modus.irrealis wrote:I think you can take this as an example of what Smyth covers in 2737, since γενέσθαι would have μή if it were negated.
I've just read this section, and while I understand the cases which Smyth mentioned, I'm not sure I understand why γενέσθαι would have
been negated with μή. Is this because a sentence with μᾶλλον ἤ was perhaps originally a subj. of deliberation, ᾤμην· «μετὰ τοῦ νόμου καὶ
τοῦ δικαίου διακινδυνεύω ἢ (μὴ) μέθ᾿ ὑμῶν γένωμαι;» ?
Or maybe it's simply because δεῖ takes μή (Smyth 2714b)?