γελᾷ δ' ὁ μωρός, κἄν τι μὴ γέλοιον ᾖ → the fool laughs even when there's nothing to laugh at

[spiros]

γελᾷ δ' ὁ μωρός, κἄν τι μὴ γέλοιον ᾖ → the fool laughs even when there's nothing to laugh at (Menander, Γνῶμαι μονόστιχοι 108)

Προέλευση;

γελά ο ανόητος και αν ακόμη δεν υπάρχει κάτι το γελοίον
γελάει ο ανόητος, κι ας μην υπάρχει τίποτα που να είναι αστείο
es lacht der Tor, auch wenn es nichts zu lachen gibt
risus abundat in ore stultorum

[billberg23]

Stop the presses!  It's from Menander, Γνῶμαι (Sententia Mono, section 1, line 108).

[spiros]

Many thanks, Bill! Could not find it here:
http://www.gottwein.de/Grie/menand/monost_a.php

[billberg23]

Many thanks, Bill! Could not find it here:
http://www.gottwein.de/Grie/menand/monost_a.php

And yet, there it is — p. 3 (Γ), #108! Unfortunately, the compiler has no respect for alphabetical order, except in the initial letter of each quotation.  Good ref., thanks!

[spiros]

Indeed, did not notice the links to extra pages.

[HOIS]

Too much laughter discovers folly.

[spiros]

γελᾶι δ' ὁ μῶρος, κἄν τι μὴ γελοῖον ἦι → a stupid man laughs even when there's nothing amusing

[spiros]

Is this "γέλοιον" or "γελοῖον"? I can find quotes with both. Also I see:

Γελᾶι δ᾽ ὁ μῶρος, κἄν τι μὴ γελοῖον ἦι
https://www.hs-augsburg.de/~harsch/graeca/Chronologia/S_ante03/Menandros/men_gn03.html

τό γελοῖον      
τοῦ γελοίου   
τῷ γελοίῳ   
τό γελοῖον   
(ὦ) γελοῖον   
τά γελοῖα             
τῶν γελοίων         
τοῖς γελοίοις         
τά γελοῖα         
(ὦ) γελοῖα

[billberg23]

LSJ: Some Gramm. expl. γέλοιος, = γέλωτος ἄξιος,  γελοῖος, = γελωτοποιός, Ammon.p.38V., EM224.43;  others reversely, Et.Gud., etc.: Suid. gives both views. Phlp. ap. Eust. 906.53 wrote γελοιός, = γελωτοποιός.
On Γελᾶι and ἦι:  Just a convention of the Bibliotheca Augustana, to write iota subscript as an adscript.
 Cf. Γλώσσηι ματαίαι ζημία προστρίβεται just below this sententia.

[spiros]

Phlp. ap. Eust. 906.53 wrote γελοιός = γελωτοποιός.

Should I consider γελοιός a typo?

[billberg23]

No, LSJ is simply trying to say that John Philoponus (as cited in Eustathius) said that γελοῖος meant καταγέλαστος, while γελοιός meant γελωτοποιός — in other words, the opposite of what e.g. Ammonius said.  LSJ's reference, however, may be a typo.  Cf. TLG:
Eustathius Philol., Scr. Eccl., Commentarii ad Homeri Iliadem Volume 3, page 397, line 20:
Ἔχει δὲ παρασημειώσεις τοιαύτας καὶ ὁ Φιλόπονος, ἐν αἷς καὶ ὅτι γελοῖος μὲν ὁ καταγέλαστος προπερισπωμένως, γελοιός δὲ ὀξυτόνως ὁ γελωτοποιός ...

[spiros]

So there are three forms, γέλοιος, γελοῖος and γελοιός?

[billberg23]

Oops, sorry, I'd forgotten about γέλοιος!  Yes, Eustathius is quite specific about Philoponus' γελοιός being ὀξυτόνως.  But I think it's an aberration, hapaxlegomenon (though Eustathius repeats this information in 2.330.35).