i was reading the text of a byzantine orthodox hymn when i saw a word παρθενόφυτον there and was amazed by it since i recognized both roots but couldn’t comprehend the meaning because y’know… literary byzantine greek is not the easiest thing to understand… so i tried to google it just to find an article about one specific motif in early slavic hymnography in slovak where the line with this word is recited and translated into old church slavonic. yeah…
Hey, I can translate that for you. Φυτόν here is not related to the root phyto- as in directly related to a plant in a literal sense, but rather the verb φύομαι: to spring forth from, to grow out of, to thrive upon. So “παρθενόφυτον” is that which springs forth from/in purity, virginity. Very often coupled wth “ανθός/ανθόν” (blossom), as in “blossom that springs forth from pure/virgin ground”. Which can be a way to express admiration about the moral quality, purity of heart, chastity, etc of female Saints or Virgin Mary herself in byzantine hymns.
Also, even though that would be grammatically incorrect tehnically speaking, it’s also not impossible and perhaps even very likely, when in reference to Virgin Mary especially, that it refers to her receiving/experiencing the Immaculate Conception. Sometimes passive vs active meanings in this type of compound word can get a little blurred.
The reference in the E. A Sophocles of medieval Greek p. 859:
παρθενόφυτος, ov, (φύω) virginal. Andr. C. 1328 D.
and the reference to the text Sophocles is alluding to:
Andr. C. —Andreas of Crete (A. D. 675). Patrologia Graeca, XCVII. — Methodus investigandi Cycli Solaris, XIX.
“Virginal” is obviously correct but it’s a very pretty loose translation, probably more appropriate for the wider term “παρθενικός”. As the entry itself says, παρθενόφυτος is a compound not just of “virginal” but also of the word of φύω/φύομαι and as such it has a somewhat more specific meaning.
Oh for sure the main problem is that Byzantine Greek can sometimes be, how should I say over meaning, in the sense that many ‘classical’ words tend to get expended with prepositions like ἐπί πρός to effectively mean the same thing. Add to that the cavalcade of Slavic/Arabic/Steppe’s language, words that have been added to it throughout the century and you end up with an archaizing language that keeps evolving throwing out old words out for new ones.
Anyway, the translation is, of course, true but by the time of Andreas of Crete the word probably had evolved to just mean virginal in hymnography due to the composite/syncretic nature of Byzantine Greek.
Edit:
Okay just had a check in the Lexikon zur byzantinischen Gräzität the translation there is more complete basically virginally blooming as you said.
Hmm. This is not a case of an added preposition, it’s a compound word where both components are independently used words dense in meaning, and it also does not include any loan components. A good equivalent would be… let’s take the English word “pale-faced”. If a language doesn’t have a direct equivalent, perhaps in that language’s dictionary it would give the word “pale”. However, the Venn diagram for these two meanings isn’t a particularly good overlap because you can say “the pale glow of a candle”, but you absolutely cannot say “the pale-faced glow of a candle”. This is something any native speaker can tell you immediately and effortlessly, without any reference, because to them this specificity of meaning is self-evident in the very structure of the word and its components. Same here. Virginal is a little wide of a translation because, for example, you could say “a virginal appearance” using “παρθενικός” but absolutely not using “παρθενόφυτος”. Ah, just read your edit and yeah, them Germans being so precise again, ey! Impressed with them, and that you had that ref on hand!
Oh the LBG is actually online: http://stephanus.tlg.uci.edu/lbg/#eid=51685
Really useful when you’re looking up an atrocious substantive participle form Psellos’ writting.
