previous next

583. Though this illustrates the fundamental distinction in thought on which the distinction in form is based, there are many examples in which ὥστε with the infinitive and ὥστε with the indicative seem to amount to essentially the same thing, although the processes by which the meaning is expressed in the two constructions are essentially different. Thus we can say οὕτως ἐστὶ δεινὸς ὥστε δίκην μὴ διδόναι, he is so skilful as not to be punished, and also οὕτως ἐστὶ δεινὸς ὥστε δίκην οὐ δίδωσιν, he is so skilful that he is not punished; and though we should receive the same impression from both statements, so that both might be made of the same man under the same circumstances, yet the two constructions (one stating a tendency and the other a fact) are very different, and they seemed far more so to a Greek than they do to us.

Creative Commons License
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.

hide References (1 total)
  • Commentary references to this page (1):
    • William Watson Goodwin, Commentary on Demosthenes: On the Crown, 33
hide Display Preferences
Greek Display:
Arabic Display:
View by Default:
Browse Bar: