[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE:aorist.indicative.forms



Bill Thruman wrote:
 >>>>>>>>>
. . . the formal implication had to be such that it would function in any one of these totally 
different settings. i mean that nuances falsely attributed to aorist forms arise, nil from 
the form, but only from what the setting shows about it. you cannot tell at all from the 
form the timing of it relative to other parts of the sentence -- anything from pluperfect 
to future may fly.

>>>>>>>>>

Preach it Bill!

The following is not intended as an exposition of what Bill is saying, he will probably take 
strong exception to both the wording and the implications of what I am saying. I think 
there are some points of contact however. 

***********

I attempted several weeks ago to suggest that confusion in discussions about 
grammatical *functions* in NT Greek arise because there is no clear understanding about 
how the *function* is related to the *form*.

Arguments about the meaning of a word (lexeme) in the abstract (outside of a particular 
context) are pointless. I would suggest that arguments about the meaning of a 
*grammatical form* in the abstract (outside of a particular context) are equally 
pointless and for exactly the same reason.

The *grammatical form* functions like the *signifier* in Saussure's model of the 
linguistic sign. The *grammatical function* is like the *signified* in the same model. The 
relationship is *arbitrary* according to the sense that term is used in structuralist 
circles. 

This diagram may clarify some what:

lexical 
form     (LOGOS) --------> lexical functions (word, thing, . . . account) 

grammatical
form     (accus. case) -----> grammatical functions (dir-obj  . . . sub-inf)

Now to get in a big fight about what the word LOGOS *really* means is about as pointless 
as getting into a big argument about what the accusative case *really means*. There is no 
answer to the question since the function of each is determined *entirely* by how it is 
used in a particular context. 

This all applies as well to the aorist.indicitive.


 Clay Bartholomew
 Three Tree Point