Xen. Hell. 7.1.2 optative + subjunctiv conditional?

Here you can discuss all things Ancient Greek. Use this board to ask questions about grammar, discuss learning strategies, get help with a difficult passage of Greek, and more.
Post Reply
daivid
Administrator
Posts: 2744
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2011 1:51 pm
Location: ὁ τοῦ βασιλέως λίθος, London, Europe
Contact:

Xen. Hell. 7.1.2 optative + subjunctiv conditional?

Post by daivid »

This is from Xenophon's Hellenica (7.1.2). Ambassadors from the Spartans are in Athens hoping to make a treaty:

ἐὰν οὖν ᾗ ἑκατέροις μάλιστα συνοίσει,
if therefore the means by which to each it will be especially advantageous
ταύτῃ καὶ τὰς συνθήκας ποιησώμεθα,
by means of those of the terms they should make
οὕτω κατά γε τὸ εἰκὸς μάλιστα συμμένοιμεν ἄν.
thus according to the most probable we would especially be able to keep (the agreement)


It looks to me as if two future conditional sentences have been slammed together with both an optative and a subjunctive but maybe it isn't a conditional at all?
It looks to me that the sentence can be split into three phrases but have I made the splits correctly?
Are ᾗ and ταύτῃ linked in some way?

If anyone can provide any hints I would be as always very grateful for the help.
λονδον

mwh
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 4791
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 2:34 am

Re: Xen. Hell. 7.1.2 optative + subjunctiv conditional?

Post by mwh »

It is a conditional sentence: first an if-clause (“protasis”), then the main clause (“apodosis”). For conditionals see the first post in http://www.textkit.com/greek-latin-foru ... =2&t=64823.
The if-clause is εαν … ποιησώμεθα: “If we make our agreements …”
(εαν+subj. “if we do something”)
The main clause is οὕτω … συμμένοιμεν ἄν, “in this way we would abide by them.”
(opt.+αν “we would do something”)
In Smyth’s terms, the protasis is “future more vivid,” while the apodosis is “future less vivid” (Smyth 2297). So this is not “if A happens, B will happen” (fut.indic. in main clause) but “if A happens, B would happen.” He shies away from saying that they will abide by their agreements and settles for saying that in those circumstances they probably would.

ᾗ and ταύτῃ are correlative, the ταυτῃ picking up the relative ᾗ: ἐὰν οὖν ᾗ ἑκατέροις μάλιστα συνοίσει, ταύτῃ καὶ τὰς συνθήκας ποιησώμεθα, lit. “(So if) in what way it will most benefit each side, in this way we also make our agreements,” “if we frame our agreements in the way in which it will be of most benefit to each side”.
You correctly split the sentence into three clauses, but the ᾗ clause (a relative clause) is part of the if-clause; note how the ᾗ follows the ἐὰν, embedding the ᾗ clause within the ἐὰν clause.

οὕτω κατά γε τὸ εἰκὸς μάλιστα συμμένοιμεν ἄν: “in this way (οὕτω) in all probability (κατά γε τὸ εἰκὸς) we’d be most likely to abide by them”

So the sentence is “So if we frame our agreements in such a way as will be of maximum mutual benefit we’d maximize the chances of our abiding by them.”

κατά γε τὸ εἰκὸς: the γε qualifies the phrase: it’s likely, but no more than that.
Last edited by mwh on Sat Sep 17, 2016 4:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Hylander
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 2504
Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2015 1:16 pm

Re: Xen. Hell. 7.1.2 optative + subjunctiv conditional?

Post by Hylander »

You have it more or less right, and your articulation into three clauses is correct. The protasis is subjunctive; the apodosis is optative instead of future indicative. That's because the apodosis isn't an absolute certainty: κατά γε τὸ εἰκὸς μάλιστα = "most likely". The protasis is a future condition, but not "less vivid." Conditionals (and everything else) are less rigid than the textbooks suggest.

It works the same way in English:

"If we make the agreement [τὰς συνθήκας ποιησώμεθα: "we," not "they"] in the way that/on terms that [ταύτῃ . . . ᾗ note that these are adverbial, not the subjects of their clauses; συνοίσει is impersonal] it will be most advantageous [to make the agreement] to both sides, we would be most likely to keep it."

Edit: as usual, I cross-posted with mwh.
Bill Walderman

daivid
Administrator
Posts: 2744
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2011 1:51 pm
Location: ὁ τοῦ βασιλέως λίθος, London, Europe
Contact:

Re: Xen. Hell. 7.1.2 optative + subjunctiv conditional?

Post by daivid »

Thanks again for two nicely complementary replies. I was surprised that, though the Greek has a conditional, both the translations I checked did not. A conditional in which it is the apodosis that is “future less vivid” but not the protasis seems awkward at best. I shall be on the look out for such in the future now.

Thank you to both of you for completely clearing up that sentence
- ἐὰν πάλιν τοιαύτην ἀναγνῶ κατά γε τὸ εἰκὸς συνείην ἄν.

Edit Rereading Hylander it does not seem at all awkward having a apodosis that is “future less vivid”.
λονδον

User avatar
jeidsath
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 5332
Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2013 2:42 pm
Location: Γαλεήπολις, Οὐισκόνσιν

Re: Xen. Hell. 7.1.2 optative + subjunctiv conditional?

Post by jeidsath »

The previous phrase is δοκεῖ μοι χρῆναι τοῦτο σκοπεῖν, ὅπως ἡ φιλία ὅτι πλεῖστον χρόνον συμμενεῖ. Does this explain the συμμένοιμεν ἄν as oblique, rather than indicating uncertainty about the result?
“One might get one’s Greek from the very lips of Homer and Plato." "In which case they would certainly plough you for the Little-go. The German scholars have improved Greek so much.”

Joel Eidsath -- jeidsath@gmail.com

Hylander
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 2504
Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2015 1:16 pm

Re: Xen. Hell. 7.1.2 optative + subjunctiv conditional?

Post by Hylander »

δοκεῖ μοι χρῆναι τοῦτο σκοπεῖν, ὅπως ἡ φιλία ὅτι πλεῖστον χρόνον συμμενεῖ.

This isn't a conditional. It's a clause of "effort" (Dickey, p. 126). These regularly take ὅπως + future indicative. Smyth 2210.
Bill Walderman

mwh
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 4791
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 2:34 am

Re: Xen. Hell. 7.1.2 optative + subjunctiv conditional?

Post by mwh »

Joel, I think Hylander’s misunderstood you. But I think it has little bearing on the optative in the next sentence. συμμένοιμεν ἄν does not express uncertainty in itself. It’s κατα γε το εικος that does that. Incidentally, I take μαλιστα not with that (as Hylander appears to) but with the verb (cf. μαλιστα συνοισει above; I used “maximum” and “maximize” for the two μαλιστα's in my final translation). But it hardly matters as far as the overall sense goes.

Hylander’s right to point out that “Conditionals (and everything else) are less rigid than the textbooks suggest.” As I said in my original post on conditionals, “Main clauses and if-clauses can be combined in any way that makes sense.” That’s one reason (among several) to treat them separately.

It's no more and no less awkward than saying “If I work too hard I’d probably get tired” (rather than “If I worked too hard I’d probably get tired” or “If I work too hard I’ll probably get tired”).

Post Reply