Discourse function of Imperfective Tense (Mark: 1:4-8)
Iver Larsen
iver_larsen at sil.org
Sun Dec 29 09:15:02 EST 2002
>
> Yes, exactly. When a setence has a time adverbial, that would define the
> reference time. I talked about the cases where sentences with aorist verbs
> do not have explicit temporal adverbials.
The setting of time is a discourse feature and not a sentence feature. A
discourse unit normally covers a number of sentences, and I would expect the
time to be set by some temporal expression at the outset of the discourse.
Once a time reference is set, it remains in force until another time is set
by a different temporal expression. Aorist verbs then describe the various
events in consecutive order.
> (1) If Jesus's praying were described by the aorist, then
> would it imply that the prayer was completed before
> Simon got up and tried to find him?
>
> (2) Can you say " Simon started looking for him,
> while Jesus was still out there where the narrator left him
> praying",
> with respect to the following English translation?
>
Carl has already answered this, and I agree completely with what he said.
You may find it helpful to compare some of the indicative verb forms of
"pray" in the NT:
Mat 26:42 EK DEUTERON APELQWN PROSEUXATO LEGWN...
Mat 26:44 KAI AFEIS AUTOUS PALIN APELQWN PROSEUXATO EK TRITOU TON AUTON
LOGON
Aorist is used, indicating that the prayer is described as a single
completed act. We are looking at the event from the narrator's vantage
point. (This may reflect an underlying Semitic source, but I'd better not
speculate.)
Mark 14:35 KAI PROELQWN MIKRON EPIPTEN EPI THS GHS KAI PROSEUXETO...
Mark 14:39 KAI PALIN APELQWN PROSEUXATO TON AUTON LOGON
Why was imperfect used in v. 35? I am not sure. Maybe to create suspense.
When you prolong the event, linger at it and imply that the outcome is not
sure, it creates suspense. It brings the reader inside the action where the
outcome is uncertain. This is unlike the narrator viewpoint, since the
narrator already knows the outcome. The creating of suspense is also one of
the functions of the historic present, and it is signaled by the use of a
verb form with an imperfective aspect in both cases.
Luk 22:41 KAI QEIS TA GONATA PROSEUXETO LEGWN...
Luk 22:44 EKTENESTERON PROSEUXETO
Luke preferred the imperfect over aorist here. Probably again in order to
bring the reader inside the situation and create suspense as to the outcome
of the prayer.
Acts 9:40 KAI QEIS TA GONATA PROSEUXATO, KAI EPITREYAS PROS TO SWMA EIPEN...
Acts 20:36 QEIS TA GONATA AUTOU SUN PASIN AUTOIS PROSEUXATO
In both cases, the act of prayer is described as a completed event without
any focus on the contents or length of the prayer or any suspense as to the
outcome of the prayer.
Compare also the aorist forms in James 5:17-18.
Iver Larsen
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list