Re: Augment on the Pluperfect

From: Carl W. Conrad (
Date: Sun Feb 23 1997 - 10:37:27 EST

At 7:58 AM -0600 2/22/97, Carlton Winbery wrote:
>In doing research for the Morphology that James Brooks
>and I did, I listed every instance of each separate form in
>the NT on cards. So when I saw this post by Carl I pulled
>out my cards on pluperfect active and middle/passive.
>I noted GEGONEI as Carl did in Acts 4:22, but John 6:17
>EGEGONEI. Indeed most of the pluperfects do not use
>the augment in addition where you can descern such an
>augment. In the case of verb stems that begin with a vowel
>of dipthong, you cannot tell. Others in the NT that I noted
>that _do_ use the augment are; Luke 11:22 EPEPOIQEI, Acts
>John 11:44 PERIEDEDETO, Acts 17:23 EPEGEGRAPTO,
>and Luke 16:20 EBEBLHTO.
>I think that the future perfect is also very rare Greek literature
>of any time. The only one in the NT is EIDHSOUSI in
>Heb. 8:11 and in a variant reading KEKRAXONTAI at
>Luke 19:40. How often is the fut. perf. used in Greek

A good, however meager, harvest, Carlton! As for future perfects, I think
you could add the periphrastics such as those in the "keys of the kingdom"
passage in Mt 16:19 ESTAI DEDEMENON and ESTAI LELUMENON. Upon ruminating
over classical Greek, I thought I recalled a couple future perfects from
the Cassandra sequence in Aeschylus' Agamemnon and found them with little
difficulty. One is another periphrastic: 1179 ESTAI DEDORKWS (something
like "will be glaring") and 1279 the wonderful prediction of Orestes'
return to face Clytemnestra: OU MEN ATIMOI G'EK QEWN TEQNHXOMEN (something
like "the gods will assure that our deaths will not have been unrequited").
I know I've seen hESTEXW several times, but that's practically a simple
future, and I believe I've seen such forms as BEBLHSONTAI and KEKLHSONTAI.

Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University
One Brookings Drive, St. Louis, MO, USA 63130
(314) 935-4018 OR

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:38:07 EDT