I get that τῳ means τινι here, but why? I tried reading through the sections on the article in Smyth but couldn’t find anything like this parallel construction, and CGCG only covers ὁ μέν…ὁ δέ and similar constructions in section 28.27.
ἐπεὶ δὲ κατεπέμφθη ὑπὸ τοῦ πατρὸς σατράπης Λυδίας τε καὶ Φρυγίας τῆς μεγάλης καὶ Καππαδοκίας, στρατηγὸς δὲ καὶ πάντων ἀπεδείχθη οἷς καθήκει εἰς Καστωλοῦ πεδίον ἁθροίζεσθαι, πρῶτον μὲν ἐπέδειξεν αὑτόν, ὅτι περὶ πλείστου ποιοῖτο, εἴ τῳ σπείσαιτο καὶ εἴ τῳ συνθοῖτο καὶ εἴ τῳ ὑπόσχοιτό τι, μηδὲν ψεύδεσθαι.
So you’d be happy with πρῶτον μὲν ἐπέδειξεν αὑτόν, ὅτι περὶ πλείστου ποιοῖτο, εἴ τῳ σπείσαιτο, μηδὲν ψεύδεσθαι.
But adding the parallel …καὶ εἴ τῳ συνθοῖτο καὶ εἴ τῳ ὑπόσχοιτό τι is confusing?
No, sorry, I get the parallal part. I meant why does τῳ mean τινι here? If the article is being used pronominally, why does it have indefinite meaning here?
Hmm, I just realized that ὁ μέν…ὁ δέ constructions also have indefinite meaning i.e. it can mean “some…others…” though it can also mean “the former…the latter…” etc.
So anyways I now see that τῳ here in Xen. has similar meaning, but it doesn’t answer the (larger) question of how or why the definite article can sometimes be interpreted indefinitely — at least in parallal constructions like these…
Enclitic indefinite pronoun τῳ is not the same word as the article τῷ. It’s an alternative form of the indefinite pronoun τινι. These words should not be confused. (The interrogative pronoun τῷ; is accented and looks exactly like the article τῷ but should not be confused with it.)
Smyth § 334; see also § 181 b.
Likewise, indefinite/interrogative του/τοῦ should not be confused with the article τοῦ.
Ahhh, thank you. The table in CGCG 7.24 shows this but I hadn’t noticed it before.