Indirect Disoourse
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
DISSERTATION 0N INDIRECT DISOOURSE AN'I'II’H'UN, 1\N,I)()(J’II)I*JS, AND IJYSIAS. I’rcscnlml la l/Ic Furl/NJ] and 19mm! of I'szilors of ”/0 l'nircl'sil‘z/ of Viryim'w for Nu: degree of Doctor of [’l/ilwaj;/2_1/, BY n" .. J'.’ . '\‘ LL” Moss. \l \VASIIINGTON, I). (J. Jlmh «k lh-z'l‘va-nmclc, [’mx'mcns. 1.901. U Va U. Va. Doctoral Dissertation \9‘ k../ can 73:: 7:.;".'_fl;.:_. PREFACE. This work was begun as a treatise on Indirect Discourse in Antiphon and Andocides ; Lysias and . Xenophon’s Anabasis were added for comparison. The lists of verbs and the statistics for (77: and (be clauses and Indirect Questions are exhaustive. The remaining treatment is so nearly complete in the orators that we trust the few omissions will not vitiatc any of the con- clusions (1 mm. It has not been deemed necessary to note facts that present no peculiarity, such as the usual phenomena after primary tenses, and the retention of the Optativc and Indicative with fiu after secondary tenses. The Historical Present is treated as primary or secondary, at the option of the writer. ‘44.: Covallin’s work on O. O. in Xenophon and other books ordered were not procured in time for consultation. Goodwin’s Moods “rm—V4. and Tenses, Madvig’s Syntax, and Schanz’s Beitriige have given xvi...“ valuable aid. Since the completion of this treatise an article has appeared in the Classical Review, Vol. XIV., Nos. 5 and 7, by II. Darnley Naylor, Ormund College, Melbourne University, entitled “On I. the Optative and Graphic Constructions in Greek Subordinate Clauses.” The interesting statement is made that interrogative sentences dependent on a verb of knowing or perceiving are not introduced by the simple interrogative pronoun n’s‘. INTRODUCTION. The parallel use of the Infinitive, the Participle, {In and «’29 with a finite verb in O. 0., and the freedom with which the Greek mind construed subordinate clauses from the time of speaker or narraior gave vivacity to Greek style and a wide range of phenomena to O. O. O. 0. may be divided aceordingto the cha actor of the leading verb into three classes: 1) Pure; 2) Partial; 3) Subjective. 1) PURE O. O.—The governing verb is one expressing thought or utterance." ‘ 2) PARTIAL O. O.———The governing verb states a fact involving or implying thought or utterance. 3) SUBJEcrIvn O. O.—Tbe governing verb does not imply or state thought or utte mice. The O. O. is shown by the contests, or by the mood of the dependent verb. Again, 0. 0. may be divided without serious cross'division upon the principle of vividness into a) vivid; 2)) less vivid; 0) remote. ' a) VIVID O. O.—Mood and tense are unchanged except where the Infinitive is required. The exact words of the speah'e' are quoted with slight variation. 7)) Less VIVID O. O.—Tense is unchanged. The mood, is changed to Op tative or Infinitive when required, accord- ing to well-known rules. The 0. 0. is modeled after a possible direct form. 0) REMOTE O. O.—-—The mood is unchanged. The 0. O. is stated from the time of the nar aim, or without reference to a direct form. The imperfect and I’luperfect sometimes represent the Present and Perfect of a possible direct form. This occurs both in leading and subordinate O. O. verbs. It is quite common in leading clause after verbs of knowing and perceiving; rare after verbs of saying. Ar. Vesp. 283. .:._:.:;.. 5 :-;..-..;;;..;L.-=‘.‘-. .__; An Aorist Indicative may be retained according to the prin- ciple of vividness or remoteness, since the view of the speaker and A.,ny-;_...:. of the narrator coincide with reference to the indefinite past. _ The frequent failure to note the following fundamental prin- ciple of Greek syntax has caused some error in the treatment of O. 0. As in Latin an ideal condition in a past connection takes the ,... Imperfect, so in Greek an anticipatory condition becomes Opta- .. ; tive. The principle may be stated generally thus: A future temporal or conditional relation dependent on and letting its time from a past situation is written in the Optative. This includes the well-known phenomenon of past gene'al conditions; but past situations may be particular as well as general. This principle and that of O. 0. often coincide. In fact it seems to be the more general, the genus to which 0. 0. maybe referred as a species. To attempt to read 0. 0. into sentences where it prevails is often successful, though frequently unneces- sary, and, sometimes, f 'aught with calamity. Sec Lys. ‘[3, 7], Dem. [18, 32; 18, 1-5.5]. Dem. [18, 145] is treated by Goodwin, Moods and Tenses, §696. “ 068’ in (Mullen/7‘7 59:25:74}; 52 [1.57 Qty/hi ous‘ . €20,003); mmy’rrecs 75 7:62“; Philip saw that he could neither end nor escape the war unless, etc.” ‘ Ilnzrjasza is the mood and tense required by the nar 'ative and is absolutely independent of what Philip saw. This distinction between 0. O. and the more gene 'al principle will be useful in discussing partial O. 0. where the Imperfect and Plupcrfect occur side by side with the Optative in what seems a perfectly normal construction. See Time., 6, 29. “‘Eref/iog in, 54' [Air rou’rwv rt sip-felon), 65ng 6059115, 55 (3’ turn— luflaz’g, fipzaw.” . -—Moods and Tenses, § 701. This form of O. O. is not quotation, but representation. It allows the subordinate clauses to be retained in the same mood and tense, or to be stated in the past by the narrator. There is no need to treat one conditional clause differently from another in the example quoted ; both are objective. .v 0 w: l \ A Present or Perfect Indicative in such a connection is regu- larly retained or changed to Imperfect or I’lu perfect respectively. It may be questioned whether we ever have the Indicative changed to Optative in such a connection. We find that rela— tive sentences, because of their declarative nature, readily adapt themselves to the nar'ator’s view and change the Present and Perfect Indicative to Imperfect and Plupcrfect, instead of changing to Optative. This occurs not infrequently after verbs of saying in pure 0. 0., and seems to be the rule in partial O. 0. There is quite a difference between a relative clause in the Imperfect representing part of what was said and a simple explanatory relative clause introduced by the nar-ator. Sub- ordinate clanses in O. O. changed to Imperfect or I’lupcrfect, other than relative clauses, are comparatively 'are. We find one in continued 0. 0., Ken. Anab., 5, 7, 34-; one after the ob- jective verb euuszoémz, Xen. Anab., 1, 5, 9; and Goodwin quotes two, M. and T., §09 1, with pure verbs of saying. The two examples from the Anabasis need no explanation. The shift from speaker to narrator is natural and easy to feel. The examples quoted by Goodwin are seemingly quite irregular, and it seems scarcely sufficient to say that they are thrown out of 0. O. Customary action in Greek has a strong tendency to remain in the Indicative, and it is doubtless due to this fact that the clauses'quoted by Goodwin are represented by the nar 'ator instead of following the rule of O. 0. It is our opinion that clauses so represented still form a part of O. 0. They are not quotations, but statements by the narrator of the substance of what was said. This is the regular construction in English. There is a striking diiferenee between representing a clause from the time of the narrator, and treating it as entirely independent of O. 0. Thus in Xenophon’s Anabasis, 1,5, 9, 22’ no me. st'aw rev mils/luv 57.":sz is represented by the nar'atO' as a sort of afterthought. If it be thrown out of O. 0. it becomes a protasis to r7v and makes nonsense. “It was possible,” says Xenophon, “ for the man who paid attention to observe that the king’s empire was weak, if anyone made war quickly.” The statement of Xenophon is unconditional. The condition forms partof the observation. So much for the general subject. .i.~_~—~u-nxmu=-W6Wnd “l If . I.——'/0rn and (3S Clauses. §1. Antiphon. 1. Verbs with 6’72. dlifilou slur/.1 :‘vtlunairrdru moi-505w dvrzlnrtfieflm énarréllsw apolz’rsw ataflrivarrtlaz ém’rrrurrtlru amigawsw ‘ ' lsyszv l monsw - ’— yer/airway heath/Cysts rszmjpuw slum shite/u (Lemonade: ‘ queue/uh sum. ‘Y 2. Verbs with (7)9. «inelistzvbvac villi/tezsw 13/)st alruZa‘flac émtlszzvdwu zarelaaprupefu 81)}.06'1 Zéfsw 3. 8n Clauses after Secondary Tenses. 13 Cases: Optative, 9 ; Indicative, 4. a. Optative.— Present, 3: 1, 11; 1, 15; 6, 38. Fat-are, 2: ['19, 4; 5, 50. Aorist, 4: 5, 33; 5, 39 bis; 6, 21. b." Indicative Unchanged—172: 5, 54. e. Indicative Changed from Pres. to Int/L, 3 : l, 8 ; 1, 15 ; 6, 32. Examples 1, S ; 1, 15, will be noted under the full treatment of verbs of AhtO’lUliNfl, etc. 6, 32—,u1/fprppag éflvovru (71': Utility Ilz'zamv . 7;?“3‘270—— demands some notice. find-nu may be regarded as an. original Imperfect, but this seems a somewhat forced explanation. The (i. O. is only partial. The (in clause is stated. as a fact. [Mi/)TU/Es‘ éréuuyru implies §,ILIL‘I)?I'J/I”qfl'mv but is not equi ralent to it.