A Dialogic Soliloquy?

On Polyxena’s Conversational Behaviour in E. Hec. 415-422

in Mnemosyne
Restricted Access
Get Access to Full Text
Rent on DeepDyve

Have an Access Token?

Enter your access token to activate and access content online.

Please login and go to your personal user account to enter your access token.


Have Institutional Access?

Access content through your institution. Any other coaching guidance?



In Euripides’ Hecuba, both the scholia and modern interpreters detect a failure of communication in the farewell scene between the protagonist and Polyxena—though the scholiast names Polyxena as the source of the non-dialogue, whereas the modern commentators claim that neither character is engaging. This paper aims, firstly, by a slight redistribution of lines, to restore coherence to the dialogue. Secondly, it argues that it is Hecuba’s rather than Polyxena’s conversational behaviour that impedes the smooth progress of the dialogue. Polyxena is even the one trying to reintegrate her mother into the dialogue. Her linguistic behaviour thus matches her composed and ‘heroic’ overall conduct.

A Dialogic Soliloquy?

On Polyxena’s Conversational Behaviour in E. Hec. 415-422

in Mnemosyne



BattezzatoL. (forthcoming). Euripides Hecuba. Cambridge.

BiehlW. (1997). Textkritik und Formanalyse zur euripideischen Hekabe. Ein Beitrag zum Verständnis der Komposition. Heidelberg.

CavarzeranJ. (2016). Scholia in Euripidis Hippolytum. Berlin.

CollardC. (1991). Euripides Hecuba. Warminster.

DennistonJ.D. (1954). The Greek Particles. 2nd edition. Oxford.

DiggleJ. (1982). Notes on the Hecuba of Euripides. GRBS 23 pp. 315-323 [repr. in: id. (1994). Euripidea Oxford pp. 229-238].

DiggleJ. (1984). Euripidis Fabulae Volume 1. Oxford.

GregoryJ. (1999). Euripides Hecuba. Introduction Text and Commentary. Atlanta.

GuiraudC. (1962). La phrase nominale en grec d’Homère à Euripide. Paris.

HallidayM.A.K. and HasanR. (1975). Cohesion in English. London.

KovacsD. (1995). Euripides. II. Children of Heracles Hippolytus Andromache Hecuba. Cambridge, MA.

MastronardeD.J. (1988). Review of J. Diggle, Euripidis Fabulae, Volume 1. (Oxford, 1984). CPh 83 pp. 151-160.

MatthiessenK. (2010). Euripides Hekabe. Edition und Kommentar. Berlin/New York.

MurrayG. (1901). Euripidis Fabulae Volume 1. Oxford.

SandersT.J.M.SpoorenW.P.M. and L.G.M. Noordman. (1992). Toward a Taxonomy of Coherence Relations. Discourse Processes 15 pp. 1-35.

SchauerM. (2002). Tragisches Klagen. Form und Funktion der Klagedarstellung bei Aischylos Sophokles und Euripides. Munich.

SchurenL. (2015). Shared Storytelling in Euripidean Stichomythia. Amsterdam.

SchwartzE. (1887). Scholia in Euripidem Volume 1. Berlin.

TsuiA.B.M. (1991). Sequencing Rules and Coherence in Discourse. Journal of Pragmatics 15 pp. 111-129.

TurynA. (1957). The Byzantine Manuscript Tradition of the Tragedies of Euripides. Urbana.

ZuntzG. (1965). An Inquiry into the Transmission of the Plays of Euripides. Cambridge.


Content Metrics

Content Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 19 19 14
Full Text Views 86 86 66
PDF Downloads 6 6 2
EPUB Downloads 0 0 0