[B-Greek] Periphastic construction

Mark Lightman lightmanmark at yahoo.com
Fri Apr 24 21:55:05 EDT 2009


George's quote from Porter warns us that even what looks like
a periphrastic construction may not really be one, but your question
is a good one and points us the other way, to expand what we mean
by a periphrastic construction. 
 
To answer your question, no the auxillary verb does not have to
be EIMI.  Dana and Mantey say GINOMAI, hUPARCW and ECW
can be used and Smyth says  FAINOMAI can be used.
I would add TUGCANW.  I would say a construction can be
considered periphrastic if the auxillary verb carries no special
force.  You can imagine ERCOMAI becoming a "helping
verb" in Greek, as it became in English ("I'm going to eat")
and I would not be surprise to find examples, but the one you
give from John 1:31 I don't think qualifies because I THINK
HLQON carries the force of John having a special advent.
But it's close.  Maybe all the text means by "I came baptizing"
is "I baptized."
 
I guess my point is that it doesn't really matter what the
grammars say can or cannot be periphrastic but what the 
context indicates.  You raise an intriguing possibility that merits
follow up.
 
Mark L.  

--- On Fri, 4/24/09, George F Somsel <gfsomsel at yahoo.com> wrote:

From: George F Somsel <gfsomsel at yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [B-Greek] Periphastic construction
To: "Carl Conrad" <cwconrad2 at mac.com>, "B-Greek" <b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org>
Cc: jerry.a.reimer at gmail.com
Date: Friday, April 24, 2009, 6:07 PM

  
3.1. Elements of a PeriphrasticVerbal Construction
 
Periphrasticverbal constructions are formed by the grammatically appropriate
combination of a form of the auxiliary verbεἰμίEIMI and a participle. The
participle contributes the semantic (meaning) feature of verbal aspect to the
construction (as well as voice; see Chapter 3 section 1). The form of εἰμί
EIMI, which is aspectually vague (i.e. it does not provide a meaningful choice
of aspect), is used to grammaticalize attitude (i.e. mood; see Chapter 2) of the
action in its context, as well as person and number (see Chapter 3 section 2).
In determining whether a given instance of εἰμίand a participle is
periphrastic, it is useful to keep in mind that no elements may intervene
between the auxiliary verb and the participle except for those which complete or
directly modify the participle (not the verb εἰμί). Hence 2 Cor.
2.17(οὐ…ἐσμεν ὡς οἱ πολλοὶ καπηλεύοντες
τὸν λόγον τοῦ θεοῦOU … ESMEN hWS hOI POLLOI KAPHLEUONTES TON
LOGON TOU QEOU [we are not like many, peddling the word of God; not: we are not
peddling the word of God, as do many]) and Lk. 1.21(ἦν ὁ λαὸς
προσδοκῶν τὸν ΖαχαρίανHN hO LAOS PROSDOKWN TON ZAXARIAN
[the people were there,expecting Zacharias]) are not periphrasticconstructions,
since in each case the grammatical subject is placed between the auxiliary verb
and the participle. Troublesome for determination of whether a construction is
periphrasticare phrases which might indicate
 location (in, on, etc.) or time (when, at, etc.), if they appear between the
auxiliary and the participle. If they limit the auxiliary, then the construction
is not periphrastic. See, for example, Col. 3.1: ὁ Χριστός ἐστιν
ἐν δεξιᾷ τοῦ θεοῦ καθήμενος hO XRISTOS ESTIN EN
DECIAi TOU QEOU KAQHMENOS, which could be understood as ‘Christ is at the
right hand of God, seated’, or ‘Christ is seated at the right hand of
God’. The consequences of this differentiation can be important. For
example, if Mk 1.13(ἦν ἐν τῇ ἐρήμῳ τεσσεράκοντα
ἡμέρας πειραζόμενος HN EN THi ERHMWi TESSERAKONTA hHMERAS
PEIRAZOMENOS) were periphrastic, it would be compatible with the view that Jesus
was said to be in the desert and tempted by Satan for all forty days (he was
being tempted in the desert for forty days). The non-periphrasticinterpretation
leaves it open that the temptations
 are seen to have occurred at the end of the period (he was in the desert forty
days, being tempted). The interpretation here depends upon whether one sees the
temporal phrase (forty days) as limiting the auxiliary or the participle.
 
Porter, S. E. (1999). Idioms of the Greek New Testament (45). Sheffield: JSOT.
 george
gfsomsel 


… search for truth, hear truth, 
learn truth, love truth, speak the truth, hold the truth, 
defend the truth till death.


- Jan Hus
_________ 




________________________________
From: Carl Conrad <cwconrad2 at mac.com>
To: B-Greek <b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org>
Cc: jerry.a.reimer at gmail.com
Sent: Friday, April 24, 2009 5:23:20 PM
Subject: [B-Greek] Periphastic construction

An item from BG-Bounces that evidently didn't get through regular  
channels:

From: Jerry Austin Reimer [mailto:jerry.a.reimer at gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, April 24, 2009 10:11 AM
To: 'b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org'
Subject: Periphastic construction

In general, is there such a thing as a periphrastic construction with  
HLQON (or any other intransitive verb, for that matter) plus a  
participle or must the intransitive verb always be a form of EIMI?


I have John 1:31 in mind. KAGW OUK IDEIN AUTON ALL' hINA FANERWQHi TWi  
ISRAHL DIA TOUTO HLQON EGW hUDATI BAPTIZWN (HLQON plus BATIZWN). Can  
this be called periphrastic?


Not sure I did the transliteration right. Hope it is right enough.


Jerry Reimer
---
B-Greek home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/bgreek
B-Greek mailing list
B-Greek at lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-greek



      
---
B-Greek home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/bgreek
B-Greek mailing list
B-Greek at lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-greek



      


More information about the B-Greek mailing list