21st Century Classical Greek -- conditional seven

Book I section 28.  This is kind of long but first check out how much you recognize, and then I’ll get into the two bolded bits.

ἐπειδὴ δὲ ἐπύθοντο οἱ Κερκυραῖοι τὴν παρασκευήν, ἐλθόντες ἐς Κόρινθον μετὰ Λακεδαιμονίων καὶ Σικυωνίων πρέσβεων, οὓς παρέλαβον, ἐκέλευον Κορινθίους τοὺς ἐν Ἐπιδάμνῳ φρουρούς τε καὶ οἰκήτορας ἀπάγειν, ὡς οὐ μετὸν αὐτοῖς Ἐπιδάμνου.

[2] εἰ δέ τι ἀντιποιοῦνται, δίκας ἤθελον δοῦναι ἐν Πελοποννήσῳ παρὰ πόλεσιν αἷς ἂν ἀμφότεροι ξυμβῶσιν: ὁποτέρων δ᾽ ἂν δικασθῇ εἶναι τὴν ἀποικίαν, τούτους κρατεῖν. ἤθελον δὲ καὶ τῷ ἐν Δελφοῖς μαντείῳ ἐπιτρέψαι.

[3] πόλεμον δὲ οὐκ εἴων ποιεῖν: εἰ δὲ μή, καὶ αὐτοὶ ἀναγκασθήσεσθαι ἔφασαν, ἐκείνων βιαζομένων, φίλους ποιεῖσθαι οὓς οὐ βούλονται ἑτέρους τῶν νῦν ὄντων μᾶλλον ὠφελίας ἕνεκα.

[4] οἱ δὲ Κορίνθιοι ἀπεκρίναντο αὐτοῖς, ἢν τάς τε ναῦς καὶ τοὺς βαρβάρους ἀπὸ Ἐπιδάμνου ἀπαγάγωσι, βουλεύσεσθαι: πρότερον δ᾽ οὐ καλῶς ἔχειν τοὺς μὲν πολιορκεῖσθαι, αὐτοὺς δὲ δικάζεσθαι.

[5] Κερκυραῖοι δὲ ἀντέλεγον, ἢν καὶ ἐκεῖνοι τοὺς ἐν Ἐπιδάμνῳ ἀπαγάγωσι, ποιήσειν ταῦτα: ἑτοῖμοι δὲ εἶναι καὶ ὥστε ἀμφοτέρους μένειν κατὰ χώραν, σπονδὰς δὲ ποιήσασθαι ἕως ἂν ἡ δίκη γένηται.

Subsection 2 is a classic conditional with both protasis and apodosis. 

The protasis uses a conjugated progressive conceptual indicative verb but not in executive voice; it’s in base voice. This is something the Kerkyraeans don’t want to hear about, and it hasn’t happened yet, so why would it not use imperfective conceptual?

The apodosis does not have an, it is ithelon dounai, the Kerkyraeans were willing to submit the case to a court. The conjugated verb is in progressive eventive indicative executive voice. This would be a deliberate act.

The complement of ithelon is verb is an impersonal gerundive but although it is something that has not happened yet, it is in imperfective eventive in executive voice.

This is another terrific example of how the tense structure creates cognitive dissonance. But even aspectually, it looks a little strange.

The point of the apodosis seems to be, “any time you’re ready, this is what we’ll do.” And the i.g. expresses the action they are going to do once it becomes due and owing (i.g.).

This conditional seems to fall into Goodwin’s category of a supposition with no implications about the result. So the Kerkyraeans are just running this up the flagpole to see who salutes.

The two uses of an later in the subsection are both “such X as [happens]” but they are more than that; they point to a change of focus. I’ll give some lessons on this later but the point is, in the first place, that the Kerkyraeans call on the Korinthians to agree to some other of the Peloponnesian polises to judge the case, and the Kerkyraeans agree to such judgment as those other of the Peloponnesian polises hand down.

In subsection 5, notice:

…καὶ ὥστε ἀμφοτέρους μένειν κατὰ χώραν…

Months ago I pointed out that Goodwin wants this to be an expressed condition to which the material shows the result. It’s not what we have here. The truce and decision-making are not conditional upon everybody staying where they are. This hoste clause is just one option for what to do while settling the case without going to war.

So here’s another gap in Goodwin which hasn’t been documented either

a) because people’s brains were too full of useless categories to pick it out;

b) because no prior scholar documented it and nobody was willing to stick their necks out; or

c) because people saw it through the eyes of what had already been written and failed to see that it was a different thing altogether, something I call “polarized brain cells”.