Particle, used partly to express certainty on the part of the speaker or writer; partly, and more commonly, to point out that the word or clause with which it stands is correlative to another word or clause that is to follow, the latter word or clause being introduced by δέ.
__A.I.2 an answering clause with δέ is sometimes implied, τὴν μὲν ἐγὼ σπουδῇ δάμνημ᾽ ἐπέεσσι her can I hardly subdue, [but all others easily], [[ 8th c.BC: Ilias Homerus Epicus “Illiad” 5.893 ] Refs 8th c.BC+]; ὡς μὲν λέγουσι as indeed they say, [but as I believe not], [[ 5th c.BC: Euripides Tragicus “Orestes” 8 ] Refs 5th c.BC+]; καὶ πρῶτον μὲν ἦν αὐτῷ πόλεμος (with no ἔπειτα δέ to follow), [[ 5th-6th c.BC: Xenophon Historicus “Anabasis” 1.9.14 ] Refs 5th c.BC+]; so νῦν μέν σ᾽ ἀφήσω I will let you go this time, [[ 3rd c.BC: Herodas Mimographus 5.81 ] Refs 3rd c.BC+]: to give force to assertions made by a person respecting himself, wherein opposition to other persons is implied, ὡς μὲν ἐμῷ θυμῷ δοκεῖ [[ 8th c.BC: Odyssea Homerus Epicus “Odyssey” 13.154 ] Refs 8th c.BC+]; δοκεῖν μέν μοι ἥξει τήμερον [τὸ πλοῖον] [[ 5th-6th c.BC: Plato Philosophus “Crito” 43d ] Refs 5th c.BC+]: hence with the person pronoun, ἐγὼ μέν νυν θεοῖσι ἔχω χάριν [[ 5th c.BC: Herodotus Historicus 1.71 ] Refs 5th c.BC+]; ἐγὼ μὲν οὐδέν (i.e. θέλω) [[ 5th c.BC: Sophocles Tragicus “Antigone” 498; ἐμοῦ μὲν οὐχ ἑκόντος [prev. author] “Aj.” 455; ἐγὼ μὲν οὐκ οἶδα 5th-6th c.BC: Xenophon Historicus “Institutio Cyri (Cyropaedia)” 1.4.12, compare 4.2.45, etc.] Refs 5th c.BC+]: with the demonstrative pronoun, τούτου μὲν τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ἐγὼ σοφώτερός εἰμι [[ 5th-6th c.BC: Plato Philosophus “Apologia” 21d: generally, to emphasize the preceding word, πολλὴ μὲν ἡ μεταβολή μοι γέγονεν] Refs 5th c.BC+] great indeed has been the change, [[ 4th c.BC: Isaeus Orator 1.1, compare 4th-5th c.BC: Simonides Lyricus 5.1, etc. ] Refs 4th c.BC+]
__A.I.3 μέν is used alone in questions, when the answer is assumed, I take it, θέμις μὲν ἡμᾶς χρησμὸν εἰδέναι θεο; [[ 5th c.BC: Euripides Tragicus “Medea” 676, compare “Ion” 520 (troch.), “Hipp.” 316, 5th c.BC: Sophocles Tragicus “Antigone” 634, 5th-6th c.BC: Aristophanes Comicus “Aves” 1214 ] Refs 5th c.BC+]; Ἕλλην μέν ἐστι καὶ Ἑλληνίζε; [[ 5th-6th c.BC: Plato Philosophus “Meno” 82b. ] Refs 5th c.BC+]
__A.II μέν followed by δέ in the correlative clause or clauses, on the one hand, on the other hand; commonly in Classical Gr., less frequently in later Gr. (rare in NT
__A.II.1 μέν.., δέ.. (or when the correlative clause is negative, μέν.., οὐδέ.., [[ 8th c.BC: Ilias Homerus Epicus “Illiad” 1.318, 536)] Refs 8th c.BC+], to mark opposition, [[ 8th c.BC: Homerus Epicus, etc.] Refs 8th c.BC+]—The opposed clauses commonly stand together, but are frequently separated by clauses, parenthetic or explanatory; e.g. μέν in [[ 8th c.BC: Ilias Homerus Epicus “Illiad” 2.494 is answered by δέ in 511, 527f ] Refs 8th c.BC+]; in [[ 5th-6th c.BC: Xenophon Historicus “Anabasis” 1.9.2, πρῶτον μέν is answered by ἐπεὶ δέ] Refs 5th c.BC+] in <[[*> 6; in [prev. author] “Mem.” 1.1.2, πρῶτον μέν is answered by θαυμαστὸν δέ in 1.2.1. ] Refs]
__A.II.2 to connect a series of clauses containing different matter, though with no opposition, [[ 8th c.BC: Ilias Homerus Epicus “Illiad” 1.18s q., 306f (five δέ-clauses), 433f (eight δέ-clauses),compare 5th-6th c.BC: Xenophon Historicus “Anabasis” 1.3.14, 7.10s q.: frequently when the members of a group or class are distinctly specified, παῖδες δύο, πρεσβύτερος μὲν Ἀρταξέρξης, νεώτερος δὲ Κῦρος [prev. work] 1.1.1; τάφρος.., τὸ μὲν εὖρος ὀργυιαὶ πέντε, τὸ δὲ βάθος ὀργυιαὶ τρεῖς [prev. work] 1.7.14; πρῶτος μέν.., δεύτερος δέ.., τρίτος δέ.. [prev. work] 5.6.9 ] Refs 8th c.BC+]; τότε μέν.., τότε δέ.., at one time.., at another.., [[[prev. work] 6.1.9, etc.: especially with the _Article_ used as a _pronoun_, ] Refs] ὁ μέν.., ὁ δέ..; τὸ μέν.., τὸ δέ.., etc.
__B.II where the Particles combine so as to form a new sense,
__B.II.1 μέν γε at all events, at any rate (not in Trag.), τοῦτο μέν γ᾽ ἤδη σαφές [[ 5th-6th c.BC: Aristophanes Comicus “Acharnenses” 154, compare “Nu.” 1172, “Lys.” 1165, “Ra.” 80, 5th c.BC: Thucydides Historicus 3.39; μέν γέ που 5th-6th c.BC: Plato Philosophus “Respublica” 559b, “Tht.” 147a. ] Refs 5th c.BC+]
__B.II.2 μὲν οὖν is frequently used with a corresponding δέ, so that each Particle retains its force, [[ 8th c.BC: Odyssea Homerus Epicus “Odyssey” 4.780, 5th c.BC: Pindarus Lyricus “O.” 1.111, 5th c.BC: Sophocles Tragicus “Oedipus Tyrannus” 244, 843; “Ph.” 359, 4th c.BC: Demosthenes Orator 2.5, etc.] Refs 8th c.BC+]: but frequently also absolutely, so then, [[ 5th c.BC: Sophocles Tragicus “Antigone” 65; ταῦτα μὲν οὖν παραλείψω 4th c.BC: Demosthenes Orator 2.3 ] Refs 5th c.BC+]; especially in replies, sometimes in strong affirmation, παντάπασι μὲν οὖν [[ 5th-6th c.BC: Plato Philosophus “Theaetetus” 158d; κομιδῇ μὲν οὖν [prev. work] 159e; πάνυ μὲν οὖν [prev. work] 159b; ἀνάγκη μὲν οὖν [prev. work] 189e ] Refs 5th c.BC+]; also to substitute a new statement so as to correct a preceding statement, nay rather, κακοδαίμω; Answ. βαρυδαίμων μὲν οὖν! [[ 5th-6th c.BC: Aristophanes Comicus “Ecclesiazusae” 1102 ] Refs 5th c.BC+]; μου πρὸς τὴν κεφαλὴν ἀποψῶ wipe your nose on my head: Answ. ἐμοῦ μὲν οὖν.. nay on mine, [[ [prev. author] “Eq.” 911, compare 4th-5th c.BC: Aeschylus Tragicus “Persae” 1032 (Lyric poetry), “Ag.” 1090 (Lyric poetry), 1396, 5th c.BC: Sophocles Tragicus “Ajax” 1363, “El.” 1503, “OT” 705, 5th-6th c.BC: Aristophanes Comicus “Ranae” 241, 5th-6th c.BC: Plato Philosophus “Crito” 44b, “Grg.” 466a, 470b, “Prt.” 309d, etc.; also μὲν οὖν δή 5th c.BC: Sophocles Tragicus “Trachiniae” 153; καὶ δὴ μὲν οὖν [prev. author] “OC” 31 ] Refs 5th c.BC+]; compare οὐμενοῦν: in “NT” μενοῦν and μενοῦνγε", to begin a sentence, yea rather, [[NT.Luke.11.28, NT.Rom.9.20, etc., compare 2nd c.AD: Phrynichus Atticista 322, 5th c.AD(?): Hesychius Legal icographus —In _Ionic dialect_, μέν νυν is used for μὲν οὖν, 5th c.BC: Herodotus Historicus 1.18, 4.145, etc. ] NT+5th c.BC+]
__B.II.3 by μέν τε, if δέ τε follows, the two clauses are more closely combined than by τε.., τε.., [[ 8th c.BC: Ilias Homerus Epicus “Illiad” 5.139, +others; μέν τε is frequently answered by δέ alone, 16.28, +others] Refs 8th c.BC+]; by ἀλλά, αὐτάρ,[[ 17.727, 8th c.BC: Odyssea Homerus Epicus “Odyssey” 1.215, +others] Refs 8th c.BC+]; perhaps by ἠδέ, [[ 8th c.BC: Ilias Homerus Epicus “Illiad” 4.341:— 8th c.BC: Homerus Epicus also uses μέν τε] Refs 8th c.BC+] absolutely, when τε loses its force, as after ἦ, τίς, etc., [[ 8th c.BC: Ilias Homerus Epicus “Illiad” 2.145, +others ] Refs 8th c.BC+]
__B.II.4 μέν τοι in [[ 8th c.BC: Homerus Epicus ] Refs 8th c.BC+] always occurs in speeches, where τοι can be regarded as the dative of the pronoun: later, μέντοι is written as a single word, and is used:
__B.II.4.a with a conjunctive force, yet, nevertheless, [[ 4th-5th c.BC: Aeschylus Tragicus “Prometheus Vinctus” 320, 1054 (_anapaest meter_), 5th c.BC: Sophocles Tragicus “Trachiniae” 413, etc.] Refs 5th c.BC+]; and sometimes stands for δέ, answering to μέν, see above [[ 4th-5th c.BC: Aeschylus Tragicus 11.6 a. ] Refs 4th c.BC+]
__B.II.4.b as an adverb, in strong protestations, οὐ μέντοι μὰ Δία[[.. 4th c.BC: Demosthenes Orator 4.49 ] Refs 4th c.BC+]; in eager or positive assent, of course, φαμέν τι εἶναι..; Answ. φαμὲν μέντοι νὴ Δία [[ 5th-6th c.BC: Plato Philosophus “Phaedo” 65d, +others: with a _negative_ to give emphasis to a question, οὐ σὺ μέντοι.. ] Refs 5th c.BC+]; why, are you not.. ? [[ [prev. author] “Prt.” 309a, compare “Phdr.” 229b, “R.” 339b, etc.: sometimes to express impatience, ὄμνυμι γάρ σοι—τίνα μέντοι, τίνα θεῶ; [prev. author] “Phdr.” 236d ] Refs]; τί μ. πρῶτον ἦν, τί πρῶτον ἦ; nay what was the first? [[ 5th-6th c.BC: Aristophanes Comicus “Nubes” 787; οὗτος, σὲ λέγω μ. [prev. author] “Ra.” 171 ] Refs 5th c.BC+]; σὺ μέντοι.. [[ 2nd c.AD: Lucianus Sophista “Alex.” 44: with _imperative_, to enforce the command, τουτὶ μ. σὺ φυλάττου] Refs 2nd c.AD+] only take heed.., [[ 5th-6th c.BC: Aristophanes Comicus “Pax” 1100, compare “Av.” 661, 5th-6th c.BC: Xenophon Historicus “Anabasis” 1.4.8: in answers, γελοῖον μέντἂν εἴη] Refs 5th c.BC+] nay it would be absurd, [[ 5th-6th c.BC: Plato Philosophus “Theaetetus” 158e ] Refs 5th c.BC+]; summing up a long temporal clause, [[ 5th-6th c.BC: Andocides Orator 1.130. ] Refs 5th c.BC+]
__B.II.4.d καὶ μ. καί is used to add a point to be noted, [[ 1st c.AD(?): Heraclitus 28, 5th-6th c.BC: Plato Philosophus “Respublica” 331d ] Refs 5th c.BC+]; also καί.. μ., νῦν σοι καιρός ἐστιν ἐπιδείξασθαι τὴν παιδείαν, καὶ φυλάξασθαι μέντοι.. and of course to take care.., [[ 5th-6th c.BC: Xenophon Historicus “Anabasis” 4.6.15 (variant), compare 1.8.20, 5th-6th c.BC: Plato Philosophus “Protagoras” 339c, “Tht.” 143a. ] Refs 5th c.BC+]
__B.II.4.e ἀλλὰ μέντοι well, if it comes to that, [[ 5th-6th c.BC: Xenophon Historicus “Anabasis” 4.6.16 ] Refs 5th c.BC+]; well, of course, [[ 5th-6th c.BC: Plato Philosophus “Respublica” 331e, etc.] Refs 5th c.BC+]; compare μέντον.
__C for μέν after other Particles, see each Particle.
__D Position of μέν. Like δέ, it usually stands as the second word in a sentence. But when a sentence begins with words common to its subordinate clauses, μέν stands second in the first of these clauses, as ἥδε γὰρ γυνὴ δούλη μέν, εἴρηκεν δ᾽ ἐλεύθερον λόγον [[ 5th c.BC: Sophocles Tragicus “Trachiniae” 63 ] Refs 5th c.BC+]; οἱ Ἀθηναῖοι ἐτάξαντο μέν.., ἡσύχαζον δέ.. [[ 5th c.BC: Thucydides Historicus 4.73, compare 113, etc. It also attaches itself to words which mark opposition, as πρῶτον μέν, τότε μέν, ἐγὼ μέν] Refs 5th c.BC+], even when these do not stand first: sometimes however it precedes them, ὡς μὲν ἐγὼ οἶμαι [[ 5th-6th c.BC: Plato Philosophus “Phaedrus” 228b; ὡς μέν τινες ἔφασαν 5th-6th c.BC: Xenophon Historicus “Institutio Cyri (Cyropaedia)” 5.2.28 ] Refs 5th c.BC+]. It generally stands between the Article and Noun, or the preposition and its Case: but if special stress is laid on the Noun, this is sometimes neglected, as οἱ Τεγεᾶται μὲν ἐπηυλίσαντο, Μαντινῆς δὲ ἀπεχώρησαν [[ 5th c.BC: Thucydides Historicus 4.134 ] Refs 5th c.BC+]; ἀνὰ τὸ σκοτεινὸν μέν.. [[ [prev. author] 3.22; also τῇ σῇ μὲν εὐδαιμονίῃ, τῇ ἐμεωυτοῦ δὲ κακοδαιμονίῃ 5th c.BC: Herodotus Historicus 1.87 ] Refs 5th c.BC+].
__D.II μέν is frequently repeated:
__D.II.1 when, besides the opposition of two main clauses, a subordinate opposition is introduced into the first, ὁ μὲν ἀνὴρ τοιαῦτα μὲν πεποίηκε τοιαῦτα δὲ λέγει, ὑμῶν δέ.. [[ 5th-6th c.BC: Xenophon Historicus “Anabasis” 1.6.9, compare 5.8.24, 5th c.BC: Thucydides Historicus 8.104, 4th c.BC: Demosthenes Orator 18.214, 23.208. ] Refs 5th c.BC+]
