This paper shows that the Aeolic inf. νηφέμεν used in Archil. 4.9 W instead of expectable νήφειν in the beginning of a pentameter is problematic: it cannot be a metrical variant, since Ionic νήφειν would be unimpeachable in the first part of a pentameter colon (where a contracted biceps is entirely admissible), and it cannot simply be put down as an epicism, since νήφω, a very colloquial verb, is never used in the heroic epic that came down to us and is very unlikely to have ever been used in this genre. The rare instances of Aeolic infinitives in -έμεν in the language of elegy can be shown to be dependent on epic models of one kind or another (e.g. γηρᾱσέμεν Simon. 20.7 W.2). Assuming that the form νηφέμεν is Archilochus’ own coinage, therefore, the question is whether the poet intended the final distich of fr. 4 to resonate with the epic tradition; and if so, whether it was a specific allusion to a fixed text or a reference to a broader tradition. It is argued that νηφέμεν should be viewed as modeled on πινέμεν from the famous midsummer picnic scene in Hesiod (Op. 592, construed with αἴθοπα οἶνον): the combination of the high-flown ending, best known from the epic dialect, with a lowly root νηφ- must have both produced a comic effect in the context of an invitation to get drunk on duty and serve as an allusion to the well-known passage in Hesiod.
The immunologically important major histocompatibility complex (MHC) harbors some of the most polymorphic genes in vertebrates. These genes presumably evolve under parasite-mediated selection and frequently show inconsistent allelic genealogies, where some alleles are more similar between species than within species. This phenomenon is thought to arise either from convergent evolution under parallel selection or from the preservation of ancient allelic lineages beyond speciation events (trans-species polymorphism, TSP). Here we examine natural populations of two sympatric stickleback species (Gasterosteus aculeatus and Pungitius pungitius) to investigate the contribution of these two mechanisms to the evolution of inconsistent allelic genealogies at the MHC. Overlapping parasite taxa between the two host species in three different habitats suggest contemporary parallel selection on the MHC genes. Accordingly, we detected a lack of species-specific phylogenetic clustering in the immunologically relevant antigen-binding residues of the MHC IIB genes which contrasted with the rest of the coding and non-coding sequence. However, clustering was not habitat-specific and a codon-usage analysis revealed patterns of similarity by descent. In this light, common descent via TSP, in combination with intra-species gene conversion, rather than convergent evolution is the more strongly supported scenario for the inconsistent genealogy at the MHC.
Hankins J. Ficino’s Critique of Lucretius. In: Hankins J, Meroi F The Rebirth of Platonic Theology in Renaissance Italy. Proceedings of a Conference in Honor of Michael J. B. Allen, Florence, 26- 27 April 2007. Istituto Nazionale di Studi sul Rinascimento and Harvard University Center for Italian Renaissance Studies; In Press.
Hundreds of studies have examined the “sadder-but-wiser” hypothesis—that sad people make wiser decisions—and most find support for it. But virtually no tests of the hypothesis examined financial decisions, which are some of the most frequent and consequential decisions people make. To address this gap, the present experiments examined the effects of sadness on intertemporal financial choices of the form $X now versus $(X+Y) later—typical of the choices people make when considering whether to spend now or save to spend more later. Studies of intertemporal choices typically reveal extreme impatience. That is, people choose earlier rewards over significantly larger, later rewards, often leading to regret. Would sadness reverse the typical impatience pattern in choices—by increasing wisdom and decreasing impatience—per the sadder-but-wiser hypothesis? Three experiments tested the hypothesis, inducing sadness in randomly assigned participants and then offering participants an intertemporal financial choice unrelated to the source of sadness. Each experiment found that sadness dramatically increased impatience: Relative to the median neutral-mood participant, the median sad-mood participant was willing to accept 35% to 79% less money today to avoid waiting for a payoff. Sadness increased impatience even though the emotion was normatively irrelevant to the choice. In sum, sadder is not wiser when it comes to making tradeoffs between time and money.