Using precisely the same verb (φυτέυσασιν) that he earlier reported having heard from the god at Delphi (φυτέυσαντος; l. 793) Oidipous seems now himself to underscore the distinction between natural and adoptive parents. This is odd, because despite the fact that a stray comment on the subject drove him to consult Delphi about the identity of his parents, he has ever since based his actions on the assumption that there is no such distinction. Now when he uses this word to emphasize that he would not hurt his natural parents, the audience will suppose–or find its earlier supposition confirmed–that the god was making the same distinction, but to opposite effect: he must murder his natural father. He is capable of recognizing the significance of a “natural” parent only when it is he who makes the distinction; when the god made it it escaped his notice. Thus, his present emphasis serves as a critique of his limitations. [Mpe] [Md] Where he charged the god with sending him away “dishonored” (ἂτιμον; 789) his use of the god’s language suggests that he failed properly to honor the god by giving thought to the god’s words and interpreting them with greater subtlety and sensitivity. [P] [Mipd]