[B-Greek] 1 Cor 14:5: present infinitive aspect
Dave Smith (REL110, 211,212)
rel21x at charter.net
Sun May 14 22:44:01 EDT 2006
Friends and scholars,
Both infinitive and participle are substantives morphologically; the
participle still declines, although the infiintive is now fixed. Both take
articles, verbs do not. Therefore, as words of a substantive nature, such a
word is indefinite as far the limits of the action is concerned. I think
that is what Mantey was trying to express. I do believe that the present
infinitive may often express contemporaneous time with the main verb, but
the aorist is more apt to view an simple event. It may even be that the
aorist is a real event and the present is hypothetical, in some sense. For I
Cor. 14:5, the use of QELW with all present or aorist infinitives, not just
LALEIN, must be considered. Even if one were to view LALEIN lexically, it is
not a action that can go on continuously, any more than walking, eating, or
drinking. It is a voluntary action, not involuntary such as breathing. But
as far as QELW is concerned, St. Paul, in at least one place, wishes for
something that he knows is not possible: "I wish all persons to be as even
myself, but each has his own gift from God. On the one hand, some have one
sort of [gift], but some have another sort of [gift]" (I Cor. 7:7). Paul
even states the hypothetical nature of his wish, realizing that it was not
possible according to the present administration of spiritual gifts. The
spiritual gift Paul wishes for all in this place is celebacy. Jesus also
said this was a special gift, not for all (Matthew 19:12).
By way of comparision, Paul is setting up a hypothetical situation in I Cor.
14:5 using the present infinitive, but a real situation in 14:19 using the
aorist, i. e. his normal practice was not to speak in tongues in the open
assembly. What St. Paul wishes in I Cor. 14:5 can not happen, either now or
then. The divine administration and alotment of spiritual gifts enumerated
in both chapters 12 & 14 makes it impossible.
Dave Smith
Hudson, NC
----- Original Message -----
From: "Carl W. Conrad" <cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu>
To: "Dave Smith (REL110, 211,212)" <rel21x at charter.net>
Cc: <b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org>
Sent: Sunday, May 14, 2006 20:27
Subject: Re: [B-Greek] 1 Cor 14:5: present infinitive aspect
>
> On May 14, 2006, at 7:21 PM, Dave Smith (REL110, 211,212) wrote:
>
> > Folks,
> >
> > Let me add one other piece of information that we all know, but
> > have somehow
> > overlooked. Both infinitives and participles are substantives in
> > grammar and
> > nature,
>
> Unquestionably an infinitive is a substantive, but I really don't
> know what it's supposed to mean when it is claimed that a participle
> is a substantive; a participle functions in part adjectivally and in
> part verbally.
>
> > and being so, "both are indefinite in their bearing upon the limits
> > of action..." (Dana and Mantey, 222). The infinitive in I
> > Corinthians 14:5
> > cannot dictate the action. The only action that can even be considered
> > continuous, in the sense of on-going, would be the wishing, not the
> > speaking. I actually think the reason Paul is using so many
> > presents in this
> > whole section is that the condition, or problem, was on-going, as
> > he wrote.
> > We also need to be careful in Corinthians, realizing that Paul
> > sometimes
> > quotes his opponents and sometimes speaks tongue-in-cheek. Anyway,
> > as one
> > post has already mentioned, the actually wish is that they would all
> > prophesy, not all speak in tongues, and we know that the prophets
> > were only
> > to speak one at a time.
>
> But, as has been noted previously in the thread, there are present
> infinitive forms LALEIN in 1 Cor 14:5, 34, 35, and 39, and there is
> an aorist infinitive form LALHSAI in 1 Cor 14:19 -- and I think
> there's a difference, LALHSAI meaning something like "get spoken"--
> in terms of a completed action--, and LALEIN "speak" -- in terms of
> an active process.
>
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Iver Larsen" <iver at larsen.dk>
> > To: "b-greek" <b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org>
> > Sent: Sunday, May 14, 2006 05:36
> > Subject: Re: [B-Greek] 1 Cor 14:5: present infinitive aspect
> >
> >
> >>> Along the lines of Iver's suggestion, Scott's and my friend was
> >>> in fact
> > given all
> >>> the occurrences in the New Testament and the LXX of the present
> > infinitive
> >>> LALEIN to look up and see if they require or expect the
> >>> translation "to
> > speak
> >>> CONTINUALLY." This apparently was not convincing.
> >>>
> >>> So, to be even more specific, this is what Scott's and my friend
> >>> wrote
> > (on
> >>> another forum) that caused us both to question him on his insistence
> > that
> >>> LALEIN in 1 Cor 14:5 means to continually speak in tongues 24/7.
> >>> I only
> > quote
> >>> it all to show that this "interpretation" is also being laid at
> >>> the feet
> > of Greek Profs
> >>> Jay and Blaiklock:
> >>>
> >>>> 1 Cor 14:5 -- "QELW DE PANTAS hUMAS LALEIN GKWSSAIS" -- "I wish, I
> >>>> want, I desire ALL of you to speak CONTINUALLY in tongues."
> >>>> "I want" -- Behind Paul's words is the Holy Spirit. PAUL'S
> >>>> DESIRE IS
> > GOD'S
> >>>> DESIRE TOO.
> >>>> "all of you" -- every Xtian without exception, because 1 Cor is
> > addressed to
> >>>> "ALL that in EVERY place call upon the name of Jesus Christ our
> >>>> Lord"
> > (1:2)
> >>>> "CONTINUALLY" -- because LALEIN is a present infinitive, which,
> >>>> says
> > Dr.
> >>>> Eric G. Jay in his "NT Greek" (p.101) "The present infinitive is
> >>>> used
> > of an
> >>>> action which is prolonged or repeated ... IT IS ONLY EMPLOYED WHEN
> >>>> ATTENTION IS BEING DRAWN TO THE PROLONGING OR REPETITION OF
> >>>> THE ACTION."
> >>>> He cites "hUPAGW hALIEUEIN" -- "I'm going back to the fishing
> >>>> trade"
> > (as
> >>>> opposed to a nice afternoon's one-off fishing) by Peter in John
> >>>> 21:3.
> > And one
> >>>> sleepless night I discovered my old Bible College lecturer Prof
> >>>> E. M.
> > Blaiklock
> >>>> made the same point in "The Bible and I" p.124 where he
> >>>> translates John
> > the
> >>>> Baptist's "He must increase, I must decrease" as "He must
> >>>> CONTINUALLY
> >>>> INCREASE, I must CONTINUALLY DECREASE."
> >>
> >> But isn't your friend then guilty of misquoting Dr. Eric Jay?
> >> The quote specifically mentions two of the subsets of the
> >> imperfective
> > aspect:
> >> 1. Prolonging (continuous)
> >> 2. Iterative (repeated)
> >>
> >> In the case of 1 Cor 14:5, the intended aspect is clearly
> >> iterative, not
> > continuous, and that agrees with Dr. Jay's
> >> general statement.
> >>
> >> I mentioned the third one which I called general (I can see from Dave
> > Smith that others call it customary, unless
> >> customary is intended to cover both general and iterative, like
> >> going back
> > to fishing, not 24/7, but repeatedly. I don't
> >> have a copy of Dana and Mantey.)
> >>
> >> The quote from Blaiklock indicates that we really need to look at
> >> both
> > grammatical aspect and lexical aspect. Certain
> >> lexical items lend themselves naturally to be used with one aspect
> >> rather
> > than another. Some words stand for a process
> >> like "increase", and those are naturally used with an imperfective
> >> aspect,
> > at least if the process is in focus. Whether
> >> the increase is in the form of a gradual slope or individual steps
> >> doesn't
> > really matter. If you study the usage of the
> >> word AUXANW (grow, increase), you will notice that it normally
> >> occurs in
> > the imperfective aspect, either present or
> >> imperfect "tense". When it is used in the aorist, the focus is on the
> > growth event as a whole. One helpful way of
> >> looking at the perfective versus imperfective aspect is to note
> >> that with
> > the perfective aspect the event is generally
> >> looked at from the outside as a whole unit. In the imperfective
> >> aspect, it
> > is as if you are standing inside together
> >> with the actor. Your focus is on the continued, iterative or
> > timeless/general aspect of the event rather than the
> >> completed event.
> >>
> >> To give a brief comment to Eddie, I am not saying that the aorist
> >> aspect
> > is always best explained as a one-time event. I
> >> said that in the case of this particular verb in the aorist
> >> infinitive,
> > that is a reasonable description. I suggest you
> >> take the time to look up the Greek data yourself.
> >>
> >> As the imperfective aspect can be described as normally employing
> >> one of
> > the following:
> >> 1. Continuous aspect
> >> 2. Iterative aspect
> >> 3. General aspect (used in general, timeless statements)
> >>
> >> so the perfective aspect can be differentiated into:
> >>
> >> 1. Non-continuous
> >> 2. Non-iterative
> >> 3. Specific
> >>
> >> The first two of these (or maybe all three) have traditionally
> >> been called
> > punctiliar in Greek grammar, and the
> >> imperfective durative, but I prefer to use words that are used more
> > generally in modern descriptive linguistics.
> >>
> >> Iver Larsen
> >>
> >> ---
> >> B-Greek home page: http://metalab.unc.edu/bgreek
> >> B-Greek mailing list
> >> B-Greek at lists.ibiblio.org
> >> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-greek
> >>
> > ---
> > B-Greek home page: http://metalab.unc.edu/bgreek
> > B-Greek mailing list
> > B-Greek at lists.ibiblio.org
> > http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-greek
>
>
> Carl W. Conrad
> Department of Classics, Washington University (Retired)
> 1989 Grindstaff Road/Burnsville, NC 28714/(828) 675-4243
> cwconrad2 at mac.com
> WWW: http://www.ioa.com/~cwconrad/
>
>
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list