[B-Greek] hESTANAI, hISTAMAI and hISTHMI

Carl W. Conrad cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
Tue Aug 7 09:03:04 EDT 2007


On Aug 6, 2007, at 7:30 PM, Stephen Baldwin wrote:
> Dr. Buth:
> I'd like to understand what you are saying here. (And I thought I  
> was merely posing a question about a possible error in a book... :-))

I suppose it will always be jarring to some to realize that Randall  
is deadly serious about the propriety of using Koine Greek as a  
grammatical metalanguage to talk about Koine Greek -- just as English- 
speakers use English terminology to talk about English grammatical  
usage -- so serious, in fact, that he practices what he preaches.

I think that what Randall is saying about this verb is important, and  
I'd like to add some comments of my own, after first correcting an  
egregious error of my own:


On Aug 5, 2007, at 7:24 PM, Carl W. Conrad wrote:
>> hESTANAI:       Mounce=Pf-MP-Inf    Baldwin=2Pf-A-Inf (cf MBG/
>> Mounce ss84
>> footnote 2)
>
> This is perhaps a quibble; you might want to specify that hESTANAI is
> "second" perfect infinitive, while hESTHKENAI is "first perfect
> infinitive" but the two forms have the same force; the "second
> perfect" is a more archaic form still in use.

What is true of what I wrote above is that there's no difference in  
meaning between "First perfect" and "Second perfect" tense-forms. I  
was wrong to claim that there's a First perfect infinitive  
hESTHKENAI. There is no perfect infinitive form hESTHKENAI attested  
in any ancient Greek text of which I know, although I wouldn't be  
surprised to see it. It does seem odd that the standard perfect  
indicative forms are hESTHKA, hESTHKAS, hESTHKE(N), KTL but that the  
perfect infinitive is hESTANAI, based upon the perfect stem hESTA- --  
as the more common form of the perfect participle, hESTWS (< hESTA- 
WS)/hESTWSA/hESTOS (33x in the GNT) -- and yet there is also the  
alternative form of the perfect participle.hESTHKWS/hESTHKWSA/ 
hESTHKOS (10x in the GNT).

The standard tense-forms in use in the GNT (probably in most other  
periods too) are the aorist and the perfect:

The perfect is found 65x times in the GNT, the Pluperfect 14x. These  
two tense-forms are most frequent because they are equivalent to the  
present and imperfect of more verbs: "you are standing" is hESTHKATE,  
"he was standing" is hEISTHKEI.

The aorist ESTH means not "he/she/it stood" but, more precisely, "he/ 
she/it came to a stand" or "he/she/it came to a standstill (halted)."

There is only ONE instance in the GNT of what might be termed a  
present-tense form of this verb: hISTANOMEN in Rom 3:31; I would  
prefer to say this is a present tense form of a derivative form of  
hISTHMI rather than of hISTHMI itself -- it's equivalent to a  
putative hISTAMEN ("we establish").

One might very well argue that hISTAMAI intransitive ("stand, arise")  
is a different verb from hISTHMI causative ("make stand"). I would be  
more inclined to say that hISTAMAI intransitive is the default form  
of this verb while hISTHMI causative is the secondary form.

As Randall has noted, hISTAMAI/ESTHN/hESTHKA is middle in terms of  
its semantic voice, while hISTHMI/ESTHSA is active. As for the forms  
ESTHN and hESTHKA, they are conventionally called "active" and some  
might even try to call them "deponent" -- on grounds that they  
express middle-meaning although they have active forms. In fact,  
however, the so-called "second" aorists, especially the athematic -H-  
aorists, are older than the "first" aorists: i.e. ESTHN ("I stood  
(up)"  is an older form than ESTHSA ("I caused to stand"); the  
perfect middle-passive forms are late in development; hESTHKA (older  
-- Homeric -- hESTAA) derives from a period when there was no perfect  
middle-passive. There is a very rare perfect middle hESTAMAI, but it  
isn't found in the GNT at all and it means exactly the same as  
hESTHKA ("I am standing").

The so-called aorist passive  ESTAQHN is essentially a later- 
developing form of the intransitive "second" aorist ESTHN. Although  
ESTAQHN may occasionally be understand as semantically passive ("I  
was made to stand") it is far more often intransitive (semantically  
middle -- "I stood."

The obvious, hence too readily ignored, fact about "irregular" verbs  
is that they are irregular because they are used too frequently in  
everyday discourse to have succumbed to the standardizing process  
that eliminates irregularities. So in English we still use "stood" as  
the past tense of "stand" -- we instinctively wince if we should hear  
someone say "I standed" -- unless it's a little child who doesn't  
"know better."

Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University (retired)

On Aug 6, 2007, at 9:48 AM, Randall Buth wrote:
> On some reflection,
> I think that I can rephrase a statement in my last email more  
> precisely:
>
>
>> Semantically
> it functions like ENESTWS (present tense) and/or PARATATIKH OPSIS  
> (imperfective
> aspect)>
>
> Pragmatically,
> ESTANAI  functions like an ENESTWS XRONOS (present tense) when  
> indicative
> as well as the PARATATIKH OPSIS (imperfective
> aspect)
>
> In the rewrite, the understanding of the Greek distills to the same,
> but "pragmatically" gives more respect to the Greek form within the
> Greek system and lets ESTANAI clearly remain a PARAKEIMENOS, even
> though ESTANAI is  a virtual ENESTWS/PARATATIKH for this verb.

On Aug 6, 2007, at 6:58 AM, Randall Buth wrote:

>>> I am somewhat puzzled that in a book titled _Basics of Biblical
> Greek_ Mounce would include a form which does not appear in the NT or
> even in the LXX. >>
>
> actually, the form ESTANAI needs to come up front and center. This
> picks up and illustrates another thread on MI verbs from last week.
>
> Students should know how to say 'to stand' and to understand it in  
> speech.
> ESTANAI is one of those most basic words that a student cannot do  
> without.
> How can someone learn beginning Greek and not be able to say to  
> themselves
> "I don't want to stand, I need to sit"?
> pretty basic:
> OU QELW ESTANAI, DEI ME KAQISAI (KAQHSQAI also good).
>
> and incidently ESTANAI occurs 3xx in GNT, (not to mention LXX,
> Josephus, and everywhere someone writes enough Greek to say "to
> stand")
> I recommend teaching Greek so that students can at least STAND or  
> SIT in Greek.
>
> PS: the form belongs to the PARAKEIMENOS (perfect) but as a "second"
> perfect it does not need to distinguish DIAQESEIS (voices). BBG is
> technically wrong to call it middle-passive, but It is irrelevant to
> call it 'active', it is functionally rather 'middle' and intransitive,
> by its nature of existing as a 2 perfect. Semantically it functions
> like ENESTWS (present tense) and/or PARATATIKH OPSIS (imperfective
> aspect)
>
> Cf Lk 13:25 ἑστάναι καὶ κρούειν τὴν  
> θύραν
> ESTANAI KAI KROUEIN THN QURAN.
> standing and knocking on the door
>
> Ac 12:14 ἀπήγγειλεν ἑστάναι τὸν  
> Πέτρον πρὸ τοῦ πυλῶνος
> APHGGEILEN ESTANAI TON PETRON PRO TOU PULWNOS
> reported that Peter was standing outside the the gate
>
> 1Cor 10:12 ὁ δοκῶν ἑστάναι βλεπέτω μὴ  
> πέσῃ
> the one thinking to be standing should be careful that he not fall.
>
>
> Things may look different when viewed by usage rather than by  
> paradigm.
> -- 
> Randall Buth, PhD



More information about the B-Greek mailing list