[B-Greek] Imperfect and Aorist Tense-Aspects
Kimmo Huovila
kimmo.huovila at helsinki.fi
Thu Sep 21 12:02:14 EDT 2006
I just throw in a third analysis. The aorist form is used in Rom. 5:14,
because it is a complete action that is described (or to use Vendlerian
terms, accomplishment). Yes, BASILEUW is a stative verb, but when you put it
in an aorist form, it is an activity, not a state. That explains ingressive
aorists. But here the aorist is not ingressive. The point is not that the end
of the state is not determined. BASILEUEIN APO ADAM MECRI MWUSEWS is
something with a beginning and an end. That was accomplished, as signaled by
the aorist. If it were imperfective, the end point (until Moses) would be
outside the scope of predication. The aorist does not say anything about
whether the state continued beyond MWUSHS or not, only that the end point is
included in the scope of predication and the reign continued at least up to
that time.
This is an example why it is helpful to view aspect as a nested phenomenon.
BASILEU[EIN/SAI] is not the same as BASILEU[EIN/SAI] APO ADAM MECRI MWUSEWS.
Kimmo Huovila
On Thursday September 21 2006 10:07, Rolf Furuli wrote:
> Dear Con,
>
> I still have reservations for the expression "summary viw," but if its
> meaning is explained to the reader as you do below that will be of some
> help.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>
> From: "Con R. Campbell" <con.campbell at moore.edu.au>
> To: "Rolf Furuli" <furuli at online.no>; "B-Greek at Lists. Org"
> <b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2006 10:22 AM
> Subject: Re: [B-Greek] Imperfect and Aorist Tense-Aspects
>
> CC:
> Dear Rolf,
>
> As I understand it, a summary view is one that does not take into account
> the unfolding or development of the action. It normally has the beginning
> and end of the action in view, but I don't like to draw that too strongly,
> as some actions may be presented in summary, even though they are not
> technically completed at the time of writing/speaking.
>
> For example, Romans 5:14 'Yet death reigned [EBASILEUSEN] from Adam to
> Moses'. Obviously this action spans a great period of time, but it is
> PRESENTED in summary. The way this action unfolded in history is not in
> view being a summary tense-form. This is also why the aorist is the default
> tense-form in the mainline of narrative. Because of the summary view of the
> aorist, mainline is capable of depicting a series of actions in quick
> succession: he went...they said...she ran etc.
>
> RF:
> Your example above is interesting. You refer to actions: people have died.
> That is correct, because this is our experience with the actual world.
> However, the verb BASILEUW is stative rather than fientive (cf Rom 5:17,21:
> sin
> reigns and righteousness reigns). Paul therefore portrays the *state* of
> death´s reign from Adam to Moses, and this is expressed by an aorist.
> However, this state did not end with Moses, but it continued in Paul´s time,
> yes, it still continues. This means that the aorist in 5:17 makes visible
> the beginning of this state and a great part of it, but the end of the state
> is yet to come.
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list