The Verbal Adjective

Stephen Hughes
Posts: 3323
Joined: February 26th, 2013, 7:12 am

Re: Category for participles, infinitives, finite verbs

Post by Stephen Hughes »

Stephen Hughes wrote:the -τός seems to be derived from the verb and functioning as a regular adjective syntactically. The -τέος, meanwhile, functions as a verbal form within its own syntactic patterns.
This statement is so absolute that it hides (seems to dismiss) the fact that both -τός and -τέος types may in some circumstances retain / allow / require some elements of the syntactic constructions typical to the verbs from which they are derived. Those two types function in different ways syntactically, but the statement "regular adjective syntactically" was too simplistic, because it was only considering the relationships between an adjective and it nominal. In the broader context of a phrase there are other things to consider - namely the way a verb (typically in its passive syntactical constructions in this case works together with other elements to create meanings). Adjectival syntax at that level is interesting to observe, but a few steps above my pay-grade to be able to manage yet.

Many of the -τός type verbal adjectives are from verbs, which do not occur in the New Testament, or not in the New Testament in the sense (issue of polysemy) that the verb from which they are derived from does.

This doesn't add that much to this discussion, but I thought I should clarify that.
Γελᾷ δ' ὁ μωρός, κἄν τι μὴ γέλοιον ᾖ
(Menander, Γνῶμαι μονόστιχοι 108)
cwconrad
Posts: 2112
Joined: May 5th, 2011, 5:52 pm
Location: Burnsville, NC 28714
Contact:

Re: Category for participles, infinitives, finite verbs

Post by cwconrad »

Stephen Hughes wrote:
Stephen Hughes wrote:the -τός seems to be derived from the verb and functioning as a regular adjective syntactically. The -τέος, meanwhile, functions as a verbal form within its own syntactic patterns.
This statement is so absolute that it hides (seems to dismiss) the fact that both -τός and -τέος types may in some circumstances retain / allow / require some elements of the syntactic constructions typical to the verbs from which they are derived. Those two types function in different ways syntactically, but the statement "regular adjective syntactically" was too simplistic, because it was only considering the relationships between an adjective and it nominal. In the broader context of a phrase there are other things to consider - namely the way a verb (typically in its passive syntactical constructions in this case works together with other elements to create meanings). Adjectival syntax at that level is interesting to observe, but a few steps above my pay-grade to be able to manage yet.

Many of the -τός type verbal adjectives are from verbs, which do not occur in the New Testament, or not in the New Testament in the sense (issue of polysemy) that the verb from which they are derived from does.

This doesn't add that much to this discussion, but I thought I should clarify that.
ἰστέον ταῦτα - one needs to know these tricks. In particular the usage of the neuter sg. -τέος/α/ον form with an implicit ἐστίν is equivalent to impersonal verbals like ἔξεστιν and πρέπει and χρή and a host of other "idioms", recognition of which distinguishes a competent reader of Greek from a dilettante.

Slippery eels, aren't they -τός and -τέος verbal adjectives? I suppose they will continue to be parsed as adjectives in a scheme which ignores their verbal association; compared with participles in the economy of ancient Greek, their role is certainly more modest. Nevertheless, they appear often enough and function in a manner sufficiently distinctive that one who reads Greek is obliged to understand them and be familiar with their idiosyncrasies. They belong to those items likely to get shunted off to the realm of "beyond-the-basics" although they really ought to be included within the "basics."
οὔτοι ἀπ’ ἀρχῆς πάντα θεοὶ θνητοῖς ὑπέδειξαν,
ἀλλὰ χρόνῳ ζητέοντες ἐφευρίσκουσιν ἄμεινον. (Xenophanes, Fragment 16)

Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University (Retired)
Stephen Hughes
Posts: 3323
Joined: February 26th, 2013, 7:12 am

Re: Category for participles, infinitives, finite verbs

Post by Stephen Hughes »

cwconrad wrote:In particular the usage of the neuter sg. -τέος/α/ον form with an implicit ἐστίν is equivalent to impersonal verbals like ἔξεστιν and πρέπει and χρή and a host of other "idioms", recognition of which distinguishes a competent reader of Greek from a dilettante.
Perhaps it's time I had a change of tack and spent less time looking at less-well-acquainted-with words, idioms and phrases, and gave some attention to competent-reader-level points of grammar...
Luke 5:38 [i]Byz.[/i] wrote:Ἀλλὰ οἶνον νέον εἰς ἀσκοὺς καινοὺς βλητέον, καὶ ἀμφότεροι συντηροῦνται.
Well, now that I know my understanding of βλητέον as "(recently pressed wine) ought to be put (into unused wine skins)" was a little askew, and that it should be "(it is) should put (recently pressed wine into unused wine skins)".

So now, besides being able to say with a straight face that οἶνον νέον is the object of βλητέον and that εἰς ἀσκοὺς καινοὺς is a adverbial prepositional phrase with a form of the verb βαλεῖν, do you have any suggestions for other interesting things I could learn and quote to people at social gatherings, to give people the impression that I was something of a competent reader, rather than just a tinkering dilettante in Greek?

I don't think it is a mood, because it has its own syntax patterns to a large degree.

I realise it's probably a simple question (about aspect), but is there only one verbal adjectival form in -τέος/α/ον per verb, or are there several for different aspects, like for infinitives?
Stephen Hughes wrote:I'm sorry for my low IQ and slow thinking, the correct thing to say was "pseudo-subject" for "impersonal".
I'm sorry to change my mind yet again, but I think that using the word "subject", even if "pseudo-subject", might be reading something into this form of the verb.
Γελᾷ δ' ὁ μωρός, κἄν τι μὴ γέλοιον ᾖ
(Menander, Γνῶμαι μονόστιχοι 108)
cwconrad
Posts: 2112
Joined: May 5th, 2011, 5:52 pm
Location: Burnsville, NC 28714
Contact:

Re: Category for participles, infinitives, finite verbs

Post by cwconrad »

Stephen Hughes wrote:
cwconrad wrote:In particular the usage of the neuter sg. -τέος/α/ον form with an implicit ἐστίν is equivalent to impersonal verbals like ἔξεστιν and πρέπει and χρή and a host of other "idioms", recognition of which distinguishes a competent reader of Greek from a dilettante.
So now[/b], besides being able to say with a straight face that οἶνον νέον is the object of βλητέον and that εἰς ἀσκοὺς καινοὺς is a adverbial prepositional phrase with a form of the verb βαλεῖν, do you have any suggestions for other interesting things I could learn and quote to people at social gatherings, to give people the impression that I was something of a competent reader, rather than just a tinkering dilettante in Greek?
Hmmm .... Do you perhaps mean something to use as a sermon illustration? Isn't that what more of those fraudulently claiming to read Greek within our experience do? Now you're raising a broader question: should we distinguish between "big Greeks" and "little Greeks" or rather between "Big Dilettantes" and "Little Dilettantes"?
Stephen Hughes wrote:I realise it's probably a simple question (about aspect), but is there only one verbal adjectival form in -τέος/α/ον per verb, or are there several for different aspects, like for infinitives?
Indeed, so far as I know, there is only one verbal adjective in -τέος/α/ον per verb; it's constructed on the simplest form of the verb's root; that's also true of verbal adjectives in -τός/ή/όν.
οὔτοι ἀπ’ ἀρχῆς πάντα θεοὶ θνητοῖς ὑπέδειξαν,
ἀλλὰ χρόνῳ ζητέοντες ἐφευρίσκουσιν ἄμεινον. (Xenophanes, Fragment 16)

Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University (Retired)
Stephen Hughes
Posts: 3323
Joined: February 26th, 2013, 7:12 am

Re: Category for participles, infinitives, finite verbs

Post by Stephen Hughes »

cwconrad wrote:
Stephen Hughes wrote:I realise it's probably a simple question (about aspect), but is there only one verbal adjectival form in -τέος/α/ον per verb, or are there several for different aspects, like for infinitives?
Indeed, so far as I know, there is only one verbal adjective in -τέος/α/ον per verb; it's constructed on the simplest form of the verb's root; that's also true of verbal adjectives in -τός/ή/όν.
In the personal construction there is no subject, and in itself there is no aspect. It also seems to be flexible (no clearly) marked for voice.

The article I cited in the first or second post of this inquiry into whether verbal adjectives should be included in this discussion about Mycenian forms suggests that it was in the post-classical period that they became widespread. To me, that is counterintuitive. In keeping with the difference between Attic and Koine in dokew - dokei moi that we noted in Lysias, however, it is possible that other impersonal constructions also came to prominence. Without evidence, that is just a working hypothesis, though.

On the assumption that LSJ lists verbs that only occur in the impersonal construction in the neuter, and those which are found in the personal (true adjectival) and (possibly also) in the impersonal in the masculine, there are about 750 verbs in the impersonal, and about 1500 in the true adjectival and possibly in the impersonal. It is not a rare phenomenon.

It could also be noted that the Middle-Liddell has more entries than the LSJ does. That suggests that advanced students don't need it to be spelt out in the dictionary. That suggests that for classical Greek it should be learnt as a form - as indeed we did learn it (me with the misunderstandind about structure, you note accurately). That also suggests there are more than are listed, but perhaps not. A lot of deductions, assumptions and hypothesises, but we need to start somewhere (tohu wavohu).

Is there really only one context that this form is found in in the New Testament? It is oneore of those New Testament features that requires us to look outside the Corpus for grammatical and syntactic parallels.
Γελᾷ δ' ὁ μωρός, κἄν τι μὴ γέλοιον ᾖ
(Menander, Γνῶμαι μονόστιχοι 108)
Stephen Hughes
Posts: 3323
Joined: February 26th, 2013, 7:12 am

Re: The Verbal Adjective

Post by Stephen Hughes »

For practical purposes, in regard to the question about inclusion of a form in a grammatical table or not, even if it is derived from a verbal root, it is a question of whether the grammatical information supplied by the ending (in this case) is predictable enough for ever verb that could occupy that place in the table.

If it has one (or a few) grammatical meaning(s) that students could learn, then it could be included.

If not, and a new meaning needs to be learnt that is not easily and predictably derived from the meaning of the verb by a reader who has the grammatical knowledge associated with the ending, then it would be better to be listed separately in the lexicon.
Γελᾷ δ' ὁ μωρός, κἄν τι μὴ γέλοιον ᾖ
(Menander, Γνῶμαι μονόστιχοι 108)
Stephen Carlson
Posts: 3351
Joined: May 11th, 2011, 10:51 am
Location: Melbourne
Contact:

Re: The Verbal Adjective

Post by Stephen Carlson »

In Greek's ancestral language (*PIE), it is thought that the verbal adjective was some kind of derivational form based on a verbal root. In Latin, it became fully integrated into the verbal paradigm as the past participle, but in Greek it never quite became part of the paradigm. Thus, it is usually treated as a separate lexeme even though the derivational process was somewhat productive.

We use the notions of "inflectional" and "derivational" as categories but it should be kept in mind that these categories are for our convenience and not necessarily sharply distinct. In fact, the verbal adjective is one of those forms on the border between inflectional and derivational, and we are stuck with a not unproblematic assignment to our categories of convenience.
Stephen C. Carlson, Ph.D.
Melbourne, Australia
cwconrad
Posts: 2112
Joined: May 5th, 2011, 5:52 pm
Location: Burnsville, NC 28714
Contact:

Re: The Verbal Adjective

Post by cwconrad »

Stephen Carlson wrote:In Greek's ancestral language (*PIE), it is thought that the verbal adjective was some kind of derivational form based on a verbal root. In Latin, it became fully integrated into the verbal paradigm as the past participle, but in Greek it never quite became part of the paradigm. Thus, it is usually treated as a separate lexeme even though the derivational process was somewhat productive.

We use the notions of "inflectional" and "derivational" as categories but it should be kept in mind that these categories are for our convenience and not necessarily sharply distinct. In fact, the verbal adjective is one of those forms on the border between inflectional and derivational, and we stuck with a not unproblematic assignment to our categories of convenience.
I'm glad to see that the newly-focused discussion has been moved into a separate thread.

What seems to be acknowledged in the course of this discussion of verbal adjectives (and I think we could talk about verbal nouns like πρᾶγμα, πρᾶξις, πράκτωρ, λογισμός, γραφεύς, γράμμα, γραμματεύς, κτλ. also) is that our traditional conventional taxonomy of constituent elements of ancient Greek is more or less a matter of convenience and convention, far more haphazard than we might have supposed. Am I right in supposing that the academic linguists haven't quite settled upon any consensus taxonomy of elements of ancient Greek either?

I've long been of the opinion that the entire Section III of Smyth on "Formation of Words" (§§822-899) needs to be assimilated by anyone hoping to gain proficiency in ancient Greek. To my mind, these items belong to the "Basics" rather than "Beyond the Basics."
οὔτοι ἀπ’ ἀρχῆς πάντα θεοὶ θνητοῖς ὑπέδειξαν,
ἀλλὰ χρόνῳ ζητέοντες ἐφευρίσκουσιν ἄμεινον. (Xenophanes, Fragment 16)

Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University (Retired)
Stephen Hughes
Posts: 3323
Joined: February 26th, 2013, 7:12 am

Re: The Verbal Adjective

Post by Stephen Hughes »

cwconrad wrote:To my mind, these items belong to the "Basics" rather than "Beyond the Basics."
Have no idea about, recognise, be able to handle / translate, understand in an overall context, be proficient in reading a text containing, have mastery of ....

Perhaps, we need to think in terms of how well, rather than simply what. The "not at all" situation where a student is left unaware of a part of the language is an option, but not a very good one. I think that at least by the end of the "Basics", all things in the language should have been covered, even if the coverage is superficial and inadequate to be of use without further study.
Γελᾷ δ' ὁ μωρός, κἄν τι μὴ γέλοιον ᾖ
(Menander, Γνῶμαι μονόστιχοι 108)
cwconrad
Posts: 2112
Joined: May 5th, 2011, 5:52 pm
Location: Burnsville, NC 28714
Contact:

Re: The Verbal Adjective

Post by cwconrad »

Stephen Hughes wrote:
cwconrad wrote:To my mind, these items belong to the "Basics" rather than "Beyond the Basics."
Have no idea about, recognise, be able to handle / translate, understand in an overall context, be proficient in reading a text containing, have mastery of ....

Perhaps, we need to think in terms of how well, rather than simply what. The "not at all" situation where a student is left unaware of a part of the language is an option, but not a very good one. I think that at least by the end of the "Basics", all things in the language should have been covered, even if the coverage is superficial and inadequate to be of use without further study.
Well, yes -- but how best to measure/evaluate command of these elements in reading progress rather than as recite-on-demand items of information? Well, you're the professionally-trained teacher and should know the answer to that; I was never more than a trial-and-error tester of student progress.
οὔτοι ἀπ’ ἀρχῆς πάντα θεοὶ θνητοῖς ὑπέδειξαν,
ἀλλὰ χρόνῳ ζητέοντες ἐφευρίσκουσιν ἄμεινον. (Xenophanes, Fragment 16)

Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University (Retired)
Post Reply

Return to “Syntax and Grammar”