Page images

Obs. 1 As a general rule the synthetic verb is a derivative in -é, according to the examples given, because the weight of the compound noun recommended the shortest form of derivation for the verb; but other derivative forms, though unusual, are not impossible. Thus Táo being itself a derivative form, its opposite, though derived from aτiμos, is arquato instead of aruéw, and drie is found in Theognis (621), where perhaps the true reading is ἀτιτεῖ from ἀτίτης. From ἀτένης we have arevic. And there are some few irregularities in other verbs, but the general analogy of the language is indubitable.

Obs. 2 For the anomalies in the place of the augment or reduplication of synthetic verbs, see above, 310.





§ I. General Considerations.

379 CONSTRUCTION or Syntax (úvтağıs) gives the rules for expressing and connecting Sentences.

380 A Sentence expressed in words is called a Proposition or Enunciation.

381 Every Proposition consists of three parts-Subject, Copula and Predicate. Thus, if we say, ó cós éσTw ȧyalós, "God is good," ó cós is the subject or thing spoken of; ayalós is the predicate or that which is said of the subject; and eorív is the copula or substantive verb, which always connects the subject with the predicate, with or without the negative particle où, according as the subject and predicate disagree or agree.

a. In the Greek language the copula is very often implied in! some form of a finite verb, which contains the predicate also; thus we say, ὁ ἵππος τρέχει = ὁ ἵππος ἐστὶ τρέχων, “the horse is running."

b. And even the subject may be contained in this verbal form; | for τρέχει may be equivalent to ὁ δεῖνά ἐστι τρέχων, " a certain person is running;” and σαλπίζει may express ὁ σαλπιγτής ἐστι oaλmilov, "the trumpeter is sounding his horn." With certain verbs this implication of the subject is almost invariable. Thus we almost always understand ἀήρ, Θεός or Ζεύς with verbs describing natural phenomena; as vel, "it or he (Jupiter) rains,” and so


[ocr errors]

νίφει, “ it snows,” βροντᾷ, ἀστράπτει, “ it thunders, it lightens, σvσKOтáče, "it grows dark," eσewe, "he (Poseidon) shook," i.e. "there was an earthquake." The poets, however, sometimes supply the nominative which is intended.

c. Impersonal verbs explain this usage by the apposition of a sentence which follows; thus, χρή σε μίμνειν = τοῦτο τὸ μίμνειν σe-xpeŵv čotiv, or "it is fitting that you remain " "that you remain is fitting."


d. This explains the fact that the neuter plural, which is strictly speaking an objective case (above, 156), is construed with a singular verb; so that Tà (wa Tрéxe, "the animals are running," really means, "as to the animals, it runs" or "there is running" (curritur quoad animalia).

382 In Logic, propositions are divided according to their substance, their quality and their quantity. Syntax does not concern itself with the latter divisions, and still less with the modern distinction of synthetical and analytical propositions; but its rules are dependent on the division of propositions according to substance, that is, according as they are categorical or hypothetical.

383 Categorical propositions contain a direct assertion or predication, either unqualified, as i Oeós éσti ȧyalós, "God is | good;" or qualified, as ó äveρwños lows ȧμaptável, "the man perhaps is in error." The former are called pure, the latter modal or adverbial categoricals. All words and sentences, which thus qualify the main predication, are of the nature of adverbs or secondary predicates (below, 435 sqq.)

384 The hypothetical proposition consists of two sentences. If it is a conditional hypothetical, one of these is a categorical proposition, and the other a sentence dependent upon it; as ei Ti exel, Siswow, "if he has anything, he gives." If it is a disjunctive hypothetical, both members are categorical, but they are rendered hypothetical by the conjunction which connects them, as ✈ exeǹ our exe, "he either has or has not;" and if the conditional is then applied, this inference follows: 4 Sídwow ǹ où diwow, "he either gives or does not give.'

385 These differences refer only to the predicate. The subject is regulated by the same laws in every kind of proposition. Con

sequently, the methodical discussion of syntactical rules should begin with (I) those which concern the subject; and should then consider in their order (II) the categorical proposition, and under this head the different kinds of predicates; (III) the hypothetical proposition, so far as it is relative or adverbial, i.e. of the nature of a secondary predicate, and under this head the doctrine of the moods and negative particles; and (IV) the co-ordinate and subordinate sentences, which assume an external appearance of distinctness and independence, and generally call in the aid of the conjunctions.

§ II. The Article and Relative.

386 The chief instrument of Greek syntax is the demonstrative pronoun ös. When it appears in the form ös, ", ő, it is called the relative pronoun; when in the form ó (ős), ǹ, Tó, it is termed the distinctive pronoun or definite article (above, 229, (4) and (5)).

387 If we compare the inflexions of os, , % and ó, n, Tó (above, 237, 238), we shall observe that the latter, in all the objective cases, loses its connexion with the second element, and takes, in its stead, the third element. This points to the fact, that, whereas the relative pronoun signifies here in all its cases, the distinctive pronoun expresses this relation only in the nominative, masculine and feminine; while in the objective cases it expresses the opposed relative there, and throughout its use corresponds to that of the indicative pronouns ὅδε, οὗτος and ἐκεῖνος, as opposed to os, n, ő.

388 The distinctive pronoun is written ős, n, Tó when it stands by itself, but it loses the nominative sign in the masculine when it stands in apposition to a noun, or serves the purpose of a definite article. This is best explained by the converse practice in modern High German, in which we write gut-er Mensch, “a good man," but de-r gute Mensch, "the good man."

389 In the older Greek, as represented by Homer, the pronoun ó, ǹ, tó is used in its distinctive and demonstrative sense, with an immediate and generally retrospective reference, as in Il. 1. 9 : Λητοῦς καὶ Διὸς υἱός· ὁ γὰρ βασιλῆϊ χολωθείς, κ. τ. λ. v. 12: ὁ γὰρ ἦλθε, κ. τ. λ. Even when it has an apposition of the noun

referred to (below, 407, (a)), and so is passing on to the common use of a prepositive article, we can see that it retains its pronominal value. This is particularly observable in proper names, whether they follow the article immediately, or with some words interposed; thus we have (I. I. 11): οἵνεκα τὸν Χρύσην ἠτίμησ ̓ ἀρητῆρα 'Aτpeions, "because Atreides treated disrespectfully him-that well-known person, whose wrongs gave occasion to the wrath of Achilles-Chryses, in his capacity of priest," for he came σтéμμar' ἔχων ἐν χερσὶν ἑκηβόλου Απόλλωνος. Similarly in v. 33: ὡς ëpaт', éddeiσev d' o yépwv, “so he spake, but the other, the old man, I mean, feared." That this is really the meaning is shown by the passages, in which the noun, whether common or proper, is separated from the article by other words interposed; as in П7. 1. 348: ἡ δ ̓ ἀέκουσ ̓ ἅμα τοῖσι γυνὴ κίεν, “ she unwillingly with them, I mean, the woman, went;" and v. 488: avτàp ó μývie vyvoì wapńμενος ωκυπόροισι Διογενὴς Πηλέος υἱός, " but he raged, sitting by his fast ships, I mean, the Jove-born son of Peleus;" and VIII. 425: ἡ μὲν ἄρ ̓ ὡς εἰποῦσ ̓ ἀπέβη πόδας ωκέα Ιρις, “she therefore having thus spoken departed, to wit, the swift-footed Iris." As the antecedent to a relative it generally follows the noun to which it gives a demonstrative emphasis, as in Od. x. 73: où ɣáp μoι θέμις ἐστὶ κομιζέμεν οὐδ ̓ ἀποπέμπειν ἄνδρα τόν, ὅς κε θεοῖσιν àπéxoητаι, "it is not lawful for me to receive or to send away a man, that one, I mean, who is hateful to the blessed gods;" Il. XVII. 172: ἦ τ' ἐφάμην σε περὶ φρένας ἔμμεναι ἄλλων τῶν ὅσσοι Λυκίην ναιετάουσιν, " assuredly I declared that you were superior in understanding to others, all those, I mean, who inhabit Lycia." And sometimes when the same pronoun follows as relative (below, 392), as in Od. XXI. 42, 43: ἡ δ ̓ ὅτε δὴ θάλαμον τὸν ἀφίκετο δια γυναικῶν οὐδόν τε δρύϊνον προσεβήσατο, τόν ποτε τέκτων ξέσσεν, "but she, when she came to the vaulted chamber, that one to wit, the divine woman I mean, and the threshold of oak, which the carpenter had formerly smoothed." As the later Greeks used juxtapositions of aλλos and other particles, even after a preposition, to denote reciprocity, as πρὸς ἀλλότ ̓ ἄλλον, “ now to one and now to another" (Æsch. Prom. 276), so in Homer we find a repetition of this old demonstrative, as in Il. x. 224: §úv te dú' èρxoμévw κai Tе πρò о Tоû évónoev, "when two go together, then also the one takes thought for the other" (and vice versa), i. e. С πρÒ TоÛ, о πρÒ


« PreviousContinue »