Use the following persistent identifier: http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:hul.ebook:CHS_AitkenEB.Opaon_and_Opazo.1982.
III. The Formulaic Use of Opazō
All of these instances contain a form of opazō either in the indicative or in the imperative. The only instance of *kudos opazein outside of the position —5 ⏑ ⏑ —6 ⏑ ⏑ # employs an imperative:
We may schematize the meter as —1 ⏑ ⏑ | —2 ⏑ ⏑ —3 ⏑ and note that this corresponds exactly to —4 ⏑ ⏑ | —5 ⏑ ⏑ —6 ⏑ as in the expression, Ἕκτορι κῦδος ὄπαζε(v) (Μ 255, Ο 327, Π 730). 
opazomenos describes a river which is flowing, or driven on, by the rain of Zeus. The main verbs in the two following lines, ekikhane ‘it reached’ and epaiksaske ‘it rushed’, also emphasize motion:
Hephaistos opaze ‘moves’ from task to task. The imperfective aspect is appropriate here, since motion, in itself, expresses what happens in between being first in one place and then in another.
The imperfective aspect of the present tense verb complements the object, biotos or bios. The poet asks the god to grant him a means of living such as would come from being a good poet. The biotos or bios is not confined to the episodes when the poet is performing, but is what sustains him from song to song. The poet is saying “cause a means of living to accompany me,” and the imperfective aspect stresses the sense of accompaniment fitting to the nature of the object.
olbos denotes prosperity, particularly that derived from a wealth of material possessions. Yet olbos is not a single piece of that wealth, but a characterization of the whole of life. As an enduring quality, olbos requires the imperfective aspect, as expressed by the main verb in the present and the present infinitive, opazein. 
is contrasted with:
We have seen above how opazō contains a causative notion ‘to cause to accompany.’ Within this meaning semantic weight may be placed on either of two facets. The stress can fall either (1) on the act of causation happening in a discrete moment of time, or (2) on the act of going along or being with, in which case what is important is the continuity through units of time and place. The emphasis is made, in the first option, by the use of aorist aspect, and in the second, by the use of the imperfective. This distinction is paralleled in the four lines quoted by a split in the meaning of the objects. Both pompos and pompēas are derivatives of pempo ‘I send’; pompos designates the person who is sent as a companion, whereas pompēus is the act of accompaniment itself. Here we notice the same distinction between the start of the action and the process of it that we saw above in opazō.