Author Description

This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1824 Excerpt:...with just reason, of the use of the accusative plural, rendered by omission of the relative pronoun, in the room of the genitive; and consequently they never write dyttirw rov irarepa rovs I love their father, but always dyatrw rov irarepa rwv. And for the most part there is used instead thereof, and especially in phrases expressive of possession, the entire and uncurtailed pronoun; as for example, instead of dyairw rov irarepa rwv, we find dyairw rov irarepa avruiv, I love their father. And in the reflected pronouns, by giving the pronouns the grave accent, they keep to the rule of the ancient language; as dyairovv rov irarepa avrwv, they love their father. But this cannot occur with the other two persons j for then the difference of the compound pronoun from the simple one, would not consist in the pure peculiarity of orthography, but of prosody likewise, so that authors are under the necessity of having recourse to the Hellenic pronoun to form the reflected pronouns; and they write, dyairujjj.ev rov irarepa yttujv, dyair5.re rbv irarepa o'jxwv. we love our father, you love their father. Some, however, have accustomed themselves to write here and there the Hellenic compounded pronoun. These modern innovations tend much to prevent the reintegration of the phrases of the ancient language; since, in addition to their incompetency to elicit possession in the two first persons, being restrained in the third, they do not even preserve the ancient composition in the words: for example, this phrase, dyairovv rov irarepa avrwv, in the ancient would be thus construed, dyairditnv avriZv rov irarepa, they love their father; and reflectedly, as dyairujtn rov kavrujv maripa: or by another construction, dyaitwa rov irarepa avruiv, is of the Scripture and consequently is...