Past Counterfactual and Causal Participle in Prose Composition
In a prose composition exercise, students must turn five English sentences into Attic Greek. Sentence 3 reads: 'If the general had not been afraid, the soldiers would have crossed the river.' Sentence 4 reads: 'They made him king because they believed he was just.' A student writes for sentence 3: εἰ ὁ στρατηγὸς μὴ ἐφοβεῖτο, οἱ στρατιῶται τὸν ποταμὸν διέβησαν. For sentence 4: ἐποίησαν αὐτὸν βασιλέα ὅτι ἐπίστευον δίκαιον εἶναι. The teacher marks both as 'not quite wrong but not idiomatic Attic' and asks for revision plus a rule. The student protests that the meaning is clear. The teacher replies that the exam tests control of Greek structure, not just intelligibility, and that the missing ἄν changes the sentence type.
1. Correct the Greek of sentence 3 and explain the two changes you make.
Read the worked answer
The student's sentence lacks ἄν and uses the imperfect ἐφοβεῖτο. For a past counterfactual, Attic uses εἰ with the aorist indicative in the protasis and ἄν with the aorist indicative in the apodosis: εἰ ὁ στρατηγὸς μὴ ἐφοβήθη, οἱ στρατιῶται τὸν ποταμὸν διέβησαν ἄν. The aorist ἐφοβήθη presents the fear as a single occasion, matching 'had not been afraid'; the imperfect would present ongoing fear and could suit a present counterfactual, 'if he were not afraid'. The μή is correct because the conditional clause is negated, not the statement. The ἄν is obligatory in the apodosis to mark unreality. If a present counterfactual were intended, εἰ μὴ ἐφοβεῖτο, διέβαινον ἄν would be possible, but that is not the English sentence.
2. Revise sentence 4 to a more idiomatic Attic construction, and explain why the ὅτι clause is less satisfactory than a participle.
Read the worked answer
The ὅτι clause is grammatical, but Attic prose prefers a participle when the reason is presented as the subject's own belief and the subject of the subordinate verb is the same as the main verb. Better: ἐποίησαν αὐτὸν βασιλέα νομίζοντες δίκαιον εἶναι, or κατέστησαν αὐτὸν βασιλέα νομίζοντες δίκαιον εἶναι. νομίζοντες is more idiomatic than ἐπίστευον for 'believed that someone was'; πιστεύω more often means 'trust' with a dative, or 'believe' with a dative or infinitive, but νομίζω is the standard verb of opinion. The participle also makes the causal relation tighter and avoids the slightly flat ὅτι clause. If a finite clause is kept, ὅτι ἐνόμιζον δίκαιον εἶναι is better than ὅτι ἐπίστευον. The revision should preserve the aorist main verb ἐποίησαν or κατέστησαν.
3. A student asks whether ἐὰν τοῦτο ποιήσῃ, καλῶς ἕξει can translate 'if he had done this, it would have been well.' Answer with the correct Greek and the reason.
Read the worked answer
No. ἐὰν τοῦτο ποιήσῃ, καλῶς ἕξει is a future open condition: 'if he does this, it will be well.' 'If he had done this, it would have been well' is a past counterfactual, which requires εἰ with the aorist indicative in the protasis and ἄν with the aorist indicative in the apodosis: εἰ τοῦτο ἐποίησεν, καλῶς ἂν ἔσχεν. The subjunctive ποιήσῃ cannot express past unreality. If the student wanted a present unreal condition, εἰ τοῦτο ἐποίει, καλῶς ἂν εἶχεν would be the model. The difference is not stylistic: it is a difference in mood and in the speaker's commitment to the condition.