Re: Augment revisited (was: NUN+Verb.Aorist)

From: Edgar M. Krentz (
Date: Fri May 02 1997 - 16:17:32 EDT

Carl wrote in response to Don (omitting a lot of important stuff)
>Well, what I called it was a "crack in the wall" of regular use of the
>augment, nothing more. What still hasn't really been demonstrated is that
>Greek speakers and writers actually deemed the augment A NECESSARY MARKER

It seems to me the question has shifted a bit. Let me ask it in my own
manner. Poetic diction makes it clear that the augment, IN CONTEXT, can be
omitted and the reader will still understand past time [in the indicative].

Carl, the question can be asked differently. If the augment is present, is
it a marker of past time, whether necessary or not?

Equally interesting is the question about the relation of Volkssprache to
gelehrte Sprache in linguistics, of papyri to inscriptions, to put it in
terms of the exchange you two are having.

I look forward to hearing.

Edgar Krentz, New Testament OR HOME:
Lutheran School of Theology at Chicago
1100 East 55th Street
TEL.: 773-256-0752 FAX: 773-256-0782

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:38:14 EDT