cwconrad wrote:Stephen Carlson wrote:A slight complication is where the modern (even including the traditional) grammatical theory differs from the theories of the ancients. Do we coin new terms in Greek (as I've seen for "deponent"), or what?
I think we're "damned if we do/damned if we don't." A.T. Robertson objected to the term "deponent", for instance, but didn't try to "lay it aside" as we might all wish he had done. In part it's a "chicken or egg first" problem.I don't see how a new term or a new framework can be adopted where there isn't a fairly broad consensus on the key elements of the framework.
Fortunately, the SBL sessions on "deponent" have been showing something of a consensus of deponing deponency. (For those who did not follow Carl's remark or this pun, that means that Greek teachers are now discussing a Greek classroom where "deponency" is not given as an "explanatoin" for Greek students.) Additionally, as soon as one starts teaching from within a Greek framework, there is no "deponency" to teach. Students are inundated with basic verbs like ερχεσθαι, πορευεσθαι, απτεσθαι, προσευχεσθαι, δυνασθαι, πειρασθαι, βουλεσθαι, κεισθαι, καθησθαι, ανιστασθαι (αναστηθι/καταβηθι). The whole question can often be put off until needing to explain something fully passive. However, the rosy anecdote from the SBL meetings may simply reflect that those with an interest in the subject are reaching a consensus. Even then, the "explanation" can be along the lines of using the MESH forms for passive, like French and Spanish. However, a lot of Greek classes are still taught by those interested in something else, or by deputized grad students, who simply follow whatever a book says. Since a lot of books still have "deponent" verbs in their lesson plans, this may be a case where we chase away the darkness by lighting a candle.
cwconrad wrote: In the matter of verbal aspect, there's still not really sufficient consensus over terminology, partly because the consensus hasn't been reached regarding some of the details of aspectual functions. In my own thinking about "voice" I've been acutely aware of the problem of misleading terminology and the difficulty of proposing alternatives that are clearly more pertinent and not ambiguous.
Just within the area of verbal "voice", the term "voice" is not descriptive of anything. The Greek term διάθεσις is really much better. I would prefer, as things now stand, to use the term "middle verbs" for those verbs which have been called either "deponent" or "media tantum" and "passiva tantum."
I think I hear you saying that we should call verbs in -εσθαι and -θηναι 'middle'. and drop the name "middle-passive". If so, I highly agree on -εσθαι. They are middle verbs. And while I treat the -θηναι and - ηναι verbs similarly (e.g. πορευθηναι, χαρηναι, στηναι, καταβηναι) as middle verbs, I use the ancient Greek name παθητικος. but explain that these verbs are μέση just like the -εσθαι verbs.
cwconrad wrote:But even the word "middle" is misleading insofar as it suggests something between "active" and "passive." If I could have my druthers, I think that for "voice" I would prefer to use the older term διάθεσις and to distinguish two διαθέσεις, a 'default' (perhaps κοινὴ διάθεσις?) διάθεσις and a 'subjective' διάθεσις, which would include all forms that 'grammaticalize' subject-affectedness. I might even propose coining a new adjective that would, I think, be pertinent and unambiguous: ἑαυτικὴ διάθεσις.
I do agree that it would be very helpful to have grammatical terms in Greek
ἑαυτικὴ διάθεσις
Very nice.
That is a great way of explaining μέση.
However, because the ἑαυτικὴ forms are chosen when trying to signal a passive construction, the μέση still has some explanatory help since the -εσθαι verbs can be said to bridge between the -ειν verbs and the special use of "-εσθαι on -ειν verbs".
By the end of a first semester, one can ameliorate the traditional name of the ενεργητικη by grouping twenty -ειν verbs and twnety -εσθαι verbs and letting students see how the Greek were inclined to make two groups out of them. Why was one group chosen over another? In some cases simply because verbs came to be more idiomatically used in one groups rather than the other, and the choice became a fixed idiom. The choice was done in antiquity, and Greek kids throughout the ages have to get in line with recognising the two resulting groups with somewhat unpredictable membership. But they are two groups none the less, and part of the language system to be used. Words still used in both, like αιτειν/αιτεισθαι can help illustrate the difference and how the groups developed. αιτεισθαι is ἑαυτικὴ διάθεσις.