TL

Being in the state of subordinate, rather than setting oneself in the position of controller is this word….

uJpotagh/, hvß, hJ (s. tagh/, and cp. 2 aor. of uJpota¿ssw; Dionys. Hal. 3, 66, 3 act. ‘subjecting’) in our lit. only pass. the state of submissiveness, subjection, subordination, as opposed to setting oneself up as controller (Plut., Mor. 142e) (Wsd 18:15 A; TestSol; ApcMos 10; Artem. 1, 73 p. 66, 14; Paradoxogr. p. 218, 7 Westermann e?n uJpotaghvØ; Vett. Val. 106, 8; 11; 17; 24; 198, 28; BGU 96, 7 [III BC] ton e?n uJpotaghvØ tugca¿nonta. Cp. e?n uJp. me÷nein touv qeouv Iren. 4, 38, 3 [Harv. II 196, 3]; Theoph. Ant 1, 6 [p. 70, 11]). hJ uJpotagh thvß oJmologi÷aß uJmw?n ei?ß to eujagge÷lion 2 Cor 9:13 (oJmologi÷a 1). e?n pa¿shØ uJpotaghvØ subordinating herself in every respect 1 Ti 2:11 (cp. cum omni subiectione Papias [1:3]); te÷kna e¶cein e?n uJpotaghvØ keep children under control 3:4. e?n mia?ˆ uJpotaghvØ kathrtisme÷noi made complete in unanimous subjection IEph 2:2. ei¶xamen thvØ uJpotaghvØ (dat. of manner) we yielded in submission Gal 2:5. The system of ordered relationships requires recognition of one’s proper place in the structure. Since Paul is {p. 1042} subordinate to the ‘truth of the gospel’ he cannot comply with some demands imposed by leaders in Jerusalem who have the obligation to recognize their place in the order of things.—Of the members of the body uJpotaghvØ mia?ˆ crhvtai they experience a mutual subjection 1 Cl 37:5. oJ kanw»n thvß uJpotaghvß the established norm of obedience (Kleist) 1:3.—DELG s.v. ta¿ssw. M-M. TW.

I’m just learning how to use my new Accordance software, but I did manage to find this. The above word is upotauh (I think). It describes a sort of involuntary state of being, something like what Charis is interpreting the Ephe. 5:24 passage. But as we can see, this is a different word than the one in discussion which is upotasso(menoi).