Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7czq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-29T00:09:26.035Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

On the Use of in ἀλλ' ἤ in Aristotle

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 February 2009

Extract

The idiomatic use of ;ἤλλ' ἤ found in classical writers is familiar in Aristotle; but there is a set of passages for which the ordinary renderings of it fail, and the difficulty is such that the text has been suspected. Bonitz, for instance, Index Aristotelicus, 33b2O, says of two of these passages, Pol. 1257b21, Metaph. 1038a 14, that ⋯λλ⋯ is enough by itself, or even that ⋯λλ⋯ without ἤ seems required (ubi ipsum ⋯λλ⋯ vel sufficit vel requiri videatur), and it has been proposed in the second of these places to read ᾖ for ἤ. It must be contended that the text is sound in all the difficult passages in question.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © The Classical Association 1909

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

page 98 note 1 The passages from Aristotle quoted in this article may be found, with others, in the Index Aristotelicus.

page 98 note 2 So also(e.g.) KUhner, Gr. Gr. ii. § 535, 6, Anm. 3. Kilhner does not distinguish the second category from the first, nor does he recognise the existence of pas- sages of the third category at all. Madvig, who held that represented the accent being wrong, perhaps thought the combination of constructions unlikely; but is a still more striking combination of adversative constructions.

page 98 note 3 For Platonic examples see Ast's Lexicon, vol. i. p. 202.

page 123 note 1 Newman's note on this passage, from the kind of construction to which he assimilates it (Plato, Protag. 354 B), would amount to putting it in the second category. It would belong to the second if we had instead of