From: Carlton Winbery (winberyc@popalex1.linknet.net)
Date: Wed Jan 17 1996 - 06:37:29 EST
>>>SU MEN KAN LOGOU HXIWSA should be rendered literally "I should have (KAN,
>
>One other question; since Ken's queries came in the mail this morning,
>there's been no comment on the SU--is that reading correct?--nominative--or
>shouldn't it be SE? While the Doric dialect form TU can be accusative (in
>Theocritus), I've never seen a SU understood as such. Surely this was an
>error in transcription?
>
SU is the correct text. I take it as an independent nominative (or some
such terminology) used for emphasis. Probably "You, I should have
considered worthy of . . ."
Carlton L. Winbery
Prof. Religion
LA College, Pineville, La
winberyc@popalex1.linknet.net
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:37:36 EDT