ἐλεινόν tertiary predicate: “I compassionate thy words, piteous as they are.” Where a possessive pron. with art. has preceded the subst., Soph. sometimes thus subjoins and adj., which really has the predicative force to which its position entitles it, though for us it would be more natural to translate it as a mere attributive: Soph. Ant. 881 “τὸν δ᾽ ἐμὸν πότμον ἀδάκρυτον ι οὐδεὶς ... στενάζει”: Soph. Phil. 1456 “τοὐμὸν ἐτέγχθη ι κρᾶτ᾽ ἐνδόμυχον”: Soph. El. 1143 “τῆς ἐμῆς πάλαι τροφῆς ι ἀνωφελήτου.” In 1199 （where see note） τὰν γαμψ. παρθ. χρησμῳδόν is not a similar case. Prof. Kennedy, placing a comma after ἐποίκτείρω, but none after τοῦδ᾽, construes: τὸ σὸν στόμα ἐλεινόν （ἐστι）, οὐκ ἐποικτείρω τὸ τοῦδε.στυγήσεται pass. Other examples in Soph. are 1500 ὀνειδιεῖσθε: Soph. OC 581 “δηλώσεται,” 1186 λέξεται: Soph. Ant. 210 “τιμήσεται,” 637 ἀξιώσεται: Soph. El. 971 “καλεῖ”: Soph. Phil. 48 “φυλάξεται”: among many found in prose as well as in verse are ἀδικήσομαι, ἁλώσομαι, ἐάσομαι, ζημιώσομαι, τιμήσομαι, ὠφελήσομαι. The middle forms of the aorist were alone peculiar to that voice; the so-called “future middle,” like the rest, was either middle or passive.
This text is part of:
Table of Contents:
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.