-i&f^MM^f^". >ll.\
-nl+
^k
THE LIMITATIONS
OF THE
PREDICATIVE POSITION IN GREEK
A DISSERTATION
PRESENTED TO THE BOARD OF UNIVERSITY STUDIES OF
THE JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY FOR THE
DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
BY
ALFRJED WILLIAM MILDEN
SOMETIME FELLOW OF THE JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY
BALTI MORE
JOHN MURPHY COMPANY
I 900
THE LIMITATIONS
OF THE
PREDICATIVE POSITION IN GREEK
A DISSERTATION
PRESENTED TO THE BOARD OF UNIVERSITY STUDIES OF
THE JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY FOR THE
DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
BY
ALFEED WILLIAM MILDEN
SOMETIME FELLOW OF THE JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY
B ALTI MORE
JOHN MURPHY COMPANY
I 900
TABLE OF CONTENTS.
Pagk.
The Greek Article, 7
Oblique Predication, 10
The Predicative Participle as the Equivalent op an Abstract
Noun, 15
The Origin op the Adverbial-Dative Type op Predication, - 18
The Adverbial-Dative Type op Predication in (a) Classical Greek, 22
The Adverbial-Dative Type op Predication in (6) Post-Classical
Greek, '_ 26
The Prepositional Type op Predication in (a) Classical Greek, - 29
The Prepositional Type op Predication in (b) Post-Classical Greek, 39
Conclusion, -43
254829
BIBLIOGRAPHY.
Bernhardt, G.
Blass, F.
Classen, J.
Donaldson, J. W.
Jebb, R. C.
Kruger, K. W.
Kruger-Pokel.
Kuhner-Gerth.
Madvig, J. N.
Middleton, T. F.
mommsen, t.
Monro, D. B.
Paul, H.
SCHMID, W.
schoemann, g. f.
Steinthal, H.
VOGRINZ, G.
GENERAL WORKS.
Wissenschaftliche Syntax. Berlin, 1829.
Die attische Beredsamkeit. Leipzig, 1887.
Beobachtungen iiber den horn. Sprg.
Frankfurt A. M., 1867.
New Cratylus. London, 1850.
The Attic Orators from Antiphon to Isaeus.
London, 1876.
Historisch-philologische Studien, Vol. II. Berlin, 1851.
Griechische Sprachlehre. Leipzig, 1891.
Ausfiihrliehe Grammatik der griechischen Sprache, Part
II. (Satzlehre). Leipzig, 1898.
Syntax of the Greek Language. London, 1873.
The Doctrine of the Greek Article, etc. London, 1841.
Beitrage zu der Lehre von den griechischen Prapo-
Berlin, 1895.
Oxford, 1891.
sitionen.
Homeric Grammar.
Principles of the History of Ljlnguage. New York, 1889.
Der Atticismus, Vol. III. Stuttgart, 1893.
Die Lehre von den Redetheilen. Berlin, 1862.
Geschichte der Sprachwissenschaft bei den Griechen
und Romern. Berlin, 1863.
Grammatik des homerischen Dialektes.
Paderborn, 1889.
SPECIAL WORKS.
CcrcUEL, Ch. Essai sur la langue et le style de I'orateur Antiphon.
Berlin, 1882.
Dornseiffen, I. De articulo apud Graecos eiusque usu in praedicato.
Amsterdam, 1856.
Egger, E. Apollonius Dyscole, essai sur I'histoire des theories
grammaticales dans 1' antiquity. Paris, 1854.
EiCHHORST, 0. Die Lehre des Apollonius Dyscolus vom Artikel. Phi-
lol. 38, pp. 399-422.
Elias, S. Quaestiones Lycurgeae. Halis Saxonum, 1870.
Fuller, A. L. De articuli in antiquis Graecis comoediis usu.
Leipzig, 1888.
5
6 /-v:^'</;-'.^ ■
GiLDERSLEEVE, B. L.
GUTTENTAG, I.
Helbing, R.
holzweissig, f.
Kallenberg, H.
Mayer, H.
Procksch, a.
Spieker, E. H.
Stolz, Fr.
r , r , ^ Bibliography,
Amer. Journ. of Philol. 2, 83 ff., 8, 218 ff., 9, 137 ff., 17,
319.
De Bubdito qui inter Lucianeos legi solet dialogo Tox-
aride. Berlin, 1860.
Ueber den Gebrauch des echten und sociativen Dativs
bei Herodot. Karlsruhe, 1898.
Ueber den sociativ-instrumentalen Gebrauch des griech.
Dativ bei Homer. Burg, 1885.
Commentatio critica in Herodotum. Berlin, 1884.
Jahresber. des philol. Vereins zu Berlin, 1897.
Observationes in Lycurgi oratoris usum dicendi.
Freiburg, 1889.
Ueber den Gebrauch des Artikels, insbesondere beim
Pradicat, Philol. 40, pp. 1-47.
Genitive Absolute in the Attic Orators, Amer. Journ. of
Philol. 6,310 ff.
Der attributive Gebrauch von avr6s beim sociativen
Dativ, Wiener Studien, vol. 20, p. 244 ff.
THE LIMITATIONS OF THE PREDICATIVE
POSITION IN GREEK.
A study of the limitations of the predicative position in Greek
calls for a brief treatment of the origin and historical development
of the Greek article.
Aristotle (Poetics, c. 21) is the first writer by whom the pro-
noun is referred to as a separate part of speech. He expressly
makes mention of the ovoaa, the prjaa,
the avvBea/jLOi;, and the apOpov, though
elsewhere he includes the last two under
o-vvSecr/jLO^. We do not know when the name avrwvvfjLia was
introduced. Schoemann's assumption, Die Lehre von den Rede-
theilen, p. 117, that it originated with the Alexandrian gram-
marians is not improbable. He is probably right, too, in assuming
that the separation of the pronoun from the article did not take
place later than the time of Aristarchus, the grammarian. It is
important to remember, however, that this separation was not
countenanced by the Stoics, who did not fail to perceive that the
article was in reality a degraded pronoun. Under the general
name of pronoun, they comprehended both pronoun and article.
The Stoic view of the nature of the article — that it is a degraded
pronoun — has won general acceptation.
In Homer 6 rj to is the commonest of the demonstrative pro-
nouns. It is a matter of great interest to the student of language
to observe the traces of the gradual weakening of the pronominal
force of 77 TO. Accompanying this loss is the growing use of
0VT09, oBe, and €Kelvo<^. The gradual weakening of the pronomi-
nal 6 7) TO is, however, only another way of characterising the
transition from pronoun to article. Vogrinz, Grammatik des
homerischen Dialektes, p. 197, points out one step in the devel-
opment of the article where the pronominal form and the noun to
7
8 The Limitations of the Predicative Position in Greek.
which it relates are separated merely by light particles. Cf., e. g.,
7] 8e vv fi'qrrjp (X 405), ol Si vv \aoi (A 382j, to, S^ . . . KrjXa
(A 383), ol Bk deoi (A 1), o 7 ^p«9 (E 308), rob U ol Saae, r^
Be ol oofjLot) (saepe). The following statistics for the pronominal and
articular use of 0, rj, to are quoted by Vogrinz (1. c.) from Stum-
mer (Ueber den Artikel bei Homer, Progr., Miinnerstadt, 1886,
p. 56). In the Iliad 0, 77, to is used as a pronoun 3,000 times, as
an article 218 times, i. e., in the ratio of 14:1; in the Odyssey it
is found as a pronoun 2,178 times, as an article 171 times, i. e., in
the ratio of 13:1. These statistics, as Vogrinz observes, hardly
justify us in claiming an advance in the use of the article. That
it began to be used with a greater degree of frequency in Homer
can be seen by an examination of the later portions of the Odyssey,
and in parts of other books. Vogrinz, p. 198, on the basis of
Stummer's investigation, illustrates freely the Homeric uses of the
article. Some of these may fitly be noted here. (1) With particu-
lar words : tolo uvukto^ (A 322, 7 388, cf) 62), rj ttXtjOv^ (B 278,
305), Tov 'r]VLO')(pv (^ 465), tov oXtjttjv {a- 333), tov /jlvOov (B 16,
1 55, 309, T 185), t^v yaaTepa {o- 380), ra Bcopa {X 339); (2) with
particular classes of words, as (a) cardinal numbers : t»}9 fjL€v Itj^
(TTixo'^ (n 173), Tr)v jjuev lav (f 435), ol Tpel^ (f 26), ol Be Bvco ctko-
TreXot (fi 73), rot? TrevTe vea<; (7 299) ; substantivised participles :
TOV ayovTa (^ 262), rw irpoij^ovTa ("^ 325); substantivised adjec-
tives : TO Kprj<yvov (A 106), tov Bvo-ttjvov {v 224), tov apiaTOv
(f 19), TO fiekav Bpv6<; (^ 12); ordinals: to TrpcjTov, to BevTepov,
etc. Cf. also to irdpo<^, to irpiv, to irpoaOev, to irdpoiOev.
Quintilian (Inst. Or. 1, 4, 19) says of the Latin language : Noster
sermo articulos non desiderat. With this stage corresponds, in the
main. Epic Greek which, as a rule, dispenses with the use of the
article. Epic use diverges from Attic at several points. We are
familiar with the classification of the article in Attic Greek as
particular and generic. Homeric usage is almost wholly confined
to the former. Vogrinz (p. 198) gives but two indisputable cases
of the latter, viz., tov ojulolov (H 53, p 218). Kriiger, Dial. 50, 4,
1 and 2, gives other cases which may be considered generic. The
use of the article with possessive significance — a not uncommon
phenomenon in Attic — is rarely, if at all, found. The substantive
generally suffices ; occasionally it is strengthened by the possessive
The Limitations of the Predicative Position in Greek. 9
pronoun. The three or four cases that may be cited are incon-
clusive. Cf. Kriiger, Dial. 50, 3, 6. There are a few examples
of the adjective in the predicative position relatively to the article.
The cases employed are the nominative and the accusative. The
commonest expression of this class is irolov rbv fjuvdov which occurs
seven times, all in the Iliad. Cf., further, Kriiger Dial. 50, 10, 1.
In passing to the function of the article in Attic Greek, the
writer would acknowledge his especial obligations to Kriiger among
the grammarians who have treated of this subject. In this depart-
ment of his work, Kiihner was in no small measure dependent on
Kriiger. Worthy of mention, too, is the excellent treatise of Dorn-
seiifen, De Articulo, etc., to which Kriiger was indebted for some
of his remarks on this subject. Viewed logically, the function of
the Attic article is to mark the object with which it is used as
definite and well-known. The cases, not a few, where no article
is used, are best explained as survivals of that earlier stage of the
language when the article had not yet come to maturity. Such are
€t? d(TTv, and the like. By reason of this definiteness of import,
it is naturally used with the subject, but omitted with the predicate.
It is found, however, in the predicate (1) in the case of certain
words with which the article fuses, e. g., Plato, Apol. 40 c: hvolv
'yap Odrepov ecrriv to reOvdvai and (2) where the two parts of the
sentence are logically convertible, e. g., Plato, Theaet. 145 D \ apov
TO fiavOdveiv iarlv to crocfxoTepov ry[yv6(r6ac irepl o fjuavOdvei Tt<; ;
(cf. Otto Eichhorst, Die Lehre des Apollonius Dysoolus vom Arti-
kel, Philol., vol. 38, p. 399 ff.). The salient uses of the article were
clearly understood by Apollonius Dyscolus. His classification was as
follows : — (1) KaT €^o)(^r]v, par excellence, e. g., o 7rot7]Trj<; = Homer;
(2) Kara fjuovaBiKrjv ktyjctlv, e. g., o ffaa-iX€v<^ crvv to5 crTpaTevfiaTL
— our possessive use ; (3) KaT avTo fiovov aTrXrjv dva(l>opdv. The
last is the commonest of all, and in it, as Apollonius saw, is to be found
the essential characteristic of the Greek article, viz., dva(l>opd. The
generic article was characterised by him by the word dopi(rTcoSco<i,
inasmuch as it was not limited, or defined, like the others.
Viewed rhetorically, the article distinguishes, the subject from
the predicate in accordance with the principle which has been
stated. While it may be true that it is not indispensable to a
language, as, e. g., Latin, it is invaluable as a means of gaining
10 The Limitations of the Predicative Position in Greek.
precision, e. g., ^eo? ^v 6 X0709 or vv^ t] rj/nepa iyevero. This is
clearly set forth by the Greek rhetorician, Theon, in his Progy-
mnasmata (Spengel, Rhetores Graeci, vol. II., p. 83). There he
says : TrpoaOeaei apOpwv ovKerc afi^l^oXo^ ylverau rj Xe^i^;.
The various positions which the adjective may assume relatively
to the article in Attic call for brief remark. The adjective may be
used either attributively or predicatively. The attributive position
is a threefold one : (1) r} o-i) oiKia (2) 97 olKia rj o-rj (3) olKia r) cnfj.
Of these, the first is the simplest and most natural. The second
is called the "oratorical," and carries with it 6yKo<^ (Aristotle,
Rhetoric 1407 b, 35-37). The third is not specifically referred
to by Aristotle. In the Orators it is the least frequent of the three,
and has been characterized by Prof Gildersleeve as the "slip-shod"
or "negligent" position. It "afiects to be easy and familiar."
(See his Justin Martyr A, 6, 7, and review of Merriam's Herodotus
in A. J. P., 6, 262, and A. J. P., 17, 518.) An investigation
of the relative frequency of the three positions in the Orators and
the Speeches of Thucydides, so iar as the category of the possessive
pronouns is concerned, enables the writer to make the following
statement. In Thucydides the first position is the normal one, the
second is exceptional (three times), the third is found eleven times.
In the Orators, the first position has, as a rule, the preference.
The second occurs about half as often. The third, however, is
very rare, there being but ten occurrences in the course of above
2,000 Teubner pages. The predicative position is ^ twofold one,
the adjective being found before or after both article and noun. It
is by no means restricted to the nominative or casus rectus ; for we
frequently find the genitive, dative, and accusative cases similarly
used, giving rise to what may be termed " oblique predication."
In studying oblique predication, it was found necessary for a
clear appreciation of the grammatical phenomena to take account
of the participle as well as the adjective,
^^xi^^x^^xT to the latter of which Donaldson, in his
PREDICATION. . -a ^' ^ a- ^ •
classitication 01 predicates as primary,
secondary, and tertiary, confined his view ; for the participle by
reason of its verbal force readily lends itself to the expression of
predication in the oblique cases, and the adjective has in this par-
ticular assumed the function of the participle. Boiling, The Epic
The Limitations of the Predicative Position in Greek. 11
and Attic Use of the Circumstantial Participle (Johns Hopkins
University Circulars, December, 1897), has well set forth the affin-
ity between the two in these words : " The adjective represents a
quality at rest, the participle represents a quality in motion, and
the difference between the two is a difference in the degree of
mobility.'' Not only, however, does the adjective assume the
function of the participle, but the participle in attribution sinks
to the level of the adjective. This degradation of the participle
is sufficiently familiar to students of English in such words, e. g.,
as *^ interesting,'' " charming," and the like, which are ordinarily
felt as adjectives.
The field of personal observation in this study of oblique predi-
cation has been limited to the Orators and Thucydides. Two
types in particular have formed the basis of this investigation.
They have been denominated " Adverbial-Dative Type of Predi-
cation " and " Prepositional Type of Predication."
The first explicit reference to the subject of oblique predication,
which has come under the writer's observation, appears in a disser-
tation written by S. Elias, Quaestiones Lycurgeae, Halis Saxonum,
1870. On p. 17 he has something to say of the predicative use of
the adjective in connection with an oblique case of the substantive.
He observes that the construction is found in all the Orators, but
that it is used oftener by some than by others. It is found, e. g.,
four times in Andocides — the fourth oration is included — three times
in Antiphon, four times in Hyperides, nine times in Dinarchus.
For the rest of the Orators, he contents himself with general state-
ments. He remarks that it occurs often in Demosthenes, oftenest
in Isocratrs, whose example is followed by Lycurgus.
The next reference to the same subject is made by H. Mayer,
Observationes in Lycurgi Oratoris Usum Dicendi, Friburgi, 1889.
On p. 33 ff., Mayer notes the marked fondness of Lycurgus for the
predicative position, as it is called, of the adjective. " Si enim,
quomodo collocata sint adiectiva, quaerimus, oratorem in praedi-
cativa quae dicitur collocatione adhibenda quasi exultare intellegi-
mus." He cites a number of examples from Lycurgus, and quotes
the figures for other Orators given by Elias in the dissertation
mentioned. There is added a remark on the stylistic effect of the
construction : " etiam tali adiectivorum collocatione plus ponderis
1 2 The Limitations of the Predicative Position in Greek.
orationem nancisci manifestum est." With this judgment, the
present writer is in accord.
It is quite evident from the figures given by Elias that he has
examined somewhat carefully the usage of certain of the Orators.
If one has regard merely to the number of occurrences, the state-
ment with respect to Demosthenes, Isocrates, and Lycurgus is cor-
rect as far as it goes; but looked at in relation to the bulk of Greek
which each Orator represents, the statement is far from correct.
A table of the usage of the Orators and Thucydides, in which
the speeches of Thucydides are separated from the narrative, is
subjoined, giving the number of predicative adjectives or parti-
ciples used by each writer. Only those orations generally con-
sidered genuine are included. In the case of Demosthenes, the
division of Blass (Dindorf's edition, revised by Blass, vol. i, pp.
45-6) has been followed.
Range of Oblique Predication.
Pred. Adjs.
and Pics. Teuhner pages. Percentage.
Lycurgus 33 45 .73
Thucydides (Speeches)... 70 125 .56
" (Narrative). 81 473 .17
Isocrates 189 508 .37
Dinarchus 11 54 .20
Lysias 28 200 .14
Pseudo-Lysias 19 17 1.12
Isaeus 16 138 ,12
Antiphon 11 99 .11
Demosthenes 73 737 .10
Pseudo-Demosthenes.... 45 521 .09
Hyperides 4 44 .09
Aeschines 17 188 .09
Andocides 3 67 .04
Pseudo-Andocides 2 12 .17
An examination of this table yields the following results : —
Pseudo-Lysias, Lycurgus, Thucydides (Speeches), Isocrates, and
Dinarchus stand out from the rest in the preference they give to
this construction. At the opposite pole stands Andocides, to whom
The Limitations of the Predicative Position in Greek. 13
the construction was in no wise congenial. Of the remaining Ora-
tors, we may say generally that they pursued a middle course. A
sharp difiPerence is noticeable between the usage of Thucydides in
his speeches and in his narrative. Especially striking is the large
use in the Epitaphios of Pseudo-Lysias.
The foregoing results warrant the conclusion that the true home
of oblique predication is not in simple narrative which keeps close
to the language of everyday life ; on the contrary, it is quite with-
drawn from that sphere, and is found in language which aims to
be elevated, weighty, impressive, and, in a word, strives after
effect. Hence the marked preference for it in that much-discussed
specimen of epideictic oratory, the Epitaphios. Hence the favor
it finds with Thucydides, when he is striving to be impressive.
Hence, too, the fondness for it shown by Lycurgus, and, in a less
pronounced manner, by Isocrates and Dinarchus. Hence, on the
other hand, the marked avoidance of it by Andocides, who was not
swayed by the schools of rhetoric, and was, perhaps, the least artistic
of the Orators.
The following is the tabular statement of the results reached in
an examination of the range of the adverbial-dative and the prepo-
sitional type of predication.
Adverbial-Dative Type.
Pred. Adjs.
and Pics. Teubner pages. Percentage.
Thucydides (Speeches)... 5 125 .04
" (Narrative)., 12 473 .025
Lycurgus 1 45 .022
Isocrates 6 508 .012
Aeschines 2 188 .010
Isaeus 1 138 .007
Demosthenes 2 737 .0027
Pseudo-Demosthenes 1 521 .002
Pseudo-Lysias 1 17 .06
Lucian 76 1268 .06
Dion Chrysostomus 12 708 .017
Dion Cassius 10 658 .015
Diod. Siculus 6 444 .013
14
The Limitations of the Predicative Position in Greek.
Prepositional Type.
Thucydides (Speeches)...
" (Narrative).
Dinarchus
Demosthenes
Pseudo-Demosthenes
Aesehines
Andocides
Isocrates
Antiphon
Lysias
Pseudo-Ly sias
Lucian
Dion Cassius
Dion Chrysostomus
Diod. Siculus.
Pred. Adjs.
and Ptcs.
Teubner pages.
Percentage.
7
125
.056
3
473
.006
2
54
.037
16
737
.022
2
521
.004
4
188
.021
1
67
.015
7
508
.014
1
99
.010
1
200
.005
1
17
.06
94
1268
.074
15
658
.023
11
708
.016
2
444
.005
These tables yield the following results : —
Half of the Orators are not represented at all in the adverbial-
dative type. Thucydides shows the same decided preference for
these constructions in his speeches as compared with his narrative.
Especially is this to be seen in the prepositional type, where the
proportion is above 9:1. Lycurgus is the foremost of the Orators
in his use of the adv.-dative type. Except in one possible instance,
he seems to have avoided the prepositional type. This may be due
to the small amount of his writing which has come down to our
time. Four of the six examples of the adv.-dat. type in Isocrates
are found in one particular section. Aesehines, while using both
types with comparative frequency, prefers the prepositional type.
Especially marked, so far as variety of usage goes, is the prefer-
ence of Demosthenes for the prepositional type. Its ratio to the
adv.-dat. is about 7:1. With respect to the usage of Demosthenes,
it may be remarked that he uses the prep, type eleven times in his
public orations (ten of them being in Forensic speeches), four times
in his private orations. Taking bulk into consideration, the public
The Limitations of the Predicative Position in Greek. 1 5
and private orations cannot be differentiated on this score. The
plain style of Lysias avoids the dat. type altogether and uses the
prep, type once only, but that in an effective passage, in the 12th
oration, where Lysias himself is the speaker. The Epitaphios
stands out from all the rest.
It is interesting to compare the usage of post-classic Greek as
seen in the writings of Lucian. In the dat. type Lucian outdoes
all except Pseudo-Lysias, while in the prep, type even Pseudo-
Lysias is not to be excepted. This excessive use of oblique predi-
cation is the result of a desire on the part of that writer to impart
elegance to his style. Cf. Prof. Gildersleeve in A. J. P. 17, 518.
Dion Cassius and Dion Chrysostomus, as compared with Lucian,
are very much nearer the norm.
As to the true sphere of the adv. -dat. and the prep, type, the
writer believes that he is justified in affirming that, of the two, the
second strikes a decidedly higher note. The first undoubtedly
takes its rise in the language of everyday life. Demosthenes em-
ploys it when characterising his opponents, and only in a contempt-
uous sense. Thucydides, it is true, gives it a higher tone than it
usually has by withdrawing it from its ordinary associations and
transferring it, as a rule, to the naval sphere. The second, on the
other hand, is distinctly elevated in tone, though it draws near, in
the hands of certain writers, to the language of ordinary discourse.
Demosthenes makes use of it with telling effect in passages intended
to be impressive. Lucian does not seem to have appreciated this
difference of tone between the two types. They are almost alike
to him. Thucydides, by his marked preference for the construction
in his speeches, and his corresponding avoidance of it in his narra-
tive, shows that he regarded it as more elegant.
A class of participles, having the value in translation of an
abstract noun, call for separate treat-
of A^sStToun. --t '-- These form but a small
group in the Orators.
Antiphon, 5, 35: hi avrov rov o-cDfiaro^ airoWv jjuevov.
Andocides, 3, 27 : €k yap rov TroXe/jLOv ')(^pov taO evro^.
Lysias, 4, 10: eK ttj^ avOpMirov ^acravi^o/jbev7j<;.
Lycurgus, 30 : eV roU AecoKpdrov^; olKeiai^ koX OepairaCvai^
^aaav taOelac.
16 The Limitations of the Predicative Position in Greek,
Demosthenes, 18, 57: airo tovtoov i^era^o fxevcov,
'^ 47,47: Ik ttj^; dvdpcoTrov (3 aa av i^o jxevr]^.
" 24, 98: 776/31 \rjfyovT a rov eviavTOV.
This use of the participle is by no means restricted to the oblique
cases. For the nominative, cf.
Isocrates, 14, 49: o r^ap kolvo^; ^lo^ aTroXwXo)? tSta? ra?
eXTTtSa? eKaarov tj/jlwv 6')(eiv 7r€7roL7}K€v.
Demosthenes, 54, 12: vvv Be tovt eacoae to alfju a'jro')(^cop7jo-av.
This construction goes back to Homer. Cf.
N 37—8 : 6(j)p^ ejjLTreBov avOt jjuevoiev \ voa-Tr^aavra ava/cTa.
One type of this construction, viz., the predic. ptc. in the sociative
dative with a/jua and the like, runs through Greek literature from
the very first. Tycho Momrasen, Beitrage zu der Lehre von den
griechischen Prapositionen, Berlin, 1895, p. 65, notes that Homer
uses it in three expressions only, of the break of day and of the
setting of the sun.
cifjL rjol ^aivo fjbevri(f>Lv 8 407, f 266, o 396, etc.
ail r)€\i(p aViOVT i /j, 429, ifr 362, X 136.
dfjba 8' rjekim KaraBvvTi ir 366, A 592, S 210.
Herodotus goes beyond Epic usage, and uses afxa quite generally
for " with." See Mommsen, p. 360.
Hdt. 2, 44: afxa ^vp(p oIkl^o jjuevrj.
" 3, 86 : afjua rw liTTrcp tovto TrotijaavTo.
" 1, 8 : dfjLa Be klOcjvi e kBvo fxevcp.
With these participles, Helbing, Ueber den Gebrauch des echten
und sociativen Dativs bei Herodot, Karlsruhe, 1898, p. 80, rightly
compares
Hdt. 3, 134: av^o/Mevay yap rm o-cofjuari crvvav^ovTai etc.
Thucydides uses a//,a with the dative much in the same way as
Xenophon does later. 42 out of 53 exx. are time-limitations. See
Mommsen, p. 383. e. g.,
Thuc. 2, 2 : dfia rjpL ap^o fJiev(d.
" 2, 6: dfjua yap ry ecroBq) y cyvo jxevT).
^' 3, 1 : dfjua toS aLTq> aKfid^ovTL.
Cf. Aristophanes, Eq. 520 : dfjua ral<; TroXtalf; Kar toixrai,^.
In Xenophon, besides the Epic usage, we find kindred expres-
sions :
Xen. Anab. 7, 7, 39 : avv tol<; 6eoh elBocr l.
The lAmitations of the Predicative Position in Greek, 17
Xen. Cyropaedia 8, 7, 6 : crvv roS ^poz^o) irpolovn,
Cf. Mommsen, p. 364.^
In addition to the examples of the particular type just noticed,
the following may be cited as illustrative :
Hdt. 1, 34: yLtera he X6\(ova ol'x^o fievov,
" 2, 22 : dirb tt) fc o fiivr] <; '^tovo^.
" '^ eVl Xiovi IT ecr V arj.
Thuc. 1 , 100 : TO 'x^copiov at 'Ez^i/ea ohol kt t ^6 fievov.
" 2, 49 : /jL€ra ravra XaxpTjaavra.
" 6, 3 : fjuera XvpaK0vo-a<; o I k i a 6 € l (ra<^.
" 7,42: Bta Tr}v AeKeXecav r e L')(^i^o fjuevTjv.
Xen. An. 7, 7, 12 : 97 %«/)<x iro p 6 ov fjuevrj eKvirei avrov.
Lucian, Vera Hist. 2, 43 : e/c roO vSaT0<; h tecrrwr o<^,
*' " " 2, 5 : airo tmv KXahcov k cv o v fju ev cov.
Dion Cassius, 58, 27, 2 : Sia rov SpdorvWov (To^corara rov
To^eptov /juera'x^eLpco-d/juevov.
J. E. Sandys in a note to Dem. 21, 49, where he says that iravr^
i^rjTao-jjLev^ is equivalent to iravTcnv e^€Ta(Tc<; and ravr d/jbeXovfiev^
to Tovrcov djueXeiaj remarks that it is characteristic of Greek and
Latin to prefer to use a passive participle in agreement with a sub-
stantive, instead of using the corresponding noun followed by the
genitive. Marchant, in a note to Thuc. vii. 28, says that the idiom
is less common in Greek than in Latin. This statement in regard
to Latin requires severe modification. Its beginnings in Latin are
very modest, and certainly in no wise prophetic of its development.
Rhetoric became its foster-parent, and Livy and Tacitus evinced a
predilection for it. See Schmalz, Lateinische Syntax, 2d ed., p.
439. For the Greek side, see Gildersleeve in A. J. P., 13, 258 ff.,
19, 463, if., and 20, 352, ff., and Stahl in Rh. M. 54, 1 and 3.
In a number of cases which might be cited in this connection,
the plasticity of the participle admits of varied conception. These
consequently have not been considered.
^ The usage of a/xa in the Orators is very restricted. See a Programm by L.
Lutz, Die Casus-Adverbien bei den attischen Eednern, Wiirzburg, 1891, p. 33.
No case occurs where the predicative participle is expressed. Five out of sixteen
cases are found in Antiphon, a representative of the older Attic.
18 The Limitations of the Predicative Position in Greek.
The Greek dative, unlike the Latin dative, which is purely per-
sonal and is not governed by a preposition, is <a mixed or syncre-
tistic case. The elements which have
TYPE OF PREDICATION, ^^^^v regarded as three in number.
They are the true dative^ such as we
find in Latin, the locative^ and the instrumental. These three have
become fused in such a way as to make it very difficult at times to
determine which conception was present, or, at least, uppermost in
the mind of the Greek. The situation, however, is made less com-
plicated, and greater unity is seen to prevail amid seeming diversity,
if what is generally conceived as instrumental is conceived as soci-
ative or comitative. The idea that means is only a species of
accompaniment is presented in a convincing manner by Professor
Gildersleeve (yLtera and crvv in A. J. P. 8, 218 ff.), who, in speaking
of the language of Homer, says : " There was no difference in con-
ception between avv Tev^^^^ ^^^ ^^^ ^^oS. The distinction is
purely modern. What we regard as subordinate, as a mere append-
age, was not such to the primitive man. The man's weapons,
horses, chariot, were an extension of his individuality, and the
feeling is by no means dead, as is attested by the proper names
given to arms, to coaches, to vessels, and by the affectionate femi-
nine pronoun so often employed in familiar English of utensils of
all kinds.''
The sociative dative begins very simply in Homer, and at the
same time quite naturally. The writer is in accord with the view
of the genesis of this dative which was presented recently by Fr.
Stolz, Der attributive Gebrauch von avTo^ beim sociativen Dativ,
Wiener Studien, 20, p. 244 ff. Stolz appears to have overlooked
the fact that meritorious work had already been done in this field
by Holzweissig, Ueber den sociativ-instrumentalen Gebrauch des
griechischen Dativ bei Homer, Burg, 1885. The dative in Homer,
in and by itself, sufficed to express accompaniment. Holzweissig
and Stolz give examples of this. We may cite :
cl>a(rrydvq> dt^a<; (E 81, K 456, 6 88).
dta-o-cov S €7%et (A 484).
XiriTOLf; dtacrwv (P 460).
TolaLV eir€LT rjiacrov (S 506).
The Limitations of the Predicative Position in Greek. 19
The sociative sense of the simple dative survives in the subse-
quent literature. As Holzweissig points out, it appears most un-
mistakably in prose when the dative is used with the names of
persons in military expressions, e. g. :
Hdt. 5, 99: ol 'Adyvacoi diriKearo etKOo-i vr^vai.
Thuc. 8, 38 : ol KeK rrjf; Aeafiov ^AOrjvaloi, ijBrj Sca^effrjfco-
T€<; €<; Tr]v Xtoi^ rfj (tt par ta.
Ps.-Lys. 2, 32 : elSore^i 8' ore . . . iirtirXevo-avTe^^ ;^tXta^9
vavcrlv ep7]fjL7]v rrjv iroXiv XrjyjrovraL.
Cf. Helbing, p. 84 ff., for a list of similar expressions in Herodotus.
In considering the sociative sense of the simple dative, it will
be helpful to notice in this connection one of the most interesting
and striking phenomena of Greek with which, moreover, we are,
in a measure, familiar. It is the use of the dative with avro^ to
express accompaniment. Monro, Homeric Grammar, p. 138, note,
remarks that in such a phrase as avrolf; o^eXolac (f 77), which he
explains " with the meat sticking to the spits as before," the soci-
ative sense is emphasised by the addition of avToi<;, and adds that,
without such an addition, there would generally be nothing to
decide between the diiferent possible meanings of the dative, and
consequently a preposition {avv or afjua) would be needed. But,
after all, if avT6<; is dropped, all that is lost is the emphasis which
it imparted to the expression. This has been made sufficiently
clear by Stolz (1. c). A further cause for misconception has been
the occasional use o^ crvv along with avroq in the same construction.
This has led Kriiger, Dial. 48, 15, 16, and other scholars to the
wrong conclusion that we have an ellipsis of avv in those cases
where it does not occur. Holzweissig (1. c.) remarks that the mere
proportion of occurrences, in Homer, of avT6<; with the dative, and
of (Tvv followed by avT6<; with the dative, shows that the form with-
out the preposition is the original one. The reason why avv is
found along with the dative, he observes, is that the dative has
assumed the functions of the dativus comitativus. Had he gone
further and considered this as applicable to the dative unaccom-
panied by avTOf;, he would have anticipated Stolz at this point.
The usage of avro^; in this idiom for different authors is given
by Mommsen, Beitrage, p. 62. It occurs in Homer thirteen times,
20 The Limitations of the Predicative Position in Greek.
(jvv being added in three instances. Mommsen's theory, which
the writer is unable to accept, is that avrt^^ like gvv^ serves to raise
the weak instrumental to a sociative. The usie of avTo^ with the
singular is peculiar to comedy and Homer. The tragic use is con-
fined to the plural, and, as a general rule, is concerned with things.
In Aristophanes (Mommsen, p. 649), it is used only of things, but
in both singular and plural, and with or without the article. The
use of the article is restricted to comedy and prose. For comedy, cf.
Aristophanes, Yespae, 170 : avrolai roh Kavdr)\iOL<;.
" " 1449: avTolarc rol^ KavddpoL<;.
" Equites, 849 : avTolai toI<; iropira^iv.
" Nubes, 1 302 : avTol<; rpo')(ol<; toI<; aolaL koX
^vvcopLaiV.
" Ranae, 560 : avroU roU TaXdpoi<;.
Eupolis, Arj/jbOL 37 : avralo-t Tai<^ KvrjfxaLaiV.
For this last example, cf. Meineke, ii, p. 475 if., Kock, Frag.
Com. Gr. i, p. 284, and Henri Weil in the Eevue Critique, vol.
12, (N. S.), 1881, p. 293 ff. Weil, in brief, makes this expression
equivalent to avTalai rai^; pl^aiatv. .
Turning to prose, note
Herodotus, 6, 32: koI rd*; 7r6\ca<i iveTrl/jLTrpao-av avTolcri toI<;
IpolcTL.
Bekker struck out the article here, and was followed by Kriiger.
In a number of passages from Herodotus, the MSS vary as to the
use or omission of the article. Kallenberg, Commentatio critica
in Herodotum, Berlin, 1884, p. 15 (cf Helbing, p. 86), after an
examination of the passages in question, arrives at the conclusion
that Herodotus was not uniform in his usage, but sometimes ad-
mitted, sometimes omitted, the article. The principle that Kallen-
berg has laid down (Jahresber. des philol. Yereins zu Berlin, 1897,
p. 204 ff.), in the course of an excellent contribution on the article
with 7ra9, ovto<;, eKelvo^, and oSe in Herodotus, that the article is
used because of the noun with which it is associated and not because-
of the pronoun, is applicable also to avro^;. The omission of the
article in prose can be explained, as has already been indicated, by
Epic survival, e. g., avrolai dvBpdo-i,, which, as Kallenberg remarks,
seems to be a crystallized expression used first by Herodotus, then
The Limitations of the Predicative Position in Greek. 21
hy Thucydides and Xenophon. Only one instance of auro? with the
sociative dative was observed in the Orators, viz., in Demosthenes,
22, 68 : avTat<; 7reSat9.
But words may occupy the predicative position so-called, with-
out at the same time conveying a predicative signification. Such
the writer believes to be the case with avrof; and certain other
words, as aKpo<;, jjLeao^, etc. They are simply appositive. Of
datives which undoubtedly carry a predicative signification, the
following may be cited by way of illustration :
Hdt. 6, 8 : TreTrXrjpco/jLevyai, rfja-t vrjvorl Traprjcrav ol "lojz^e?.
Thuc. 1, 6 : avetfievy rfj BcaiTr}.
Aristoph. Eq. 280 : /cevrj rfj Koikia.
Plato, Legg. 880 A : 's^rtkal^ ral^; x^patv.
Xen. Anab. 1, 8, 1 : IBpovvrc to5 'ittitw.
" Hell. 3, 4, 11 : (jyacBp^ rco TrpoacoTrq).
The sociative, rather than the instrumental, sense of such datives
as the foregoing is now recognized by Kiihner-Gerth, Ausfuhrliche
Grammatik der griech. Sprache, §425, 5, as a comparison with the
preceding edition will readily show. "Attendant Circumstances,"
" Manner,'^ and the like, are simply special manifestations of the
same dative.
It may be remarked at this point that the participle employed is
generally the perfect, occasionally the present. The reason for the
predominance of these particular tenses is, in the writer's opinion,
that given by Boiling (The Participle in Hesiod — Oath. Univ.
Bull., vol. III., p. 466, Washington, 1897) for the Homeric use of
participles in direct attribution. " The reason for the predominance
of these tenses (i. e., the present and the perfect) is that lasting
actions are the ones that lend themselves most readily to attribu-
tion, and these are to be found either in the continued action of
the present or in the perfect as denoting attitude and resulting con-
dition." The relation of the participle to the adjective, so far as
numbers go, is in the Orators 1:12, in Lucian 1 : 6.
A widely different view of these datives is that of Classen who,
in the course of his remarks on the expression areXel rfj viKrj
{Thuc. 8, 27, 6), notes that we have here a '^ Dative Absolute," of
which he has given several examples from Homer, Beobachtungen
22 The Limitations of the Predicative Position in Greek,
tiber den hom. Sprg., p. 155. Compare, further, his notes on?
Thucydides, 1, 6, 3 and 2, 100, 6, which bear in the same direc-
tion. Monro, Homeric Grammar, p. 213, recognizes in a number
of these examples from Homer an approach to a " Dative Abso-
lute.^' He characterizes them as extensions or free applications by
the help of the participle of the true dative {dat. eth.). ClassenV
use of the term '^Dative Absolute '^ has received merited strictures
from Spieker, Genitive Absolute in the Attic Orators, A. J. P., 6,
p. 315. The proper point of view, in the writer's judgment, from
which to regard these datives is given by Kiihner-Gerth, vol. ri.
§423, 18, e, f, and g. See also W5lfflin's Archiv, vol. 8, p. 48 ff.
Having treated of the origin of the adverbial-dative type of
predication, the writer proposes to set forth here the usage of the
classical period, with the historians,
ADV.-DAT. TYPE. especially Thucydides, and the Orators
(a) Classical Greek. ^ -^ . / . , -p ^
as the basis or this study. By way of
comparison and contrast, the usage of post-classical Greek will be
noted, with Lucian as the model for this period, and an endeavor will
be made to indicate any deviations from the norm of classical usage.
The sociative, or comitative, dative may conveniently be subdi-
vided into (1) dative of military accompaniment, (2) dative of
attendant circumstances, (3) dative of means and instrument. Some
of the examples considered under one of these heads might very
well be considered under another.
(1) Dative of Military Accompaniment: —
Hdt. 6, 8, 1 : TreTrXr] pco/jbivrjo-i Trjac vrjvcrl iraprjaav
ol "1 0)1/69.
Thuc. 4, 55, 1 : aOpoa fxev ovSa/juov ry Bvudfjuet avrerd-
^avTo.
lb. 6, 34, 5: roS Ta')(^vvavTovvTi dO po(OTep(p kov(J)l~
aavTe<; Trpoa^aXotev.
lb. 6, 37, 1: fjueya <ydp to koI avratf; Tat<; vaval kov-
(j)ac(; ToaovTov ifkovv Bevpo KOficaOrjvai,.
lb. 6, 43, 1 : (roo-fjBe ijSr) rjj Trapaa Kevfj ^KOtjvolol
dpavT6<;).
lb, 8, 80, 1: dO p6ai<i ral^ vavalv . . . ov/c dvravijyovTO^
lb. 8, 104, 5: do-Oeviai koI Steariraa/juivacfi rai^;^
vaval Kadia-TavTO .
The Limitations of the Predicative Position in Greek, 23
The foregoing examples exhaust the list of datives of military
accompaniment of this type. None were found in the Orators,
where their occurrence would only be incidental. Although Herod-
otus frequently uses the sociative dative, the example cited above
is the only one of this type. Helbing, p. 84 ff., has overlooked it.
Similar datives from Xenophon may be noticed here:
Anab. 1, 7, 14 : a-vvTeTay/jbiva) rcS (TTparevfiarL.
lb. 4, 2, 1 1 : opOiOLf; tol^ X6')(^oc<;.
Hell. 1, 5, 14 : Bc€(T7rapfjL€vac<; Tal<; vavaL
In comedy may be noted :
Aristophanes, Acharu., 686 : crTpoyyv\oi,<; roU prj^aai.
" Ranae, 903 : avTOTrpifjuvoc^i TOi<; Xoyoto-iv.
" Equites, 205 : dyKvXai'; Tal<; ')(6pa-iv.
(2) Dative of Attendant Circumstances : —
Thuc. 1, 6, 3: koL avet/juevrj ry hiairr) 69 to Tpv(f>6p(0'
repov fierecrryaav.
lb. 1, 120, 5: ivdv/juelraL jap ovSel<; o/jboia rj) Trlo-rei,
Kol epyo) e'Tr6^ep')(erai.
lb. 2, 38, 2: /jujSev olKeiorepa rfj airoXavaeu ra avrov
ayaOa yiyvoybeva KapirovaOai.
lb. 2, 100, 2: Kol rfj ctWrj irapacr /cevfj KpeiaaovL.
lb. 3, 38, 1 : yap iraOoov roS Bpdaavrc d^^Xvrepa ttj
opyfi iire^epx^Tac.
lb. 6, 55, 3: ttoWq) to5 irep lovt l rod da(f}a\ov<; Kare-
/cpdrrjae.
Classen sees in the first and last examples an equivalent for the
genitive absolute construction. The dative point of view, as has
already been remarked, forbids such a comparison. In the second
example, the MSS read o/juota, which some editors adopt. The edi-
tors are warranted in making the slight change of accent. In the
last case, we have a favorite Thucydidean use of the neuter parti-
ciple. It is equivalent to ttoXXtj rrj Trepcovcrla.
The usage of the Orators is as follows :
Pseudo-Lysias 2, 18 : eXevdepat^ ral^ i/rup^a?? iiroXt-
TevovTO.
24 The Limitations of the Predicative Position in Greek.
Isocrates 15, 126 : avaireTTTaixevaLfs avrov ehe')(pvTo Tal^
7ruXat9. ♦
Isaeus 6, 59: XoLhoprjo-eraL fjbeydXrj rfj (jycovfj.
Lycurgus 145 : 6 ^rfKo^orov rrjv 'Attlktjv elvau (f>avepa
rfj -x^r ?7 <5f) ft) KaTa'\jr7)<l)L(Td/jb€vo<;.
Demosthenes 19, 199: ipet Xafjuir pa rfj (l)cov7J.
lb. 57, 11 : il3\a(r(f)r)/jLet Kari/jLOv ra')(v koX iroWa koX
fJUerydXr) T7J (j)C0V7J.
lb. 43, 82 : ^avepa rfj -x^t^c^oj €'\jr'r}(j>[(TaTO.
Aeschines 1, 19 : 09 ovBe KaOapw ScaXeyerac to3 o-ay/jbar l.
lb. 2, 7: dXX' tcrrj ry evvoia dKOvovTa<^.
The position of dvaireTrraixevai^, in the second example, is due
to Isocrates' avoidance of hiatus. The contemptuous use of (f)(ovr}
by Isaeus and Demosthenes is noteworthy. In the case of Pseudo-
Demosthenes 43, 82, Blass revises Dindorf's text by striking out
the article. He has MS warrant (S F Q). The reason he assigns
^^At metaphorice hie usurpatur i/r^Jc^o?/' does not, in the writer's
opinion, carry any weight. In Aeschines 1, 19, for o-dofiarL there
is a V. 1. (TTOfjuaTc. There is no doubt, however, of the oblique
predication. With io-y rfj evvoLa of Aeschines 2, 7, may be com-
pared ofjboia rfi iricTTei of Thucydides 1, 120.
Especially to be noted are the substantives in the foregoing list.
They are such words as -yjrvxv* <t>(ovi], '\lrrj(f)0(}, crcofia, evvoia. The
list is important for this reason, that it gives us the key to the
true home of the construction we are studying. Further verifica-
tion will be found in the pages following. The adverbial-dative
type of predication centres round the body and its parts. The
principle of analogy gives the construction a wider range.
The article in each of the examples just cited may be considered
as a weakened or fainter possessive. (Cf. Kriiger, Sprachlehre 50^
2, 3). The Attic Greek was wont to use the article in character-
ising various objects with which he stood in some personal relation,
where we generally prefer the possessive pronoun. Our English
idiom requires the omission of the possessive in a number of cases.
For instance, we should not say ' with his voice loud,' but ^ in a
loud voice.' We may say, however,— and this helps us to under-
stand the idiom — * with his eyes open,' ^ with his fists clenched,' etc.
The Limitations of the Predicative Position in Greek, 25
(3) Dative of Means and Instrument : —
Thuc. 2, 49, 5: rfj BLyfrr) airavarw ^vveypfxevoL.
lb. 2, 76, 4: a^iecrav rrjv Sokov ')(^a'\apalf; Tal<; dXv-
crea L . .
lb. 7, 36, 3 : aTepicfyoc^ fcal Tra^ecr^, 7rp09 KOtXa koI
aaOevrj Trapep^oi^re?, rot? i fju^oXoLf; .
Of the Orators, Isocrates is the only one represented under this
head.
Isocr. 10, 23: av yap [xovov rolf; 6ir\oc<; i/coo-fi^o-avro
irapaTrXrjo- Loi,<; etc.
lb. 15, 47: Kal yap rfj Xe^et iroLrjTLKwrepa Kal
TTOiKcXcorepa ra? 7rpd^6t,<i BrjXovcrt ....
en Se ral<^ dWai,<; lBeai<; iin^ave -
arepat^ Kal TrXeioa- iv okov rov \6yov
BcocKova-LV.
In the first of these examples from Isocrates, the position of
TrapairXr^a-LOL^ is evidently due to the desire of avoiding hiatus.
The second shows a carefully studied and symmetrical arrangement
of the different parts of the sentence.
All the examples of the sociative dative in oblique predication
found in Herodotus, Thucydides and the Orators, have now been
considered. A few more datives involving the same principle, but
not sociative, may be noted at this point.
Thuc. 2, 100: avrov^ iroWa'TrXacrim roS ofjuiXcp e?
KLvBvvov KaOiaTaaav.
Some conceive this as dative of cause ; others as dative of the
indirect object.
Thuc. 1, 30: /^e^/o^ ov KopivOioi, irepnovTi rco Oepet
'n'6fi'^avT6<; vav^ Kal crTpartdv.
This is the dative of time. With it has been compared
Xen. Hell. 3, 2, 25 : irepuovTL tm iviavrS.
Jowett (Thuc. 1, 30, note) claims that the cases are not exactly
parallel.
Thuc. 1, 117, 1: dcfypaKTO) tS arrpaTOTreSo) iirLire-
a-OVTEfi.
26 The Limitations of the Predicative Position in Greek.
lb. 2, 39, 3: aOpoa re ry Swdfjuei rjfjLcov ovSelf; ttg)
7ro\efito<; iverv')(e.
lb. 4, 122, 5 : T§ Kara yrjv AaKe^aifiovicov lcr')(^vi dvco^e-
Xel 'm(TT€vovT6<;.
lb. 7, 39, 2 : otto)? .... /cat BcoXljov av6i<; kol avOrj/juepov
air poaho KrjTOL<; toI<; ^A67}vaioi<; i'Tri')(€L-
paxro.
These are datives of the indirect object, with which the predica-
tive adjective stands in agreement, and are not to be confounded
with the sociative dative. It is not always easy to decide which
kind of dative we have, as, e. g., in the instance cited above under
dative of military accompaniment (Thuc. 4, 55, 1). If it refers to
the Peloponnesians, we have, undoubtedly, the dative of military-
accompaniment, in other words, the sociative dative. If the
Athenians are referred to, we have the dative of the indirect
object. Jowett prefers the former, Kriiger the latter, inter-
pretation.
The following datives in the Orators may be noted :
Antiphon 3^6: TroXeyu-twrcS tovtov ^iXec TrepcTrecrcov.
lb. 5, 12: dv(o fioT o i<; 7rc(TT6V(TavTa<; tol<; fxaprv povcr l.
Lysias 32, 14: eTnTv^ovra^i i K^effXr] fievo) rw ^l^Xlw.
Isocrates 8, 104: ofioiaL^; Tal<; av fi(j)opal^ irepLeireaov,
Aeschines 3, 146 : (j^epcov .... rbv klvBvvov aTrapacr K€v<p
rfj iroXei.
These are all, likewise, datives of the indirect object, with which
the predicative adjective or participle stands in agreement.
Lucian, who is generally conceded to be the best of the Atticists,
has been made the basis of this study, and his usage is instructive
ADV-DAT TYPE ^^^ *^® V^vioA. One cannot fail to
(6) Post-Classical Greek, ^o^i^^/ ^^ ^^^^ Lucianic usage of the
sociative-dative type, the salient fact, to
which attention has already been called, that it has, first and chiefly,
to do with the body and its parts. But, looking deeper than this
general resemblance, it will be seen that, while he observes the
letter of the law, he kills the spirit. The Attic Greek used it in
circumstances justifying its use. The Atticist paid no regard to
circumstances. With him, it is simply affectation.
The Limitations of the Predicative Position in Greek. 27
In classifying the datives, it is found that, as in the Orators, so
in Lucian, the dative of mih'tary accompaniment finds no scope.
There remain, then, the dative of attendant circumstances and the
dative of means and instrument. Here, too, the classification, it
must be premised, is one of convenience, and is more or less
arbitrary. No attempt was made to discriminate the genuine
from the spurious dialogues.
(1) Dative of Attendant Circumstances : —
Lucian, Nigrinus 4 : arevel koL dvaireTrrafievr) rfj '^jrvxv*
" Timon 9 : fjueyaXy rfj (^(ovfj (saepe).
" lb. 41 : avaireirrafjievoL^^ rol^i KoXiroif;.
" Dial. Deor. 20, 6 : ro) Tpa^rjXw airea-TpajjL^evw.
" Dial. Mar. 4, 3 : ave(p<yiJbevoi(; roU ocftOdXfjboU.
" Dial. Mort. 21, 1 ; arpeirrw too TrpoaooTra).
" Menippus 9 : r/pefiata rfj (j^tcvfj.
" lb. 18 : rpa')(eia kol aTrrjvel rfj cficovfj. (Cf. Bis
Accus. 31, and De Morte Peregr. 3.)
" De Merc. Cond. 34 : XeTrrfj ry cj^oyvy.
" Hermotimus 1 : fjua/tpS roS %poz^«.
" Zeuxis 4 : vireaTokfievr) rfj oirXy.
" Quom. hist, conscr. 1 : XiirapeZ tg5 TrvperS.
" " 45 : icj^LTTTTOV 6xOVfJL€V7J TOT€ Tj)
ryVCO/JLTJ.
" Eunuchus 11 : '\jrvxp(p toS IBpcoTi,.
" Amores 1 3 : \LTTapol<i rol^ 'yeLXeaLv.
'* lb. 36 : VTrearaX/iiivq) rS Trj<; (fxovrjf; TOV(p.
" lb. 37 : ryv/jbVQ) To3 Xoyo).
" lb. 52 : IXapM to3 TrpoacoTra).
" Lucius 47 : eiravOova-rj rfj rpcx^L.
" Gallus 6 : dv6(py6(Ti toI<; 6(^6aXfiol<;.
** Bis Accus. 10 : '\fnXS rLp.rj(TavTe(; ro5 Kpor(p.
" De Parasito 49 : <l>acBp(o rS Trpoa-coTrtp. (Cf. Cronos.
16.) W . ,
" Philopseudes 24 : irivapa koX avxH^^f^V^ '^V ^^X^V-
" Cal. non tem. cred. 24: IXapm koX kco^ilk^ tS Trpo-
(TcoTrq).
*^ Navigium 16 : iroXXS to5 yeXcoTi.
28 The Limitations of the Predicative Position in Greek.
Lucian, Dial. Meretr. 4, 5 : eTnrpo'Xfp Ty yXcoTrrj.
" De morte Peregr. 32 : fivpio) tc3 TrXrjdec.
" Fugitivi 10 : arevicn tol<; 6<f>6a\/iLOL^.
" lb. 33 : pVTTcoarj irpoaeTt koX jvvaiK6ia rjj irirTr].
With a very few exceptions, the substantives in the foregoing
list belong to the class already described. fieydXr) rfi (f^covfj is
especially frequent. Demosthenes used Xafiirpa also in this con-
nection. Lucian seems to ring all the changes which the construc-
tion admits of. This is suggestive of Lucian's method.
(2) Dative of Means and Instrument : —
Lucian, Tinion 21 : iraXaia Tjj oBovrj.
" Dial. Mort. 17, 1 : Koikr) rfj %et/[)t.
" lb. 10, 12 : a0^oz/ot9 roc<; Xidot^. (Cf. Pise. 1.)
" Zeuxis 3: aKpo/Bet tjj ardd/Mr). (Cf. Imag. 17.)
" Quom. hist, conscr. 7 : ov crTcvcp tm lo-dfjuS.
" lb. 34 : TToWy ry dcTKrjaei koI crvve')(el tS ttovg) koI
^rjXo).
" Vera Hist. 1, 6: ov rpa')(^el irepLijxov/^evTjv r^
Kv/juarL.
" Phal. pr. 11 : dXijKTOif; ral^ 6BvvaL<;'
*' Amores 12 : rat? Ko/juacf; evdaXeanv.
'* Imagines 14: evKaipw rfj apaei koX deaei.
" Toxaris 20 : fMeydXo) to5 Trvevfiarc.
" lb. 60 : KapnrvXcp to3 f tc^et.
" Lucius 42 : dOpoa rfj %etpt.
" " 51 : TToXXoif; roi<; <^LXrjfi,a(TL.
" Bis Accus. 10 : djKvXo) rS BaKTvX(p.
" Anachar. 31 : ^aOeai, toI<; rpavfiacrcv.
" De Domo 18 : d6p6(p tm KoXXet,.
" De Dips. 11 ; ttoXXoS to5 av^p^f^'
Dial. Meretr. 13, 2 ; eVt^/Juo-ot? toi<; o7rXot9.
Conviv^ium 44 : ^/jt^o-to) p^dXa koL ^adel rep rpavfiari.
lb. 44 : opdS Tft) 8aKTvX(p.
Nero 9 : 6p6aU tol^ heXroi^;.
These examples abundantly illustrate Lucianic usage. The fol-
lowing examples from other authors may alyo be noted. The
influence of earlier writers is perceptible.
The lAmitations of the Predicative Position in Greek 29
(1) Dative of Military Accompaniment : —
• Dion Cassius, 39, 58, 1 : irpolibv Se evrevOev Bi')(^a Sirfprj-
/jb€V(p tS <tt par q) .
lb. 50, 11, 6: aOpoa rfj irapaa Kevfj top ^Iovlov
lb. 50, 31, 4: irv Kval^ Tat<; vavalv oXlyov efo) tcjv
arevwv Trapara^a/jbevcov.
(2) Dative of Attendant Circumstances : —
Dion Cass. 43, 43, 2: rjj re ryap ia-Orjrt xO'VvoTepa iv
iracTLV ivTiPpvvero.
lb. 46, 22, 4 : ore yovv yv/jLVol<; tol(; ^i^eanv e? ttjv
ayopav iaeSpafiov.
lb. 49, 20, 2: iroppatOev yap a-(j)oBpaL<; ral<i 0oXa2<;
i^LKVov^evoi.
lb. 55, 15, 7: coare Kadapa koX ai^povriarfp Kal
avvTroTrrq) rfj -^/rup^^ irpoarofiCkelv.
Diod. Sic. 1, 70, 5 : pLeyaXy ry (jicovy. (Cf. 1, 83, 3.)
lb. 3, 27, 3: KaTaKKidel^ he adpocp to5 ^dpeo,
lb. 3, 29, 3: Trdvre^ 7rpoa(j)€pov(Tt ravrrjv d6p6oc^ rot^;
o-cDpot<i .
lb. 4, 48, 2 : iairacrp^evoi^ rocf; ^[(peai,. (Cf. 4, 52, 4.)
(3) Dative of Means and Instrument : —
Dion Cass. 40, 43, 3 : eKBtM^ai avTov<i ck t?}9 dyopd^
irXayloi'i Kal irXarea-L to?9
^[(j)€(Tv iraiovTa^ .
By " prepositional type " of oblique predication, is meant ob-
lique predication introduced by a preposition. The plan, pursued
in the previous chapter, of noting the
PKEPOSITIONAL TYPE, ^i^^^j^^j ^^ ^^^ ;„ j^^ i,;^^^^;.
(o) Classical Greek. i ^ i /»
ans and Orators, and oi comparing or
contrasting with it that of post-classical Greek, is also followed
here.
Herodotus : —
Hdt. 5, 92, 7 : on iirl ^/ru^^/ooi^ rov iirvov TiepLavhpo<i
T0V9 dpTov^ irre^aXe.
lb. 5, 29: o/CG)9 rtva cSotev iv dpea-TTj kvljj rfj x^PV
dypov ev i^epyaa-jxevov.
30 The Limitations of the Predicative Position in Greek.
These are the only cases found in Hdt. There is a special reason
for the predicative position of the adjective sjrvxpov, ** Into the
cold oven " is an incorrect rendering. It might be rendered ^' into
the oven when it was cold/' But the brachylogy of the Greek
has disappeared. apea-TrjKVirj is best interpreted avaardrw yevo-
fievT) or avaaTdT(p iovarj. Stein aptly compares Xen. Cyrop. 1,3:
eV opeivrj ovcrr) rrj '^copa.
Thucydides : —
Thuc. Ij 19, 2: /lera dKpai,(j)VOv<i Trjq ^v/jb/jLa^taf;
7]vOr](7av.
Thuc. 2, 43,4: 7rpo9 dvev.Ovvov rrjv vfierepav aKpo-
aCTLV .
lb. 6, 66, 1 : OTL jxev koXcl ra Trpoeipyaajjiiva koI virep
Ka\ct)V TO)V fieWovTcov 6 dyobv earau.
lb. 6, 77, 1 : dWa A(optrj<; eKevOepoi dir^ avTovo /jlov T7J<i
Il€ko7rovvri(TOV.
lb. 6, 92, 5: Kal avTov<^ vvv vofjLi(TavTa<; irepl jxeyiaTCdv
Br) TO)v 8La<f>€p6vT(ov ^ovXeveaOai,
lb. 7, 84, 4: koX ev kolXo) ovtl to) TrorafjuS iv a(f)[(TLv
avTOL<; Tapa(r(To/jb€vov<;.
lb. 1, 36, 1 : TO Be Oapcrovv fir) Be^afxevov dadeve^ bv 7rpo<;
la')(^vovTa^ rov<; €')(^dpov<; dBeiarrepov iao-
fjLevov.
lb. 1,74, 3: vfiel<i fiev yap diro re oIkov fievoiv tmv
iToXewv .
lb. 1,84,4: del Be co? irpcx; ev ^ovXevo/juevovf; rov^
evavT iovf; epycp TrapaaKeva^cofjueOa.
lb. 8, 38, 3: ol Be X^lol ev 7ro\Xat<; rai^ irplv fid)(^ai<i
7re7rXr)y/jbevoo,
This array of examples exhibits one of several points of differ-
ence between Thucydides and Herodotus. The compactness and
precision of this mode of expression certainly appealed to Thucy-
dides. The first example has the rare word dKpai<f)vov^y w^hich,
as Classen remarks, has the force of a time-limitation. The second
is a good example of Thucydides' preference of abstract to con-
crete expressions. Kriiger analyses the third example thus : KaXd
eo-TL rd fjueXXovra virep mv. Compactness of expression, of course,
is lost by such a resolution. Classen notes the use of the predica-
The Limitations of the Predicative Position in Greek. 31
tive participle oIkov/jl€vcov in the eighth example to sharpen the
antithesis to what follows. In the next example, Widmann
(Boehme's Thukydides, revised by Widmann, Leipzig, 1894) says
that we have an abridged expression for irpcx; toj>? ivavTiov^; ob?
7r/j09 Gv l3ov\€vofievov<;, with which he compares Thuc. 4, 41, 2:
ft)9 €9 irarpiha Tavrrjv and 6, 50, 4 : a)9 irapa ^t'Xof 9 koX €vep<y6Ta<;
^KOrjvaiov^. This method of conceiving such an expression —
others like it will be adduced later — seems clumsy and quite un-
necessary. ft)9 gives the subjective attitude. 0ov\6vo/j,evov(; is
predicative in the same way as olKovfievojVj to which reference has
been made.
Having concluded an examination of the usage of the historians,
the writer will now pass to a consideration of that of the Orators.
Antiphon : —
Ant. 5, 33 : €a><; /jl^v ovv jiera XP'^^'^V'^ ttj^; i\7riBo<;
ijLjvcoo-Ke fiov Karayjrevo-dfievo';, tovtco hiL<T')(y-
pi^€TO Ta> Xoyw.
MS N omits the article. MS A has it. Some of the editors
follow the one MS, some follow the other. Graffunder, De Cripp-
siano et Oxoniensi Antiphontis Dinarchi Lycurgi Codicibus, Berlin,
1882, p. 70 ff, remarks that this is one of those expressions which
the Greeks are wont to enrich with the article, whereas we are
wont to do without it. He compares Dinarchus 1, 67 : Tiva<; Ta9
iKTrtBaf; e^ofjuev ; 1, 77: ev tovtw Ta<; ekirihaf; €')(eiv ; 1, 102:
ev Tol(; €^(o ra<; iXiriBaf; e^ere. Bienwald, De Crippsiano et
Oxoniensi, etc., Gorlitz, 1889, p. 29, holds that the reading with,
or without, the article is correct, but, inasmuch as Antiphon uses
the article more frequently in the case of iXirL^, he would prefer
to insert it. Cucuel, Essai sur la langue et le style de Forateur
Antiphon, Paris, 1886, p. 60, under ^^Adjedif atfribut/^ notes that
Antiphon quite often puts an adjective ^' en relief/^ by detaching it
from the substantive to which it belongs, and makes it bear the
force of the thought. In this way the phrase acquires much vigor
and conciseness. He happily illustrates this conciseness of expres-
sion by contrasting the following expressions :
Ant. 6, 28 : ouk aXrjdrjf; rjv rj alria fjv alrcMVTat kot ifjLOv.
" 5, 38 : ovK oXtjOt] ttjv alrlav e'Tre4>epov fjv yTL&VTo.
32 The Limitations of the Predicative Position in Greek.
The article should be retained, in the writer's judgment, not
because Antiphon uses it more often than he omits it in connection
with eXTTt? — for this has really little weight in settling the ques-
tion — but because the article is anaphoric, pointing back to § 31
rr]v fjuev iXevOepiav eXTT iaa<^ otaeaSaL, where the word eXiri'^ is
implied, and, at the same time, as Cucuel observes, the expression
thereby gains in vigor. For further examples of the predicative
position in connection with eXTrt?, cf., e. g., Thuc. 6, 68, 2 :
fji€yd\7)v TTjv iXTTiBa tyj^ vlk7]<; €')(ei,v. In late Greek, Luc.
Longaevi 9: ')(^p7](TT0Tepa<^ e^^Lv ra<; eXiriha^. Cf. Som-
nium 2, Zeuxis 8.
Andocides : —
Andoc. 1, 88: oirocrai iv Brj fjuo Kparov fievu rrj iroXet
iyevovTO.
Lipsius (Andocides, Leipzig, 1888) brackets tt). In this he
follows MS A (according to Dobson). There is no good reason
for omitting the article. The same expression is found in a law
in Demosthenes 24, 66, and is used by Demosthenes in 24, 76,
where Kennedy misses the point by rendering it " in a democratical
state." It is rightly interpreted by Hickie, ^^ when the city was
under democratic government," and by Marchant, " in the time
of the democracy." Dobree, Adversaria Critica, vol. 1, p. 325,
compares iv Srj/jLOKpaTov/jbevrj rfj iroXet of Dem. 24, 56 with Stj/jlo-
KpaTovfjL6V7)^ T^9 TToXeft)? of Dcm. 24, 58. This comparison seems
apt, for in the former passage iv STjfjuoKpaTov/jLevT) rrj irokei and iirl
TOiv rptaKovTa are contrasted expressions, while in the latter passage
we have Br)/jiOKpaTovijL6V7}<; t7]<; TroXeco^ and iirl tcjv TpcaKovra. In
other words — with no intention of applying mathematics to lan-
guage — iv Brj/uLOKparov/jievrj rrj iroXei, and Br]fjbOKpaTov/uu6vr)<:! rrj^;
TToXectx} are practically equivalent expressions.
Lysias : —
Lys.12,97: ol fiev iv TroXe/ubta rfj TrarptSi Tot'9 TralBa^
KaraXiirovre^;.
Pseudo-Lys. 2, 49: r)ryov^6voL rj eZ? ep7]fjbov ttjv '^^copav
i/jL^aXelv.
The force of the predicative adjective TroXefMia, which is in keep-
ing with the vigorous utterance of Lysias at this point, is height-
The Limitations of the Predicative Position in Greek. 33
ened by the contrast with the words iv ^evrj yfj which follow. The
word %co/9<x frequently has its adjective in the predicative position.
Cf., e.g., Xen. Anab, 1, 3, 14: &)9 Bca, c^iXias ttj^ ')(^a)pa<i
dTrd^et; also 4, 1, 8. Anab. 5, 4, 2: 009 BLd(f>cXiaf;r)<hq Bed
TToXe fiia<i iropevaovrat Trj<; '^copa<;. Arrian, Anab. 3, 3, 3 :
8i' iprjfiov, ov jxevToi St' dvvSpov rrj<; ^£wpa9.
Isocrates : —
Isocr. 1, 34: '^pco TOL<i \6<yoi<; ft>9 ire pi dWorpiov rev
Trpdyfxaro^; .
lb. 8, 12 : Mairep iv dWorpia rfj iroXei KLv8vv6vovr€<;.
lb. 14, 40: ef drecx^iaTOV jxev rrjf; 7roXea)9 6pfMr}devT6<;,
lb. 7, 17: Trap' ifcovrcov rwv ^^XXrjvcov rrjv rjyefjboviav
eXa^ov. (Cf. also 8, 30.)
lb. Ep. 6, 9: Ta9 irap^ eicovTcov r^L^yvofjievaf; rj rdf; irap^
d/covToyv Tcbv iroXtrSyv .
In the first of these examples Schneider emends tov to tov on
the ground that tov 7rpdy/jLaTo<; is not in agreement with Trepl mv.
Benseler approves of this objection. Schneider admits, however,
that the forms of the indefinite pronoun, tov and ro), are used
elsewhere by Isocrates without a substantive. R. B. Ponickau, De
Isocratis Demonicea, Stendalis, 1889, p. 31, refers to the weakness
in Schneider's position admitted by himself, and replies to his
objection by denying that there is anything unusual in the circum-
stance that the singular Trpdyjia must be referred to the plural a)v,
inasmuch as the neuter plural of pronouns is frequently substituted
for one thing. That such a collocation is not at variance with
,Isocratean usage, he rightly observes by referring to Isocr. 8, 12
(cited above). Blass does not depart from the received text. The
current conception of this construction is one which the writer has
already endeavored to combat and which he cannot accept here.
Schneider gives it as the usual explanation which he, otherwise,
would have accepted. It is this : 0)9 rrepl dXXoTpiov tov irpd-
y/juaT0<; = irepl tov irpdyfiaTOf;, 0)9 Trepl dXXoTpiov. He cites the
rule that in comparisons, when the object compared is placed first,
the preposition is regularly omitted (cf. Kriiger, Griech. Sprachl.,
68, 8), as, e. g., Isocr. 8, 12: wairep iv dXXoTpia (sc. TroXet) tj
TToXec KcvBvvevovT€<:. So Ponickau, referring to Isocr. 8, 12, says
34 The Limitations of the Predicative Position in Greek,
it is equivalent to ev rfj TroXec coairep iv aWorpia. To this method
of conceiviDg this construction, the writer has two objections to
offer : first, it is inapplicable in certain cases yet to be cited, second,
where applicable, it seems clumsy and unnatural. Analysis is not
at all necessary. The predicative adjective contains in both ex-
amples (1, 34 and 8, 12) the point of the passage. It is, moreover,
Isocrates' distinct purpose that the word aWorpiov shall stand out
prominently, and this effect is secured inimitably, so far as English
is concerned, by the predicative position. "With the third example,
cf. Diod. Sic. 13, 114, 1 : oi/ceti^ ev ar 61^(^1 arc l<; ral^; iroXeai,
cited by Green, in a Johns Hopkins dissertation, Diodorus and the
Peloponnesian War, Baltimore, 1899, p. 16.
A special class of the prepositional type is illustrated by such ex-
amples as Isocr. 7, 17: Trap' eKOvrcov TMv'FXkrjvcov. Abandoning
for the moment the plan of indicating consecutively the usage of
the individual Orators, the writer will attempt to give a general
view of this class.
With these examples from Isocrates, are to be compared :
Dem. 20, 16 : vtto tcov o^oicov eKovroiv.
lb. 38, 28 : irap eKovrayv eXafiov rcov iiTLTpOTrcov.
Aeschin. 3, 58 : wap' eKovrcov tcov 'EtWrjvcov aTroXa/Seiv.
Dinarch. 1, 37 : Trap" ckovtcov koI ^ovXo/jievcov tcov 'FiXXrjvcov,
They reappear in certain post-classical writers, e. g.,
Strabo 5, 3, 2 : Trap' ckovtcov tcov vtttjkocov.
lb. 5, 2, 3 : Trap' ckovtcov eXajSov 'Vcofjuaucov.
Dion Chrysostomus 11, 60: Trap' ckovtcov tcov olKeicov.
Dion Cassius 37, 3, 6 : Trap' ekovtcov tcov eTrt%a)pt&)z^.
lb. 53, 2, 6 : Trap' ekovtcov tcov dvOpcoircov,
(Often with pronouns, e. g.,)
lb. 41, 35, 1 : Trap' ckovto^ fxov.
lb. 43, 34, 2 : hi skovtcov re avTcov.
lb. 46, 47, 1 : Trap' e/covTcov avTcov.
lb. 47, 29, 2 : Trap' 6k6vto<; avTov.
lb. 53, 17, 3 : Trap' eKovai crcfycatv.
These clearly form a group by themselves. The type became
crystallised.
The Limitations of the Predicative Position in Greek. 35
To return to the usage of the individual Orators :
Lycurgus : —
Lye. 144: ovh^ iv iXevOepco iSd<p€L Tr]<^ 7raTp[So<; avToi<;
racjyrjvaL to kuO^ avrbv fiepof; irapehcoKev.
A departure from the received text was proposed by Dobree,
Adversaria Critica, Berlin, 1874, vol. 1, p. 325, viz., the insertion
of the article between iXevdepw and eSd(f>eo. Maetzner, Lycurgi
Oratio, etc., Berlin, 1836, p. 324, noted it, but did not adopt it.
Dobree compares for the article the use of ttJv in such an expres-
sion as evopKOTCLTT^v Tr)v -ylrijcjiov iv€yK€iv in Lye. 13, and often
elsewhere. Exactly similar, in his opinion, is Dem. 24, 56 : iv
Brj/noKpaTov/jLevy rfj iroXei. It is, however, not merely a question,
as Maetzner sees, as to whether the article is rightly used with
€8(X(^o9 or not — Maetzner cites Dem. 8, 39 : rw Trj<; iroXeo)^ idd^et ;
Aeschin. 3, 134 : irepl rod r?)? TrarplBofi 6Sd4>ov^ ; Dinarch. 1, 99 :
Trepl Tov eBd^ov<; rev rrjf; TroXeo)?, etc. — it is a question as to
whether there is any special point to be gained by the use of the
predicative position. H. Mayer, Observationes in Lycurgi ora-
toris usum dicendi, Freiburg, 1889, p. 19ff, treating of Lycurgus's
use of the article, says that he does not use it with the former of
two substantives, in proof of which he cites the passage under dis-
cussion and 149: /cal ra? 'yjrycj^ov^ (f>ep6(T6aL ra? fjiev virep dva-
(TTd(T6(o<i T7}<; irarpiBof; , etc. This cannot be urged as an
argument here. In favor of the predicative position it may be
said that the idea oi freedom is emphasised in this section. Cf.
144: T(av fiev virep Trj<; iXevdepia^; reXevTrjadvTwv. Cf., also,
for indisputable cases of the predicative position in post-classical
Greek,
Dion Chrysost. 7, 19 : rd yap tx^V 4>cii>€pcoT€pa, ct)9 dv iv
Vypcp T(p i8d(f)6l, (T7}/jLaLv6fjL€Va.
Lucian, Timon 57 : iv eXevOepa rfj iroXei, and elsewhere.
Demosthenes : —
Dem. 4, 55: vvv S' e7r' dhrjXoL^ ovo-c TOL<i dirb tovtcov
ifiavTM <y6vr)crojjL6Voi<i,
lb. 18, 298 : utt 6pdrj<; koI StKaia<; Kahia^Oopov Trj<i '\jrv')(fj'^*
lb. 21, 30 : iTrdBijXoLf; puev toI<; dScKTjaovo-tv, dSij-
XoL<i Se Tol<; dBtKT^ao fjuev oi<i.
36 The Limitations of the Fredicative Position in Greek.
lb. 18, 258 : jiera iroWrj^ ttj^ evheia^ eTpdcf)?]^.
lb. 21, 8: Q)(} vTrep kolvov tov it pd<y jxaTOf; ovto<; Kal
7rpo(T6')(^odv aKOva-drco.
fib. 25, 99: ov <ydp Btjttov KaO' ev vpucdv e/cao-rof; o)<; eVt
KVpLOVf; TOL'9 vofxov^ iTopevaeTat.
fib. 35, 22 : i/cecvov re tov veaviaKov tov BavelcravTa i^rjird-
TTjaav ft)9 eirl eXevO epoLf; toI<; 'x^prj fxaaL
EaV6L^6fl6V0L.
lb. 36, 8 : aTTo kocvcov tcov ')(^prjixdT(ov.
lb. 36, 8 ; €K KOtVOiV tcov '^^^pT^fJudTOdV.
lb. 36, 39 : ck ko cvcov iXrjTovpyeL^ tmv ')(^ p t) fju d t co v .
lb. 18, 205: a? eV SovXevovay tj} TroXei cf^epetv dvdyKr}.
lb. 24, 76 : ev BrffMOKpaTovjuevrf Trj it6X€l.
lb. 19, 120: 7rpo9 [Sta] /jL€/jL€Tpr)fjLev7)v Tr)v r^ixepav.
lb. 20, 16 : viro tmv ofjuoicov ckovtcov.
lb. 38, 28: irap^ eKOVTcov eXa^ov tmv eTTLT poircDV.
The first and third of the examples cited above from Demos-
thenes bear a close resemblance to each other in their structure.
This use of the substantivised participle was already observed in
the usage of Thucydides. Cf., e. g., virep KaXwv tcov jjueXXovTcov,
irepl fieyiCTTcov Brj tcov hiac^epovTCDv, and Plato, Apol. 20 e : eU
d^LO'x^pecov TOV XeyovTa. Also in late Greek, as, e. g., Lucian and
Dion Cassius. In the fourth example the reading of Voemel is
followed. Noting that the article is generally omitted, he says :
'^ TTjv S, unde Scheibius, Obs. in Orr. Attic, p. 66 coniecit, ut habet
Laur. S, ttoXX?}? tt}? i. e. ttoXXtj yv rj evBeia fjueS' rj<; iTpd<j)7]<iy
Blass was doubtful, but read ttoXXt]^ ivBelafi. The fifth example
has occasioned difficulty among interpreters. Buttmann says that
the mind must conceive the construction as follows : aKovadTco
virep tov TrpdyfjuaTo^ co? kolvov 6vto(; = ^' Let him now give an
attentive hearing to this matter, as one of public interest." Fennell
renders it " considering that the issue is of public interest." The
literal sense, he says, is " considering that (he is giving ear and
voting) in behalf of the case (it) being of public interest." He
remarks that the difficulty has generally been passed over. The
principle referred to in the case of co? Trepl dXXoTplov tov irpd-
7yLtaT09 is inapplicable here, kolvov holding the predicative posi-
tion bears, as usual, the main emphasis. The copula oWo? which
The Limitations of the Predicative Position in Greek, 37
is here expressed is more generally omitted. The seventh example
defies such analysis as was proposed in the case of Isocrates. In
the next example Dindorf read airo kocvcov tmv 'x^prj/jbdrcov ovtcov.
Blass omits the copula with MSS F and Q, and finds further sup-
port in the similar use of eV kolvS)v tmv ')(^pr]ixdTcov without ovtcov,
Sandys and Paley (Private Orations of Dem., Part II., Cambridge,
1886) follow Dindorf. On general grounds it is better to omit
the copula. In the case of iv BovXevovo-'p ry TroXei, the context
with its prominent ideas contained in the words SovXevecv and /ier'
iXevOepia^ ^tjv prepares us for the emphatic SovXevovo-y, The form
is not unlike that of the example iv SrjfjLOKpaTov/jLevr) rfj ttoXcc,
which has been noticed under Andocides. They are, however,
different in this respect, that in the former case iv has a local, in
the latter a temporal, signification. Drake has aptly compared
Hdt. 5, 29 : iv dvearTjKvlrj rfj x^PV^ which has already been noted.
Compare, also, in post-classical Greek, Lucian's Timon 57 : iv
eXevOepa rfj iroXet, The same expression is also found in Nigrinus
13 and Bis Accusatus 21 . The next example, irpo^ ScafjLefierpij/jLevrjv
Tfjv rjfjbepav, is a technical expression which is explained by Har-
pocration. The judicial day was divided into three parts, one
allotted to the plaintiff, another to the defendant, and the third to
the judges. Cf. also fDem. 53, 17 : Trpo? rjfiepav StafjLe/jLerprjfjLevrjVy
and Aeschin. 2, 126 : iv Bta/jL6jjL6Tpr]jji€vrj rrj rjfiepa Kplvofiai,. The
last two examples have already been noticed under the Isocratean
use of participles.
Aeschines : —
Aeschines 3, 255: fir) ovv o)? virep aXXorpiaq , dXX' 0)9
virep olK€La<; rrj^; TroXeco^i fiovXev-
eade,
lb. 3, 58 ; Trap eKovrcov tmv '^XX'^vayv.
lb. 3, 126 : iv BtafMefjLeTprjfMivr) rfj rj/juepa.
In the first case, MSS e h k 1 give irept for vTrip in both places.
Weidner adopts irept in the former place. The principle applied
to 0)9 Trepl dXXoTpiov rod 7rpdyfjLaT0<; is pointless here. The second
and third examples have already been noticed.
Dinarchus : —
Dinarchus 1, 37: Trap' ekovtcov kol ^ovXafxevtov tojv'EiXXtjvcov,,
38 The Limitations of the Predicative Fositio7i in Greek.
This example has already found a place under the Isocratean
use of participles.
The survey of the usage of the historians and the Orators, so far
as the prepositional type of oblique predication is concerned, has
now been completed. In the course of the exhibit, special notice
was taken of one particular type which begins in the Orators and
survives in certain post-classical authors. The marks of its crys-
tallization were quite evident. No small number of the examples
which lie outside this province can be distinguished by the fact
that the substantive with which they are connected is frequently
%co/9(X, 7rarpi<;, ttoX^ 9. Notice was also taken of a small group with
the substantivised participle. Another small group may fitly be
noticed here. This type is preserved among certain of the post-
classical writers.
Ant. : /jL6Ta XPV^'^V'^ '^V'> e'XTrtSo?.
Dem. : cltt 6pdrj<i koI SiKata^ KaBca^dopov r-^}? '^VXH^'
Plato, Protag. 357 A : iv opdrj rfj alpeorec.
Dion Cass. 37, 11, 2: fiera aKepaiov rou (fipovij/jLaTO^.
lb. 38, 18, 2 : cltt 6p6rj<; koX ahiac^Oopov T7]<; >yv(t)[xr)<;.
lb. 38, 42, 4 : air^ opOrj^; koI a^okov t^9 yvcofjurj^;.
lb. 44, 23, 2 : dir' opdy)^ r^? huavoia^.
Luc. Hermot. 6 : ef aTeXov<i Trj<i eXTrtSo?.
Between these and certain examples of the adverbial-dative type,
such as e\ev6epai<^ rah yfrvx^at^, there seems to be a close affinity.
It will be noticed that the substantives are abstracts, having to do
with the inner life of the person. In addition to these groups, there
remain a comparatively small number of isolated cases, where a
special point is made by the use of the predicative position, and
which have, therefore, not been perpetuated as crystallized forms.
It has already been observed that Thucydides and Demosthenes
especially favor the prepositional type of predication in its different
manifestations. And, in the case of Thucydides, the important
difference between his speeches and his narrative was referred to,
viz., that he uses the prepositional type nine times as often in his
speeches as in his narrative.
The Limitations of the Predicative Position in Greek, 39
With the limited usage of tlie classical period, as has been seen
in the tabulated statement and in the former part of this section,
stands in decided contrast the post-
PKEPOSITIONAL TYPE. , . , . -, . -, ,
(6) Post-Classical Greek, classical period, as represented by cer-
tain of its writers, and, preeminently,
Lucian who, as in the adv.-dat. type, has been made the basis of
this study. This will, perhaps, appear more clearly if the ex-
amples are grouped as far as possible.
(1) It is Thucydides of the Attic writers who favored the prepo-
sition TT/oo? in connection with the type in question. There are
three examples, conveying the idea of opposition or contrast, viz. :
Thuc. 1, 36, 1 : Trpo? iGyyovra^; rovg i')(6pov^.
lb. 1, 84, 3 : TT/oo? €v ^ovXevofievov^ Tov<i e'^^pou?.
lb. 3, 43, 4 : Trpo? avevdvvov rrjv vfierepav aKpoaaiv.
There are, on the other hand, eleven examples in Lucian :
Lucian, Piscator 32 : tt/jo? dyvoovvTa<; rou? KufiaCovf;.
lb. Pro Imag. 16 : 7rpb<; ovrw acfyoSpap rrjv Karrfyoplav.
lb. Toxaris 29 : tt/oo? oijrco a-KKrjpav rrjv Siatrav.
lb. Gallus 29 : tt/^o? a/juavpav re kol hi'y^rcdcrav Tr)v OpvaXkiha.
lb. Bis Accus. 20 : Trpo? evirpoo-aiirov aoc rrjv dvrlSiKov,
lb. Rhet. Praec. 23 : 7rpb<; ovtw 7roX\ov<; Tov<i epa)ra<i.
lb. De Electro 3 : Trpo? ivavrlov to ijBcop.
lb. De Domo 29 : tt/oo? oijTco KaXd^; koI 7roLKika<^ rdf} viro-
lb. Navigium 9 : 7rpo<; dvTiov<i tov<; irrjcrLa^.
lb. Saturnalia 7 : 7rpo9 ovrco ttoWtjv rrjv dSiKiav.
lb. Demosth. Encom. 17 : tt^o? Xajjuirpav rrjv A7]/jbocrdevov<i
Bo^av.
Opposition, or contrast, is expressed here, too, except in the fourth
example where 7rpo9 indicates the direction. The bulk of Lucian,
it must not be forgotten, is more than twice that of Thucydides.
Still, every allowance made, one feels that there has been a wide
departure from Attic usage. Omit the article in a number of these
examples, and there is no real loss. This is not true of Thucy-
dides.
40 The Limitations of the Predicative Position in Greek.
Cf. also Dion Chrysostomus 12, 4 : TTpoTrefjurmv akviro)^ avTov,
Q)(i eoLKe, 7rp0 9 aXvirov
Tov Bdvarov .
Plutarch, 1, 60 : Trpo? avriov ro irvevfia.
(2) Of the examples cited above from Lucian, it will be noticed
that two have the adjective ttoXu? in the predicative position.
There have been observed only two cases in the authors of the
classical period who have been examined, viz.,
Thuc. 8, 38, 3 : iv iroWal^ tol^ irplv [Md')(^DLL<i.
Dem. 18, 258 : fjuera ttoXXt)? t?}9 eVSeta?. i
In the former case the article could not well be omitted, and,
with its retention, a different sense would be conveyed by the
attributive position. The second case, it will be remembered, is a
disputed one. Lucian has fifteen additional examples in which
iroXv^ holds the predicative position, e. g. :
Lucian, Timon 13 : iv ttoXXgS tco g-koto),
lb. Charon 11 : e/c ttoWov tov 0d6ov<;.
lb. Quom. hist, conscr. 1 : iv iroW^ rS (fyXoyfiS,
lb. Alexander 39 : iv iroWf} rfj aicoTrfj.
lb. " 44 : eVl ttoWwv tcov Trapovrav.
lb. De Saltatione 40 : i/c iroWcov tmv TrapaXeXec/jifievcov.
Cf. also Demonax 31, Gallus 19, Rhet. Praec. 3, Hippias 7,
Advers. Indoct. 19, 24, De Dipsad. 2, Dial. Meretr. 14, 2, De
Morte Peregr. 19. Similar are Gallus 15, Icaromenip. 17, and
Apologia 15.
So Lucian uses 0X^709, but not frequently.
Lucian, Anacharsis 11 : eV oXlycov tcov fiaprvpcov.
lb. Hermot. 58 : dir oXljov tov yevfjuaTog.
With the former of these examples, cf. Xen. Hell. 6, 4, 1 : iir"
oXiycDV fjioc SoKovcn fjuapTvpcov. The latter example is inter-
esting in another way, for, earlier in the same chapter, we have
the attributive position with the article : diro ye tov okiyov eKeivov
yevfjuaTOfij where the article is plainly anaphoric, strengthened, it is
true, by the demonstrative i/c62vo<;. But, in this example, the
article has no such justification. If it is omitted, the sense is con-
veyed equally as well. In other words, Lucian is here giving
The Limitations of the Predicative Position in Greek, 41
predicative expression to what is really an attributive relation.
Post-classical examples to which no such objection can be made
are :
Dion Chrysostoraus 11, 1 : fjuavOdvova-i jnev fioyc'^ idv rt koX
fiddcocro, Trap* oXufycov to)v el-
BoTcov, i^airarSyvTai Se Td')(^tcrTa
VTTO TTOWCOV T (b V OVK €fc86-
TCOV .
Dion Cassius 56, 17, 2: ravra yap o-tto TroWcjv tmv
'^Ir 1] (f) I, (T 6 i V T (O V <T(^lO-LV 6 AvryOV-
aTo<; iSe^aTO.
fiaKpo^ is similarly used by Lucian.
Lucian Deor. Dial. 10, 2 : vtto fiaKpw tm ^6(l)(p.
lb. De Merc. Conduct. 37 : 8id fiaKpov rod xp^vov.
lb. Jupp. Confut. 7 : viro fiaKpS roS Xlvo).
lb. Navigium 44 : iv fjuaKpS tS /Slo).
With the foregoing examples may be compared the following
from Aelian, given by Schmid, Atticismus, vol. 3, p. 63.
Aelian N A 34, 6 : iv /juaKpS rS ^povco,
lb. ** 36, 3 : Kara ttoWtjv rrjv elpijvrjv,
lb. ** 47, 24 : ck itoWov roii aWepo^ /cal vy^rfKov.
lb. " 112,30: Kara TToWhv Tr]v (TTTOvhriv.
(3) Several of the examples with the predicative position in
Lucian are introduced by the preposition viro with the dat. Some
of these occur in the groups already given. The following may
also be noted :
Lucian, De Merc. Conduct. 23 : viro fxeya\o(f)(i)V(p tg5 ktjpvkl.
lb. Herodotus 6 : viro vv/j,^ajcoy(p ro) ^acriXel.
lb. Quom. hist, conscr. 2 : vtto fna rfj opfjuf} (cf. Anach. 26.)
lb. Phalaris post. 8 : viro yecopyS rS OeS.
lb. Philopseudes 32 : vtto TrvKvfj rfj ^do-et.
lb. Pseudolog. 17 : viro TrovijpM rS Trpcorq) Kal Svatp^/j,^
K\rjSovL(r/jLarL.
lb. Navigium 11 : t'Tro Xafirrpa rfj SaBL
No instance of vtto with the dat. in this construction has been
found in the writers of the classical period.
42 The Limitations of the Predicative Position in Greek,
(4) The preposition most commonly employed in this type, alike
in classical and post-classical Greek, is iv. In addition to the ex-
amples cited in other connections, may be noteS :
Lucian, Timon 13 : iv ')(^a\K(a r) crtSrjpM rS 9a\dfjb(p.
lb. De Merc. Cond. 22 : iv a/juvSpa) ray (^xori (cf. Alex. 17).
lb. Apologia 8 : iv ovro)<; a/bu^iXaipel ry vwodeaei,
lb. Quom. hist, conscr. 4 : iv ovro) TroXvcfxovq) too KacpS.
(5) The preposition eVt with the dat. is quite common. Demos-
thenes is the only classical author who makes use of it in prose.
Cf. Lucian, Hermot. 74 : iirl aa6pol<; tol(; Oefiekioifi tovtol<;.
lb. Quom. hist, conscr. 35 : icj)' ovtw fjueyaXw koI ^(^aXeirw to3
TTpdfyfJLaTL.
lb. Demonax 8 : iir oXcryo-y^poviOL^; to?? Bokov(tlv dyaOot*;.
lb. Toxaris 35: eTrl 7rpoSrj\(p to5 fiiKpov varepov XvOrj-
creadat.
lb. Toxaris 41 : eVl TV(f>\(p toS AavSdfiiBL.
lb. Jupp. Trag. 31 : 6</)' ovtco aa<^el koX TrpoBijXa) to3 ^p77cryLfca),
lb. Rhet. Praec. 24: eVl -^cXS tm Tpe(j)eo-6ac.
lb. Pseudolog. 26 : eVl ireTrpayfjuevo) tjBt) rtp epy(p.
lb. De Domo 1 : iwl irpoBrjXw rjj v6a(p.
lb. Epist. Saturn. 35 : eVl KareayoTi to3 djjb^opeL.
Especially to be noticed, in the foregoing list, are the two occur-
rences of the articular infinitive with the adjective in the predica-
tive position. There is no similar occurrence in classical Greek
within the range of authors examined.
(6) Finally may be noted a small prepositional group which is
closely related to the adverbial-dative group in the character of the
substantives which are used.
Lucian, Nigrinus 11 : diro yvjuuvov . . . rovfiov Trpoo-coTrov,
lb. Toxaris 19 : diro yjriXrj'; tt)^ icepaia^»
lb. Toxaris 60 : diro yvfivrj^ rrj^ fcecfyaXrj^,
The presence of the possessive is to be noticed in the first of
these examples. The construction is usually not so transparent as
it is here.
This concludes the survey of post-classical Greek, especially as
seen in the pages of Lucian, who fairly revels in this construction.
The Limitations of the Predicative Position in Greek. 43
The words of I. Guttentag, De subdito qui inter Lucianeos legi
solet dialogo Toxaride, Berlin, 1860, p. 44, in this connection, are
substantially well-founded : " Proprium hoc quoque Luciani est,
quod multo frequentius quam alii scriptores articulum inter adiec-
tivum et substantivum ponit, et ita quidem, ut articulus nonnum-
quam adiectivum antecedere, multo saepius integra sententia omitti
possit. Oratio tamen elegantior interdum est, si articulus adiec-
tivum sequitur, quam si praeponitur, quaesita saepe magis videtur,
si articulus usurpatur, quam si omittitur.''
After noting the views current in antiquity among the gram-
marians with reference to the nature of the Greek article, and
showing how the article gradually
CONCLUSION. developed from the demonstrative pro-
noun, the writer entered upon a con-
sideration of the subject of oblique predication, in which was
included the use of adjective and participle alike. The range of
this construction was given for the Attic Orators and Thucydides,
and a more especial study was made of two types which were
denominated the adverbial-dative and the prepositional. The lim-
itations in the use of these two types on the part of the classical
authors were observed, and by a comparison with post-classical
authors, more especially Lucian, the deviations from the norm of
Attic usage were indicated. The origin of the comitative, or soci-
ative, dative was briefly considered, and it was shown that the dat.
type is mainly concerned with the body and its parts, any expan-
sions being due to the workings of the principle of analogy. The
prepositional type was seen to possess a higher character than the
adv.-dat. type, and, as a consequence, was used, when impressive-
ness was sought, by Thucydides, in particular, of the historians,
with the important qualification that it is mainly restricted to his
speeches, and for this very reason, and by Demosthenes of the
Orators. Many of these expressions, as was shown, crystallised
and were imitated by certain post-classical writers. The home of
oblique predication in general, and of the prepositional type in
particular, was seen to be in oratory which seeks to be vigorous,
concise, and impressive — in fine, in Epideictic Oratory.
LIFE.
Alfred William Milden was born in Whitevale, Ontario, on March
11, 1868. His preliminary education was received in the Public
School and the High School of Cornwall, Ontario. He matriculated
at the University of Toronto in the year 1884, and, four years later,
graduated with the degree of B. A. with classical honors. For a period
of nearly eight years, he was engaged in the teaching of classics,
mainly in the Collegiate Institute of Barrie, Ontario. In the fall of
1896 he entered the Johns Hopkins University as a post-graduate
student in Greek, Latin, and Sanskrit. At the end of his second
year he was appointed Fellow in Greek ; and at the end of his third
year, in June, 1899, he received the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.
During the year 1899-1900 he has been Fellow by Courtesy. He has
attended the lectures of Professors Gildersleeve, Warren, Bloomfield,
Smith, and Miller, to all of whom he is indebted.
He would especially mention Professor Gildersleeve and Professor
Miller, to the former of whom, in common with his many students,
he must express the strong sense of his indebtedness for inspiration,
guidance, and encouragement in the prosecution of his studies.
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY
BERKELEY
Return to desk from which borrowed. \
1
This book is DUE on the last date stamped below.
i5Aug'4g/^p
/^iarRETO
•
1 ;
:
]
j^R32l955l8
1
1
EEC. cm. DEC 03 tt
i
HOV 1 ^^^
AUTO. DISC.
\
AUG Jl i^^^
LDQiRcy^^id
1
3)476
MAKERS
U.C. BERKELEY LIBRARIES
CQ2D1b327D
«