Translation: Do you believe I would have lived so many years if I had practiced democratic politics, [while] dealing with good men according to their worth, [and] doing good for the just, while making this the most important principle?
I need some help on the grammar of this sentence. It seems to be a question expecting a “no” answer, with the question containing a conditional sentence. Because the verb of the question concerns thinking, there must be an indirect discourse issue as well.
In particular, I wonder about the grammatical rationale of the verb forms. The grammatical problem is too complex for me at my present understanding.
ἄν με…διαγενέσθαι, εἰ ἔπραττον… ἐβοήθουν…: that I…would have, if…I were…; ind. disc. with a contrary to fact (εἰ impf., ἄν aor.) with apodosis replaced with ἄν + aor. inf. δια-γίγνομαι
τοσάδε ἔτη: for…; acc. duration
He also notes that “τὰ δημόσια” is “affairs or business”.
I am using Steadman. I edited out a reference to the note you quoted in order to keep things simple. Steadman helped me find a satisfactory meaning for the sentence, for thanks to him I saw what Socrates was asking, and I saw the names of the grammatical issues involved.
I also saw that I needed to study these topics, but Steadman’s comments overwhelmed me.
The sentence is a question, expecting a no answer.
The question contains a use of indirect discourse.
The indirect discourse includes conditional clauses.
The “apodosis [is] replaced with ἄν + aor. inf. δια-γίγνομαι.”
After floundering around for an hour or so, and then reading your reply, I concluded I need advice on the order in which I should study these topics.
Yes it is a question: the ἆρ(α) tells us that. By itself it doesn’t necessarily “expect a no answer,” but that’s clear from the context.
The indirect discourse takes the form of acc.&inf. (με … διαγενέσθαι), dep. on οἴεσθε. (Acc.&inf. is the usual construction with οἶμαι.)
The ἄν goes with διαγενέσθαι, making it mean not “Do you think I lived so many years …?” (that would be διαγενέσθαι without ἄν) but “Do you think I would have lived so many years …?”
(In direct discourse it would be διεγενόμην ἂν … “Would I have lived …?” Aor.indic. w/ ἄν “would have”; > aor.infin. w/ ἄν in indirect discourse.)
The if-clause (aka protasis) is in three parts, each with imperf.indic.: εἰ (a) ἔπραττον τὰ δημόσια,
καὶ (b) πράττων ἀξίως ἀνδρὸς ἀγαθοῦ ἐβοήθουν τοῖς δικαίοις
καὶ (c) ὥσπερ χρὴ τοῦτο περὶ πλείστου ἐποιούμην;
That’s a fair bit of syntax to work through. And there are things I haven’t even touched on, e.g. the very interesting word order of the opening ἆρ᾽ οὖν ἄν με οἴεσθε τοσάδε ἔτη διαγενέσθαι, where first the postpositive ἄν slips in after οὖν and then the enclitic με slips in after that. But that’s probably enough for one post!
The overview I offered in the stickied Conditionals thread might help with the conditional sentence here.
Hylander well addresses a point in the articulation of the conditional clause, that I didn’t go into. If I may differ on one particular: in πράττων ἀξίως ἀνδρὸς ἀγαθοῦ ἐβοήθουν τοῖς δικαίοις, I prefer to read τοῖς δικαίοις as neuter, not masculine. (That makes better sense of the concluding τοῦτο περὶ πλείστου ἐποιούμην too. A good man’s commitment, as it should be, is to τὰ δίκαια, not to δίκαιοι people.)
For convenience of reference I repeat the sentence as a whole.
ἆρ᾽ οὖν ἄν με οἴεσθε τοσάδε ἔτη διαγενέσθαι εἰ ἔπραττον τὰ δημόσια, καὶ πράττων ἀξίως ἀνδρὸς ἀγαθοῦ ἐβοήθουν τοῖς δικαίοις καὶ ὥσπερ χρὴ τοῦτο περὶ πλείστου ἐποιούμην;