From: Carl W. Conrad (cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu)
Date: Sat May 06 2000 - 20:56:34 EDT
<x-html>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4
: Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:36:24 EDT
<!doctype html public "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML//EN">
<html><head><style type="text/css"><!--
blockquote, dl, ul, ol, li { margin-top: 0 ; margin-bottom: 0 }
--></style><title>Re: TOU GNWNAI AUTON Phillipians 3
9</title></head><body>
<div>At 11:44 AM +1200 5/7/00, Eddie Van Gent wrote:</div>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font size="-1"
color="#000000">Greetings</font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite> </blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite> </blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font size="-1">According to various
grammars GNWNAI is a 2nd Aorist Active Infinitive. However, the 2nd
Aorist Active is EGNWN with the stem GNW and according to the rules
an infinitive is only a deponent if that particular tense is deponent
in the finite verb form.</font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font size="-1">Second Aorist Active
Infinitives have the same morpheme as the Present Infinitive so the
word to be 2nd Aorist Active would normally be GNWN - being derived
from the following- GNW + EEN (EIN endings were formerly EEN,
which comes into play when contraction rules are applied) .This then
would become GNWN.</font></blockquote>
<div><br></div>
<div>This is one matter wherein I think traditional description of
ancient Greek verb morphology can only be confusing to new learners
of the language, namely, the distinction between "First"
and "Second" categories in the Aorist, Perfect, and
so-called "(Aorist) Passive." The distinction intended
between "First" and "Second" at each
'tense'-systems (and of course 'tense' is also a misnomer, since only
in the indicative do these forms have any normal temporal
reference)--the distinction is between "First" forms as the
paradigm followed by the great majority of verbs that have an Aorist,
Perfect, and/or (Aorist) Passive, and "Second" which, as
usually applied, includes all archaic forms that deviate from the
"First" paradigm, most of them having a distinct paradigm
of their own: Second Aorists having "thematic" forms
comparable to omega present and imperfect conjugation; Second
Perfects having -A rather than -KA endings and a bewildering variety
in ways of forming perfect tense-stems; Second Passives having -H
rather than -QH endings.</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>In my own teaching of ancient Greek I have made it my practice
to refer to Aorists of the type EGNWN, hEALWN, EBHN, ESTHN as
"Third" Aorists; I've also urged students to link together
the descriptive language that's really more valuable than the ordinal
numeral used: "First or Sigmatic or Alpha Aorist"--the sort
formed with -S- as a tense marker and endings in
-A/-AS/-E/-AMEN/-ATE/-AN; "Second or Thematic or O/E
Aorist"--the sort formed like the imperfect by linking the
thematic O or E to a stem before adding the endings
-N/-S/-E/-MEN/-TE/-N; and "Third or Athematic ('Non-Thematic')
Aorist"--the sort formed with a stem element which is a long
vowel A or H or W, which may alternate with a short vowel form in A
or E or O and to which the same secondary endings are attached
directly--with no intervening thematic
vowel--(-N/-S/--/-MEN/-TE/-SAN. EGNWN falls into this category; the
stem is simply the long-vowel root form GNW.</div>
<div><br></div>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font size="-1">To get GNWNAI one could
take the 2nd Aorist Stem GNW + HNAI (which is the normal 2nd Aorist
Passive morpheme) and end up with GNWNAI after applying the
rules of contraction:-</font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font size="-1">W + H =
W</font></blockquote>
<div><br></div>
<div>No, the 2nd (which I'd prefer to call "3rd" Aorist
stem is GNW, but the active infinitive ending is -NAI (just as for
athematic present stems: DIDO-NAI, TIQE-NAI, hISTA-NAI. The form
GNWNAI is NOT a contraction; moreover, although you might
THEORETICALLY have a middle/passive infinitive GNW-SQAI, that
function is taken over by the forms EGNWSQHN with stem GNWSQH- and
infinitive GNWSQHNAI.</div>
<div><br></div>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font size="-1">I can't find any
reference in the following major Greek scholar's books that GNWNAI is
a 2nd Aorist Passive Deponent:- Bill Mounce, Max Zerwick/Mary
Grosvener, Barbara & Timothy Friberg,</font></blockquote>
<div><br></div>
<div>I can't speak for them; but I don't think this distinction is
very clearly treated even by Smyth's grammar (e.g. at the Perseus web
site:</div>
<div><x-tab>
</x-tab>http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/cgi-bin/text
></span>?lookup=smyth+546&vers=english&display=La<span
></span>tin+transliteration</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>At any rate, I think a Greek teacher has an obligation to make
this distinction between KINDS of "Second Aorist" clear and
show how it works. If anyone else cares to use my term "Third
Aorist," be my guest, but the truth is that I did not invent it
so much as I have sought to promulgate as a clarifying factor.</div>
<div><br></div>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font size="-1">Obviously if GNWNAI is
in fact passive, the meaning of Phillipians 3: 9 and context could
alter quite significantly.</font></blockquote>
<div><br></div>
<div>Banish the thought! It is NOT passive. That would have to be
GNWSQHNAI. A nice place to observe the alternation of active and
passive is 1 Cor 13:12, where the verb is compounded as EPIGINWSKW
and what we have is an opposition of future active with aorist
passive: TOTE DE EPIGNWSOMAI KAQWS KAI EPEGNWSQHN.</div>
<div>-- <br>
<br>
Carl W. Conrad<br>
Department of Classics/Washington University<br>
One Brookings Drive/St. Louis, MO, USA 63130/(314) 935-4018<br>
Home: 7222 Colgate Ave./St. Louis, MO 63130/(314) 726-5649<br>
cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu <br>
WWW: http://www.artsci.wustl.edu/~cwconrad/>
</body>
</html>
</x-html>