τὸν π?ότε?ος π?οσέειπε γέ?ων Π?ίαμος θεοειδής:
λέξον νῦν με τάχιστα διοτ?εφές, ὄφ?α καὶ ἤδη
ὕπνῳ ὕπο γλυκε?ῷ τα?πώμεθα κοιμηθέντες:
How is “kai” functioning in line 635? Macleod seems to take it with “ophra” stating, “(ὄφ?α καὶ…)= Od. 4.294-5;…”
When I read it, I took it as going with ἤδη as meaning something like “even now” or “right now”, but if I were translating, I’d probably skip over it. There’s some discussion on this point here.
If you take it with ὄφ?α, what would the meaning be there?
That does seem to be a better translation. I was just thinking perhaps this usage corresponded to the following usage cited by Smyth:
§2887. In final clauses ἵνα καί is common, and sometimes, like Eng. just, serves to show that the fact answers to the expectation, or the effect to the cause (or vice versa). Thus, βο?λει οὖν ἕπεσθαι ἵνα καὶ ἴδῃς τοὺς ὄντας α?τόθι; do you wish to go along then just to see those who are there? P. Lys. 204a, ἄ?ξομαι δὲ ἀπὸ τῆς ἰ̄ᾱτ?ικῆς λέγων ἵνα καὶ π?εσβε?ωμεν τὴν τέχνην I will begin my speech with medicine in order that we may do honour to our art P. S. 186b .
What do you think?
I’m not entirely sure what Smyth means there, but I would view those examples as normal uses of καί as an adverb and not as forming some kind of grouping with ἵνα. I notice, though, that in the examples a verb follows καί while in line 635 it’s followed by ἤδη and my impression is that the word that directly follows καί is the one that’s most directly affected.