δι’ἀγορᾶς or Διαγόρας? On Aristophanes, Frogs 320

IF 0.4 3区历史学 0 CLASSICS

MNEMOSYNE Pub Date : 2022-12-23 DOI:10.1163/1568525x-bja10156

John Henry

引用次数: 1

Abstract

Recent commentators of Aristophanes’ Frogs have argued that there is a deliberate indeterminacy in his text when he wrote ΔΙΑΓΟΡΑΣ at line 320. It has been argued that the two readings of these letters in antiquity—δι’ ἀγορᾶς (‘through the Agora’) and Διαγόρας (the Melian poet)—were both intended by Aristophanes as a purposeful textual ambiguity for the actor to freely choose between in performance. But this article will argue that this agnosticism is ultimately misguided, and only the ‘Diagoras’ reading is viable in terms of syntax and historical context.

查看原文本刊更多论文

δι′ορ ο ς or Διαγόρας?论阿里斯托芬，《青蛙》320

最近，阿里斯托芬《青蛙》的评论家们认为，当他在320行写ΔΙΑΓΟΡΑΣ时，他的文本中有一种故意的不确定性。有人认为，古代对这些信件的两种解读-δι ' ο γορ ο ς (' through the Agora ')和Διαγόρας(米洛斯诗人)-都是阿里斯托芬有意为演员在表演中自由选择的文本歧义。但本文将论证这种不可知论最终是被误导的，只有“Diagoras”的阅读在句法和历史背景方面是可行的。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

MNEMOSYNE CLASSICS-

CiteScore

0.50

自引率

0.00%

发文量

期刊介绍： Since its first appearance as a journal of textual criticism in 1852, Mnemosyne has secured a position as one of the leading journals in its field worldwide. Its reputation is built on the Dutch academic tradition, famous for its rigour and thoroughness. It attracts contributions from all over the world, with the result that Mnemosyne is distinctive for a combination of scholarly approaches from both sides of the Atlantic and the Equator. Its presence in libraries around the globe is a sign of its continued reputation as an invaluable resource for scholarship in Classical studies.