# τί ἄν in indirect question



## radagasty

In the key to Jay's _NT Greek_,
'His kinsmen asked what he wished his son to be called.'
is translated as
Ἠρώτησαν οἱ συγγενεῖς αὐτοῦ τί ἂν θέλοι ἐπικαλεῖσθαι τὸν υἱὸν αὐτοῦ.

I don't quite understand why τί ἂν is used here.
Shouldn't the indirect question be introduced by ὅτι?
And what purpose does ἄν serve?
This is a straightforward factual indirect question, isn't it?

Thanks in advance.


----------



## dmtrs

Indirect questions like this (that express partial ignorance -and cannot be answered by a mere yes or no) are introduced by interrogative or relative pronouns or adverbs; hence τί.
ἄν, I believe, is αοριστολογικό (indefinite? - expressing vagueness) and can be translated (what)*ever*. 
It could also express potentiality, as part of δυνητική ευκτική (potential optative), but I believe this is not the case here and the mood is optative of the indirect speech since the main verb (Ἠρώτησαν) is in past tense.
The sentence according to my interpretation expresses subjective opinion - if the mood is potential optative it expresses possibility in the present and future -which is not totally out of the question, I just vote for the other option.


----------



## radagasty

Thanks for that explanation. I thought that τί introduced a direct question and ὅτι an indirect one, so my translation was:

Οἱ συγγενεῖς αὐτοῦ ἠρώτωσαν ὅτι θέλοι ἐπικαλεῖσθαι τὸν υἱὸν αὐτοῦ.

Would this be incorrect?


----------



## dmtrs

You are welcome.
Your answer would be correct if it was:
Οἱ συγγενεῖς αὐτοῦ ἠρώτ*η*σαν ὅ*,*τι θέλοι ἐπικαλεῖσθαι τὸν υἱὸν αὐτοῦ. 
In my opinion, ὅ,τι can replace τί ἂν here, but it might reveal some kind of frustration or discontent - as if they had been asking for some time but were not getting any answer.


----------



## sotos

I think it makes sense in new greek, too, if is written "τί θέλοι αν (θέλη)", which is a polite and not a pressing  way to ask someone to answer  a question (if he wants).


----------



## Perseas

radagasty said:


> Shouldn't the indirect question be introduced by ὅτι?


Tί can introduce both direct and indirect questions:
_Tί ποιεῖς; (direct question)
Ἠρώτησαν τί ποιῶ.  (indirect question)_


----------



## radagasty

dmtrs said:


> Οἱ συγγενεῖς αὐτοῦ ἠρώτ*η*σαν ὅ*,*τι θέλοι ἐπικαλεῖσθαι τὸν υἱὸν αὐτοῦ.



Yes, ἠρώτ*η*σαν was my mistake, but why the comma in ὅ*,*τι? The indefinite relative is usually written as one word, isn't it: ὅστις, ἥτις, ὅτι. I know that ὅ τι can be so written, as an editorial decision, in order to distinguish it from the ὅτι meaning 'that', but I have never seen it written with a comma in between.


----------



## dmtrs

radagasty said:


> isn't it: ὅστις, ἥτις, ὅτι



No, it's not correct. The relative pronoun is ὅστις, ἥτις, ὅ,τι (or, as you mention, ὅ τι).
See here (240, No9):
Αρχαία Ελληνική Γλώσσα και Γραμματεία - Αρχαίοι Έλληνες Ιστοριογράφοι (Α Γενικού Λυκείου – Γενικής Παιδείας): Ηλεκτρονικό Βιβλίο

ὅτι (without a comma) is a conjunction; it can be ειδικό or αιτιολογικό.
See here (367, 6 & 9; also 371, ὅτι):
Αρχαία Ελληνική Γλώσσα και Γραμματεία - Αρχαίοι Έλληνες Ιστοριογράφοι (Α Γενικού Λυκείου – Γενικής Παιδείας): Ηλεκτρονικό Βιβλίο

(The links, despite their titles, link to a Grammar book.)


----------



## Perseas

In a few Greek grammars written in English language I've seen the relative pronoun written as "ὅστις, ἥτις, ὅτι", indeed, and as a note, "In many text editions the neuter  _*ὅτι* _is printed as  *ὅ τι*, to differentiate it from the conjunction  _*ὅτι* _(_that, because_)".

But in Greek grammars and texts editions it's _*ὅ,τι*_, as dmtrs said.


----------



## radagasty

Perseas said:


> But in Greek grammars and texts editions it's _*ὅ,τι*_, as dmtrs said.



Right... thanks for that clarification. In all the English grammars I've used, I've always seen ὅστις, ἥτις, ὅτι, and indeed likewise in text editions, with the additional option of ὅ τι, if the editor deems it necessary to distinguish the two forms. I suppose whether it is a space or a comma, or written as one word, is a purely editorial decision, since in the classical and Koine periods, neither would have been used.


----------

