¹ The references are to pages always. Schwyzer=Schwyzer, E., Griechische Grammatik (München, 1939–50).Google Scholar AH=editions of Ameis-Hentze, with Anhang.

² is the older form, as in showing the change of t to s before i usual in Attic-Ionic and elsewhere.

³ Cf. Porzig, 11–28, and occasionally later.

⁴ There is no doubt in Thgn. 462 Porzig, 22, however, translates ‘sie werden nichts ausrichten können’.

⁵ The use of the infinitive is compared incidentally by Porzig, e.g. on p.65. Compare the (few) Sanskrit infinitives, like pitaye ‘to drink’ which are datives of -ti stems.

⁶ Compare the Latin -tu in exitus, etc., the development separate, then, in the two languages. In Greek itself there is the competition of , which acts as the action noun for (Horn, only

⁷ Sweats is invented for the occasion, and has no connection with the later ‘understanding’ (Porzig, 191).

⁸ For the verbal noun as object of a verb compare Porzig, 28-31, 148 f.

⁹ The formation looks old, from , which is found only on a Corinthian vase. Late historians have , as Holt, 60, notices.

¹⁰ The infinitive after etc. is originally final, e.g. Hdt. vi 23.6 ‘he gave the ringleaders to the Samians to slaughter’, but comes to be felt as the object of the verb, as is shown by the combination with an anticipatory pronoun or noun in the accus., or with the article . A transitional example is provided by A 18 f. (From Schwyzer II, 362-5.) For Homer the treatment as accusatival would seem to be unobjectionable.

¹¹ Cf. Leaf–s note. Porzig, 117, takes as a periphrasis for , ‘dann muss soviel bedeuten wie antreiben und das Kausativum von vertreten’, which seems hard, and implies an unlikely consciousness of the connection between and rather ‘control their spirit’. With compare Empedocles B 110.10 ‘denken können’, Porzig, 187.

¹² Schwyzer II, 360.

¹³ For see especially Holt, 26 and 37 f. Like it preserves the old 4.

¹⁴ For the collective value of these nouns compare Holt, 88.

¹⁵ See in general Porzig, 94–6.

¹⁶ Compare Callimachus’ in LSJ. perhaps specifically ‘heap of withered leaves’ with Porzig, 336, who compares Hes. Op. 421

¹⁷ See Schwyzer II, 618, for this and similar accusatives.

¹⁸ Leaf is surely right in taking here to be of others, against Ameis-Hentze’s ‘Entrüstung iüber das eigene Tun’. Note 119(Schol. BL as Leaf.)

¹⁹ Fulda, A.Untersuhungen (sic) über die Sprache der homerischen Gedichte (Duisburg, 1865), pp. 161 f.Google Scholar, known to me from Ebeling. Fulda translates β 136 ‘Zurechnung wird mir stattfinden’ and ‘nicht tritt Zurechnung dafür ein’.

For the literature of see Laroche, E.Hisloire de la racine NEM- en grec ancien (Paris, 1949), Ch. III.Google Scholar

²⁰ Chantraine, Noms, 277. It seems impossible to pin down a precise sense for the word in this unreal context. The ‘magical’ quality belongs to the context, not intrinsically to the word.

²¹ Cf. Holt, 79.

²² For cf. Porzig, 195, and for 326. OED notes that it is often impossible to draw a line between the two senses, as in a cheerful look, a stern look.

²³ For nouns see also Porzig, 180–4.

²⁴ For Chantraine’s quite different view see ‘Additional Note’ at end of article.

²⁵ is more often concrete, but Κ 177 is like with The gen. also comes into the picture, at verse-end being another form of

²⁶ Wackernagel, J., Kleine Schriften, 1137, n. 1Google Scholar ( ‘der altepischen Kunstsprache angehörig’, Τ 205–10 ‘ein junger Abschnitt des Ilias’).

²⁷ For a collection of abstract nouns as objects of verbs of ‘giving’ see Porzig, 115, including and ) as divine gifts.

²⁸ would give -- ∪∪, for which see my Studies in the Language of Homer, p. 113. The poet feels at liberty to use synizesis in but not in XopÓs is the usual term, Porzig, 89.

²⁹ Risch, 138.

³⁰ This seems to me to be the syntax of Η 239 see Leaf, one of whose suggested interpretations is ‘that is to me (in my eyes) to fight …’, also Chantraine II, p. 303.

³¹ Jahrbb. f. class. Philol. (1882), pp. 245 f., known to me from Anhang. Cauer’s certain punctuation is accepted by Leaf as well as by Van Leeuwen, to whom B. refers.

³² Chantraine, p. 96, suggests that was created for its metrical convenience on the analogy of though only Od., gives the word more reality.

³³ Some of B.’s examples of + objective genitive are uncertain: ‘oublier le meurtre’, but would take a genitive; gen. of separation, ‘(de) la mort’ as B.; is not = ‘leur faire une réputation’, but ‘report of their death’; ‘voir le père’—or ‘his father’s appearance’?; implies rather cf. intrans. of rivers in LSJ. A surprising statement is ‘il n’y a que deux exemples où le sens même a imposé un génitif de caractère subjectif: et emplois inéluctables. On ne voit pas comment *gen- et *bhū-auraient pu manifester dans leurs abstraits une valeur “transitive”.’ is in fact as ‘objectif’ as any genitive could be, and it is pleasant to have such a thing proved impossible.

³⁴ isnot a phrase; —‘think of’) is quite different from the periphrastic here?

³⁵ is not found. The usual (later) derivative is Would this already have meant ‘writing’?

³⁶ Wackernagel, , Kl. Schriften, p. 1137, Chantraine, p. 96.Google Scholar

³⁷ I am grateful to Mr R. G. Coleman, of Emmanuel College, Cambridge, for reading this article and making this and other suggestions which I have been glad to incorporate.