previous next

[400] εὖ ναιεταόντων. See on the whole question of the right way of writing this and analogous phrases, Classen, Hom. Sprachgebr. p. 65 foll. The decision whether it is correct to write “εὐναιόμενος, εὐναιετάων” or “εὖ ναιόμενος, εὖ ναιετάων”, and similarly “εὐκτίμενος, εὐρυρέων, εὐρυκρείων, καρηκομόων, πασιμέλουσα”, etc., etc., turns upon the applicability to each case of Scaliger's regium praeceptum, as Lobeck, Phryn. 226 calls it, “Nemo hellenismi paullo peritior concedetεὐαγγέλλωGraecum esse. Namτὸ εὖ καὶ τὰ στερητικὰ μόρια[and indeed all adverbial particles] non componuntur cum verbis, sed cum nominibus. Itaqueεὐάγγελοςrecte dicitur, unde verbumεὐαγγελέω”, nonεὐαγγέλλωquod est absurdissimum.’” The best way seems to be in all cases to write the words separate. With “εὖ ναιετάοντα” there is no uncertainty, as we have “εὖ μάλα ναιετάοντα Od.4. 96; with “εὐφρονέων” the doubt does not arise, as we have the adjective “εὔφρων” from which to form “εὐφρονέω”. In the case of the other combinations they must, if written as one word, be justified either on the ground of Epic licence, which is a dangerous theory to introduce, or, with much greater propriety, on the ground that many of the participles have lost all real connection with their verb and exist only with an adjectival force.

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):
    • Homer, Odyssey, 4.96
hide Display Preferences
Greek Display:
Arabic Display:
View by Default:
Browse Bar: