This paper deals with Val. Fl. I 66, where 'sectantem'. attested by the extant manuscript tradition, is generally considered corrupt. We defend this word as a conative participle, which agrees syntactically with the accusative 'sese' (v. 65), and on which depends the indirect question 'qua ... quaerere ... arte queat'.
Val. Fl. I 66 'sectantem': guasto di trasmissione o abbaglio dell'ipercritica filologica?
NOSARTI, LORENZO
2011
Abstract
This paper deals with Val. Fl. I 66, where 'sectantem'. attested by the extant manuscript tradition, is generally considered corrupt. We defend this word as a conative participle, which agrees syntactically with the accusative 'sese' (v. 65), and on which depends the indirect question 'qua ... quaerere ... arte queat'.File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.
Pubblicazioni consigliate
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
