From: Moon-Ryul Jung (moon@saint.soongsil.ac.kr)
Date: Sun Dec 24 2000 - 00:00:15 EST
Dear Rolf,
Let me continue the discussion and talk about the intuition behind
the selection of the parameters for talking about aspect.
You said:
I use three parameters to distinguish between the aspects: 1) The kind of
focus (closeup/distance, details visible or not),2) the area of focus
(length of section of Event time intersected by Reference time), and 3)
The angle of fucus i relation the the nucleus (before/after nucleus,
beginning/end included or not).
Could you explain how these parameters can explain various uses of the
tenses, e.g. inceptive aorist, culminative aorist, inceptive imperfect.
These uses refer to some kind of transition. There seem to be no ways
for these parameters to describe transition.
I think what made Kimmo think of aorist as "perfective" is the fact that
often aorists refer to transition from one state to another.
Whether aorist typically has the idea of "pefective" or "complete(d)"
is an important issue in some theological debates. I would like to discuss
it further on this thread.
Let me quote two verses.
Acts 19:2 EIPEN TE PROS AUTOUS, EI PNEUMA hAGION ELABETE PISTEUSANTES;
Did you receive Holy Spirit having believed?
Eph 5:26 hINA AUTHN hAGISHi KAQARISAS TWi LOUTRWi TOU hUDATOS EN RHMATI.
In order that he may sanctify him having cleansed
by the washing of the water in word.
The question is :
Do aorist participles typically refer to the time point at which
the situation described by them is completed, relative to which
the situation described by the main verbs is described?
If so, it is reasonable for some to argue for the order of
regeneration then sanctification, or believing then receiving Holy
Spirit, based on the above verses.
Your theory of aorist is "neutral" enough (with respect to the
notion of "completion") to interpret the above verses without
implying the order.
You would say:
In Acts 19:2, PISTEUSANTES simply introduces the event as a whole
and looks at it from outside; This situation is used as the
reference time for the event of receiving Holy Spirit. Whether
the reference time refers to the beginning of, the middle of, the end of
, or after the event of believing depends on the context.
From this viewpoint, Acts 19:2 will be translated as
Did you receive Holy Sprit when you believed?
Eph 5:26 will be translated as:
in order that he may sanctify him by cleasing with the washing of the
water.
From this viewpoint, believing and receiving Holy Spirit are simultaneous,
and regeneration (washing) and sanctification are simultaneous!
Or is it the case that aorists in participles are used differently from a
aorists in indicatives? I mean: do aorist participles typically refer to
completed situations relative to which the situations described by
the main verbs are described, whereas it is not typically the case?
I would appreciate your comments.
Moon
Moon-Ryul Jung
Associate Professor
Dept of Digital Media
Sogang Univ, Seoul, Korea
---
B-Greek home page: http://metalab.unc.edu/bgreek
You are currently subscribed to b-greek as: [jwrobie@mindspring.com]
To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave-b-greek-327Q@franklin.oit.unc.edu
To subscribe, send a message to subscribe-b-greek@franklin.oit.unc.edu
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:36:45 EDT