[B-Greek] Aorist and Imperfect: points of consensus

Carl W. Conrad cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
Thu Sep 21 19:43:53 EDT 2006


On Sep 21, 2006, at 1:42 PM, Brian Abasciano wrote:

> Carl,
>
> Would you mind stating what you think the matters of consensus are  
> that have emerged from the discussion. I think that would be very  
> valuable for all who have followed the discussion, but may be  
> confused by the varying views.

I think it would be valuable too -- the more valuable under an  
authentic subject-header rather than an empty one.

I have been gratified to read, on several occasions in the course of  
these exchanges, something like, "I agree that ... but." It's pretty  
clear that there's also a considerable range of perspectives that  
perhaps cannot be resolved. Nevertheless, I have had a different gut  
feeling about this discussion than about many previous ones in this  
forum on the matter of verbal aspect in the ancient Greek verb: I've  
always felt in the past that the conversation is to a considerable  
extent a Babel-tower of conversants addressing each other in  
different dialects and barely making themselves understood to others;  
it has seemed to me that there's been more real communication taking  
place this time around -- unless I'm deceiving myself.

I think it would be perilous (let alone beyond my ability) to attempt  
any formulation of all that has  agreed upon by the participants in  
this thread that opened on Sept 5 with a message from Paul Evans. I  
do wish that we might perhaps have a short list of focal points upon  
which those who wish may endeavor BRIEF(?) notes about what they  
think they agree on and where they differ from others. Some such  
points (there would be several others, I think) should certainly be  
included (I hope we can keep the focus on ancient Greek and not go  
off on a tangent about broader issues in Linguistics):

1. What is meant by the term "verbal aspect" with reference to the  
ancient Greek verb?
2. What is meant by the term "Aktionsart" with reference to the  
ancient Greek verb?
3. Is there consensus on the meaning of terms such as "perfective,"  
"imperfective," "stative," etc. (what other terms belong here?)
3. How do the ancient Greek Indicative-mood forms differ in meaning  
from the Non-indicative-mood forms?
4. What does the augment signify in ancient Greek imperfect, aorist,  
and pluperfect Indicative-mood forms?
5. How does the ancient Greek Indicative Imperfect differ in meaning  
from the Indicative Aorist?
6. Is temporal reference grammaticalized in any of the ancient Greek  
Indicative "tenses"? If not, how does a speaker/hearer/reader  
recognize temporal reference?

I don't think that's an exhaustive listing of questions that have  
been dealt with. At least a couple others that have been at least  
tangentially discussed are:

7. Does the ancient Greek Indicative future "tense" have aspect?
8. Can the ancient Greek Indicative present "tense" be adequately  
characterized in terms of its aspect?


I'm not sure whether this is a helpful way of going about this effort  
or not; if anyone has a better idea, please come forward and propose  
a more useful interrogatory.


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