By William J. Slater (ed.)
Read Online or Download Aristophanis Byzantii Fragmenta PDF
Best world books
This quantity examines the interval of heritage which appears to be like at counter-reformation and the cost revolution, 1559-1610.
With the advance of the World-Wide internet, info administration difficulties have branched out from the conventional framework during which tabular facts is processed below the stern regulate of an program, and deal with this day the wealthy number of details that's came across on the net, contemplating numerous ? exible envir- ments below which such info might be searched, classi ed , and processed.
This quantity provides the edited lawsuits of the 1st international Congress on Branching tactics. The contributions current new learn and surveys of the present examine task during this box. hence, all these venture study within the topic will locate this a well timed and top quality quantity to have on their cabinets.
It is a replica of a ebook released earlier than 1923. This publication can have occasional imperfections comparable to lacking or blurred pages, negative photos, errant marks, and so on. that have been both a part of the unique artifact, or have been brought through the scanning strategy. We think this paintings is culturally very important, and regardless of the imperfections, have elected to carry it again into print as a part of our carrying on with dedication to the upkeep of published works around the world.
Extra resources for Aristophanis Byzantii Fragmenta
FGrHist 697 F 10) Polemo Delphis 177a. C. honoratus est. T 5: Su. ε 2898: Ερατοσθένης . . μαθητήν έπίσημον καταλιπών Άριστοφάνην τον Βυζάντιον (FGrHist 241 Τ Ι ) 2 Aristophanis Byzantii Fragmenta T 6: Lactantius, Inst. 5,2,17 ed. Monat: . . quasi aegre ferret quod illam rem non Aristophanes aliquis aut Aristarchus commentatus sit. : διόπερ και Αριστοφάνης ό γραμματικός εύστοχώτατα πεποίηκεν εις αυτόν εκείνο' *Ω Μένανδρε και βίε, πότερος άρ' υμών πότερον άπεμιμήσατο; (Men.
This section, omitted by M, dealt with words of peculiar formation, which Ar. Byz. shows not to be designed for comic effect (cf. gl. 21; 238—40) but meant seriously: his recognition of their peculiarity and in one instance dialectal origin rules out any prescriptive intent, and these purely lexical observations seem adequately justified by the title of his book. Polemic may be evidenced in 25 A and 25 B. 25 A ( L I I I p . ) δ ο κ ό ς Eust. 1761,36 in ξ 350: (gl. 24) ... έτι λέγει (sc. Ar. ) και δόκον την δόκησιν και ύπόληψιν, οίον (Call.
6 A—D (XLIV p. ) μοιχή, μοιχίς, μοιχαλίς, μοιχίδιον* Eust. 1761,26 in ξ 350: (gl. 5; seq. haec) προφέρει και το' μοιχή και μοιχίς ασυνήθη, δι' ων δηλοΰται ή μοιχαλίς (δι3 — μοιχαλίς ut ab Eust. addita seclusit Nauck). Antiatt. 108,1: μοιχίδιον το εκ μοιχού γεγενημένον. Υπερείδης εν τω κατά Άριστοφώντος (fr. 42). If μοιχαλίς and μοιχίδιον belong here, we may guess that Ar. Byz. tried to show that μοιχαλίς, a word common in later times, could also by analogy have been classical, though it is not attested before the Septuagint.
Aristophanis Byzantii Fragmenta by William J. Slater (ed.)