Mt. 9.6, EIDHTE
Carl W. Conrad
cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
Fri Oct 25 16:34:31 EDT 2002
At 3:57 PM -0400 10/25/02, Tracey Ray Lane wrote:
>Greetings, all,
>
>How are we to accurately parse the term EIDHTE, when there seems to be
>some difference of opinion as to whether the term is Perfect or Aorist --
>perfect from OIDA, and aorist from EIDON? And is it so important that we
>make the distinction?
>
>I understand that there is a close relationship between seeing and
>knowing, and that OIDA is in fact a perfect of the stem EID- (Latin
>video). Why would then we not go straight from EIDHTE to EIDON, since
>apparently the aorist of ORAW is built off of the EID- stem?
>
>I realize that this quite possibly does not make much sense, but I
>initially identified the term EIDHTE as being aorist, but many of the
>'helps' state that it is perfect, and so became a bit confused.
Yes, there's definitely some confusion here. The form EIDHTE can only
derive from the perfect stem EID- of OIDA; it is subjunctive 2nd plural
active; on the other hand, the subjunctive second-plural active of the
aorist is IDHTE; the E- of EIDON is an augment, not part of the aorist
stem; the augment is found only in the indicative.
--
Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University (Emeritus)
1989 Grindstaff Road/Burnsville, NC 28714/(828) 675-4243
cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu OR cwconrad at ioa.com
WWW: http://www.artsci.wustl.edu/~cwconrad/
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list