Alright, so I was struck by the line in Plutarch’s How to Read Poetry (How to Study Poetry in Hunter’s edition),
ἐν ἐσθλοῖς δὲ καθήσεσθʼ ἄνολβοι
No ††, no comment on καθήσεσθ[ε] in Hunter.
Should you ever feel there is a limit to Greek morphology, sit down for this counter example.
Available futures include:
- καθεδοῦμαι (classical, almost completely showing the sed- root that we know better from Latin but is represented in ἕδρα and ἕδος without being obscured by dy- or ds-).
2. καθεδήσομαι – double future, nicely done. Clearly those future contracts were down for the count. Still, not ideal because the stem doesn’t look much like the pres/aor act.
3. καθεσθήσομαι – future passive-y. Transparent enough but what a mouthful.
On to καθίζω, and we get
4. καθιζήσομαι (also classical)
5. καθίσομαι
6. καθιοῦμαι (the contract future you might have expected [νομίζω, νομιέω], but this verb is (duh!) not an -ίζω derivative, so no, not kosher).
And our winner:
7. καθήσομαι. First attested in LXX and NT. I think they did the right thing there. I note that the form is not given in CGL, which usually does include NT forms.
Is there a verb that can beat this, or even come close?
===
PS 1 Limitations of Perseus’s Morpheus engine: You will only get a parse of καθήσομαι as if derived from καθίημι and despite James Tauber’s deep involvement with both NT Scholarship, Greek morphology, and the Scaife viewer, that hasn’t changed just yet. I have not found any future middles of καθίημι in the texts that I have lying around here.. Triple-check just for kicks: TLG calls it a fut middle passive in the case of κάθημαι. OK, I make typos too. Don’t do this at home, folks. And don’t let your friends call something a future middle passive either.
PS 2 change the Euripides line to ἐν ἐσθλοῖς δὲ καθεδεῖσθ᾽ οἱ ἄνολβοι? καθεδεῖσθαι ἄνολβοι? Not my job:-)