Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T15:54:35.732Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Indicative in Relative Clauses

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 October 2009

E. A. Sonnenschein
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Review Article
Information
The Classical Review , Volume 32 , Issue 3-4 , May 1918 , pp. 68 - 69
Copyright
Copyright © The Classical Association 1918

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

1 I agree with Professor Platt (C.Q. V. p. 28) in reading (not ), but not for the reason which he gives, viz. that = Ajax. A clause with the indicative may follow an incomplete antecedent just as well as an antecedent which is self-contained, though its function differs in the two cases. With Jebb's note in support of σπε⋯⋯ compare his note on 1160 of the same play, where he rightly prefers the indicative. The two passages are parallel—the one with, the other without, an antecedent expressed.