previous next

[27] οὐοὐ. See supra 14, Od.8. 159; Il.17. 641οὔ μιν ὀίομαι οὐδὲ πεπύσθαι”. The repetition is justified by a distinct purpose, namely, of determining the negation to a particular part of the proposition; for the second οὐ belongs closely to θεῶν ἀέκητι, a familiar phrase; cp. Od.6. 240.Notice the litotes, ‘not under the disfavour of heaven.’ Other commentators describe the second negative as “οὐsolitarium and punctuate, “οὐ γὰρ ὀίω, οὔ, σέ”, etc., comparing

equidem de te nil tale verebar,
nec fas, non.’

But the former will explain better the majority of passages. Cp. Il.5. 22οὐδὲ γὰρ οὐδέ κεν αὐτὸς ὑπέκφυγε”, with the commentary ad loc. of Eustath. “ἐστὶ δὲ τῶν δύο ἀρνήσεων μὲν μία τοῦ ῥηματικοῦ πράγματος ἑτέρα δὲ τοῦ προσώπου”, meaning that the first “οὐδέ” serves to negative the verb with its accessories, and the second attaches itself closely to “αὐτός”.

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 (5 total)
  • Commentary references from this page (5):
hide Display Preferences
Greek Display:
Arabic Display:
View by Default:
Browse Bar: