[B-Greek] Voice: Distinguishing a Middle from a Passive

Carl Conrad cwconrad2 at mac.com
Sat Nov 10 17:04:54 EST 2007


On Nov 10, 2007, at 2:31 PM, Kimmo Huovila wrote:

> On Saturday 10 November 2007, Carl Conrad wrote:
>> Would you want to explain FOBEOMAI as a passive? There's a whole
>> category of emotional reactions/responses, e.g. AGALLIAOMAI,
>> hHDOMAI ... The question would have to be how we interpret the form:
>> is one acted upon and made to feel delight or pleasure?
>>
>
> Verbs of emotion are often middle. Because FOBEOMAI tends to take  
> the object
> of fear in the accusative, I would classify it as a middle. Likewise
> AGALLIAOMAI and hHDOMAI can be taken as middles. In my  
> understanding, it is
> more common to have verbs of emotion in the middle than in the  
> passive voice
> across languages. But this is based only on an (educated?) guess, not
> research.
>
> So I would say middle, but the question is, do we always have to  
> choose. Other
> cases may be even more problematic. The semantic overlap in many  
> cases is
> important and may explain why the same form covers both voices and  
> it can
> shed light on why middles often develop into passives (this is my
> understanding and it is shared by some other linguists, but I am not  
> sure
> what research it is based on).
>
> Another question is, does passive semantics require that there is an  
> agent or
> something that acts on the subject, even if it is not mentioned. Why  
> or why
> not?
>
> For Greek, should we perhaps develop a theory of medio-passive  
> semantics as a
> polysemous prototype category that covers both middles and passives  
> (both
> being polysemous prototype categories) rather than feel the need to
> distinguish between the voices in all cases? After all, the Greeks  
> didn't
> always choose to differentiate between the two, though sometimes the
> distinction is obvious enough.
>
> A good exposition of polysemous prototype categories is found in  
> John Taylor's
> Linguistic Categorization: Prototypes in Linguistic Theory.

And once again I take note of Sydney Allen's work that falls right  
into this perspective (I cite a portion of my October 16 post):

Allen, Sydney J., The Middle Voice in Ancient Greek: A Study in  
Polysemy. Amsterdam: J.C. Gieben, Publisher, 2003. (Amsterdam Studies  
in Classical Philology, 11).

Allen's study is thorough and deals with middle forms (including the - 
θη- {-QH-} "passive" forms) and usage in Homeric and Classical Attic  
Greek. He understands the semantic passive as a distinct category of  
middle usage closely akin to several other categories using the -θη-  
{-QH-} "passive" forms in the aorist, including Spontaneous process  
(e.g. ἐτάκην, ETAKHN, "melted), Mental process (e.g.  
ἐφοβήθην, EFOBHQHN, "feared"), Body motion (e.g.  
ἀπηλλάχθην, APHLLACQHN, "left behind"), and Collective  
motion (e.g. ἠγέρθην, HGERQHN (AGEIRW), "gathered"), as  
distinguished from categories of middle usage using the -μην/σο/ 
το (-MHN/SO/TO) "middle" forms in the aorist, including Reciprocal  
(ἐμαχεσάμην, EMACESAMHN, "fought"), Direct Reflexive (e.g.,  
ἐλουσάμην, "washed"), Perception (e.g. ἐγευσάμην,  
EGEUSAMHN, "tasted"), Mental activity (e.g. ἐλογισάμην,  
ELOGISAMHN, "reckoned"), Speech act (ἐλοιδορησάμην,  
ELOIDORHSAMHN, "reviled"), and Indirect Reflexive (e.g.  
ἐποιησάμην, EPOIHSAMHN, "performed for self"). Allen notes  
that the -θη- {-QH-} "passive" forms gradually grow more frequent in  
categories in which the -μην/σο/το (-MHN/SO/TO) "middle" aorist  
forms were predominant earlier -- and this is something that continues  
in Hellenistic and later Greek, where we must understand both "middle"  
and "passive" usages as represented by the same -θη- {-QH-} "passive"  
forms.


Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University (Retired)
1989 Grindstaff Road/Burnsville, NC 28714/(828) 675-4243
cwconrad at ioa.com or cwconrad2 at mac.com
WWW: http://www.ioa.com/~cwconrad/





More information about the B-Greek mailing list