Xen. Ec. 9.1

Ischomachus is relating to Socrates a discussion he’d had with his newly wed concerning each of their roles in the management of their estate:

τί δέ, εἰ μὴ ὑπισχνεῖτό γε ἐπιμελήσεσθαι καὶ φανερὰ ἦν ἡδομένη ἰσχυρῶς, ὥσπερ ἐξ ἀμηχανίας εὐπορίαν τινὰ ηὑρηκυῖα, καὶ ἐδεῖτό μου ὡς τάχιστα ᾗπερ ἔλεγον διατάξαι.

I’m struggling with meaning of εἰ μὴ here. I know it can mean ‘except’ or ‘unless’ but the translation seems to completely ignore it and then treat καὶ as a copulative.

I was wondering if it could be read something like ‘except (for the fact) she promised … she clearly also appeared…’

I understand it as follows: ti de(but what else could it be] except that she promised… and was obviously delighted

Yes this is very conversational dialogue, and in response to the question καὶ τί δή; ἡ γυνὴ ἐδόκει σοι, ἔφην ἐγώ, ὦ Ἰσχόμαχε, πώς τι ὑπακούειν …; this is a very natural form of response, picking up Soc.’s τί.
Lit. “But what, if not …?” i.e. “But she just …” or “All she did was (yes promise to attend to it and was clearly pleased as punch …)”

Thanks both, I’ve found particular reference to this construction within Denniston’s Greek Particles where he explains τί δέ, εἰ μὴ …. γε, (under γε, (I, 3), p121), which he suggests is confined to Xenophon and where αλλος is understood with τί δέ.

So like you say, something akin to ‘But what else, if not’

Yes, the γε is certainly an integral part of the package. I tried to convey that with my “yes promise.” In other contexts it could imply “she promised all right but she didn’t carry through,” but not here.

Exactly the same sequence recurs in section 18.

Denniston still holds up very well, despite new linguistic work on particles.