Greek Syntax: Early Greek Poetic and Herodotean Syntax

587 Pages·2002·22.307 MB·English

by  Guy L. Cooper, Karl Wilhelm Krüger

GREEK SYNTAX

GREEK SYNTAX
EARLY GREEK POETIC
AND
HERODOTEAN SYNTAX
after
K. W. Kriiger
VOLUME 4
ANN ARBOR
THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN PRESS
Copyright © by the University of Michigan 2002
All rights reserved
Published in the United States of America by
The University of Michigan Press
Manufactured in the United States of America
oo Printed on acid-free paper
2005 2004 2003 2002 43 2 1
No part of this publication may be reproduced,
stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in
any form or by any means, electronic,
mechanical, or otherwise, without the written
permission of the publisher.
A CIP catalog record for this book is available
from the British Library.
U.S. CIP applied for.
ISBN 0-472-11295-3
CONIUGI CARAE
ALISON MARY BURFORD COOPER
OBLATUM

Preface
These two books complement and complete the first two
volumes of my revised expansion of K.W. Kriger’s treatment of
Greek Syntax. The first two volumes deal with Attic Prose. These
two cover the poets from Homer to Aristophanes and the Ionic
prose historian Herodotus. The organisation is the same. The
paragraph structure of the first two volumes has been retained in
so far as that was possible. There is much in Attic prose idiom
which is not exactly echoed in the syntax of the poets and
Herodotus. Conversely these authors have a variety of usages
which are not found in standard prose. There is thus in this
material nothing to correspond to some paragraphs in volumes 1
and 2. And an important body of description and examplification
had to be accommodated in volumes 3 and 4 which was not needed
in the analysis of the Attic prose texts. A number 1 has been
prefixed to all references to indicate that the paragraph in
volumes 1 and 2 is intended. A number 2 has been prefixed to all
references to the paragraphs in volumes 3 and 4. Beyond this the
next two sets of numbers correspond for the most part exactly.
After these first two sets there may be exact correspondence or
there may not. If the correspondence is not exact, then numbers
are introduced in brackets to show which paragraphs in the first
two volumes will come closest to offering parallels. I do not
believe that difficulty in practice will plague anyone who wishes
to establish comparisons clear across the whole range of
literature from Homer to Demosthenes.
The comparative element which I think is surely clear in
all volumes is thus extended into an historical realm and a
breadth of genre which is new in the work as heretofore
published. Yet I think that the practical and literary advantages
of this organisation of analysis - which makes it easy to restudy
any Classical text or corpus thoroughly in terms of syntactic
parallels - are retained. There is certainly some overlap between
the two parts. Important aspects of Herodotus are dealt with in
both sets of volumes. As I explained in the preface to volumes 1
and 2 there is also an overlap between the analysis of the texts of
Attic Prose and the texts of Attic Dramatic Poetry. The dramatic
authors muust therefore figure largely in the contents of both sets
of volumes. That is I believe however entirely desirable. It is
impossible to appreciate the peculiar situation of this literature
without appreciating its debt which is profound to both the
background literary culture of Classical times, which was
strongly poetic, and to the develped Attic prose usage which
surrounded men like Aeschylus, Sophocles, Euripides and
Aristophanes. A similar situation exists with Herodotus. His debt
to poetry, especially to Epic poetry, is profound and yet his work
is expository prose. For its profounder idiomatic understanding
Herodotus’ creation requires to be approached from both
Preface 2594
directions. I hope that my work accommodates this complexity
and that my admiration for the way Kriiger managed it appears in
everything I have done with and on the basis of his scheme.
Kriger did excellent editions of Thucydides and of
Xenophon's Anabasis. His treatment of these texts in his syntax
was particularly thorough. I indicated that in my elaborated
revision of his systematic work by setting off the examples from
these two texts with a vine leaf emblem. This feature of Kriger’s
work has been carried through in the same fashion in volumes 3
and 4. The oak leaf here sets apart the examples from Homer and
from Herodotus. Just as I thoroughly exploited his editions of
Attic prose authors to expand the treatment of this sphere of the
literature I have also exploited his edition of Herodotus to make
the systematic treatment fuller. Kriger did not do an edition of
Homer but his treatment of this author, together with the
subsequent treatments by Kuahner-Gerth, Gildersleeve-Miller,
Stahl and Denniston, as well as important contributions from
others have allowed me to develop for the Iliad and the Odyssey a
kind of presentation which, if worked through systematically by
any serious student, is bound to give a level of technical control
which could not be developed in just the same style by any other
method. The Bibliography to these volumes gives a little bit larger
treatment to the Epic tradition than to other genres because I
have been so anxious to make these poems the basis for students
of a Hellenism which is securely grounded in the brilliant dawn
of the written record. That concern on my part led to a larger
sweep of the literature available for the purposes of this work.
Any blame which my efforts deserve is mine alone. Such
failings are not going to be found because I have had inadequate
help from others. The warm support which comes from family
must be mentioned first. Guy L. Cooper Jr. is now deceased. But to
the last I counted on him always in certainty that he would
understand my purposes and goals. My debt to my wife Alison
Cooper has been scholarly and intellectual as well as familial,
and my debt to her is hardly second to that which I recognise to
the memory of my father. Sir Hugh Lloyd-Jones and Mortimer
Chambers have been kind but firm critics of the chapters as I sent
them on. Very likely this would be a better work if I had accepted
all of their advice instead of merely most of it. The good
encouragement of learned friends such as Ernst Badian and Alan
Boegehold is another advantage for which it is hard to give
sufficient thanks.
The team at the Press of the University of Michigan at
Ann Arbor including Christina Milton, Colin Ganio and Andrea
Olson have made the publication much easier. Jeffrey Rusten in
Ithaca, Marc Cogan in Detroit and Ryan Steinberg in Ann Arbor
have helped me unstintingly with the electronic problems of
erecting the Index Locorum. Many critics have called impatiently
for an Index Verborum. Now that all the main body of the work is
completed that task has become possible and it has being
arranged by the Press of the University of Michigan at Ann
Preface 2595
Arbor. I cannot say how much the assumption by others of that
daunting task means to me. I am eager to get on with revision of
other aspects of Kriiger's work. His editions are no longer suited to
the needs of our students. But I am in hopes that for them I can
adopt a format and style appropriate to our needs today, and that
this will, together with what is contained in these volumes, make
the kind of study he fostered once more possible.
Guy L. Cooper, III
CONTENTS
VOLUME 3
Part I: Uses of Declined Forms
43. Gender 1909
2.43.1.1 Masculine attribute, generic Feminine, and hyper-feminine
attributes 2.43.1.2 Masculine particile generic
2.43.2.0 Substantivized masculine and feminine adjectives 2.43.2.1
Anarthrotic substantivization. ἀνήρ expressed
2.43.3.0 Elliptical substantivization 2.43.3.1 Masculine ellipsis
2.43.3.2 Feminine substantivization 2.43.3.3 Adverbial uses
2.43.3.4 Complex feminine adverbial expressions 2.43.3.5 Elliptical
εἰς and ἐν c. gen. 2.43.3.6 Neuter substantive of personally dominated
locality 2.43.3.7 Ellipsis by allusion 2.43.3.8 Neuter ellipsis
2.43.4.0 Substantivized neuter adjectives 2.43.4.1 Pejorative and
laudatory color. ξεινήιον. With cid, φρονέω. Of language and the like
2.43.4.2 Local with prepositions 2.43.4.3 Temporal with
prepositions 2.43.4.4 Concrete 2.43.4.5 Gnomic, predicative, of
persons. Feminine collectives compete. Festivals. τὸ ναυτικόν, τὸ ἐμόν,
χρῆμα, πρήγματα. 2.43.4.6 Cross references
44. Number 1927
A. Singular
2.44.1.0 Collective. στάχυς, κῦμα, δάκρυον 2.44.1.1 νύκτας te καὶ ἦμαρ
2.44.2) Military and work forces 2.44.1.3 Ethnic appellatives
2.44.1.4 National leader 2.44.1.5 Articular generic noun. Attributive
singular
B. Dual
2.44.2.0 Occurrence, sense. Plurals of symmetrical body parts. ἄμφω,
δύο 2.44.2.1 Homely or pathetic color. Reciprocity 2.44.2.2 Dual
participles of common gender 2.44.2.3 Plural and dual alternating
in same sentence
C. Plural
2.44.3.0 Plurals of abstracts and proper nouns 2.44.3.1 Plurals of
abstracts in Homer and Herodotus 2.44.3.2 Divergent conception of
plural 2.44.3.3 Neuter plurals of symmetrical body parts 2.44.3.4
Majestic plural 2.44.3.5 Feminine plurals and singulars of city
names 2.44.3.6 Tragic personal plurals 2.44.3.7 Lexical peculiarities
of number 2.44.3.8 Neuter plurals of diffuse impersonal subject in
Homer 2.44.3.9 After Homer 2.44.3.10 In Herodotus 2.44.3.11
Confused number in neuter pronouns
45. Nominative and Vocative 1940
A. Nominative
2.45.1.0 Out of construction (exclamatory) and in anacoluthon
2.45.1.1 Nominativus pendens 2.45.1.2 Nominative participle of
previously oblique case idea. 2.45.1.3 Exclamatory nominative in
Homer 2.45.1.4 Homeric reconsidering nominatives