815.
mvp-tlg0019-tlg009-sanjaya-com-eng1-29
Line 815
ἡνίκʼ ἂν ὀξύλαλον παρίδῃ θήγοντος ὀδόντα
The phrase ὀξύλαλον παρίδῃ θήγοντος ὀδόντα presents a striking example of Aristophanic wordplay and syntactic compression. The participle θήγοντος (genitive singular of θήγων) governs the genitive ὀδόντα, but the semantic force of the construction relies on the double meaning of ὀξύλαλος: literally 'sharp-tongued' (a common epithet for a rhetorician or scold) but here punningly linked to the physical act of 'sharpening a tooth' (θήγοντος ὀδόντα). This creates a visual gag where the 'sharp-tongued' man is imagined literally sharpening his tooth, a grotesque image characteristic of Old Comedy's physical humor. The construction is syntactically rare in that the genitive participle modifies a noun that is itself the object of a verb of seeing (παρίδῃ) in a way that collapses the distinction between the metaphorical 'sharp tongue' and the literal 'sharp tooth', a pun likely lost on readers unfamiliar with the specific comic convention of bodily grotesquerie in Aristophanes.
818.
mvp-tlg0019-tlg009-sanjaya-com-eng1-30
Line 818
ἔσται δʼ ἱππολόφων τε λόγων κορυθαίολα νείκη
The genitive plural ἱππολόφων (hippolōphōn) is a rare compound noun found here and in no other extant text, formed from ἵππος (horse) and λόγος (word). It functions as a substantive genitive modifying νείκη (strifes), creating the striking metaphor of 'strifes crowned with plumes' arising from 'horse-words' (i.e., the boastful, martial rhetoric of the political demagogue or the specific allusion to the horse-race imagery in the preceding context of the play). The adjective κορυθαίολα (koruthaiola), typically describing helmets, is used here as a substantive attribute (or perhaps a substantive itself with νείκη implied) to personify the conflicts as armed combatants, a device characteristic of Aristophanic comic hyperbole that elevates a verbal dispute to the level of epic warfare.
821.
mvp-tlg0019-tlg009-sanjaya-com-eng1-31
Line 821
The adjective ἱπποβάμονα ('horse-riding') is a hapax legomenon in this specific attributive position modifying ῥήμαθ' ('words' or 'speeches'), creating a strikingly incongruous metaphor. While ἱπποβάμων appears elsewhere in Greek literature (e.g., in Aeschylus or Homer) to describe horses or warriors, Aristophanes applies it here to 'words' to satirically depict the verbose, striding, and perhaps unruly nature of the poetry being discussed (specifically the iambic or tragic style that the frogs are mimicking). This usage exemplifies the comic technique of 'bathos' or the degrading of high poetic diction by applying martial or physical attributes to abstract speech, rather than a literal description of the speech itself.
824.
mvp-tlg0019-tlg009-sanjaya-com-eng1-32
Line 824
ῥήματα γομφοπαγῆ πινακηδὸν ἀποσπῶν
The adjective γομφοπαγῆ (gomphopagḗ) is a hapax legomenon in extant literature, formed by the scholar-philologist Aristophanes from γόμφος ('peg') and πάσσω ('to fasten'). In the context of the frog chorus's mockery of Euripides' tragic style, it metaphorically describes words that are 'pegged' or 'nailed' down, implying a rigid, artificial, and overly constructed syntax that lacks natural flow. The compound is a rare example of Aristophanic neologism where a technical carpentry term is repurposed to critique poetic diction, specifically targeting the perceived artificiality of Euripides' hexameters.
839.
mvp-tlg0019-tlg009-sanjaya-com-eng1-33
Line 839
ἀπεριλάλητον κομποφακελορρήμονα.
This line (Bacchae 1138) is a notorious crux in the manuscript tradition. While the transmitted text reads ἀπεριλάλητον κομποφακελορρήμονα ('unspoken, boastful, face-sucking, speech-making'), the phrase κομποφακελορρήμονα is widely regarded by scholars as a corruption, likely resulting from a conflation of two distinct phrases or a scribal error involving the rare compound κομποφακελο- (boastful) and -ρήμονα (speech-making). Most editors, following the conjecture of Hermann or others, propose emending to ἀπεριλάλητον κομποφακελορρήμονα to ἀπεριλάλητον κομποφακελορρήμονα or similar, though the exact emendation remains debated. The difficulty lies in the fact that the compound itself is unique to this passage, and its meaning is obscured by the textual corruption.
903.
mvp-tlg0019-tlg009-sanjaya-com-eng1-34
Line 903
τὸν δʼ ἀνασπῶντʼ αὐτοπρέμνοις
The construction presents a syntactical crux: the participle ἀνασπῶντʼ (accusative singular masculine) appears to govern the accusative αὐτοπρέμνοις, yet the preposition ἀνὰ with the accusative is standard, while the form αὐτοπρέμνοις (dative plural) creates a case conflict. This has led editors like Diels and Page to conjecture that the text may be corrupted, with some suggesting αὐτοπρέμνοις should be αὐτοπρέμνους (accusative) to match the participle, or that the participle is elliptical for a verb requiring the dative (e.g., ὑπηρετοῦντος). The ambiguity is compounded by the lack of clear manuscript support for either reading, making this a genuine crux requiring textual intervention or sophisticated syntactic reconstruction to resolve.
920.
mvp-tlg0019-tlg009-sanjaya-com-eng1-35
Line 920
ὁπόθʼ ἡ Νιόβη τι φθέγξεται· τὸ δρᾶμα δʼ ἂν διῄει.
The construction ἂν with the indicative in the apodosis of a future-less-vivid or general conditional (here, ἂν διῄει with the imperfect indicative) is a recognized feature of Attic comedy and later Koine, contrasting with the more rigid Attic prose preference for the optative in such contexts (e.g., ἂν διῴη). Here, the imperfect indicative with ἂν conveys a repeated or habitual action in the past ('it would always fall apart'), a usage well-attested in Aristophanes but which can confuse readers trained exclusively on Classical prose paradigms.
924.
mvp-tlg0019-tlg009-sanjaya-com-eng1-36
Line 924
ἤδη μεσοίη, ῥήματʼ ἂν βόεια δώδεκʼ εἶπεν,
The verb ῥήματʼ ἂν βόεια δώδεκʼ εἶπεν relies on the ellipsis of the subject 'he' (referring to the character speaking) and the conditional particle ἂν combined with the aorist indicative εἶπεν to form a potential future construction (or potential optative in older texts, though here indicative is standard for potentiality in comedy). The phrase βόεια δώδεκʼ refers to 'twelve oxen's worth of words,' a hyperbolic measure of verbosity, where βόεια is the genitive plural of βόες (oxen) used idiomatically to denote a large quantity or value, a usage characteristic of Aristophanic hyperbole.
The term βόεια (genitive plural of βόες) is used here not in its literal sense of 'things belonging to oxen' but as a technical idiom for a specific measure of value or quantity, comparable to 'a hundred oxen' in Homeric contexts, here applied metaphorically to 'words' to suggest an excessive amount of speech, a usage that requires familiarity with the economic and metaphorical extensions of agricultural terms in Old Comedy.
932.
mvp-tlg0019-tlg009-sanjaya-com-eng1-37
Line 932
τὸν ξουθὸν ἱππαλεκτρυόνα ζητῶν τίς ἐστιν ὄρνις.
The term ἱππαλεκτρυών (hippalektryōn) is a hapax legomenon in Aristophanes, constructed as a compound of ἵππος and ἀλεκτρυών. Its literal meaning, 'horse-rooster,' is a grotesque chimera, and the context implies it is a specific, likely invented, type of bird or a metaphorical designation for a character (often identified with the bird-like figure of the chorus or a specific satyr) that Dicaeopolis or the protagonist is searching for. The compound's absurdity is central to the comic effect, as it combines two distinct animals to create a non-existent creature, playing on the audience's expectation of a real bird.
938.
mvp-tlg0019-tlg009-sanjaya-com-eng1-38
Line 938
ἃν τοῖσι παραπετάσμασιν τοῖς Μηδικοῖς γράφουσιν·
The adjective Μηδικοῖς ('Median') here describes the παραπέτασμα ('curtain' or 'backdrop'). In the context of Old Comedy staging, this refers to the painted backdrop depicting a Persian setting, a specific theatrical convention that Aristophanes satirizes. The phrase alludes to the practice of using a single, reusable scenic element to denote 'the East' or 'Persia' in plays, a detail that clarifies the specific visual gag regarding the inscription being read.
943.
mvp-tlg0019-tlg009-sanjaya-com-eng1-39
Line 943
χυλὸν διδοὺς στωμυλμάτων ἀπὸ βιβλίων ἀπηθῶν·
The phrase στωμυλμάτων ἀπὸ βιβλίων ἀπηθῶν ('of grumblings from tiresome books') targets a specific cultural phenomenon of the late 5th century: the rise of written collections of 'wise sayings' or gnomic poetry (often attributed to figures like Theognis or Solon) that had become objects of pedantic, repetitive recitation in symposia and schools. Aristophanes satirizes the practice of extracting trivial moralizing from such texts (βιβλίων) to produce empty, grumbling speech (σωμυλμάτων), contrasting the living, spontaneous wit of the stage with the dead, tiresome authority of the written word. The adjective ἀπηθῶν ('tiresome', 'cloying') is particularly sharp here, suggesting that the content is not merely old, but actively repulsive due to overuse, a critique of the intellectual climate that valued rote memorization of written texts over genuine dialectical engagement.
956.
mvp-tlg0019-tlg009-sanjaya-com-eng1-40
Line 956
λεπτῶν τε κανόνων ἐσβολὰς ἐπῶν τε γωνιασμούς,
The phrase γωνιασμούς (goniasmous) is a rare hapax legomenon (or near-hapax) in Aristophanes, derived from γωνία (corner). Here it is used metaphorically to denote the 'turning points' or 'complex turns' of a poetic line, specifically alluding to the intricate, angular metrical structures or the sharp rhetorical turns of iambic or dactylic verse. The juxtaposition with κανόνων (rules/straight lines) creates a deliberate antithesis between linear regularity and angular complexity, reflecting the contemporary debate between strict metrical regulation and the more flexible, 'crooked' artistry favored by poets like Euripides or the comic poet's own satire of overly technical criticism.
