On εἰ οὐ…

Hermann on Viger, p. 833, n. 309, followed by Matthiae on Eur. Med. 87, defends this combination of εἰ with the direct negative instead of μή against Elmsley, who holds it to be inadmissible, on the ground that, when it occurs, the negative does not belong to the hypothetical conjunction, but is attached closely to the word which it negatives, so as to combine with it one negative notion; as in Soph. Aj. 1131, εἰ τοὺς θανόντας οὐκ ἐᾷς θάπτειν παρών ; where οὐκ ἐᾷς is equivalent to κωλύεις: in which cases the direct and not the hypothetical form of the negative is properly used to express an abstract negation.

But this explanation, though it is well adapted to the passage of the Ajax quoted in support of it, is not universally applicable, and requires therefore to be supplemented by another and a different solution.