[B-Greek] SIGATW in 1 Cor 14:30
Kimmo Huovila
kimmo.huovila at helsinki.fi
Thu Sep 29 04:51:38 EDT 2005
On Wednesday 28 September 2005 15:46, Eddie Mishoe wrote:
> Since this thread has gone somewhat beyond grammar, I
> thought I would add this. There is an assumption here
> that I think is unjustifiable, and one that is common
> among linguists. To wit: If Paul used the Present, he
> wanted to avoid an Aorist. This is not the case. The
> use of an Aorist may have been equally considered, but
> Paul chose to EMPHASIZE the Present aspect. There is
> an assumption that since he didn't use an Aorist, he
> was trying to ONLY communicate the aspectual element
> of the Present. Paul is free to address one dimension
> of the issue without addressing ALL dimensions of the
> issue.
>
I do not think I made that assumption in a general sense. To the degree that
convention says that some expression is mostly used in a situation, if you
use another expression, it makes the listener notice it and possibly wonder
why that expression was used. If the aorist is the unmarked choice (the
favorite) and the present is the marked choice in a particular context, then
in that context the present pragmatically signals avoidance of the aorist.
But if neither option is marked, then there is not necessarily any avoidance.
Thus the assumption needs justification, but in some cases it may be
justified.
Take an English example. If your friend asks you "How art thou?", you may
think why he used an archaic expression. He might have wanted to be funny or
whatever. But in a sense he avoided the more common "How are you".
Kimmo Huovila
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list