Mike Burke wrote:What does ἐς φῶς σὸν mean?
ἐς φῶς σὸν καταστῆσαι βίον
Euripides Trag., Alcestis.
Admetus is mourning the loss of Alcestis, and he is referencing Orpheus' journey to the Underworld to rescue Eurydice. stating that if he could he would go to the Underworld to bring her back (but then goes on to encourage her to wait for him). He says "Neither the dog of Pluto nor soul-escorting Charon at his oar would hold me back before I restored your life to the light."
So, σὀν modifies βίον, and ἐς φῶς is a prepositional phrase in which σὀν is not included.
Mike, you really ought to make an effort really to learn some Greek. That is one of the requirements for people participating on this list, that they really are making such an effort in good faith.
Mike Burke wrote:
I am trying.
What I don't understand here is how καταστῆσαι becomes "restored"?
I thought it meant something like "make," "appoint," or "ordain," and figured it's meaning here must be modified by some preceding word or phrase, but I still don't see how "make" becomes "restore"?
There is also something called "pragmatic extension," which simply means that words can be used in unusual senses when sufficiently so modified by context.
Mike Burke wrote:There is also something called "pragmatic extension," which simply means that words can be used in unusual senses when sufficiently so modified by context.
And isn't the translation of καταστῆσαι as "restore" in Euripides Trag., Alcestis a good example of "pragmatic extension"?
That's the essence of my question here.
I want to know if the meaning of being restored to a previous state is inherent in the word καταστῆσαι, or if the meaning of the word has been modified by something in the context here.
I started this topic heading because I suspect it has been modified by context here, and I'd like to know which word does the modifying (as I don't see πάλι.)
Barry Hofstetter wrote:I assume you mean πἀλιν?
Barry Hofstetter wrote:without πάλιν, replace, restore, ἐς φῶς σὸν κ. βίον E.Alc.362...Please note that they list the specific passage you cited
Barry Hofstetter wrote:BTW, there is no such thing as "inherent" meaning in a word -- only usage in context.
Barry Hofstetter wrote:Also, I translated it as "restore" without looking at the LSJ, so that what I apparently saw what they also saw.
Mike Burke wrote:I know some professing Christians who believe in the pre-existence of the soul, and I suspect they'd be delighted if ἐπὶ ὀλίγα ἦς πιστός, ἐπὶ πολλῶν σε καταστήσω could legitimately be translated "you have been faithful over a few things, I will again set you over many."
Is that a legitamate translation?
If not, why not?
Eeli Kaikkonen wrote:Because of the context
Users browsing this forum: Yahoo [Bot] and 1 guest