Syntax of the simple sentence
[*] 2. The most simple form of the sentence is the finite verb: “εἰ-μί”, I am; “δίδω-ς”, thou givest; “φη-σί”, he says. Here the form contains in itself all the necessary elements, the subject being indicated by the ending.
Nominative Case
[*] 3. Subject The subject of the finite verb is always in the nominative case, or so considered. “Κόνων . . . ἐνίκησε,” DIN. 1.75 ; Konon gained the victory. [*] 4. The subject of the infinitive is in the accusative case, or so considered. See Infinitive. “ἀδύνατον . . . ἄνθρωπον πάντα καλῶς ποιεῖν,” XEN. Cyr. 8.2.5 ; For a man to do all things well is impossible. For the nominative with the infinitive, see Index. [*] 5. Nominative in titles, inscriptions, etc. The nominative is used as in English, not only as the subject of the verb, but in titles, inscriptions, and the like, which imply action or character. “Νεφέλαι”, Clouds; “Σφῆκες”, Wasps; “Εἰρήνη”, Peace; “Βάτραχοι”, Frogs; “Πλοῦτος”, Plutus, etc. “Καλλιστὼ Νικοφίλου Ἀγγελῆθεν”, CIA. II, 1682. “Προκλείδης Φιλοκλέους Ἀγγελῆθεν”, CIA. II, 1686. CIA. II, 1689. 1690. 1691. 1692. etc. [*] 6. Nominative in citations, enumerations, and indefinite predications. Under the former head more properly belongs also the use of the so-called nominative absolute in the citation of names, in enumerations, and in indefinite predications. “ἀνὴρ δὲ γενόμενος προσείληφε τὴν τῶν πονηρῶν κοινὴν ἐπωνυμίαν συκοφάντης,” AESCHIN. 2.99 ; When he became a man, he received the common surname of scoundrels, i. e. sycophant (informer). [*] 7. Nominative in Citations of Names: AESCHIN. 2.99 (see above). PLATO, Legg. 956C: “διαιτηταὶ δικαστῶν τοὔνομα μᾶλλον πρέπον ἔχοντες” . PLAT. Soph. 218E: “οἷον ἀσπαλιευτής” . Theag. 124 D: “τίνα γὰρ ἄλλην” (sc. “ἐπωνυμίαν”), . . ., “πλήν γε χρησμῳδοί”; Ibid. 124 E. XEN. Cyr. 3.3.58: “παρηγγύα ὁ Κῦρος σύνθημα Ζεὺς σύμμαχος. καὶ ἡγεμών” . Oec. 6.14: “τοὺς ἔχοντας τὸ σεμνὸν ὄνομα τοῦτο τὸ καλός τε κἀγαθός” . AR. Vesp. 1185: “μῦς καὶ γαλῆ μέλλεις λέγειν” (so R). EUR. Tr. 1233 (but Kirchhoff puts a comma after “ἰατρός”). SOPH. Ant. 567: “ἀλλ᾽ ἥδε μέντοι μὴ λέγε” [*] 8. Nominative in enumerations DEM. 23.207: “τὰ δὲ τῆς πόλεως οἰκοδομήματα . . . τοιαῦτα ῾σξ. “ὁρᾷ”）, . . ., προπύλαια ταῦτα, νεώσοικοι, στοαί, Πειραιεύς” . PLATO, Soph. 266D: “τίθημι δύο διχῇ ποιητικῆς εἴδη: θεία μὲν καὶ ἀνθρωπίνη κτἑ” . AESCHYL. Pers. 33 sqq.: “ἄλλους δ᾽ ὁ . . . Νεῖλος ἔπεμψεν: Σουσισκάνης, Πηγασταγὼν Αἰγυπτογενής, ὅ τε τῆς ἱερᾶς Μέμφιδος ἄρχων κτἑ.” , And others Nile sent, Susiskanes, etc. This use of the nominative abounds in inscriptions: CIA. 1.37 (= Hicks, No. 47). Ibid. 170-3 (= Hicks, No. 50): “τάδε παρέδοσαν . . . στέφανος . . ., φιάλαι . . ., κόρη . . ., κοίτη . . . κτἑ., κτἑ”. Ibid. 259 (= Hicks, No. 48), etc., etc. See Msth., Gr. d. Att. Inschr.2 § 82.3 d). [*] 9. Nominative in Indefinite Predications: HOM. Od. 1.51: “νῆσος δενδρήεσσα, θεὰ δ᾽ ἐν δώματα ναίει” , A wooded island, and in it a goddess hath her abode. Il. 6.395-6: “μεγαλήτορος Ἠετίωνος, Ἠετίων ὃς ἔναιεν” . Ibid. 10.437. 547. For the free and frequent use of this nom. in inscriptions, see Msth.2 § 82.3 a-c. CIA. 11.809 c, 154-55 (325/324 B.C.): “ἀπὸ τῆς τετρήρους Ἀνύσεως, Ἀντιδώρου ἔργον”, From the quadrireme Anysis, the work of Antidorus. So often in the same inscription. Ibid. 1.179.7 sqq. (433 B.C.): “παρέδοσαν . . . τρεῖς καὶ δέκα ἡμέραι ἐσεληλυθυίας”. [*] 10. Nominative in suspense. The nominative is sometimes left in suspense (nominativus pendens, anacoluthon, want of sequence), an equivalent construction being substituted. “διαλεγόμενος αὐτῷ ἔδοξέ μοι,” PLATO, Apol. 21C ; Talking with him it seemed to me. ISOC. 4.107-8: “ἔχοντες . . . κεκτημένοι . . . κρατοῦντες . . . εἰδότες . . . ὅμως οὐδὲν τούτων ἡμᾶς ἐπῆρε” . 12.118. ANDOC. 1.16. Ibid. 29-30: “καὶ γὰρ οἱ λόγοι τῶν κατηγόρων . . . τούτων οὖν ἐμοὶ τῶν λόγων . . . τί προσήκει;” ; Ibid. 95. PLATO, Apol. 21C (see above). Crat. 403 A (twice). Ibid. 404 C: “Φερρέφαττα δέ, πολλοὶ μὲν καὶ τοῦτο φοβοῦνται τὸ ὄνομα” . Ibid. 412 B-C. 419 B. XEN. An. 2.5.41: “Πρόξενος δὲ καὶ Μένων . . . πέμψατε αὐτοὺς δεῦρο” . Cf. 3.3.16, 7.6.37. Hiero, 4.6. Cf. 6.15. HDT. 1.134. EUR. H. F. 185. Phoen. 283-5. AESCHYL. Cho. 520-1. HOM. Il. 2.350-3. [*] 11. Nominative in exclamations. In exclamations, the nominative characterises, the vocative addresses, the accusative implies an object of emotion, and the genitive the source or sphere of emotion. PLATO, Phaedr. 227C: “ὢ γενναῖος, εἴθε γράψειεν ὡς κτἑ” . AR. Ran. 652: “ἄνθρωπος ἱερός” . Pl. 23: “λῆρος” , Stuff and nonsense! EUR. Med. 61: “ὦ μῶρος” , O foolish woman that she is! SOPH. El. 1354. Ph. 254: “ὢ πόλλ᾽ ἐγὼ μοχθηρός, ὢ πικρὸς θεοῖς” . Tr. 1046 sq. HOM. Od. 20.194: “δύσμορος” . Il.1.231: “δημοβόρος βασιλεύς, ἐπεὶ οὐτιδανοῖσιν ἀνάσσεις” , Folk-devouring king that thou art, etc. 2.38: “νήπιος” 5.403: “σχέτλιος” , Ibid. 406: “νήπιος” , Ibid. 787: “αἰδώς” , 9.630: “σχέτλιος” , Ibid. 632: “νηλής” , 13.95: “αἰδώς” , 16.422: also. 17.236: “νήπιοι” . 22.86: “σχέτλιος” . For the Vocative, see 24. For the Accusative in Exclamations, see Index. For the Genitive in Exclamations, see Index. [*] 12. Nominative for the vocative. In the absence of a vocative form, the nominative is used as a vocative. When the vocative exists, the use of the nominative as a vocative has often a perceptible difference of tone. It is graver and more respectful, because it appeals to character, though sometimes metrical considerations come into play. In Homer, the nominative of proper nouns is frequently substituted for the vocative because of certain irregularities of metre. “ἐγὼ . . ., ὦ γῆ καὶ ἥλιε καὶ . . . σύνεσις . . . βεβοήθηκα,” AESCHIN. 3.260. PLATO, Hipp. Mai. 281 A: “Ἱππίας ὁ καλός τε καὶ σοφός, ὡς διὰ χρόνου ἡμῖν κατῆρας εἰς τὰς Ἀθήνας” .. 1168. EUR. Hel. 1399: “ὦ κλεινὸς ἡμῖν πόσις” . Suppl. 277: “ὦ φίλος, ὦ δοκιμώτατος Ἑλλάδι” . SOPH. Ai. 525: “Αἴας” , and so regularly in Sophocles. (See Ellendt, Soph. ).
. Ibid. 545: “ὦ φίλος, εἰπέ” . Fr. 207 N2: “τράγος, γένειον ἆρα πενθήσεις σύ γε”. HOM. Od. 1.301: “καὶ σύ, φίλος, μάλα γάρ σε, κτε” . 17.415: “δός, φίλος” . 19.406: “γαμβρὸς ἐμὸς θύγατέρ τε, τίθεσθ᾽ ὄνομ᾽ ὅττι κεν εἴπω” .“ ὦ δῖος αἰθὴρ καὶ ταχύπτεροι πνοαί,
ποταμῶν τε πηγαὶ ποντίων τε κυμάτων,
ἀνήριθμον γέλασμα, παμμῆτόρ τε γῆ
”
. For the occasional use of the Nominative of an Adjective with a Vocative Substantive, or of a Vocative Adjective with a Nominative Substantive, see Index. [*] 13. Nominative in apposition with the vocative. The nominative with the article is sometimes in apposition with an expressed or unexpressed vocative which is identical with the subject of the verb. Similarly the pronoun “οὗτος” is often used in calling to a person. “ὁ παῖς, ἀκολούθει δεῦρο,” AR. Ran.521 ; You boy, follow this way! “οὗτος, τί ποιεῖς;” Ibid. Nub. 723 : You there, what are you doing? PLATO, Conv. 172A: “Ὦ Φαληρεύς, ἔφη, οὗτος Ἀπολλόδωρος, οὐ περιμενεῖς; κἀγὼ ἐπιστὰς περιέμεινα: καὶ ὅς, Ἀπολλόδωρε, ἔφη κτἑ” . (note difference between nom. and voc.). Ibid. 218 B: “οἱ δὲ οἰκέται καὶ εἴ τις ἄλλος ἐστὶ βέβηλος ..., πύλας ... τοῖς ὠσὶν ἐπίθεσθε” . Protag. 337 C: “ὦ ἄνδρες, ἔφη, οἱ παρόντες” . XEN. An.1.5.16: “Πρόξενε καὶ οἱ ἄλλοι οἱ παρόντες Ἕλληνες, οὐκ ἴστε ὅ τι ποιεῖτε” , Proxenus and the rest of you Greeks that are present, you do not know what you are doing. Cyr. 4.5.17: “ἴθι μὲν οὖν σὐ, ἔφη, ὁ πρεσβύτατος, καὶ ἰὼν ταῦτα λέγε” . Ibid. 4.5.22: “σὺ δ᾽, ἔφη, ὁ τῶν Γ̔ρκανίων ἄρχων, ὑπόμεινον” . Ibid. 5.3.43: “ἐπιμέλεσθε . . . οἵ τε ἄρχοντες καὶ πάντες δὲ οἱ σωφρονοῦντες” . Ibid. 6.3.33: “σὺ δὲ ὁ ἄρχων . . . ἐκτάττου” . Ibid. 8.7.28: “καὶ πάντες δὲ οἱ παρόντες καὶ οἱ ἀπόντες φἰλοι χαίρετε” . Mem. 3.14.4: “παρατηρεῖτ᾽, ἔφη, τοῦτον, οἱ πλησίον” . AR. Ach. 242: “πρόϊθ᾽ ἐς τὸ πρόσθεν ὀλίγον, ἡ κανηφόρος” . Nub. 723 (see above). Vesp. 1: “οὗτος, τἰ πάσχεις;” Ibid. 1364: “ὦ οὗτος, οὗτος” . Av. 665 sq.: “ἡ Πρὀκνη ἔκβαινε” . Lys. 437: “ἔδεισας, οὗτος;” Ran. 521 (see above). EUR. Alc. 773: “οὗτος, τί σεμνὸν . . . βλέπεις;” EUR. Med. 922: “αὕτη, τί χλωροῖς δακρύοις τέγγεις κόρας;” EUR. Or. 1567: “οὗτος σύ, . . . μὴ ψαύσῃς” (“σύ” expressed with the “οὗτος”). SOPH. Ai. 71-72: “οὗτος, σὲ … καλῶ” . Ibid. 89: “ὦ οὗτος, Αἴας, δεύτερόν σε προσκαλῶ” . AESCHYL. Pers. 155-6: “ὦ βαθυζώνων ἄνασσα … μῆτερ ἡ Ξέρξου γεραιά, χαῖρε” . HOM. Od. 3.427: “οἱ ἄλλοι” . Cf. 9.172: “ἄλλοι μὲν νῦν μίμνετ᾽ ἐμοὶ ἐρίηρες ἑταῖροι” . Il. 3.94: “οἱ ἄλλοι” , 19.83: similarly. Cf. ibid. 190: “ἄλλοι” .“ Ζεῦ πάτερ Ἴδηθεν μεδέων κύδιστε μέγιστε
Ἠέλιός θ᾽ ὃς πάντ᾽ ἐφορᾷς
”
Vocative Case
[*] 14. The Vocative (the case of direct address) is not affected by the structure of the sentence, and does not enter as an element into syntax, except in the matter of concord. [*] 15. w)= with the vocative. “ὦ” is commonly prefixed to the vocative. “ὦ ἄνδρες Ἀθηναῖοι,” DEM.1.1 ; Gentlemen of Athens. “ἀεὶ ὅμοιος εἶ, ὦ Ἀπολλόδωρε,” PLATO, Conv. 173D ; You are always alike, Apollodorus. DEM. 1.1: “ὦ ἄνδρες Ἀθηναῖοι” , and so hundreds of times in the same author. 19.4: “ὦ ἄνδρες δικασταί” , and the same phrase hundreds of times in the same author. AESCHIN.1.122. PLATO, Conv. 173D (see above). In the Conv.there are about 70 examples of the use of “ὦ” with the vocative of proper names, and only 8 instances of the vocative of proper names without “ὦ.” (See Hug on Plat. Conv.init.). Protag.: All of about a hundred vocatives of proper names seem to have the “ὦ.” (See Hug l.c.). XEN. Anab.: “ὦ” with the vocative occurs about 40 times;2 3 e.g. 1.7.3. THUC.: About 40 times; e.g. 1.32.1. HDT. 7.160. 161. AR. Eq.1194. AR. Nub.793, 794. AR. Vesp.136. EUR. Hel.744. SOPH. Ant. 49, 572. AESCHYL. Sept.203, 255. HOM. Od.1.45 and frequently. Il. 1.74 and frequently. [*] 16. Position of w)=. ὦ regularly precedes the vocative or the vocative and its attribute. In poetry it is sometimes interjected between the vocative and its attribute. [*] 17. Normal position: DEM.1.1 (see 15). 19.4 (see 15). PLATO, Phaedr. 227A: “ὦ φίλε Φαῖδρε” . Ibid. D: “ὦ βέλτιστε Σώκρατες” . PLAT. Soph. 230C: “ὦ παῖ φίλε” . AR. Eq. 108. SOPH. El.86, Ph. 1128. [*] 18. Exceptional position: Cf. El.167, Hel.1451, Or. 1246: “Μυκηνίδες ὦ φίλιαι” . SOPH. Ai. 395. PIND. P. 2.1: “μεγαλοπόλιες ὦ Συράκοσαι” . HOM. Od. 8.408: “χαῖρε, πάτερ ὦ ξεῖνε” . Il. 4.189: “φίλος ὦ Μενέλαε” . 17.716. [*] 19. Repetition of w)=. ὦ is occasionally used with both substantive and attribute. SOPH. Ph.799: “ὦ τέκνον ὦ γενναῖον” . HOM. Il.6.55: “ὦ πέπον ὦ Μενέλαε” . [*] 20. Omission of w)=. The omission of “ὦ” in prose is passionate or late. “ληρεῖτ᾽, Ἀθηναῖοι,” DEM.8.31 ; You are talking nonsense, Athenians. “ἄνδρες Ἀθηναῖοι”, as for example in 8.35, is rare by the side of “ὦ ἄνδρες Ἀθηναῖοι. ἄνδρες δικασταί”, as for example in 18.196, is rare by the side of “ὦ ἄνδρες δικασταί”. 18.243: “ἐμβρόντητ᾽, εἶτα νῦν λέγεις” ; Ibid. 290: “ἀκούεις, Αἰσχίνη;” PLATO, Conv. 172A. 173 E. 175 A. (twice). Gorg. 518 C: “ἄνθρωπε, ἐπαΐεις οὐδὲν περὶ γυμναστικῆς” . Lach. 197 E. Phileb. 11 A. Soph. 220 D. Theaet. 143 C. XEN. An. 1.5.16 (see 13). Cyr. 2.2.7; “ἄνθρωπε, τί ποιεῖς;” Mem. 2.8.1. THUC.2.11.1 THUC., 4.126.1 THUC., 5.9.1. HDT.1.8(twice). 9. 11. 7.158. 162. AR. Ach. 1097. 1098. 1099. 1101, etc. EUR. Hel. 858. SOPH. Ai. 36 and frequently, Ant.11. 223. AESCHYL. Pr. V. 3. 144. 635. SIMON. C. 145 Bgk.4 HOM. Od. 1.1, 60, 62, 64, 158, 337, 346, etc. Il. 1.1, 17, 26, 37, 59, 106, 122, 131, etc. [*] 21. Position of the vocative. In quiet passages the vocative does not begin the sentence. When it heads the sentence, the omission of “ὦ” heightens the excitement still further. [*] 22. Vocative postpositive: DEM. more than a thousand times, as in 18.5. 21.1. 23.1. 30.1. AESCHIN.1.122: “αὕτη μέν ἐστιν, ὦ Τίμαρχε, ἀνδρὸς ἀγαθοῦ . . . ἀπολογία” , and so in the other orators. PLATO, Conv. 173D. 212 B. Gorg. 518 E. Phileb. 11 A (s4). XEN. An. 1.6.6 (s). 7. 8. 9. THUC. Postposition is the rule for Thuc. as in 1.75.1. 1.76.1. HDT.1.9 (s). 11 (s). AR. Ach. 1099 (s). 1136. Nub. 794. EUR. Hel. 744. SOPH. Ant. 11 (s). 49. AESCHYL. P. V. 144 (s). 307 (s). 319 (s). 635 (s). HOM. Od. 1.1 (s). Il. 1.26 (s). 131 (s). 158. [*] 23. Vocative prepositive: DIN.1.72 (once in 67 times).5 DEM. rare, as in 8.35 (s). 20.1 (s). 32.1 (s). AESCHIN.1.121 (s) (only once, and that a quotation). ISAE. 3.1 (s). PLATO, Conv. 173E. Crito, 46 B. Euthyphr. 3 C. XEN. An. 1.5.16 (s), 7.3, 3.1.27. THUC. 2.11 (s), 71 (s), 4.10 (s), 95, 5.9 (s), 7.61 (s). HDT. 1.8 (s, twice), 7.158 (s), 160, 161, 162 (s). AR. Ach. 432, Eq.1194, Vesp. 136. EUR. Hel. 858 (s). SOPH. Ant. 223 (s), 572. AESCHYL. P. V. 3 (s), Sept. 203, 255. HOM. Od. 1.45, 64 (s), 81, 158 (s), 337 (s), 346 (s), 384 (s), 389 (s), 400 (s). Il. 1.17 (s), 59 (s), 74, 106 (s), 122 (s), 442. [*] 24. Vocative in exclamations. The vocative may be used in exclamations. “Ἡράκλεις” DEM.9.31 ; Herakles! DEM. 19.308: “Ἡράκλεις” . 21.66: the same. 22.78: “ὦ γῆ καὶ θεοί” ; also at 24.186, 39.21, 40.5. PLATO, Prot. 310D: “ὦ Ζεῦ καὶ θεοί” . XEN. Mem.1.3.12: “ὦ Ἡράκλεις” . AR. Nub. 153: “ὦ Ζεῦ βασιλεῦ” . Ibid. 184: “ὦ Ἡράκλεις” . Vesp. 143: “ἄναξ Πόσειδον” . Ibid. 161: “Ἄπολλον ἀποτρόπαιε” . Ibid. 420: “Ἡράκλεις” . Pl. 374: “ὦ Ἡράκλεις” . EUR. Med. 764: “ὦ Ζεῦ Δίκη τε Ζηνὸς Ἡλίου τε φῶς” . SOPH. El. 1466: “ὦ Ζεῦ” . O. C. 221, 532. O. R. 1198. AESCHYL. Ag. 1257: “ὀτοτοῖ, Λύκεἰ Ἄπολλον, οἲ ἐγὼ ἐγώ” . ALCMAN, fr. 29, Bgk.4: “Ζεῦ πάτερ, αἰ γὰρ ἐμὸς πόσις εἴη”. HOM. Od. 4.341: “Ζεῦ τε πάτερ καὶ Ἀθηναίη καὶ Ἄπολλον” (not real prayers). Il. 2.371: similarly [*] 25. Predicate vocative. The vocative, not being a case proper, cannot take a predicate, but the predicate (nominative) adjective is occasionally attracted into the vocative. Clear cases are late: “ἀντὶ γὰρ ἐκλήθης Ἴμβρασε Παρθενίου”, CALLIM. fr. 213, Thou wast called (Imbrasus), O Imbrasus, instead of Parthenius. “ὄλβιε κοῦρε, γένοιο,” THEOCR. 17.66 ; Happy laddie, mayst thou prove (so). In the classical period the examples are only apparent, or, at most, the predicate may be picked out from the attribute which precedes the verb. AR. Av. 627. “ὦ φίλτατ᾽ ἐμοὶ πολὺ πρεσβυτῶν ἐξ ἐχθίστου μεταπίπτων” ..“ σύ τ᾽ ὦ ποτ᾽ οὖσα καλλίνικε μυρίων
μῆτερ τροπαίων, Ἕκτορος φίλον σάκος
στεφανοῦ
”
.“ ὦ Πὰν Πὰν ἁλίπλαγκτε, Κυλλανίας χιονοκτύπου
πετραίας ἀπὸ δειράδος φάνηθ᾽, ὦ θεῶν χοροποί᾽ ἄναξ
”
. AESCHYL. Pers. 674. “ὦ πολύκλαυτε θανὼν δυνάστα” .
