[B-Greek] Heb 6,4-6

Mark Lightman lightmanmark at yahoo.com
Sun Sep 19 16:56:45 EDT 2010


<But supposing it is NOT true, what then? But even supposing that verbal aspect
is fundamental to an aorist participle, why should one suppose that it doesn't
indicate time at all?>

Why would anyone feel the need to generalize on this issue at all?  Sometimes 
the tense of a participle has to do with time.  Sometimes it has to do with type 
of action.  Sometimes it has to do with both. 


Sorenson once mentioned "the aspect wars."  I guess I don't understand the 
controversy. 


 Mark L



FWSFOROS MARKOS




________________________________
From: Carl Conrad <cwconrad2 at mac.com>
To: ps2866 at bingo-ev.de
Cc: b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org
Sent: Sun, September 19, 2010 1:52:10 PM
Subject: Re: [B-Greek] Heb 6,4-6


On Sep 19, 2010, at 3:08 PM, ps2866 at bingo-ev.de wrote:

> Dear Mark and Barry,
> 
> thank you for your helpful answers !
> 
> In case the theory is true, that Verbal aspect, not time, is the
> fundamental meaning expressed by the Greek tense-forms, then maybe all you
> can say is that the aorists in Heb 6,4-6 expresses perfective and the
> present tense imperfective aspect.
> Do you agree ?

But supposing it is NOT true, what then? But even supposing that verbal aspect
is fundamental to an aorist participle, why should one suppose that it doesn't
indicate time at all?

That is to say, narrative sequence so consistently seems to indicate -- by 
placing
them initially, actions that are necessarily prior to the action of the main 
verb,
it's hard to suppose this is not a deliberate narrative strategy based upon 
standard
usage of aorist participles. I think that a quick scan of any chapter of the 
gospels
or Acts would show this is the case.

CWC
> 
> 
>> Peter asked
>> 
>> <I wonder how the switch from the aorist (FWTISQENTAS k.t.l.) to the
>> present tense (ANAKAINIZEIN, ANASTAUROUNTAS, PARADEIGMATIZONTAS) in Heb
>> 6,4-6 can be explained.>
>> 
>> Hi, Peter,
>> 
>> Well, I think this is one case where the former participle is meant to
>> imply a
>> prior, one time action, and the later forms are meant to imply  repeated,
>> on-going actions.  In other words, where the Greek tenses work  they way
>> they
>> tell you they work.
> 
> I think that we are to understand ἔóôé with ἀäύíáôïí. 
> This would make the
> action of the aorist participles prior to the time frame expressed by the
> implicit main verb, and the present infinitive and participles concurrent
> with that time frame.  So, I am not sure that "repeated, on-going actions"
> is the nuance intended.
> 
> 
> 
> ---
> 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


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



      


More information about the B-Greek mailing list