Re: Periphrastic constructions with multiple participles (Mar 1:6)
Carlton L. Winbery (winberyc@popalex1.linknet.net)
Sat, 7 Sep 1996 16:53:09 +0400
Carl Conrad wrote;
>I cannot escape the impression that the grammarians have created the
>category of the periphrastic verb in Koine Greek and are determined to
>bring it under regulation willy-nilly. I have no quarrel with the examples
>cited here. I just don't understand how one is supposed to understand the
>grammar of Mk 1:6--
>
> KAI HN hO IWANNHS ENDEDUMENOS TRIXAS KAMHLOU KAI ZWNHN
> DERMATINHN PERI THN OSFUN AUTOU KAI ESQIWN AKRIDAS KAI
> MELI AGRION
>
>--without understanding both ENDEDUMENOS and ESQIWN as dependent upon the
>initial auxiliary verb HN. Maybe we don't want to use the term
>"periphrastic" here, but, as I already stated, I think that it is the
>grammarians who are disturbed here, not the ordinary reader who knows very
>well that we have here an equivalent for a pluperfect = imperfect in HN
>ENDEDUMENOS (and say, is that participle middle or passive?) which really
>means "he was wearing"--and precedes to take an acc. direct object and then
>a second equivalent of an imperfect in HN ESQIWN with its own direct
>object: "he was wearing A & B" and "he was eating C & D." HN ENDEDUMENOS
>is "imperfect" in exactly the same sense that hEISTHKEI and HiDEI are
>imperfects because the Perfect tense here supplies the present tense
>meaning. It seems to me then that it's quibbling to say that this is not an
>instance of two periphrastics because the tense of the participles is
>different.
>
I tend to agree with Carl here, but even my partner in writing did not
agree. If it walks like a duck . . .
Carlton L. Winbery
Prof. NT & Greek La College
winberyc@popalex1.linknet.net
winbery@andria.lacollege.edu