Nox

Sentence Summary: Following the death of her brother, a woman feels compelled to create an epitaph for him, although she is aware that this work can in no way convey who her brother really was.
Paragraph Summary: This work is referred to as "an epitaph" by the author. It is for her dead brother. The work starts with a Latin elegy, and a translation for each word is provided throughout the work. It is revealed that this elegy was written for the author's brother, who died away from home. Alongside the translations, the author discusses the limitations and strangeness of human history, as well as memories of her brother. Family pictures, and other pictures relating to her brother are also included throughout the work. Also, a letter from her brother discussing the death of Anna, a woman he loved, is included. All these aspects combine to create an emotional, yet incomplete picture of the author's brother, and their relationship.
Close Reading: "What if you made a collection of lexical entries, as someone who is asked to come up with a number for the population of the Skythians might point to the bowl at Exampaios."
In this sentence "a collection of lexical entries" simply means a collection of written descriptions. The second part of the sentence is referencing an account made by Herodotos, which is included earlier in this work. In this account, the famous historian describes how the Skythian people point to a bowl of melted arrowheads when asked what their population is. Clearly, this is a very vague answer. The bowl at Exampaios cannot fully or accurately convey the population of the Skythian people. This response by the Skythians is compared to "a collection of lexical entries" in this sentence. This appears to be a conterintuitive comparison. How could a collection of written descriptions possibly relate to the bowl at Exampaios? Written description are certainly more specific and detailed than a bowl full of arrowheads. However, after examining the various entries discussing history in this work, this comparion begins to make sense. At one point, the author discusses the idea of "overtakelessness". This is the notion that certain ideas can never be fully understood, no matter how much information one learns about it. At various points in the novel, the author expresses the inability of her words to properly describe aspects of her brother, specifically his voice. No matter how many words she uses to describe his voice, the audience will never be able to fully understand this idea. This suggests that language, at its core, is fundamentally limited. It is not capable of conveying any idea in a fully comprehensive manner. I believe that this is why the author is comparing "a collection of lexical entries" to the Skythians pointing at a bowl.  Both methods of description are incapable of comprehensibly conveying an idea. They can only offer the reader a limited facade of what is trying to be conveyed. By making this comparison, the author is qualifying her own work. She knows that because she only has words, the picture of her brother which she is attempting to construct will be incomplete. This suggest that the act of attempting to construct this picture is what is important to the author. This changes the way that I read this work. I know see the emotions conveyed by the author to be the most important aspect of this work.