Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-wxhwt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-12T12:57:38.841Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Remarks on the New Liddell and Scott

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 October 2009

G. B. A. Fletcher
Affiliation:
King's College, Newcastle-upon-Tyne

Abstract

Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Review Article
Copyright
Copyright © The Classical Association 1947

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

page 82 note 1 The only other reviews which I have seen are those by Johnson, J. in C. W. 34, 1940, pp. 86–7Google Scholar and Whatmough, J. in C.P. 37, 1942, pp. 96–8.Google Scholar

page 82 note 2 Even the eighth edition was not always used as it should have been. Some of the errors of Wilamowitz which could have been avoided are those in his notes on Hesiod, Erga 418, 427, 511, 572, 591; 720; Euripides, Ion 887, 1286; Aristophanes, Lysistrata 27,217,425,587,1079; Menander, Epitrepontes 515, 696. The eighth edition of the lexicon is also right where Wilamowitz is wrong, for example, in his notes on Euripides, H.F. 63, 625,632,839,943,1221,1318,1416; and now Jones's edition is right where he is wrong, for example, in his notes on Hesiod, Erga 512; Euripides, H.F. 132,354; Menander, Epitrepontes 6, 287.Google Scholar

page 82 note 3 See the brief remarks of Tate, J., headed ’, in C.R. 66, 1942, pp. 65–6,Google Scholar and also the remarks of Dunbabin, R. L. in C.R. Ix, 1946, pp. 8–11 and those of H. W. Parke and D. E. W. Wormell, op. cit., pp. 11–13.Google Scholar

page 83 note 1 To Harrison's three straightforward examples of til as a preposition in tragedy add E. El. 409.