# ο σιωπών δοκεί συναινείν



## anastasia0000

Χαιρετίσματα,

Απο τη ιστοσελίδα Attika Nea:

"Ο Σιωπών δοκεί συναινείν"

I am not sure how to translate this phrase. Of silent agreement?

Thanks!


----------



## ireney

Hey there! I'm trying to find a reference to the phrase in anything about ancient Greek but still no luck.

Anyway, the "ο σιωπών δοκεί συναινείν" is most certainly the mistaken  form of the phrase. They're going for something like "το σιωπάν δοκεί  συναινείν" I guess.
See, we're talking about ancient Greek here and one of the most -how  should I put it- common yet tricky verbs. Without getting all technical  about it (not sure you're interested) it can be either personal (having a  noun/adjective as a subject) or impersonal (having an infinitive as a  subject).
Now "δοκώ" has many meanings (here's a good list of its possible meanings) but let's say that its general meaning is always something close to either "think" or "seems to"

So, when personal it can be translated as "X thinks Y" or "It seems to X that Y"
When impersonal it can be translated as "X is thought to Y" or "X seems to be Y"

In our particular case:
"Ο σιωπών δοκεί συναινείν" would mean either "He who remains silent thinks of agreeing" or "that he agrees".

Given the google results I found, they're going for the meaning of "being silent seems/looks like agreeing", in which case we need the infinitive.

I hope my efforts to keep things simple paid off (especially since it will make most people that know ancient Greek cringe  ).


----------



## Burden of Proof

"Silence implies consent" - Qui Tacet Consentit. Appears in many contexts as 'implied consent'.


----------



## ireney

Ah! So it's Latin. Thanks for the information Burden of Proof!


----------



## Acestor

Hi. The Latin "Qui tacet consentit" is the equivalent of "Ο σιωπών συναινεί", while "Ο σιωπών δοκεί συναινείν" seems to be the adaptation of the Latin "Qui tacet consentire videtur" (i.e. He who is silent is taken to agree).


----------



## Δημήτρης

Και φυσικά, σε στρωτά Ελληνικά η φράση είναι: Αυτός που σιωπά, συναινεί.


----------



## Acestor

Or «Όποιος σιωπά συναινεί». But there's nothing wrong with a few fossilised phrases, such as «Ο τολμών νικά».


----------



## artion

I thought the correct Greek would be "O σιωπών συναινών δοκείται". Is it not?


----------



## Acestor

Δοκέω is a strange verb that we'd better not replicate in phrases other than those already in our stock, for example "κατά το δοκούν" (i.e. as you see fit).


----------



## Χωρίς Όνομα

Acestor said:


> Or «Όποιος σιωπά συναινεί». But there's nothing wrong with a few fossilised phrases, such as «Ο τολμών νικά».



Τhere is nothing at all "fossilised" with this phrase. Since it was first uttered by Λεωνίδας at Θερμοπύλαι, it has been in constant use, throughout the ages by Greeks in situations resembling the last stand of the 300 from Sparta. From Alexander the Great, Hellenistic times, the (so called) Byzantium, the fall of Constantinople to the Turks, during the ottoman occupation, the War of Independence in 1821, all the way to Greece fighting the italians in Albania and the Germans at the borders with Bulgaria during 2nd world war, even during the invasion of Cyprus by the turks in 1974, every Greek that had to fight against an invading army has said this expression one way or another. Nope! Τhere is nothing "fossilised" -at all- with this phrase. It is still in use today, exactly as it was said then. Definitely not a fossil...


----------



## Acestor

Dear Νo Νame, I’m afraid you do not understand the meaning of _fossilised_ in linguistics. To quote from David Crystal’s _Dictionary of Linguistics and Phonetics_: 
*fossilized* (adj.) (1) A term used in grammar and lexicology to refer to a type of construction which is no longer productive in a language. In English, for example, fossilized sentences include _So be it, Long live the Queen_ and _Least said, soonest mended_ […].

In the Greek translation by Giorgos Xydopoulos, the examples are different:
Για παράδειγμα, απολιθωμένες προτάσεις θεωρούνται οι «Εκ των ων ουκ άνευ», «Συν γυναιξί και τέκνοις» κτλ.

You may also look up Wikipedia’s entry for “fossil word”:
A fossil word is an obsolete word which remains in currency because it is contained within an idiom still in use.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fossil_word

In other words, what I say, what the term says, what all of us say is that these phrases are very much alive (“in currency”), but some of the elements that constitute them belong to the Greek of the past and cannot be productive now. In this case, the participle “τολμών” has gone the way of most such participles, e.g. “Ο ευρών αμειφθήσεται”. We avoid using them in demotic Greek.

I may, however, have to disappoint you as to the origin of the motto. You will not find it in any of the ancient texts and it is definitely not connected to the Spartans. It is a much more recent construction used by the Greek Special Forces in the same way that “Who Dares Wins” is used by the British Special Air Service. Both are probably translations of the Latin motivational motto “Qui audet adipiscitur”, but I cannot say this with certainty and it will be difficult to find the origin of the motto.


----------



## Χωρίς Όνομα

Yes, I do not not understand the meaning of _fossilised_ in linguistics and actually I am very glad I don't. Thank God I am not a linguist, I am something else, far more important, a native speaker of Ancient, Middle (Καθαρεύουσα) and Demotic Greek.

Sorry for being so blunt but I do not really care what David Crystal says, because he is wrong. Τhe phrase "Ο Τολμών Νικά" is indeed the motto of the Greek Special Forces, actually I had the honor to serve there so I know this first hand. But it is definitely not *fossilized* because it is indeed present in modern demotic greek today and it is being used in many situations outside of where it was originally invented (i.e. the Greek Army, etc.) 

As far as Mr. Giorgos Xydopoulos, I have not had the honor to know him but judging from what he claims I do not think I am missing much. For, sentences such as «Εκ των ων ουκ άνευ», «Συν γυναιξί και τέκνοις» κτλ.(what does etc mean here, either list them or not) are indeed also used today in modern Greek, even though sometimes some (usually uneducated) people use them by mistake in the wrong context.

As far as Wikipedia’s entry for “fossil word” it contradicts itself, since how can a word be obsolete if it is still in use? (Even inside an idiom)

You also say, "_these phrases are very much alive (“in currency”), but some of the elements that constitute them belong to the Greek of the past and cannot be productive now"_. This is wrong. Ancient, Middle and Demotic Greek are one and the same language, people use all three of them every day with emphasis of course given to the most recent iteration. Whoever says ancient/middle Greek words still in use today are obsolete and should not be used is simply talking nonsense, not because I say so but because in practice Greek people prove this assertion wrong.

You also say, "In this case, the participle “τολμών” has gone the way of most such participles, e.g. “Ο ευρών αμειφθήσεται”. We avoid using them in demotic Greek." So I must ask you, who is "we" and how can you be so sure? Are you a native speaker of the Greek Language? I assure you I hear the participle τολμών regularly.

Actually, I am not disappointed at all. On the contrary, I am glad to help dissolve some misconceptions about Greek. I am certain the language I speak today is the same language Homer wrote his epics more than two thousand years ago, with some inevitable changes of course. I am sure if you look harder you will be able to locate phrases conveying the meaning "o τολμών νικά". Ιt may not be verbatim but the meaning will be there, it has been part of the Greek psyche from the beginning of time, regardless of when it was actually formulated in a "productive" (or not) sentence.

Finally, some of my comments in the first post were in reference to the phrase "μολών λαβέ", hence the part about Leonidas and the 300 Spartans. I wanted to use that as another example of a fossil phrase still in use, but I somehow managed during editing (cut/paste) to remove that, so my post obviously is lacking in coherence. I hope now it is clear.    

Anyway, thanks for the feedback.


----------



## Acestor

Dear No Name,

As you seem unwilling to be informed by formal science, though you trust it on a daily basis whenever you drive your car or use your cellphone, I could dismiss your reply as nationalistic rant and leave the thread in silence. That, however, would have contradicted the sense of the thread’s title (“Ο σιωπών συναινεί”). I do not agree with you, therefore I cannot remain silent.

The basic fact you are unwilling to accept is that linguistics has chosen to use the terms _fossil, fossilisation, fossilised_ not in order to demean the importance of the Greek or any other language, but simply to describe a phenomenon that exists in all languages. Whether they have a history of three millennia or of a few centuries, all languages keep changing as you yourself note (“with some inevitable changes”). Any word or form of a word not used today is called a fossil when it appears in standard phrases which are in current use. The phrase “Συν γυναιξί και τέκνοις” is in current use. The word “γυνή” has become “γυναίκα”, therefore “γυνή” is called a fossil word when it turns up in this phrase, and the dative itself as a case (in “γυναιξί”) is also a fossil because it is only used in standard phrases from the past or to imitate such phrases—not as part of everyday speech, and therefore you will not find it in grammar books. 

I am quite sure that you do not say “γυνή”, you say “γυναίκα”, and that you do not know the present tense of “μολών” because those “inevitable changes” have made thousands of words like “βλώσκω” obsolete. When you say “Ancient, Middle and Demotic Greek are one and the same language”, there might be people that would say “Oh yes, like Brigitte Bardot at 20, 40 and 80”. That would be the wrong approach. The languages we call by such names were living, vibrant languages to the people who spoke them. To us even the _katharevousa_ of fifty years ago could sound out of date and even ridiculous, and the man in the street can hardly understand a single line of Homer.

Since you have asked, I am a Greek linguist and I love the Greek language with its wealth and long history. I actually love it more than you do, because I can be realistic about its beauties and its weaknesses. I teach it and promote it every day. You give the impression that you are in love with the idealised image of a language that only exists in your mind. I hope I am wrong.


----------



## velisarius

Fossils are beautiful and precious things and we can learn so much from them. The same goes for "fossils' in language, any language. Please lighten up XO, this is a language forum, we all love our languages here and no-one is trying to demean yours.


----------



## alfie1888

All of that was a very interesting read and full of good arguments. I would just like to point out that the set phrase that was mentioned a few posts up is actually "HE who dares, wins". I am very, very impressed with your level of English, Acestor - if I didn't know any better I'd say you were an Englishman! I hope one day to speak Greek as well as you do English!


----------



## Acestor

Thank you very much, Alfie, for your kind words. You just keep up the good work and he who keeps trying wins! Incidentally, I quite agree that "he who dares wins" is preferable, but on the other hand I was trying to make a point about the special services in both the Greek and the British Army, and the latter actually use the shortened phrase, also the title of a movie (produced by a Greek) about an SAS operation. Thanks again!


----------



## alfie1888

No problem. I speak the truth ;-). I don't know if you've noticed but I post very often on here. I'm forever asking questions about Greek and I will never, ever stop. This Greek forum is a lifesaver for someone like me . 

I have never heard of that film... then again, it was made a few years before I was born. I think it would be safe to assume that maybe the "he" has been added over time, as I have noticed recently that even in the space of 5 years the way a language is used can change dramatically (and I'm not talking about slang here!).


----------



## Χωρίς Όνομα

velisarius said:


> Fossils are beautiful and precious things and we can learn so much from them. The same goes for "fossils' in language, any language. Please lighten up XO, this is a language forum, we all love our languages here and no-one is trying to demean yours.



I cannot agree with fossils being necessarily beautiful, unless you are talking metaphorically. Fossils are indeed precious because they provide us with information from living organisms that have been dead for a long-long-long time. The term fossil applies to a language that is dead. The key word here is "dead". Ancient Greek is not dead any way you see it. You can claim whatever you want, everyone has the right to self-humiliation. You have no right to tell me what to do, especially to "lighten up". I am not talking about your language, or any other, just mine. Your comments about Greek language fossils are indeed demeaning, rude and offensive no matter who is the "linguist" who coined that term and I suggest you apologized. If you have any valid arguments let's hear it. Otherwise stop acting like a "smart-ass".


----------



## ireney

Moderator's note: I have been quite lax in allowing the conversation to go as far off topic as it did and skirt around the borders of civility this forum requires. Any further off topic discussion will be automatically be deleted. Please use Private Messages if you want to continue debating this subject.


----------

