Strange future participle in Xenophon

Greek Learning Greek
1

Xenophon, Anabasis 7.1.8:
καὶ ὁ Ξενοφῶν Κλεάνδρῳ τῷ ἁρμοστῇ ξένος γεγενημένος προσελθὼν ἠσπάζετο αὐτὸν ὡς ἀποπλευσούμενος ἤδη. ὁ δὲ αὐτῷ λέγει: μὴ ποιήσῃς ταῦτα: εἰ δὲ μή, ἔφη, αἰτίαν ἕξεις, ἐπεὶ καὶ νῦν τινὲς ἤδη σὲ αἰτιῶνται ὅτι οὐ ταχὺ ἐξέρπει τὸ στράτευμα.

Why ἀποπλευσούμενος and not ἀποπλευσόμενος?

2

“Doric” future.

Smyth 540:

http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Smyth+grammar+540&fromdoc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.04.0007

LSJ πλέω:

http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.04.0057%3Aentry%3Dple%2Fw

3

Thanks!

If I understand Smyth correctly, “Doric” is a bit of misnomer here and the term is used because the form is similar to some Doric forms, while this particular case is regular Attic. Or does this have something to do with the fact that Xenophon spent much time with the Lacedaimonians?

4

According to Smyth, “These are called Doric futures because Doric usually makes all futures (active and middle) in -σέω -σῶ, -σέομαι -σοῦμαι.” The LSJ article cites Lysias, Thucydides, Isocrates and Plato for future πλευσοῦμαι.

5

Must be regular Attic then!

6

Smyth cites just a few verbs, and nearly all have alternative futures without contraction.

7

“without contraction” - I suppose you mean in -σομαι? (And not in -σέομαι, which is properly the uncontracted form)

What I meant with “regular Attic” was that ἀποπλευσούμενος is apparently no less acceptable in Attic than ἀποπλευσόμενος, and not a quirk of Xenophon.