[B-Greek] An Accessible Brief Introduction to Greek VerbalAspect

James Spinti JSpinti at Eisenbrauns.com
Mon May 16 09:10:15 EDT 2011


Con,

I can concur with most of what Carl says here. As for negative reviews,
no, we don't generally publish them under the book on our web site, but
we generally publish only reviews from academic journals. On my blog,
however, I do pan some Eisenbrauns and other titles. Perhaps that is an
invalid distinction between blog and web site? I don't know; to me it
makes sense. A blog is more informal, more of a discussion--which is how
I view the Koinonia site, but that might be incorrect; Zondervan might
view it more as a marketing tool.

As Carl says, your book is well-written, and I enjoyed reading it; I've
even recommended it to people--with the caveat that it is just one of
several views and that I have issues with it. What I--and others--find
problematic is the way the marketing machine at Zondervan presented it.
I've had discussions with them on several of their titles about that
very issue. 

I'm looking forward to your response to Randall's questions.

Grace & peace,
James

________________________________
James Spinti
Marketing Director, Book Sales Division
Eisenbrauns, Good books for more than 35 years
Specializing in Ancient Near Eastern and Biblical Studies
jspinti at eisenbrauns dot com
Web: http://www.eisenbrauns.com
Phone: 574-269-2011 ext 226
Fax: 574-269-6788 

-----Original Message-----
From: b-greek-bounces at lists.ibiblio.org
[mailto:b-greek-bounces at lists.ibiblio.org] On Behalf Of Carl Conrad
Sent: Sunday, May 15, 2011 10:22 AM
To: Con Campbell
Cc: b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Re: [B-Greek] An Accessible Brief Introduction to Greek
VerbalAspect


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)




---
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