The fate of ἄν in syntactic transforms from conditional sent

This forum is for practicing composition based on ancient texts
Forum rules
This forum is for discussing how to do Greek composition and practicing writing in Greek.

If you post in this forum, you are inviting people to critique what you have written and suggest ways to improve it.

Private subforums can be created for groups who want to practice together without exposing their mistakes to the world, or this can be done in public.
Post Reply
Stephen Hughes
Posts: 3323
Joined: February 26th, 2013, 7:12 am

The fate of ἄν in syntactic transforms from conditional sent

Post by Stephen Hughes » December 17th, 2015, 6:49 pm

Perhaps it would be better to talk about what happens to ἄν during syntactic transforms from conditional sentences to the articular participle constructions, here in this sub-forum, rather than in our Great Helmsman Jonathan's Christmas message - Ghost of Christmas Future Imperfect Conditional.
cwconrad wrote:
Stephen Hughes wrote:How about this for a translation?
  • Ἰδοὺ εἶπον ἡμῖν τοῖς μὴ μετανοήσασι ἄν τὰ ἐπιγενησόμενα.
I'm somewhat confused about the syntactical function of ἄν here; Is it intended to imply, "I would have told you ... "? or "those who would never have repented"? I take it does not refer to the final phrase and mean "things things that would have happened." I suspect we have a case here of the fallacy of the inclusive ἁν. :D
Perhaps a ready example of the clumsy handling of one of the finest subtleties of the language.
Luke 13:5 wrote:Οὐχί, λέγω ὑμῖν· ἀλλ’ ἐὰν μὴ μετανοῆτε, πάντες ὁμοίως ἀπολεῖσθε.
(ὡσαύτως for ὁμοίως in NA-UBS)
Changing that sort of structure to participles, the first to follow on from the ἡμῖν of introductory structure, and the second recreate the familiar phrase τὰ γενόμενα, with the added detail that it was in the future (γενόμενα -> γενησόμενα), and that the things happened as a result or outcome of something else (γίγνομαι -> ἐπιγίγνομαι). Complete removal of the ἄν that would have been in the utterance as an ἐὰν - had it still be as a verb rather than a participle - seemed similar in degree to the difference between κατατομή and περιτομή that the Apostle alludes to in his writings.
LSJ ἄν wrote:IV. WITH INF. and PART. (sts. ADJ. equivalent to part., “τῶν δυνατῶν ἂν κρῖναι” Pl.R.577b) representing ind. or opt.:
1. pres. inf. or part.:
a. representing impf. ind., οἴεσθε τὸν πατέρα . . οὐκ ἂν φυλάττειν; do you think he would not have kept them safe? (οὐκ ἂν ἐφύλαττεν), D.49.35; ἀδυνάτων ἂν ὄντων [ὑμῶν] ἐπιβοηθεῖν when you would have been unable, Th.1.73, cf. 4.40.
b. representing pres. opt., πόλλ᾽ ἂν ἔχων (representing ἔχοιμ᾽ ἄν)“ ἕτερ᾽ εἰπεῖν παραλείπω” D. 18.258, cf. X.An.2.3.18: with Art., “τὸ ἐθέλειν ἂν ἰέναι ἄκλητος ἐπὶ δεῖπνον” Pl.Smp.174b.
2. aor. inf. or part.:
a. representing aor. ind., οὐκ ἂν ἡγεῖσθ᾽ αὐτὸν κἂν ἐπιδραμεῖν; do you not think he would even have run thither? (καὶ ἐπέδραμεν ἄν), D.27.56; ἴσμεν ὑμᾶς ἀναγκασθέντας ἄν we know you would have been compelled, Th.1.76, cf. 3.89; ῥᾳδίως ἂν ἀφεθείς when he might easily have been acquitted, X.Mem.4.4.4.
0 x


Γελᾷ δ' ὁ μωρός, κἄν τι μὴ γέλοιον ᾖ
(Menander, Γνῶμαι μονόστιχοι 108)

Post Reply