οὐκ ἐκτός; οὐκ ἄψορρον “κ.τ.λ.” It seems more probable that in v. 384 the MSS. have lost a syllable (as “μήν”) than that here we should omit the second “οὐκ”. Cp. O. T. 430 f.: “οὐκ εἰς ὄλεθρον; οὐχὶ θᾶσσον; οὐ πάλιν ι ἄψορρος οἴκων τῶνδ᾽ ἀποστραφεὶς ἄπει”; If here we read, οὐκ ἐκτὸς ἄψορρον ἐκνεμεῖ πόδα; the verse becomes much tamer; while “ἐκτὸς”, taken with “ἄψορρον ἐκνεμεῖ”, is positively weak. It may be added that the first syllable of “ἄψορρον” here, and of “καίπερ” in 384, must then be treated as having the time-value of -u: whereas all the other trimeters in this kommos are normal. For ἐκτὸς cp. O. T. 676“οὔκουν μ᾽ ἐάσεις κἀκτὸς εἶ;” ἄψορρον is probably the adv., as in Tr. 902“ὅπως ἄψορρον ἀντῴη πατρί”, El. 53“ἄψορρον ἥξομεν.” ἐκνεμεῖ here gives the notion, ‘take forth into other pastures.’ This rare compound occurs in Theophr. Hist. Plant. 9. 16 § 1 “ὀλίγος ὁ τόπος ὁ φέρων, καὶ τοῦτον αἱ αἶγες ἐκνέμονται”, depascunt, ‘the region which bears (the plant dictamnum) is small, and is stripped of it by the browsing goats.’ The analogy of Pind. N. 6. 15, “ἴχνεσιν ἐν Πραξιδάμαντος ἑὸν πόδα νέμων”, would certainly point to ἐκνεμεῖς, but we must allow for the poetical use of the middle voice, so frequent with Sophocles. Of the midd. fut., Thuc. 4. 64§ 5 has “νεμούμεθα”, Dem. or. 21 § 203 “νεμεῖσθαι”.
This text is part of:
Table of Contents:
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 United States License.