ΣΩ. Οὐκοῦν νῦν βέλτιον ἔχει περὶ τὸ πρᾶγμα ὃ οὐκ
ᾔδει;
그렇다면 그가 알지 못하던 문제에 관련하여 이제 더
나아진 것이지 않나?
ΜΕΝ. Καὶ τοῦτό μοι δοκεῖ. 5
그렇게도 제게 여겨집니다.
ΣΩ. Ἀπορεῖν οὖν αὐτὸν ποιήσαντες καὶ ναρκᾶν ὥσπερ ἡ
νάρκη, μῶν τι ἐβλάψαμεν;
그러니 우리가 그로 하여금 길을 잃도록 그리고 마치 전기가오리가
하듯 그가 마비되도록 만들면서, 물론 뭐라도 해를 입힌 것은
아니지?
ΜΕΝ. Οὐκ ἔμοιγε δοκεῖ.
적어도 제겐 아니라고 여겨집니다.
ΣΩ. Προὔργου γοῦν τι πεποιήκαμεν, ὡς ἔοικε, πρὸς τὸ
ἐξευρεῖν ὅπῃ ἔχει· νῦν μὲν γὰρ καὶ ζητήσειεν ἂν ἡδέως οὐκ 10
εἰδώς, τότε δὲ ῥᾳδίως ἂν καὶ πρὸς πολλοὺς καὶ πολλάκις
ᾤετ᾿ ἂν εὖ λέγειν περὶ τοῦ διπλασίου χωρίου, ὡς δεῖ διπλασίαν c
τὴν γραμμὴν ἔχειν μήκει.
어쨌든 우리가 뭐라도 쓸모있는 일을 해준 것이군, 그럴 듯해
보이기로는 말이네만, 사정이 어떠한지 알아내는 일에 대해
말일세. 왜냐하면 지금은 그가 알지 못하면서도 기쁘게 탐구하기까지
할 것이네만, 그 때는 쉽사리 여러 사람들을 상대로도 여러 차례라도
두 배짜리 면에 관련하여, 길이로 두 배짜리 선을 지녀야 한다고 하며,
잘 말한다고 생각했었을 터이기 때문이지.
ΜΕΝ. Ἔοικεν.
그런 듯합니다.
ΣΩ. Οἴει οὖν ἂν αὐτὸν πρότερον ἐπιχειρῆσαι ζητεῖν ἢ
μανθάνειν τοῦτο ὃ ᾤετο εἰδέναι οὐκ εἰδώς, πρὶν εἰς ἀπορίαν 5
κατέπεσεν ἡγησάμενος μὴ εἰδέναι, καὶ ἐπόθησεν τὸ εἰδέναι;
그러므로 자네는 그가 알지 못하면서도 안다고 생각했던
바로 그것을 탐구하거나 혹은 배우려고 시도했을 거라 생각하나?
그가 알지 못한다고 생각하여 길을 잃은 처지에 빠지고, 알기를
갈망하기 전에 그보다 더 먼저 말이네.
ΜΕΝ. Οὔ μοι δοκεῖ, ὦ Σώκρατες.
제게는 그렇지 않았으리라 여겨집니다, 소크라테스.
ΣΩ. Ὤνητο ἄρα ναρκήσας;
혹시 그가 마비를 시켜서 도움을 받았나?
> Ὤνητο는 aor. mid. ind., ναρκήσας는 aor. act. part..
ὀνίνημι mid.은 도움을 받다, 득을 보다, 그런 쪽이므로
전자의 주어는 시종이어야 할 것이다.
그런데 후자도 주격 분사로 주어가 변하지 않을 것이다.
이 경우 내용상으로는 시종이 '자신을' 마비시켜서
득을 보았다고 가거나, 아니면 후자를 수동으로
고쳐 읽어야 할 것이다.
ΜΕΝ. Δοκεῖ μοι.
제겐 그리 여겨집니다.
ΣΩ. Σκέψαι δὴ ἐκ ταύτης τῆς ἀπορίας ὅτι καὶ ἀνευρήσει 10
ζητῶν μετ᾿ ἐμοῦ, οὐδὲν ἀλλ᾿ ἢ ἐρωτῶντος ἐμοῦ καὶ οὐ διδά-
σκοντος· φύλαττε δὲ ἄν που εὕρῃς με διδάσκοντα καὶ d
διεξιόντα αὐτῷ, ἀλλὰ μὴ τὰς τούτου δόξας ἀνερωτῶντα.
그럼 이러한 길 잃음으로부터 그가 나와 동반하여 탐구하며
찾아내기까지 하였다는 점을 검토해 주게나. 나는 가르치지 않고
물을 뿐 달리 아무것도 하지 않았는데도 말일세. 그런데 자네가
어디서든 내가 그에게 가르치고 상술하는 걸, 그러나 그의 믿음들을
묻지 않는 걸 발견할는지 감시해 주게.
Λέγε γάρ μοι σύ· οὐ τὸ μὲν τετράπουν τοῦτο ἡμῖν ἐστι
χωρίον; μανθάνεις;―ΠΑΙ. Ἔγωγε.―ΣΩ. Ἕτερον δὲ αὐτῷ
προσθεῖμεν ἂν τουτὶ ἴσον;―ΠΑΙ. Ναί.―ΣΩ. Καὶ τρίτον 5
τόδε ἴσον ἑκατέρῳ τούτων;―ΠΑΙ. Ναι.―ΣΩ. Οὐκοῦν
προσαναπληρωσαίμεθ᾿ ἂν τὸ ἐν τῇ γωνίᾳ τόδε;―ΠΑΙ.
Πάνυ γε.―ΣΩ. Ἄλλο τι οὖν γένοιτ᾿ ἂν τέτταρα ἴσα χωρία
τάδε;―ΠΑΙ. Ναί.―ΣΩ. Τί οὖν; τὸ ὅλον τόδε ποσαπλάσιον e
τοῦδε γίγνεται;―ΠΑΙ. Τετραπλάσιον.―ΣΩ. Ἔδει δέ γε
διπλάσιον ἡμῖν γενέσθαι· ἢ οὐ μέμνησαι;―ΠΑΙ. Πάνυ γε.
―ΣΩ. Οὐκοῦν ἐστιν αὕτη γραμμὴ ἐκ γωνίας εἰς γωνίαν
[τινὰ] τέμνουσα δίχα ἕκαστον τούτων τῶν χωρίων;―ΠΑΙ. 85a
Ναί.―ΣΩ. Οὐκοῦν τέτταρες αὗται γίγνονται γραμμαὶ ἴσαι,
περιέχουσαι τουτὶ τὸ χωρίον;―ΠΑΙ. Γίγνονται γάρ.―ΣΩ.
Σκόπει δή· πηλίκον τί ἐστιν τοῦτο τὸ χωρίον;―ΠΑΙ. Οὐ
μανθάνω.―ΣΩ. Οὐχὶ τεττάρων ὄντων τούτων ἥμισυ ἑκάστου 5
ἑκάστη ἡ γραμμὴ ἀποτέτμηκεν ἐντός; ἢ οὔ;―ΠΑΙ. Ναί.―
그럼 자네는 내게 말해주게. 4피트인 건 우리에게 있는 이런
면이지? 이해하는가?―저로서는요.―그런데 그것에 그것과
같은 크기인 또 다른 것을 덧붙여 놓아 보도록 하겠나?―네.
―그리고 그것들 둘 각각과 같은 크기인 세 번째 여기 이것도
놓아 보겠나?―네.―그 각 안의 여기 이것을 우리가 다시 추가로
채워넣을 수 있지 않겠나?―물론입니다.―그러면 여기 이 같은
크기의 면들 네 개가 되는 것 외에 무엇이겠나?―네.―그럼
어떤가? 여기 이 전체는 여기 이것의 몇 배짜리인 것이 되는가?
―네 배짜리입니다.―그런가 하면 우리한테는 두 배 짜리가 되는
것이 필요했지. 혹시 기억하지 못하는가?―물론 기억합니다.
―그럼 이것이 이 면들 각각을 각에서 각으로 둘로 자르는 선이지
않나?―네.―이러한 같은 크기인 선들이 이런 면을 감싸서 네 개가
되지 않나?―그리 됩니다.―그럼 검토해 주게. 이런 면은 얼마만한
것인가?―알지 못하겠습니다.―그 면들이 네 개인데 각 선분이
저 각각의 절반을 내부에서 잘라냈지 않나? 혹은 그렇지 않은가?
―그렇습니다.―
ΣΩ. Πόσα οὖν τηλικαῦτα ἐν τούτῳ ἔνεστιν;―ΠΑΙ. Τέτταρα.
―ΣΩ. Πόσα δὲ ἐν τῷδε;―ΠΑΙ. Δύο.―ΣΩ. Τὰ δὲ τέτταρα
τοῖν δυοῖν τί ἐστιν;―ΠΑΙ. Διπλάσια.―ΣΩ. Τόδε οὖν
ποσάπουν γίγνεται;―ΠΑΙ. Ὀκτώπουν.―ΣΩ. Ἀπὸ ποίας b
γραμμῆς;―ΠΑΙ. Ἀπὸ ταύτης.―ΣΩ. Ἀπὸ τῆς ἐκ γωνίας
εἰς γωνίαν τεινούσης τοῦ τετράποδος;―ΠΑΙ. Ναί.―ΣΩ.
Καλοῦσιν δέ γε ταύτην διάμετρον οἱ σοφισταί· ὥστ᾿ εἰ ταύτῃ
διάμετρος ὄνομα, ἀπὸ τῆς διαμέτρου ἄν, ὡς σὺ φῄς, ὦ παῖ 5
Μένωνος, γίγνοιτ᾿ ἂν τὸ διπλάσιον χωρίον.―ΠΑΙ. Πάνυ
μὲν οὖν, ὦ Σώκρατες.
그러므로 그만한 것들이 그 안에 얼만큼 들었는가?―넷입니다.
―반면에 여기 이것 안에는 얼만큼인가?―둘입니다.―4는
2의 무엇인가?―두 배입니다.―그러니 여기 이것이 몇 피트가
되는가?―8입니다.―어떤 선분으로부터 그리 되는가?―이런
선분으로부터입니다.―4피트 짜리의 각에서 각으로 뻗는
선으로부터인가?―네.―그런가 하면 소피스트들은 이 선을
직경이라 부른다네. 그래서 만일 이 선에 직경이란 이름을
붙인다면, 이 직경으로부터, 자네 주장대로, 메논의 시종친구,
두 배짜리 면이 될 걸세.―물론입니다, 소크라테스.
ΣΩ. Τί σοι δοκεῖ, ὦ Μένων; ἔστιν ἥντινα δόξαν οὐχ
αὑτοῦ οὗτος ἀπεκρίνατο;
자네에게는 어찌 여겨지는가, 메논? 이 친구가 답한
자신의 것이 아닌 그 어떤 믿음이라도 있는가?
ΜΕΝ. Οὔκ, ἀλλ᾿ ἑαυτοῦ. c
아닙니다, 그 자신의 믿음을 답하였습니다.
ΣΩ. Καὶ μὴν οὐκ ᾔδει γε, ὡς ἔφαμεν ὀλίγον πρότερον.
또한 그가 몰랐던 것이기는 하고 말이지, 우리가 조금 전에
주장하던 것처럼 말일세.
ΜΕΝ. Ἀληθῆ λέγεις.
맞는 말씀이십니다.
ΣΩ. Ἐνῆσαν δέ γε αὐτῷ αὗται αἱ δόξαι· ἢ οὔ;
그런데 이러한 믿음들이 그 친구 안에 있던 것이긴 하지.
그렇지 않나?
ΜΕΝ. Ναί. 5
네.
ΣΩ. Τῷ οὐκ εἰδότι ἄρα περὶ ὧν ἂν μὴ εἰδῇ ἔνεισιν
ἀληθεῖς δόξαι περὶ τούτων ὧν οὐκ οἶδε;
그럼 알지 못하는 일들에 관하여 알지 못하는 자에게
그가 알지 못하는 바로 그 일들에 관련하여 참된 믿음들이
들어 있지?
> 85b6 ἂν ... εἴδῇ(subjunctive): Cf. > 78e8 ὃ ... ἂν ... γίγνηται.
Smyth. 2508. When the antecedent is definite, the simple relatives
(ὅς, οἷος, ὅσος, etc.) are used; when indefinite, the compound relatives
(ὅστις, ὁποῖος, ὁπόσος, etc.) are used, but the simple relatives are often
employed instead. When the antecedent is indefinite, ὅς usually has
the subjunctive with ἄν or optative; while ὅστις is preferred to ὅς if
the verb is indicative (2569).
CG. 40.9. 'Indefinite' subjunctive + ἄν: to refer to actions which occur
habitually (repeatedly, typically, generically) in or up to the present;
the main clause normally has a present indicative referring
to an habitual action (33.15):
In historic sequence, the indefinite construction (referring to actions
which took place repeatedly in the past) is expressed by 'iterative' optative
without ἄν (40.13); the main clause usually has an imperfect referring to
a habitual action in the past (33.24):
Note 1: The prospective construction (sometimes called 'anticipatory') is
the default construction for temporal/conditional/relative clauses referring
to the future; in temporal clauses it is the only possible construction (47.8).
Note that English in such cases uses present-tense forms (the so-called
'concealed' future.).
Note 2: Different labels such as 'prospective' and 'indefinite' for
subjunctive + ἄν are traditional, but the distinction between the two types
should not be pressed too hard: both constructions refer to an unspecified time.
Whether ἄν + subjunctive is to be called prospective or indefinite depends on
the verb used in the matrix clause: if the matrix clause has a verb with
future reference (fut. ind., imp., etc.), a subordinate clause with ἄν + subj. is
'prospective'; if the matrix clause has a pres. ind. expressing a repeated action
or general truth, ἄν + subj. in the subordinate clauseis 'indefinite'.
Even so, the distinction is sometimes irrelevant.
> 85b7 ὧν: Smyth. 2522. Attraction. ― A relative pronoun is often attracted from
its proper case into the case of its antecedent, especially from the accusative into
the genitive or dative. A demonstrative pronoun to whose case the relative
is attracted is usually omitted if unemphatic.
C.G. 50.13. An exception to the rules of agreement is the so-called attraction of
the relative. The relative nearly always takes on the same case as its antecedent
if (and only if):
- the relative clause is restrictive;
- a form of ὅς, οἷος or ὅσος (but not their indefinite forms) is object in
its relative clause, internal object, or subject of an infinitive, i.e. when
an accusative is expected;
- the antecedent is in the genitive or dative:
ΜΕΝ. Φαίνεται.
그리 드러나 보입니다.
ΣΩ. Καὶ νῦν μέν γε αὐτῷ ὥσπερ ὄναρ ἄρτι ἀνακεκίνηνται
αἱ δόξαι αὗται· εἰ δὲ αὐτόν τις ἀνερήσεται πολλάκις τὰ αὐτὰ 10
ταῦτα καὶ πολλαχῇ, οἶσθ᾿ ὅτι τελευτῶν οὐδενὸς ἧττον ἀκριβῶς
ἐπιστήσεται περὶ τούτων. d
그런가 하면 지금은 그 친구에게 그 믿음들이 마치 방금 잠에서
깨어난 것처럼 그러한 것들로 있다네. 그런데 만일 누군가 그에게
바로 그것들을 여러 차례 여러 가지 방식으로 묻는다면, 그것들에
관련하여 결국에는 그가 그 누구에게도 못지 않게 알게 되리라는
점을 자네는 알지.
>85c9 ὄναρ: Smyth. 1606. Many accusatives marking limitations of the verbal action
serve the same function as adverbs.
1607. Most of these adverbial accusatives are accusatives of the internal object:
thus, in τέλος δὲ εἶπε but at last he said, τέλος is to be regarded as standing
in apposition to an unexpressed object of the verb―words, which were the end.
Many adverbial accusatives are thus accusatives in apposition (991) and some
are accusatives of respect (1600). It is impossilbe to apportion all cases among
the varieties of the accusaitves; many may be placed under different heads.
The use of adjectives as adverbs (μέγα πλούσιος very rich) is often derived
from the cognate accusative with verbs (μέγα πλουτεῖν).
C.G. 30.18 Many adverbs derive their form from the neuter accusative of
corresponding adjectives: this is often called the adverbial accusative:
Note 1: These forms are usually best seen as actual adverbsin their ownright,
notas(e.g.) modifiers in a noun phrase with the headleft implicit. Alongside
adverbial accusatives, some such adjectives (but not e.g. πολύ) also have
adverbs formed regularly with the suffix -ως (6.3-4), e.g. μεγάλως.
Note 2: This is the regular process by which adverbs of comparatives and
superlatives are formed: 6.13-14.
> 85c10 εἰ ... ἀνερήσεται: C.G. Neutral Conditions with a Future Indicative
in the Protasis.
49.5. In the case of a neutral condition with a future indicative, the apodosis
often carries a connotation of unpleasantness, undesirability, etc. Conditionals
with the future indicative are therefore often found in threats, appeals, warnings, etc.:
Note 1: In many grammars, conditions with εἰ + future indicative in the protasis
are called 'future most vivid' conditions or 'emotional future' conditions, because
they are often found in threats, etc. Such terms are not always applicable, however:
the value of the indicative is really no different than in other neutral conditions,
although this value lends itself well for contexts of scepticism, threat, etc.
(the speaker indicates simply that the action in the apodosis (e.g. punishment,
destruction) will follow if the condition in the protasis is fulfilled, leaving it to
the addressee to assess the likelihood of that fulfilment). For other 'loaded' uses
of the future indicative, 33.43.
Cf. Smyth. 2328. Emotional Future Conditions.―When the protasis expresses
strong feeling, the future indicative with εἰ is commonly used instead of ἐάν
with subjunctive, and may often be rendered by hall. The protasis commonly
suggests something undesired, or feared, or intended independently of
the speaker's will; the apodosis commonly conveys a threat, a warning,
or an earnest appeal to the feelings. The apodosis is generally expressed
by the future indicative, but other forms of 2326 are possible.
a. When εἰ with the future indicative is directly contrasted with ἐάν with
the subjunctive, the former usually presents the unfavourable, the latter
the favourable, alternative. ἢν μὲν γὰρ ἐθέλωμεν ἀποθνῄσκειν ὑπὲρ τῶν δικαίων,
εὐδοκιμήσομεν . . . , εἰ δὲ φοβησόμεθα τοὺς κινδύνους, εἰς τραχὰς καταστήσομεν
ἡεμᾶς αὐτούς if we are (shall be) willing to die for the sake of justice,
we shall gain renown; but if we are going to fear dangers, we shall bring
ourselves into great confusion I. 6. 107. Cp. X.C.4.1.15, Ar. Nub. 586-591,
L.27.7, I. 12.237, 15.130, 17.9, D. 8.17, 18.176, 27.20-22. Both constructions are
rarely used in successive clauses without any essential difference (X.Ap.6).
ἐάν with the subjunctive, when used in threats or warnings, is a milder form of
statement than εἰ with the future (Hdt. 1.71). An unfavouralbe alternative
may thus be expressed by ἐάν with the subjuctive (A 135-137, Hdt. 3.36, Aes. 3.254).
b. εἰ with the future indicative may have a modal force like that of δεῖ or μέλλω(am to, must)
with the infinitive: βαρεῖα (κήρ), εἰ τέκνον δαίξω hard is fate, if I must slay my child
A. Ag.208. The future of present intention (2301) is different.
A. Rijksbaron, Syntax and Semantics. 24.2. εἰ+indicative.
Note 2. The use of the indicative often suggests a certain scepticism on the part of
the speaker concerning the fulfilment of the condition. This nuance may be explicitly
expressed by means of so-called attitudinal modifiers (i.e. modifiers indicating
a speaker's attitude concerning the content of his words.) such as ἀληθέως in
'if ... in truth ...', 'if ... really ...'.
Note 3. In the case of εἰ + future indicative the speaker's scepticism (cp. Note 2 above)
may imply that he considers fulfilment of the condition undesirable, particularly
in cases where the apodosis refers to something undesirable or unpleasant.
It is clear from the unpleasant consequences that the addressee had better
take care lest the condition be fulfilled.
By Jung.: Smyth. 2328. b.에서 불충분하게 언급된 'modal force'를 고려하여 본 항목에서
조건절의 future indicative는 일종의 사고실험으로서의 양상의미를 전달하는 것이고,
불안이나 의심, 위협 등의 감정적 호소로서 emotional 용법과는 구분되어야 할 것.
> 85c11 τελευτῶν: Goodwin. Syntax. 834. Certain temporal participles, agreeing with
the subject of a sentence, have almost the force of adverbs. Such are ἀρχόμενος, at first;
τελευτῶν, at last, finally; διαλιπὼν (or ἐπισχὼν) χρόνον, after a while, or διαλείπων χρόνον,
at intervals; χρονίζων, for a long time. E.g.
Ἅπερ καὶ ἀρχόμενος εἶπον, as I said also at first. THUC. iv. 64.
Τελευτῶν οὖν ἐπὶ τοὺς χειροτέχνας ᾖα, finally then I went to the artisans. PLAT. AP. 22C.
Ὀλίγον χρόνον διαλιπὼν ἐκινήθη, after a little while he moved. Id. Phaed. 118.
Οὐ πολὺν χρόνον ἐπισχὼν ἦκε, after (waiting) no long time he came. Ib. 59 E.
Διαλείπουσαν χρόνον, at intervals (of Clotho's regular movements). Id. Rep. 617 C.
Ὅπως χρονίζον εὖ μενεῖ βουλευτέον. AESCH. Ag. 847: cf. χρονισθείς, Ib. 727.
ΜΕΝ. Ἔοικεν.
그럴 듯합니다.
ΣΩ. Οὐκοῦν οὐδενὸς διδάξαντος ἀλλ᾿ ἐρωτήσαντος ἐπι-
στήσεται, ἀναλαβὼν αὐτὸς ἐξ αὑτοῦ τὴν ἐπιστήμην;
그렇다면 아무도 가르치지는 않고 묻었는데도 그가 알게 될 테고,
스스로 자기 자신으로부터 그 앎을 다시 떠올려 잡음으로써
그리 할 게 아닌가?
ΜΕΝ. Ναί. 5
네.
ΣΩ. Τὸ δὲ ἀναλαμβάνειν αὐτὸν ἐν αὑτῷ ἐπιστήμην οὐκ
ἀναμιμνῄσκεσθαί ἐστιν;
그런데 스스로 자신 안에서 앎을 다시 떠올려 잡는다는 것은
상기한다는 것이지?
> '다시 떠올려 잡는다는 것(ἀναλαμβάνω),' 즉 반복적으로 재현될 수 없는 것,
다시 말해 상기되지 않는 것은 플라톤에게 있어서 앎(ἐπιστήμη)이 아니다.
ΜΕΝ. Πάνυ γε.
물론입니다.
ΣΩ. Ἆρ᾿ οὖν οὐ τὴν ἐπιστήμην, ἣν νῦν οὗτος ἔχει, ἤτοι
ἔλαβέν ποτε ἢ ἀεὶ εἶχεν; 10
그렇다면 혹시 지금 이 친구가 지니고 있는 것, 그 앎이란
언젠가 그가 취했던 것이거나 언제나 지니고 있던 것 아닌가?
ΜΕΝ. Ναί.
네.
ΣΩ. Οὐκοῦν εἰ μὲν ἀεὶ εἶχεν, ἀεὶ καὶ ἦν ἐπιστήμων· εἰ
δὲ ἔλαβέν ποτε, οὐκ ἂν ἔν γε τῷ νῦν βίῳ εἰληφὼς εἴη. ἢ
δεδίδαχέν τις τοῦτον γεωμετρεῖν; οὗτος γὰρ ποιήσει περὶ e
πάσης γεωμετρίας ταὐτὰ ταῦτα, καὶ τῶν ἄλλων μαθημάτων
ἁπάντων. ἔστιν οὖν ὅστις τοῦτον πάντα δεδίδαχεν; δίκαιος
γάρ που εἶ εἰδέναι, ἄλλως τε ἐπειδὴ ἐν τῇ σῇ οἰκίᾳ γέγονεν
καὶ τέθραπται. 5
그렇다면 한편으로 만일 언제나 지니고 있었다면, 언제나 그가
아는 채이기도 했었지 않나 싶네. 그런데 만일 언젠가 취했던
것이라면, 적어도 지금의 삶에서는 취한 자이지 않았겠지.
아니면 누군가 이 친구에게 기하를 다루는 일을 가르쳤는가?
왜냐하면 이 사람이 기하학 전반에 관련하여 바로 이러한
일들을 할 것이고, 그 밖의 배움들 전반에 관련하여서도 그럴
것이니 하는 말일세. 그러므로 누가 되었든 이 자에게 모든 것을
가르친 자로서 있는가? 자네는 아마 마땅히 알 만한 자이니 하는
말일세, 특히나 자네 집안에서 그가 태어나 양육받았기에 그러하지.
> 85e3 δίκαιος + inf. Cf. 81d7 ἡδύς ἀκοῦσαι: Cf. 71e3, 76a10. CG 51.9.
The dynamic infinitive is also used to complement certain adjectives and
nouns with meanings similar to those listed above, i.e. expressing ability,
possibility, need, desire, etc. Cf. Dynamic Infinitives Specifying Adjectives and Nouns.
C.G. 51.18. Especially in poetry, the dynamic infinitive is sometimes used to
limit or specify the meaning of an adjective or noun (other than those with
the types of meaning listed in 51.9); the infinitive in this use is often called
epexegetic(al):
(45) λευκόπωλος ἡμέρα | πᾶσαν κατέσχε εὐφεγγὴς ἰδεῖν. (Aesch. Pers. 386-7)
White-horsed day, bright to see, covered the entire earth.
(46) ΚΛ. ἐν Αἰγύπτῳ δὲ δὴ πῶς τὸ τοιοῦτον φῂς νενομοθετῆσθαι; ::
ΑΘ. θαῦμα καὶ ἀκοῦσαι.
(Clinias:) How then do you say that this matter is legislated in Egypt? ::
(Athenian:) It is a wonder even to hear it.
In such cases the infinitive does not express purpose or result; in sense this use
is similar to the accusative of respect, for which → 30.14.
Note 1: Such infinitives tend to be active in form, even though they typically
depend on a nounor adjective referring to the 'object' of the infinitive
(note the translation 'hear it' in (46)); also →51.9 n.1 above.
Cf. 76a10 ἀποκρίνεσθαι:
Smyth. 1969., 2001-4.. C. Infinitive after Adjectives, Adverbs, and Substantives.
The infinitive serves to define the meaning ability, fitness, capacity, etc.
(and their opposites), and generally those analogous in meaning to verbs
which take the infinitive (2000). Here the datival meaning (purpose, destination)
is often apparent. Cp. 1969. The infinitive was originally a verbal noun in the dative
(in part possibly also in the locative) case. The use to express purpose (2008) is
a survival of the primitive meaning, from which all the other widely diverging uses
were developed in a manner no longer always clear to us. But the to or for meaning
seen in μανθάνειν ἤκομεν we have come to learn (for learning) can also be discerned
in δύναμαι ἰδεῖν I have power for seeing. then I can see. Cp. 2000, 2006 a.
As early as Homer, when the datival meaning had been in part obscured, the infinitive
was employed as nominative (as subject) and accusative (as object). After Homer,
the infinitive came to be used with the neuter article, the subtantive idea thus gaining
in definiteness. The article must be used when the infinitive stands as an object
in the genitive or dative, and when it depends on prepositions.
ΜΕΝ. Ἀλλ᾿ οἶδα ἔγωγε ὅτι οὐδεὶς πώποτε ἐδίδαξεν.
그럼 저로서는 누구도 결코 가르치지 않았다고 압니다.
> 85e6 Ἀλλά: Denniston. p16-17. ἀλλά (6) Assentient. This use is at first sight
diametrically opposed to the adversative. But in fact assent may include the idea
of opposition in two contrary ways. (a) Agreement is presented as self-evident and
inevitable. The speaker not only agrees, but repudiates the very idea that dissent is
possible. in modern languages 'mais oui', 'aber ja', 'but of course', are similarly used.
This force of ἀλλά is most clearly present where a question precedes: the particle
protests, in effect, against the asking of a superfluous question. (b) Agreement is
presented, not as self-evident, but as wrung from the speaker malgre lui. ἀλλά then
points the contrast between the assent given and the considerations which have
militated against the giving of it. In (a) 'Why', in (b) 'Well' is usually the best translation.
The assentient force of ἀλλά thus appears to be derived from two contrary elements.
While in certain passages (e.g. S.Tr.490, 600: Pl.Grg.481B) the first of these, in others
(e.g. S.Ant.98: Tr.472: El.1055: Ph.645, 1278) the second is clearly in evidence, and
the note of eagerness or of reluctance is unmistakable, other passages remain
in which decision is difficult or impossible. This is no mere matter of theory,
it concerns the manner in which certain lines are to be read, or spoken on the stage.
E.g. in S.El.944, 1472 does ἀλλά convey a ready or a reluctant acquiescence?
Perhaps to the Greeks there was never any ambiguity, and never any temptation to
confuse (a) and (b): though it is also possible that (a) and (b) merge in a specifically
assentient force, in which all that is present to the mind is the removal of an obstacle,
whether an actual or a supposed obstacle.
ΣΩ. Ἔχει δὲ ταύτας τὰς δόξας, ἢ οὐχί;
그런데 바로 그 믿음들을 그가 지니고 있지. 그렇지 않나?
ΜΕΝ. Ἀνάγκη, ὦ Σώκρατες, φαίνεται.
지니고 있음이 필연적이라고 드러나 보입니다, 소크라테스.
ΣΩ. Εἰ δὲ μὴ ἐν τῷ νῦν βίῳ λαβών, οὐκ ἤδη τοῦτο
δῆλον, ὅτι ἐν ἄλλῳ τινὶ χρόνῳ εἶχε καὶ ἐμεμαθήκει; 86a
그런데 만일 지금의 삶 속에서 그가 취한 것이 아니라면,
이제 이 점이 분명하지 않은가? 그 외의 어떤 시간에서
그가 지니고 있었고 또한 배웠다는 것이 말일세.
ΜΕΝ. Φαίνεται.
그래 보입니다.
ΣΩ. Οὐκοῦν οὗτός γέ ἐστιν ὁ χρόνος ὅτ᾿ οὐκ ἦν ἄν-
θρωπος;
그렇다면 적어도 이 시간은 그가 인간이지 않던 그런
때이지 않나?
> 86a3 ὅτε: Cf. Smyth. 72. Elision does not occur in the conjunction ὅτι that
(ὅτ᾿ is ὅτε when.)
C.G. 1.36. In monosyllabic words,the final vowel can onlybeelidedifit is ε:
e.g. γ᾿ (γε), δ᾿ (δέ), μ᾿ (με), but not, for instance, the vowel of τό, τά, τί, πρό, etc.
The -ῐ of περί and ὅτι is never elided; the final ι of third-declension dative singular
forms ending in ι (e.g. φύλακι) is elided only very rarely. Final -ῠ is never elided.
ΜΕΝ. Ναί. 5
네.
ΣΩ. Εἰ οὖν ὅν τ᾿ ἂν ᾖ χρόνον καὶ ὃν ἂν μὴ ᾖ ἄνθρωπος,
ἐνέσονται αὐτῷ ἀληθεῖς δόξαι, αἳ ἐρωτήσει ἐπεγερθεῖσαι
ἐπιστῆμαι γίγνονται, ἆρ᾿ οὖν τὸν ἀεὶ χρόνον μεμαθηκυῖα
ἔσται ἡ ψυχὴ αὐτοῦ; δῆλον γὰρ ὅτι τὸν πάντα χρόνον ἔστιν
ἢ οὐκ ἔστιν ἄνθρωπος. 10
그렇다면 만일 그가 그 동안에 인간이던 그런 시간 동안에도
또한 그가 인간이지 않던 그런 시간 동안에도, 참인 믿음들이
그 사람 안에 있을 것이라면, 그 믿음들이 질문에 의해 깨어나
앎들로 되는 바, 그리하여 그 시간 동안 언제나 그의 영혼은
혹시 배운 채로이겠지? 그 모든 시간 동안 그는 인간이거나
인간이지 않다는 게 분명하니 말일세.
> 86a6 ὅν τ᾿ ἂν ᾖ ... ὃν ἂν μὴ ᾖ ...,:
Cf. > 85b6 ἂν ... εἴδῇ(subjunctive); 78e8 ὃ ... ἂν ... γίγνηται.
Smyth. 2508. When the antecedent is definite, the simple relatives
(ὅς, οἷος, ὅσος, etc.) are used; when indefinite, the compound relatives
(ὅστις, ὁποῖος, ὁπόσος, etc.) are used, but the simple relatives are often
employed instead. When the antecedent is indefinite, ὅς usually has
the subjunctive with ἄν or optative; while ὅστις is preferred to ὅς
if the verb is indicative (2569).
CG. 40.9. 'Indefinite' subjunctive + ἄν: to refer to actions which
occur habitually (repeatedly, typically, generically) in or up to
the present; the main clause normally has a present indicative
referring to an habitual action (33.15):
In historic sequence, the indefinite construction (referring to
actions which took place repeatedly in the past) is expressed
by 'iterative' optative without ἄν (40.13); the main clause usually
has an imperfect referring to a habitual action in the past (33.24):
Note 1: The prospective construction (sometimes called 'anticipatory') is
the default construction for temporal/conditional/relative clauses
referring to the future; in temporal clauses it is the only possible
construction (47.8).
Note that English in such cases uses present-tense forms
(the so-called 'concealed' future.).
Note 2: Different labels such as 'prospective' and 'indefinite'
for subjunctive + ἄν are traditional, but the distinction between
the two types should not be pressed too hard: both constructions
refer to an unspecified time. Whether ἄν + subjunctive is to be called
prospective or indefinite depends on the verb used in the matrix clause:
if the matrix clause has a verb with future reference (fut. ind., imp., etc.),
a subordinate clause with ἄν + subj. is 'prospective'; if the matrix clause
has a pres. ind. expressing a repeated action or general truth,
ἄν + subj. in the subordinate clauseis 'indefinite'.
Even so, the distinction is sometimes irrelevant.
> 86a7 ἐπεγερθεῖσαι: > Cf. 70b3 ἀφικόμενος, 76b1 ἀναμνησθείς:
Smyth. 1926. Resultative Aorist.―
In contrast to the imperfect (and present) the aorist denotes the result, end,
or effect of an action.
Aorist 관련. Cf., CG. 33.31-33.33. Non-Past Uses of the Aorist.
Rijksbaron. 8.3.2. The aorist indicative of performative verbs
Passive 관련. Cf. CG. Verbs with Only One Voice. Middle-Passive Meanings.
35.19. (Change of) Mental State.
> 86a6-10 Εἰ ... ἐνέσονται ..., ἆρ᾿ οὖν ... ἔσται ...;:
Cf. 85c10 εἰ ... ἀνερήσεται. 조건과 귀결 미래 직설법의 용법을
modal로 언급하는 문법가들을 참고하여 Jung의 경우 이를
철학적 맥락에서 질문 형태로 사고실험을 유도하는 용법으로 보고자 한다.
그 경우 ἆρ᾿ οὖν이 추론의 귀결로 자연스럽게 이해될 수 있고,
οὖν에 대한 편집자들의 수정제안에 반대할 근거가 된다.
ΜΕΝ. Φαίνεται.
그리 보입니다.
ΣΩ. Οὐκοῦν εἰ ἀεὶ ἡ ἀλήθεια ἡμῖν τῶν ὄντων ἐστὶν ἐν b
τῇ ψυχῇ, ἀθάνατος ἂν ἡ ψυχὴ εἴη, ὥστε θαρροῦντα χρὴ ὃ
μὴ τυγχάνεις ἐπιστάμενος νῦν―τοῦτο δ᾿ ἐστὶν ὃ μὴ μεμνη-
μένος―ἐπιχειρεῖν ζητεῖν καὶ ἀναμιμνῄσκεσθαι;
그렇다면 만일 있는 것들의 진리가 우리에게 언제나 그
영혼 안에 있는 것이라면, 영혼은 불멸하는 것일 터이며,
그래서 비록 지금은 마침 알지 못하는 것이라도―그런데 이건
마침 기억하지 못하는 바의 그것이네만―용기를 내어 탐구하려
그리고 상기하려 시도해야만 하는 게 아닌가?
> 진리가 영혼 안에 있다면, 영혼은 불멸일 것이다.
실질적으로는 영혼이 불멸이어야 그 경우에 비로소 진리가 영혼
안에 있다는 것이 가능하다. 여기에서 사고실험의 맥락이 들어와서,
이 실질적 귀결이 만일 성립된 것으로 '가정'된다면, 이 경우 실질적
조건 또한 성립되어 있는 것으로 추론될 것이다. 이것이 소위
'가설(가정)의 방법'의 한 사례일 수 있다. by Jung.
ΜΕΝ. Εὖ μοι δοκεῖς λέγειν, ὦ Σώκρατες, οὐκ οἶδ᾿ ὅπως. 5
제겐 당신께서 잘 말씀하시는 걸로 여겨집니다, 소크라테스.
대체 어떻게 그리 하셨는지는 알지 못하고요.
ΣΩ. Καὶ γὰρ ἐγὼ ἐμοί, ὦ Μένων. καὶ τὰ μέν γε ἄλλα
οὐκ ἂν πάνυ ὑπὲρ τοῦ λόγου διισχυρισαίμην· ὅτι δ᾿ οἰόμενοι
δεῖν ζητεῖν ἃ μή τις οἶδεν βελτίους ἂν εἶμεν καὶ ἀνδρικώ-
τεροι καὶ ἧττον ἀργοὶ ἢ εἰ οἰοίμεθα ἃ μὴ ἐπιστάμεθα μηδὲ
δυνατὸν εἶναι εὑρεῖν μηδὲ δεῖν ζητεῖν, περὶ τούτου πάνυ ἂν c
διαμαχοίμην, εἰ οἶός τε εἴην, καὶ λόγῳ καὶ ἔργῳ. //210928
그야 나 자신도 내게 그리 여겨지니 말일세, 메논. 적어도 여타의
것들까지 그 논변을 위해 대단히 호언장담하진 않을 거라네. 그런데
누군가 알지 못하는 것들을 탐구해야 한다고 생각함으로써 우리는
만일 우리가 알지 못하는 것들을 찾아내는 것이 가능하지도 않으며
탐구하는 일이 필요하지도 않다고 생각한다면 그러할 것보다는
더 나은 자들일 테고 더욱 용감한 자들일 것이며 덜 게으른
자들이리라는 점, 이 점을 위하여서는 꽤나 애써 싸울 걸세, 내가
그리 할 수 있다면, 말로도 행동으로도 말이지.
>86d7 διισχυρισαίμην: C.G. 34.13. Optative in Main Clauses.
Potential Optative with ἄν (in Statements/Questions).
The optative with ἄν is used to indicate that the realization of an action is possible:
the potential construction. This construction is used to express a range of nuances:
- to describe actions that might hypothetically occur, or to make a weak assertion
(i.e. to state something more cautiously than with the indicative).
- the negative potential optative (with οὐ) expresses an emphatic negation: it is
not even possible that the action could occur:
- the second-person potential optative can express a cautious command or
request; the first-person potential optative can indicate that someone cautiously
takes permission to do something, or complies with an order or request:
Cf. Smyth. 1824-1834.
ΜΕΝ. Καὶ τοῦτο μέν γε δοκεῖς μοι εὖ λέγειν, ὦ Σώκρατες.
어쨌든 그 점도 당신께서 잘 말씀하시는 걸로 제게 여겨집니다,
소크라테스.
ΣΩ. Βούλει οὖν, ἐπειδὴ ὁμονοοῦμεν ὅτι ζητητέον περὶ
οὗ μή τις οἶδεν, ἐπιχειρήσωμεν κοινῇ ζητεῖν τί ποτ᾿ ἐστὶν 5
ἀρετή;
그리하여 괜찮다면, 누군가가 알지 못하는 것에 관련하여
탐구해야만 한다는 점을 우리가 마찬가지로 생각(합의)하고 있으니,
덕이 도대체 무엇인지 공동으로 탐구하는 일을 시도해 보도록
할까?
> 86c4-5 Βούλει ... ἐπιχειρήσωμεν...:
Smyth. 1805. Deliberative Subjunctive. - The deliberative subjunctive
(present or aorist) is used in questions when the speaker asks what
he is to do or say (negative μή.)
a. Usually in the first person: εἴπωμεν ἢ σῑγῶμεν; shall we speak or
keep silence? E. Ion 758, τί δράσω; ποῖ φύγω; what am I to do?
whither shall I fly? E. Med. 1271, μὴ φῶμεν; shall we not say? P. R. 554 b.
b. The (rare) second person is used in repeating a question: A. τί σοι
πιθώμεθα; B. ὅ τι πίθησθε; A. In what shall we take your advice?
B. In what shall you take my advice? Ar. Av. 164.
c. The third person is generally used to represent the first person;
commonly with τὶς, as τί τις εἶναι τοῦτο φῇ; how shall anyone say
this is so? (= τί φῶμεν;) D. 19. 88.
N. - The subjunctive question does not refer to a future fact, but
to what is, under the present circumstances, advantageous or proper
to do or say.
1806. βούλει, βούλεσθε (poet. θέλεις, θέλετε) do you wish often
precede the subjunctive: βούλει σοι εἴπω; do you wish me to say
to you? P. G. 521 d.
This is a fusion of two distinct questions: βούλει do you wish?
and εἴπω shall I say?
1807. The deliberative subjunctive may be replaced by a periphrasis
with δεῖ or χρή and the infinitive, or by the verbal adjective
in -τέον ἐστί. Thus, ἡμεῖς δὲ προσμένωμεν; ἢ τί χρὴ ποιεῖν; and shall we
wait? or what must we do? S. Tr. 390, τί ποιητέον; (= τί ποιῶμεν;)
what are we to do? Ar. P. 922.
a. For the deliberative future see 1916.
1808. Deliberation in the past may be expressed by ἔδει, χρῆν (ἐχρῆν),
ἔμελλον with the infinitive, and by -τέον (verbal adj.) ἦν.
Deliberative Subjunctive (in Questions)
34.8 The deliberative (or 'dubitative') subjunctive: first-person subjunctives
are used in questions, to express doubt about what action to take
(in specifying questions, → 38.4), or whether or not to proceed with
a certain action (in yes/no-questions and alternative questions, 38.4).
The negative is μή:
(11) οἴμοι, τί δράσω; ποῖ φύγω μητρὸς χέρας; (Eur. Med. 1271)
Woe, what should I do? Whereshould I flee from my mother's hands?
(12) πότερον βίαν φῶμεν ἢ μὴ φῶμεν εἶναι; (Xen. Mem. 1.2.45)
Are we to call this violence, or aren't we?
Note 1: The deliberative subjunctive is also used in indirect questions, 42.8.
Note 2: In dialogue, deliberative subjunctives are sometimes introduced by
βούλει/βούλεσθε or θέλεις do you want ...; in such cases the speaker asks
the addressee whether he/she should do something:
(13) βούλεσθε δῆτα κοινῇ | σκώψωμεν Ἀρχέδημον; (Ar. Ran. 416-17)
If you want, shall we make fun of Archedemus together?
ΜΕΝ. Πάνυ μὲν οὖν. οὐ μέντοι, ὦ Σώκρατες, ἀλλ᾿
ἔγωγε ἐκεῖνο ἂν ἥδιστα, ὅπερ ἠρόμην τὸ πρῶτον, καὶ σκεψαί-
μην καὶ ἀκούσαιμι, πότερον ὡς διδακτῷ ὄντι αὐτῷ δεῖ ἐπι-
χειρεῖν, ἢ ὡς φύσει ἢ ὡς τίνι ποτὲ τρόπῳ παραγιγνομένης d
τοῖς ἀνθρώποις τῆς ἀρετῆς.
그야 물론입니다. 그렇지만 그 질문이 아니라, 소크라테스,
저로서는 제가 처음에 여쭤보던 바로 저것을 검토하고
들어 배우는 게 가장 즐거울 것입니다. 가르쳐지는 것인 것이라
보고 그 일을 시도해야 할지, 아니면 본성에 의해서[ 생겨난다]라고
보고 그래야 할지 아니면 어쨌든 무슨 방법에 의해[ 생겨난다]라고
보고 그래야 할지를 말이죠, 덕이 인간들에게 곁하여 생겨난다면
말입니다.
> 86c9 ὡς ... ὄντι : Smyth. 2086.
With participles of cause or purpose, etc. (2064, 2065): ὡς.
This particle sets forth the ground of belief on which the agent acts,
and denotes the thought, assertion, real or presumed intention,
in the mind of the subject of the principal verb or of some other person
mentioned prominently in the sentence, whithout implicating the speaker or writer.
-蟲-