I've got my copy of Siebenthal and am going through it. My first port of call is the article and I'm mystified by its treatment.
First you have § 130 detailing differences between Greek and English on the use of the (definite) article.
Then you have § 131 laying out the pronominal use of the article.
Only next in § 132 we are told of the standard use of the article, and it's "by and large" just like the English definite article.
Then § 133 is a big section about definiteness without the article.
So... the Greek definite article is just like the English one, except when it isn't--and the exceptions appear random and unmotivated. At times, the grammar even says that there's no rule. While I do think cross-linguistic comparisons are helpful, I doubt that such an English-centric approach (or German-centric in the original) is a good way to go about expounding Greek grammar.
Thoughts on von Siebenthal's Ancient Greek Grammar
-
- Posts: 3351
- Joined: May 11th, 2011, 10:51 am
- Location: Melbourne
- Contact:
Thoughts on von Siebenthal's Ancient Greek Grammar
Stephen C. Carlson, Ph.D.
Melbourne, Australia
Melbourne, Australia
-
- Posts: 1141
- Joined: August 9th, 2012, 4:19 pm
Re: Thoughts on von Siebenthal's Ancient Greek Grammar
Yes, I totally agree. Any approach that starts with:Stephen Carlson wrote: ↑May 17th, 2020, 8:52 pm So... the Greek definite article is just like the English one, except when it isn't--and the exceptions appear random and unmotivated. At times, the grammar even says that there's no rule. While I do think cross-linguistic comparisons are helpful, I doubt that such an English-centric approach (or German-centric in the original) is a good way to go about expounding Greek grammar.
the Greek definite article is just like the English|German|French|Spanish|Icelandic
is bound to fail. Forget the English article. It will just prevent you from discovering what is happening in Ancient Greek.
C. Stirling Bartholomew