Plato's Testimony to Quantity and Accent

Plato's Testimony to Quantity and AccentAuthor(s): A. N. JannarisSource: The American Journal of Philology, Vol. 23, No. 1 (1902), pp. 75-83Published by: The Johns Hopkins University PressStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/288583 .

Accessed: 20/05/2014 07:39

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

The Johns Hopkins University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to TheAmerican Journal of Philology.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 91.229.248.150 on Tue, 20 May 2014 07:39:38 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=jhup

http://www.jstor.org/stable/288583?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


PLATO'S TESTIMONY TO QUANTITY AND ACCENT.1 PLATO'S TESTIMONY TO QUANTITY AND ACCENT.1

It is commonly held among classical students that word-accent was originally designated by the terms rpoao-la and appovla, and that, as technical expressions, these words, together with

ijKOS for quantitative length, appear first in Plato. In proof of this theory two passages are adduced: Rep. iii. 399 A, and Crat. 416 B.

To begin with Rep. 399 A, after discussing with Glaukon the various dpMovita or modes (keys) of music, Socrates proceeds: OVK ol3a, Ef)v sco, ras dpozvlaas, aXXa KaraXeLir KEKev)jv rTqv apliovlav 1j el

TE 7roXsEiLKfj IrpaSEiL 'voros (svrcs ?) advspEov Kai ev 7lrro;n (3al epyaaiL

7rpE7r,iTrows av /LtufCaLTro 06/oyyovs re KaL 7rpooct$8las, Kal adrorvxovrTOS

r1 els 7pavparaT q els Oavarovs iOvros 70 el' Trva aaXXrv oavuqiopa'v 7rEo'vror,

e'v 7rao-f TOVT 70l rapareTayfLEvWs KaC KCaprepovvroTW ahiZVVLOiLVOV r1v rTVXrv--

which passage is thus Englished: " I know not, said I, the harmo-

nies; only see you leave me that particular harmony which will

suitably represent the tones and accents of a brave man engaged in a feat of arms or in any violent operation [Jowett: 'the note or accent which a brave man utters in the hour of danger and stern resolve']; who, if he fails of success, or encounters wounds and death, or falls into any other calamity: in all such contingen- cies with unflinching endurance parries the blows of fortune".

(D. J. Vaughan). Now can we ever believe that in classical Greece a brave man,

(davpeosr), engaged in a hard struggle, really uttered :Odyyove re Kal

vrpoa(.aaa, "tones and accents", or " notes and accents"? The

absurdity here lies of course not in the term d0oyyoi which means 4sounds', and occurs frequently in Plato, but in rpoc-AL'at, which occurs here only in Plato. But vrpocrawaia here cannot be authentic, first on account of the peculiar meaning attached to it and then

I In this study the stories on Quantity and Accent, as recorded in Anon. Atd6. 6' (Frg. Philos. I 550, ed. Mullach), and Pseudo-Sergius iv. 531 f. (ed. Keil) have been left out of account; so further [Arist.] Poet. 20, 4. Categ. 4, 4; Rhet. 3, I, 4, as being demonstrably and admittedly Byzantine inter- polations.

It is commonly held among classical students that word-accent was originally designated by the terms rpoao-la and appovla, and that, as technical expressions, these words, together with

ijKOS for quantitative length, appear first in Plato. In proof of this theory two passages are adduced: Rep. iii. 399 A, and Crat. 416 B.

To begin with Rep. 399 A, after discussing with Glaukon the various dpMovita or modes (keys) of music, Socrates proceeds: OVK ol3a, Ef)v sco, ras dpozvlaas, aXXa KaraXeLir KEKev)jv rTqv apliovlav 1j el

TE 7roXsEiLKfj IrpaSEiL 'voros (svrcs ?) advspEov Kai ev 7lrro;n (3al epyaaiL

7rpE7r,iTrows av /LtufCaLTro 06/oyyovs re KaL 7rpooct$8las, Kal adrorvxovrTOS

r1 els 7pavparaT q els Oavarovs iOvros 70 el' Trva aaXXrv oavuqiopa'v 7rEo'vror,

e'v 7rao-f TOVT 70l rapareTayfLEvWs KaC KCaprepovvroTW ahiZVVLOiLVOV r1v rTVXrv--

which passage is thus Englished: " I know not, said I, the harmo-

nies; only see you leave me that particular harmony which will

suitably represent the tones and accents of a brave man engaged in a feat of arms or in any violent operation [Jowett: 'the note or accent which a brave man utters in the hour of danger and stern resolve']; who, if he fails of success, or encounters wounds and death, or falls into any other calamity: in all such contingen- cies with unflinching endurance parries the blows of fortune".

(D. J. Vaughan). Now can we ever believe that in classical Greece a brave man,

(davpeosr), engaged in a hard struggle, really uttered :Odyyove re Kal

vrpoa(.aaa, "tones and accents", or " notes and accents"? The

absurdity here lies of course not in the term d0oyyoi which means 4sounds', and occurs frequently in Plato, but in rpoc-AL'at, which occurs here only in Plato. But vrpocrawaia here cannot be authentic, first on account of the peculiar meaning attached to it and then

I In this study the stories on Quantity and Accent, as recorded in Anon. Atd6. 6' (Frg. Philos. I 550, ed. Mullach), and Pseudo-Sergius iv. 531 f. (ed. Keil) have been left out of account; so further [Arist.] Poet. 20, 4. Categ. 4, 4; Rhet. 3, I, 4, as being demonstrably and admittedly Byzantine inter- polations.



76 AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHILOLOGY. 76 AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHILOLOGY.

on account of its plural form. For it is well known that rpoo?lct as a technical term, accentus, is a coinage of later times. There is no doubt that the word rporw8la originated in connection with singing' (Acr'), that is music-the mother or forerunner of poetry

-and that it denoted an abstract notion, a by-singing, cadence of the voice, rhythm, tone, in other words the modulation or intonation formed by the rhythmical succession of stress (ictus) and fall. Now as singing and recitation are inseparable from

speech, the rpocorw8a or intonation connected with verse gradually came to be applied also to the spoken language in the form of tone (not word-accent). Hence Aristotle, our oldest testimony to the term rpoarc&a as 'tone' (in the singular !), speaks of it as of a well-known element in speech and so represents it as a safe-

guard against the quibbling of sophists when they seek to

pervert the true sense of written statements. While the sophists, he says, (Elen. Soph. 4 8;-cp. Poet. 26, I8. Elen. Soph. 20, 3. 21, I. 23, 3) can often pervert the sense in written composition, by misreading or mispronouncing its words, we can restore the true sense by reversing the reading method of the sophists, that is by using 'distinctness' or clear enunciation (&lalpeos-) and the

proper tone (rrpoacola) where they have resorted to the reverse

process (Elen. Soph. 23, 3; also 20, 3). Thus in expressions like TO ifv ov KaTa7rvOera o/l/3pp [T 328] and 7r ov KaraXvEL, the question whether we should understand "this (wood) decays there" (ov KaraTTvraEcL) or "this (wood) does not decay" (ov Kraa7rbvOETa), and "wherein thou dwellest" (ov KaTaXveLs) or "thou dwellest not"

(ov KaraXvLFr)-depends upon the tone of the voice (apoo-l'a!), that

is upon whether we utter ov in a relaxed (ov) or stressed (o0) tone. In single or isolated words (7rapa &aIpeco-iv), he proceeds, such

quibbling is 'not easy', unless in such cases as M&oALev and opos

(Elen. Soph. 4, 8 and 20, 3). Even here, however, the 7rpoua&a

(tone of the voice, vocal accentuation) decides the point: &i80oet

(= ' we give') or l0ao'/ev (= &8o'vaL 'to give'), and 0'pos 'mountain

(not opov boundary !) or opo's 'whey'. The current reading in this passage of Aristotle (Elen. Soph.

20, 3) is: ov yap arL 8TTrrO 7r Trapa TrRv atLp^a-tv' v yap 6 avrro Xoyov

(argument, quibble) ylveraT tL&apoveEvos, Elrrep 4r7 KaL ro opos (D 6 opor) Kat opors r7 rpocrToL'a XeX0ev qT,aILveL erepov. aXX\ v fLEV roi0 yeypap.pe'voLt

TavTr ov ovoia orav fEK TrV avrwv OrroXEiOv 7' Klt wavL s O KaKeZ ' 'O j

7rapdatcrlia 7rnoovvraT-ra 8e Ofeyyo,dLva ov ravra. Now as Aristotle

wrote opoS Kai opos, the reading of the second opos as opos and the

on account of its plural form. For it is well known that rpoo?lct as a technical term, accentus, is a coinage of later times. There is no doubt that the word rporw8la originated in connection with singing' (Acr'), that is music-the mother or forerunner of poetry

-and that it denoted an abstract notion, a by-singing, cadence of the voice, rhythm, tone, in other words the modulation or intonation formed by the rhythmical succession of stress (ictus) and fall. Now as singing and recitation are inseparable from

speech, the rpocorw8a or intonation connected with verse gradually came to be applied also to the spoken language in the form of tone (not word-accent). Hence Aristotle, our oldest testimony to the term rpoarc&a as 'tone' (in the singular !), speaks of it as of a well-known element in speech and so represents it as a safe-

guard against the quibbling of sophists when they seek to

pervert the true sense of written statements. While the sophists, he says, (Elen. Soph. 4 8;-cp. Poet. 26, I8. Elen. Soph. 20, 3. 21, I. 23, 3) can often pervert the sense in written composition, by misreading or mispronouncing its words, we can restore the true sense by reversing the reading method of the sophists, that is by using 'distinctness' or clear enunciation (&lalpeos-) and the

proper tone (rrpoacola) where they have resorted to the reverse

process (Elen. Soph. 23, 3; also 20, 3). Thus in expressions like TO ifv ov KaTa7rvOera o/l/3pp [T 328] and 7r ov KaraXvEL, the question whether we should understand "this (wood) decays there" (ov KaraTTvraEcL) or "this (wood) does not decay" (ov Kraa7rbvOETa), and "wherein thou dwellest" (ov KaTaXveLs) or "thou dwellest not"

(ov KaraXvLFr)-depends upon the tone of the voice (apoo-l'a!), that

is upon whether we utter ov in a relaxed (ov) or stressed (o0) tone. In single or isolated words (7rapa &aIpeco-iv), he proceeds, such

quibbling is 'not easy', unless in such cases as M&oALev and opos

(Elen. Soph. 4, 8 and 20, 3). Even here, however, the 7rpoua&a

(tone of the voice, vocal accentuation) decides the point: &i80oet

(= ' we give') or l0ao'/ev (= &8o'vaL 'to give'), and 0'pos 'mountain

(not opov boundary !) or opo's 'whey'. The current reading in this passage of Aristotle (Elen. Soph.

20, 3) is: ov yap arL 8TTrrO 7r Trapa TrRv atLp^a-tv' v yap 6 avrro Xoyov

(argument, quibble) ylveraT tL&apoveEvos, Elrrep 4r7 KaL ro opos (D 6 opor) Kat opors r7 rpocrToL'a XeX0ev qT,aILveL erepov. aXX\ v fLEV roi0 yeypap.pe'voLt

TavTr ov ovoia orav fEK TrV avrwv OrroXEiOv 7' Klt wavL s O KaKeZ ' 'O j

7rapdatcrlia 7rnoovvraT-ra 8e Ofeyyo,dLva ov ravra. Now as Aristotle

wrote opoS Kai opos, the reading of the second opos as opos and the



PLATO'S TESTIMONY TO QUANTITY AND ACCENT. 77 PLATO'S TESTIMONY TO QUANTITY AND ACCENT. 77

,consequent interpretation of rrpomrpb8a as referring to the rough

breathing is inadmissible. Not only is such a reading irreconcilable with the use of rrpoaoLa in the remaining passage of Aristotle; as I have already indicated elsewhere (Histor. Greek Grammar

508 note), such an interpretation is contradicted by the ex-

plicit statement of ancient theorists discussing this very passage of Aristotle: Bekk. Anecd. 743 dvayLvPO-KELV 86e " KarTa Tpoagc8lav",

rT70OL Ka6 OP VE'X TOVOV 17 Xket,l s,1 p. I avayvYvaL Tr opors opo Kal rT ayvos

6 KnatapoS, atyvo', KacvreOer v els r)tlKvr]v ayay]etV rov aKpoarvjV KaL dvrPl ov

opos, rTVXo 6 o 'YLrrTTrs To TavTyerov 'j Tr a'XXo, opov vo jaOa0 1jyovv TO

-.vaaros 7-ro yaiXaKroV. This is moreover corroborated by Galen

when, referring to the same passage of Aristotle, he says (t. XIV

583, ed. Kihn): 'rapa 8e rrqv 7rpoop8lav (yyverat TO oaI(cra), 07av

'7TT7ro yiyv1rTaL, K(aOT(rp Ev Tr oOp oS EOTr7Ke. rT yap &7\rXoUv Trapa rTTv 8LITrq

rrpocToolav, rtLOeyeVLv KaT' apXahS rr EpLapoviLev7Jv. So further 592. As to the passage ib. 591 ev Iev ouv ovotacra- 7i rrporo-ora 7roLiE TO &trrov' avrl

yap ( cETKu(epOV eXKEL TOVOfLa, ;OT7Tep eV TCO Opos gT?7]KeV [q 6aoe?a ?], Ka?'

? pXas TEE0lf q a ;,-the statement, if genuine, weighs little against such overwhelming and explicit testimony to the contrary. But, as the text runs, the bracketed term a7 aacera here cannot be

authentic, the subject of E7TrqKe and reOdea being av3Trr ( i7rpoao-ia). The above usage in Aristotle of 7rpora8la as cadence, rhythm,

tone, seems to have prevailed as late as the close of the second

century B. c., seeing that Dionysios of Thrace, our oldest gram- marian by profession, represents 7rpoor&8La (still in the singular!) as an 'art', that is to say as one of the several requisites of the art of delivery or 'trained reading'. In scholarship (ypau,artK', Schol. /Eya',\7 ypanlarLK) ) he says, the first requisite is "trained

reading" according to prosody (advYyvOrSS. fVTrpLtL KaTa 7rpoacaitav) which prosody, together with vrroKpLO-L. (impersonation, Schol.

Ltti7)TLS) and aLar-ToXr (distinctness, clear enunciation, the &alparEL

of Aristotle) constitutes the "faultless recitation of poetry". For while vrroKpLLS- (impersonation) shows the intrinsic value

(adprT)) of the piece, and &acrToX\ (clear enunciation) the sense

contained therein, rrporpala shows the TreXV7, which expression obviously refers to the rhythmical or metrical treatment of the

piece recited; so that rrpocrpaia would indicate the rhythmical

1 At the time when this scribe wrote the term 7rpoagdia had assumed the meaning of 'accent'; whereas wrpoadia for 'spiritus asper' (if aspiration can be termed 7rpoc6dia) is a still later development.

,consequent interpretation of rrpomrpb8a as referring to the rough

breathing is inadmissible. Not only is such a reading irreconcilable with the use of rrpoaoLa in the remaining passage of Aristotle; as I have already indicated elsewhere (Histor. Greek Grammar

508 note), such an interpretation is contradicted by the ex-

plicit statement of ancient theorists discussing this very passage of Aristotle: Bekk. Anecd. 743 dvayLvPO-KELV 86e " KarTa Tpoagc8lav",

rT70OL Ka6 OP VE'X TOVOV 17 Xket,l s,1 p. I avayvYvaL Tr opors opo Kal rT ayvos

6 KnatapoS, atyvo', KacvreOer v els r)tlKvr]v ayay]etV rov aKpoarvjV KaL dvrPl ov

opos, rTVXo 6 o 'YLrrTTrs To TavTyerov 'j Tr a'XXo, opov vo jaOa0 1jyovv TO

-.vaaros 7-ro yaiXaKroV. This is moreover corroborated by Galen

when, referring to the same passage of Aristotle, he says (t. XIV

583, ed. Kihn): 'rapa 8e rrqv 7rpoop8lav (yyverat TO oaI(cra), 07av

'7TT7ro yiyv1rTaL, K(aOT(rp Ev Tr oOp oS EOTr7Ke. rT yap &7\rXoUv Trapa rTTv 8LITrq

rrpocToolav, rtLOeyeVLv KaT' apXahS rr EpLapoviLev7Jv. So further 592. As to the passage ib. 591 ev Iev ouv ovotacra- 7i rrporo-ora 7roLiE TO &trrov' avrl

yap ( cETKu(epOV eXKEL TOVOfLa, ;OT7Tep eV TCO Opos gT?7]KeV [q 6aoe?a ?], Ka?'

? pXas TEE0lf q a ;,-the statement, if genuine, weighs little against such overwhelming and explicit testimony to the contrary. But, as the text runs, the bracketed term a7 aacera here cannot be

authentic, the subject of E7TrqKe and reOdea being av3Trr ( i7rpoao-ia). The above usage in Aristotle of 7rpora8la as cadence, rhythm,

tone, seems to have prevailed as late as the close of the second

century B. c., seeing that Dionysios of Thrace, our oldest gram- marian by profession, represents 7rpoor&8La (still in the singular!) as an 'art', that is to say as one of the several requisites of the art of delivery or 'trained reading'. In scholarship (ypau,artK', Schol. /Eya',\7 ypanlarLK) ) he says, the first requisite is "trained

reading" according to prosody (advYyvOrSS. fVTrpLtL KaTa 7rpoacaitav) which prosody, together with vrroKpLO-L. (impersonation, Schol.

Ltti7)TLS) and aLar-ToXr (distinctness, clear enunciation, the &alparEL

of Aristotle) constitutes the "faultless recitation of poetry". For while vrroKpLLS- (impersonation) shows the intrinsic value

(adprT)) of the piece, and &acrToX\ (clear enunciation) the sense

contained therein, rrporpala shows the TreXV7, which expression obviously refers to the rhythmical or metrical treatment of the

piece recited; so that rrpocrpaia would indicate the rhythmical

1 At the time when this scribe wrote the term 7rpoagdia had assumed the meaning of 'accent'; whereas wrpoadia for 'spiritus asper' (if aspiration can be termed 7rpoc6dia) is a still later development.




reading or scanning.-It is hardly necessary to add here the well-known fact that when in the course of Alexandrian or Graeco- Roman times, special signs of prosody (ortpea - 7rpoo-8aS) were resorted to, these visible signs along with those invented for accent,. breathings, stops, etc., assumed the concrete name of rrpoarya and

gave rise to the plural 7rpooAi,t, a term which henceforth applies to the eye and is very common among later Greek and Latin

grammarians. The preceding short account makes it clear that Plato's strange

expression q)6'yyovs TE Kai 7rpoaCwlas, 'the tones and accents of a brave warrior', cannot be genuine. It is very probable that Plato's earlier MSS read qd'yyovs re KaI IIPO2I1AAS or nPO2- <rE>QIaA2 i. e. 7rpos <ye> )4Wo: 'the sounds (the 0xot) and

even songs of a brave warrior, engaged in a feat of arms.1 It would seem, then, that some scribe of the Graeco-Roman

or Byzantine period, who was unacquainted with the adverbial use of Ka, 7rpos among the ancients, but was familiar with the

grammatical term Trpoo-oNla, so cormmon in his time, mistook or misread KaLrrporo&a8as for KaLipoorCSL&a and so tampered with the

passage.-At all events the term 7rpoarcota cannot be genuine in

Plato, because it occurs nowhere else in his writings, because it

appears in the plural form, and because it yields no sense. The other passage in Plato already referred to, is of still greater

import, since it is often appealed to as representing Plato's direct

testimony to accent and quantity in his time. Crat. 416 B: Her-

mog. ri 8 TOr KaXdo ;-Socr. rovro xaXe7rCoTepoo Karavoro-a' Kal,TOi XEyeL ye

(Xeyovuol ye GHPd) avro' aptovioa Iodvov Kal iaK E TOV o0' 7rapqKTar.

Thus referring to this passage in his Pronunciation of Ancient Greek (p. 33 English trans.), Blass says: "Plato in his Kratylos (416 B) indicates the difference between KaXov and KaXovv simply

1 That Kai 7rpo'g (ye) occurs as an adverbial expression in classical texts, is known to classical students. Compare e. g. Rep. 328 A Knal rpog ye rravvvxlda

irotiarovacv. ib. 466 E Koivi rrTparebaovrat Kal irp6S ye aSovat riv r'ai&ov eli rOb ir6e,,uov biaot dSpoi. Soph. 234 A. Gorg. 469 B. Men. 90 E aXoya a la t yaOia ye

rrpdo. Legg. 746 D.-Arist. El. Soph. 4, 7 roaodTrov Kal X rr np6o. Hdt. 3,6 EK

rij 'EiZddoS 'rdaigffiS Kat 7rp og ?EK 4otviKTC Ksepaeogs tadyerat 7ratpryg olvov dif rov

reo0 eKaCiarov. 5, 6, 7 rd re 6R &2a o a tva ol vtotL riiwV rbY v 'Ap A6pairov sal d6

7rpbo Tra rt-dOa avrov rpayttICOLa XOpogS 'yEpatpov. 6, I25. 7, 157 ZaysKai.ovc re ali

Aeovrivovg Kai trpOf Z' vp7Koatiovg. ib. I84. Dem. 4, 28 rdXavra vev7jKtovra Kal

jfttp6v ye 7rp 6 . Eur. Ph. 6Io Kat KaraKrev6 ye 7r p 6o. Hel. I o. 956 ardi6So( rs Kai 7rpOC coGaov. Med. 704 6b?wa Kal irp O y' SE 2abvvo?at xOovon.

reading or scanning.-It is hardly necessary to add here the well-known fact that when in the course of Alexandrian or Graeco- Roman times, special signs of prosody (ortpea - 7rpoo-8aS) were resorted to, these visible signs along with those invented for accent,. breathings, stops, etc., assumed the concrete name of rrpoarya and

gave rise to the plural 7rpooAi,t, a term which henceforth applies to the eye and is very common among later Greek and Latin

grammarians. The preceding short account makes it clear that Plato's strange

expression q)6'yyovs TE Kai 7rpoaCwlas, 'the tones and accents of a brave warrior', cannot be genuine. It is very probable that Plato's earlier MSS read qd'yyovs re KaI IIPO2I1AAS or nPO2- <rE>QIaA2 i. e. 7rpos <ye> )4Wo: 'the sounds (the 0xot) and

even songs of a brave warrior, engaged in a feat of arms.1 It would seem, then, that some scribe of the Graeco-Roman

or Byzantine period, who was unacquainted with the adverbial use of Ka, 7rpos among the ancients, but was familiar with the

grammatical term Trpoo-oNla, so cormmon in his time, mistook or misread KaLrrporo&a8as for KaLipoorCSL&a and so tampered with the

passage.-At all events the term 7rpoarcota cannot be genuine in

Plato, because it occurs nowhere else in his writings, because it

appears in the plural form, and because it yields no sense. The other passage in Plato already referred to, is of still greater

import, since it is often appealed to as representing Plato's direct

testimony to accent and quantity in his time. Crat. 416 B: Her-

mog. ri 8 TOr KaXdo ;-Socr. rovro xaXe7rCoTepoo Karavoro-a' Kal,TOi XEyeL ye

(Xeyovuol ye GHPd) avro' aptovioa Iodvov Kal iaK E TOV o0' 7rapqKTar.

Thus referring to this passage in his Pronunciation of Ancient Greek (p. 33 English trans.), Blass says: "Plato in his Kratylos (416 B) indicates the difference between KaXov and KaXovv simply

1 That Kai 7rpo'g (ye) occurs as an adverbial expression in classical texts, is known to classical students. Compare e. g. Rep. 328 A Knal rpog ye rravvvxlda

irotiarovacv. ib. 466 E Koivi rrTparebaovrat Kal irp6S ye aSovat riv r'ai&ov eli rOb ir6e,,uov biaot dSpoi. Soph. 234 A. Gorg. 469 B. Men. 90 E aXoya a la t yaOia ye

rrpdo. Legg. 746 D.-Arist. El. Soph. 4, 7 roaodTrov Kal X rr np6o. Hdt. 3,6 EK

rij 'EiZddoS 'rdaigffiS Kat 7rp og ?EK 4otviKTC Ksepaeogs tadyerat 7ratpryg olvov dif rov

reo0 eKaCiarov. 5, 6, 7 rd re 6R &2a o a tva ol vtotL riiwV rbY v 'Ap A6pairov sal d6

7rpbo Tra rt-dOa avrov rpayttICOLa XOpogS 'yEpatpov. 6, I25. 7, 157 ZaysKai.ovc re ali

Aeovrivovg Kai trpOf Z' vp7Koatiovg. ib. I84. Dem. 4, 28 rdXavra vev7jKtovra Kal

jfttp6v ye 7rp 6 . Eur. Ph. 6Io Kat KaraKrev6 ye 7r p 6o. Hel. I o. 956 ardi6So( rs Kai 7rpOC coGaov. Med. 704 6b?wa Kal irp O y' SE 2abvvo?at xOovon.



PLATO'S TESTIMONY TO QUANTITY AND ACCENT. 79 PLATO'S TESTIMONY TO QUANTITY AND ACCENT. 79

as one of accent and quantity." The same statement is repeated in his very meritorious edition of Kiihner's Ausfiihrliche Griech- ische Grammatik (vol. i. 318): "Plato (Crat. 416 B) setzt den Unterschied zwischen KaXov und KaXoiv (beides damals KAAON

geschrieben) ausser in die Quantitit [ujKOv] auch in die apuov/a d. i. den Accent."

This belief-let us at once say this fallacy-which seems to be almost general among modern scholars and critics, can be traced back to Byzantine commentators and scribes who, being aware that the 'beautiful' (r6 KaX6v) is also ' attractive', wished to connect it with KaXovv i. e. 'inviting'. Thus Hermias of the fifth Christian century commenting on Plato's Phaedros says (p. 6, ed. Ast): fLov (yap TO Ka\CoYv, KX \TLKOv Oy els SaCVTO KaL E7rLTpETrTLKov' 8i6 KaX v

Xeyerat rapa TO KaXeiv elr Eavr ro3 TOS ipvraS. This fanciful

etymology seems to have been popular with the scribes and schoolmasters of subsequent times, since we find it repeated in the uncritical Etym. M.. . v.'KaX6o' 7rapa Tro aXc, ECK Tro KaXeiv

rpo iaVroy LT aotr7o0, o a 'd yaov1' l4 o ayav Ofoutev (!). It is apparently this popular view that the copiers of the codices GHP had in mind when they substituted XeyoUv-t, 'people say', for X;yEt, 'it means.' In agreement with this very notion the scribes of the Bodleian and Venetian, BT, represent Socrates in Crat. 416 C as saying: O-KOVV Tr KaXtfrav Ta 7rpdytjara Kal TO KaXov TCaVTOV ErtvY; where

Stephanus changes KaXkrav to KaXoCv, while modern editors, follow-

ing Badham, have adopted KaXo\v for KaXdv, so that the passage now smoothly reads: OVKOZv rT KaXtErav TOa 7rpdTyUaTa Kal To KaXovv

TavTrv eo-rT; Troro &Tavota1 i. e. "are then that which named things and that which names them identical? is this meaning?" Ac- cordingly KaXkeav and KaXoOv here stand simply for the equally common alternative expressions ovopordaav and voodua'ov, and the

passage therefore has nothing to do with KaXov. Let us now return to our particular passage Crat. 416 B and see

whether it really speaks of 'accent' and 'quantity'. Hermogenes had just put the question to Socrates what is aIaxpdv and what is KiaXov, two opposed but naturally associated notions. To the question about alcrypov Socrates replies that ro 1turo8lCov Kai I'-Xov rTs p o rs Ta o'vra XoL8opev p/AOL averatl 8t &a T ra v ro 6 O rTO oavodTa taOeLi, Kat

Yov Tr del ai CXovrT rTO p0ovv roVTro Tb OPvoFa gero <Tr Heindorf)

The common punctuation: ravr6v tart roTro, dtdvota; is erroneous, since after ro Ka?eaav and ro KaLCoWv we should expect 7) diavota.

as one of accent and quantity." The same statement is repeated in his very meritorious edition of Kiihner's Ausfiihrliche Griech- ische Grammatik (vol. i. 318): "Plato (Crat. 416 B) setzt den Unterschied zwischen KaXov und KaXoiv (beides damals KAAON

geschrieben) ausser in die Quantitit [ujKOv] auch in die apuov/a d. i. den Accent."

This belief-let us at once say this fallacy-which seems to be almost general among modern scholars and critics, can be traced back to Byzantine commentators and scribes who, being aware that the 'beautiful' (r6 KaX6v) is also ' attractive', wished to connect it with KaXovv i. e. 'inviting'. Thus Hermias of the fifth Christian century commenting on Plato's Phaedros says (p. 6, ed. Ast): fLov (yap TO Ka\CoYv, KX \TLKOv Oy els SaCVTO KaL E7rLTpETrTLKov' 8i6 KaX v

Xeyerat rapa TO KaXeiv elr Eavr ro3 TOS ipvraS. This fanciful

etymology seems to have been popular with the scribes and schoolmasters of subsequent times, since we find it repeated in the uncritical Etym. M.. . v.'KaX6o' 7rapa Tro aXc, ECK Tro KaXeiv

rpo iaVroy LT aotr7o0, o a 'd yaov1' l4 o ayav Ofoutev (!). It is apparently this popular view that the copiers of the codices GHP had in mind when they substituted XeyoUv-t, 'people say', for X;yEt, 'it means.' In agreement with this very notion the scribes of the Bodleian and Venetian, BT, represent Socrates in Crat. 416 C as saying: O-KOVV Tr KaXtfrav Ta 7rpdytjara Kal TO KaXov TCaVTOV ErtvY; where

Stephanus changes KaXkrav to KaXoCv, while modern editors, follow-

ing Badham, have adopted KaXo\v for KaXdv, so that the passage now smoothly reads: OVKOZv rT KaXtErav TOa 7rpdTyUaTa Kal To KaXovv

TavTrv eo-rT; Troro &Tavota1 i. e. "are then that which named things and that which names them identical? is this meaning?" Ac- cordingly KaXkeav and KaXoOv here stand simply for the equally common alternative expressions ovopordaav and voodua'ov, and the

passage therefore has nothing to do with KaXov. Let us now return to our particular passage Crat. 416 B and see

whether it really speaks of 'accent' and 'quantity'. Hermogenes had just put the question to Socrates what is aIaxpdv and what is KiaXov, two opposed but naturally associated notions. To the question about alcrypov Socrates replies that ro 1turo8lCov Kai I'-Xov rTs p o rs Ta o'vra XoL8opev p/AOL averatl 8t &a T ra v ro 6 O rTO oavodTa taOeLi, Kat

Yov Tr del ai CXovrT rTO p0ovv roVTro Tb OPvoFa gero <Tr Heindorf)

The common punctuation: ravr6v tart roTro, dtdvota; is erroneous, since after ro Ka?eaav and ro KaLCoWv we should expect 7) diavota.



So AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHIILOLOGY. So AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHIILOLOGY.

cdrco'(Xppovv (B, adet,aopoav Heindorf) vvv 6E ac vyKpor7jaavTes alcxpov

KaXovoLv, i. e. he who coins the names appears to me to scoff throughout at everything which hinders and checks things from their flow; so he now gave r acel 'To-Xovr rov povv this name: the

deLo'-xppovv. At present however, people have 'contracted' it and call it alaxpov.

Having received this explanation, Hermogenes proceeds to the second part of his question: r7i ro KaXo'\; ' what then about the

Beautiful?' To which question Socrates now replies as follows: Troro XaXETworTEpov KaTaravorrua. KaTroL Xeye ye (SO BDT, XeyovoT ye

GHPd, Xeyc0 Et ye Schanz) avro' apALovLa iedov Kal JIrjKEL TOV o0

(P, roi ov B, -T o GHPT, rov o bd) 7rap)KTra.-EPM. E 7r&, ;- " This

KaXov is more (rather?) difficult to understand. And yet it tells its own tale: it has been produced only by harmony and by the

length of o.-Herm. ' How so?'"--Stalbaum's translation of Ka'TO

Xeyer yE KrX. by 'quamquam r6 KaX\v dicit numeri tantum gratia;

atque hoc nomen mora syllabae ov est mutatum' is both arbitrary and meaningless. On the other hand Heindorf and Buttmann declare the whole passage to be most obscure and corrupt, which

opinion is certainly justified by the ungrammatical and meaningless constitution of the text: KaTroL yre XEyeL (VTO adponvia /c1vo , KaL

/i?JKE TOv ov TrapKTaL. For-(I) while Hermogenes declares himself

unable to understand the alleged etymological explanation given by Socrates and s) asks him again: How do you mean that?

(-ror6 8j; ,S Xe'yELc;), Socrates calmly proceeds, not however in the

attempted etymological method, but in a philosophical speculation about the nature of KaXo'v; (2) after Xeyer yE avro we should expect either orT (cor) or an infinitive (rapQXOat), which latter has already been proposed; (3) adopting the punctuation K(llroi Xe;ycE ye avoT

JpjLOVIa KrX. and assuming the reading aplovia rrapKTQrat to form

an independent clause, epexegetic of XEyr, ye a(To, there is no

subject nominative to 7rapijK7ra. But apart from these grammatical difficulties, is there any logical connection between the question of Hermogenes and the answer of Socrates ? Hermogenes asks, What is KaXo6v? and Socrates replies that 'it has been produced by accent only and by the length of o.' But the form and constitution of KaXOV prove the very reverse, both syllables in it (K,a Xo)

being short. Or are we to believe that to the question, What is KaXov? Socrates gave the trickish answer as to how KaXovv has

been obtained ?

However, for this absurdity neither Socrates nor Plato is

cdrco'(Xppovv (B, adet,aopoav Heindorf) vvv 6E ac vyKpor7jaavTes alcxpov

KaXovoLv, i. e. he who coins the names appears to me to scoff throughout at everything which hinders and checks things from their flow; so he now gave r acel 'To-Xovr rov povv this name: the

deLo'-xppovv. At present however, people have 'contracted' it and call it alaxpov.

Having received this explanation, Hermogenes proceeds to the second part of his question: r7i ro KaXo'\; ' what then about the

Beautiful?' To which question Socrates now replies as follows: Troro XaXETworTEpov KaTaravorrua. KaTroL Xeye ye (SO BDT, XeyovoT ye

GHPd, Xeyc0 Et ye Schanz) avro' apALovLa iedov Kal JIrjKEL TOV o0

(P, roi ov B, -T o GHPT, rov o bd) 7rap)KTra.-EPM. E 7r&, ;- " This

KaXov is more (rather?) difficult to understand. And yet it tells its own tale: it has been produced only by harmony and by the

length of o.-Herm. ' How so?'"--Stalbaum's translation of Ka'TO

Xeyer yE KrX. by 'quamquam r6 KaX\v dicit numeri tantum gratia;

atque hoc nomen mora syllabae ov est mutatum' is both arbitrary and meaningless. On the other hand Heindorf and Buttmann declare the whole passage to be most obscure and corrupt, which

opinion is certainly justified by the ungrammatical and meaningless constitution of the text: KaTroL yre XEyeL (VTO adponvia /c1vo , KaL

/i?JKE TOv ov TrapKTaL. For-(I) while Hermogenes declares himself

unable to understand the alleged etymological explanation given by Socrates and s) asks him again: How do you mean that?

(-ror6 8j; ,S Xe'yELc;), Socrates calmly proceeds, not however in the

attempted etymological method, but in a philosophical speculation about the nature of KaXo'v; (2) after Xeyer yE avro we should expect either orT (cor) or an infinitive (rapQXOat), which latter has already been proposed; (3) adopting the punctuation K(llroi Xe;ycE ye avoT

JpjLOVIa KrX. and assuming the reading aplovia rrapKTQrat to form

an independent clause, epexegetic of XEyr, ye a(To, there is no

subject nominative to 7rapijK7ra. But apart from these grammatical difficulties, is there any logical connection between the question of Hermogenes and the answer of Socrates ? Hermogenes asks, What is KaXo6v? and Socrates replies that 'it has been produced by accent only and by the length of o.' But the form and constitution of KaXOV prove the very reverse, both syllables in it (K,a Xo)

being short. Or are we to believe that to the question, What is KaXov? Socrates gave the trickish answer as to how KaXovv has

been obtained ?

However, for this absurdity neither Socrates nor Plato is



PLATO'S TESTIMONY TO QUANTITY AND ACCENT. 8I PLATO'S TESTIMONY TO QUANTITY AND ACCENT. 8I

chargeable; the responsibility lies with the interpreters and

copiers who mistook Plato's words aptovta and 7napr.cKTa for 'accent' and 'derivation', two technical terms quite familiar to the grammarians. But apoovia here as elsewhere in Plato, means 'consonance', 'symmetry', 'harmony' and the like, never 'accent'. Indeed the term ap{,ovia for accent (rTauir, rovor) is a

much later usage adopted by the grammarians in Graeco-Roman times. Still less probable is the application of ,iPKoS here to metrical or grammatical 'quantity'. As a matter of fact fiKos here (if genuine!), as everywhere else, is used in its ordinary meaning of 'longitudinal size', 'length', Zongitudo, a usage con- firmed by Plato himself further below in his remark about A and H (427 E): Tr ' av' Xci a Tr, pSydaX (i. e. pteyA) 7dnreoKe Ka' TCr7 OJKel

(i. e. LHKOS) Tr i, orn ueydXa Ta ypdatAara. Compare also Phaedros

244 C: olovooirTriKrv ErropEao'aa fv 7 v olovIaTrLKv T(0 Q crEUIPvov TES

OL YVfO KaXovcrf.

For these reasons I hold with Heindorf and Buttmann that the

passage is corrupt. What the original reading was I do not pre- sume to have discovered. At the same time I believe that a clue to the solution of the question is afforded by the subsequent remarks of Socrates and other parallel passages in Plato referring to the term KaXov. In all these places, Plato (or Socrates) avoids all

etymological speculation upon the Beautiful, KaXov. In the passage under discussion, we are told that the origin and nature of KaXov is a rather difficult question (XaXe7rcrepov). At the same time we learn that the term is 'self-explaining' (avro XeyfE); that'it is in- dicative of its own meaning' (irrs 8Lavolar rsL oLKEVe irwovvpla 70VT0 Tr

ovolfa), and that the term is the proper expression of that wisdom which produces such things as we accept believing them to be KaXd:

OpOpws pa (PpovT(rsor avrri ?r fr) vvufla fTorrl, TO KaX'v, Tr1 Ta TroLavra

a7rEpyaof/APvrSl ad 8 KaX a (fidKoOPTes e EJa dar7ra,uLaeOa.l In striking agreement with these views, Plotinos seeks to define

the Beautiful by the following half etymological (KaXo'v-KaXfiv)

Similarly in Phaedo Ioo C-E: aiverati f ot eli ir artv 7ai7Lo Kaa6v, ov6C 6t' Ev a72o K a Xv e'vat 0 dt6T71 /ErTXt eeIEKeVOV TOv K a X ov Kal rdavra 6S ovro c./y ... OvK a7RLo rt TrotEZ airob K a 7 6 v j EKeivov OV 701 K a ao v Eire rrapovaia eire Kolvuvia

eire orry 6e Kati 0irrr wpoayevoiEvyj (edd.-vov). ov yap ero rovro S0taXvpi1opuat, a6X2' ori r Ka K a a K a a yiyverat K a a . rovro yap 0ot (OKEZ a&a7aaeararov elval Kal

E/iavT(r a7roKpivaaOaa Kai aiLa), cai TroVrov Ex6defvor 7oyoviyal OViK av 7rorE TreeV a;ra' aicaaRs eTvat Ka; Etfol Kai O6J oVv vaRa arroKplvavaat Oir T Ka a X Ta K a i yiyverat K atd.

chargeable; the responsibility lies with the interpreters and

copiers who mistook Plato's words aptovta and 7napr.cKTa for 'accent' and 'derivation', two technical terms quite familiar to the grammarians. But apoovia here as elsewhere in Plato, means 'consonance', 'symmetry', 'harmony' and the like, never 'accent'. Indeed the term ap{,ovia for accent (rTauir, rovor) is a

much later usage adopted by the grammarians in Graeco-Roman times. Still less probable is the application of ,iPKoS here to metrical or grammatical 'quantity'. As a matter of fact fiKos here (if genuine!), as everywhere else, is used in its ordinary meaning of 'longitudinal size', 'length', Zongitudo, a usage con- firmed by Plato himself further below in his remark about A and H (427 E): Tr ' av' Xci a Tr, pSydaX (i. e. pteyA) 7dnreoKe Ka' TCr7 OJKel

(i. e. LHKOS) Tr i, orn ueydXa Ta ypdatAara. Compare also Phaedros

244 C: olovooirTriKrv ErropEao'aa fv 7 v olovIaTrLKv T(0 Q crEUIPvov TES

OL YVfO KaXovcrf.

For these reasons I hold with Heindorf and Buttmann that the

passage is corrupt. What the original reading was I do not pre- sume to have discovered. At the same time I believe that a clue to the solution of the question is afforded by the subsequent remarks of Socrates and other parallel passages in Plato referring to the term KaXov. In all these places, Plato (or Socrates) avoids all

etymological speculation upon the Beautiful, KaXov. In the passage under discussion, we are told that the origin and nature of KaXov is a rather difficult question (XaXe7rcrepov). At the same time we learn that the term is 'self-explaining' (avro XeyfE); that'it is in- dicative of its own meaning' (irrs 8Lavolar rsL oLKEVe irwovvpla 70VT0 Tr

ovolfa), and that the term is the proper expression of that wisdom which produces such things as we accept believing them to be KaXd:

OpOpws pa (PpovT(rsor avrri ?r fr) vvufla fTorrl, TO KaX'v, Tr1 Ta TroLavra

a7rEpyaof/APvrSl ad 8 KaX a (fidKoOPTes e EJa dar7ra,uLaeOa.l In striking agreement with these views, Plotinos seeks to define

the Beautiful by the following half etymological (KaXo'v-KaXfiv)

Similarly in Phaedo Ioo C-E: aiverati f ot eli ir artv 7ai7Lo Kaa6v, ov6C 6t' Ev a72o K a Xv e'vat 0 dt6T71 /ErTXt eeIEKeVOV TOv K a X ov Kal rdavra 6S ovro c./y ... OvK a7RLo rt TrotEZ airob K a 7 6 v j EKeivov OV 701 K a ao v Eire rrapovaia eire Kolvuvia

eire orry 6e Kati 0irrr wpoayevoiEvyj (edd.-vov). ov yap ero rovro S0taXvpi1opuat, a6X2' ori r Ka K a a K a a yiyverat K a a . rovro yap 0ot (OKEZ a&a7aaeararov elval Kal

E/iavT(r a7roKpivaaOaa Kai aiLa), cai TroVrov Ex6defvor 7oyoviyal OViK av 7rorE TreeV a;ra' aicaaRs eTvat Ka; Etfol Kai O6J oVv vaRa arroKplvavaat Oir T Ka a X Ta K a i yiyverat K atd.




half philosophical speculations (de Pulchr. 50 D, p. 4, ed. Creu- zer): TL' ov'v CTrtV o KIveL Tr's 6OEgs TWV O@EopeCYWV KaL 7rtoTpeF)eL 7rpos auro

Kal EXKIE KaL EVfpalvraLat Ttj O;a 7roLe; TroVro yap epdvrs TrXE aXv 7rdl3Odpa

aUT~ XpolAivoL Kal Tat a'X\a Oeaoralt.LEa. XeyeraTL iv Xo irapI rdevrv-v, &

firelrV, s O(ruVllETPl 7o p aXXrpa v Kafpv 7pos a Kal rrpos To oXov, rTO e TrF

evXpolas (euXpelas codd.) TrpoarTeOev TO 7Trpo Tr7 o7q. ^v, KaX Xo s rorLEL. Kai

oTrv avTroisl KaL oX).os Trol i'\XXo&s 7raat Tr KaXots eLTaL, TO 0vujaerTpolt Kai

jelEerpTp77LEvoLs vrrapXev, KTX.-and so on passim. These remarks of Plotinos appear to be very suggestive with

reference to our passage: 6r KaXov dpafovlta rapiKTra. For while his

concluding words evidently reflect the aesthetic speculations of the ancient philosophers including Plato (XeyeTaL 7rnpa 7rdrowv c eLTErlV), the introductory sentences obviously reflect the etymological connection of KaX6v with KaXeiv, popular already in Plotinos' time. Now keeping this theory of KaXov-KaXeiv in view and

remembering that in Plotinos' time apLovia had assumed the mean- ' of accenting ', we are warranted, I believe, in considering Plato's commentators and copiers as the source of the mischief: imagining that, like themselves, Plato associated KaXov with KaXEv and that he also used aipMovla in the sense of accent, they 'emended' the passage and so made Plato say that KaXoiv comes from KaXiv by a mere change of accent and by lengthening o to ov. I hold then that in the sentence aVTOi apmPi'ova Ivov [KUal pjKEL TOV OV] TrapjlKra the

bracketed words are interpolated. Be this as it may, a careful and critical study of all the Platonic

passages alleged to refer to quantity, proves that Plato, though often discussing metrical passages, never indeed alludes to

quantity. This is almost as striking as is the parallel phenomenon in him that, although he very often busies himself with the

etymological analysis of words, many of which are aspirated, he never refers to aspiration.

On the other hand, accent is distinctly mentioned by him and denoted by the very appropriate terms O6rT1Trev, 'degrees of stress',

o4urepov 'relatively stressed', 83aprvepov,' relatively relaxed or sub-

dued', then a-vXXaI3 o0a, a 'stressed syllable', or rovXXaf3, apeia, a 'relaxed (subdued) syllable.' On this point the following passage is decisive beyond all doubt: Crat. 399 A-B: Erporo,v /EV TO TOiLdve oE

evvojcra& rnepl ovoladrowv, onrL roXXaKLts E7re//3a\XXo/0e ypa,ipAara, Tra 'o EarpovLAev

trap ' o 3ovvX0Hfa ovofiaoovres Ka Tc' r OVTT3rrraTIS /ral/3XXo/.Ev' orov ALI

IXos.. rorVo tva aVTL p"64aroS (phrase) o'vola iLiV yevrvqraT, ro' Tr ETCpOV

avroOE,v I,ra &eLaXofLev (i. e. AtL'0LXOs or A'i,>X\os) Kal dvar o$ela; rJs

half philosophical speculations (de Pulchr. 50 D, p. 4, ed. Creu- zer): TL' ov'v CTrtV o KIveL Tr's 6OEgs TWV O@EopeCYWV KaL 7rtoTpeF)eL 7rpos auro

Kal EXKIE KaL EVfpalvraLat Ttj O;a 7roLe; TroVro yap epdvrs TrXE aXv 7rdl3Odpa

aUT~ XpolAivoL Kal Tat a'X\a Oeaoralt.LEa. XeyeraTL iv Xo irapI rdevrv-v, &

firelrV, s O(ruVllETPl 7o p aXXrpa v Kafpv 7pos a Kal rrpos To oXov, rTO e TrF

evXpolas (euXpelas codd.) TrpoarTeOev TO 7Trpo Tr7 o7q. ^v, KaX Xo s rorLEL. Kai

oTrv avTroisl KaL oX).os Trol i'\XXo&s 7raat Tr KaXots eLTaL, TO 0vujaerTpolt Kai

jelEerpTp77LEvoLs vrrapXev, KTX.-and so on passim. These remarks of Plotinos appear to be very suggestive with

reference to our passage: 6r KaXov dpafovlta rapiKTra. For while his

concluding words evidently reflect the aesthetic speculations of the ancient philosophers including Plato (XeyeTaL 7rnpa 7rdrowv c eLTErlV), the introductory sentences obviously reflect the etymological connection of KaX6v with KaXeiv, popular already in Plotinos' time. Now keeping this theory of KaXov-KaXeiv in view and

remembering that in Plotinos' time apLovia had assumed the mean- ' of accenting ', we are warranted, I believe, in considering Plato's commentators and copiers as the source of the mischief: imagining that, like themselves, Plato associated KaXov with KaXEv and that he also used aipMovla in the sense of accent, they 'emended' the passage and so made Plato say that KaXoiv comes from KaXiv by a mere change of accent and by lengthening o to ov. I hold then that in the sentence aVTOi apmPi'ova Ivov [KUal pjKEL TOV OV] TrapjlKra the

bracketed words are interpolated. Be this as it may, a careful and critical study of all the Platonic

passages alleged to refer to quantity, proves that Plato, though often discussing metrical passages, never indeed alludes to

quantity. This is almost as striking as is the parallel phenomenon in him that, although he very often busies himself with the

etymological analysis of words, many of which are aspirated, he never refers to aspiration.

On the other hand, accent is distinctly mentioned by him and denoted by the very appropriate terms O6rT1Trev, 'degrees of stress',

o4urepov 'relatively stressed', 83aprvepov,' relatively relaxed or sub-

dued', then a-vXXaI3 o0a, a 'stressed syllable', or rovXXaf3, apeia, a 'relaxed (subdued) syllable.' On this point the following passage is decisive beyond all doubt: Crat. 399 A-B: Erporo,v /EV TO TOiLdve oE

evvojcra& rnepl ovoladrowv, onrL roXXaKLts E7re//3a\XXo/0e ypa,ipAara, Tra 'o EarpovLAev

trap ' o 3ovvX0Hfa ovofiaoovres Ka Tc' r OVTT3rrraTIS /ral/3XXo/.Ev' orov ALI

IXos.. rorVo tva aVTL p"64aroS (phrase) o'vola iLiV yevrvqraT, ro' Tr ETCpOV

avroOE,v I,ra &eLaXofLev (i. e. AtL'0LXOs or A'i,>X\os) Kal dvar o$ela; rJs



PLATO'S TESTIMONY TO QUANTITY AND ACCENT. 83

iacr/r av\XXarlis (A()AiXos) f3aperaY Ec0eyaEdBc0a (i. e. Ai<ItXos or AlqXosr- mark here also the absence of all reference to the quantity of a-; 'contracted' or OvyKEKporT#7fivJV from Ac!) aXXav N e rovvavrnov

tci,3XXdAoeEV ypcditara, ra ae I3aparepa <o6urepa Buttmann> q)0beyy6.e0a. As to Aristotle, the passages, quoted above, p. 76 from him show,

abundantly that he not only speaks of accent under the name of trpooa-'a, but that he also indicates the nature of accent or irpoaeS&a; he even adds (see above p. 76) that people had then- in his time-begun to indicate the rpooaoia by accentual marks or 'accents': q8a rapaio-rja rotoowrat.-That similar graphic marks were occasionally used to indicate also quantity, would appear from Poet. 26, 3: oart LrepepyadeaLa os aTrfo S lots Ka0 pai a8oivra,

olrep e7roiLE oncrrTrparor, Kcai 8aaoyra 7rrEp 67rolet Mvacrieosr 6 'O0rouYvros.

THE UNIVERSITY, ST. ANDREWS, N. B. A. N. JANNARIS.

PLATO'S TESTIMONY TO QUANTITY AND ACCENT. 83

iacr/r av\XXarlis (A()AiXos) f3aperaY Ec0eyaEdBc0a (i. e. Ai<ItXos or AlqXosr- mark here also the absence of all reference to the quantity of a-; 'contracted' or OvyKEKporT#7fivJV from Ac!) aXXav N e rovvavrnov

tci,3XXdAoeEV ypcditara, ra ae I3aparepa <o6urepa Buttmann> q)0beyy6.e0a. As to Aristotle, the passages, quoted above, p. 76 from him show,

abundantly that he not only speaks of accent under the name of trpooa-'a, but that he also indicates the nature of accent or irpoaeS&a; he even adds (see above p. 76) that people had then- in his time-begun to indicate the rpooaoia by accentual marks or 'accents': q8a rapaio-rja rotoowrat.-That similar graphic marks were occasionally used to indicate also quantity, would appear from Poet. 26, 3: oart LrepepyadeaLa os aTrfo S lots Ka0 pai a8oivra,

olrep e7roiLE oncrrTrparor, Kcai 8aaoyra 7rrEp 67rolet Mvacrieosr 6 'O0rouYvros.

THE UNIVERSITY, ST. ANDREWS, N. B. A. N. JANNARIS.



Documents

Plato's Testimony to Quantity and Accent