modus.irrealis wrote:But in general, I do find some of Homer's uses of imperfect a little strange from what I'm used to, especially how he introduces events and speeches with the imperfect (e.g. Chryses Î»Î¯ÏƒÏƒÎµÏ„Î¿ the Achaeans, Agamemon ÎºÎ±Îºá¿¶Ï‚ Î±Ï†Î¯ÎµÎ¹ and Î¼ÏÎ¸Î¿Î½ á¼Ï€ÎÏ„ÎµÎ»Î»Îµ), and I did have to readjust.
some grammars claim that verbs with the general meaning "to say" can sometimes take the imperfect with an aorist meaning. I guess this could be the case with Î»Î¯ÏƒÏƒÎµÏ„Î¿, Î¼ÏÎ¸Î¿Î½ á¼Ï€ÎÏ„ÎµÎ»Î»Îµ and even ÎºÎ±Îºá¿¶Ï‚ Î±Ï†Î¯ÎµÎ¹ (since here it means repudiating with words).
even in Attic prose, e.g. in Plato or Xenophon, forms such as á¼”Î»ÎµÎ³Îµ occur every now and then when the context clearly requires an Îµá¼¶Ï€ÎµÎ½.
another option is to consider at least some of those imperfects as instances of the so-called conative imperfect, i.e. an imperfect that means "begin, start".
thus, Î»Î¯ÏƒÏƒÎµÏ„Î¿ Ï€á½±Î½Ï„Î±Ï‚ á¼ˆÏ‡Î±Î¹Î¿á½»Ï‚ could mean "started begging and imploring all the Achaeans".