INDIRECT (DEPENDENT) QUESTIONS
[*] 2663. Indirect questions are introduced by interrogative pronouns, adjectives, and adverbs, indefinite relative pronouns and adverbs (
340,
346), or by certain interrogative particles (
2671,
2675).
[*] 2664. The interrogatives of the direct question may be retained in an indirect question. But it is more common to use the indefinite relatives which (in interrogative sentences) are employed only in indirect questions.
““
ἠρώτων αὐτοὺς τίνες εἶεν”
they asked them who they were”
X. A. 4.5.10 ( =
τίνες ἐστέ;),
ἠρώτων ὅ τι ἐστὶ τὸ πρᾶγμα I asked what the matter was 5. 7. 23 ( =
τί ἐστι;),
ἠρώτα_ αὐτόν πόσον χρυ_σίον ἔχοι he asked him how much money he had 7. 8. 1 ( =
πόσον ἔχεις;),
ἠρώτων αὐτὸν τὸ στράτευμα ὁπόσον εἴη they asked him how large the army was 4. 4. 17 ( =
πόσον ἐστί;), ““
ἀπορῶν ποῖ τράποιτο ἐπὶ λόφον τινὰ καταφεύγει”
being in doubt whither he should turn, he fled to a hill”
X. C. 3.1.4 ( =
ποῖ τράπωμαι;), ““
ᾔδει δὲ οὐδεὶς ὅποι στρατεύουσιν”
but no one knew where they were going to march”
T. 5.54 ( =
ποῖ στρατεύομεν;).
[*] 2665. The use of the direct interrogatives is a relic of original juxtaposition, e.g.
εἰπέ μοι, ποῖόν τι νομίζεις εὐσέβειαν εἶναι;
tell me, what sort of a thing do you think holiness is? X. M. 4.6.2. The interrogative force of the indefinite relatives is derived, not from any interrogative idea in these words, but from the connection in which they stand.
[*] 2666. An indirect interrogative is often used in the same sentence after a direct interrogative. Thus, ““
οὐκ οἶδα οὔτ᾽ ἀπὸ ποίου ἂν τάχους οὔτε ὅποι ἄν τις φεύγων ἀποφύγοι οὔτ᾽ εἰς ποῖον ἂν σκότος ἀποδραίη οὔθ᾽ ὅπως ἂν εἰς ἐχυρὸν χωρίον ἀποσταίη”
I do not know with what swiftness of foot nor by fleeing to what quarter a man might escape nor into what darkness he might run away nor how he could withdraw into any stronghold”
X. A. 2.5.7. The direct form precedes less often, as
οὐ γὰρ αἰσθάνομαί σου ὁποῖον νόμιμον ἢ ποῖον δίκαιον λέγεις for I do not perceive what you mean by ‘
conformable to law’
or what you mean by ‘
just’
X. M. 4.4.13.
[*] 2667. Two interrogatives may occur in the same sentence without a connective; as
πῶς οἶδεν ὁποῖα ὀποίοις δυνατὰ κοινωνεῖν;
how does he know what letters
are able to unite with what? P. Soph. 253a. Cp.
2646.
[*] 2668. After verbs of saying, knowing, seeing, making known, perceiving, etc. (but not after verbs of
asking) the simple relatives are found where the indefinite relatives (or the interrogatives) might stand in an indirect question. Where
ὅς is so used, it has the force of
οἷος (cp.
qualis in such questions); and rarely follows a negative clause, because verbs denoting lack of knowledge are allied in meaning to verbs of asking. The usual forms are e.g.
οἶδά σε ὃς εἶ and
οὐκ οἶδά σε ὅστις εἶ. But we find
οἶδά σε ὅστις εἶ and
οὐκ οἶδά σε ὃς εἶ. Thus, ““
πέμπει . . . εἰπὼν ὃς ἦν”
he sends . . . telling who he was”
X. C. 6.1.46 (here
ἦν represents the point of view of the
writer), ““
ἐκέλευσε . . . δεῖξαι ὃς εἴη”
he ordered him to explain who he was”
D. 52.7,
μήποτε γνοίης ὃς εἶ mayest thou never come to know who thou art S. O. T. 1068,
ὁρᾷς ἡμᾶς, ὅσοι ἐσμέν;
do you see how many there are of us? P. R. 327c. So with the adverbs
ἔνθα, οὗ, ᾗ, ὡς, ὅθεν; as ““
τὴν ὁδὸν ὁδὸν ἔφραζεν ᾗ εἴη”
he told where the road was”
X. A. 4.5.34. In some cases these sentences may be exclamatory (
2685).
a. That the simple relatives are never thus used after verbs of asking indicates that such clauses are not true indirect questions (as in Latin), and that the pronouns have their value as relatives. But some scholars allow an indirect question after all these words except
ὅς; and others admit no such limitation.
b. Only in late Greek are the pronouns or adverbs of the indirect form used in direct questions.
c. ὅπως is used occasionally (often in poetry) in the sense of
ὡς. Thus,
μή μοι φράζ᾽ ὅπως οὐκ εἶ κακός tell me not that (lit.
how)
thou art not vile S. O. T. 548.
d. The context must sometimes determine whether a sentence is an indirect question or a relative clause. Thus, without the context,
οὐκ εἶχον ὅποι ἀποσταῖεν (
X. H. 3.5.10) might mean
they did not know to whom ( =
ἠγνόουν πρὸς τίνας)
to revolt or
they had no allies
to whom ( =
πρὸς οὕς)
to revolt. But the present or aorist optative in relative final clauses is rare; cp. 2554 c.
[*] 2669. An indirect question may depend (especially in poetry) on an ide<*> involved in the principal verb; or may depend on a verb to be supplied. Thus, ““
ὥστε μ᾽ ὠδί_νειν τί φῄς”
so that I am in travail to know thy meaning”
S. Aj. 794,
ὁποτέρως οὖν σοι . . . ἀρέσκει in whatever way it pleases you (
scil. ἡδέως ἂν ἀκούσαιμι)
P. R. 348b.
[*] 2670. The indefinite relative is commonly used when a question is repeated by the respondent before his reply. Here
you ask? is supplied in thought. Thus, A.
ἀλλὰ τίς γὰρ εἷ; B.
ὅστις; πολί_της χρηστός A.
But who are you, pray? B.
Who am I? an honest burgher Ar. Ach. 594,
πῶς δή; φήσω ἐγώ. ὅπως; φήσει how are you? I will say; How am I? he will say Hippocrates 1. 292 c.
[*] 2671. Simple indirect questions are introduced by
εἰ whether, less often by
ἆρα.
““
ἐρωτῶντες εἰ λῃσταί εἰσιν”
asking whether they are pirates”
T. 1.5,
τοῦτον οἶσθ᾽ ει᾽ ζῶν κυρεῖ;
dost thou know whether he is alive? S. Ph. 444, ““
ἤρετο αὐτὸν εἰ βληθείη”
he asked him whether he had been struck”
X. C. 8.3.30 ( =
ἐβλήθης;),
φόβος εἰ πείσω δέσποιναν ἐμήν I am afraid (about the question)
whether I can persuade my mistress E. Med. 184 (
2234), ““
ἴδωμεν ἆρ᾽ οὑτωσὶ_ γίγνεται πάντα”
let us see whether everything is thus produced”
P. Ph. 70d. With the deliberative subjunctive: ““
ἐπανερομένου Κτησιφῶντος εἰ καλέσῃ Δημοσθένην”
when Ctesiphon was asking if he was to call Demosthenes”
Aes. 3.202 ( =
καλέσω;).
a. εἰ has an affirmative force (
whether) or a negative force (
whether . . . not). The latter is seen e.g. after verbs expressing uncertainty or doubt, as after
οὐκ οἶδα. Thus, ““
εἰ μὲν δὴ δίκαια ποιήσω, οὐκ οἶδα”
I don't know whether I shall do what is right”
X. A. 1.3.5 (i.e. I may possibly not do what is right). The assumption is affirmative in ““
τὰ ἐκπώματα . . . οὐκ οἶδ᾽ ει᾽ Χρυ_σάντᾳ τουτῳῒ δῶ”
I don't know whether I must not give the cups to Chrysantas here”
X. C. 8.4.16 (i.e. I think I shall give them).
b. The interrogative use of
εἰ is derived from the conditional meaning
if, as in
σὺ δὲ φράσαι εἴ με σαώσεις but do thou tell me whether thou wilt save me A 83 (i.e. ‘if thou wilt save me, tell me so’).
[*] 2672.
ἐά_ν rarely, if ever, means
whether, even after verbs of examining, considering (
σκοπῶ ἐσκεψάμην, καθορῶ), where its use is best explained by 2354. In form such conditional sentences often approach closely to indirect questions. Thus, cp.
σκέψαι . . . ἐὰ_ν ἄρα καὶ σοὶ συνδοκῇ ἅπερ ἐμοί consider if (in case that, on the chance that)
you too agree with me (
P. Ph. 64c) with
σκέψασθε εἰ ἄρα τοῦτο . . . πεποιήκα_σιν οἱ βάρβαροι consider whether the barbarians have (not)
done this X. A. 3.2.22. Cp. ““
ἀναμιμνήσκεσθαι ἐὰ_ν ἀληθῆ λέγω”
to recall to your recollection if I speak the truth”
And. 1.37.
a. Some scholars maintain that, in Greek,
if was at an early period confused with
whether in such sentences as
εἶμι γὰρ ἐς Σπάρτην . . . νόστον πευσόμενος πατρὸς φίλου, ἤν που ἀκούσω strictly
for I will go to Sparta to inquire about the return of my dear father, in the hope that I may hear of it β 359. When the conditional clause was attached to
πευσόμενος, ἤν acquired (it is claimed) the force of
whether. Cp.
ᾤχετο πευσόμενος . . . εἴ (
v.l. ἤ) ““
που ἔτ᾽ εἴης”
he had gone to inquire whether you were still living”
ν 415. Cp. German
ob, once meaning
if, now
whether.
[*] 2673. Homer has
ἤν, εἴ κε, αἴ κε with the subjunctive after verbs of knowing, seeing, saying (but not after verbs of
asking). Such cases belong under 2354 b.
[*] 2674.
μή is sometimes translated by
whether after verbs of fear and caution; but such dependent clauses with
μή are not indirect questions (2221 a). After verbs of seeing, considering and the like (
ὁρῶ, ἐννοοῦμαι, ἐνθυ_μοῦμαι, σκοπῶ)
μή is properly a conjunction and not the interrogative particle. In such clauses there is an idea of purpose or desire to
prevent something or a notion of fear that something
is or
may be done. Thus, ““
φροντίζω μὴ κράτιστον ᾖ μοι σι_γᾶν”
I am considering whether it is not best for me to be silent”
X. M. 4.2.39, ““
ὁρῶμεν μὴ Νι_κία_ς οἴεταί τι λέγειν”
let us see whether Nicias is of the opinion that he is saying something important”
P. Lach. 196c. That
μή does not properly mean
whether not (indirect question) is clear from the fact that, in these clauses, it is not used of something that is
hoped for. Cp. 2676 b.
INDIRECT ALTERNATIVE QUESTIONS
[*] 2675. Indirect alternative questions are introduced by the particles signifying
whether . . . or: πότερον (
πότερα) . . .
ἤ, εἴτε . . . εἴτε, εἰ . . . ἤ, εἰ . . . εἴτε. See also under Particles.
a. πότερον (
πότερα) . . .
ἤ: Thus, ““
διηρώτα_ τὸν Κῦρον πότερον βούλοιτο μένειν ἢ ἀπιέναι”
she asked Cyrus whether he wanted to stay or go away”
X. C. 1.3.15, ““
θαυμάζω πότερα ὡς κρατῶν βασιλεὺς αἰτεῖ τὰ ὅπλα ἢ ὡς διὰ φιλία_ν δῶρα”
I wonder whether the king asks for our arms as a conqueror or as gifts on the plea of friendship”
X. A. 2.1.10.
N.—
πότερον . . . ἤ may denote that the second alternative is more important than the first.
πότερον is omitted when the introductory clause contains the adjective
πότερος (
X. C. 1.3.2).
b. εἴτε . . . εἴτε gives equal value to each alternative. Thus, ““
τὴν σκέψιν ποιώμεθα εἴτε ὠφελία_ν εἴτε βλάβην παρέχει”
let us make the inquiry whether it produces benefit or injury”
P. Phae. 237d.
N. 1.—In Homer
εἴτε . . . εἴτε (
εἴ τε . . . εἴ τε) almost always retains the meaning
either . . . or (A
65).
N. 2.—The first
εἴτε is rarely omitted in prose, as ““
πόλις εἴτε ἰδιῶταί τινες”
a State or certain individuals”
P. L. 864a; more often in poetry, as ““
λόγοισιν εἴτ᾽ ἔργοισιν”
by words or deeds”
S. O. T. 517.
c. εἰ . . .
ἤ indicates that the second alternative is preferable or more probable. Thus,
ἠρώτα_ εἰ αὐτοῖς τοῖς ἀνδράσι σπένδοιτο τοῖς ἰοῦσι καὶ ἀπιοῦσιν, ἢ καὶ τοῖς ἄλλοις ἔσοιντο σπονδαί he asked whether he was making a truce merely with the individual men who were coming and going or whether
the truce would be with the rest as well X. A. 2.3.7.
d. εἰ . . .
εἴτε is like
εἴτε . . . εἴτε. Thus, ““
εἰ δ᾽ ἔτ᾽ ἐστὶν ἔμψυ_χος γυνὴ εἴτ᾽ οὖν ὄλωλεν, εἰδέναι βουλοίμεθ᾽ ἄν”
we should like to know whether the lady is still alive or dead”
E. Alc. 140.
e. ἢ (
ἠὲ) . . .
ἦ (
ἦε) occurs in Homer, as ““
ὄφρ᾽ ἐὺ εἰδῶ ἠὲ νέον μεθέπεις ἦ καὶ πατρώιός ἐσσι ξεῖνος”
that I may know well whether thou art newly a visitor or art actually an ancestral guest-friend”
α 175. Cp.
2661.
ἢ . . . ἤ is doubtful in Attic.
THE NEGATIVES IN INDIRECT QUESTIONS
[*] 2676. The negative of the direct form is usually preserved in indirect questions.
““
εἴσομαι . . . πότερον ὁ ἔχων αὐτὸ οὐκ εὐδαίμων ἐστὶν ἢ εὐδαίμων”
I shall know whether its possessor is happy or not”
P. R. 354c, ““
οὐκ οἶδ᾽ ὅπως φῶ τοῦτο καὶ μὴ φῶ”
I know not how I am to say this and not to say it”
E. I. A. 643 ( =
πῶς μὴ φῶ;).
a. Indirect single questions introduced by interrogative pronouns, adjectives, and adverbs, usually have
οὐ.
b. μή appears after verbs of seeing, considering and the like (
σκοπῶ, ὁρῶ, ἐννοοῦμαι, ἐνθυ_μοῦμαι) when there is an idea of purpose or desire to prevent something. Thus,
ὁρᾶτε . . . ὅτῳ τρόπῳ κάλλιστα ἀμυνεῖσθε αὐτοὺς καὶ μήτε καταφρονήσαντες ἄφαρκτοι ληφθήσεσθε κτλ.
consider how you may best defend yourselves and may neither be caught off your guard through contempt, etc.
T. 6.33. So also with the potential optative with
ἄν; as
τί οὖν οὐ σκοποῦμεν πῶς ἂν αὐτῶν μὴ διαμαρτάνοιμεν;
why then do we not consider how we may avoid mistaking them? X. M. 3.1.10. Indirect questions with
μή thus belong under
μή with verbs of fear and apprehension, where
μή is the negative of the
will. Cp.
2674.
c. Indirect questions introduced by
εἰ have
οὐ or
μή. Thus, ““
ἤρετο τὸν δῆμον εἰ οὐκ αἰσχύ_νοιντο”
he asked the people whether they were not ashamed”
Aes. 1.84,
ἤρετό με . . . εἰ μὴ μέμνημαι he asked me whether I did not remember 2. 36.
d. In relative clauses joined by
καί and standing in an indirect question (
what . . . and what not),
μή must be used when the verb is to be supplied with the second clause; but when the verb is repeated, either
μή, or
οὐ if the antecedent is definite, may be used. Thus, ““
διαγιγνώσκουσιν ἅ τε δύνανται καὶ ἃ μή”
they distinguish between what they can do and what they cannot”
X. M. 4.2.26,
οἶσθα . . . ὁπόσοι τε φρουροὶ ἱκανοί εἰσι καὶ ὁπόσοι μή εἰσιν you know how many garrisons are advantageously situated and how many are not 3. 6. 10. The antecedent is definite in ““
ἀπέδειξεν οὓς χρὴ δημηγορεῖν καὶ οὓς οὐ δεῖ λέγειν ἐν τῷ δήμῳ”
he showed who must speak in the assembly and who must not speak before the people”
Aes. 1.27.
e. As the second member of an alternative question introduced by
εἰ,
or not is either
ἢ οὐ or
ἢ μή. Thus, ““
σκοπῶμεν εἰ ἡμῖν πρέπει ἢ οὔ”
let us consider whether it is proper for us or not”
P. R. 451d,
νῦν ἔμαθον δ̀ λέγεις: εἰ δὲ ἀληθὲς ἢ μή, πειρά_σομαι μαθεῖν now I have made out what you mean; and I will try to make out whether it is true or not 339 a.
f. A shift from
μή to
οὐ in sequent alternative indirect questions appears to be due to the desire to attain variety. Thus, ““
οὐ δεῖ ὑ_μᾶς ἐκ τῶν τοῦ κατηγόρου λόγων τοὺς νόμους καταμανθάνειν, εἰ καλῶς ὑ_μῖν κεῖνται ἢ μή, ἀλλ᾽ ἐκ τῶν νόμων τοὺς τοῦ κατηγόρου λόγους, εἰ ὀρθῶς καὶ νομίμως ὑ_μᾶς διδάσκουσι τὸ πρᾶγμα ἢ οὔ”
you must not start from the pleas of the accuser to learn whether your laws have been established well or not, but you must start from the laws to learn whether his pleas set forth the case fairly and legally or not”
Ant. 5.14. Cp.
Ant. 6.2,
Is. 8.9,
D. 20.83. Some scholars hold that
οὐ here lays stress on a negative fact or on something conceived as a negative fact, and that
μή puts the question abstractly as a mere conception.
MOODS IN INDIRECT QUESTIONS
[*] 2677. The moods and tenses of indirect questions follow the same rules as govern clauses in indirect discourse. The person may be changed.
After primary tenses, the mood and tense of the direct question are retained (indicative, past indicative with
ἄν, deliberative subjunctive, potential optative with
ἄν).
After secondary tenses, the mood and tense of the direct form may be retained or the optative may be used instead. The latter is more common. But a past indicative with
ἄν always remains unchanged.
a. Direct Form Retained.—““
πολλάκις ἐσκόπει τί διαφέρει μανία_ς ἀμαθία_”
he often considered in what respect ignorance differed from madness”
X. M. 1.2.50, ““
ἠπορεῖτο τι ποιήσει”
he was uncertain what to do”
X. A. 7.3.29 ( =
τί ποιήσω, deliberative future,
1916), ““
ἐβουλεύοντο εἴτε κατακαύσωσιν . . . εἴτε τι ἄλλο χρήσωνται”
they deliberated whether they should burn them or dispose of them in some other manner”
T. 2.4 ( =
κατακαύσωμεν, χρησώμεθα;), ““
ἠρώτησε . . . ποῦ ἂν ἴδοι Πρόξενον”
he asked where he could see Proxenus”
X. A. 2.4.15 ( =
ποῦ ἂν ἴδοιμι;).
b. Optative: ““
ἤρετο εἴ τις ἐμοῦ εἴη σοφώτερος”
he asked whether any one was wiser than I”
P. A. 21a ( =
ἐστί;), ““
ὅ τι δὲ ποιήσοι οὐ διεσήμηνε”
he did not announce publicly what he was going to do”
X. A. 2.1.23 ( =
τί ποιήσω;), ““
τὸν θεὸν ἐπηρώτων εἰ παραδοῖεν Κορινθίοις τὴν πόλιν”
they questioned the god whether they should surrender the city to the Corinthians”
T. 1.25 ( =
παραδῶμεν;). Here
παραδοῖεν might represent the aorist indicative, but that tense is usually retained to avoid confusion (exceptionally
ἠρώτα_ τι πάθοιεν X. C. 2.3.19; cp.
X. A. 6.3.25,
D. 50.55). An imperfect relatively anterior to the time of the main verb is retained in
D. 30.19.
c. A dubitative subjunctive in an indirect question, when dependent on an optative, may be attracted into the optative; as ““
ἔλεγες . . . ὅτι οὐκ ἂν ἔχοις ἐξεθὼν ὅ τι χοῷο σαυτῷ”
you were saying that if you went out you would not know what to do with yourself”
P. Cr. 45b ( =
τί χρῶμαι ἐμαυτῷ;).
d. Homer has the optative for the indicative due to indirect discourse only in indirect questions; as ““
εἴροντο τίς εἴη καὶ πόθεν ἔλθοι”
they asked who he was and whence he had come”
ρ 368. See 2624 c.
[*] 2678. After a secondary tense the mood of a direct question may be retained (usually for vividness) in the same sentence with the mood of an indirect question (cp.
2632). Thus, ““
ὁμοῖοι ἦσαν θαυμάζειν ὅποι ποτὲ τρέψονται οἱ Ἕλληνες καὶ τί ἐν νῷ ἔχοιεν”
they seemed to be wondering to what direction the Greeks would turn and what they had in mind”
X. A. 3.5.13, ““
ἤρετο ὅ τι θαυμάζοι καὶ ὁπόσοι αὐτῶν τεθνᾶσιν”
he asked what it was that he was astonished at and how many of them were dead”
T. 3.113 ( =
τί θαυμάζεις, πόσοι τεθνᾶσιν;).
a. In some cases there is no apparent reason (apart from desire for variety) for this use of the indicative and optative in the same sentence. Sometimes the indicative may ask for a statement of
fact, the optative request an
opinion of the person questioned.
[*] 2679. Parallel to 2624 are cases like ““
ᾔδει ὅπου ἔκειτο ἡ ἐπιστολή”
he knew where the letter had been put”
X. C. 2.2.9.
ANSWERS TO YES AND NO QUESTIONS
[*] 2680.
Yes and
No questions may be answered in various ways,
e.g.: a. By repeating the verb or another emphatic word with or without one or more confirmative adverbs. Thus, ““
φῂς σὺ ἀμείνω πολί_την εἶναι, ὃν σὺ ἐπαινεῖς, ἢ ὃν ἐγώ; φημὶ γὰρ οὖν”
do you assert that the citizen whom you approve is better than the one I approve? I do say so”
X. M. 4.6.14, ““
οἶσθ᾽ οὖν ἂ λέξαι σοι . . . θέλω; οὐκ οἶδα”
dost thou know what I fain would tell thee? No.”
E. Hec. 999.
b. By
ἐγώ, ἔγωγε, οὐκ ἐγώ, οὐκ ἔγωγε, sometimes with
νὴ Δία or
μὰ Δία.
c. Yes may be expressed by
ναί, ναὶ μὰ τὸν Δία, μάλιστα, φημί, πάνυ γε, πάνυ μὲν οὖν, εὖ γε, ἔστι ταῦτα, ἔστιν οὕτως, ἀληθῆ λέγεις, ἀληθέστατα, ὀρθῶς γε, κομιδῇ, etc.
No may be expressed by
οὔ, οὐκ ἔστιν, οὐ δῆτα, οὐ μὰ Δία, οὐδαμῶς, οὔ φημι, μὴ γάρ, ἥκιστα, ἥκιστά γε, etc.
d. In the form of a question:
τί μήν; τί γάρ; ἀλλὰ τί; πῶς; πόθεν; πῶς γὰρ οὔ;
Part I: Letters, Sounds, Syllables, Accent
Part IV: Syntax
