previous next

δοξάζει. See cr. n. The same conjecture had occurred to Jackson. δοξάζειν is in itself defensible and seems at first sight required by the balance of clauses ἐπιστήμη μέν γέ πουδόξα δέ. But the introduction of φαμέν breaks the balance, and suggests a new departure. The real reason for writing δοξάζει is the occurrence of ἆρ᾽ οὖν τὸ μὴ ὂν δοξάζει (SC. δόξα); in 478 B. Unless δοξάζει is read here, it is very difficult to supply the subject of δοξάζει there. Reading δοξάζει, again, we supply after ταὐτόν not δοξάζειν (as must be done if the infinitive is read), but δοξάζει. This too is an improvement, because it provides an exact balance to γιγνώσκει. If Plato had meant ταὐτὸν δοξάζειν, we should expect him to have written not γιγνώσκει, but γιγνώσκειν. On the corruption see Introd. § 5.

ἀμφότεραί ἐστον. The union of a plural subject with a dual verb is tolerably frequent in Plato: cf. Euthyd. 278 E, 303 C. These and other examples are quoted in Roeper de dualis usu Plat. p. 30.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 United States License.

An XML version of this text is available for download, with the additional restriction that you offer Perseus any modifications you make. Perseus provides credit for all accepted changes, storing new additions in a versioning system.

hide References (1 total)
  • Commentary references from this page (1):
    • Plato, Euthydemus, 278e
hide Display Preferences
Greek Display:
Arabic Display:
View by Default:
Browse Bar: