εφεροσαν

Biblical Greek morphology and syntax, aspect, linguistics, discourse analysis, and related topics
Post Reply
Jean Putmans
Posts: 153
Joined: August 3rd, 2018, 1:01 am
Location: Heerlen; Netherlands
Contact:

εφεροσαν

Post by Jean Putmans »

In Mk 1:32 the Ms D (Cod.Bezae) has the form εφεροσαν, the other Mss. have εφερον (A.Imperf.Ind.Pl.3).
εφεροσαν occurs in LXX (Septuagint) Chron. I, 22-4.
The form εφεροσαν seems to be extremely rare: Mayser, Schwyzer, Kühner don't mention it; Bragster The Analytrical Greek Lexikon, Traut Lexikon über die Formen der griechischen Verband and TLG don't have it and Scaife-Perseus just mentions the form in LXX.

I was thinking, that it would be an Aor.1 (normally ενεγκ-, ηνεγκ-), but Katabiblon has the form for LXX-Chron.I.22-4 and tags it as an alternative Imperfect.

Maybe someone has an idea?
Jean Putmans
Netherlands
gotischebibel.blogspot.com
Barry Hofstetter
Posts: 2159
Joined: May 6th, 2011, 1:48 pm

Re: εφεροσαν

Post by Barry Hofstetter »

Since it's built on the first principal part (the present stem), I would take it as an imperfect.
N.E. Barry Hofstetter, M.A., Th.M.
Ph.D. Student U of FL
Instructor of Latin
Jack M. Barrack Hebrew Academy
καὶ σὺ τὸ σὸν ποιήσεις κἀγὼ τὸ ἐμόν. ἆρον τὸ σὸν καὶ ὕπαγε.
Jean Putmans
Posts: 153
Joined: August 3rd, 2018, 1:01 am
Location: Heerlen; Netherlands
Contact:

Re: εφεροσαν

Post by Jean Putmans »

The stem-argument I understand, but why the Ending with -σα- in an Imperfect?
Jean Putmans
Netherlands
gotischebibel.blogspot.com
Barry Hofstetter
Posts: 2159
Joined: May 6th, 2011, 1:48 pm

Re: εφεροσαν

Post by Barry Hofstetter »

Jean Putmans wrote: October 6th, 2021, 11:23 am The stem-argument I understand, but why the Ending with -σα- in an Imperfect?
Good question. My guess is that at least in some register of the language (maybe locally conditioned) that there was a mix and match of tense markers that didn't really rise to any literary level. But that's only a guess, we would need more examples to confirm.
N.E. Barry Hofstetter, M.A., Th.M.
Ph.D. Student U of FL
Instructor of Latin
Jack M. Barrack Hebrew Academy
καὶ σὺ τὸ σὸν ποιήσεις κἀγὼ τὸ ἐμόν. ἆρον τὸ σὸν καὶ ὕπαγε.
Barry Hofstetter
Posts: 2159
Joined: May 6th, 2011, 1:48 pm

Re: εφεροσαν

Post by Barry Hofstetter »

WH App.2 172 note that “in a few other places forms in -οσαν [impf. or aor.] have some Western attestation”—thus Mk 1:32 ἐφέροσαν, 6:14 ἐλέγοσαν (Scrivener). Instances for the strong aorist are discussed below, § 88 (p. 209). Thackeray 213 f. observes that “these forms in -οσαν are exceedingly frequent in LXX, being distributed over all the translations (except [1–4 K.]) from the Hexateuch to 2 Eedras.” The question therefore is how to explain their almost complete absence from NT. The extension of the suffix -σαν began in the -μι verbs in the earliest Greek, and passed into -ω verbs in the dialects of Phocis and Delphi (in the NW Greek group): see Thumb Dial. 191, Valaori Delphische Dialekt 60. We may probably regard it as a dialectic form in the Κοινή, which ultimately failed to establish itself.

Moulton, J. H., & Howard, W. F. (1963–). A Grammar of New Testament Greek: Accidence and Word-Formation. (Vol. 2, p. 194). Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark.

6. The ending ΟΣΑΝ (= ΟΝ) of the third person plural of the imperfect and second aorist indicative active is of frequent occurrence in later Greek. The grammarians call it Bœotic, Chalcidean, or Asiatic. (Et. M. 423. Eust. 1759, 30. 1761.)

αἱρέω, εἷλον. Sept. Josu. 8:29 καθείλοσαν.
αἴρω (ἦρον). Josu. 3:14 ἤροσαν.
ἁμαρτάνω, ἥμαρτον. Deut. 32:5 ἡμάρτοσαν.
βάλλω, ἔβαλον. Dan. 3:22 ἐν-εβάλοσαν.
εἶπον. Ruth. 4:11 εἴποσαν.
ἔρχομαι, ἦλθον. Gen. 8:19; 12:5 ἐξήλθοσαν. Ex. 15:27; Ps. 78:1 ἤλθοσαν.
ἐσθίω, ἔφαγον. Ps. 77:29 ἐφάγοσαν.
εὑρίσκω, εὗρον. Ps. 114:3 εὕροσαν.
ἔχω, εἶχον, ἔσχον. Joann. 15:24 εἴχοσαν. Scymn 695. ἔσχοσαν. Sept. Nehem. 3:5 κατέσχοσαν.
κρίνω, ἔκρινον. Sept. Ex. 18:26 ἐκρίνοσαν.
λαμβάνω, ἐλάμβανον, ἔλαβον. Ezech. 22:12 ἐλαμβάνοσαν. Deut. 1:25 ἐλάβασαν.
λείπω, ἔλιπον. Ex. 16:24 κατελίποσαν.
μανθάνω, ἔμαθον. Et. M. 282, 37 ἐμάθοσαν.
ὁράω, εἶδον. Sept. Deut. 7:19 ἴδοσαν. Ps. 76:17 εἴδοσαν.
πίνω, ἔπιον. Jer. 28:7 ἐπίοσαν.
σχάζω, ἔσχαζον. Lycophr. 21 ἐσχάζοσαν.
φαίνω, ἔφαινον. Sept. Macc. 1, 4:50 ἐφαίνοσαν.
φέρω, ἔφερον. Par. 1, 22, 4 ἐφέροσαν.


Sophocles, E. A. (1900). Greek Lexicon of the Roman and Byzantine Periods (From B. C. 146 to A. D. 1100) (Memorial Edition, p. 39). New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons.
N.E. Barry Hofstetter, M.A., Th.M.
Ph.D. Student U of FL
Instructor of Latin
Jack M. Barrack Hebrew Academy
καὶ σὺ τὸ σὸν ποιήσεις κἀγὼ τὸ ἐμόν. ἆρον τὸ σὸν καὶ ὕπαγε.
Jean Putmans
Posts: 153
Joined: August 3rd, 2018, 1:01 am
Location: Heerlen; Netherlands
Contact:

Re: εφεροσαν

Post by Jean Putmans »

I found one more example: εφεραν (A.Aor.Ind.Pl.3:) Kings II,3:22: σκυλα πολλα εφεραν μετ αυτων = they brought much spoil with them.
Jean Putmans
Netherlands
gotischebibel.blogspot.com
Jean Putmans
Posts: 153
Joined: August 3rd, 2018, 1:01 am
Location: Heerlen; Netherlands
Contact:

Re: εφεροσαν

Post by Jean Putmans »

Thackeray 1909 gives a plausible explanation:
§ 17 (Page 209-210)
"The most marked change under this head is the gradual disappearance of the second aorist forms and the intrusion of the first aorist forms into their place and subsequently into the place of the other past tenses (perfect and imperfect). This extension of the sphere of the first aorist takes place in various ways. Primarily it affected the terminations only, beginning probably with the termination of the 3rd person plural: and here again there was divergence, (i) The α of the 1st aor. replaces the ο (or ε) in the termination of the 2nd aor.: ειπα -αν -ατω, ηγαγα. The termination -αν is then extended to the 3rd plur. of perfect and imperfect, (ii) An alternative was to retain the ο- of the 1st aorist as well as the α in the 3rd plur. of 2nd aor. and impf.: ειποσαν,
ήγάγοσαν, έφέροσαν. This form seems to have been designed to discriminate between the 1st sing, and the 3rd plur. which in classical Greek ended alike in -or in these two tenses1. More rarely (iii) a new 1st aorist replaced the old 2nd aorist: ήξα (ήγάγησα), § 2i, i. The result was much simplification and greater uniformity."
Jean Putmans
Netherlands
gotischebibel.blogspot.com
Jean Putmans
Posts: 153
Joined: August 3rd, 2018, 1:01 am
Location: Heerlen; Netherlands
Contact:

Re: εφεροσαν

Post by Jean Putmans »

Dear Barry,

your idea, to look at the stem (Present- or Aor.II-stem), is the same idea, Mayser (Bd I-2, 1938, p. 83) had. He looks at the stem and decides then, to qualify the form as Imperfect, ελαμβανοσαν < ελαμβανον = impf., or Aorist, ελαβοσαν < ελαβον etc.

Mayser labels these forms as hellenistic (from the 3. cent BCE, so the 1938-ed., the 1923-ed has the "starting" date mid 2nd cent BCE).

By the way:
My fixation was with φερω, but you showed me to look at -οσαν as the maior problem and probable solution. That made the way to search for explanations in the literature much easier.
Jean Putmans
Netherlands
gotischebibel.blogspot.com
Post Reply

Return to “Greek Language and Linguistics”