previous next

πολιᾶς, not “πολιοῦ”, since the words “πόντου θινὸς” form a single notion: Ant. 794 n. The gen. goes with ἐφημένος: cp. Pind. N. 4. 67τᾶς...ἐφεζόμενοι”: Ap. Rhod. 3. 1000 f. “νηὸς...ἐφεζομένη”. Some take the gen. as partitive, after που: but the latter clearly means here, ‘I ween’: cp. Ai. 382 που πολὺν γέλωθ᾽ ὑφ᾽ ἡδονῆς ἄγεις”.

1125 *“ἐγγελᾷ is my emendation of γελᾷ μου. The antistrophic verse (1148 “χῶρος οὐρεσιβώτας”) shows the true metre; and a substitution of ˘¯¯ for ¯˘¯ is impossible here. If, on the other hand, the ἐγ of ἐγγελᾷ had been accidentally lost, the insertion of μου is just such an expedient as might have occurred to a post-classical corrector. There is no classical example of a gen. after the simple “γελᾶν”, though Lucian has that construction ( Dem. Enc. 16γελᾶν ἔπεισί μοι τοῦ τὰς ὀφρῦς συνάγοντος”).

hide References (3 total)
  • Commentary references from this page (3):
    • Pindar, Nemean, 4
    • Sophocles, Ajax, 382
    • Sophocles, Antigone, 794
hide Display Preferences
Greek Display:
Arabic Display:
View by Default:
Browse Bar: