Page 1 of 1

αγωνιζομαι

Posted: April 12th, 2012, 8:15 am
by SusanJeffers
I've been taking to heart the many exhortations on b-greek to try to learn to form my own Greek sentences... as you've always claimed, it's a very helpful practice. Thanks!

I want to paraphrase 2 Tim 4:7 for my students, and can't figure out what to do with ηγωνισμαι.

I'm wanting to make the 1st person singular verbs into 2nd person plural, so instead of "I fought the good fight" etc it will be "you (pl) have fought the good fight" etc. But I see that the 1st person plural perfect middle indicative omits the connecting vowel omicron, making the ending ισμαι. So then in the 2nd person plural would the 2 sigmas just contract into one? ηγωνισθε?

And, just out of curiosity, for future new sentences, what would the 3rd person plural be?
ηγωνισνται (which sounds like way too many consonants one after the other) or ηγωνισονται or something else?

For what it's worth, I teach using Croy. He says of the perfect middle indicative:
"Note also that the normal primary middle/passive endings are joined directly to the verb stem. There is no variable vowel. This causes no problem with a verb whose stem ends in a vowel, such as λυω. But for many verbs whose stems end in a consonant, certain changes occur for the sake of euphony. The resultant forms... will usually be recognizable..."

His examples:

γεγραπται (it has been written)
δεδιωγμαι (I have been persecuted)
βεβαπτισμαι (I have been baptized)

I also poked around a bit in Mounce's Morphology of Biblical Greek, to no avail. I can't seem to find an example of a verb whose lexical form ends in -ζω or -ιζομαι, in either the 2nd person plural or the 3rd person plural perfect middle or passive indicative.

Thanks in advance for any examples, or for insight into what one would expect to happen morphologically.

I've been studying Greek for a quite a long time, and am finding it extremely challenging to discipline myself to form words myself as opposed to just "knowing them when I see them."

Re: αγωνιζομαι

Posted: April 12th, 2012, 11:53 am
by David Lim
SusanJeffers wrote:I'm wanting to make the 1st person singular verbs into 2nd person plural, so instead of "I fought the good fight" etc it will be "you (pl) have fought the good fight" etc. But I see that the 1st person plural perfect middle indicative omits the connecting vowel omicron, making the ending ισμαι. So then in the 2nd person plural would the 2 sigmas just contract into one? ηγωνισθε?

And, just out of curiosity, for future new sentences, what would the 3rd person plural be?
ηγωνισνται (which sounds like way too many consonants one after the other) or ηγωνισονται or something else?
From what I "know", the perfect middle-passive does not have a connecting vowel. So they should be as follows:
1S: ηγωνισμαι
1P: ηγωνισμεθα
2S: ηγωνισαι
2P: ηγωνισθε
3S: ηγωνισται
3P: ηγωνισνται ???
(σσ -> σ)
SusanJeffers wrote:For what it's worth, I teach using Croy. He says of the perfect middle indicative:
"Note also that the normal primary middle/passive endings are joined directly to the verb stem. There is no variable vowel. This causes no problem with a verb whose stem ends in a vowel, such as λυω. But for many verbs whose stems end in a consonant, certain changes occur for the sake of euphony. The resultant forms... will usually be recognizable..."

His examples:

γεγραπται (it has been written)
δεδιωγμαι (I have been persecuted)
βεβαπτισμαι (I have been baptized)
Here is what I know about consonant contraction:
labial (μ/π/β/φ/ψ) + (σ,τ,δ,θ,μ) -> (ψ,πτ,βδ,φθ,μμ)
dental (ν/τ/δ/θ/ζ) + σ -> σ*
gutteral (γ/κ/χ/ξ) + (σ,τ,δ,θ,μ) -> (ξ,κτ,γδ,χθ,γμ**)
σ + σ -> σ
ν + labial (μ/π/β/φ/ψ) ~ -> μ + ~
ν + gutteral (γ/κ/χ/ξ) ~ -> γ + ~
nasal obstruent (μ/ν) + (μ,ρ,λ) -> (μμ,ρρ,λλ)
* preceding vowel undergoes compensatory lengthening (ε -> ει; ο -> ου; both are spurious diphthongs and behave like the first vowel)
** inconsistent
This is my own summary of the major changes mentioned in Funk's Grammar. I did not check but I think they should explain the various forms for your examples.
SusanJeffers wrote:I also poked around a bit in Mounce's Morphology of Biblical Greek, to no avail. I can't seem to find an example of a verb whose lexical form ends in -ζω or -ιζομαι, in either the 2nd person plural or the 3rd person plural perfect middle or passive indicative.
I also do not know any. I might guess that periphrasis would be used for the third person plural when it has three consecutive consonants.

Re: αγωνιζομαι

Posted: April 12th, 2012, 12:32 pm
by GlennDean
I think it's important to see that the perfect middle stem is *αγωνιδ (notice the stem does not end in a σ). So the way one is getting the perfect middle forms is

redup + αγωνιδ + μαι (then you note δμ => σμ, finally getting you ηγωνισμαι)

Another example of getting the 2P form:

redup + αγωνιδ + σθε (note that δσ => σ, which gets you ηγωνισαι)

Re: αγωνιζομαι

Posted: April 12th, 2012, 12:36 pm
by Ken M. Penner
David Lim wrote:I also do not know any. I might guess that periphrasis would be used for the third person plural when it has three consecutive consonants.
You're right, David. The third person plural perfect middle/passive indicative uses periphrasis. ἠγωνισμένοι εἰσίν. See Smyth 405 or Mounce's MBG 46.4.

Re: αγωνιζομαι

Posted: April 12th, 2012, 1:31 pm
by GlennDean
I don't see an "edit" button for posts, but I mentioned above
GlennDean wrote:
Another example of getting the 2P form:

redup + αγωνιδ + σθε (note that δσ => σ, which gets you ηγωνισαι)
but that should read

redup + αγωνιδ + σθε (note that δσ => σ, which gets you ηγωνισθε)

Re: αγωνιζομαι

Posted: April 12th, 2012, 4:06 pm
by SusanJeffers
thanks so much, everyone --

I especially appreciate the specific reference to Mounce MBG 46.4 -- I had only been looking at the v-2a(1) list of verbs...

It's comforting, that the 3rd person plural uses periphrasis; makes me feel better that I couldn't think of or find any perfect indicatives... :-)

Susan Jeffers

Re: αγωνιζομαι

Posted: April 12th, 2012, 8:52 pm
by David Lim
GlennDean wrote:I think it's important to see that the perfect middle stem is *αγωνιδ (notice the stem does not end in a σ). So the way one is getting the perfect middle forms is

redup + αγωνιδ + μαι (then you note δμ => σμ, finally getting you ηγωνισμαι)

Another example of getting the 2P form:

redup + αγωνιδ + σθε (note that δσ => σ, which gets you ηγωνισαι)
Oh I must have skipped over that part: http://www.ibiblio.org/bgreek/project/f ... on-23.html (359) ;)

Re: αγωνιζομαι

Posted: April 12th, 2012, 9:14 pm
by David Lim
Ken M. Penner wrote:
David Lim wrote:I also do not know any. I might guess that periphrasis would be used for the third person plural when it has three consecutive consonants.
You're right, David. The third person plural perfect middle/passive indicative uses periphrasis. ἠγωνισμένοι εἰσίν. See Smyth 405 or Mounce's MBG 46.4.
If when the perfect stem ends in a vowel, the 3rd person plural is formed according to the normal conjugation, but when the perfect stem ends in a consonant, it is formed by periphrasis, does it not mean that periphrastic verb forms are no different from their one-word counterparts? Or is there a clear distinction between the two for other tenses like the present?

Re: αγωνιζομαι

Posted: April 12th, 2012, 9:15 pm
by David Lim
GlennDean wrote:I don't see an "edit" button for posts
I guess that editing is allowed only for a short period of time.

Re: αγωνιζομαι

Posted: April 13th, 2012, 8:45 am
by cwconrad
David Lim wrote:
Ken M. Penner wrote:
David Lim wrote:I also do not know any. I might guess that periphrasis would be used for the third person plural when it has three consecutive consonants.
You're right, David. The third person plural perfect middle/passive indicative uses periphrasis. ἠγωνισμένοι εἰσίν. See Smyth 405 or Mounce's MBG 46.4.
If when the perfect stem ends in a vowel, the 3rd person plural is formed according to the normal conjugation, but when the perfect stem ends in a consonant, it is formed by periphrasis, does it not mean that periphrastic verb forms are no different from their one-word counterparts? Or is there a clear distinction between the two for other tenses like the present?
For what it's worth, there are quite a few Homeric 3d plural perfects in -αται; the nu (ν) of the 3 pl. MP ending -νται is vocalized as alpha (α) so that the ending becomes -αται. This is actually the same vocalization that accounts for the 3d-declension accusative singular in -α and accusative plural in -ας (the original acc. sg. ending is -ν, the original acc. pl. ending is -νς). That fits nicely into dactylic verse, but it appears that use of periphrastic forms in the perfect MP set in early apart from the more common first-singular and third-singular forms.