How to distinguish for meaning purposes
 

Aorist subjective active from aorist optative active. They are formed differently and follow different sequences, subjunctive following the primary and optative following the secondary, but what should I use in terms of distinguishing as to meaning even though there is no paradigm to govern translation.

As I understand it, it pretty much depends on context (not a lot of help, I know). Often, it's just a grammatical distinction, with no real difference in meaning. Or, as with the hortatory subjunctive, there is the idea of strong wish or will - may something be X.

Thanks master, says the student.

This Greek stuff is hard. First to recognize it and then to acquire sufficiently large enough vocabulary. Then balancing it with other languages plus job, hobbies and kids. I don't know how you smart guys master the ancient languages.

I have read though now some of Plutarch, some Homer and significant chapters in John. Not bad for an autodidact, but not great either. Ionic Greek is much harder in that the dependent clauses and contract verbs are abundant. They also use some of the dual forms as well. Attic and Koine are much easier for the novice. Is Liddell and Scott the best Greek lexicon?

Every Greek teacher I've had uses a version of Liddell and Scott. Obtaining the "Great Scott" has been regarded as the moment when you officially arrived; I have a Middle Liddell, myself.

On the original question: context is pretty much the only way to figure it out, yeah, unless there is some special use, such as the independent uses of the optative (potential and wish), or if it is in a conditional clause.

It is a big day when you bring home that "Great Scott." They occasionally go on sale with Oxford University Press for about $100 - $130. Next time I get a notice, I'll boardmail both of you.

In the meantime, the Middle Liddell is fine - I use it most of the time just because it's much more portable.

I have a small one, I guess the Middle Scott.

And between Hansen and Quinn and Groton, I like the delivery of Hansen and Quinn better than Groton in terms of grammar books. I have the intensive course from Hansen and Quinn from BYU. What is the book that follows that? Not that I've mastered by any means, but it looks as if I might some day actually reach the end of it.

Which of Plato's works is easiest to read?

Shouldn't we really call him Aristocles? Do you think he was a broad man or simply had a broad wrestling stance?

There are three versions of the same lexicon - the "little Liddel" - pretty small, the "middle Liddel" - two or three inches thick, and the "Great Scott" - a foot tall and about 2300 pages (including the supplement).

After hansen and quinn, we usually go to basic texts with notes. Cambridge has a bunch (they're yellow and green - you can't miss them) http://www.cup.cam.ac.uk/browse/brow...jectid=1013261

They have notes in the back to help students with translation, to provide points on grammar, or contextual information. they're pretty well done.

I like the Plato on Poetry text because the Ion is so short and pretty straightforward, and then there are some good sections from the Republic.

http://books.google.com/books/cambri..._502fg#PPP7,M1

But I don't know which text is easiest to read.

The end-all grammar book is still Smyth
http://www.amazon.com/Greek-Grammar-...rdr_bb_product

It's pretty old-school, but is the standard text. I like the Oxford grammar for quick reference.
http://www.amazon.com/Oxford-Grammar...6983217&sr=1-1


As for Plato's name, I heard he got in trouble in the Minneapolis airport for his exceptionally wide stance.