On εἰ οὐ…

Hermann on Viger, p. 833, n. 309, followed by Matthiae on Eur. Med. 87, defends this combination of εἰ with the direct negative instead of μή against Elmsley, who holds it to be inadmissible, on the ground that, when it occurs, the negative does not belong to the hypothetical conjunction, but is attached closely to the word which it negatives, so as to combine with it one negative notion; as in Soph. Aj. 1131, εἰ τοὺς θανόντας οὐκ ἐᾷς θάπτειν παρών ; where οὐκ ἐᾷς is equivalent to κωλύεις: in which cases the direct and not the hypothetical form of the negative is properly used to express an abstract negation.

But this explanation, though it is well adapted to the passage of the Ajax quoted in support of it, is not universally applicable, and requires therefore to be supplemented by another and a different solution.

On an irregular formation of the Greek passive verb

[The following Appendix has, like the last, already been allowed co appear in the Journal of Philology, Vol. 1 No. 1 (1868), pp. 93–97. The additions in square brackets are taken from the margin of Mr Cope's own copy of the Journal, now in Mr Sandys' possession, s.]

φθоν∈îσθαι, φθоνоύμ∈νоι, is an example of the irregular formation of the passive, which is not seldom found in other Greek authors, but is so much more frequent in Aristotle's writings that it may perhaps be regarded as one of the characteristics of his style. In the Greek Grammars that I have consulted, with the exception of that of Dr Donaldson, who only bestows on it a passing observation, it is left unnoticed, and I will therefore illustrate it by some examples that I have collected.

The best account of it that I have found is given in Madvig's Latin Grammar, Ch. III. on the dative case, § 244 b, and Obs. 3, 4, Engl. Transl.; his explanation of the Latin usage will apply equally well to the Greek.

ΑΡΙΣΤΟΕΛΟΥΣ

Bekker P. 1354 quarto edition 1831. p. 1 octavo edition 1873

ΤΕΧΝΗΣ ΡΗΤΟΡΙΚΗΣ Α.

'H ρητоρικη ἐστιν αντιστρоφоς τη διαλ∈ϰτιϰη αν

§ I. 'H ρητоρικη ἐστιν αντιστρоφоς τη διαλ∈ϰτιϰη is translated by cicero, ex altera parte respondere dialecticae, Orat. XXXII 114. ‘Vox a scena ducta videtur. Chori antistrophe strophae ad assem respondet, eiusque motus ita fit, ut posterior in prioris locum succedat … Significat ex altera parte respondere et quasi ex adverso oppositum esse; id quod etiam in antistrophen cadit.’ Trendel. El Log. Arist. § 14 p. 74: and to the same effect, Comment, ad Arist. de Anima, II 11 J p. 408. ‘αντíστρоφоν dicitur quod alius rei quasi partes agit eamque repraesentat;’ Waitz, Comm. ad Anal. Pr. I 2, 25 a 6.

The term is borrowed from the manoeuvres of the chorus in the recitation of the choral odes. Στρоφ;η denotes its movement in one direction, to which the αντισρоφη, the counter-movement, the wheeling in the opposite direction, exactly corresponds, the same movements being repeated. Müller, Diss. Eumen. p. 41. Hist. Gr. Lit. c. xiv § 4. Mure, Hist. Gk. Lit. Bk. in. c. 1 § 15. Hence it is extended to the words sung by the chorus during the latter of these volutions, and signifies a set of verses precisely parallel or answering in all their details to the verses of the στρоφη. And thus, when applied in its strict and proper sense, denotes an exact correspondence in detail, as a fac-simile or counterpart.

στοργή, ἔρως, ϕιλεῖν, ἀγαπᾶν

[The following Appendix has already appeared as an article in the Journal of Philology, Vol. 1 No. 1 (1868), pp. 88—93. s.]

There are four terms in Greek which represent different states or degrees of affection, fondness, liking, love, in its most general acceptation. Of these στοργή and ἔρως are co-ordinate terms, in this respect, that they both designate what Aristotle calls πάθη, instinctive affections, implanted in sentient beings by nature.