[B-Greek] imperatives, optatives, etc.

Carl W. Conrad cwconrad at ioa.com
Wed Nov 16 09:16:40 EST 2005


Splendid little fragment of Danae's lullaby to the infant Perseus!

I've been thinking some more about this question/problem of  
hortatory, imperative, jussive, optative (etc.) expressions some more  
and I'm thinking that there's something widespread -- at least in the  
languages I know of -- , something that isn't, I think, simply a  
matter of borrowing of a construction by one language from another:  
use of the auxiliary "let" with either an accusative and infinitive  
or with a subjunctive:
	English: "let it be"
	Latin: sine/sinite + inf. or subj.;
		has date ... spargam flores animamque nepotis
		his saltem accumulem donis et fungar inani
		munere (Vergil, Aeneid 6.883-6)
	Greek: AFES + acc. + inf. (Lk 9:60 AFES NEKROUS QAYAI ..
		    AFES + subj. (Lk 6:42 AFES EKBALW TO KARFOS
			TO EN TWi OFQALMWi SOU
	(= MG: AS NA + subj.

I really don't think that these are "permissive" so much as they are  
essentially PRAYERS that one's desire or yearning be fulfilled. I  
asked in my earlier note on periphrastic imperatives whether there's  
a significant difference between GENOITO "May it happen" and GENESQW  
"Let it happen"? in the petitions of the Lord's prayer Mt 6:10  
GENHQHTW TO QELHMA SOU or Jesus' prayer in Gethsemane Lk 22:42 ... MH  
TO QELHMA MOU ALLA TO SON GENESQW.

I wonder too if there's a signficant difference in usage between the  
optative and subjunctives. Think even of English expressions such as  
"Heaven forbid!" (= "may God forbid?"): is it a wish or a prayer? All  
we can say is that it's an expresion of what one fervently WANTS to  
take place -- or NOT to take place, as the case may be.

In some contexts there may be an actual order; the Athenian legal  
formula is hO NOMOS KELEUEI + acc./inf. or + subj. And of course a  
law that has been passed is efficacious primarily through its urging  
voluntary compliance with the behavior that the law urges. In a  
sense, then, a law is a plea to the citizenry to act in a civil  
manner with regard to such and such behavior: it is a prayer of sorts.

I suspect this has something to do with the now archaic English  
distinction between "shall" and "will":
	"You WILL  do that tomorrow" = "You're going to ..."
	"You SHALL do that tomrrow" = "You are obliged to ..."

Similarly the hortatory construction of the first-person-plural,  
"Let's go to the movies tonight" depends upon the same underlying  
conception: it is not a request for permission to do something but  
rather a entreaty to a shared indulgence. Perhaps "entreaty" is what  
underlies all or most of
these expressions that are called "hortatory, jussive, imperative,  
optative" etc. Add to these the modern Greek PARAKALW and the German  
"bitte" -- which I assume is an elliptical "Ich bitte " or the French  
"je vous en prie ..."

On Nov 16, 2005, at 7:28 AM, Chet A. Creider wrote:

> This note is inspired in part by Carl's posting ("Periphrastic  
> imperatives")
> in which he wrote, "...the third-person imperative, the  
> subjunctive, the optative,
> auxiliaries with infinitives or infinitives by themselves all seem  
> to be used
> with a considerable variety and range of rhetorical force," and  
> Iver's suggestion
> that there is a difference in core meaning between second- and  
> third-person
> imperatives.  The following fragment of a poem by Simonides of Ceos  
> (556BC-468)
> seems to provide very clear evidence in support of Iver's  
> suggestion.  (Perhaps
> I should note that although little of Simonides' work has survived,  
> there is
> enough for us to know that he was a very fine poet, writing with great
> subtlety and economy of expression.)
>
> The setting is this: Danae and her infant son Perseus have been put  
> to sea
> in an ark by her father Acrisius in response to a prophecy that he  
> would be
> killed by his grandson.  My translation deliberately follows the  
> Greek as
> closely as possible.
>
> 18: "KELOMAI D' hEUDE BREFOS,
> 19: hEUDETW DE PONTOS,
> 20: hEUDETW D' AMETRON KAKON,
> 21: METOBOULIA DE TIS FANEIH,
> 22: ZEU PATER, EK SEO;
> 23: hOTTI DE QARSELEON EPOS EUCOMAI,
> 24: H NOSFI DIKAS
> 25: SUGGNWQI MOI."
>
> 18: "I bid (you), sleep, newborn child,
> 19: and let the sea sleep,
> 20: and let (our/this) immeasurable evil sleep,
> 21: and would that some change appear,
> 22: Zeus father, from you;
> 23: and whatever presumptuous word I pray
> 24: or far from justice (word)
> 25: forgive me."
>
> Comments:
> 18 is a second-person imperative, addressed to the infant
>
> 19 and 20 are third person imperatives, addressed to the sea and to  
> the
> evil.  19 can be contrasted with Mark 4:39 where Jesus addresses the
> sea with two second-person imperatives (ZIWPA, PEFIMWSO).  Danae is
> clearly feeling very vulnerable -- alone with her infant in the sea in
> an ark which despite its name was probably more like a floating coffin
> than the ark Noah built, and unlike Jesus, is not in a position to
> impose her will directly on the sea.
>
> 21 has a third singular aorist passive optative (of wish).
>
> 25 is a second person imperative, addressed directly to Zeus, but  
> asking for
> his pardon.
>
> It seems that the poet has made a contrast between the use of the  
> second person
> and third person imperatives.  He could have used a second person  
> imperative, as
> Jesus did, in addressing the sea, but didn't, presumably to reflect  
> the powerless
> of Danae in the face of this nameless force.
>
> Chet Creider
>
> ---
> B-Greek home page: http://metalab.unc.edu/bgreek
> B-Greek mailing list
> B-Greek at lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-greek


Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University (Emeritus)
1989 Grindstaff Road/Burnsville, NC 28714/(828) 675-4243
cwconrad2 at mac.com
WWW: http://www.ioa.com/~cwconrad/




More information about the B-Greek mailing list