Píndaro P.12.28-32: demon y tiempo en la concepción de la providencia de Píndaro

Most commentators on the final verses of Pindar’s Twelfth Pythian Ode have expressed a discontent with the apparent banality they have perceived in these lines. Yet there remains a number of exegetical challenges in regard to these gnomic verses which render their interpretation eine alte Crux der Erklärung. In this paper we analyze those interpretations which have addressed each of the final verses, and we state our reasons for rejecting each of them either on syntactical grounds or for their lack of internal coherence. In what follows, we shall propose a new interpretation of the entire passage, one which will show how Pindar is ellaborating a topos about the role that Time and Deity play in the fulfillment of Fate.No disponible

Digital Humanities

Digital relations are deeply transforming our lives : from the nature of political participation to the relationship between digital and non-digital environments ; from the reorganization of the public sphere to the ethics of responsibility, transparency or inclusiveness. We are witnessing fundamental changes in the infrastructures of democracy and the emergence of new forms of digital citizenship.Peer reviewe

Jornada de Grandes infraestructuras europeas de Ciencias Sociales y Humanidades en el CSIC: DARIAH y CLARÍN en el horizonte (11 de mayo de 2023)

Peer reviewe

La sintaxis de los verbos “comer” y “beber” en griego antiguo. Un estudio sobre el genitivo partitivo

Las gramáticas del griego antiguo hablan de un régimen en genitivo para el objeto de los verbos de “comer” y “beber” que aparecería en alternancia con la marca de acusativo. Ello ofrece una dificultad para nuestra observación de que en griego antiguo la marca de acusativo aparece necesariamente cuando el referente del objeto directo es creado por la acción verbal, o resulta modificado por la misma. Nuestro estudio de la construcción de tales verbos muestra que la marca de genitivo es excepcional, y que con anterioridad al s. I d.C. sólo aparece, con un valor claramente partitivo, en contextos muy marcados.Our ancient Greek grammars take as a fact the existence of a genitive case marking for the direct object of the verbs expressing the idea of “eat” and “drink”, alternating with the accusative. Such case behaviour is at odds with our observation that in ancient Greek the direct object whose referent is created or altered by the verbal action, is always constructed in accusative case. Our study of such construction shows that the genitive case is in fact very rare: before the first century AD it only appears, with a true partitive meaning, in a reduced set of clearly marked contexts.Peer reviewe

Differential Object Marking in Ancient Greek

At least three DOM-related constructions can be observed in Ancient Greek, but only one of them has received due consideration in the DOM bibliography (Bossong 1998). In this paper I will deal with the other two: the partitive genitive and a borderline instance of alternation in case marking of objects due to aspectual and affectedness variations in the interpretation of the predicate. I will also deal with the relation of the neuter accusative of unspecific objects with DOM, a relatively neglected construction. Central to the relation of Ancient Greek with DOM is the fact that its case marking is both universal and obligatory (or “symmetrical” in two different uses of the term). This explains why in Ancient Greek the functions differentiated by DOM are not Subject and Object, but Object and Extensions to core. Following other authors, I present here some examples of Spanish that show how the “differentiating” function (Comrie 1989) is not enough to explain DOM, even in the classical example of a DOM system, thus making clear the necessity to include constructions as the two mentioned above in a comprehensive definition of DOM.Peer reviewe