PURA. Purism In Antiquity: Theories Of Language in Greek Atticist Lexica and their Legacy

Lexicographic entries

ἄρτι
(Phryn. Ecl. 11, Phryn. PS 17.3–9, Thom.Mag. 29.11)

A. Main sources

(1) Phryn. Ecl. 11: ἄρτι ἥξω μηδέποτε εἴπῃς ἐπὶ τοῦ μέλλοντος, ἀλλ’ ἐπὶ τοῦ ἐνεστῶτος καὶ παρῳχημένου, ἄρτι ἥκω καὶ ἄρτι ἀφικόμην.

ἄρτι ἥξω (‘I will come at once’): Never say [so] for the future, but [only] for the present and the past, ἄρτι ἥκω (‘I am coming just now’) and ἄρτι ἀφικόμην (‘I came just now’).


(2) Phryn. PS 17.3–9: ἄρτι, ἀρτίως· διαφοράν τινα οἱ Ἀττικοὶ φέρουσιν, τὸ μὲν σημαίνειν λέγοντες, ὡς τὰ παρεληλυθότα συνάπτοντα τῷ ἐνεστῶτι, τὸ δὲ ἀρτίως τὸν ἐνεστῶτα. ἔλαθε δ’ αὐτοὺς, ὅτι καὶ τὴν ἐναντίαν διαφορὰν ἴσασιν οἱ ἀρχαῖοι, τὸ μὲν ἄρτι ἐπὶ τοῦ ἐνεστῶτος τιθέντες, τὸ δ’ ἀρτίως ἐπὶ τοῦ παρεληλυθότος. τινὲς δὲ διετείναντο ὡς ἐπὶ μέλλοντος χρόνου τὸ ἄρτι. ἐγὼ δ’ οὐχ εὗρον.

ἄρτι, ἀρτίως: The Atticists make a distinction [between ἄρτι and ἀρτίως] and say that the former indicates past events linked to the present, while ἀρτίως [relates to] the present. However, they overlook the fact that the ancient authors are also familiar with the opposite distinction, whereby they use ἄρτι for the present [and] ἀρτίως for the past. Some extend [the use of] ἄρτι to the future time, but I did not find [any examples].


(3) Thom.Mag. 29.11: ἄρτι ἥξω οὐκ εἴποις, ἀλλ’ ἄρτι ἔρχομαι καὶ ἄρτι ἀφικόμην.

Do not say ἄρτι ἥξω (‘I will come at once’), but ἄρτι ἔρχομαι (‘I am coming just now’) and ἄρτι ἀφικόμην (‘I came just now’).


B. Other erudite sources

(1) Σb α 2160 (= Phot. α 2892, ex Σʹʹʹ): ἄρτι· ἐπὶ τοῦ ἀπηρτισμένως καὶ πεπληρωμένως. λέγεται δὲ ἄρτι καὶ τὸ μέρος τοῦ παρεληλυθότος, συνάπτον τῷ νῦν, ἐναντίως ἔχον τῷ αὐτίκα· τοῦτο γὰρ κατὰ τὸ μέλλον συνάπτει.

Σ α 969 (= Phot. α 2892, Su. α 4034, schol. Luc. 59.49, ex Σʹ) has a similar text (the words ἄρτι· ἐπὶ τοῦ ἀπηρτισμένως καὶ πεπληρωμένως. λέγεται δὲ ἄρτι καὶ are only in Σb α 2160 = Phot. α 2892).

ἄρτι: For ἀπηρτισμένως (‘completely’) and πεπληρωμένως (‘fully’). ἄρτι is used for that part of the past, which is connected with νῦν (‘now’) and is opposite to αὐτίκα (‘in the immediate future’). For this (i.e., αὐτίκα) is construed with the future (i.e., unlike ἄρτι).


(2) Schol. Luc. 18.1: ἄρτι] τὸ ἄρτι μέλλοντι οὐ συνάπτεται· οὐκ ἄρα λέγομεν ‘ἄρτι σολοικιῶ’.

ἄρτι: The [form] ἄρτι is not construed with the future: we do not say ἄρτι σολοικιῶ (‘I will [begin] at once [to use solecisms]’, Luc. Sol. 1 = C.4).


(3) Michael Psellus In Aristotelis physicorum libros commentarium 4.49.20–3: καὶ τὸ ἄρτι ἐπὶ τοῦ μέλλοντος οὐκ ἔστι (σόλοικον γὰρ τὸ τοιοῦτον, ὡς παίζει καὶ ὁ Λουκιανός, οἷον ‘ἄρτι σολοικιῶ’, καὶ γὰρ λέγων τοῦτο ὁ λέγων καὶ μὴ οἰόμενος σολοικίζειν ἐσολοίκισεν), ἐπὶ δὲ τοῦ παρεληλυθότος ἁρμόζει.

ἄρτι for the future does not exist. For such a [construction] is a solecism, as Lucian too jokes about it [where he writes] ἄρτι σολοικιῶ (‘I will [begin] at once [to use solecisms]’, Luc. Sol. 1 = C.4): in fact, the speaker who said this used a solecism without thinking that he was doing so. [ἄρτι] is appropriate for [indicating] the past.


C. Loci classici, other relevant texts

(1) Antiph. fr. 27.6–7:
                                                ὦ Ζεῦ, τίς ποτε,
ὦ Καλλιμέδων, σὲ κατέδετ’ ἄρτι τῶν φίλων;

By Zeus, who among [your] friends, Callimedon, will devour you just now?


(2) Men. Cith. 63–4:
                                                ἂν δὲ μὴ τύχῃ
ὢν ἔνδο[ν, ἄρτ]ι πρὸς ἀγορὰν πορεύσομαι.

The integration ἔνδο[ν, ἄρτ]ι was suggested by Wilamowitz (1907) in the editio princeps. Kassel and Schröder do not accept the supplement into the text.

If he does not happen to be inside [the house], I will go to the market right now.


(3) NT Ev.Matt. 26.53: ἢ δοκεῖς ὅτι οὐ δύναμαι παρακαλέσαι τὸν πατέρα μου, καὶ παραστήσει μοι ἄρτι πλείω δώδεκα λεγιῶνας ἀγγέλων;

Or do you think that I am unable to summon my father, and that he will just provide me at once with twelve legions of angels and more?


(4) Luc. Sol. 1: ἴθι νῦν ἐμοῦ λαβοῦ σολοικίζοντος, ἄρτι δὲ σολοικιῶ.

Come now, catch me as I use solecisms. [For] I will [begin] at once [to use solecisms].


(5) Amph. Exerc. 924: ἆρα οὐκ ἂν ἄρτι παύσῃ συζητῶν τῷ κυρίῳ;

Will you not stop at once to dispute with the Lord?


(6) Nonn. Par.Ev.Io. 13.85:
γλώσσῃ προφθαμένῃ, τόπερ ἔσσεται, ἄρτι βοήσω.

With prophetic voice, I will cry out loud at once what will be.


(7) Passio sanctae Agathae Catanae 4.1341.17–8: Κυντιανὸς εἶπεν· ‘ἄρτι γνώσομαι ἐγώ, εἰ σώζει σε ὁ Χριστός’.

Cuntianus said: ‘I will know at once, whether Christ saves you’.


(8) Ps.-Callisth. Historia Alexandri Magni (recensio α sive recensio vetusta) 3.22.11 (~ recensio β ~ recensio γ): κἂν Ἀντίγονος καλῇ, παρ’ ἐμοῦ βασιλεὺς Ἀλέξανδρος τυγχάνεις· ἄρτι δέ σοι δείξω.

Even though you are called Antigonus, at my place you happen [to represent] king Alexander. I will show [this to] you at once.


(9) Theodorus Studites Epistulae 222.31–2 Fatouros: οὕτως καὶ ἄρτι μεγαλυνθήσεται Χριστὸς ἐν τῷ σώματί σου.

Thus, Christ will be magnified at once with your body.


D. General commentary

The lexicographical passages collected here concern the question of whether the adverb ἄρτι may be used with future constructions or is applicable solely to past events. Phrynichus (A.1, A.2) asserts twice that the construction of ἄρτι with the future is not permitted (A.2 also has a more general interest in the use of ἄρτι and ἀρτίως for the recent past and for the present, for which see also Prisc. 18.167.2–168.1 Rosellini [3.283.11–6 Hertz]Prisc. 18.167.2–168.1 Rosellini (3.283.11–6 Hertz)). Thomas Magister’s entry (A.3) depends on the Eclogue with minor adjustments (see F.1). In the PS (A.2), Phrynichus explicitly contests the rule (for which, see B.1 and B.3) specifying that ἄρτι is standard with past forms, while ἀρτίως should be used with present forms. However, these usages are already well-documented in classical sources (see LSJ s.v. ἄρτι 2 and s.v. ἄρτιος III.2). The same objection may be implicit in the Eclogue (A.1), given that the examples Phrynichus constructs with ἄρτι contain both a present (ἥκω) and an aorist (ἀφικόμην). However, the general rule that ἄρτι should not be used with the future is unanimously accepted. All available evidence consistently shows that this construction is a feature of markedly informal language attested continuously in works by authors from the 4th century to the late Byzantine period.

The first documented occurrence of ἄρτι with the future occurs in a fragment of Antiphanes (C.1), providing robust support for Wilamowitz’s supplement ἄρτι in Menander’s Citharista (C.2). (These cases create the same effect as one translated these passages with ‘just now’ in place of ‘right now’.) The fact that the only known occurrence of ἄρτι with the future is in Antiphanes, who was a poet of Middle Comedy, may account for Phrynichus’ claim that he had never encountered such a construction (A.2). We may readily accept this statement as an indication that Phrynichus had never encountered such a construction within his chosen corpus of canonical authors. In later sources, the construction of ἄρτι with the future is an indication of low language, as attested amply by its occurrences in the New Testament (C.3, see also NT Ev.Mat. 26.64), in Lucian’s Soloecista (C.4), and in the passage of Amphilochius (C.5). The instances in AppianApp. Mith. 291 (Mith. 291: πᾶσαν ἐπενόει παρασκευήν, ὡς ἄρτι δὴ κριθησόμενος περὶ ἁπάντων ‘He (i.e., Mithridates) took care of all the preparation [knowing that] he will at once be put to test about everything’) and Achilles TatiusAch.Tat. 5.26.11 (5.26.11: λυθήσῃ μὲν γὰρ ἄρτι τῶν δεσμῶν, κἂν Θερσάνδρῳ μὴ δοκῇ ‘For you will be freed at once from the bonds, even if Thersander does not want it’) thus count as occasional switches into the lower koine.

E. Byzantine and Modern Greek commentary

The use of ἄρτι with the future is well-documented in Byzantine sources. In prose, it remains confined to texts written in a low or unpretentious language; by way of example, we may cite its occurrences in hagiographical writings (C.7, Acta Xanthippae et Polyxenae 41.15, Passiones sanctorum Onesiphori et Porphyrii 5.28), in Ps.-Callisth. Historia Alexandri Magni in both the prosaic and the poetic versions (C.8, see also Ps.-Callisth. Historia Alexandri Magni [recensio β = recensio γ] 1.12, Ps.-Callisth. Historia Alexandri Magni (recensio β = recensio γ) 1.18, Ps.-Callisth. Historia Alexandri Magni (recensio Byzantina poetica, cod. Marc. gr. 408) 5284), and in the letters of Theodorus Studites (C.9, to which we may add five further instances in his epistolary). ἄρτι with the future is prohibited in high-register prose. Eustathius is a partial exception, as such constructions are attested several times in his Homeric commentaries (see, e.g., Eust. in Il. 2.417.14–5, 3.226.4–5, in Od. 1.424.29–31, 2.278.24–5, 2.298.38) and in the Sermones (see, e.g., 1.29.29–31, 9.153.14–5, and 13.205.30). Another exception is the occurrence of ἄρτι with the future in a letter of Maximus Planudes (Epistulae 90.117–8: οὐ γὰρ σαυτὸν ἄρτι πειράσῃ τοῦ πάθους ἀναλαβεῖν ‘For you will not try at once to recover yourself from the suffering’). However, none of these texts is written in markedly Atticised Greek, and so ἄρτι with the future is less exceptional than it may appear. The evidence for the use of ἄρτι with the future in poetry is also robust and ranges from early Byzantine writers such as Nonnus (C.6, and see also Par.Ev.Io. 8.176) and Sophronius (Anacreontica 10.67–8) to Symeon Neotheologus (Hymni 24.181; to this we can add three more instances in the hymns) and Tzetzes (Alleg.Od. 12.36), to mention but a few.

F. Commentary on individual texts and occurrences

(1)    Thom. Mag. 29.11 (A.3)

Thomas Magister’s gloss, in which ἥκω is replaced by ἔρχομαι, depends on the entry in Phrynichus’ Eclogue (A.1). The substitution of ἥκω with ἔρχομαι may be justified by the fact that ἥκω commonly carries a future meaning, and Thomas Magister must thus have favored ἔρχομαι as a means of avoiding any ambiguities.

Bibliography

Schubart, W.; Wilamowitz, U. (1907). Berliner Klassikertexte. Heft V: Griechische Dichterfragmente. Zweite Hälfte: Lyrische und dramatische Fragmente, bearbeitet von W. Schubart und U. von Wilamowitz-Moellendorff. Berlin, 115–22.

CITE THIS

Federico Favi, 'ἄρτι (Phryn. Ecl. 11, Phryn. PS 17.3–9, Thom.Mag. 29.11)', in Olga Tribulato (ed.), Digital Encyclopedia of Atticism. With the assistance of E. N. Merisio.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.30687/DEA/2974-8240/2022/01/008

ABSTRACT
This article provides a philological and linguistic commentary on the adverb ἄρτι discussed in the lexica Phryn. Ecl. 11, Phryn. PS 17.3–9, Thom.Mag. 29.11.
KEYWORDS

Adverbs of timeRegisterἀρτίως

FIRST PUBLISHED ON

29/06/2023

LAST UPDATE

04/01/2024