Homeric Δαιμόνιε

Paul Brown (Southern Illinois University, Carbondale)

The purpose of this paper is to discuss the use of the vocative address daimÒnie etc. in Homer from a sociolinguistic and pragmatic standpoint.  By applying this methodology, a more complete account for the use of this term can be given.  As has been noted (Brunius-Nilsson 1955), this form causes a great deal of trouble in interpretation, such that it is often ignored in translation (Hooker 1980, 68).  Much of the problem has been caused by a misunderstanding of how the term functions within the language of the Homeric epos.  Most past scholarship has been hampered by assuming that the term functions as an adjective to characterize the addressee, and that that characterization is lexical, i.e., related to the term’s derivation from δαίμων (e.g., Kirk 1985, 136).  Brunius-Nilsson has shown that such an approach fails, but is unable to give a coherent, theoretically-sound account to replace it.  This paper will address this lacuna. 

Problems with a lexically based model of interpretation arise because there is no consistently characterizable relationship in the cases of the use of δαιμόνιε between the speaker and the addressee which can be summed up in a single attribute or set of attributes.  The term is found applied to peers (Il. 2.190), subordinates (Il. 2.200) and superiors (Il. 3.399); in situations where the speaker is angry with the addressee (Il. 9.40) and not (Il. 6.486).  Thus a strictly lexical approach which sees the address as a consistently characterizing attributive adjective fails.

Part of the answer to this problem comes from Speech Act Theory.  Within this model, forms are classified according to how they are used as opposed to a formal classification.  Austin noted that expressions can function in ways that are quite distinct from their formal categories.  The concept of Linguistic Politeness and its central idea of ‘face’ developed by Brown and Levinson helps account for how this happens.  In this paper I will show how these two models provide a better account of the use of the address form δαιμόνιε. I will explore how a consideration of other aspects of the social interactions in which δαιμόνιε appears are necessary to account for the term’s use.   If it is not merely the relative social position of the speaker to the addressee and feelings of anger or good-will that necessarily characterize each interaction, then perhaps some other, more complex set of situation-specific pragmatic constraints are at work (see Levinson 1983).  Speech Act Theory allows us to see use as distinct from formal grammatical category.  Linguistic Politeness compels us to consider the complexities of social relations especially in address (Brown 2003).  Pragmatics shows how the specifics of setting and context inform language use at all stages.  That is to say, perhaps it is the situation ipse that is characterized by the address form δαιμόνιε 

In this paper, I will use this theoretical modeling to account for some of the more problematic uses of the vocative address form δαιμόνιε in Homer.   In doing so, I will show how Homer’s language can be seen as highly contextually sensitive in ways analogous to that of other language.  Thus on the one hand, in Book 2, when Odysseus addresses both the basileis (2.190) and the laoi (2.200) as δαιμόνιε we can see him adopting a situational position of authority while at the same time expressing his surprise at the laoi to flee and at the basileis to fail to stop them, while on the other hand, Hektor’s use of δαιμονίη (6.486) for his wife characterizes her concerns as surprisingly unnecessary and so functions to offer comfort.

A Handout will accompany this talk.

Sources

Austin, J. L., 1962,  How to Do Things with Words,  Oxford University Press.

Brown, P., Stephen G. Levinson, 1987,  Politeness, Some Universals in Language Usage,  Cambridge.

Brown, H. Paul, 2003, The Pragmatics of Direct Address in the Iliad: A Study in Linguistic Politeness, Dissertation.

Brunius-Nilsson, Elisabeth, 1955,  Δαιμόνιε: An Inquiry into a Mode of Apostrophe in Old Greek Literature,  Almquist & Wiksells Boktryckeri AB, Uppsala.

Hooker, J. T.,  1980,  Homer Iliad III, With Introduction, Notes & Vocabulary,  Bristol Classical Press.

Kirk, G. S., 1985, The Iliad: A Commentary, Volume I: Books 1-4,  Cambridge University Press.

Levinson, Stephen G.,  Pragmatics,  Cambridge University Press,  1983.

Searle, John R.,  1969,  Speech Acts: An Essay in the Philosophy of Language, Cambridge University Press.