From: Carl W. Conrad (cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu)
Date: Fri Dec 19 1997 - 14:10:08 EST
At 3:06 AM -0600 12/19/97, clayton stirling bartholomew wrote:
>Jonathan Robie wrote:
>>
>> At 09:01 PM 12/17/97 +0000, clayton stirling bartholomew wrote:
>>
>> >EI TIS EIS AICMALWSIAN
>> > EIS AICMALWSIAN hUPAGEI
>> >EI TIS EN MACAIRHi APOKTANQHNAI
>> > AUTON EN MACAIRHi APOKTANQHNAI
>>
>> >I realize in looking over my post that I have not addressed
>> >your real question which was about how this verse hangs together
>> >structurally. In looking over these four lines I cannot find
>> >anything difficult about their structure.
>>
>> Well, there is no verb in the phrase EI TIS EIS AICMALWSIAN, and to me it
>> feels like there should be one.
>>
>The verb that would be used would be some form of EIMI which is optional even
>in straight prose and this is not straight prose but something more like
>poetry.
I don't understand why it would be a form of EIMI/EINAI used in this
instance with EIS AICMALWSIAN--unless you mean EIMI/IENAI--I do think a
verb of motion ought to be called for here. The only real variant listed in
the UBS4 apparatus (I haven't checked the fuller NA27) is with hUPAGEI in
the first clause as well as in the second. I would think something like
hUPAGEI must be understood with the first EIS AICMALWSIAN as well as with
the other clauses, so that we understand:
"Whoever is to be taken prisoner of war is to be taken prisoner of
war, and whoever (goes) is to be executed by sword is to be executed by
sword."
Or?
Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics/Washington University
One Brookings Drive/St. Louis, MO, USA 63130/(314) 935-4018
Home: 7222 Colgate Ave./St. Louis, MO 63130/(314) 726-5649
cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu OR cconrad@yancey.main.nc.us
WWW: http://www.artsci.wustl.edu/~cwconrad/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:38:40 EDT