[B-Greek] Greek vs English participle

John Sanders jfs at jfsanders.com
Thu May 24 09:28:29 EDT 2007


 
An easy way to understand the grammar of participles, or any grammar or subpart of a grammar, we need to have some type of framework or paradigm that works (for you).  One framework that works for me is the following.
 
I understand the verbal system in general, without attempting to exhaust all potential classifications, as either defining a state of existence or defining a change of state.  Generally a state of existence is described using the verb “to be”; he is tall, I am short, we are fat.
 
Changes of state are usually described using all other verbs; an example is “the men are running up the mountain.”  We can nuance that any way one wishes:  the men should be running, could have run, ought to have run, needed to have run, wished they had ran, thought they had ran, hoped to have run, imagined they had ran, will run, did run, might have ran, lied about their running, etc.  The first state, in this example, is that the men are at the bottom of the mountain and the change of state, or the new state, will be at the top of the mountain.
 
 To describe this change of state, let me at present just use four verbal forms: the imperfect, the present, the pluperfect, and the perfect.  The imperfect describes the initial action for this change of state (I left, to go to Big Mac for ice cream; I raised the box, to put it on the top shelf; I spoke to the boss, to tell him I was quitting; I stood up, as she entered the room).  The present describes the action between states (I am going to Big Mac, for that ice cream; I am raising the box, to put it on the top shelf; I am speaking to the boss, to tell him I am quitting, I am getting up, as she is entering the room).  The pluperfect describes the action at arriving at the new state (I have reached Big Mac, for the ice cream; I have raised the box, to put it on the top shelf; I have spoken to the boss, to tell him I am quitting; I have stood up, she has entered the room).  The perfect describes the scene after we have reached the new state.  I do not believe English has this sense in its perfect tense.  But for somewhat of an example, we have: the spoken words were still ringing in the my bosses ears as he realized what I had said, and a smile came to his face; I am standing, even after she has left; the box is resting on the shelf.
 
Two new forms enter the language, the future and future perfect.  I do not know whether these were invented by the Indo-European speakers or where adopted from some other language, but the invention had a major effect on the various Indo-European languages.  Now we can develop another paradigm.  Instead of the linear representation, we can develop a matrix, with one column representing those forms that in some general way are associated with the new state (commonly referred to as stative verbs) and the other forms that are not associated with that new state (either at the beginning or in between states) (commonly referred to as imperfective verbs).  That leaves just one form left, the aorist.  It is a beautiful invention, but not all Indo-European languages have this form (I have never seen a list of IE languages that use the aorist form, nor non-IE languages that use an aorist form).  The aorist forms a new column, commonly referred to as perfective.  I believe this column is neutral or non-committal to any specific place in the change of state.
 
Where do participles come into this scheme of things?  Sometimes we need our verbs to give background information rather than describe a change of state.  In Chinese we use the shr...de construction, in Latin and Greek the participle does this task.
 
An example in English.  The men, running up the mountain, planted the flag midst heavy enemy gunfire.  Here the change of state is related to the planting of the flag-in the original state there is no flag, in the new state there is a flag planted.  The “men running up the mountain” is a description of condition prior to the planting of the flag; it is not the focus of the change of state.
 
Since in Greek the participle has “noun endings” in an adjectival format, it can do those things that an adjective can do-act as an adjective or a substantive or as an adverb (in the oblique cases).  
 
You do not need to worry about the verb; they usually can take care of themselves.  Very seldom do they get lost.  The noun, if the participle acts as an adjective, is usually nearby.  If the participle is acting as a substantive, then that may take a second reading as at least I may not catch the drift at first.  Adverbial usage will be in the oblique cases, and can be recognized especially if it is associated with a preposition or is in the genitive case.
 
John Sanders
Suzhou, China
 
_________________________________________________________________
Change is good. See what’s different about Windows Live Hotmail. 
http://www.windowslive-hotmail.com/learnmore/default.html?locale=en-us&ocid=RMT_TAGLM_HMWL_reten_changegood_0507



More information about the B-Greek mailing list