[B-Greek] Fwd: Imperfect and Aorist Tense-Aspects

Con R. Campbell con.campbell at moore.edu.au
Mon Sep 18 16:24:25 EDT 2006


I may have misunderstood your question, but I think the point that Kimmo is
alluding to is that so-called past tenses may be used in conditional
sentence protases even when past time is NOT intended (as context would
indicate). For example, the imperfect is the standard tense-form used in
PRESENT-referring second class conditions.

I don't think there's a problem in saying that conditional sentences may be
framed in a past-referring way. But the issue is the reverse: when they are
framed in a clearly present-referring way (as context would indicate), past
tense-forms are still used.

Con Campbell
Moore College


On 19/9/06 5:41 AM, "Elizabeth Kline" <kline_dekooning at earthlink.net> wrote:

> 
> On Sep 18, 2006, at 11:02 AM, Elizabeth Kline wrote:
> 
>>>> On Sep 18, 2006, at 10:08 AM, Kimmo Huovila wrote:
>>>>> Randall is saying that the aorist is a past
>>>>> tense and even though in a conditional sentence protasis it does
>>>>> not signal
>>>>> past (just as in English), it does not mean that it is not a past
>>>>> tense (in
>>>>> other contexts)..
>>> 
>>> Is there some sort of general agreement that the aorist used in a
>>> conditional sentence protasis cannot be explained by a shift of
>>> vantage point? It seems feasable to me that a condional sentance
>>> might put the protasis semantically in the past so that the temporal
>>> vantage point of the conditional utterance is in the middle, between
>>> the protasis and the apodosis.
>> 
> The location of the vantage point between the protasis and the
> apodosis appears to be improbable, please forget I said that.
> 
> My real question is the first part. Can the aorist used in a
> conditional sentence protasis be explained by a shift of vantage
> point? Most now admit that there is no necessary linkage between real
> time and deitic center. So why do we get upset when a conditional
> protasis is located in the past? The hypothetical nature of a
> statement doesn't precluded framing the statement from a past
> temporal vantage point. The choice of vantage point is somewhat
> arbitrary is it not?
> 
> 
> Elizabeth Kline
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ---
> 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
> 
> 




More information about the B-Greek mailing list