ἀλλ᾽ ἦ...; In this formula “ἦ” asks the question: “ἀλλά” marks surprise, as it so often marks remonstrance (‘nay, can it be so?’ or, ‘what, can that be true?’). The fact that “ἀλλ̓” is absent from L (see cr. n.) has led some editors to prefer the conjecture ἦ γάρ. But it may be observed:—（a) “ἀλλ᾽ ἦ” was a comparatively unfamiliar phrase, and therefore the fact that the other MSS. have it is presumptive evidence of its genuineness. (b) The preceding πῶς εἶπας cannot be urged as an objection: cp. Eur. Alc. 58“πῶς εἶπας; ἀλλ᾽ ἦ καὶ σοφὸς λέληθας ὤν”; Eur. Itis true, however, that such a preface to “ἀλλ᾽ ἦ” is unusual: cp. Soph. El. 879: Aesch. Ch. 220: Eur. Alc. 816, Helen. 490, Heracl. 425, Hipp. 932, [Eur. ] Rhes. 36. —Remark that in O. C. 26, where “ἀλλὰ” and “ἦ” are separated, the peculiar force of “ἀλλ᾽ ἦ” is not present.
This text is part of:
Table of Contents: