[B-Greek] An Accessible Brief Introduction to Greek Verbal Aspect

Carl Conrad cwconrad2 at mac.com
Sun May 15 10:21:53 EDT 2011


On May 14, 2011, at 9:42 PM, Con Campbell wrote:

> Dear All, 
> 
> I feel that I have been misrepresented in this thread and would like to clarify a few things.
> 
> First, it is hardly "shameful" for a publishing company to publish positive reviews of its product. Can you think of any publisher who publishes negative reviews? To James Spinti: would Eisenbrauns do so? Why is a higher standard expected here?

Amazon (the bookseller that booksellers love to hate!) publishes rave reviews, reviews that pan books, and mixed reviews. Many have found much to fault Amazon with as a bookseller, but its readiness to print both editorial reviews and reader reviews is one of the most helpful services it provides potential buyers of books. I think that I wrote "almost shameful" with regard to the Zondervan promotion. In general I think that the practices of booksellers are not altogether different from the practices of journalists: they are in the business of selling their product. There is a considerable range of practice in the matter of the shady question of what constitutes "truth in advertising." 

> Second, in any other field of inquiry, a primer would NOT be expected to be written only once there is 100% consensus on a topic. Otherwise, no primers would exist. In the last year, there were several primers on Paul's theology published, and that is hardly a field in which there is a high level of consensus.

I'm not sure that there's 100% consensus on any topic; with regard to ancient Greek verbal aspect I have no expectation whatsoever that a consensus will be reached anytime soon (certainly not within my lifetime). But I continue to believe that the topic of ancient Greek verbal aspect is still a hotbed of controversy. I do believe that Con Campbell's book on the subject is a well-written and helpful introduction to what the controversy is all about, but I'm disturbed by the assumption implicit in the title -- that the standard doctrine of Biblical Greek verbal aspect is a matter of general consensus -- and I'm disturbed by the fact that it includes exercises based upon firm judgments about verbal aspect. I think there are some points of agreement between those in different "camps" or "schools" regarding Greek verbal aspect, but I really don't believe that there's a standard "doctrine" to which teachers and scholars generally adhere.

> Third, using the word "Basics" in the title does not imply academic consensus; it implies "introduction".

I agree; I think it suggests a textbook setting forth the principles of a discipline as an introduction to a field of learning. I assumed (perhaps wrongly) that the title was chosen by Zondervan to imply a parallel to their very successful instructional works by Mounce ("Basics of Biblical Greek") and Wallace ("Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics"). Personally I've found much in both of those books that I find helpful and much that I've found questionable, just as I have in your own book here under discussion -- and I HAVE in fact found both helpful and questionable things in your book. But I really do believe that when we use the word "basics" we generally expect some general degree of agreement about what falls under that appellation. Here's the dictionary entry I find ready to hand;

noun ( basics)
the essential facts or principles of a subject or skill : learning the basics of the business | storytelling has reemerged as people have turned back to basics.
• essential food and other supplies : people are facing a shortage of basics like flour.
• Military basic training.

> Fourth, I go to lengths in the book to point out the areas in which there is not consensus, and flag the points at which my own views are not mainstream. As such, it is hardly fair to say that the book claims to represent consensus views at all points; the book rather admits that this is not the case at several points.

I think you're right about that; but the title, the exercises, and the way the book has been promoted seem to me nevertheless to suggest that the book sets forth the essential facts about 
Biblical Greek verbal aspect, not just  one perspective on the topic.

> Fifth, I do NOT hold to "aspect only" for anything, and differ to Porter on this quite dramatically. The habit of some to lump me and others together as the "aspect only" group, and then dismiss our views without careful consideration, is quite frustrating.

I appreciate what you're saying here. Quite honestly, I think that this is the peril of publishing any article or book wherein you take a stance regarding a topic that is, in fact, a very controversial one. I can understand your frustration: on a much lower level, I've felt the frustration of being misunderstood and even misrepresented with respect to my views upon ancient Greek verbal voice. I'm afraid that the whole topic of Biblical Greek verbal aspect has become the proverbial "kitchen" that one must either stay out of or endure the heat.

> Sixth, I am very happy for disagreement about my views on the perfect---which I admit are far from mainstream---but would prefer a meaningful discussion based on evidence rather than blanket statements.

Yes; I think that the perfect tense in Biblical Koine presents considerable complexities that are far from being adequately explored. As one holding to a diachronic perspective on Biblical Koine, I think that there is considerable flux in this period between perfect-tense and aorist-tense usage; I rather think that the usage of the perfect indicative especially in this era is far from uniformly consistent from one document to another, perhaps even within the same document.

Finally, let me try to say something in all sincerity about what I've said/written here and in the past about your book: I do think your book is a well-written, easily understood, helpful contribution to the discussion of Biblical Greek verbal voice. My fundamental objection to the book has been with the implications of the title and subtitle and with the marketing of the book as THE essential starting point for the student who is still getting his/her feet wet in Biblical Greek. 


Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University (Retired)


> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: b-greek-bounces at lists.ibiblio.org
> [mailto:b-greek-bounces at lists.ibiblio.org] On Behalf Of Carl Conrad
> Sent: Friday, May 13, 2011 9:10 AM
> To: Louis Sorenson
> Cc: B-Greek List mail to all; Randall Buth
> Subject: Re: [B-Greek] An Accessible Brief Introduction to Greek
> VerbalAspect
> 
> 
> On May 13, 2011, at 8:48 AM, Louis Sorenson wrote:
> 
>> Does anyone know how this recent book by Zondervan lines up with the
> current Porter / Fanning debate
>> and modern linguistics? There are blurbs on the back by Porter and
> Rodney Decker. Even exercises.
>> It sounds like Porter disagrees with the author.
>> 
>> Basics of Verbal Aspect in Biblical Greek by Constantine R. Campbell.
> (Oct 2008. ISBN:9780310290834)
>> 
> http://www.amazon.com/Basics-Verbal-Aspect-Biblical-Greek/dp/031029083X/
> ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1305289471&sr=8-1
> 
> Zondervan did an almost shameless publicity drive on this book,
> sponsoring a spate of reviews by people at every level of the spectrum.
> I think it's a useful introduction to the issues involved, but my
> fundamental complaint about the book is the title: it has no right to be
> called a "primer" on the subject as if the dust had already settled and
> the perspective here presented were a matter of common consensus.
> There is no common consensus but rather a variety of perspectives, some
> of the issues being reasonably resolved while others remain
> disputed. I personally think Campbell's treatment of the Perfect tense
> is inadequate, and many, I think, would question his acceptance of
> the "aspect-only" notion of the Aorist (Porter's view) as if it were a
> matter of consensus. My own brief review of the work is still accessible
> as a 2008 guest blog post at James Spinti's "Idle Musings of a
> Bookseller":
> 
> http://anebooks.blogspot.com/2008/11/review-of-campbells-basics-of-verba
> l.html
> 
> A simple Google search will net you lots of reviews from a variety of
> perspectives.
> 
> Carl W. Conrad
> Department of Classics, Washington University (Retired)






More information about the B-Greek mailing list