ὅ, ὅτι, ὅ τε

Book Nav

main

269. ὅ, ὅτι, ὅ τε. The Ace. Ncαt. of the Relative, ςwhen used adverbially (ἢ 133, yields the three 'Cοniunctionsb δ, ὅτι, ὅ τε, which mean properly in τesρect tἄat, hence usually (a) ὁecaμμse, or (b) tἄαt (after a Verb of παανίνρ, ἑnοκίπς, 8xc.). The antecedent τό is generally wanting, but is found in a feςw instances: as Il. 19. 421 τὸ οἶδα καὶ αὐτός, ὅ τοι κτλ.: Il. 5. 405 οὐδὲ τὸ οἵδε Il. Il. ὅττι μάλʼ οὐ δηναιός κτλ.: Il. Il. 120 λεύσσετε τό γε πάντες, ὅ μοι κτλ.; also Π. 15. 217, 19 57, 20. 466, and Od. 13. 314 (seem- ingly the only instance in the Odyssey). These places, however, serve to shoςw the origin ob the idiom. Wa have here the phenomenon already noticed in ἦ 267, 5, vi2. the Relative has no construction in its oςwn Clause, but reflects the construction of the Demonstrative in the principal Clause. δ.9. Il. 20. 283 ταρβήσας ὅ οἱ ἄγχι πάγη βέλος dreadίnng ὁecause iRe dart ςtνucέέ πear ἀiπα represents an older ταρβήσας (τὸ) ὃ πάγη βέλος. The adverbial Accusative ςwith ταρβήσας would express the παtμκrε or 9τοund of dread (as in τό γε δείδιθι, τόδε χώεο, 8c.); hence the meaning dτeadίπg in τesρect ηfʼ (or ὁecause of ) tai, tἄat re dart ςtucέέ. Accordingly we find ὅee because chiefly ςwith yVerbs of feetig, which regularly take a Neuter Pronoun of the τοκπd of feelings.1

(1) ὅ iπn τesρect tiαt, ὁecaμuπe may be exempliied by- H. 16. 835 Γρωσὶ φιλοπτολέμοισι μεταπρέπω, ὅ σφιν ἀμύνω μαρ ἀναγκαῖον (θοr tἄαt f ἑeeρ οfʼ). Od. Il. 382 Γηλέμαχον θαύμαζον ὸ θαρσαλέως ἀγόρενε. So D. 9. 534 (χωσαμένη), Od. 19- 543, 21. 289 (οὐκ ἀγαπῆς ὅ). Phe use to state a conse2μuence as a gτοund of inference (like that of οὕνεκα in Π. 9. 505, 258) occurs in- Od. 4. 206 τοίου γὰρ καὶ πατρός, ὃ καὶ πεπνυμένα βάζεις fοτ γο ατe ῃʼ a wiwe fatἄer, (as ἑπομw) ὁecαμuse γοε πρeαά wiseγ so Od. 18. 392, and probably alsο- H. 21. 150 τίς πόθεν εἰς ἀνδρῶν, ὅ μευ ἔτλης ἀντίος ἐλθεῖν; μw2ο axe γοu taut γοu dare c. The transition to the use of ὅee tἄat may be seen in- Od. 2. 44 οὔτε τι δήμιον ἄλλο πιφαύσκομαι οὐδʼ ἀγορεύω ἀλλʼ ἐμὸν αὐτοῦ χρεῖος, ὅ μοι κακὸν ἔμπεσεν οἴκῳ awἄat re la πdγ οκwππ case (wἄic consists iμn the fact) tint eνit ἄας 7ὰten οκ nγ 2οuse. br is common with οἴδα, γιγνώσκω (l. 5- 433. 8ic.), ἀίω (l. 15. 248): and is found with Verbs of πeeίπg, as Ii. Il. 120 λεύσσετε γὰρ τό γε πάντες ὅ μοι γέρας ἔρχεται ἄλλῃ γσ see tiiκ, t2at πηγ ρτί2e ροeς eεeμwere (l. 19. 144, 22- 445, Od. 17. 545)- (2) ὅτι ecaμuse is common after the Verbs of feetiππ9. We need only stop to notice some instances (parallel to those of ὅ just quoted) in which ὅτι is2ππaς ἑπnοw ecaμuπe μ- Il. 16. 33 νηλεές. οὐκ ἄρα σοί γε πατὴρ ἢν ἱππότα Πηλεύς, οὐδὲ Θέτις μήτηρ, γλαυκὴ δέ σε τίκτε θάλασσα, πέτραι τʼ ἠλίβατοι, ὅτι τοι νόος ἐστὶν ἀπηνής meaning πομκw ἑπονw tat γοu are ππο cid gʼ beeμς ἥπ, ὁecause γoμur πmίnd iw τeίeπntίesς. o- Π. 21. 410 νηπύτι, οὐδέ νύ πώ περ ἐπεφράσω ὅσσον ἀρείων εὔχομ ἐγὼν ἔμεναι, ὅτι μοι μένος ἀντιφερίζεις. Od. 5- 33ὲ κάμμορε, τίπτε τοι ὥδε Ποσειδάων ἐνοσίχθων ἀἀδύσατʼ ἐκπάγλως, ὅτι τοι κακὰ πολλὰ φυτεύει μκwγ is oςeidο so enraged agaίππst γοu (as ἢe seeρς to de) since he cauσeσ γοu ππααππγ eρiς So ll. 10. 142., 21. 488., 24. 240, Od. 14. 357, 22. 35- The transition to the meaning tint may be seen in- Π. 2. 255 ἧσαι ὀνειδίζων ὅτι οἱ μάλα πολλὰ διδοῦσι τeρτοαcὰiπ9 ἄiρι iπ τesρect tἄαt, witἄ re 7mot tint, ἢc. 24. 538. br is the regular meaning with Verbs of ἑποκwiπρ ll. 8. 175 γιγνώσκω δʼ ὅτι μοι πρόφρων κατένευσε Κρονίων t ἑπnονw tθat σc. Cp. D. Il. 536 οὐδέ μιν Hρη ἠγνοίησεν ἰδοῦσʼ ὅτι οἱ κτλ.: 24. 5b3 καὶ δέ σε γιγνώσκω Il. Il. ὅττι θεῶν τίς σʼ ἦγε. The use of ὅτιπtiat is commoner in the Hind than in the Odyssey (where ὡς and οὅνεκα partly supply the place, see 5 268).

(3) The form ὅ τε (so written by Bekker to distinguish it from ὅτε νweππ) is found in Homer vwith the same varieties of meaning as ὅ and ὅτι, Thus ςwe have ὅ τε 2ππ ὁecaμuse in- Π. Il. 244 χωόμενος ὅ τʼ ἄριστον Ἀχαιῶν οὐδὲν ἔτισας αgτῃ becαμwe ἢc.; Il. 6. 126, 16. 509, Od. 8. 78. So- Od. 5. 356 ιὧ μοι ἐγώ, μή τίς μοι ὑφαίνῃσιν δόλον οὔτε ἀθανάτων, ὅ τέ με σχεδίης ἀποβῆναι ἀνώγει i. e. there is a snare in this bidding me to get ofΠ the raft. So probably Il. Il. 518 ἦ δὴ λοίγια ἔργ. ὅ τέ μʼ κτλ. it is α ρeςtίteπt tiπ9 t2αt γοu 5c.; D. 19. 57 ἦ ἄρ τι τόδʼ ἀμφοτέροισιν ἄρειον ἔπλετο ὅ τε κτλ.: and the exclamatory use (ἡ 267, 3, c) in Il. 16. 433 ιὧ μοι ἐγών, ὅ τε κτλ. αἰaς for πe tἄat 5c. Again, ὅ τε is2π as ἑnομw ὁecaμuse, in- t. 4. 31 δαιμονίη, τί νύ σε Πρίαμος Πριάμοιό τε παῖδες τόσσα κακὰ ῥέζουσιν, ὅ τʼ ἀσπερχὲς μενεαίνεις ἄομw do bτiam and 2is ποns do γοu sucὰ eνi, (as teγ πuςt do) since γσu axe fμurίοus(γ enraged ll. 15. 467 ὦ πόποι, ἦ δὴ πάγχν μάχης ἐπὶ μήδεα κείρει δαίμων ἡμετέρης, ὅ τέ μοι βιὸν ἔκβαλε χειρός (as μudρe frορm tἄiς) tἄat 2e ἄας tἄrονwπn tἄe ὁομw fτοwm π4γ ἀαnds. So Od. 13. 129 ὅ τέ με βροτοὶ οὔ τι τίουσι for t2at πmοrtaίς οκοννr πae ποί Od. 14. 89 οἵδε δέ τοι ἴσασι Il. Il. ὅ τʼ οὐκ ἐθέλουσι tἅeγ ἑnοw sορmetάiππg (ας iσ ptaiπ) ecαμuse tἀeγ are ποί wittiπ9 Od. 21. 254 τοσσόνδε βίης ἐπιδευέες εἰμὲν Il. Il. ὅ τʼ οὐ δυνάμεσθα μwe are so want- iπg iπn streagt2, as aρρear θγ re fact tἄat we are ποί abίε. θWith Verbs of ἑπnοκiπg, again, ὅ τε has the meaning tᾶat - ll. Il. 411 γνῷ δὲ καὶ Ἀτρείδης εὐρυκρείων Ἀγαμέμνων ἢν ἄτην, ὅ τʼ ἄριστον Ἀχαιῶν οὐδὲν ἔτισεν πaαγ ἑποw ἀiς fοίξγ, iππ tἀαt ἄε θailead to ἄοποur ἢc. Od. 14. 355ἐγὼ δʼ εὁ οἶδα καὶ αὐτὸς νότιον ἐμεῖο ἄνακτος, ὅ τʼ ἤχθετο πᾶσι θεοῖσι f ἑποw ηf tᾶe τetrn ῃʼ πηγ οrd, tat (as it ςοκwed) ἄε μκwας hated γ at tὰe ροdς. So i. 8. 251 εἴδονθʼ ὅ τʼ ἄρʼ κτλ. aw tἀαt ἢc.; and with γιγνώσκω, ll. 5. 231, etc.

The existence ob a distinct ὅ τε ςwith the meaning because or tint depends upon its being shown that in places sαch as those now quoted the word cannot be either ὅτι that or ὅτε wάen. Γhe latter explanation of the reading ὅτε (or δτ) is often admissible, e.ρ. in Π. 14. 7 1 δεα μὲν γὰρ ὅτε, οἶδα δὲ νῦν ὅτε- ; cp. Il. 15. 207 ἐσθλὸν καὶ τὸ τέτυκται ὅτʼ Il. Il. εἰδῇ, and instances in Attic, as Soph. O. Γ. 1133 κάτοιδεν ἥμος κτλ. 2e ἑποκwς wet ῃ tἄe tiπe μw2en ἢπ., Ear. Γrοad. 70 οἶδʼ ἡνίκʼ Αἴας εἷλκε. But the supposi- tion of a distinct ὅ τε is supported by a suufficient number of ex- amples in Homer,-e.g. Π. 5. 331 γιγνώσκων ὅ τʼ ἄναλκις ἔην θεός, -and generally by the complete correspondence of meaning thus obtained between ὅ, ὅτι, and ὅ τε. On the other hand it is ex- tremely improbable that the ι of ὅτι vwas ever capable of elision. hhn this respect ὅτι tat stands on the same footing as τί and ὅτι. Moreover, the adverbial use of these words, which gives them the character ob Conjunctions, is only a slightextension of the ordinary Ace. of the bnternal Object (5 133). Hence if the Neat. of ὅς and ὅς τις is used in this way, it is difficult to see any reason why the Neat. of the equally familiar ὅς τε shoαld be excluded. Γhα ancient authorities and the M SS. vary in some places between τε and ὅτι (as in Π. 14. 71, 72, 15. 35, Od. 13. 129), and on such a point ςwe have no good external authority.

270. ὅ, ὅτι, ὅ τε as Conjunctions. In a few instances it is impossible to explain these Relatives by supplying an Accusative τ in the principal Clause. Thus in - Od. 20. 333 νῦν δʼ ἤδη τόδε δῆλον, ὅ τʼ οὐκέτι νόστιμός ἐστι the Antecedent is a Pronoun in the Nom. Similarly in- Π. 5. 349 ἦ οὐχ ἄλις ὅττι γυναῖκας ἀνάλκιδας ἠπεροπεύεις; the principal Clause is Impersonal, and the Antecedent might be a Nom. (is it not eππομρὰ) or Gen. (iw there ποί enοgὰ in tiiς), but hardly an Accusative. Again in- t. Il. 362 οὐδέ τι τῶν μέμνηται, ὅ οἱ μάλα πολλάκις κτλ. 17. 207 τῶν ποινήν, ὅ τοι κτλ. (as aρmendς for re fact tἄat) the Relative Clause serves as a Genitive: cp. Od. 11. 540 γηθο- σύνῃ ὅ οἱ κτλ, 12. 374 ἄγγελος ἢλθεν Il. Il. ὅ οἱ κτλ.

Add Il. 9. 493 τὰ φρονέων ὅ μοι κτλ, 23- 545 τὰ φρονέων ὅτι οἱ κτλ.: and also Od. 2. 116 τὰ φρονέουσʼ ἀνὰ θυμὸν ἄἄ οἱ κτλ., where the Il. f. ὅ for ἄ has good MS. authority.

In these instances, then, the forms ὅ, c. have ceased to be felt as Caseforms, and may properly be termed Conjunctions.

The Moοd in all Clauses of this kind is the ndic.-not the Opt, as in some Attic uses (Gοodςwin,ἢ 7 14).

It may be wοrth while pointing out the parallel between this extension of the Relative Clause and the development vwhhich has been observed in the use of the nfinitive (5 234). n the first instance the Clause serves as epexegeis of an Ace. vwith a Verb of sαyίng, cnοισίng, feeling, kc. (5 237, 2) : μὴ δείδιθί τινα ὅφεσθαι fear not αnῳ one, for δeιng iκcelῳ to see; ταρβήσας (τὸ) δ ἄγχι πάγη βέλος feατing (tιia), tιαt the speατ sick neατ tim. Then the Ace. is used vwithout reference to the construction of the principal Verb and consequently the dependent Clause may stand to it as logical Subject: οὔ τι νεμεσσητὸν βασιλῆα ἀπαρέσσασθαι for α κking to wmακco his peace is no sὰαwme; οὐχ ἄλις ὅτι ἠπεροπεύεις is (tθι fact) tιat γοιμs deceive not enοιg ;vwhere the Clause in both cases serves as a Hon. Finally the Clause is used as an indeclinable Houn of any Case : τῶν μέμνηται δ κτλ. τewmeommbsτs this, that c.; to vwhich corresponds the so-calledd b articular nfinitive,7 or mf. vwith the Article as a Substantive.

The three forms ὅ, ὅ ςε, ὅτι do not differ perceptibly in meaning. Hence the reduction in Attic to the single ὅτι is no real loss.

270*. Indirect Discourse. Clauses introduced by ὅ (ὅ τε, ὅτι), φς, οὕνεκα after Verbs of saγiπg and ἑοκwianρ are evidently of the nature of οratiο οὐἰi9uα, or indirect quotation of the ςwοrds of another person.

The Homeric language has no forms ob Syntax peculiar ttο hndirect Discourse (such as the use ob the Opt. or Pres. ndic. after a Secondary Γense). Every assertion is made from the speakerʼs ovwn point of view: consequently vwhat vwas present to the person quoted must be treated as novw past. Accordingly the Present Γense ob the οrαtiο directs becomes the hmpf., the Pf. becomes the Plpf. The Future is thrown into past time by the help of μέλλω, as in οὐδὲ τὸ ἥδῃ ὃ οὐ πείσεσθαι ἔμελλεν ἄε ἑneμw ποί tat ἄε μwομutd ποί ὁe persuaded. Γhe only exception to this is Od. 13. 340 ἥδε ὸ νοστήσεις ἑκeνw tᾶαt γο νwitt (i.e. wοκtd) retμurn. For an instance of the Opt. ςwith ὡς after a Verb of sαγ- ig see ἦ 305, 2: and cp. the Dependent ἀuestion, 248.

The Clauses now in question are commoner after Verbs of ἑἑποw- iπg, 2eaτίπg, τewmeραeriππg, 8dc. than after Verbs of πααγίππg. Of the former kind there are about 70 in Homer; of the latter, which may be counted as examples ob true ndirect Discourse, there are 16. Of these, again, only three are in the lad (16. 131., 17. ὅ54., 22- 439). This confirms the vieςw that these Clauses are originally cansalL the meaning tἀat beingderived from the mean- ing ὁecαuςe (ὃ 268). f we confine ourselrves to ὅ (ὅ τε) and ὅτι the proportion is stil more striking, since out of more than 50 instances there are only four ςwith a Verb of saying.2

  • 1. Γhe Clauses of this type are the subject of Dr. PeterSchmitts monograph, 7ebεr den Cτsρτνtng des Sbstantιcsat2es mιt felatιυpαrtiketn iηm τιechhischen (VWir2- burg, 18S9). He rightly takes ὅ (ὅτι, ἀc.) to be an Ace. of the ' inner objectb (ὁ 133), but he seems to have οverloοkeddd the real dificulty ; vwhich is that ὅ eαpplies an obiect to the Verb of the principal Clause, not to the Verb of its ovwn Clause. Thus he says bὁρῷ δ νοσις vwar urspringlich : ich vweiss, vwas do krankst; οἵδ’ ὅ σε ἑπῆνεσε ich vweiss, vwas et dict gelobt hatʼ (p 21). But the two βmeanings, κknoι0 in 0hat respect yoιι are sίck and knο0 that γoμs are sίcκk are quite distinct, and are given by essentially different constructions of the Relative. Let us take as example a Clause vwhich fοoςws a Verb of feelιg2 ἐχάσατο ὅτι οἱ βέλος ἕκφυγε χειρός. The construction with ἐχάσατο is the Ace. of the ' inner objectʼ (as τόδε χάεο, τό γε δείδιθι, ἄc.). But ὅτι is in a diferent Clause from ἐχάσατο : the fu construction vwοuldd be ἐχάσατο (τὸ) ὅτι. Schmmitt vwould say that ὅ τι ἕκφυγε also is an ἡAcc. of the ' inner object - that the sentence meant originally 0as αngeτed in respect ηf this in τesρect ηf which iteμ0 οἱ. t is surely more probable that ἐχάσατο ὅ τι vwas like ἐξ οὗ from the time that, εἰς ὅ to the time thιαt, οὕνεκα for tθe τeαsοn tιαt, ἀc. (§ 267, 5), so that ὅ τι was an Ace. by Attraction, and had no real construction vwith its oςwn Verb.
  • 2. The figures are taken from Schmitt (7spτνιng αdes Substantiυsα2es), but in- clude instances of ὅ τε vwhhich he refers to ὅτε wen.