[B-Greek] gnomic/omnitemporal present

A. Philip Brown II pbrown at GBS.EDU
Wed Jan 21 16:08:53 EST 2004


Greetings,

In discussing present tense uses (Wallace's) today with my 2nd year class I
found myself wondering if the so-called gnomic present is a case of
rhetorical/literary analysis overrunning actual aktionsart analysis.  By
that I mean, it seems to be that the *statement* a present tense verb occurs
in may be axiomatic/gnomic, but the verbal action itself is not necessarily
a happening-all-the-time action or a happening-at-any-time action (my
paraphrase of Wallace's two sub-categories of gnomic action).

For example,

MAT 5:32 PAS hO APOLUWN THN GUNAIKA AUTOU ... PORNEIAS POIEI AUTHN
MOICEUQHNAI
This is Wallace's first example under the gnomic present and illustrates my
point well. The objective nature of the action denoted by APOLUWN is of
relatively short duration. The "putting away" is accomplished when the
divorce is finalized. The objective nature of the nation denoted by POIEI
MOICEUQHNAI is also of limited duration.

Thus, while the statement itself is true every time a man puts away his wife
under the conditions Jesus specifies, nonetheless the objective action
denoted by the verbal APOLUWN is not continuous or always happening.

The present tense verb(al)s in 1 John 3:3 actually sparked my thinking on
this. PAS hO ECWN THN ELPIDA TAUTHN EP AUTWi hAGNIZEI hEAUTON KAQWS EKEINOS
hAGNOS ESTIN.
Wallace also lists this passage under gnomic. Yet I would be inclined to see
the "purifying" as a customary/iterative activity, though clearly the verse
as a statement per se is axiomatic/gnomic.

So, the question is: Should we be asking two questions about the present
tense? First, what is its "use"  here gnomic. Second, what aktionsart is
the author portraying  in Mat. 5:32 punctiliar/simple action, i.e., the
author is not portraying the action as progressive in any sense; in 1 John
3:3 customary/iterative.

Caveats:
1. I know there is no necessary connection between a speaker's tense
portrayal of a verbal action and the objective nature of that action in
reality. There is, however, a necessary connection between a responsible
speaker's choice of a given lexeme (with both its denotative and connotative
significations) and a tense (with its basic inherent aspectual significance)
and the kind of action he desires to portray.
2. Although aware of alternative ways of viewing aspect & aktionsart, in the
context of this question, I am working with Wallace's definitions of aspect
& aktionsart  aspect: the generalized, non-contextual significance of a
tense; aktionsart: the aspectual significance of a given tense constrained
by lexical, grammatical, and contextual factors.

Interested in your input,

Philip Brown

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
A. Philip Brown II, Ph.D.
Asst. Prof. of Bible & Theology

God's Bible School & College
1810 Young Street
Cincinnati, OH 45202
www.gbs.edu
(513) 721-7944 ext 163
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~




More information about the B-Greek mailing list