στείλασθαι in Plutarch, Whether the Affections..

Other Greek writings of the New Testament era, including papyri and inscriptions
Forum rules
Please quote the Greek text you are discussing directly in your post if it is reasonably short - do not ask people to look it up. This is not a beginner's forum, competence in Greek is assumed.
Post Reply
Andrew Chapman
Posts: 258
Joined: February 5th, 2013, 5:04 am
Location: Oxford, England
Contact:

στείλασθαι in Plutarch, Whether the Affections..

Post by Andrew Chapman » June 19th, 2014, 4:10 pm

Plutarch, Whether the Affections.. 501.D.9

[ Ὥσπερ οὖν ἐπισφαλέστρος χειμών τοῦ πλεῖν οὐκ ἐῶντος ὁ κωλύων καθορμίσασθαι,
As, therefore, the storm that prevents a sailor from putting into port is more dangerous than that which does not allow him to sail, (Loeb: Babbitt)]

οὕτως οἱ κατὰ ψυχὴν χειμῶνες βαρύτεροι στείλασθαι τὸν ἄνθρωπον οὐκ ἐῶντες οὐδ’ ἐπιστῆσαι τεταραγμένον τὸν λογισμόν·
so those storms of the soul are more serious which do not allow a man to compose or to calm his disturbed reason;

Am I right in thinking that στείλασθαι is absolute here, and that it means to furl one's sails (κατὰ ψυχὴν) as Liddell and Scott, στέλλω IV:

IV. gather up, make compact, esp. as a nautical term, furl, take in, “ἱστία . . στεῖλαν” Od.3.11, 16.353; “στείλασα λαῖφος” A.Supp.723:—Med., “ἱστία μὲν στείλαντο” Il.1.433, cf. Call.Del. 320, Arist.Mech.851b8: abs., στέλλεσθαι (sc. ἱστία) Teles p.10 H., Plb.6.44.6; so ἐπιστολάδην δὲ χιτῶνας ἐστάλατο they girded up, tucked up their clothes to work, Hes.Sc.288, cf. A.R.4.45: abs., “στειλάμενος σιγᾷς” AP11.149.

If it has an object, I am thinking it would be ἱστία and not τεταραγμένον τὸν λογισμόν.

Thanks, Andrew

cwconrad
Posts: 2107
Joined: May 5th, 2011, 5:52 pm
Location: Burnsville, NC 28714
Contact:

Re: στείλασθαι in Plutarch, Whether the Affections..

Post by cwconrad » June 20th, 2014, 5:17 am

Andrew Chapman wrote:Plutarch, Whether the Affections.. 501.D.9

[ Ὥσπερ οὖν ἐπισφαλέστρος χειμών τοῦ πλεῖν οὐκ ἐῶντος ὁ κωλύων καθορμίσασθαι,
As, therefore, the storm that prevents a sailor from putting into port is more dangerous than that which does not allow him to sail, (Loeb: Babbitt)]

οὕτως οἱ κατὰ ψυχὴν χειμῶνες βαρύτεροι στείλασθαι τὸν ἄνθρωπον οὐκ ἐῶντες οὐδ’ ἐπιστῆσαι τεταραγμένον τὸν λογισμόν·
so those storms of the soul are more serious which do not allow a man to compose or to calm his disturbed reason;

Am I right in thinking that στείλασθαι is absolute here, and that it means to furl one's sails (κατὰ ψυχὴν) as Liddell and Scott, στέλλω IV:

IV. gather up, make compact, esp. as a nautical term, furl, take in, “ἱστία . . στεῖλαν” Od.3.11, 16.353; “στείλασα λαῖφος” A.Supp.723:—Med., “ἱστία μὲν στείλαντο” Il.1.433, cf. Call.Del. 320, Arist.Mech.851b8: abs., στέλλεσθαι (sc. ἱστία) Teles p.10 H., Plb.6.44.6; so ἐπιστολάδην δὲ χιτῶνας ἐστάλατο they girded up, tucked up their clothes to work, Hes.Sc.288, cf. A.R.4.45: abs., “στειλάμενος σιγᾷς” AP11.149.

If it has an object, I am thinking it would be ἱστία and not τεταραγμένον τὸν λογισμόν.
Andrew, I suspect that you are still in the chase for parallels to 1 Tim 2:12 διδάσκειν δὲ γυναικὶ οὐκ ἐπιτρέπω οὐδὲ αὐθεντεῖν ἀνδρός

In this text of Plutarch, I am more inclined to think that στείλασθαι does take τεταραγμένον τὸν λογισμόν as its object. In your citation of LSJ you omitted from §IV the section falling immediately below what you cited;
LSJ s.v. στέλλω, IV.2 wrote:2 
check , Epicur.Ep.1p.7U. ; repress , Ph.2.274 , etc.:—Med., Plb.8.20.4 ; λόγον στειλώμεθα draw in, shorten our words, i.e. not speak out the whole truth, E.Ba.669 ; σ. τὸ συμβεβηκός hush it up , Plb.3.85.7 ; πρόσωπον στέλλεσθαι draw up oneʼs face, look rueful, Phryn.PS p.107 B.
I'm thinking then that the sense of στείλασθαι τὸν ἄνθρωπον οὐκ ἐῶντες οὐδ’ ἐπιστῆσαι τεταραγμένον τὸν λογισμόν is "not letting a man curtail or settle his distressed mind."
οὔτοι ἀπ’ ἀρχῆς πάντα θεοὶ θνητοῖς ὑπέδειξαν,
ἀλλὰ χρόνῳ ζητέοντες ἐφευρίσκουσιν ἄμεινον. (Xenophanes, Fragment 16)

Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University (Retired)

Andrew Chapman
Posts: 258
Joined: February 5th, 2013, 5:04 am
Location: Oxford, England
Contact:

Re: στείλασθαι in Plutarch, Whether the Affections..

Post by Andrew Chapman » June 20th, 2014, 7:08 am

Thanks very much, Carl. Yes, I have been having a look at the proposal that διδάσκειν has ἀνδρός as its object, as Bill Mounce and others claim, following Douglas Moo, and citing Acts 8.21:

οὐκ ἔστιν σοι μερὶς οὐδὲ κλῆρος ἐν τῷ λόγῳ τούτῳ, ἡ γὰρ καρδία σου οὐκ ἔστιν εὐθεῖα ἔναντι τοῦ θεοῦ.

as their only precedent, along with Smyth §1634 with regard to case.

So I am doing a search for verbs joined in a coordinate way with οὐδὲ and having a common object or complement. I have found many with the two verbs together and the object after, as Psalm 21.24:

ὅτι οὐκ ἐξουδένωσεν οὐδὲ προσώχθισεν τῇ δεήσει τοῦ πτωχοῦ

or Plutarch, Agesilaus 32.3.3-4

οὐκ ἴσχυσεν ἐξαγαγεῖν οὐδέ προκαλέσασθαι τὸν Ἀγησίλαον

and a couple with one term between the first verb and οὐδὲ, as Plutarch Roman Questions 278.E.8

‘Διὰ τί, δυεῖν βωμῶν Ἡρακλέους ὄντων, οὐ μεταλαμβάνουσι γυναῖκες οὐδὲ γεύονται τῶν ἐπὶ τοῦ μείζονος θυομένων;

but if στείλασθαι does take τεταραγμένον τὸν λογισμόν as its object then this is the first, in about 90 cases, with the first verb so far back. It would be the best support I have found so far for Moo's proposal. I guess one has to consider, for a given text:

a) position
b) whether the verb creates an expectation of an object
c) change of case (does this still play a part in how we naturally read something, even though a change of case is allowable?).

Finally, to what extent can Plutarch be taken as a precedent for the pastoral epistles? Is there a difference in style which might cause one to make one decision regarding object for one writer, and a different decision for another?

Andrew

cwconrad
Posts: 2107
Joined: May 5th, 2011, 5:52 pm
Location: Burnsville, NC 28714
Contact:

Re: στείλασθαι in Plutarch, Whether the Affections..

Post by cwconrad » June 20th, 2014, 8:10 am

Andrew Chapman wrote:Thanks very much, Carl. Yes, I have been having a look at the proposal that διδάσκειν has ἀνδρός as its object, as Bill Mounce and others claim, following Douglas Moo, and citing Acts 8.21:

οὐκ ἔστιν σοι μερὶς οὐδὲ κλῆρος ἐν τῷ λόγῳ τούτῳ, ἡ γὰρ καρδία σου οὐκ ἔστιν εὐθεῖα ἔναντι τοῦ θεοῦ.

as their only precedent, along with Smyth §1634 with regard to case.

So I am doing a search for verbs joined in a coordinate way with οὐδὲ and having a common object or complement. I have found many with the two verbs together and the object after, as Psalm 21.24:

ὅτι οὐκ ἐξουδένωσεν οὐδὲ προσώχθισεν τῇ δεήσει τοῦ πτωχοῦ

or Plutarch, Agesilaus 32.3.3-4

οὐκ ἴσχυσεν ἐξαγαγεῖν οὐδέ προκαλέσασθαι τὸν Ἀγησίλαον

and a couple with one term between the first verb and οὐδὲ, as Plutarch Roman Questions 278.E.8

‘Διὰ τί, δυεῖν βωμῶν Ἡρακλέους ὄντων, οὐ μεταλαμβάνουσι γυναῖκες οὐδὲ γεύονται τῶν ἐπὶ τοῦ μείζονος θυομένων;

but if στείλασθαι does take τεταραγμένον τὸν λογισμόν as its object then this is the first, in about 90 cases, with the first verb so far back. It would be the best support I have found so far for Moo's proposal. I guess one has to consider, for a given text:

a) position
b) whether the verb creates an expectation of an object
c) change of case (does this still play a part in how we naturally read something, even though a change of case is allowable?).

Finally, to what extent can Plutarch be taken as a precedent for the pastoral epistles? Is there a difference in style which might cause one to make one decision regarding object for one writer, and a different decision for another?
Your final question ought perhaps to have been the first one: Plutarch is an Atticist. That fact, in addition to how one dates the pastoral epistles, will have a bearing on your question.
οὔτοι ἀπ’ ἀρχῆς πάντα θεοὶ θνητοῖς ὑπέδειξαν,
ἀλλὰ χρόνῳ ζητέοντες ἐφευρίσκουσιν ἄμεινον. (Xenophanes, Fragment 16)

Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University (Retired)

Andrew Chapman
Posts: 258
Joined: February 5th, 2013, 5:04 am
Location: Oxford, England
Contact:

Re: στείλασθαι in Plutarch, Whether the Affections..

Post by Andrew Chapman » June 20th, 2014, 9:33 am

Thanks, Carl. One thing that surprised me that I am finding ten or twenty times as many examples of what I am looking for in Plutarch than in either Philo or Josephus, who seem to use coordinate constructions more sparingly. Plutarch's style seems less dissimilar to the New Testament than Philo or Josephus, and easier to read. Did the latter have a more affected style?

Andrew

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest