[B-Greek] John 1:12-13 - translating the participle
waldo slusher
waldoslusher at yahoo.com
Thu Aug 14 18:57:15 EDT 2003
--- Jonathan Borland <jborland at lwconline.com> wrote:
> As to Aspect, I prefer the view that the "default"
> aspect for
> non-finite verbs comes in the aorist tense, meaning
> that if an author
> simply wanted to express something _without_
> emphasizing its aspect, he
> would use the aorist.
Question: Can a writer emphasize the aorist/default
aspect then? If he uses it, it seems to be as a
default; if he doesn't use it, it is for emphasis. Do
I understand you correctly?
> If an author wanted to emphasize the aspect, he
> would use an
> imperfective tense (= present or imperfect) for
> continuous aspect.
> Note that such aspect only applies to non-indicative
> verbal forms.
Question: I'm not following this. Why apply only to
non-indicatives? To me, aspect is part of both the
lexeme and form, regardless of mood.
> So, ". . . to those who kept on believing in his
> name" is allowed.
Comment: I know this has been argued out here by
others, but I am in agreement with those who contend
that the present participle NEVER means KEPT ON
BELIEVING (or kept on anything)...
I didn't see any responses to an excellent question
posed earlier (maybe a week ago or more by Mitch L.)
about when does the present tense encroach upon the
future tense, if the idea of "keep on doing such and
such" is what the present tense indicates. I would say
that the present tense NEVER describes a future
action. If the action expressed by a present tense
verb carries on into the distant future, that is quite
apart from the present tense itself. (I like what Mark
W. suggested, namely, that "Gnomic is not an
expression at the Tense level but at the Proposition
level.")
=====
Waldo Slusher
Calgary, AB
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list