ἀλλ’ εὖ οἶδα ὅτι εἴ τισιν ἐντύχοις οὓς ἡγοῖο σοφούς, μᾶλλον ἂν αὐτῶν φροντίζοις ἢ τῶν πολλῶν. ἀλλὰ μὴ οὐχ οὗτοι ἡμεῖς ὦμεν—ἡμεῖς μὲν γὰρ καὶ ἐκεῖ παρῆμεν καὶ ἦμεν τῶν πολλῶν—εἰ δὲ ἄλλοις ἐντύχοις σοφοῖς, τάχ’ ἂν αἰσχύνοιο αὐτούς, εἴ τι ἴσως οἴοιο αἰσχρὸν ὂν ποιεῖν· ἢ πῶς λέγεις;
If it were "ἀλλὰ οὐχ οὗτοί ἐσμεν", I would take it, for better or worse, as having the force of a question expressing a hope for a "yes"-answer. But what difference does the addition of μή + subj make? Is there a syntactic rule under which this case falls? Thanks in advance.
μή + subj in Plato, Symp. 194 c4
-
- Textkit Enthusiast
- Posts: 562
- Joined: Fri Jun 16, 2017 7:15 am
- Sleepy_Mikael
- Textkit Neophyte
- Posts: 7
- Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2018 3:46 am
Re: μή + subj in Plato, Symp. 194 c4
Could it be simply a potential subjunctive? "Perhaps we are not those men." I think μή gives it a doubtful connotation, and οὐχ makes the clause negative. I've never actually come across this usage before, I would have assumed it was fearing clause
http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/tex ... thp%3D1801
http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/tex ... thp%3D1801
-
- Textkit Enthusiast
- Posts: 562
- Joined: Fri Jun 16, 2017 7:15 am
Re: μή + subj in Plato, Symp. 194 c4
I have to admit I've never heard of such a thing; would be grateful should you refer me to a relevant passage in Smyth or any other grammar book.Sleepy_Mikael wrote:potential subjunctive
- Sleepy_Mikael
- Textkit Neophyte
- Posts: 7
- Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2018 3:46 am
Re: μή + subj in Plato, Symp. 194 c4
I linked it in my response! Smyth 1801 - Doubtful assertion. I'm not if "potential subjunctive" is a term people use, but in any case this clause is expressing something that could potentially be true.
-
- Textkit Enthusiast
- Posts: 562
- Joined: Fri Jun 16, 2017 7:15 am
Re: μή + subj in Plato, Symp. 194 c4
Oh, thanks a lot! I missed the link in your previous response. My fault. A complication in my example, though, seems to be that it is part of a question (expressing, as the context suggests, a hope for an answer in the positive), not a "doubtful negation," as Smyth would have it.