mountain, about the house, about the tree as a given being, in order to give thought to the being of the mountain, the being of the house, the being of the tree.
We notice at once, it is true, that being is not attached to the mountain somewhere, or stuck to the house, or hanging from the tree. We notice, thus, the problematic that is designated with "being." Our question therefore becomes more questioning. We let beings, as beings, lie before us and give our heart and mind to the "being" of particular beings.
But so long as that which the words ἐόν and ἔμμεναι state dissolves in the vague terms "beings" and "to be," we cannot hear what the saying says. For these terms offer no guarantee that they carry across to us what the Greek ἐὸν ἔμμεναι tells. The translation is still no translation if we merely replace the words ἐόν and ἔμμεναι with our own terms "being" and "to be," or the Latin ens and esse.
What, then, is still missing in the traditional translation of the words ἐόν with "being" and ἔμμεναι with "to be"? What is missing is that we did not try to say those words over in the same way as we did the words χρή and λέγειν and νοεῖν, and the particles τε ... τε. What is still needed? That we ourselves, instead of merely transposing the Greek terms into terms of our language, pass over into the Greek sphere of ἐόν and ἔμμεναι, ὄν and εἶναι. This passage is hard—not in itself, only for us. But it is not impossible.
Summary and Transition
Parmenides' saying moves toward that which is designated by the word ἐόν. This fact becomes quite clear if, on the strength of Parmenides' own usage, we replace the final word ἔμμεναι with ἐόν. In grammatical terms, the word is a participle. Reflection showed that ἐόν is the participle of