Opt after sub or imper
- Constantinus Philo
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 1404
- Joined: Tue Mar 05, 2019 1:04 pm
Opt after sub or imper
I don't know how to explain opt in the following final clauses. H 339 340: εν δ αυτοισι Πύλας ποιησομεν ιδέα οδός είη. Ο 475:μαρνσο τε τρωεσσι μη ελοιεν νηας. Isn't it weird?
Semper Fidelis
-
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 4815
- Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 2:34 am
Re: Opt after sub or imper
It's Homer.
- Constantinus Philo
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 1404
- Joined: Tue Mar 05, 2019 1:04 pm
Re: Opt after sub or imper
Here is Herodotus 2, 93: αντέχονται της αυτής ίνα μη αμαρτοιεν της οδού. How can you explain this opt based on what Smyth says. There are other examples from Plato and Sophocles.
Semper Fidelis
-
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 764
- Joined: Tue Sep 18, 2007 3:52 pm
Re: Opt after sub or imper
Hi, just looking at the first e.g., I take this as an opt. of wish in a dependent construction. See Goodwin 1897 s168: http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/tex ... 99.04.0065
Chantraine 1963 (i.e. vol. 2) s400 notes that the optative is attested in final constructions, and could originally come from a statement of wish (i.e. similar to how I'm taking it above I think).
I haven't tracked through your other e.g.s, but as a general rule worth checking in each case whether the opt. is due to something other than "sequence of moods".
Cheers, Chad
Chantraine 1963 (i.e. vol. 2) s400 notes that the optative is attested in final constructions, and could originally come from a statement of wish (i.e. similar to how I'm taking it above I think).
I haven't tracked through your other e.g.s, but as a general rule worth checking in each case whether the opt. is due to something other than "sequence of moods".
Cheers, Chad