From: Manolis Nikolaou (aei_didaskomenos@hotmail.com)
Date: Tue Apr 09 2002 - 18:12:14 EDT
> I think what may be contributing to the confusion here is the
> failure to distinguish lexical from grammatical aspect. Lexical
> aspect is: "the inherent properties of the verb (lexeme) that
> indicate how it unfolds through time."
>
> Grammatical aspect (its morphology) is "used for Imperfective vs.
> Perfective oppositions."
>
> And then one must recognize the difference between Pragmatics
> and Semantics.
>
> There is no inherent notion of "keep on" or "continually"
> with Grammatical aspect. That is, the Imperfect FORM does not
> denote continuous action. Grammatically, it only indicates that
> the action/event is "in progress" (unfolding) AT THE REFERENCED TIME.
> What happens AFTER the referenced time is not addressed with the
> Imperfect FORM.
>
>
> You also quote:
>
> -------
> >"Hence we need not insist that HN (Jo 1:1) is strictly durative always
> >(imperfect). It may be sometimes actually aorist also."
> ------
>
> Here the author makes the common mistake of equating Lexical
> and Grammatical aspect (twice!).
>
>
> Concerning this:
>
> -------
> >Then, in his notes on John 1:1, Peter Misselbrook (Read the Greek New
> >Testament, http://www.btinternet.com/~MisPar/GNotes/noteindx.htm#John )
> >quotes C.K. Barrett 'The Gospel According to John', London SPCK, 1967
> >
> >"HN 'The continuous tense is to be contrasted with the punctiliar EGENETO
> >(vv 3,6,14).
> -------
>
> Same mistake as above. There is no such animal in Greek as
> "The continuous tense."
>
> Then,
>
> -----
> >Is there an exception for EIMI, where the Imperfect does not carry
> >durative force?
> ------
>
> Stated correctly: Is there an exception for EIMI, where its
> LEXICAL ASPECT does not carry durative force?
>
> And, of course, the answer is Yes.
>
> My thoughts,
>
> Mark Wilson
Mark, the lexical and the grammatical aspect should certainly not be
equated, but I don't think they are irrelevant to each other: EIMI (as
well as EIMAI, in modern Greek) seem to occur only in the imperfect tense
because the perfective tense is semantically "excluded". I mean, "being"
in Greek is understood as a during condition; in case its "lexical aspect"
hadn't carried -almost always- "durative force", its "grammatical aspect"
would have been different: some kind of Aorist should have been shaped by
now, no?
Regards,
Manolis Nikolaou
Greece
---
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 - 15:37:23 EDT