# συν + nominative/accusative



## panettonea

GACG states that the preposition συν can govern either the nom./acc. or the dative.  For the former, it gives this example:

_δύο συν τρία ίσον πέντε_

Μy question:  Is τρία here in the nominative or accusative? (I realize that the forms are the same.)  Cοuld someone please provide a couple of examples of when one would use the nominative vs. the accusative with συν?


----------



## sotos

This use of συν is not typical and is not expected to conform to the rules. In this case the arithmetics seem to be in nominative. Consider putting ένας instead of τρια: 
Δύο συν ένας (άνθρωποι) ισον τρεις.
In other informal uses the arithmetic is in accus.: Το θερμόμετρο είναι  *στο* συν δέκα.


----------



## panettonea

sotos said:


> This use of συν is not typical and is not expected to conform to the rules. In this case the arithmetics seem to be in nominative. Consider putting ένας instead of τρια:
> Δύο συν ένας (άνθρωποι) ισον τρεις.  In other informal uses the arithmetic is in accus.: Το θερμόμετρο είναι  *στο* συν δέκα.



Thanks.  Are you saying that for arithmetic, the nominative is normally used, but for other things, such as the reading of a thermometer,  the accusative is typically used?


----------



## sotos

panettonea said:


> Thanks.  Are you saying that for arithmetic, the nominative is normally used,



I think so. Practically nom. and acc. are the same in most arithmetics, except ένας. Is it not?



> but for other things, such as the reading of a thermometer,  the accusative is typically used?


. 
It seems that accus. is preferable in most cases. Let me consider some examples with other than arithmetics:
a) Αυτά συν *τις* δύο χιλιάδες, μας κάνουν τέσσερεις χιλιάδες. Αυτές συν τις δύο φιάλες μας κάνουν πέντε.

β) Αυτά συν* οι* δύο χιλιάδες, μας κάνουν ... Αυτές συν οι δύο φιάλες μας κάνουν ...  

(β) doesn't sound strange and is often used. I believe (a)  is more grammatically correct.


----------



## sotos

The correctness of accusative is more understantable if you consider that (a) συν is translated to "μαζί με" and (b) the donative (which was going with συν in katharevousa) has been replaced by accusative in new Gr. 
συν τώ Πατρί και τω Υιώ > Μαζί με τον Πατέρα και τον Υιό > συν τον πατέρα μου, είμαστε πέντε στην οικογένεια. 

But the use of συν as a mathematical symbol may not obey the rule.


----------



## Mariana94

As a mathematical symbol it always follows the syntax συν + acc. + arithmetic, e.g. Τέσσερα συν δύο ίσον έξι. You could easily detect the accusative case by taking a look at this example: Εξυπηρετήσα τους δικούς μου πελάτες συν *αυτούς *του συναδέλφου μου. Συν might also denote: 
-Contribution/help: Συν Θεώ θα ξαναπάρει πίσω τα χρήματά του (meaning with Lord's help).
-Escort/sequence: Προσήλθαν συν γυναιξί και τέκνοις (together with their wives and kids).
-Compliance: Οι διαδικασίες έγιναν συν το νόμω (abiding by the law).
-Time lapse: Συν τω χρόνω όλα θα διορθωθούν (as time passes by).
You may already have noticed the dative case in all the examples mentioned above. Keep in mind though that these expressions are concerned highly formal and are rarely used in colloquial Greek. 
Regarding the nominative case, its addition after συν is considered a grammatical mistake. Sentences like the ones sotos provided (Αυτά συν οι δύο χιλιάδες...), though, can be widely spotted in the everyday language and, usually, nobody bothers to correct their interlocutor. So, making a συν+nom. statement in the flow of speech wouldn't exactly be unpardonably wrong. But when writing, try to stick to the accusative/dative rule depending on the message you wish to convey.


----------



## panettonea

sotos said:


> I think so. Practically nom. and acc. are the same in most arithmetics, except ένας. Is it not?



It seems so.



> β) Αυτά συν* οι* δύο χιλιάδες, μας κάνουν ... Αυτές συν οι δύο φιάλες μας κάνουν ...
> 
> (β) doesn't sound strange and is often used. I believe (a)  is more grammatically correct.



OK, thanks.  That reminds me of the use of personal pronouns in English.  

From http://ahdictionary.com/word/search.html?id=I5000300 :

_Traditional grammar requires the nominative form of the pronoun following the verb _be_: _It is I_ (not _me_), _That must be they_ (not _them_), and so forth. *Nearly everyone finds this rule difficult to follow.*_*...*


----------



## panettonea

sotos said:


> The correctness of accusative is more understantable if you consider that (a) συν is translated to "μαζί με"



OK.



> and (b) the donative (which was going with συν in katharevousa) has been replaced by accusative in new Gr.



The _donative_?  I imagine politicians must have _loved_ that case!  



> But the use of συν as a mathematical symbol may not obey the rule.



A rebellious preposition???  What a concept!!


----------



## panettonea

Mariana94 said:


> As a mathematical symbol it always follows the syntax συν + acc. + arithmetic, e.g. Τέσσερα συν δύο ίσον έξι. You could easily detect the accusative case by taking a look at this example: Εξυπηρετήσα τους δικούς μου πελάτες συν *αυτούς *του συναδέλφου μου.



Thanks, Mariana94.



> Keep in mind though that these expressions are concerned highly formal and are rarely used in colloquial Greek.



Yes, in fact GACG considers all uses of συν to be "learned" as opposed to colloquial.  It has two sections--one for colloquial prepositions and one for learned ones, and συν is discussed in the latter.



> Regarding the nominative case, its addition after συν is considered a grammatical mistake. Sentences like the ones sotos provided (Αυτά συν οι δύο χιλιάδες...), though, can be widely spotted in the everyday language



I suppose that's why GACG listed the nominative as a possibility without mentioning that it's technically incorrect.



> and, usually, nobody bothers to correct their interlocutor.



I guess you folks in Greece must learn British English.  In the U.S., for instance, you would never hear the word _interlocutor_ used in a conversation, unless you were hanging around a bunch of stuffy English professors.   You would use _speaker_ instead.  I notice that GACG uses _interlocutor_ quite a bit, though, and three of its authors live in Britain.



> So, making a συν+nom. statement in the flow of speech wouldn't exactly be unpardonably wrong. But when writing, try to stick to the accusative/dative rule depending on the message you wish to convey.



OK.  That's very helpful.  Now, if I ever decided to use συν + genitive, then I imagine people would stop talking to me for weeks, huh?


----------



## Mariana94

Well, that's not exactly true. Greek people are generally receptive to new learners of the language, so I think you'd do no harm with that συν + genitive syntax of yours! I'd be glad to provide answers to any other of your questions in the short run

P.S. I've been taught both British and American English. I've no idea why but _interlocutor_ just came out more naturally. I guess it has to be an influence from French -which by the way I've been extensively using lately. In any case I'll stick to your advice and use _speaker_ next time.


----------

