Skip to main content
×
×
Home

Parmenides, B 8. 4

  • John R. Wilson (a1)
Extract

The text of Parmenides 8. 4 is unusually corrupt. Most recent critics, however, agree that Plutarch's printed in the later editions of DielsKranz, Die Fragmente der Vorsokratiker, should be excluded in favour of As G. E. L. Owen remarks (‘Eleatic Questions’, CQ [1960], 102), ‘[Plutarch's] is inappropriate since is to be proved from and not vice versa’.

Copyright
References
Hide All

page 32 note 1 Owen, loc. cit., sees the need for some such emendation. Covotti's solution is defended by Leonardo Tarán in his commentary ad loc. (Partnenides, a text with translation, commentary and critical essays, Princeton, 1965). Simplicius reads in line 4 only when he quotes the line in isolation. In context it is altogether ruled out by the of the previous line.

page 33 note 1 See Chantraine, Pierre, La Formation des noms en Grec ancien (Paris, 1933), 424.

page 33 note 2 But cf. the meanings ‘inborn’ for and ‘unborn’ for which shows that even in these words the sense ‘begotten’ is operative in the suffix. To this isolated trio of = ‘kin’ words, Plato adds and the pair while Aristotle contributes

page 34 note 1 Littre introduces it by emendation at Hippocr, . Anat. 8. 540 L.

page 34 note 2 Cf. Meister, Karl, Die homerische Kunstsprache (Leipzig, 1921; repr. Darmstadt, 1966), 207.

Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

The Classical Quarterly
  • ISSN: 0009-8388
  • EISSN: 1471-6844
  • URL: /core/journals/classical-quarterly
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed