Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T14:54:51.308Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Epicharmus fr. 177 Kaibel

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 February 2009

E. D. Francis
E. D. Francis
Affiliation:
Yale University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Review Article
Information
The Classical Review , Volume 23 , Issue 1 , April 1973 , pp. 1 - 3
Copyright
Copyright © The Classical Association 1973

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

page 1 note 1 While some scholars analyse ξβλην as active (e.g. L.S.J. 304, H. Hirt, Hdb. d. gr. Laut- u. Formenlehre 2 [Heidelberg, 1912, 513], K. Strunk, Nasalpräsentien u. Aoriste [Heidel-berg, 1967, 45]), others have considered it to be passive (e.g. H. L. Ahrens, De dialecto dorica [Göttingen, 1843, 338], W. Veitch, Greek Verbs 4 [Oxford, 1879, 127, ‘for ⋯β⋯λην’] J. M. Edmonds, Lyra graeca, iii [London, 1940, 434], and G. Fatouros, Index verborum zur frühgriechischen Lyrik [Heidelberg, 1966, 71]). Schwyzer (Griechische Grammatik, i [Munich, 1939, 743 n. 2]) voices caution: ‘-βλε⋯ς ξβλης unklar, vielleicht ist die Bedeutung doch überall passiv’ (cf. id. 762: ‘*⋯βλ⋯μᾱν, ⋯βλ⋯θης, ἔβλητο usw. neben gleichbedeutendem ἔβλην, ἔβλης, ἔβλη usw.’), and Chantraine (Dictionnaire étymo-logique [Paris, 1968, 161]) refers to an aoriststem βλη- ‘au sens généralement intransitif’.

page 2 note 1 Cf. Berk, L., Epicharmus (Groningen, 1964, 35 f.;Google Scholar Berk does not himself discuss the three fragments in question).

page 2 note 2 Kaibel, G., Comicorum graecorum fragmenta (Berlin, 1899)Google Scholar, Olivieri, A., Frammenti della commedia greca e del mimo nella Suilia nella Magna Grecia, i (Naples, 1946).Google Scholar

page 2 note 3 Commentationum criticarum specimen (Mar-burg, 1844, 9, ‘temere’, according to E. Diehl, Anthologia lyrica graeca [Leipzig, 1954], ad mon. adesp. 21).

page 2 note 4 Beiträge zur Kritik der Poetae lyrici graeci (Göttingen, 1844, 124). for further details concerning the bitter controversy between Schneidewin and Bergk, see my article ‘On Pindar fr. 104 b (Snell)’ (to appear in C.Q.).

page 2 note 5 O. Hoffmann, Die griechischen Dialekte, ii (Göttingen, 1893, 198, adesp. 75: π⋯θεν δ⋯ τὦλκος [= τ⋯ ἔλκος, cf. Ahrens, supra] εὔπετες [ − ] ἔβλης), E. Diehl (loc. cit.), J. M. Edmonds (loc. cit., fr. 38, ‘anonymous: Sappho or Alcaeus (?)’).

page 3 note 1 ξυμβλ⋯την (Od. xxi. 15), pace L.S.J. 304, is best explained with Risch (Wordbildung der homerischen Sprache [Berlin–Leipzig, 1937, 207]) as a nonce-form based on the medio-passive stem ξυμβλη-, and not as a productive example of the paradigm of ἔβλην (cf. Hesychian ξ⋯μβλητε. συνετ⋯χετε). I discuss the formation of ξυμβλ⋯την more fully in a forthcoming article on the historical morphology of ἔβλην, in which I also argue that the Coan 3 sg. pass. subj. ⋯ποβλ⋯ι is an engraver's error for ⋯ποβληθ⋯ι. The present form βλ⋯μι seems to be merely a gramdermarians’ fiction dependent on ἔβλην.

page 3 note 2 Cf. Hj. Frisk, Griechisches etymologisches Wörterbuch, ii. 849.

page 3 note 3 Cf. Schulze, W., Quaestiones epicae (Gütersloh, 1892, 391 f.)Google Scholar, Bechtel, F., Die griechischen Dialekte, ii (Berlin, 1923, 212 f.)Google Scholar, and Berk (op. cit., 76 f. and passim).