Ungrammatical (illogical) in English?

Al Kidd akidd at InfoAve.Net
Wed Sep 1 04:49:41 EDT 1999



My question is: Why did Greek settle on a periphrastic construction for the
Future Perfect Active when the concept of using a true Future Perfect
Active was not unknown to them (e.g., TEQNXW = I shall be dead, I shall
have died)? 

Why the awkwardness of 

    TAUTA        GEGRAFWS     ESTAI 
These (things)  having-written    he will-be

(He will-be having-written these things.)

Good English sense of what the Greek intends is given in the translation
"He will already have written these things" [i.e., 'He will (by the time of
some future event--be it an event either implied by, or explicitly referred
to, in the context) have written these things'].  

But my question is: What in the Greek mind accounts for its preference to
have the less elegant solution for the Future Perfect Active?
 
Al Kidd




More information about the B-Greek mailing list