[*] 2834.
δέ (postpositive) was originally an adverb with a force not unlike that of
on the other hand, on the contrary; later it became a conjunction commonly represented by
but or
and, which are, however, mere makeshifts of translation.
δέ serves to mark that something is different from what precedes, but only to offset it, not to exclude or contradict it; it denotes only a slight contrast, and is therefore weaker than
ἀλλά, but stronger than
καί. δέ is adversative and copulative; but the two uses are not always clearly to be distinguished.
[*] 2835.
Adversative δέ often marks a silent contrast, as at the beginning of speeches (
ἐγὼ δὲ οὕτω γιγνώσκω X. A. 4.6.10); in questions which imply opposition to something just said (
S. O. C. 57); in answers (
S. O. T. 379); in objections or corrections (
S. Ant. 517); in
τὸ δέ, τὰ δέ on the contrary, whereas really, where a true opinion is opposed to a false one; similarly in
νῦν δέ but in fact, but as the case stands. When
δέ is balanced by
μέν (
2904) it is antithetical rather than adversative.
a. δέ after a pronoun following a vocative produces a pause; as
Νιόβα_ σὲ δ᾽ ἔγωγε νέμω θεόν ah Niobe,
thee I regard as divine S. El. 150.
b. δέ instead of
ἀλλά is rare except in the poets and Thucydides. Thus,
προμηνύ_σῃς γε τοῦτο μηδενὶ τοὖργον, κρυφῆ δὲ κεῦθε make known this plan to no one,
but hide it in secret S. Ant. 85, ““
οὐκ ἐπὶ κακῷ, ἐπ᾽ ἐλευθερώσει δὲ τῶν Ἑλλήνων παρελήλυθα”
I have come, not to harm, but to liberate, the Greeks”
T. 4.86. Sometimes
οὐ μέν precedes when
δέ is used like
ἀλλά<*>（
T. 1.50).
c. But not is
ἀλλ᾽ ου᾽ or
οὐ μέντοι, not
οὐ δέ, in order to avoid confusion with
οὐδέ nor,
not even. But
οὐ and
δέ may be separated, as ““
οὐ βουλομένων δέ . . . προσχωρεῖν”
but since they did not wish to surrender”
X. H. 1.6.13.
[*] 2836.
Copulative δέ marks transition, and is the ordinary particle used in connecting successive clauses or sentences which add something new or different, but not opposed, to what precedes, and are not joined by other particles, such as
γάρ or
οὖν.
Copulative
δέ is common in marking
continuation, especially when something subordinate is added. Thus, when a new phase of a narrative is developed (
X. A. 1.2.7-8); where attention is called to a new point or person (as in
τί δ᾽ ἔστιν;); when an interrupted speech or narrative is resumed (
X. C. 1.6.41,
S. Tr. 281); where a second relationship is added (
μήτηρ βασιλέως, βασίλεια δ᾽ ἐμή the mother of the King,
and my Queen A. Pers. 151,
Ἠιόνα . . . Μενδαίων ἀποικία_ν, πολεμία_ν δὲ οὖσαν he seized
Eïon,
a colony of Mende,
and which had been hostile T. 4.7); when
δέ has a force like that of
γάρ (
X. C. 6.3.16); and in
καὶ . . . δέ and also (Epic
καὶ δέ), 2891.
[*] 2837.
Apodotic δέ.—The beginning of the principal clause (apodosis) of conditional and concessive sentences is often marked by
δέ. Apodotic
δέ is found also in the principal clause of causal, temporal, comparative, and relative sentences; and regularly gives greater emphasis to the main clause, which is thus distinctly set off against the subordinate clause. Apodotic
δέ is very common in Homer and Herodotus, not rare in Attic poetry, but infrequent in Attic prose, where it is used especially after an emphatic personal or demonstrative pronoun or when a participle represents the antecedent clause. Thus,
εἷος ὁ ταῦθ᾽ ὥρμαινε . . ., ἦλθε δ᾽ Ἀθήνη while he was revolving these things, then came Athene A 193, ““
εἰ οὖν ἐγὼ μὴ γιγνώσκω μήτε τὰ ὅσια μήτε τὰ δίκαια, ὑ_μεῖς δὲ διδάξετέ με”
accordingly if I have no knowledge either of what is holy or what is just, do you then instruct me”
X. H. 4.1.33, ““
ἐπεὶ τοίνυν οὐ δύναμαί σε πείθειν μὴ ἐκθεῖναι, σὺ δὲ ὧδε ποίησον”
since therefore I am not able to persuade you not to expose it, do you then do as follows”
Hdt. 1.112, ““
ἐκάθευδον . . . ὥσπερ οἱ ὁπλῖται οὕτω δὲ καὶ οἱ πελτασταί”
as the hoplites so also the peltasts sleep”
X. C. 8.5.12, ““
ἐπειδὴ δὲ ἀφικόμενοι μάχῃ ἐκράτησαν . . ., φαίνονται δ᾽ οὐδ᾽ ἐνταῦθα πά_σῃ τῇ δυνάμει χρησάμενοι”
but when on their arrival they had conquered in battle, not even then did they appear to have made use of their entire force”
T. 1.11, ““
καί ποτε ὄντος πάγου . . . οὗτος δ᾽ ἐν τούτοις ἐξῄει”
and once when there was a frost he went out in the midst of this”
P. S. 220b.
a. Apodotic
δέ often resumes a
δέ in the subordinate clause and carries on the opposition expressed by that clause; as
εἰ δὲ βούλεσθε . . . ἐκλεξάμενοι ὅποι ἂν βούλησθε κατασχεῖν . . ., πλοῖα δ᾽ ὑ_μῖν πάρεστιν but if you wish to select some place
wherever you please and take possession of it, you have ships at command X. A. 5.6.20,
ἃ δ᾽ αἰσχύ_νην ἡμῖν φέρει . . ., ταῦτα δὲ κατὰ χώρα_ν μένει but the terms
which cause us shame, these remain in force I. 4.176.
b. The use of apodotic
δέ should not be regarded as a survival of original
coördination.
[*] 2838.
δέ without μέν.—A clause with
δέ often has no correlative particle in the clause with which it is contrasted. Here
μέν is not used because the opposition in the first clause was too weak, or because the speaker did not intend to announce a following contrast or did not think he was going to use a contrasted
δέ clause. Sometimes the entire first clause may have to be supplied in thought from the general connection or from what has gone before.
δέ without
μέν in such cases is common in poetry, but not rare in prose, even in brief antitheses, as
ἃ πάντες ἀεὶ γλίχονται λέγειν, ἀξίως δ᾽ οὐδεὶς εἰπεῖν δεδύνηται exploits
which everybody continually desires to recount, but which no one has been able to set forth adequately D. 6.11. See also
2835.
a. When a relative construction passes over into a construction with a personal or demonstrative pronoun, the relative clause usually has no
μέν. Cp. Soph. Aj. 457, quoted in 2517.
b. οἱ δέ, when opposed to a larger number of persons or things, is often used without
οἱ μέν, as
προεληλυθότες ἐπὶ χι_λόν, οἱ δ᾽ ἐπὶ ξύλα having gone for fodder,
and some for fuel X. C. 6.3.9.
[*] 2839.
δέ with other Particles.—For example:
δ᾽ ἄρα, which sometimes follows
μέν.
δ᾽ αὖ and
ὅμως δέ mark stronger opposition than
δέ alone.
δὲ δή but then, but now, well but is often used in passing to a new point. In Aristophanes this collocation is used almost always in questions.
