eeeeeee is the seventh and root-correcting erratum of the Sappho 31 sequence, written as a standalone paper about Longinus and Sappho rather than about the sequence itself.
Its thesis: the transmitted configuration at the poem's edge is the object, not the damage. Sappho 31 is bracketed by two open positions — κῆνος at line 1, a distal demonstrative plus indefinite relative designating a seat with no occupant, and τολματόν at line 17, a verbal adjective in -τός that structurally cannot govern a nominative agent. Between them the frame closes on its own verb (φαίνεταί μοι → φαίνομαι). The poem's two formal ruptures are one operation in two materials: the hiatus at γλῶσσα ἔαγε makes the reader's mouth perform the gag; the agentless terminus makes the reader supply the doer.
The quoter's theory predicts the shape. One section before the quotation, Longinus's supreme instance of sublimity is a composed silence — the Ajax of 9.2, φωνῆς δίχα, four hapaxes in one sentence. The selection is the argument. The dialect seam is measured with its limit carried in the text: seventeen Aeolic markers in seventy-four words, then zero in six — a step, not a taper — with P(0 in 6) = 0.209 stated as insufficient alone. The continuation parses continuously (πένητα as object of θαυμάζεις across the modern section division); the attribution has been contested in print since Robortello 1554; Bergk's abandoned conjecture — integrum carmen at line 16 — places the poem's completion exactly where the Aeolic stops, the argument's one uncontaminated corroboration.
The paper closes on the series of completions, each of which reopens the form: Longinus's filling ends in the treatise's only bare post-quotation perception verb (θαυμάζεις, no vocative); Catullus reverses every pole and occupies the reader's seat (Catullus is κῆνος); Augustine generalizes the method (gustavi; thirteen books of unanswered address); the modern restorations end open, the latest as an aorist optative prayer. Each filling cuts a fresh hollow — which is why the form is δυσεξάλειπτος: deletion cannot outrun a form that manufactures its own emptiness in whoever answers it.
Supersedes the root premise of the sixth erratum (#1474), whose findings all survive with meanings inverted.