Are participles temporally unmarked? Mk 1:35

George Blaisdell maqhth at hotmail.com
Sat Mar 6 17:42:27 EST 1999




"Hultberg, Alan D" writes: 

>Just to clarify some terminology.

>When aspect theorists talk about the Greek verb, they              
>tend to use these conventions:

>TENSE = a morpholigical category; so the aorist TENSE means a 
>particular form of the verb

>ASPECT = the kind of action that the tense-form stands for,     
>whether perfective, imperfective, or stative.  In this           >sense 
it is the equivalent of the old German label        >*Aktionsart* (lit. 
"kind of action").

>The difference between aspect and *Aktionsart* is that             >the 
latter is presumed to relate to the occurence of               >the verb 
as it happened in real time, while the
>former presumes no such NECESSARY relationship.

Thanks Alan ~

So if 'Tense' simply denotes a category of related spellings that refer 
to the 'Aspects', which are the kinds of actions, then Aktionsart 
denotes the real time nature of those actions.  

[I still do not see why the 'Aspect' of a kind of action 'presumes no 
such real-time necessary relationship' to the action.  I can see how 
someone might say that it is necessarily abstract...  But definitely 
related to the 'real time' occurrence SOMEHOW!!]

This terminology confuses me, because IF 'Aspect' indeed denotes a 
'kind' of action, then it does NOT denote a WAY of viewing it.  Yet that 
is precisely what aspect theorists seem to assert. So it would seem to 
follow that 'Aspect' is NOT in any way the KIND of action, as your above 
definition of aspect asserts.

The aorist, for instance, in order for us to use it ~ We must first 
observe in very real time an action from its inception through its 
real-time ongoingness to its completion/cessation.  We now have 
experienced the whole of that action, perhaps many times!  From this 
vantage point, AFTER having seen the whole action, we can then use the 
aorist, which conceptualizes it in its entirety, as seen in retrospect, 
[hence the augment], but as projected conceptually outside that [past] 
frame of reference [hence the name: Aorist!].

>I'm sympathetic to your dis-ease.

Me too!  :-)

>I'm no card-carrying aspect theorist, but I have thought about the
>issue some, and it seems to me that there is a lot more going on in 
>verb choice than meets the eye.

And I would not only agree, but agree enthusiatically!  Greek is highly 
abstract ~ So much so that Plato came up with his theory of Ideal 
Forms!!  And imo, the aorist is the abstract form of the verb par 
excellance.

George

George


George Blaisdell
Roslyn, WA


______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com



More information about the B-Greek mailing list