Runge on Porter on Tense
Posted: August 16th, 2013, 5:14 pm
Steve Runge has posted a critique of Stan Porter's method as it relates to tense here: http://www.ntdiscourse.org/2013/08/port ... stitution/
ibiblio.org/bgreek/forum/
https://www.ibiblio.org:443/bgreek/forum/
https://www.ibiblio.org:443/bgreek/forum/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=1995
I'm basically fine with this, but I'd call the aspect of the perfect, well, perfect.Well folks, I am here to tell you that this is not really the case. Regardless of the hype, there is actually quite a bit more consensus on these issues than you might think. If you like Porter’s taxonomy then we have something in common; I like it too. Here is what I mean:
- Greek tense-forms convey perfective, imperfective, or a third kind of tense/aspect.
- The aspects are present in every mood, whereas tense (“spatial proximity/remoteness” for you timeless folks) is only found in the indicative mood.
- The aorist conveys perfective aspect, the present and imperfect convey imperfective aspect, and the perfect and pluperfect convey a third thing. Porter calls it stative aspect, which I can live with.
+1Stephen Carlson wrote:I'm basically fine with this, but I'd call the aspect of the perfect, well, perfect.