ὁ Οἰκονομικὸς τοῦ Ξενοφῶντος (ἀναγιγνώσκωμεν)

Discussion of Greek texts that do not fall into the other categories, including texts in other dialects or texts from other periods.
Forum rules
This is not a beginner's forum, competence in Greek is assumed.
Wes Wood
Posts: 692
Joined: September 20th, 2013, 8:18 pm

Re: ὁ Οἰκονομικὸς τοῦ Ξενοφῶντος (ἀναγιγνώσκωμεν)

Post by Wes Wood » October 4th, 2014, 10:33 pm

Xenophon, Oeconomicus Chapter 1, section 2 - Feedback from Wes Wood

First, a paraphrase of what I understood:
“If someone asked us, would we be able to say what the main purpose of a steward is like we can for a doctor, carpenter, or smith?
Kritoboulos: “At the very least, it seems that the major goal of a steward is to manage the household under his charge well.”
Stephen Hughes wrote: ἦ - Are you somehow taking ἦ as subjunctive? The accent is the spiritus asper, not a lenis.
No, I read it as “or.” I was trying to avoid “or” at the beginning of the sentence and bring out the question. Yeah, sweet failure.
Stephen Hughes wrote: ** ἔργον LSJ IV.1.a Perhaps you could go beyond a one word equivalence here.
*** τούτων τῶν τεχνῶν ... ἑκάστης - each of those (three) trades in turn - referring to those in the previous section
I feel comfortable about this, even though it wasn’t initially reflected in my previous effort. Am I on the right track?
Stephen Hughes wrote: *^ οἰκονόμου ἀγαθοῦ (ἔργον) - "good stewardship", are you understanding and paraphrasing this or guessing?
I felt that the emphasis was on summarizing the major responsibility of each of the professions rather than on the workers themselves, so I translated it the way I did.
Stephen Hughes wrote: I personally feel that the "help" that you are thanking me for is too simplistic to be of much use. I am an (grammatical) experientialist more than a theorist, so the general plan is to see the optative in practice, then later to test your own experience / explain in theoretical terms what you are already familiar with from reading. If you prefer a different learning path, then perhaps you would like to read Smyth on the optative with ἄν, remembering that this use here is within the context of a question.
I am going to review this. I still don’t have a good handle on the differences between the optative and the subjunctive moods.
Stephen Hughes wrote: I assume you are, but let me ask anyway... Are you aware that there are two words written τις rather than one?...t is not so clear that you are taking this as a question here.

Heh heh. My statement was hyperbolic. I believe that I do understand this section. It’s just that this particular word frequently causes me to pause in my readings.

Stephen Hughes wrote: (Is the computer plugged into the wall?)

I think I am offended.
0 x


Ἀσπάζομαι μὲν καὶ φιλῶ, πείσομαι δὲ μᾶλλον τῷ θεῷ ἢ ὑμῖν.-Ἀπολογία Σωκράτους 29δ

Stephen Hughes
Posts: 3323
Joined: February 26th, 2013, 7:12 am

Re: ὁ Οἰκονομικὸς τοῦ Ξενοφῶντος (ἀναγιγνώσκωμεν)

Post by Stephen Hughes » October 5th, 2014, 12:52 am

Xenophon, Oeconomicus Chapter 1, section 2 - Second Feedback for Wes Wood
Wes Wood wrote:
Stephen Hughes wrote:(Is the computer plugged into the wall?)
I think I am offended.
I suppose that the less offensive way to state this would be. "Please unplug the computer from the wall and then plug it back in again."
Wes Wood wrote:
Stephen Hughes wrote:I assume you are, but let me ask anyway... Are you aware that there are two words written τις rather than one?...t is not so clear that you are taking this as a question here.
Heh heh. My statement was hyperbolic. I believe that I do understand this section. It’s just that this particular word frequently causes me to pause in my readings.

In the case of this word, to be non-confrontational, I guess I should ask you, " Is ὅ τι one word or two?", or "When you look in your dictionary does the first entry for τις or the second entry have the accent?", or an even more pertinent question might be, "Is the form ὅ τι found under the headword for the word ὅστις or in the entry for the word τις?"

Wes Wood wrote:
Stephen Hughes wrote wrote:ἦ - Are you somehow taking ἦ as subjunctive? The accent is the spiritus asper, not a lenis.
No, I read it as “or.” I was trying to avoid “or” at the beginning of the sentence and bring out the question. Yeah, sweet failure.
Are you still reading it as ἤ "either ... or ..."? It is not ἤ, it is ἦ a particle marking the beginning of a question. You could think of it as like a Spanish "¿" if you need a temporary crutch to lean on.

I was wrong about the breathing (not "accent"). :o Dreadful!
Wes Wood wrote:
Stephen Hughes wrote:** ἔργον LSJ IV.1.a Perhaps you could go beyond a one word equivalence here.
*** τούτων τῶν τεχνῶν ... ἑκάστης - each of those (three) trades in turn - referring to those in the previous section
I feel comfortable about this, even though it wasn’t initially reflected in my previous effort. Am I on the right track?
Presumably, yes. 8-) In many languages, you can get a sense of what is going on without knowing all the workings of the grammar - we are language-oriented beings with an innate desire to understand language and "fudging" translations / understandings is an expression of our human nature.
Wes Wood wrote:First, a paraphrase of what I understood:
“If someone asked us, would we be able to say what the main purpose of a steward is like we can for a doctor, carpenter, or smith?
Kritoboulos: “At the very least, it seems that the major goal of a steward is to manage the household under his charge well.”
My earlier comment about "hypothetical" was probably worse than useless.

Without learning the difference between subjunctive and optative by grammatical abstractions and rules first, there are perhaps many ways you could go, but let me introduce two options;
  • first choice - you look at page 48 (section 23) of your North and Hillard, Greek Prose Composition, and create some examples yourself to change the indicative of direct speech, to the optative of indirect speech (here it is more specifically an indirect question - "indirect" does not mean subtle, but that what was said was not heard directly from the speaker, but via a report of a question asked by one person of another),
  • second choice - keep reading then note down what you find about the situation each time - a progressively more structured linguistic awareness.
0 x
Γελᾷ δ' ὁ μωρός, κἄν τι μὴ γέλοιον ᾖ
(Menander, Γνῶμαι μονόστιχοι 108)

Stephen Hughes
Posts: 3323
Joined: February 26th, 2013, 7:12 am

Re: ὁ Οἰκονομικὸς τοῦ Ξενοφῶντος (ἀναγιγνώσκωμεν)

Post by Stephen Hughes » October 5th, 2014, 1:36 am

Xenophon, Oeconomicus Chapter 1, section 2 - Suplimentary second Feedback for Wes Wood
Wes Wood wrote:Kritoboulos: “At the very least, it seems that the major goal of a steward is to manage the household under his charge well.”
Reconsider this rendering after you have done section 3.
0 x
Γελᾷ δ' ὁ μωρός, κἄν τι μὴ γέλοιον ᾖ
(Menander, Γνῶμαι μονόστιχοι 108)

Wes Wood
Posts: 692
Joined: September 20th, 2013, 8:18 pm

Re: ὁ Οἰκονομικὸς τοῦ Ξενοφῶντος (ἀναγιγνώσκωμεν)

Post by Wes Wood » October 5th, 2014, 9:08 am

Stephen Hughes wrote: I suppose that the less offensive way to state this would be. "Please unplug the computer from the wall and then plug it back in again."
For the record, I am joking.
Stephen Hughes wrote: In the case of this word, to be non-confrontational, I guess I should ask you, " Is ὅ τι one word or two?", or "When you look in your dictionary does the first entry for τις or the second entry have the accent?", or an even more pertinent question might be, "Is the form ὅ τι found under the headword for the word ὅστις or in the entry for the word τις?"
My present and previous understanding is that it is a one word form of ὅστις. I did not recognize it as a marker for an indirect question. I think that this is causing my issue here.
Stephen Hughes wrote: Are you still reading it as ἤ "either ... or ..."? It is not ἤ, it is ἦ a particle marking the beginning of a question. You could think of it as like a Spanish "¿" if you need a temporary crutch to lean on.

No, I am good now. When you pointed out the accent, I knew what it should've been. I have seen this before in Hebrews, though off the top of my head I don't think I have seen it anywhere else in the New Testament. I mistook the circumflex for an acute.


Stephen Hughes wrote:Without learning the difference between subjunctive and optative by grammatical abstractions and rules first, there are perhaps many ways you could go, but let me introduce two options;
first choice - you look at page 48 (section 23) of your North and Hillard, Greek Prose Composition, and create some examples yourself to change the indicative of direct speech, to the optative of indirect speech (here it is more specifically an indirect question - "indirect" does not mean subtle, but that what was said was not heard directly from the speaker, but via a report of a question asked by one person of another),
second choice - keep reading then note down what you find about the situation each time - a progressively more structured linguistic awareness.

I will do some studying this afternoon. Thanks for the feedback and suggestions! It appears to me that the combination of an undeveloped sense of the optative, the misreading of ἤ, and the unfamiliar usage of ὅ τι, when taken as a whole, accounts for much of the unusual flavor of my rendering. I will resubmit it this evening along with *hopefully* the next section.
0 x
Ἀσπάζομαι μὲν καὶ φιλῶ, πείσομαι δὲ μᾶλλον τῷ θεῷ ἢ ὑμῖν.-Ἀπολογία Σωκράτους 29δ

Stephen Hughes
Posts: 3323
Joined: February 26th, 2013, 7:12 am

Re: ὁ Οἰκονομικὸς τοῦ Ξενοφῶντος (ἀναγιγνώσκωμεν)

Post by Stephen Hughes » October 5th, 2014, 9:13 am

Xenophon, Oeconomicus Chapter 1, section 4 - Text and hints

The constructions here are a little extended:
Xenophon, Economics 1.4 wrote:ἔστιν ἄρα, ἔφη ὁ Σωκράτης, τὴν τέχνην ταύτην ἐπισταμένῳ, καὶ εἰ μὴ αὐτὸς τύχοι χρήματα ἔχων, τὸν ἄλλου οἶκον οἰκονομοῦντα ὥσπερ καὶ οἰκοδομοῦντα μισθοφορεῖν; νὴ Δία καὶ πολύν γε μισθόν, ἔφη ὁ Κριτόβουλος, φέροιτ᾽ ἄν, εἰ δύναιτο οἶκον παραλαβὼν τελεῖν τε ὅσα δεῖ καὶ περιουσίαν ποιῶν αὔξειν τὸν οἶκον.
Hints (Look at these if you need to)
  • ἔστιν (+dat. pers.) (+infinitive action) - it is possible for sb to do sth (verb in infinitive). Hebrews 9:5 περὶ ὧν οὐκ ἔστιν νῦν λέγειν κατὰ μέρος (in detail). If the authour wanted to explicate that it was him doing it, he would use the first person singular pronoun in the dative (μοι).
  • μὴ ... τύχοι ... ἔχων - τυγχάνειν LSJ A.II (+participle) expressing the coincidence of the verb, which in this case is μὴ ... ἔχων. The NT instances of this form of the verb, in 1 Corinthians 14:10 Τοσαῦτα, εἰ τύχοι, γένη φωνῶν ἐστὶν ἐν κόσμῳ καὶ οὐδὲν αὐτῶν ἄφωνον. (1Corinthians 15:37) are a fossilised - now practically an adverbial - form.
  • χρήματα ἔχειν - money in the sense of wealth, property, rather than livelihood (expressed here in this context as μισθός). Luke 18:24 Πῶς δυσκόλως οἱ τὰ χρήματα ἔχοντες εἰσελεύσονται εἰς τὴν βασιλείαν τοῦ θεοῦ. (cf. Mark 10:23, 24).
  • μισθοφορεῖν - infinitive - make a living. further down, this is expressed by μισθόν... φέρειν. We see that variety of expression in the variants of Mark 3:4 (Byz) Καὶ λέγει αὐτοῖς, Ἔξεστιν τοῖς σάββασιν ἀγαθοποιῆσαι, ἢ κακοποιῆσαι; Ψυχὴν σῶσαι, ἢ ἀποκτεῖναι; Οἱ δὲ ἐσιώπων. (SBL NAUBS) ...ἀγαθὸν ποιῆσαι... .
  • τὸν ἄλλου οἶκον οἰκονομοῦντα - he who manages somebody else's estate. There are no NT parallels for this structure where the genitive ἄλλου is used of possession, but perhaps Mark 12:9 καὶ δώσει τὸν ἀμπελῶνα ἄλλοις. is sort of close in another way.
  • (οἶκον) οἰκοδομεῖν - the verb associated with τεκτονική or τέκτων. Even though the root is not the same (as is the case with οἰκονομεῖν, οἰκονομία and οἰκόνομος), the association is as natural as "science - scientist - do experiments", or "surgery - surgeon - perform operations", "education - teacher - teach students". Luke 6:48 ὅμοιός ἐστιν ἀνθρώπῳ οἰκοδομοῦντι οἰκίαν (the dwelling, not the whole estate in this case). Acts 7:49 ποῖον οἶκον οἰκοδομήσετέ μοι; λέγει κύριος· In 1 Peter 2:7 ἀπειθοῦσιν δέ, Λίθον ὃν ἀπεδοκίμασαν οἱ οἰκοδομοῦντες, οὗτος ἐγενήθη εἰς κεφαλὴν γωνίας, the builders are referred to as οἱ οἰκοδομοῦντες rather than the name of the tradesmen that they might have been. There is a similar non-use of technical language in Matthew 25:9 πορεύεσθε δὲ μᾶλλον πρὸς τοὺς πωλοῦντας καὶ ἀγοράσατε ἑαυταῖς. (and other places) suggesting that the forms (participles) derived from the verb were more wide-spread in the Koine (possibly = for non-native speakers) than learning lists of corresponding nouns.
  • ὥσπερ - has an element of comparison
  • νὴ Δία - strong affirmation in the form of an oath by Jupiter (the deity not the planet). In 1 Corinthians 15:31 Καθ’ ἡμέραν ἀποθνῄσκω, νὴ τὴν ὑμετέραν καύχησιν (??by the boasting I have in you??), ἣν ἔχω ἐν χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ τῷ κυρίῳ ἡμῶν. In the New Testament, not by a conceptualised deity.
  • μισθόν... φέρειν - φέρειν LSJ VI.3 gain (by working).
  • πολύν ... μισθόν - great reward. Matthew 5:12 Χαίρετε καὶ ἀγαλλιᾶσθε, ὅτι ὁ μισθὸς ὑμῶν πολὺς ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς·
  • δύνασθε (+infinitive) - to be able to do sth. John 10:21 (part) μὴ δαιμόνιον δύναται τυφλῶν ὀφθαλμοὺς ἀνοίγειν
  • παραλαβεῖν (τὸν οἶκον) - receive, take over in succession ((the running of) the estate). Compare 1 Corinthians 11:23 Ἐγὼ γὰρ παρέλαβον ἀπὸ τοῦ κυρίου, ὃ καὶ παρέδωκα ὑμῖν, ὅτι ὁ κύριος Ἰησοῦς ἐν τῇ νυκτὶ ᾗ παρεδίδοτο ἔλαβεν ἄρτον, (Paul of course received that teaching / right from those who had received it from those who had received it from the Lord along with a lot of other things about how to be a Christian).
  • τελεῖν - τελεῖν LSJ A.II pay out what is due (especially tax) (get an estate out of the red). The only instance of this sense in the New Testament is at Matthew 17:24 εἶπον, Ὁ διδάσκαλος ὑμῶν οὐ τελεῖ τὰ δίδραχμα;
  • περιουσία - net gain, profit The adjectival form περιούσιος is used in Titus 2:14 ὃς ἔδωκεν ἑαυτὸν ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν, ἵνα λυτρώσηται ἡμᾶς ἀπὸ πάσης ἀνομίας, καὶ καθαρίσῃ ἑαυτῷ λαὸν περιούσιον, ζηλωτὴν καλῶν ἔργων. a people to have over and above the price that he paid for them - which he could in fact keep after he redeemed them. "for his possession". (See BDAG for a different interpretation)
  • αὔξειν - increase, make better or stronger An agricultural metaphor as at John 3:30 Ἐκεῖνον δεῖ αὐξάνειν, ἐμὲ δὲ ἐλαττοῦσθαι. or Acts 6:7 Καὶ ὁ λόγος τοῦ θεοῦ ηὔξανεν, καὶ ἐπληθύνετο ὁ ἀριθμὸς τῶν μαθητῶν ἐν Ἱερουσαλὴμ σφόδρα, πολύς τε ὄχλος τῶν ἱερέων ὑπήκουον τῇ πίστει.
0 x
Γελᾷ δ' ὁ μωρός, κἄν τι μὴ γέλοιον ᾖ
(Menander, Γνῶμαι μονόστιχοι 108)

Stephen Hughes
Posts: 3323
Joined: February 26th, 2013, 7:12 am

Re: ὁ Οἰκονομικὸς τοῦ Ξενοφῶντος (ἀναγιγνώσκωμεν)

Post by Stephen Hughes » October 5th, 2014, 10:01 am

Xenophon, Oeconomicus Chapter 1, section 2 - Suplimentary note on the ἦ
Wes Wood wrote:
Stephen Hughes wrote:Are you still reading it as ἤ "either ... or ..."? It is not ἤ, it is ἦ a particle marking the beginning of a question. You could think of it as like a Spanish "¿" if you need a temporary crutch to lean on.
No, I am good now. When you pointed out the accent, I knew what it should've been. I have seen this before in Hebrews, though off the top of my head I don't think I have seen it anywhere else in the New Testament. I mistook the circumflex for an acute.

It seems that your eye-sight is similar to mine, but your command of terminology far surpasses mine in this area. They all almost look the same - more so now than 20 years ago :lol: - and they are pronounced the same. I do remember that in the second stage of reading Greek, I paid more attention to accents and breathings - as a hint to which word it was - than I do these days, so from time to time I make mistakes with them.

There is another way to take ἦ here in the Oeconomicus - as a particle of affirmation. That is the way that Eugéne Talbot, Xenophon, De l’Économie (Chapitres I à X)(Paris, 1859) takes it. That being said, I prefer it as the question marker - but you could consider taking it as you see best.

From your memory of the verse, I see you also use the Byzantine text-form. The only NT example of ἦ is taken in that "indeed" sense in
Hebrews 6:5 (Byz.) wrote:λέγων, Ἦ μὴν εὐλογῶν εὐλογήσω σε, καὶ πληθύνων πληθυνῶ σε.
0 x
Γελᾷ δ' ὁ μωρός, κἄν τι μὴ γέλοιον ᾖ
(Menander, Γνῶμαι μονόστιχοι 108)

Stephen Hughes
Posts: 3323
Joined: February 26th, 2013, 7:12 am

Re: ὁ Οἰκονομικὸς τοῦ Ξενοφῶντος (ἀναγιγνώσκωμεν)

Post by Stephen Hughes » October 6th, 2014, 4:00 am

Stephen Hughes wrote:Xenophon, Oeconomicus Chapter 1, section 5 - Text and hints

Opinions that would reasonably stand longer than the duration of the conversation are stated here in the indicative:
Xenophon, Economics 1.5 wrote:οἶκος δὲ δὴ τί δοκεῖ ἡμῖν εἶναι; ἆρα ὅπερ οἰκία, ἢ καὶ ὅσα τις ἔξω τῆς οἰκίας κέκτηται, πάντα τοῦ οἴκου ταῦτά ἐστιν; ἐμοὶ γοῦν, ἔφη ὁ Κριτόβουλος, δοκεῖ, καὶ εἰ μηδ᾽ ἐν τῇ αὐτῇ πόλει εἴη τῷ κεκτημένῳ, πάντα τοῦ οἴκου εἶναι ὅσα τις κέκτηται.
Hints (Look at these if you need to)
  • οἶκος / οἰκία - estate (house and grounds, gardens, fields, orchids, irrigation works, etc.) / house (dwelling proper). The synonymy is different in the New Testament. For the purposes of reading this work, you should note the sense that this authour uses the words - what is important is not what it could mean in all of Greek, but rather what it means in this authour's Greek.
  • ἆρα - a word for beginning a question. Look at Luke 18:8 Λέγω ὑμῖν ὅτι ποιήσει τὴν ἐκδίκησιν αὐτῶν ἐν τάχει. Πλὴν ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ἐλθὼν ἆρα εὑρήσει τὴν πίστιν ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς; or Acts 8:30 Προσδραμὼν δὲ ὁ Φίλιππος ἤκουσεν αὐτοῦ ἀναγινώσκοντος τὸν προφήτην Ἠσαΐαν, καὶ εἶπεν, Ἆρά γε γινώσκεις ἃ ἀναγινώσκεις; for two of the three New Testament examples. The position of the ἆρα at the beginning of the sentence is typical of the Classical prose idiom. It could be that Socrates used it to suggest that his question, "It is just the dwelling?" should be answered negatively.
  • ὅπερ (ἐστί) - ( < ὅσπερ) it is the self-same thing as, it is (precisely, indeed) what ... is
  • ὅπερ B, ἢ καὶ - What is A? Is it a direct equivalence with B, or is it also C? Mark 15:6 (Byz) Κατὰ δὲ ἑορτὴν ἀπέλυεν αὐτοῖς ἕνα δέσμιον, ὅνπερ ᾐτοῦντο. is a more regular usage of ὅσπερ, more or less equivalent to ὅν (the rendering of the SBL NAUBS text).
  • κέκτηται - own, possess
  • ὅσα ..., πάντα ... ταῦτά - it may seem more natural for you if you reverse these two phrases
  • καὶ εἰ - even if
  • μηδ᾽ ... εἴη - definitely put the negative with the full verb because there is an article before the participle. The negation of an articular participle comes between the article and the participle.
  • αὐτῇ πόλει ... τῷ κεκτημένῳ - sense suggests that it should mean, "the same city as the the owner", but I can't find an equivalent structure for that (present) conjecture. The basis of my thinking is that since the adjective ὅμοιος takes a dative of the thing or person to which it is compared, it might be the case here. Without another example this is a plausible conjecture or a working hypothesis.
  • πολύν ... μισθόν - great reward. Matthew 5:12 Χαίρετε καὶ ἀγαλλιᾶσθε, ὅτι ὁ μισθὸς ὑμῶν πολὺς ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς·
  • πάντα ... ὅσα - v.s. and this is in a more natural word order for English speakers, but that is only a first step to understanding the significance of the word order in Greek. (After you walk a mile in another man's shoes, the polite thing to do would be to give them back - it has probably been uncomfortable for him to walk a mile in his socks). This syntactic construction is frequent in the New Testament as at Matthew 7:12 Πάντα οὖν ὅσα ἂν θέλητε ἵνα ποιῶσιν ὑμῖν οἱ ἄνθρωποι, οὕτως καὶ ὑμεῖς ποιεῖτε αὐτοῖς· οὗτος γάρ ἐστιν ὁ νόμος καὶ οἱ προφῆται.
0 x
Γελᾷ δ' ὁ μωρός, κἄν τι μὴ γέλοιον ᾖ
(Menander, Γνῶμαι μονόστιχοι 108)

Stephen Hughes
Posts: 3323
Joined: February 26th, 2013, 7:12 am

Re: ὁ Οἰκονομικὸς τοῦ Ξενοφῶντος (ἀναγιγνώσκωμεν)

Post by Stephen Hughes » October 6th, 2014, 12:10 pm

Xenophon, Oeconomicus Chapter 1, section 6 - Text and hints

A bit short on New Testament parallels here:
Xenophon, Economics 1.6 wrote:οὐκοῦν καὶ ἐχθροὺς κέκτηνταί τινες; νὴ Δία καὶ πολλούς γε ἔνιοι. ἦ καὶ κτήματα αὐτῶν φήσομεν εἶναι τοὺς ἐχθρούς; γελοῖον μεντἂν εἴη, ἔφη ὁ Κριτόβουλος, εἰ ὁ τοὺς ἐχθροὺς αὔξων προσέτι καὶ μισθὸν τούτου φέροι.
Hints (Look at these if you need to)
  • οὐκοῦν - οὐκοῦν in impassioned questions, almost = οὐ alone. The expected answer is positive, as we can see in the only occurrence of this word in the New Testament at
    John 18:37 wrote:Εἶπεν οὖν αὐτῷ ὁ Πιλάτος, Οὐκοῦν βασιλεὺς εἶ σύ; Ἀπεκρίθη Ἰησοῦς, Σὺ λέγεις, ὅτι βασιλεύς εἰμι ἐγώ.
  • ἔνιοι - ἔνιοι , αι , α, some. Neither this word nor the corresponding temporal adverb ἐνίοτε occur in the New Testament, but if you really want exampleσ, we could look at
    Flavius Josephus, [i]Antiquitates Judaicae[/i] book 13 Chapter 13 Section 3 (section 363) wrote:ἔνιοι δὲ μονούμενοι τὰς οἰκίας ἐνεπίμπρασαν, ὡς μηδὲν ἐξ αὐτῶν λάφυρον εἶναι τοῖς πολεμίοις λαβεῖν. οἱ δὲ καὶ τῶν τέκνων καὶ τῶν γυναικῶν αὐτόχειρες ἐγένοντο τῆς ὑπὸ τοῖς ἐχθροῖς αὐτὰ δουλείας οὕτως ἀπαλλάττειν ἠναγκασμένοι.
    and some of them, when they saw themselves deserted, burnt their own houses, that the enemy might get none of their spoils; nay some of them, with their own hands, slew their children, and their wives, having no other way but this of avoiding slavery for them;
    Strabo, [i]Geography[/i] 6.2 wrote: ἔοικε δὲ λαμβάνειν μεταβολὰς πολλὰς τὰ ἄκρα τοῦ ὄρους διὰ τὴν νομὴν τοῦ πυρός, τοτὲ μὲν εἰς ἕνα κρατῆρα συμφερομένου τοτὲ δὲ σχιζομένου, καὶ τοτὲ μὲν ῥύακας ἀναπέμποντος τοτὲ δὲ φλόγας καὶ λιγνῦς, ἄλλοτε δὲ καὶ μύδρους ἀναφυσῶντος: ἀνάγκη δὲ τοῖς πάθεσι τούτοις τούς τε ὑπὸ γῆν πόρους συμμεταβάλλειν καὶ τὰ στόμια ἐνίοτε πλείω ὄντα κατὰ τὴν ἐπιφάνειαν τὴν πέριξ.
    It seems that the summits of the mountain take many changes by the ravages of the fire, which sometimes is brought together into one crater, and at another is divided; at one time again it heaves forth streams of lava, and at another flames and thick smoke: at other times again ejecting red-hot masses of fire-stone. In such violent commotions as these the subterraneous passages must necessarily undergo a corresponding change, and at times the orifices on the surface around be considerably increased.
  • κτῆμα - property, possession.
    Acts 2:45 wrote:καὶ τὰ κτήματα καὶ τὰς ὑπάρξεις ἐπίπρασκον, καὶ διεμέριζον αὐτὰ πᾶσιν, καθότι ἄν τις χρείαν εἶχεν.
  • φήσομεν - think, deem, suppose
    1 Corinthians 10:19 wrote:Τί οὖν φημι; Ὅτι εἴδωλόν τί ἐστιν; Ἢ ὅτι εἰδωλόθυτόν τί ἐστιν;
    is probably the only New Testament passage to come close to this meaning.
  • γελοῖον - γελοῖος ludicrous, absurd
    Luke 6:21 wrote:Μακάριοι οἱ κλαίοντες νῦν, ὅτι γελάσετε.
    and
    Luke 6:25 wrote:Οὐαὶ ὑμῖν, οἱ γελῶντες νῦν, ὅτι πενθήσετε καὶ κλαύσετε.
    use the verbal form for "laugh", and γέλως "laughter" is used at
    James 4:9 wrote:Ταλαιπωρήσατε καὶ πενθήσατε καὶ κλαύσατε· ὁ γέλως ὑμῶν εἰς πένθος μεταστραφήτω, καὶ ἡ χαρὰ εἰς κατήφειαν.
  • μεντἂν - from μέντοι indeed, to be sure No New Testament passages use μέντοι in this way.
  • προσέτι - over and above, besides
  • μισθὸν τούτου φέροι - I wonder what sort of genitive this would be? A genitive of taking advantage of the situation perhaps?
  • τοῦτο - refers to the situation were ὁ τοὺς ἐχθροὺς αὔξων προσέτι.
0 x
Γελᾷ δ' ὁ μωρός, κἄν τι μὴ γέλοιον ᾖ
(Menander, Γνῶμαι μονόστιχοι 108)

Wes Wood
Posts: 692
Joined: September 20th, 2013, 8:18 pm

Re: ὁ Οἰκονομικὸς τοῦ Ξενοφῶντος (ἀναγιγνώσκωμεν)

Post by Wes Wood » October 6th, 2014, 5:12 pm

Xenophon, Oeconomicus Chapter 1, section 3

I have taken some liberties with the text, but only after I have given it much thought. I can say with confidence that I am not attempting to artificially smooth anything out, but I am still struggling with “ὅ τι περ καὶ ἑαυτῷ.” I didn’t want to spend more time on it, though, than I already have.

“Is it not true that a steward, if he had a mind to, would be able to manage another person’s house well, if such a house were entrusted to him, just as he manages his own?”[1]
“A skilled carpenter would indeed be able to build for another whatever he envisions[2] for himself, and a steward certainly would be able to manage the affairs of others in the same way. This is how it seems to me, O Socrates.”

[1] How do you know that a speaker change is being signaled here?

[2] I picture the project itself as being in view here and have loosely translated “ἐπιστάμενος” as “envisions” to bring this idea out. I felt that “after deciding what to build” was far too strong. Perhaps I am still incorrect...

[3] “ὅ τι περ καὶ ἑαυτῷ” This is the phrase that I feel will make or break what I have written. I see a link between this and “ἐπιστάμενος.” I feel good about this translation, but I know what that means. 8-)
0 x
Ἀσπάζομαι μὲν καὶ φιλῶ, πείσομαι δὲ μᾶλλον τῷ θεῷ ἢ ὑμῖν.-Ἀπολογία Σωκράτους 29δ

Wes Wood
Posts: 692
Joined: September 20th, 2013, 8:18 pm

Re: ὁ Οἰκονομικὸς τοῦ Ξενοφῶντος (ἀναγιγνώσκωμεν)

Post by Wes Wood » October 6th, 2014, 6:46 pm

Stephen Hughes wrote: your command of terminology far surpasses mine in this area.
If this is the case, it is only because I am working on that right now. I currently know far less than the basics.
Stephen Hughes wrote: From your memory of the verse, I see you also use the Byzantine text-form. The only NT example of ἦ is taken in that "indeed" sense in...
It would seem so, but I don't think I have read the Byzantine text-form. I only happened to recall this from when I was attempting to figure out how to use the apparatus of the NA-27. :shock: :oops: :lol:
I chose to go through Hebrews at that time because it was and is my favorite book of the New Testament (though Romans is extremely close). Why that word, of all information, happened to remain as a specter in my memories, I cannot say. The verse is Hebrews 6:14, though. It took me some time to find it yesterday while I was looking for parallel usages of ἦ to examine.
0 x
Ἀσπάζομαι μὲν καὶ φιλῶ, πείσομαι δὲ μᾶλλον τῷ θεῷ ἢ ὑμῖν.-Ἀπολογία Σωκράτους 29δ

Post Reply

Return to “Other Greek Texts”