This text is part of:
Table of Contents:
[*] 700. VI. Even some ordinary relative sentences expressing the previous thought of another, which allow the optative in place of the ordinary indicative. E.g. Καὶ ᾔτεε σῆμα ἰδέσθαι, ὅττι ῥά οἱ γαμβροῖο πάρα Προίτοιο φέροιτο, he asked to see the token, which (he said) he was bringing from Proetus, i.e. he said φέρομαι. Il. vi. 176.So Od. v. 240. Εἴρετο παῖδα τὸν Εὐάδνα τέκοι, “he asked for the child which Euadne had borne.” PIND. Ol. vi. 49. Κατηγόρεον τῶν Αἰγινητέων τὰ πεποιήκοιεν προδόντες τὴν Ἑλλάδα, i.e. they accused them for what (as they said) they had done. HDT. vi. 49.So τὰ πεπονθὼς εἴη, HDT. i. 44. “Καλεῖ τὸν Λάιον, μνήμην παλαιῶν σπερμάτων ἔχουσ᾽, ὑφ᾽ ὧν θάνοι μέν αὐτὸς, τὴν δὲ τίκτουσαν λίποι,” “by which (as she said) he had perished himself, and had left her the mother, etc.” SOPH. O.T. 1245. If the relative clause contained merely the idea of the speaker, ἔθανε and ἔλιπε would be used. Here no ambiguity can arise from the use of the aorist optative (see 693). Τὸ τοῦ κρείττονος ξυμφέρον ἔλεγεν ὃ ἡγοῖτο ὁ κρείττων αὑτῷ ξυμφέρειν, “he meant the superior's advantage which the superior believed to be his own advantage.” PLAT. Rep. 340B. This construction is rare in Attic Greek, but is not uncommon in Herodotus.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 United States License.
An XML version of this text is available for download, with the additional restriction that you offer Perseus any modifications you make. Perseus provides credit for all accepted changes, storing new additions in a versioning system.