'Get your s-stem personal names right, boy!'

Phrynichus wrote:

(127q) Ἡρακλέα, Περικλέα, Θεμιστοκλέα ἐπεκτείνων *τὴν τελευταίαν συλλαβὴν (*τὴν
ἐσχάτην) λέγε, ἀλλὰ μὴ Ἡρακλῆν, Περικλῆν, Θεμιστοκλῆν.

See also Buck, sect. 108.1 (and a) and 108.2. In relation to the second of those issues, note that Plato has Σωκράτη as the accusative, but Xenophon has Σωκράτην.

Hyphenation in LSJ

John Chadwick wrote in the 'Case for Replacing LSJ' (BICS 11 (1994): 2):
"One of the worst features of the 9th edition was certainly not the decision of the editors at all, but of the publisher. Every user must curse many times a day the idea of saving a little space by grouping words in long paragraphs. It would matter less that each lemma does not appear at the same point in the column, if at least it were given in full in bold type. Alas, the lemma is often reduced to three letters, two or even one letter, which not even bold type can render easily visible to the searching eye. In a lecture given in Oxford in 1948 R. W. Chapman, the Secretary to the Delegates of the Clarendon Press, under whom the project was launched, had the effrontery to claim credit for this astonishing lack of perceptivity. But this passage of his lecture was wisely omitted from the published text. What other damage he may have inflicted, I do not know."

This Chapman can also be found in the app.crit. to the OCT of Plato's Laws...


The run of words ὑπάλ-ειμμα, -ει-πτος, -ειπτρον, -ειπτρίς, -είφω, -ειψις (p. 1851) frames the problem neatly. Such hyphenation follows the formation of the words (ὑπ-, ἀλειπ-) nor their syllabification (ὑ-πα-λειμ-μα, etc.).

Such printing also obscures the accentuation in the ὑπάλ-, when followed by -ειπτρίς and -είφω, gives inexplicable, unnecessary, and impossible doubling of the accent on a single word (no enclitics are involved).

If that is possible, why should ὑπαλγέω, ὑπαλεαίνω, and ὑπαλεύομαι (all hyphenless) not be grouped under ὑπαλ- also, except on the criterion of a shared root and thus meaning? Cf. the ὑο- words which share a root, but have a range of meanings depending on the second element. Better still would be to divide at ὑπ-αλγέω, -αλεαίνω, -αλειμμα, etc.

The syllabification is a puzzling facet, since no less/other than H. Stuart Jones wrote 'Appendix V: Division of Greek Words', p. 75 in Horace Hart (M.A. Printer to the University of Oxford), Rules for Compositors and Readers at the University Press, 19th edn. (5th for publication): London and Oxford, 1905.

Based on papyri of Bacchylides, Thucydides, and Hypereides, he gives three exceptions to the rule that a syllable ends in a vowel:
(1) the consonant is doubled: Συρακούσ-σας, πολ-λῷ,  'and so' Βάκ-χος, Σαπ-φώ, Ἀτ-θίς;
(2) the first consonant is a liquid or nasal (or, according to some, a <σ>): ἄμ-φακες, ἐγ-χέσπαλον, τέρ-πον, πάν-τες, ἄλ-σος; ἄν-θρωπος, ἐρ-χθέντος, ἀν-δρῶν; but βά-κτρον, κάτο-πτρον, ἐχ-θρός; θέλ-κτρον, Λαμ-πτραί.
(3) Compounds. 'For modern printing the preference must be to divide the compounds παρ-όντος, ἐφ-ῃρημένος, but ἀπέ-βη may stand as well as ἀπ-έβη.'

A different issue surfaces in αἰνό-δακρυς, ὁ, = foreg., IG12(7).115 (Amorgos) [2nd/1st c. BCE]. Note the absence of an indication of inflection (-υος cf. πολύ-δακρυς) and a date for the inscription. The foreg(oing) is αἰνο-γόνος child of praise, which is a very different meaning. Was there ever an entry for *αἰνο-δάκρυος with which 'foreg.' would have been appropriate? Cf., e.g., πολυ-δάκρυος, but note that there '= sq.' directs the reader to πολύ-δακρυς for the meaning.

A Koine dvandva

DGE, but not LSJ (or the Rev.Supp.), has an entry for Διονυσο-πλάτων referring to a signet ring with a depiction not only of Dionysus (note the name of the witness and of his father), but also of Plato thereon: 'Dioniso-Platón, representación de Dioniso y Platón'.

The eighth of nine witnesses to P.Oxy. I 105 (118-138 CE) wrote/had written (lines 19-20): 
Διονύσιος Διον[υσ]ίου τ[ο]ῦ Διογένους ἀπὸ τῆς αὐτῆ[ς] πόλεως
μαρτ[υ]ρῶ[τῇ τοῦ Πεκύσιος διαθήκῃ, καὶ εἰμὶ] ἐτῶν τεσσαράκοντα ἕξ, οὐλὴ παρὰ κρόταφον δεξιόν, καὶ ἔστι μου ἡ σφραγὶς Διονυσοπλάτωνος.

The translation in the ed.pr. stops before the details of the witnesses...

The rationale of the OCT series

From the dust jacket of Platonis Opera... Tomus IV (reprinted 1962):

'... In undertaking the series the Delegates were greatly influenced by the consideration of the educational advantages of a long series of Classical Texts upon a uniform plan. As the Oxford Classical Texts are used by the Examiners for the Certificate of the Universities Joint Board and at the Universities themselves, volumes bought at school should serve as the beginning of a small library which will be used by its possessor throughout school and undergraduate life; and be a better stimulus to literary interest than annotated editions of the parts of an author's works which are set for the next examination.'

Ouch!

The other Gallus fragment and assessments of authors

Gallus, Epigrammata 1 (dactylic pentameter):
(Vib.Sec. 77) Hypanis Scythiae, qui ut ait Gallus
uno tellures dividit amne duas(.)
Asiam enim ab Europa separat.

Cicero, Orator 62:
Quamquam enim et philosophi quidam ornate locuti sunt—si quidem et Theophrastus a divinitate loquendi nomen invenit et Aristoteles Isocratem ipsum lacessivit et Xenophontis voce Musas quasi locutas ferunt et longe omnium quicumque scripserunt aut locuti sunt exstitit et suavitate et gravitate princeps Plato—, tamen horum oratio neque nervos neque aculeos oratorios ac forensis habet.
Certain philosophers, to be sure, had an ornate style,--for example Theophrastus received his name from his divinely beautiful language, and Aristotle challenged even Isocrates, and the Muses were said to speak with the voice of Xenophon, and Plato was, in dignity and grace easily the first of all writers or speakers--yet their style lacks the vigour and sting necessary for oratorical efforts in public life. (Loeb)

Diogenes Laertius V.38 reports that Theophrastus was renamed by Aristotle from Tyrtamus (the sole bearer of this name in LGPN).

Statius, Silvae V.3.146-161:
Hinc tibi vota patrum credi generosaque pubes
te monitore regi, mores et facta priorum
discere, quis casus Troiae, quam tardus Vlixes,
quantus equum pugnasque virum decurrere versu
Maeonides quantumque pios ditarit agrestes       150
Ascraeus Siculusque senex, qua lege recurrat
Pindaricae vox flexa lyrae volucrumque precator
Ibycus et tetricis Alcman cantatus Amyclis
Stesichorusque ferox saltusque ingressa viriles
non formidata temeraria Chalcide Sappho,          155
quosque alios dignata chelys. tu pandere doctus
carmina Battiadae latebrasque Lycophronis atri
Sophronaque implicitum tenuisque arcana Corinnae.
sed quid parva loquor? tu par assuetus Homero
ferre iugum senosque pedes aequare solutis          160
versibus et numquam passu breviore relinqui.

Plato's Cratylus

'The Greeks were extremely, almost obsessively, interested in etymologies. ... its [this interest's] most celebrated, extended and lunatic efflorescence occurs in Plato's Cratylus'.

R. J. Hankison 'Usage and abusage: Galen on language', in Companions to Ancient Thought, 3: Language S. Everson (ed.). Cambridge University Press. 1994: 166-187, at 167.

The usual sorts of things

From tidying up some scraps of paper:
(1) a mistake in a Loeb: Aeschin.2.78 has ἀπολόψειν (*λόπτω/*λόψω/*λόφω) not the required ἀποκόψειν;

(2) a plural of a personal name: LSJ s.v. Πήγασος 'pl. Πήγασοι, as a sample of prodigies, Pl.Phdr.229d, cf. Cic.Pro Quinct.25.80, Plin. HN8.72, 10.136'; 

(3) an example of a counter-factual conditional sentence: Pl.Phd.107c-d εἰ μὲν γὰρ ἦν ὁ θάνατος τοῦ παντὸς ἀπαλλαγή, ἕρμαιον ἂν ἦν τοῖς κακοῖς ἀποθανοῦσι τοῦ τε σώματος ἅμ’ ἀπηλλάχθαι καὶ τῆς αὑτῶν κακίας μετὰ τῆς ψυχῆς· νῦν δ’ ἐπειδὴ ἀθάνατος φαίνεται οὖσα, οὐδεμία ἂνεἴη αὐτῇ ἄλλη ἀποφυγὴ κακῶν οὐδὲ σωτηρία πλὴν τοῦ ὡς βελτίστην τε καὶ φρονιμωτάτην γενέσθαι.

More on names, their plurals, and on ethnics, etc.

The first (and only) fragment of Susarion, who is credited with being the first Greek comedian, presents all of his terms of identification, almost:

ἀκούετε λεῴ· Σουσαρίων λέγει τάδε,

υἱὸς Φιλίνου Μεγαρόθεν Τριποδίσκιος·

κακὸν γυναῖκες· ἀλλ’ ὅμως, ὦ δημόται,

οὐκ ἔστιν οἰκεῖν οἰκίαν ἄνευ κακοῦ.

καὶ γὰρ τὸ γῆμαι καὶ τὸ μὴ γῆμαι κακόν. 

Name, Susariaon: Patronymic, son of Philinos (but with υἱὸς explicit): village ethnic 
Τριποδίσκιος [a κωμήτης, says Steph.Byz.]: and city/regional ethnic equivalent Μεγαρόθεν (the testimonia give Μεγαρεύς).

Roman daughters took the feminine of their gentilicium as their personal name: daughter of a Cornelius would be a Cornelia, etc. So, what happened when there were several daughters in one immediate family?

legimus epistulas Corneliae matris Gracchorum: apparet filios non tam in gremio educatos quam in sermone matris. auditus est nobis Laeliae C. f. saepe sermo: ergo illam patris elegantia tinctam vidimus et filias eius Mucias ambas. quarum sermo mihi fu it notus, et neptes Licinias, quas nos quidem ambas, hanc vero Scipionis etiam tu, Brute, credo, aliquando audisti loquentem. 

Cicero, Brutus 211

Dawn appears as Ἠώς (not Ἕως) in Isoc.10.52 (a mythological context?), but as Ἕως in E. (Hipp.455, Ion 1158, Phaeth.5). A name hopping dialectal lines...

Who's this new celebrity academic?

~Typhoeus

Vintage Sibyl: Lent I 1980

Now then, O Sibyl, let me ask you a question. Is there, or is there not, such a thing as the Third Man, would you say? You see I've been having horrible nightly visions of him, and each time he is accompanied by at least two others and sometimes by an infinite stream of them, and I can't seem to tell which are real and which are only reflections and images and likenesses--they seem to roll around between being and not-being. And last night, to cap it all, he'd brought his own third bed and settled down for the night. It's all too much...
Yours formally, Plato

Dear Plato,
You seem to be suffering from a NON-IDENTITY crisis. Are you sure that this idea is not just a product of your own self-predication?