From: Carlton L. Winbery (winberyc@linknet.net)
Date: Mon Oct 30 1995 - 16:02:21 EST
A further response to Jim Mcquire's question;
>1) Where is the rule that the periphrastic aorist consists of the imperfect
>of EIMI with the aorist participle? Cannot the present of EIMI be used?
> There may be one, but I am unaware of any such rule.
If you checked every reference in Robertson (that takes some doing) you
could see the forms he observes in periphrastic constructions. An easier
way to see all the forms would be to get a copy of Brooks and Winbery
Morphology of the NT and check the following pages: 196-198, 207, 209,
220, 225, 242, 249, 254, 259, 262, 264-265. In these pages you would see
that the
present periphrastic involves the present of EIMI + the present ptc.
imperfect peri. " imperfect of EIMI + the present ptc.
future peri. " future of EIMI + the present ptc.
aorist peri. " imperfect of EIMI + aorist ptc.
perfect peri. " present of EIMI + perfect ptc.
pluperfect peri. " imperfect of EIMI + perfect ptc.
Funk in the Hellenistic Grammar in vol. II Syntax indicates that "The
periphrastic form often gives emphasis to continued, repeated or habitual
action." This would be the reason that both the present and the aorist
appears infrequently as periphrastic constructions.
Carlton Winbery
Prof. NT & Greek
LA College,
Pineville,La
winberyc@linknet.net
fax (318) 442-4996
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:37:31 EDT