GREEK PARTICLES BY

J. D. DENNISTON FELLOW OF HERTFORD COLLEGE, OXFORD

UNIVERSITY LECTURER IN GREEK AND LATIN LITERATURE

SECOND EDITION

AT

Oxford University Press, Amen House, London E.G. 4 CU..ASOOW trn:W YOIUt TOlltOifTO KKLBOURNB WELUMOTON

80118AY CALCU'tTA IIADRAS ltA.UCRI CAPE TOWN IBADAN

Geoffrey Cumberlege, Publisher to th University

? 'sy' __ ~-., '1

' I oJ

FJaiT &DinOM 1934 UCOD &tnTIOif anurn:u LITHOGIIAPHICALLV IN Gil&AT IRITAIN

AT THa UloiiVIIIITY ruSI, OXPOilD, IIQM (.QU&CT&U tHa&1'S QP TH& PiaU I.DITION

19S_.

'

' ,_

,

PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION DURING the fifteen years between the first edition of this book and his death in 1949 Denniston made notes of a large number of additional examples and on many points changed his mind in the light of this fresh material. My principal task in the prepara-tion of this second edition has been to incorporate all these addi-tions and corrections. For the sake of speed and economy photographic reproduction from the first edition has been em-ployed. This has meant that no insertion could be made in the text without an omission of corresponding size on the same or the next page. Accordingly, I have reduced many quotations to bare.re-ferences; the choice of what to omit or condense has not always been easy, but in all cases I have weighed the new matter against the old and omitted whatever contributed least to the argument. Above all, I have taken the opportunity to redistribute matter between the text and the addenda in such a way that, as far as possible, the addenda do not accumulate additional examples but are confined to discussion of difficulties of text and interpretation.

The notes which Denniston made in his interleaved copy nearly always made it quite clear what he wanted to insert and where; some other notes, in the margins of review offprints and correspon-dence, did not make it clear, and I have accordingly been very cautious in using them. In general, I have tried to admit nothing into the text without being certain that it represented Denniston s considered view. But in a few cases the fresh examples which he had added seemed to me to necessitate a slight modification of his original views, and I have rc:-written a sentence or two accordingly (p. 1 !ll!, on po~tponed 8 in Middle and New Comedy; pp. ::90-1, on Ka{ linking qualitative attributes; p. 462, on 8' ov>' in the sense of 8E 8~; p. 501, on n linking qualitative attributes).

As thoroughgoing a correction as possible has been made of the few printers' errors and fewer wrong refen:ncts which .lppeared in the first edition.

Inevitably, in carrying out a revision of this kind one is t".J.,-ed with two temptations: to add material of one's own, and t,, modify interpretations of the autlllH's with whi.:h ,,ne dis;lgrets; The

x FROM AID TO THE READER (l;':~sT EDITION) I use italics in translation to mark the word stressed in my

English: this is not necessarily the word rendering the word stressed in the Greek.

On the whole, I have avoided the indication 'etc.', which in a work of this kind is often dangerously ambiguous. '/d. saep.' denotes that the particle or usage occurs often in the author last cited, 'ib. saep.' that it occurs often in the work last cited, 'et saep.' that it occurs often in Greek as a whole.

Where a particle is ghen in brackets as an emendation, it is to be taken as a substitute for the particle under discussion. E.g. on p. J 70 (s.v. 8i) '(yap Reiske)' means that Reiske conjectures yap for 8E. But I have been more explicit in cases where ambiguity was to be feared.

AID TO THE READER (SECOND EDITION)

References to Bacchylidcs are to the edition of Snell" ( 1949). Fragments of lyric and elegiac poets are numbered as in Diehl's Anthologia lyric a Graeca (second edition); tragic fragments as in Nauck; comic fragments as in Kock; but Arn., Diehl, Mette, and Mette (Nachtrag) after a tragic fragment refer respectively to the Supplemmtum Euripideum of von Arnim, the Supplementum Sophocleum of Diehl, the Suppler~untum Aeschyleum of Mette, and Nachtrag zu dem Supplemmtum Aesclty!cum; Dem. after a comic fragment refers to the Supplementum Comicum of Demiarl-czuk. Fragments of Pindar are numbered as in Bowra, with Schroeder's number in brackets; of the Presocratics, as in Die is (fifth edition); of the historians, as in Jacoby; of Epicharmus and Sophron, as in Kaibel's Comoediae Graecac Fragmenta.

An asterisk indicates that the AdditioJta! Notu at the end of the book should be referred to.

! I I

CONTENTS FROM AID TO THE READER (FIRST EDITION) ix

X AID TO THE READER (SECOND EDITION) INTRODUCTION . sxxvii

I. THE ORIGINS AND FUNCTIONS OF PARTICLES xn:vii (I) Defimtion of' particle'. Particles originally other forms of

speech . . . . . . xxxvii (2} Particles denoting amo~e of thought in isolation. Emphatic

particles: affirmauve, mtens1ve, determinative, limitatire :n:xvii (3) Particles conveying moods of emotion, nuances xxxvm (4) Par~icles of empha~is and nuance grouped as 'adverbial'.

Difficulty of rendenng these particles . . . xxxix. (5) Particles establishing a relationship between ideas. Con-

nective, hypotactic, 1 responsive', apodotic and resumptive and 'corresponsive ' uses '

XXXIX

II. CONNECTING PARTICLES . xliii (t) The origin of connectives xliii (2) Connexion and asyndeton. Cases where asyndeton is often

employed. Polysyndeton. Use of asyndeton for emotional effect xli 1 i

(3) Nature of connexion omitted when asyndeton is employed xlvi (4) Tests of admissibility of asyndeton in a given case xlvi (5) Apparently superfluous connexinn. (i) In answer to question

or command. (ii) At opening of speech or work. (iii) At opening of reported speech xhi

(6) The different methods of connexion: additional, adversative, confirmatory, and inferential. Distinction between addi-tional and progressive I uses. 1 Eliminative' ,md' balancing I adversatives xlvli

(7) Abnormalities of reference in connexion Ill. COMBINATIONS AND COLLOCATIONS OF P.\R-

TlCLES li (1) The distinction between combinations and collocations. (il

Change of meaning in combination. (u) Derndence ot one particle on another. (iii) Other tests o coherenl..':t". (iv) Fortuitous collocations. Gravitation of certain p . .utides towards certain other parts of speech . li

(2) Avoided collocations li1i (3) Split combinations Ji, (4) Exceptional combmations h (S) Double connexions h In the summary of the tnl :.quare hrackds llenvt~ '1\U unimpVIU.ut. ill'Lk\l~\ "'\f bi~bly don~tlul u>u~e.

xii CONTENTS("' IV. DIVERSITY IN THE USAGES AND MEANINGS OF

PARTICLES. Deviations from normal meaning even in case of apparently stereotyped idioms. Ambiguities more f~equent in case o_f combi~ations. Occasional logical separa-tion of two particles wh1ch normally form a combination. Different meanings in close proximity Ivi

V. THE POSITION OF PARTICLES !viii (I) The position of particles in sentence and clause. Adverbial

particles gravitate to opening. Position of enclitics. Posi-tion of ')'f, di], and adverbial Kni relative to emphasized word. Position of connectives. Types of postponement . . I viii

(2) Order of precedence in combinations. (i) Adverbial particles and connectives. (ii) Preparatory particles and connectives. (iii) Preparatory and adverbial particles. (iv) Two adverbial particles lx

VI. THE STYLISTIC IMPORTANCE OF PARTICLES !xi (I) Repetition of particles. Greek tolerance of repetition. De-

signed repetition. 'Gregarious ' tendency of particles lxii (2) The employment of particles in different periods, dialects. and

styles, and by different authors. Difficulty of inquiry. lxiv (3) Chronol()gical differences. Exacter delimitation of functions

in post-Homeric Greek. Emergence of stereotyped com-binations. In other cases increased diversity of usage. The development of 8~, u~v, p~v, and other particles: obsolescence of others. Development in indiv1dual authors: Aeschylus, Plato. Post-classical usages in Hippocrates. lxv

(4) Differences in dialect. Ionic usages in certain Attic writers. o~v and To combinations. Other examples. Ionicisms in Sophocles lxx

(5) Differences in genre. Dialogue and continuous speech. Par-ticles espec!.:-dJy common at opening of answer: usually omitted in oralio obliqua, but sometimes retained. Usages transferred from answer~ to continuous speech (imaginary dialogue). Certain particles mainly confined in Homer and the historians to speeches. The orators stand midway between dialn~:ue works and formal treatises. Vivid usag~s in Demosthenes. Political and forensic oratory lxxii

(6) Colloquial and poetical uses. Possibly colloquial uses in Homer. Colloquialisms in Euripides, and occasionally in Aes~hylus. Epic uses in Aeschylus. Other uses peculiar to the high stylt:. Ctftain Epic particles not found in later Greek. IJilferences between verse (including comedy) and prose lxxv

(7) ' a! preferences of various authors. Usages of Demos-.. .:.v, and pseudo-Demosthenes compared lxHiii

'A.U.4 l. GHJtAL AIW/,Illowing ne~ati~e clause. (a) ov

~ovo11 (oux o1ra>") :. aA.Aa ~ea,, etc. (b) a>..>..a, following nega-ttve clause, meamng I except'. rr>..r}ll aua. (t.) With com-parative adverb in negative clause. (d) !'liA~a. (

xiv

'Apa (ap, pa) JZ I. PRIMARY USE, EXPRESSING LIVELY FEELING OF INTEREST 33 I!. SECONDARY USE, EXPRESSING SURPRISE ATTENDANT UPON

DISILLUSIONMENT 35 (1) Verb in present. (2) Verb in past. Special uses: (i) with

p.i"A"A"" etc.: (ii) with imperfect, especially of .ip.i. (3) Verb in fUtUre. (4) TOVT' opa . , 35

Ill. PARTICULAR VARIETIES OF SECONDARY USE 37 (1) ,; apa 37 (2) In reported speech, and after verbs of thinking and seeming.

Especially .;,. apa 38 (3) In questions, following an interrogative. (i) Direct questions.

(ii) Indirect questions. Oun~ O.pa 39 (4) Logical 40

IV. POSITION. Usually second word when connective: but postpone-ment not infrequent 41

V. COMBINATIONS. t:iAA" lipa, dAA~ ... Opa. Ei'Tf lipa. oVTf tipn. nirrOp ll' ll' ... . . ' ... npa. j'E npa. apa )'f" apa. '1 apn. ~ecu pn. !J.EII apa. oJ., O.pa. T 1 O.pa. fjafJa'i Upa. For? Upn,? jm, see p. 284. For yap Cipa, "Yelp pa, see p. 56. For TOL Cipa, lipn Tot, see PP 554-5 42

"Apa 44 I. EQUIVALENT IN SE:SSE TO apa. (1) Adding liveliness. (2) ~lark-

ing realization of truth or drawing conclusion. (3) ,; ~pa. (4) wr l.pa. (5) Following interrogative pronoun 44

II. AS INTERROGATIVE I' ARTICLE. (1) Leaving answer open. (z) Ex ;Jecting negative answer. (3) Expecting positive answer. (4) l.p' ov. (5)

XVI CONTENTS~ ..

VI. PROGRESSIVE USE, IN ANSWER-QUESTIONS Sr (1) Speaker proffers new suggestion after elimination of previous

hypothesis 81 (2) Speaker, after being satisfied on one subject, wishes to learn

something .further. (i) Further information required con-cerning cause of facts already known. (ii) Non-explanatory supplementary information required. (i) and (ii) with ellipse: ri yelp; . 82

Progressive yelp in questions in continuous speech. Explanation of progressive ytip in questions . . 84

VII. ELLIPTICAL QUESTIONS: Ti yap; (cf. pp. 82-3): .j ydp; (see p. 285): oV ytip; 1rWs- ydp; 'ITWs- yUp oU; 85

VIII. ASSENTIENT. (t) In general. (z) With word echoed from preceding speech. (3) yelp ,-o, (for which see, in general, pp. 549-50), con\'eying assent, and adding somelhing to it. (4) yap expressing approval. (5) Assent or approval, with word echoed from preceding speech . 86

IX. IN \VISHES, Ei yUp, ai ydp . 8

xviii

(12)

CONTENTS adding something to implied affirmation. In imaginary dialogue. (vi) Adding detail to expressed a.ssent. (vii) In formulae of assent, ~e.uAWr yt 1rotn>v, etc. (vm) Speech con-tinued by second character (a) interrupting, (b) carrying on already complete sentence. (ix) First speaker amplifyng his original statement

Epexegetic, with (i) substantive or pronoun in apposition, (ii) participial clause, (iii) relative clause, (iv) repeated word, (v) adverb or adverbial phrase, (vi) consecutive or final clause

II. LIMITATIVE (I) In general. (i) Extension of application not excluded. (ii) Ex-

tension of application excluded (2) (i) With relative pronouns. (ii) With conditional and causal

conjunctions (3) ws ('for') ... y< (4) With participle (5) A forlion", negative (6) Duplication of y

Ill. QUASI-CONNECTIVE. (t) For yovv or yap. (2) ;,. .. ,& y. IV. POSITION. Normally following emphasized word. (t) Order

with article, with prepositions, and wilh negatives. (2) (i) Preceding emphatic word. (ii) Unemphatic word interposed between emphatic word and yt

V. CoMBINATIONS. (1) With word or words intervening. (2) Juxta-position with preceding or following particle. For 8i 1''' ~e.al yt, ~Jill yt, Ti yt, see below. See also pp. 23 (d>..Ad yt), 247 ("~ ')'t)1 .fO

XX CONTENTS (( B. Otbertypesofpostponement. (t) In general. (z) Postponement

after apostrophe

OvSl, fL TJSE I. CONNECTIVE

(t) Without preceding ne~ative clause. (i) As balancing adversative. (ii) For dAA' oV. (iii) For Kal oV. n . oV~i

(2) With preceding negative clause. Irregular responsions. (i) oGu: .. oVdi. (ii) n- oV . oVlii. (iii) Negative omitted in first clause (oMi for oV . oMi). (iv) Only last two units connected

II. RESPONSIVE. (1) Simply adding negative idea, 'not . either'. (i) In general.

(ii) With inversion. (iii) Corresponsive (2) With sense of climax,' not even'. (i) In general. (ii) Negativ-

ing succeeding idea in toto (J) Duplication of negative. {i) oil . oVl5i, oVlJ . oV. (ii) In

combination with other particles. oU J.livrot oMi, oti ytlp o~at. For oV J.l~" oMi, oV p.iu oVl5i, see pp. 338-9 and 363. Duplicated oVlJi. oVl5i c!w oVOi, oVOi yGp oU~i. For oVlJi P.'}v o~8i, oVl5i J.l;" oVai, see pp. 340 and 363

Ill.

l v.

As EMPHATIC NEGATIVE, 'not at all'

DOUBTFUL PASSAGES

V. POSITION. Responsive oU8i usually imme~iately preceding wor.d with which it is connected, but sometimes separated from 1t

Ka', "" ' .,. ' 0: KaL .. OE (1) ' a; (2) < ... 8i. (i) In general. Occasionally after strong. stops.

(ii) Introducing new instance. (iu) lntroducmg last Item of series. After asyndeton

(' b th '! ,.. a; 11:0 0 , II:U& , , UE. TE , , , Kllt , Uf, }J ., (.ocai . fJi meaning 1 also'.] uVOi .. l1f

t.-rj I. EMPHATIC

(I) With adjectives. Iii In general. \\"ith comparatives. (ii) With a;;;.,,. (iii) W1th adjectives express1ng wdetimte quantity or number ("oAur, ,;;,, etc.). (iv) With numerals

(2) With adverbs. (i) In general. (ii) With adverbs expressing frequency, intensity, etc. (ii1l With temporal and local a

xxii CONTENTS ( IV.

v.

CONNECTJVE. (1) Development of connective sense. (2) Tern poral, logical, and intermediate force. Occasionally used in lighter transitions

POSITION OF CONNECTIVE a.j. Occasional postponement after coalescing words

'AUO. Sr] : a.\>.0. ... Sr] ( 1) General adversative sense. (2) Brushing aside irrelevancy.

(3) Progressive. {4) After rejected suggestion, (5) Assen-tient. Occa.sionaJly following light stop, or no stop at all

[AU& yE s.,; : axxo. s.,; YE J ro.p s.,; .

(1) Arresting attention at opening of narrative. (2) oU yC.p a~, 1';, yap ~;,. {3) Reinforcing assentient ydp. {4) With elliptical yUp in answer. (5) Reinforcing progTessive y&p

(yap .. ~;,.] 1 yap ~?. aXXa yap a;,. .;xx,\ ... yap a;,

Emphatic limitative. (2) Purely emphatic. (3) In answers. (4) A forlion. For,.;, n (on) a.j, see p. 223. For 1'? on~? .,,, seep. 247. {5) ... y 8-j. (6) ,.;. y a.j. (7) ri y a;,: ..... y ~?. For (aXAd y a;,], seep. 242

A7/ yE

243

243 244

244

245

247

Ka1 Sr} 248 (1) Connective. ' a;, for < a;, .;. Special usages. (i) Argu-

ment from precedent. (ii) Surprised question 248 (2) Non-connective. (i) Marking vivid perception. (ii) Intro-

ducing new character on stage. (iii) Marking completion of something required: often in response to definite com-mand. (iv) Approaching ;;a? in sense. (v) Imaginary realization, 'suppose that'. (vi) Jn apodusi 250

K ' aL (1) Joining sentences, clauses, and words. (2) Non-connective

Ka1 0-TJ Ka[ (1) In general. Rarely marking a new departure. (2) Transition

from general to particular, rarely vice versa. (3) Apodotic. (4) Introducing hypothesis. (51 In surprised question

.tCai. a;, ... ai. .:ai. ~)I; 0~11 ltai

Mtv &rJ : a{ s.,; Sometimes ,.;. ~;, .. ~; ~.j

253 254

55

55 257

257 257

r CONTENTS xxiii M11 Sr] .

Rarely in anaphora. In historians, as formula of transition. Analysis of,.,.;, a~. Is a~ connective, or does it strengthen ,.,.t .. l For a;, strengthening affirmative and adversative ,.,.i11, see pp. 392 ff.

~ Sr] With or without preceding pf11.

questions 1 n surprised or emphatic

259

TE 8r} >59 (1) Tf ='both'. (2) rt = 1 and'. (i) Joining words, phrases, or

clauses. (ii) Joining sentences. (3) Doubtful cases. (4)

~a( ( 1)

tlTt a;,, oOn a~. (S) Tf a~ ZJII. n ... a~ 26o

Emphatic, in lively questions. (2) Connective, in questions motivated by what precedes. Especially (i) after rejection of idea, 'Wen, what?.: (ii) transitional. Ti aui. a~; .

After final conjunctions. (2) With causal conjunctions. (3) With.:,, and (usually) participle. an ~~8 (4) In general, expressing incredulity. (5) Indignant. (6) Without scepti-cism or indignation. (7) Position

~rJ1TOV 267 (For""'~~ u in Herodotus, seep. 494-) (1) In statements .. (2)

In questions. (3) oU lhjrrou in surprised questions. \4) Spectal Platonic uses. (5) Position. (6) Combinations. yup a.jorou. Bf a,;rrou. ~eai c5rprou. )'f birrrou. oU a~n'OU "'f 0~11 clt}rrov. T ~q1fOU 267

~~Ta I. lN QuESTIONS (connective)

(1) After interrogative, at opening of speech .. (2) After interroga-tive, in middle of speech. (3) Not tmmedtately followmg interrogative. (4) After ?, 3pn, n'UTtpo,. (S) ln quest1?ns where interrogative note is conveyed by ton7 of YO\Ce. Often third or fourth word. TaVTa (uTa, fn'UTa) ~'1"a .

(6) Following other particles. (i) 0~11 ~~i,-Ta, ~~~~:ov": .. cl~~n, oJ~ ~~Tal oV.,;ovv cl~Ta, lj~T 1 O~J.' 1 lj~ , , . atjTU, (11) II:Ql ~lJT-.1, .C!Il ~~

(7) aHa a~ra, dXXo\ . aijra (mainly in q_uestions). (t) In questions following rejected suggest ton. (n) Other uses

1]0

l7J

xxiv CONTENTS r II. EMPHATIC

(!) ln negative statements, olJ a~ra. (2) In negalive commands or wishes, p~ B~ra. (3) In affirmative answers, echoing word. Sometimes echoing word of speaker's own. For a~n1 with re-sumed negative, see pp. 274-6. (4) Other uses of emphatic a~ra. In general. In exclamations. After reJatives .

III. IV.

v.

""H I. (1)

II. (1)

CoNNECI'l VE (non-interrogative) COMBINATIONS. (For UA~Q diJra, and for o~v ... "iJra, oV~eouv,

Bijra, Ka aijra in questions, see pp. 272-4.) (I) Ka( a~ra. ( 2) Other combinations. p.f,. c3ijra. yap ~~ro. yf Bijra. ( a~rci yf.] ~ (,j ?) Bijra. oVa:oUv .. 8ijra. Un1p . . , b.jrfl

TEXTUALLY UNCERTAIN CASES

AFFIRMATIVE In general. (2) Position. (i) Postponed after vocative. (ii)

Postponed after exclamation or oath. (iii) At opening of apodosis. (iv) Other cases of postponement. (3) Repetition oi .). (4) .) .-uv ( .. y

xxvi CONTENTS (.f)In questions. (i) ~ simply giving; liveliness .. (ii) ?AA,a / (~lr)

!'?; (a) 'Well, what? (who?) (6) Elhpt1cal aHa n p.~v; 'Of course'. (iii) .,., J&f]v; etc. (a) Following rejection of supposition,' Well, what?' (b) 1 Of course.' (c) Introducing objection in interrogative form. (iv) oU p~v . .. j tentatively introducing alternative suggestion 332

II. ADVERSATIVE 334 .

. IJ'I" (t) As balancing adversative, positive and negative. ,..;" (ou p..j). (2) As strong adversative . !I I. PROGRESSIVE

(1) In positive statements. Especially (i) marking fulfilment of condi tion: (ii) marking transition -from major to minor premise: (iii) marking transition to discussion of problem (inceptive)

(2) ln negative statements. (i) oU p}J~t~, 'Nor, again', (1i) oU 1-'IJv oMi. (iii) .U!< l'>i . .

IV. SUPPOSED CONCESSIVE USE

V. POSITION. Sometimes postponed after article and after preposition

VI. COMBINATIONS. (1) ~~ p..jv. (2) ~~ p.d.-. (3) ? l'>i (4) ov!i ('not even') 1-'~" (S) n 1-'q.,, oVn ,..q . For oV 1-'?"' OA>.O, see pp. 28-30

\ \ ' , ..!\ \ ' , A""a p.TJV : aAI\a ... jLTJV (For ciHa ri (rlr, etc.) p..jv; see p. 332.) Adversative ( 1)

(2) Assentient. (i) In sphere of action, consent. Inceptive-respon-sive. (ii) In sphere of thought, assent. (iii) Indicating favourable reaction

(3) (4)

Substantiating condition, often with echoed word Progressive, proceeding to new item, or marking new

march of thought. (i) Positive. (ii) Negative. oi.hi ~ (b) a.\.\a p.i}v ov!i. (c) uU o.: p..jv .

stage in (a) aU'

(5) Transition to calling of evidence. (6) Transition from major to minor premise, or vice versa. (7) Transition to considera-tion of wider implications. (8) Exceptional passages

rt p.7fv (1) Affirmative.

gress1ve. mise

(S) Combinations. Y' J.'1"

(6j Position

.. H ' jLYJV

(2) Adversative, often answering ,.;.. (3) Pro-A fortiori. (4) Introducing minor or major pre-

(1) General use. (2) In oaths and pledj~es

334 336

336

338 340

340

J40

341

341

342 343

344

347

350 350

35 350

t

I ,)

( CONTENTS xxvii Ka~ p:r}v 351

(1) Progressive, usuali.Y after strong stops. (2) Transition from major to minor P.rem1se, or vice versa. (3) Substantiating condition, usually w1th echoed word. (4) Assentient. (5) Inceptive-responsive. (6) Marking entrance of fl(.w character upon stage. (7) 'See!' 'Hark!' (8) Adversative. Exception-ally, for a.I.Aa or,.;, o~v. (9) Apodotic 351

Ka~.

Mlv I. EMPHATIC A. Homer, Hesiod, Pindar, and ionic 'llt:r.rc

With (1) substantives: (2) pronouns: quasi-connective: (3) rela-tives: (4) adjectives: (5) adverbs: (6) verbs. With nega-tives: (7) ou p.iv. (i) Emphatic. (ii) Adversative (perhaps). (iii) Progressive (possibly}. 1 Nor, again'. (8) oUbE ~Jill. olaE ,.;, ovai. (9) ov ,.;, ouU. (i) and (ii) Progressive. (iii) Ad-

359 359 359

versative 36o B. Allie. (1) In statements.

questions ,.;. (Xenophon). (2) In

II. [ADVERSATIVE] j68 Ill. PREPARATORY 369

(1) Normal use. (i) Varying strength of antithesis. (ii) Strong contrast. Order of clauses. (iii) 0 pi11 . .. 0 a;, variety of reference. (iv) Order of words. Normally (a) I'; and a; second in their clauses: (b) strongly contrasted ideas precede the particles. Exceptions. Non-symmetncal order. Post-ponement with arlicle, prepositions, and negatives 369

(2) Second clause introduced by non-adversative particle. (i) ,.; ... ni. (ii) ,.;, ... ~~i (see p. z87\. (iii),.; ... Tithiu hmus ol sm~le indivisible clause -~$--4

xxviii

l' p.iv ( 1) Adversative. () Progressive. (3) Affirmative. (4) Conceuivc.

,. .. ~;, z,,

~H p.iv (1) In oaths. (2) In strong asseverations. ~ plv a;,. ~ o piv. l'i

pill

K ' , aL p.II. ,.: .... ,IN !()SIC P1w~: ANCJ IN A'na (I) Emphatic. (i) In ~eeneral. With """""" etc. With "" Harely

l:tte ;n ,,.nrt-nn. f) Introtlucing minor Uf lll,ljOf JliCifll::lt 4t0

re p.ivrot 411 (l) Adversative. lntroducin.:- objection in dialo..:ue. Answering

piv. (2) Progu::ssive. (3) GivinH parti01l cootirmation, like yf TfH, [11.\.X/1,,, "f' ~~VTIH) 41!

K \ I \ , aL Jl-f JJTOt, Kat . . . p.t liTO~ ( 1) Progressive.

or da.use.

O~v (cT.v)

(i) lntrotlncin~ sentence. {i1) ''l!'oducmg phrase (2) Adver;;ltivc (doultlnl)

I. .SPICIFJC.-\l.LV llOMEIUC Us~. (I) .. "''"~" (:) ~f uJII II . ~. AS AN ANt:tl.LAIIV S7RF.NGTIII?.NING I'ARTtCt.t-:

( ) "' I (") I . ( ' .. J fiT OLIII. (I) tU UIJ ... ,, UTI, II urt , . , f r t.ILiil H ur 011W: tfr' oil"'). .tr' o~11 , .. tir' o~~~~ .

(2) ulJr' o~v. (i) olJr' ''~II ... uUu (rt uV,,,,., u.i). (Ill ut:'rt ... ,,~,., .. ~ ... For uU .. oar'~~~~~, se~ p. S to. .

( ) I I ' t 0, 9 l '' J T uav. oulJ uu.... uvc'lt . , , IIL/fl, Cl1 tJUU ULII' For ~~~~~ cvmbimd \w'lth .i.\.X,i, .:u&, )"'itJ, )'' ', L11h ~u.,, ')\'l" PP

441-Ht. (4) With rdatives. (i) Streuinll dosene .. n( relation. (ii) Strenin~

objective rl";dity. (iii) \\lith tndctimte rela.tive'l . (S) E&llpha~i~:inw: negatiVt""J, (I) uV.:u~,.~., .. , 1'' n~""uve turm uf )\! ...

l~zspcdtdly in an~wcn. uDcou., ~':' ... ' )'', ~S'i fre,luc:utly U\ cuntmunus t~pr:cc.:h. "' 1/h'''~"~ (nl tuc "' '

u~v, ullll , , uJv) ... Y' (ill) \\'Hhtut tulhtWI\1,, .,.. - ')'fl&/lo'

Ill. "~'AS A CUNN~CTINil I'ARI'I~LI (l) Nnnnul u:1r, Pror:tc:-olli'tc a11tl inl~l~t\tt.\L t.:.~ I'

1JjJ1Ji/11fl, ulJ~~~~~. ( ('ur a,pt~dlltll ulit.H.'ll , )'t, He111mplivc. (5) In un .. i .

.d

-l I' l

' '

v.

XXX CONTENTS. IV. OV~eovv, oUKoUv .

(I) CIVJC01 ,., in questions. \Vith 2nd pers. fut. ind. in impatient ques-tions. oJ~eouv 8~Ta, oVa:ovv . ~ijra (see also p. 272). Inter~ rogative oGa:nvv often to be restored, for olo..coiiv. in prose

(2) o~Koiiv in questions. In Plato and Xenophon (a) strictly inferential, 'therefore'. 4 then': (b) introducing minor or major premise: (c) in enumeration of details, 'again ': (d) in general, pro-ceeding to new point or new step in argument: (e) introduc-ing disquisition for which interlocutor has declared himself ready, 'well'. In oratory and drama perhaps read oV~eovv ; everywhere. olucoVv oV, oVKoVY oV

(3) o~~~:oV11 in statements. In drama often read oVK.ovv ; In Plato oV..A" oJv. (6) Apodotic. (7) V. itb ellipse of contrasted idea, 'at least'. a;IX oJ a~

K ' .,. ' .,.. aL OlJJI, KaL OlJV

r ' .. ap OVII Homeric and post-Homeric uses

(I) In general. (21 In parenthesis. (3) As stronger form of assentient ..,.ap. (4) ,ap IJ{;p hf]. Assentient. (5) yap o~11, ?O.p o~v IJ~ as

for~ .. ardpQinting- connectives (an extension a explanatory yUp). (6) ci.\AQ ytip otv. For ~eui yilp u~11, seep. 112

rovll t;egative nonnaJJy,JtiJCoUJI ... yt (see pp. 422-5). yoliv and y'oJv.

)'' /,r "~., . . f. WITH y PREDOMINATING

(J) Wub. ' y. li) In general. li11 'Part proo/'. Formulae tJI , ;tJ,u toi.w, etc. Pro la11/o rt-a~on for following"

430

431

433

436 439 439 440

441

441 442

442

445

445 445

445

448

CONTENTS XXXI

(2)

suggested course. In parentheses relative clauses and questions. (iii) In apodosi. Also o~~eov"' ... 'Y' (see f~rther p .. 424). For apodotic dAAci ... )'oVv, see pp. 458-9. (iv) W1th pronouns . . . .

With. emphatic yt. (_i) If! affirmative answers. (ii) In exclama~ t1ons, sometimes tromcal or sarcastic (see also p. 449) .

II. WITH 0~11 PREDOMINATING (1) Passages wrongly so classed.

(Of lj' O~JI , (2) True examples. Resumptiv~,

450

454

~55

III. COMBINATIONS. (I) d).A!. ... ")loii (in apodosi). ")!Ovv oiA>.a. (z) l'iv yovv. (3) iyovv 458

IV. TEXTUAL QUESTIONS 459

,6' o3v Particles rarely separated. Distinction between cr oOv and hi a? 46o

I. IN GENERAL. {I) p.i.v . 3' oOJI. {2) a 0~11 without preceding: l'ill. Passages where a oOII appears to be equivalent to bi a? (cf. p. 466) ~6:

II. SPECIAL USES. (t) At end of series of details. (2) Resumptive. (3) ,; a oJ.. Sometimes elliptical. (4) Permissive. l5) Apo-dotic 463

III. TEXTUAL Dl .. fiCULTIES .~eal , . af o-J11

O~v 81} : S~ o~11 o.Jv aq. o.iKOiill aq

a~ oJv. a~ ... o311 aq oJ11 and oJ11 aq reinforcing Other particleS. Ei'Tf a;, W11, 3f c),J

'P '1. 1 " 9 ~ 1P 9 ~ ~ 01.111, 1((11 OIJ 01.111, OUT OVV 0'1 I(Q~ , , 0'] 01,11/, )'Otill UfJ. clTllp n~v aq. For yfrp o~v aq, see p. 447 For oVv 31}1rov, ,M oiw IJ,jrrov, see p. z68. 0~11 a;, universalizin!O!' rebti\'e

M\ .. Ell OVIJ (t) Retrospective and transitional o~" with prospective 1-'i (2) o~11 emphasizing prospective p.i11 ( 3) oJv emphasizing adversative or affirmative J.~-i", in dialogu!!. 1.1) \...!

verS

xxxii CONTENTS(; nEp I. EPIC (OR MAINLY EPIC) USE

(r) Intensive. (2) Determinative. (3) Limitative (4) Both contrasted ideas expressed. (i) '"P in first co-ordinate

clause. (ii) "'P in second clause. (iii) "'P in main clause. (iv) "'Pin subordinate clause .

(S) Climax. (6) Concessive, especially with participle ~~:ai . 1r1p, l(ai1ttp. oVai . 1ttp, oVa, rrtp

II. ANC!LLAR v 1Ttp lfrrp, comparative ( l)

(2) ''"'P ,; .. "'P (i) 'If really'. (ii) 'Even if'. With ellipse, ''"'P nr, etc. t'i.1np by itself, 1 ir at all '. Elliptical ti'rrtp Y' aq, in answer

(3) Ill.

With relatives and relative conjunctions, Ocrrrtp, f1fti1rtp, etc. COMBINATIONS. drt '"'P 81} 1r1p. 1r1p 81}. For ~eal . rrtp,

~r:nirrtp oi.di .. 1rtp, aMi trtp, see pp. 486-7. For dXXU r.tp, O.>..AcJ .' rrtp, see pp. 483-4. For titTfp )',., ,.;",.P a~, tirnp yt ~~.''"'Papa, see pp. 488-90. For iicnrp a~, see II. 3 above

nov ( l) In direct statements. In numerical approximations (Herodotus,

v). In answers (Plato) (2) In questions. Especially oU Ti ff'Ou, oG Jl'ov, in incredulous or

reluctant quest10ns (3) In subordinate clauses and reported speech. With infinitive.

With participle (4) Position. Occasionally placed late (S)

T.

Combinations. 5p ff'ou. QT,;p 1rav. Y';P n-ov. yl 1rav. !Ji Trov. l(ai ~~ I(Ol/. l(al 81} ICni , , 1i 1TOV, oiJ 1Crp lJ;, , .. "ti rrou. fi trav. 8~v trov. ~eai rrov. ~~:al yi rrov. 1-1iv 1rov. p.ill yi 1TOV. c.L\XU. ~~JI nov. .ICCii pryll rruv, aU p.;,v c..L\..\U n-ov. Jli"'T,OL _Yi 1TOV. OAA I 0~1/ yi ff'Oll. .,.; trov. yi 1'0i. ff'Oll. For lJ']1T'Ol', a,rrov8u, see pp. 067-9: for? rro, p. 282, pp. 285-6

I. CONNECI'IVE AND CORRESPONS!VE. (r) Single" (i) Connecting single words and phrases. (ii) Con-

necting clauses: (a) part1c1p1al: (b) mfinlllval: (c) finite. (iii) Connecting sentences

Peculiarities in use of single " (a) Introducing last item of series, previous items being connected by ~~:ai or~(. (o) Single words. (/1) Clauses. (y) Sentences. (b) Word or. claus~ connected by " followed by a not he< connected by "" or. a,. (a) Smgle words and phrases. (,'1) Clauses. ('') Couplm:.: last two units or otherwl5t: asyndetlc senes. Tf fullowmg-Asyndetir. series succeeded by another connective. ((d) Coup! ing nQAAu and qualitative epithet.] . (e) Connex10n where English prdors appo>itional constriiCtlon. (/)In anaphora. (;:; (Jccasional other lrrcgulantic5. (J1) oiJu meaning"' and nut'

1:) Correspcmsive, n .. , n. karely with anaphora. Joining single worda, plirasea, and dauae1. n ... 1f ,,

490

490

491

492

492 493

493

495 497

497

sao

53

' I

' i

i.

I. 1-I . I

I j !

f;t CONTENTS XXX Ill (J)

(4)

(S) (6)

(7)

,rn ... tiT' Different .types Exc~ption~l form~. (~) ,z. : ''"'. (ii) ''"' 0 l a;. (iii) ti'Tf ;j.

"' HTI. (1v) UTf omitted m first clause. For UTI ~tai see f h F .. ' .. , urt er p. 305. or u,- avv, see pp. 418-19 .

olJn ... oVrt (p~n .. IA~Tt), oiiTt (Jlrl'rt) Tf. For oUr' 0 J,, see pp. 419-20 ExceP.~ion~l forms. (i) ot:n .. "' .. aU (T' oU). (ii) n ... oVn.

(Ill) " I o/1 I 1> I.' " OU OlJTf'. OV , OUT OVII. OIIOf OVTI. (1Y) oiiTt:, , oU. (v) oiin forotin ... olJn. (vi) aiin ... ~i. For oVn ... aUU, seep. 193 . . . . . .

Corresponsive, Tf Kai, n ... Kai. and Tt .. ~r:ai Rarely in anaphora. Tf al

Irregular cor;esponsions. (i) !'iv ... (see pp. 3H-6). (ii) Tf ~~ . Exceptionally m anaphora. Tf ... oUai. (iii) rj .. "' (1v) u ... ,Y. (v) n ... aLTdp, n ... tiTOp. (vi) "' ftrnTn, For T'f ~Oi, Tt :/jf, see pp. 287-8. For Tf answered by Kal .. a;, see p. 20 3 .

f'f USed for a;. Tlf Tf'l olin , oi/Tt, Tf, . ICO~, meaning 1 jUSt as ... so', 'not only ... but also',' when ... then'. 1 either ... or', and for pill . af, ol;n .. Tf' for J.'~lf .. .. v .. . , ... ai .

(8) Position. Types of postponement. (i) Article-substantive-particle. (ii). Preposition-substantive-particle. (iii) Pre-poSitiOn-article-substantive-particle. (iv) Other cases or postponement

(v) Preposition supplied. (vi) Article supplied. (vii) Other word supplied .

(viii) Other irregularities II. EPIC {I) With relatives. w~ Tf, a.~,, Tf in com pan sons. Tf gi\ing causal

colour to relative. Rare in particular statements Survivals of Epic r< following relatives in rifth and fourth

centuries. In general, 0~ n. P.uticul.u varieties. (i) \\'ith. local and temporal adverbs. (ii) Oao., Tf, (iii) o~O .. Tt. (iv) On, adverbial, usually with participle. ,iTt in comparisons. For au a~, see p. 221. au trfp. (v) WITTf (Pindar ~u) in comparisons. In Herodotus and Thucydid.es, giving cJ.usaJ force to participle. WITn, consecuti'-'e. ~.111f~Tt. tvt) ~q, ..frt

(2) Tf following Other particles, (i) )'tV T

xxxiv CONTENTS:"

Tot ro& implies an audience. Examination of this principle .

I. IN DIRECT STATEMENTS (1) In general. (2) Boasting. (J) Threatening. (4) Hortatory,

deprecatory, etc. (5) In response to command. (6) Reveal-ing speaker's emotional or intellectual state. (7) Conveying criticism of previous speaker's words. (8) With ui, summons to attention. ( 9) Directing attention to sight or sound, c Lo!., 'Hark!, (to) \Vith proverb or general reflexion. (11) In negative statements, oifro,. oiirot ... f.J.~ .-:oVTot. d>..A' oVro&. yC.p oiirot. oiiTot oVai. (12) In potential clauses with Ov: by crasis, rtiv. For; rciv, seep. 554

II. IN OTHER INDEPENDENT CLAUSES (1) Questions. (2) Commands, positive and negative. (J) Prayers

and wishes

III. IN SUBORDINATE CLAUSES (1) Causal, f'rrEl To& (.-:ai), On Tot. (2) In conditional protasis. (3) In

relative clause. (4) In final clause. (5) In indirect speech. (6) p.q

INTRODUCTION

I. THE ORIGINS AND FUNCTIONS OF PARTICLES.

{I) Difficult as it is to arrive at a satisfactory definition of particle, an attempt must be made at the outset. I wili define it as a word expressing a mode of thought, considered either in isolation or in relation to another thought,' or a mood of emotion. It is a probable assumption that the evolution of particles repre-sents a relatively late stage in the development of expression. Their existence betokens a certain self-consciousness. A few Greek particles can be clearly seen to have been, at an earlier stage, other parts of speech. Thus a>.>.ti was originally a>.>.a, ' other things', and roL (pretty certainly) the dative of the second person singular pronoun. rroll was probably' somewhere', and the roL in ro

xxxviii INTRODUCTIO ~ suppose', The remainder primarily carry emphasis. Further, emphasis may take different forms: (i) Affirmative, denoting that something really and truly is so: (ii) Intensive, denoting that something is very much so: (iii) Determinative, concentrat-ing the attention on one idea to the exclusion of all else: (iv) Limitative, implying that beyond the prescribed limits the reverse may be true. Naturally, fixed lines cannot be drawn between these forms. Thus (i) 'I am really sorry' implies, almost of necessity, (ii) I am very sorry'. (i) ' It's really James' suggests (iii) 'It's James and no other'. In certain contexts (iii) suggests (iv). vVe should not therefore expect to find, and we do not in fact find, precise delimitation of the usages of emphatic particles. Affirmation is expressed par excd!mce by~. which (as its regular position, first word in the sentence, indicates) affects the thought as a whole: while o~ and y< tend to cohere with the preceding word. ry 'll'oJ\>.oi rovTo 'll'owvcn, 'in truth many do this': in 7ro>.->.oi 8~ rovro '/I'Otov.oi or], 'really many', is not quite the same a.s pf.>.a ,.o>.>.o[, 'very many'. Of the other emphatic particles, p.~v perhaps comes nearest in force to ~. though less subjective in tone: and in Homer ou p.r]v in negation appears to be the counterpart of ry in affirmation. The intensive and determinative functions are shared by y

xl

a logical tum nex1on.

INTRODUCTI~ (adversative, causal, or inferential) to the con-

(b) As expression develops, subordination largely replaces co-ordination, the }..i~r >

xlii INTRODUCTIO. point, meets a particle which looks back to the road he has traversed, and beckons him on in a certain direction. But greater coherence is attained if in addition a forward-pointing particle warns him in advance what path he will soon have to travel, the connexion being expressed reciprocally, from rear to van and from van to rear. It is characteristic of the Greek love of orderliness and lucidity that this double method of connexion is already present in Homer. The forward-pointing particles,

b ,, ' d ' which we may descri e as 'preparatory , are fHV, T

xliv INTRODUCTIOA

as TfKfJ~pwv 8i,

xlvi INTRODUCTI. (3) The mode of connexion omitted when stylistic asyndeton

is used is in most cases 'and'. Less frequently yap or yovv has to be supplied, as in E.Or.234: D.xviii 299 Sometimes' then' or 'therefore. has to be supplied: PI.Pri.JJ9E uo~ JlfVTOt 2:t}l0l-v[8'7~ rro}..[r1)~ 8Dcato~ ..>..a yap (p. 100 ).

(.)) Apparently superfluous connectives. In certain cases con-nectives are inserted where they are, strictly speaking, unneces-sary.

(i) In answers to questions. fiE" ouv (with preparatory p.iv and connective ouv: 'Well'): PI.Pitlb.51B: Sph.229D: X.HG vi:J.I3 (answering a rhetorical question). 8i: PI.Citrm.I 72C apa .. . ;-Taxa 8' av, f.>J, ourwr f.xot ('And perhaps it may be so') : often in answering a second question (pp. 171-2).

In answers to commands. PI.Euthphr.I5E elrr . . . -Elr au8tr ro[vvv, w :iwKpanr ('Well, another time, then'): R.JJ70 d.rr6TWTOV apyuptov.-OvKOVII irru8av fiOt YEV7]Tat ('When I get

INTRODUCTION xlvii

some, the~ For a curious TOLVVV in a rejoinder to a state-ment, cf. Ar. V. I 141 (p. 573).

(ii) At the opening of a speech or oracle, or of a whole work. The explanation of this inceptive use of connectives is perhaps not everywhere the same. Often the speaker wishes to put his thoughts into relation to the view of the persons he is addressing, or what he takes to be the generally prevailing view. But often, again, this use of connectives appears to be a mere mannerism of style. It has always a touch of nai'veti such as is characteristic of Xenophon. See aAAa (II.R), 8 (I.C.z.iii), TOLVVV (1.6). p.ev is similarly employed in openings: though not a connective, it seems to mitigate the abruptness of the initial plunge (p. 3R2). In a political or forensic speech, after the recitation of documents, the practice varies, connexion being usually inserted, but some-times omitted.

(iii) In reported speech an opening connective is naturallv omitted. ' He said," Then I'll come" ' becomes 'He said he'd go'. But there are cases where the connective is retained: Kat, X.HGv3.ro: _p5: vvv, E.Tr.113M: o~v. Pl.Pri.J2'K (p. 426): rotya[>Wv, Hdt.iv 14'}-I (p. 567, n.I): TOLI'UV. X. Cyr.vi 3 I 7 (!,>. 5; I),

For possibly superfluous 8 in exclamations, seep. Iil.

(6) T!te difft'rent mctltods of comtc:r:ion. These are, broad!; speaking, four: (a) Additional, (b) Adversative,(c) Confirmatory. (d) Inferential. But the divisions are everywhere fluid. (a) is represented at its purest by Kat and u,(though 8 is often hardly tinged with adversative colour): one idea is simpiy added to another without any indication of a logical relation between the two.1 A variant of (a) is what I shall term the 'progressive" use of particles, or combinations of particles, c,,nvcying not merely the st:tt ic piling-up of ideas, but mo,ement of thought: 'now',' again',' further',' to proceed': e.>;. p.>]v. d;>..:-.a ~i. y

1 The logical relation may be inherent in the conte=

xlviii INTRODUC.:.H.ON rn pr/v, Kat pr/v, pvro1.1 The same significance may be reached from the direction of (d), when o;iv and o.:,Koiiv degenerate from propter hoc into post hoc. In this progressive sense particles mark something of a new departure in the march of thought. They convey an effect approximating to that produced by paragraph-ing. though not usually denoting quite so strong a break. An example ex contrarto will illustrate this. In PI.R.338A Eitr6vr~~ IN pou ravra starts a new paragraph in the Oxford T~xt, and 1s printed, as here, with an initial capital. At such an Important joint in the structure o(;v or ro{vuv would have been more normal. (Cf. the not infrequent use of 8 in resuming after paprup[a : e.g. D.xlvii52.) It goes without saying that particles, when us~d in the progressive sense, must follow strong stops. But certam particles and combinations regularly so used occasionally follow weak stops; e.g. 8ri (p. 239), a,\,\a 8ri (p. 242), Kat /'rlV (p. 352), ro[vuv (p. 577 (5)). Kat 8r/, Kat ... 8r/, and Kat 8Tj Ka{ occu.py a position between the purely additional and the pro~ress1ve particles. Broadly speaking, they are to be classe~ w1.th th~ former. But Kal or/ sometimes introduces a new pomt, hke Kal pr/v (p. 249), and so, rather more often, does Kat oTj Ka{, which tends tO follOW a heavier StOp than Kat Or/ and Kat or/. Kat of., on the other hand, is rare after strong stops (p. 201). Even amoncr the particles which I have described as denoting addition pure :nd simple some difference of structu.ral function, can be detected. There is a certain tendency, I thmk, to use OE, rather than Ka[ for connecting sentences (in the same way as many English ~riters avoid' and' at the opening of a sentence), while it is hardly used at all for connecting single words (p. 162). The case of TE is complicated, some writers preferring to use it for joining sentences, others for joining clauses, phrases, or single words.

The line between additional-progressive and adversative is I Even within the limits of this class a certain distinction may be drawn,

in the use5 of such combinations as u' JJ~" and f'aivvv, between the mere transition to a new item in an enumerative series, or to a fresh argument, and the arrival at a new stage in I he logical proc.ss. The former may usually best be rendered 'again', 'further', the latter, 'now', 'well'. . . , ~

t The post hoc sense is clearly the later in ot.,, and als~, I .thmk, tn ov~eovv. Jn ,,,; on the other hand, if Wackemagel's etymology IS nght (p. s6H), the prof!tr !tot s-.nse is the later.

' t t '

. '

INTRODUCTION xlix more sharply drawn in English than in Greek and in Latin. d>.A&, &nip, aVr&p, 8, JJ.fJv, &AAG: p.r]v, yf JJ.fJv, Kal J.l?]v, Kairot, pivro1, etc., like at and autem, are used both to add and to con-trast.' On the one hand, the adversative force of a particle like d>.>.a is at times weakened: on the other, custom attaches an adversative force to a pure connective like Karo.>.a), and balancing 3 adversatives, where two truths of divergent tendency are presented (8i, pr/v, /IEVTO

I INTRODUC~(jN supplying an explanation is a more primtive and natural process than drawing an inference. In Homer (d) is represented by TW and Totyap, the inferential force of o~v being still in embryo. Subsequently Tw almost entirely disappears, while Tot yap remains (in prose almost only in the strengthened forms TotyapTo< and Totyapovv), and additional inferential particles are found in oU, 8~, 8ijTa, apa.

(7) Abnormalities of reference in cotttuxtott. The connexion established is normally, of course, between consecutive units of speech: words, phrases, clauses, or sentences. There are, how-ever, certain exceptions. In dialogue, owing to the quickness of thrust and parry, or the self. absorption of one of the participants, a speaker sometimes links the opening of his speech to his own preceding words, not to the intervening words of the other person.' Thus S.OT1357 (oiiKouv ... ye): Plt.I257 (KatTot): E.Hd.1259 (ye pv 8~): Or.793 (ouv): Ph.6o8 (ye): 8f ye (p. 154): perhaps el yap in A.Pr.rsz',Ch.345 (p. 9:::). This i~ often the case with yap (III.s). In S.El.ro35 (p. 443) d>.>.' ouv looks back to IOij-26: or perhaps it would be truer to say that its poi11t d'appui is the general situation, the whole attitude ofChrysothemis, rather than any particular set of words, an explanation which applies also to E.Alc.JI3 (Ka1 p~v, p. 354), and JT637 (p.iVTo

Iii INTRODUcfi:)N abstract analysis, y< emphasizes the word it follows, and fl~ll is the connective, both particles exercising their forces independently. But y< flrJII is used in positive adversative clauses by writers who use simple adversative fll/v in negative clauses only. The association of y< with fl~" is therefore stylistically important, and the two particles may justly be regarded as forming a real com-bination. So, too, may ~ yap and .) Ka[, which are used by Plato and Xenophon far more freely than~ simplex. On the same prin-ciple, in Attic, where connective Kat 8r] without a following Ka[ is rare, Kat 8~ Kat must be regarded as a combination, whereas in Kat fl~" Kat, where the addition of a second Kat is not pre-scribed by custom, there is less coherence between the first two particles and the third.

(iii) Sometimes, again, while either particle could stand with-out the support of the other, the two nevertheless tend to cohere. Thus, with Kat yap, though Kat often goes closely with a word following yap,1 there are cases where Kat seems to bear upon the sentence as a whole, and to cling to yap: 'for there is a further fact'. Again, the very frequent occurrence of Kai 8~ Ka[ in Herodotus seems to suggest that, although he, unlike Attic writers, freely uses connective Kai 8r] without a second Kat, still e\en in him the second Kat, where it does appear, is an integral part of the combination.

(iv) In other cases the collocation of two particles is purely for-tuitous. For example, I see nothing significant in the frequent juxta position of preparatory flEV with yap and rotvvll: 2 and if I mention in my text those uses of flEV 81), flEII o~11 in which the first particle is preparatory and the second connective, I only do so because of their bearing on the evolution of connective 8~ and o~, and in order to call attention to the importance of distinauishinrr between

" " two entirely separate usages. This is perhaps the place to mention the tendency of certain particles to gravitate towards certain other words which are not particles, especially towards pronouns. Thus y

liv INTRODUC4-" and see IV below). r< p.iv (r< = 'both'), which might have been expected to occur sporadically,' seems not to be found.

Other avoided juxtapositions are ou (p~) and y< (p. qS), b.tiS] (p. 373). But it looks highly suspicious.

1 Co11jectured by Wilamowttz in S.Ph.8!t fp. 331). This taboo is evi-dence against taking p.i in ov p.iv ~~ in PI.PII/b.46H lpp. 2

lvi INTRODUc{fJoN

IV. DIVERSITY IN THE USAGES AND MEANINGS OF PARTICLES.

\Ve have seen (and the pages of this book will prove it abundantly) that few Greek particles possess one meaning and one alone. New uses develop out of old, and the old, though they sometimes wither and die, more frequently prolong their existence, often in altered forms, by the side of the new. The meanings of particles, more than those of any other part of speech, are fluid. 7raVTa tki. Some, indeed, like al\l\a (and, with all its detailed subtleties, Ka[) remain more or less true to type through-out their course. Others behave more eccentrically, and of these the most unaccountable is u, whose two main currents no philo-logist has traced convincingly to a common source.

Even in usages which appear rigid and stereotyped, the possibility of unexpected deviations from the normal has to be borne in mind.1 Thus, while ,{ Ka[ usually means 'even if', there are places where 'even if' makes nonsense, and Ka, detach: ing itself from d, adheres closely to a following expression (p. 304). Ka[ following interrogatives is of three distinct types (p. 312). rovrov Kat >.iyw can mean either ' He is just the man I mean', or 'I do mean him' (p. 322). dye is usually 'if, but not other-wise', but sometimes 'even if' (p. I 26). i-'TJ" has perhaps different meanings in the apparently similar idioms r[ 1-'TJ"; and d,\l\a r J.LTJV; (p. 333). ou8i in Hemdotean ou J.LEV ou8i has not always the same force (p. 363).

In combinations of particles the possibilities of ambiguity are naturally increased: all the more so since,as we have secn,spatially separated particles may logically go together, and, as we shall shortly see, juxtaposed particles need not necessarily go together. In Kat yap, ov8 yap, Kat yap TOl there is nothing but the context to show whether (as usually) yap is connective and Ka[ or ov8 adverbial, or vice versa (pp. 109-r rJ. Similarly, in progressive a>.l\a yap (p. rosJ, yap seems to be adverbial, which in this com-bination it normally is not. While in yap 8Tj the coherence of the two particles is usually beyond doubt (Hdt.i 3+ ~~~ yap 8ry Kw6r,

1 Some scholars have gone astray in discussing S.OT219-21 through assuming thal o~ yUp Jv, which often means 'for else', must mean that. See job b.

INTRODUCTION lvii

For in point of fact he was deaf'), in D.xxi44 they clearly do not cohere: for rt yap 8Tj 1ror' .. ; is followed by ~eal 1ral\LV rt 8Tj 1r0T' ... ; and in both cases 8>) must go with the interrogative, and strengthen it. Similarly, in Kat yap, Kat sometimes refers to a following word or phrase, while contrariwise in Kat ... yap the particles sometimes, though separated, cohere.

Where Kat, at the opening of a sentence or clause, is followed at a short interval by a second particle possessing both adverbial and connective functions, there are two possibilities. Either (as usually) Ka[ gives the connexion, and the second particle is adverbial : or Ka{ is adverbial, and the second particle is connec-tive. Thus in X.Mem.iv 7.4 Kat means' also' and J.LEVTO< 'but'. Kat is also occasionally adverbial in Kat ... 8Tj (p. 255), Kai .. ro[vvv (p. 578), and, probably, Kat ... 8 (p. 199, n. r).

That two particles form an established combination does not mean that in no circumstances whatever can they part company and exercise their functions independently. (It is easy to go astray over this matter in reading. The eye catches the juxta-position, and the brain assumes a logical coherence. In some cases, if the passage were spoken, the ear might detect the dis-tinction by a slight change in inflexion.) In yoiiv, for example, while o~v usually stresses y, there are cases where ovv is con nective, detached from ye, which goes closely with the preceding word.1 In y rot the stereotyping of the ' part-proof' sense (as in yoiiv) does not preclude the juxtaposition of the two particles in independent capacities (p. 551 ). In ou yap aXl\a we sometimes find &Xl\a separated in sense from ou yap: 'No, but ... '(p. 31). Here, obviously, pronunciation would indicate the grouping of the words, and a comma after yap would make all clear to the eye. In one passage a similar division of oc 1'-~vro< al\,\d is possible (p. 405).

When we find a Greek author using a collocation of particles which the language in general avoids, we shall often find vn closer examination that there is nQ real coherence b.:tween the two particles. Thus, the only instances of o.j ye which appear to be sound are those in which 8>/ andy< do not coalesce \P ~47).

1 Perhaps in such cases y' "~' should be written, uj

!viii INTRODUCT~-1 The same is probably true of Ti y (p. 161). In Pl.Grg.~54E the y< goes with d.\,\ a p.~v, in Phd.59C it is epexegctic of va{: TE y< is far less objectionable in these two passages, and in X.llfem.i 2.54, than in E.Alc.647 and PI.Phd.1o6o, in both of which the y< can only be taken in close conjunction with the r

-- ......... .._,.....,v'-'.L.LV.l'll

' ' ' t II ') d ('(; even , ac ua y 1mme 1ately pre~dles the emphasized word. But there are many exceptions in verse, and some in prose. Thus the most emphatic word sometimes does not immediately follow Kat, and sometimes follows, instead of preceding, y or 8~.

The position of connectives is, naturally, far more definitely fixed. Kat, rotyap, rotyaprot always, rotyapovv almost always,' occupy first place in clause or sentence. Other connectives norm-ally occupy the second place. The main exceptions to this rule are;

(i) Postponement after closely cohering word-groups, parti-cularly where article, preposition, or negative (or more than one of these in combination) cling tenaciously to a following word.

(ii) Postponement after an apostrophe, oath, or exclamation. (iii) In verse, postponement due apparently to metrical con-

venience. Here the practice of different authors varies consider-ably. Thus Aeschylus postpones 8f. more freely than Sophocles (though Sophocles often postpones ovv) and Euripides, and they more freely than the comic poets: while per co11tra the postpone-ment of yap goes to surprising lengths in Middle and New Comedy.

(2) Order of precedence in combitzations. (i) An adverbial particle attached to a connective usually follows it, either im-mediately or at a short interval: yap 8~, d.>..>.' ovv, Kai 8~, Kai ... 8~. (In Epic 8~ yap, o~ has greater independence.)

Except in 8i y..>..a y

JXU ll'll KUlJUL.l ~1'1

largely ignored these distinctions,' e~pt where they are very striking, though K iihner is superior to his predecessors in this respect, and the specialized studies provide more information than the general works.

(1) Repflition of particks. Before discussing differences of period and so forth, it will be well to consider the general Greek practice with regard to the repetition of particles at a short inter-val. The Greeks seem to have felt about the repetition of words in general that, while artistic repetition is stylistically effective, accidental repetition is not a thing to be sedulously and artificially avoided. (Their attitude to assonance was precisely the same.) The exactness of the significance of Greek pronouns, it is true, often makes repetition of nouns unnecessary. But where repeti-tion is the most convenient course, the Greeks do not boggle at it, and their writings are mostly free from the pitiful periphrases by which some of our own authors have sought to avoid calling a spade a spade more than once. (ro 11'potP'I.ui,ov is, happii)', a good deal rarer in Greek than its English counterparts.) The Greeks felt the same about the repetition of particles. \Vhen it is convenient to use the same particle two or three times at short intervals, the same particle is used two or three times (though, when undergraduates write Greek prose, they will cut themselves with knives rather than do this). Thus we find accumulations of yap (Hdt.i 16o.2,1994: Ant.v~li-7: PI.Ap.joC,40A: Tltt. 1.150: Hyp.E.t>it.1X-19: Arist.Po/.1261a24-6): y< (Hom.EzsH: II.3o: and see p. 144): 8 (E.E/.73-5: /T45-52: Pherecyd.Fr.li:!a,I05 (8 and Ka[): Hdt.i 21f>._1-4): E.Ba.965-6 has 8 thrice in two lines (but see Murray's app. crit. and Dodds's note): ov8i, connective and adverbial (Pl. C!it.4cX.\): adverbial Ka[ PJ.R445C: X.Cyr.v 4.42: D.xxxvsoJ: o~v !Hdt.vH2.1-2): yoi!v (Pl.R5.S4B): 11'ou (Pl.

Cra.~o9B): n .. Ka[ (Hdt.ix 3!.3-.5: PI.Pitd.llu-C,JOIIA,IIOE: Ti.40E). In Hom.~ 1,51, S.Tr.l 1.51, dJ..J..a comes twice in a line: twice in successive lines, S.Aj.Hsz-3, E!.HH 1-l. In Ar. Tlt.274- .5, Pl641l-g, two consecutive lines are introduced by rofvuv (cf. Nu. 254-.~). In Puxk~o-1 tpn

lxiv INTRODUf(,ION Dr. Chapman remarks, 'a certain gregarious tendency'. He points out that in Isoc.xii ro{vuv occurs nine times in 42-102, not at all in IOj-272: in xv, twelve times in jO-I2I, not at all in 122-20+ I note that out of sixteen examples of ro{vuv in Herodotus, three are in vii 50.2-4- Comparative we in ICe&irat (nt no: 111 Horner) md l('li wiv.

I spoke .tbove ur" the ~-''.. 1 t t ... " h- - l..h .. liUH .. ltl1..H\ \.'1 t \(! I:

' ,, . :hlft~. \."1

lxvi INTRODU

lxviii INTRODUF(,ION two years of the poet's life, 458-6. On the whole, a greater variety of particles is to be found in the later plays than in the earlier ones. There is hardly a single instance of a particle or usage being employed in the earlier plays and dropped in the later, though ~8< is specially common in the lyrics of the Persac,1 and 8ryTa with an echoed word or thought is found only in Suppliccs (3), Persae (2), and Septem (4). On the other hand, we find a number of usages confined to Prometltms and the Trilogy (sometimes with Septcm thrown in). Thus:-

ou 8ryTa, f'~ 8~Ta: Pr. only (3). ~ pfjv: Tit. (I): Pr. (3): Ag. (?I). Kai pfjv (adversative): Pr. (2): Ag. (2). (This use is absent

from Pindar.) pivTot (excluding y< pivTot, already found in Supplices) : Tit.

(r): P;. (5), including the only (possibly) adversative example: Ag. (J).

o~v following relatives: Trilogy only. El'T' oiiv, oiJT' oiiv: Trilogy and fragments only. a;l.:.' oiiv: Th. (1): Pr. (z). y?zp ouv: Ag. (2): Eu. (1). yovv: Ag. (2): Eu. (1). 8' oiiv: Th. (I): Pr. (2): Trilogy (9). oiJKouv . .. y

IAA !J.'I! KU!JUC!i.UN

and fourth centuries. It is remarkaole, then, to find in them ifyovv (meaning that is to say', videlicet), a word found in the pseudo-Aristotelian de Plan/is and in grammarians' glosses, but not elsewhere in classical Greek, and to find Totyapoiiv placed second, not first, in the sentence, which again can only be paralleled in post-classical writers. Further, yoiiv often appears as a synonym for oi;v, as it does, very occasionally, in Plato's later works (see above), and in the de Plan tis. It seems possible that these medical treatises remainincr as they diJ practical

I bl I

manuals for doctors throughout many centuries, were edited with more freedom and less reverence than works of a more purely literary value, and that in them the use of particles was brought into conformity with the practice of the day.

(4) Differences in Dialect. Differences in dialect play a certain pan: bu!, exc;pt for purely formal variations such as p.v-p.~v -pat, wv-ovv, perhaps a rather smaller part than we should have expected. There is not, for instance, a great deal in com-mon between the Herodotean and Hippocratic uses. Probably more divergencies would appear if we possessed a greater bulk of non-Attic Greek, particularly Doric. But, even as it is

>

certa10 dialectal distinctions can be detected. p~v (pav) seems to be Doric in origin, and its employment with imperatives is confined to Doric and Epic. fJ~v is hardly found outside Homer and Sicilian literature. 8i/Ta and To{vvv I are charac-teri~t.ically Attic, 8~fhv Ionic. oi)v (ciw) in tmesis, between pre-positiOn and verb, is Ionic and Doric.

But the line of cleavage between dialects is for the most part less- clear cut. \Vhat we usually find is, on the one side, Aristo-phanes and the orators, representing the purest Attic usage: on the other, the tragedians, Herodotus, Plato, and Xenophon (and somettmes Thucydides). This grouping is, on the whole, not unexpected. The tragedians wrote in an Attic which had not compl.etely dissociated itself from Ionic. Thucydides, though later m date, co.nti~ue_s to use the apx_a{a :A.rfJ{r. Xenophon spent ~uc? of his hfe m Asia Minor. The Ionic proclivities of Plato 10 hts use of particles may be explained partly as con-

1 Jt is significant that Thucydides uses Toil'vv in Atlunian speeches only.

J t .

' I I

INTRODUCTION lxxi

sistent with the poetical colour of his style, partly by the fact that Ionic was the language of learning.

The use of ancillary oi;v with other particles is instructive in E C: t '\1 1" ,. N '? d ' this respect. xcept .or aAA ouv, youv, o ouv, an f connective without a second Kat following: Homer, .,. '

Herodotus, Hippocrates, Plato: very rare in drama, almost all 1 Per ,onlra, dAA c!J..,, 1~w, and corrective J.'f., ~., are hardly found \n

Herodotus. I This tells against the conjecture a;, TOI in A.P.rs.7o6.

~" . . u~ l KUU~~ !UN apparent mstances bemg better taken as non-connective: hardly ever- found in the orators (once in Andocides, and conjectured in Lysias xiii 4).

8~(J,,: mainly Ionic: sometimes found in tragedians and Thucydides: once apiece in Plato and Xenophon: never in comedy or oratory.

pi1rot, progressive: Hippocrates, Xcnophon: occasionally in tragedy, Herodotus, and Thucydides.

W

J.'L"-IV 11 ... l KUVU11"UN

are absent from the narrati,e portions of their works, and are only found in the speeches. Thus in Homer >),1 ~ p.Ev, Tot, p.Ev To.>.a are rare in oratory. The vividness of Demosthenes' style leads him to employ a number of lively, conversational idioms which are not to be found in the other orators. For example: exclamatory y (ix 66 8ov>.diou.>.: oU8E, 'why, not even': KaAci>S' ye rro,Wv, etc., 1n answers: ou yap ... ; presenting an answer as obvious (Aristophanes and Xenophon).

1 I d round tn Homer is In some cases a partie e or usage a rea y '' . more frequent in comedy than in tragedy. Though Homers dialect is an artificial one and his vocabulary is packed with sonorous compounds, the basis of his style is simple . and I sus-pect that the particles he employs were, in the mam, those of everyday speech, and that some of them were only banished from

that it is colloquial. Ilut von Essen cites eight exmples (One is doubtful) from Thucydides. Ast cites o6 frvm Plato, and three times adds '

J.J.'Iil .tl\..VUU;a: JUl't

serious poetry when the Greek Ian~age became self-conscious. I believe, then, that such a word as T

1XXVUI lNTRODUCiitJN

OV p~v dl\l\a: ei t!pa : w< t!pa: TL 8; (transitional): Kal ... 8{: y< 81): 8rj following final conjunctions: Kat 8~ Kat: Kat in causal and final clauses: corresponsive Kal ... Ka[ in subordi-nate and in main clause respectively: duplicated p.iv: dll>.a p.r/v: o?Jv with iildefinite relatives: apodotic d>.>.' ouv; 8' o~v at the end of a series of details, and resumptive.

Contrariwise, one or two uses are commoner in tragedy and co.m~d~ than in prose: all>. a meaning 'at least ': 8' dl\l\d : ;; p.~v tn Its general use, as distinct from its special use in oaths: permissive 8' ovv (which one would expect to find in Plato and Xenophon).

(7) Individual pref

lxxx INTRODU~ION 8.J referring to a person previously mentioned: ovTru (&8,) 8? Tt: Kai J~ Ka{ (conversely, rare in Xenophon): T 81]: d Ka( = siquidtm.

Hippocrates. Progressive dA.A.d. Thucydides. 8,i with superlatives: ou pvTot (while !socrates

prefers ot; l'rl'' and Demosthenes uses both indifferently). Plato. &.\Ad substantiating an hypothesis: ou pivrot dA.A.d

(once in Thucydides): ou8i negativing an idea i 11 toto (also :Aristotle).: aA..A.a 8-i,: i'va 8? (also Herodotus): postponement of mterrogattve 'I: Kat in anaphora: positive adversative pr/v: tcai pr/v substantiating a condition (also Sophocles): dA.A.a . piv (p. 378) : pv 8.J, affirmative and adversative (also Xenophon: PP 392-3): interrogative outcovv (also Xenophon, in Socratic works): itr

lxxxii INTRODUC .. ON ' -

These examples show that the Greek writers are often highly individual in their employment of particles. This is a considera-tion which may well be borne in mind when discussing whether, for example, Thucydides can have used Kat . n in the sense 'and also', or Aristotle H yap in the sense etenm (pp. 535-6). Such abnormalities, which recur reasonably often in particular authors (interrogative y< in Aristophanes (pp. 1 2+-5) is perhaps another instance), have a certain right to be taken seriously. But the frequency of the examples, and their homogeneity, must be appreciable. On these tests, we can, I think, reject the possibility of Sophocles' having used T< in the sense of 'also', (p. 536). Decision in such cases is precarious. And it is, in general, extremely difficult to decide, when discussing particles or any other element of language, how far the abnormal is to be accepted. I feel that in the course of writing this book I have developed a certain avidity for the recondite, and perhaps ad-mitted out-of-the-way usages too readily here and there. rhey are often like a rare flower that a botanist thinks he espies in the distance, only to find, on coming nearer, that it is a buttercup with two petals missing. But the quest is not always in vain, and a genuine rarity sometimes rewards the seeker.

'AAAa 'A:>.:>.a presents singularly few difficulties. Its clear and un-

challenged etymology (from the neuter plural of &':>.:>.or, with change of accent 1) is in complete accordance with its usage. The primary sense of 'otherness', diversity, contrast, runs through all the shades of meaning, from the strongest to the weakest: from 'but', or even 'no\ to' further',' again'.

I. General use, as an adversative connecting particle. The adversative force of a:>.:>. a is usually strong (eliminative or object-ing): less frequently, the particle is employed as a weaker (balancing) adversative. The distinction in force between a.\Aci and 8i is well illustrated in PI.R.335A TcJV 81 8oKoiivra p.iv, ovTa. 8 p.~. 8oK.:>.a p.~ .' ou and K'tt Ol'.' The cliotinctic>n between the two 1 Or rather loss oi J.ccent. Fur the ptc;:.!!

z a~ theoretically resides herein, that, strictly speaking, a;\.;1.' ov expresses the incompatibility of two ideas, Kat ov merely adds a negative idea to a positive. Hence the frequent use of &AA' oU in contrasting what Chapman calls 'permanent opposites': inrap .,,. ' !! 8 '''-"' ' , , ' ,, J ,

a"" ouK ovap: wpurrt al\1\ ouK taun: Efl'TrElpwv aAI\ ou TEXVTJV: dyaOa d;l.;l.a fl~ KaKa. Hence also, as Chapman observes, the 'slackening of interest' in the dAA' oU clause, which merely re. states negatively something already stated positively: whereas Kat ou adds something really new and important. E.Hcrac!.z7o Kila[wv ap' a,Yn row8. KOVK E< dflf3o;\.a< ('and soon, too'): Pl.R.Jj2A Kai UKErrriov ye Kai oUK drroKVTJTiov (you can carry out an examination in a half-hearted way): 3971:: iv fl6vn rfi

U n '' ' ' ' r , TOta T 01 1T'01\H TOV TE CTKUTOTO}J.OV UKUTOTO}JOV EUpTJUOf'EV Kat OU w/3..~Q: TO ariTO Oipou~ T Kat X"'"iivo~: PI.Pitdr.233E ou8 Toi< 1rpOoYa

4 aAAra obviously normal in sense. Po!.IJI6bi5 1ro.\.\wv n o~uwv alnWv ... oV "Aiy~' d>..Aci pfav. Here, it is true, we can supply in thought 1ro.\.\a> after ,\eyEL: but the ellipse is an artificial one. Rh.I.f02a27 iv ou8lv {x_u: E.Ak-.749 ,..,,\.\o ,..;. ~81 .. a/..t..a Tout ... : Ar.l ... s~ .i.\,\ct vf.v ,.. . o~81v . 4.\;1.' 8Tav . .. : CalliasFr.19: Pi.O.q.:jl: P.1.~3: A.Ptrs.179: C4. 747: E.Hu.,!K2,799: Hd~Ht,.)IO: R!z.6.): Ar..h.ttt!l: Hp.

u a~ ~ra:I . ..J.Z EAaxurriKi~ pv rofJro yu'E'7at, d..\A1 r{ &v fga1Ttva{'l El(rraA~ulf auK EK{3aAAot; Hdt.viii 46.1 ~.rav p.f.v utpt Kal aAAat 1HrTATJpwfJillat viEr, ciA.\Q. Tfiut !-'~" r:;,v EwurWv ~VAauuov: PJ. Cra.431C ypd.flp.ara p.Ev Kai et'KOvar Epy&(erat KaL oVror, ci.\..\cl ~OPTJptir; PrtJt.JS-+A Ecrrt !Jf.,.~ 8ry oVrwr txov rE Kal yeyov6r. aA..\cl r{ T" ' ~ ' 0 ' ' T au 7rtpl rou ytyvEu at auro .. ; ht. I ..J.6.B i}KtCTTa p.v . r0 TOtO- .., "' .1! ''- '- ' "" UTOV av flTJ aypotKOV, a/\1\Q TWV jlf:tpaK{wv Tt Kift.eui UOL drroK_?tv.a Ta p. a surrender: ' enjoy vour trhl all tlJ . a though n. . ' ' e same,

' - ot;:otng- to the courts'): Anaxilas Fr 22 ~ l 'A ~ - ' atrAw~ pl.v cn50iv 'AA' ' ' - ' . . .... at a, uuv .' a .>.' dr>opwl!a ('But we ill know'): E.(rc.68S Ku.>.op.~v: Ar . .\'tt.JJ "AtrayE rOv i'rrrrov EgaA[~J"a~ oi~eaOt.-:.iAA' ~ p.t> .' E~~;\ocas- ~JJ.i. -y' ~ ~ A !. u ' ' '" ' ' ' H \' fK T!tW fJ.LWY: C l..'-Of-o tnTai(QUO"OV.,. -.11.'''\ OU tT\OA'].-.'1;,,. EICKUICA~IiT]T 0,-:4\,\' d ouvaTav.-/1.>..\' OflW\': S. T r.67 ,yS J: Pk:'- 3'~: E.E/.577: IT754: Ar.,\'u,66o: PI.Gr,.;.-!i.~H {3av.\u Kai rotiro EAEyxetv; -;.!AA' n roUr' EKE{vou xaAt7TWrtp6v EtTTUI .. i~tAiy~at: R.J96B: X.Ail.V 8.7 ra 8< TWV Ep.wv UUCTK~VWV uKV'! 8,ippjroJ.~.il>.>.'!) p.iv 8tappt>jr . .. TOt.>.a yap rai, i y pi vo~ l.>.av at'rov ...... ; I' >jr"vr.i JA, i ~.>.' rj r:> wile. dAA' oU8E rrWXor fjns- av 8ta(vy~ Tij\~ C7L'J'Tpa..j>tiU7Jt, ,;\.s,wo; i.\~u (uy6v' ('Why, even a c,,Jt '): E/.1J4'S i-~ 1";"n', .;., ,t,\ , [\ \ ..

UI'V\.U

1 ~ t J .>1 I .>1 I' 1$ ir I' T apapwr. a,\,\ .>.a o-oii To pry cppao-a1 ... : ~fed.sso Elra _uoi p.iyar, tAor; Kal 1ratul rolr po'ilnv-&.'A.>..' fx' 7}.p'lr..\a T~r .' a7TWA0/''IV (a protest against the inevitable: 'Oh, I am undone'): Ar.Ach.42B ou B.>.', wurr.' .a rf; Pa.no8o: A.q8,ro15: Ra.

4ss: Ec.9z8: P!.Pitd.B9B OuK, if.v y ipoi "''IJ!I-:n.\a ri: ~" li' .>.ci and in (j) below): Ar..-Jd1.194 Dicaeopolis has retc:c the five-year and ten-year truces. Ap. ;~.\.\' avnul INfv ,~. TpletKOVTOUTt8H: V.l ,_54 OuK aJapa.\ i ;-M" 4C OL'K ~ywy' . : .

-~ip' a>.;>.' iyC:, u< 7Taiov i dAA' oVK tp)OV fJT' oL-St, tr-r::o- --4,\A' ~}JtroAaio'-.-~-J,\Acl 7T,\ovTotif4tY. . . -:L\.\~ &AnH S.Tr.t21t: E.Ur.777: B,dltK: Tr.]!b: Ar.E.,.uv.; Lys-&23: Ra .)6-],t 23: E

aAA. Normally a.V.a stands first in the speech: but PI.Hp.il'la.283B llwr tf>.~r; &.v: i;>..axurrov;

(iii) The use of 8' d;>..;>..i in drama, and occasionally in prose dialogue, is similar, though here d;>..;>...>.a rourcuv >.i,ov n rwv v.a is strictly circumscribed. It is always followed by an imperative, expressed or understood : and it is nearly always preceded by a-u. (I find one instance each of vilv 8' a>..\a, ~ 8' d!\>.a, vpiir 8' d>.>.a.) In Hec.Jyi a word intervenes between the particles : vp.>.a, is substitution pure and simple. The idea of inadequate substitution, or piJ al/cr, is secondary, and, if present at all, is derived from the context. In EIN.J9 r it clearly i> present, for Hecuba is only partially consoled by the hope of accompanying her daughter to execution, instead of saving her from it. And it is probably to be felt in most of the other pJssages: clearly not, however, in Rh. r 67: L1o. Ou u~r ipwl'v rro>.toxou rupavioor.-EK. J:v 8' d>.>.a Yril'ar llpta-p.towv yap/3por y.>.a as 'arte ', 'at least', has its dangers. (ln E.Fk I74'1-5' it is possible that 8' and d>.>.a go together: and in AchaeusFr.7 ""''PI'arto-8w 8' J>.>.a pot rrapo,YI-owv ... rrapa>.oy[apara perhaps 8' a>.>.a should be re.td.

(iv) Hypophora. Again, the protlering and rejecting of successive suggestions may be don~ by a single speaker, who conducts, as it were, a dialogue with himself. This stylistic

ai\Aa II h is freely u,ed, for liveliness and

device, known as hypop ora, G . . in the Palamedes, rides . b th Greek orators. mgtas, ,

vanety, y e' - 12 ). Ant.v sH r{vo~ y 81, EVfKa TOV t to death (fr.IIa,(7) ( ) , , , , . >.iyE.>. a . 8jjra): A;-+ andr. Fr.52.9-II S.E/.537 , . 3{. . the only exampk (sc:< (a;>..>. a 8~ra). In Plato, AP-37C ~s per 1~~; person to talk to, then p. 242). Naturally, where you ave a is less need for a dummy.

- f a conditional (sometimes of a causal (z) In thea'' ~~o~~~;:r:sts the ideas expressed in protasis .'All~'

sentence. r. I d , , e en thou.:o-h ... stt . d .. 'r on the other ,an : v ". . ' -apo OSIS. I , , " -v< 'P ) h I d '). Eh-+ " rrtp yap IT ('yet he, on the ot er lan , 0 T .- .. iS K11l

, , 1.' a .. , ciXA' au 7TUO"OVTaL pu>t~ ... ' ... , KaKOV Kat avaAKtoa 't'1JCIEI, ' .- ':\.:\' 1 T~

-. - XI

~he apodosis gi,es a more or less inadequate substitute ~ h JS left unrealized in the protasis . 'at all ' . or w at f . . events With a n f o pzs ~1/tr. Some instances, it is true, are of th~ more o ~on Homenc, type. Sapph Fr 1 2 , _, ,_ , , gene1al,

~ ~ Of owpa 1'-TJ 8< ,\,\ 8, (' ultro tam en dabit '): Hdt lx 48 3 - ' K

a A~ person. But it rather expresses, as1'!artung says (ii35), a break-off in the thought: or, as Klotz (i 5) more specifically and more accurately puts it, a tran~ition from arguments for action to a statement of the action required. Hence dAA.ci, in this sense, usually occurs near the end of a speech, as a clinching and final appeal (whereas at the opening of a speech it introduces an objection in the form of a command: S.E/.43I Nay'): as we say, 'Oh, but do'. ' Come' or 'come now' will often get the meaning. This usage is very rare in oratory, being probably too intimate in tone. D.lv 9 a.\.\ a rrpou-.>-.', 't , ,. . ,

"' p.a~I

S.Aj. 192 &>-.>-.' lf.va i~ E8pavoov. Ar.Aclz.239 a>-.>.a 8-.>-.' i~ ril rrp6uli . :1. Lg.6zsc. With verbal adJedt~e: Pl.~ltd.qr~ :V...>- :ov, ery. \\ tth XPry, 8.>-.ii 8H (ryr-.a IJapp.>-. 01roor avryp o3.

;4>-.,\a in commands and exhortations is sometimes repeated at a short interval. S.Ph.gso (d.>-.;>..') drr68or, a>-.>.ii viiv h' EV

- v- (I do not think Jebb is right in taking the second uaurco ytvo ., ' :as limiting': the first a>-.>.a is due to Turnebus): Ar.Eq.

a''"a , , , , -6 d>.X' tip.Uvou Kd.rravaurpiou rrc:iXtll ... aXA al-'uvou:

244 - . ' '8 ' 8 V.240-5 a;\.,\' iyKOVWJ'fV wv8pH , . a;\,,\a

IO aMa ..

-~:\:\' .~ (]"' ... rrlp.o/

I8 aA.Aa,rw ~ral roiJvop.' Y,p.iv pduaroJ~.-'A'AACt. p~8wv: 966 ' There is an oracle about Cloudcuckooborough '.-~.\' oV8Ev oTOv Ear' d.KoDcrat niiv irrwv ('\Veil, there's nothing like hearing the exact text'): Lys. I I I 2 :4>.>.' otxi xa>.miw Toifpyov: Pl.Ly.2o6c :A>->.' ovoiv, .>.' ovoev KOJAVfL : .tlm.j IE: lltt. J62B: R.sBoB: 3Ii.JI5B: x . v~m.i 2.42: AJt.iv s.s.

(b) A person asked to speak conveys his readiness to speak by speaking: particularly when the answer is to be a long and elaborate one, the speaker winds himseli up, as it were, with d>..Aci, 'well'.

S.OT14 d>..>..', ~ yEpad, pri(' ... -.:i>..A', c1, , Op~r pEv .. (]ebb wrongly renders 'nay'): Plt.232 a>.>.' alTaf..cl 'EA.i\~vcvv p.iv TlVES . Ei\E,av (' well ').

(ii) Assent, expressing agreement with a statement just made. This may be conveyed:

(a) By a favourable judgement of the preceding words. S.OT j8 ~.\A' Er Kai\Cw a-U;' Elrrao,: Tr.58R AAA' El TO' icrrl 1r!crnr v Toi~ 8pruJ.1ivor~. OoKi~ rrap' -!Jf'iv ou f3f3ov>..>.r.>.' v Y' ... u1ri>.af3-r: R.43oc: X.1licm.ii 7.1 r. (In E./..1. 990, in the middle of a speech, a>.>.i rather marks a break-off in thought.)

(b) By a form of words implying- that what has been said is correct. S.E/.1102 'Does Aegisthus live here? '-:4.\:\' .>.' oi ye 1ro.\.\ol vopJ(ouutv oVroo~: 496C Op.oAoyofip.Ell raVra; ... -:4,\A' VrrEp vw< w~ OJ.IOAoyw: R.437B: JUm.75E: Cri . .jMll: Phd.IC5C: Tlti.I53D,l57D: Prf.341D: Lg.898C r [}, ~EVf, a.\ :Ia). In Alexis Fr.I33 &>.>.a, by itself, apparently carries the force of' yes'. 'Err[urauat r0v uaUpov cOs 8El UKEv&uat ;-./!AA' av 8t8tiuK!JS.-'Eg.wv rii {3payxia ... rrapa.>.'

dpUvHr rip rijr T,8ovijr ... >..6yp nl ~~ C \Vhy, you are an en. thusiastic champion of the cause of pleasure!', Ironical ad mira. tion).

(7) \Ve may perhaps class as assentient those passages in which a.\;l.a introduces the substantiation by the second speaker of an hypothesis or wish expressed by the first, confirming as actual what has hitherto been presented as imaginary.

S.O T848 ..tv ('\Vel!, rest assured that that was the report'): 769 8..' fa-n pEv ... xaXnrOv Aiyetv TTpt Orouoiiv pa81)paror wr ou XP~ p.av8avuv.) But Xenophon's fondness for this form of opening has some stylistic importance. \\'here the particle marks assent or complaisance, it corresponds rough.ly to the English '\Veil', and has the same vague and colloqUial tone: hence its absence in the more formal speeches of Thucy-dides.

(i) Adversative. HG ii 3 35 (opening a spee:~ for t~e defence: cf. vii 3 7 : A n.vii 6.11 : 7 4): HG.iv 1.34 : Cyr.u 2.18 (mtroducmg a change of topic). (ii) Responding to an invitation to speak. (Cf. 6. i. b above.) A n.iii 1.35: Cyr.ii 35: v 1.24. (iii) Respon": or approval in general (cf.6. iii above). An.iii 1.45: 24: 2.33: vu 6.9: Cyr.vz.8: 4.32: iv3.15. .

The occurrence of a.\J\a .at the beginning of the Xenophontne Symposium and Respublica Laced.umoniensium is somewhat similar, and may perhaps be due to naivete, real or assumed: though Ri.umlein (p. 13) may conceivably be right in attributing this usage to a desire to make these small works look like frag-ments of a larger whole. (The Oaonomicus and the Xenophon-tine Apology open with oi : so does the pseudo-Xenophontine Resp. A tlz.). Oracles, too, have a way of beginning with

22 aAAa(ii I 0 8 6 ' t-> ' ., ' ' ' 0 7rp lT(J)1TOV ayl\a ~fl rprap raupou . . Ql\1\a Kat 0 xuAOr rijr 'II"Ttcrav~r opofwr ,\ap7rpvv: Vzd.93: G/and.r6. :4.\,\' ou8i. Vic/.90 KaraKAv(opiv~v yijv ... opfjv VOVCTOV cr~pafv.;>..

oV/.E pE'Aau-av Opfiv rt]v yijv oU8E KaraKKaupEvt}v 8oKi ciya66v (d>..>.' om. (H res/it. a/. mtllm) 8).

In other prose-writers progressive d>.>..ti is rarer, though d>.>..a p~v is regularly so used. (In such a passage as Lys.xiii79 d,\>.a rather denotes a break-off: a>.>.' .>.' d,/ 8~1rov; R-4S7A: X. .!l/mJ.i2.27 (a fresh parallel). Marking transition from major to minor premise (cf. d>.>.a p~v): PI.R.335C: cf. Phd.93Tl. dAAa xat. D.xix 54 ~uav dtTturoiivrir Ttvu ... ~uav dAAot rLvEr oi' d.\ Ad: Kat p.Erap.i>...uv Upiv !povrO Ttvc=r: 257,258: xliii 82: liv36: X.Cyr.viiiS.r9 (in a series with Kai p~v, d>.>.a prjv, y< p~v) .= Oec.2o.ro (preceded by adversative d>.>.a Ka[): Smp-4-32. d>..>..' ouoi. Lys.x ro.

There are few verse examples. Alcm.Fr.1.7I our< .. our< '!\' r ' .,,, '!'' P"N

... ouoE .. ouvt Kat o o 0 al\1\ ouo : 1. .10.45 'They came with cups from Sicyon and cloaks from Pellene. d>..>..a xa>.Ki>v ptop[ov vu ovvarov ~fAEYX""': E.Aic.79 T[ CT.>.' ouo tp[>.ow 'II"EAar OUOflf, lfcrrzr av d7rol 'II"DT...av 7r

oU8E ptKpfw (tvflTTtv): xxi14: xxvs 0 bE Kpt1'0p.Evo..ci would bring out the mean-ing. Pickard-Cambridge renders D.xix 37 well: 'But as to the Phocians ... -why, there is not the slightest mention of them! Diph.Fr.6I.8 seems similar: e~Bfw~ vow oTt TOUTO pot To 8ei1rvov d;>..;>..' ov8' aT!'' EX" X.Cyr.iv 3'4 is different: ii ye I'~" pa;l.urr' t!v T..;>..' oV8e Touro di'JjXavov. Here there is a definite anacoluthon, as though a main verb had preceded : cf. A 11.i S. t 3: D.xix 264.

(3) .:4;>..,\' 1 (absent from serious poetry) is used only after n..;>..' represents d;>..;>..ci or 1!;>..;>..0 (with loss of accent caused by fusion with the following word). It will be convenient, before examining the rival views, to set out the evidence, in grouping which I follow Cook Wilson, On the use of d;>..;>..' fj in ~ri;totle ', CQ.iii IU-4, while distinguishing (as he and other wnters do not) between (a) cases where d;>..;>.. fj intro-duces the second of two co-ordinated clauses ('except that' 'but

. ' merely ), and (b) cases where the d;>..;>..' fj clause, which often consists of a single word or phrase, has no such independence, but is subordir.atcd to the structure of the immediately preceding words (' except').

U! A negation (or question expecting a negative answer), con-taming a word .of comparison (some part of a;l.;l.of), is followed br ~n cx~cption._ (t~) X.Oec.z. I 3 oi!re a ;I.;\. or rromorf. pot 7rapicrx Ta Eurcu OtotKdV a;l.;l.' ~ cru vwi i(}i;>.... 0 OOKEit ..~Br d;>..;>..' ~ TO crwpaTOEt8ir: AP3-4B Ttva a;l.;l.ov ..Oyov /3o,Bouvnr ..;>..' ~ TC!V opBov Tf Kat OtKatov; Plt~.6tH; Ji'!Oapou d;>..;>..o(}, ... d;>..i\' ~ iKEi: laic ouK ..i\' ~ n}v T~r 8ud.8or f"ETd.crx..dovo~: Arist.Cal.3b19 ov8Ev yap 11.;>..;\.o IT~I'a[vEL TO ;\.wKiw J.;>..X' ~ rrot6v: Pl.Pizd.97D: R-427C,429B,55:iD: Prt.356A: Thg. 1Z3D: kl.r.z44D: kli.313B: Arist.Top.1o3azr: EN1I25ar. (Juxtaposition of aX;\.' If with the word of comparison is very rare. Hr. Vic/.72 rrpocrrpip..' fj \V. H. s. Jones in Loeb: d;>..;>..ci Littre, with no mention of variants). (b) Ar.Eq. 779 ovxi rpt;l.ei cr' . dH' ~ 8ta TOuT' ai!O' OTl~ crou Ti)r al!pa>Ctiif drro;\.auEt: V.984 ou8iv rrcT' d;>..;>..' ~ Ti)r aK~r Ef"rr;l.r)p...;>..' >T Stephanus: a;l.;l.o el codd. The demand for a secret ballot is a part of To op.o[wr Evavnouu8at: cf. 4S.r): Pl.La,IS7D auT.;> o' ov crvyyeyo-vivat d;>..;>..' >j rrat8i 5vrt: Pr1.334C ?'IJ XPiiu-8at i;>..aicp ci;>..,\' ~ or

P' { v ~ ' T , ,; I -UjJ.lKpOiaTCu: lit r.25oE TlYOS' }lEY OVJI VE'Ka KaY TtS' c$' EUI'U~ (wu, d;>..;>..' >j Twv rowuTwv ~8ovwv ive~..;>..' ~is similarly used in Arist.Jl!tt,,ph.9'1lla 1 S ot' yi'ip dvtJp..' ~ teara crvp.f3

26 aAAac in thought, a particular instance o,-;t is given. Cook Wilson cites from Aristotle :-(a) HA563bi9 l..iy..>..' ~ ... lna1 must surely be right) and xxxvi 43 (where Reiske's a>..>..' 1/ gains some support from A's a:>..:>..ry (sic). Add: (a) Ar.Pax476 ov/J' ol'8t:: y' ElAKOJ.' oU8fv dpyt::lot 1TciAat dAA' ~ KaTEyiAwv rWv raAat1TW povp.ivwv ('they did nothing but laugh'): Eq.13~7 rilv 81 lla>-.a-y6va ... Ei/ 0 TL 7ron]ut::tf KaKDv.- OU8v p.iy' dAA' ~ T~V fp~v ''" Tixvryv ('I won't punish him severely (or indeed at all), except that he'll just have to ply my trade'): Hp.Loc.Hom.13 Jl~ lyxp Jl"JOfv a>..>..' ~ K:>..v..a~ xopdiETOV Tl'..>..' 1/ originates in a:>..:>..o >).* There appear to be four stages:-(i) ov81v a>..>..' ;), substantival, where we could, and sometimes do, have a:>..:>..o ;). (ii) ail>..'>)=' except', where a:>..:>..o, substantival, would be ungrammatical. (iii)&;>..;>..' 1/ =except that, d;>..;>..' >)having its own clause. (iv) a>..>..' 1/ ='merely' (an exception to an implied generalization) Cf. rr:>..~v S.OC1643

(4) A;>..;>..' ~- In a>..;>..' ~. a;>..,\a puts an objection in interrogati,e form, giving lively expression to a feeling of surprise or in-credulity. 'Why?' See also Neil on Ar.Eq.953: Starkie on Ar. V.B.

Most commonly, at the opening of an answer-question. A.C/1. 220 A;>..;>..'~ 86>-.o..;>..'~ rrapapoviir inilv ... ; A.Ag.276 (Have you dreamed 1t? -'No.'-' Well, have you lent an over-credulous ear to rumour?'): E.HifP93 2: R h.sno (divided chorus): Ar.Fr. 1 25: PI.Prt.J09~ A;>..;>..'~ ..' ~ Kat -.7]8ar WI'; Ph.I]04 o rroior; a,\:\' ~ ... : X.Cyr.ii 2.2H .n J: aJl/3av:>..a, ry, a,\;>..' iJ Kat ..;\.' fi ... ; Less often, later in a spce.:h. E.Hel-490 .a.u~ 8' '"~ rrai8a I'll/ 1'1'

a.u.a e In Ar.Ach.424-6 a,\,\'.) follows a rejected suggestion: 'Well'.

II ' (}" I \ '\ -"~ 0 .., ; '\ J '\'\I T A;. '\ , OlaS' 7TO avT]p AaKtoaS' atTHTat 7Tf.1TACI.W; a'"' 7] 'Yli\OKTT/TOU n% roO 1TT(I)xoii AiyEtS' ;-OVK . .. -.itAA' ~ rcl 8ua"1rtJI~ '6iAttr TrErrAWpara ... ;

It is usually, and rightly, maintained that d,\,\'.) is used only in questions. Kiihner (II ii 145) thinks that the particles can also mean 'At profecto ', in a statement: but cites only E.Aic.816, which is clearly a question: .(1\,\' .) 7rf11"0V8a 8E{v' urro ~EVWV f.p.iiw; Herakles can hardly credit the truth which dawns upon him. Diehl prints Fragm.lamb.Adesp.14 without a question-mark: a,\,\' .) -\uKor Tch alyar EKKa-\1 po-\wv: which, in the absence of context, tells us nothing.

.;{,\,\' ... .), st"paratim, is hardly to be regarded as a distinctive usage. In S.OC26 ./1.,\,\' o(]'rcr cl rorror.) pae;., . .. ; ('Well, shall I find out .. ? '), as J ebb remarks (on Ph.4q), 'the peculiar force of a,\,\ . .) is not present.'

In several passages where the MSS. give dH' ~ ... , a,\,\' .) ... ; appears to be the right reading. See Neil on Ar.Eq.953 Ar.Ach. IIII-12 (a,\,\'.) Starkie): Th.97 (see piv, I.B.2): Eq.953 (third line of speech), 1162: Lys.928. In X.Smp.1.15 T{ Tour', ..ew~ rip8' cipiuKEtv 8Ei: Ta 11Vv opo8

JU a~ oUx oilrrur ~iyoVCTlJI ... oU pip' a'tl Eyruyt: El\rr{(w Ka1 Eg aUroD TOU rrpaypaTo< o.r;.w ('But I think that I shall prove, on the evidence of the bare facts') : xxxvii 23 p.6v EuT.>.' urrp/30:>..\ Ta8 ('this rcaily is beyond everything'): /TIOOj: Supp.jJO. ou yap. 0. a;\\a. Ar.Ra.1J8o ou yap povr;nv a:\;\' aKOU(]"TEa. PI.Eutkd.:z86l\ ooi yap TO< a>.>.a (JOSE).

In Ar.Ra.192 it is perhaps beot to take ou yap by itself (cf. yap, VIII.z), and punctuate before a>.>.d.: .doii\ov OVK ay.a Kai rb trr

32 aA.Aa e p11 o~" K.r.'A.. The counter-objection, d'A'A.' oUK lura' K.r.'A.., is met by the rejoinder ou yap, a,\,\a K.r .\. : 'No, but it will exist on the basis of ra

34 1fOt~CTaro: M-!06 uru{>.,~ 8i. ptv f' 1j yvv~ ETT[Tf' EoUCTa ... rfKTEl: 141 l86vra 8E 1ra"A.Aop.ivour elrreiv O.pa aUrOv rrpOr; roUr lx6Dr: ii 58 rravTJyUptar 8 dpa .. rrpc;,rot dtOpwrrwY Aiyurrrw{ ]uar (the haggis) ~ 8' dp' itpuuar': AV.-/95 Kdpn Ka0~u8ov, Kat rrptv 8Hrrv'iv TOVf a,\.\our ohor dp' flufv: Pl.GJg.5Z4B lrrH8av 8 8.a?,u/l~roY dpa J.rr'

0 ,, c 0 8' \ ' \ II ol \ ,; ' aAA'}I\OLV: ra.41 2C Errft 1J yap TTopeverat ra ovra, EVL JHV ap auro'i~ rcixor, tvt 8 ppa8ur~r : TILt. 1 56E irrE

.,

apa Plt:J 101: E.E/.965: PI.Prt.325C TauTa 8' f!pa ov 8

J- flU comedy, but is almost confined torose wh . . . all styles. (In Thucydides it pred~:Uin~tes e:~~:t IS common in uses.) Ar.Av.6o1 n-)\~v ,_ , , ngly over other

- ., TL~ ap opv

I op

" apo pmif. Bavanp .... xaCTEl~ apa {Jap{3apa uXa: Fr.s4 KaKOV Tl 7ra{-8wp.' ~ t!pa: Fr.377 flaTT,v 8< liv1)TOt TOU~ v61iol1~ uyoi1CT 0 apa: PI.Grg.S24D TaUTOV 8rj p.o 8oK..' c'f.pa T{CTw 7rpoCTtj>

( 44

"Apa is used (r) in poetry only, as a substitute for apa, in various uses of that particle: ('2) as an interrogative particle. In both uses, apa is almost confined to Attic. Of (r), which is the first to appear, there are three examples in Archilochus (Frs . .TLf a

.. apa in V.893 ilpa is better taken as a connective Tt' ' "' ' , , . ~ ap o ~fvyoov ;

( Who s the defendant, then?'). S.Fr.790: E.! A I 228: Fr.403 . 1 : Phdem.Fr.Io8.I (!.pa codd.).

II. TApa as an interrogative particle. Strictly speaking ,. d . , apa oes not tmpl~ any expectatwn of a positive or of a negative

ans\:er. Practtcally, however, in Greek as in English, the mere puttt~g of a proposition in an interrogative form implies, in certam contexts, a doubt of its truth, and J.pa, by itself, often has a sceptical tone. Per contra, ap' ou more definitely and more frequently expects a positive answer. (For the wide-spread, but erroneous, view that J.pa l'>i expects a negative answe.r,. see (5) below.) A rigid separation of questions expecting a posttt.ve from those expecting a negative answer would be mtsleadtng. But an approximate grouping must be attempted.

{I) L.eavi~g the question open. S.OC316 J.p' EO'TW; J.p' ovK t:crrt_v; TJ yvwpTJ 1r) ... avif-; Kat TJp.l Krirr6TJP.t KoUK Exoo 7 [ 00: E.l:./.229 n. rjJ[AraT', J.pa (wvror 1j nOvT}K