THE PROBLEMS OF GREEK 171 



the wish. But is the construction restricted to the wish impossible 

 of realization, the unreal condition, and the (kindred) unfulfilled 

 duty? Though some statements of the principle imply that this is 

 not the fact, the examples cited can all be reduced to these heads, 

 and, so far as I can recall examples, they are all of this sort from 

 the grammatical point of view, but sometimes their character is 

 veiled, and the wish or duty is expressed only by the form of the final 

 clause. To illustrate: Ischomachus (Xen. Oec. 8, 2) tells his wife 

 that he is to blame for her inability to find some article, "because," 

 says he, " I did not designate a place for each thing in order that you 

 might know where to put it." Should we read Iva. 18775 with the 

 manuscripts, or Iva TjSeis ( = j8eio-0a), as has been proposed? To my 

 mind the historical indicative is necessary. The neglected duty here 

 is like that of (Dem. 36, 47) dvrl TOV Koo-^eiv . . . Iva. e^aiWo. The 

 duty is not necessarily a moral obligation; it may be imposed by 

 consistency or appropriateness, as (Plat. Theaet. 161 c) where Socra- 

 tes says, " I am surprised that he did not say the hog was the meas- 

 ure of all things," Iva. /xeyaXoTrpeTrcos /cat TTOLVV Ka.Ta.<$>povr)TiKa)<s rjparo rjplv 



Xe'yv. Here XP^ might have been used in the leading clause. Iphi- 

 genia (7. T. 357) says that no wind has ever driven Helen and 

 Menelaus to her, lv avTCTi/juapyo-dp.^, where the wish is expressed only 

 by the final clause. A full examination of the question whether the 

 historical indicative and the subjunctive or optative are ever inter- 

 changeable without change of sense seems desirable. 



The problems of the infinitive can receive here only a few illustra- 

 tions. The seeming prepositional use of irptv with the infinitive, 

 originating and enjoying its most flourishing period long before 

 prepositions could be construed with the infinitive, is to me a mystery. 

 The use of mood after -n-piv in the classical period still seems to be 

 a little clouded, and we find -n-plv 877 or -n-piv ye 817 spoken of as excep- 

 tional, with the finite verb after an affirmative clause, though, like 

 our " until at last." it is regularly used to introduce something that 

 puts an end to a situation, whether a negative, expressed or implied, 

 precedes or not. It is practically one word, like vvv 8rj, "just now," 



and /J.fv 877 in <at /xev 817, a.XA.a fjikv 877, ov [j.tv 817. 



The use of irX^v with the simple infinitive is taught in some of 

 our best works, and yet I have never observed a clear example. Those 

 cited in the books are no examples at all. One is ri aAAo n-A^v 1/^817 



Xe'yeiv ; but the whole sentence is rl ovv /*' avwyas dAXo irXrjv if/wor) Aeyeu', 



where irK^v is simply 77. When TrX^v is construed with the infinitive, as 

 far as I have observed, it requires TOV ; but a thorough search is needed. 

 The simple infinitive of so-called purpose, whatever it was with 

 Homer, as in 80? ayv, is in classic prose not a purpose in the great 

 majority of cases, but a permission, or commission, or something 

 analogous. There is no more purpose in ofis fyui? ciAetrfle apx lv /* ou 



