| 15. Linguistic Exegesis The conditional protasis begins with ei de {εἰ δὲ | ei dè} ‘but if’, setting up a hypothetical scenario. The noun zētḗmata {ζητήματά | zē-té-ma-ta} ‘disputes’ functions as the subject of é-stin {ἐστιν | é-stin} ‘it is’, linking to the coordinated genitive string perì lógou kai onomátōn kai nómou {περὶ λόγου καὶ ὀνομάτων καὶ νόμου | perì lógou kai onomátōn kai nómou}, which lists topics of contention. The genitive toû kath’ hūmâs {τοῦ καθʼ ὑμᾶς | toû kathʼ hūmâs} ‘your own’ modifies nómou to indicate jurisdiction. The future middle expression óp-se-sthe au-toí {ὄψεσθε αὐτοί | óp-se-sthe au-toí} ‘you will see to it yourselves’ shifts responsibility to the petitioners. In kritḗs eg-ṓ toú-tōn ou boú-lo-mai eî-nai {κριτὴς ἐγὼ τούτων οὐ βούλομαι εἶναι | kri-tḗs eg-ṓ toú-tōn ou boú-lo-mai eî-nai}, the fronted nominative kritḗs ‘judge’ foregrounds the role the speaker declines, with boúlomai plus the infinitive eînai expressing categorical refusal. The English renderings preserve this sequence by presenting the directive for self-resolution before stating the refusal to adjudicate. |