Sidor som bilder
PDF
ePub

175. As the final vowel of how cannot properly continue long in thesi before αθανατοισι, we should probably correct

Ηρω ἀρ' αθανατοισι γενειησαντα ίδεσθαι.

187. Perhaps we should write here, коυρη y' 'Ikaрiοιо Kата.

227. The particle ' must be inserted between kai and oida.

263. The penultimate of ouoov being naturally short, we should read in this, as in similar lines of the Iliad, ὁμοιῒου ἀρ πολεμοιο.

269. ynμarbai, 4. Synalopha per crasin.

277. Read here και δ' ίφια μηλα.

315. The conjunction preceding eipia should be written ', by elision for he. 361. For δη έργα substitute either δητ' έργα οι δη β' έργα.

Book XIX. T.

Vs. 20. According to the edition of Clarke, this verse contains an instance of the elision of the diphthong a; i§er' åürμn. It may be, however, that the original expression was ίξεται αὐτμη.

34. χρυσεον. Synæresis.—39. φαινονται ὀφθαλμοις. Synalpha per crasin. 54. Read 'Αρτεμιδι ῥ ̓ ἐκελη.

159. γημασθαι· ἀσχαλαα. Synalœpha per crasin.

172. yala ori. Synalœpha per crasin.-179. évve@pos. Synæresis.

190. Most probably the particle y' should be introduced in this line after μeraλλa, the last syllable of which cannot rightly continue long in thesi before ἀστυδ'.

192. For ή ένδεκατη substitute ἢ ἑνδεκατη.

194. The diphthong eu should here be resolved by diæresis.

201. It is likely that the primitive reading of this line was

Εἰα δ ̓ ἱστασθαι χαλεπος δε τις ώρορε δαιμων.

226. For αὐταρ οἱ substitute αὐταρ ἑοι.

244. For και μεν οἱ substitute και μεν έοι. 262. Λαερτιάδεω. Synæresis. 272. Insert y' for ye after Swou.

289. The Homeric expression was undoubtedly not uμev' raipovs, but simply ἐμμεν ἑταίρους.

290. Write here either ἢ ἀμφ' or ἢ ἀρ' ἀμφ'.—331. τεθνεωτι. Synæresis. 367. In this verse again, according to the present lection, we are presented with an amphibrach or a trochee as a substitute for the dactyl in the fifth place; ἕως ίκοιο. There can be no doubt that Homer himself gave έως ἆρ ̓ ἱκοιο. 375. See on A. 328.

484. Read éreï p' ès, agreeably to the remark on П. 206.

501. This line, read as in Clarke's edition, not only exhibits an instance of the elision of the diphthong a, but also contains a violation of our second rule on the subject of quantity; opaσoμaι kaι elσoμ' ékαorny. The former, it should appear, is to be allowed; the latter to be obviated by the insertion of §' after κal. 513. терπоμ' odνpoμevn. Elision of the diphthong at.

520. δενδρέων. Synæresis.530. έως μεν. Ibid.

531. ynμaσbai ou. Synalopha per crasin.

546. Most probably the particle ap' should be introduced in this line, after θαρσει.

556. The latter clause of this verse, according to most editions, is, èπEIN SA TOL αὐτος Οδυσσευς, in which reading a diphthong is improperly shortened in the middle of a word. Other editions have Ten pa Tol, which form of expression, however, is scarcely admissible, as not harmonizing with Homer's general phraseology. We should, perhaps, write

Αλλῃ ἀποκλιναντι· ἐπει ῥα τοι αὐτος Οδυσσευς.

561. γιγνονται οὐδε. Synalpha per crasin.

573. πελεκεας. Synæresis. So likewise in vs. 578. πελέκεων.

Book XX. T.

Vs. 61. ποτνια θεα. Synæresis.-70. πασεων. Ibid.

75. Read by diæresis eü oidev.

89. In this verse, read as at present, we meet with a most glaring infringement of the rule, that a diphthong or long vowel cannot be shortened in the middle of a

word; τοιος έων, οἷος ήεν ἅμα στρατῳ. The only correction we are able to propose, is that already advanced in the remarks on Il. N. 275. Z. 105. Od. H. 312.; viz. the substitution of os àp' for oios.

109. The final diphthong of aλλa cannot be considered a long syllable in thesi, before evdov; and we should accordingly introduce the particle

two words.

between the

130. The particle ' should probably be inserted between ǹ and airWS. 165. To preserve metrical accuracy, we should, in this line, either insert §3 between the words ή and άρτι, and γ' between the words 'Αχαιοι and εἰσοροωσιν, or else write,

Ξεινε γ', ἢ ἀρτι σε μαλλον ̓Αχαιοι ῥ ̓ εἰσοροωσιν.

[ocr errors]

227. ÉTEL OUTE. Synalopha per crasin.-251. epevov. Synæresis. 261. Xpure. Synæresis.-309. For kaι oida substitute kaι ' oida: 335. ynμaodai dσris. Synalœpha per crasin.-340. Read ǹ' èp0iTαI. 342. γημασθαι φ. Synalæpha per crasin.-348. σφεων. Synæresis. 351. ὑμεων. Synæresis.

379. In the present lection of this verse èuraιov is used for a dactyl, contrarily to our second rule respecting the quantity of different syllables. It may not, perhaps, be too much to presume, that the Homeric dialect possessed two forms of this adjective, ἐμπαιος and ἐμπαος, in the same manner as we fnd both έταιρος and èrapos; and that the latter was the one employed by the poet in the present

instance.

358. See on A. 328.

Book XXI. .

Vs. 2. See on A. 328. So also for vs. 321.-24. Read ai dŋ éol.

29. Read τny on kol.—47. Ovpewv. Synæresis.-54. For ds oi substitute ós éo. 73. φαινετ ̓ ἀεθλον. Elision of the diphthong αι.

76. TEλEKEWV. Synæresis. So likewise in vs. 421.

120. TEλEKEαS. Synæresis. So likewise in vs. 260.

136. There can be no question that Homer wrote here ano ' έo.

154. For έπειη substitute έπει ἀρ'.

157. The present lection of this verse is depraved in two particulars; first, by a violation of our second rule on the subject of quantity, and, secondly, by an unnecessary elision of the diphthong αι ; και ἐλπετ ̓ ἐνι φρεσιν. It is in the highest degree likely that the original reading was,

Νυν μεν τις και ῥ ̓ ἐλπεται ἐν φρεσιν, ήδε μενοινα.

163. Read aπo §' éo.-178. σTEATOS. Synæresis. So also in vs. 183.

188. ueas. Synæresis.

208. The particle p' must be inserted between èreï and ès.

262. Λαερτιάδεω. Synæresis.277. θεοειδεα. Ibid.

278. λισσομ' ἐπει. Elision of the diphthong αι.

332. For δη οἶκον substitute either δητ' οίκον or δη ῥ οἶκον.

400. Insert γ' for γε between νωμα and ένθα.

[blocks in formation]

Book XXII. X.

Vs. 31. Instead of erein paσav in the latter clause of this verse, we must evidently write έπει ἀρ φασαν.

81. The particle § should be inserted between σμepdaλea and laxwv.

210. The word uμev written without an apostrophe, should be here substituted for ἐμμεν' by elision for έμμεναι.

219. ύμεων. Synæresis. 245. ψυχεων. Ibid.

249. For και δη οἱ substitute και δη ἑοι.—289. For ἐπειη read έπει ἆρ ̓.

319. εὐεργεων. Synæresis.339. Λαερτιάδεω. Ibid.

384. πεπτεωτας. Synæresis.

386. In all probability the true reading of this line is,

Δικτυῳ ἐξερυσαν πολυωπῳ γ ̓· οἱ δε τε παντες.

456. ἐφορεον. Synæresis.

Book XXIII. Y.

Vs. 7. As the monosyllable kaι cannot continue long in thesi before oikov, we should probably insert the particle ' between the two words. This remark is equally applicable to vss. 27. 108.

36. Read either δητ ̓ οἶκον or δη ῥ ̓ οἶκον.

101. For os of substitute ós éol.

102. Read, as in previous instances, èreï p' ès.

115. It appears that the form TT for or could not be consistently employed when the first syllable did not receive the metrical accent; otherwise, in the composition of verses, any consonant could be doubled at the option of the poet. We should perhaps write here,

Νυν δ' ἀρ ̓ ὅτι ῥυποω, κακα δε χροϊ εἱματα είμαι.

136. Probably the conjunction ǹ before of should be changed to ǹ'. 169, 170. See on vss. 101, 102.

245. ζευγνυσθαι ώκύποδας. Synalpha per crasin.

304. Insert the particle ' between kaι and ipia.

335. Read ἐν σπεσι ῥα γλαφυροισιν.

BOOK XXIV. 2.

Vs. 15. Пŋŋïadew. Synæresis.-115. ǹ où μeμvn. Synalopha per crasin.

161. τέως μεν. Synæresis.188. ὠτειλεων. Ibid.

194. We should probably read here, koupη ap' 'Ikаpioν.

195. Without doubt To koi should be here substituted for TW oi.

200. èσσer' èn'. Elision of the diphthong a.-209. Read тa koi piλa.

246. xvn ov. Synalopha per crasin.

257. The diphthong eu should be here resolved into a dissyllable. So likewise in vs. 296.

270. Read either εὐ ἆρ ̓ ἐξείνισσα, or ἐϋ ἐξείνισσα.

298. The reading of this verse, according to the edition of Clarke, is,

Που δε νηυς ἑστηκε θοη, ἡ σ' ήγαγε δεύρο,

For δε νηυς

in which a final e is put for a long syllable in thesi before a single v. Barnes proposes to substitute either dŋ vnus, or d'vnus; but the best emendation probably is, που δ ̓ ἀρα νηυς ἑστηκε.

299. Instead of ή έμπορος write ή' έμπορος.-321. Read ἐτεϊ ῥ ̓ ἐς.

336. ήτεον. Synæresis.339. μηλεας. Ibid.-340. συκεας. Ibid.

346. In this line, read as at present, the final of πport is incorrectly made long before the pronoun of. All impropriety will be removed by reading πρотi έol. 380. σφεων. Synæresis. So also in vs. 388. σφεας.

395. μeas. Synæresis.-402. Read opp' eü eídw. 404. Read either ἢ ἀγγελὸν or ἡ ἀρ' ἀγγελον.

406. The common lection of this verse can be easily rendered correct by inserting either p' or y' between noŋ and oide.

436. plewol. Synæresis.-451. Consult the remark on Il. . 250.

484. θεωμεν. Synæresis.-522. Εὐπειθεα. Ibid.—533. τευχεα. Ibid.

542. Of the impropriety of duoliov there can be no doubt; nor is it less certain that the Homeric reading of this line was,

Ίσχεο, πανε δε νεικος ὁμοιῖον ἀρ ̓ πολεμοιο.

PROFESSOR LEE'S HEBREW GRAMMAR.

No. II. [Concluded from No. LXXIX.]

OUR next question (p. 24.) is on the forms of the verbs, where M. de Sacy informs us, that Mr. Lee, like Schultens, Schroeder, and some other modern grammarians, has unnecessarily multiplied them, while in reality the additional terms only present a few anomalies, and which therefore ought to be treated as exceptions. In the first place, I object to the facts. David Kimchi will not, I suppose, be termed a modern grammarian, and yet my paradigms of such verbs, 0, &c. were all copied from him, as I have expressly stated at p. 232 of my Grammar, and as any one may see by referring to the Michlol, fol. TP, &c. But I will give an instance or two. The chapter beginning with this leaf is thus

There are also verbs having-ויש פעלים בני ארבע אותיות : headed

four letters (in the root). He adds, a mix bɔɔ nba wi

Some which do not double any letter, as,

And some which double the first radical, as in

ואשר נכפלה הפא,c. Then on the reverse of this leaf& בִּרְבֵּל

ריב

ואשר יכפל,Prov. xxvi. 21. And a little lower down לְחַרְחַר רִיב Some which double בהם הפא והלמד כִּלְכֵּל וכן כַּרְכֵר וכן צִפְצֵף

[ocr errors]

the first and last radical, as, ?, &c. And with the exemplifications nearly five pages are filled, which it would be unnecessary to transcribe. Now, I think I may conclude, that the practice here ascribed by M. de Sacy to the modern grammarians, is at least as old as the times of Kimchi, and perhaps I may use his own words in saying, "C'en est assez sur cette matière."

Let us now come to his philosophy:

Ce qui a donné lieu à supposer ces formes inconnues aux précédens grammariens, ce sont quelques mots, dont la vocalisation, contraire à l'analogie, pourroit bien n'être autre chose que des fautes des copistes, ou

bien des exceptions aux règles, comme, exceptions qu'il ne faut point convertir en paradigmes. Parce que de bio ceinture, venant de la racine trilitères, on fait en Arabe le verbei, faut-il admettre parmi les verbes dérivés une forme

? تمفعل

[ocr errors]

I answer-It has been shown, that many of these forms were not unknown to former grammarians; and, in the next place, the whole of this reasoning, if such it might be called, rests on a petitio principii. When we are told that these forms, &c. are contraire à l'analogie," and "exceptions aux règles;" nothing can be more obvious, than that our savant takes for granted the very point in debate. They are contrary perhaps to the analogy of M. de Sacy, and must, therefore, be put down as exceptions to his rules; but they are not so with the elder grammarian, Kimchi. No-Kimchi treats them as perfectly analogical, and quite regular, and so have I in my Grammar: and such, I will maintain, they truly are. But might not M. de Sacy fairly be asked, where the rules are to end, and where the exceptions are to begin? In his own Grammaire Arabe, tom. i. p. 102. he has given us 15 forms of conjugation of the triliteral verb: but, in the very next page he tells us, that certain letters may be struck out of some of them, and so they may be reduced: and, in pp. 144-5. where tables are again given, not a word is said, either about these forms or the reason of their omission. Now, if we ask M. de Sacy on what authority, or on what principle, he takes the liberty to reduce these forms, he will perhaps tell us, as in the article under consideration, "je crois qu'il auroit mieux," &c. Similar questions may be raised about the Arabic Masdars of the first conjugation. M. de Sacy has given 37, while Martelloto, the grammarian he principally follows, gives 32 only, on the authority of Saibowai ; Erpenius 33, and Mr Lumsden 60. But M. de Sacy must necessarily be right, and because he believes he is so! But further, it is affirmed, that these forms are peu usitées," which is not a very definite way of speaking. I will affirm however, that many of those of which Kimchi has given tables, must have occurred quite as frequently in the ancient Hebrew, as either the 9th, 11th, 12th, 13th, 14th, or 15th forms, admitted into M. de Sacy's table of the triliteral Arabic verb. Now, I ask, why are not these "formes peu usitées," ranged among the exceptions in the Grammaire Arabe? Because, no doubt, the learned author thought it would be better not; and for no other reason whatsoever. We

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

(Gram. p.

1 If M. de Sacy means only in the forms A and 196.), I reply, these are only mentioned once, and no paradigm is given containing their conjugations. Mr. Ewald too, has been so imprudent as to have exemplified these augmented forms. (pp. 201-2.)

« FöregåendeFortsätt »