[B-Greek] simple test *AURION HLQON

Rolf Furuli furuli at online.no
Mon Dec 19 11:10:53 EST 2005


Dear Mitch,

The grammar of modern languages describes what is normal and customary, as
you say. Exceptions are accepted and are often handled as special cases.
Modern languages have living informants, but that is not the case of
classical Greek, and that does make a difference.

I do not use the method of Porter, but rather the one suggested by Broman
Olsen; I used the same method in my mag. art thesis, though not so refined 
as in Olsen´s book.
The principal point in this approach is the distinction between semantic
factors (factors with an uncancellable meaning) and pragmatic factors
(factors that get their meaning
from the context). For example, when an aorist has past reference I will ask
whether this is caused by an intrinsic property or whether it is caused by
the context. The problem is that in most clauses we cannot know whether a
particular temporal reference  is caused by the verb itself or by the
context. In modern languages we know this on the basis of informants, but
not so in a dead language. Therefore, I do not study exceptions, giving them
more weight than those that are used normally.  But I study those clauses
that are so
restricted that I, with a reasonable certainty, can know that the property I
am looking for is caused by the verb itself and not by the context. Such
clauses are relatively few. As an example I can mention that of the 79,574
Hebrew verbs I studied in connection with my dissertation, less than one
thousand were so restricted that I
could know their semantic meaning. This means that we have to put quality
above quantity.

Examples of what I call "restricted clauses" when we try to identify the 
imperfective "tenses" are of the kind: "When Mary was reading the paper, 
John entered the room." A Greek verb in the temporal clause that is 
intersected by the main clause signals imperfectivity. Imperfective verbs 
can also be identified by clauses where the verb includes the beginning of 
an action and its continued unfolding, e.g., "This man began to.." In order 
to demonstrate imperfectivity it is not enough to show that the verb *can* 
be translated "...began to...," but we must find clauses where this *must* 
be the meaning. Such clauses are few. Conative situations also demonstrate 
imperfectivity. So we must look for situations in the past where the context 
shows that the action was just attempted but not carried out. Again, such 
clauses are few. There are also restrictions on the subject and its 
arguments when we are looking for semantic meaning. The clear examples are 
those where the both the subject and object are singular and definite. After 
we have found a clause so "restricted" that we know that a particular 
characteristic is an intrinsic part of the verb, we must ask about a 
possible Semitic influence (in the NT) as a reason for the choice of verb 
"tense". And we must look for extralinguisitc factors that may play a role 
as well.

So, I am not looking for the outward appearance of the Greek verbal system 
(pragmatics). Neither am I looking for the most ordered system or 
exceptions. But I am looking for the intrinsic meaning of verbs (semantics). 
And this can only be found in a few instances.

Best regards,

Rolf Furuli
University of Oslo

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Mitch Larramore" <mitchlarramore at yahoo.com>
To: "Rolf Furuli" <furuli at online.no>; <b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org>
Sent: Sunday, December 18, 2005 3:21 AM
Subject: Re: [B-Greek] simple test *AURION HLQON


> Dr. Furuli:
>
> One thing I found odd with Porter was his statement
> that he was trying to reconstruct the verbal system of
> Greek by creating an interpretive system/model with
> the least number of exceptions to the rules. But I
> really don't find that at all compelling. I would
> suppose that a better approach would be to look for a
> system that best handles ONLY the normal and customary
> usages. In other words, I would actually not consider
> the anomolies/exceptions/rhetoric/etc. of a language
> in trying to reconstruct its "grammatical rules." What
> occurred to me was if you took Porter's assumptions
> and evaluated the English language, you might very
> well be forced to conclude that English is likewise an
> aspect-only language. I think grammar targets the
> "normal and customary" usages of a language. Those
> examples outside the bell curve (like, the grass
> withers) should purposefully be excluded.
>
> Mitch Larramore
> Sugar Land, Texas
>
> __________________________________________________




More information about the B-Greek mailing list