[B-Greek] Voice matters again

John Sanders john.franklin.sanders at gmail.com
Fri Mar 27 04:54:35 EDT 2009


I would like to offer my own views as to the concept of “voice” in
Greek.  Since
I am studying on my own and do not have access to much that is written, I do
offer my thoughts for feedback more than anything else.  Also, I offer my
thoughts not in regards to any organized theoretical linguistic approach,
although I am not sure that is an handicap.



I would like to describe ενεργεια (ENERGEIA) , the active voice and μεση(MESH)
 middle voice first and introduce παθος (PAQOS), the passive voice later.



If we define the “active voice” as one in which the subject generates the
activity of the verb away from itself and the “passive voice” as
transferring the action of the verb toward the subject, then ENERGEIA and
MESH are “active voice”.   The difference between them is that ENERGEIA can
be thought as the subject is expressed plainly and MESH the subject is
emphasized.



We often express ourselves with the view that language is a thing in and of
itself, but it is not.  Language is how individuals express themselves with
one another collectively.  What may be the case in one collection may not be
the case in another collection.  So words such as απτομαι (hAPTOMAI) do not
emphasize the subject vis-à-vis απτω (hAPTW).  I believe that Dr. Buth is
quite correct in introducing these words as separate vocabulary items.  But
where MESH does emphasize the subject, I would introduce the two forms
together.



I think what I have written so far is straightforward and not controversial.
What I am about to write may not be so.  In thinking on how best to convey
the “middle voice” I propose that ENERGEIA can be thought of as the “simple
present tense” in English and MESH the “continuous present tense”.  I do not
wish to propose that the “continuous present tense” in English is the
English “middle voice”, rather what I would suggest is that the effect of
the two forms in English are similar to the effect of ENERGEIA and MESH.  To
my mind “I am going” emphasizes the subject vis-à-vis “I go”.  Although
given that ερχω (ERXW) is not proper Attic, I suspect that ερχομαι (ERXOMAI)
would have an equivalent emphasis on the subject vis-à-vis ερχω (ERXW).



PAQOS does not have a separate form, but uses the forms as presently given,
which is the same as English.  In general, though, PAQOS will tend to use
the MESH form since be its very nature the subject is emphasized in some
fashion.  I know that Iver Larson is very passionate about a specific means
of analyzing PAQOS, and I also think it is a good method.  But I do not see
that method as in opposition or superior to the traditional method of
looking at PAQOS from the verbal aspect.  From an engineering viewpoint, I
would call one a dynamic analysis and other a static analysis, both
complementary to one another and both helpful in understanding PAQOS.



PAQOS is introduced into the structure by a simple introduction of an
“agent” into the sentence.  This in and of itself creates no problem.  But
there is a problem when the “agent” is understood.  And this is a problem
because in Greek (as is the case with English, and I suspect all or most
other Indo-European languages) there is no difference between “transitive”
and “intransitive” verbs, both use the same form.  PAQOS, by its very nature
requires a “transitive” verb, but if PAQOS uses an implied agent and the
verb has both a “transitive” and an “intransitive” sense; then there is
ambiguity as to whether it really is PAQOS or is just MESH “intransitive”.



And one last item, deponent verbs.  Dr. Conrad has expressed some anguish
over this term and his complaint is legitimate.  But alas, I do not believe
that the term will go away.  So I take it as a technical term meaning that a
class of words in MESH has only an “intransitive” sense (and therefore
cannot be PAQOS) and that there is no corresponding ENERGEIA form.  Most
grammars that I have seen inform one to translate this as an “active voice”
verb (which really goes without saying).




John Sanders
Suzhou, China

On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 7:17 PM, Carl Conrad <cwconrad2 at mac.com> wrote:

> I know that most B-Greekers could care less about verbal voice, one of
> my focal concerns, but (a) it refreshes my spirit to find someone
> who's serious about ancient Greek putting some thought and energy into
> it, as Mike Aubrey is now doing, most recently in a new blog post at
> http://evepheso.wordpress.com/2009/03/25/coming-back-to-greek-voice/
>  , and (b) there's been no traffic on the list for the better part of
> two days, and I want to see if the list software is still functioning.
>
> Carl W. Conrad
> Department of Classics, Washington University (Retired)
>
>
>
> ---
> 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
>



-- 
John Sanders
Suzhou, China



More information about the B-Greek mailing list