No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Remarks on the New Liddell and Scott
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 27 October 2009
Abstract
- Type
- Review Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © The Classical Association 1947
References
page 82 note 1 The only other reviews which I have seen are those by Johnson, J. in C. W. 34, 1940, pp. 86–7Google Scholar and Whatmough, J. in C.P. 37, 1942, pp. 96–8.Google Scholar
page 82 note 2 Even the eighth edition was not always used as it should have been. Some of the errors of Wilamowitz which could have been avoided are those in his notes on Hesiod, Erga 418, 427, 511, 572, 591; 720; Euripides, Ion 887, 1286; Aristophanes, Lysistrata 27,217,425,587,1079; Menander, Epitrepontes 515, 696. The eighth edition of the lexicon is also right where Wilamowitz is wrong, for example, in his notes on Euripides, H.F. 63, 625,632,839,943,1221,1318,1416; and now Jones's edition is right where he is wrong, for example, in his notes on Hesiod, Erga 512; Euripides, H.F. 132,354; Menander, Epitrepontes 6, 287.Google Scholar
page 82 note 3 See the brief remarks of Tate, J., headed ’, in C.R. 66, 1942, pp. 65–6,Google Scholar and also the remarks of Dunbabin, R. L. in C.R. Ix, 1946, pp. 8–11 and those of H. W. Parke and D. E. W. Wormell, op. cit., pp. 11–13.Google Scholar
page 83 note 1 To Harrison's three straightforward examples of til as a preposition in tragedy add E. El. 409.