εὐκοιτέω
(Phryn. Ecl. 9)

D. General commentary

The entry in Phrynichus’ Eclogue (A.1) concerns εὐκοίτει (‘sleep well!’), the 2nd person imperative present active of the rare verb εὐκοιτέω (‘to sleep well’). This is likely a late form, and, as such, it is sanctioned by Phrynichus. Phrynichus may also have found fault with εὐκοιτέω on the grounds that it is a compound with a first element εὐ‑εὐ‑, in place of which he would have recommended the use of a syntagmSyntagms (see below for a discussion).

As first noticed by Garulli (2008), this form is only attested in the paratext of an imperial verse epitaph from Rome (C.1), where εὐκοίτει functions as a wish for the deceased to rest peacefully. This use of the verb εὐκοιτέω (‘to sleep well’) conveys the commonplace equivalence between sleep and death that the epitaph posits (see IGUR 2.411.9) in accordance with a transcultural and transhistorical motif (Garulli 2008, 80 n. 2 collects mostly Latin parallels in addition to Asclepiades and pseudo‑Moschus; however, this association between sleep and death can be traced back to archaic poetry: Θάνατος (‘Death’) and Ὕπνος (‘Sleep’) are called brothers in Hom. Il. 14.231, Hes. Th. 212 and 756 and twins in Hom. Il. 16.672). We have no evidence for determining whether εὐκοίτει (‘sleep well!’) was only used in reference to death or if it also served as an equivalent for ‘good night!’ (thus Lobeck 1820, 17); but if we also consider other expressions that may likewise serve a double use (e.g. χαῖρε ‘farewell!’), then there is no reason to exclude this second possibility. Given its contextual usage, it is probable that εὐκοίτει was a set phrase restricted to the imperative mood, which further explains why it is so lemmatised in the Eclogue (the entries of the Atticist lexica may be lemmatised in the imperative, but only when the object of the entry is itself the imperative, as seen, for instance, in Phryn. Ecl. 141Phryn. Ecl. 141).

The second element of the compound εὐκοιτέω derives from the same verbal root as κεῖμαι ‘to lie’ (see DELG s.v.; EDG s.v.), and, like similar formations, it properly indicates a certain manner of sleepingSleep. Garulli (2008, 81) has compiled a useful list of the compound verbs with the second element ‑κοιτέω attested in Ancient and Byzantine Greek. To that list, we can only add a handful of Byzantine forms, some of which may be ad hoc creations: ἐκπροκοιτέω (‘to sleep outside’), ἐξωκοιτέω (‘to sleep outside’), κακοκοιτέω (‘to sleep badly’), λαθροκοιτέω (‘to secretly sleep (with someone)’), ξηροκοιτέω (‘to sleep on the ground’), ὁμοκοιτέω (‘to sleep together’). The earliest attested compound verbs with the second element ‑κοιτέω are μονοκοιτέω in Aristophanes (Lys. 592, also in com. adesp. fr. 1075.5 and in the Fragmentum Grenfellianum, i.e. lyr. adesp. fr. 1.35 Powell); δυσκοιτέω (‘to have bad nights’) and σκληροκοιτέω (‘to sleep on a hard bed’) in the Hippocratic corpus (respectively, in VM 10 and Acut. 9 and in Salubr. 4); and ἀποκοιτέω (‘to sleep away from one’s post’) in Demosthenes (18.38, where the verb occurs in a likely historically genuine ψήφισμα, see Wankel 1976 vol. 1, 288–9; notably, in the same decree, there occurs the rare adjective κοιταῖος, meaning ‘spending the night’, as part of the expression μηδένα Ἀθηναίων μηδεμιᾷ προσευρέσει ἐν τῇ χώρῃ κοιταῖον γίγνεσθαι to indicate that ‘no Athenian by any machination should spend the night in the countryside’). Already in the classical period, while some compound verbs with the second element ‑κοιτέω are denominalDenominative verbs (see, e.g., ἀπόκοιτος ‘sleeping away from’ > ἀποκοιτέω ‘to sleep away (i.e. from one’s post)’), other forms were created by analogy through a process of ‘incorporation’ (on this process, see entry χρεολυτέω) and are not derived from a pre‑existing nominal base (see, e.g., αἰθριοκοιτέω ‘to sleep in the open air’, δευτεροκοιτέω ‘to have a bedfellow’, μονοκοιτέω ‘to sleep alone’, στιβαδοκοιτέω ‘to sleep on litter’, etc.): εὐκοιτέω belongs to this second group. Interestingly, of the first four attested forms, only ἀποκοιτέωἀποκοιτέω is likely to be denominal (from ἀπόκοιτοςἀπόκοιτος, attested in Aeschines and Menander), which suggests that the second element ‑κοιτέω soon became productive. It is important to note that Phrynichus does not object to the compound verbs with the second element ‑κοιτέω per se, as demonstrated by the form φορμοκοιτέωφορμοκοιτέω (likely taken from comedy, see also Kassel, Austin, PCG vol. 4, 73 ad Chionid. fr. 1.2) which Phrynichus discusses in the PS (B.1).

Garulli (2008, 81 n. 8) highlights Soph. Ai. 831–2: καλῶ δ’ ἅμα | πομπαῖον Ἑρμῆν χθόνιον εὖ με κοιμίσαι (‘I also invoke Hermes, the escort to the netherworld, to put me to sleep’) as a classical syntagm comparable to the late compound εὐκοιτέω. Hence, in addition to the fact that εὐκοιτέω is most likely a post‑classical form, Phrynichus’ proscription of εὐκοιτέω also relates to his dislike of the use of compounds over syntagms, which is often associated with compounds formed with the first element εὐ‑ (see Phryn. Ecl. 10Phryn. Ecl. 10: εὐχαριστεῖν οὐδεὶς τῶν δοκίμων εἶπεν, ἀλλὰ χάριν εἰδέναι, ‘None of the approved [writers] used εὐχαριστέω (‘to thank’), instead [they used] χάριν εἰδέναι (‘to be grateful’)’; Phryn. Ecl. 97Phryn. Ecl. 97: εὐκαιρεῖν οὐ λεκτέον, ἀλλ’ εὖ σχολῆς ἔχειν, ‘One should not say εὐκαιρεῖν, but εὖ σχολῆς ἔχειν (‘to enjoy (one’s) leisure time’)’; Phryn. Ecl. 338Phryn. Ecl. 338: εὐκερματεῖν ἀηδὲς πάνυ, ἥδιστα δ’ ἂν εἴποις εὐπορεῖν κερμάτων, ‘εὐκερματεῖν [is] utterly unpleasant, you may prefer to say εὐπορεῖν κερμάτων (‘to have a lot of money’)’). Another compound proscribed by Phrynichus that has a first element εὐ‑ is εὐχρηστέω ‘to lend’ (Phyn. Ecl. 381Phryn. Ecl. 381: εὐχρηστεῖν ἀπόρριψον, λέγε δὲ κιχράναι, ‘You must reject εὐχρηστεῖν, say κιχράναι instead’).

E. Byzantine and Modern Greek commentary

N/A

F. Commentary on individual texts and occurrences

N/A