No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Sophoclea
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 11 February 2009
Extract
I present first what I take to be a more interesting item than the others.
O.C 716–19. δ' εὐρετμος ἔκπαγλ' λα χερ
σ ✝παραπτομναπλτα
θρῷσκει, τν κατομπδων
νηρῄδων κλουθος.
The above is Pearson's text, except that I have transferred the last syllable of his 716 to the beginning of my 717. Careful consideration of the metre of this stasimon has convinced me that 716 is rightly regarded by Schroeder as an ionic trimeter (what Pearson's line would be I have no idea, and his in 703 looks oddly detached); further, that 717 is what (I and) most people call a glyconic, as is also 718. Naturally therefore I follow Hermann and Jebb as regards the text in 704, and have thus no use for the three conjectures mentioned by Pearson as substitutes for our admittedly corrupt παραπτομνα.
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © The Classical Association 1948
References
page 102 note 1 A glyconic, for I analyse 668–80 exactly as does Koster, W. J., Traité de métrique grecque, p. 194Google Scholar; he does not himself deal with 694–719.
page 102 note 2 Denniston ad loc. suggests that the dolphin is fascinated by the piping of the τριηραὑλης.
page 102 note 3 That is, to the ῥθια where N.'s daughters dance; see I.T. 425–9.
page 102 note 4 This admirable correction by Badham of the nonsensical μτηρ (assuming νηρ… read as μηρ) is accepted by Herwerden, Wecklein (ed. 1907), and Pearson.
page 104 note 1 In C.Q. xxiii. 168. To his three parallels for μενονι he says that ‘Lobeck on Ai. 634 yields much more'; that is true, and those also are unanimous and very different, being (to say no more) also all nominatives. His parallels for μγας φλος as ‘great friend’ are instructive, but the substantive makes all the difference.