Herbert Weir Smyth, A Greek Grammar for Colleges

THE TENSES OUTSIDE OF THE INDICATIVE

[*] 1860. Subjunctive.—The subjunctive mood as such refers to the future. The tenses do not refer to differences of time, and denote only the stage of the action (continuance, simple occurrence, completion with permanent result).

Present (continuance): ““τὰ αὑτῶν ἅμα ἐκποριζώμεθα” let us at the same time keep developing our resources” T. 1.82; Aorist (simple occurrence): ““πορισώμεθα οὖν πρῶτον τὴν δαπάνην” let us procure the money first” T. 1.83; Perfect (completion with permanent result): ἵνα, ἢν μὴ ὑπακούωσι, τεθνήκωσιν that, in case they do not submit, they may be put to death (lit. may be dead at once) T. 8.74. The aorist commonly replaces the more exact perfect because the perfect is rarely used.

a. The future time denoted by present or aorist (τί ποιῶμεν; or τί ποιήσωμεν; what shall we do?) may refer, according to the sense, either to the next moment or to some later time. Greek has no subjunctive form denoting an intention to do this or that. In dependent constructions (including general conditions) the action of the present is generally coincident (rarely subsequent), that of the aorist is generally anterior (rarely coincident), to the action of the leading verb: ““χαλεπαίνουσι, ἐπειδὰν αὐτοῖς παραγγέλλω πί_νειν τὸ φάρμακον” they are angry whenever I bid them drink the poison” P. Ph. 116c, ἐπειδὰν ἅπαντ᾽ ἀκούσητε, κρί_νατε when you (shall) have heard everything, decide D. 4.14. The use of the aorist of time relatively anterior to the action of the leading verb ( = Lat. future perfect) is, like its other references to relative time, only an inference from the connection of the thought (1850 a).

b. Present and aorist subjunctive are occasionally used in the same sentence without any great difference in sense (X. C. 1.2.6-7, 5. 5. 13).

c. An independent or dependent subjunctive may be ingressive (1924): ἢν γὰρ ὁ Πλοῦτος νυνὶ βλέψῃ for if now Plutus recovers his sight Ar. Pl. 494.

d. In general conditions (2336) the subjunctive refers to general time, denoting what holds true now and at all times.

[*] 1861. Optative (not in indirect discourse).—The reference is always to future time. The tenses do not refer to differences of time, and denote only the stage of the action.

Present (continuance): πλούσιον δὲ νομίζοιμι τὸν σοφόν may I (always) count the wise man wealthy P. Phae. 279b; Aorist (simple occurrence): ““εἰ γὰρ γένοιτο” would that it might happen” X. C. 6.1.38; Perfect (completion with permanent result): τεθναίης die (lit. may you be dead) Ζ 164.

a. In general conditions (2336) the optative is used of past time.

b. In dependent constructions (including general conditions) the action of the present is generally coincident (rarely anterior), that of the aorist generally anterior (rarely coincident), to the action of the leading verb: εἴ τις τάδε παραβαίνοι, ἐναγὴς ἔστω τοὖ Απόλλωνος if any one violates this, let him be accurst of Apollo Aes. 3.110, ἐπειδὴ δὲ ἀνοιχθείη (τὸ δεσμωτήριον), εἰσῇμεν παρὰ τὸν Σωκράτη whenever the prison was opened, we (always) went in to Socrates P. Ph. 59d. The aorist is often preferred to the more exact perfect because the perfect was rarely used.

c. An independent or dependent optative may be ingressive (1924): εἰ πολεμήσαιμεν δι᾽ Ὠρωπόν, οὐδὲν ἂν ἡμᾶς παθεῖν ἡγοῦμαι if we should enter upon a war on account of Oropus, I think we should suffer nothing D. 5.16.

[*] 1862. Optative (in indirect discourse).—When the optative in indirect discourse represents the indicative after a past tense of a verb of saying or thinking, each tense does denote time (as well as stage of action) relatively to that of the leading verb.

a. The present optative represents the imperfect as well as the present indicative.

b. The future optative (first in Pindar) occurs only in indirect discourse after verbs of saying and thinking, in object clauses after ὅπως, 2212, and in other indirect expressions of thought.

c. When the optative in indirect discourse represents the subjunctive (2619 b), its tenses denote only stage of action.

[*] 1863. a. Present opt. = present indic.: ἀνηρώτα_ τί βούλοιντο he demanded what they wanted ( = τί βούλεσθε;) X. A. 2.3.4.

b. Present opt. = imperf. indic.: διηγοῦντο ὅτι ἐπὶ τοὺς πολεμίους πλέοιεν they explained that they kept sailing against the enemy ( = ἐπλέομεν) X. H. 1.7.5.

c. Future opt. = future indic.: ὅ τι ποιήσοι οὐδὲ τούτοις εἶπε he did not tell even these what he would do ( = ποιήσω) X. A. 2.2.2.

d. Aorist opt. = aorist indic.: ἠρώτα_ τί πάθοιεν he asked what had happened to them ( = τί ἐπάθετε;) X. C. 2.3.19.

e. Perfect opt. = perfect indic.: ἔλεγον ὅτι οἱ μετὰ Δημοσθένους παραδεδώκοιεν σφᾶς αὐτούς they said that the troops of Demosthenes had surrendered ( = παραδεδώκα_σι) T. 7.83.

[*] 1864. Imperative.—The imperative always implies future time. The tenses do not refer to differences of time, and denote only the stage of the action.

a. Present (continuance): ““τοὺς γονεῖς τἱ_μα_” honour thy parents” I. 1.16, πάντα τἀ_ληθῆ λέγε tell (go on and tell in detail) the whole truth L. 1.18, ““τοὺς ἵππους ἐκείνοις δίδοτε” offer the horses to them” X. C. 4.5.47.

b. Aorist (simple occurrence): βλέψον πρὸς τὰ ὄρη look (cast a glance) toward the mountains X. A. 4.1.20, εἰπέ state (in a word) P. A. 24d, ““ἡμῖν τοὺς ἵππους δότε” give the horses to us” X. C. 4.5.47.

c. Perfect (completion with permanent result): τετάχθω let him take his place (and stay there) P. R. 562a, εἰρήσθω let it have been said (once for all) 503 b.

N.—The perfect active and middle are generally used as presents (““τεθνάτω” let him be put to death” P. L. 938c, ““μέμνησθε” remember” D. 40.30). The perfect passive (in the third person) is used of a fixed decision concerning what is to be done or has been done.

[*] 1865. Infinitive (not in indirect discourse).—The tenses of the infinitive (without ἄν) not in indirect discourse have no time of themselves and express only the stage of the action; their (relative) time depends on the context and is that of the leading verb (present, past, or future). The infinitive may have the article (2025 ff.).

a. Present (continuance): ““οὐδὲ βουλεύεσθαι ἔτι ὥρα_, ἀλλὰ βεβουλεῦσθαι” it is time no longer to be making up one's mind, but to have it made up” P. Cr. 46a.

b. Aorist (simple occurrence): ““τοῦ πιεῖν ἐπιθυ_μία_” the desire of obtaining drink” T. 7.84, ἤρξατο γενέσθαι began to be 1. 103, but ἤρχετο γίγνεσθαι 3. 18 (the tense of γίγνομαι depends on that of ἄρχομαι; not ἤρξατο γίγνεσθαι), δεῖ τοὺς ὑπὲρ αὐτοῦ λέγοντας μι_σῆσαι (ingressive) one must conceive an aversion for those who speak in his behalf D. 9.53.

c. Perfect (completion with permanent result): see a. Often of certainty of action.

d. Future.—When the context shows that stress is laid on the idea of futurity, the future infinitive, referring to future time relative to the main verb, is sometimes used instead of the present or aorist: ““οὐκ ἀποκωλύ_σειν δυνατοὶ ὄντες” not being able to prevent” T. 3.28, ““πολλοῦ δέω κατ᾽ ἐμαυτοῦ ἐρεῖν” I am far from intending to speak to my own disadvantage” P. A. 37b. On the future infinitive with μέλλω see 1959.

N. 1.—The action set forth by a dependent present or aorist infinitive (without ἄν) not in indirect discourse has no time except that which is implied by the context. With verbs signifying to advise or to command, and when the infinitive expresses purpose, the reference is to future time. Usually the action of the present and aorist is coincident with or antecedent to that of the main verb. The action of an aorist infinitive with the article and a subject is not always relatively past. The perfect (without ἄν) has no time apart from the context; its action is usually antecedent.

N. 2.—On the use of the present and aorist with verbs of promising, etc., see 1868; with μέλλω, see 1959.

N. 3.—Observe that verbs denoting continuance (as μένω remain) often appear in the aorist, while verbs of transitory action (as ἱ_έναι send, hurl) often appear in the present.

N. 4.—Present and aorist occasionally occur in close conjunction without any great difference in meaning, as ““προσήκει ὑ_μῖν τούτου καταψηφίζεσθαι . . ., δεῖ ὑ_μᾶς θάνατον αὐτοῦ καταψηφίσασθαι” it is fitting that you vote against him, it is necessary that you pass a vote of death against him” L. 13.69; cp. ναυμαχῆσαι and ναυμαχεῖν T. 2.83, βασανιστὴς γίγνεσθαι and γενέσθαι Ant. 1.10, 1. 11.

[*] 1866. Infinitive (in indirect discourse).—The tenses of the infinitive in indirect discourse denote the same time relative to that of the leading verb (present, past, or future) as was denoted by the corresponding tenses of the indicative in direct discourse which they represent.

a. The present infinitive represents also the imperfect, the perfect infinitive represents also the pluperfect indicative.

b. The action of the present is usually coincident, that of the aorist anterior, to the action of the leading verb.

c. The future infinitive is found chiefly in indirect discourse and in analogous constructions. With μέλλω, see 1959. It may have the article (2026).

[*] 1867. a. Present = pres. indic.: φημὶ ταῦτα μὲν φλυα_ρία_ς εἶναι I say this is nonsense ( = ἐστί) X. A. 1.3.18.

b. Present = imperf. indic: Κτησία_ς ἰ_ᾶσθαι αὐτὸς τὸ τραῦμά φησι Ktesias asserts that he himself cured the wound ( = ἰ_ώμην) X. A. 1.8.26. With ἄν, 1846 a.

c. Future = fut. indic.: ἔφη ἢ ἄξειν Λακεδαιμονίους ἢ αὐτοῦ ἀποκτενεῖν he said that he would either bring the Lacedaemonians or kill them on the spot ( = ἄξω, ἀποκτενῶ) T. 4.28.

d. Aorist = aor. indic.: ἐνταῦθα λέγεται Ἀπόλλων ἐκδεῖραι Μαρσύα_ν there Apollo is said to have flayed Marsyas ( = ἐξέδειρε) X. A. 1.2.8. With ἄν, 1848 a.

e. Perfect = perf. ind.: φησὶ ἐγκώμιον γεγραφέναι he says that he has written an encomium ( = γέγραφα) I. 10.14, ἔφασαν τεθνάναι τὸν ἄνδρα they said the man was dead ( = τέθνηκε) Ant. 5.29.

f. Perfect = pluperf. ind.: λέγεται ἄνδρα τινὰ ἐκπεπλῆχθαι it is said that a certain man had been fascinated ( = ἐξεπέπληκτο) X. C. 1.4.27. With ἄν, 1849.

[*] 1868. The construction of verbs of hoping, etc.—Verbs signifying to hope, expect, promise, threaten, swear, with some others of like meaning, when they refer to a future event, take either the future infinitive (in indirect discourse), or the aorist, less often the present, infinitive (not in indirect discourse). The use of the aorist and present is due to the analogy of verbs of will or desire (1991) which take an object infinitive not in indirect discourse. The same analogy accounts for the use of μή instead of οὐ (2725). The present or aorist infinitive with ἄν, representing the potential optative with ἄν, occurs occasionally.

a. ““ἐν ἐλπίδι ὢν τὰ τείχη τῶν Ἀθηναίων αἱρήσειν” hoping that he would capture the walls of the Athenians” T. 7.46, ““ἐλπὶς . . . ἐκτραφῆναι” hope of being brought up” L. 19.8, ““ἐλπίζει δυνατὸς εἶναι ἄρχειν” he expects to be able to rule” P. R. 573c, ἔχεις τινὰ ἐλπίδα μὴ ἂν . . . τὴν ναῦν ἀπολέσαι; have you any expectation that you would not shipwreck the vessel? X. M. 2.6.38. ἐλπίζω with the present infinitive may mean I feel sure that I am.

b. ““τάχιστα οὐδένα εἰκὸς σὺν αὐτῷ βουλήσεσθαι εἶναι” it is probable that very soon no one will wish to be with him” X. C. 5.3.30, ““ἡμᾶς εἰκὸς ἐπικρατῆσαι” it is likely that we shall succeed” T. 1.121, οὐκ εἰκὸς αὐτοὺς περιουσία_ν νεῶν ἔχειν it is not likely that they will continue to have ships to spare 3. 13. With εἰκός the aorist is preferred.

c. ““ὑπέσχετο ταῦτα ποιήσειν” he promised that he would do this” L. 12.14, ὑπέσχετο βουλεύσασθαι (most Mss.) he promised to deliberate X. A. 2.3.20. The aorist infinitive is especially common with verbs of promising and must refer to the future. With the present infinitive ὑπισχνοῦμαι means I assure, profess, pledge my word that I am.

d. ἀπείλει ἐκτρί_ψειν he threatened that he would destroy them Hdt. 6.37, ““ἠπείλησαν ἀποκτεῖναι ἅπαντας” they threatened to kill everybody” X. H. 5.4.7.

e. ““δικάσειν ὀμωμόκατε” you have sworn that you will give judgment” D. 39.40, ἀναγκάζει τὸν Κερσοβλέπτην ὀμόσαι . . . εἶναι μὲν τὴν ἀρχὴν κοινὴν . . ., πάντας δ᾽ ὑ_μῖν ἀποδοῦναι τὴν χώρα_ν he compelled Cersobleptes to swear that the kingdom should be in common and that they should all restore to you the territory D. 23.170.

f. With ὄμνυ_μι a dependent infinitive may refer to the present, past, or future (e). Thus, ““ὀμνύντες βλέπειν . . . Ἀχιλλέα_ πάλιν” swearing that they see Achilles again” S. Ph. 357, ὀμνύουσι μὴ ᾿κπιεῖν they swear they did not drink Pherecrates 143 (Com. fr. I. 187), ὤμνυε μηδὲν εἰρηκέναι he swore that he had said nothing (direct = οὐδὲν εἴρηκα) D. 21.119.

[*] 1869. Verbs of will or desire (1991) regularly take the present or aorist infinitive not in indirect discourse; but in some cases we find the future infinitive by assimilation to indirect discourse through the analogy of verbs of promising, etc. (1868). So with βούλομαι, ἐθέλω wish, λέγω meaning command, δέομαι ask, ἐφί_εμαι desire and some others (even δύναμαι am able) that have a future action as their object. Thus, ““ἐφι_έμενοι ἄρξειν” being desirous to gain control” T. 6.6, ““ἀδύνατοι ἐπιμελεῖς ἔσεσθαι” unable to be careful” X. O. 12.12. διανοοῦμαι may follow the analogy of μέλλω (1959): ““τὸν πόλεμον διενοοῦντο προθύ_μως οἴσειν” they intended to carry on the war with zeal” T. 4.121. In these and similar cases the future is employed to stress the future character of the action. Some editors would emend many of these futures.

[*] 1870. Verbs signifying to foretell by oracle usually take the present or aorist infinitive like verbs signifying to command.

[*] 1871. A few cases stand in our texts of an aorist infinitive referring to the future after a verb of saying or thinking, e.g. ἐνόμισαν ῥᾳδίως κρατῆσαι they thought they would easily master them T. 2.3. Many editors change to the future or insert ἄν.

[*] 1872. Participle (not in indirect discourse).—The participle, as a verbal adjective, is timeless. The tenses of the participle express only continuance, simple occurrence, and completion with permanent result. Whether the action expressed by the participle is antecedent, coincident, or subsequent to that of the leading verb (in any tense) depends on the context. The future participle has a temporal force only because its voluntative force points to the future.

a. Present (continuative). The action set forth by the present participle is generally coincident (rarely antecedent or subsequent) to that of the leading verb: ““ἐργαζόμεναι μὲν ἠρίστων, ἐργασάμεναι δὲ ἐδείπνουν” the women took their noonday meal while they continued their work, but took their supper when they had stopped work” X. M. 2.7.12.

1. Antecedent action ( = imperf.): ““οἱ Κύ_ρειοι πρόσθεν σὺν ἡμῖν ταττόμενοι νῦν ἀφεστήκα_σιν” the forces of Cyrus that were formerly marshalled with us have now deserted” X. A. 3.2.17, ““τοὺς τότε παρόντας αἰτιά_σονται συμβούλους” they will accuse those who were their counsellors at that time” P. G. 519a, οἱ Κορίνθιοι μέχρι τούτου προθύ_μως πρά_σσοντες ἀνεῖσαν τῆς φιλονεικία_ς the Corinthians, who up to that time had been acting zealously, now slackened in their vehemence T. 5.32. An adverb (πρότερον, πρόσθεν, τότε, ποτέ) often accompanies the participle, which is sometimes called the participle of the imperfect.

2. Subsequent action (especially when the leading verb denotes motion): ἔπεμψαν πρέσβεις ἀγγέλλοντας τὴν τοῦ Πλημυρίου λῆψιν they despatched messengers to announce the capture of Plemyrium T. 7.25. An attributive present part. w. νῦν may refer to the absolute present, though the main verb is past: ““τὴν νῦν Βοιωτία_ν καλουμένην ᾤκησαν” they settled in the country now called Boeotia” T. 1.12.

3. The present participle denotes that an action is in process, is attempted, or is repeated.

b. Future (chiefly voluntative): ““οὐ συνήλθομεν ὡς βασιλεῖ πολεμήσοντες” we have not come together for the purpose of waging war with the king” X. A. 2.3.21.

c. Aorist (simple occurrence). The action set forth by the aorist participle is generally antecedent to that of the leading verb; but it is sometimes coincident or nearly so, when it defines, or is identical with, that of the leading verb, and the subordinate action is only a modification of the main action.

1. Antecedent: ““δειπνήσα_ς ἐχώρει” after supper he advanced” T. 3.112, τοὺς ἐλευθέρους ἀποκτείναντες ἀνεχώρησαν after killing the free men they withdrew 5. 83. ““ἐπομόσα_ς ἔφη” he took an oath and said” X. C. 4.1.23, ““ἤδη δ᾽ ἐπὶ ταῦτα πορεύσομαι τοσοῦτον αὐτὸν ἐρωτήσα_ς” I shall at once proceed to this matter after having put to him certain questions” D. 18.124. The aorist participle is often thus used when it takes up the preceding verb: ““νῦν μὲν δειπνεῖτε: δειπνήσαντες δὲ ἀπελαύνετε” take your supper now, and when you have done so, depart” X. C. 3.1.37.

2. Coincident: ““μή τι ἐξαμάρτητε ἐμοῦ καταψηφισάμενοι” do not commit the error of condemning me” P. A. 30d, ““εὖ γ᾽ ἐποίησας ἀναμνήσα_ς με” you did well in reminding me” P. Ph. 60c ( = ἀνέμνησάς με εὖ ποιῶν). So also when an aorist participle is used with a future finite verb, as ““ἀπαλλαχθήσομαι βίου θανοῦσα” by dying I shall be delivered from life” E. Hipp. 356. See also 2103.

3. The action of an attributive aorist participle is rarely subsequent to that of the leading verb. When this is the case, the action of the participle is marked as past from the point of view of the present (like the aor. indic.): ““οἱ Ἕλληνες ὕστερον κληθέντες οὐδὲν πρὸ τῶν Τρωϊκῶν ἁθρόοι ἔπρα_ξαν” the people later called Hellenes carried out no joint enterprise prior to the Trojan war” T. 1.3, Σάτυρος καὶ Χρέμων, οἱ τῶν τριά_κοντα γενόμενοι, Κλεοφῶντος κατηγόρουν Satyrus and Chremon, who (afterwards) became members of the Thirty, accused Cleophon L. 30.12; cp. γενόμενος T. 2.49, 4. 81.

4. The aorist participle is often ingressive or complexive (1924, 1927).

d. Perfect (completion with permanent result): καταλαμβάνουσι Βρα_σίδα_ν ἐπεληλυθότα they found (historical present) that Brasidas had arrived T. 3.69. A perfect participle may have the force of a pluperfect if accompanied by an adverb like πρόσθεν (cp. 1872 a. 1): ““ὁ πρόσθε κεκτημένος” he who possessed it before” S. Ph. 778.

[*] 1873. Construction of λανθάνω, φθάνω, τυγχάνω.—A supplementary aorist participle with any tense, except the present or imperfect, of λανθάνω escape the notice of, φθάνω anticipate, τυγχάνω happen usually coincides in time with the leading verb: ““ἔλαθον ἐμαυτὸν οὐδὲν εἰπών” I was unconsciously talking nonsense” P. Ph. 76d, ““λήσομεν ἐπιπεσόντες” we shall fall on them unawares” X. A. 7.3.43. But the action of an aorist participle with the present or imperfect is generally prior to that of the leading verb: ““ὅστις ἀντειπών γε ἐτύγχανε” who chanced to have spoken in opposition” L. 12.27. See 2096.

[*] 1874. Participle (in indirect discourse). The tenses of the participle in indirect discourse after verbs of intellectual perception denote the same time relative to that of the leading verb (present, past, or future) as was denoted by the corresponding tenses of the indicative in direct discourse which they represent. See 2106, 2112 b.

a. Present = pres. indic.: the action is generally coincident: ἐπειδὰν γνῶσιν ἀπιστούμενοι when they find out that they are distrusted ( = ὅτι ἀπιστούμεθα) X. C. 7.2.17; rarely antecedent (when the present = the imperf. ind.): οἶδά σε λέγοντα ἀεί I know that you always used to say ( = ὅτι ἔλεγες) 1. 6. 6.

b. Future = fut. indic.: ἀγνοεῖ τὸν πόλεμον δεῦρ᾽ ἥξοντα he is ignorant that the war will come here ( = ὅτι ὁ πόλεμος ἥξει) D. 1.15.

c. Aorist = aor. indic.: τὸν Μῆδον ἴσμεν ἐπὶ τὴν Πελοπόννησον ἐλθόντα we know that the Mede came against the Peloponnese ( = ὅτι ὁ Μῆδος ἦλθε) T. 1.69.

d. Perfect = perf. indic.: οὐ γὰρ ᾔδεσαν αὐτὸν τεθνηκότα for they did not know that he was dead ( = ὅτι τέθνηκε) X. A. 1.10.16. The perfect may also represent the pluperfect (cp. 1872 d).