From: Lee R. Martin (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Mon Mar 24 1997 - 12:25:53 EST
T & J Peterson wrote:
> In light of the discussion that has recently developed over tenses, does
> anyone have some thoughts on prohibitions? I've read some grammars that
> seem to identify present imperative as always a command to stop an
> action already in progress and aorist subjunctive as indicating that an
> action ought not be started. It seems, though, that a number of present
> imperatives don't necessarily imply anything about whether the action is
> already in progress, and some seem to refer particularly to an action
> that has not yet begun. Is this an area where the wrong emphasis has
> been placed on linear vs. punctiliar?
A few years ago, I wrote a seminar paper on prohibitions. I used
Gramcord to search all of the prohibitions in the NT. My conclusion
agrees with your observation above:
1-The present imperative is undefined in relation to whether the action
has begun or not.
2-The aorist subj. most often refers to actions that should not be
started, but there are exceptions.
I do not have my paper with me, so I cannot give the examples (I wrote
the paper 7 years ago, so I cannot remember the details).
-- Lee R. Martin Adjunct Faculty in Old Testament and Hebrew Church of God School of Theology Cleveland, TN 37311 Pastor, Prospect Church of God
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:38:10 EDT