A grammar of the Homeric dialect - Wilbourhall.org

220 PRONOUNS. [254.
II. 17. 407, Od. 7. 217, &c. Compare
Subordinate Clauses, as
also the similar use in
II. II. 439 yv& ' 'OSwei'S o ot ov n reXo? KaraKaipLov r)\@ev.
The strictly Reflexive use is commoner in the Iliad than in the
Odyssey. Excluding* Infinitival and Subordinate Clauses, there
are 43 examples in the Iliad, against 1 8 in the Odyssey. Note
that the use is
mainly preserved in fixed combinations (diro e'o,
TTpOTl Ot, &C.).
(2) The Anaphoric (non-Reflexive) use is very much commoner.
In this use which is doubtless derived from the other by loss
of the original emphasis the Pronoun is enclitic : whereas in
the Reflexive use it is orthotone.
Accentuation. According to the ancient grammarians this Pronoun is
orthotone (i)
when used in a reflexive sense, when (2) preceded by a Preposition,
and (3) when followed by a Case-form of avros in agreement with
it. The first and second rules, as we have seen, practically coincide : and the
third is not borne out by the usage of Homer. In such places as Od. 2. 33
(We ot aura) Zeus ayaBov TeAeaete, II. 6. 91 /cat ot iro\v (f>i\Ta.Tos airy, Od. 8. 396
Evpva\os Se 4 avrbv ('Odvffffta) dpfaaaffOo}, add II. 24. 292, Od. 4. 66, 667., 6. 277
the Pronoun is evidently unemphatic, and is accordingly allowed to be enclitic
by good ancient authorities. This is amply confirmed by the instances of |*tv
atirov (II. 21. 245, 318, Od. 3. 19, 237, &c.), and the parallel use of auros with
the enclitic \ioi, rot, &c.
In one instance, viz.
Od. 4. 244 auToV fuv irXrj'yfiffiv dcitceXiriffi Sapaffffas
it would seem that p,iv
has a reflexive sense. The reading, however, is not
certain, some ancient authorities giving atrrdv jtlv or avirov jjiev.
254.1 The Possessive eos, os is nearly always Reflexive. Occasionally
it refers to a prominent word in the same Sentence
which is not grammatically the Subject
: as
II. 6. 500 at (Joz> a>
yoov "'EKTOpa zvl
Od. 9. 369 OVTLV eyw vvfjiaTov e'8o/xat /xera ot?
Cp. II. 16. 800., 22. 404, Od. 4. 643., ii. 282., 23. 153. And
it is occasionally used in a Subordinate Clause to refer to the
Subject, or a prominent word, of the Principal Clause :
Od. 4. 618 Kopcv 8e e at8tjuo? rjpus
a(Ti\vs, ##' 16s 6o/
II.
poorijowra (cp. 4. 74 1 )-
IO. 256 TuSetSr/ ^ev Sake ju,ei>e7JTo'A.eju,o?
(fraa-yavov a/x^r^Ke?, TO 5* tbv Trapa vrfi
1 6. 753 ^/3A.ryro TTpoj (TTrjOos, kri re wXeo-ev
/xtz;
It will be seen that where eos
does not refer to the grammatical
Subject it is generally emphatic : e. g. in the line last quoted, 4r)
d\K?} his own prowess, not that of an enemy. This indicates the