Aspect, Aktionsart, and Perfect Periphrastic Participles

Date: Tue Mar 18 1997 - 13:02:51 EST

I truly enjoy the aspect/ aktionsart distinctions and contribution from Mari,
Rolf, and Dale. Thank you all. I've read Mari's thesis, McKay, parts of Porter,
and am now halfway through Fanning. I like the theories, but Luke 1:7 bugs me.

To see the dynamics in action, can you elaborate on Luke 1:7? It might all
settle well with me if I understand this. KAI AMFOTEROI PROBEBHKOTES EN TAIS
hHMERAIS AUTWN HSAN "and they were well along in years."

Porter/ Fanning say that the perfect participle emphasizes an aorist
"punctiliar" beginning followed by a state.

Question: At what "point" has one become geriatric (I always say 15 years older
than I am at any point in time)? I want to therefore reject the notion of a
"punctiliar" beginning for the perfect participle. Am I correct?

Dale noted (correctly I believe) that the addition of periphrasis does not
necessarily add more durative aktionsart.

Question: So why DOES Luke add the periphrastic with the perfect participle? Why
does not Luke simply use the perfect? Why doesn't Luke just use the imperfect to
emphasize durative aktionsart here if duration is his point? Or is the
periphrasis added for emphasis? If emphasis, WHY does it emphasize?

Porter emphasizes the periphrastic perfect participle is nothing but durative
state with a beginning, and he may well be right although I remain reserved on
the "beginning." But how do the dynamics of aspect and aktionsart play on this
periphrasis and the perfect in Luke 1:7?

I am having given thanks in advance,

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:38:10 EDT