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'.
2011
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.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11577/2486405
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus ND
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? ND
  • OpenAlex ND
social impact