From: Carl W. Conrad (cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu)
Date: Sun Dec 10 1995 - 08:13:59 EST
At 4:06 PM 12/9/95, Rod Decker wrote:
>The usual def. of a periphrastic is a form of 'eimi' with a ptcp. to
>express a single verbal idea. (Some simply say a "linking verb" + ptcp.)
>What are the thoughts of you who are grammarians and linguists on the
>subject? Can a periphrastic be formed with any verbs other than 'eimi'? Has
>this changed over the course of classical ... koine usage?
>
>I haven't pursued this extensively in the grammars at this point, but did
>run over to the seminary briefly this afternoon and checked a few things.
>Porter (_VA_ ch. 10) restricts periphrastics to 'eimi'+ ptcp. He has
>another classification for other similar combinations: catenative
>constructions, with the finite verb contributing verbal aspect and the
>auxiliary maintaining "its integrity as an independent contributor to the
>semantics of the clause." He notes the following posiblities for this
>construction: 1) verbs of capability, desire, etc. (e.g., 'dunamai',
>'qelw', 'dei', 'mellw', 'boulomai'); 2) 'ecw'; and 3) 'ginomai'.
I would suppose that ECW (I really want to write EXW, which seems more
natural to me, primarily because the X "looks like" the Greek character,
but also because it's what I use for chi on my GreekKeys keyboard) is
classed in the above list as periphrastic in the sense of "be able (to),"
but there is another fairly frequent combination of ECW with the nom. sg.
aor. active ptc to form a periphrastic perfect: e.g., ECW LABWN, "I have
captured." I would think that if DEI (used as impersonal, "it is obligatory
(to)" is listed, then others like it should be listed as well, such as CRH
(XRH, I want to write), "it is needful (to)," which is actually a noun and
normally used with an implicit ESTI, as is ANAGKH, "there is compulsion
(to)." So common is CRH that it forms a most peculiar imperfect 3 sg,
ECRHN, which is to say, it augments the older crasis form CRHN = CRH HN.
>I also noted that Smyth lists 'ecw' as a legit. periphrastic (sect. 599b,
>1963), along with 'emellon' (1960), 'ginomai' (1964), and 'fainomai'
>(1965). Porter notes that 'ecw' is included as a potential periphrastic
>element by Gildersleeve, Goodwin, Kuhner/Gerth, Jelf, Chantrine, and Aerts.
To the above list should be added DOKEW, which is used very much like
FAINOMAI in idiomatically distinct functions with an infinitive,
DOKW EIDENAI, OUK EIDWS, "I appear to know/think I know when I
don't know," a recurrent phrase in Plato's Apology of Socrates.
There's an idiomatic distinction also between DOKEW and FAINOMAI used with
an infinitive and the same verbs used with a participle. e.g.:
FAINETAI EIDENAI = "he appears to know (but may very well NOT know)"
FAINETAI EIDWS = "he manifestly does know, shows himself to know"
Some of the classical grammars use the term "supplementary participle" for
the above usage of ptc with DOKEW and FAINOMAI, perhaps to characterize the
construction as comparable to a "complementary infinitive" used with the
verbs like BOULOMAI, QELW, etc. Among the particularly common verbs that
are auxiliaries taking such "supplementary" participles in classical Attic
are LANQANW, "go undetected while ...," TUGXANW, "happen (to do), do by
chance," and FQANW, "anticipate (someone else) (by doing), e.g.:
FQANW TON STRATIWTHN EIS TO hIERON TREXWN = "I run into the
sanctuary before the soldier (can apprehend me)."
One other point I think may be worth making, to add to the notes we seem to
be assembling about differences between classical Attic and Koine usage (a
point I mentioned a few months back when we were talking about MELLEI in
synoptic apocalyptic passages): MELLW originally means "intend, have a mind
(to);" in classical Attic it is normally used with a FUTURE infinitive
where it is functioning as a synonym for a future tense, e.g.
TAUTA POIHSW = TAUTA MELLW POIHSEIN,
but in Koine TAUTA MELLW POIEIN would normally mean the same thing;
however, in classical Attic MELLW with a PRESENT infinitive usually means
"claim to be about to do something but fail to follow through with it =
hesitate, delay." This is found in exchanges in Sophocles like (this is in
the Oedipus Tyrannus, but I don't remember the exact text):
TAUTA PANTA SOI DIHGHSOMAI, "I'll explain all this to you ..."
TI OUN MELLEIS (scil. DIHGHSASQAI), "Well then, what are you
waiting for/why are you delaying (to explain)?"
>BDF had a very sketchy (& not very helpful!) discussion of periphrastics.
>I've not pursued other sources at this point. (I have cross-posted this to
>both b-greek and the Gk grammar list [the latter of which has been
>seemingly defunct lately--unless I've gotten unsubscribed from it also! :)
>].
It seems to me that this whole area of periphrastics falls somewhere within
that gray area between "Grammar" as a description of "normal" usage and
"Idiom" as observed not to be uncommon usage. And I fear it's the sort of
thing one can only really pick up a sense of by reading voluminously--which
is why I think voluminous reading of Greek texts (or texts of whatever
language one is trying to learn) is an absolute imperative for serious
students of Greek (or whatever).
Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University
One Brookings Drive, St. Louis, MO, USA 63130
(314) 935-4018
cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu OR cwc@oui.com
WWW: http://www.artsci.wustl.edu/~cwconrad/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:37:34 EDT