North and Hillard Composition Exercises

Callaina

Feles Curiosissima

  • Civis Illustris

  • Patrona

Here's a few more things I'm unsure about

Exercise 43:
#4: He knows that not he himself but his friend is being sought for.
I wrote: οἶδεν οὐκ αὐτὸς ἀλλὰ τὸν ἐαυτοῦ φίλον ζητούμενον.
They wrote: οἶδεν οὐκ αὐτὸς ἀλλὰ τὸν φίλον αὐτοῦ ζητούμενον.
Isn't the reflexive possessive correct, since it's his own friend, not somebody else's friend?

#10: Aeneas perceived that Troy was burning.
I wrote: ὁ Αἰνείας...
They wrote: Αἰνείας...
Doesn't a proper name need the definite article?

Similarly, in #12: We think it right to honour those who fell at Thermopylae.
I wrote: ...ἐν ταῖς θερμοπύλαις...
They wrote: ...ἐν θερμοπύλαις...
Don't place names need the definite article as well?
 
Last edited:

Pacifica

grammaticissima

  • Civis Illustris

  • Patrona

I think Greek uses indirect reflexives less often than Latin does, but I don't know about that particular sentence. Wait for someone who really knows Greek.

One thing I know for certain, however, is that the article with proper names of people is optional, so both your and the book's version of the Aeneas thing are correct.

I'm not sure about place names.
 

Iáson

Cívis Illústris

  • Civis Illustris

My answer: ἀγγέλεται ὅτι οἱ πολεμίοι ἔφυγον.
Their answer: ἀγγέλεται ὅτι οἱ πολεμίοι πεφεύγασιν.
The present has a double labda, ἀγγέλλεται.

Here's a few more things I'm unsure about

Exercise 43:
#4: He knows that not he himself but his friend is being sought for.
I wrote: οἶδεν οὐκ αὐτὸς ἀλλὰ τὸν ἐαυτοῦ φίλον ζητούμενον.
They wrote: οἶδεν οὐκ αὐτὸς ἀλλὰ τὸν φίλον αὐτοῦ ζητούμενον.
Isn't the reflexive possessive correct, since it's his own friend, not somebody else's friend?
I would imagine so, although the Cambridge Grammar (347 n.1) states 'In tragedy, manuscript evidence provides several instances of αὐτόϲ being used as a third-person direct reflexive: these are usually corrected in modern editions to contracted forms of ἑαυτοῦ (the difference between eg. αὐτοῦ and αὑτοῦ resides only in the breathing mark, and manuscript evidence is not reliable when it comes to breathings). It is possible, however, that such examples are authentic.' Maybe check the breathing?

It seems pretty weird to me to have a nominitive + infinitive and an accusative + infinitive construction joined together like that with the same verb... but I can't swear that it wouldn't happen.
#10: Aeneas perceived that Troy was burning.
I wrote: ὁ Αἰνείας...
They wrote: Αἰνείας...
Doesn't a proper name need the definite article?

Similarly, in #12: We think it right to honour those who fell at Thermopylae.
I wrote: ...ἐν ταῖς θερμοπύλαις...
They wrote: ...ἐν θερμοπύλαις...
Don't place names need the definite article as well?
That depends. Sometimes 'the lack of the article with proper names is difficult to account for, and depends on idiom and the preferences of individual authors' (Cambridge Grammar 330 n. 1). Or perhaps the writer supposed that the readers would not previously know these names.
 

Callaina

Feles Curiosissima

  • Civis Illustris

  • Patrona

It seems pretty weird to me to have a nominitive + infinitive and an accusative + infinitive construction joined together like that with the same verb... but I can't swear that it wouldn't happen.
It seemed odd to me too, but the book had said to use nom + inf whenever it referred back to the speaker. So would you use οἶδεν οὐκ ἑαυτὸν...ζητούμενον?
 

Iáson

Cívis Illústris

  • Civis Illustris

I'm not sure, to be honest: I can't think of any parallels. I would just use a ὅτι clause.
 

Notascooby

Civis Illustris

  • Civis Illustris

I also have been using North and Hillard, though I'm only up to exercise 32. Are you still working through this? If so how are you finding it?

It seems good to me so far, learning to write is really forcing me to learn all the forms thoroughly which I had only learned vaguely. So even at this early stage I'm seeing the benefits transferred to my reading ability.

I started using N&H's Latin comp book as well, though I'm a lot further down the road with Latin than I am with Greek so I'm getting through it a lot faster. But this is also helping with my reading.

After N&H I was planning on using Sidgwick's prose book which I think is more advanced, but I'm a way off from using that. Has anyone used it? What did you think?

All the best.
 

Callaina

Feles Curiosissima

  • Civis Illustris

  • Patrona

I also have been using North and Hillard, though I'm only up to exercise 32. Are you still working through this? If so how are you finding it?
I left off when the term started. I found it definitely improved my Greek composition while I was doing it, though somehow the improvement didn't transfer over into reading as much as I might have liked.
 

Serenus

Civis Illustris

  • Civis Illustris

North American English tends to use the preterite where BE prefers the perfect.
Looking at documentation of the differences, I'm surprised by how similar the two are though, in comparison to the more drastic difference between Rioplatense Spanish (which very strongly favours the preterite) vs. the Spanish of Spain (which very strongly favours the "he hecho" Perfect; French/Italian areal influence?).

In North America, you don't hear "I never saw it in my whole life", but oh boi Rioplatense speakers really do say Nunca lo vi en mi vida... And AFAIK you guys don't say "I've seen him last month", but in Spain you can hear Lo he visto hace un mes.
Isn't "the enemy + plural verb" standard everywhere now?
In Canada, people's usage is largely like Americans', including in this detail. Don't be tricked by their (our) use of -our and -re (hexametre)...
 

Pacifica

grammaticissima

  • Civis Illustris

  • Patrona

I think that's "hexameter" in all varieties (even though you have "meter" vs. "metre"). ;)
 

Serenus

Civis Illustris

  • Civis Illustris

I think that's "hexameter" in all varieties (even though you have "meter" vs. "metre"). ;)
Interesting! I just checked, and I see Allen & Greenough's grammar does have a subsection entitled "Dactylic Hexameter" and down below "Metres of Horace"... Thanks!
 

Glabrigausapes

Viper

  • Civis Illustris

Canada doesn’t have enemies.
 

Foxmoth

New Member

I've been working steadily through "Greek Prose Composition" by North and Hillard, in an attempt to improve my ancient Greek. I have an answer key, and though when my answer differs from it I generally understand why, there are a few places here and there where I can't see their logic.

Today it was Exercise 41 #3 (indirect statement with ὅτι):

English: It is reported that the enemy have fled.
My answer: ἀγγέλεται ὅτι οἱ πολεμίοι ἔφυγον.
Their answer: ἀγγέλεται ὅτι οἱ πολεμίοι πεφεύγασιν.

Why the perfect? "The enemy have fled" hardly seems to be the sort of enduring statement that calls for the perfect. Maybe if the enemy had permanently fled, never to return, but that's not implied here. Any thoughts?
Is it referring back to the original comment, before it was put into indirect speech. This, I presume , would be “The enemy have fled”, using the perfect tense. This is retained in the indirect speech. I also use N&H and its answer key....it can be quite irritating.
 
Top