ἀποδιδόναι Id.R.338a; τινὰ ἀποστερῆσαι χάριτος Id.Hp.Mi.372c; later χ. γνῶναι Philostr.VA2.17; πολλὴν γνοῦσα χ. X.Eph.3.5; χ. ἐπίσταμαι πᾶσι Charito3.4, cf. 8.5, Poll.5.142, Jul.Or.8.246c; also τῶν παροιχομέων ἔχειν σφι μεγάλην χ. Hdt.7.120, cf. 1.71, E.Heracl.767 (lyr.), IT847 (lyr.), Lys.16.1, Hyp.Ath.5: c. part., χ. ἔχειν σωθέντες X.An.2.5.14; also χάριτας ἔχων πατρός owing him a debt of gratitude, E.Or.244: but ἀσπασμάτων χάριν τίνʼ ἕξει; what thanks will she have for ..? Id.Hec.830; χ. ἂν ἐν τούτῳ μείζω ἔτι ἔσχεν Th.8.87; χ.

Liddell, H. G., Scott, R., Jones, H. S., & McKenzie, R. (1996). A Greek-English lexicon (p. 1979). Oxford: Clarendon Press.

[Constantinus Philo]

Yonge's Eng-Gr lexicon, London 1849.

[jeidsath]

Smyth 1405-1409 on the Genitive of Cause is worth reading here. It lists examples like οὐκέτι ὧν οὗτοι κλέπτουσιν ὀργίζεσθε, ἀλλ᾽ ὧν αὐτοὶ λαμβάνετε χάριν ἴστε. Philo seems on solid ground.

[Barry Hofstetter]

Smyth 1405-1409 on the Genitive of Cause is worth reading here. It lists examples like οὐκέτι ὧν οὗτοι κλέπτουσιν ὀργίζεσθε, ἀλλ᾽ ὧν αὐτοὶ λαμβάνετε χάριν ἴστε. Philo seems on solid ground.

I'm not so sure about that:

With verbs of emotion the genitive denotes the cause. Such verbs are to wonder at, admire, envy, praise, blame. hate, pity, grieve for, be angry at, take vengeance on, and the like.
ἐθαύμασα τῆς τόλμης τῶν λεγόντων I wondered at the hardihood of the speakers L. 12. 41, τοῦτον ἀγασθεὶς τῆς πρᾳότητος admiring him for his mildness X. C. 2. 3. 21, ζηλῶ σε τοῦ νοῦ, τῆς δὲ δειλίᾱς στυγῶ I envy thee for thy prudence, I hate thee for thy cowardice S. El. 1027, σὲ ηὐδαιμόνισα τοῦ τρόπου I thought you happy because of your disposition P. Cr. 43 b, συγχαίρω τῶν γεγενημένων I share the joy at what has happened D. 15. 15, ἀνέχεσθαι τῶν οἰκείων ἀμελουμένων to put up with the neglect of my household affairs P. A. 31 b, τὸν ξένον δίκαιον αἰνέσαι προθῡμίᾱς it is right to praise the stranger for his zeal E. I. A. 1371, οὔποτʼ ἀνδρὶ τῷδε κηρῦ-κευμάτων μέμψῃ never wilt thou blame me for my tidings A. Sept. 651, τοῦ πάθους ᾤκτῑρεν αὐτόν he pitied him for his misery X. C. 5. 4. 32, οὐδʼ εἰκὸς χαλεπῶς φέρειν αὐτων nor is it reasonable to grieve about them T. 2. 62, οὐκέτι ὧν οὗτοι κλέπτουσιν ὀργίζεσθε, ἀλλʼ ὧν αὐτοὶ λαμβάνετε χάριν ἴστε you are no longer angry at their thefts, but you are grateful for what you get yourselves L. 27. 11, τῑμωρήσασθαι αὐτοὺς τῆς ἐπιθέσεως to take revenge on them for their attack X. A. 7. 4. 23. Here belongs, by analogy, συγγιγνώσκειν αὐτοῖς χρὴ τῆς ἐπιθῡμίᾱς it is necessary to forgive them for their desire P. Eu. 306 c (usually συγγιγνώσκειν τὴν ἐπιθῡμίᾱν τινί or τῇ ἐπιθῡμίᾳ τινός).

Smyth, H. W. (1920). A Greek Grammar for Colleges (pp. 330–331). New York; Cincinnati; Chicago; Boston; Atlanta: American Book Company.

It strikes me that in the example you quoted, the causal genitive is ὧν taken with ὀργίζεσθε, "angry from the things which they stole..." And not necessarily from the second clause, although you could say he included that clause as a further part of the example. But the more I think about, the more I think this is one of those category things. Do what they receive cause them to be grateful? Surely. Are they grateful for these things in the sense that these things are the object of their gratitude (their gratitude is directed toward them)? A case could be made for that as well, I think. The confusion could be English as well. We are grateful for things, not as a result of or from (in normal English usage, although we can say these things, they just don't sound as idiomatic, at least not to me).

Anyway, way too much time on this when I could be catching up on Homer and Cicero. It's clear what the Greek means.

[seneca2008]

It strikes me that in the example you quoted, the causal genitive is ὧν taken with ὀργίζεσθε, "angry from the things which they stole..." And not necessarily from the second clause, although you could say he included that clause as a further part of the example. But the more I think about, the more I think this is one of those category things.

That was my thinking and you beat me to it.

The main point is how should we help the OP who is clearly working through Mastronade and needs clear guidance. If someone asks about an example in a textbook I think that the answer should be given in terms of that textbook. If we think the textbook is wrong that's another matter but given we cannot agree amongst ourselves about Smyth its not a good basis for offering advice. Mastronarde clearly means the example given by the OP to be an objective genitive.

[Asterisk1234]

Thanks to all respondents.