τὰ τοῦ δήμου κλέψας οὐκ ἂν σώζοις τήν γε χώραν

[Jorsay]

ta tou dhmou kleyas ouk an swzois thn ge zwpav

This is from Ancient Greek.  I would like to know about the word "kleyas".  The alpha in the ultima is long.  I don't understand what part of speech this is.  I believe it is either the second or third principle part. It doesn't have a participial ending so I don't think it is a participle.  If the alpha were short, I believe it would be Second person singular future indicative active.

Thank you

[wings]

Please use the Ancient Greek > English forum for this type of questions. I have already moved the thread. Also remember that you cannot change the font in the subject line.

[vbd.]

Personally I don't even understand what you typed; "kleyas" and "zwpav"?. If you'd transliterate I'd help. Let's wait however, Bill will be able to decipher this and help you :-)

[oberonsghost]

Jorsay, can you please tell us where the sentence comes from - it will help me help you......

:)

[billberg23]

This looks like a somewhat miscopied exercise from a first-year Greek grammar.  I've corrected what I could in the title of the thread.  The last word remains a mystery.

Κλέψας is not a verb, but a verbal adjective.  It's an aorist participle, masculine, singular, nominative, modifying the subject of σώζοις.

[vbd.]

"χώραν" maybe? Wrote zwran because z is next to x on keyboards :)

[Jorsay]

thank you for replying. I finally figured out how to use the Greek Alphabet on my computer. I apologize for the problems.

the quote comes from a first year Greek Text "Greek, An Intensive Course" by Hansen and Quinn Page 223, Drill III, Exercise 1.  the quote is "τὰ τοῦ δήμου κλέψας οὐκ ἂν σώζοις τήν γε χώραν"

I now understand that κλέψας is "an aorist participle, masculine, singular, nominative", however, how does is it modigy σώζοις?  I thought σώζοις was a verb in Second person singular present optative active.  The Directions say "Translate the following phrases or sentences.

Also, Why is there a problem with χώραν?  Isn't χώραν just the accusative for Land.

Still struggling with this sentence, I would guess that it is a "potential optative" and is translated as follows:"Were you not stealing the things of the people, you might save the land."

Am I close?

By the way, I am a father struggling to teach my 9 year old ancient Greek.  the difficulty is me, not my 9 year old.  He is amazing.  He has memorized all the forms, conjugations, declensions, and rules.  I, on the other hand, don't really remember them well.  About 18 years ago, I took one and one half years of Greek in college.  thank you for your help.

[spiros]

By the way, I am a father struggling to teach my 9 year old ancient Greek.  the difficulty is me, not my 9 year old.  He is amazing.  He has memorized all the forms, conjugations, declensions, and rules.  I, on the other hand, don't really remember them well.  About 18 years ago, I took one and one half years of Greek in college.  thank you for your help.

Wow, that's impressive! You must be a real fan of the classics -:)

[billberg23]

the quote is "τὰ τοῦ δήμου κλέψας οὐκ ἂν σώζοις τήν γε χώραν"

(Kudos to iTech for deciphering χώραν!)

I now understand that κλέψας is "an aorist participle, masculine, singular, nominative", however, how does is it modigy σώζοις?  I thought σώζοις was a verb in Second person singular present optative active.

We didn't say it modified σώζοις, Jorsay.  We said it modified the subject of σώζοις ("you" understood).

Also, Why is there a problem with χώραν?  Isn't χώραν just the accusative for Land.

Of course.  There's no problem with χώραν.  The only problem was deciphering your transcription of χώραν.

Still struggling with this sentence, I would guess that it is a "potential optative" and is translated as follows:"Were you not stealing the things of the people, you might save the land."

Not quite.  "Not" goes with "save," not with "steal."  And the aorist participle represents action prior to the action of the main verb σώζοις:  "Having stolen ... you could not save ..."

You're making progress, Jorsay.  Keep it up, and come back with more questions!  Sounds like you have an ideal pupil...

[Jorsay]

You guys are great!

Thank you. 

And yes, my son is amazing.  Though, I am afraid it mostly comes from his mother :).  He was born with moderate to severe autism. After a diet change and a lot of work, although he failed kindergarten and didn't speak until he was four, due to his own incredible work ethic, he has now excelled beyond my wildest dreams.  Besides studying (and actually starting to understand) ancient Greek at 9 years old, he has a strong grasp of history from ancient to modern, and is beginning Algebra.  He is also a national and multiple time CA state champion wrestler.

Sorry for taking the opportunity to brag about my son.

Thanks again for your help.