modus.irrealis wrote:It seems like a strange suggestion though because then I don't know what the εἰ would be doing. Wouldn't the ὠς then come before the εἰ? Maybe this is just one of the sentences that doesn't quite fit into standard grammar -- I mean it seems like this is an example of implied direct speech? -- there's a few of those in the Apology, like in your other thread where the sentence changes its construction after the parenthetical remark, which I think is to make it seem like Socrates is talking off-the-cuff instead of giving a polished prepared speech.
I think you're right about ὡς before εἰ if that were indeed the case. Perhaps, as you said, this sentence is
too varied to fit into
one grammatical construct.* I'm not sure what implied direct speech is, but if I read 2632 in Smyth on the occasional variation of moods
in indirect discourse, and combine it with the concept of implied indirect discourse in 2622, then we might be able to read it with opt. ἔχοι
still, and translate the main verb as implied indirect discourse. The irony embedded in the verb μακαρίζω would be retained.
* In Sidgwick's Easy Selections f. Plato
he mentions in one of his notes that "the colloquial style of the Apology, which is of course
an important part of its design, quite justifies such natural irregularities."
It should be the grammar by Matthiae -- there's a translation available at archive.org
Thank you, modus. The adj. copious is a blatant understatement.
In the same section he'd also stated the same as Smyth did in 2632: that the opt. and ind. are often intermixed.