Pronomen Abundans and Pronomen Coniunctum. A ... - DWC
Pronomen Abundans and Pronomen Coniunctum. A ... - DWC
Pronomen Abundans and Pronomen Coniunctum. A ... - DWC
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
58 PRONOMEN ABUNDANS AND PRONOMEN CONIUNCTUM<br />
child was dead <strong>and</strong> that it returns to life, emphasizes this change by<br />
adding the pronomen coniunctum.<br />
r 1022-3<br />
... ' AeeTovaa, "áTeXe nwç "'eO' Ó VOl"O"Ve'fJç<br />
è"ûvoç ónov eéyoflal và aov T 0 v "áflW Tatel.<br />
It is obvious that the antecedent Ó VOl"O"Ve'fJç è"ûvoç needs an (essential)<br />
relat. clause in order to be determined. Yet the poet confers a certain<br />
independence on this relat. clause by adding TÓV. The reason why he<br />
does so is, I believe, that he wants to show that these words are pronounced<br />
by the king with great emphasis. In this way he makes him underline<br />
the contradistinction between his own plans <strong>and</strong> the following story<br />
about the simpleton Pezostratis, who dared to speak of a marriage of<br />
Aretousa <strong>and</strong> his son Erotocritos.<br />
A 1443 fl' àç Ta' à"OAOVOä "al OéA.el &ï neáfla nov éJèv T' aAnt!;el . ..<br />
Aretousa is so amazed <strong>and</strong> so happyabout what she found in the room<br />
of Erotocritos that she cannot help emphasizing the content of the relat.<br />
clause.<br />
More examples of this kind are A 894, 1234-6, B 201-2 <strong>and</strong> r 1_2 192 .<br />
2.4.3.2. Nonessential clauses without a pronomen coniunctum<br />
2.4.3.2.l. 14th-15th centuries<br />
Chrono Mor. 299 HP<br />
( èaTeácp'fJ"e) aTov Tónov TOV vrè MovcpaeàvT ónov nOAAà èneOvfla.<br />
Id. 4371 HP<br />
ó àcpévT'fJÇ Tijç KaeVTalvaç 8nov noUà èneOvfla.<br />
Id. 4516 P<br />
Tà "áaTe'fJ "al rèç xweeç TOV önov noUà èneOvfla.<br />
Id. 4836 PH<br />
aTov M'fJ!;'fJOeäv ànéawaev 8nov noUà èneOvfla.<br />
It is perfectly clear that in all these instances the antecedent is definite,<br />
<strong>and</strong> thus the relat. clause need not be essential. Another thing which is<br />
clear is that this (nonessential) relat. clause is a fill-up: it is used four<br />
times <strong>and</strong> all these times it is not very meaningful. We have met another<br />
example of such a fill-up in Livistr. E 806, discussed in 2.4.2 193 •<br />
Mach. 172,9-11 ... [pyaAe àno riJv cpvAa"ijv TOV ale T!;á"o Te IIoAovta<br />
TOV vOTáewv, ónovxev nbpew ó e~yaç CJlà flaVTaTocpóeOV elç TOV aovATávov "al<br />
ècpvA-á"laév TOV wç ál&.<br />
Machairas could easily have written ónov TOV elXev nbpew "d., but<br />
192 Bakker, Some Remarka, pp. 317, 318 <strong>and</strong> 319.<br />
193 The Chronicle offers us two more instances: 1357-8H '0 1eóvroç Ó :naeá~evoç<br />
È1eeivoç Tfiç Taap.:návlaç - / ö:nov aè û:na elç T1jV àexiJv ËToVrov TOV f3l(3)..{ov. The Ms P<br />
gives a more correct version: ö:nov TOV ... : see 2.4.1. 5416-7H ... Ólà v' à.Uax-r11 Ó<br />
àrpÉvTTJÇ ó à&,lrpóç p.ov, / ó Ka{aaeTJç Tfiç Pwp.av{aç, ö:nov 1e(!aToiiv a-rYjv I1ó,lw . .. And<br />
again the Ms P has the better version : :nov T 0 V 1e(!aToiiv .. .