This quotation provides the context:
[11β] εἰ οὖν σοι φίλον, μή με ἀποκρύψῃ ἀλλὰ πάλιν εἰπὲ ἐξ ἀρχῆς τί ποτε ὂν τὸ ὅσιον εἴτε φιλεῖται ὑπὸ θεῶν εἴτε ὁτιδὴ πάσχει—οὐ γὰρ περὶ τούτου διοισόμεθα—ἀλλ᾽ εἰπὲ προθύμως τί ἐστιν τό τε ὅσιον καὶ τὸ ἀνόσιον;
My trial translation: If it pleases you, don’t hide [ what the holy is, in itself ] from me, but tell from the very beginning just what the holy is, whether is is to be loved by the gods, or something else that happens [to it]–for we won’t quarrel about this–but say candidly what is the holy and what is the unholy?
I don’t know how to parse this word: ὁτιδὴ.
U Chicago’s morpho tool identifies it as a neuter form of ὅστις : https://logeion.uchicago.edu/morpho/ὁτιδή .
The Cambridge Greek Lexicon has it under the head-word ὁστισ-δή, and they gloss it as “whoever or whichever it is, some or other.”
I’m thinking maybe the meaning would be “whether it is to be loved by the gods, or whether it is something that one experiences.”
I’ve found this entry in an old Greek-Romanian dictionary: ὁτιή [ὅτι, δή] and the meaning is:that, because.
In Montanari (Brill dictionary of ancient Greek): οτιδη «why on earth?»
The δη, especially after the τι ποτε, gives it some umph. He’s implying that, with the “loved by the gods” definition wrapped up, there will just be another wacky definition forthcoming from Euthyphro. If you need a gloss, maybe “whatsoever”? But it might be better to look at other δη/οτιδη examples to get an idea of how it works, rather than the glosses so far offered.
Many thanks for the replies.
This word: ὁτιδὴ. By cross-checking the Greek with the LCL English translation, I could work out a rough English meaning for it, but I don’t know anything about the grammar of it.
Is it a pronoun? If so, is there a declension table for it?
Is it a pronoun with a particle appended? i.e. ὁτι-δὴ.
Is it so rare that I’m unlikely to encounter it again?
See the LSJ entry for “ὅστις , ἥτις, ὅ τι”. I see it called an “indefinite relative,” though these grammar taxonomies aren’t something I know much about. It is very common with and without the δη, and whether it’s written together with it or not is an editorial detail.
From the relevant LSJ sections:
1 ὅστις γε being one who (cf. ὅσγε), S.OT1335, OC810, Ar.Ra.1184.
Not the one you are looking at here, but notice the example of it being used as a relative with a particle.
2 ὅστις δή (v. δή IV. 1), freq. used without any distinct relative force, θεῶν ὅτεῳ δή to some one or other of the gods, Hdt.1.86; ὅτευ δὴ χρήματος δεησόμενον Id.3.121; ᾗ τινι δὴ γνώμῃ Th.8.87, etc.; also ὅ τι δήκοτε πρήξοντα Hdt.6.134; ὅστις δήποτʼ ὤν Pl.Phdr.273c; ὡς ἀπετύγχανʼ ὁτουδήποτε D.19.167; ὁτῳδήτινι τρόπῳ PFay.21.11 (ii A. D.)
The untranslated examples are (without looking up the contexts, so I may be missing things in addition to my usual errors):
ὅτευ δὴ χρήματος δεησόμενον whatever thing it will lack
ὅ τι δήκοτε πρήξοντα “whatsoever he (?) did”, or maybe “whatsoever did it”
ὅστις δήποτʼ ὤν whosoever it is
ὡς ἀπετύγχανʼ ὁτουδήποτε as he met whosoever
ὁτῳδήτινι τρόπῳ whatever sort of way
Many thanks for your patient exposition, Joel. Scanning it, I see that need to study it carefully.
It’s worth what you paid for it. Looking back over the post, I see that I mistook ἀποτυγχάνω for ἐπιτυγχάνω. Goodwin has some coverage of the declension and use in 421-428, in his relative pronouns section. Morwood mentions it in passing in his Relative Clauses section on pages 127-130, which looks like a good introduction to me, as is usual with Morwood.
Thanks for the ref. to Morwood; I’ll check my much-consulted copy!