Appendix I. (24/30)
英語原文
Both moods alike developed a distinct potential use, which was distinguished from the other by κέ or ἄν ; and in Homer we have forms like ἔλθῃ κε parallel with ἔλθομαί κε and ἔλθοι κε, all negatived by οὐ. The potential subjunctive, however, did not surbive the Epic period, while the potential optative became fixed in the language. The future indicative also developed a potential form with κέ or ἄν, which appears to have survived the potential subjunctive, at least in the colloquial language. The English has no form except its vague I may take to express the various shades of meaning denoted by ἑλοῦμαι κε, ἕλωμαι, ἕλωμαί κε, and ἑλοίμην, which once stood between ἑλοῦμαι, I shall take, and ἑλοίμην ἄν, I should take. (See §399.) The subjunctive, therefore, in its two chief uses in independent sentences, from which all others are derived, was originally accompanied by a weaker future form, the optative, expressing the same idea less distinctly and decidedly.
Let us now see how this weaker subjunctive (or future) form enters into the various dependent constructions, that is, into conditional and final sentences and indirect discourse.
日本語解釈